LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. PROFESSIONAL GROUND-WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING SERVICES 76 PEARL STREET SUITE 203 ESSEX JUNCTION, VT 05452 November 23, 2010 802-288.9600 FAX 802-288-9881 ~v~nvIbgwcb.coin Mr. John Ferraro Husky Injection Molding Systems, Ltd. 288 North Road Milton, VT 05468 RE: Interior Well Installation and Sampling and Hydrostatic Testing of BO-5; VTSMS No. 2009-4003 Dear John, This letter is intended to summarize recent environmental work conducted by Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. (LBG) within the platelirie at the Husky Injection Molding Systems, Ltd. (Husky) facility in Milton, Vermont (the Site). Two 2-inch diameter monitor wells (1W-I and IW-2) were installed within the plateline between Boehringer machine No. 5 (BO-5) and the recovery well, and a groundwater sample was collected from Interior Well No. I (IW-l). Additionally, a sample of Henry Filter coolant was collected from within the Henry Filter apparatus, where the coolant leaves the filter, bound for machines on the plateline. A hydrostatic test was performed on the interstitial space beneath BO-5 in an effort to assess the potential for coolant to be leaking through cold joints in the concrete structure. This work was proposed by LBG in a Work Scope dated July 20, 2010, which was approved by you and the Vermont Sites Management Section (VTSMS). A Site Location Map is provided as Figure 1 and a Site Plan is included as Figure 2. The Site has not been re-surveyed since the interior wells were installed, so their location on the Site Plan is approximate, as is measured groundwater elevation in 1W- 1. Results of the pending high vacuum extraction pilot test, also proposed in the July 20, 2010 Work Scope, will be submitted under separate cover following completion of the test. Interior Well Installation On September 1, 2010 LBG personnel installed two 2-inch diameter monitoring wells on the plateline, between BO-5 and the recovery well. The wells were installed with the goals of obtaining more geological and hydrogeological information about the source of Henry Filter coolant in groundwater beneath the plateline, and to serve as monitoring points for the pending high vacuum extraction test. The geologic logs for IW-l and IW-2 are included as Appendix 1. The interior wells were installed using a modified air knife apparatus. Vermont Concrete Cutting, Inc. of Waterbury, Vermont, was subcontracted to core 10-inch diameter holes through the 9-inch thick plateline floor at each well location. A hole was then bored into substrate beneath the building with the modified air knife equipment. The modified air knife method of soil coring relies CONNECTICUT OFIIO • ILLINOIS . SOUTH DAKOTA . PENNSYLVANIA . FLORIDA NEW JERSEY . MINNESOTA TEXAS . WISCONSIN NEW YORK . MISSOURI VERMONT . MICHIGAN . GEORGIA
Transcript
LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC.PROFESSIONAL GROUND-WATER AND
Mr. John FerraroHusky Injection Molding Systems, Ltd.288 North RoadMilton, VT 05468
RE: Interior Well Installation and Sampling and Hydrostatic Testing of BO-5; VTSMS No.2009-4003
Dear John,
This letter is intended to summarize recent environmental work conducted by Leggette,Brashears & Graham, Inc. (LBG) within the platelirie at the Husky Injection Molding Systems, Ltd.(Husky) facility in Milton, Vermont (the Site). Two 2-inch diameter monitor wells (1W-I and IW-2)were installed within the plateline between Boehringer machine No. 5 (BO-5) and the recovery well,and a groundwater sample was collected from Interior Well No. I (IW-l). Additionally, a sample ofHenry Filter coolant was collected from within the Henry Filter apparatus, where the coolant leavesthe filter, bound for machines on the plateline. A hydrostatic test was performed on the interstitialspace beneath BO-5 in an effort to assess the potential for coolant to be leaking through cold jointsin the concrete structure. This work was proposed by LBG in a Work Scope dated July 20, 2010,which was approved by you and the Vermont Sites Management Section (VTSMS).
A Site Location Map is provided as Figure 1 and a Site Plan is included as Figure 2. The Sitehas not been re-surveyed since the interior wells were installed, so their location on the Site Plan isapproximate, as is measured groundwater elevation in 1W- 1.
Results of the pending high vacuum extraction pilot test, also proposed in the July 20, 2010Work Scope, will be submitted under separate cover following completion of the test.
Interior Well Installation
On September 1, 2010 LBG personnel installed two 2-inch diameter monitoring wells on theplateline, between BO-5 and the recovery well. The wells were installed with the goals of obtainingmore geological and hydrogeological information about the source of Henry Filter coolant ingroundwater beneath the plateline, and to serve as monitoring points for the pending high vacuumextraction test. The geologic logs for IW-l and IW-2 are included as Appendix 1.
The interior wells were installed using a modified air knife apparatus. Vermont ConcreteCutting, Inc. of Waterbury, Vermont, was subcontracted to core 10-inch diameter holes through the9-inch thick plateline floor at each well location. A hole was then bored into substrate beneath thebuilding with the modified air knife equipment. The modified air knife method of soil coring relies
CONNECTICUT OFIIO • ILLINOIS . SOUTH DAKOTA . PENNSYLVANIA . FLORIDA NEW JERSEY . MINNESOTA
TEXAS . WISCONSIN NEW YORK . MISSOURI VERMONT . MICHIGAN . GEORGIA
on non-impact based soil removal techniques, primarily a combination of vacuum and physicalremoval. Vacuum was applied to the air knife by way of a rotary blower and drum head vacuum.Physical removal of soil occurred in a manner similar to that of a hand augur.
In 1W-I angular crushed stone was encountered immediately beneath the plateline floor to adepth of 2.6 feet below the floor surface. Uniform sand, presumably construction fill, was foundbeneath the plant mix to a depth of 7.3 feet below the plateline floor. The bottom six inches of sandwere wet, suggesting that the groundwater table had been encountered. Below the sand, dense, nativetill was encountered. This material was reported as being moist. The well was set at a depth of 7.8feet below the top of the casing.
Geologic material encountered while boring IW-2 differed from that of 1W-i. Angular crushedstone was again found to a depth of 2.6 feet beneath the plateline floor. Native till was found at 2.6feet below the floor surface as opposed to the uniform sand discovered in 1W-I at the same depthbelow grade. The till encountered was very dense and dry. The well was set at a depth of 7.3 feetbelow the top of the casing.
Soils from both wells were continuously screened with a photoionization detector (PID) forvolatile organic compounds (VOCs) using conventional headspace techniques. A PID measurementof 7.1 parts per million by volume (ppmv) was encountered in 1W-I from a sample collected withinthe wet sand at approximately seven feet below grade. LBG personnel noted an odor from soils in1W-I at depths corresponding to the positive PID reading. No PID measurements above backgroundlevels or odors were reported in soils collected from IW-2. It should be noted that PID measurementsup to 5.0 ppmv have been recorded by LBG from the ambient air on the plateline.
Hydrostatic Test of BO-5 Interstitial Space
A hydrostatic test was performed on the interstitial space beneath BO-5 in an effort to determineif Henry Filter coolant observed in groundwater beneath the plateline could be leaking through coldjoints in the concrete structure. This test was recommended by LBG as a follow up to the BoehringerInvestigation completed in the Spring of 2010 and summarized in a letter to you, dated June 30,2010. The Boehringer Investigation included a hydrostatic test of the Boehringer machine sumps(BO-4, BO-5 and BO-6). Boehringer machines were selected for inspection by Husky and LBG dueto the unexplained accumulation of Henry Filter coolant within their sumps. The test was performedby filling the sumps with water to a level even with the base of the raceway leading to the interstitialspace. Water level elevation was measured over two days to assess the potential for Henry Filtercoolant to be leaking into groundwater through the sumps. We concluded that the sumps do notappear to be leaking; however, the potential for Hemy Filter coolant to be lealcing through otherareas ofthe Boehringer machines’ foundations remained unanswered.
The hydrostatic test performed between September 1 and 8, 2010 was conducted in a similarmanner to the test conducted in the Spring 2010, but the interstitial space beneath the machine wasfilled with water instead of the sump. A mechanical seal was fabricated to fit into the racewayconnecting the sump and interstitial space. Environmental Products and Services of Vermont (EPS)was subcontracted to enter the BO-5 sump under a confined space permit in order to install a sealwithin the raceway. The seal included a 90 degree elbow and PVC riser pipe that extended above the
elevation of the interstitial space and used to measure the static water level (see Mechanical SealDetail Sketch, Figure 3, for more detail). Water was introduced into the interstitial space through thePVC riser to an elevation 5.31 feet below the plateline floor, 0.21 feet above the base of the PVCelbow.
Water level within the interstitial space beneath BO-5 was measured twice over a period of oneweek. These measurements are summarized below, in Table 1.
Table 1. A hydrostatic test was peiforined on the interstitial space beneath BO-5 from September 1 to 8, 2010. Waterlevel in the interstitial space was measured using a Solinst inteface probe or an electronic water level meter from areference point on the platelinefloo;; at the top of the BQ-5 sump. All depths presented below are standardized to theSolinst inteiface probe.
Date & Time Depth to Water9/1/10 10:30 5.319/3/tO 09:53 5.319/8/10 13:48 5.29
Based on results from the hydrostatic test cold joints within the concrete structure do not appearto be leaking at a measurable rate considering the methods used in BO-5. In contrary, the slight risein water level over time suggests that any coolant slowly leaking into the interstitial space from BO5 is being held within the concrete structure before flowing into the sump. Husky personnel removecoolant from within the sump as needed for disposal by evaporation. According to Husky personnel,coolant has not been accumulating in the sump recently, and therefore coolant evacuation effortsfrom the sump have been suspended.
Groundwater and Henry Filter Coolant Sampling
Scope of WorkOn September 3, 2010, LBG personnel were present on-Site to measure depth to groundwater in
the newly installed interior wells. Groundwater was encountered in 1W-i, though IW-2 was found tobe dry. Depth to groundwater measurements are presented below, in Table 2. 1W-i was developedto establish hydraulic connectivity with the surrounding aquifer and was easily pumped dry duringthe process. A sample of purge water was collected in a six-ounce glass jar for refractometer testingby Husky; a coolant concentration of 5% was reported. (It should be noted that full strength coolantin the Henry Filter system has a concentration of 13% as measured by a refractometer.)
On September 8, 2010, LBG returned to Husky to measure depth to groundwater in the newinterior wells and the recovery well, collect a groundwater samples from the interior wells, andcollect a sample from the coolant leaving the Henry Filter, bound for machines on the plateline. 1W-2 remained dry and therefore was not sampled. Prior to collecting a groundwater sample from 1W-i,the well was purged with a peristaltic pump and dedicated polyethylene tubing until it ran dry.Following recharge, the well was sampled for VOCs (U.S. EPA Method No. 8260); TPH fingerprint(U.S. EPA Method No. 8015); total arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel,silver, thallium, and zinc (U.S. EPA Method No. 6010); chloride (U.S. EPA Method No. 9056); andBis(2-ethyhexyl)Phthalate (U.S. EPA Method No. 8270). A sample for the same suite of parameterslisted above was also collected from the Henry Filter at a sample port located immediately before
coolant leaves the filter for the plateline. All samples were collected in laboratory-providedglassware and shipped on ice, under chain of custody to ChemServe Environmental Analysts ofMilford, NH.
The Henry Filter coolant sample was collected primarily with the goal of comparing analyticaldata from the recovery well and new interior wells to ±11 strength coolant. Information about thecomposition of Henry Filter coolant is limited due to its classification as “proprietary information.”The origin of some compounds that have been detected in groundwater in the recovery well cannoteasily be explained by on-Site processes and materials. Analysis of the Henry Filter coolant wasconducted in order to gain flirther insight into the source of all compounds presently detected ingroundwater beneath the plateline. In order to thrther aid in this effort, a TPH fingerprint comparisonwas made using gas chromatography (GC) chromatograms.
ResultsDepth to groundwater measurements are summarized below, in Table 2. The interior wells have
not yet been surveyed, so groundwater elevation within the wells cannot be calculated at this time.LBG will complete the survey in conjunction with the high vacuum extraction test. Results of thesurvey and corresponding calculations of groundwater table elevation beneath the plateline will bepresented in the final report for work completed in accordance with the July 20, 2010 Work Scope.
Table 2. Depth to groundwater was measured in 1W-I and IW-2 on September 3 and 8, 2010, and in RW-1 on September8, 2010. Measurements were made with either a Solinst inteiface probe or an electronic water level metei~ All depthspresented below are standardized to the Solinst inteiface probe.
~/7 /7 ~ /~/\/~/ fl LI. L
;wduw~ ~tECDite, /7 ~CpLIIL07~ ~7~/,V Groundwater
1W 1 9/3/10 6.259/8/10 6.27
IW-2 9/3/10 Dry9/8/10 Dry
RW-l 9/8/10 5.62
Following receipt of the laboratory report, analytical results were reviewed by LBG to ensurevalidity of the data and to request revisions by ChemServe as necessary. Analytical results aresummarized below, in Table 3 and a complete laboratory report, including the GC chromatograms,is included as Attachment 1.
Table 3. Summaiy of analytical results collectedfrom interior sampling locations (Recove;y Well, Interior Well and Henty Filter,). Results ofsamples collectedfrom 1W-i and the Henry Filter on September 8. 2010 are discussed herein
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
4-IsopropyltolueneMethylene Chloride
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)Phthalate
Notes: 1. Analytical data from July 2009 originates from sampies Injection Molding Systems, Ltd. personnel; All other samp’2. Metals analyzed by U.S. EPA Method No. 6010; TPH was analyzed by U.S. EPA Method No. 8015; Halogens were analyzed by U.S. EPA Method No. 9056
(unless otherwise noted); VOCs were analyzed by U.S. EPA Method No. 8260; SVOCs were analyzed by U.S. EPA Method No. 8270.3. RW - recovery well; pg/L - micrograms per liter; mglL - milligrams per liter; TPH - Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons, VOCs - volatile organic compounds;
SVOCs - semi-volatile organic compounds; DRO - diesel-range organic TPH compounds; VGES - Vermont Groundwater Enforcement Standards; NE - not established;NT - not tested; NR - not reported; J-value - Reported value is ≥ the method detection limit, but <the quantitation limit; 1W - interior well; ND — not detected.
4. Ex. Well - sample collected from groundwater within a sump dug in a corner of the gun drill excavation; Henry - sample collected from the Henry Filter system.5. Samples analyzed by Endyne, Inc., ChemServe Environmental Analysts, and AMRO Environmental Laboratories Corporation.6. Bold, italicized values exceed the VGES; * Secondary VGES; All other VGES values reported are primary standards.
The analytical results appear to be largely consistent with the trends previously observedin groundwater quality in the recovery well. Beryllium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel and zincwere detected in 1W-i above the laboratory reporting limits and beryllium, lead and nickelexceeded their respective Vermont Groundwater Enforcement Standards (VGES). TPH wasdetected well above the laboratory reporting limit, though no formal VGES exists for comparisonpurposes. Chloride was reported in excess of the VGES in 1W-i. Acetone, 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene, 1,3 ,5-Trimethylbenzene, 4-Isopropyltoluene, and Methylene Chloride werethe VOC compounds detected above the laboratory reporting limits. Acetone, 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene, 1 ,3,5-Trimethylbenzene, and Methylene Chloride exceeded the VGES. NoBis(2-ethylhexyl)Phthalate was detected above the laboratory reporting limit, though it should benoted that an elevated method detection limit was used due to matrix interference and subsequentdilution of the sample for analysis.
In the Henry Filter sample a similar suite of compounds was detected. Beryllium,chromium copper, lead, nickel, silver and zinc were detected above the laboratory reportinglimits for total metals. TPH, chloride and Bis(2-ethylhexyl)Phthalate were also detected.Acetone, 4-Isopropyltoluene and Mehtylene Chloride were the only VOCs reported. Henry Filtercoolant samples were not compared to the VGES as the sample is not groundwater and thereforeis not subject to such scrutiny.
Discussion
Geologic and hydrogeologic conditions discovered beneath the plateline while installingthe new interior monitoring wells proves that variability exists in the substrate and groundwaterflow direction. The groundwater table elevation in 1W-I and the recovery well is higher than thebottom of IW-2; however, IW-2 remains dry. This can be explained by the geologic materialencountered in each well; more porous, non-native material surrounds IW-l and the recoverywell, while dense, native till surrounds IW-2. Groundwater flow beneath the plateline is clearlycontrolled by preferential pathways through less dense material, and therefore, linearrelationships between potential sources of contamination and groundwater sampling pointscannot be assumed.
Based upon results of the TPH fingerprint comparison, Henry Filter coolant does appearto be impacting groundwater beneath the plateline. The analytical results of other parameterslend farther evidence to this conclusion. Acetone and Bis(2-ethylhexyl)Phthalate were twocompounds whose presence in groundwater beneath the plateline had previous been puzzling andtheir concurrent presence in Henry Filter coolant is useful to know.
The relative concentration of acetone in the coolant compared to 1W-i and previousrecovery well samples remains puzzling since it is not proportionate to coolant concentration(recovery well samples consistently have refractometer results of approximately 11-13% and1W-I was approximately 5%; the concentration of fall strength Henry Filter coolant in thesystem is 13%).
It is worth noting that TPH concentrations in the Henry Filter coolant and 1W-i are twoorders of magnitude lower than TPH concentrations reported in the recovery well during theWinter/Spring of 2010.
The presence of 1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene, 1 ,3,5-Trimethylbenzene and 4-Isopropyltoluenein 1W-i is also curious, as these compounds have never been detected in the recovery well andonly 4-Isopropyltoluene was reported above the method detection limits in the Henry Filtercoolant sample.
Results of the hydrostatic test on the interstitial space beneath BO-5 do not suggest thatcold joints within the concrete structure are leaking. In contrary, the slight rise in water levelover time suggests that any coolant slowly leaking into the interstitial space from BO-5 is beingheld within the concrete structure before flowing into the sump for subsequent removal by Huskypersonnel.
Recommendations
A confirmation round of samples should be collected from both 1W-i and the HenryFilter to verify the results of September 8, 2010 sampling efforts. Samples should be collectedfor the same suite of parameters; VOCs (U.S. EPA Method No. 8260); TPH fingerprint (U.S.EPA Method No. 8015); total arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel,silver, thallium, and zinc (U.S. EPA Method No. 6010); chloride (U.S. EPA Method No. 9056);and Bis(2-ethyhexyl)Phthalate (U.S. EPA Method No. 8270).
LBG intends to perform a one-month high vacuum extraction test and a limited survey ofthe Site to incorporate the new interior wells into the existing Site Plan before 2011.
Exterior work proposed for the Site in a separate July 20, 2010 Work Scope should alsobe completed.
Please feel free to contact John Diego or me with any questions or concerns you mayhave.
Regards,Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc.
K~~rawdEnvironmental Scientist
Cc. Mr. Gerold Noyes, J’7’DEC
Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc.
FIGURES
LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC.
0
SITE LOCATION MAP
FIGURE:CHECKED BY:
PREPARED BY:
LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC.Professional Groundwater and Environmental Services
76 Pearl Street, Suite 203
Essex Junction, VT 05452
(802) 288-9600
FILE: DRAWN BY:q:\Env. Proj./Husky DDR
L
GB
DATE: 10/8/091JRD
SITE
LOCATION
COPYRIGHT (C) 2006, MAPTECH, INC. (978) 792-1000
SOURCE: United States Geological Survey 7.5 Minute Topographic
Map for the Milton, VT Quadrangle
FEETSCALE IN
1,000
HUSKY INJECTION MOLDING SYSTEMS LTD
MILTON, VERMONT
NORTH ROAD
0
SITE LOCATION MAP
FIGURE:CHECKED BY:
PREPARED BY:
LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC.Professional Groundwater and Environmental Services
76 Pearl Street, Suite 203
Essex Junction, VT 05452
(802) 288-9600
FILE: DRAWN BY:q:\Env. Proj./Husky DDR
L
GB
DATE: 10/8/091JRD
SITE
LOCATION
COPYRIGHT (C) 2006, MAPTECH, INC. (978) 792-1000
SOURCE: United States Geological Survey 7.5 Minute Topographic
Map for the Milton, VT Quadrangle
FEETSCALE IN
1,000
HUSKY INJECTION MOLDING SYSTEMS LTD
MILTON, VERMONT
NORTH ROAD
SITE PLAN
HUSKY INJECTION MOLDING SYSTEMS LTD
FIGURE:CHECKED BY:
PREPARED BY:
MILTON, VERMONT
LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC.Professional Groundwater and Environmental Services
76 Pearl Street, Suite 203
Essex Junction, VT 05452
(802) 288-9600
FILE: DRAWN BY:Q:\ENV.PROJ.\HUSKY DDR
L
GB
DATE: 9/22/092JRD
NORTH ROAD
NO. DATE DESCRIPTION BY
1 inch = ft.
( IN FEET )
GRAPHIC SCALE
040 40 80
40
16020
RECOVERY WELL
LEGEND
WELL CASING ELEVATION IN UNITS OF FEET93.20
REFERENCES:
1. THIS PLAN REFERENCES AN ELEVATION AND DISTANCE SURVEY CONDUCTED BY LBG ON 9/17/2009.
CATCH BASIN
DY
H FIRE HYDRANT
SOIL BORING
TREE (APPROXIMATE)
TRENCH
GROUNDWATER MONITOR WELL
INTERIOR WELL INSTALLATION11/19/101 DDR
SITE PLAN
HUSKY INJECTION MOLDING SYSTEMS LTD
FIGURE:CHECKED BY:
PREPARED BY:
MILTON, VERMONT
LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC.Professional Groundwater and Environmental Services
76 Pearl Street, Suite 203
Essex Junction, VT 05452
(802) 288-9600
FILE: DRAWN BY:Q:\ENV.PROJ.\HUSKY DDR
L
GB
DATE: 9/22/092JRD
NORTH ROAD
NO. DATE DESCRIPTION BY
1 inch = ft.
( IN FEET )
GRAPHIC SCALE
040 40 80
40
16020
RECOVERY WELL
LEGEND
WELL CASING ELEVATION IN UNITS OF FEET93.20
REFERENCES:
1. THIS PLAN REFERENCES AN ELEVATION AND DISTANCE SURVEY CONDUCTED BY LBG ON 9/17/2009.
CATCH BASIN
DY
H FIRE HYDRANT
SOIL BORING
TREE (APPROXIMATE)
TRENCH
GROUNDWATER MONITOR WELL
INTERIOR WELL INSTALLATION11/19/101 DDR
DY
H
RW-1
MW-5
MW-6
MW-1
MW-2
MW-3
MW-4
SB-6SB-5
LOCATED
250 FEET
STORMWATER
DETENTION
POND 1
STORMWATER
DETENTION
POND 2
99.51
98.98
94.14
101.66
99.37
96.22
96.99
O.H. DOOR O.H. DOOR O.H. DOOR O.H. DOOR O.H. DOORS
HENRY
FILTER
GRAVEL
ASPHALT
GRAVEL
RAMP
@ 4
.6
HUSKY INJECTION
MOLDING SYSTEMS LTD
TOP OF EMBANKMENT
TOP OF EMBANKMENT
SURFACE WATER
DRAINAGE AREA
94.16
93.16
92.92
93.51
91.61
93.98
92'
93'
94'
93'
92'
91.63
92'
92
'
93
'
94
'
IW-2
IW-1
APPENDIX 1
LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC.
SITE: Husky Injection Molding Systems Ltd. BORING NO.: IW-1
Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 76 Pearl Street, Suite 203 Essex Junction, VT 05452 www.lbgweb.com
COMMENTS: DURATION: Until well ran dry. ABBREVIATIONS: bgs=below ground surface; EOB=End of boring; GS=ground surface; NM=not measured; ppmv=parts per million by volume.
COMMENTS: No groundwater was encountered. DURATION: N/A ABBREVIATIONS: bgs=below ground surface; EOB=End of boring; GS=ground surface; NM=not measured; ppmv=parts per million by volume.
