FINAL LIGHT NON-AQUEOUS PHASE LIQUID (LNAPL) … · GMA 1 containing LNAPL on groundwater at a seasonal average depth of less than 15 feet bgs and at a lateral distance within 30

Transmitted Via Overnight Courier

April12, 2013

Mr. Richard Fisher U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 5 Post Office Square - Suite 1 00 Boston, Massachusetts 02109-3912

Re: GE-Pittsfield/Housatonic River Site Groundwater Management Area 1 (GECD310)

GE 159 Plastics Avenue Pittsfield, MA 01201 USA

Final LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report for East Street Area 1

Dear Mr. Fisher:

Enclosed is a report entitled Final LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report for East Street Area 1. This report describes the soil gas sampling event conducted in December 2012 at East Street Area 1-South within Groundwater Management Area (GMA) 1, presents the results from that sampling event as well as the June 2012 sampling event (along with certain associated groundwater monitoring results), and includes an overall evaluation of the soil gas results to assess the need for additional investigation or evaluation activities.

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

Sincerely,

Richard W. Gates Remediation Project Manager

Enclosure

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

PEDA (CD-ROM)

Corporate En,llrunmentol Programs

Barbara Landau, Noble & Wickersham (CD-ROM) James Gagnon, O'Reilly, Talbot & Okun David Langseth, Gradient Corporation (CD-ROM) Andrew Silfer, GE (cover letter only) Rod McLaren, GE (cover letter only) James Nuss, ARCADIS James Bieke, Sidley Austin John Ciampa, SPECTRA Jack Yablonsky, Berkshire Gas Richard Nasman, Berkshire Gas (cover letter only) Ishwar Murarka, Ish, Inc. Property Owners - Parcels J I 0-6-I 0, J I 0-6-17,

JI0-6-2I, 110-6-22, JI0-6-24, & 110-6-3I Public Information Repositories GE Internal Repositories

General Electric Company Pittsfield, Massachusetts

Final LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report for East Street Area 1

Groundwater Management Area 1 April 2013

Final LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report for East Street Area 1 Groundwater Management Area 1

Prepared for:

General Electric Company

Prepared by:

ARCADIS of New York, Inc. 6723 Towpath Road P.O. Box 66 Syracuse New York 13214-0066 Tel 315.446.9120 Fax 315.449.0017 Our Ref.:

B0031215

Date:

April 12, 2013

G:\GE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_1\Reports and Presentations\ESA1S VI Report Fall 2012\0861311214_LNAPL VolRpt-Final.doc i

Table of Contents

1. Background 1

2. Summary of Soil Gas Investigation Activities 3

2.1 Soil Gas Sample Locations 3

2.2 Soil Gas Sampling and Analysis Methods 3

2.3 Modifications to Analytical Methods 4

2.4 Data Validation 6

2.5 Associated Groundwater Monitoring 6

3. Summary of Analytical Results 8

3.1 Soil Gas Analytical Results 8

3.2 Comparison to Screening Levels 9

3.2.1 Residential Areas 9

3.2.2 Commercial Areas 10

3.3 Comparison of Soil Gas Data to Historical LNAPL 10

3.4 Associated Groundwater Monitoring Results 11

4. Discussion of Results 12

4.1 Evaluation of Detected Constituents with Concentrations Exceeding Soil Gas RSLs 12

4.1.1 Bromodichloromethane and Chloroform 13

4.1.2 Evaluation of Other Constituents Detected in Soil Gas Above RSLs 15

4.2 Evaluation of Detected Constituents without Screening Levels 16

4.3 Evaluation of Non-Detect Constituents with Detection Limits Above RSLs 18

5. Conclusions and Recommendation 20

6. References 22

G:\GE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_1\Reports and Presentations\ESA1S VI Report Fall 2012\0861311214_LNAPL VolRpt-Final.doc ii

Table of Contents

Tables

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

Table 2 Soil Gas Sampling Results via Method TO-17 and TO-13a (µg/m3) – East Street Area 1 South – Residential

Table 3 Soil Gas and Ambient Air Sampling Results via Method TO-15 (µg/m3) – East Street Area 1 South – Industrial

Table 4 Soil Gas Sampling Results via Method TO-17 and TO-13a (µg/m3) – East Street Area 1 South – Industrial

Table 5 Soil Gas and Ambient Air Sampling Results via Method TO-15 (ppbv) – East Street Area 1 South – Residential

Table 6 Soil Gas Sampling Results via Method TO-17 and TO-13a (ppbv) – East Street Area 1 South – Residential

Table 7 Soil Gas and Ambient Air Sampling Results via Method TO-15 (ppbv) – East Street Area 1 South – Industrial

Table 8 Soil Gas Sampling Results via Method TO-17 and TO-13a (ppbv) – East Street Area 1 South – Industrial

Table 9 East Street Area 1 LNAPL Analytical Results

Table 10 East Street Area 1 Groundwater Analytical Results

Table 11 Evaluation of Constituents Above Screening Levels

Table 12 Evaluation of Detected Constituents without Screening Levels

Table 13 Evaluation of Constituents with Detection Limits Above Screening Levels

Figure

Figure 1 LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Sampling Locations

Attachments

Attachment A Sample Logs

Attachment B Air Sampling Data Validation Report: Soil Gas Investigation – December 2012

Attachment C City of Pittsfield Drinking Water Quality Reports and bromodichloromethane/ chloroform related documentation

G:\GE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_1\Reports and Presentations\ESA1S VI Report Fall 2012\0861311214_LNAPL VolRpt-Final.doc iii

Table of Contents

Attachment D City of Pittsfield East Street Area 1 Utility Figure and Supporting Documents

Attachment E GE Pittsfield Groundwater Data for Bromodichloromethane and Chloroform

G:\GE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_1\Reports and Presentations\ESA1S VI Report Fall 2012\0861311214_LNAPL VolRpt-Final.doc 1

LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report

1. Background

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

Section 2 of the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan identified areas within GMA 1 containing LNAPL on groundwater at a seasonal average depth of less than 15 feet bgs and at a lateral distance within 30 feet from an occupied or potentially occupied building. It noted that GE’s initial LNAPL volatilization assessment proposal in March 2011 had identified such areas within two Removal Action Areas at GMA 1 – namely, East Street Area 1-North and East Street Area 1-South. It explained further, however, that since that time, it was determined that the existing buildings at East Street Area 1-North, which were unoccupied, would be demolished in the near future. (In fact, those buildings were demolished in February 2012.) For this reason, the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan proposed to evaluate the potential for impacts from volatilization of constituents in the LNAPL on the indoor air of two commercial buildings and six residential buildings at East Street Area 1-South. These consist of the commercial buildings at 1260 and 1264 East Street and the residential structures at 1224/1226, 1228, 1230/1232, 1234, 1236/1238, and 1244/1246 East Street, as shown on Figure 1.

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



from these soil gas sampling rounds would be compared to the pertinent EPA Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) for indoor air in commercial/industrial or residential buildings (as applicable), converted to soil gas RSLs using an attenuation factor of 0.1 for both types of buildings. It provided further that, if the data showed exceedances of those conservative soil gas RSLs, GE would evaluate the data and propose follow-up activities if necessary.

The initial round of soil gas sampling was conducted on June 21-22, 2012, at the approved locations near the commercial and residential buildings. The East Street Area 1 LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Interim Data Report (LNAPL Volatilization Interim Data Report; ARCADIS 2012c), submitted on September 6, 2012, described the June 2012 sampling event and associated groundwater monitoring activities conducted as part of the LNAPL volatilization assessment, presented the soil gas results from that sampling event, and proposed certain modifications to the LNAPL volatilization assessment to be implemented for the second soil gas sampling round.

This report was conditionally approved by EPA on November 15, 2012 (EPA 2012b). As part of its conditional approval, EPA required GE to provide a proposal for modifications to the sampling and/or analytical methods for certain analytes which had reporting limits higher than the EPA RSLs during the initial sampling round, so as to achieve reporting or detection limits at or below those RSLs or, where that is not feasible, to reach the lowest levels that can be practicably achieved. In response, on November 20, 2012, GE submitted a revised and expanded version of Table 11 from the LNAPL Volatilization Interim Data Report that listed, in revised Tables 11a and 11b, the analytical methods and proposed sample volumes to be used in the second sampling round, together with the expected method detection limits and reporting limits, along with the soil gas RSL, for all analytes included in the assessment (ARCADIS 2012d). EPA provided conditional approval of that submittal on December 6, 2012 (EPA 2012c).

The second round of soil gas sampling was conducted on December 11-13, 2012, at the same locations sampled in June 2012. This Final LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report for East Street Area 1 (LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report) describes the December 2012 sampling event and presents the soil gas sampling results from both the June and December 2012 sampling events. This report also includes an overall evaluation of the soil gas results, including a comparison to the EPA RSLs, to determine if additional activities are necessary to further assess the potential for impacts of constituents from the LNAPL to the indoor air of the above-identified buildings. This evaluation includes a number of specific discussions required by EPA’s conditional approval letters of November 15 and December 6, 2012, to support the elimination of certain constituents from the need for further evaluation or investigation.



2. Summary of Soil Gas Investigation Activities

GE proposed to conduct two soil gas sampling events to account for potential temporal and seasonal variability in results, and EPA approved that proposal. A description of the initial sampling event conducted on June 21-22, 2012 was presented in the LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Interim Data Report and is incorporated by reference therein. This section describes the details of the second sampling event conducted on December 11-13, 2012.

2.1 Soil Gas Sample Locations

Both soil gas sampling events included the collection of soil gas samples at the same six sample locations (SVP-1 through SVP-6), consistent with the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan and EPA’s conditional approval letter for it. Sample locations were situated in areas where (1) LNAPL had been observed in the last five years within 30 feet from the buildings identified for evaluation (i.e., monitoring wells 31R, 33, 34, 35, 72, 75 and 76 and both the Southside and Northside Recovery Systems); or (2) existing monitoring wells were not present between the building and apparent LNAPL accumulation areas. These six soil gas sample locations, along with the monitoring well and recovery system locations, are shown on Figure 1. A detailed description of the buildings located near the sampling locations was presented in the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan. These consist of the commercial buildings at 1260 and 1264 East Street and the six residential structures at 1224/1226, 1228, 1230/1232, 1234, 1236/1238, and 1244/1246 East Street (Figure 1).

In addition to the sampling of these six points, both the June and the December sampling events included collection of an ambient air sample at a location upgradient of the soil gas locations, as also shown on Figure 1, to evaluate the potential presence of background sources of the constituents.

2.2 Soil Gas Sampling and Analysis Methods

During the December 11-13, 2012 sampling event, soil gas samples were collected as detailed in the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan, with certain modifications described in the LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Interim Data Report and the subsequent revised and expanded version of Table 11 from that report. Those modifications are discussed in Section 2.3 below. A helium tracer gas leak test had been conducted at each soil gas sampling point during the June 2012 sampling event and all six points were shown to be properly sealed, indicating that there was no influence from ambient air into the collected samples. Therefore, the helium tracer gas leak test was not repeated prior to the December 2012 sampling event, consistent with ARCADIS’s standard operating procedures (ARCADIS 2012a).



Consistent with the June 2012 event, all soil gas samples were collected from soil gas probes installed approximately one foot above the water table. The collection of soil gas data close to the water table has been shown to provide worst-case results that are comparable to conditions that might be found under a building slab. Soil gas samples collected for analysis of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method TO-15 and certain associated semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) that can be analyzed by the same method (e.g., naphthalene) were collected in passivated SUMMA® canisters with an attached pre-set flow regulator. Due to elevated detection limits recorded during the June 2012 sampling event, the SUMMA® canister volume was increased from 1 liter to 6 liters to provide additional sample volume for the analytical laboratory to use for analysis. All canisters were confirmed to have acceptable vacuum levels prior to sample collection. Soil gas samples for analyses of other SVOCs, namely, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), were collected using sorbent tube methodology as specified by EPA Methods TO-13A and TO-17. Additionally, soil gas samples were collected for analysis of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) using sorbent tube methodology in accordance with EPA Method TO-17. Sample logs are presented in Attachment A.

As previously noted, an ambient air sample was collected upgradient of the soil gas sampling locations. This ambient sample was collected using a passivated 6-liter SUMMA® canister with an attached pre-set flow regulator. The sample was collected from breathing height (approximately 3 to 5 feet above ground) from a location upwind of all the soil gas samples. The ambient air sample was collected for analysis of VOCs and associated SVOCs using EPA Method TO-15.

All samples were submitted to Air Toxics Ltd, located in Folsom, California for analysis. Air Toxics has a current National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP) certification and is accredited in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The samples were analyzed for VOCs and associated SVOCs by EPA Method TO-15, for PAHs by EPA Methods TO-13A and TO-17 (depending on the particular constituents), and for PCBs by EPA Method TO-17. The modifications to the analytical methods used for the December 2012 samples are described in Section 2.3, and the results received from the laboratory are discussed in Section 3.

2.3 Modifications to Analytical Methods

As indicated in the LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Interim Data Report, the soil gas samples collected in June 2012 were analyzed for VOCs and associated SVOCs by EPA Method TO-15, for PAHs by EPA Methods TO13A and TO-17, and for PCBs by EPA Method TO-17. For VOCs and associated SVOCs analyzed by Method TO-15, the reporting limits were lower than the calculated soil gas RSLs for the majority of compounds; however, for some of these constituents, it was not possible to obtain lower reporting limits below the RSLs using the standard Method TO-15 analysis. For PAHs and PCBs, the reporting limits used



were the currently available limits associated with the volumes of soil gas obtained in accordance with the methods approved in the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan, but were generally above the RSLs (where available).

Although standard methods were used for all analyses, EPA’s November 15, 2012, conditional approval letter directed GE to work with the analytical laboratory to modify the current methods to reach reporting or detection limits below the RSLs or, where that was not feasible, the lowest levels that could be practicably achieved. GE’s November 20, 2012 letter to EPA replaced Table 11 from the LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Interim Data Report with revised Tables 11a and 11b, which proposed lower reporting or detection limits for many constituents. Tables 11a and 11b were conditionally approved by EPA on December 6, 2012. The lower reporting and detection limits presented in Tables 11a and 11b were developed in consultation with the analytical laboratory and included several modifications to the sampling and analytical approach for the second round, as described below.

For VOCs and associated SVOCs analyzed by Method TO-15, reporting and detection limits were reduced by the analytical laboratory using both a low-level scan and a Selected Ion Monitoring (SIM) scan. These TO-15 methods are the same as the standard TO-15 method, with the exception that they use more sensitive instrumentation to allow the identification of lower concentrations and the achievement of lower detection and/or reporting limits. Of the chemicals analyzed by Method TO-15, approximately 20 were evaluated using the SIM mode and the remainder were evaluated using the low-level scan mode. With these modifications, the reporting and detection limits were significantly lowered. The revised Table 11a submitted to EPA on November 20, 2012 specified base reporting or method detection limits below the calculated residential soil gas RSLs for all of the TO-15 constituents except four (1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane, acrolein, acrylonitrile, and hexachlorobutadiene). For the samples collected in December 2012, the laboratory was able to achieve reporting or detection limits below the residential soil gas RSLs for all of the TO-15 constituents except the four identified in revised Table 11a, plus one other (dibromochloromethane) in one sample.1

1 For three of the four constituents identified in revised Table 11a (1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane, acrolein, and acrylonitrile), the reporting limits for the December 2012 samples were above the residential soil gas RSLs and no method detection limits were available (since these are non-routine analytes), while for hexachlorobutadiene, both the reporting and the method detection limits were above those RSLs. For five other constituents analyzed by Method TO-15 in the December 2012 samples, none of which were detected, the reporting limits were above the residential soil gas RSLs, but the method detection limits were below those RSLs. This indicates that the compounds were not present at levels above the RSLs, because if they had been detected at levels between the reporting limits and method detection limits, they would have been reported as estimated (J-flagged) concentrations. These constituents were 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane, 1,2-dibromoethane, 3-chloropropene, benzyl chloride, and dibromochloromethane (except in one sample where the method detection limit slightly exceeded the residential soil gas RSL).



Similarly, for PCBs, GE worked with the analytical laboratory to develop a revised methodology to reduce the reporting limits for PCBs (to the residential screening level). Specifically, the methodology for PCB analysis was revised to utilize thermal desorption for Method TO-17 instead of a solvent extraction method. In contrast to the solvent extraction method, which uses only a small portion (1 to 2 microliters [mL]) of the final 1.0 mL extract, the thermal desorption technique introduces essentially the entire sample mass onto the unit. Using thermal desorption along with operating the mass spectrometer in the more sensitive SIM mode provided a 1000-fold improvement in analytical sensitivity as compared to the conventional TO-17 extraction-based method. Revised reporting limits for PCBs, which were equal to the calculated residential soil gas RSL, were presented to EPA in the revised Table 11b submitted to EPA on November 20, 2012. These revised reporting limits were achieved in the PCB analysis of the soil gas samples collected in December 2012.

For PAHs, a more refined analytical method is not currently available by which the reporting limits can be reduced to be lower than the soil gas RSLs (where available). This information was identified in the revised Table 11b and approved by EPA. As a result, the reporting and detection limits used for the December 2012 sampling event remained above the RSLs.

2.4 Data Validation

The 2012 soil gas and ambient air analytical results were received from the laboratory in units of both micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3) and parts per billion by volume (ppbv). These data have been validated. The results of the validation of the data collected in June 2012 were presented in Attachment C to the LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Interim Data Report, which is incorporated by reference herein. The results of the validation of the data collected in December 2012 are presented in Attachment B hereto. For both sets of data, the results of the validation indicate that 100% of the analytical data are considered usable.

2.5 Associated Groundwater Monitoring

The Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan stated that GE was then monitoring wells 33, 34, and 72 (located in East Street Area 1-South in the vicinity of the buildings subject to this assessment) for the presence of LNAPL on a monthly basis and that, as part of the LNAPL volatilization assessment, GE had initiated and would continue monthly monitoring for the presence of LNAPL at wells 35 and 76 for the duration of this assessment. These activities were conducted throughout 2012. Additional monitoring (approximately twice per week from late July through November 2012) was conducted at wells 33, 34, and 72 (and other locations) to support a separate evaluation of GE’s Northside Recovery System located at East Street Area 1-North. The monitoring results for the first half of 2012 (i.e., January through June 2012) were presented in GE’s Groundwater Management Area 1 NAPL Monitoring Report for Spring 2012 (Spring 2012 NAPL Monitoring Report, ARCADIS 2012b) and also discussed in the LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Interim Data Report. The results



of these activities throughout the second half of 2012 (i.e., July through December 2012) were presented in GE’s Groundwater Management Area 1 NAPL Monitoring Report for Fall 2012 (Fall 2012 NAPL Monitoring Report; ARCADIS 2013b). Those results are also briefly summarized in Section 3.4 below.

In addition, in its May 14, 2012 conditional approval letter for the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan, EPA directed GE to sample and analyze groundwater from well 31R for a full suite of VOCs and SVOCs for a minimum of four semi-annual monitoring rounds starting in spring 2012, and to add the entire suite of SVOCs to the analysis of groundwater from well 72R for at least the next two sampling rounds. EPA stated that GE should compare the results from these samples to the GW-2 Performance Standards (i.e., the Method 1 GW-2 groundwater standards set out in the Massachusetts Contingency Plan [MCP]). During the spring 2012 semi-annual sampling round, GE sampled and analyzed groundwater from well 31R for a full suite of VOCs and SVOCs and groundwater from well 72R for VOCs, as described in the LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Interim Data Report.2 During the fall 2012 semi-annual sampling round, conducted in October 2012, GE sampled and analyzed groundwater from well 31R for the full suite of VOCs and SVOCs and groundwater from well 72R for the full suite of SVOCs. The results of this sampling event were presented in GE’s Plant Site 1 Groundwater Management Area Groundwater Quality Monitoring Interim Report for Fall 2012 (Fall 2012 GMA 1 Groundwater Quality Report; ARCADIS 2013a), but are also briefly described in Section 3.4 of this LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report, as required by EPA’s May 14, 2012 conditional approval letter. These analyses will continue in spring 2013.

2 As noted in that report, well 72R was not sampled for a full suite of SVOCs in spring 2012 because that sampling event was conducted prior to receipt of EPA’s May 14, 2012 conditional approval letter.



3. Summary of Analytical Results

This section presents a summary of the analytical results from the soil gas (and ambient) air samples collected during the June 2012 and December 2012 sampling events and a comparison of the soil gas results to the calculated soil gas RSLs, as well as historical LNAPL data. It also briefly discusses the results of the associated groundwater monitoring activities conducted as part of the LNAPL volatilization assessment.

3.1 Soil Gas Analytical Results

The analytical results for the soil gas samples collected during the June 2012 and December 2012 sampling events are presented in Tables 1 through 4 in units of µg/m3 and in Tables 5 through 8 in units of ppbv. Results from samples collected near residential buildings (SVP-1, SVP-2, and SVP-6) are shown in Tables 1 and 5 (VOCs and associated SVOCs) and Tables 2 and 6 (PCBs and PAHs). Analytical results from samples collected near commercial buildings (SVP-3, SVP-4, and SVP-5) are presented in Tables 3 and 7 (VOCs and associated SVOCs) and Tables 4 and 8 (PCBs and PAHs). Analytical results for the ambient air samples collected during both sampling events are presented in µg/m3 in Tables 1 and 3 and in ppbv in Tables 5 and 7 for comparative purposes. All sample locations are shown on Figure 1.

In the soil gas samples collected during June 2012, a total of 42 VOCs and five PAHs were detected at least once.3 More specifically, soil gas data collected from the residential areas during the June 2012 sampling event showed the presence of 34 VOCs and two PAHs (Tables 1, 2, 5 & 6), and soil gas data collected from the commercial areas during that event showed the presence of 35 VOCs and five PAHs (Tables 3, 4, 7 & 8). No PCBs were detected in any soil gas samples collected in June 2012.

In the soil gas samples collected during the December 2012 sampling event, 31 VOCs and one PAH were detected at least once.3 More specifically, soil gas data collected from the residential areas during the December 2012 sampling event showed the presence of 24 VOCs and one PAH (Tables 1, 2, 5 & 6), and soil gas data collected from the commercial areas during that event showed the presence of 18 VOCs and one PAH (Tables 3, 4, 7 & 8). No PCBs were detected in any soil gas samples collected during December 2012, even with the lower reporting limit used.

3 Although naphthalene (a PAH) was analyzed for both in Method TO-15 and in Method TO-17, it was only counted as detected once even if detected via both methods.



3.2 Comparison to Screening Levels

Analytical results for the soil gas samples were compared to highly conservative screening levels based on the EPA RSL table (EPA 2012d).4 Soil gas samples collected near residential homes (SVP-1, SVP-2, and SVP-6) were compared to screening values calculated by applying an attenuation factor of 0.1 to the EPA RSLs for Residential Indoor Air at a 10-6 cancer risk or a non-cancer hazard quotient of 1.5 Soil gas samples collected near commercial buildings (SVP-3, SVP-4, and SVP-5) were compared to screening values calculated by applying the same attenuation factor to the EPA RSLs for Industrial Indoor Air at a 10-6 cancer risk or a non-cancer hazard quotient of 1.5 As noted previously, these soil gas results are expected to be representative of worst-case conditions as all samples were collected approximately one foot above the water table – directly above the source. These comparisons are shown in µg/m3 in Tables 1 through 4 and in ppbv in Tables 5 through 8, and are discussed further below.

3.2.1 Residential Areas

In the samples collected from locations near residential buildings during the June 2012 sampling event, five VOCs (benzene, benzyl chloride, bromodichloromethane, chloroform, and ethylbenzene) were detected at concentrations exceeding their respective residential screening levels in at least one sample (Tables 1 and 5). In the samples collected from these locations during the December 2012 sampling event, only bromodichloromethane and chloroform were detected above their respective screening levels. Neither bromodichloromethane nor chloroform has been detected in LNAPL. As discussed in more detail in Section 4.1.1, chloroform and bromodichloromethane are byproducts of drinking water chlorination and have been detected in the City of Pittsfield drinking water (as shown by the City’s Annual Drinking Water Reports for 2011 and 2010 in Attachment C), and thus are likely attributable to such chlorination. In both the June and December 2012 sampling events, no PAHs were detected at concentrations above their respective screening levels, and no PCBs were detected in any of the soil gas samples (Tables 2 and 6).

In the samples collected at these locations during the June 2012 sampling event, reporting limits for 20 VOCs and all PAHs with available RSLs exceeded those screening levels in at least one sample, and the reporting limits for PCBs likewise exceeded the screening level (Tables 1, 2, 5, & 6). During the December 2012 sampling event, as noted in Section 2.3 and shown in Tables 1 and 5), reporting limits for nine VOCs exceeded their respective screening

4 These screening levels are not regulatory requirements and are not indicative of actual risks to occupants of the buildings, but are used as an initial screening tool in accordance with the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan, as conditionally approved by EPA . 5 Soil gas RSL = indoor air RSL ÷ 0.1



levels in at least one sample, but the method detection limits for five of those VOCs were below the screening levels in all samples (except for one constituent in one sample). For PAHs, only naphthalene was detected during this sampling event; however, reporting limits for all other PAHs (where a screening level was available) continued to exceed available screening levels, as indicated in the approved revised Table 11b. No PCBs were detected in the December 2012 sampling event, and the reporting limit did not exceed the soil gas screening level.

3.2.2 Commercial Areas

In samples collected from locations near commercial buildings during the June 2012 sampling event, one VOC (chloroform) and one PAH (naphthalene) were detected at concentrations that exceeded their respective industrial screening levels in at least one sample (Tables 3 and 7). In the December 2012 sampling event, only one VOC (acrolein) was detected above its respective screening level and only in one sample, although in the other samples the reporting limits for this chemical exceeded the screening level. For PAHs, other than naphthalene in two samples in June 2012, no PAHs were detected at concentrations above their respective screening levels, and no PCBs were detected during either sampling event (Tables 4 and 8).

In the samples collected at these locations during June 2012, the reporting limits for nine VOCs, all PAHs with available screening levels, and all PCBs exceeded screening levels in at least one sample (Tables 3, 4, 7, & 8). During the December 2012 sampling event, reporting limits for three VOCs (1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane, acrolein, and acrylonitrile) exceeded their respective screening levels (no method detection limits were available for these VOCs); and the reporting limits for all PAHs with available screening levels exceeded those screening levels. No PCBs were detected in that event, and the reporting limit was below the soil gas screening level.

3.3 Comparison of Soil Gas Data to Historical LNAPL

Table 9 presents analytical data for detected VOCs, PCBs, and SVOCs from LNAPL samples collected at East Street Area 1-North or East Street Area 1-South. These data show detections in the LNAPL of four VOCs that were also detected in soil gas during either the June 2012 or December 2012 sampling events (acetone, tetrachloroethene, chlorobenzene, and trichloroethene). However, of these four constituents, none was detected in soil gas above its respective soil gas RSL. Additionally, while PCBs were detected in the LNAPL samples, they were not detected in any soil gas samples from either sampling event.



3.4 Associated Groundwater Monitoring Results

As discussed in Section 2.5, as part of the LNAPL volatilization assessment, GE performed monthly monitoring for the presence of LNAPL at wells 33, 34, 35, 72, and 76 (locations shown on Figure 1) and more frequent monitoring at wells 33, 34, and 72 as part of a separate assessment of its Northside Recovery System. The LNAPL monitoring results for July through December 2012 were presented in the Fall 2012 NAPL Monitoring Report. As shown there, LNAPL was not observed in well 33; but it was observed in the other wells on a number of occasions – namely, 2 of 40 occasions at well 34, 5 of 8 occasions at well 35, 21 of 38 occasions at well 72, and all 7 occasions at well 76. The extent of LNAPL indicated by these findings, which is also shown on Figure 1, is generally consistent with the LNAPL extent in this area over the past few years.

In addition, as also noted in Section 2.5, during the fall 2012 semi-annual sampling event, GE sampled and analyzed groundwater from well 31R for a full suite of VOCs and SVOCs, and it sampled and analyzed groundwater from well 72R for a full suite of SVOCs. The results from these wells were presented in the Fall 2012 GMA 1 Groundwater Quality Report and are also included in Table 10. As shown there, none of the VOC sample results from well 31R exceeded the GW-2 Performance Standards, and no SVOCs were detected in either of these two wells in fall 2012.

Well 31R was sampled for VOCs beginning in spring 2012. The only VOCs detected at that well were chloroform in both the spring and fall 2012 sampling events and bromodichloromethane in the fall 2012 sampling event (Table 10). At well 72R, samples were not analyzed for VOCs in fall 2012, but these same two constituents were detected in spring 2012. Prior to that event, no VOCs had been detected in well 72R since sampling was initiated at this well in fall 2005. The likely association of the recent presence of bromodichloromethane and chloroform with the Pittsfield public water supply is discussed in Section 4.1.1.

No SVOCs have ever been detected in well 31R or 72R, although the SVOC data are limited to the full suite of SVOCs at well 31R in spring and fall 2012 and at well 72R in fall 2012, along with prior data from well 72R for five select SVOCs (1,2-dichlorobenzene, 1,3-dichlorobenzene, 1,4-dichlorobenzene, 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene, and naphthalene) which were analyzed for in combination with the VOC analyses performed at that well.



4. Discussion of Results

In accordance with the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan, GE evaluated the soil gas analytical results in comparison to the relevant conservative soil gas RSLs to determine if additional activities are necessary to further assess the potential for constituents in the LNAPL to volatilize and impact the indoor air of nearby occupied buildings. In addition, GE evaluated the soil gas data in light of the requirements specified by EPA in its November 15 and December 6, 2012 conditional approval letters. Specifically, these included evaluations of: (a) detected constituents with concentrations exceeding the applicable soil gas RSLs; (b) constituents detected in soil gas above ambient air levels but for which EPA RSLs are not available; and (c) non-detected constituents with reporting and detection limits higher than the applicable soil gas RSLs.

4.1 Evaluation of Detected Constituents with Concentrations Exceeding Soil Gas RSLs

As discussed in Section 3.2.1, in the soil gas samples collected near the residential buildings in June 2012, benzene, benzyl chloride, bromodichloromethane, chloroform, and ethylbenzene were detected at concentrations greater than their respective soil gas RSLs. In the samples collected at these locations in December 2012, only chloroform and bromodichloromethane were detected above their soil gas RSLs.

As discussed in Section 3.2.2, in the soil gas samples collected near the commercial buildings in June 2012, only naphthalene and chloroform were detected above their soil gas RSLs. In the samples collected at these locations in December 2012, neither of these two constituents was detected above the soil gas RSLs; however, acrolein was detected above the soil gas RSL in sample SVP-4.6

Thus, in total, seven constituents were detected in soil gas above the conservative soil gas RSLs in at least one sample from either the June 2012 or December 2012 sampling events. These constituents are benzene, benzyl chloride, bromodichloromethane, chloroform, ethylbenzene, naphthalene, and acrolein. None of these constituents has been detected in LNAPL at East Street Area 1. Further evaluations of the potential that the presence of these constituents in the soil gas is attributable to volatilization from the LNAPL (or other GE-related sources) are presented below – first for bromodichloromethane and chloroform, and then for the other above-listed constituents.

6 This constituent was not detected in any other samples collected in June or December 2012, although the reporting limits (approximately 8 µg/m3 for the June 2012 samples and approximately 2 µg/m3 for the December 2012 samples) exceeded the RSL.



4.1.1 Bromodichloromethane and Chloroform

Bromodichloromethane and chloroform were detected (or had elevated detection limits) in soil gas above their respective screening levels in most samples collected in June 2012. In the December 2012 samples, bromodichloromethane and chloroform were only detected above screening levels at sampling locations SVP-1, SVP-2, and SVP-6. In both events, soil gas concentrations of these constituents at SVP-1 were consistently higher than levels detected at the other sampling locations. As noted in the LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Interim Data Report, both of these constituents are believed to be associated with the chlorinated public water supply and not historical GE activities. To support this conclusion, in response to Condition #4 in EPA’s November 15, 012 conditional approval letter, information on concentrations of bromodichloromethane and chloroform in the municipal water supply, groundwater, and soil gas, the presence of municipal water lines in this and other areas, and typical sources of these constituents is presented below.

Both bromodichloromethane and chloroform are known byproducts associated with the chlorination of public waters, including the City of Pittsfield water supply. According to the 2011 Pittsfield Water Report (included in Attachment C), bromodichloromethane was detected in the water supply at concentrations ranging from 0.60 to 3.20 parts per billion (ppb) and chloroform was detected in the water supply at concentrations ranging from 13 to 97 ppb with an average concentration of 55 ppb in 2011.

The USGS (2006) reports that chloroform was the most frequently detected VOC in samples from drinking water supply wells. That report states:

“Chlorinated drinking water from PWSs [Public Water Supplies] may enter the subsurface through the irrigation of lawns, gardens, golf courses, athletic fields, and parks, as well as leaking swimming pools, spas, or sewers for treated wastewater. In addition, the maintenance of a chlorine residual is required in the distribution systems of PWSs and increases the likelihood that leakage from these systems also will lead to the contamination of ground water and surface water by chloroform and other disinfection by-products. Solley and others (1998) estimated that the loss of treated drinking water through leaking distribution pipes and other unknown routes may be as high as 15 percent in some systems."

The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences notes that “[b]romodichloromethane is a by-product of water disinfection, and the main route of human exposure is through exposure to chlorine-treated water,” and that this constituent has frequently been detected in public water supplies (NIEHS 2011) (see excerpt in Attachment C).

Given the known levels of chloroform and bromodichloromethane in drinking water, any leaks in a water main could result in concentrations of these constituents in soil gas samples.



Information on utility lines in Pittsfield indicates that an 8-inch cast iron water main is present along East Street. As shown in Attachment D, which contains a drawing and supporting information provided by the City of Pittsfield, this water main was installed in 1935, and its current condition is unknown. In any event, regardless of any leaks, use of water from the City of Pittsfield for watering lawns, car washing, and other activities could introduce chloroform and bromodichloromethane into the subsurface through infiltration.

Several groundwater wells and all soil gas points are in close proximity to the East Street water main. A review of all groundwater sampling data on these constituents from wells within East Street Area 1-North and -South, presented in Attachment E in Table E-1, shows that bromodichloromethane and/or chloroform were only detected in wells downgradient of East Street, never upgradient within these areas. Of the downgradient wells, these compounds were detected only in wells 72R (in April 2012) and 31R (in April and October 2012). As depicted on the Attachment D drawing provided by the City of Pittsfield, well 72R is very close to both the water main and SVP-1, and well 31R is located approximately 60 feet downgradient of the water main. This information provides a further indication of the likelihood that these compounds are related to the treated municipal water source.

In addition to data from wells located near East Street, GE evaluated other groundwater detections of bromodichloromethane and chloroform at its facility to determine if water main leaks could be contributing to detected results. Overall, between 1990 and 2012, chloroform was detected in 23 wells at the GMAs that are located (in whole or part) within the GE facility (GMA 1, GMA 3, and GMA 4) and that were analyzed for these compounds, as shown in Tables E-2, E-3, and E-4 in Attachment E. Bromodichloromethane was detected in four of these wells, which were the only wells analyzed for this constituent, as also shown in Tables E-2 through E-4. Of the 23 wells, 14 are within 60 feet of utility lines carrying chlorinated water (drinking water or fire suppression lines), as shown on Figure E-1 in Attachment E. A review of the data from GMA 1, GMA 3, and GMA 4 indicates that, in each GMA, the maximum chloroform concentration was detected in a well within 60 feet of a water line. Although all wells near water lines did not have high concentrations of chloroform, this is likely due to either the sporadic nature of leaks or the variable outside water uses by occupants of nearby residences or commercial structures. In short, the groundwater results for chloroform and bromodichloromethane from multiple wells show that these constituents are detected at the highest concentrations in areas near water lines.

Further evidence for this association can be found in an evaluation of volatilization potential. In particular, the detected concentrations of bromodichloromethane and chloroform in groundwater at monitoring wells 31R and 72R in East Street Area 2-South are sufficient to yield the soil gas concentrations detected at SVP-1. A simple conversion using Henry’s Law Constant (HCL) indicates that the concentrations detected in groundwater could be the source of the concentrations detected in soil gas, as follows.



Csg = Cgw x CF x HLC

Where:

Csg = concentration in soil gas (µg/m3)

Cgw = concentration in groundwater (µg/L)

CF = conversion factor (L/m3)

HLC = Henry’s Law Constant (unitless)

For bromodichloromethane, a groundwater concentration of 2.1 µg/L (detected at well 31R) yields a potential soil gas concentration of 182 µg/m3. For chloroform, a groundwater concentration of 28 µg/L (detected at well 31R) yields a potential soil gas concentration of 4,200 µg/m3. These results compare to bromodichloromethane detections of 52 to 42 µg/m3 and chloroform detections of 1,400 to 1,600 µg/m3 at SVP-1 (the maximum concentrations of these constituents detected in the soil gas).

In addition to the public water supply, non-point sources of chloroform include housing developments using individual septic systems, leaking sewers in urban areas, and the use of chlorinated drinking water for watering lawns and gardens and filling swimming pools. Bromodichloromethane has been reported in many regulatory documents as being used as a disinfectant and byproduct of disinfection for drinking water. As indicated in an EPA document from May 2001, Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule: A Quick Reference Guide (EPA 2001), total trihalomethanes (TTHM), which include chloroform, bromodichloromethane, dibromochloromethane, and bromoform, are known byproducts of drinking water decontamination to control microbial contamination. In addition bromodichloromethane was historically used as a “solvent for fats, waxes, and resins, and it has been used to separate minerals and salts, as a flame retardant, and as an ingredient in fire extinguishers” (NIEHS 2011). None of these uses is associated with GE’s historical activities in Pittsfield.

Overall, the evidence indicates that the presence of bromodichloromethane and chloroform in the soil gas samples is very likely associated with the Pittsfield public water supply and is not attributable to GE’s activities, let alone the LNAPL in this area. As a result, to the extent that response actions may be necessary to address these chemicals, they would be the responsibility of the City.

4.1.2 Evaluation of Other Constituents Detected in Soil Gas Above RSLs

In addition to bromodichloromethane and chloroform, five other constituents – acrolein, benzene, benzyl chloride, ethylbenzene, and naphthalene – have been detected at least once in a soil gas sample above a screening level. As previously noted, none of these constituents has been historically detected in LNAPL found in East Street Area 1 (Table 9). Further, with



the exception of benzyl chloride, none of these additional chemicals has been detected in any groundwater samples collected in East Street Area 1-South (see Table 10); and benzyl chloride is not currently a compound included on the groundwater analyte list.

A summary of background air concentrations and potential sources for acrolein, benzene, benzyl chloride, ethylbenzene, and naphthalene is provided in Table 11. Specifically, Table 11 compares the concentrations of these constituents detected in soil gas above RSLs to indoor and outdoor air background concentrations (as reported in a number of publications), which is conservative since soil gas concentrations would be expected to be higher than indoor and outdoor air concentrations. Currently, there are no data available on background concentrations in soil gas, although data have shown that pressure changes can cause constituents in indoor air to migrate below the ground surface (McHugh et al. 2006). Additionally, localized spills or other uses of household products can contribute to low levels of chemicals detected in soil gas, although these potential sources are difficult to document. For example, benzene, ethylbenzene, and naphthalene are well-known components of gasoline and engine exhaust. All soil gas samples were collected in the right-of-way next to East Street.

The information presented in Table 11 demonstrates that various other sources are associated with these constituents and that, with the exception of ethylbenzene in one sample, the concentrations detected in soil gas are within the reported ranges of indoor or ambient air background levels, and thus are consistent with background, particularly given that soil gas concentrations would be expected to be somewhat higher than indoor and ambient air concentrations. In the case of ethylbenzene, the one elevated detection of 40 µg/m3 at SVP-1 in June 2012 was not repeated in the December 2012 sampling event. In December 2012, the ethylbenzene concentration in soil gas at this same location was an estimated concentration of 0.046 µg/m3 (well below the RSL), further indicating that the prior detection was likely associated with an isolated, localized, or temporary source. Thus, the overall evidence indicates that the presence of the five above-identified constituents in the soil gas samples above RSLs is not attributable to volatilization from the LNAPL and is likely attributable to non-GE-related sources.

4.2 Evaluation of Detected Constituents without Screening Levels

Several constituents which do not have available RSLs were detected in at least one soil gas sample during either the June 2012 or the December 2012 sampling event. These chemicals are 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene, 1,3-dichlorobenzene, 4-ethyltoluene, ethanol, heptane, isooctane, and 2-methylnaphthalene. Of these constituents, ethanol, heptane, and isooctane were also detected in the ambient air samples, but only ethanol was detected at similar or higher concentrations in the ambient air samples than in the soil gas samples and thus is not evaluated further, consistent with EPA’s November 15, 2012 conditional approval letter. Information on the six remaining constituents is presented in Table 12. As shown in that



table, of those six constituents, four (1,3,5-trimethylbenzene, 4-ethytoluene, heptane and isooctane) have not been analyzed for in historical LNAPL, groundwater, or soil samples at East Street Area 1-North and -South. 1,3-Dichlorobenzene and 2-methylnaphthalene have been analyzed historically in both LNAPL and groundwater samples within East Street Area 1, and the only detections were for 1,3-dichlorobenzene in groundwater with concentrations ranging up to 0.0051 ppm, which is far below the MCP Method 1 GW-2 of 2 ppm. In the soil samples from East Street Area 1, 1,3-dichlorobenzene was not detected, but 2-methylnaphthalene was detected at concentrations ranging from 0.15 to 7.2 ppm.

GE does not believe that it is required to conduct a further evaluation of these constituents. The EPA-approved Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan provided that the first step in screening the soil gas data would be to compare the results to screening levels based on the EPA indoor air RSLs. There was no requirement to conduct other evaluations of constituents that do not have such RSLs. Moreover, the lack of an EPA indoor air RSL indicates that EPA has made a judgment that there are insufficient data for quantitative assessment of potential vapor intrusion risks from these constituents.

Nevertheless, in accordance with EPA’s November 15, 2012 conditional approval letter, each of these constituents was evaluated further considering the nature and volatility of the constituent, the availability of other vapor intrusion screening levels, and the availability of toxicity data. These variables are included in Table 12 and summarized below. As a first step, these chemicals were evaluated to determine if they would have the potential to volatilize from groundwater or soil into soil gas. As described in EPA’s Superfund Vapor Intrusion FAQs (EPA 2012e), chemicals are considered volatile if they have a Henry’s Law constant (HLC) greater than 1 x10-5 atm/m3-mol, vapor pressure greater than 1 mmHg, and/or molecular weight less than 200 g/mol. Each of the chemicals listed in Table 12 would meet one of more of these criteria, although it should be noted that 2-methylnaphthalene has a low vapor pressure and could only be analyzed in the soil gas using a sorbent tube method that allows for the identification of less volatile constituents.

Despite this apparent potential for volatility in soil gas, none of the constituents listed in Table 12 is included in EPA’s Vapor Intrusion Screening Level (VISL) calculator and, therefore, screening levels cannot be calculated. Similarly, no inhalation toxicity data are available in EPA’s IRIS or HEAST databases, and reliable inhalation toxicity data could not be identified from other sources, including state databases. This further supports the conclusion that either these constituents are not a significant vapor intrusion concern or that there is no reliable way to evaluate them.



As a further evaluation of these constituents, vapor intrusion screening levels were identified from Massachusetts, as well as Michigan.7 As shown in Table 12, for 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene, 1,3-dichlorobenzene, heptane, and 2-methylnaphthalene, the concentrations detected in soil gas were below these screening levels (where available), indicating that there is no risk or potential vapor intrusion exposure concern for the concentrations detected in soil gas. No screening levels could be identified for 4-ethyltoluene or isooctane. However, for isooctane, background levels at a gasoline station were available for comparison, as also shown in Table 12. All concentrations detected in soil gas were well below the gas station background levels.

Overall, there is no indication that the concentrations of constituents that were detected in soil gas above ambient air levels but have no available EPA RSLs would present a vapor intrusion risk due to volatilization from the LNAPL or groundwater in East Street Area 1.

4.3 Evaluation of Non-Detect Constituents with Detection Limits Above RSLs

Although most of the chemicals included in the evaluation were not detected, the detection limits (or reporting limits for constituents with no available method detection limits) for some of the non-detected constituents exceeded the calculated soil gas RSLs. Chemicals that were not detected in the June 2012 sampling event but had detection or reporting limits above the RSLs included numerous VOCs, PAHs with available RSLs (except naphthalene), and PCBs. As discussed in Section 2.3, for the samples collected in December 2012, GE worked closely with the analytical laboratory to reduce detection and reporting limits. As a result, only five VOCs reported as non-detect (acrolein,8 acrylonitrile, 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane, dibromochloromethane [in one sample], and hexachlorobutadiene) had detection limits (or reporting limits for constituents with no available method detection limits) exceeding the calculated RSLs.9 In addition, the PAHs with RSLs (except naphthalene) continued to have reporting and detection limits above the RSLs.10

In accordance with EPA’s December 6, 2012 conditional approval letter, the non-detected constituents from the December 2012 sampling event with detection limits above the RSLs

7 The New Jersey, New York, and California vapor intrusion screening levels were also reviewed, but do not include screening levels for the constituents listed in Table 12. 8 As discussed in Section 4.1 above, acrolein was detected in one sample from the December 2012 sampling event (from the commercial area), but not in any of the other samples. 9 As noted above in Section 2.3, four other non-detected VOCs (1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane, 1,2-dibromoethane, 3-chloropropene, and benzyl chloride) had reporting limits above the residential soil gas RSLs, but their method detection limits were below those RSLs, indicating that they were not present at levels above the RSLs (or else they would have been reported at estimated concentrations). 10 These PAHs are benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, chrysene, dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, and indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene.



have been further evaluated. Table 13 presents information on these constituents, including information on the detection (or non-detection) of the constituents in NAPL, groundwater, or soil in East Street Area 1 and the nature and volatility of the constituents. As shown in Table 13, none of these constituents was detected in either NAPL or groundwater from East Street Area 1, and none of the VOCs was detected in soil samples from East Street Area 1.

As in Table 12, Table 13 lists the HLC, vapor pressure, and molecular weight for each of these constituents as a means to evaluate the potential volatility of the constituent. As noted above, EPA considers chemicals to be volatile if they have an HLC greater than 1 x10-5 atm/m3-mol, vapor pressure greater than 1 mmHg, and/or molecular weight less than 200 g/mol (EPA 2012e). Of the chemicals listed in Table 13, most of the PAHs (benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, chrysene, dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, and indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene) do not meet any of these criteria, indicating that these chemicals are not sufficiently volatile to be of concern for vapor intrusion. In addition, three other constituents, benzo(a)anthracene, hexachlorobutadiene, and 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane, have a vapor pressure less than 1 mmHg and a molecular weight greater than 200 g/mol, indicating that these constituents are likewise not sufficiently volatile to be of concern for vapor intrusion.

In addition, for four of the five non-detected VOCs with detection (or reporting) limits higher than screening levels (acrolein, acrylonitrile, 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane, and hexachlorobutadiene), as well as the PAHs, GE’s revised Tables 11a and 11b, which were approved by EPA, indicated that the lowest reporting and detection limits that could practicably be achieved using current laboratory standards are higher than their residential soil gas RSLs.11 For remaining VOC, dibromochloromethane, the detection limit just slightly exceeded the soil gas residential RSL in only one sample (SVP-1 with a method detection limit of 1.4 µg/m3 compared to a residential soil gas RSL of 0.9 µg/m3), while in all other samples, the method detection limits were lower than the applicable RSLs.

Overall, an evaluation of the foregoing information indicates that the non-detected constituents with reporting and (where available) detection limits above RSLs are not considered volatile and/or have no currently available analytical technique to obtain lower reporting or detection limits. In either case, given the infeasibility of achieving lower limits, there is no need or justification for further evaluation of these non-detected constituents to assess their potential to pose a vapor intrusion concern due to volatilization from the LNAPL.

11 As previously noted, acrolein was detected in one sample from the December 2012 sampling event, but the concentration detected (2.1 µg/m3), as well as the reporting limits for acrolein for that event, are within the background range even for residential areas, as shown in Table 11. For example, ATSDR (2007) reports that “concentrations of acrolein range from <0.05 to 29 µg/m3 (0.02-12 ppb) in residential homes” (p. 120).



5. Conclusions and Recommendation

GE collected two rounds of soil gas data (June 2012 and December 2012) from East Street Area 1-South as a means to evaluate potential volatilization of constituents in LNAPL into soil gas. Soil gas was evaluated as a first step to assess whether constituents that may have volatilized from the LNAPL are present at concentrations that could potentially be associated with vapor intrusion to nearby buildings. As outlined in the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan (as subsequently modified with EPA approval), samples were analyzed for VOCs and certain associated SVOCs by EPA Method TO-15, PAHs by EPA Methods TO-13A and TO-17, and PCBs by EPA Method TO-17, with certain modifications for the December 2012 samples in an effort to achieve lower reporting and detection limits.

A number of constituents were detected in soil gas samples at concentrations above the conservative soil gas RSLs derived from EPA’s indoor air RSLs; other detected constituents did not have available RSLs; and a few non-detected constituents had detection limits (or reporting limits for constituents with no available method detection limits) above the calculated soil gas RSLs. For each of these categories, a review of relevant evidence and factors indicates that these constituents are not attributable to the LNAPL and/or would not pose a vapor intrusion concern, and do not warrant further evaluation, for the following reasons:

1. None of the constituents detected in soil gas at levels exceeding the RSLs or without available RSLs and none of the non-detected constituents with detection and reporting limits above the RSLs was previously detected in LNAPL or groundwater at East Street Area 1 (with the exception of chloroform and bromodichloromethane, which were detected in groundwater downgradient of East Street and are discussed in point 2 below, and 1,3-dichlorobenzene, which has no RSL and was detected in groundwater at levels three orders of magnitude below the MCP GW-2 standard).

2. Of the constituents detected in soil gas above RSLs, two (chloroform and bromodichloromethane) are very likely attributable to the Pittsfield public water supply, and the others are associated with common background sources and are generally consistent with typical indoor air background concentrations.

3. For detected constituents without available EPA RSLs, further evaluation is not required under the approved approach in the Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan and due to the absence of any EPA values for screening of these constituents or available inhalation toxicity information. In any event, these constituents had concentrations below state agency screening levels or typical background levels where such levels are available.

4. For the non-detected constituents with detection limits (or reporting limits for constituents with no available method detection limits) above the RSLs, most of those compounds are not considered to be sufficiently volatile to be of concern for vapor intrusion; and in any



event, for all of these compounds, it is technically infeasible to obtain lower detection or reporting limits.

Based on these evaluations, GE has concluded that there is no need for further investigation or assessment regarding the potential for constituents in the LNAPL in East Street Area 1 to pose a risk, via volatilization and subsequent vapor intrusion, to the occupants of nearby buildings. With EPA’s approval, GE will decommission each vapor point by removing the protective casing and available tubing in the spring of 2013. Additionally, all locations will be returned to previous grade conditions upon completion of the decommissioning.



6. References

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 2007. Toxicological Profile for Acrolein. Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA.

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

ARCADIS. 2012b. Groundwater Management Area 1 NAPL Monitoring Report for Spring 2012. August.

ARCADIS. 2012c. East Street Area 1 LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Interim Data Report for Groundwater Management Area 1. September.

ARCADIS. 2012d. Revised and Expanded Version of Table 11 from East Street Area 1 LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Interim Data Report for Groundwater Management Area 1. November.

ARCADIS. 2013a. Plant Site 1 Groundwater Management Area Groundwater Quality Monitoring Interim Report for Fall 2012. January.

ARCADIS. 2013b. Groundwater Management Area 1 NAPL Monitoring Report for Fall 2012. February.

EPA. 2001. Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule: A Quick Reference Guide. May. http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/mdbp/upload/2001_05_23_mdbp_qrg_st1.pdf

EPA. 2012a. Conditional Approval of General Electric’s January 5, 2012 submittal titled Revised LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Work Plan for Groundwater Management Area 1 – East Street Area 1, GE-Pittsfield/Housatonic River Site. May.

EPA. 2012b. Conditional Approval of General Electric’s September 6, 2012 submittal titled East Street Area 1, LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Interim Data Report, GE-Pittsfield/Housatonic River Site. November.

EPA. 2012c. Conditional Approval of General Electric’s November 20, 2012 submittal titled Groundwater Management Area 1, East Street Area 1 LNAPL Volatilization Assessment, GE-Pittsfield/Housatonic River Site (revised Table 11). December.

http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/mdbp/upload/2001_05_23_mdbp_qrg_st1.pdf



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

EPA. 2012e. Superfund Vapor Intrusions FAQs. February.

McHugh, T.E., P. C. De Blanc, and R.J. Pokluda. 2006. Indoor Air as a Source of VOC Contamination in Shallow Soils below Buildings. Soil & Sediment Contamination 15:103–122.

National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS). 2011. Report on Carcinogens, Twelfth Edition (pg. 73). http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/twelfth/profiles/Bromodichloromethane.pdf

USGS. 2006. U.S. Geological Survey: Sources and Occurrence of Chloroform and Other Trihalomethanes in Drinking-Water Supply Wells in the United States, 1986–2001, Ivanhnenko and Zogorski. http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2006/5015/sir2006-5015.pdf

http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/twelfth/profiles/Bromodichloromethane.pdf

http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2006/5015/sir2006-5015.pdf

Tables

G:\GE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_1\Reports and Presentations\ESA1S VI Report Fall 2012\0861311214_Fall 2012_ESA1S VI Tables 4-9-13.xlsx

Page 1 of 44/12/2013

Table 1Soil Gas and Ambient Air Sampling Results for VOCs and Select SVOCs by Method TO-15 - East Street Area 2-South - Resident

Final LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report - April 2013Groundwater Management Area 1General Electric Company – Pittsfield, Massachusetts(Results are presented in ug/m3)

Location ID: AMB AMB SVP-1 SVP-1Date Collected: 06/21/12 12/11/12 06/21/12 12/11/12Sample Name: Indoor Air Soil Gas AMB-062112 AMB-12/11/12 SVP-1 SVP-1

VOCs/Select SVOCs - TO-151,1,1-Trichloroethane 5,200 52,000 ND(4.5) 0.028 J ND(4.7) 0.04 J1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.042 0.42 ND(5.6) ND(0.26) ND(5.9) ND(0.45) (a)1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane 31,000 310,000 ND(6.3) ND(1.5) ND(6.6) ND(2.5)1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0.15 1.5 ND(4.5) ND(0.21) ND(4.7) ND(0.36)1,1-Dichloroethane 1.5 15 ND(3.3) ND(0.16) ND(3.5) 0.05 J1,1-Dichloroethene 210 2,100 ND(3.2) ND(0.076) ND(3.4) ND(0.13)1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 2.1 21 ND(24) ND(7.2) ND(25) ND(12)1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 7.3 73 ND(4) ND(0.95) 19 ND(1.6)1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 0.00016 0.0016 ND(32) ND(1.9) ND(33) ND(3.2)1,2-Dibromoethane 0.0041 0.041 ND(6.3) ND(0.074) ND(6.6) ND(0.12) (b)1,2-Dichloro-1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane - - - - ND(5.7) ND(1.3) ND(6) ND(2.3)1,2-Dichlorobenzene 210 2,100 ND(4.9) ND(1.2) ND(5.1) ND(2)1,2-Dichloroethane 0.094 0.94 0.37 J 0.064 J ND(3.5) ND(0.26)1,2-Dichloropropane 0.24 2.4 ND(3.8) ND(0.89) ND(4) ND(1.5)1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene - - - - ND(4) ND(0.95) 5.8 ND(1.6)1,3-Butadiene 0.081 0.81 ND(1.8) ND(0.43) ND(1.9) ND(0.72)1,3-Dichlorobenzene - - - - ND(4.9) ND(1.2) ND(5.1) ND(2)1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.22 2.2 ND(4.9) ND(1.2) ND(5.1) ND(2)1,4-Dioxane 0.32 3.2 ND(12) ND(0.7) ND(12) ND(1.2)2-Butanone 5,200 52,000 2.4 J 1.9 J 2.5 J 2 J2-Hexanone 31 310 ND(13) ND(4 J) ND(14) ND(6.7 J)3-Chloropropene 0.41 4.1 ND(10) ND(3) ND(11) ND(5.1) (c)4-Ethyltoluene - - - - ND(4) ND(0.95) 19 ND(1.6)4-Methyl-2-pentanone 3,100 31,000 ND(3.4) ND(0.79 J) 2.4 J ND(1.3 J)Acetone 32,000 320,000 19 J 8.1 53 7.3Acetonitrile 63 630 ND(14) ND(1.6) ND(14) ND(2.7)Acrolein 0.021 0.21 ND(7.5) ND(2.2) ND(7.8) ND(3.7)Acrylonitrile 0.036 0.36 ND(7.1) ND(2.1) ND(7.4) ND(3.5)alpha-Pinene - - - - ND(46) ND(5.4) ND(48) ND(9.1)Benzene 0.31 3.1 0.41 J 0.48 16 ND(0.52)Benzyl Chloride 0.05 0.5 ND(4.2) ND(1) ND(4.4) ND(1.7) (d)Bromodichloromethane 0.066 0.66 ND(5.5) ND(0.65) 52 42Bromoform 2.2 22 ND(8.5) ND(2) ND(8.8) ND(3.4)Bromomethane 5.2 52 ND(32) ND(3.7) ND(33) ND(6.3)Carbon Disulfide 730 7,300 ND(10) ND(3) 45 ND(5.1)Carbon Tetrachloride 0.41 4.1 ND(5.2) 0.55 J 2.6 J 2.2Chlorobenzene 52 520 2.5 J ND(0.89) 2.7 J ND(1.5)Chloroethane 10,000 100,000 ND(8.6) ND(2.5) ND(9) ND(4.3)Chloroform 0.11 1.1 ND(4) ND(0.94) 1,600 1,400 EJChloromethane 94 940 ND(17) 1.2 ND(18) ND(0.68)cis-1,2-Dichloroethene (see Note 7) 63 630 ND(3.2) ND(0.15) ND(3.4) ND(0.26)cis-1,3-Dichloropropene (see Note 8) 0.61 6.1 0.48 J ND(0.88) ND(3.9) ND(1.5)Cyclohexane 6,300 63,000 ND(2.8) ND(0.66) 1.9 J ND(1.1)Dibromochloromethane 0.09 0.9 ND(7) ND(1.6) ND(7.3) ND(2.8) (e)Dichlorodifluoromethane 100 1,000 2.8 J 2.4 6.1 3.3d-Limonene - - - - ND(18) ND(5.4) ND(19) ND(9.1)Ethanol - - - - 11 2 2.4 J 1.8 JEthyl acetate - - - - ND(12) ND(3.5) ND(12) ND(5.9)Ethylbenzene 0.97 9.7 0.69 J 0.1 J 40 0.046 JHeptane - - - - 0.99 J ND(4) 6.2 ND(6.7)Hexachlorobutadiene 0.11 1.1 ND(35) ND(2) ND(36) ND(4.4) (f)Isooctane - - - - 0.64 J ND(4.5) 4.4 ND(7.6)Isopropyl alcohol 7,300 73,000 1.1 J 0.38 J ND(8.4) ND(4)Isopropylbenzene 420 4,200 ND(4) ND(0.95) 1.6 J ND(1.6)

EPA Residential RSL


Page 2 of 44/12/2013

Table 1Soil Gas and Ambient Air Sampling Results for VOCs and Select SVOCs by Method TO-15 - East Street Area 2-South - Resident



EPA Residential RSL

VOCs/Select SVOCs - TO-15 (continued)m&p-Xylene 100 1,000 0.69 J 0.28 J 130 0.093 JMethyl Methacrylate 730 7,300 ND(34) ND(7.9) ND(35) ND(13)Methyl tert-butyl ether 9.4 94 ND(3) ND(0.7) 0.29 J ND(1.2)Methylene Chloride 96 960 6.5 J ND(1.3) 3 J 1.8 JNaphthalene 0.072 0.72 ND(17) 0.085 J ND(18) 0.12 Jn-Butyl Acetate - - - - ND(39) ND(4.6) ND(41) ND(7.8)n-Hexane 730 7,300 3.1 ND(0.68) 9.4 ND(1.2)n-Octane - - - - ND(15) ND(4.5) ND(16) ND(7.6)Nonane 210 2,100 ND(17) ND(5.1) ND(18) ND(8.6)n-Propylbenzene 1,000 10,000 ND(4) ND(0.95) 4.4 ND(1.6)o-Xylene 100 1,000 ND(3.6) 0.11 J 40 0.04 JPropene 3,100 31,000 ND(5.6) ND(1.7) ND(5.9) ND(2.8)Styrene 1,000 10,000 ND(3.5) ND(0.82 J) ND(3.6) ND(1.4 J)Tetrachloroethene 9.4 94 1.7 J 0.06 J 13 0.17 JTetrahydrofuran 2,100 21,000 ND(2.4) ND(2.8) ND(2.5) ND(4.8)Toluene 5,200 52,000 15 0.56 140 0.16 Jtrans-1,2-Dichloroethene 63 630 ND(3.2) ND(0.76) ND(3.4) ND(1.3)trans-1,3-Dichloropropene (see Note 8) 0.61 6.1 0.91 J ND(0.88) ND(3.9) ND(1.5)Trichloroethene 0.43 4.3 ND(4.4) ND(0.21) 4.2 J ND(0.35)Trichlorofluoromethane 730 7,300 4.4 J 1.3 5.9 1.8 JVinyl Acetate 210 2,100 ND(12) ND(3.4) ND(12) ND(5.8)Vinyl Chloride 0.16 1.6 ND(2.1) ND(0.049) ND(2.2) 0.034 J


Page 3 of 44/12/2013

Table 1Soil Gas and Ambient Air Sampling Results for VOCs and Select SVOCs by Method TO-15 - East Street Area 2-South - Residential


Location ID: SVP-2 SVP-2 SVP-6 SVP-6Date Collected: 06/21/12 12/11/12 06/21/12 12/11/12Sample Name: Indoor Air Soil Gas SVP-2 SVP-2 SVP-6 SVP-6

VOCs/Select SVOCs - TO-151,1,1-Trichloroethane 5,200 52,000 ND(4.8) [ND(4.8)] ND(0.18) ND(5) 0.045 J1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.042 0.42 ND(6) [ND(6)] 0.015 J (a) ND(6.3) ND(0.24) (a)1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane 31,000 310,000 2.7 J [ND(6.7)] ND(1.2) ND(7) ND(1.3)1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0.15 1.5 ND(4.8) [ND(4.8)] ND(0.18) ND(5) ND(0.19)1,1-Dichloroethane 1.5 15 ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(0.13) ND(3.7) ND(0.14)1,1-Dichloroethene 210 2,100 ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(0.064) ND(3.6) ND(0.068)1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 2.1 21 ND(26) [ND(26)] ND(6) ND(27) ND(6.4)1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 7.3 73 5.3 [4.9] ND(0.8) 10 ND(0.85)1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 0.00016 0.0016 ND(34) [ND(34)] ND(1.6) ND(35) ND(1.7)1,2-Dibromoethane 0.0041 0.041 ND(6.7) [ND(6.7)] ND(0.062) (b) ND(7) ND(0.066) (b)1,2-Dichloro-1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane - - - - ND(6.1) [ND(6.1)] ND(1.1) ND(6.4) ND(1.2)1,2-Dichlorobenzene 210 2,100 ND(5.3) [ND(5.3)] ND(0.97) ND(5.5) ND(1)1,2-Dichloroethane 0.094 0.94 ND(3.5) [0.38 J] ND(0.13) ND(3.7) ND(0.14)1,2-Dichloropropane 0.24 2.4 ND(4) [ND(4)] ND(0.75) ND(4.2) ND(0.8)1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene - - - - 1.3 J [1.3 J] ND(0.8) 2.9 J ND(0.85)1,3-Butadiene 0.081 0.81 ND(1.9) [ND(1.9)] ND(0.36) ND(2) ND(0.38)1,3-Dichlorobenzene - - - - ND(5.3) [ND(5.3)] ND(0.97) ND(5.5) ND(1)1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.22 2.2 ND(5.3) [ND(5.3)] ND(0.97) ND(5.5) ND(1)1,4-Dioxane 0.32 3.2 ND(13) [ND(13)] 0.88 ND(13) ND(0.62)2-Butanone 5,200 52,000 4.2 J [2.5 J] 1 J 8.9 J 0.83 J2-Hexanone 31 310 ND(14) [ND(14)] ND(3.3 J) ND(15) ND(3.5 J)3-Chloropropene 0.41 4.1 ND(11) [ND(11)] ND(2.5) (c) ND(11) ND(2.7) (c)4-Ethyltoluene - - - - 3.9 J [4.6] ND(0.8) 9 ND(0.85)4-Methyl-2-pentanone 3,100 31,000 ND(3.6) [ND(3.6)] ND(0.66 J) 1.9 J ND(0.71 J)Acetone 32,000 320,000 36 [33] 5.5 110 4.9Acetonitrile 63 630 ND(15) [ND(15)] ND(1.4) ND(15) ND(1.4)Acrolein 0.021 0.21 ND(8) [ND(8)] ND(1.8) ND(8.4) ND(2)Acrylonitrile 0.036 0.36 ND(7.6) [ND(7.6)] ND(1.8) ND(7.9) ND(1.9)alpha-Pinene - - - - ND(49) [ND(49)] ND(4.5) ND(51) ND(4.8)Benzene 0.31 3.1 1.9 J [1.9 J] ND(0.26) 2.1 J ND(0.28)Benzyl Chloride 0.05 0.5 0.73 J [ND(4.5)] ND(0.84) (d) ND(4.7) ND(0.9) (d)Bromodichloromethane 0.066 0.66 ND(5.9) [ND(5.9)] ND(0.54) ND(6.1) ND(0.58)Bromoform 2.2 22 ND(9) [ND(9)] ND(1.7) ND(9.4) ND(1.8)Bromomethane 5.2 52 ND(34) [ND(34)] ND(3.1) ND(36) ND(3.4)Carbon Disulfide 730 7,300 6.4 J [6.2 J] ND(2.5) 13 2.2 JCarbon Tetrachloride 0.41 4.1 ND(5.5) [ND(5.5)] ND(1) ND(5.8) ND(1.1)Chlorobenzene 52 520 2.9 J [2.9 J] ND(0.74) 2.9 J ND(0.8)Chloroethane 10,000 100,000 ND(9.2) [ND(9.2)] ND(2.1) ND(9.6) ND(2.3)Chloroform 0.11 1.1 5.9 [5.8] 2.3 15 6Chloromethane 94 940 ND(18) [ND(18)] ND(0.33) ND(19) ND(0.36)cis-1,2-Dichloroethene (see Note 7) 63 630 ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(0.13) ND(3.6) ND(0.14)cis-1,3-Dichloropropene (see Note 8) 0.61 6.1 ND(4) [ND(4)] ND(0.74) 0.6 J ND(0.78)Cyclohexane 6,300 63,000 0.58 J [0.62 J] ND(0.56) ND(3.1) ND(0.6)Dibromochloromethane 0.09 0.9 ND(7.4) [ND(7.4)] ND(1.4) (e) ND(7.8) ND(1.5) (e)Dichlorodifluoromethane 100 1,000 2.6 J [2.8 J] 2.5 3.1 J 2.6d-Limonene - - - - ND(20) [ND(20)] ND(4.5) ND(20) ND(4.8)Ethanol - - - - 3.2 J [5.4 J] 1.3 J 2 J 2.7Ethyl acetate - - - - ND(13) [ND(13)] ND(2.9) ND(13) ND(3.1)Ethylbenzene 0.97 9.7 6.5 [6] ND(0.14) 11 0.03 JHeptane - - - - 0.9 J [1.4 J] ND(3.3) 1.6 J 0.32 JHexachlorobutadiene 0.11 1.1 ND(37) [ND(37)] ND(2.2) (f) ND(39) ND(2.4) (f)Isooctane - - - - 0.84 J [ND(4.1)] ND(3.8) 0.82 J ND(4)Isopropyl alcohol 7,300 73,000 ND(8.6) [ND(8.6)] ND(2) 1.3 J 0.39 JIsopropylbenzene 420 4,200 ND(4.3) [ND(4.3)] ND(0.8) 0.69 J ND(0.85)

EPA Residential RSL


Page 4 of 44/12/2013




EPA Residential RSL

VOCs/Select SVOCs - TO-15 (continued)m&p-Xylene 100 1,000 24 [22] 0.072 J 33 0.1 JMethyl Methacrylate 730 7,300 ND(36) [ND(36)] ND(6.6) ND(37) ND(7.1)Methyl tert-butyl ether 9.4 94 ND(3.2) [ND(3.2)] ND(0.58) ND(3.3) ND(0.62)Methylene Chloride 96 960 2 J [1.5 J] ND(1.1) 2.8 J ND(1.2)Naphthalene 0.072 0.72 ND(18) [ND(18)] ND(0.42) ND(19) 0.092 Jn-Butyl Acetate - - - - ND(42) [ND(42)] ND(3.8) ND(43) ND(4.1)n-Hexane 730 7,300 3.8 [3.3] ND(0.57) 2.4 J 0.48 Jn-Octane - - - - ND(16) [ND(16)] ND(3.8) ND(17) ND(4)Nonane 210 2,100 ND(18) [ND(18)] ND(4.2) ND(19) ND(4.5)n-Propylbenzene 1,000 10,000 1 J [1.2 J] ND(0.8) 2.1 J ND(0.85)o-Xylene 100 1,000 7.8 [7.8] 0.031 J 12 0.05 JPropene 3,100 31,000 ND(6) [ND(6)] ND(1.4) ND(6.3) ND(1.5)Styrene 1,000 10,000 ND(3.7) [ND(3.7)] ND(0.69 J) ND(3.9) ND(0.74 J)Tetrachloroethene 9.4 94 6.2 [6.1] 0.073 J 39 7.9Tetrahydrofuran 2,100 21,000 ND(2.6) [ND(2.6)] ND(2.4) ND(2.7) ND(2.6)Toluene 5,200 52,000 18 [20] 0.18 32 0.22trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 63 630 ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(0.64) ND(3.6) ND(0.68)trans-1,3-Dichloropropene (see Note 8) 0.61 6.1 ND(4) [ND(4)] ND(0.74) ND(4.2) ND(0.78)Trichloroethene 0.43 4.3 1.8 J [1.3 J] ND(0.17) 2.2 J ND(0.18)Trichlorofluoromethane 730 7,300 5.8 [6.2] 0.91 2.2 J 1.2Vinyl Acetate 210 2,100 ND(12) [ND(12)] ND(2.8) ND(13) ND(3)Vinyl Chloride 0.16 1.6 ND(2.2) [ND(2.2)] ND(0.041) ND(2.3) ND(0.044)

Notes:J = Indicates an estimated value.ND = Analyte was not detected. The number in parantheses is the associated reporting limit. E = Indicates a concentration that exceeds the calibration rangeRSL = Regional Screening Levelug/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter-- = No screening level for this parameter

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

4. Shading indicates that soil gas concentration exceeds residential soil gas RSL.5. Bolded ND result indicates non-detected compound with detection limit (or reporting limit for compounds with no available method detection limit) higher than soil gas RSL.6. Field duplicate sample results are presented in brackets.7. Screening value for trans-1,2-dichloroethene was used as surrogate for cis-1,2-dichloroethene.8. Screening value for 1,3-dichloropropene was used to screen cis and trans isomers in soil gas. Cis-1,3-dichloropropene was only detectedin one soil gas sample and trans-1,3-dichloropropene was not detected in any soil gas sample, so the concentrations could not be summed. 9. (a) = Method Detection Limits for 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane in analyses of 12/11/12 samples were 0.027 ug/m3 for SVP-1, 0.013 ug/m3 for SVP-2, and 0.014 ug/m3 for SVP-6.10. (b) = Method Detection Limits for 1,2-Dibromoethane in analyses of 12/11/12 samples were 0.033 ug/m3 for SVP-1, 0.016 ug/m3 for SVP-2, and 0.017 ug/m3 SVP-6.11. (c) = Method Detection Limits for 3-Chloropropene in analyses of 12/11/12 samples were 1.7 ug/m3 for SVP-1, 0.86 ug/m3 for SVP-2, and 0.92 ug/m3 for SVP-6.12. (d) = Method Detection Limits for Benzyl Chloride in analyses of 12/11/12 samples were 0.46 ug/m3 for SVP-1, 0.23 ug/m3 for SVP-2, and 0.24 ug/m3 for SVP-6.13. (e) = Method Detection Limits for Dibromochloromethane in analyses of 12/11/12 samples were 1.4 ug/m3 for SVP-1, 0.72 ug/m3 for SVP-2, and 0.76 ug/m3 for SVP-6.14. (f) = Method Detection Limits for Hexachlorobutadiene in the analyses on 12/11/12 samples were 4.3 ug/m3 for SVP-1, 2.1 ug/m3 for SVP-2, and 2.3 ug/m3 for SVP-6.

1. Samples were analyzed by Air Toxics Laboratories via EPA Method TO-15.

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


Page 1 of 14/12/2013

Table 2Soil Gas Sampling Results for PCBs via Method TO-17 and PAHs by Methods TO-13A and TO-17 - East Street Area 2 South - Residential

Final LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report - April 2013Groundwater Management Area 1 General Electric Company – Pittsfield, Massachusetts(Results are presented in ug/m3)

Location ID: SVP-1 SVP-1 SVP-2 SVP-2 SVP-6 SVP-6Date Collected: 06/21/12 12/11-12/13/12 06/21/12 12/11-12/13/12 06/21/12 12/11-12/13/12Sample Name: Indoor Air Soil Gas SVP-1 SVP-1 SVP-2 SVP-2 SVP-6 SVP-6

PCBs-TO-17Aroclor-1016/1242 0.12 1.2 ND(5) ND(0.042) ND(5) [ND(5)] ND(0.043) ND(5) ND(0.042)Aroclor-1221 0.0043 0.043 ND(5) ND(0.042) ND(5) [ND(5)] ND(0.043) ND(5) ND(0.042)Aroclor-1232 0.0043 0.043 ND(5) ND(0.042) ND(5) [ND(5)] ND(0.043) ND(5) ND(0.042)Aroclor-1248 0.0043 0.043 ND(5) ND(0.042) ND(5) [ND(5)] ND(0.043) ND(5) ND(0.042)Aroclor-1254 0.0043 0.043 ND(5) ND(0.042) ND(5) [ND(5)] ND(0.043) ND(5) ND(0.042)Aroclor-1260 0.0043 0.043 ND(5) ND(0.042) ND(5) [ND(5)] ND(0.043) ND(5) ND(0.042)Total PCBs - - - - ND(5) ND(0.042) ND(5) [ND(5)] ND(0.043) ND(5) ND(0.042)PAHs-TO-13ABenzo(a)anthracene 0.0087 0.087 ND(10) ND(9.1) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10)Benzo(a)pyrene 0.00087 0.0087 ND(10 J) ND(9.1) ND(10 J) ND(10) ND(10 J) ND(10)Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.0087 0.087 ND(10) ND(9.1) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10)Benzo(g,h,i)perylene - - - - ND(10) ND(9.1) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10)Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.0087 0.087 ND(10) ND(9.1) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10)Chrysene 0.087 0.87 ND(10) ND(9.1) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10)Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.0008 0.008 ND(10) ND(9.1) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10)Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.0087 0.087 ND(10) ND(9.1) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10)PAHs-TO-172-Methylnaphthalene - - - - 0.63 ND(0.5) 0.21 J [ND(50)] ND(0.47) 0.52 ND(0.5)Acenaphthene - - - - ND(1) ND(0.5) ND(1) [ND(100)] ND(0.47) ND(1) ND(0.5)Acenaphthylene - - - - ND(0.5) ND(0.5) ND(0.5) [ND(50)] ND(0.47) ND(0.5) ND(0.5)Anthracene - - - - ND(0.5 J) ND(0.5) ND(0.5 J) [ND(50 J)] ND(0.47) ND(0.5 J) ND(0.5)Fluoranthene - - - - ND(0.5) ND(0.5) ND(0.5) [ND(50)] ND(0.47) ND(0.5) ND(0.5)Fluorene - - - - ND(1) ND(0.5) ND(1) [ND(100)] ND(0.47) ND(1) ND(0.5)Naphthalene 0.072 0.72 0.38 J ND(0.5) 0.17 J [ND(50)] ND(0.47) 0.66 0.1 JPhenanthrene - - - - ND(0.5) ND(0.5) ND(0.5) [ND(50)] ND(0.47) ND(0.5) ND(0.5)Pyrene - - - - ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) [ND(100)] ND(0.94) ND(1) ND(1)

Notes:J = Indicates an estimated value.ND = Analyte was not detected. The number in parantheses is the associated reporting limit. RSL = Regional Screening Levelug/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter-- = No screening level for this parameter1. Samples submitted to Air Toxics Laboratories for analysis of PCBs and select semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), namely polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).2. Samples have been validated as described in Attachment A.

4. Shading indicates that soil gas concentration exceeds residential soil gas RSL.5. Bolded ND result indicates non-detected compound with detection limit higher than the residential soil gas RSL.

7. Field duplicate sample results are presented in brackets.

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

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

EPA Residential RSL


Page 1 of 44/12/2013

Table 3Soil Gas and Ambient Air Sampling Results for VOCs and Select SVOCs by Method TO-15- East Street Area 2 South - Commercial



VOCs/Select SVOCs - TO-151,1,1-Trichloroethane 22,000 220,000 ND(4.5) 0.028 J ND(5.2) ND(0.18) [ND(0.19)]1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.21 2.1 ND(5.6) ND(0.26) ND(6.6) ND(0.23) [ND(0.24)]1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane 130,000 1,300,000 ND(6.3) ND(1.5) ND(7.3) ND(1.3) [ND(1.3)]1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0.77 7.7 ND(4.5) ND(0.21) ND(5.2) ND(0.18) [ND(0.19)]1,1-Dichloroethane 7.7 77 ND(3.3) ND(0.16) ND(3.9) ND(0.14) [ND(0.14)]1,1-Dichloroethene 880 8,800 ND(3.2) ND(0.076) ND(3.8) ND(0.067) [ND(0.07)]1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 8.8 88 ND(24) ND(7.2) ND(28) ND(6.3) [ND(6.5)]1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 31 310 ND(4) ND(0.95) 1.7 J ND(0.83) [ND(0.86)]1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 0.002 0.02 ND(32) ND(1.9) ND(37) ND(1.6) [ND(1.7)]1,2-Dibromoethane 0.02 0.2 ND(6.3) ND(0.074) ND(7.3) ND(0.065) [ND(0.068)]1,2-Dichloro-1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane - - - - ND(5.7) ND(1.3) ND(6.7) ND(1.2) [ND(1.2)]1,2-Dichlorobenzene 880 8,800 ND(4.9) ND(1.2) ND(5.7) ND(1) [ND(1)]1,2-Dichloroethane 0.47 4.7 0.37 J 0.064 J ND(3.9) ND(0.14) [ND(0.14)]1,2-Dichloropropane 1.2 12 ND(3.8) ND(0.89) ND(4.4) ND(0.78) [ND(0.81)]1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene - - - - ND(4) ND(0.95) ND(4.7) ND(0.83) [ND(0.86)]1,3-Butadiene 0.41 4.1 ND(1.8) ND(0.43) ND(2.1) ND(0.37) [ND(0.39)]1,3-Dichlorobenzene - - - - ND(4.9) ND(1.2) ND(5.7) ND(1) [ND(1)]1,4-Dichlorobenzene 1.1 11 ND(4.9) ND(1.2) ND(5.7) ND(1) [ND(1)]1,4-Dioxane 1.6 16 ND(12) ND(0.7) ND(14) ND(0.61) [ND(0.63)]2-Butanone 22,000 220,000 2.4 J 1.9 J 3.5 J 0.48 J [ND(2.6)]2-Hexanone 130 1,300 ND(13) ND(4 J) ND(16) ND(3.5 J) [ND(3.6 J)]3-Chloropropene 2 20 ND(10) ND(3) ND(12) ND(2.6) [ND(2.8)]4-Ethyltoluene - - - - ND(4) ND(0.95) 1.3 J ND(0.83) [ND(0.86)]4-Methyl-2-pentanone 13,000 130,000 ND(3.4) ND(0.79 J) ND(3.9) ND(0.69 J) [ND(0.72 J)]Acetone 140,000 1,400,000 19 J 8.1 34 4 [3.1]Acetonitrile 260 2,600 ND(14) ND(1.6) ND(16) ND(1.4) [ND(1.5)]Acrolein 0.088 0.88 ND(7.5) ND(2.2) ND(8.8) ND(1.9) [ND(2)]Acrylonitrile 0.18 1.8 ND(7.1) ND(2.1) ND(8.3) ND(1.8) [ND(1.9)]alpha-Pinene - - - - ND(46) ND(5.4) ND(53) ND(4.7) [ND(4.9)]Benzene 1.6 16 0.41 J 0.48 1.3 J ND(0.27) [ND(0.28)]Benzyl Chloride 0.25 2.5 ND(4.2) ND(1) 0.74 J ND(0.87) [ND(0.91)]Bromodichloromethane 0.33 3.3 ND(5.5) ND(0.65) ND(6.4) ND(0.57) [ND(0.59)]Bromoform 11 110 ND(8.5) ND(2) ND(9.9) ND(1.7) [ND(1.8)]Bromomethane 22 220 ND(32) ND(3.7) ND(37) ND(3.3) [ND(3.4)]Carbon Disulfide 3,100 31,000 ND(10) ND(3) 28 ND(2.6) [ND(2.7)]Carbon Tetrachloride 2 20 ND(5.2) 0.55 J ND(6) ND(1.1) [ND(1.1)]Chlorobenzene 220 2,200 2.5 J ND(0.89) 3.1 J ND(0.78) [ND(0.81)]Chloroethane 44,000 440,000 ND(8.6) ND(2.5) ND(10) ND(2.2) [ND(2.3)]Chloroform 0.53 5.3 ND(4) ND(0.94) 6.7 2.1 [2.5]Chloromethane 390 3,900 ND(17) 1.2 ND(20) ND(0.35) [ND(0.36)]cis-1,2-Dichloroethene (see Note 7) 260 2,600 ND(3.2) ND(0.15) ND(3.8) 0.022 J [ND(0.14)]cis-1,3-Dichloropropene (see Note 8) 3.1 31 0.48 J ND(0.88) 0.64 J ND(0.77) [ND(0.8)]Cyclohexane 26,000 260,000 ND(2.8) ND(0.66) 2 J ND(0.58) [ND(0.6)]Dibromochloromethane 0.45 4.5 ND(7) ND(1.6) ND(8.1) ND(1.4) [ND(1.5)]Dichlorodifluoromethane 440 4,400 2.8 J 2.4 18 12 J [2.5 J]d-Limonene - - - - ND(18) ND(5.4) ND(21) ND(4.7) [ND(4.9)]Ethanol - - - - 11 2 4 J 2.9 [1.1 J]Ethyl acetate - - - - ND(12) ND(3.5) ND(14) ND(3) [ND(3.2)]Ethylbenzene 4.9 49 0.69 J 0.1 J 0.87 J ND(0.15) [0.029 J]Heptane - - - - 0.99 J ND(4) 0.63 J ND(3.5) [ND(3.6)]Hexachlorobutadiene 0.56 5.6 ND(35) ND(2) ND(41) ND(2.3) [ND(2.3)]Isooctane - - - - 0.64 J ND(4.5) 1 J ND(3.9) [ND(4.1)]Isopropyl alcohol 31,000 310,000 1.1 J 0.38 J ND(9.4) 0.37 J [ND(2.2)]Isopropylbenzene 1,800 18,000 ND(4) ND(0.95) ND(4.7) ND(0.83) [ND(0.86)]

EPA Residential RSL


Page 2 of 44/12/2013




EPA Residential RSL

VOCs/Select SVOCs - TO-15 (continued)m&p-Xylene - - 4,400 0.69 J 0.28 J 1.8 J 0.11 J [0.079 J]Methyl Methacrylate 3,100 31,000 ND(34) ND(7.9) ND(39) ND(6.9) [ND(7.2)]Methyl tert-butyl ether 47 470 ND(3) ND(0.7) ND(3.4) ND(0.61) [ND(0.63)]Methylene Chloride 1,200 12,000 6.5 J ND(1.3) 2.9 J ND(1.2) [ND(1.2)]Naphthalene 0.36 3.6 ND(17) 0.085 J ND(20) ND(0.44) [0.069 J]n-Butyl Acetate - - - - ND(39) ND(4.6) ND(45) ND(4) [ND(4.2)]n-Hexane 3,100 31,000 3.1 ND(0.68) 1.4 J ND(0.6) [ND(0.62)]n-Octane - - - - ND(15) ND(4.5) ND(18) ND(3.9) [ND(4.1)]Nonane 880 8,800 ND(17) ND(5.1) ND(20) ND(4.4) [ND(4.6)]n-Propylbenzene 4,400 44,000 ND(4) ND(0.95) ND(4.7) ND(0.83) [ND(0.86)]o-Xylene 440 4,400 ND(3.6) 0.11 J 1 J 0.035 J [0.026 J]Propene 13,000 130,000 ND(5.6) ND(1.7) ND(6.6) ND(1.4) [ND(1.5)]Styrene 4,400 44,000 ND(3.5) ND(0.82 J) ND(4.1) ND(0.72 J) [ND(0.75 J)]Tetrachloroethene 47 470 1.7 J 0.06 J 17 2.5 [0.067 J]Tetrahydrofuran 8,800 88,000 ND(2.4) ND(2.8) ND(2.8) ND(2.5) [ND(2.6)]Toluene 22,000 220,000 15 0.56 2.9 J 0.38 [0.13]trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 260 2,600 ND(3.2) ND(0.76) ND(3.8) ND(0.67) [ND(0.7)]trans-1,3-Dichloropropene (see Note 8) 3.1 31 0.91 J ND(0.88) ND(4.3) ND(0.77) [ND(0.8)]Trichloroethene 3 30 ND(4.4) ND(0.21) 5.5 0.14 J [ND(0.19)]Trichlorofluoromethane 3,100 31,000 4.4 J 1.3 5 J 0.89 J [0.92 J]Vinyl Acetate 880 8,800 ND(12) ND(3.4) ND(13) ND(3) [ND(3.1)]Vinyl Chloride 2.8 28 ND(2.1) ND(0.049) ND(2.4) ND(0.043) [ND(0.045)]


Page 3 of 44/12/2013




VOCs/Select SVOCs - TO-15 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 22,000 220,000 0.45 J 0.14 J 0.5 J 0.281,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.21 2.1 0.94 J ND(0.23) ND(5.9) ND(0.24)1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane 130,000 1,300,000 1.2 J 0.62 J ND(6.6) ND(1.3)1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0.77 7.7 ND(4.8) ND(0.18) ND(4.7) ND(0.19)1,1-Dichloroethane 7.7 77 ND(3.5) ND(0.13) ND(3.5) ND(0.14)1,1-Dichloroethene 880 8,800 ND(3.5) ND(0.066) ND(3.4) ND(0.069)1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 8.8 88 ND(26) ND(6.2) ND(25) ND(6.5)1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 31 310 12 ND(0.82) 4.7 ND(0.86)1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 0.002 0.02 ND(34) ND(1.6) ND(33) ND(1.7)1,2-Dibromoethane 0.02 0.2 ND(6.7) ND(0.064) ND(6.6) ND(0.067)1,2-Dichloro-1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane - - - - ND(6.1) ND(1.2) ND(6) ND(1.2)1,2-Dichlorobenzene 880 8,800 ND(5.3) ND(1) ND(5.1) ND(1)1,2-Dichloroethane 0.47 4.7 ND(3.5) ND(0.13) ND(3.5) ND(0.14)1,2-Dichloropropane 1.2 12 ND(4) ND(0.77) ND(4) ND(0.81)1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene - - - - 4.2 J ND(0.82) 1.9 J ND(0.86)1,3-Butadiene 0.41 4.1 ND(1.9) ND(0.37) ND(1.9) ND(0.39)1,3-Dichlorobenzene - - - - 1.2 J ND(1) ND(5.1) ND(1)1,4-Dichlorobenzene 1.1 11 ND(5.3) ND(1) ND(5.1) ND(1)1,4-Dioxane 1.6 16 ND(13) ND(0.6) ND(12) ND(0.63)2-Butanone 22,000 220,000 6.7 J 1.8 J 4.3 J 1.1 J2-Hexanone 130 1,300 ND(14) ND(3.4 J) ND(14) ND(3.6 J)3-Chloropropene 2 20 ND(11) ND(2.6) ND(11) ND(2.7)4-Ethyltoluene - - - - 10 ND(0.82) 3.7 J ND(0.86)4-Methyl-2-pentanone 13,000 130,000 1.8 J ND(0.68 J) ND(3.5) ND(0.72 J)Acetone 140,000 1,400,000 71 9.2 96 5.5Acetonitrile 260 2,600 ND(15) ND(1.4) ND(14) ND(1.5)Acrolein 0.088 0.88 ND(8) 2.1 ND(7.8) ND(2)Acrylonitrile 0.18 1.8 ND(7.6) ND(1.8) ND(7.4) ND(1.9)alpha-Pinene - - - - ND(49) ND(4.6) ND(48) ND(4.9)Benzene 1.6 16 8.1 ND(0.26) 1.7 J ND(0.28)Benzyl Chloride 0.25 2.5 0.84 J ND(0.86) 0.73 J ND(0.9)Bromodichloromethane 0.33 3.3 ND(5.9) ND(0.56) ND(5.7) ND(0.59)Bromoform 11 110 ND(9) ND(1.7) ND(8.8) ND(1.8)Bromomethane 22 220 ND(34) ND(3.2) ND(33) ND(3.4)Carbon Disulfide 3,100 31,000 26 ND(2.6) 6.5 J ND(2.7)Carbon Tetrachloride 2 20 ND(5.5) ND(1) ND(5.4) ND(1.1)Chlorobenzene 220 2,200 2.6 J ND(0.76) 2.8 J ND(0.8)Chloroethane 44,000 440,000 ND(9.2) ND(2.2) ND(9) ND(2.3)Chloroform 0.53 5.3 11 ND(0.81) 1.9 J 0.67 JChloromethane 390 3,900 ND(18) ND(0.34) ND(18) ND(0.36)cis-1,2-Dichloroethene (see Note 7) 260 2,600 ND(3.5) ND(0.13) ND(3.4) ND(0.14)cis-1,3-Dichloropropene (see Note 8) 3.1 31 0.79 J ND(0.75) ND(3.9) ND(0.79)Cyclohexane 26,000 260,000 2.3 J ND(0.57) ND(2.9) ND(0.6)Dibromochloromethane 0.45 4.5 ND(7.4) ND(1.4) ND(7.3) ND(1.5)Dichlorodifluoromethane 440 4,400 82 15 14 19d-Limonene - - - - ND(20) ND(4.6) ND(19) ND(4.9)Ethanol - - - - 3.6 J 2.9 4.2 J 3Ethyl acetate - - - - ND(13) ND(3) ND(12) ND(3.2)Ethylbenzene 4.9 49 20 0.022 J 4.2 0.02 JHeptane - - - - 4.6 ND(3.4) 1.5 J ND(3.6)Hexachlorobutadiene 0.56 5.6 ND(37) ND(2.3) ND(36) ND(2.4)Isooctane - - - - 4.4 ND(3.9) 0.84 J ND(4.1)Isopropyl alcohol 31,000 310,000 ND(8.6) ND(2) 1.9 J ND(2.2)Isopropylbenzene 1,800 18,000 1 J ND(0.82) 0.68 J ND(0.86)

EPA Residential RSL


Page 4 of 44/12/2013




EPA Residential RSL

VOCs/Select SVOCs - TO-15 (continued)m&p-Xylene - - 4,400 72 0.085 J 16 0.091 JMethyl Methacrylate 3,100 31,000 ND(36) ND(6.8) ND(35) ND(7.2)Methyl tert-butyl ether 47 470 0.25 J ND(0.6) ND(3.1) ND(0.63)Methylene Chloride 1,200 12,000 2.5 J ND(1.2) 2.7 J ND(1.2)Naphthalene 0.36 3.6 4.2 J 0.051 J 4.2 J 0.065 Jn-Butyl Acetate - - - - ND(42) ND(3.9) ND(41) ND(4.2)n-Hexane 3,100 31,000 4.1 ND(0.58) 2.2 J ND(0.62)n-Octane - - - - ND(16) ND(3.9) ND(16) ND(4.1)Nonane 880 8,800 ND(18) ND(4.4) ND(18) ND(4.6)n-Propylbenzene 4,400 44,000 2.4 J ND(0.82) 1 J ND(0.86)o-Xylene 440 4,400 26 0.034 J 5.8 0.037 JPropene 13,000 130,000 ND(6) ND(1.4) ND(5.9) ND(1.5)Styrene 4,400 44,000 ND(3.7) ND(0.71 J) ND(3.6) ND(0.74 J)Tetrachloroethene 47 470 20 0.4 5.4 J 0.27Tetrahydrofuran 8,800 88,000 ND(2.6) ND(2.4) ND(2.5) ND(2.6)Toluene 22,000 220,000 68 0.16 12 0.14trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 260 2,600 ND(3.5) ND(0.66) ND(3.4) ND(0.69)trans-1,3-Dichloropropene (see Note 8) 3.1 31 ND(4) ND(0.75) ND(3.9) ND(0.79)Trichloroethene 3 30 3.7 J ND(0.18) 1.4 J ND(0.19)Trichlorofluoromethane 3,100 31,000 27 6.2 25 9.5Vinyl Acetate 880 8,800 ND(12) ND(2.9) ND(12) ND(3.1)Vinyl Chloride 2.8 28 ND(2.2) ND(0.042) ND(2.2) ND(0.045)

Notes:J = Indicates an estimated value.ND = Analyte was not detected. The number in parantheses is the associated reporting limit. RSL = Regional Screening Levelug/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter-- = No screening level for this parameter


4. Shading indicates that soil gas concentration exceeds industrial soil gas RSL.5. Bolded ND result indicates non-detected compound with detection limit (or reporting limit for compounds with no available method detection limit) higher than industrial soil gas RSL.6. Field duplicate sample results are presented in brackets.7. Screening value for trans-1,2-dichloroethene was used as surrogate for cis-1,2-dichloroethene.8. Screening value for 1,3-dichloropropene was used to screen cis and trans isomers in soil gas. Cis-1,3-dichloropropene was detectedin two soil gas samples,but trans-1,3-dichloropropene was not detected in any soil gas sample, so the concentrations could not be summed.

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

1. Samples were analyzed by Air Toxics Laboratories via EPA Method TO-15


Page 1 of 14/12/2013

Table 4Soil Gas Sampling Results for PCBs via Method TO-17 and PAHs by Methods TO-13A and TO-17 - East Street Area 2 South - Commercial

Final LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report - April 2013 Groundwater Management Area 1 General Electric Company – Pittsfield, Massachusetts(Results are presented in ug/m3)


PCBs-TO-17Aroclor-1016/1242 0.61 6.1 ND(5) ND(0.042) ND(5) ND(0.043) ND(5) ND(0.042)Aroclor-1221 0.021 0.21 ND(5) ND(0.042) ND(5) ND(0.043) ND(5) ND(0.042)Aroclor-1232 0.021 0.21 ND(5) ND(0.042) ND(5) ND(0.043) ND(5) ND(0.042)Aroclor-1248 0.021 0.21 ND(5) ND(0.042) ND(5) ND(0.043) ND(5) ND(0.042)Aroclor-1254 0.021 0.21 ND(5) ND(0.042) ND(5) ND(0.043) ND(5) ND(0.042)Aroclor-1260 0.021 0.21 ND(5) ND(0.042) ND(5) ND(0.043) ND(5) ND(0.042)Total PCBs - - - - ND(5) ND(0.042) ND(5) ND(0.043) ND(5) ND(0.042)PAHs-TO-13ABenzo(a)anthracene 0.11 1.1 ND(10) ND(10) [ND(10 J)] ND(10 J) ND(10 J) ND(10) ND(10)Benzo(a)pyrene 0.011 0.11 ND(10 J) ND(10) [ND(10 J)] ND(10 J) ND(10 J) ND(10 J) ND(10)Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.11 1.1 ND(10) ND(10) [ND(10 J)] ND(10 J) ND(10 J) ND(10) ND(10)Benzo(g,h,i)perylene - - - - ND(10) ND(10) [ND(10 J)] ND(10 J) ND(10 J) ND(10) ND(10)Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.11 1.1 ND(10) ND(10) [ND(10 J)] ND(10 J) ND(10 J) ND(10) ND(10)Chrysene 1.1 11 ND(10) ND(10) [ND(10 J)] ND(10 J) ND(10 J) ND(10) ND(10)Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.01 0.1 ND(10) ND(10) [ND(10 J)] ND(10 J) ND(10 J) ND(10) ND(10)Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.11 1.1 ND(10) ND(10) [ND(10 J)] ND(10 J) ND(10 J) ND(10) ND(10)PAHs-TO-172-Methylnaphthalene - - - - 0.21 J ND(0.5) [ND(0.5)] 1.2 ND(0.45) 1.6 ND(0.5)Acenaphthene - - - - ND(1) ND(0.5) [ND(0.5)] 0.83 J ND(0.45) 0.31 J ND(0.5)Acenaphthylene - - - - ND(0.5) ND(0.5) [ND(0.5)] ND(0.5) ND(0.45) ND(0.5) ND(0.5)Anthracene - - - - ND(0.5 J) ND(0.5) [ND(0.5)] ND(0.5 J) ND(0.45) ND(0.5 J) ND(0.5)Fluoranthene - - - - ND(0.5) ND(0.5) [ND(0.5)] ND(0.5) ND(0.45) ND(0.5) ND(0.5)Fluorene - - - - ND(1) ND(0.5) [ND(0.5)] 0.34 J ND(0.45) ND(1) ND(0.5)Naphthalene 0.36 3.6 0.13 J ND(0.5) [ND(0.5)] 1.8 ND(0.45) 3.2 0.33 JPhenanthrene - - - - ND(0.5) ND(0.5) [ND(0.5)] 0.19 J ND(0.45) ND(0.5) ND(0.5)Pyrene - - - - ND(1) ND(1) [ND(1)] ND(1) ND(0.89) ND(1) ND(1)

Notes:J = Indicates an estimated value.ND = Analyte was not detected. The number in parantheses is the associated reporting limit. RSL = Regional Screening Levelug/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter-- = No screening level for this parameter1. Samples submitted to Air Toxics Laboratories for analysis of PCBs and select semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), namely polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).2. Samples have been validated as described in Attachment A.

4. Shading indicates that soil gas concentration exceeds industrial soil gas RSL.5. Bolded ND result indicates non-detected compound with detection limit higher than industrial soil gas RSL.




EPA Residential RSL


Page 1 of 44/12/2013


Final LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report - April 2013Groundwater Management Area 1General Electric Company – Pittsfield, Massachusetts(Results are presented in ppbv)


VOCs/Select SVOCs - TO-151,1,1-Trichloroethane 950 9,500 ND(0.82) 0.0052 J ND(0.86) 0.0074 J1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.0061 0.061 ND(0.82) ND(0.039) ND(0.86) ND(0.065) (a) 1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane 4,000 40,000 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.86) ND(0.33)1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0.028 0.28 ND(0.82) ND(0.039) ND(0.86) ND(0.065)1,1-Dichloroethane 0.37 3.7 ND(0.82) ND(0.039) ND(0.86) 0.012 J1,1-Dichloroethene 53 530 ND(0.82) ND(0.019) ND(0.86) ND(0.033)1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 0.28 2.8 ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.4) ND(1.6)1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 1.5 15 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) 3.8 ND(0.33)1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 0.000017 0.00017 ND(3.3) ND(0.19) ND(3.4) ND(0.33)1,2-Dibromoethane 0.00053 0.0053 ND(0.82) ND(0.0096) ND(0.86) ND(0.016) (b) 1,2-Dichloro-1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane - - - - ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.86) ND(0.33)1,2-Dichlorobenzene 35 350 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.86) ND(0.33)1,2-Dichloroethane 0.023 0.23 0.091 J 0.016 J ND(0.86) ND(0.065)1,2-Dichloropropane 0.052 0.52 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.86) ND(0.33)1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene - - - - ND(0.82) ND(0.19) 1.2 ND(0.33)1,3-Butadiene 0.037 0.37 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.86) ND(0.33)1,3-Dichlorobenzene - - - - ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.86) ND(0.33)1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.037 0.37 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.86) ND(0.33)1,4-Dioxane 0.089 0.89 ND(3.3) ND(0.19) ND(3.4) ND(0.33)2-Butanone 1,800 18,000 0.81 J 0.64 J 0.85 J 0.67 J2-Hexanone 7.6 76 ND(3.3) ND(0.96 J) ND(3.4) ND(1.6 J)3-Chloropropene 0.13 1.3 ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.4) ND(1.6) (c) 4-Ethyltoluene - - - - ND(0.82) ND(0.19) 3.9 ND(0.33)4-Methyl-2-pentanone 760 7,600 ND(0.82) ND(0.19 J) 0.58 J ND(0.33 J)Acetone 13,000 130,000 7.8 J 3.4 22 3.1Acetonitrile 38 380 ND(8.2) ND(0.96) ND(8.6) ND(1.6)Acrolein 0.0092 0.092 ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.4) ND(1.6)Acrylonitrile 0.017 0.17 ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.4) ND(1.6)alpha-Pinene - - - - ND(8.2) ND(0.96) ND(8.6) ND(1.6)Benzene 0.097 0.97 0.13 J 0.15 4.8 ND(0.16)Benzyl Chloride 0.0097 0.097 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.86) ND(0.33) (d)Bromodichloromethane 0.0099 0.099 ND(0.82) ND(0.096) 7.8 6.3Bromoform 0.21 2.1 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.86) ND(0.33)Bromomethane 1.3 13 ND(8.2) ND(0.96) ND(8.6) ND(1.6)Carbon Disulfide 230 2,300 ND(3.3) ND(0.96) 14 ND(1.6)Carbon Tetrachloride 0.065 0.65 ND(0.82) 0.087 J 0.42 J 0.35Chlorobenzene 11 110 0.55 J ND(0.19) 0.6 J ND(0.33)Chloroethane 3,800 38,000 ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.4) ND(1.6)Chloroform 0.023 0.23 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) 326 280 EJChloromethane 46 460 ND(8.2) 0.57 ND(8.6) ND(0.33)cis-1,2-Dichloroethene (see Note 7) 16 160 ND(0.82) ND(0.039) ND(0.86) ND(0.065)cis-1,3-Dichloropropene (see Note 8) 0.13 1.3 0.1 J ND(0.19) ND(0.86) ND(0.33)Cyclohexane 1,800 18,000 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) 0.55 J ND(0.33)Dibromochloromethane 0.011 0.11 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.86) ND(0.33) (e)Dichlorodifluoromethane 20 200 0.57 J 0.48 1.2 0.66d-Limonene - - - - ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.4) ND(1.6)Ethanol - - - - 5.7 1 1.3 J 0.99 JEthyl acetate - - - - ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.4) ND(1.6)Ethylbenzene 0.22 2.2 0.16 J 0.023 J 9.1 0.011 JHeptane - - - - 0.24 J ND(0.96) 1.5 ND(1.6)Hexachlorobutadiene 0.01 0.1 ND(3.3) ND(0.19) ND(3.4) ND(0.5) (f) Isooctane - - - - 0.14 J ND(0.96) 0.95 ND(1.6)Isopropyl alcohol 3,000 30,000 0.44 J 0.16 J ND(3.4) ND(1.6)Isopropylbenzene 85 850 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) 0.32 J ND(0.33)

EPA Residential RSL


Page 2 of 44/12/2013




EPA Residential RSL

VOCs/Select SVOCs - TO-15 (continued)m&p-Xylene 23 230 0.16 J 0.065 J 30 0.022 JMethyl Methacrylate 180 1,800 ND(8.2) ND(1.9) ND(8.6) ND(3.3)Methyl tert-butyl ether 2.6 26 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) 0.08 J ND(0.33)Methylene Chloride 28 280 1.9 J ND(0.39) 0.87 J 0.53 JNaphthalene 0.014 0.14 ND(3.3) 0.016 J ND(3.4) 0.023 Jn-Butyl Acetate - - - - ND(8.2) ND(0.96) ND(8.6) ND(1.6)n-Hexane 210 2,100 0.87 ND(0.19) 2.7 ND(0.33)n-Octane - - - - ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.4) ND(1.6)Nonane 40 400 ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.4) ND(1.6)n-Propylbenzene 200 2,000 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) 0.9 ND(0.33)o-Xylene 23 230 ND(0.82) 0.026 J 9.3 0.0092 JPropene 1,800 18,000 ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.4) ND(1.6)Styrene 230 2,300 ND(0.82) ND(0.19 J) ND(0.86) ND(0.33 J)Tetrachloroethene 1.4 14 0.25 J 0.0088 J 2 0.026 JTetrahydrofuran 710 7,100 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) ND(0.86) ND(1.6)Toluene 1,400 14,000 4 0.15 36 0.041 Jtrans-1,2-Dichloroethene 16 160 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.86) ND(0.33)trans-1,3-Dichloropropene (see Note 8) 0.13 1.3 0.2 J ND(0.19) ND(0.86) ND(0.33)Trichloroethene 0.08 0.8 ND(0.82) ND(0.039) 0.77 J ND(0.065)Trichlorofluoromethane 130 1,300 0.78 J 0.23 1 0.31 JVinyl Acetate 60 600 ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.4) ND(1.6)Vinyl Chloride 0.063 0.63 ND(0.82) ND(0.019) ND(0.86) 0.013 J


Page 3 of 44/12/2013




VOCs/Select SVOCs - TO-151,1,1-Trichloroethane 950 9,500 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.032) ND(0.92) 0.0082 J1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.0061 0.061 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] 0.0022 J (a) ND(0.92) ND(0.035) (a) 1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane 4,000 40,000 0.35 J [ND(0.88)] ND(0.16) ND(0.92) ND(0.17)1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0.028 0.28 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.032) ND(0.92) ND(0.035)1,1-Dichloroethane 0.37 3.7 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.032) ND(0.92) ND(0.035)1,1-Dichloroethene 53 530 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.016) ND(0.92) ND(0.017)1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 0.28 2.8 ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(0.81) ND(3.7) ND(0.86)1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 1.5 15 1.1 [1] ND(0.16) 2.1 ND(0.17)1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 0.000017 0.00017 ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(0.16) ND(3.7) ND(0.17)1,2-Dibromoethane 0.00053 0.0053 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.0081) (b) ND(0.92) ND(0.0086) (b) 1,2-Dichloro-1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane - - - - ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.16) ND(0.92) ND(0.17)1,2-Dichlorobenzene 35 350 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.16) ND(0.92) ND(0.17)1,2-Dichloroethane 0.023 0.23 ND(0.88) [0.094 J] ND(0.032) ND(0.92) ND(0.035)1,2-Dichloropropane 0.052 0.52 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.16) ND(0.92) ND(0.17)1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene - - - - 0.27 J [0.26 J] ND(0.16) 0.58 J ND(0.17)1,3-Butadiene 0.037 0.37 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.16) ND(0.92) ND(0.17)1,3-Dichlorobenzene - - - - ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.16) ND(0.92) ND(0.17)1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.037 0.37 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.16) ND(0.92) ND(0.17)1,4-Dioxane 0.089 0.89 ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] 0.24 ND(3.7) ND(0.17)2-Butanone 1,800 18,000 1.4 J [0.85 J] 0.34 J 3 J 0.28 J2-Hexanone 7.6 76 ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(0.81 J) ND(3.7) ND(0.86 J)3-Chloropropene 0.13 1.3 ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(0.81) (c) ND(3.7) ND(0.86) (c) 4-Ethyltoluene - - - - 0.8 J [0.93] ND(0.16) 1.8 ND(0.17)4-Methyl-2-pentanone 760 7,600 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.16 J) 0.47 J ND(0.17 J)Acetone 13,000 130,000 15 [14] 2.3 46 2.1Acetonitrile 38 380 ND(8.8) [ND(8.8)] ND(0.81) ND(9.2) ND(0.86)Acrolein 0.0092 0.092 ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(0.81) ND(3.7) ND(0.86)Acrylonitrile 0.017 0.17 ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(0.81) ND(3.7) ND(0.86)alpha-Pinene - - - - ND(8.8) [ND(8.8)] ND(0.81) ND(9.2) ND(0.86)Benzene 0.097 0.97 0.6 J [0.59 J] ND(0.081) 0.65 J ND(0.086)Benzyl Chloride 0.0097 0.097 0.14 J [ND(0.88)] ND(0.16) (d) ND(0.92) ND(0.17) (d) Bromodichloromethane 0.0099 0.099 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.081) ND(0.92) ND(0.086)Bromoform 0.21 2.1 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.16) ND(0.92) ND(0.17)Bromomethane 1.3 13 ND(8.8) [ND(8.8)] ND(0.81) ND(9.2) ND(0.86)Carbon Disulfide 230 2,300 2.1 J [2 J] ND(0.81) 4 0.72 JCarbon Tetrachloride 0.065 0.65 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.16) ND(0.92) ND(0.17)Chlorobenzene 11 110 0.63 J [0.63 J] ND(0.16) 0.64 J ND(0.17)Chloroethane 3,800 38,000 ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(0.81) ND(3.7) ND(0.86)Chloroform 0.023 0.23 1.2 [1.2] 0.47 3 1.2Chloromethane 46 460 ND(8.8) [ND(8.8)] ND(0.16) ND(9.2) ND(0.17)cis-1,2-Dichloroethene (see Note 7) 16 160 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.032) ND(0.92) ND(0.035)cis-1,3-Dichloropropene (see Note 8) 0.13 1.3 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.16) 0.13 J ND(0.17)Cyclohexane 1,800 18,000 0.17 J [0.18 J] ND(0.16) ND(0.92) ND(0.17)Dibromochloromethane 0.011 0.11 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.16) (e) ND(0.92) ND(0.17) (e) Dichlorodifluoromethane 20 200 0.53 J [0.56 J] 0.51 0.64 J 0.53d-Limonene - - - - ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(0.81) ND(3.7) ND(0.86)Ethanol - - - - 1.7 J [2.8 J] 0.7 J 1 J 1.4Ethyl acetate - - - - ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(0.81) ND(3.7) ND(0.86)Ethylbenzene 0.22 2.2 1.5 [1.4] ND(0.032) 2.6 0.0069 JHeptane - - - - 0.22 J [0.36 J] ND(0.81) 0.4 J 0.079 JHexachlorobutadiene 0.01 0.1 ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(0.3) (f) ND(3.7) ND(0.3) (f) Isooctane - - - - 0.18 J [ND(0.88)] ND(0.81) 0.17 J ND(0.86)Isopropyl alcohol 3,000 30,000 ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(0.81) 0.55 J 0.16 JIsopropylbenzene 85 850 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.16) 0.14 J ND(0.17)

EPA Residential RSL


Page 4 of 44/12/2013




EPA Residential RSL

VOCs/Select SVOCs - TO-15 (continued)m&p-Xylene 23 230 5.4 [5.1] 0.016 J 7.6 0.024 JMethyl Methacrylate 180 1,800 ND(8.8) [ND(8.8)] ND(1.6) ND(9.2) ND(1.7)Methyl tert-butyl ether 2.6 26 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.16) ND(0.92) ND(0.17)Methylene Chloride 28 280 0.58 J [0.42 J] ND(0.32) 0.8 J ND(0.35)Naphthalene 0.014 0.14 ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(0.081) ND(3.7) 0.018 Jn-Butyl Acetate - - - - ND(8.8) [ND(8.8)] ND(0.81) ND(9.2) ND(0.86)n-Hexane 210 2,100 1.1 [0.94] ND(0.16) 0.68 J 0.14 Jn-Octane - - - - ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(0.81) ND(3.7) ND(0.86)Nonane 40 400 ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(0.81) ND(3.7) ND(0.86)n-Propylbenzene 200 2,000 0.21 J [0.25 J] ND(0.16) 0.43 J ND(0.17)o-Xylene 23 230 1.8 [1.8] 0.0072 J 2.7 0.011 JPropene 1,800 18,000 ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(0.81) ND(3.7) ND(0.86)Styrene 230 2,300 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.16 J) ND(0.92) ND(0.17 J)Tetrachloroethene 1.4 14 0.91 [0.9] 0.011 J 5.7 1.2Tetrahydrofuran 710 7,100 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.81) ND(0.92) ND(0.86)Toluene 1,400 14,000 4.9 [5.4] 0.047 8.4 0.059trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 16 160 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.16) ND(0.92) ND(0.17)trans-1,3-Dichloropropene (see Note 8) 0.13 1.3 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.16) ND(0.92) ND(0.17)Trichloroethene 0.08 0.8 0.33 J [0.24 J] ND(0.032) 0.41 J ND(0.035)Trichlorofluoromethane 130 1,300 1 [1.1] 0.16 0.39 J 0.22Vinyl Acetate 60 600 ND(3.5) [ND(3.5)] ND(0.81) ND(3.7) ND(0.86)Vinyl Chloride 0.063 0.63 ND(0.88) [ND(0.88)] ND(0.016) ND(0.92) ND(0.017)

Notes:J = Indicates an estimated value.ND = Analyte was not detected. The number in parantheses is the associated reporting limit. E = Indicates a concentration that exceeds the calibration rangeRSL = Regional Screening Levelug/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter-- = No screening level for this parameter


4. Shading indicates that soil gas concentration exceeds residential soil gas RSL.5. Bolded ND result indicates non-detected compound with detection limit (or reporting limit for compounds with no available method detection limit) higher than soil gas RSL.6. Field duplicate sample results are presented in brackets.7. Screening value for trans-1,2-dichloroethene was used as surrogate for cis-1,2-dichloroethene.8. Screening value for 1,3-dichloropropene was used to screen cis and trans isomers in soil gas. Cis-1,3-dichloropropene was only detectedin one soil gas sample and trans-1,3-dichloropropene was not detected in any soil gas sample, so the concentrations could not be summed. 9. (a) = Method Detection Limits for 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane in analyses of 12/11/12 samples were 0.004 ppbv for SVP-1, 0.002 ppbv for SVP-2, and 0.002 ppbv for SVP-6.10. (b) = Method Detection Limits for 1,2-Dibromoethane in analyses of 12/11/12 samples were 0.004 ppbv for SVP-1, 0.002 ppbv for SVP-2, and 0.002 ppbv SVP-6.11. (c) = Method Detection Limits for 3-Chloropropene in analyses of 12/11/12 samples were 0.54 ppbv for SVP-1, 0.27 ppbv for SVP-2, and 0.29 ppbv for SVP-6.12. (d) = Method Detection Limits for Benzyl Chloride in analyses of 12/11/12 samples were 0.09 ppbv for SVP-1, 0.04 ppbv for SVP-2, and 0.05 ppbv for SVP-6.13. (e) = Method Detection Limits for Dibromochloromethane in analyses of 12/11/12 samples were 0.16 ppbv for SVP-1, 0.08 ppbv for SVP-2, and 0.09 ppbv for SVP-6.14. (f) = Method Detection Limits for Hexachlorobutadiene in the analyses on 12/11/12 samples were 0.4 ppbv for SVP-1, 0.2 ppbv for SVP-2, and 0.2 ppbv for SVP-6.

1. Samples were analyzed by Air Toxics Laboratories via EPA Method TO-15.

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


Page 1 of 14/12/2013

Table 6Soil Gas Sampling Results for PCBs via Method TO-17 and PAHs by Methods TO-13A and TO-17 - East Street Area 2 South - Residential

Final LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report - April 2013Groundwater Management Area 1 General Electric Company – Pittsfield, Massachusetts(Results are presented in ppbv)


PCBs-TO-17 Aroclor-1016/1242 0.010 0.10 ND(0.47) ND(0.004) ND(0.47) [ND(0.47)] ND(0.0041) ND(0.47) ND(0.004)Aroclor-1221 0.0006 0.006 ND(0.61) ND(0.0051) ND(0.61) [ND(0.61)] ND(0.0053) ND(0.61) ND(0.0052)Aroclor-1232 0.0006 0.006 ND(0.53) ND(0.0044) ND(0.53) [ND(0.53)] ND(0.0046) ND(0.53) ND(0.0045)Aroclor-1248 0.0004 0.004 ND(0.42) ND(0.0035) ND(0.42) [ND(0.42)] ND(0.0036) ND(0.42) ND(0.0035)Aroclor-1254 0.0003 0.003 ND(0.37) ND(0.0031) ND(0.37) [ND(0.37)] ND(0.0032) ND(0.37) ND(0.0032)Aroclor-1260 0.0003 0.003 ND(0.34) ND(0.0029) ND(0.34) [ND(0.34)] ND(0.003) ND(0.34) ND(0.0029)Total PCBs - - - - ND(0.61) ND(0.0051) ND(0.61) [ND(0.61)] ND(0.0053) ND(0.61) ND(0.0052)PAHs-TO-13ABenzo(a)anthracene 0.0009 0.0093 ND(1.1) ND(0.97) ND(1.1) ND(1.1) ND(1.1) ND(1.1)Benzo(a)pyrene 0.00008 0.0008 ND(0.97 J) ND(0.88) ND(0.97 J) ND(0.97) ND(0.97 J) ND(0.97)Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.0008 0.0084 ND(0.97) ND(0.88) ND(0.97) ND(0.97) ND(0.97) ND(0.97)Benzo(g,h,i)perylene - - - - ND(0.88) ND(0.8) ND(0.88) ND(0.88) ND(0.88) ND(0.88)Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.0008 0.0084 ND(0.97) ND(0.88) ND(0.97) ND(0.97) ND(0.97) ND(0.97)Chrysene 0.0093 0.0009 ND(1.1) ND(0.97) ND(1.1) ND(1.1) ND(1.1) ND(1.1)Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.00007 0.0007 ND(0.88) ND(0.8) ND(0.88) ND(0.88) ND(0.88) ND(0.88)Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.0008 0.008 ND(0.98) ND(0.89) ND(0.98) ND(0.98) ND(0.98) ND(0.98)PAHs-TO-172-Methylnaphthalene - - - - 0.11 ND(0.086) 0.036 J [ND(8.6)] ND(0.081) 0.089 ND(0.086)Acenaphthene - - - - ND(0.16) ND(0.079) ND(0.16) [ND(16)] ND(0.075) ND(0.16) ND(0.079)Acenaphthylene - - - - ND(0.08) ND(0.08) ND(0.08) [ND(8)] ND(0.076) ND(0.08) ND(0.08)Anthracene - - - - ND(0.068 J) ND(0.068) ND(0.068 J) [ND(6.8 J)] ND(0.065) ND(0.068 J) ND(0.068)Fluoranthene - - - - ND(0.06) ND(0.06) ND(0.06) [ND(6)] ND(0.057) ND(0.06) ND(0.06)Fluorene - - - - ND(0.15) ND(0.074) ND(0.15) [ND(15)] ND(0.069) ND(0.15) ND(0.074)Naphthalene 0.014 0.14 0.072 J ND(0.095) 0.032 J [ND(9.5)] ND(0.09) 0.12 0.019 JPhenanthrene - - - - ND(0.068) ND(0.068) ND(0.068) [ND(6.8)] ND(0.065) ND(0.068) ND(0.068)Pyrene - - - - ND(0.12) ND(0.12) ND(0.12) [ND(12)] ND(0.11) ND(0.12) ND(0.12)

Notes:J = Indicates an estimated value.ND = Analyte was not detected. The number in parantheses is the associated reporting limit. RSL = Regional Screening Levelppbv = parts per billion by volume-- = No screening level for this parameter1. Samples submitted to Air Toxics Laboratories for analysis of PCBs and select semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), namely polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).2. Samples have been validated as described in Attachment A.

4. Shading indicates that soil gas concentration exceeds residential soil gas RSL.5. Bolded ND result indicates non-detected compound with detection limit higher than the residential soil gas RSL.



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

EPA Residential RSL


Page 1 of 44/12/2013




VOCs/Select SVOCs - TO-151,1,1-Trichloroethane 4,000 40,000 ND(0.82) 0.0052 J ND(0.96) ND(0.034) [ND(0.035)]1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.031 0.31 ND(0.82) ND(0.039) ND(0.96) ND(0.034) [ND(0.035)]1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane 17,000 170,000 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.96) ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0.14 1.4 ND(0.82) ND(0.039) ND(0.96) ND(0.034) [ND(0.035)]1,1-Dichloroethane 1.9 19 ND(0.82) ND(0.039) ND(0.96) ND(0.034) [ND(0.035)]1,1-Dichloroethene 220 2,200 ND(0.82) ND(0.019) ND(0.96) ND(0.017) [ND(0.018)]1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 1.2 12 ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.8) ND(0.84) [ND(0.88)]1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 6.3 63 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) 0.35 J ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 0.00021 0.0021 ND(3.3) ND(0.19) ND(3.8) ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]1,2-Dibromoethane 0.0026 0.026 ND(0.82) ND(0.0096) ND(0.96) ND(0.0084) [ND(0.0088)]1,2-Dichloro-1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane - - - - ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.96) ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]1,2-Dichlorobenzene 150 1,500 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.96) ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]1,2-Dichloroethane 0.12 1.2 0.091 J 0.016 J ND(0.96) ND(0.034) [ND(0.035)]1,2-Dichloropropane 0.26 2.6 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.96) ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene - - - - ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.96) ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]1,3-Butadiene 0.19 1.9 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.96) ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]1,3-Dichlorobenzene - - - - ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.96) ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.18 1.8 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.96) ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]1,4-Dioxane 0.44 4.4 ND(3.3) ND(0.19) ND(3.8) ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]2-Butanone 7,500 75,000 0.81 J 0.64 J 1.2 J 0.16 J [ND(0.88)]2-Hexanone 32 320 ND(3.3) ND(0.96 J) ND(3.8) ND(0.84 J) [ND(0.88 J)]3-Chloropropene 0.64 6.4 ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.8) ND(0.84) [ND(0.88)]4-Ethyltoluene - - - - ND(0.82) ND(0.19) 0.27 J ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]4-Methyl-2-pentanone 3,200 32,000 ND(0.82) ND(0.19 J) ND(0.96) ND(0.17 J) [ND(0.18 J)]Acetone 59,000 590,000 7.8 J 3.4 14 1.7 [1.3]Acetonitrile 150 1,500 ND(8.2) ND(0.96) ND(9.6) ND(0.84) [ND(0.88)]Acrolein 0.038 0.38 ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.8) ND(0.84) [ND(0.88)]Acrylonitrile 0.083 0.83 ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.8) ND(0.84) [ND(0.88)]alpha-Pinene - - - - ND(8.2) ND(0.96) ND(9.6) ND(0.84) [ND(0.88)]Benzene 0.5 5 0.13 J 0.15 0.41 J ND(0.084) [ND(0.088)]Benzyl Chloride 0.048 0.48 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) 0.14 J ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]Bromodichloromethane 0.049 0.49 ND(0.82) ND(0.096) ND(0.96) ND(0.084) [ND(0.088)]Bromoform 1.1 11 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.96) ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]Bromomethane 5.7 57 ND(8.2) ND(0.96) ND(9.6) ND(0.84) [ND(0.88)]Carbon Disulfide 1,000 10,000 ND(3.3) ND(0.96) 9 ND(0.84) [ND(0.88)]Carbon Tetrachloride 0.32 3.2 ND(0.82) 0.087 J ND(0.96) ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]Chlorobenzene 48 480 0.55 J ND(0.19) 0.66 J ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]Chloroethane 17,000 170,000 ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.8) ND(0.84) [ND(0.88)]Chloroform 0.11 1.1 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) 1.4 0.42 [0.51]Chloromethane 190 1,900 ND(8.2) 0.57 ND(9.6) ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]cis-1,2-Dichloroethene (see Note 7) 66 660 ND(0.82) ND(0.039) ND(0.96) 0.0056 J [ND(0.035)]cis-1,3-Dichloropropene (see Note 8) 0.68 6.8 0.1 J ND(0.19) 0.14 J ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]Cyclohexane 7,600 76,000 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) 0.58 J ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]Dibromochloromethane 0.053 0.53 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.96) ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]Dichlorodifluoromethane 89 890 0.57 J 0.48 3.7 2.4 J [0.5 J]d-Limonene - - - - ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.8) ND(0.84) [ND(0.88)]Ethanol - - - - 5.7 1 2.1 J 1.5 [0.58 J]Ethyl acetate - - - - ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.8) ND(0.84) [ND(0.88)]Ethylbenzene 1.1 11 0.16 J 0.023 J 0.2 J ND(0.034) [0.0067 J]Heptane - - - - 0.24 J ND(0.96) 0.15 J ND(0.84) [ND(0.88)]Hexachlorobutadiene 0.053 0.53 ND(3.3) ND(0.19) ND(3.8) ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]Isooctane - - - - 0.14 J ND(0.96) 0.21 J ND(0.84) [ND(0.88)]Isopropyl alcohol 13,000 130,000 0.44 J 0.16 J ND(3.8) 0.15 J [ND(0.88)]Isopropylbenzene 370 3,700 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.96) ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]

EPA Residential RSL


Page 2 of 44/12/2013




EPA Residential RSL

VOCs/Select SVOCs - TO-15 (continued)m&p-Xylene - - 1,000 0.16 J 0.065 J 0.41 J 0.026 J [0.018 J]Methyl Methacrylate 760 7,600 ND(8.2) ND(1.9) ND(9.6) ND(1.7) [ND(1.8)]Methyl tert-butyl ether 13 130 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.96) ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]Methylene Chloride 350 3,500 1.9 J ND(0.39) 0.83 J ND(0.34) [ND(0.35)]Naphthalene 0.069 0.69 ND(3.3) 0.016 J ND(3.8) ND(0.084) [0.013 J]n-Butyl Acetate - - - - ND(8.2) ND(0.96) ND(9.6) ND(0.84) [ND(0.88)]n-Hexane 880 8,800 0.87 ND(0.19) 0.39 J ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]n-Octane - - - - ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.8) ND(0.84) [ND(0.88)]Nonane 170 1,700 ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.8) ND(0.84) [ND(0.88)]n-Propylbenzene 900 9,000 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.96) ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]o-Xylene 100 1,000 ND(0.82) 0.026 J 0.24 J 0.008 J [0.006 J]Propene 7,600 76,000 ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.8) ND(0.84) [ND(0.88)]Styrene 1,000 10,000 ND(0.82) ND(0.19 J) ND(0.96) ND(0.17 J) [ND(0.18 J)]Tetrachloroethene 6.9 69 0.25 J 0.0088 J 2.5 0.36 [0.0099 J]Tetrahydrofuran 3,000 30,000 ND(0.82) ND(0.96) ND(0.96) ND(0.84) [ND(0.88)]Toluene 5,800 58,000 4 0.15 0.78 J 0.1 [0.035]trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 66 660 ND(0.82) ND(0.19) ND(0.96) ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]trans-1,3-Dichloropropene (see Note 8) 0.68 6.8 0.2 J ND(0.19) ND(0.96) ND(0.17) [ND(0.18)]Trichloroethene 0.56 5.6 ND(0.82) ND(0.039) 1 0.027 J [ND(0.035)]Trichlorofluoromethane 550 5,500 0.78 J 0.23 0.89 J 0.16 J [0.16 J]Vinyl Acetate 250 2,500 ND(3.3) ND(0.96) ND(3.8) ND(0.84) [ND(0.88)]Vinyl Chloride 1.1 11 ND(0.82) ND(0.019) ND(0.96) ND(0.017) [ND(0.018)]


Page 3 of 44/12/2013




VOCs/Select SVOCs - TO-151,1,1-Trichloroethane 4,000 40,000 0.083 J 0.026 J 0.092 J 0.0511,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.031 0.31 0.14 J ND(0.033) ND(0.86) ND(0.035)1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane 17,000 170,000 0.15 J 0.081 J ND(0.86) ND(0.18)1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0.14 1.4 ND(0.88) ND(0.033) ND(0.86) ND(0.035)1,1-Dichloroethane 1.9 19 ND(0.88) ND(0.033) ND(0.86) ND(0.035)1,1-Dichloroethene 220 2,200 ND(0.88) ND(0.017) ND(0.86) ND(0.018)1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 1.2 12 ND(3.5) ND(0.83) ND(3.4) ND(0.88)1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 6.3 63 2.4 ND(0.17) 0.96 ND(0.18)1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 0.00021 0.0021 ND(3.5) ND(0.17) ND(3.4) ND(0.18)1,2-Dibromoethane 0.0026 0.026 ND(0.88) ND(0.0083) ND(0.86) ND(0.0088)1,2-Dichloro-1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane - - - - ND(0.88) ND(0.17) ND(0.86) ND(0.18)1,2-Dichlorobenzene 150 1,500 ND(0.88) ND(0.17) ND(0.86) ND(0.18)1,2-Dichloroethane 0.12 1.2 ND(0.88) ND(0.033) ND(0.86) ND(0.035)1,2-Dichloropropane 0.26 2.6 ND(0.88) ND(0.17) ND(0.86) ND(0.18)1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene - - - - 0.86 J ND(0.17) 0.39 J ND(0.18)1,3-Butadiene 0.19 1.9 ND(0.88) ND(0.17) ND(0.86) ND(0.18)1,3-Dichlorobenzene - - - - 0.21 J ND(0.17) ND(0.86) ND(0.18)1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.18 1.8 ND(0.88) ND(0.17) ND(0.86) ND(0.18)1,4-Dioxane 0.44 4.4 ND(3.5) ND(0.17) ND(3.4) ND(0.18)2-Butanone 7,500 75,000 2.3 J 0.61 J 1.4 J 0.36 J2-Hexanone 32 320 ND(3.5) ND(0.83 J) ND(3.4) ND(0.88 J)3-Chloropropene 0.64 6.4 ND(3.5) ND(0.83) ND(3.4) ND(0.88)4-Ethyltoluene - - - - 2 ND(0.17) 0.76 J ND(0.18)4-Methyl-2-pentanone 3,200 32,000 0.44 J ND(0.17 J) ND(0.86) ND(0.18 J)Acetone 59,000 590,000 30 3.9 40 2.3Acetonitrile 150 1,500 ND(8.8) ND(0.83) ND(8.6) ND(0.88)Acrolein 0.038 0.38 ND(3.5) 0.9 ND(3.4) ND(0.88)Acrylonitrile 0.083 0.83 ND(3.5) ND(0.83) ND(3.4) ND(0.88)alpha-Pinene - - - - ND(8.8) ND(0.83) ND(8.6) ND(0.88)Benzene 0.5 5 2.5 ND(0.083) 0.53 J ND(0.088)Benzyl Chloride 0.048 0.48 0.16 J ND(0.17) 0.14 J ND(0.18)Bromodichloromethane 0.049 0.49 ND(0.88) ND(0.083) ND(0.86) ND(0.088)Bromoform 1.1 11 ND(0.88) ND(0.17) ND(0.86) ND(0.18)Bromomethane 5.7 57 ND(8.8) ND(0.83) ND(8.6) ND(0.88)Carbon Disulfide 1,000 10,000 8.5 ND(0.83) 2.1 J ND(0.88)Carbon Tetrachloride 0.32 3.2 ND(0.88) ND(0.17) ND(0.86) ND(0.18)Chlorobenzene 48 480 0.58 J ND(0.17) 0.61 J ND(0.18)Chloroethane 17,000 170,000 ND(3.5) ND(0.83) ND(3.4) ND(0.88)Chloroform 0.11 1.1 2.2 ND(0.17) 0.39 J 0.14 JChloromethane 190 1,900 ND(8.8) ND(0.17) ND(8.6) ND(0.18)cis-1,2-Dichloroethene (see Note 7) 66 660 ND(0.88) ND(0.033) ND(0.86) ND(0.035)cis-1,3-Dichloropropene (see Note 8) 0.68 6.8 0.17 J ND(0.17) ND(0.86) ND(0.18)Cyclohexane 7,600 76,000 0.66 J ND(0.17) ND(0.86) ND(0.18)Dibromochloromethane 0.053 0.53 ND(0.88) ND(0.17) ND(0.86) ND(0.18)Dichlorodifluoromethane 89 890 17 3.1 2.8 3.9d-Limonene - - - - ND(3.5) ND(0.83) ND(3.4) ND(0.88)Ethanol - - - - 1.9 J 1.5 2.2 J 1.6Ethyl acetate - - - - ND(3.5) ND(0.83) ND(3.4) ND(0.88)Ethylbenzene 1.1 11 4.6 0.005 J 0.98 0.0047 JHeptane - - - - 1.1 ND(0.83) 0.37 J ND(0.88)Hexachlorobutadiene 0.053 0.53 ND(3.5) ND(0.17) ND(3.4) ND(0.18)Isooctane - - - - 0.95 ND(0.83) 0.18 J ND(0.88)Isopropyl alcohol 13,000 130,000 ND(3.5) ND(0.83) 0.76 J ND(0.88)Isopropylbenzene 370 3,700 0.2 J ND(0.17) 0.14 J ND(0.18)

EPA Residential RSL


Page 4 of 44/12/2013




EPA Residential RSL

VOCs/Select SVOCs - TO-15 (continued)m&p-Xylene - - 1,000 17 0.02 J 3.6 0.021 JMethyl Methacrylate 760 7,600 ND(8.8) ND(1.7) ND(8.6) ND(1.8)Methyl tert-butyl ether 13 130 0.071 J ND(0.17) ND(0.86) ND(0.18)Methylene Chloride 350 3,500 0.73 J ND(0.33) 0.79 J ND(0.35)Naphthalene 0.069 0.69 0.79 J 0.0098 J 0.79 J 0.012 Jn-Butyl Acetate - - - - ND(8.8) ND(0.83) ND(8.6) ND(0.88)n-Hexane 880 8,800 1.2 ND(0.17) 0.64 J ND(0.18)n-Octane - - - - ND(3.5) ND(0.83) ND(3.4) ND(0.88)Nonane 170 1,700 ND(3.5) ND(0.83) ND(3.4) ND(0.88)n-Propylbenzene 900 9,000 0.49 J ND(0.17) 0.21 J ND(0.18)o-Xylene 100 1,000 5.9 0.0078 J 1.3 0.0086 JPropene 7,600 76,000 ND(3.5) ND(0.83) ND(3.4) ND(0.88)Styrene 1,000 10,000 ND(0.88) ND(0.17 J) ND(0.86) ND(0.18 J)Tetrachloroethene 6.9 69 2.9 0.059 0.8 J 0.04Tetrahydrofuran 3,000 30,000 ND(0.88) ND(0.83) ND(0.86) ND(0.88)Toluene 5,800 58,000 18 0.042 3.2 0.036trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 66 660 ND(0.88) ND(0.17) ND(0.86) ND(0.18)trans-1,3-Dichloropropene (see Note 8) 0.68 6.8 ND(0.88) ND(0.17) ND(0.86) ND(0.18)Trichloroethene 0.56 5.6 0.69 J ND(0.033) 0.26 J ND(0.035)Trichlorofluoromethane 550 5,500 4.8 1.1 4.5 1.7Vinyl Acetate 250 2,500 ND(3.5) ND(0.83) ND(3.4) ND(0.88)Vinyl Chloride 1.1 11 ND(0.88) ND(0.017) ND(0.86) ND(0.018)

Notes:J = Indicates an estimated value.ND = Analyte was not detected. The number in parantheses is the associated reporting limit. RSL = Regional Screening Levelppbv = parts per billion by volume-- = No screening level for this parameter


4. Shading indicates that soil gas concentration exceeds industrial soil gas RSL.5. Bolded ND result indicates non-detected compound with detection limit (or reporting limit for compounds with no available method detection limit) higher than industrial soil gas RSL.6. Field duplicate sample results are presented in brackets.7. Screening value for trans-1,2-dichloroethene was used as surrogate for cis-1,2-dichloroethene.8. Screening value for 1,3-dichloropropene was used to screen cis and trans isomers in soil gas. Cis-1,3-dichloropropene was detectedin two soil gas samples,but trans-1,3-dichloropropene was not detected in any soil gas sample, so the concentrations could not be summed.

1. Samples were analyzed by Air Toxics Laboratories via EPA Method TO-15



Page 1 of 14/12/2013

Table 8Soil Gas Sampling Results for PCBs via Method TO-17 and PAHs by Methods TO-13A and TO-17 - East Street Area 2 South - Commercial

Final LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report - April 2013 Groundwater Management Area 1 General Electric Company – Pittsfield, Massachusetts(Results are presented in ppbv)


PCBs-TO-17 Aroclor-1016/1242 0.058 0.58 ND(0.47) ND(0.004) ND(0.47) ND(0.0041) ND(0.47) ND(0.004)Aroclor-1221 0.0027 0.027 ND(0.61) ND(0.0051) ND(0.61) ND(0.0052) ND(0.61) ND(0.0051)Aroclor-1232 0.0027 0.027 ND(0.53) ND(0.0044) ND(0.53) ND(0.0045) ND(0.53) ND(0.0044)Aroclor-1248 0.0018 0.018 ND(0.42) ND(0.0035) ND(0.42) ND(0.0036) ND(0.42) ND(0.0035)Aroclor-1254 0.0016 0.016 ND(0.37) ND(0.0031) ND(0.37) ND(0.0032) ND(0.37) ND(0.0031)Aroclor-1260 0.0013 0.013 ND(0.34) ND(0.0029) ND(0.34) ND(0.0029) ND(0.34) ND(0.0028)Total PCBs - - - - ND(0.61) ND(0.0051) ND(0.61) ND(0.0052) ND(0.61) ND(0.0051)PAHs-TO-13ABenzo(a)anthracene 0.012 0.12 ND(1.1) ND(1.1) [ND(1.1 J)] ND(1.1 J) ND(1.1) ND(1.1) ND(1.1)Benzo(a)pyrene 0.0011 0.011 ND(0.97 J) ND(0.97) [ND(0.97 J)] ND(0.97 J) ND(0.97) ND(0.97 J) ND(0.97)Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.011 0.11 ND(0.97) ND(0.97) [ND(0.97 J)] ND(0.97 J) ND(0.97) ND(0.97) ND(0.97)Benzo(g,h,i)perylene - - - - ND(0.88) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88 J)] ND(0.88 J) ND(0.88) ND(0.88) ND(0.88)Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.011 0.11 ND(0.97) ND(0.97) [ND(0.97 J)] ND(0.97 J) ND(0.97) ND(0.97) ND(0.97)Chrysene 0.12 1.2 ND(1.1) ND(1.1) [ND(1.1 J)] ND(1.1 J) ND(1.1) ND(1.1) ND(1.1)Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.00088 0.0088 ND(0.88) ND(0.88) [ND(0.88 J)] ND(0.88 J) ND(0.88) ND(0.88) ND(0.88)Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.0097 0.097 ND(0.98) ND(0.98) [ND(0.98 J)] ND(0.98 J) ND(0.98) ND(0.98) ND(0.98)PAHs-TO-172-Methylnaphthalene - - - - 0.036 J ND(0.086) [ND(0.086)] 0.21 ND(0.077) 0.28 ND(0.086)Acenaphthene - - - - ND(0.16) ND(0.079) [ND(0.079)] 0.13 J ND(0.071) 0.049 J ND(0.079)Acenaphthylene - - - - ND(0.08) ND(0.08) [ND(0.08)] ND(0.08) ND(0.072) ND(0.08) ND(0.08)Anthracene - - - - ND(0.068 J) ND(0.068) [ND(0.068)] ND(0.068 J) ND(0.061) ND(0.068 J) ND(0.068)Fluoranthene - - - - ND(0.06) ND(0.06) [ND(0.06)] ND(0.06) ND(0.054) ND(0.06) ND(0.06)Fluorene - - - - ND(0.15) ND(0.074) [ND(0.074)] 0.05 J ND(0.066) ND(0.15) ND(0.074)Naphthalene 0.069 0.69 0.025 J ND(0.095) [ND(0.095)] 0.34 ND(0.085) 0.6 0.063 JPhenanthrene - - - - ND(0.068) ND(0.068) [ND(0.068)] ND(0.068) ND(0.061) ND(0.068) ND(0.068)Pyrene - - - - ND(0.12) ND(0.12) [ND(0.12)] ND(0.12) ND(0.11) ND(0.12) ND(0.12)

Notes:J = Indicates an estimated value.ND = Analyte was not detected. The number in parantheses is the associated reporting limit. RSL = Regional Screening Levelppbv = parts per billion by volume-- = No screening level for this parameter1. Samples submitted to Air Toxics Laboratories for analysis of PCBs and select semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), namely polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).2. Samples have been validated as described in Attachment A.

4. Shading indicates that soil gas concentration exceeds industrial soil gas RSL.5. Bolded ND result indicates non-detected compound with detection limit higher than industrial soil gas RSL.




EPA Residential RSL


Page 1 of 24/12/2013

Table 9East Street Area 1 LNAPL Analytical Results

Final LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report - April 2013East Street Area 1-North and East Street Area 1-SouthGeneral Electric Company – Pittsfield, Massachusetts(Results are presented in parts per million, ppm)

Location ID: ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-NDate Collected: 10/12/79 10/18/79 10/18/79 10/18/79 10/18/79 10/18/79 10/28/79 01/10/80 02/13/80 03/04/80 04/01/80 07/31/96Sample Name: 48 48 51 52 53 56 55 1260 SUMP 48 48 48 ESA1-NSC-1

Units : ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppmVolatile OrganicsAcetone NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NDChlorobenzene ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10)Tetrachloroethene NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NDTrichloroethene NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NDPCBsAroclor-1254 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 94 ND(3) ND ND NDAroclor-1260 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 180 46 146 122 91Total PCBs 49 33 14 7 4 8 9 274 46 146 122 91Semivolatile Organics1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA ND1,4-Dichlorobenzene NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA


Page 2 of 24/12/2013

Table 9East Street Area 1 LNAPL Analytical Results

Final LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report - April 2013Groundwater Management Area 1 General Electric Company – Pittsfield, Massachusetts(Results are presented in parts per million, ppm)

Location ID: ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-N ESA1-SDate Collected: 08/17/05 01/08/08 09/17/09 08/03/11 03/11/13 10/06/04Sample Name: BLDG.78-081705-OIL-C1 909096-2007 909096-1 PTA909096 PTA909096 34

Units : ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppmVolatile OrganicsAcetone ND(5.8) 3.04 J ND(50) ND(99) ND(24.8) ND(0.05 J)Chlorobenzene ND(5.8) ND(1) ND(10) 10.8 5.08 ND(0.05)Tetrachloroethene ND(5.8) 0.19 J ND(10) ND(3.96) ND(0.99) ND(0.05 J)Trichloroethene ND(5.8) 0.28 J ND(10) ND(3.96) ND(0.99) ND(0.05)PCBsAroclor-1254 ND(8) 21.5 43.9 ND(95.2) ND(95.8) NAAroclor-1260 200 40.2 60 512 231 NATotal PCBs 200 62 104 510 230 NASemivolatile Organics1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND(120) 30 J 26.7 J ND(476) ND(956) NA1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND(120) ND(96.9) ND(99) 76.1 J ND(956) NA

Notes:J - Indicates that the associated numerical value is an estimated concentration.1. Samples were collected by GE subcontractors and submitted for analysis of PCBs and other selected constituents.

3. NA- Not analyzed.4. ND - Analyte was not detected. The number in parentheses is the associated reporting limit. 5. Sample 34 is a combined LNAPL and groundwater sample collected from monitoring well 34.6. Samples 909096-2007, 909096-1 and PTA909096 are LNAPL samples collected from the Northside Recovery System7. Sample 1260 SUMP is an LNAPL sample collected from a former sump at 1260 East Street.8. Samples 48, 51, 52, 53, 55, and 56 are LNAPL samples collected from the listed monitoring wells.9. Sample BLDG. 78-081705-OIL-C1 is an LNAPL composite sample collected from ESA1N and ESA1S LNAPL drums.

2. This table presents only the results for those volatile organic compounds, PCBs, and semi-volatile organic compounds that were detected in one or more samples.


Page 1 of 64/12/2013

Table 10Groundwater Analytical Results


Sample ID:Method 1

GW-2 ESA1S-31R ESA1S-31R ESA1S-31R ESA1S-31R ESA1S-31R ESA1S-31R ESA1S-33 ES1-8 ES1-8 ES1-8Parameter ollected: Standards 10/30/08 04/09/09 10/22/09 04/08/10 04/18/12 10/31/12 04/01/03 04/02/02 10/16/02 10/22/02Volatile OrganicsAcetone 50 NA NA NA NA ND(0.025) J ND(0.025) J [ND(0.025) J] ND(0.010) ND(0.010) J ND(0.010) NABromodichloromethane 0.006 NA NA NA NA ND(0.0010) 0.0021 [0.0020] ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) NAChlorobenzene 0.2 NA NA NA NA ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) NAChloroform 0.05 NA NA NA NA 0.011 0.028 [0.025] ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) NATotal VOCs 5 NA NA NA NA 0.011 0.030 [0.027] ND(0.20) ND(0.20) ND(0.20) NAPCBs-FilteredAroclor-1254 Not Listed ND(0.000069) J ND(0.000068) ND(0.000068) ND(0.000068) NA NA 0.000080 J ND(0.000065) NA ND(0.00025)Total PCBs 0.005 ND(0.000069) J ND(0.000068) ND(0.000068) ND(0.000068) NA NA 0.000080 J ND(0.000065) NA 0.0039Semivolatile Organics1,3-Dichlorobenzene 2 NA NA NA NA ND(0.0052) ND(0.0051) [ND(0.0051)] ND(0.010) ND(0.010) 0.0051 J NA1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.2 NA NA NA NA ND(0.0052) ND(0.0051) [ND(0.0051)] ND(0.010) ND(0.010) 0.027 NA


Page 2 of 64/12/2013



Sample ID:Method 1

GW-2 ES1-13R ES1-13R ES1-13R ES1-13R ES1-14 ES1-14 ES1-14Parameter ollected: Standards 04/20/10 10/21/10 04/12/11 10/11/11 04/03/02 10/16/02 04/02/03Volatile OrganicsAcetone 50 ND(0.0050) [ND(0.0050)] ND(0.0050) J ND(0.025) J 0.0010 J [ND(0.025)] ND(0.010) J ND(0.010) ND(0.010)Bromodichloromethane 0.006 ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050)Chlorobenzene 0.2 ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] 0.00061 J ND(0.0010) 0.00017 J [0.00016 J] ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050)Chloroform 0.05 ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050)Total VOCs 5 ND(0.10) [ND(0.10)] 0.00061 J ND(0.10) 0.0012 J [0.00016 J] ND(0.20) ND(0.20) ND(0.20)PCBs-FilteredAroclor-1254 Not Listed ND(0.000068) [ND(0.000068)] ND(0.000070) ND(0.000062) ND(0.000062) [ND(0.000062)] ND(0.000065) 0.000042 J 0.00041Total PCBs 0.005 ND(0.000068) [ND(0.000068)] ND(0.000070) ND(0.000062) ND(0.000062) [ND(0.000062)] ND(0.000065) 0.000042 J 0.00041Semivolatile Organics1,3-Dichlorobenzene 2 ND(0.0053) [ND(0.0053)] ND(0.0053) ND(0.0047) ND(0.0048) [ND(0.0047)] ND(0.010) ND(0.010) ND(0.010)1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.2 0.0041 J [0.0051 J] 0.0016 J ND(0.0047) 0.0023 J [0.0024 J] ND(0.010) ND(0.010) ND(0.010)


Page 3 of 64/12/2013



Sample ID:Method 1

GW-2 ESA1N-52 ESA1N-52 ESA1N-52 ESA1N-52 ESA1N-52 ESA1N-52 ESA1N-52 ESA1S-72R ESA1S-72RParameter ollected: Standards 04/03/02 10/17/02 04/03/03 04/09/04 10/04/05 04/05/06 10/18/07 10/06/05 04/04/06Volatile OrganicsAcetone 50 ND(0.010) J ND(0.010) ND(0.010) NA NA NA NA ND(0.010) [ND(0.010)] ND(0.010) [ND(0.010)]Bromodichloromethane 0.006 ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) NA NA NA NA ND(0.0050) [ND(0.0050)] ND(0.0050) [ND(0.0050)]Chlorobenzene 0.2 ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) NA NA NA NA ND(0.0050) [ND(0.0050)] ND(0.0050) [ND(0.0050)]Chloroform 0.05 ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) NA NA NA NA ND(0.0050) [ND(0.0050)] ND(0.0050) [ND(0.0050)]Total VOCs 5 ND(0.20) ND(0.20) ND(0.20) NA NA NA NA ND(0.20) [ND(0.20)] ND(0.20) [ND(0.20)]PCBs-FilteredAroclor-1254 Not Listed ND(0.000065) 0.00058 ND(0.000065) ND(0.000065) 0.000048 J 0.000087 ND(0.000072) J 0.00012 [0.00010] 0.00014 [0.00014]Total PCBs 0.005 0.000067 0.00079 ND(0.000065) ND(0.000065) 0.000048 J 0.000087 ND(0.000072) J 0.00012 [0.00010] 0.00014 [0.00014]Semivolatile Organics1,3-Dichlorobenzene 2 ND(0.010) ND(0.010) ND(0.010) NA NA NA NA ND(0.0050) [ND(0.0050)] ND(0.0050) [ND(0.0050)]1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.2 ND(0.010) ND(0.010) ND(0.010) NA NA NA NA ND(0.0050) [ND(0.0050)] ND(0.0050) [ND(0.0050)]


Page 4 of 64/12/2013



Sample ID:Method 1

GW-2 ESA1S-72R ESA1S-72R ESA1S-72R ESA1S-72R ESA1S-72R ESA1S-72R ESA1S-72RParameter ollected: Standards 10/23/07 04/17/08 10/22/09 04/08/10 10/10/11 04/18/12 10/31/12Volatile OrganicsAcetone 50 ND(0.0050) J [ND(0.0050) J ND(0.0050) J [ND(0.0050) J] ND(0.0050) [ND(0.0050)] ND(0.0050) [ND(0.0050)] ND(0.025) ND(0.025) J NABromodichloromethane 0.006 ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) 0.0013 NAChlorobenzene 0.2 ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010) NAChloroform 0.05 ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) 0.017 NATotal VOCs 5 ND(0.10) [ND(0.10)] ND(0.10) [ND(0.10)] ND(0.10) [ND(0.10)] ND(0.10) [ND(0.10)] ND(0.10) 0.018 NAPCBs-FilteredAroclor-1254 Not Listed ND(0.000065) ND(0.000071) [ND(0.000069)] ND(0.000065) J [ND(0.000066)] ND(0.000067) [ND(0.000068)] 0.000044 J 0.000029 J NATotal PCBs 0.005 ND(0.000065) ND(0.000071) [ND(0.000069)] ND(0.000065) J [ND(0.000066)] ND(0.000067) [ND(0.000068)] 0.000044 J 0.000029 J NASemivolatile Organics1,3-Dichlorobenzene 2 ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) NA ND(0.0055)1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.2 ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) NA ND(0.0055)


Page 5 of 64/12/2013



Sample ID:Method 1

GW-2 GMA1-6 GMA1-6 GMA1-6 GMA1-6 GMA1-6 GMA1-6 GMA1-6 GMA1-6Parameter ollected: Standards 04/09/02 10/15/02 04/02/03 04/09/04 10/13/05 04/04/06 10/23/07 04/17/08Volatile OrganicsAcetone 50 ND(0.010) J ND(0.010) ND(0.010) ND(0.010) J ND(0.010) ND(0.010) 0.0047 J ND(0.0050) JBromodichloromethane 0.006 ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010)Chlorobenzene 0.2 ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) 0.00014 J ND(0.0010)Chloroform 0.05 ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010)Total VOCs 5 ND(0.20) ND(0.20) ND(0.20) ND(0.20) 0.0016 J ND(0.20) 0.0048 J ND(0.10)PCBs-FilteredAroclor-1254 Not Listed ND(0.000065) ND(0.000065) 0.000050 J ND(0.000065) 0.000041 J ND(0.000065) ND(0.000065) J ND(0.000068) JTotal PCBs 0.005 ND(0.000065) ND(0.000065) 0.000050 J ND(0.000065) 0.000041 J ND(0.000065) ND(0.000065) J ND(0.000068) JSemivolatile Organics1,3-Dichlorobenzene 2 ND(0.010) ND(0.010) ND(0.010) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010)1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.2 ND(0.010) ND(0.010) ND(0.010) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) 0.0011 0.00081 J


Page 6 of 64/12/2013



Sample ID:Method 1

GW-2 GMA1-6 GMA1-6 GMA1-6 GMA1-6 GMA1-6Parameter ollected: Standards 10/22/09 10/26/09 04/14/10 10/11/11 04/20/12Volatile OrganicsAcetone 50 ND(0.0050) NA ND(0.0050) ND(0.025) ND(0.025) JBromodichloromethane 0.006 ND(0.0010) NA ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010)Chlorobenzene 0.2 ND(0.0010) NA ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010)Chloroform 0.05 ND(0.0010) NA ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010)Total VOCs 5 ND(0.10) NA ND(0.10) ND(0.10) ND(0.10)PCBs-FilteredAroclor-1254 Not Listed NA ND(0.000066) ND(0.000067) ND(0.000065) ND(0.000070)Total PCBs 0.005 NA ND(0.000066) ND(0.000067) ND(0.000065) ND(0.000070)Semivolatile Organics1,3-Dichlorobenzene 2 ND(0.0010) NA ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010)1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.2 0.00050 J NA 0.00045 J 0.00039 J 0.00060 JNotes:J = Indicates that the associated numerical value is an estimated concentration.

3. Samples have been validated as per GE's EPA-approved FSP/QAPP, General Electric Company, Pittsfield, Massachusetts.

NA = Not Analyzed.ND = Analyte was not detected. The number in parentheses is the associated reporting limit.1. Samples submitted to SGS Environmental Services, Inc. for analysis of PCBs and Appendix IX+3 constituents.2. This table presents only the results for those volatile organic compounds, PCBs, and semi-volatile organic compounds that were detected in one or more samples. It also shows the MCP Method 1 GW-2 standards for comparison.


Page 1 of 14/12/2013

Table 11Evaluation of Detected Constituents Above Screening Levels

Final LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report - April 2013East Street Area 1-North and East Street Area 1-SouthGeneral Electric Company - Pittsfield, Massachusetts

EPA (2012) (4)

ATSDR Toxicological

ProfileHodgson and Levin

(2003) (9)

Constituent Indoor Air Ambient Air

Range of Median Values

Range of 90th

Percentile

Range of 95th

Percentiles

Range at residential

homes Range of Data

from Residences

Acrolein 2.1 ND (0.5) - ND (250) ND (0.025) - ND (0.1)

ND (0.1) - ND (77) NA NA NA NA NA <0.05 - 29 (5) 5.75 (mean), 21.1

(90th%); 29.8 (max) cigarette smoke, auto exhaust (5)

Benzene 1.3 J - 16 ND (0.05) - ND (10) ND (0.001) - ND

(0.005)ND (0.0052) -

0.024.5 (mean);

12.5 (95th%)3.2 (mean); 9.6 (95th%) <1.6 - 3.1 5.2 - 15 9.9 - 29

3.87 - 7.19 (range of

means) (6)

4.79 (mean); 6.07 - 13.1 (90th%); 26.82

- 130.93 (max)

petroleum and petrochemical refining, automobile exhaust, scented candles, carpet glue, and cigarette smoke (3, 6)

Benzyl Chloride0.73 J - 0.84 J NA NA NA 1.2 (mean);

<7.2 (95th%)1.2 (mean);

<6.6 (95th%) NA NA NA NA NAemissions from burning polyvinyl chloride, emissions from tile floor plasticized by butyl benzyl phthalate (10)

Ethylbenzene

0.02 J - 40 ND (0.05) - ND (10) ND (0.001) - ND (0.005) ND (0.0052) - 19 2.8 (mean);

7.6 (95th%)1.4 (mean); 4.3 (95th%) 1.0 - 1.7 5.2 - 9.6 12 - 17 0.04 - 35 (range

of means) (7)

6.08 (mean); 13.03 (90th%); 25.61 -

173.61 (max)pesticides, carpet glues, varnishes, paints, gasoline, cigarette smoke (7)

Naphthalene0.051 J - 4.2 J ND (0.05) - ND

(0.05)ND (0.0001) - ND

(0.01) 0.16 - 10 6.6 (mean); 20.9 (95th%)

10.6 (mean); 15.1 (95th%) NA NA NA 0.86 - 32 (range

of means) (8)1.83 (mean); 2.15

(90th%); 4.98 (max) coal tar, gasoline and diesel fuels, cigarette smoke, wood burning, moth repellent (8, 11)

Notes:NA = Not availableND = Analyte was not detected. The number in parentheses is the associated reporting limit. ppm = parts per millionJ = Indicates an estimated concentrationug/m3 = micrograms per cubic meterppm = parts per million1. Analytical results are from samples of NAPL, groundwater, and soil collected at East Street Area 1-North or East Area 1-South.2. = EPA. 2001. Building Assessment Survey and Evaluation Study (BASE).3. = New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP). 2013. Vapor Intrusion Technical Guidance. Summary of Ambient Indoor Levels and New Jersey Median Background Concentrations of Volatile Contaminants in Homes.4. = EPA. 2012. Background Indoor Air Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds in North American Residences (1990 - 2005): A Compilation of Statistics for Assessing Vapor Intrusion. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.5. = Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 2007 Toxicological Profile for Acrolein. Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA.6. = ATSDR. 2007. Toxicological Profile for Benzene. Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA.7. = ATSDR. 2010. Toxicological Profile for Ethylbenzene. Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA.8. = ATSDR. 2005. Toxicological Profile for Naphthalene, 1-Methylnaphthalene , and 2-Methylnaphthalene. Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA.9. = Hodgson, A.T. and Levin, H. 2003. Volatile Organic Compounds in Indoor Air: A Review of Concentrations Measured in North America Since 1990.10. = EPA. 1986. Health and Environmental Effects Profile for Benzyl chloride. 600/x-86-148. Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH. 11. = Delaware Health and Social Services Division of Public Health: Naphthalene FAQ 2010.

Representative Background Sources

Detected Concentration in Soil Gas (ug/m3)

EPA BASE (2)

Indoor and Outdoor Air Background Concentrations (ug/m3)

Concentration in NAPL (ppm) (1)

Concentration in Groundwater

(ppm) (1)Concentration in

Soil (ppm) (1)

NJDEP (3)

G:\GE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_1\Reports and Presentations\ESA1S VI Report Fall 2012\0861311214_Fall 2012_ESA1S VI Tables 4-9-13.xlsx - Table 12

Page 1 of 14/12/2013

Table 12Evaluation of Detected Constituents without Screening Levels


Constituent1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 1.3 J - 5.8 NA NA NA 0.00877 2.48 120.2 NA NA 11000 16000 NA NA

1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND (0.97) - 1.2 J ND (96.9) - ND (956) ND (0.001) - 0.0051 ND (0.34) - ND (1) 0.00263 2.15 147 42 13000 160 220 NA NA

4-Ethyltoluene 1.3 J - 19 NA NA NA 0.00501 3 120.19 NA NA NA NA NA NAHeptane 0.63 J - 6.2 NA NA NA 2 46 100.2 NA NA 180000 260000 NA NAIsooctane 0.82 J - 4.4 NA NA NA 3.04 49.3 114.22 NA NA NA NA 2801.3 933.8

2-Methylnaphthalene 0.051 J - 4.2 J ND (96.9) - ND (956) ND (0.0047) - ND (0.01) 0.15 - 7.2 0.000518 0.055 142.2 560 2400 520 740 NA NA

Notes:IASL = Indoor air screening levelNA = Not availableND = Analyte was not detected. The number in parentheses is the associated reporting limit. ppm = parts per millionug/m3 = micrograms per cubic meterJ = indicates an estimated concentration1. = Analytical results are from samples of NAPL, groundwater, and soil collected at East Street Area 1-North or East Street Area 1-South.2. = Rappaport, S.M., Selvin, S., and Waters, M.A., Exposures to hydrocarbon components of gasoline in the petroleum industry, Appl Ind Hyg (1987) 2: 148–154 (value indicates the mean air concentration for service station attendants).3. = Kearney, C.A., Dunham, D.B. Gasoline vapor exposures at a high-volume service station. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 1986;47(8):535–9 (value indicates the concentration of isooctane in the personal air of a high volume service station attendant).

Occupational Background Data (ug/m3)Vapor Intrusion Screening Levels (ug/m3)

Massachusetts DEP Michigan DEP

Concentration in Soil Gas (ug/m3)

Concentration in NAPL (ppm) (1)

Concentration in Groundwater

(ppm) (1)

Concentration in

Soil (ppm) (1)

Henry's Law Constant

(atm-m3/mol)

Vapor Pressure

(mm Hg @ 25C)

Applied Industrial Hygiene

(2)

American Industrial Hygiene

Association (3)

Molecular Weight

(g/mole)

Residential Sub-slab screening

values

Commercial Sub-slab screening

values

Residential Sub-slab Criteria

Non-residential Sub-slab Criteria


Page 1 of 14/12/2013

Table 13Evaluation of Non-Detected Constitutents with Detection Limits Above Screening Levels.1


Constituent1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane ND (1.6) - ND (37) ND (0.05) - ND (50) ND (0.005) - ND (0.005) ND (0.0052) - ND (3.9) 1.47E-04 0.75 236Acrolein ND (1.8) - ND (3.7) (3) ND(0.5) - ND(250) ND (0.025) - ND(0.10) ND(0.10) - ND(77) 1.22E-04 274 56.06Acrylonitrile ND (1.8) - ND (8.3) ND (0.05)- ND (250) ND (0.02) - ND (0.1) ND (0.0052) - ND (7.7) 1.38E-04 109 53.06Dibromochloromethane ND (1.4) - ND (8.1) ND (0.05)- ND (10) ND (0.001) - ND (0.005) ND (0.0052) - ND (3.9) 3.20E-02 15 208.28Hexachlorobutadiene ND (1.7) - ND (41) ND (96.9) - ND (956) ND (0.001) - ND (0.0053) ND (0.34) - ND (1) 1.03E-02 0.22 260.76Benzo(a)anthracene ND (9.1) - ND (10) ND (96.9) - ND (956) ND (0.0047) - ND (0.01) 0.14 - 5.3 1.20E-05 0.0000002 228.29Benzo(a)pyrene ND (9.1) - ND (10) ND (96.9) - ND (956) ND (0.0047) - ND (0.01) 0.14 - 3.8 4.57E-07 0.000000002 252.3Benzo(b)fluoranthene ND (9.1) - ND (10) ND (96.9) - ND (956) ND (0.0047) - ND (0.01) 0.13 - 4.0 6.57E-07 0.0000005 252.3Benzo(k)fluoranthene ND (9.1) - ND (10) ND (96.9) - ND (956) ND (0.0047) - ND (0.01) 0.079 - 1.7 5.84E-07 0.00000000010 252.3Chrysene ND (9.1) - ND (10) ND (96.9) - ND (956) ND (0.0047) - ND (0.01) 0.15 - 4.3 5.23E-06 0.000000006 228.3Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene ND (9.1) - ND (10) ND (96.9) - ND (956) ND (0.0047) - ND (0.01) 0.096 - 0.57 1.23E-07 0.00000000010 278.35Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene ND (9.1) - ND (10) ND (96.9) - ND (956) ND (0.0047) - ND (0.01) 0.12 - 1.7 3.48E-07 0.00000000013 276.33

Notes:ND = Analyte was not detected. The number in parentheses is the associated reporting limit. ppm = parts per millionug/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter1. = This table provides information on compounds that were not detected in soil gas, but had detection limits (or reporting limits for compounds with no available method detection limits) above screening levels. 2. = Analytical results are from samples of NAPL, groundwater, and soil collected at East Street Area 1-North or East Street Area 1-South. 3. = Acrolein was detected in one sample at a concentration of 2.1 ug/m3 (see Table 11)

Concentration in soil gas

(ug/m3)Concentration in NAPL

(ppm) (2)Concentration in

Groundwater (ppm) (2)

Henry's Law Constant

(atm-m3/mol)Vapor Pressure (mm Hg @ 25C)

Molecular Weight

Concentration in Soil (ppm) (2)

Figure

ii il' !

I I I I

NOTES:

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

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

3. SI1E BOUNDARY IS APPROXIMA'IE.

4.. All. MONI~G WELL I..DCAllONS ME. APPROlGMA'IE.

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

--. K1 14-2

K10.14-1

I I

' I \ \ _ _. ....

~---

sw-1A

AMB-082112111

--· ESA1N-52 sTREET

8 K10.17-7

J1IHI-15

0 J1D-6-14

L£CEND:

BUILDING

DEMOUSHED BUILDING

EJCIS11NG MONITORING WELL

DECOMMIS9ClNED MONITORING WELL

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

APPROlatotA1E CURRENT EXtENT OF LNAPL (CIBSER\m IN FALL 2.012)

SOL VAPOR SAW'LE I..OCAllON

MtBIEIIT AIR SAMPLE UlCAllON

I J11H!-12 I PARCEL BOlNJARY AND PARCEL 1D

0 I

K10.15-11

130'

GRAPHIC SCALE

2QO'

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY PIT115FiaD, M'oiiSACHUSEm5

EAST STREET AREA 1 LNAPL VOI.ATILIZAnON ASSESSMENT DATA REPORT

LNAPL VOLATILIZATION ASSESSMENT SAMPLING LOCATIONS

~ARCADIS 1

Attachments

Attachment A Sample Logs

AMB-121112.doc 2/12/2007

Indoor/Ambient Air Sample Collection Log

Sample ID: AMB - 121112

Client: General Electric Date/Day: 12/11/12 Tuesday Project: GMA1 Sample Intake Height: 2’ ALS Location: Pittsfield MA Subcontractor: NA Project #: B0031215.0.1 Miscellaneous

Equipment: Car/Truck Traffic Samplers: Daniel Zuck/ Chris Kassel

Coordinates: (See attached Figure) ~55’ W of SVP-6 Start Time: 09:00

Outdoor/Indoor: Outdoor End Time: 14:53 Instrument Readings: Time Canister

Pressure (inches Hg)

Temperature (F)

Relative Humidity (%)

Air Speed (ft/min)

Barometric Pressure

PID (ppb) / (ppm)

09:00 -28.5 33.4 NA 3 29.25 0

12:54 -14.25 34.3 1.4 7 29.30 0

14:53 -9.25 31.1 0.2 2 29.35 0

SUMMA Canister Information Size (circle one): 1 L 6 L Canister ID: 5676 Flow Controller ID: FC00790 General Observations/Notes:

Photo(s): 101-1824 *Note: Humidity reads not available on weather unit. Initial Digital reading pre-sample: -28.98

G:\GE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_1_Confidential\Reports and Presentations\ESA1S VI Report Fall 2012\Atta A (Sampling)\Individulal logs\GE ESA1S Sampling Log_SVP-1.doc 3/29/2013

Soil Gas Sample Collection Log

Sample ID: SVP-1

Client: General Electric Date/Day: 12/11/12 M / T / W / Th / F Project: GMA1 Barometer (inHg): Start: 29.26 Stop: 29.27

Location: Pittsfield MA Temperature/Humidity: Start: [ 32.9 ºF / NA %] Stop: [ 32.8 ºF / NA %]

Project #: B0031215.0.1 Wind Speed/Direction: 4 (mph) / W Samplers: Daniel Zuck /Chris Kassel Subcontractor: NA Logged By: Chris Kassel Equipment: PPB RAE Background PID Ambient Air Reading: 0 ppb Moisture Content of

Sampling Zone (circle one):

Dry / Moist

Sampling Depth: 4’– 4.5’

Probe (circle one):

Permanent / Temporary

Approximate air volume in probe and sampling line:

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

SUMMA Time of Collection:

Start: 09:11 Finish: 09:40

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

Nearby Groundwater Monitoring Wells/Water Levels:

Well ID Depth to Groundwater (feet)

33 4.31

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

Canister ID: 34017

Flow Controller ID: FC00688

TO-15 Canister Pressure (in Hg): Reported By Laboratory Measured Prior to Sample Collection Measured Following Sample Collection

Digital pre-sample: -28.64

Analog: -27.5

Analog: -6

TO-17/TO-13a Sorbent Tube: Sample ID and Analysis Air Volume & flow rate (L or ml/min) Sample Collection Start/End Time

Mi-15332 SVP-1 (TO-17 SVOCs) 10L @ (99.5 initial/ 99.8 final mL/min) 12/12/12 08:50 /10:30

Mi-201431 SVP-1 (TO-17 PCBs) 23.83L @ (98.0 initial/ 95.0 final mL/min) 12/13/12 08:24/12:31

(12/11 /12) SVP-1(TO-13A SVOCs) ~11 L @ (95.77mL/min) 12/11/12 09:56 /11:50

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

General Observations/Notes: 12/11/12 – 12/12/12, Humidity reading not available on weather unit. 12/13/12 weather: 52.5% relative humidity, 39.0 ºF. Photo ID:101-1827 TO-17 Vacuum pressure: Approximately 0 inHg during sorbent tube collection Barometer/Temperature/Humidity (12/12/12): [Start: 29.7 inHg/23.1 ºF/80.9 %] [Stop:29.68 inHg/29.6ºF /NA%] Wind Speed/Direction (12/12/12): 1.4 mph / W

G:\GE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_1_Confidential\Reports and Presentations\ESA1S VI Report Fall 2012\Atta A (Sampling)\Individulal logs\GE Soil Gas Sampling Logs_SVP-2.doc 3/29/2013


Sample ID:SVP-2/DUP-121112

Client: General Electric Date/Day: 12/11/12 M / T / W / Th / F Project: GMA1 Barometer (inHg): Start: 29.26 Stop:29.27

Location: Pittsfield MA Temperature/Humidity: Start: [32.9 ºF /NA %] Stop: [ 32.8 ºF / NA %]



Dry / Moist

Sampling Depth: 5’–5.5 ’

Probe (circle one):





Start: SVP 09:18 DUP 09:18 Finish:SVP 09:44 DUP 09:45




72 7.50

34 6.82


Canister ID: (SVP-2) 33662 (DUP) 33937

(SVP-2) 6844

Flow Controller ID: (DUP) FC00390

TO-15 Canister Pressure (in Hg): Reported By Laboratory Measured Prior to Sample Collection Measured Following Sample Collection

Digital pre-sample:(SVP) -29.05 (DUP) -29.03

Analog: (SVP) -28.50 (DUP) -28.75

Analog: (SVP) -6.0 (DUP) -7.5


Mi-161557 SVP-2 (TO-17 SVOCs) 10.56L @ (99.9 initial/98.0 final mL/min) 12/12/12 09:00 /10:47

Mi-201416 SVP-2 (TO-17 PCBs) 23.11L @ (100 initial/101 final mL/min) 12/13/12 08:17/12:07

(12/11/12 ) SVP-2(TO-13A SVOCs) 10L &101.7 initial/101.7 final mL/min 12/11/12 10:17/ 13:23 DUP-121112 (TO-13A SVOCs) 10L &101.7/101.7 final ml/min 12/11/12 10:17 / 13:23


General Observations/Notes: 12/11-12/12: Humidity reading not available on weather unit. 12/13/12 @ 1140: 52.5% humidity, wind 0 mph, 39.0 ºF, 29.28 inHG. Vacuum pressure: Approximately 0 inHg during sorbent tube collection Photo ID:101-1823 TO-13a Photo ID:101-1826 Barometer/Temperature/Humidity (12/12/12): [Start: 29.70 inHg/23.0 ºF/ 84.9%] [Stop:29.68 inHg/30ºF /NA%] Wind Speed/Direction (12/12/12): 0 mph / NA



Sample ID:SVP-3/DUP-121212

Client: General Electric Date/Day: 12/11/12 M / T / W / Th / F Project: GMA1 Barometer (inHg): Start:29.25 Stop: 29.26

Location: Pittsfield MA Temperature/Humidity: Start: [ 33ºF /NA %] Stop: [ 33.6ºF /NA %]



Dry / Moist

Sampling Depth: 3.2’–3.7’

Probe (circle one):









35 NA

25 7.70


Canister ID: 34427


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


Analog: -28.5

Analog: -6.5


Mi-154543 SVP-3 (TO-17 SVOCs) 10.05L @ (101 initial/ 113 final mL/min) 12/12/12 09:23 /12:31

Mi-201415 SVP-3 (TO-17 PCBs) 23.83L @ (103 initial/ 95 final mL/min) 12/13/12 08:30 /12:37

(12/11/12 ) SVP-3 (TO-13A) 10L @ (100 initial / 93.2 final mL/min) 12/11/12 10:34 /12:23 Mi-151356 DUP-121212 (TO-17 SVOCs)

10.05L @ (101 initial/113 final ml/min) 12/12/12 09:23 / 12:31

General Observations/Notes: 12/11/12 – 12/12/12: Humidity reading not available on weather unit. 12/13/12: weather: 52.5% relative humidity, 39.0 ºF. Vacuum pressure: Approximately 0 inHg during sorbent tube collection Photo ID:101-1825 TO-17 Barometer/Temperature/Humidity (12/12/12): [Start: 29.7 inHg/ 22.2ºF/82.8 %] [Stop:29.67 inHg/46.2ºF /NA%] Wind Speed/Direction (12/12/12): 0mph / NA




Sample ID:SVP-4


Location: Pittsfield MA Temperature/Humidity: Start: [ 34.3 ºF / 5.7%] Stop: [ 33.8ºF / NA %]



Dry / Moist

Sampling Depth: 4.5’– 5’

Probe (circle one):









25 7.70


Canister ID: 34449




Analog: -30.0

Analog: -8.0


Mi- 154450 SVP-4 (SVOCs) 11.16L @ (121 initial/ 148 final mL/min) 12/12/12 09:32 /10:55

Mi- 201417 SVP-4 (PCBs) 23.23L @ (111 initial / 120 final mL/min) 12/13/12 08:35/11:47 (12/11/12 ) SVP-4 (TO-13A) (no sample collected) 10L @ (103 mL/min initial) 12/11/12 10:47 / NA, hit by vehicle 12/11/12 SVP-4 (TO-13A) 10L @ (97 initial / 104 final mL/min) 12/11/12 12:26/14:11


General Observations/Notes: 12/11/12 – 12/12/12: Humidity reading not available on weather unit. 12/13/12 @1317: 51.0% humidity, wind 0 mph, 39.7 ºF, 29.25 inHG. Vacuum pressure: Approximately 0 inHg during sorbent tube collection Photo ID:101-1821TO-13A Photo ID:101-1828 TO-17 Barometer/Temperature/Humidity (12/12/12): [Start:29.7 inHg/ 23.5ºF/ NA %] [Stop: 29.68 inHg/32.1ºF /NA%] Wind Speed/Direction (12/12/12): 0mph / NA



Sample ID: SVP-5


Location: Pittsfield MA Temperature/Humidity: Start: [ 34.5 ºF / 3.7 %] Stop: [ 33.4ºF / 4.7 %]



Dry / Moist

Sampling Depth: 4.5’– 5’

Probe (circle one):









25 7.70


Canister ID: 12689




Analog: -28.75

Analog: -8.75


Mi-154507 SVP-5 (TO-17 SVOCs) 10 L @ (108 initial/ 102 final mL/min)) 12/12/12 10:56 / 12:30

Mi-201420 SVP-5 (TO-17 PCBs) 23.86L @ (105 initial/ 107 final mL/min) 12/13/12 12:25 / 16:08

(12/11/12 ) SVP-5 (TO-13A) 10L @ (97 initial/ 97 final mL/min) 12/11/12 12:11 / 14:01


General Observations/Notes: 12/11/12 – 12/12/12: Humidity reading not available on weather unit. 12/13/12 @ 1258: 46.7% humidity, wind 0 mph, 43.5 ºF, 29.26 inHG. Vacuum pressure: Approximately 0 inHg during sorbent tube collection Photo ID:101-1822 TO- 13A Photo ID:101-1829 TO-17 Barometer/Temperature/Humidity (12/12/12): [Start:29.68 inHg/32.3 ºF/ NA%] [Stop:29.68 inHg/36.3ºF /NA%] Wind Speed/Direction (12/12/12): 1.5mph / W



Sample ID:SVP-6


Location: Pittsfield MA Temperature/Humidity: Start: [ 33.4ºF /4.7 %] Stop: [ 32.8 ºF / 3.8 %]

Project #: B0031215.0.1 Wind Speed/Direction: 4.5(mph) / W Samplers: Daniel Zuck /Chris Kassel Subcontractor: NA Logged By: Chris Kassel Equipment: PPB RAE Background PID Ambient Air Reading: 0 ppb Moisture Content of


Dry / Moist

Sampling Depth: 4.8’–5.3’

Probe (circle one):









31R 8.30


Canister ID: 4362

Flow Controller ID: 0000006497



Analog: -28.75

Analog: -8.0


Mi-154503 SVP-6 (TO-17 SVOCs) 10.04L @ (99.1 initial/ 99.78 final mL/min) 12/12/12 11:10 /12:51

Mi-195009 SVP-6 (TO-17 PCBs) 23.58L @ (100 initial/ 110 final mL/min) 12/13/12 12:47 /16:00

(12/11/12 ) SVP-6 (TO-13A) 10L @ (101 initial/ 101 final mL/min) 12/11/12 12:49 / 14:20


General Observations/Notes: 12/11/12 – 12/12/12: Humidity reading not available on weather unit. 12/13/12 @ 1304: 50.2% humidity, wind 0 mph, 41.1 ºF, 29.26 inHG. Vacuum pressure: Approximately 0 inHg during sorbent tube collection Photo ID:101-1830TO-17 Barometer/Temperature/Humidity (12/12/12): [Start:29.68 inHg/ 29ºF/ NA%] [Stop:29.68 inHg/36.1ºF /NA%] Wind Speed/Direction (12/12/12): 4.5mph / W

Attachment B Data Validation Report

Page 1 of 6 G:\GE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_1\Reports and Presentations\ESA1S VI Report Fall 2012\Attachment B (DVR)\0861311214_LNAPL Vol DVR-Text-Fall 2012.doc 4/12/2013

Attachment B Air Sampling Data Validation Report Soil Gas Investigations – December 2012 General Electric Company Pittsfield, Massachusetts

1.0 General

This attachment summarizes the data validation review performed on behalf of the General Electric Company (GE) for air samples collected in December 2012 as part of soil gas (and related ambient air) sampling activities conducted at East Street Area 1-South within the GE-Pittsfield/Housatonic River Site in Pittsfield, Massachusetts. The samples were analyzed by Eurofins AirToxics Ltd. of Folsom, California in accordance with the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Compendium Methods TO-15 for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) (and certain associated semi-volatile organic compounds [SVOCs] that can be analyzed by that method), TO-13A for certain other SVOCs (namely, certain polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons [PAHs]), and TO-17 for certain other PAHs and for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Data validation was performed for eight TO-15 results, ten TO-13A results, and ten TO-17 results.

2.0 Data Evaluation Procedures

This attachment outlines the applicable quality control criteria utilized during the data review process and any deviations from those criteria. The data review was conducted in accordance with the general procedures in GE’s Field Sampling Plan/Quality Assurance Project Plan (FSP/QAPP) (ARCADIS BBL, March 30, 2007) as approved by EPA, and the following documents:

· EPA Region I, EPA-New England Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Environmental Analyses (July 1996, revised December 1996) (EPA Region I Guidelines):

· EPA Region I, Region I Laboratory Data Validation Functional Guidelines for Evaluating Pesticide/PCB Analyses, (February 2004);

· EPA, Compendium Methods TO-13A, Determination of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) in Ambient Air Using Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) (January 1999);

· EPA, Compendium Methods TO-15, Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) in Air Collected in Specially-Prepared Canisters and Analyzed by Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) (January 1999); and

· EPA, Compendium Methods TO-17, Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds in Ambient Air Using Active Sampling Onto Sorbent Tubes (January 1999) (modified for analyses of SVOCs and PCBs).

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


The following data qualifiers were used in this data evaluation:

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

ND The compound was analyzed for, but was not detected at the method detected limit (MDL). The sample RL or PQL limit is presented in parentheses. Non-detect sample results are presented as ND(RL) within this report for consistency with documents previously prepared for investigations conducted at the GE-Pittsfield/Housatonic River Site. (This project-specific nomenclature differs from that in EPA guidance.)

ND J The compound was not detected at the MDL, but the RL or PQL (presented in parentheses) is estimated and may or may not represent the actual level of quantitation. Non-detect sample results that required qualification are presented as ND(RL) J within this report for consistency with documents previously prepared for investigations conducted at the GE-Pittsfield/Housatonic River Site. (This project-specific nomenclature differs from that in EPA guidance.)

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

3.0 Data Validation Procedures

Section 7.5 of the FSP/QAPP states that analytical data will be validated to a Tier I level following the procedures presented in the EPA Region I Guidelines (cited above). The Tier I review consisted of a completeness evidence audit to ensure that laboratory data and documentation were present. In the event that data packages were determined to be incomplete, the missing information was requested from the laboratory. Upon completion of the Tier I review, the data packages complied with the EPA Region I Tier I data completeness requirements.

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

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


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

Parameter Tier I Only Tier I &Tier II

Total Samples Duplicates Blanks Samples Duplicates Blanks

EPA TO-15 0 0 0 7 1 0 8

EPA TO-13A 0 0 0 6 1 3 10

EPA TO-17 0 0 0 6 1 3 10

Total 0 0 0 19 3 6 28

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

4.0 Summary of QA/QC Parameter Deviations Requiring Data Qualification

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

The initial calibration criterion requires that the percent relative standard deviation (%RSD) must be less than or equal to 30%. Sample data for detect and non-detect compounds with %RSD values greater than 30% were qualified as estimated (J). The compounds that exceeded initial calibration criterion and the number of samples qualified due to those deviations are presented in the following table.

Compounds Qualified Due to Exceedance of %RSD Values

Analysis Compound Number of Affected Samples Qualification

EPA TO-15 2-Hexanone 8 J

4-Methyl-2-pentanone 8 J

Styrene 8 J

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

Compounds Qualified Due to Surrogate Recovery Deviations


EPA-TO 13A All Compounds 2 J EPA-TO 17 All Compounds 1 J


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

Compounds Qualified Due to Blank Deviations


EPA TO-15 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 2 ND 1,2-Dibromoethane 7 ND

1,2-Dichloroethane 2 ND

Benzene 7 ND

Carbon Disulfide 7 ND

Ethylbenzene 2 ND

Hexane 1 ND

Naphthalene 2 ND

Trichloroethene 7 ND

Field duplicate samples were analyzed to evaluate the overall precision of laboratory and field procedures. The RPD between field duplicate samples is required to be less than 50% for air sample values greater than five times the PQL for organics. Sample results that exceeded these limits were qualified as estimated (J). The compound that did not meet field duplicate RPD requirements and the number of samples qualified due to those deviations are presented in the following table.

Compound Qualified Due to Field Duplicate Deviations

Analysis Analyte Number of

Affected Samples Qualification

EPA TO-15 Dichlorodifluoromethane 2 J Compound identification requires that the compound be within the calibration range of the instrument. Sample data for detected compounds that exceeded the calibration range were qualified as estimated (EJ). The compound that exceeded calibration range and the number of samples qualified due to those deviations are presented in the following table.

Compounds Qualified Due to Exceedance of Calibration Range


EPA TO-15 Chloroform 1 E J


5.0 Overall Data Usability

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

Data Usability

Parameter Percent Usability Rejected Data

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

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

5.1 Precision

Precision measures the reproducibility of measurements under a given set of conditions. Specifically, it is a quantitative measure of the variability of a group of measurements compared to their average value. For this investigation, precision was defined as the RPD between duplicate sample results. The duplicate samples used to evaluate precision included field duplicates and LCS/LCSD samples. For this analytical program, 0.24% of the data required qualification due to field duplicate RPD deviations. None of the data required qualification due to LCS/LCSD RPD deviations.

5.2 Accuracy

Accuracy measures the bias in an analytical system or the degree of agreement of a measurement with a known reference value. For this investigation, accuracy was defined as the percent recovery of QA/QC samples that were spiked with a known concentration of an analyte or compound of interest. The QA/QC samples used to evaluate analytical accuracy included instrument calibration, internal standards, surrogate recoveries, and LCS/LCSDs. For this analytical program, 2.9% of the data required qualification due to instrument calibration deviations and 3.0% of the data required qualification due to surrogate recovery deviations. None of the data required qualification due to internal standard recovery deviations or LCS/LCSD recovery deviations.


5.3 Representativeness

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

5.4 Comparability

Comparability is a qualitative parameter expressing the confidence with which one data set can be compared with another. This goal was achieved through the use of the standardized techniques for sample collection and analysis presented in the FSP/QAPP or the EPA-approved work plan. Specifically, all the air samples collected in December 2012 were analyzed using EPA Methods TO-15, TO-13A, and TO-17 for various constituent groups, as described above.

5.5 Completeness

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

G:\GE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_1\Reports and Presentations\ESA1S VI Report Fall 2012\Attachment B (DVR)\0861311214_Bldg_69_Soil Gas__2013_ppbv & ugm3.xlsValidation

Page 1 of 2 4/12/2013

Sample Delivery Group No. Sample ID Date Collected Matrix

Validation Level Qualification Compound QA/QC Parameter Value Control Limits

Qualified Result ug/m3

Qualified Result ppbv Notes

EPA TO-13A1212220 DUP-12/11/12 12/11/2012 Air Tier II Yes Benzo(a)anthracene Surrogate Recovery-Fluorene-d10 57.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(1.1) J Duplicate of SVP-3

Benzo(a)pyrene Surrogate Recovery-Fluorene-d10 57.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.97) JBenzo(b)fluoranthene Surrogate Recovery-Fluorene-d10 57.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.97) JBenzo(g,h,i)perylene Surrogate Recovery-Fluorene-d10 57.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.88) JBenzo(k)fluoranthene Surrogate Recovery-Fluorene-d10 57.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.97) JChrysene Surrogate Recovery-Fluorene-d10 57.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(1.1) JDibenzo(a,h)anthracene Surrogate Recovery-Fluorene-d10 57.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.88) JIndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene Surrogate Recovery-Fluorene-d10 57.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.98) J

1212220 Field Blank 1 12/11/2012 Air Tier II No1212220 Field Blank 2 12/11/2012 Air Tier II No1212220 SVP-1 12/11/2012 Air Tier II No1212220 SVP-2 12/11/2012 Air Tier II No1212220 SVP-3 12/11/2012 Air Tier II No1212220 SVP-4 12/11/2012 Air Tier II Yes Benzo(a)anthracene Surrogate Recovery-Fluorene-d10 53.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(1.1) J

Benzo(a)pyrene Surrogate Recovery-Fluorene-d10 53.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.97) JBenzo(b)fluoranthene Surrogate Recovery-Fluorene-d10 53.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.97) JBenzo(g,h,i)perylene Surrogate Recovery-Fluorene-d10 53.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.88) JBenzo(k)fluoranthene Surrogate Recovery-Fluorene-d10 53.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.97) JChrysene Surrogate Recovery-Fluorene-d10 53.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(1.1) JDibenzo(a,h)anthracene Surrogate Recovery-Fluorene-d10 53.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.88) JIndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene Surrogate Recovery-Fluorene-d10 53.0% 60% to 120% ND(10) J ND(0.98) J

1212220 SVP-5 12/11/2012 Air Tier II No1212220 SVP-6 12/11/2012 Air Tier II No1212220 Trip Blank 12/11/2012 Air Tier II NoEPA TO-151212286 AMB-12/11/12 12/11/2012 Air Tier II Yes 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane Method Blank - - ND(0.26) ND(0.039)

1,2-Dibromoethane Method Blank - - ND(0.074) ND(0.0096)2-Hexanone ICAL %RSD 31.9% <30% ND(4.0) J ND(0.96) J4-Methyl-2-pentanone ICAL %RSD 30.2% <30% ND(0.79) J ND(0.19) JCarbon Disulfide Method Blank - - ND(3.0) ND(0.96)Styrene ICAL %RSD 30.5% <30% ND(0.82) J ND(0.19) JTrichloroethene Method Blank - - ND(0.21) ND(0.039)

1212286 DUP-12/11/12 12/11/2012 Air Tier II Yes 1,2-Dibromoethane Method Blank - - ND(0.068) ND(0.0088) Duplicate of SVP-32-Hexanone ICAL %RSD 31.9% <30% ND(3.6) J ND(0.88) J4-Methyl-2-pentanone ICAL %RSD 30.2% <30% ND(0.72) J ND(0.18) JBenzene Method Blank - - ND(0.28) ND(0.088)Carbon Disulfide Method Blank - - ND(2.7) ND(0.88)Dichlorodifluoromethane Field Duplicate RPD 131.0% <50% 2.5 J 0.5 JStyrene ICAL %RSD 30.5% <30% ND(0.75) J ND(0.18) JTrichloroethene Method Blank - - ND(0.19) ND(0.035)

1212286 SVP-1 12/11/2012 Air Tier II Yes 1,2-Dibromoethane Method Blank - - ND(0.12) ND(0.016)1,2-Dichloroethane Method Blank - - ND(0.26) ND(0.065)2-Hexanone ICAL %RSD 31.9% <30% ND(6.7) J ND(1.6) J4-Methyl-2-pentanone ICAL %RSD 30.2% <30% ND(1.3) J ND(0.33) JBenzene Method Blank - - ND(0.52) ND(0.16)Carbon Disulfide Method Blank - - ND(5.1) ND(1.6)Chloroform Exceeds CAL Range - - 1400 EJ 280 EJStyrene ICAL %RSD 30.5% <30% ND(1.4) J ND(0.33) JTrichloroethene Method Blank - - ND(0.35) ND(0.065)

1212286 SVP-2 12/11/2012 Air Tier II Yes 1,2-Dibromoethane Method Blank - - ND(0.062) ND(0.0081)2-Hexanone ICAL %RSD 31.9% <30% ND(3.3) J ND(0.81) J4-Methyl-2-pentanone ICAL %RSD 30.2% <30% ND(0.66) J ND(0.16) JBenzene Method Blank - - ND(0.26) ND(0.081)Carbon Disulfide Method Blank - - ND(2.5) ND(0.81)Ethylbenzene Method Blank - - ND(0.14) ND(0.032)Naphthalene Method Blank - - ND(0.42) ND(0.081)Styrene ICAL %RSD 30.5% <30% ND(0.69) J ND(0.16) JTrichloroethene Method Blank - - ND(0.17) ND(0.032)

1212286 SVP-3 12/11/2012 Air Tier II Yes 1,2-Dibromoethane Method Blank - - ND(0.065) ND(0.0084)2-Hexanone ICAL %RSD 31.9% <30% ND(3.5) J ND(0.84) J4-Methyl-2-pentanone ICAL %RSD 30.2% <30% ND(0.69) J ND(0.17) JBenzene Method Blank - - ND(0.27) ND(0.084)Carbon Disulfide Method Blank - - ND(2.6) ND(0.84)Dichlorodifluoromethane Field Duplicate RPD 131.0% <50% 12 J 2.4 JEthylbenzene Method Blank - - ND(0.15) ND(0.034)Hexane Method Blank - - ND(0.60) ND(0.17)Naphthalene Method Blank - - ND(0.44) ND(0.084)Styrene ICAL %RSD 30.5% <30% ND(0.72) J ND(0.17) J

Table B-1Analytical Data Validation Summary

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

Building 69 Soil Gas and Indoor Air Investigation- Winter 2012

G:\GE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_1\Reports and Presentations\ESA1S VI Report Fall 2012\Attachment B (DVR)\0861311214_Bldg_69_Soil Gas__2013_ppbv & ugm3.xlsValidation

Page 2 of 2 4/12/2013

Sample Delivery Group No. Sample ID Date Collected Matrix

Validation Level Qualification Compound QA/QC Parameter Value Control Limits

Qualified Result ug/m3

Qualified Result ppbv Notes

Table B-1Analytical Data Validation Summary

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

Building 69 Soil Gas and Indoor Air Investigation- Winter 2012

EPA TO-15 continued1212286 SVP-4 12/11/2012 Air Tier II Yes 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane Method Blank - - ND(0.23) ND(0.033)

2-Hexanone ICAL %RSD 31.9% <30% ND(3.4) J ND(0.83) J4-Methyl-2-pentanone ICAL %RSD 30.2% <30% ND(0.68) J ND(0.17) JBenzene Method Blank - - ND(0.26) ND(0.083)Carbon Disulfide Method Blank - - ND(2.6) ND(0.83)Styrene ICAL %RSD 30.5% <30% ND(0.71) J ND(0.17) JTrichloroethene Method Blank - - ND(0.18) ND(0.033)

1212286 SVP-5 12/11/2012 Air Tier II Yes 1,2-Dibromoethane Method Blank - - ND(0.067) ND(0.0088)1,2-Dichloroethane Method Blank - - ND(0.14) ND(0.035)2-Hexanone ICAL %RSD 31.9% <30% ND(3.6) J ND(0.88) J4-Methyl-2-pentanone ICAL %RSD 30.2% <30% ND(0.72) J ND(0.18) JBenzene Method Blank - - ND(0.28) ND(0.088)Carbon Disulfide Method Blank - - ND(2.7) ND(0.88)Styrene ICAL %RSD 30.5% <30% ND(0.74) J ND(0.18) JTrichloroethene Method Blank - - ND(0.19) ND(0.035)

1212286 SVP-6 12/11/2012 Air Tier II Yes 1,2-Dibromoethane Method Blank - - ND(0.066) ND(0.0086)2-Hexanone ICAL %RSD 31.9% <30% ND(3.5) J ND(0.86) J4-Methyl-2-pentanone ICAL %RSD 30.2% <30% ND(0.71) J ND(0.17) JBenzene Method Blank - - ND(0.28) ND(0.086)Styrene ICAL %RSD 30.5% <30% ND(0.74) J ND(0.17) JTrichloroethene Method Blank - - ND(0.18) ND(0.035)

EPA TO-171212249 Dup-12/12/12 12/12/2012 Air Tier II No Duplicate of SVP-31212249 Field Blank 1 121212 12/12/2012 Air Tier II No1212249 Field Blank 2 121212 12/12/2012 Air Tier II No1212249 SVP-1 12/12/2012 Air Tier II No1212249 SVP-2 12/12/2012 Air Tier II No1212249 SVP-3 12/12/2012 Air Tier II No1212249 SVP-4 12/12/2012 Air Tier II No1212249 SVP-5 12/12/2012 Air Tier II No1212249 SVP-6 12/12/2012 Air Tier II No1212249 Trip Blank 121212 12/12/2012 Air Tier II Yes 2-Methylnaphthalene Surrogate Recovery-Naphthalene-d8 16.0% 50% to 150% ND(0.45) J ND(0.077) J

Acenaphthene Surrogate Recovery-Naphthalene-d8 16.0% 50% to 150% ND(0.45) J ND(0.071) JAcenaphthylene Surrogate Recovery-Naphthalene-d8 16.0% 50% to 150% ND(0.45) J ND(0.072) JAnthracene Surrogate Recovery-Naphthalene-d8 16.0% 50% to 150% ND(0.45) J ND(0.061) JFluoranthene Surrogate Recovery-Naphthalene-d8 16.0% 50% to 150% ND(0.45) J ND(0.054) JFluorene Surrogate Recovery-Naphthalene-d8 16.0% 50% to 150% ND(0.45) J ND(0.066) JNaphthalene Surrogate Recovery-Naphthalene-d8 16.0% 50% to 150% ND(0.45) J ND(0.085) JPhenanthrene Surrogate Recovery-Naphthalene-d8 16.0% 50% to 150% ND(0.45) J ND(0.061) JPyrene Surrogate Recovery-Naphthalene-d8 16.0% 50% to 150% ND(0.89) J ND(0.11) J

1212307 FB-12/13/12-1 12/13/2012 Air Tier II No1212307 FB-12/13/12-2 12/13/2012 Air Tier II No1212307 SVP-1 12/13/2012 Air Tier II No1212307 SVP-2 12/13/2012 Air Tier II No1212307 SVP-3 12/13/2012 Air Tier II No1212307 SVP-4 12/13/2012 Air Tier II No1212307 SVP-5 12/13/2012 Air Tier II No1212307 SVP-6 12/13/2012 Air Tier II No1212307 Trip Blank 12/13/12 12/13/2012 Air Tier II No

Attachment C City of Pittsfield Drinking Water Quality Reports and Bromodichloromethane/ chloroform related documentation

1

2011 Annual Drinking Water Quality Report

For The City of Pittsfield, Massachusetts

MassDEP Public Water Supply ID #1236000

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

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

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

2

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

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

3

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

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

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

4

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

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

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

Date(s) Collected

90TH

percentile

Action Level

MCLG

# of sites above Action

Level

Possible Source of Contamination

Lead (mg/L)

9/30-10/5/11

0.0035 0.015 0 0 Corrosion of household

plumbing systems; erosion of natural deposits

Copper (mg/L)

9/30-10/5/11

0.16 1.3 1.3 0 Corrosion of household

plumbing systems; erosion of natural deposits; leaching from

wood preservatives

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

Highest % Positive in a

month

Total # Positive

MCL MCLG Violation

(Y/N) Possible Source of Contamination

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

Fecal Coliform or E. coli ----- 0 * 0 No Human and animal fecal waste

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

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

5

TT Highest Detected Daily Value

Violation (Y/N)

Possible Source of Contamination

Turbidity (NTU) 5 0.49 No Soil runoff

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

Regulated Contaminant Date(s)

Collected

Highest Result/Running

Average Detected

Range Detected

MCL or

MRDL

MCLG or

MRDLG

Violation (Y/N)

Possible Source(s) of Contamination

Inorganic Contaminants

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

2 2 No

Discharge of drilling wastes; discharge from

metal refineries; erosion of natural

deposits

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

4 4 No

Erosion of natural deposits; water additive which

promotes strong teeth; discharge from

fertilizer and aluminum factories

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

10 10 No

Runoff from fertilizer use; leaching from

septic tanks; sewage; erosion of natural

deposits

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

Runoff from fertilizer use; leaching from

septic tanks; sewage; erosion of natural

deposits

Perchlorate (μg)

9/28/11 0 0 2 N/A No Rocket propellants,

fireworks, munitions, flares, blasting agents

Disinfection Byproducts

Total Trihalomethanes (TTHMs) (ppb)

Quarterly in 2011

50.1 19.5-50.1

80 ----- No Byproduct of drinking water chlorination

Haloacetic Acids (HAA5) (ppb)

Quarterly in 2011

28.5 13.2-28.5

60 ----- No Byproduct of drinking water disinfection

Chlorine (ppm) (free, total or combined)

Weekly in 2011

1.61 0.22-1.61

4 4 No Water additive used to control microbes

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

6

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

Unregulated and Secondary Contaminants

Date(s) Collected

Result or Range

Detected

Average Detected

SMCL ORSG Possible Source


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

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

Bromodichloromethane (ppb) 9/28/11 0.60-3.20 1.90 --- ---

Byproduct of drinking water chlorination

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

chlorination

Bacteriological Contaminants

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

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

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

2010 Annual Drinking Water Quality Report For

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

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

PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM INFORMATION

Address: _70 Allen Street, Pittsfield, MA

Contact Person: Bruce Collingwood, Commissioner of Public Utilities

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

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

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

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

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

DRINKING WATER SOURCES

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

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

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

1

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

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

What Hazards Exist For Our Water Supply?

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

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

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

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

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

POTENTIAL DRINKING WATER CONTAMINANTS

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

Contaminants that may be present in source water include:

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

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

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

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

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

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

2

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

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

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

Cross Connection lnspection/Backflow Prevention Program

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

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

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

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

3

IMPORTANT DEFINITIONS

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

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

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

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

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

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

Applicable Abbreviations:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Level ContamlnatJ•)n

Lead Corrosion of household

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

natural deposits Corrosion of household

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

wood preservatives

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

4

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

I Highest %

Positive tn a

tl--------+·- · month Total Coliform

Fecal Coliform or E. coli

0

Total# Pos1t1va

0

MCL

>5%

*

MCLG

0

0

Vtolabon ! t'f/N)

No

No

Possible Source of Contammation

Naturally present in the environment

Human and animal fecal waste

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

TT I Htghest Detected Violat1on Possible Source of Contamination

Dally Value (Y/N)

Turbidity (NTU) 5 l 1.88 No Soil runoff

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

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

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

tJr Vtolat1on Possible Source(s) of

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


Discharge of drilling

0.007-wastes; discharge from

Barium (ppm) 12/16/10 0.010 0.010

2 2 No metal refineries; erosion of natural

deposits Erosion of natural deposits; water

0.02-additive which

Fluoride (ppm) • 12/16/10 0.03 0.03

4 4 No promotes strong teeth; discharge from

fertilizer and aluminum factories

Runoff from fertilizer

0.03-use; leaching from

Nitrate (ppm) 12/16/10 0.07 0.07

10 10 No septic tanks; sewage; erosion of natural

deposits Runoff from fertilizer use; leaching from

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

erosion of natural deposits

Disinfection Byproducts

Total Trihalomethanes Quarterly 56.3

31.6-80 No

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

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

Byproduct of drinking (ppb) in 2010 water disinfection

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

4 4 No Water additive used to

or combined) 2010 1.00 control microbes

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

5

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

2010 PRSRTSTD

US POSTAGE

PAID HOLLISTON, MA PERMIT NO. 72

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

Unregulated and Date(sJ Result or

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

Detected


I

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

of treatment process

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

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

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

Bacteriological Contaminants

Cryptosporidium Discharged especially where

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

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

COMPLIANCE WITH DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS

Does My Drinking Water Meet Current Health Standards?

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

6

Report on Carcinogens, Twelfth Edition (2011)

National Toxicology Program, Department of Health and Human Services

BromodichloromethaneCAS No. 75-27-4

Reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogenFirst listed in the Sixth Annual Report on Carcinogens (1991)

CH

Br

Cl

Cl

CarcinogenicityBromodichloromethane is reasonably anticipated to be a human car-cinogen based on sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity from studies in experimental animals.

Cancer Studies in Experimental Animals

Oral exposure to bromodichloromethane caused tumors at several dif-ferent tissue sites in mice and rats. Administration of bromodichloro-methane by stomach tube caused benign and malignant kidney tumors (tubular-cell adenoma and adenocarcinoma) in male mice and in rats of both sexes, benign and malignant liver tumors (hepato-cellular adenoma and carcinoma) in female mice, and benign and ma-lignant colon tumors (adenomatous polyps and adenocarcinoma) in rats of both sexes (NTP 1987, ATSDR 1989, IARC 1991, 1999).

Since bromodichloromethane was listed in the Sixth Annual Re-port on Carcinogens, additional studies in rats have been identified. Administration of bromodichloromethane in the drinking water in-creased the combined incidence of benign and malignant liver tumors (hepatocellular adenoma or carcinoma) in males (George et al. 2002) and caused benign liver tumors (hepatocellular adenoma) in females (Tumasonis et al. 1987).

Cancer Studies in Humans

�e data available from epidemiological studies are inadequate to evaluate the relationship between human cancer and exposure spe-cifically to bromodichloromethane. Several epidemiological studies indicated a possible association between ingestion of chlorinated drinking water (which typically contains bromodichloromethane) and increased risk of cancer in humans, but these studies could not provide information on whether any observed effects were due to bromo dichloromethane or to one or more of the hundreds of other by-products also present in chlorinated water (ATSDR 1989).

PropertiesBromodichloromethane is a trihalomethane that exists as a colorless liquid at room temperature. It is slightly soluble in water and very soluble in ethanol, ethyl ether, benzene, and acetone. It is stable at normal temperatures and pressures (Akron 2009, HSDB 2009). Phys-ical and chemical properties for bromodichloromethane are listed in the following table.

Property Information

Molecular weight 163.8Speci�c gravity 1.980 at 20°C/4°CMelting point –57°CBoiling point 90°CLog Kow 2.00Water solubility 3.96 g/L at 30°CVapor pressure 50 mm Hg at 20°CSource: HSDB 2009.

UseBromodichloromethane is used in the synthesis of organic chemi-cals and as a reagent in laboratory research. It previously was used as a solvent for fats, waxes, and resins, and it has been used to sep-arate minerals and salts, as a flame retardant, and as an a ingredient in fire extinguishers (ATSDR 1989).

ProductionBromodichloromethane is not used or produced commercially in the United States. Small quantities have been produced, but production volumes were not found (ATSDR 1989). In 2009, bromodichloro-methane was available from 18 suppliers worldwide, including 11 U.S. suppliers (ChemSources 2009). No data on U.S. imports or ex-ports were found, but little, if any, trade is expected (ATSDR 1989).

ExposureBromodichloromethane is a by-product of water disinfection, and the main route of human exposure is through exposure to chlorine-treated water (IARC 1991). �e amount of bromodichloromethane produced during chlorination depends on temperature, pH, the bro-mide ion concentration of the water, the presence of trihalometh-ane precursors, and the specific treatment processes (ATSDR 1989). �e organic trihalo methane precursors are naturally occurring humic and fulvic acids. �e general population is exposed to trihalometh-anes through consumption of treated drinking water, beverages, and food products, inhalation of contaminated air, and dermal contact with treated water.

As water-disinfection by-products, trihalomethanes occur at higher concentrations in finished water than in raw waters. It is esti-mated that bromodichloromethane levels increase by 30% to 100% in water distribution pipes; formation of bromodichloromethane is likely to continue as long as chlorine and organic trihalomethane precur-sors remain in the water (ATSDR 1989). Since 1998, the concentra-tion of total trihalo methanes in public water systems has been limited to 80 ppb (μg/L) (EPA 1998). �e highest detected concentration of bromodichloromethane before regulations went into effect was in New Orleans, Louisiana, where its concentration was 11 ppb (μg/L) in raw water and 116 ppb in finished water (NRC 1980). In the water supplies of 113 U.S. cities surveyed from 1976 to 1977, the mean bro-modichloromethane concentration was 18 ppb (IARC 1991). Bromo-dichloromethane was detected in 445 of 945 finished water supplies from groundwater sources in a survey conducted from 1981 to 1982, at a median concentration of approximately 1.8 ppb (HSDB 2009), and in 35 of 40 Michigan water supplies at a median concentration of 2.7 ppb (Furlong and D’Itri 1986). Bromodichloromethane was found in 14 of 63 industrial wastewater discharges, at concentrations rang-ing from less than 10 to 100 ppb (HSDB 2009).

�e tap-water uses associated with the greatest bromodichloro-methane exposure, based on concentrations of total trihalomethanes in the blood or exhaled breath, were showering, bathing, and hand dishwashing (Ashley et al. 2005, Nuckols et al. 2005). Ingestion of tap water or hot or cold beverages containing tap water did not increase blood or exhaled breath concentrations. �e concentration of bromo-dichloromethane in the blood increased 3- to 4-fold after shower-ing; for two study sites, the median blood concentrations were 38 and 43 ppt (ng/L) after showering (Nuckols et al. 2005), and the median water concentrations of bromodichloromethane were 14 and 12 ppb.

Exposure can also occur from dermal contact with and ingestion of chlorinated swimming-pool water. Individuals who frequent indoor swimming pools and saunas potentially are at higher risk from inhala-tion exposure (ATSDR 1989). Bromodichloromethane was detected at concentrations of 13 to 34 ppb in chlorinated freshwater pools (Beech

Table of Contents: http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/roc12

Page 73

Report on Carcinogens, Twelfth Edition (2011)

National Toxicology Program, Department of Health and Human Services

et al. 1980). Another study examined dermal and inhalation exposure of two college students (one male and one female) to bromodichloromethane during a typical twohour swimming workout. The results suggested that the main route of exposure was dermal, rather than inhalation, and showed that training was associated with a measurable body burden of bromodichloromethane (Lindstrom et al. 1997). Another study found that concentrations of bromodichloromethane in the urine of swimmingpool workers depended on its concentration in the air in the swimmingpool enclosure and increased over the course of a fourhour shift by a factor of 2.5 (Caro and Gallego 2007). At the same pool, concentrations of bromo dichloromethane in the urine of swimmers increased by a factor of 3 to 4 after one hour of exercise. Because the workers and swimmers were exposed to the same air concentration of bromodichloromethane, the difference in uptake was attributed to dermal absorption by the swimmers. These results agree with those of a similar study of swimmers that measured bromodichloromethane in alveolar air before and after swimming (Aggazzotti et al. 1998).

Although consumers potentially are exposed to bromodichloromethane from contaminated food, resulting from use of chlorinated water to produce these foods, such exposure is not common, and concentrations of bromodichloromethane in food are at or below concentrations in drinking water (HSDB 2009). In the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Total Diet Study, bromodichloromethane was found in 46 food products, at concentrations ranging from 3 ppb (the limit of quantitation) to 37 ppb (FDA 2003). Bromodichloromethane was detected in cola drinks at concentrations of 2.3 to 3.8 ppb in one study (HSDB 2009); in another study, it was found in noncaramelcolored soft drinks at 0.1 to 0.2 ppb and in cola drinks at 0.9 to 5.9 ppb (AbdelRahman 1982).

Bromodichloromethane is not produced on a large commercial scale (HSDB 2009). If contamination occurs from a spill on land, volatilization will occur, which is the predominant environmental removal process, or the compound will leach into groundwater, where significant biodegradation can occur under anaerobic conditions. Bromodichloromethane has a relatively long halflife in air, estimated at 2 to 3 months (ATSDR 1989). Reactions with hydroxyl radicals or singlet oxygen are probably the only identifiable transformation processes in the atmosphere. Longrange global transport is possible. Bromodichloromethane has been detected in rainwater, indicating that washout from the atmosphere is possible; however, it is likely that the compound will revolatilize (HSDB 2009). According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Toxics Release Inventory, the largest total environmental releases of bromodichloromethane occurred in 1992, when 15,000 lb was released, all as fugitive air emissions. In 2007, one industrial facility released 296 lb of bromodichloromethane to the air (TRI 2009).

The potential for occupational exposure to bromodichloromethane is greatest among workers using it as a reagent for research or to synthesize organic chemicals. Most other uses have been discontinued (ATSDR 1989). The National Occupational Exposure Survey (conducted from 1981 to 1983) estimated that 3,266 workers, including 502 women, potentially were exposed to bromodichloromethane (NIOSH 1990).

RegulationsEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA)Clean Water ActEffluent Guidelines: Halomethanes are listed as toxic pollutants.Water Quality Criteria: Based on fish or shellfish and water consumption = 0.55 μg/L; based on fish or

shellfish consumption only = 17 μg/L.

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability ActReportable quantity (RQ) = 5,000 lb.

Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know ActToxics Release Inventory: Listed substance subject to reporting requirements.

Safe Drinking Water ActMaximum contaminant level (MCL) = 0.080 mg/L for total trihalomethanes (sum of chloroform,

bromodichloromethane, dibromochloromethane, and bromoform).

Food and Drug Administration (FDA)Maximum permissible level in bottled water = 0.08 mg/L for total trihalomethanes.

ReferencesAbdel-Rahman MS. 1982. The presence of trihalomethanes in soft drinks. J Appl Toxicol 2: 165-166. Aggazzotti G, Fantuzzi G, Righi E, Predieri G. 1998. Blood and breath analyses as biological indicators of exposure to trihalomethanes in indoor swimming pools. Sci Total Environ 217(1-2): 155-163. Akron. 2009. The Chemical Database. The Department of Chemistry at the University of Akron. http://ull.chemistry.uakron.edu/erd and search on CAS number. Last accessed: 7/09. Ashley DL, Blount BC, Singer PC, Depaz E, Wilkes C, Gordon S, Lyu C, Masters J. 2005. Changes in blood trihalomethane concentrations resulting from differences in water quality and water use activities. Arch Environ Occup Health 60(1): 7-15. ATSDR. 1989. Toxicological Profile for Bromodichloromethane (Final Report). NTIS Accession No. PB90-167461. Atlanta, GA: Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. 88 pp. Beech JA, Diaz R, Ordaz C, Palomeque B. 1980. Nitrates, chlorates and trihalomethanes in swimming pool water. Am J Public Health 70(1): 79-82. Caro J, Gallego M. 2007. Assessment of exposure of workers and swimmers to trihalomethanes in an indoor swimming pool. Environ Sci Technol 41(13): 4793-4798. ChemSources. 2009. Chem Sources - Chemical Search. Chemical Sources International. http://www.chemsources.com/chemonline.html and search on bromodichloromethane. Last accessed: 5/16/09. EPA. 1998. Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule. EPA 815-P-00-001. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. FDA. 2006. Total Diet Study Market Baskets 1991-3 through 2003-4. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Food/FoodSafety/FoodContaminantsAdulteration/TotalDietStudy/UCM184304.pdf.Furlong EA-N, D’Itri FM. 1986. Trihalomethane levels in chlorinated Michigan drinking water. Ecol Modeling 32: 215-225. George MH, Olson GR, Doerfler D, Moore T, Kilburn S, DeAngelo AB. 2002. Carcinogenicity of bromodichloromethane administered in drinking water to male F344/N rats and B6C3F1 mice. Int J Toxicol 21(3): 219-230. HSDB. 2009. Hazardous Substances Data Bank. National Library of Medicine. http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/sis/htmlgen?HSDB and search on CAS number. Last accessed: 6/09. IARC. 1991. Bromodichloromethane. In Chlorinated Drinking-water; Chlorination By-products; Some Other Halogenated Compounds; Cobalt and Cobalt Compounds. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risk of Chemicals to Humans, vol. 52. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer. pp. 179-212. IARC. 1999. Bromodichloromethane. In Re-evaluation of Some Organic Chemicals, Hydrazine, and Hydrogen Peroxide. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risk of Chemicals to Humans, vol. 71. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer. pp. 1295-1304. Lindstrom AB, Pleil JD, Berkoff DC. 1997. Alveolar breath sampling and analysis to assess trihalomethane exposures during competitive swimming training. Environ Health Perspect 105(6): 636-642. NIOSH. 1990. National Occupational Exposure Survey (1981-83). National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Last updated: 7/1/90. http://www.cdc.gov/noes/noes1/x5772sic.html. NRC. 1980. Drinking Water and Health, vol. 3. National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. http://www.nap.edu/openbook/0309029325/html/R1.html. 415 pp.NTP. 1987. Toxicology and Carcinogenesis Studies of Bromodichloromethane (CAS No. 75-27-4) in F344/N Rats and B6C3F1 Mice (Gavage Studies). NTP Technical Report Series no. 321. Research Triangle Park, NC: National Toxicology Program. 182 pp. Nuckols JR, Ashley DL, Lyu C, Gordon S, Hinckley AF, Singer P. 2005. Influence of Tap Water Quality and Household Water Use Activities on Indoor Air and Internal Dose Levels of Trihalomethanes. Environ Health Perspect 113(7): 863-870. TRI. 2009. TRI Explorer Chemical Report. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.epa.gov/triexplorer and select Bromodichloromethane. Last accessed: 7/09. Tumasonis CF, McMartin DN, Bush B. 1987. Toxicity of chloroform and bromodichloromethane when administered over a lifetime in rats. J Environ Pathol Toxicol Oncol 7(4): 55-63.

Attachment D City of Pittsfield East Street Area 1 Utility Figure and Supporting Documents

~

0 co N

u

HWY GUARD TYPE SS (SEE LAYOUT DETAIL ON SHEET NO. 48)

TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONDUIT SEE SHEET NO. 30

WATER SUPPLY ALTERATIONS SEE BELOW

DRAINAGE DETAILS I --~~-......_ ,.... I ---. --J.34, aooN

SEE BELOW ! STATE

PITTSFIELD MERRILL ROAD

FED. AID. PROJ. NO FISCAL SHEET ~:;;orA~

BURIED END STA. 9+50± TO STA. 12+15± CONC. BARR. CONC. BARR. STA. 14+10± TO STA. 16+45± BURIED END

TERMINAL SECTION STA. 19+59± 68.46' LT. TO STA. 23+55± 52.50' LT. TERMINAL SECTION

BRIDGE END STA. 16+30± LT. TO STA. 16+60± LT. BURIED END

CONT. ON SHEET NO. 6, 7

EXIST. 72" CLF -·--- ~-r-··\--W::'./.:BW (RET.)

<'Rf::BL ILD EXIST. TO FINISH ""'"LJ!t.

REBUILD EXI TO FINISH G

I

I REBUILD · .LTQ FINI

! -- ·--~-

! t !

ST. DMH GRADE----'

2" CLF W/BW 50 (EAST ST.

(NEWELL

PROP. 72" TEMP. CONST. FENCE

.----PROP. 72" CLF W/BW STAS. 11+60 TO 13+05

PROP. CONC. MEDIAN BARRIER

TBM #1028

EXIST. BRIDGE P-1

EXIST. 72" CLF W/BW (RET.)----EXIST. 72" CLF

--W/BW~ &S) ---.~· PROP.

ORIRO\N /t\'l(ffl. SEED---' GRANITE CURB~•/

..vr..t:' I VB

.L.AI..J • CURB (R) CITY LAYOUT LINE

BOTTOM OF SLOPE · LIMIT OF WORK

EXIST. GRANITE CURB (R&R) .-«'q.....

PROP. BIT. CONC. CURB - TY. 2------,

PROP. 72" TEMP. CONST. FEN

IPf'!(l)IP, 6

GRANITE CURB (R&R)

RCP S=0.010

PLANE

/ • I

I '

I l ' \

EXIST. G.E. CO. PIPELINE 3 PIPES (ABAN.) r (SEE NOTE 21 ON SHEET 2)~ PROP. RETAINING WALL NO.

i

V-i ~*

"" '~ ~'

0 rq

PROP. RR SPUR TRACK LOCATION (WBO)

PROP. MODIFIED LOAM BORROW AND SEED

PROP. LIMIT OF WORK

PROP. RETAININq WALL NO. P-10-W7

EXIST. BIT. CONq. PAVEMENT (R) i

285 LF 15" RCP S=r-0154

YEAR NO. HEET

MASS. STP-1 924(001 )X 1998 8 176

PROJECT FILE NO. 045710

CONSTRUCTION PLAN

SHEET 2 ----__11

CONT. ON SHEET NO. 9

, I ~ >.7:::--T-.s'---r--==-=-==---r--=;::-,--r-:::==,_....--,----,-----,--~,----j;~~cj~~~~~~~;;:;:~~~;~-~~~=~:-~~---=--:-~· ·:·:~:~,~~:l~~~~'~\ }" C!P WA ·i[l\ ~ C!P W),.Tfr~ 'i NO. STRUCT. STA. OFFSET RIM INVERTS ~-""' .. "'-"-,~"'=-- ..:.: _ /i- "1 1111 '~W~" ;.,, 15 A CBCI 11+00 37.62' LT. 1028.83' 1021.95' 12" OUT

........... __ ··-~. -"' • ' · •v ·~ 16 A DMH 11+00 13.90' RT. 1029.11' 1021.53' (12" N)

BENCHMARK TBM #9

TBM #1028

., .. • --.. ·--· ' ... ·- ,. =~ d, ·~"':? • 0 ,. I 1 026.15' (8" S) ._ -~- . -··- • I I ' r''"\t ""r-"'·1-~ ~- -{.j:;c ~ -+=- _,._, ~ l_ ~~~q ' 1,\1("'.1 ______ ---· -~"-L-r- J ~iJ(;.;..' T- -f ·---:-:::.__._-:::;. ::u

· ~ .......... _ .'... -~- "'~ · V·!C''' · ------,.:;{~,- -~' .. , ___ -\- ' 1 015,50' 12" OUT -~. ··-...... f 7 f ~- 1-o..1t J ¢ . , o-"'t\ - T--~ ~~ --- -~ ""'"

· --- ---1- · ""'t·'~:- co.-7" .... 1 .. i/.;, ti'"'- ;- · ·- --- .... W.::V/G 1--7177 -t-...;o--J--..,.~-+-::~~:..,.....i~~~~~~~-l-'1:=_02=:6~.24~0'+8~",-::!.0:::.U T:..+--' j I ;'AI-/ ! -, .. /, ----::.~.,;~:;-,;.::·:.::-:·:· -i:::__- 19 993.52' 12" OUT

· X" 1 '! D \1.' '\ :.-•-R'I l : v ~!u 'h'P, ·r [R! - ~=-+~-+--'~"---1-'-'-' . _,, ... :~~-..!'' 1 t:.. I . i • '. 20 992.92' 12" OUT . -..__ ......... ·:± . ___ , --...... . I ~ c- I j If,:" l--=::7-t--7--+---=.:::..::.:-+-.c:::,.:.~--il--'=:.:::..-~-+~==.::::...,....j.:::=~~;.=.,...:=..~'--

·~--.... , .. ~ ..... y~,.J;;"-Jj'-. ... T '·ilf'---- ....... -- 4.!..!_"-' 21 1 021.21' 12" OUT ~~--5:.t... --- ,......,_ ~-~i-.o c.... l J rr ... ~'-'"""""-=;.;~.., - -- -- l-~-f--':-'--l--7~'--+-.!.7·~::....ji---:;:~-=::,:-+...!..!:::~~~.:::.=.~~.;.=..,.....:::~L_ ~(' ;:,/"' +--s~r":::-y-tvt';-------1'-----._- .. -- 22 1016.74' (12" w)

... ,,_,__ I I·~ r,:; ·~- ,. __ fL - -r-'--·- - 1021.1 0' (12" NW) ,~ --~ --1 ::; f:h f'--(·:r.:':...n / ? -

J I /±·~ .. ;;'_t::U; /11 :1 1021.86' (8" s) ' I II ~ jl 1016.49' 15" OUT

A Gl 11+00 24.17' RT. 1 028.90' B CBCI 7+81.01 30.73' RT. 998.19' B CBCI 8+70 22' LT. 998.25' A CBCI 15+95 32' LT. 1 026.54' A DMH 16+05 26' LT. 1 026.37'

Et=

. \ ------ ---f·l~·ii' / ll 1 / I-:2::-:2""'A-t--:A--+--=-D"'M.,..,H-+-1,...,5=-+·..,8::-o5c-~~2-=-o.-, -c-L=T.-+~1-0-26~.~9=s·~~~~('-'Ex.':'_r_sT-'.""'1'-'N+-)-- ................... ._ __ ........ !.. ............ __ ..... I JC:: I ' I ' I I--::--=-I---:A--+--G=I,---+-1"'5::-+--,9,-,5c-l-=-o--c=,.....,.=+-1-0-26-.-6~1 .~1:::_01~6~.6~8:;_~,,!..:12;,."_::::.0:::_U~T~

.......... - 1 ' · ·-----....1 !! 23 24.17' RT. 1024.11' 8" OUT / I \. I / 24 A CBCI 18+85 32' LT. 1018.18' 1012.85' 12" OUT

I BENCHMARKS

LOCATION ELEVATION HYDRANT TOP EAST STREET 'i STA 9+15, 25' LT. 1002.00'

CHISLED SQUARE - TOP OF CONC. ON EXISTING "PECK'S BRIDGE" MERRILL ROAD Ef_ STA 13+50, 25' LT. 1 028.08'

.11 I I I 25 A DMH 18+95 26' LT. 1018. 01' 1012. 09' ( 15" W) ' 1 012.71' ( 12" NW)

• I I 1 013.50' (8" S) I / // 1012.03' 15" OUT

....... ______ ..) I 1-1276=-+-AA-+--'C~BG&Il.---+--=1281++8755 24.17' RT. 11000189 .. 2854: 1015.75' 8" OUT 32.80' LT. 1004.51' 12" OUT

28 A DMH 21+85 26.97' LT. 1009.67' 1004.40' (12" NW)

29 A Gl

Ef_ A - MERRILL ROAD Ef_ B = EAST STREET

21+75 24.17' RT. 1009.31'

1004.46' (8" S) 1003.74' (15" W) 1 003.68' 15" OUT 1006.81' 8" OUT

FOR PROFILE SEE SHEET NO. 13 AND 19

~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------~--------------------------------~---------------------------------------------------_J

--·------------------:---------------------------------

dzuck

Callout

8" Cast Iron Pipe - Water

dzuck

Callout

SVP-6

dzuck

Callout

SVP-1

dzuck

Oval

dzuck

Oval

dzuck

Callout

Homeowner noted wet driveway all season long.

dzuck

Callout

SVP-2

dzuck

Oval

dzuck

Line

dzuck

Callout

SVP-3

dzuck

Oval

dzuck

Callout

SVP-4

dzuck

Callout

SVP-5

dzuck

Oval

dzuck

Oval

dzuck

Line

dzuck

Rectangle

dzuck

Callout

EAS1S-72R

dzuck

Callout

ESA1S-31R

dzuck

Rectangle

10

Cement Walks

The total length of new walks laid was 1.94 miles.

I..cngt,h Width Location feet ftwt Cole Avenue-south side 1255 5 Copley Terra.ce-wcst side on 4.5 Edwin Street-east side 519 fi .fohn Street---cast side 1460 0 Lenox Avenue-cast side 890 6 Madison Avenue-south side 238 6 Marian Avenue-south side 1:!77 fi McArthur Street-south side .1420 fi North Street-west side 111 20 Onota Street-cast side 1916 6 Onota Street-west side 140 5 Strong Avenue-south side 499 5 Strong Avenue-north side 361 5

Chapter 90 Highways Construction in Conjunction with State and County

East Street, from the cement concrete pavement to the road cros~ing the Junction Bridge, constructed pcnolithic surface, with all necessary grading and drainage. C. B. Lindholm Co., Inc., contractor.

North Street from the Lanesborough Line southerly about 3000 feet, present cement concrete pavement widened generally twelve feet apd curbs set, all on the west side, with all necessary grading. C. B. Lindholm Co., Inc., contractor.

Welfare Work Relief

The following is a summary of work done by men furnished and paid by the Welfare Department:

Snow Removal-loading snow and clearing walks and outside roads of drifts, opening gutters itnd catch basins of icc and snow, work on snow fences.

Highway Maintenance-surfacing with gravel and grading various streets and roads, filling washouts and making repairs, cleaning pavements and gutters of leaves and deposits of the

11

winter, repairing culverts, cutting and burning brush, repair of guard fences and building new guard fences, constructing gravel 'valks, filling joints of pavements, painting traffic lines, repairing and painting bridges and laying cobble gutters.

Highway Construction-excavation, grading and surfacing new street improvements.

Sewer and Drain Construction-excavating for and laying new sewers and drains, as tabulated.

Smver Maintenance-cleaning catch basins. Sewage Disposal-cleaning sewer beds and general main

tenance. Water \Vorks-Excavating for· new water mains and lower

ing existing water mains and pipes on ERA projects, excavation for many new curb stops installed on old water services, painting railing, repair of dams, digging test pits and repair of road to proposed dmn and cutting brush on the water shed.

Work Done as Supervisor Under ERA and WPA Projects During 1935

P'ort Hill A venue-The roa<:hvay was widened to 24 feet 1

graded, surfaced with gravel, oiled and rolled. Culverts rebuilt and drainage work done.

Highland Avenue-The street was worked to grade, roadway surfaced with gravel, rolled and oiled, 27 feet wide; gravel walks built and a retaining wall. Storm water drains were laid with the required catch basins. A sanitary sewer from Pecks Road was laid 1250 feet northerly. Considerable ledge was encountered.

South Mounta.in Road-Roadway widened and graded to a width of 24 feet, surfaced with gravel, rolled and oiled. Culverts were rebuilt and cobble gutters laid.

Hungerford Street-The roadway was widened to 20 feet from Fort Hill Avenue easterly to West Housatonic Street and to 24 feet from Fort Hill A venue westerly to West Housatonic Street, graded and surfaced with gravel, a drain laid and catch basins. Two old bridges were ·entirely rebuilt and

i !

>

16

SANITARY SEWERS

Laid under ·ERA and WPA Projects walil 2.05 Miles

Diameter L~ngth Location Inches F(~Ct Manholl~s

Caroline Street. G 1025 Essex Street fi 1 1:)0 Frederick Street () 200 Highland Avenue ti 1320 Highland Avenue 8 1250 Osceola Street 8 27:j Osceola Street 6 72[1 Oswald Avenue 6 1100 West Housn,tonic Street 10 880 West Housatonic Street 12 2830

.Jl, ( RENEWAL AND EXTENSION OF WATER MAINS

4 4

13

3 4

Laid under ERA :tnd WPA Projects. was 2.44 Miles, of which 1.8.1 miles replaced old pipe of inadequate capacity.

Diameter Length Location Inches Feet Hydmnts Main

Adams Street (Renewal) 8 800 East Street (Renewal) 8 25[)0 6 Han'cock Road (Renewal 8 1370 2 I Madison A venue (Renewal) 8 1()10 3 Madison Avenue (Renmval) 10 030 Second Street (Renewal) 8 2700. 3 7 West Street 8 2000 4 West Street 10 1100

STREETS ACCEPTED Width Length

Name From To Feet Feet Draper Avenue Springside A venue Roland Street. :)0 562 Ontario Street Superior Street Nowell Street 4~).!) fi85 Paisley Terrace Dawes A venue Southerly 50 423 Pembroke Avcmue Newell Street Hope Street GO 827 Plumb Street Holmes Rund Atmcr Ave. 40 825 Rhode Island Avenue Dalton Avenue Tyler Stn~et fiO 1011 Richardson Street Parkside Avenue Southerly 40 1078 Sadler Avenue Springsidc Avenue Roland Street 50 536 Scammell Avenue Springside A venue Roln.nd Street ;)0 521 Willard Place Longview Termee Northerly 50 839

17

Forestry

Under an ERA Project shade trees in the city have been systematically trimmed and treated and partly dead or dangerous trees removed. Further reference may be had to the description of the Federal Project CITY TREES herein contained. Under another Project, trees were planted to replace those cut and removed or to fill unplanted areas.

The special Forestry Committee is filing a report on re(orestation on the water shed to which. reference may be had. This may complete the plan of reforestation on the water shed, \Vhich is a great improvement and should prove a wise investment.

Snow Removal

With the purchase of unother large 4-wheel drive truck and plow the department is in much better condition to remove snow. An old tractor has been put to good usc by the attuchment of a bull dozer. The apparatus now consists of ten blade plows, two 4-wheel drive trucks and plmvs, one 2-ton tractor and plow, the new motor grader and plow, the aforesaid bull dozer and a garage truck, so called, for.furnishing gasoline or transportation of mechanics and also the old snow loader. More sanding of icy streets was done in response to requests.

Municipal Garage

The garage was operated successfully the past year. New equipment will be needed to replace cars and· trucks which require extensive repairs by reason of mileage. The new motor grader purchased was a Caterpillar, No. 11, Auto Patrol, it has given excellent service and was operated continuously during the year, grading and scarifying and in the winter plowing snow. An additional unit should be purchased for use on WPA construction.

The old 15-ton steam roller purchased in 1912 finally broke down near the end of the year and is beyond repair.

Attachment E GE Pittsfield Groundwater Data for Bromodichloromethane and Chloroform

G:\GE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_1\Reports and Presentations\ESA1S VI Report Fall 2012\Attachment E (Chloro-Bromo Pitts)\0861311214_Atta E_ESA1S VI - Chloroform-Bromo Detects_All GMAs.xlsxGMA 1 ESA1

Page 1 of 1

4/12/2013

Table E-1East Street Area 1-North and East Street Area 1-South - Well Locations analyzed for Chloroform and Bromodichloromethane

Final LNAPL Volatilization Assessment Report - April 2013East Street Area 1-North and East Street Area 1-SouthGeneral Electric Company - Pittsfield, Massachusetts(Results are presented in parts per million, ppm)

Sample ID: ES1-8 ES1-8 ES1-14 ES1-14 ES1-14 ESA1N-52 ESA1N-52 ESA1N-52Parameter Date Collected: 04/02/02 10/16/02 04/03/02 10/16/02 04/02/03 04/03/02 10/17/02 04/03/03Volatile OrganicsBromodichloromethane ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050)Chloroform ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050)

Sample ID: ESA1S-31R ESA1S-31R ESA1S-33 ES1-13R ES1-13R ES1-13R ES1-13R ESA1S-72RParameter Date Collected: 04/18/12 10/31/12 04/01/03 04/20/10 10/21/10 04/12/11 10/11/11 10/06/05Volatile OrganicsBromodichloromethane ND(0.0010) 0.0021 [0.0020] ND(0.0050) ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0050) [ND(0.0050)]Chloroform 0.011 0.028 [0.025] ND(0.0050) ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0050) [ND(0.0050)]

Sample ID: ESA1S-72R ESA1S-72R ESA1S-72R ESA1S-72R ESA1S-72R ESA1S-72R ESA1S-72R GMA1-6Parameter Date Collected: 04/04/06 10/23/07 04/17/08 10/22/09 04/08/10 10/10/11 04/18/12 04/09/02Volatile OrganicsBromodichloromethane ND(0.0050) [ND(0.0050)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) 0.0013 ND(0.0050)Chloroform ND(0.0050) [ND(0.0050)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) [ND(0.0010)] ND(0.0010) 0.017 ND(0.0050)

Sample ID: GMA1-6 GMA1-6 GMA1-6 GMA1-6 GMA1-6 GMA1-6 GMA1-6 GMA1-6Parameter Date Collected: 10/15/02 04/02/03 04/09/04 10/13/05 04/04/06 10/23/07 04/17/08 10/22/09Volatile OrganicsBromodichloromethane ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010)Chloroform ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0050) ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010)

Sample ID: GMA1-6 GMA1-6 GMA1-6Parameter Date Collected: 04/14/10 10/11/11 04/20/12Volatile OrganicsBromodichloromethane ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010)Chloroform ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010) ND(0.0010)

Notes:1. This table presents all results for bromodichloromethane and chloroform in groundwater from East Street Area 1-North and East Street Area 1-South.2. ND = Analyte was not detected. The number in parentheses is the associated reporting limit.3. Where duplicate samples were taken the duplicate result is indicated in brackets.

East Street Area 1 - South



East Street Area 1 - North


G:\GE\GE_Pittsfield_CD_GMA_1\Reports and Presentations\ESA1S VI Report Fall 2012\Attachment E (Chloro-Bromo Pitts)\0861311214_Atta E_ESA1S VI - Chloroform-Bromo Detects_All GMAs.xlsx Page 1 of 1 4/12/2013

Table E-2GMA 1 - Well Locations with Detections of Chloroform and Bromodichloromethane


GMA 1 detections > 60 feet from water lines

East Street Area 2 - SouthSample ID: 3-6C-EB-14 17A 17C F-1 GMA1-4 GMA1-4 GMA1-4 GMA1-11 ESA1S-31R ESA1S-72R

Parameter Date Collected: 04/11/08 03/26/90 03/26/90 03/22/90 10/09/03 04/06/04 10/05/04 03/27/03 10/31/12 04/18/12

Bromodichloromethane NA NA NA NA 0.00089 J NA NA NA 0.0021 [0.0020] 0.0013Chloroform 0.00064 J 0.0010 J 0.0040 J 0.0020 J 0.0089 0.0057 0.0041 J 0.0040 J 0.028 [0.025] 0.017

Sample ID: LSSC-08I LSSC-16S LSSC-16S LSSC-16S LSSC-16S LSSC-16S LSSC-16S LSSC-16S RF-03D RF-16Parameter Date Collected: 04/10/03 10/05/05 04/06/06 10/17/07 04/08/08 10/26/09 10/07/11 04/11/12 04/17/12 04/08/03

Bromodichloromethane NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NAChloroform 0.43 0.0028 J 0.0027 J 0.00081 J 0.00048 J 0.0013 0.0014 0.00088 J 0.0039 0.026

Notes:1. This table presents only the results for groundwater samples from GMA 1 in which bromodichloromethane and/or chloroform was detected.2. NA = Not Analyzed. 3. Where duplicate samples were taken the duplicate result is indicated in brackets.4. "J" indicates the concentration was estimated.

GMA 1 detections < 60 feet from water lines


Volatile Organics

Volatile Organics

East Street Area 2 - North East Street Area 1 - South

Lyman Street Area 30s Complex




Sample ID: 002A 016C-R 039B 089D-R 51-14 51-14 51-14 51-14 51-14 51-14 51-14Parameter Date Collected: 11/17/00 04/27/05 10/20/99 04/26/05 04/23/02 10/07/04 10/20/05 05/02/08 04/22/10 10/21/11 04/17/12

Bromodichloromethane NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.0014 J NA 0.00075 JChloroform 0.014 0.00064 J 0.0030 J 0.024 0.0034 J 0.0019 J 0.011 0.0039 0.031 J 0.0016 0.014

Notes:1. This table presents only the results for groundwater samples from GMA 3 in which bromodichloromethane and/or chloroform was detected.2. NA = Not Analyzed. 3. "J" indicates the concentration was estimated.

GMA 3 detections > 60 feet from water linesUnkamet Brook Area Unkamet Brook Area


Volatile Organics




Sample ID: GMA4-6 GMA4-6 GMA4-6 GMA4-6 GMA4-6 GMA4-6 GMA4-6 GMA4-9 GMA4-9 H78B-15 H78B-15 H78B-15 H78B-15 H78B-16 H78B-16 H78B-16 H78B-16Parameter Date Collected: 04/21/08 04/16/09 10/12/10 04/12/11 10/18/11 04/10/12 10/16/12 10/07/09 10/22/12 11/09/06 10/23/08 10/09/09 10/16/12 04/22/08 10/05/09 10/12/11 10/19/12

Bromodichloromethane NA 0.00018 J NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NAChloroform 0.0030 0.0032 0.0024 [0.0024] 0.0023 0.00040 J [0.00040 J] 0.00042 J 0.00098 J [0.0013] 0.0014 J 0.0013 0.0049 0.00021 J 0.00013 J 0.00019 J 0.00014 J 0.00028 J 0.00016 J [0.00017 J] 0.0013

Sample ID: GMA4-2 GMA4-2 H78B-17R H78B-17R H78B-17R H78B-17R H78B-17R H78B-17R H78B-17R H78B-17R H78B-17R H78B-17RParameter Date Collected: 04/22/02 11/10/03 04/19/02 10/02/02 04/23/03 11/06/03 04/29/04 10/13/05 04/17/06 04/22/08 10/05/09 06/09/10

Bromodichloromethane NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NAChloroform 0.0026 J 0.00074 J 0.0086 0.017 0.0049 J 0.044 0.088 0.11 0.070 0.033 0.022 0.012 J

Notes:1. This table presents only the results for groundwater samples from GMA 4 in which bromodichloromethane and/or chloroform was detected.2. NA = Not Analyzed. 3. Where duplicate samples were taken the duplicate result is indicated in brackets.4. "J" indicates the concentration was estimated.

GMA 4 detections > 60 feet from water lines

Hill 78 Remainder

Hill 78 RemainderGMA 4 detections < 60 feet from water lines

Volatile Organics

Volatile Organics

X

X

X

X

X

X X

X

XX

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

XX

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X X X

X

XX

X

X X

X

XX

X

X

X

X

X

X

XX

X

X

X

XXX

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

XX

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

G

T

T

T

T

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

GG

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

G

G

G

G

G

E

E

S

S

TS

S

S

G

002A

3-6C-EB-14

016C-R

039B

78-4

089D-R

GMA2-2

GMA4-6

GMA4-9

H78B-15

H78B-1617A

17C

F-1

GMA1-4

GMA1-11

ESA1S-31RESA1S-72R

LSSC-08ILSSC-16S

RF-03D

RF-16

51-14

GMA4-2

H78B-17R

IMA

GE

S:

XR

EFS

: B

3121

5X00

Xre

f_w

ater

-fire

PR

OJE

CTN

AM

E:

----

WELL LOCATIONS WITH DETECTIONS OFCHLOROFORM AND

BROMODICHLOROMETHANE

CIT

Y:

Syr

acus

e

GR

OU

P: E

nvC

AD

D

B:

DM

W, R

.ALL

EN

, A.S

chill

ing

LD

: A

.Sch

illin

g

LYR

:ON

=*;O

FF=R

EF,

(FR

Z)

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANYPITTSFIELD, MASSACHUSETTS

FINAL LNAPL VOLATILIZATION ASSESSMENT REPORT

FIGURE

E-1

LEGEND:

DEMOLISHED BUILDING

POTABLE WATER LINE

FIRE PROTECTION LINE

WELLS WITHIN 60 FEET FROM WATER LINE IN WHICHCHLOROFORM AND/OR BROMODICHLOROMETHANEHAS BEEN DETECTED

WELLS BEYOND 60 FEET FROM WATER LINE IN WHICHCHLOROFORM AND/OR BROMODICHLOROMETHANEHAS BEEN DETECTED