EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - Vermont · i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Environmental Compliance Services, Inc. (ECS) has conducted an initial site investigation (ISI) at the Herttua Residence, located

aandreoli

Text Box

INITIAL SITE INVESTIGATION HERTTUA PROPERTY 1801 EAST MAIN STREET RICHMOND, VT 05477 Prepared for: Mr. Art Herttua 1801 East Main Street Richmond, VT 05477 Project No. 08-211393.00 March 2009 Prepared by: ECS 1 Elm Street, Suite 3 Waterbury, VT 05676 tel: 802-241-4131 fax: 802-244-6894 www.ecsconsult.comax: 802-244-6894 www.ecsconsult.com

i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Environmental Compliance Services, Inc. (ECS) has conducted an initial site investigation (ISI) at the Herttua Residence, located at 1801 East Main Street in Richmond, Vermont. The ISI was performed following the removal of a spherical underground storage tank (UST) containing gasoline on 19 November 2008. The ISI included the drilling of five soil borings and subsequent installation and sampling of three monitoring wells (MW-1 through MW-3), and an evaluation of potential threats to nearby sensitive receptors. ECS’s findings related to this work are summarized as follows:

• Benzene and lead were detected in source area monitoring well MW-1 at concentrations above the Vermont Groundwater Enforcement Standards (VGESs). Benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene and xylenes (BTEX) compounds totaled 36.4 micrograms per liter (µg/L) in the sample collected from MW-1, which is located within the UST excavation. No volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were detected in samples collected from downgradient monitoring wells MW-2 and MW-3 or the onsite drinking water supply well. No total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) were detected in any of the monitoring wells.

• The presence of lead and 1,2-Dichloroethane (a lead scavenger compound) in the groundwater suggests that leaded gasoline may have been contained in the UST. Soil sampling would be necessary to confirm the presence of tetra ethyl lead in the source area.

• During the soil-boring program, photoionization detector (PID) readings ranging from zero to

1,972 parts per million (ppm) were obtained from soil samples collected from the soil borings. The native soils generally consisted of sand and gravel with trace amounts of silt. The highest PID reading was recorded in the former UST excavation above the water table between 9 and 11 feet below ground surface (bgs) in MW-1. The second highest PID reading was recorded in a soil boring located approximately 10 feet southwest of MW-1.

• Potential sensitive receptors include the soil and groundwater beneath the former UST excavation

area, the Winooski River, and the onsite drinking water supply well. Access to impacted soils in the source area is limited and the risk of human exposure is low; however, the potential impact to the groundwater table will likely increase overtime (i.e. spring snowmelt, infiltration, precipitation). Groundwater is at a depth of approximately 30 feet.

• The Winooski River is located approximately 700 feet southwest of the former UST excavation, and based on water quality data in downgradient wells, it is unlikely that it is impacted by petroleum contamination from the site.

• The onsite water supply well is located approximately 75 feet northeast and upgradient of the former UST location. No VOCs were detected in a sample collected from this well.

• The site owner has reason to believe that there is another spherical tank buried on the property. This suspected tank is located in the southeast corner of the property along Route 2 at the foundation of a former monitor barn, which was relocated off of the property for restoration in 2000. A metal detector survey confirms the suspected presence of a second tank. It is unknown whether the suspected UST contains liquid. ECS will investigate the suspected tank location when an excavator is onsite to remove stockpiled soils from the UST excavation.

ii

Based on the conclusions stated above, it is the opinion of ECS that the site does not meet the criteria of a Sites Management Activities Completed (SMAC) designation due to the presence of contamination above the VGES in the vicinity of the former UST and the ongoing release of gasoline from petroleum-contaminated soils remaining in the former UST location. ECS recommends the following:

1. Soil vapor extraction (SVE) should be implemented in the source area to prevent further groundwater impact. The highly contaminated unsaturated zone appears to be limited to a 10 foot radius around the former tank grave and a maximum depth of approximately 20 feet. ECS estimates that two to three extraction wells would be necessary to remediate the contamination in the unsaturated zone.

2. An impervious cap should be installed in the vicinity of the former UST to further reduce infiltration through the contaminated zone to the groundwater table and to minimize short-circuiting of an SVE system. This would also serve to reduce human and animal risk and exposure to lead in shallow soils.

3. The soil pile should be removed from the site and hauled to ESMI for disposal this spring. If corrective action is implemented, soil cuttings from the installation of SVE wells will be added to the soil pile prior to disposal.

4. The additional suspected tank location will be investigated while equipment is onsite for soil pile removal. ECS will follow UST closure and site assessment requirements.

5. Semiannual groundwater monitoring is recommended with samples from the three onsite

monitoring wells analyzed for VOCs by EPA Method 8021B and lead. The next groundwater monitoring event should be scheduled during the spring 2009.

6. Semi-annual summary reports will be prepared, which will include water-quality analytical results, figures showing groundwater flow direction and contaminant distribution, relevant tables, time-series graphs, laboratory reports, and recommendations for further action.

TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 SITE DESCRIPTION AND PHYSICAL SETTING .............................................................................................. 1 1.2 SITE HISTORY & CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL ............................................................................................ 1 1.3 OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE OF WORK ............................................................................................................ 2

2.0 INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURES AND RESULTS ................................................................................. 3

2.1 SOIL BORING / MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION ................................................................................. 3 2.2 SOIL-SCREENING RESULTS ......................................................................................................................... 3 2.3 GROUNDWATER CHARACTERISTICS........................................................................................................... 4 2.4 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................... 4

3.0 SENSITIVE RECEPTOR SURVEY AND RISK ASSESSMENT .............................................................. 6

3.1 SENSITIVE RECEPTOR SURVEY ................................................................................................................... 6 3.2 RISK ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................................................................... 6

4.0 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................................. 7 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................... 8 FIGURES Figure 1 Site Location Map Figure 2 Site Plan Figure 3 Groundwater Flow Direction Map Figure 4 Contaminant Concentration Map TABLES Table 1 Groundwater Elevation Calculations Table 2 Summary of Analytical Results APPENDICES

Appendix A Boring Logs / Monitoring Well Construction Diagrams Appendix B Field Notes Appendix C Photodocumentation Appendix D Laboratory Analytical Reports

Initial Site Investigation Document No. 211393isir.Mar09.doc Herttua Residence 17 March 2009 1801 East Main Street, Richmond, VT Page 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION This report details the results of an Initial Site Investigation (ISI) performed by Environmental Compliance Services (ECS) at the Herttua Residence, located at 1801 East Main Street in Richmond, Vermont (Figure 1). The ISI was performed following the discovery of a spherical underground storage tank (UST) filled with gasoline on 19 November 2008. The ISI included the drilling of five soil borings and subsequent installation of three monitoring wells (MW-1 through MW-3), and an evaluation of potential threats to nearby sensitive receptors. This work was conducted in general conformance with an ECS workplan dated 9 December 2008, and the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (VT DEC) approval e-mail dated 29 December 2008. 1.1 SITE DESCRIPTION AND PHYSICAL SETTING

The site is located off of US Route 2 between Richmond and Jonesville, Vermont. The site operates as a farm and contains a residential house and two barns. The property is wooded and grassy surrounded by residential and commercial properties (Figure 2). The spherical tank was located adjacent to the smaller of the two onsite barns during a restoration project. The residence is served by a private drilled well, located approximately 75 feet northeast of the former UST location. According to the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources Internet Mapping Site of Private Wells, at least 5 private water supply wells are located with a ½-mile of the site. These wells are identified as being more than 1000 feet from the former UST location. 1.2 SITE HISTORY & CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL On 19 November 2008, ECS responded to a call that an abandoned UST was encountered during excavation surrounding the foundation of a barn. The UST consisted of a five-foot diameter sphere filled with a liquid petroleum product resembling gasoline. The Richmond Fire Department was the first to respond to this incident and provided two decon pools to store the liquid temporarily until environmental professionals arrived on the site. Mr. Bill Atwood of Bill Atwood Excavating removed the tank, Environmental Products and Services (EP&S) disposed of the liquids and cleaned the tank, and ECS performed the closure assessment. The UST consisted of a sphere with three holes, which were plugged with wooden dowels. Otherwise, the tank was in good condition with no pitting or rust. According to Mr. Attwood, upon removal of the tank from the ground, liquid product began to fill the excavation. Two decon tubs/pools were used to collect the remaining liquid from the tank. Liquid product in the excavation was removed with a 5-gallon bucket and placed in the decon pools. Groundwater was not encountered. The fill material surrounding the tank consisted of a medium to coarse sand, which was saturated with product on arrival to the site. Photoionization detector (PID) readings of the soil just below the tank at approximately 6 feet below ground surface (bgs) were 1,670 parts per million (ppm). In an effort to determine the extent of contamination, ECS asked Mr. Atwood to dig deeper in the former tank location. Excavated soils were placed on polyethylene plastic. PID readings decreased to 907 ppm at 7 feet bgs and 380 ppm at 9 feet bgs. Based on the location of the barn (which was suspended pending the current restoration project) and the coarsening sand sequence observed in the geology with depth, ECS decided that removal by excavation was not practical or cost effective. Approximately five cubic yards of grossly contaminated soil were polyencapsulated onsite.


The site owner has reason to believe that there is another spherical tank buried on the property. This suspected tank is located in the southeast corner of the property along Route 2 at the foundation of a former monitor barn, which was relocated off of the property for restoration in 2000. ECS surveyed the area with a metal detector and it appears that a large metal object is buried in the suspected location. It is unknown whether the suspected UST contains liquid. ECS will investigate the suspected tank location when an excavator is onsite to haul soils for offsite disposal.

1.3 OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE OF WORK

The objectives of this initial site investigation were to:

• Evaluate the degree and extent of petroleum contamination in soil and groundwater in the vicinity of the former UST;

• Qualitatively assess the risks to environmental and public health via relevant sensitive

receptors and potential contaminant migration pathways; and, • Identify appropriate monitoring and/or remedial actions based on the site conditions.

To accomplish these objectives, ECS has: • Supervised the advancement of five soil borings and subsequent installation of three water-

table monitoring wells (MW-1 through MW-3); • Screened subsurface soils from soil borings for the possible presence of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) using a PID; • Identified sensitive receptors in the area, and assessed the risk posed by the contamination to

these potential receptors; and, • Prepared this summary report, which details the work performed, qualitatively assesses risks,

provides conclusions, and offers recommendations for further action.


2.0 INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURES AND RESULTS

2.1 SOIL BORING / MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION

On 12-13 February 2009, ECS supervised the completion of five soil borings and subsequent installation of three monitoring wells (MW-1 through MW-3) to initially characterize contaminant and hydrogeologic conditions at the site. Monitoring well locations are presented on Figure 2. Monitoring well MW-1 was located within the former UST excavation. MW-2 and MW-3 were located downgradient of the UST excavation. Soil borings SB-4 and SB-5 were installed within ten feet south west and southeast of MW-1 to a depth of 16 feet in an effort to delineate the extent of soil contamination in the vicinity of the former UST. No monitoring wells or borings were installed upgradient of the former UST due to time constraints. There are no suspected sources of gasoline upgradient of the former UST. During drilling activities, groundwater was encountered at approximately 33 feet bgs. The native soils generally consisted of sand and gravel with a trace of silt. ECS provided oversight as NH Boring installed the soil borings using hollow-stem auger drilling methodology with an all-terrain vehicle (ATV) rig. Soil samples were generally collected at 5-foot intervals from each boring using two-foot long split spoons. All downhole drilling and sampling equipment was decontaminated during use, as appropriate. Impacted drill cuttings, mainly generated from the vicinity of the former tank grave, were returned to the boring where they originated or added to the existing onsite soil pile for off-site disposal. The monitoring wells were constructed with two-inch diameter polyvinyl chloride (PVC) casing and factory-slotted 0.010-inch slot screen. The screen sections were set approximately 5 feet above and below the presumed groundwater level. Sections of solid PVC riser were added to bring the tops of the well casings to approximately 0.5 feet bgs. Clean silica #1 filter sand was placed in the borehole annulus around each well approximately two feet above the slotted interval. A granular bentonite seal, approximately one to two-foot thick, was set above the sand pack and the remainder of the annular space was backfilled with native material. Each well was capped with a watertight plug and a flush-mounted steel protective casing was placed around each monitoring well and cemented into place. The wells were developed using bailers on 20 February 2009. All purge water was discharged to the ground surface in the vicinity of each well. On 26 February 2008, the monitoring wells and soil boring locations were surveyed relative to existing site features, with an azimuth accuracy of ± 1.0 feet and an elevation accuracy of ± 0.01 feet. Monitoring-well construction details are included on the soil-boring and well-construction logs in Appendix A. Field notes are presented in Appendix B. Photodocumentation is presented in Appendix C. 2.2 SOIL-SCREENING RESULTS

During the soil-boring program on 12-13 February 2009, PID readings ranging from zero to 1,972 ppm were obtained from soil samples collected from the soil borings. The highest PID reading was recorded in the former UST excavation above the water table between 9 and 11 feet bgs in MW-1. The second highest PID reading of 77.4 ppm was recorded in soil boring SB-4 at approximately 9 to 11 feet bgs. The close proximity of the barn prevented the installation of soil borings and wells northwest of the former


UST. Approximately 2 cubic feet (one wheelbarrow full) of petroleum-contaminated drill cuttings were added to the existing onsite soil stockpile.

An ECS field scientist screened soil samples from discrete intervals in each soil boring for the possible presence of VOCs using a Thermo 580B portable PID. The PID was calibrated in the field with an isobutylene standard gas to a benzene reference. Soil samples were placed into a polyethylene bag, which was then sealed, agitated, and allowed to equilibrate. The PID probe was inserted into the headspace, and the highest reading was recorded. PID screening results are included on the boring logs in Appendix A.

2.3 GROUNDWATER CHARACTERISTICS Based on the hydrogeologic data, the groundwater in the unconfined surficial aquifer at the site appears to flow generally southeast toward the Winooski River (Figure 3). The average horizontal hydraulic gradient is 2 percent between MW-1 and MW-2. The vertical groundwater flow components at the site, and the hydraulic relationship between the shallow unconfined aquifer and the bedrock aquifer, are currently unknown. Fluid levels were measured in the monitoring wells on 26 February 2009 to calculate the groundwater flow direction. Depths to groundwater in the on-site monitoring wells ranged from 31.58 feet (MW-3) to 33.30 feet (MW-2) below top-of-casing. Static water-table elevations were computed for each monitoring well by subtracting the measured depth-to-water readings from the surveyed top-of-casing elevations, which are relative to an arbitrary site datum of 100.00 feet. Water-level measurements and elevation calculations are presented in Table 1. Groundwater flow direction maps were prepared using these data (Figure 3). 2.4 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS Groundwater samples were collected on 26 February 2009 from the three newly installed monitoring wells and analyzed for the possible presence of VOCs via EPA Method 8021B and for total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) via EPA Method 8015 for gasoline range organics (GRO) and lead (MW-1 only). A drinking water sample was collected from the onsite water supply well and analyzed for VOCs via EPA Method 524.2. Benzene and lead were detected in the MW-1 sample at concentrations above the Vermont Groundwater Enforcement Standards1 (VGESs). Benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene and xylenes (BTEX) compounds totaled 36.4 micrograms per liter (µg/L) in the sample collected from MW-1, which is located within the UST excavation. No VOCs were detected in samples collected from downgradient monitoring wells MW-2 and MW-3 or the onsite drinking water supply well. No TPHs were detected in any of the monitoring wells. The presence of lead and 1,2-Dichloroethane (DCA, a lead scavenger) in the groundwater suggests that the UST contained leaded gasoline. Soil samples would be necessary to confirm the presence of tetra ethyl lead in the source area.

1 Vermont Groundwater Enforcement Standards (VGESs) for eight petroleum related VOCs are as follows: benzene - 5 µg/L; toluene — 1,000 µg/L; ethylbenzene - 700 µg/L; xylenes — 10,000 µg/L.; MTBE, a gasoline additive, - 40 µ/L; naphthalene — 20 µg/L; 1, 2, 4-trimethylbenzene — 5 µg/L; and 1, 3, 5-trimethylbenzene —4 µg/L.


Prior to groundwater sample collection, the monitoring wells were purged with a bailer and then sampled using disposable bailers and dropline, in accordance with ECS standard protocols. Purge water was discharged directly to the ground in the vicinity of each well. A trip blank and a duplicate sample were collected to ensure that adequate quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) standards were maintained. All samples were transported under chain-of-custody in an ice-filled cooler to Spectrum Analytical, Inc. of Agawam, Massachusetts. Analytical results of the duplicate sample, collected from MW-1, were all within the EPA relative percent difference of 30 percent. No petroleum-related compounds were detected in the trip blank. Analytical results are summarized in Table 2 and presented on Figure 4. The laboratory analytical reports are presented in Appendix D.


3.0 SENSITIVE RECEPTOR SURVEY AND RISK ASSESSMENT 3.1 SENSITIVE RECEPTOR SURVEY ECS conducted a survey to identify sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the Herttua Residence that could potentially be impacted by contamination associated with the site. The following sensitive receptors were identified in the vicinity of the property.

• The soil and groundwater beneath the former UST excavation area; • Farm animals; • The Winooski River; and • The onsite drinking water well.

3.2 RISK ASSESSMENT ECS qualitatively assessed the risks that the residual soil and dissolved-phase subsurface contamination poses to the receptors identified above. In general, human exposure to petroleum-related contamination is possible through inhalation, ingestion, or direct contact while impacts to environmental receptors are due either to a direct release or contaminant migration through one receptor to another or along a preferential pathway.

• Soil and Groundwater Beneath the Former UST Excavation - Elevated VOCs were detected by PID in soil samples collected during the former UST removal and soil boring activities (PID readings >1,000 ppm). Access to impacted soils in this area is limited and the risk of human exposure is low; however, the potential impact to the shallow groundwater table will likely increase with spring melt and infiltration of rain water.

• Farm animals - The presence of lead and 1,2-Dichloroethane (a lead scavenger) in the groundwater suggests that the UST may have contained leaded gasoline. Farm animals (i.e. chickens and sheep) have access to the former UST location. Soil samples would be necessary to confirm that the surface exposure to lead in this area is low.

• Winooski River – The Winooski River is located approximately 800 feet southwest of the

former UST excavation. PID readings of zero were recorded in two downgradient monitoring wells MW-2 and MW-3; therefore, it is unlikely that the Winooski River will be impacted by petroleum contamination from the site.

• On-site Water Supply Well – The onsite water supply well is located approximately 75 feet

northeast and upgradient with respect to overburden groundwater flow from the former UST location. No VOCs were detected in a sample collected on 26 February 2009 from this well. The current risk of contamination of this well is considered to be low.


4.0 CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of the site investigation described above, ECS concludes the following:

• Benzene and lead were detected in source area monitoring well MW-1 at concentrations above the VGESs. BTEX compounds totaled 36.4 µg/L in the sample collected from MW-1, which is located within the UST excavation. No VOCs were detected in samples collected from downgradient monitoring wells MW-2 and MW-3 or the onsite drinking water supply well. No TPH were detected in any of the monitoring wells.

• The presence of lead and 1,2-DCA (a lead scavenger) in the groundwater suggests that leaded gasoline may have been contained in the UST. Soil sampling would be necessary to confirm the presence of tetra ethyl lead in the source area.

• During the soil-boring program, PID readings ranging from zero to 1,972 ppm were obtained

from soil samples collected from the soil borings. The native soils generally consisted of sand and gravel with trace amounts of silt. The highest PID reading was recorded in the former UST excavation above the water table between 9 and 11 feet bgs in MW-1. The second highest PID reading was recorded in a soil boring located approximately 10 feet southwest of MW-1.

• Potential sensitive receptors include the soil and groundwater beneath the former UST excavation

area, the Winooski River, and the onsite drinking water supply well. Access to impacted soils in the source area is limited and the risk of human exposure is low; however, the potential impact to the groundwater table will likely increase overtime (i.e. spring snowmelt, infiltration, precipitation). Groundwater is at a depth of approximately 30 feet.

• The Winooski River is located approximately 700 feet southwest of the former UST excavation, and based on water quality data in downgradient wells, it is unlikely that it is impacted by petroleum contamination from the site.

• The onsite water supply well is located approximately 75 feet northeast and upgradient of the former UST location. No VOCs were detected in a sample collected from this well.

• The site owner has reason to believe that there is another spherical tank buried on the property. This suspected tank is located in the southeast corner of the property along Route 2 at the foundation of a former monitor barn, which was relocated off of the property for restoration in 2000. A metal detector survey confirms the suspected presence of a second tank. It is unknown whether the suspected UST contains liquid. ECS will investigate the suspected tank location when an excavator is onsite to remove stockpiled soils from the UST excavation.


5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the conclusions stated above, it is the opinion of ECS that the site does not meet the criteria of a SMAC designation due to the presence of contamination above the VGES in the vicinity of the former UST. ECS recommends the following:

1. Soil vapor extraction (SVE) should be implemented in the source area to prevent further groundwater impact. The highly contaminated unsaturated zone appears to be limited to a 10 foot radius around the former tank grave and a maximum depth of approximately 20 feet. ECS estimates that two to three extraction wells would be necessary to remediate the contamination in the unsaturated zone.

2. An impervious cap should be installed in the vicinity of the former UST to further reduce infiltration through the contaminated zone to the groundwater table and to minimize short-circuiting of an SVE system. This would also serve to reduce human and animal risk and exposure to lead in shallow soils.

3. The soil pile should be removed from the site and hauled to ESMI for disposal this spring. If corrective action is implemented, soil cuttings from the installation of SVE wells will be added to the soil pile prior to disposal.

4. The additional suspected tank location will be investigated while equipment is onsite for soil pile removal. ECS will follow UST closure and site assessment requirements.

5. Semiannual groundwater monitoring is recommended with samples from the three onsite

monitoring wells analyzed for VOCs by EPA Method 8021B and lead. The next groundwater monitoring event should be scheduled during the spring 2009.

6. Semi-annual summary reports will be prepared, which will include water-quality analytical results, figures showing groundwater flow direction and contaminant distribution, relevant tables, time-series graphs, laboratory reports, and recommendations for further action.

FIGURES

Mr. Art Herttua

Environmental Compliance Services, Inc.

www.ecsconsult.com

1 Elm Street, Suite 3

Waterbury, VT 05676

Phone 802.241.4131 Fax 802.244.6894

1801 East Main Street

Richmond, VT 05477Figure 1: SITE LOCUS

Base Map: U.S. Geological Survey; Quadrangle Location: Richmond, VT

Generated By: Christine DiMaio

Lat/Lon: 44º 23' 51" NORTH, 72º 57' 41" WEST - UTM Coordinates: EAST / NORTH

TABLES

Well I.D. Top of Casing Elevation Depth to Water Water Table

ElevationMW-1 100.00 31.60 68.40MW-2 100.34 33.30 67.04MW-3 99.73 31.58 68.15

All values reported in feet relative to arbitrary site datum of 100.00 feet. ND - not detected

Monitoring Date: 26 February 2009

TABLE 1GROUNDWATER ELEVATION CALCULATIONS

Herttua FarmRichmond, VT

Table 2.Summary of Analytical Results

Herttua FarmRichmond, Vermont

Monitoring Date: 26 February 2009

Well I.D. Benzene Toluene Ethyl benzene Xylenes Total

BTEX MTBE Total TMB EDB 1,2-DCA Naphthalene TPH GRO Lead

MW-1 10.4 17.7 BRL<1.0 8.3 36.4 BRL<1.0 2.0 BRL<1.0 1.1 BRL<1.0 BRL<0.4 0.0238MW-2 BRL<1.0 BRL<1.0 BRL<1.0 BRL<3.0 BRL BRL<1.0 BRL<2.0 BRL<1.0 BRL<1.0 BRL<1.0 BRL<0.4 NAMW-3 BRL<1.0 BRL<1.0 BRL<1.0 BRL<3.0 BRL BRL<1.0 BRL<3.0 BRL<1.0 BRL<1.0 BRL<1.0 BRL<0.4 NA

Duplicate (MW-1) 7.7 13.7 2.2 6.5 30.1 BRL<1.0 2.0 BRL<1.0 BRL<1.0 BRL<1.0 BRL<0.4 NAHerttua Well BRL<0.5 BRL<0.5 BRL<0.5 BRL<1.0 BRL BRL<0.5 BRL<1.0 BRL<0.5 BRL<0.5 BRL<0.5 NA NATrip Blank BRL<1.0 BRL<1.0 BRL<1.0 BRL<3.0 BRL BRL<1.0 BRL<2 BRL<1.0 BRL<1.0 BRL<1.0 NA NA

VGES 5 1,000 700 10,000 -- 40 350 0.05 5 20 -- 0.015Notes:Results given in micrograms per liter (µg/L).BTEX - a sum of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and total xylenesMTBE - methyl tertiary butyl ether TMB - trimethyl benzeneBRL - Below Reporting LimitVGES - Vermont Groundwater Enforcement Standards, shaded area denotes exceedence of VGESAll samples collected by ECS and analyzed by Spectrum Analytical, Inc.

EDB - 1,2-DibromoethaneDCA - dichloroethaneTPH - Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons; results given in milligrams per liter (mg/L)

*Effective 05/03/07, EDB & 1,2 DCA were added to the list of chemicals analyzed for an 8021B VT Scan.

ECS 211393btx.xls

APPENDIX A SOIL BORING LOGS AND WELL CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAMS

65 MILLET STREET (802) 434-4500 RICHMOND, VERMONT 05477 (802) 434-6076 - FAX

BORING / WELL IDENTIFICATION: SB-1/MW-1 SITE NAME: Herttua Residence

SITE LOCATION: Richmond, VT INSTALLATION DATE: 2/12/2009

JOB NUMBER: 08-211393.00 WELL DEPTH: 35 feet BORING DEPTH: 36 feet ECS REPRESENTATIVE: Jeff Girard DEPTH TO WATER (DURING DRILLING): 33 feet DRILLING COMPANY: NH Boring

Londonderry, NH SCREEN DIAMETER: 2” DEPTH: 25-35 ft SCREEN TYPE/SIZE: 0.010 slot schedule 40 PVC SAMPLING METHOD: Split Spoon 5-foot intervals RISER DIAMETER: 2” DEPTH: 0-25 ft REFERENCE POINT (RP): Flush mount well box RISER TYPE/SIZE: Schedule 40 PVC ELEVATION OF RP: Not measured REMARKS: Source area – former UST excavation

DEPTH (IN FEET)

SAMPLE DEPTH

RECOVERY (IN)

SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND NOTES

PID (PPM)

WELL PROFILE

LEGEND

0 0-2 6,18,14,5 rec = 9”

Fill, dark brown fine to medium sand and silt, little gravel. No odor, moist 0.0

Concrete

2

Native

Material

4 4-6 2,3,4,6 rec = 6”

Light brown, fine to coarse sand, trace silt and small gravel. Light odor, moist. 76.4

Bentonite

6

Filter Sand

8

Riser

10 9-11 7,8,8,12 rec = 9”

Same as above, strong sweet odor. 1972

Screen

12

Water Level

14 14-16 11,9,10,10 rec = 20”

Light brown, fine sand, some silt. Light odor, dry 49.8

16

18

20 19-21 6,8,11,13 rec = 18”

Same as above, no odor 9.1

22

24 24-26 11,14,17,19 rec = ?

Same as above 6.7

26

28

30 29-31 10,14,13,14 rec = 20”

Lt brown, fine sand and silt, moist, no odor. 6.2

32 At 30 feet bgs, silt with some fine sand.

34 34-36 6,9,12,16 rec =?

Silt with little fine sand, saturated 0.7

36

38

40

42

44 End of Sampling = 36 feet Well set @ 35 feet

PROPORTIONS USED BLOW COUNT (COHESIVE SOILS) BLOW COUNT (GRANULAR SOILS) Notes: AND 33-50% <2 VERY SOFT 0-4 VERY LOOSE SOME 20-33% 2-4 SOFT 4-10 LOOSE PID used: Thermo Model 580B LITTLE 10-20% 4-8 MEDIUM STIFF 10-30 MEDIUM DENSE Benzene reference TRACE 0-10% 8-15 STIFF 30-50 DENSE 15-30 VERY STIFF >50 VERY DENSE >30 HARD



SITE LOCATION: Richmond, VT INSTALLATION DATE: 2/12-13/2009


Londonderry, NH SCREEN DIAMETER: 2” DEPTH: 29-39 ft SCREEN TYPE/SIZE: 0.010 slot schedule 40 PVC SAMPLING METHOD: Split Spoon 5-foot intervals RISER DIAMETER: 2” DEPTH: 0-29 ft REFERENCE POINT (RP): Flush mount well box RISER TYPE/SIZE: Schedule 40 PVC ELEVATION OF RP: Not measured REMARKS: Southeast of former UST excavation - downgradient

DEPTH (IN FEET)

SAMPLE DEPTH

RECOVERY (IN)


PID (PPM)

WELL PROFILE

LEGEND

0 0-2 6,6,5,12 rec = 24”

Dk brown silt and fine sand, little organics, wet/frozen, no odor 0.0

Concrete

2

Native

Material

4 4-6 2,3,7,7 rec = 19”

4-5 ft - Light brown, silt and fine sand, trace gravel. Light odor, moist. 0.0

Bentonite

6 5-6 ft – fine sand, some silt. Gravel at 7 ft. Moist, no odors

Filter Sand

8

Riser

10 9-11 10,12,9,14 rec = 6”

Lt brown fine to coarse sand, some gravel, little silt. Moist, no odor 0.0

Screen

12

Water Level

14 14-16 5,6,6,7 rec = 15”

Brown silt, trace fine sand, moist, no odor 0.0

16

18

20 19-21 12,20,19,20 rec = ?

Lt brown fine sand and little silt, dry, no odor 0.0

22

24 24-26 16” Same as above

0.0

26

28

30 29-31 15,28,25,21 rec = ?

Same as above 0.0

32

34 34-36 13,16,21,23 rec =17”

Light brown fine sand and silt, wet, no odor 0.0

36

38 39-41 17,49,48,40 rec = ?

Lt brown fine sand and silt, saturated, no odor 0.0

40

42







Londonderry, NH SCREEN DIAMETER: 2” DEPTH: 29-39 ft SCREEN TYPE/SIZE: 0.010 slot schedule 40 PVC SAMPLING METHOD: Split Spoon 5-foot intervals RISER DIAMETER: 2” DEPTH: 0-29 ft REFERENCE POINT (RP): Flush mount well box RISER TYPE/SIZE: Schedule 40 PVC ELEVATION OF RP: Not measured REMARKS: Southwest of former UST excavation - downgradient

DEPTH (IN FEET)

SAMPLE DEPTH

RECOVERY (IN)


PID (PPM)

WELL PROFILE

LEGEND

0

Concrete

2

Native

Material

4

Bentonite

6

Filter Sand

8

Riser

10 9-11 16,41,75 rec = 3”

Brown, f-c sand, little silt, dry, no odor, moist 0.9

Screen

12

Water Level

14

16

18

20 19-21 30,54,57,80 rec = 20”

Lt brown fine sand and little silt, dry, no odor. 0.0

22

24 24-26 29,38,34,39 16”

Same as above 0.0

26

28

30 29-31 22,28,32,35 rec = 21

Same as above,wet 0.0

32

34 34-36 11,19,34,50 rec =22”

Same as above, increasing silt at 4” tip of spoon, no odor 0.0

36

38 39-41 10,18,25,33 rec = ?

Brown, silt with little fine sand, saturated, no odor 0.0

40

42




BORING / WELL IDENTIFICATION: SB-4 SITE NAME: Herttua Residence


JOB NUMBER: 08-211393.00 WELL DEPTH: NA BORING DEPTH: 16 feet ECS REPRESENTATIVE: Jeff Girard DEPTH TO WATER (DURING DRILLING): NA DRILLING COMPANY: NH Boring

Londonderry, NH SCREEN DIAMETER: NA DEPTH: NA SCREEN TYPE/SIZE: NA SAMPLING METHOD: Split Spoon 5-foot intervals RISER DIAMETER: NA DEPTH: NA REFERENCE POINT (RP): NA RISER TYPE/SIZE: NA ELEVATION OF RP: Not measured REMARKS: Approximately 10 feet southwest of the former UST excavation

DEPTH (IN FEET)

SAMPLE DEPTH

RECOVERY (IN)


PID (PPM)

WELL PROFILE

LEGEND

0

Concrete

2

Native

Material

4 4-6 13,15,19,21 rec = 14”

Dk brown, fine to coarse sand, trace silt and gravel. No odor, dry. 15.6

Bentonite

6

Filter Sand

8

Riser

10 9-11 17,17,16,23 rec = ?

Dk brown fine to medium sand, trace silt and gravel, moist, light odor 77.4

Screen

12

Water Level

14 14-16 16,24,27,31 rec = 20”

Light brown, fine sand and silt. No odor, dry 12.5

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

36

38

40

42

44 End of Sampling = 16 feet No well set



BORING / WELL IDENTIFICATION: SB-5 SITE NAME: Herttua Residence


JOB NUMBER: 08-211393.00 WELL DEPTH: NA BORING DEPTH: 16 feet ECS REPRESENTATIVE: Jeff Girard DEPTH TO WATER (DURING DRILLING): NA DRILLING COMPANY: NH Boring

Londonderry, NH SCREEN DIAMETER: NA DEPTH: NA SCREEN TYPE/SIZE: NA SAMPLING METHOD: Split Spoon 5-foot intervals RISER DIAMETER: NA DEPTH: NA REFERENCE POINT (RP): NA RISER TYPE/SIZE: NA ELEVATION OF RP: Not measured REMARKS: Approximately 10 feet southwest of the former UST excavation

DEPTH (IN FEET)

SAMPLE DEPTH

RECOVERY (IN)


PID (PPM)

WELL PROFILE

LEGEND

0

Concrete

2

Native

Material

4 4-6 18,37,30,33 rec = ?

Brown, fine to medium sand, trace silt and gravel. No odor, dry. 2.6

Bentonite

6

Filter Sand

8

Riser

10 9-11 22,15,19,22 rec = 13”

Dk brown fine to coarse sand, some gravel trace silt, moist, light odor 23.3

Screen

12

Water Level

14 14-16 13,33,34,28 rec = 12”

Upper 6” – fine to coarse sand and gravel, saturated, no odor 6.5

16 Lower 6” – fine sand and silt, dry, no odor

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

36

38

40

42

44 End of Sampling = 16 feet No well set


APPENDIX B FIELD NOTES

APPENDIX C PHOTODOCUMENTATION

Drilling at the former UST excavation for MW-1

Drilling at the MW-3 location

APPENDIX D LABORATORY ANALYTICAL REPORTS

Laboratory Report

Report Date: 11-Mar-09 16:41

Final Report

Revised Report

Re-Issued Report

Environmental Compliance Services

1 Elm St. Suite 3

Waterbury, VT 05676

Attn: Laura Woodard

SPECTRUM ANALYTICAL, INC.Featuring

HANIBAL TECHNOLOGY

Project:

Project

Herttua Farm - Richmond, VT

08-211393.00

ü

Laboratory ID Client Sample ID Matrix Date Sampled Date Received

27-Feb-09 10:4026-Feb-09 00:00Drinking WaterSA91578-01 Trip Blank

27-Feb-09 10:4026-Feb-09 11:10Drinking WaterSA91578-02 Water Supply

27-Feb-09 10:4026-Feb-09 10:35Ground WaterSA91578-03 MW-1



27-Feb-09 10:4026-Feb-09 00:00Ground WaterSA91578-06 Duplicate

Massachusetts # M-MA138/MA1110

Connecticut # PH-0777

Florida # E87600/E87936

Maine # MA138

New Hampshire # 2538

New Jersey # MA011/MA012

New York # 11393/11840

Pennsylvania # 68-04426/68-02924

Rhode Island # 98

USDA # S-51435

Vermont # VT-11393

Authorized by:

Hanibal C. Tayeh, Ph.D.

President/Laboratory Director

Technical Reviewer's Initial:

I attest that the information contained within the report has been reviewed for accuracy and checked against the quality control

requirements for each method. These results relate only to the sample(s) as received.

All applicable NELAC requirements have been met.

Spectrum Analytical holds certification in the State of New York for the analytes as indicated with an X in the "Cert." column within

this report. Please note that the State of New York does not offer certification for all analytes.

Please note that this report contains 22 pages of analytical data plus Chain of Custody document(s). When the Laboratory Report is

indicated as revised, this report supercedes any previously dated reports for the laboratory ID(s) referenced above. Where this report

identifies subcontracted analyses, copies of the subcontractor's test report is available upon request. This report may not be

reproduced, except in full, without written approval from Spectrum Analytical, Inc.

Spectrum Analytical, Inc. is a NELAC accredited laboratory organization and meets NELAC testing standards. Use of the NELAC logo however

does not insure that Spectrum is currently accredited for the specific method or analyte indicated. Please refer to our "Quality" web page at

www.spectrum-analytical.com for a full listing of our current certifications and fields of accreditation. States in which Spectrum Analytical, Inc.

holds NELAC certification are New York, New Hampshire, New Jersey and Florida. All analytical work for Volatile Organic and Air analysis are

transferred to and conducted at our 830 Silver Street location (NY-11840, FL-E87936 and NJ-MA012).

Please contact the Laboratory or Technical Director at 800-789-9115 with any questions regarding the data contained in this laboratory report.

Headquarters: 11 Almgren Drive & 830 Silver Street • Agawam, MA 01001 • 1-800-789-9115 • 413-789-9018 • Fax 413-789-4076

www.spectrum-analytical.comPage 1 of 22

CASE NARRATIVE:

The samples were received 3.6 degrees Celsius, please refer to the Chain of Custody for details specific to temperature upon receipt.

An infrared thermometer with a tolerance of +/- 2.0 degrees Celsius was used immediately upon receipt of the samples.

See below for any non-conformances and issues relating to quality control samples and/or sample analysis/matrix.

EPA 524.2

Laboratory Control Samples:

9030295-BS1

Analyte out of acceptance range in QC spike but no reportable concentration present in sample.

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

Carbon disulfide

Naphthalene

Analyte out of acceptance range.

n-Butylbenzene

9030295-BSD1

Analyte out of acceptance range in QC spike but no reportable concentration present in sample.


Carbon disulfide

Naphthalene



Hexachlorobutadiene

n-Propylbenzene

tert-Butylbenzene

The RPD result exceeded the QC control limits; however, both percent recoveries were acceptable. Sample results for the QC

batch were accepted based on percent recoveries and completeness of QC data.

Chloroethane

SW846 8260B

Laboratory Control Samples:

9030422-BSD1


Naphthalene

* Reportable Detection Limit BRL = Below Reporting Limit

This laboratory report is not valid without an authorized signature on the cover page .

Page 2 of 22

SW846 8260B

Spikes:

9030422-MS1 Source: SA91750-01

The spike recovery was outside acceptance limits for the MS and/or MSD. The batch was accepted based on acceptable LCS

recovery.

1,1-Dichloroethene

9030422-MSD1 Source: SA91750-01

Surrogate recovery outside of control limits. The data was accepted based on valid recovery of the remaining surrogate.

Dibromofluoromethane

The spike recovery was outside acceptance limits for the MS and/or MSD. The batch was accepted based on acceptable LCS

recovery.

1,1-Dichloroethene

Toluene



Page 3 of 22

Trip BlankSample Identification

Matrix26-Feb-09 00:00

Collection Date/Time Received27-Feb-09

Client Project #08-211393.00 Drinking Water

SA91578-01

Result AnalyzedMethod Ref. Cert.BatchPreparedDilutionAnalyte(s)CAS No. Units *RDLFlag

Volatile Organic Compounds

Volatile Organic Compounds by 8260B

Prepared by method SW846 5030 Water MS

SW846 8260B 06-Mar-09 903030405-Mar-091µg/l71-43-2 1.0Benzene BRL

" " ""1µg/l106-93-4 1.01,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) BRL

" " ""1µg/l107-06-2 1.01,2-Dichloroethane BRL

" " ""1µg/l100-41-4 1.0Ethylbenzene BRL

" " ""1µg/l1634-04-4 1.0Methyl tert-butyl ether BRL

" " ""1µg/l91-20-3 1.0Naphthalene BRL

" " ""1µg/l108-88-3 1.0Toluene BRL

" " ""1µg/l95-63-6 1.01,2,4-Trimethylbenzene BRL


" " ""1µg/l179601-23-1 2.0m,p-Xylene BRL

" " ""1µg/l95-47-6 1.0o-Xylene BRL

Surrogate recoveries:

70-130 %924-Bromofluorobenzene " " ""460-00-4

70-130 %104Toluene-d8 " " ""2037-26-5

70-130 %1001,2-Dichloroethane-d4 " " ""17060-07-0

70-130 %102Dibromofluoromethane " " ""1868-53-7



Page 4 of 22

Water SupplySample Identification




SA91578-02



524.2 Purgeable Organic Compounds


EPA 524.2 05-Mar-09 903029505-Mar-091µg/l76-13-1 0.51,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane (Freon

113)

BRL

" " ""1µg/l67-64-1 10.0Acetone BRL

" " ""1µg/l107-13-1 0.5Acrylonitrile BRL

" " ""1µg/l71-43-2 0.5Benzene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l108-86-1 0.5Bromobenzene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l74-97-5 0.5Bromochloromethane BRL X

" " ""1µg/l75-27-4 0.5Bromodichloromethane BRL X

" " ""1µg/l75-25-2 0.5Bromoform BRL X

" " ""1µg/l74-83-9 0.5Bromomethane BRL X

" " ""1µg/l78-93-3 10.02-Butanone (MEK) BRL

" " ""1µg/l104-51-8 0.5n-Butylbenzene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l135-98-8 0.5sec-Butylbenzene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l98-06-6 0.5tert-Butylbenzene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l75-15-0 0.5Carbon disulfide BRL

" " ""1µg/l56-23-5 0.5Carbon tetrachloride BRL X

" " ""1µg/l108-90-7 0.5Chlorobenzene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l75-00-3 0.5Chloroethane BRL X

" " ""1µg/l67-66-3 0.5Chloroform BRL X

" " ""1µg/l74-87-3 0.5Chloromethane BRL X

" " ""1µg/l95-49-8 0.52-Chlorotoluene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l106-43-4 0.54-Chlorotoluene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l96-12-8 0.51,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane BRL

" " ""1µg/l124-48-1 0.5Dibromochloromethane BRL X


" " ""1µg/l74-95-3 0.5Dibromomethane BRL X

" " ""1µg/l95-50-1 0.51,2-Dichlorobenzene BRL X



" " ""1µg/l75-71-8 0.5Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon12) BRL X

" " ""1µg/l75-34-3 0.51,1-Dichloroethane BRL X

" " ""1µg/l107-06-2 0.51,2-Dichloroethane BRL X

" " ""1µg/l75-35-4 0.51,1-Dichloroethene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l156-59-2 0.5cis-1,2-Dichloroethene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l156-60-5 0.5trans-1,2-Dichloroethene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l78-87-5 0.51,2-Dichloropropane BRL X



" " ""1µg/l563-58-6 0.51,1-Dichloropropene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l10061-01-5 0.5cis-1,3-Dichloropropene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l10061-02-6 0.5trans-1,3-Dichloropropene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l100-41-4 0.5Ethylbenzene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l87-68-3 0.5Hexachlorobutadiene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l591-78-6 10.02-Hexanone (MBK) BRL

" " ""1µg/l98-82-8 0.5Isopropylbenzene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l99-87-6 0.54-Isopropyltoluene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l1634-04-4 0.5Methyl tert-butyl ether BRL X

" " ""1µg/l108-10-1 10.04-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) BRL

" " ""1µg/l75-09-2 0.5Methylene chloride BRL X


" " ""1µg/l103-65-1 0.5n-Propylbenzene BRL X



Page 5 of 22

Water SupplySample Identification




SA91578-02



524.2 Purgeable Organic Compounds


EPA 524.2 05-Mar-09 903029505-Mar-091µg/l100-42-5 0.5Styrene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l630-20-6 0.51,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane BRL X

" " ""1µg/l79-34-5 0.51,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane BRL X

" " ""1µg/l127-18-4 0.5Tetrachloroethene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l108-88-3 0.5Toluene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l87-61-6 0.51,2,3-Trichlorobenzene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l120-82-1 0.51,2,4-Trichlorobenzene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l71-55-6 0.51,1,1-Trichloroethane BRL X

" " ""1µg/l79-00-5 0.51,1,2-Trichloroethane BRL X

" " ""1µg/l79-01-6 0.5Trichloroethene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l75-69-4 0.5Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11) BRL X

" " ""1µg/l96-18-4 0.51,2,3-Trichloropropane BRL X

" " ""1µg/l95-63-6 0.51,2,4-Trimethylbenzene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l108-67-8 0.51,3,5-Trimethylbenzene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l75-01-4 0.5Vinyl chloride BRL X

" " ""1µg/l179601-23-1 0.5m,p-Xylene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l95-47-6 0.5o-Xylene BRL X

" " ""1µg/l109-99-9 10.0Tetrahydrofuran BRL

" " ""1µg/l994-05-8 0.5Tert-amyl methyl ether BRL X

" " ""1µg/l637-92-3 0.5Ethyl tert-butyl ether BRL X

" " ""1µg/l108-20-3 0.5Di-isopropyl ether BRL X

" " ""1µg/l75-65-0 10.0Tert-Butanol / butyl alcohol BRL X



80-120 %104Toluene-d8 " " ""2037-26-5





Page 6 of 22

MW-1Sample Identification



Client Project #08-211393.00 Ground Water

SA91578-03



Gasoline Range Organics

Prepared by method VPH - EPA 5030B

+Mod 8015 04-Mar-09 903023004-Mar-095mg/l 0.4Gasoline Range Organics BRL


70-130 %862,5-Dibromotoluene (PID) " " ""615-59-8

70-130 %892,5-Dibromotoluene (FID) " " ""615-59-8



SW846 8260B 06-Mar-09 903030405-Mar-091µg/l71-43-2 1.0Benzene 10.4


" " ""1µg/l107-06-2 1.01,2-Dichloroethane 1.1




" " ""1µg/l108-88-3 1.0Toluene 17.7

" " ""1µg/l95-63-6 1.01,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 1.0


" " ""1µg/l179601-23-1 2.0m,p-Xylene 4.6

" " ""1µg/l95-47-6 1.0o-Xylene 3.7



70-130 %103Toluene-d8 " " ""2037-26-5



Total Metals by EPA 6000/7000 Series Methods

SW846 6010B 06-Mar-09 903023905-Mar-091mg/l7439-92-1 0.0075Lead 0.0238 X



Page 7 of 22





SA91578-04

















" " ""1µg/l108-88-3 1.0Toluene BRL



" " ""1µg/l179601-23-1 2.0m,p-Xylene BRL

" " ""1µg/l95-47-6 1.0o-Xylene BRL



70-130 %106Toluene-d8 " " ""2037-26-5





Page 8 of 22





SA91578-05

















" " ""1µg/l108-88-3 1.0Toluene BRL



" " ""1µg/l179601-23-1 2.0m,p-Xylene BRL

" " ""1µg/l95-47-6 1.0o-Xylene BRL



70-130 %103Toluene-d8 " " ""2037-26-5





Page 9 of 22

DuplicateSample Identification




SA91578-06











SW846 8260B 07-Mar-09 903042206-Mar-091µg/l71-43-2 1.0Benzene 7.7



" " ""1µg/l100-41-4 1.0Ethylbenzene 2.2



" " ""1µg/l108-88-3 1.0Toluene 13.7



" " ""1µg/l179601-23-1 2.0m,p-Xylene 3.7

" " ""1µg/l95-47-6 1.0o-Xylene 2.8



70-130 %103Toluene-d8 " " ""2037-26-5





Page 10 of 22

Result Units Level

Spike

Result

Source

%REC

%REC

Limits RPD

RPD

LimitFlag Analyte(s)

Volatile Organic Compounds - Quality Control

*RDL

Batch 9030142 - VPH - EPA 5030B

Blank (9030142-BLK1)

Prepared & Analyzed: 03-Mar-09

Gasoline Range Organics mg/l 0.4BRL

50.0 70-130Surrogate: 2,5-Dibromotoluene (PID) 8844.1 mg/l

50.0 70-130Surrogate: 2,5-Dibromotoluene (FID) 7537.7 mg/l

LCS (9030142-BS1)


Gasoline Range Organics 365 70-13096mg/l349



LCS Dup (9030142-BSD1)


Gasoline Range Organics 365 2570-13096 0.5mg/l351



Duplicate (9030142-DUP1)

Prepared: 03-Mar-09 Analyzed: 04-Mar-09

Source: SA91476-06

Gasoline Range Organics 303mg/l 0.4J 0.040.04



Matrix Spike (9030142-MS1)


Source: SA91476-06

Gasoline Range Organics 365 70-13084mg/l 38.2346



Batch 9030216 - VPH - EPA 5030B






LCS (9030216-BS1)







Gasoline Range Organics 365 2570-130100 1mg/l365





Source: SA91531-08

Gasoline Range Organics 30mg/l 0.4 BRLBRL





Source: SA91531-08





Page 11 of 22

Result Units Level

Spike

Result

Source

%REC

%REC

Limits RPD

RPD



*RDL

Batch 9030216 - VPH - EPA 5030B



Source: SA91531-08


Batch 9030230 - VPH - EPA 5030B






LCS (9030230-BS1)







Gasoline Range Organics 365 2570-13083 0.2mg/l305





Source: SA91570-04

Gasoline Range Organics 30mg/l 0.4 BRLBRL





Source: SA91570-04




Batch 9030295 - SW846 5030 Water MS



1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane (Freon 113) µg/l 0.5BRL

Acetone µg/l 10.0BRL

Acrylonitrile µg/l 0.5BRL

Benzene µg/l 0.5BRL

Bromobenzene µg/l 0.5BRL

Bromochloromethane µg/l 0.5BRL

Bromodichloromethane µg/l 0.5BRL

Bromoform µg/l 0.5BRL

Bromomethane µg/l 0.5BRL

2-Butanone (MEK) µg/l 10.0BRL

n-Butylbenzene µg/l 0.5BRL

sec-Butylbenzene µg/l 0.5BRL

tert-Butylbenzene µg/l 0.5BRL

Carbon disulfide µg/l 0.5BRL

Carbon tetrachloride µg/l 0.5BRL

Chlorobenzene µg/l 0.5BRL

Chloroethane µg/l 0.5BRL

Chloroform µg/l 0.5BRL



Page 12 of 22

Result Units Level

Spike

Result

Source

%REC

%REC

Limits RPD

RPD



*RDL




Chloromethane µg/l 0.5BRL

2-Chlorotoluene µg/l 0.5BRL

4-Chlorotoluene µg/l 0.5BRL

1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane µg/l 0.5BRL

Dibromochloromethane µg/l 0.5BRL

1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) µg/l 0.5BRL

Dibromomethane µg/l 0.5BRL

1,2-Dichlorobenzene µg/l 0.5BRL



Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon12) µg/l 0.5BRL

1,1-Dichloroethane µg/l 0.5BRL


1,1-Dichloroethene µg/l 0.5BRL

cis-1,2-Dichloroethene µg/l 0.5BRL

trans-1,2-Dichloroethene µg/l 0.5BRL

1,2-Dichloropropane µg/l 0.5BRL



1,1-Dichloropropene µg/l 0.5BRL

cis-1,3-Dichloropropene µg/l 0.5BRL

trans-1,3-Dichloropropene µg/l 0.5BRL

Ethylbenzene µg/l 0.5BRL

Hexachlorobutadiene µg/l 0.5BRL

2-Hexanone (MBK) µg/l 10.0BRL

Isopropylbenzene µg/l 0.5BRL

4-Isopropyltoluene µg/l 0.5BRL

Methyl tert-butyl ether µg/l 0.5BRL

4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) µg/l 10.0BRL

Methylene chloride µg/l 0.5BRL

Naphthalene µg/l 0.5BRL

n-Propylbenzene µg/l 0.5BRL

Styrene µg/l 0.5BRL

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane µg/l 0.5BRL

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane µg/l 0.5BRL

Tetrachloroethene µg/l 0.5BRL

Toluene µg/l 0.5BRL

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene µg/l 0.5BRL

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene µg/l 0.5BRL

1,1,1-Trichloroethane µg/l 0.5BRL

1,1,2-Trichloroethane µg/l 0.5BRL

Trichloroethene µg/l 0.5BRL

Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11) µg/l 0.5BRL

1,2,3-Trichloropropane µg/l 0.5BRL

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene µg/l 0.5BRL


Vinyl chloride µg/l 0.5BRL

m,p-Xylene µg/l 0.5BRL

o-Xylene µg/l 0.5BRL



Page 13 of 22

Result Units Level

Spike

Result

Source

%REC

%REC

Limits RPD

RPD



*RDL




Tetrahydrofuran µg/l 10.0BRL

Tert-amyl methyl ether µg/l 0.5BRL

Ethyl tert-butyl ether µg/l 0.5BRL

Di-isopropyl ether µg/l 0.5BRL

Tert-Butanol / butyl alcohol µg/l 10.0BRL

50.0 80-120Surrogate: 4-Bromofluorobenzene 9145.5 µg/l

50.0 80-120Surrogate: Toluene-d8 10351.4 µg/l

50.0 80-120Surrogate: 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 10250.8 µg/l

50.0 80-120Surrogate: Dibromofluoromethane 9949.5 µg/l

LCS (9030295-BS1)


1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane (Freon 113) 10.0 80-120105µg/l10.5

Acetone 10.0 70-130111µg/l11.1

Acrylonitrile 10.0 70-13097µg/l9.7

Benzene 10.0 80-12090µg/l9.0

Bromobenzene 10.0 80-12091µg/l9.1

Bromochloromethane 10.0 80-12097µg/l9.7

Bromodichloromethane 10.0 80-12094µg/l9.4

Bromoform 10.0 80-120102µg/l10.2

Bromomethane 10.0 80-12086µg/l8.6

2-Butanone (MEK) 10.0 70-13078µg/l7.8

n-Butylbenzene 10.0 80-12078µg/lQC17.8

sec-Butylbenzene 10.0 80-12083µg/l8.3

tert-Butylbenzene 10.0 80-12081µg/l8.1

Carbon disulfide 10.0 70-130171µg/lQC217.1

Carbon tetrachloride 10.0 80-12096µg/l9.6

Chlorobenzene 10.0 80-12096µg/l9.6

Chloroethane 10.0 80-12080µg/l8.0

Chloroform 10.0 80-12087µg/l8.7

Chloromethane 10.0 80-12086µg/l8.6

2-Chlorotoluene 10.0 80-12082µg/l8.2

4-Chlorotoluene 10.0 80-12082µg/l8.2

1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 10.0 80-12089µg/l8.9

Dibromochloromethane 10.0 80-12096µg/l9.6

1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) 10.0 80-12085µg/l8.5

Dibromomethane 10.0 80-12086µg/l8.6

1,2-Dichlorobenzene 10.0 80-12090µg/l9.0



Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon12) 10.0 80-12086µg/l8.6

1,1-Dichloroethane 10.0 80-12090µg/l9.0


1,1-Dichloroethene 10.0 80-120108µg/l10.8

cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 10.0 80-12088µg/l8.8

trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 10.0 80-12095µg/l9.5

1,2-Dichloropropane 10.0 80-12086µg/l8.6



1,1-Dichloropropene 10.0 80-12088µg/l8.8

cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 10.0 80-12088µg/l8.8



Page 14 of 22

Result Units Level

Spike

Result

Source

%REC

%REC

Limits RPD

RPD



*RDL


LCS (9030295-BS1)


trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 10.0 80-12089µg/l8.9

Ethylbenzene 10.0 80-12085µg/l8.5

Hexachlorobutadiene 10.0 80-12096µg/l9.6

2-Hexanone (MBK) 10.0 70-13074µg/l7.4

Isopropylbenzene 10.0 80-12087µg/l8.7

4-Isopropyltoluene 10.0 80-12083µg/l8.3

Methyl tert-butyl ether 10.0 80-12087µg/l8.7

4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) 10.0 70-13077µg/l7.7

Methylene chloride 10.0 80-120105µg/l10.5

Naphthalene 10.0 80-12070µg/lQC27.0

n-Propylbenzene 10.0 80-12080µg/l8.0

Styrene 10.0 80-12084µg/l8.4

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 10.0 80-12096µg/l9.6

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 10.0 80-12094µg/l9.4

Tetrachloroethene 10.0 80-12095µg/l9.5

Toluene 10.0 80-12090µg/l9.0

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 10.0 80-12081µg/l8.1

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 10.0 80-12075µg/lQC27.5

1,1,1-Trichloroethane 10.0 80-12095µg/l9.5

1,1,2-Trichloroethane 10.0 80-12090µg/l9.0

Trichloroethene 10.0 80-12085µg/l8.5

Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11) 10.0 80-120110µg/l11.0

1,2,3-Trichloropropane 10.0 80-12091µg/l9.1

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 10.0 80-12083µg/l8.3


Vinyl chloride 10.0 80-120112µg/l11.2

m,p-Xylene 20.0 80-12089µg/l17.7

o-Xylene 10.0 80-12089µg/l8.9

Tetrahydrofuran 10.0 70-13077µg/l7.7

Tert-amyl methyl ether 10.0 70-13093µg/l9.3

Ethyl tert-butyl ether 10.0 70-13081µg/l8.1

Di-isopropyl ether 10.0 70-13085µg/l8.5

Tert-Butanol / butyl alcohol 100 70-13098µg/l97.9







1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane (Freon 113) 10.0 2080-120101 3µg/l10.1

Acetone 10.0 3070-130109 2µg/l10.9

Acrylonitrile 10.0 3070-130106 9µg/l10.6

Benzene 10.0 2080-12090 0.9µg/l9.0

Bromobenzene 10.0 2080-12083 9µg/l8.3

Bromochloromethane 10.0 2080-12093 5µg/l9.3

Bromodichloromethane 10.0 2080-12096 2µg/l9.6

Bromoform 10.0 2080-12094 9µg/l9.4

Bromomethane 10.0 2080-12096 11µg/l9.6

2-Butanone (MEK) 10.0 3070-130102 26µg/l10.2

n-Butylbenzene 10.0 2080-12083 7µg/l8.3



Page 15 of 22

Result Units Level

Spike

Result

Source

%REC

%REC

Limits RPD

RPD



*RDL




sec-Butylbenzene 10.0 2080-12083 0.1µg/l8.3

tert-Butylbenzene 10.0 2080-12079 2µg/lQC17.9

Carbon disulfide 10.0 3070-130156 9µg/lQC215.6

Carbon tetrachloride 10.0 2080-12096 0.1µg/l9.6

Chlorobenzene 10.0 2080-12089 8µg/l8.9

Chloroethane 10.0 2080-120100 22µg/lQR210.0

Chloroform 10.0 2080-12087 0.7µg/l8.7

Chloromethane 10.0 2080-12098 12µg/l9.8

2-Chlorotoluene 10.0 2080-12083 1µg/l8.3

4-Chlorotoluene 10.0 2080-12081 1µg/l8.1

1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 10.0 2080-12098 10µg/l9.8

Dibromochloromethane 10.0 2080-12092 4µg/l9.2

1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) 10.0 2080-12088 4µg/l8.8

Dibromomethane 10.0 2080-12091 6µg/l9.1

1,2-Dichlorobenzene 10.0 2080-12088 2µg/l8.8



Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon12) 10.0 2080-12088 2µg/l8.8

1,1-Dichloroethane 10.0 2080-12093 3µg/l9.3


1,1-Dichloroethene 10.0 2080-120103 5µg/l10.3

cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 10.0 2080-12088 1µg/l8.8

trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 10.0 2080-12089 6µg/l8.9

1,2-Dichloropropane 10.0 2080-12091 6µg/l9.1



1,1-Dichloropropene 10.0 2080-12089 2µg/l8.9

cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 10.0 2080-12088 1µg/l8.8

trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 10.0 2080-12094 5µg/l9.4

Ethylbenzene 10.0 2080-12081 4µg/l8.1

Hexachlorobutadiene 10.0 2080-12078 21µg/lQC17.8

2-Hexanone (MBK) 10.0 3070-13094 24µg/l9.4

Isopropylbenzene 10.0 2080-12082 5µg/l8.2

4-Isopropyltoluene 10.0 2080-12085 1µg/l8.5

Methyl tert-butyl ether 10.0 2080-12091 5µg/l9.1

4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) 10.0 3070-13090 15µg/l9.0

Methylene chloride 10.0 2080-120103 2µg/l10.3

Naphthalene 10.0 2080-12067 5µg/lQC26.7

n-Propylbenzene 10.0 2080-12078 3µg/lQC17.8

Styrene 10.0 2080-12081 3µg/l8.1

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 10.0 2080-12082 16µg/l8.2

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 10.0 2080-12096 3µg/l9.6

Tetrachloroethene 10.0 2080-12081 16µg/l8.1

Toluene 10.0 2080-12089 2µg/l8.9

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 10.0 2080-12075 7µg/lQC17.5

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 10.0 2080-12070 6µg/lQC27.0

1,1,1-Trichloroethane 10.0 2080-12095 0.2µg/l9.5

1,1,2-Trichloroethane 10.0 2080-12094 5µg/l9.4

Trichloroethene 10.0 2080-12088 3µg/l8.8



Page 16 of 22

Result Units Level

Spike

Result

Source

%REC

%REC

Limits RPD

RPD



*RDL




Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11) 10.0 2080-120108 3µg/l10.8

1,2,3-Trichloropropane 10.0 2080-12099 8µg/l9.9

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 10.0 2080-12082 1µg/l8.2


Vinyl chloride 10.0 2080-120106 5µg/l10.6

m,p-Xylene 20.0 2080-12080 10µg/l16.1

o-Xylene 10.0 2080-12081 9µg/l8.1

Tetrahydrofuran 10.0 3070-13094 19µg/l9.4

Tert-amyl methyl ether 10.0 3070-130102 10µg/l10.2

Ethyl tert-butyl ether 10.0 3070-13088 8µg/l8.8

Di-isopropyl ether 10.0 3070-13092 8µg/l9.2

Tert-Butanol / butyl alcohol 100 3070-130109 11µg/l109







Source: SA91684-01

Benzene 20.0 80-12095µg/l BRL19.1

Chlorobenzene 20.0 80-120117µg/l BRL23.5

1,1-Dichloroethene 20.0 80-12091µg/l BRL18.2

Toluene 20.0 80-120105µg/l BRL20.9

Trichloroethene 20.0 80-120100µg/l BRL19.9





Matrix Spike Dup (9030295-MSD1)


Source: SA91684-01

Benzene 20.0 2080-12097 1µg/l BRL19.3

Chlorobenzene 20.0 2080-120119 2µg/l BRL23.9

1,1-Dichloroethene 20.0 2080-12091 0.2µg/l BRL18.2

Toluene 20.0 2080-120106 2µg/l BRL21.3

Trichloroethene 20.0 2080-120100 0.4µg/l BRL20.0



















Page 17 of 22

Result Units Level

Spike

Result

Source

%REC

%REC

Limits RPD

RPD



*RDL













LCS (9030304-BS1)


Benzene 10.0 70-13099µg/l9.9





Naphthalene 10.0 70-13070µg/l7.0

Toluene 10.0 70-130106µg/l10.6



m,p-Xylene 20.0 70-13099µg/l19.9

o-Xylene 10.0 70-130100µg/l10.0







Benzene 10.0 3070-130102 3µg/l10.2




Methyl tert-butyl ether 10.0 3070-13094 0.6µg/l9.4

Naphthalene 10.0 3070-13072 3µg/l7.2

Toluene 10.0 3070-130102 4µg/l10.2



m,p-Xylene 20.0 3070-13098 1µg/l19.6

o-Xylene 10.0 3070-13098 1µg/l9.8







Source: SA91648-03

Benzene 20.0 70-13094µg/l BRL18.7


1,1-Dichloroethene 20.0 70-13087µg/l BRL17.5

Toluene 20.0 70-130104µg/l BRL20.8




Page 18 of 22

Result Units Level

Spike

Result

Source

%REC

%REC

Limits RPD

RPD



*RDL




Source: SA91648-03







Source: SA91648-03

Benzene 20.0 3070-13094 0.8µg/l BRL18.9

Chlorobenzene 20.0 3070-130113 0.7µg/l BRL22.6

1,1-Dichloroethene 20.0 3070-13085 3µg/l BRL17.0

Toluene 20.0 3070-130104 0.2µg/l BRL20.8

Trichloroethene 20.0 3070-130100 1µg/l BRL20.0


























LCS (9030422-BS1)


Benzene 20.0 70-13091µg/l18.2





Naphthalene 20.0 70-13071µg/l14.2

Toluene 20.0 70-13099µg/l19.8



m,p-Xylene 40.0 70-13089µg/l35.6

o-Xylene 20.0 70-13093µg/l18.7




Page 19 of 22

Result Units Level

Spike

Result

Source

%REC

%REC

Limits RPD

RPD



*RDL


LCS (9030422-BS1)







Benzene 20.0 3070-13083 9µg/l16.6




Methyl tert-butyl ether 20.0 3070-13090 3µg/l17.9

Naphthalene 20.0 3070-13063 12µg/lQC112.6

Toluene 20.0 3070-13094 6µg/l18.8



m,p-Xylene 40.0 3070-13085 5µg/l34.0

o-Xylene 20.0 3070-13089 5µg/l17.8







Source: SA91750-01

Benzene 20.0 70-13076µg/l BRL15.2


1,1-Dichloroethene 20.0 70-13036µg/lQM7 BRL7.1

Toluene 20.0 70-130103µg/l BRL20.7








Source: SA91750-01

Benzene 20.0 3070-13088 15µg/l BRL17.7

Chlorobenzene 20.0 3070-130115 3µg/l BRL23.1

1,1-Dichloroethene 20.0 3070-1308 123µg/lQM7 BRL1.7

Toluene 20.0 3070-130135 26µg/lQM7 BRL27.0

Trichloroethene 20.0 3070-130126 25µg/l BRL25.3




50.0 70-130Surrogate: Dibromofluoromethane 13266.1 µg/lSGC



Page 20 of 22

Result Units Level

Spike

Result

Source

%REC

%REC

Limits RPD

RPD


Total Metals by EPA 6000/7000 Series Methods - Quality Control

*RDL

Batch 9030239 - SW846 3005A



Lead mg/l 0.0075BRL

LCS (9030239-BS1)


Lead 1.25 85-115108mg/l 0.00751.35



Lead 1.25 2085-115111 2mg/l 0.00751.38



Source: SA91578-03

Lead 200mg/l 0.0075 0.02380.0238



Source: SA91664-01

Lead 1.25 75-125103mg/l 0.0075 BRL1.29



Source: SA91664-01

Lead 1.25 2075-125106 3mg/l 0.0075 BRL1.33

Post Spike (9030239-PS1)


Source: SA91664-01

Lead 1.25 80-120107mg/l 0.0075 BRL1.34



Page 21 of 22

Notes and Definitions

Analyte out of acceptance range.QC1

Analyte out of acceptance range in QC spike but no reportable concentration present in sample.QC2

The spike recovery was outside acceptance limits for the MS and/or MSD. The batch was accepted based on acceptable

LCS recovery.

QM7

The RPD result exceeded the QC control limits; however, both percent recoveries were acceptable. Sample results for the

QC batch were accepted based on percent recoveries and completeness of QC data.

QR2

Surrogate recovery outside of control limits. The data was accepted based on valid recovery of the remaining surrogate.SGC

RPD Relative Percent Difference

dry Sample results reported on a dry weight basis

BRL Below Reporting Limit - Analyte NOT DETECTED at or above the reporting limit

Not ReportedNR

J Detected but below the Reporting Limit; therefore, result is an estimated concentration (CLP J-Flag).

A plus sign (+) in the Method Reference column indicates the method is not accredited by NELAC.

Laboratory Control Sample (LCS): A known matrix spiked with compound(s) representative of the target analytes, which is used to

document laboratory performance.

Matrix Duplicate: An intra-laboratory split sample which is used to document the precision of a method in a given sample matrix.

Matrix Spike: An aliquot of a sample spiked with a known concentration of target analyte(s). The spiking occurs prior to sample

preparation and analysis. A matrix spike is used to document the bias of a method in a given sample matrix.

Method Blank: An analyte-free matrix to which all reagents are added in the same volumes or proportions as used in sample

processing. The method blank should be carried through the complete sample preparation and analytical procedure. The method

blank is used to document contamination resulting from the analytical process.

Method Detection Limit (MDL): The minimum concentration of a substance that can be measured and reported with 99%

confidence that the analyte concentration is greater than zero and is determined from analysis of a sample in a given matrix type

containing the analyte.

Reportable Detection Limit (RDL): The lowest concentration that can be reliably achieved within specified limits of precision and

accuracy during routine laboratory operating conditions. For many analytes the RDL analyte concentration is selected as the lowest

non-zero standard in the calibration curve. While the RDL is approximately 5 to 10 times the MDL, the RDL for each sample takes

into account the sample volume/weight, extract/digestate volume, cleanup procedures and, if applicable, dry weight correction.

Sample RDLs are highly matrix-dependent.

Surrogate: An organic compound which is similar to the target analyte(s) in chemical composition and behavior in the analytical

process, but which is not normally found in environmental samples. These compounds are spiked into all blanks, standards, and

samples prior to analysis. Percent recoveries are calculated for each surrogate.

Validated by:

Hanibal C. Tayeh, Ph.D.

Rebecca Merz



Page 22 of 22

Documents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - Vermont · i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Environmental Compliance Services, Inc. (ECS) has conducted an initial site investigation (ISI) at the Herttua Residence, located