SI Report March 2012 - Vermont on behalf of Bourne’s Inc. of Morrisville, ... The hand auger borings were focused around the AST on the west side of the Site and beneath the AST

P.O. Box 189 Waterbury, Vermont 05676

Tel: (802) 244-5051 Fax: (802) 244-8505

WSE No. 2110288

Phase (check one) Type (check one)

Site Investigation Report Work Scope Corrective Action Feasibility Investigation Technical Report Corrective Action Plan PCF Reimbursement Request Corrective Action Summary Report General Correspondence Operations and Monitoring Report

Report March 2012

SITE INVESTIGATION REPORT

Bourne’s Bulk Fuel Storage Facility 1983 Waterbury-Stowe Road Waterbury, Vermont

SMS # 2011-4145

Prepared For: Vermont Agency of Natural Resources Mr. Ashley Desmond 103 South Main Street / West Building Waterbury, VT 05671-0404 and, Mr. Peter Bourne, President Bourne’s Energy, Inc. P.O. Box 549, 72 Lower Main Street Morrisville, VT 05661

Bourne’s Former Bulk Fuel Facility Waterbury, VT

i Weston & Sampson

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................................................... i 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 SCOPE OF WORK ......................................................................................................................... 2

3.0 LOCATION AND BACKGROUND DESCRIPTION .................................................................. 3

3.1 General Description ................................................................................................................ 3

4.0 HISTORICAL STUDIES ................................................................................................................... 4

4.1 2010 Test Pit Investigation and Hand Auger Borings ............................................................ 4

5.0 FIELD SAMPLING PROGRAM ................................................................................................... 5

5.1 Utility Clearance and Health and Safety Plan ........................................................................ 5

5.2 Soil Sampling and Groundwater Monitoring Well Installation .............................................. 5

5.3 Site Survey and Groundwater Elevations ............................................................................... 7

5.4 Groundwater Quality Results ................................................................................................. 8

5.5 Quality Assurance / Quality Control (QA/QC) ...................................................................... 9

6.0 RECEPTOR ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................. 11

7.0 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL .................................................................................................... 12

7.1 Site Geology ......................................................................................................................... 12

7.2 Groundwater Flow ................................................................................................................ 12

7.3 Contamination Distribution .................................................................................................. 13

7.4 Estimated Amount of Contamination ................................................................................... 14

7.5 Contaminant Fate and Transport .......................................................................................... 15

8.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................ 16

9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................................. 19

10.0 LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 20

11.0 COMMON ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................. 21


ii Weston & Sampson

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Site Locus Map Figure 2 Site Plan Figure 3 Soil Contaminant Distribution Plan Figure 4 Geologic Cross Section A-A’ Figure 5 Groundwater Contour Plan Figure 6 Groundwater Contaminant Distribution Plan

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Soil Sampling Analytical Results Table 2 Groundwater Elevations Table 3 Groundwater Sampling Analytical Results Table 4 Estimated Amounts of Contaminated Soils and Fuel-Oil

Impact to Subsurface Soils Table 5 Groundwater and Contaminant Transport Velocities

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Site Photographs Appendix B Boring Logs and Well Completion Logs Appendix C Laboratory Reports


Weston & Sampson 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Weston & Sampson Engineers, Inc. (Weston & Sampson) has prepared this Site Investigation (SI)

Report on behalf of Bourne’s Inc. of Morrisville, Vermont for the former bulk fuel facility located at

1983 Waterbury-Stowe Road (Route 100) in Waterbury, Vermont (hereinafter referred to as “Site”, see

Figures 1 and 2). Photographs of the Site are included as Appendix A.

The bulk fuel facility was officially decommissioned in 2010 but prior to removing the above ground

storage tanks (ASTs) Weston & Sampson conducted a limited field investigation via hand auger soil

borings and test pit excavations to understand potential environmental impacts that may persist at the

Site. No analytical laboratory samples were collected during the 2010 limited Site investigation but

field screenings and visual observations concluded that fuel-oil contamination exists in the subsurface.

Weston & Sampson prepared a letter report dated August 5, 2010 which summarized the findings of

the test pit and hand auger investigation.

Based on the findings of Weston & Sampson’s limited Site investigation the Vermont Department of

Environmental Conservation (VTDEC) Sites Management Section (SMS) issued a First Letter dated

January 21, 2011 and assigned this property the identification number #2011-4145. This SI Report has

been prepared to summarize the work performed and present findings and recommendations for the

Site.


2 Weston & Sampson

2.0 SCOPE OF WORK

Weston & Sampson conducted this field investigation in accordance with the VTDEC approved Work

Scope and Cost Estimate, dated April 14, 2011. The goal of the recent subsurface investigation is as

follows:

Collect data to further define the vertical and horizontal extent of fuel-oil contamination in soil

within the Site property boundaries.

Determine if groundwater has been impacted by fuel-oil contamination and, if so, determine the need for long-term treatment and/or monitoring.

Assess the potential for contaminant impact to all nearby sensitive receptors.

The following scope of services was performed during this Site Investigation:

Task 1.0 Preparation of a Work Scope and Cost Estimate

Task 2.0 Prepare a Site Health and Safety Plan

Task 3.0 Utility Clearances

Task 4.0 Soil Borings and Groundwater Monitoring Well Installation

Task 5.0 Groundwater Gauging, Sampling and Analyses

Task 7.0 Survey Groundwater Monitoring Wells and Surface Water

Task 8.0 Prepare a Summary Report

The locations of all existing investigation activities are presented on Figure 2. The above referenced

scope of work has been completed and the results are provided in the following sections.


3 Weston & Sampson

3.0 LOCATION AND BACKGROUND DESCRIPTION

3.1 General Description

The Site is located on the west side of Waterbury-Stowe Road (Route 100) in the town of Waterbury,

Vermont. The Site is bordered to the north, south and west by open fields that generally slope down to

the east and southeast. The Site is bordered to the east by Route 100 and wooded land beyond that. An

unnamed stream crosses underneath Route 100 immediately northeast of the Site and flows south-

southeast.

The Site was decommissioned in 2010 and is currently unoccupied; however, a garage

building/loading rack remains (see Figure 2). The loading rack is enclosed in a 3-sided building that is

open on the east side facing Route 100. The eastern side of the building is accessed via a pad-locked

chain link fence. A small lagoon is located adjacent to the southern side of the garage building.

According to the Site owner the clay-lined lagoon existed when they purchased the property and while

the Site was operational the lagoon was used as a precautionary containment measure should any oil

spill or leak from the tanks occur. A concrete pad resides at the highest topographical point at the Site

and is oriented along the western property boundary. The existing concrete pad is associated with a

former 30,000 gallon AST (AST-1). Six (6) concrete footings remain immediately north of the garage

building that is associated with a former 20,000 gallon AST (AST-2). Both former ASTs historically

contained #2 fuel oil, the 20,000 gallon AST most likely contained diesel fuel at one time during the

operation of the facility. The 30,000 gallon AST was a split compartment tank (9,000/21,000 gallon)

and according to the Site owner, the smaller compartment periodically contained kerosene.

Photographs from the Site are provided in Appendix A. The following table presents general property

characteristics of the Site:

Property Characteristics

Owner: Bourne’s Energy, Inc. Site Name: Waterbury Bulk Fuel Facility Property Address: 1983 Waterbury Stowe Road, Waterbury, VT Latitude / Longitude: 44 21' 37" North / 72 43' 59" West Elevation: 592’ +/- above sea level

Utilities: No on-Site water, septic, heat or hot water. Existing below ground electrical power.

Building / Structures: Garage/loading rack


4 Weston & Sampson

4.0 HISTORICAL STUDIES

4.1 2010 Test Pit Investigation and Hand Auger Borings

Weston & Sampson excavated 6 test pits throughout the Site on June 15, 2010 prior to

decommissioning the bulk fuel facility. Bourne’s provided the backhoe and operator. Test pits were

opened for soil evaluation and all materials were put back in place. Soil samples were screened at

various depths (generally 0-1’, 2-3’, 3-4’ and 5’) for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) with a photo-

ionization detector (PID) instrument using a jar-headspace technique. Samples were also observed for

the presence of fuel-oil odors and staining. One (1) test pit was excavated through the gravel floor of

the existing garage building and the remaining test pits were excavated in the front parking area.

Additionally, 8 hand auger soil borings were advanced in locations not accessible with the backhoe.

The hand auger borings were focused around the AST on the west side of the Site and beneath the AST

on the north side of the Site.

Soils observed at the Site during the test pit and hand auger investigation were impacted by fuel oil.

Contamination was present beneath the garage building and throughout the gravel area east, extending

towards Route 100. Overall concentrations ranged from <1 to 179 parts-per-million volume (ppmv). In

general, the highest levels of VOCs were observed at a depth of 3-5’; however, several locations

identified elevated VOCs at a depth of >5’ in the base of the test pits. Therefore, the vertical extent

could not be determined with the reach of the backhoe. Groundwater was generally encountered at 3-4’

during the test pit activities, no sheens or LNAPL was observed.


5 Weston & Sampson

5.0 FIELD SAMPLING PROGRAM

This section outlines the recent field sampling that was conducted to obtain data for evaluating risk and

decision-making related to the release of fuel-oil contamination to the subsurface.

5.1 Utility Clearance and Health and Safety Plan

Prior to conducting subsurface sampling activities all locations were marked and utility clearance was

performed that included notifying DigSafe. The Site owner provided a precision utility locator that was

used to mark out a subsurface electrical conduit leading from a utility pole south of the Site to the

garage building.

A Site-specific Health and Safety Plan (HASP) was prepared in accordance with Weston & Sampson’s

corporate Health & Safety Program and with consideration of the guidelines under the federal

Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency

Response (29 CFR 1910.120), Safety and Health Regulations for Construction (29 CFR 1926.65) and

the Vermont Occupational Safety and Health Administration (VOSHA). The HASP focused

specifically on risks associated with trained workers performing a subsurface investigation. The HASP

was on Site during the field investigation work and discussed with the investigation team members at

the tail-gate kickoff meeting.

5.2 Soil Sampling and Groundwater Monitoring Well Installation

On June 14, 2011 ENPRO Services, Inc. (ENPRO) performed soil borings and monitoring well

installations under subcontract and oversight by Weston & Sampson. Borings were advanced with a

track-mounted AMS Power Probe 9600 Series direct push drill rig. Soil samples were collected

continuously with a 48” MacroCore sampler with dedicated polyethylene liners. All reusable sampling

equipment on the drill rig was decontaminated between borings with a mixture of Alconox detergent

and water.

A total of 12 borings were advanced throughout the Site of which 6 were completed as 1” PVC

monitoring wells. Boring locations were distributed throughout the Site to investigate previously

identified areas of concern and to determine the extent and magnitude of subsurface contamination;

soil boring and monitoring well locations are shown on Figure 2. Photo documentation of the soil


6 Weston & Sampson

boring investigation is included in Appendix A and soil boring and monitoring well logs are provided

in Appendix B.

All soil samples were field screened to evaluate evidence of oil or hazardous material (OHM) by visual

observation and by jar-headspace field screening for VOCs using a PID equipped with a 10.6 eV lamp

calibrated with a 100 ppmv isobutylene standard. The results of the field screening are shown on the

Boring Logs (Appendix B).

One (1) soil sample was collected from each monitoring well location at the depth of greatest visual or

olfactory evidence of contamination. A total of 6 soil samples were collected and sent under chain-of-

custody to Endyne Laboratories in Williston, Vermont. All of the soil samples were analyzed for

VOCs, and total petroleum hydrocarbons - diesel range organics (TPH-DRO). The analytical results

for VOCs were compared to the Investigation and Remediation of Contaminated Properties Procedure

(IROCPP) “Industrial” Soil Screening Values (SSVs) and TPH-DRO was used to document the type

and quantity of fuel oil that was found to impact the subsurface. A summary of subsurface soil results

is presented in Table 1 and complete laboratory reports are provided in Appendix C.

The total depth of the soil borings ranged from 8’ to 12’; each boring was terminated within the first

few feet of competent native clay material. The approximate vertical and horizontal limits of fuel-oil

impacted subsurface soil at the Site can be seen on Figure 3 (Soil Contaminant Distribution Plan) and

Figure 4 (Geologic Cross Section A-A’). The soil stratigraphy is characteristic of: 0-4’ (sandy fill); 4-

6’ (silty sand and clay); and below 6’ (clay). Groundwater was encountered between 1.3 to 3.8’ (see

Table 2).

There was visual and olfactory observations of fuel-oil contaminated soil in most of the recently

installed soil borings (MW-102 and MW-104 through MW-111) and PID results ranged from <1 to

417 ppmv throughout the Site, the highest headspace reading of 417 ppmv was detected at MW-105

(adjacent to the southeast corner of the garage building) at a depth of approximately 5’. This sample

contained a sheen and was collected in the vicinity of the water table.


7 Weston & Sampson

Naphthalene: Of the 6 soil samples collected, 2 had concentrations of naphthalene above the

Industrial SSV of 18,000 ug/kg; MW-107 (1.5 to 2.2’) at 33,300 ug/kg and MW-109 (1.5 to 2.9’) at

20,300 ug/kg. Several other VOCs were detected in each of the 6 soil samples but all concentrations

were below the Industrial SSVs.

Total VOCs: Total VOCs are not regulated; however, this value provides a good overview of the

contaminant levels in the subsurface soils. Total VOCs were detected in all 6 samples with

concentrations ranging from 25,495 ug/kg at MW-111 (4.0 to 4.9’) to 108,660 ug/kg at MW-107 (1.5

to 2.2’).

TPH-DRO: As shown on Table 1, all 6 soil samples detected TPH-DRO with concentrations

ranging from 499 mg/kg in MW-111 (4-4.9’) to 28,900 mg/kg in MW-107 (1.5-2.2’). The TPH-DRO

hydrocarbon range was found to be between C10 to C24 that is fairly characteristic of #2 heating oil,

diesel fuel and kerosene, all of which have been stored at the bulk fuel facility.

Review of this analytical data set in Table 1 indicates the highest concentration of contamination in

soil was detected at MW-107 which is located within the footprint of the former 20,000 gallon AST

(AST-2) along the northern edge of the garage building; whereas the lowest concentrations of

contaminants in subsurface soil samples were detected at MW-111, located directly adjacent to Route

100 near the northeast corner of the Site. Based on overall field observations the western upgradient

side of the Site has relatively low levels of fuel-oil impact as compared to the central and eastern

portions of the Site. The approximate vertical and horizontal limits of fuel-oil impacted subsurface soil

at the Site can be seen on Figure 3 (Soil Contaminant Distribution Plan) and Figure 4 (Geologic Cross

Section A-A’).

5.3 Site Survey and Groundwater Elevations

A transit survey of the recently installed monitoring wells and nearby surface water was conducted by

Weston & Sampson and all elevations are referenced to a temporary benchmark established at an

elevation of 100.00’. Depth to groundwater is shallow and on July 21, 2011 was found to range from

1.29’ at MW-104 just downgradient from the lagoon to 3.76’ at MW-111 located in the northeast


8 Weston & Sampson

corner of the Site (refer to Table 2). Based on groundwater elevation measurements throughout the

Site groundwater generally flows to the east toward Route 100 and the stream; the stream flows to the

south. A groundwater contour plan with the inferred groundwater flow direction is presented as Figure

5.

5.4 Groundwater Quality Results

Following installation, each well was developed to remove suspended fines and facilitate hydraulic

connectivity with the surrounding aquifer. Slight sheens and moderate odors were observed in MW-

104, MW-105, MW-107 and MW-109 during the well development activities.

On July 21, 2011 Weston & Sampson returned to the Site to gauge the groundwater monitoring wells

to measure the depth to water and the potential presence of separate-phase fuel oil floating on the water

table also known as a light non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL); no LNAPL was detected in any of the

wells. During both Site visits (June 14 and July 21, 2011) it was observed that the surface water level

in the lagoon fluctuates and was close to being completely dry during our Site visit in July 2011.

On July 21, 2011 Weston & Sampson collected laboratory analytical samples from each of the recently

installed groundwater monitoring wells, the lagoon and the existing recovery well (RW-1) located

inside the garage building. All groundwater samples from the recently installed monitoring wells were

collected in general accordance with the EPA Region 1 Low-Flow groundwater sampling procedures.

A total of eight (8) aqueous samples were collected and analyzed for VOCs and TPH-DRO. All sample

containers were filled and then placed in a cooler with ice and transported to Endyne Laboratories by

courier under standard chain-of-custody procedures.

The analytical results for the groundwater samples collected were compared to the Vermont

Groundwater Enforcement Standards (VGES). A summary of the groundwater analytical results can be

seen on Table 3 and the complete lab report is provided in Appendix C.

Total VOCs: Total VOCs were detected in all monitoring wells and RW-1. No VOCs were detected

in the lagoon water sample. Total VOCs ranged from 1.6 ug/L at RW-1 located inside the garage

building to 687 ug/L at MW-107 located to the north where the former AST-2 was located. A total

VOC concentration contour map is presented as Figure 5.


9 Weston & Sampson

Benzene: Concentrations of benzene were detected above the VGES (5 ug/L) in 3 groundwater

monitoring wells (MW-105, -107 and -111) ranging from 5.6 ug/L at MW-111 to 8.5 ug/L at MW-107.

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzenes (TMB): Concentrations of 1,2,4-TMB were detected above the VGES (5

ug/L) in all 6 groundwater monitoring wells ranging from 9.8 ug/L at MW-104 to 157 ug/L at MW-

107.

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzenes (TMB): Concentrations of 1,3,5-TMB were detected at or above the

VGES (4 ug/L) in all 6 groundwater monitoring wells ranging from 4.0 ug/L at MW-104 to 53.3 ug/L

at MW-107.

Naphthalene: Concentrations of naphthalene were detected above the VGES (20 ug/L) in all 6

groundwater monitoring wells ranging from 32.9 ug/L at MW-104 to 261 ug/L at MW-109.

TPH-DRO: Concentrations of TPH-DRO were detected in all 6 groundwater monitoring wells

ranging from 1.93 mg/L at MW-102 to 252 mg/L at MW-107. TPH-DRO was detected in RW-1 at

33.4 mg/L and was not detected in the lagoon water sample. The TPH-DRO hydrocarbon range varied

in location with an overall window between C6 to C28 that is fairly characteristic of #2 heating oil,


Other: All of the monitoring wells detected a number of other VOCs above the reporting limits (see

Table 3) but below respective VGES standards.

5.5 Quality Assurance / Quality Control (QA/QC) The usability of the field and laboratory soil and groundwater data was evaluated to provide minimum

criteria and performance standards for the collection and analyses of data to be used at this Site for risk

assessment, background determinations, remediation and/or Site closure. The criteria for data usability

are considered adequate if sampling and laboratory procedures are consistent with the following

criteria:


10 Weston & Sampson

1. The laboratory provides the following certification:

Chain-of-custody accurately describes condition of samples received. Compliance with all method QA/QC requirements and performance standards; and, Analytical methods were used in accordance with the Work Scope and Cost Estimate.

2. The data validation process defines the criteria that constitute data quality that include:

Chain-of-custody Preservation and holding times Instrument calibrations Preparation blanks Matrix spikes/matrix spike duplicates (MS/MSD) Laboratory control samples Required quantitation limits (sensitivity of chemical measurements) Sample analysis and preparation methods

The data quality assessment process ensures that the type, quantity and quality of environmental data

to be used in decision-making are defensible; and, quality criteria required for the data, specifically

precision, accuracy, representativeness, completeness, comparability and sensitivity (PARCCS) are

achieved. Based on our review of the analytical report, the data is acceptable for use in this report to

support the conclusions and recommendations presented.


11 Weston & Sampson

6.0 RECEPTOR ANALYSIS

A potential receptor survey was conducted to identify risks associated with the subsurface

contaminants observed on Site.

The closest drinking water supply well that was identified on the State of Vermont’s interactive Well

Locator database is located approximately 4,900’ northeast of the Site and is unlikely to be affected by

the fuel-oil release. A windshield survey of the surrounding properties was conducted and no private

water supply wells were observed.

Known receptors of this fuel-oil release included the subsurface soil and groundwater on Site and

possibly to the east in the direction of groundwater flow. The stream located north and east of the Site

likely acts as a hydraulic barrier and represents a presumed limit for subsurface contaminant migration

in that direction. During our previous pre-decommissioning work in June 2010, we advanced 3 soil

borings along the west bank of the stream to the east of Route 100. This work included a walk along

the west bank of the stream for visual observations such as oil sheens emanating from the bank into the

water in addition to the collection of soils from 3 locations between 0-3’, into the groundwater table.

Soil samples were screened for VOCs with a PID using a jar-headspace technique. Samples were also

observed for the presence of petroleum odors and staining. In the 3 locations screened, no evidence of

petroleum contamination was observed in any of the soil samples collected; no sheens, odors or VOC

concentrations in excess of 1 ppmv was observed. Based on this data, no evidence has been found to

date that suggests impact to the stream.


12 Weston & Sampson

7.0 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL

This conceptual model has been prepared to help identify the sources of contamination, their ability to

migrate in the subsurface and potential to adversely affect a potential receptor.

7.1 Site Geology

The Site consists of overburden sand and gravel fill material underlain by native silt and competent

clay. The soil stratigraphy is characteristic of: 0-4’ (sandy fill); 4-6’ (silty sand and clay); and below 6’

(clay). The native clay appears to be serving as a confining layer thereby supporting a limited

overburden aquifer and limiting the downward vertical migration of fuel oil.

According to the Surficial Geologic Map of Vermont (Doll, 1970), the soils underlying the Site are

identified as lake bottom sediments, specifically silt, silty clay and clay. This material is consistent

with field observations made during test pit and Geoprobe observations. The soils identified in the

subsurface investigations are predominantly described as sand and gravel fill directly overlying silt and

clay. According to the Geologic Map of Vermont (Doll 1961), the bedrock is mapped as the

Ottauquechee Formation, black carbonaceous phyllite or schist containing interbeds of massive

quartzite. No bedrock was encountered during this subsurface drilling program.

7.2 Groundwater Flow

The direction of groundwater flow was calculated to flow from west to east (see Figure 5).

Groundwater flow was further evaluated along the eastern downgradient side of the Site by reviewing

the soil stratigraphy from the boring logs MW-109, SB-110 and MW-111. The groundwater velocity

beneath the Site was calculated using: 1) a range of hydraulic conductivities of 1.0 ft/day for the

groundwater at the water table in more permeable fine to medium sand at MW-109 and 0.001 ft/day

for the groundwater immediately below in the less permeable silty/fine sand/clay; 2) a horizontal

hydraulic gradient of 0.049 ft/ft that is the average between the linear paths between MW-102/MW-

109 and MW-107/MW-111; and 3) an effective porosity of 0.2 that is the average between silty clay

and fine to medium sand (ref. EPA Bioscreen, 1996).


13 Weston & Sampson

365

iKVGW

Estimated Groundwater Flow Velocity

Groundwater Location

K (ft/day)

i (ft/ft)

(--)

VGW

(ft/yr)

More permeable soils near water table 1.0 0.049 0.2 ~90

Less permeable soils below water table 0.001 0.049 0.2 < 1

where: VGW = groundwater seepage velocity (feet/yr)

K = hydraulic conductivity (feet/day) i = hydraulic gradient (feet/feet)

η = effective porosity

7.3 Contamination Distribution

The characterization efforts conducted to date indicate that groundwater and subsurface soil are

impacted with fuel-oil contamination. The approximate vertical and horizontal limits of fuel-oil

impacted subsurface soil at the Site can be seen on Figure 3. Because the Site is currently not in use

and has been decommissioned, the potential for a future fuel-oil release has been mitigated.

Based on overall field observations the western upgradient side of the Site has relatively low levels of

fuel-oil impact as compared to the central and eastern portions of the Site. The concentrations of

contamination based on laboratory data in conjunction with field observations and groundwater

contour data, indicate that there are likely 2 primary release areas at the Site, one at the former 20,000

gallon AST (AST-2) and one at loading rack located in the garage building; both being adjacent to

each other.

East of the existing garage building the contamination extends from the northern property boundary to

the southern property boundary. Based on this information it is likely that subsurface contamination is

migrating off Site to the east. Several locations showed fuel-oil impact in the fill unit above the clay,

and relatively low concentrations within the first few feet in the clay. Based on these observations it

can be inferred that the clay unit beneath the Site is effectively reducing downward migration of

contamination. See the attached boring logs (Appendix B) for field screening results and associated

soil descriptions.


14 Weston & Sampson

At SB-100, located underneath the concrete pad near the northwest corner of the Site, no evidence of

contamination was observed. No evidence of odors or sheens were observed along the bank of the

stream east of Route 100.

7.4 Estimated Amount of Contamination

Weston & Sampson used the TPH-DRO soil data to estimate the amount of impacted soils, residual

contaminant mass and volume of TPH/Fuel Oil (see Figure 3 and Table 4). To derive the estimates,

the “average” values were calculated using TPH-DRO analytical data from the 6 soil samples; a unit

thickness of 4’; and an area of impact of 4,280 square feet. The “low” and “high” estimates used a

factor of 25% lower and higher that were applied to the “average” TPH-DRO concentration (7,863

mg/kg) and “average” unit thickness (4’). These results are offered as tool for framing the degree of oil

that has been released which is a mix of #2 heating oil, diesel fuel and kerosene.

Estimated Amounts of Contamination

Parameter Units Low Average High

volume of soil cu.yds. 476 634 793

mass of soil tons 713 951 1,189

mass of TPH/Fuel Oil pounds 8,038 14,289 22,327

volume of TPH/Fuel Oil gallons 1,160 2,063 3,223


15 Weston & Sampson

7.5 Contaminant Fate and Transport

Since there has been a release of fuel oil that has impacted the subsurface soil and groundwater,

Weston & Sampson estimated the velocity of contaminant transport via groundwater flow. Since there

was no LNAPL observed floating on the water table, there is no need to estimate LNAPL transport

velocity.

The subsurface soil characteristics, groundwater seepage velocity and chemical parameters governing

sorption were used to estimate the rate at which dissolved fuel-oil contaminants migrate. The migration

of dissolved-phase hydrocarbons occur at a rate which is less than the groundwater flow velocity.

These contaminant transport velocities are calculated in Table 5 and summarized below.

Estimated Transport Velocities

Parameter Low

Geometric Mean

High

(feet/year)

benzene <1 1.1 36

xylenes <1 <1 9.3

TMBs <1 <1 7.9

naphthalene <1 <1 3.3

groundwater <0.1 2.8 89

The velocity of dissolved-phase fuel-oil contamination is relatively low; however, the groundwater

wells along the downgradient eastern side of the Site have several compounds that exceed the VGES,

therefore it is likely that to some degree a plume extends off Site to the east. Since the flow velocity is

rather low, it is likely that natural attenuation mechanisms such as sorption and in-situ biodegradation

serve to minimize the length of the plume.


16 Weston & Sampson

8.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Based on the information obtained and data generated during this Site Investigation, and previous

assessment activities, we offer the following conclusions:

The Site is a former bulk fuel facility located at 1983 Waterbury-Stowe Road (Route 100) in

Waterbury, Vermont (see Figures 1 and 2). The facility was decommissioned in 2010 that included

removal of a 30,000 gallon split-compartment (9,000/21,000 gallons) AST (AST-1) and a 20,000

gallon AST (AST-2). Fuel-oil products that were stored included #2 heating oil, diesel fuel and

kerosene. A garage building still remains that enclosed the loading rack and provided an area

where one truck could be parked. The Site is currently unoccupied and not in use.

Throughout the facilities’ operational history, several small quantity fuel-oil spills have occurred;

the outcome of these spills was generally containment and surface clean up. However, it is reported

that one spill was significant enough to warrant the installation of a 36” diameter x 4’ deep

perforated corrugated metal recovery well (RW-1) in the center of the garage building. It’s reported

that separate-phase fuel oil/LNAPL had been actively removed from RW-1 in the past, but further

details of removal (quantities, dates, results) are not known.

Weston & Sampson performed a Site investigation which included the installation of 12 soil

borings throughout the Site of which 6 were completed as groundwater monitoring wells. The

results of the Site investigation revealed fuel-oil contamination in the subsurface soil and

groundwater. Contaminant concentrations in both matrices exceed Industrial SSVs for soils and

VGES for groundwater.

Based on overall field observations the western upgradient side of the Site has relatively low levels

of fuel-oil impact as compared to the central and eastern downgradient portions of the Site. The

approximate vertical and horizontal limits of fuel-oil impacted subsurface soil at the Site can be

seen on Figure 3. The soil stratigraphy is depicted on a geologic cross section (Figure 4) and is

characteristic of: 0-4’ (sandy fill); 4-6’ (silty sand and clay); and below 6’ (clay). Groundwater was

encountered between 1.3 to 3.8’ (see Table 2).

Six (6) soil samples were collected during the recent Site investigation (see Table 1); total VOCs

were detected in subsurface soils ranging from 25,495 ug/kg at MW-111 (4-4.9’) to 108,660 ug/kg


17 Weston & Sampson

at MW-107 (1.5-2.2’). Of the 6 soil samples collected, 2 of the soil samples detected

concentrations of naphthalene above the Industrial SSV of 18,000 ug/kg; MW-107 (1.5-2.2’) at

33,300 ug/kg and MW109 (1.5-2.9’) at 20,300 ug/kg. Several other fuel-oil related VOCs were

detected in each of the soil samples but all of the concentrations were below their respective

Industrial SSVs.

Concentrations of TPH in soil ranged from 499 mg/kg in MW-111 (4-4.9’) to 28,900 mg/kg in

MW-107 (1.5-2.2’).

Fuel-oil sheens and odors were observed with purge water from wells MW-104, -105, -107 and -

109; however, no LNAPL was encountered. Benzene was detected above the VGES in MW-105, -

107 and -111. Groundwater samples collected from “all” of the recently installed monitoring wells

detected VOC concentrations of 1,2,4-TMB, 1,3,5-TMB and naphthalene above applicable VGES

standards (see Table 3).

An aqueous sample collected from the recovery well (RW-1) located in the garage building

detected a TPH-DRO concentration of 33.4 mg/L; the lagoon sample did not report any

contaminants above the reporting limits.

Overall the TPH-DRO analyses detected a hydrocarbon range in soils between C10 to C24 and in

groundwater between C6 to C28. This hydrocarbon range is fairly characteristic of #2 heating oil,


The amount of fuel oil within the subsurface soils on Site is estimated between 1,160 to 3,223

gallons that has impacted a volume of soil between 476 to 793 cubic yards (or 713 to 1,189 tons).

For further details see Table 4.

East of the existing garage building the contamination extends from the northern property

boundary to the southern property boundary. Since the groundwater flow direction was calculated

to be flowing from west to east, it is likely that subsurface contamination is migrating off Site to

the east and under Route 100.

A cursory evaluation to help predict the mobility of the fuel oil (fate/transport) was performed with

supporting information furnished in Table 5. Groundwater flow velocity was estimated between <1


18 Weston & Sampson

to 89 feet/year with a geometric mean of 2.8 feet/year (see Figure 5). Select contaminants have

transport velocities between <1 to a high of 36 feet/year (see Table 5 and Figure 6). The low and

geometric mean of transport velocities for benzene, xylenes, TMBs and naphthalene are all less

than 5 feet/year. The highest rate is 36 feet/year for benzene; however, benzene was detected in

groundwater at relatively low concentrations (i.e. < 10 ug/L).

The velocity of dissolved-phase fuel-oil contamination is relatively low; however, the groundwater

wells along the downgradient eastern side of the Site have several compounds that exceed the

VGES; therefore, it is likely that to some degree a plume extends off Site to the east. The highest

concentration of naphthalene (261 ug/L) was detected in the downgradient well (MW-109) near the

southeast corner of the Site near Route 100 and the property line. Considering this as a potential

worst case situation, the transport velocity for naphthalene ranges between <1 to 3.3 feet/year.

Since the flow velocity is low, it is likely that natural attenuation mechanisms such as sorption and

in-situ biodegradation serve to minimize the length of the plume.

Known receptors of this fuel-oil release included the subsurface soil and groundwater on Site and

possibly to the east in the direction of groundwater flow. No evidence has been found to date that

suggests impact to the stream east of Route 100.


19 Weston & Sampson

9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

The soils beneath the Site are impacted with fuel-oil contamination; however, due to cost and

complexity compared to the relatively low risk posed to human health or ecological receptors under the

current use of the Site, Weston & Sampson does not feel that an evaluation of remediation alternatives

is necessary at this time. If the status of the Site is intended to change and/or development is to occur

then a remediation program would likely be warranted. Since the contamination is relatively shallow

then the most effective remedial action would be soil removal. Furthermore, since there is likely

contamination that has migrated off Site under Route 100 any future road work in the immediate

proximity of the Site may encounter contaminated soil.

Weston & Sampson recommends conducting quarterly groundwater monitoring for a period of one (1)

year to document water quality associated with the release of fuel oil at the Site.


20 Weston & Sampson

10.0 LIMITATIONS

This study was prepared exclusively for the use of Bourne’s Energy, Inc. and Vermont State Agency of

Natural Resources. The findings provided by Weston & Sampson in this report are based solely on the

information reported in this document. Future investigations, and/or information that were not

available to Weston & Sampson at the time of this investigation, may result in a modification of the

findings and recommendations stated in this report.

Should additional information become available concerning this Site or neighboring properties that

could directly impact the Site in the future; that information should be made available to Weston &

Sampson for review so, if necessary, conclusions and/or recommendations presented in this report may

be modified. The conclusions and/or recommendations of this report are based on: Site conditions

observed by Weston & Sampson personnel at the time of the investigations; and information provided

by the property owner. This report has been prepared in general accordance with accepted engineering

and environmental assessment practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made.

V:\Bournes VT\Waterbury\Reports\SI Report\SI Report March 2012.doc


21 Weston & Sampson

11.0 COMMON ACRONYMS

AAI EPA All Appropriate Inquiries

AHERA Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act

ANR Agency of Natural Resources

AST Aboveground Storage Tank

ASTM American Society for Testing Materials

BG Background

BGS Below Ground Surface

CARB California Air Resource Board

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CO Carbon Monoxide

COC Chain-of-Custody

CPAI Clay Point Associates, Inc.

CVRPC Central Vermont Regional Planning Commission

DO Dissolved Oxygen

DNAPL Dense non aqueous-phase liquid

DQO Data Quality Objectives

DRO Diesel Range Organics

DUP Duplicate

EDR Environmental Data Resources, Inc.

EM Electromagnetic Induction

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

ESA Environmental Site Assessment

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency

FD Floor Drain

FID Flame Ionization Detector

GC Gas Chromatograph

GIS Geographic Information Systems

GPS Global Positioning Systems

GPR Ground Penetrating Radar


22 Weston & Sampson

GRO Gasoline Range Organics

HASP Health and Safety Plan

HCL Hydrochloric Acid

HNO3 Nitric Acid

HREC Historical Recognized Environmental Condition

H2S Hydrogen Sulfide

H2SO4 Sulfuric Acid

HUD U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

IP Ionization Potential/Interface Probe

LCS Laboratory Control Sample

LBP Lead-Based Paint

LEL Lower Explosive Limit

LNAPL Light non aqueous-phase liquid

LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tank

MCL Maximum Contaminant Level

MDL Method Detection Limit

MS Mass Spectrometer / Matrix Spike

MSD Matrix Spike Duplicate

MW Monitoring Well

NAPL Non aqueous-phase liquid

NT Not tested

O2 Oxygen

OHM Oil and Hazardous Material

PAH Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbon

PARCCS Precision, Accuracy, Representativeness, Comparability,

Completeness and Sensitivity

PAT Proficiency Analytical Testing Program

PEL Permissible Exposure Limit

PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyl

PCM Phase Contrast Microscopy

PID Photoionization Detector


23 Weston & Sampson

PLM Polarized Light Microscopy

PRG EPA Region 9 Preliminary Remediation Goal

PUL Precision Utility Location

PVC Polyvinyl Chloride

QA/QC Quality Assurance/Quality Control

QAPP Quality Assurance Project Plan

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

REC Recognized Environmental Condition

RF Radio Frequency

RL Reporting Limit

RPD Relative Percent Difference

SB Soil Boring

SED Sediment

SHWS Vermont State Hazardous Waste Site

SOP Standard Operating Procedure

SS Surficial Soil

S.U. Standard Unit

TEM Transmission Electron Microscopy

TOC Top of Casing

TPH Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons

TWA Time Weighted Average

USGS United States Geological Survey

UST Underground Storage Tank

VGES Vermont Groundwater Enforcement Standard

VLF Very Low Frequency

VOC Volatile Organic Compound

VOSHA Vermont Occupational Safety Health Administration

VTDEC Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation

VTDOH Vermont Department of Health

XRF X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzer


24 Weston & Sampson

UNITS

cm centimeter

g gram

kg kilogram

ft feet/foot

l liter

lin linear

m meter

mg milligram

mg/L milligrams-per liter or parts-per-million (liquid)

mg/kg milligrams-per-kilogram or parts-per-million (solid)

ppm parts-per-million

ppb parts-per-billion

ppmv parts-per-million volume (vapor)

sq square

ug/L micrograms-per liter or parts-per-billion (liquid)

ug/kg micrograms-per-kilogram or parts-per-billion (solid)

Weston &Sampson

FIGURES

FIGURE 1 SITE LOCUS MAP

FORMER BULK FUEL FACILITY

BOURNE’S ENERGY WATERBURY, VERMONT

V:\Bournes VT\Waterbury\Reports

SITE

Weston &Sampson

TABLES

MW-102 (1.3-2.1')

MW-104 (4-5.5')

MW-105 (5.2-5.8')

MW-107 (1.5-2.2')

MW-109 (1.5-2.9')

MW-111 (4-4.9')

6/14/2011 6/14/2011 6/14/2011 6/14/2011 6/14/2011 6/14/2011

Residential Industrial

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ug/Kg 1,900 9,300 < 360 < 1,320 < 1,160 < 1,600 < 1,360 < 4001,1,1-Trichloroethane ug/Kg 8,700,000 38,000,000 < 180 < 660 < 580 < 800 < 680 < 2001,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ug/Kg 560 2,800 < 360 < 1,320 < 1,160 < 1,600 < 1,360 < 4001,1,2-Trichloroethane ug/Kg 1,100 5,300 < 180 < 660 < 580 < 800 < 680 < 2001,1-Dichloroethane ug/Kg 3,300 17,000 < 180 < 660 < 580 < 800 < 680 < 2001,1-Dichloroethene ug/Kg 240,000 1,100,000 < 180 < 660 < 580 < 800 < 680 < 2001,1-Dichloropropene ug/Kg NS NS < 180 < 660 < 580 < 800 < 680 < 2001,2,3-Trichloropropane ug/Kg 5 95 < 360 < 1,320 < 1,160 < 1,600 < 1,360 < 4001,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ug/Kg 22,000 99,000 < 360 < 1,320 < 1,160 < 1,600 < 1,360 < 4001,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ug/Kg 62,000 2,600,000 7,300 26,900 10,800 32,300 26,200 6,6601,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ug/Kg 780,000 10,000,000 3,860 6,720 3,460 11,300 9,630 2,2904-Isopropyltoluene ug/Kg NS NS 1,280 2,710 1,220 2,390 2,760 583Ethylbenzene ug/Kg 5,400 27,000 237 755 1,130 2,590 1,390 754Isopropylbenzene ug/Kg NS NS 650 1,980 912 2,230 1,110 471Naphthalene ug/Kg 3,600 18,000 11,100 9,250 8,270 33,300 20,300 9,800n-Butylbenzene ug/Kg 3,900,000 51,000,000 2,440 4,130 2,360 4,710 4,860 1,100n-Propylbenzene ug/Kg 3,400,000 21,000,000 1,300 4,640 1,720 4,290 2,560 828s-Butylbenzene ug/Kg NS NS 1,400 3,210 1,590 2,750 1,780 609Xylenes, Total ug/Kg 630,000 2,700,000 611 9,190 3,350 12,800 6,380 2,400

Total VOCs ug/Kg NS NS 30,178 69,485 34,812 108,660 76,970 25,495

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH)

C10-C26 mg/Kg -- -- 5,370 1,300 1,790 28,900 9,320 499C26-C40 mg/Kg -- -- < 300 < 150 < 300 < 1,500 < 600 < 30C7-C10 mg/Kg -- -- < 300 < 150 < 300 < 1,500 < 600 < 30TPH mg/Kg -- -- 5,370 1,300 1,790 28,900 9,320 499Hydrocarbon Range -- -- -- C10 - C24 C10 - C22 C10 - C22 C10 - C22 C10 - C22 C10 - C22

JHS Field Screening Results ppmv -- -- 141 413 417 395 380 258GENERAL CHEMISTRY BY MOISTURE (%)Percent Solids % NA NA 85.4 85.1 91.8 82.1 86.0 78.9

Notes:

1. TPH-DRO concentrations are in units of parts-per-million (ppm) or milligrams-per-kilogram (mg/kg) on a dry weight basis.

2. VOCs are in units of parts-per-billion (ppb) or micrograms per kilogram (ug/kg) on a dry weight basis.

3. "NS" indicates that there is no standard listed in the current IROCPP SSVs.

4. Bold values indicate a detection above the method reporting limit.

5. Italicized non-detect values indicate that the reporting limit is greater than the regulatory guidelines.

6. Highlighted values indicate an exceedance of the Investigation and Remediation of Contaminated Properties Procedure (IROCPP) "Industrial" Soil Screening Values (SSVs).

V:\Bournes VT\Waterbury\Reports\SI Report\Tables\[Tables.xls]Table 5

TABLE 1SOIL SAMPLING ANALYTICAL RESULTS

Bournes EnergyWaterbury, Vermont

Sample ID

Sample Collection Date

AnalyteReporting Limit Units

IROCPP SSVs

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) Method 8260B

Method 8015B

Weston & Sampson

Shot IDRoad Box

Type

Transit Reading

(feet)

Shot Elevation

(feet)

Depth to Water (July 21, 2011)

(ft. bgs)

Depth to Water (July 21, 2011)

(ft. btoc)

Water Table Elevation

(feet)

BENCHMARK -- 3.26 100.00 -- -- --MW-102 TOC standpipe 103.26+1.18 104.44 3.33 5.72 98.72MW-102 GS -- 1.21 102.05 -- -- --

MW-104 TOC flush grade 4.16 99.10 1.29 0.94 98.16MW-104 GS -- 3.81 99.45 -- -- --


MW-107 TOC standpipe 2.16 101.10 1.64 4.37 96.73MW-107 GS -- 4.89 98.37 -- -- --



LAGOON WL -- 4.98 98.28 -- 0.00 98.28MANHOLE WL -- 4.84 98.42 -- -- --MANHOLE GS -- 4.01 99.25 -- 2.30 96.95MANHOLE T.D. -- 8.31 94.95 -- -- --

BROOK (E. RT. 100) -- 11.22 92.04 -- 0.00 92.04BROOK (W. RT. 100) -- 9.20 94.06 -- 0.00 94.06

BENCHMARK -- 3.26 100.00 -- -- --

NOTES:

1. Transit: height = 5.35' above ground surface; elevation = 103.26'.

2. Benchmark Elevation = 100' (corner of concrete footing associated with former AST immediately North of on-site building)


TABLE 2

Bournes Energy

Waterbury, Vermont

GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS

Weston & Sampson

MW- 102 MW-104 MW-105 MW-107 MW-109 MW-111Manhole (RW-1)

Lagoon

7/21/2011 7/21/2011 7/21/2011 7/21/2011 7/21/2011 7/21/2011 7/21/2011 7/21/2011

Analyte

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ug/L 5 33.8 9.8 129 157 64.0 32.2 < 1.0 < 1.01,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ug/L 4 18.6 4.0 47.1 53.3 26.1 25.2 1.6 < 1.04-Isopropyltoluene ug/L NS 2.5 < 1.0 11.6 7.6 6.2 < 5.0 < 1.0 < 1.0Acetone ug/L 700 130 < 10.0 < 50.0 < 50.0 < 20.0 < 50.0 < 10.0 < 20.0Benzene ug/L 5 < 1.0 < 1.0 5.8 8.5 3.6 5.6 < 1.0 < 1.0Ethylbenzene ug/L 700 2.9 3.8 35.6 29.7 5.8 20.6 < 1.0 < 1.0Isopropylbenzene ug/L NS 4.4 1.2 15.8 10.7 3.0 5.9 < 1.0 < 1.0Naphthalene ug/L 20 80.6 32.9 239 258 261 162 < 2.0 < 2.0n-Butylbenzene ug/L NS 4.0 < 1.0 17.6 13.9 8.7 5.0 < 1.0 < 1.0n-Propylbenzene ug/L NS 5.6 1.7 20.9 16.5 3.4 6.2 < 1.0 < 1.0s-Butylbenzene ug/L NS 2.4 < 1.0 11.8 6.4 3.1 < 5.0 < 1.0 < 1.0Total Xylenes ug/L 10,000 8.5 8.4 69.3 125 24.4 38.8 < 2.0 < 2.0

Total VOCs ug/L NS 293 62 604 687 406 302 1.6 ND

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH)C10-C26 DRO mg/L NS 1.75 9.70 18.4 247 13.9 4.42 33.4 < 0.40C26-C40 TPH mg/L NS < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40 < 8.0 < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.80 < 0.40C7-C10 TPH mg/L NS < 0.40 < 0.40 0.92 < 8.0 0.54 0.52 < 0.80 < 0.40TPH 1.93 9.7 19.3 252 14.4 4.94 34.1 <0.40Hydrocarbon Range -- -- C6 - C18 C10 - C24 C6 - C24 C6 - C22 C6 - C24 C6 - C20 C10 - C28 --

Sheen Observed During Sampling -- -- no yes yes yes yes no no noOdor Observed During Sampling -- -- no yes yes yes yes no no no

Notes:

1. TPH-DRO concentrations are in units of parts-per-million (ppm) or milligrams-per-liter (mg/L).

2. VOCs are in units of parts-per-billion (ppb) or micrograms-per-liter (ug/L).

3. "NS" indicates that there is no standard listed in the current VGES.

4. Bold values indicate a detection above the method reporting limit.

5. Italicized non-detect values indicate that the reporting limit is greater than the regulatory guidelines.

6. Highlighted values indicate an exceedance of the Vermont Groundwater Enforcement Standards (VGES).


Vermont Groundwater Enforcement

Standards (VGES)Method 8260B

Method 8015B

TABLE 3GROUNDWATER SAMPLING ANALYTICAL RESULTS


Sample ID

Sample Collection Date

Weston & Sampson

areaunit

thicknessvolume mass

bulk density

soil TPH concentration

specific gravity

separate phase

adsorbed phase

(sq.ft.) (ft) (cu.yds.) (tons) (kg/L) (mg/kg) (kg) (lbs) @15oC (gal) (gal)

3.0 476 713 1.7 5,897 3,645 8,038 0.83 -- 1,160representative of a "low" estimate (multiply avg. unit thickness and soil TPH concentration by 0.75)

4.0 634 951 1.7 7,863 6,480 14,289 0.83 -- 2,063representative of an "average" estimate. TPH is average concentration of 6 soil samples.

5.0 793 1,189 1.7 9,829 10,125 22,327 0.83 -- 3,223representative of a "high" estimate (multiply avg. unit thickness and soil TPH concentration by 1.25)

References

1. EPA Bioscreen, 1996.

2. Exxon/Mobil MSDS sheets, 2012.

3. API Publication 1628.


TABLE 4ESTIMATED AMOUNTS OF CONTAMINATED SOILS AND FUEL-OIL IMPACT TO SUBSURFACE SOILS


Product Type: No. 2 Fuel Oil/Diesel and some Kerosene

Source Area Soils Volume of TPH/Fuel Oil

Locationmass of TPH in soil

Notes

Oil Impacted Area On Site

4,280

Weston & Sampson

HYDROGEOLOGYHydraulic gradient (i)MW-107 to MW-111 96.73 95.34 1.39 rise (ft)

37.18 run (ft)0.04 (i) - slope (rise/run)

MW-102 to MW-109 98.72 94.42 4.30 rise70.91 run0.06 (i) - slope (rise/run)

0.049 (i) averagehydraulic conductivity (K) low 0.001 ft/day

high 1.0 ft/day

geometric mean 0.032 ft/dayhydraulic gradient (i) 0.049 ft/fteffective porosity () 0.20Groundwater Velocity (V seepage = Ki/ ) low 0.0002 ft/day 0.09 ft/year

geometric mean 0.008 ft/day 2.8 ft/yearhigh 0.25 ft/day 89 ft/year

CONTAMINANT FATE/TRANSPORTSorption Parameters benzene xylenes TMBs naphthalenecarbon/water sorption coefficient (Koc) 88.9 504 608 1,544

fraction of organic carbon in soil (Foc) 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002

soil water distribution coefficient (Kd = Koc * Foc) 0.18 1.01 1.22 3.09

soil bulk density (s) 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7Retardation Factor (R = 1 + Kd*s/) 2.5 9.6 11.3 27.2

Contaminant Transport Velocity (Vcoc = V seepage /R) low 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ft/day

geometric mean 0.003 0.001 0.001 0.000 ft/day

high 0.098 0.026 0.022 0.009 ft/day

low 0.036 0.009 0.008 0.003 ft/year

geometric mean 1.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 ft/year

high 36 9.3 7.9 3.3 ft/year

References1. EPA On-line Tools for Site Assessment Calculation, Ecosystems Research, Athens GA (2012).

2. EPA Region 9 RSLs - Chemical Specific Parameters, May 2012.

3. EPA Bioscreen, 1996.


GROUNDWATER AND CONTAMINANT TRANSPORT VELOCITIESTABLE 5


Weston & Sampson

Weston &Sampson

APPENDIX A

1

Bourne’s EnergyWaterbury, Vermont

Weston & Sampson

Photo #1

Drill Rig set up at MW-104

Edge of Lagoon

Photo #2 – Inside Garage Building

Loading Rack

SB-106 Location

Recovery Well (RW-1)

Photo #3

Garage Building

Lagoon

2

Bourne’s EnergyWaterbury, Vermont

Weston & Sampson

Photo #4

Example of Native Clay Material

Photo #5

Looking North from the Site

Route 100

Stream

Photo #6

Looking Southeast from the Site

Stream

Route 100

Weston &Sampson

APPENDIX B

Weston & Sampson SHEET: 1 of 1

ENGINEERS, INC. Project No.: 2110288.ACHKD BY: Kevin McAleer

BORING Co.: LOCATION: DATE START:FOREMAN: GROUND ELEV.: DATE END:WSE SCIENTIST: PVC ELEV.:

WELL DEPTH: NA DEPTH TO WATER:BORING DEPTH: 12' bgs DEPTH TO NAPL:SCREEN INTERVAL: NARISER INTERVAL: NASUMP INTERVAL: NA

DEPTH

(feet) No. PEN/REC (ft) DEPTH (ft) BLOWS/6" PID (ppmv))

0SAND FILTER

CEMENT GROUT

NATIVE BACKFILL

BENTONITE SEAL

4'

4'WELL SCREEN

RISER PIPE

WATER LEVEL

NANOT APPLICABLE

8'8' REFUSAL

12'

REMARKS:BLOWS/FT DENSITY

0-2 V. SOFT TRACE 0-10% End boring at 12' bgs in native clay.2-4 SOFT LITTLE 10-20% Cored through concrete slab at former AST to conduct SB-100.4-8 M. STIFF SOME 20-35% Soil boring was backfilled with bentonite grout.8-15 STIFF AND 35-50% No Sample was collected.15-30 V. STIFF> 30 HARD

NOTES: 1) STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY BETWEEN SOIL TYPES. TRANSITIONS MAY BE GRADUAL.

2) WATER LEVEL READINGS HAVE BEEN MADE FOLLOWING WELL COMPLETION.

3) FIELD SCREENING USING PID CALIBRATED TO A 100 PPMV ISOBUTYLENE STANDARD.

4) DRILLING METHOD DID NOT INCORPORATE BLOW COUNTS THEREFORE THE SOIL DENSITY DESCRIPTIONS ARE BASED ON FIELD OBSERVATIONS.

V:\Bournes VT\Waterbury\Reports\Soil Boring & Monitoring Well\Boring and Well Logs\[Bournes Combined Boring and Well Logs .xls]MW-104

30-50 DENSE> 50 V. DENSE

Fill

Clay

End boring at 12' bgs

0-1.3' Medium SAND and Gravel, sub-round to sub-angular, dry, loose, brown, Fill.

1.6-1.8' Fine SAND and Silt, dense, damp, dark gray.

10-30 M. DENSE

BLOWS/FT DENSITY

0-4

PROPORTIONS

V. LOOSE4-10 LOOSE

GRANULAR SOILS COHESIVE SOILS

S-1

WELL PROFILE

LEGENDBurmister Classification

1.1-2.2' SILT, some Clay, wet, stiff, dark gray, native.

S-2

S-3

<1

CAP:

NA

4 / 2.2' 4-8' bgs NA <1

Shawn Donovan NA

06/14/11

0-2.0' SILT and Clay, little medium/fine sand, stiff, saturated, gray.

2.0-4.0' CLAY, V. Stiff, cohesive, wet, gray.

NA

SAMPLE SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

GUARD: NAWELL MATERIALS: NAMATERIALS: 4' Macro Cores

+- 5.5' bgsMETHOD:

PROJECT Boring/Well No.: SB-100

Bournes Energy

Waterbury, Vermont

Bob Briggs NAEnpro See Site Plan

06/14/11

4 / 1.8'

4 / 4.0'

0-0.9' V. Fine SAND, some Silt, trace small gravel, M. stiff, fractured rock or cobble at 0.9'-1.1', damp, gray and dark brown.

<18-12' bgs

Geoprobe Direct Push

0-4' bgs NA

NA





DEPTH


0SAND FILTER

CEMENT GROUT

NATIVE BACKFILL

BENTONITE SEAL

4'

4'WELL SCREEN

RISER PIPE

WATER LEVEL

NANOT APPLICABLE

8'8' REFUSAL

12'12'

16'REMARKS:

BLOWS/FT DENSITY

0-2 V. SOFT TRACE 0-10% End boring at 16' bgs in native clay.2-4 SOFT LITTLE 10-20% Cored through concrete slab at former AST to conduct SB-101.4-8 M. STIFF SOME 20-35% Soil boring was backfilled with bentonite grout.8-15 STIFF AND 35-50% No Sample was collected.15-30 V. STIFF> 30 HARD






LOOSE

BLOWS/FT DENSITY

0-4 V. LOOSE

S-4 4 / 0.0' 8-12' bgs

> 50 V. DENSE

10-30 M. DENSE30-50 DENSE

4-10

WELL PROFILE

LEGEND

Fill

0-0.7' Meduim SAND and Gravel, wet (from drill water), loose, Fill.

CAP: NA

0-4' bgs NA <1

GUARD: NAWELL MATERIALS:

COHESIVE SOILS PROPORTIONS

NA

NA NA

S-1

GRANULAR SOILS

Shawn Donovan NABob Briggs

06/14/11

MATERIALS: 4' Macro Cores NAMETHOD:


Bournes Energy

Waterbury, Vermont


NAEnpro See Site Plan

06/14/11

4-8' bgs NA 48

+- 6' bgs

NA

0-0.2' Medium to Coarse SAND, loose, fractured rock in drive shoe, moderate petroleum odor, moist, Fill.

Burmister ClassificationSAMPLE SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

End boring 16' bgs

S-2

NA8-12' bgsS-3

4 / 0.7'

4 / 0.0'

No recovery - gray CLAY smeared on core sleeve, saturated.

No recovery - loose material washed out due to groundwater.

4 /0.2'




WELL DEPTH: 12' bgs DEPTH TO WATER:BORING DEPTH: 12' bgs DEPTH TO NAPL:SCREEN INTERVAL:RISER INTERVAL:SUMP INTERVAL:

DEPTH


0 c cSAND FILTER

CEMENT GROUT

NATIVE BACKFILL

BENTONITE SEAL

4'

4'WELL SCREEN

RISER PIPE

24WATER LEVEL

69 NANOT APPLICABLE

8'8' REFUSAL

12'


0-2 V. SOFT TRACE 0-10% End boring at 12' bgs in native silt and clay.2-4 SOFT LITTLE 10-20%4-8 M. STIFF SOME 20-35%8-15 STIFF AND 35-50%15-30 V. STIFF> 30 HARD





4 / 2.1'

4 / 4.0'

S-2

Bob Briggs NA

<18-12' bgs


S-3

6

141

2.5-7.5' bgs

7.3-7.5' bgs

1.7-3.0' Gray SILT and CLAY, trace V. fine sand, V. stiff, saturated.

6

0-4.0' Gray CLAY, wet, V. stiff, cohesive.

2.5' bgs-2.39' ags

5.7' btoc 7/22/2011

06/14/11

PROJECT Boring/Well No.: SB-102/MW-102

Bournes Energy

Waterbury, Vermont

Enpro See Site Plan06/14/11

Shawn Donovan NA

WELL MATERIALS: 1" PVC (0.10 Slot Screen)MATERIALS: 4' Macro Cores NAMETHOD:

4-8' bgs NA

GRANULAR SOILS COHESIVE SOILS

SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

GUARD: PVC Stick-upCAP: Plastic Cap

0-4' bgs NAS-1

WELL PROFILE


SAMPLE

> 50 V. DENSE

10-30 M. DENSE

BLOWS/FT DENSITY

0-4 V. LOOSE4-10 LOOSE

Collected soil sample 1.3-2.1' bgs.

0-0.2' Loamy TOPSOIL, loose, dry.

0.2-1.3' Brown medium to coarse SAND, V. loose, moist, Fill.

1.3-2.1' Light gray medium and coarse SAND, loose, wet, slight sheen/staining, trace large gravel, FILL.

0-1.7' Dark brown to gray SILT, some fine gravel, dense, wet.

30-50 DENSE

PROPORTIONS

NA

4 / 3.0'




WELL DEPTH: 12' bgs DEPTH TO WATER:BORING DEPTH: 12' bgs DEPTH TO NAPL:SCREEN INTERVAL: NARISER INTERVAL: NASUMP INTERVAL: NA

DEPTH


0SAND FILTER

CEMENT GROUT

NATIVE BACKFILL

BENTONITE SEAL

4'

4'WELL SCREEN

RISER PIPE

WATER LEVEL

NANOT APPLICABLE

8'8' REFUSAL

12'


0-2 V. SOFT TRACE 0-10% End boring at 12' bgs in native silt and clay.2-4 SOFT LITTLE 10-20% Soil boring was backfilled with bentonite grout.4-8 M. STIFF SOME 20-35% No Sample was collected.8-15 STIFF AND 35-50%15-30 V. STIFF> 30 HARD







End boring 12' bgs

1.0-1.5' Light brown SILT and fine SAND, trace clay @ 1.5' in recovery, stiff, wet at bottom of recovery.

2

<1

<1

0-1.1' Light brown to gray SILT and very fine Sand, trace clay, stiff, wet.

Clay

NA

10-30 M. DENSE

BLOWS/FT DENSITY



GUARD:

SAMPLE

GRANULAR SOILS

0-4.0' Similar to S-2 1.1-2.2'

1.1-2.2' Gray SILT, some Clay, V.stiff, wet.

<1

3

CAP: NA

0-4' bgs NAS-1

WELL PROFILE

Fill

NA

06/14/11Shawn Donovan NA


NA

SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

0-1.0' Brown medium and coarse SAND, some medium sub-round Gravel, loose, damp, Fill.

WELL MATERIALS: NAMATERIALS: 4' Macro Cores NA

Boring/Well No.: SB-103

Bournes Energy

Waterbury, Vermont

METHOD: Geoprobe Direct Push +- 3.5' bgs

06/14/11Enpro See Site PlanBob Briggs NA

PROJECT

4 / 1.5'

4 / 4.0'

S-2

8-12' bgs

4 /2.2'

S-3

4-8' bgs




WELL DEPTH: 5' bgs DEPTH TO WATER:BORING DEPTH: 8' bgs DEPTH TO NAPL:SCREEN INTERVAL: 1 - 5' bgsRISER INTERVAL: 0.2-1.0' bgsSUMP INTERVAL: 4.8-5' bgs

DEPTH


0 c cSAND FILTER

CEMENT GROUT

NATIVE BACKFILL

BENTONITE SEAL

4'

4'WELL SCREEN

RISER PIPE

WATER LEVEL

NANOT APPLICABLE

8'REFUSAL


0-2 V. SOFT TRACE 0-10% End boring at 8' bgs in native silt and clay.2-4 SOFT LITTLE 10-20% Collected soil sample from 4-5.5' bgs. 4-8 M. STIFF SOME 20-35%8-15 STIFF AND 35-50%15-30 V. STIFF> 30 HARD






5

5

80

413

4 / 2.0'

S-2 4 / 3.8'

S-1

PROJECT Boring/Well No.:SB-104/MW-104

Bournes Energy

Waterbury, Vermont

4-8' bgs NA

Enpro See Site PlanBob Briggs

MATERIALS: NAMETHOD: Geoprobe Direct Push 1.85' btoc 7/22/2011

06/14/11NA

4' Macro Cores


GUARD: Flush mount road box


WELL MATERIALS: 1" PVC (0.10 Slot Screen)

End boring 8' bgs

WELL PROFILE


0-1.5' Gray SILT, some fine to medium SAND, damp, slight staining/sheen, slight petroleum odor

1.5-3.8' Gray CLAY, wet, V. stiff, slight staining/sheen, moderate odor.

SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

0-0.9' Orange-brown fine to coarse SAND, little fine Gravel, sub-round, damp, loose, Fill.

0.9-2.0' Dark brown to black medium and coarse SAND, some medium sub-round gravel, wet, loose - FILL

CAP: Plastic cap

0-4' bgs NA

30-50 DENSE

21

0-4 V. LOOSE

> 50 V. DENSE

SAMPLE

GRANULAR SOILS

10-30 M. DENSE

BLOWS/FT DENSITY

4-10 LOOSE




WELL DEPTH: 6.0' bgs DEPTH TO WATER:BORING DEPTH: 6.0' bgs DEPTH TO NAPL:SCREEN INTERVAL: 1.8 - 6' bgsRISER INTERVAL: 0.2-1.8' bgsSUMP INTERVAL: 5.8-6.0' bgs

DEPTH


0 c cSAND FILTER

CEMENT GROUT

NATIVE BACKFILL

BENTONITE SEAL

4'

4'WELL SCREEN

RISER PIPE

WATER LEVEL

NANOT APPLICABLE

8'REFUSAL


0-2 V. SOFT TRACE 0-10% End boring at 8' bgs in native silt and clay.2-4 SOFT LITTLE 10-20% Collected soil sample 5.2-5.8' bgs.4-8 M. STIFF SOME 20-35%8-15 STIFF AND 35-50%15-30 V. STIFF> 30 HARD






2


End boring 8' bgs

58

417

15

5

10-30 M. DENSE

BLOWS/FT DENSITY


4 / 2.7'

NA

GRANULAR SOILS

0-4' bgs NAS-1

0-1.1' Brown meduim SAND and Gravel, loose, dry, Fill.

1.1-2.7' V. Fine SAND and Silt, M. Stiff, brown, wet at 2' in recovery.

<1

MATERIALS: 4' Macro Cores NAMETHOD:


SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

S-2 4 / 4.0' 4-8' bgs


06/14/1106/14/11

Shawn Donovan NA

WELL MATERIALS: 1" PVC (0.10 Slot Screen)


Bournes Energy

Waterbury, Vermont

0-1.8' Light brown to gray SILT, some Clay, trace fine gravel, sub-round, stiff, stained/sheen, wet, petroleum odor.

2.3' btoc 7/22/2011

WELL PROFILE

LEGEND

1.8-4.0' Gray CLAY some silt, stiff, saturated.

Enpro See Site PlanBob Briggs NA

Burmister ClassificationSAMPLE

CAP: Plastic cap





WELL DEPTH: NA DEPTH TO WATER:BORING DEPTH: 8' Bgs DEPTH TO NAPL:SCREEN INTERVAL: NARISER INTERVAL: NASUMP INTERVAL: NA

DEPTH


0SAND FILTER

CEMENT GROUT

NATIVE BACKFILL

BENTONITE SEAL

4'

4'WELL SCREEN

RISER PIPE

WATER LEVEL

NANOT APPLICABLE

8'REFUSAL


0-2 V. SOFT TRACE 0-10% End boring at 8' bgs in native silt and clay.2-4 SOFT LITTLE 10-20% Boring located inside storage shed/garage.4-8 M. STIFF SOME 20-35% Soil boring was backfilled with bentonite grout.8-15 STIFF AND 35-50% No Sample was collected.15-30 V. STIFF> 30 HARD






FillClay

SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

Shawn Donovan

S-2 4 / 3.1' 4-8' bgs

End boring 8' bgs

1220-1.2' Brown to light brown SAND and Gravel, sub-round to sub-angular, trace silt, dry, loose, Fill.

40

3

06/14/11NA


06/14/11


Bournes Energy

Waterbury, Vermont

WELL MATERIALS: NAMATERIALS: NAMETHOD: Geoprobe Direct Push +- 3' bgs

4' Macro Cores

CAP: NA

0-4' bgs NAS-1

WELL PROFILE

GUARD: NA

4 / 1.2'


SAMPLE

GRANULAR SOILS COHESIVE SOILS PROPORTIONS

NA

0-0.4' Similar to S-1 with <20% silt content

0.4-3.1' Gray SILT and CLAY, some very fine sand, stiff, wet, trace fine gravel up to 1.5' in recovery

BLOWS/FT DENSITY



10-30 M. DENSE




WELL DEPTH: 8' bgs DEPTH TO WATER:BORING DEPTH: 8' bgs DEPTH TO NAPL:SCREEN INTERVAL: 3-5' bgsRISER INTERVAL: 3' bgs - 1.78' agsSUMP INTERVAL: 7.8-8' bgs

DEPTH


0 c cSAND FILTER

c c

c cCEMENT GROUT

c cNATIVE BACKFILL

cBENTONITE SEAL

4'

4'WELL SCREEN

RISER PIPE

WATER LEVEL

NANOT APPLICABLE

8'REFUSAL


0-2 V. SOFT TRACE 0-10% End boring at 8' bgs in native silt and clay.2-4 SOFT LITTLE 10-20% Boring located adjacent to north side of on-Site building.4-8 M. STIFF SOME 20-35% Collected soil sample 1.5-2.2' bgs.8-15 STIFF AND 35-50%15-30 V. STIFF> 30 HARD






12

357

GRANULAR SOILS

End boring 8' bgs

57

75

3

2

0-0.8' Brown medium SAND and Gravel, dry, V. loose, Fill.

0.8-2.2' Dark brown medium SAND and Gravel, M. dense, strong petroleum odor, sheen/staining, Fill.

BLOWS/FT DENSITY



10-30 M. DENSE

CAP: Plastic Cap

0-4' bgs NAS-1

WELL PROFILE


395

NAMETHOD:


GUARD: PVC Stick-up

SAMPLE

0-0.6' Dark brown medium SAND and Gravel, wet, loose, strong odor, M. sheen, Fill.

SAMPLE DESCRIPTION


Shawn Donovan NA

WELL MATERIALS: 1" PVC (0.10 Slot Screen)MATERIALS: 4' Macro Cores

4.4' btoc 7/22/2011

06/14/11


Bournes Energy

Waterbury, Vermont

Bob Briggs NA

S-2 4 / 4.0' 4-8' bgs NA

1.4-4.0' Gray to dark gray CLAY, V. stiff, wet.

0.6-1.4' Gray very fine SAND and Silt, stiff, wet.


4 / 2.2'





DEPTH


0SAND FILTER

CEMENT GROUT

NATIVE BACKFILL

BENTONITE SEAL

4'

4'WELL SCREEN

RISER PIPE

WATER LEVEL

NANOT APPLICABLE

8'8' REFUSAL

12'


0-2 V. SOFT TRACE 0-10% End boring at 12' bgs in native clay2-4 SOFT LITTLE 10-20% Soil boring was backfilled with bentonite grout.4-8 M. STIFF SOME 20-35% No Sample was collected.8-15 STIFF AND 35-50%15-30 V. STIFF> 30 HARD






4 / 1.5'

4 / 3.1'


5

111

48

FillClay

End Boring 12' bgs

0.8-1.5' Brown fine SAND & Gravel, sub-round, loose, moist, Fill.

0-0.5' Gray CLAY, V.stiff, wet, M. petroleum odor.

0-3.1' Gray CLAY, V. stiff, wet.

NA06/14/11Enpro

S-2

8-12' bgs

4 / 0.5'

S-3

4-8' bgs

7

Geoprobe Direct Push +- 3.5' bgs

GUARD: NA


Bournes Energy

Waterbury, Vermont

See Site PlanBob Briggs 06/14/11Shawn Donovan NA

WELL MATERIALS: NAMATERIALS: 4' Macro Cores NAMETHOD:

PROPORTIONS

NA

WELL PROFILE

LEGENDBurmister ClassificationSAMPLE DESCRIPTION

NA

1

<1

V. LOOSE4-10 LOOSE

CAP: NA

0-4' bgs NAS-1

SAMPLE

COHESIVE SOILS


GRANULAR SOILS

10-30 M. DENSE

BLOWS/FT DENSITY

0-4




WELL DEPTH: 8' bgs DEPTH TO WATER:BORING DEPTH: 5.5' bgs DEPTH TO NAPL:SCREEN INTERVAL: 1.5-5.5' bgsRISER INTERVAL: 1.5'-0.3'bgsSUMP INTERVAL: 5.3-5.5' bgs

DEPTH


0SAND FILTER

c c

c cCEMENT GROUT

NATIVE BACKFILL

cBENTONITE SEAL

4'

4'WELL SCREEN

RISER PIPE

WATER LEVEL

c c c NANOT APPLICABLE

8' c c cREFUSAL


0-2 V. SOFT TRACE 0-10% End boring at 8' bgs in native silt and clay.2-4 SOFT LITTLE 10-20% Boring located at southeast corner of the Site.4-8 M. STIFF SOME 20-35% Collected soil sample 1.5-2.9' bgs.8-15 STIFF AND 35-50%15-30 V. STIFF> 30 HARD






NA

0-0.9' Dark gray fine SAND and Silt, stiff, <10% clay, wet, slight petroleum odor

0.9-2.0' Similar to S-2 (0-0.9') with <20% clay content

End boring 8' bgs

82

5

<1

Bob Briggs NA

S-2 4 / 3.5' 4-8' bgs

4 / 2.9'0-2.9' Dark gray fine to medium SAND, some large Gravel from 0-0.3' in recovery, M. dense, damp @ 3.5', Fill, strong petroleum odor.

47

190

Geoprobe Direct Push 3.3' btoc 7/22/2011

06/14/11


Bournes Energy

Waterbury, Vermont


Shawn Donovan NA

WELL MATERIALS: 1" PVC (0.10 Slot Screen)MATERIALS: 4' Macro Cores NAMETHOD:

SAMPLE DESCRIPTION


2-3.5' Dark gray CLAY, V. stiff, wet.

380


GRANULAR SOILS

CAP: Plastic cap

0-4' bgs NAS-1

WELL PROFILE


SAMPLE

BLOWS/FT DENSITY



10-30 M. DENSE





DEPTH


0SAND FILTER

CEMENT GROUT

NATIVE BACKFILL

BENTONITE SEAL

4'

4'WELL SCREEN

RISER PIPE

WATER LEVEL

NANOT APPLICABLE

8' 5REFUSAL


0-2 V. SOFT TRACE 0-10% End boring at 8' bgs in native silt and clay.2-4 SOFT LITTLE 10-20% Soil boring was backfilled with bentonite grout.4-8 M. STIFF SOME 20-35% No Sample was collected.8-15 STIFF AND 35-50%15-30 V. STIFF> 30 HARD






FillClay

20

34

8

354

48

0-1.6' Gray SILT and very fine Sand, moist to wet, stiff, native.

> 50 V. DENSE

10-30 M. DENSE30-50 DENSE


SAMPLE

LOOSE

GRANULAR SOILSBLOWS/FT DENSITY

0-4 V. LOOSE4-10

NA

0-1.4' Dark brown to gray medium SAND & Gravel, round to sub-round, dense, damp, Fill.

1.4-2.3' Brown fine and very fine SAND, trace Silt and fine Gravel, V. dense, damp, Fill.

CAP: NA

0-4' bgs NAS-1

WELL PROFILE

MATERIALS: 4' Macro Cores NA


1.6-3.4' Gray clay, V. stiff, wet, strong odor, visable sheen/staining

SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

GUARD:


Shawn Donovan NABob Briggs

+- 3' bgs

06/14/11


Bournes Energy

Waterbury, Vermont

NA

End boring 8' bgs

4 / 2.3'


S-2 4 / 3.4' 4-8' bgs NA

WELL MATERIALS: NA

METHOD:




WELL DEPTH: 8' bgs DEPTH TO WATER:BORING DEPTH: 8' bgs DEPTH TO NAPL:SCREEN INTERVAL: 1.5-5.5' bgsRISER INTERVAL: 1.5'-0.3' bgsSUMP INTERVAL: 5.3-5.5' bgs

DEPTH


0SAND FILTER

c c

c cCEMENT GROUT

NATIVE BACKFILL

cBENTONITE SEAL

4'

4'WELL SCREEN

RISER PIPE

c c cWATER LEVEL

c c c

c c c NANOT APPLICABLE

8' c c cREFUSAL


0-2 V. SOFT TRACE 0-10% End boring at 8' bgs in native clay.2-4 SOFT LITTLE 10-20% Boring located near NE property corner.4-8 M. STIFF SOME 20-35% Collected soil sample 4.0-4.9' bgs.8-15 STIFF AND 35-50%15-30 V. STIFF> 30 HARD






LOOSE

30-50 DENSE

120

8

BLOWS/FT DENSITY


CAP: Plastic cap

0-4' bgs NA

0-4 V. LOOSE

End boring 8' bgs

0.9-1.9' Brown SILT and very fine SAND, stiff, wet.

1.9-3.5' Gray CLAY, wet, soft.


SAMPLE SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

> 50 V. DENSE

10-30 M. DENSE

GRANULAR SOILS

4-10


WELL MATERIALS: 1" PVC (0.10 Slot Screen)NA

METHOD: Geoprobe Direct Push 3.6' btoc 7/22/2011

S-2 4 / 3.5' 4-8' bgs NA

S-1

WELL PROFILE



MATERIALS: 4' Macro Cores

06/14/11


Bournes Energy

Waterbury, Vermont

0-0.9' Similar to S-1 2.0-2.7' <30% clay.

4 / 2.7'


1.1-2.0' Very Fine SAND and Silt, stiff, moist, brown.

2.0-2.7' Gray very fine SAND and Silt, <20% clay content, V. stiff, moist to wet.

10

160

71

258

Weston &Sampson

APPENDIX C

Laboratory Report

Bourne's WaterburyPROJECT:

DATE RECEIVED:

WORK ORDER:

DATE REPORTED:

100695Weston & Sampson

PO Box 189

Waterbury, VT 05676

SAMPLER:

June 28, 2011

1106-08002

Shawn Donovan

June 15, 2011

Enclosed please find the results of the analyses performed for the samples referenced on the attached chain of custody located at the end of this report.

The column labeled Lab/Tech in the accompanying report denotes the laboratory facility where the testing was performed and the technician who conducted the assay. A "W" designates the Williston, VT lab under NELAC certification ELAP 11263; "R" designates the Lebanon, NH facility under certification NH 2037 and “N” the Plattsburgh, NY lab under certification ELAP 11892. “Sub” indicates the testing was performed by a subcontracted laboratory. The accreditation status of the subcontracted lab is referenced in the corresponding NELAC and Qual fields.

This NELAC column also denotes the accreditation status of each laboratory for each

reported parameter. “A” indicates the referenced laboratory is NELAC accredited for the parameter reported. “N” indicates the laboratory is not accredited. “U” indicates that NELAC does not offer accreditation for that parameter in that specific matrix. Test results denoted with an “A” meet all National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program requirements except where denoted by pertinent data qualifiers. Test results are representative of the samples as they were received at the laboratory.

Endyne, Inc. warrants, to the best of its knowledge and belief, the accuracy of the analytical

test results contained in this report, but makes no other warranty, expressed or implied, especially no warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.

Reviewed by:

Harry B. Locker, Ph.D.Laboratory Director

160 James Brown Dr., Williston, VT 05495Ph 802-879-4333 Fax 802-879-7103

ELAP 11263

www.endynelabs.com

NH203756 Etna Road, Lebanon, NH 03766

Ph 603-678-4891 Fax 603-678-4893

Laboratory Report

Weston & Sampson

Page 2 of 8

CLIENT:PROJECT: Bourne's Waterbury

WORK ORDER:DATE RECEIVED:

1106-0800206/15/2011

6/28/2011REPORT DATE:

001 Sampled: 6/14/11Site: SB-102 (1.3-2.1') 6/22/11 MDPWAnalysis Date:

QualNelacUnitResultParameterQualNelacUnitResultParameter

TEST METHOD: EPA 8015B

10:50

UExtraction by EPA 3550B Completed Amg/Kg, dryC7-C10 TPH < 300

Amg/Kg, dryC10-C26 TPH-DRO 5,370 Amg/Kg, dryC26-C40 TPH < 300

Amg/Kg, dryTot. Petroleum Hydrocarbons 5,370 UHydrocarbon Window C10-C24

001 Sampled: 6/14/11Site: SB-102 (1.3-2.1') 6/24/11 MGTWAnalysis Date:



10:50

Nug/Kg, DryDichlorodifluoromethane < 900 Aug/Kg, DryChloromethane < 540

Aug/Kg, DryVinyl chloride < 360 Aug/Kg, DryBromomethane < 900

Aug/Kg, DryChloroethane < 900 Nug/Kg, DryTrichlorofluoromethane < 360

Uug/Kg, DryDiethyl ether < 900 Aug/Kg, Dry1,1-Dichloroethene < 180

Nug/Kg, DryAcetone < 1,800 Nug/Kg, DryCarbon disulfide < 900

Aug/Kg, DryMethylene chloride < 900 Nug/Kg, Dryt-Butanol < 3,600

Aug/Kg, DryMethyl-t-butyl ether (MTBE) < 360 Aug/Kg, Drytrans-1,2-Dichloroethene < 180

Uug/Kg, DryDi-isopropyl ether (DIPE) < 360 Aug/Kg, Dry1,1-Dichloroethane < 180

Uug/Kg, DryEthyl-t-butyl ether (ETBE) < 360 Aug/Kg, Dry2-Butanone < 1,800

Nug/Kg, Dry2,2-Dichloropropane < 360 Nug/Kg, Drycis-1,2-Dichloroethene < 180

Nug/Kg, DryBromochloromethane < 360 Aug/Kg, DryChloroform < 180

Uug/Kg, DryTetrahydrofuran < 1,800 Aug/Kg, Dry1,1,1-Trichloroethane < 180

Aug/Kg, DryCarbon tetrachloride < 180 Nug/Kg, Dry1,1-Dichloropropene < 180

Aug/Kg, DryBenzene < 180 Uug/Kg, Dryt-Amylmethyl ether (TAME) < 360

Aug/Kg, Dry1,2-Dichloroethane < 180 Aug/Kg, DryTrichloroethene < 180

Aug/Kg, Dry1,2-Dichloropropane < 360 Nug/Kg, DryDibromomethane < 360

Aug/Kg, DryBromodichloromethane < 180 Aug/Kg, Drycis-1,3-Dichloropropene < 180

Nug/Kg, Dry4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) < 1,800 Aug/Kg, DryToluene < 180

Aug/Kg, Drytrans-1,3-Dichloropropene < 360 Aug/Kg, Dry1,1,2-Trichloroethane < 180

Aug/Kg, DryTetrachloroethene < 180 Nug/Kg, Dry1,3-Dichloropropane < 180

Nug/Kg, Dry2-Hexanone < 1,800 Aug/Kg, DryDibromochloromethane < 360

Nug/Kg, Dry1,2-Dibromoethane < 180 Aug/Kg, DryChlorobenzene < 180

Aug/Kg, DryEthylbenzene 237 Nug/Kg, Dry1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane < 360

Aug/Kg, DryXylenes, Total 611 Nug/Kg, DryStyrene < 180

Aug/Kg, DryBromoform < 360 Aug/Kg, DryIsopropylbenzene 650

Aug/Kg, Dry1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane < 360 Nug/Kg, DryBromobenzene < 180

Aug/Kg, Dryn-Propylbenzene 1,300 Nug/Kg, Dry1,2,3-Trichloropropane < 360

Nug/Kg, Dry2-Chlorotoluene < 180 Aug/Kg, Dry1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 3,860

Nug/Kg, Dry4-Chlorotoluene < 180 Aug/Kg, Dryt-Butylbenzene < 180

Aug/Kg, Dry1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 7,300 Aug/Kg, Drys-Butylbenzene 1,400

Aug/Kg, Dry4-Isopropyltoluene 1,280 Aug/Kg, Dry1,3-Dichlorobenzene < 180

Aug/Kg, Dry1,4-Dichlorobenzene < 180 Aug/Kg, Dryn-Butylbenzene 2,440

Aug/Kg, Dry1,2-Dichlorobenzene < 180 Nug/Kg, Dry1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane < 360

Nug/Kg, Dry1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene < 360 Uug/Kg, Dry1,3,5-Trichlorobenzene < 360

Nug/Kg, DryHexachlorobutadiene < 180 Aug/Kg, DryNaphthalene 11,100

Nug/Kg, Dry1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene < 360 A%Surr. 1 (Dibromofluoromethane) 99

A%Surr. 2 (Toluene d8) 95 A%Surr. 3 (4-Bromofluorobenzene) 103

UUnidentified Peaks > 10

Laboratory Report

Weston & Sampson

Page 3 of 8



1106-0800206/15/2011


002 Sampled: 6/14/11Site: SB-104 (4-5.5') 6/22/11 MDPWAnalysis Date:



12:05




002 Sampled: 6/14/11Site: SB-104 (4-5.5') 6/23/11 MGTWAnalysis Date:



12:05

Nug/Kg, DryDichlorodifluoromethane < 3,300 Aug/Kg, DryChloromethane < 1,980

Aug/Kg, DryVinyl chloride < 1,320 Aug/Kg, DryBromomethane < 3,300

Aug/Kg, DryChloroethane < 3,300 Nug/Kg, DryTrichlorofluoromethane < 1,320

Uug/Kg, DryDiethyl ether < 3,300 Aug/Kg, Dry1,1-Dichloroethene < 660

Nug/Kg, DryAcetone < 6,600 Nug/Kg, DryCarbon disulfide < 3,300

Aug/Kg, DryMethylene chloride < 3,300 Nug/Kg, Dry QA-t-Butanol < 13,200

Aug/Kg, DryMethyl-t-butyl ether (MTBE) < 1,320 Aug/Kg, Drytrans-1,2-Dichloroethene < 660

Uug/Kg, DryDi-isopropyl ether (DIPE) < 1,320 Aug/Kg, Dry1,1-Dichloroethane < 660

Uug/Kg, DryEthyl-t-butyl ether (ETBE) < 1,320 Aug/Kg, Dry2-Butanone < 6,600

Nug/Kg, Dry2,2-Dichloropropane < 1,320 Nug/Kg, Drycis-1,2-Dichloroethene < 660

Nug/Kg, DryBromochloromethane < 1,320 Aug/Kg, DryChloroform < 660



Aug/Kg, DryBenzene < 660 Uug/Kg, Dryt-Amylmethyl ether (TAME) < 1,320


Aug/Kg, Dry1,2-Dichloropropane < 1,320 Nug/Kg, DryDibromomethane < 1,320



Aug/Kg, Drytrans-1,3-Dichloropropene < 1,320 Aug/Kg, Dry1,1,2-Trichloroethane < 660


Nug/Kg, Dry2-Hexanone < 6,600 Aug/Kg, DryDibromochloromethane < 1,320


Aug/Kg, DryEthylbenzene 755 Nug/Kg, Dry1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane < 1,320

Aug/Kg, DryXylenes, Total 9,190 Nug/Kg, DryStyrene < 660

Aug/Kg, DryBromoform < 1,320 Aug/Kg, DryIsopropylbenzene 1,980

Aug/Kg, Dry1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane < 1,320 Nug/Kg, DryBromobenzene < 660

Aug/Kg, Dryn-Propylbenzene 4,640 Nug/Kg, Dry1,2,3-Trichloropropane < 1,320






Aug/Kg, Dry1,2-Dichlorobenzene < 660 Nug/Kg, Dry1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane < 1,320

Nug/Kg, Dry1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene < 1,320 Uug/Kg, Dry1,3,5-Trichlorobenzene < 1,320


Nug/Kg, Dry1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene < 1,320 A%Surr. 1 (Dibromofluoromethane) 100



Laboratory Report

Weston & Sampson

Page 4 of 8



1106-0800206/15/2011





12:55







12:55























Aug/Kg, DryEthylbenzene 1,130 Nug/Kg, Dry1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane < 1,160


Aug/Kg, DryBromoform < 1,160 Aug/Kg, DryIsopropylbenzene 912














Laboratory Report

Weston & Sampson

Page 5 of 8



1106-0800206/15/2011





14:20

UExtraction by EPA 3550B Completed Amg/Kg, dryC7-C10 TPH < 1,500

Amg/Kg, dryC10-C26 TPH-DRO 28,900 Amg/Kg, dryC26-C40 TPH < 1,500





14:20







































Laboratory Report

Weston & Sampson

Page 6 of 8



1106-0800206/15/2011





15:45







15:45







































Laboratory Report

Weston & Sampson

Page 7 of 8



1106-0800206/15/2011


006 Sampled: 6/14/11Site: SB-111 (4-4.9') 6/22/11 MDPWAnalysis Date:



17:00


Amg/Kg, dryC10-C26 TPH-DRO 499 Amg/Kg, dryC26-C40 TPH < 30

Amg/Kg, dryTot. Petroleum Hydrocarbons 499 UHydrocarbon Window C10-C22

006 Sampled: 6/14/11Site: SB-111 (4-4.9') 6/24/11 MGTWAnalysis Date:



17:00

Nug/Kg, DryDichlorodifluoromethane < 1,000 Aug/Kg, DryChloromethane < 600

Aug/Kg, DryVinyl chloride < 400 Aug/Kg, DryBromomethane < 1,000

Aug/Kg, DryChloroethane < 1,000 Nug/Kg, DryTrichlorofluoromethane < 400



Aug/Kg, DryMethylene chloride < 1,000 Nug/Kg, Dryt-Butanol < 4,000

Aug/Kg, DryMethyl-t-butyl ether (MTBE) < 400 Aug/Kg, Drytrans-1,2-Dichloroethene < 200

Uug/Kg, DryDi-isopropyl ether (DIPE) < 400 Aug/Kg, Dry1,1-Dichloroethane < 200

Uug/Kg, DryEthyl-t-butyl ether (ETBE) < 400 Aug/Kg, Dry2-Butanone < 2,000

Nug/Kg, Dry2,2-Dichloropropane < 400 Nug/Kg, Drycis-1,2-Dichloroethene < 200

Nug/Kg, DryBromochloromethane < 400 Aug/Kg, DryChloroform < 200



Aug/Kg, DryBenzene < 200 Uug/Kg, Dryt-Amylmethyl ether (TAME) < 400


Aug/Kg, Dry1,2-Dichloropropane < 400 Nug/Kg, DryDibromomethane < 400



Aug/Kg, Drytrans-1,3-Dichloropropene < 400 Aug/Kg, Dry1,1,2-Trichloroethane < 200


Nug/Kg, Dry2-Hexanone < 2,000 Aug/Kg, DryDibromochloromethane < 400


Aug/Kg, DryEthylbenzene 754 Nug/Kg, Dry1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane < 400


Aug/Kg, DryBromoform < 400 Aug/Kg, DryIsopropylbenzene 471

Aug/Kg, Dry1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane < 400 Nug/Kg, DryBromobenzene < 200

Aug/Kg, Dryn-Propylbenzene 828 Nug/Kg, Dry1,2,3-Trichloropropane < 400



Aug/Kg, Dry1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 6,660 Aug/Kg, Drys-Butylbenzene 609

Aug/Kg, Dry4-Isopropyltoluene 583 Aug/Kg, Dry1,3-Dichlorobenzene < 200


Aug/Kg, Dry1,2-Dichlorobenzene < 200 Nug/Kg, Dry1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane < 400

Nug/Kg, Dry1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene < 400 Uug/Kg, Dry1,3,5-Trichlorobenzene < 400


Nug/Kg, Dry1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene < 400 A%Surr. 1 (Dibromofluoromethane) 99



Laboratory Report

Weston & Sampson

Page 8 of 8



1106-0800206/15/2011


Report Summary of Qualifiers and Notes

QA-: QA/QC associated with this analysis did not meet laboratory acceptance limits indicating the results may bebiased low.

Laboratory Report

Bournes - WaterburyPROJECT:

DATE RECEIVED:

WORK ORDER:

DATE REPORTED:

100695Weston & Sampson

PO Box 189

Waterbury, VT 05676

SAMPLER:

July 28, 2011

1107-10288

Shawn Donovan

July 22, 2011

Enclosed please find the results of the analyses performed for the samples referenced on the attached chain of custody located at the end of this report.

The column labeled Lab/Tech in the accompanying report denotes the laboratory facility where the testing was performed and the technician who conducted the assay. A "W" designates the Williston, VT lab under NELAC certification ELAP 11263; "R" designates the Lebanon, NH facility under certification NH 2037 and “N” the Plattsburgh, NY lab under certification ELAP 11892. “Sub” indicates the testing was performed by a subcontracted laboratory. The accreditation status of the subcontracted lab is referenced in the corresponding NELAC and Qual fields.

This NELAC column also denotes the accreditation status of each laboratory for each

reported parameter. “A” indicates the referenced laboratory is NELAC accredited for the parameter reported. “N” indicates the laboratory is not accredited. “U” indicates that NELAC does not offer accreditation for that parameter in that specific matrix. Test results denoted with an “A” meet all National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program requirements except where denoted by pertinent data qualifiers. Test results are representative of the samples as they were received at the laboratory.

Endyne, Inc. warrants, to the best of its knowledge and belief, the accuracy of the analytical

test results contained in this report, but makes no other warranty, expressed or implied, especially no warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.

Reviewed by:

Harry B. Locker, Ph.D.Laboratory Director

160 James Brown Dr., Williston, VT 05495Ph 802-879-4333 Fax 802-879-7103

ELAP 11263

www.endynelabs.com

NH203756 Etna Road, Lebanon, NH 03766

Ph 603-678-4891 Fax 603-678-4893

Laboratory Report

Weston & Sampson

Page 2 of 10

CLIENT:PROJECT: Bournes - Waterbury


1107-1028807/22/2011


001 Sampled: 7/21/11Site: MW-107 7/26/11 RBFWAnalysis Date:



13:00

UExtraction Mod. EPA 3510C Completed Umg/LC7-C10 TPH < 8.0

Umg/LC10-C26 TPH-DRO 247 Umg/LC26-C40 TPH < 8.0

Umg/L DS-Tot. Petroleum Hydrocarbons 252 UHydrocarbon Window C6-C22

001 Sampled: 7/21/11Site: MW-107 7/26/11 MGTWAnalysis Date:



13:00

Aug/LDichlorodifluoromethane < 25.0 Aug/LChloromethane < 15.0

Aug/LVinyl chloride < 10.0 Aug/LBromomethane < 25.0

Aug/LChloroethane < 25.0 Nug/LTrichlorofluoromethane < 10.0

Uug/LDiethyl ether < 25.0 Aug/L1,1-Dichloroethene < 5.0

Nug/LAcetone < 50.0 Nug/LCarbon disulfide < 25.0

Aug/LMethylene chloride < 25.0 Nug/Lt-Butanol < 100

Aug/LMethyl-t-butyl ether (MTBE) < 10.0 Aug/Ltrans-1,2-Dichloroethene < 5.0

Nug/LDi-isopropyl ether (DIPE) < 10.0 Aug/L1,1-Dichloroethane < 5.0

Nug/LEthyl-t-butyl ether (ETBE) < 10.0 Aug/L2-Butanone < 50.0

Nug/L2,2-Dichloropropane < 10.0 Nug/Lcis-1,2-Dichloroethene < 5.0

Nug/LBromochloromethane < 10.0 Aug/LChloroform < 5.0

Uug/LTetrahydrofuran < 50.0 Aug/L1,1,1-Trichloroethane < 5.0

Aug/LCarbon tetrachloride < 5.0 Nug/L1,1-Dichloropropene < 5.0

Aug/LBenzene 8.5 Nug/Lt-Amylmethyl ether (TAME) < 10.0

Aug/L1,2-Dichloroethane < 5.0 Aug/LTrichloroethene < 5.0

Aug/L1,2-Dichloropropane < 10.0 Nug/LDibromomethane < 10.0

Aug/LBromodichloromethane < 2.5 Aug/Lcis-1,3-Dichloropropene < 5.0

Nug/L4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) < 50.0 Aug/LToluene < 5.0

Aug/Ltrans-1,3-Dichloropropene < 10.0 Aug/L1,1,2-Trichloroethane < 5.0

Aug/LTetrachloroethene < 5.0 Nug/L1,3-Dichloropropane < 5.0

Nug/L2-Hexanone < 50.0 Aug/LDibromochloromethane < 10.0

Nug/L1,2-Dibromoethane < 5.0 Aug/LChlorobenzene < 5.0

Aug/LEthylbenzene 29.7 Nug/L1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane < 10.0

Aug/LXylenes, Total 125 Nug/LStyrene < 5.0

Aug/LBromoform < 10.0 Aug/LIsopropylbenzene 10.7

Aug/L1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane < 10.0 Uug/LBromobenzene < 5.0

Aug/Ln-Propylbenzene 16.5 Nug/L1,2,3-Trichloropropane < 10.0

Nug/L2-Chlorotoluene < 5.0 Aug/L1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 53.3

Nug/L4-Chlorotoluene < 5.0 Aug/Lt-Butylbenzene < 5.0

Aug/L1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 157 Aug/Ls-Butylbenzene 6.4

Aug/L4-Isopropyltoluene 7.6 Aug/L1,3-Dichlorobenzene < 5.0

Aug/L1,4-Dichlorobenzene < 5.0 Aug/Ln-Butylbenzene 13.9

Aug/L1,2-Dichlorobenzene < 5.0 Nug/L1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane < 10.0

Aug/L1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene < 10.0 Uug/L1,3,5-Trichlorobenzene < 10.0

Nug/LHexachlorobutadiene < 2.5 Aug/LNaphthalene 258

Nug/L1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene < 10.0 A%Surr. 1 (Dibromofluoromethane) 105



Laboratory Report

Weston & Sampson

Page 3 of 10



1107-1028807/22/2011





12:50

UExtraction Mod. EPA 3510C Completed Umg/LC7-C10 TPH 0.92

Umg/LC10-C26 TPH-DRO 18.4 Umg/LC26-C40 TPH < 0.40

Umg/LTot. Petroleum Hydrocarbons 19.3 UHydrocarbon Window C6-C24




12:50
























Aug/LXylenes, Total 69.3 Nug/LStyrene < 5.0






Aug/L1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 129 Aug/Ls-Butylbenzene 11.8









Laboratory Report

Weston & Sampson

Page 4 of 10



1107-1028807/22/2011





11:40







11:40





Nug/LAcetone 130 Nug/LCarbon disulfide < 5.0

Aug/LMethylene chloride < 5.0 Nug/Lt-Butanol < 20.0








Aug/LBenzene < 1.0 Nug/Lt-Amylmethyl ether (TAME) < 2.0
















Aug/L1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 33.8 Aug/Ls-Butylbenzene 2.4





Nug/LHexachlorobutadiene < 0.5 Aug/LNaphthalene 80.6




Laboratory Report

Weston & Sampson

Page 5 of 10



1107-1028807/22/2011





12:35







12:35






























Aug/L1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 9.8 Aug/Ls-Butylbenzene < 1.0

Aug/L4-Isopropyltoluene < 1.0 Aug/L1,3-Dichlorobenzene < 1.0

Aug/L1,4-Dichlorobenzene < 1.0 Aug/Ln-Butylbenzene < 1.0



Nug/LHexachlorobutadiene < 0.5 Aug/LNaphthalene 32.9




Laboratory Report

Weston & Sampson

Page 6 of 10



1107-1028807/22/2011


005 Sampled: 7/21/11Site: Manhole 7/26/11 RBFWAnalysis Date:



12:20




005 Sampled: 7/21/11Site: Manhole 7/26/11 MGTWAnalysis Date:



12:20























Aug/LEthylbenzene < 1.0 Nug/L1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane < 2.0

Aug/LXylenes, Total < 2.0 Nug/LStyrene < 1.0

Aug/LBromoform < 2.0 Aug/LIsopropylbenzene < 1.0


Aug/Ln-Propylbenzene < 1.0 Nug/L1,2,3-Trichloropropane < 2.0



Aug/L1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene < 1.0 Aug/Ls-Butylbenzene < 1.0





Nug/LHexachlorobutadiene < 0.5 Aug/LNaphthalene < 2.0




Laboratory Report

Weston & Sampson

Page 7 of 10



1107-1028807/22/2011


006 Sampled: 7/21/11Site: Lagoon 7/26/11 RBFWAnalysis Date:



12:00


Umg/LC10-C26 TPH-DRO < 0.40 Umg/LC26-C40 TPH < 0.40

Umg/LTot. Petroleum Hydrocarbons < 0.40 UHydrocarbon Window NA

006 Sampled: 7/21/11Site: Lagoon 7/26/11 MGTWAnalysis Date:



12:00























Aug/LEthylbenzene < 1.0 Nug/L1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane < 2.0

Aug/LXylenes, Total < 2.0 Nug/LStyrene < 1.0

Aug/LBromoform < 2.0 Aug/LIsopropylbenzene < 1.0


Aug/Ln-Propylbenzene < 1.0 Nug/L1,2,3-Trichloropropane < 2.0

Nug/L2-Chlorotoluene < 1.0 Aug/L1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene < 1.0


Aug/L1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene < 1.0 Aug/Ls-Butylbenzene < 1.0





Nug/LHexachlorobutadiene < 0.5 Aug/LNaphthalene < 2.0



UUnidentified Peaks 0

Laboratory Report

Weston & Sampson

Page 8 of 10



1107-1028807/22/2011





16:20







16:20






























Aug/L1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 64.0 Aug/Ls-Butylbenzene 3.1









Laboratory Report

Weston & Sampson

Page 9 of 10



1107-1028807/22/2011





16:30







16:30






























Aug/L1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 32.2 Aug/Ls-Butylbenzene < 5.0









Laboratory Report

Weston & Sampson

Page 10 of 10



1107-1028807/22/2011


Report Summary of Qualifiers and Notes

DS-: The Laboratory Duplicate analysis was not within method acceptance limits. The value of the LaboratoryDuplicate was significantly lower than reported value.

Documents

SI Report March 2012 - Vermont on behalf of Bourne’s Inc. of Morrisville, ... The hand auger borings were focused around the AST on the west side of the Site and beneath the AST