Amendment_UST-SIR-Final.pdf

Department of The Army New York District Corps of Engineers Jacob K. Jarvis Federal Building

26 Federal Plaza New York, NY 10278‐0090

Contract #W912DS‐09‐D‐0001

Task Order #0021

Underground Storage Tank (UST) Closure/Site Investigation Report

Caven Point Marine Terminal, Jersey City, New Jersey

February 26, 2013

27 GLEN ROAD, NORTH ENTRANCE

SANDY HOOK, CONNECTICUT 06482

P.O. Box 178, Newtown, CT 06470

(203) 270‐8100, FAX (203) 364‐0480

www.e4sciences.com

The Louis Berger Group, Inc.

412 Mount Kemble Avenue

Morristown, New Jersey 07962

(973) 407‐1000, FAX (973) 267‐6468

www.louisberger.com

TWaldron Text Box March 3, 2013

The Louis Berger Group, Inc. UST Closure/Site Investigation Report – Caven Point Marine Terminal

ES-1

Executive Summary

The United States Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) - New York District conducted the closure of two 12,000-gallon diesel Underground Storage Tanks (UST) which had been used to fuel marine vessels at Caven Point Marine Terminal (Site) in Jersey City, Hudson County New Jersey. This Closure/Site Investigation (SI) Report documents the decommissioning of the USTs and the post-excavation soil and groundwater investigation, which occurred between March 2011 and December 2012.

Tyree Environmental Corp. (Tyree) under contract with the USACE supervised the UST removal activities and conducted initial post excavation sampling activities in March 2011.

The UST removals were performed by Tyree's subcontractor, Coastal Environmental Group, Inc., under the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) UST Closure Permit #N10-7538.

The USACE-NYD assigned e4sciences|Earthworks (e4) and The Louis Berger Group, Inc.

(LBG) under contract W912DS-09-D-0001 Task Order #0021 to conduct supplemental post-excavation soil sampling and a groundwater investigation to assess the potential impacts of the former USTs. This SI Report was completed as part of UST Closure activities conducted at the Site. The UST closure and investigation activities were performed in accordance with the NJDEP Underground Storage Tanks Regulations (N.J.A.C. 7:14B), and the NJDEP Technical Requirements for Site Remediation (N.J.A.C. 7:26E).

Pursuant to the Site Remediation Reform Act (SRRA), PL. 2009, c. 60, enacted by the State of New Jersey on May 7, 2009, and implemented under the Administrative Requirements for Site remediation (ARRCS), the NJDEP Underground Storage Tanks Regulations (N.J.A.C.

7:14B), and the Technical Requirements for Site Remediation (N.J.A.C. 7:26E), the USACE retained LBG's Licensed Site Remediation Professional (LSRP), Mr. Thomas Waldron (LSRP# 591638), on June 23, 2011 to oversee the documentation of the UST closure, the post-excavation soil and groundwater investigation, and the preparation and submittal of this UST Closure/SI Report.

Soils. Tyree collected and analyzed 20 soil samples. E4/LBG collected and analyzed 44 soil samples collected from 31 soil borings at the Site. The results identified a) one area of elevated Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (EPH) that appears related to weathered petroleum and b) one area of elevated 2-methylnaphthalene. Additional monitoring is proposed for the EPH-impacted area. A deed notice will be placed on the 2-methylnaphthalene-impacted area. Beyond those two areas no further soil investigation/remedial activities are proposed.

All of the EPH results fall below the non-residential standards. Only one sample (CP-11- SB20) exceeds the product determination level. CP-11-SB20 showed EPH concentrations of 10,437 mg/kg; the product determination level is 8,000 mg/kg. Weathered petroleum was observed in soils at CP-11-SB20. The weathered petroleum did not appear to be associated with the diesel USTs. No further evaluation of EPH is proposed, except in the CP-11-SB20 area, ES-2

In an attempt to assess the constituents in the petroleum at CP-11-SB20, a sample collected in a subsequent boring CP-11-SB29 was analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs, PCBs, and TAL metals.

Only benzene was identified in excess of the IGWSRS. Several SVOCs (benzo[a]pyrene or benzo[a]anthracene) were also detected in excess of RDCSRS or NRDCSRS. These SVOCs typically are associated with historic fill material. Aluminum, magnesium and lead were detected in excess of RDCSRS, NRDCSRS or IGWSRS. Elevated aluminum and magnesium are consistent with ambient metal concentrations in urban areas. They are not thought to be the result of onsite operations. Lead is typically associated with historic fill material.

A monitoring well will be installed at CP-11-SB20 to characterize and evaluate the extent of the contamination related to the elevated EPH levels. A GC-fingerprint sample will be analyzed to characterize a fluid sample collected from the proposed monitoring well. Four soil borings will be advanced and sampled adjacent to the proposed monitoring well. The soil samples analysis will be contingent upon the GC-fingerprint results from the proposed monitoring well.

2-methylnaphthalene was identified in excess of the IGWSRS above the water table in the soils in the former filter housing area in sample PP-8 (Tyree) and in boring CP-11-SB09 (e4/LBG). The SPLP results for 2-methylnaphthalene indicate that this compound was not detected, suggesting that the 2-methyl-naphthalene will not likely impact groundwater.

Soil removal in the vicinity of the former filter housing area is not practical because the 2-methylnaphthalene-impacted soils are located above three 8,000-gallon USTs which have been abandoned in-place. According to the USACE, excavation of soils in this area would require the installation of a temporary coffer dam. This is not practical or feasible given the bulkhead construction in this area. Excavation would compromise key structural elements of the bulkhead. As a result, a deed notice will be placed on this area where 2-methylnaphthalene was detected in excess of the IGWSRS.

Groundwater. The network of eight monitoring wells sufficiently monitor groundwater flow and potential contamination in the shallow and deeper groundwater zones in the vicinity of the former UST, piping and fuel dispenser area. Shallow groundwater flow is consistently towards north away from the Hudson River during both low and high tide groundwater cycles.

Shallow groundwater flow to the Hudson River is impeded by the bulkheads.

Benzene and several SVOCs exceeded the Groundwater Quality Standards (GWQS) in some of the samples. The benzene concentration did not exceed the GWQS in any of the wells during the last two sampling events. As a result, no further groundwater sampling for VOCs is proposed. No additional monitoring wells are proposed; however, one round of groundwater sampling is proposed to evaluate the source of SVOCs detected in the groundwater collected from CP-11-MW01 through CP-11-MW03.

The SVOCs in the samples are typical constituents associated with incomplete combustion products that commonly occur in historic fill material. Therefore, filtered and unfiltered groundwater samples will be collected to assess whether the detected SVOCs maybe the result

ES-3

of sediments in groundwater samples. A synoptic round of groundwater samples at all eight wells will be collected during the sampling event.

Vapor Intrusion. No indoor nor sub-slab vapor concentrations were detected in excess of applicable NJDEP standards. As a result, no further Vapor intrusion investigation is warranted or proposed.

Receptor Evaluation. A sensitive receptor, the Hudson River, was identified adjacent to the Site. Historic fill and petroleum-impacted soils were identified at the site; however, no migration pathway to the Hudson River has been identified. Soils and historic fill are contained within the bulkheads and are covered by asphalt pavement. Because shallow groundwater flow is away from the bulkhead, no ecological evaluation is warranted or proposed.

Costs. The cost to implement these UST closures and investigation activities was approximately $250,000. This included a) removal of two 12,000-gallon diesel oil USTs; b) excavation, transportation, and recycling of contaminated soil and other materials generated during UST closures; c) post-excavation soil sampling and analysis; d) backfill, e) installation and sampling of a permanent monitoring-well network, and f) labor for sampling, construction oversight, and report preparation.

TOC-1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ ES-1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

2.0 PHYSICAL SETTING

2.1 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

2.2 HYDROGEOLOGY

2.3 SURFACE WATER AND WETLANDS

3.0 UST CLOSURE ACTIVITIES

3.1 UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK CLOSURE

3.1.1 Soil Management and Disposal

3.1.2 Tank Cleaning and Disposal Documents

3.1.3 Site Restoration

3.2 POST-EXCAVATION SOIL SAMPLING

3.3 GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION

3.4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.0 SITE INVESTIGATION

4.1 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION

4.2 GEOPHYSICAL INVESTIGATION

4.3 SOIL INVESTIGATION

4.3.1 Soil Sampling Results

4.4 GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION

4.4.1 Well Installation

4.4.2 Tidal Investigation

4.4.3 Groundwater Sampling

4.4.4 Groundwater Sampling Results

4.5 VAPOR INTRUSION INVESTIGATION

4.6 RECEPTOR EVALUATION

5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.0 REFERENCES

TOC-2

TABLES

Table 1 Tyree Soil Sample Summary Table 2 Tyree Soil Sample Analytical Results – EPH Table 3 Tyree Soil Sample Analytical Results – SVOCs Table 4 Tyree Groundwater Sample Analytical Results Table 5 Soil and Groundwater Sample Summary Table 6 Soil Sample Analytical Results - EPH, Naphthalene and 2-Methylnaphthalene Table 7 Soil Sample Analytical Results SPLP Table 8 Soil Sample Analytical Results TCL Organics & TAL Metals Table 9 Monitoring Well Construction and Groundwater Elevations Table 10 Groundwater Sample Analytical Results

FIGURES

Figure 1 Site Location Map Figure 2 Site Plan Figure 3 Tyree Soil Sample Results for EPH, Naphthalene and 2-Methylnaphthalene Figure 4 Tyree Groundwater Sample Exceedances Figure 5 Soil Sample Results EPH, Naphthalene and 2-Methylnaphthalene Figure 6 Groundwater Elevation Contours at High Tide – December 14, 2011 Figure 7 Groundwater Elevation Contours at Low Tide – December 14, 2011 Figure 8 Groundwater Elevation Contours at High Tide – August 21, 2012 Figure 9 Groundwater Elevation Contours at Low Tide – August 21, 2012 Figure 10 Groundwater Exceedances Map Figure 11 Proposed Deed Notice, Soil Borings and Monitoring Well Locations

APPENDICES

Appendix A UST Closure Activity Photographs Appendix B UST Closure Documents Appendix C Laboratory Data Packages Appendix D NJDEP Forms Appendix E Geophysical Survey Mapping Appendix F Soil Boring Logs Appendix G Monitoring Well Documents Appendix H Tidal Investigation Appendix I Groundwater Sampling Purge Logs

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The United States Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) - New York District conducted the closure of two 12,000-gallon diesel Underground Storage Tank (UST) which had been used to fuel marine vehicles at the Caven Point Marine Terminal (Site) in Jersey City, Hudson County New Jersey. This Closure/Site Investigation (SI) Report documents the decommissioning of the USTs and the soil and groundwater investigation, which occurred between March 2011 and December 2012.

Tyree Environmental Corp. (Tyree) under contract with the USACE supervised the UST removal activities and conducted initial post excavation sampling activities in March 2011.

The UST removals were performed by Tyree's subcontractor, Coastal Environmental Group, Inc. (Coastal), under the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) UST Closure Permit #N10-7538.

The USACE-NYD assigned e4|Earthworks (e4) and The Louis Berger Group, Inc. (LBG) under contract W912DS-09-D-0001 Task Order #0021 to conduct supplemental post-excavation soil sampling and a groundwater investigation to assess the potential impacts of the former USTs. This SI Report was completed as part of UST Closure activities conducted at the Site. The UST closure and investigation activities were performed in accordance with the NJDEP Underground Storage Tanks Regulations (N.J.A.C. 7:14B), and the NJDEP Technical Requirements for Site Remediation (N.J.A.C. 7:26E).

Pursuant to the Site Remediation Reform Act (SRRA), PL. 2009, c. 60, enacted by the State of New Jersey on May 7, 2009, and implemented under the Administrative Requirements for Site remediation (ARRCS), the NJDEP Underground Storage Tanks Regulations (N.J.A.C.

7:14B), and the Technical Requirements for Site Remediation (N.J.A.C. 7:26E), the USACE retained LBG's Licensed Site Remediation Professional (LSRP), Mr. Thomas Waldron (LSRP# 591638), on June 23, 2011 to oversee the documentation of the UST closure and the implementation of the soil and groundwater investigation described herein, and the preparation and submittal of this UST Closure/RI Report.

2.0 PHYSICAL SETTING

Caven Point Marine Terminal is located at 3 Chapel Avenue in a mixed residential, commercial and industrial setting in Jersey City, Hudson County, New Jersey. The Site occupies a 6.07-acre parcel situated on a 23-acre island along the western shoreline of New York Bay. Port Liberté, a residential/commercial development, also occupies the island and is located immediately north, east and west of the Site. The portion of Port Liberté property west of the Site is largely undeveloped. A scrap metal recycling facility is located approximately 1000 feet to the south of the Site, separated by a narrow bay of water. The Hudson River is present along the Site’s eastern and southern bulkheads. Figure 1 is an annotated U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute quadrangle (Jersey City, New Jersey) showing the Site location, local topography, drainage, and cultural features. The Site is relatively flat and is located at approximately six feet above mean sea level (msl).

Most of the Site is capped by asphalt surfaces and, in the eastern portion of the Site, by metal buildings and asphalt surfaces. Until recently, the metal buildings had contained USACE offices, various maintenance shops, and storage areas. Heavy wind and water damages were sustained to the buildings as a result of Hurricane Sandy in October 2012. The offices in the buildings are presently not occupied; the USACE has currently setup temporary offices in trailers staged in the western portion of the Site. The former diesel fuel USTs were located adjacent to the offices in the building along the eastern portion of the Site. A Site plan showing the location former UST locations is provided in Figure 2.

2.1 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

The Historic Fill Map of the Jersey City Quadrangle shows the Site as being underlain by historic fill, or “non-indigenous material placed on a site in order to raise the topographic elevation of the Site” (NJDEP, 2004). USACE dredging and fill plans, dated 1949, indicate that some of the fill material, where the former diesel USTs were located, was derived from dredge material obtained from the shallow sediments south of and immediately adjacent to the Site (USACE, 1949).

During subsurface investigations, which included soil boring and monitoring well installation, LBG encountered fill material beneath the pavement to approximately 12 to 15 feet below ground surface (bgs). The material consisted of gravel to sandy silt and included varying amounts of shell fragments, indicative of past dredging activities, and was found to be consistent with the definition of historic fill material, per N.J.A.C. 7:26E. According to the Surficial Geologic Map of Northern New Jersey, the native overburden and unconsolidated sediments underlying the fill consist of tidal marsh and estuarine deposits (Stone, 2002).

Native deposits were identified at some of the soil borings as bedded silt, sand, and/or sand and gravel deposits.

Regionally, the Site is situated within the Newark Basin of the Piedmont physiographic province. The Newark Basin is a southwest to northeast trending basin filled with 6,000 to 20,000 feet of alternating sedimentary and igneous rocks of late Triassic and early Jurassic age. According to the Bedrock Geologic Map of Northern New Jersey, the unconsolidated material at the Site is underlain by Manhattan Schist (Lower Cambrian or Late Proterozoic era) consisting of medium-dark gray, medium- to coarse-grained schist and gneiss (Drake, 1996). The unit is not exposed in the area, though it has been documented from sea level to 1400 feet below sea level.

2.2 HYDROGEOLOGY

The shallow groundwater table was encountered at approximately two to five feet bgs during the groundwater investigation. Based on a review of local topography, surface water bodies and wetlands, shallow groundwater would be expected to flow to the east-southeast towards the Hudson River, located adjacent to the Site. However, based on the water levels collected during this UST closure investigation, the bulkheads at the Site divert groundwater water flow to the north-northeast. Tidal groundwater fluctuations are observed in the groundwater monitoring wells; however, the overall groundwater flow to the north is constant throughout the tide cycle. Groundwater elevations and flow are discussed in more detail in Section 3.5.3.

2.3 SURFACE WATER AND WETLANDS

Surface water and wetlands were assessed as part of an ecological evaluation which was conducted at the Site and surroundings. The ecological evaluation was previously submitted to the NJDEP as part of a Receptor Evaluation submitted September 13, 2011. Pertinent discussions of the ecologic evaluation are provided below.

The nearest NJDEP mapped body of surface water is the Hudson River (Upper New York Bay) which surrounds the Site to the south, east, and west. This river is classified by the NJDEP Surface Water Quality Standards (SWQS) as SE2 (NJDEP, 2011). The classification SE2 is designated to saline estuarine waters with designated uses for: maintenance, migration and propagation of the natural and established biota; migration of diadromous fish;

maintenance of wildlife; secondary contact recreation; and any other reasonable uses. A dredged lagoon bisects the Port Liberté residential community and connects to the Hudson River northwest and northeast of the Site.

Wetland types mapped within the vicinity of the Site include deciduous scrub-shrub (PSS) and disturbed wetlands (modified) located approximately 2000 feet to the northwest. The disturbed wetlands are presently a part of the Liberty National Golf Club. Managed wetlands in maintained lawn are located approximately 1000 feet north of the Site in the Port Liberté residential community. Both are separated by the Site and by portions of the Hudson River.

3.0 UST CLOSURE ACTIVITIES

The UST closure activities occurred between March and April 2011 and included the removal of two 12,000-gallon diesel USTs. This section presents an overview of the closure activities that were performed including: UST and piping removal, cleaning and disposal, post-excavation sampling, groundwater sampling, sample analysis and site restoration, which were overseen by Tyree. A summary of the UST closure, sampling and site restoration activities is discussed below. The subsequent investigation and compliance activities performed by e4/LBG are discussed in Section 4.

3.1 UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK CLOSURE

In March 2011, Tyree, under contract with the UASCE, supervised the closure activities for two 12,000-gallon diesel USTs which were conducted by Coastal. The two USTs, fiberglass piping and in-line fuel filter were removed by Coastal. The USTs had fueled marine vessels at the marine terminal through a in-line filter system, and a dispenser area, which was located near the southwestern corner of the bulkhead shown in Figure 3.

According to Coastal (2011a), the closure activities were permitted under NJDEP UST Closure Permit #N10-7538 at the Site, Facility #005838 for tanks #E7 and #E8. The USTs were fiberglass-coated double-walled steel tanks which had been installed in or about 1990 and were approximately 21 years old. The tanks measured approximately 10 feet in diameter by 20.5 feet long and were anchored with concrete deadmen at a depth of approximately 14 feet below grade. The USTs were equipped with leak detection devices and induced cathodic protection systems. Approximately 6,280 gallons of fluids were removed from the piping and USTs prior to their removal. The top of the tanks were approximately 4 feet below grade.

According to USACE personnel (Mr. Ronald Rhea), the USTs were inspected for corrosion and holes; the USTs were in very good condition and there was no evidence of any holes.

The piping associated with these USTs were double-walled fiberglass lines which fed through a fuel filter system before reaching the dispenser area. The fuel dispenser had previously been removed; however, the concrete base and piping to the dispenser were still present at the time of the UST closures. During the pipe removals, one of the double-walled fiberglass pipes to the former dispenser area were damaged by the removal operations and limited residual diesel fuel in the line was released to the ground. According to the Confirmed Discharge Notification form signed by Coastal (Coastal, 2011b), approximately 2 gallons of diesel fuel was released from the non-pressurized pipe. The release was contained with adsorbent pads and a 5-gallon plastic bucket. The NJDEP hotline was notified of a discharge and case #11-03-04-1535-12 was assigned. Photographs of UST closure activities and the damaged pipe are provided in Appendix A.

Petroleum impacted soils in the immediate vicinity of the USTs and former dispenser were removed. The resulting UST excavation, which had encompassed both USTs, measured approximately 50 feet long by 30 feet wide and 13 feet deep. The excavation in the former dispenser area measured approximately 15 feet long by 10 feet wide and approximately 10 feet deep and was bounded by the bulkheads on the east and southern sides.

3.1.1 Soil Management and Disposal

Soil generated from the UST closure were temporarily stockpiled, tested and eventually disposed of off-site. The materials removed during the excavation activities were handled in accordance with all applicable federal, state and local regulations. A total of 237 tons of non-hazardous soil was removed as part of the UST closure. The soil was transported for disposal at the Clean Earth of Carteret facility in Carteret, New Jersey. Soil disposal documents, including manifests and weight tickets, are provided in Appendix B.

3.1.2 Tank Cleaning and Disposal Documents

The USTs were removed from the ground, power washed and disposed of offsite by SIMS Metal Management of Newark, NJ. Approximately 1,955-gallons of oil water were generated during the UST cleaning, and were disposed at the Clean Water facility located in Staten Island. Tickets from SIMS Metal Management and from the Clean Water facility are provided in Appendix B.

3.1.3 Site Restoration

The excavation was backfilled using certified clean fill (crushed quarry process) documented in Appendix B. The backfill material was capped with asphaltic or concrete pavement.

3.2 POST-EXCAVATION SOIL SAMPLING

After the removal of the USTs, post-excavation soil samples were collected by Tyree along the excavation sidewalls and former piping runs. Tyree collected 20 soil samples during the investigation: 11 samples from the sidewall of the excavation areas and nine were from below the piping. Two of the sidewall samples were taken from the fuel dispensary area and nine were taken from the sidewall of the tank excavation area. Six of the pipeline samples (PP-1 through PP-6) were collected along the piping runs which extended from the tank area to the dispenser area, two of the pipeline samples (PP-7 through PP-8) taken in the vicinity of the former filter housing and one (PP-9) was collected at the fuel dispensary excavation area.

Sidewall samples were collected from 6 to 7 feet bgs, and samples taken from below the pipe were collected from 2.5 to 3 ft bgs. Sample locations are shown on Figure 3.

A Soil Sample Summary Table indicates analytical parameters for each post-excavation sample collected by Tryee (Table 1). Each sample was submitted for EPH (Category 1) with a contingency analysis for 2-methylnaphthalene and naphthalene on a minimum of 25% of samples with EPH results exceeding the trigger concentration of 1,000 mg/kg. The EPH concentrations ranged from undetected to 7,640 mg/kg (Table 2). The EPH results for all samples were compared to the EPH (Category 1) criteria in Appendix 1 of the NJDEP guidance entitled, Protocol for addressing Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons dated August 9, 2010. The EPH results were compared to residential, non-residential and product determination criterion concentrations cited in the guidance. The EPH results are shown on Figure 3. The laboratory data packages are provided in Appendix C.

Four EPH samples (SW-3, SW-4, PP-8, and PP-9) exceeding 1,000 mg/kg were analyzed for 2-methylnaphthalene and naphthalene. In addition, Tyree analyzed six of the sidewall samples (SW-6, SW-7, SW-8, SW-9, SW-10, and SW-11) for all semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs). The SVOC results, including the SVOCS 2-methylnaphthalene and naphthalene, are summarized on Table 3. 2-Methylnaphthalene concentrations range from undetected to 32.8 mg/kg, with three samples (SW-3, SW-10, and PP-8) exceeding the impact to groundwater criterion of 5 mg/kg. None of the other SVOCs exceed the soil remediation standards.

3.3 GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION

During the tank removal activities, Tyree collected three grab groundwater samples from UST and dispenser excavations. Samples GW-1 and GW-2 were collected in the area of the tank excavation and sample GW-3 was collected from the fuel dispenser excavation. A discontinuous sheen was observed at GW-3 during collection of the sample. The groundwater samples were analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and SVOCs.

The groundwater sampling results are summarized on Table 4 and the sampling locations are shown on Figure 4. Chlorinated VOCs (1,1,1-trichloroethane and 1,1-dichloroethylene) and benzene were detected in the groundwater samples in excess of the Groundwater Quality Standards (GWQS). The chlorinated VOCs are typically associated with solvents and the benzene is generally associated with petroleum products. The SVOCs detected in the groundwater samples that exceeded the GWQS include constituents commonly associated with petroleum product (2-methylenaphthalene, naphthalene, fluoranthene, fluorene and pyrene), historic fill material (benzo[a]pyrene, benzo[b]fluoranthene, benzo[k]fluoranthene, indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene and dibenzo[a,h]anthracene), and a plastizer (bis[2-ethylhexyl]phthalate) commonly associated with lab contaminants. The SVOCs exceeding the GWQS are likely to be caused by sediments in the groundwater samples. SVOCs typically are not very soluble in water and will tend to adhere to sediment particles, resulting in false positive results.

The laboratory data packages are provided in Appendix C.

3.4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Conclusions and recommendations based on the UST closure and sampling activities conducted by Tyree are as follows:

The two 12,000-gallon USTs and piping removed were in very good condition Post-excavation sampling indicates that petroleum-impacted soils were identified;

however, none of the EPH concentrations exceeded the non-residential standards 2-methylnapthalene was identified in excess of the IGWSRS above the water table in the former filter housing area Additional soil sampling is needed to document the nature and extent of petroleum-impacted soils VOCs and SVOCs were identified above the GWQS in the groundwater. Additional groundwater sampling is needed to evaluate groundwater quality in the vicinity of the former USTs and dispenser area

Monitoring wells will be installed and sampled.

4.0 SITE INVESTIGATION

A soil and groundwater investigation was conducted by e4/LBG to supplement the Tyree post-excavation sampling and to assess the nature and extent of soil and groundwater impacts.

Field activities were conducted between August 2011 and August 2012. A NJDEP UST Facility Certification Questionnaire form is provided in Appendix D.

4.1 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION

Prior to e4/LBG commencing field activities a notification sign was posted and maintained along the Site perimeter fencing as part of the required public notification and outreach conducted in accordance with Administrative Requirements for the Remediation of contaminated Sites (ARRCs) 7:26C-1.7. The NJDEP's public notification form is provided in Appendix D.

4.2 GEOPHYSICAL INVESTIGATION

A geophysical investigation of the southeast portion of the Site was conducted to identify potential subsurface structures, utilities and anomalies to be avoided during soil boring and monitoring well installations. The geophysical survey was conducted by Hager-Richter Geoscience, Inc. (Hager-Richter) and included precision utility location (PUL), ground penetrating radar (GPR) and time-domain electromagnetic induction (EM61) surveys of the areas of interest. The three abandoned USTs, as well as electric, water, sewer and drain lines, and several unidentified utilities, were detected and marked out with pin-flags. A drawing generated from the geophysical survey is provided in Appendix E.

4.3 SOIL INVESTIGATION

In an effort to appropriately supplement the Tyree soil sampling results and to document the extent of petroleum-impacted soils in the vicinity of the former USTs, piping and dispenser areas, a total of 22 soil borings (CP-11-SB01 through CP-11-SB31) were advanced using a direct-push drill rig operated by a New Jersey licensed-borer from Tri-State Drilling Technologies, Inc. of Garden City, New York. Refer to Table 5 for a complete listing of soil samples collected.

The soil borings were advanced in 4-foot intervals using a direct-push drill rig, and continuous 2-inch diameter cores of soil were recovered via disposable acetate sleeves. Each soil interval was visually inspected for evidence of contamination and field-screened for organic vapors using a calibrated photoionization detector equipped with a 10.2 electron-volt lamp (PID). All soils were classified according to the Burmister Soil Classification System.

During drilling activities subsurface conditions were recorded, including soil type/color, PID readings, depth to groundwater, contaminant observations/odors, free-phase product, and drilling specifications. Boring logs are provided in Appendix E.

The soil samples were biased to the most contaminated 0.5-foot interval based on field observations or at the 0.5-foot interval above the shallow water table. Soil samples collected beneath the former piping runs were typically collected approximately 2.5 feet bgs. The UST sidewall samples were biased to the most contaminated interval and were typically collected from depth at or near the water table encountered at the time. The sidewall samples were collected at a frequency of 1 sample per linear foot of sidewall. The samples beneath the piping runs were collected to supplement the Tyree samples, such that, sampling beneath the piping runs were collected at a rate of one sample per 15 foot of piping. Two to three attempts were made to collect sidewall samples above the water table along the western and southern sidewalls of the former dispenser area excavation; however, samples could not be collected because of insufficient recovery. Soil samples were collected from beneath the dispenser area excavation at approximately depth of 10 to 10.5 feet.

The soil samples were delivered to ChemTech Laboratories (NJ Certification No. 20012) of Mountainside, New Jersey for analysis. The laboratory data packages are provided in Appendix C. Each of the soil samples was analyzed for EPH with analysis for 2-methylnaphthalene and naphthalene contingent upon EPH results. Twenty-five percent of the samples where EPH was detected over 1,000 mg/kg were analyzed for 2-methylnaphthalene and naphthalene. Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure (SPLP) analyses for 2-methylnaphthalene and naphthalene were conducted on select soil samples collected from above the water to evaluate site-specific IGWSRS.

4.3.1 Soil Sampling Results

Soil samples were collected from a total of 31 soil borings (CP-11-SB01 through CP-11- SB31) installed during two separate sampling events in August and December 2011. The EPH results for all samples were compared to the EPH criteria in Appendix 1 of the NJDEP guidance entitled, Protocol for Addressing Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons, dated August 9, 2010. The EPH results were compared to the residential, non-residential and product determination criterion concentrations cited in the guidance.

The EPH sampling results are summarized on Table 6 and depicted on Figure 5. None of the EPH samples exceeded the non-residential criterion of 54,000 mg/kg. Two of the EPH samples (CP-11-SB09 and CP-11-SB-20) exceeded the residential EPH criterion of 5,100 mg/kg. Contingency analysis for 2-methylnaphthalene and naphthalene indicated that 2-methylnaphthalene above the IGWSRS was detected in the soil column above the water table at boring CP-11-SB09, located at the former filter housing area. 2-methylnaphthalene was not detected in the SPLP analyses conducted on the CP-11-SB09 soil sample, as shown in Table 7.

One of the soil samples collected from boring CP-11-SB20 exceeded the product determination criterion of 8,000 mg/kg, indicating that product may present in the soil at this location. During the August 2011 sampling, several of the sidewall soil samples were collected at depths beneath the water table, based on water levels subsequently obtained once the monitoring wells were installed onsite. As a result, several of the sample locations were reoccupied and EPH samples were collected from depths biased to the most contaminated interval or from depths directly above the water table.

Elevated PID readings and heavily petroleum-impacted soils were observed at soil boring CP- 11-SB20. The petroleum at this location was weathered product that did not appear to be diesel fuel; furthermore, EPH results exceeded the product determination criterion. As a result, during the December 2011 sampling, soil boring CP-11-SB31 was collected within two feet of boring CP-11-SB20 and analyzed for EPH. In addition, a soil boring CP-11-SB29, was collected within 10 feet of approximately and analyzed for unknown petroleum product parameters consistent with the Technical Requirements for Site Remediation NJAC 7:26E Table 2-1. A soil sample collected from boring CP-11-SB29 was analyzed for EPH, TCL VOCs, SVOCs and PCBs. The soil sampling results are summarized on Table 8.

4.4 GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION

Monitoring wells were installed and sampled to characterize and delineate the extent of groundwater contamination.

4.4.1 Well Installation

A total of eight on-site monitoring wells were installed to characterize and delineate the groundwater impacts at the Site. In August 2011, three monitoring wells (CP-11-MW01 through CP-11-MW03) were installed to verify the groundwater sampling results previously obtained by Tyree from the UST and dispenser area excavations. In November 2011, five additional monitoring wells (CP-11-MW04 through CP-11-MW07 and CP-11-MW01D) were installed to horizontally and vertically delineate the extent of the contaminant plume.

The monitoring wells were installed using hollow-stem auger drilling technique with split-spoon samples collected to facilitate lithologic logging of each monitoring well. The wells were installed by a New Jersey-licensed well driller from Allied Drilling, Inc. (Allied) of Orangeburg, New York. Each split-spoon was field-screened for organic vapors using a calibrated photoionization detector equipped with a 10.2 electron-volt lamp (PID).

The shallow monitoring wells (CP-11-MW01 through CP-11-MW07) were constructed to a total depth of 12 feet bgs with 2-inch diameter, schedule 40, PVC casing threaded into a 10-foot length of 0.01-slotted PVC screen. The screened interval bridges the water table. The annular space between the PVC and the wall of each well boring was filled with #1 size well sand to a depth corresponding to at least two feet above the well screen. A seal was formed by using #00 size sand in the annular space immediately above the #1 well sand. The remaining annular space was grouted. The deep monitoring well (CP-11-MW01D) was installed to a total depth of 35 feet bgs with 2-inch diameter, schedule 40, PVC casing threaded into a 5-foot length of 0.01-slotted PVC screen. Each well is equipped with an expandable locking well plug and protective steel flush-mount housing over the PVC.

Monitoring well construction details are summarized on Table 9.

Each monitoring well was surveyed by a New Jersey-licensed land surveyor, and each surveyed elevation was used to determine groundwater elevations across the Site. Following well installation, the monitoring wells were developed with a submersible pump to remove as much sediment from the well as practical. Well development procedures were performed until a near turbid-free discharge was achieved. Well logs and Forms A and B are provided for each well in Appendix G.

4.4.2 Tidal Investigation

Continuous water levels were measured for over 72 hours during each of the three groundwater sampling events to evaluate the influence of tidal fluctuations on groundwater water levels and groundwater flow direction. The tidal investigation was conducted in accordance with the NJDEP, Ground Water Technical Guidance, dated April 3, 2012.

Groundwater elevations during the tidal cycles were obtained from water levels measured in each well by pressure transducers. The tidal stage in the Hudson River was obtained from either an onsite gauging station or from the Battery Park station in New York City. Water level hydrographs for each well during the investigation are provided in Appendix H.

Groundwater level fluctuations in the wells generally ranged from less than 0.5 foot to over four feet during the tidal cycle. The greatest ranges in fluctuations were measured in the deep well CP-11-MW01D where water level fluctuations over four feet were observed. Water levels in the shallow wells generally fluctuate less than a foot over any given tide cycle, while the Hudson River stage typically ranges between four and five feet. The hydrographs in Appendix H, show that in the shallow wells, the highest groundwater elevation is consistently observed at the upgradient well CP-11-MW03 and the low elevation is measured in the downgradient wells CP-11-MW01 and CP-11-MW04. Based on groundwater elevations observed in the shallow monitoring wells, groundwater flow is consistently towards the north during the entire tidal cycle. Groundwater elevations maps using water levels measured at all eight monitoring wells indicate that groundwater flow is northerly during both high tide and low tide. Groundwater flow to the Hudson River is impeded by the bulkhead. Groundwater contour maps for both high and low tide are shown for the December 2011 and August 2012 sampling events in Figures 7 through 10.

4.4.3 Groundwater Sampling

At the beginning of the groundwater sampling event, a complete round of groundwater elevation measurements were collected from all monitoring wells prior to purging and sampling activities. As each monitoring well plug was removed, a head space vapor reading was recorded with a PID. Water-levels were then measured from the top of each PVC well casing using an electronic water level indicator. The water in the monitoring wells were also visually checked for sheens and none were observed.

Groundwater samples were collected by low flow purging and sampling techniques in accordance with the NJDEP Field Sampling Procedures Manual (2005). Dedicated Teflon®-lined tubing was installed and connected to a QED SamplePro® bladder pump with a disposable Teflon® bladder. At wells with screens bridging the water table, pumps were placed at the mid-point of the water column, and a low-flow purge was initiated and maintained at a pumping rate not in exceedance of 500 ml/min. At the deep well (CP-11- MW01D) with the screen completely submerged, the pumps were set at the midpoint of the screen. A continuous flow was monitored for pH, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, conductivity, redox potential and temperature. Additionally, water levels, pump depth, purge rates/times, sampling times and weather were recorded on purge logs (Appendix I). After well purging and water stabilization requirements were met, groundwater samples were collected directly from the effluent (prior to flow-through water quality meter). All samples were stored and shipped with ice preservation at less than 4o Celsius temperature. All groundwater samples were analyzed for TCL VOCs and SVOCs. At least one duplicate sample and trip blank was collected for QA/QC samples during each sampling event.

The groundwater samples were delivered to ChemTech Laboratories (NJ Certification No.

20012) or Hampton Clark Veritech of Fairfield, New Jersey for analysis. See Table 5 for a complete listing of groundwater samples collected.

4.4.4 Groundwater Sampling Results

Three groundwater sampling events were completed at the Site. During the initial groundwater sampling event on September 15, 2011, only three monitoring wells (CP-11- MW01 through CP-11-MW03) were installed at the time of the sampling event. A total of eight wells (CP-11-MW01 through CP-11-MW07 and CP-11-MW01D) were sampled during each subsequent sampling event in December 2011 and August 2012. Synoptic groundwater levels measurements were collected prior to each sampling event. Groundwater levels and elevations are summarized on Table 9.

The groundwater sampling results are summarized on Table 10 with the sampling locations and exceedances of the NJDEP GWQS shown on Figure 11. The groundwater sampling results showed that during the first round of sampling, benzene was detected in excess of the GWQS at wells CP-11-MW01 and CP-11-MW02, located in the former tank excavation.

Benzene exceedances were not detected in the upgradient well, CP-11-MW03, or during the two subsequent events. SVOC exceedances typically associated with historic fill material were detected in three wells (CP-11-MW01 through CP-11-MW03). The SVOCs observed in the groundwater samples may be the result of sediments in the groundwater samples.

4.5 VAPOR INTRUSION INVESTIGATION

Based on the groundwater sampling results from the September 2011 sampling event, a vapor intrusion (VI) investigation was conducted by e4/LBG in November and December 2011 to evaluate possible vapor intrusion in the USACE offices immediately west of the former USTs. Benzene was identified in the groundwater exceeding the NJDEP vapor intrusion Groundwater Screening Level (GWSL) at well CP-MW01, which is situated within 30 feet of the USACE’s office building. The highest benzene concentration was detected at CP-MW01 at 46 ug/l and exceeded the benzene GWSL of 15 ug/l. The results of the VI investigation were provided to the NJDEP in LBG letter dated December 29, 2011.

In summary, the findings of the indoor, sub-slab and background air sampling showed that low level benzene concentrations were detected in the indoor, sub-slab and background air samples; however, none of the concentrations exceeded their respective standards. Both of indoor and the outdoor background samples exhibited concentrations below non-residential indoor air screening levels (NRIASL); and the sub-slab soil gas samples were below the non-residential soil gas screening levels (NRSGSL). As a result, no further VI sampling was proposed. In addition, no further investigation is proposed based on the most recent groundwater water sampling event, December 2012, which indicates that there are no groundwater constituents exceeding the GWSL, including benzene, which has been not detected during the last two rounds of groundwater sampling.

4.6 RECEPTOR EVALUATION

An Ecological Evaluation (EE) was conducted pursuant to the Technical Requirements for Site Remediation NJAC 7:26E-3.11 and Ecological Evaluation Technical Guidance document dated August 2011. The EE memorandum was prepared in support of a Receptor Evaluation for the Site and was provided to the NJDEP in LBG memorandum dated February 17, 2011.

In summary, on February 9, 2012, a site inspection was conducted by LBG scientists experienced in the use of techniques and methodologies for conducting ecological risk assessments. The Site and the surrounding lands were inspected for stressed or dead vegetation, discolored soil, seeps and other discharges. There were no signs of discolored sediments or stressed vegetation within the intertidal or scrub shrub wetlands. The Site and the surrounding properties were inspected for environmentally sensitive areas and any evidence of impacts from contamination, such as stressed or dead vegetation, discolored soil, sediment, or water, absence of biota, or presence of a seep or discharges. There were no discolored surface waters or sediments within the surface waters of the Hudson River and associated lagoons.

The nearest surface water body to the Site is the Hudson River (Upper New York Bay). The Hudson River surrounds the Site to the south, east, and west. This river is classified by the NJDEP Surface Water Quality Standards (SWQS) as SE2. Based site inspection, there are no known contaminants of ecological concern within the Site boundaries. Contaminated groundwater and soils identified within the Site are found at depths that are not directly accessible to wildlife. Environmentally sensitive areas surround the Site to the east, south, and west and include surface waters associated with the Hudson River. However, no seeps or sheens have been observed along the Site’s concrete bulkhead which impedes groundwater flow from directly discharging to the Hudson. As a result, no further ecological sampling or evaluation pursuant to N.J.A.C. 7:26E-4.7 is proposed.

In addition, no further investigation is proposed based on the most recent groundwater sampling events, which indicate that there is no groundwater migration pathway directly to the Hudson River. The groundwater flow is to the north and the contaminant plume has been horizontally and vertically delineated. Furthermore, petroleum-impacted soils and historic fill in the UST area are capped by impermeable surfaces (parking lot and buildings) or contained by bulkheads.

5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The conclusions and recommendations discussed in this section area based on the Tyree UST closure activities and the supplemental investigation activities conducted by e4/LBG.

Soils

None of the EPH results exceeded the non-residential standards and only one sample (CP-11-SB20) exceeded the product determination level. No further evaluation of EPH impacted soils is proposed, except where EPH exceeds the product determination level.

Weathered petroleum was observed in soils at boring CP-11-SB20, which did not appear to be associated with the diesel USTs. The results showed EPH concentrations of 10,437 mg/kg which exceeds the product determination level of 8,000 mg/kg.

Additional investigation of this area is proposed.

2-methylnaphthalene was identified in excess of the IGWSRS above the water table in the former filter housing area at boring CP-11-SB09. The SPLP results for 2-methylnaphthalene indicate that this compound was not detected, suggesting that the 2-methyl-naphthalene will not likely impact groundwater. E4/LBG findings in the former filter housing area are consistent with Tyree’s findings which indicated that 2-methylnaphthalene was present in the soils (Sample PP-8) above the water table in excess of the IGWSRS.

A sample collected at boring CP-11-SB29 was analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs, PCBs, and TAL metals in an attempt to assess the constituents in the petroleum discovered at CP-11-SB20. Only benzene was identified in excess of the IGWSRS. Several SVOCs (benzo[a]pyrene and benzo[a]anthracene), which are typically associated with historic fill material, were also detected in excess of RDCSRS or NRDCSRS.

Aluminum, magnesium and lead were detected in excess of RDCSRS, NRDCSRS or IGWSRS. The aluminum and magnesium are consistent with ambient metal concentrations in urban areas and are not thought to be the results of onsite operations.

Lead is a metal typically associated with historic fill material.

Soil removal in the vicinity of the former filter housing area is not practical because the 2-methylnaphthalene-impacted soils are located above three 8,000-gallon USTs which have been abandoned in-place. According to the USACE, excavation of soils in this area would require the installation of a temporary coffer dam which is not practical or feasible given the bulkhead construction in this area. As a result, a deed notice will be placed on the area where 2-methylnaphthalene was detected in excess of the IGWSRS. The deed notice area is shown on Figure 11.

No further soil investigation of the USTs, piping and dispenser area is proposed.

The elevated EPH levels detected in the soil sample from boring CP-11-SB20 will be evaluated further to characterize and evaluate the extent of the contamination by installing a monitoring well at CP-11-SB20. A GC-fingerprint sample be analyzed to characterize a fluid sample collected from the proposed monitoring. Four soil borings will be advanced and sampled adjacent to the proposed monitoring well. The soil samples analysis will be contingent upon the GC-fingerprint results from the proposed monitoring well, discussed below. The proposed monitoring wells and soil borings are shown on Figure 11.

Groundwater

The eight monitoring wells sufficiently monitor shallow and deep groundwater in the vicinity of the USTs, piping and dispenser area.

Shallow groundwater flow to the Hudson River is impeded by the bulkheads.