Si&te of New Hampshire DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTA$?§ERVICES JN"HDES 6 Hazen Drive, P.O. Box 95, Concord, NH 03302-0095 603-271-3503 FAX 603-271-2867 TDD Access: Relay NH 1-800-735-2964
SITE INSPECTION PRiORITIZATION INTERNAL CONCURRENCE
The Site Inspection Prioritization report for:
Dated: iQh^nt______has been completed by the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, Waste Management Division (NHDES-WMD) under the Multi-Site Cooperative Agreement (MSCA) with the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Following final review by appropriate NHDES-WMD staff, this report has been found to be: .
Acceptable for submission to USEPA as written.
Not acceptable for submission to USEPA.
____ Acceptable for submission to USEPA, provided that the changes on the attached page(s) are made.
^Concurrences:
John Regan / Date Hazardous Waste Remediation Bureau
Gary U£njh, Supervisor Date Hazardous Waste Remediation Bureau
Charles Berube Date MSCA Coordinator Hazardous Waste Remediation Bureau
AIR RESOURCES DIV. WASTE MANAGEMENT DIV. WATER RESOURCES DIV. WATER SUPPLY & POLLUTION CONTROL Dl' 64 No. Main Street 6 Hazen Drive 64 No. Main Street P.O. Box 95 P.O. Box 2033 Concord. N.H. 03301 P.O. Box 2008 Concord. N.H. 03302-0095 Concord. N.H. 03302 2033 Tel. 603-271-2900 Concord. N.H. 03302-2008 Tel. 603-271-3503 Tel. 603-271-1370 FAX 603-271-2456 Tel. 603-271-3406 FAX 603-271-2181 FAX 603-271-1381 FAX 603-271-7894 FILE
FINAL SITE INSPECTION PRIORITIZATION REPORT FOR MOHAWK TANNERY NASHUA, NEW HAMPSHIRE
CERCLIS NO.NHD981889629
Prepared by:
New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services Waste Management Division
November 1996
^ TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page
Introduction ...... 1
Site Description ...... 1
Operational and Regulatory History and Waste Characteristics ...... 2
Waste/Source Sampling ...... NA
Groundwater Pathway ...... 7
Surface Water Pathway ...... 18
Soil Exposure Pathway ...... 25
Air Pathway ...... 27
Summary ...... 29
References...... 31
Attachments:
Appendix A
Appendix B List of Figures
Figure No. Title
1. Location Map ...... (3-1)
2. Site Sketch ...... (3-2)
3. Groundwater Elevation Contour Plan ...... (3-3)
4. Surface Water Pathway Target Plan ...... (19)
List of Tables
Table No. Title Page
1. Source Evaluation for Mohawk Tannery Source Areas 1-6 ...... (4)
2. Hazardous Waste Quantity for Mohawk Tannery Source Areas 1-6 ...... (5)
3. Sample Summary: Mohawk Tannery ...... (6)
4. Summary of Analytical Results Source Sample Analysis for Mohawk Tannery...... (9-15)
5. Public and Private Groundwater Supply Sources Within Four Miles of Mohawk Tannery...... (16)
6. Estimated Drinking Water Populations Served by Groundwater Sources Within Four Miles of Mohawk Tannery ...... (17)
7. Water Bodies Within the Surface Water Segment of Mohawk Tannery ...... (20)
8. Drinking Water Intakes Along the 15-Mile Downstream pathway from Mohawk Tannery ...... (21)
9. Estimated Population Within Four Miles of Mohawk Tannery (26) FINAL SITE INSPECTION PRIORITIZATION REPORT MOHAWK TANNERY NASHUA, NH NHD 981889629
INTRODUCTION
The New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, Waste Management Division (WMD) was requested by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (ERA) New England, to perform a Site Inspection Prioritization (SIP) of the Mohawk Tannery property in Nashua, New Hampshire.
Background information used in the generation of this report was obtained through file searches at the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (DES) and EPA, telephone interviews with town officials and individuals knowledgeable of the property history and characteristics, and conversations with other federal, state, and local agencies.
This package follows the guidelines developed under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended, commonly referred to as Superfund. These documents do not necessarily fulfill the requirements of other EPA regulations such as those under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) or other federal, state, or local regulations. SIPs are intended to provide a preliminary screening of properties to facilitate EPA's assignment of site priorities. They are limited efforts and are not intended to supersede more detailed investigations.
SITE DESCRIPTION AND REGULATORY HISTORY
The former Mohawk Tannery property, presently owned by the Chester Realty Trust, was used as a tannery from 1924 to 1984 (Ref. 1, pg. 2). While in operation the tannery was managed by Warren Kean, currently a trustee for the Chester Realty Trust.
The tannery facility is located at 11 Warsaw Avenue in a residential area of Nashua, New Hampshire approximately one mile west of the center of the City of Nashua and 1/4 mile east of the F.E. Everett Turnpike. The site consists of two contiguous properties: an approximately 15 acre developed parcel to the north, on which the tannery facility is situated, and an undeveloped parcel to the south which is also approximately 15 acres in size (Ref. 1).
The most comprehensive environmental investigation at the Mohawk facility was the "Phase II Hydrogeologic Study and Conceptual Closeout Plan" conducted in 1985 by Goldberg- Zoino & Associates, Inc. (GZA). Analytical data from the GZA report is summarized in appendix B. No source sampling was conducted during this SIP process. Additional investigations used in the preparation of this report are listed in the references section.
Past site visits by the City of Nashua Health Department document the dumping of sludge
t £ Mohawk Tannery Draft Site Inspection Report NHD 981889629 October 29,1996
removed from wooden sluiceways on the ground surface beneath the sluiceways as well as damage to one sluiceway which allowed acid waste stream effluent to escape and run along the ground beside the damaged sluiceway (Ref. 2). Citizen complaints regarding Hydrogen sulphide odors and solid waste dumping are contained in DES-WMD files.
OPERATIONAL HISTORY AND WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
The tanning industry typically uses a number of inorganic and organic chemicals, primarily Chromium, Sodium chloride, Sodium sulfate and Chlorinated phenols. Other organic chemicals associated with the tanning industry include dyes, Toluene, Chlorobenzene, Trichloroethene, 1,2-dichloroethane and 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethene. Also, the animal hides naturally contain Calcium, Potassium and Magnesium (Ref. 3, pg. 2).
While in operation, the Mohawk Tannery, also known as Granite State Leathers (GSL), produced acidic and alkaline waste streams. Effluent consisted, in general, of an alkaline waste stream resulting from the hide pre tanning preparation process, and an acid waste stream resulting from the tanning process itself (Ref. 4). The alkaline waste stream which consisted of about 50,000 gallons per day (G.P.D.), was composed primarily of undissolved lime and proteinaceous solids, including: hair, fleshings, and hide scraps. The acid waste stream, approximately 100,000 G.P.D., consisted primarily of spent Chromium tanning materials, some hide residue "pickling" wastes, tanning materials and alkaline waste water derived from the pre-tanning process (Ref. 1, pg. 3).
Due to incomplete records, little is known about the tannery's effluent treatment practices from 1924 to the 1960s. Information provided by GSL indicates that two lagoons, Areas I and II, were established by the 1960s. Approximate locations of Areas I and II are shown on figure 2. It is assumed that prior to the construction of these lagoons, all waste products were discharged directly to the Nashua River.
Initial treatment utilizing lagoons consisted of combining the alkaline and acid waste stream effluent. A liquid fraction overflow from the lagoons was discharged to the Nashua River. According to a 1971 report prepared by the Roit Corporation (Ref. 4), a separate treatment process for the alkaline and acid waste streams was in effect at that time. The alkaline effluent was pumped from the hide pre tanning preparation or "Beamhouse" area of the main facility underground to an elevated wooden sluiceway through which it was transported to a screen building for removal of solids. The effluent was then transported via a second wooden sluiceway to the previously mentioned settling lagoons, first Area II then Area I, for long-term sedimentation before the liquid fraction was discharged into the Nashua River. Both the Area I and Area II lagoons are located approximately 20-30 feet east of the Nashua River in a 100 -year flood zone (Ref. 5).
The acid effluent stream was similarly discharged by pumping from a separate underground pipe to an elevated wooden sluiceway, and subsequently passed through a series of five, PENNICHUCK WATER WORKS
FIGURE 1 Mohawk Tannery Site Legend Qiudnuiflt lociUon 0 1 / 2 1 Niihiu North. N-H. ?PE = >->-> 1968 surface water miles photorevtaed 1915 pathway = »» F1MBEL DOOR COMPANY
F1MBEL LANDFILL BOSTON & MAINE RAILROAD
ASSUME AREA f LOCATION LAGOON EXISTING DRAINAGE LAGOOK Q RESIDENCES LINE
AREA I! FORMER LAGOON
SUMED RESIDENCES LOCATIOr PRE 1970 OUTFALL
MONITORING WELL (SCREENED INTERVAL UNKNOWN) -*-*• FENCE GRASS TREE A - SLUDGE CLARIFYING UNIT B - SLUDGE DEWATERING UNDEVELOPED LAND UNIT
SULF10E OXIDATION SuiUZATlON TANK SPRAGUE MAW FACILITY PROPERTY BOILER HOUSE CONTROL BUILDING NOT TO SCALE NASH STORAGE TANK ADAPTED FROM NUS SITE SKETCH SITE SKETCH MOHAWK TANNERY NASHUA, NH. FIGURE 2 y w ASSUMED LOCATIONna^j^^ss=ae^NT --"^^oVT—-^^ -^^a^^^^^^,,T ^™ jo ^»«v OF LAGOON DRAINAGE LINE NASHUA RIVtR fLPW^
SI Figure 3 Mohawk Tannery TABLE 1
SOURCE EVALUATION FOR MOHAWK TANNERY
Potential Source Area Containment Factors Spatial Location
Area I Earthen Berm Refer to Figure 2
Area II Earthen Berm/1 to 4 ft. soil Refer to Figure 2 cover
Area III 3 ft. sand/gravel cover Refer to Figure 2 Area IV 1 to 4 ft. sand/silt cover Refer to Figure 2
AreaV 2 to 12 ft. sand/silt cover Refer to Figure 2
Area VI 2 to 5 ft. sand/silt cover Refer to Figure 2
Area VII 1 ft. soil cover Refer to Figure 2
Area VIII PVC Liner Refer to Figure 2
Area IX None Refer to Figure 2 TABLE 2
HAZARDOUS WASTE QUANTITY FOR MOHAWK TANNERY
Substance Quantity or Years of Disposal Source Area Volume/Area
Sludge 556,992 ft.3 Pre 1960to 1984 Area I
Sludge 555,926 ft.3 Pre 1960 to 1974 Area II
Emplaced Sludge 18,172ft.3 1971-1974 Area III
Emplaced Sludge 63,484 ft.3 1971-1974 Area IV
Emplaced Sludge 47,977 ft.3 1971-1974 AreaV
Emplaced Sludge 73,443 ft.3 pre 1971 -1974 Area VI Hide Scraps Solid Waste & Sludge 191,808ft.3 1980 Area VII Wastewater Treatment Sludge 490,050 ft.3 1979-1984 Area VIII Chromium (Effluent Discharge) 1 47,888 Ibs. 1924-1984 Area IX
Note: Emplaced sludge was dredged from its original location by Clamshell Crane in preparation for construction of the new wastewater treatment facilities and placed in these areas. TABLE 3
SAMPLE SUMMARY: MOHAWK TANNERY SAMPLES COLLECTED BY NHDES-WMD
Sample Location No. Date Remarks Sample Source Matrix
251071 10/8/93 SED-1-L Nashua River Sediment Soil
251072 10/8/93 SED-1-M Nashua River Sediment Soil
251073 10/8/93 SED-1-R Nashua River Sediment Soil
251074 10/8/93 SED-2-L Nashua River Sediment Soil
251075 10/8/93 SED-2-M Nashua River Sediment Soil
251076 10/8/93 SED-2-R Nashua River Sediment Soil
251077 10/8/93 SED-3-L Nashua River Sediment Soil
251078 10/8/93 SED-3-M Nashua River Sediment Soil
251079 10/8/93 SED-3-R Nashua River Sediment Soil
251080 10/8/93 SED-4-L Nashua River Sediment Soil
251081 10/8/93 SED-4-M Nashua River Sediment Soil
251082 10/8/93 SED-4-R Nashua River Sediment Soil
251083 10/8/93 SED-4-RDYS Nashua River Sediment Soil
251084 10/8/93 SED-5-L Nashua River Sediment Soil
251085 10/8/93 SED-5-M Nashua River Sediment Soil
251086 10/8/93 SED-5-R Nashua River Sediment Soil
251087 10/8/93 SED-6-L Nashua River Sediment Soil
251088 10/8/93 SED-6-M Nashua River Sediment Soil
251089 10/8/93 SED-6-R Nashua River Sediment Soil
251090 10/8/93 SP-1 Soil at outfall pipe Soil
284569 10/5/94 Caldwell well Drinking water Water
284570 10/5/94 Picarillo well Drinking water Water
NOTES: See Figures 4,5 and 6 of the narrative report (pg. 22,23 and 24) for the analytical data and sediment sampling locations. Mohawk Tannery Draft Site Inspection Report NHD 981889629 October 29,1996
approximately 20-foot diameter, settling basins before being discharged to the river via an open channel. The sludge buildup was periodically removed by a clam shell crane and placed in an approximately 50-foot diameter sludge collection/drying pit located immediately to the east of the settling basins. This area is identified as Area VI on figure 2. The treatment process described above was phased out during 1973-1974.
The Mohawk Tannery was sampled as part of several separate investigations which are identified in the text and references of this report. The most comprehensive study to date is the "Phase II Hydrogeological Study and Conceptual Closeout Plan," conducted in 1985 by Goldberg-Zoino & Associates, Inc.The analytical data from the above referenced report is summarized in appendix B and all sample locations are shown on figure 3 and on the full size map contained in appendix A.
SIP source sampling was not conducted at the Mohawk Tannery due to the existence of usable data from previous studies.
The tannery is easily accessible to anyone who desires to gain site access. A fence surrounds the site on three sides only and has several holes in it. There is no restricted access from the river, as that side of the site property has no fence. School age children have been observed, passing through the broken areas in the fence, to take a short cut across the Mohawk property on foot and on mountain bicycles past the Area I and Area II lagoons.
GEOLOGY
The Mohawk Tannery Site is located in the Lower Merrimack River Basin, which is underlain by gray quartz-mica schist known as the Merrimack schist (Ref.1, pg. 14). The property is characterized by shallow to moderate depths to bedrock (95 to 49 feet) (Ref.1, pg. 13-17). Bedrock topography slopes gradually to the south across the property (Ref. 1, pg. 13-17). Bedrock cores were moderately to slightly weathered and moderately to highly fractured. Fractures were observed to dip approximately 30 to 90 degrees from vertical. Orientation, or strike, of these fracture faces cannot be determined from available data. Major structural trends in this formation are generally believed to be oriented to the northeast and northwest, with primary fracture systems in the northeast and secondary fracture systems in the northwest (Ref. 1, pg. 15). The surficial geologic map prepared by Koteff indicates a possible bedrock low or trough with a longitudinal axis approximately paralleling the Nashua River and eventually discharging to the Merrimack River (Ref.6).
Surficial deposits at the Mohawk Tannery Site consist of artificial fills, granular delta deposits, natural organic soils, recent alluvium and glacial till. The artificial fills encountered at the site consisted of rubbish, granular soil, animal hide matter, scrap metal, and building debris (Ref.1, pg. 13-16). Mohawk Tannery Draft Site Inspection Report NHD 981889629 October 29,1996
The location of the site, partially in a kame delta (theTannery facility) and partially in a lowland setting adjacent to the Nashua River, with high ground to the northeast, suggests a westerly to southwesterly groundwater flow direction to the river. Anomalies in the regional flow pattern can be caused by the influence of bedrock topography, zones of materials with varying hydraulic properties, and areas of varying surface water infiltration rates. In such a setting, the Nashua River may serve as a discharge line for overburden and upper bedrock groundwater flow. A Hydrogeologic study, conducted by GZA in October 1985, did not consider the glacial till present at the site to act as an aquiclude in preventing vertical groundwater flow between underlying bedrock and overlying delta or alluvial deposits due to the discontinuous nature of till distribution at the site as well as its sandy and somewhat permeable character (Ref. 1, pg. 19).
GROUNDWATER
The site topography slopes west toward the Nashua River with ground surface levels varying from an elevation of approximately 100 feet near Warsaw Avenue to about 28 feet at the Nashua River (Ref.1 pg.2) GZA assessed groundwater flow beneath the site by installing 11 monitoring wells in test borings from June to September 1985. An interpretation of groundwater flow patterns within the surficial deposits was provided by GZA as figure 4 of reference 1 and is included in this report as figure 3. This figure depicts groundwater elevations measured in on-site monitoring wells by GZA on August 23,1985. Based on the August 1985 groundwater elevation measurements, it appears that groundwater generally flows in a south to southwesterly direction toward the Nashua River. Groundwater elevations vary across the site from approx. 29.6 at GZ-2 to approx. 25.1 at GZ-14.
The majority of residents within 4 miles of the Mohawk Tannery obtain their drinking water from municipal supplies located greater than 4 miles from the site. The Merrimack Village District operates three gravel packed wells with well head protection areas located 3-4 miles north of the site in the town of Merrimack, NH. These wells serve approximately 15,500 people (Ref. 7). Two,approximately 30 ft. deep, drive point residential wells were identified at approximately Yz mile southeast of the site (Ref.8) and are the nearest known drinking water sources to the site. These two wells combined provide drinking water for three adults (Ref. 8). The wells were sampled and analyzed by DBS for volatile organic compounds (VOC's) and inorganics in October 1994. Laboratory analysis detected no evidence of contamination related to the Mohawk Tannery site. Analytical results are provided in Ref. 9 and Sample locations are shown on figure 1. The nearest public drinking water supply was determined to be the Olsen's Mobile Home Park well located 2-3 miles from the site in Litchfield, NH. This well serves approximately 108 people (Ref.7). Approximately 12,086 people rely on groundwater within 4 miles of the Mohawk Tannery Site as a drinking water supply (Ref.8,10, SI Table 6). TABLE 4
SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR GROUNDWATER MOHAWK TANNERY
\ \ "* Compound/Element Sample Maximum,' Reference Location Concentration Concentration Comments (ppm) (ppm)
Arsenic GZ-6 .120 <>tY;J 0.002 Ref. 1 Table 1 1
Chromium GZ-6 .004 ND Ref. 1 Table 1 1
Lead GZ-9 .10 ND Ref. 1 Table 1 1
Mercurv GZ-14 .0009 ND Ref. 1 Table 1 1 , -r ^ > Selenium GZ-9 .058 ^ ^ • ' ND Ref. 1 Table 1 1
Silver GZ-1 .05 ND Ref. 1 Table 1 1
Compound/Element Sample Maximum Reference Location Concentration Concentration Comments (ppb) (ppb)
Toluene GZ-9 98.0 ND Ref. 1 Table 1 2
Chloroform GZ-9 13.0 ND Ref. I Table 12
1 ,2-Dichloroethane GZ-11 48.0 IS)"ND' Ref. 1 Table 1 2
1.1,1 -Trichloroethane GZ-4 4.0 ND Ref. 1 Table 1 2
Compound/Element Sample Maximum Reference Location Concentration Concentration Comments tppb) (ppb)
2.4-Dimethvl phenol GZ-1 3 TRACE ND Ref. 1 Table 13
4-Nitrophenol GZ-2 TRACE . ND Ref. 1 Table 1 3
p-chloro-m-cresol GZ-6 TRACE ND Ref. 1 Table 13
Phenol GZ-1 3 TRACE ND Ref. 1 Table 13 TABLE 4
SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR SURFACE WATER MOHAWK TANNERY
Compound/Element Sample Maximum Reference Location Concentration Concentration Comments
Methylene Chloride 1106 177 ppb NPDES Ref. I Table 12 EFFLUENT & DATA Ref. 25
Phenol 1106 2,500 ppb NPDES Ref. 25 EFFLUENT DATA
Silver R-l .06 ppm NONE Ref. 1 Table 1 1
Arsenic R-2 & R-3 .002 ppm NONE Ref. 1 Table 11
Cadmium 251086 18.7 ppm 1.6 ppm Ref. 1 1
Chromium 251079 313 ppm 1 1.8 ppm Ref. 1 1
Lead 251086 163 ppm 17.0 ppm Ref. 11
Zinc 1106 .132 ppm NPDES Ref. 25 EFFLUENT DATA TABLE 4
SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS SOIL AND SLUDGE MOHAWK TANNERY
Compound/Element Sample Maximum Reference Location Concentration Concentration Comments Depth
Acetone TP-37 3600 ppb ND Ref. 1 Table 8 2.5- 12ft.
2-Butanone TP-37 780 ppb ND Ref. 1 Table 8 2.5- 12ft.
Chlorobenzene GZ-3 210 ppb NONE Ref. 1 Table 8 9ft.
Methvlene Chloride TP-37 290 ppb ND Ref. 1 Table 8 2.5- 12ft.
Tetrachloroethvlene ' TP-37 380 ppb ND Ref. 1 Table 8 2.5-12 ft.
Toluene TP-37 9300 ppb 130 ppb Ref. 1 Table 8 2.5 12ft.
Pentachlorophenol TP-39 5 10,000 ppb ND Ref. 1 Table 8 3 9 ft.
Phenol TP-39 50,000 ppb ND Ref. 1 Table 8 3 9 ft.
2.4,6-Trichlorophenol TP-39 140.000 ppb ND Ref. 1 Table 8 3 9 ft.
Cadmium NPDES 3.5 ppm ND Ref. 1 1 0.5 ft. Outfall
Chromium NPDES 3,290 ppm .20 ppm Ref. 1 1 0.5 ft. Outfall
Lead NPDES 22 ppm ND Ref. 1 1 0.5 ft. Outfall
Mercury TP-38 .01 ppm .006 ppm Ref. 1 Table 7
Silver TP-38 .04 ppm .02 ppm Ref. 1 Table 7 NOTES: ND indicates the compound was not detected
X TABLE 4
SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS GROUNDWATER FOR FIMBEL LANDFILL
Compound Sample Maximum Reference Location Concentration Concentration Comments
Chloroform F-l 31ppb ND Ref. 23 Appendix F
1 ,2-Dichloroethane F-2 13ppb 2 Ref. 23 Appendix F
Arsenic F-l 0.318 ppm NA Ref. 24 Table 2
Selenium F-3 0.004 ppm ND Ref. 23 Appendix F
Barium F-l 0.15 ppm NA Ref. 24 Table 2
1.1-Dichloroethane F-4 22ppb .NA Ref. 24 Table 2
1,1,1-Trichloroethane F-4 lOppb NA Ref. 24 Table 2
Toluene F-6 5ppb NA Ref. 24 Table 2
Methvl-t-butvl ether F-6 5ppb NA Ref. 24 Table 2 Notes: NA indicates the data was not available TABLE 4
SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS SOIL AND SLUDGE FOR FIMBEL LANDFILL
Substance Sample Maximum Reference Location Concentration Concentration Comments Depth (ppb) (ppb)
Heptachlorinated Dibenzo TP-7 0.65 NA Table 4, Ref. 22 8ft. Dioxin
Octachlorinated Dibenzo TP-7 16.0 NA Table. 4, Ref. 22 8ft. Dioxin
1234678 Heptachlorinated TP-10 0.17 NA Table 4, Ref. 22 7-8 ft. Dibenzo Furan
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene Boring-3 2^800 NA Table 1, Ref.24 NA
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene TP-10 520 NA Table 3, Ref. 22 7-8 ft.
Acetone TP-10 12,000 ' NA Table 3, Ref.22 7-8 ft.
Benzene TP-10 7 NA Table 3, Ref. 22 7-8 ft.
Methyl ethyl ketone TP-10 5,100 NA Table 3, Ref. 22 7-8 ft.
Methyl-t-butyl ether TP-10 25 NA Table 3, Ref.22 7-8 ft.
Tetrachloroethene TP-10 480 NA Table 3, Ref.22 7-8 ft.
Toluene TP-10 84 NA Table 3, Ref. 22 7-8 ft.
Trichloroethene TP-11 33 NA Table 3, Ref. 22 7-8 ft.
Xylene TP-10 3,000 NA Table 3, Ref. 22 7-8 ft.
Chlorobenzene TP-6 25 NA Table 2, Ref. 22 3-4 ft.
Bis (2-ethyl hexy!)phthalate TP-10 2,100 NA Table 3. Ref. 22 7-8 ft.
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene TP-10 2,900 NA Table 3. Ref. 22 7-8 ft.
Napthalene TP-10 7,500 NA Table 3, Ref.22 7-8 ft.
Nitrobenzene TP-10 8,000 NA Table 3, Ref. 22 7-8 ft.
Phenol TP-10 60,000 NA Table 3, Ref. 22 7-8 ft.
Notes: NA indicates the data was not available
Vf TABLE 4
SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS SOIL AND SLUDGE FOR FIMBEL LANDFILL
Substance Sample Maximum Reference Location Concentration Concentration Comments
Arsenic Boring 3 ll.Oppb NONE Ref.24 Table 1
Barium Emplaced Sludge 34.0 ppm NONE Ref. 23 Appendix.G
Chromium TP-10 32.500 ppm NONE Ref.22 Table3
Lead TP-10 46.0 ppm NONE Ref.2-2 Table3
Copper Emplaced Sludge 19.0 ppm NONE Ref. 23 Appendix.G
Cadmium TP-10 3.0 ppm NONE Ref.22 Table3
Cvanide Emplaced Sludge 0.69 ppm NONE Ref. 23 Appendix.G
Magnesium Emplaced Sludge 1 ,500 ppm NONE Ref. 23 Appendix.G
Nickel Emplaced Sludge 8.2 ppm NONE Ref. 23 Appendix.G
Silver Emplaced Sludge 1 .4 ppm NONE Ref. 23 Appendix.G
Zinc Emplaced Sludge 120 ppm NONE Ref. 23 Appendix.G
Mercurv TP-10 0.2 ppm NONE Ref.22 Table3
Selenium TP-10 1.2 ppm NONE Ref.22 Table3 Notes: NA indicates the data was not available NONE Indicates no background analysis for sludge samples from within the lined landfill TABLE 4
SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR LEACHATE AT FIMBEL LANDFILL
Substance Sample Maximum Reference Location Concentration Concentration Comments
Toluene Leachate 11 ppb 2 ppb Ref. 23 Appendix H
Acetone Leachate 740 ppb 50 ppb Ref. 23 Appendix H
Carbon Disulfide Leachate 10 ppb 2 ppb Ref. 23 Appendix H 2-Butanone Leachate 49 ppb 10 ppb Ref. 23 Appendix H
4-Methvl-2-Pentanone Leachate 32 ppb 10 ppb Ref. 23 Appendix H
Phenol Leachate 4,800 ppb 100 ppb Ref. 23 Appendix F
Chromium(EP Tox) Leachate 0.42 ppm NA Ref. 23 Table 6
Lead(EP Tox) Leachate 4.3 ppm NA Ref. 23 Table 6
Arsenic(EP Tox) Leachate 0.2 ppm NA Ref. 23 Table 6 Notes: NA indicates the data was not available
l\ TABLE 5
PUBLIC GROUNDWATER SUPPLY SOURCES WITHIN FOUR MILES OF MOHAWK TANNERY
Distance/ Source Location of Estimated Source EPAID Direction from Name Source Population Type Number Property Served
2-3 miles/northeast Olson's Mobile Litchfield 108 2 OB 10 ft. & 1373030 Home Park 6ft.
3-4 miles/east Francouer Apts. Hudson 96 BR 800 ft. 1202010
3-4 miles/east So. NH Water Hudson 139,000 GPW 65 ft. 1201010 Co.
3-4 miles/west Flint Pond Hollis 30 GPW 35 ft. 1172010 Water Co.
Notes: OB = Overburde n Well BR = Bedrock Well GPW = Gravel Pack Well
PRIVATE GROUNDWATER SUPPLY SOURCES WITHIN ONE MILE OF MOHAWK TANNERY
Distance/ Source Location of Estimated Source EPAID Direction from Name Source Population Type Number Property Served 1/4-1/2 miles southwest Caldwell 8 Bitirnas St. 1 OB 35 feet NA 1/4-1/2 miles southwest Picarillo 18BitimasSt. 2 OB 25 feet NA Table 6
Estimated Drinking Water Populations Served by Groundwater Sources Within Four Miles of Mohawk Tannery
Radial Distance From Estimated Estimated Total Estimated Mohawk Tannery Population Served by Population Served by Population [miles] Private Wells Public Wells Served by Groundwater Sources Within the Ring
0.00 < 0.25 0 0 0
0.25 < 0.50 3 0 3
0.50 < 1.00 99 0 99
1 .00 < 2.00 475 0 475
2.00 < 3.00 1,358 108 1,466
3.00 < 4.00 2,810 139,126 141,936
TOTAL 4,745 139,234 143,979 Mohawk Tannery Draft Site Inspection Report NHD 981889629 October 29,1996
SURFACE WATER
The Mohawk Tannery site is located in the lower Merrimack River Basin on the eastern bank of the Nashua River (Figure 1). Groundwater beneath the site generally flows in a south to southwesterly direction toward the Nashua River.
Sources one and two are located approximately 20 to 40 feet east of the Nashua River (Figure 2) (Ref. 1). Areas III,IV, V and VI, which comprise Source 3, are located approximately 260 feet, 200 feet, 370 feet, and 400 feet east of the Nashua River, respectively (Figure 2) (Ref. 1). Source areas one, two, and three appear to be located within a 100-year flood zone (Ref. 5). All sources have no engineered containment designed to prevent overland flow or groundwater to surface water migration (Ref. 1).
The Probable Point of Entry (PPE) for contaminants entering the surface water pathway was determined to be the area surrounding a 12" to 14" diameter concrete drain/effluent pipe (Figure 3) located approximately 10 feet back from the water's edge on the eastern bank of the Nashua River. A soil sample (SP-1) collected by DBS on 10/8/93 at the above referenced pipe outfall detected elevated levels of Chromium (3,290 mg/kg), slightly elevated levels of Cadmium (3.5 mg/kg), and Lead at typical urban background levels (22.0 mg/kg) in the river bank soils (Refs. 11, 26)
Sampling of Nashua River sediments by DES on 10/8/93 also detected elevated levels of Chromium, Cadmium and Lead. Maximum concentrations of the above contaminants detected in Nashua River sediments were Chromium (144 ppm), Cadmium (18.7 ppm) and Lead (163 ppm) (Ref. 11). The locations and analytical results from the Nashua River sediment analysis are shown on pages 22, 23, and 24 of this report.
The nearest downstream municipal drinking water intake is located in Lowell, MA, 14.3 miles downstream from the Mohawk Tannery (Ref. 7). According to the Lowell Water Utilities Laboratory Director no maximum contaminant levels (MCL's) have been exceeded and the only water quality problem they experience is elevated iron levels (Ref. 12). The target distance limit (TDL) of 15 stream miles begins at the Mohawk outfall on the east bank of the Nashua River directly west of source area one and ends in the Merrimack River about 1.75 miles before the Pawtucket Dam in Lowell, MA
The Pennichuck Water Co. operates a municipal drinking water supply which supplies surface water from Holts, Harris, Supply and Bowers ponds to approximately 75,000 Nashua residents. Both Harris and Supply ponds are located 1-2 miles north of the site. During periods of high demand, the Pennichuck Water Co. recharges these ponds from a Merrimack River surface water intake located about two stream miles upstream from the confluence of the Nashua and Merrimack Rivers (Ref. 3).
1* MOHAffK TANNERY 15-MILE DOTCSTREAM PATHIAY
the location of wetland frontage
LOUELL WATER UTILITY INTAKE (14.3 mi I til TABLE 7
WATER BODIES WITHIN THE SURFACE WATER SEGMENT OF MOHAWK TANNERY
Surface Water Descriptor * Length of Flow Length of Body Reach Characteristics Wetlands [miles] [cfs] [feet]
Nashua River Moderate to Large 3.4 611 2,112 Stream
Merrimack River Large Stream to 11.6 4,487 1,373 River TABLE 8
DRINKING WATER INTAKES ALONG THE 15-MILE DOWNSTREAM PATHWAY FROM MOHAWK TANNERY
Intake Name Water Body Downstream Flow Rate at Estimated Distance from Intake [cfs] Population PPE [miles] Served
Lowell, MA Water Merrimack River 14.3 4,487 135,000 Utility FICUREM-
Chromium in Nashua Rivet sediments at oulet of Suspect Effluent Pipe(SP-l Mohawk Tannery Nashua, NH
Notes:
> = greater than < = less than DUP= duplicate sample Results expressed as mg/Kg dry weight FIGURE o
Lead in Nashua River sedimen at outlet of Suspected Effluent Pipe (SP-1) Mohawk Tannery, Nashua, NH
Direction of Flow
as: ^ = greate r than <= less than DUP= duplicate sample Results expressed as mg/Kg dry weight FIGURE 6
Cadmium in Nashua River sediments at outlet of Susepct Effluent Pipe(SP- Mohawk Tannery Nashua. NH
Direction of Flow
Notes:
= greater than _ ^ = less than DUP= duplicate sample Results expressed as mg/Kg dry weight Mohawk Tannery Draft Site Inspection Report NHD 981889629 October 29, 1996
The Merrimack River below Concord, NH is stocked annually with about 4,623 Trout and 1,618 Shad (Ref. 13). The Nashua River is stocked with about 600 Alewives and about 200 Shad annually and its tributaries are stocked with Trout (Ref. 13).
Both the Merrimack and Nashua rivers are fished regularly. They are both listed as "recommended fishing waters" in reference 14. Evidence of fishing (i.e., line, bobbers, etc.) has been observed by DES staff during previous river bottom sediment sampling activities. A spool of fishing line was recovered from the bottom of the Nashua River less than 1,000 feet downstream of the site during sediment sampling conducted by DES in October 1993. This location is within an area of observed contamination as shown by sediment analysis (Ref. 11).
Wetland frontages along the surface water pathway TDL were determined by hand measurements of National Wetlands Inventory Maps using a planimeter to directly measure downstream distances (Ref. 15). Only wetlands meeting the requirements of 40 CFR 230.3 were counted. There are approximately 0.66linear miles of wetland frontage within the TDL. The Nashua River runs for 3.4 downstream miles and contains approximately 0.4 linear miles of wetland frontage. The Merrimack River completes the final 11.6 miles of the TDL and contains approximately 0.26 linear miles of wetland frontage. Exact locations are shown on page 19 and the classifications of wetlands counted are shown in Ref. 15. Stream flow and wetland frontage data are summarized in Table 7.
SOIL EXPOSURE
Past site evaluations (Ref. 16) as well as personal observations of DES staff (Ref. 17) have documented two to three individuals working on the site near areas of observed contamination.
The Mohawk Tannery has no associated resident population. The nearest residence (Figures 1&2) is located approximately 170 feet east of the Area VII observed contamination, based on measurements of Figure 4 from Reference 4. A fence prevents direct travel to Area VII; however, a broken section of the fence allows site access. The travel distance using the area of broken fence to gain site access is assumed to be greater than 200 feet. No sampling of the nearest residents property is known to have been conducted. A visual survey of the property was conducted and no obvious areas of stressed vegetation or stained soils were observed. There are no known schools or daycare facilities within 200 feet of the site.
No terrestrial sensitive environments are known to exist on an area of observed contamination; although the Northern Prickly Ash tree, a state endangered species, reportedly exists in the areas surrounding the site (Ref. 18).
32- TABLE 9
ESTIMATED POPULATION WITHIN FOUR MILES OF MOHAWK TANNERY
Radial Distance from Mohawk Tannery [miles] Estimated Population
0.00 < 0.25 502
0.25 < 0.50 1,447
0.50 < 1.00 7,928
1.00 < 2.00 33,662
2.00 < 3.00 23,525
3.00 < 4.00 20,763
TOTAL 87,827 Mohawk Tannery Draft Site Inspection Report NHD 981889629 October 29,1996
The area surrounding the Mohawk Tannery is a residential community with the following demographics:
Distance Population on a source 0 0 to 1/4 mile 502 >i/4 to Vz mile 1,447 1 > /2 to 1 mile 7.928
Total within 1 mile 9,880
The majority of the data used in the preparation of this report was obtained from previous site investigations listed in the references section of this report. The most comprehensive site study was completed by GZA in 1985 (Ref. 1). A summary of GZA's data is included in appendix B of this report.
A surficial soil sample was collected by DES-WMD staff on 10/8/93 at the outfall of a concrete pipe (SP-1) which empties into the Nashua River adjacent to the Area I lagoon. Analytical results showed elevated levels of Chromium (3,290 ppm), slightly elevated levels of Cadmium (3.5 ppm), and Lead at typical urban background levels (22 ppm) in the riverbank soils(Refs.11,26). No background soil samples were taken as part of that sampling event.
AIR
The nearest potential receptor of airborne contaminants is a residential dwelling located approximately 170 feet east of Area VII. This home is currently occupied by two adults and two children.
All sensitive environments within the TDL were determined by the New Hampshire Natural Heritage Program (Ref. 18) and the Massachusetts Natural Heritage Program (Ref. 19). Additional information on endangered species in the Nashua, NH area was provided by New Hampshire Fish and Game Non-Game Wildlife Program (Ref. 20). This data could only be provided on a town level and therefore could not be correlated with the correct TDL's. Mohawk Tannery Draft Site Inspection Report NHD 981889629 October 29,1996
DISTANCE SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENT TYPE on a source Area I and Area II wetlands 0-1/4 mile 11.9 acres of wetland area 1/4- 1/2 mile Banaed Sunfish 16.9 acres of wetland area 1/2- 1 mile Birds Foot Violet Burgrass 89.9 acres of wetland area 1-2 miles Eastern Hognose Snake Northern Prickly Ash Goats Rue 176.1 acres of wetland area 2-3 miles Bald Eagle Siberian Chives American Plum Swamp Azalea Hairy Stargrass 539.8 acres of wetland area
3-4 miles Geometrid Moth 1 ,276.1 acres of wetland area
There are no records available to indicate that air quality monitoring was conducted at the Mohawk Tannery site either during the SIP or previously. The area surrounding the site is a residential community with the following demographics:
Distance Population (Frost Demographic Data (Ref. 10) 0 to 1/4 mile 502 >1/4to1/2 mile 1,447 >1/2 to 1 mile 7,928 >1 to 2 miles 33,662 >2 to 3 miles 23,525 >3 to 4 miles 20.763
4 miles total 87,827
28-35 Mohawk Tannery Draft Site Inspection Report NHD 981889629 October 29,1996
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The Mohawk Tannery was an active facility from 1924to 1984. During the tannery's 60 years of operation the resulting sludge was contained on-site in unlined lagoons as well as at the lined Fimbel Door Landfill located on the adjacent property to the north. The liquid fraction that remained after sedimentation of the sludge was directed to the Nashua River. The facility's waste consisted in general of an alkaline waste stream resulting from the hide pre-tanning preparation process, and an acid waste stream resulting from the tanning process itself. The alkaline waste stream, which consisted of about 50,000 gallons per day (g.p.d.), was comprised primarily of undissolved lime and proteinaceous solids including: hair, fleshings and hide scraps. The acid waste stream of about 100,000 g.p.d. was comprised primarily of spent Chromium tanning materials, some hide residue "pickling" wastes, tanning materials and alkaline water derived from the pre-tanning process.
Additional sources of potential contamination include several 55 gallon drums, originally from the Amoskeag Leather Co.,which were transported by Mohawk personnel to the Mohawk facility and dumped into the Fimbel Door Landfill.
Two separate inadvertent Sodium hydro sulfate discharges, approximately 100 gallons and 1,282gallons, were accidentally released on September 23, 1980and February 2, 1984, respectively, in the vicinity of the storage tank located to the east of the main facility. In both cases, the Sodium hydro sulfate was reported to have been flushed from the area through an underground drain line which exits to the general area located to the north of the main facility. Runoff discharged from this drain flowed into the gravel pit located in the northeastern section of the site.
Previous investigations conducted by various private environmental consultants have detected elevated levels of metals and VOC's in sludges, soils and groundwater at both the Mohawk Tannery and the Fimbel Door facilities. The locations and maximum concentrations detected are summarized on Table 4. No samples were collected from the above referenced media as part of this SIP report.
Previous sampling of Nashua River sediments and soils at the end of Mohawk's outfall was conducted in October 1993by the DES-WMD as part of the Mohawk Tannery Site Expanded Site Inspection Report. Results of the sediment analysis showed elevated levels of Chromium (313ppm),Cadmium (18.7ppm), and Lead (163ppm). Sample locations and results are summarized in reference 11. Soil analysis detected elevated levels of Chromium (3,290 ppm),slightly elevated levels of Cadmium (3.5 ppm),and Lead at typical urban background levels (22 ppm) in the riverbank soils at the outfall location (SP-1) shown on figure 2.(Refs. 11,26) Mohawk Tannery Draft Site Inspection Report NHD 981889629 October 29,1996
Based on the existing data, the site has affected groundwater quality. The threat to drinking water receptors appears limited based on groundwater flow gradients provided by GZA;however, incomplete characterization and the scarcity of groundwater hydrogeology data precludes definitive conclusions. In particular, groundwater quality in bedrock has been inadequately characterized.
The surface water pathway has been affected, based on sediment sampling and NPDES discharge data. The threat to drinking water receptors appears limited, due to the 14.3 mile downstream distance from the site to the nearest surface water intake and the fact that the dilution capacity of the Nashua River is likely to significantly mitigate impacts; however, the unclosed lagoons present an ongoing threat to both groundwater and surface water quality in the vicinity of the tannery facility.
The soil pathway has also been affected. The existing analytical data documents the presence of sludge within the top two feet of ground surface at several of the onsite lagoons and landfill areas as well elevated levels of Chromium and Cadmium in river bank soils.
No air samples have been collected at the Mohawk Tannery as part of this SIP report or previous investigations. The potential does exist for windblown particulates from Area VII to travel 170 feet to the nearest residential dwelling, as well as documented releases of biogas from the area I lagoon. REFERENCES
1. Goldberg-Zoino & Associates, Inc. 1985. Phase n Hydrogeologic Study and Conceptual Closeout Plan Granite State Leathers Facility, Nashua, NH.
2. A letter from Phillip V. Hurley, MPH, Director, City of Nashua Health Department to Russell Nylander, NH Water Supply and Pollution Control Commission, dated April 13, 1972.
3. NUS/FTT Screening Site Inspection at Mohawk Tannery, July 5, 1989, TDD No. F18808-03
4. Roit Corporation. 197 1. Mohawk Associates, Inc., proposed effluent control program.
5. "Flood Insurance Rate Maps of the City of Nashua, New Hampshire, Panel 5." compiled by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, National Flood Insurance Program. June 15, 1979..
6. Koteff, Carl, 1976. Geologic Quadrangle Map Nashua North Quadrangle, New Hampshire (9Q-1290) U.S. Geological Survey.
7. DES-GIS Public Water Supply Surface Sources Printout, February 1995.
8. DES-WMD 1994 Residential drinking water supply surveys for nearest residential wells located at 18 Bitirnas and 28 Bitimas Street.
9. Nearest residential water supply water quality analysis, October 5, 1994.
10. Frost Associates. 1994. Centracts demographic database, Bob Frost, PO Box 495, Essex, CT 06426. Printout dated March 14.
11. DES-WMD - 1993. Mohawk Tannery Expanded Site Inspection.
12. Telecon conversation between Diane Henderson, Lab Director, Lowell Water Utility and Joe Donovan, DES-WMD, dated January 31, 1995 - 10:15 a.m.
13. Telecon conversation between Bob Fawcett, NH Fish and Game Department and Joe Donovan, DES-WMD, regarding the stocking of fish in the Merrimack River. Telecon date 2/21/95 - Time 3:18 p.m.
14. NH Fish and Game Department. 1994. Fishing Waters of NH. 15. US Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service. 1990. National Wetlands Inventory maps: Nashua South NH-MA; Pepperell, MA-NH; South Merrimack-NH; Nashua North- NH.
16. August 29, 1990 HRS Documentation Record Review for Mohawk Tannery Site.
17. July 19, 1993 speed memo from Joe Donovan, DES-WMD to Mohawk SI file regarding Mohawk Tannery employees observed working on-site.
18. State of NH, Department of Resources and Economic Development, Natural Heritage Inventory, May 27, 1994. Endangered species database inventory.
19. Telecon conversation between Joe Donovan, DES-WMD and Diane Lauber, MA Natural Heritage Inventory, regarding endangered species along the Merrimack River from NH-MA state line to the end of the 15 mile surface water target distance limit. Telecon dated January 30, 1995 - 10:45 a.m.
20. Letter dated July 15, 1994 from John Kanter, Nongame Project Coordinator, NH Fish and Game Department to Joe Donovan, DES-WNM.
21. DES laboratory analysis, October 8,1993, Inorganic sediment analysis for Mohawk Tannery Site, DES Laboratory Numbers 251071 through 251090.
22. Woodward and Curran Inc. 1992 Site Investigation Report/Remedial Action Plan Tannery Sludge Landfill, Fimbel Door Corporation.
23. GZA. November, 1985. Hydrogeologic Study and Conceptual Closeout Plan, Fimbel Landfill, Nashua, NH. File No. D-5227
24. Woodward and Curran Inc. 1995. Letter faxed to Stergois Spanos Re: July 21, 1995 sludge sampling at Fimbel Landfill.
25. NPDES application for permit to discharge #NH0000396 with supporting data and calculations showing daily averages for Chromium discharged to the Nashua River.
26. MA DEP- BWSC & ORS, June 1996. Urban Fill "Background" Levels REFERENCE 1 OCT 29
PHASE II HYDROGEOLOGIC STUDY AND CONCEPTUAL. CLOSEOUT ' PLAN
GRA1TITE STATE LEATHERS FACILITY NASHUA, NEW HAMPSHIRE
Prepared for: Fair:&ount Height Associates Nashua, New Hampshire
Prepared by: Goidberg-Zoino & Associates, IRC \ Manchester, New Hampshire
October 1985 Fila No. D-5226 REFERENCE 2 CITY O F NASHUA, NEW HAMPSHIRE SI ONE'1 CU.^iiUOr .,. u. CHAIRMAN Or THE JOARO
HEALTH DEPARTMENT ROGER R. DIONNE. M. D. ROLAND G. LEBEL IB MULBERRY ST., 03060 BOARD MCMICRS
TEL. 603-883-0921 PHILLIP V. HURLEY, M. P. H. DIRECTOR
April 13, 19T2
Mr. Russell Nylander Hew Hampshire Water Supply & Pollution Control Commission 105. Loudon Road Concord, Hew Hampshire 03301
Dear Mr. Nylander-.
**,- Officer Mr. Donald S. Sharp, on Following a report from the Of fi cer , r the Grjmite
Health Officer. " The tannery has proceeded, with. th< .sceme report of March 1972. Four ""JJT the eat and west banks of the .running roughly north and south midway tne e h produced first large lagoon. These units * i^on was noted. foaming and scum formation nto the river seems the sanded solids as a routine check if .we provide the samples? The so-called acid-line pits have ^-dredged into the adjacent open pit filling this pit to ^e accumula sludge pit is also adjacent to the hair separation over into the ttS^f tair on the ground between ^ dropped '
Hu. is fte tvc waste stream have not yet teen coined but scheduled as per the Bolt proposal.'
' Some improvement in handling new collection system, is proposed, fall, but little miscellaneous cast-off items ^^ by ihe plant gain has been recorded since then. their vaste disposal ' Engineer, Mr. James Shildneck^he harmful to the environ- . systems may be more aesthetically patchwork and . mTnt or air or vater. duality, the units. minimal despite the undoubted expense of the screen and Mr. Russell Nylander April 13, 1972 Page 2
It is our intention to increase our surveillance of this operation as the veather warms. Any suggestions on methods, desirable specimen collection, etc., and engineering or laboratory assistance you can offer will "be appreciated.
Very truly yours,
Fhillip V. Hurley, M.P.H. Director
PVH-.dk cc: Mr. Forrest Bumford James Hogan, City Engineer Board of Health (3) Donald Sharp, Health. Officer REFERENCE 3 ^isiusl CORPORATION
=OBD. MASSACHUSETTS 01730 -373-3370 1U. \ 1 '5b=) C-583-6-9-205
IC£PI\R!'.':-. JulyS, 1989 l WA:
Mr. Carl Baxter Department of Environmental Services Waste Management Division Health and Welfare Building Six Hazen Drive Concord, NH 03301
Subject: Final Screening Site Inspection Report Mohawk Tannery Nashua, New Hampshire TDD No. F1-8808-03 Reference No. $375NH50$I CERCLIS No. NHD981889629
Dear Mr. Baxter:
Enclosed are two copies of the Final Screening Site Inspection Report for the Mohawk Tannery facility, located in Nashua, New Hampshire. This final report has been revised according to comments received. Unaddressed comments have been incorporated in the NUS/FIT project file.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
Lisa M. Kulju Project Manager
LMJ:mah
Enclosure
cc: D. Smith/EPA-RPO (w/o enclosure) (2) J. Pillion (w/o enclosure) REFERENCE 4 MOHAWK ASSOCIATES, INC.
PROPOSED EFFLUENT CONTROL PROGRAM
March 24, 1972
Prepared by
Max S. Maire, P.E. (N.H. *2798)
Tl_:E ROIT CORPORA IION 555 High Street Westwood, Massachusetts 02090 MOHAWK ASSOCIATES, INC.
'""."-3 . "-t.V: ''••'•:&
Proposed Effluent Control Program
Exhibits EXHIBITS
I Analysis of Present Effluent Discharge to River
II Plan of Tannery Property Showing Treatment Plant (Pockec)
III Tannery Water Utilization
IV Effluent Row Rate
V Treatment Facilities Alternatives
VI Lagoon Details REFERENCE 5 JUN-21-1994 15=36. ~?CT N.H..3.1.M. Co c^-r1. EXiiC'i'iY . .''»'.
Otfle* at Em«r9*ncy Minig- . . SUM Omet Pant S«utti 107 Pteuam Street Concert. New Mjmpjwre 03301 S03/271-2231 ' 1-800-S52-3792 8TEPHEM MEPRIU. FAX C03.12S-7341 GEORGE L. WERSOH Gowfner
TELEFAX COVrlR SHEET
. DELIVER TO:
FAX »:
FROM: DATEt TIME:
SUBJECT:
We are transmitting j- page{s) including this cover sheet. If the transmission has not been completed please call:
271-2231 SENDER PHONE 5
225-7341 OUR FAX t COMMENTS:
Stat» o« New Hampshire TDD Acecaa: Relay NH 1-€00-735-256* Post-lt" bra'/djgjc transmittal memo 7671
P , RIVER BOTTOM SAMPLING^, i
NASHUA NORTH, N.
sw/4 MANCHESTC3 IS" QU*CRA.NCL 42071-G4-TF-024
1S68 NATIONAL FLOOU Ihitii.A.W PP.OC«A FIRM FLOOD INSURAHCE RATE MAP CITY OF NASHUA, NEW HAMPSHIRE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY PAKE 5 OF 10 M7 $&&£&£& JUN-21-1934 15 = 33 FROM N.H.Q.E.n. Concord I TD TOTPL 'P. W TO JLN-21-1994 15=28 FROM N.H.Q.E.M. Concord 1 APPROXIMATE SCAUC ,000 I I I I I NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM FLOODWAY FLOOD BOUNDARY'AND FLOODWAY MAP OTY OF NASHUA, NEW HAMPSHIRE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY PAHEl 5 OF 1Q COMMUHITY-PAMEL HI 330097 0005BT * • EFFECT1VEMTE: AND URBAN C :K-':-tti FRD1 N.H.O.E.M. Concord 1 TO REFERENCE 6 DEPARTMENT OF !K£ INTSHiri; ... • ftjD -p |pn UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY ^ * ' SlmFICIAL GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE NASHUA NORTH QUADRANGLE, HILLSBOROUGH AND ROCKINGHAM COUNTIES, NEW HAMPSHIRE By Carl Koteff Prepared in cooperation with THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE Department of Resources and Economic Development v. c JC 2 n > r- £: '" * 2 > C ~* z K ^OLOGIC QUADRANGLE MAP ." ^'. Published by the U.S. Geological Survey, 1976 G meuium, well-sorted. Occurs on lake deposits, the highest stream terraces, till, and on bedrock. Derived from glacial-lake and stream- , terrace deposits, and deposited by northwest winds as transverse and longitudinal dunes, as well as amorphous masses of sand. As much as 40 ft 112 m) thick GLACIAL LAKE MERRIMACK DEPOSITS < PLEISTOCENEl- Sand, gravel, silt, and minor clay: deposited in or graded to glacial Lake Merrimack whose level was controlled by a spillway about 1 mile (1.6 km) south of the quadrangle border. Appreciable clay known only from drill holes in northern part of map area in the Merrimack Valley. Deposits laid down in contact with or beyond adjacent stag- nant ice. Correlation of deposits on west and east sides of the Mem- mack Valley is tentative Reeds Ferry delta deposits, named for area north of quadrangle. As much as 60 ft (18 m) thick Souhegan River delta deposits. As much as 75 ft i23 mi thick Thorntons Ferry delta deposits. Averages about 40 ft 112 mi thick .{Jrhnb Nesenkeag Brook delta deposits. As much as 50 ft (15 mi thick Qmdp Darrah Pond delta deposits. From 40ft(12 m) to over 100 ft 130 mi thick Qmtr Toll Road delta deposits. As much as 160 ft (49 m) thick Qmpr Page Road delta deposits. From 40 ft 112 mi to over 100 ft i30 mi thick Qmpb Pennichuck Brook delta deposits. As much as 50 ft (15 mi thick Qma Alvirne delta deposits. Averages about 50 ft (15 ml thick Burque delta deposits. As much as 100 ft (30 m) thick Hudson delta deposits. From 30 ft (9 mi to 90 ft (27 mi thick Shopping Center delta deposits. Averages about 100 ft (30 mi thick _W325 Qmhs Hollis Street delta deposits. Averages about 30 ft (9 mi thick Qmb Chiefly lake-bottom deposits but includes areas of uncorrelated Lake Mernmack deposits near Nashua. As much as 30 ft (9 mi thick GLACIAL-STREAM DEPOSITS (PLEISTOCENE)-Sand, gravel, and minor silt laid down by glacial streams during successive south to north ice positions in the eastern part of the quadrangle; oldest is Qg, Chronologic correlation with Lake Merrimack deposits is tenta- tive. Averages 20 to 25 ft (6 to 3 mi thick W 207 Qg5 UXCORRELATED GLACIAL-STREAM DEPOSITS '40 GLACIAL LAKE TYNGSBORO DEPOSITS (PLEISTOCENE)-Sand, gravel, and minor silt laid down in glacial Lake Tyngsboro prior to development of Lake Merrimack. Deposits formed a dam across the Merrimack Valley just south of the quadrangle border TILL (PLEISTOCENE)—Light-to dark-gray, nonsorted to poorly sorted mixture of clay, silt. sand, pebbles, cobbles, and boulders: contains some gravel. Thickness varies but generally is less than 20 ft. (6 mi. May be more than 50 ft 115 mi under the crests of drumlins ARTIFICIAL FILL aft. solid waste disposal sites GRADED AREAS—Geology concealed by construction: partly cut. partly filled BEDROCK EXPOSURES—Individual outcrops not shown completely in till areas.Ruled pattern indicates areasof abundant exposures and areas where surficial deposits are less than 10 ft i;i mi thick. Extent of ruled pattern mapped in part from aerial photographs K/'x^ - >*^ /' .1 •:.-:•;.; £ %*• j REFERENCE 7 STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE Inter-Department Communication DATE 17December1993 FROM: George Hastings°:: SUBJECT: Description of methodology used to identify Public Water Supply sources (groundwater and surface water) relative to a given site. TO: Joe Donovan Waste Management Division, Engineering Bureau The following is a summary of the steps taken to identify Public Water Supply sources (PWS) to support your Site Investigations. The software used throughout is ARC/INFO, Rev. 6. IDENTIFICATION OF PWS WELLS 1. Based on the location map provided by you,a polygon coverage (BUFFERS) is created which contains six buffer circles about the Site. (The Site's location is precisely determined by digitizing the location from a USGS 71/2-minute topographic quadrangle; the RMS error is always <0.003.) The radii of the respective buffers are 0.25-, 0.50-, 1.0-, 2.0-, 3.0-, and 4.0-miles. Label points are then added to each polygon and labeled with the respective radius value (e.g., 0-0.25, 0.25-0.50, etc.). The coverage BUFFER is now complete. 2. Using the department's Public Water Supply coverage (PWS)1, an IDENTITY coverage is created using the coverage BUFFER. The result of this operation is to create a derivative of PWS (PWS_BUF) in which all of the PWS features are now labeled with the name of the "buffer" ring in which they fall. PWS_BUF is further edited to include only those Public Water Supply sources which are: (1) within the buffers, (2) groundwater sources, (3) active systems, and (4) active sources. 3. A report is generated from PWS_BUF's polygon attribute table, listing the buffer distance, PWSID, system name, town, system type, and population served. IDENTIFICATION OF PWS SURFACE INTAKES 1. A 15-mile buffer about the Site is added to the coverage BUFFER. This buffer is used to perform a gross, "first-cut" identification of PWS surface intakes (again, which are active systems and active sources) relative to the Site. 1 The department's PWS coverage contains over 3,700 public water supply sources statewide. The coverage was developed jointly by the U.S. EPA,and the NHDES. Over 93% of the coverage features were located using GPS technology. Feature attributes are derived from best available data provided by the NHDES Water Supply Engineering Bureau. Development of the coverage is ongoing. Methodology description. Page 2 2. Those PWS features which survived the first cut are further examined to determine which lie downstream from the Site, based on the location of the "starting point" provided by you. This step involves a simple examination of the "starting point" and the current PWS features drawn on the computer monitor against the hydrographic data (USGS DLG-3, source scale 1:24,000/1:25,000). 3. The final cut, also performed interactively on the computer monitor, is to measure downstream for a distance of 15 miles from the Site's "starting point", including only those PWS surface intakes which lie within that distance. In the event that double-line hydrographic features are encountered while moving downstream, the measurement is taken from that shoreline which takes the most direct line. 3. From those PWS features which survived the final cut, a report is generated from PWS's polygon attribute table, listing the PWSID, system name, town, system type, population served, and the approximate distance downstream from the "starting point". ''.'ednesday, 1 February 1995 .. ITE: MOHAWK TANNERY N^HUA. IMH 42 15 55.29 ri. I at '• 19 '5.39 W. !cng Idtnt , f ; oat ; •::! of ?:ii:!i- '..ater Sapp !y '.'.'e ! I s, active system jnd :ict;ve -cur~e, , itl-i.n tl-e .•)! stances of 3 to 0.25, 3.25 to 3.50, 3.53 to 1.3, 1.3 to 2.3, 2.3 tc 2.2, 2.3 ".3 4.0 ;ni ! e: :f trie z\ te. SUFFER SYSTE! I -OP. D; U. PANG: PV/S 1 D SUPPLY NAME TOV/N "*~ ',' r~ — CEPV rr ^ ... J ., 0 1372020-002 OLSON'S MOBILE HOME PARK L'.TCHFIELD 108 •> 3 - 3.0 1373030-003 OLSON '3 MOBILE HOLE PARK LITCHFIELD 2 1C3 •-> 3 - 4.3 '202010-003 FPA NCCEUP APT/HUDSON MOTOR INN HUDSON /* 36 2 .3 - 4.3 12013*3-006 SOUTHERN TJH V/ATER CO MPANY HUDSON 2 1 3930 ~ J - 4.3 1622330-301 C I rO'S OF NASHUA REALTY TRUST NASHUA N 250 w .3 - 4.3 1172010-001 FLI NT POrjD WATER COMPANY HOLLIS C 30 Identification of Public .'/ater Supply Surface Sources, active system and act i cour ce, v/ithm 15 .niles, dov/nstream, of the site. POP. FV;S I 0 2LTFLY MANE TOWN SERVED "6CC30 LC'.VELL //ATEP. '.'T I L 1 TY LOWELL. '!A 135000 ;Intake ^ approximately 14.3 miles) Wednesday, 8 June 1994 SITE: MOHAWK TANNERY NASHUA, NH 42 45 56.29 N. I at 71 29 15.89 W. long Identification of Public Water Supply Wells (active system and active source) which have a Wellhead Protection Area, as defined by the NHDES Wellhead Protection Program, within the distances of 0 to 0.25, 0.25 to 0.50, 0.50 to 1.0. 1.0 to 2.0, 2.0 to 3.0, and 3.0 to 4.0 miles of the site. BUFFER SYSTEM POP. DISTANCE PWSID SUPPLY NAME TOWN TYPE SERVED 3.0 4.0 1531010-001 MERRIMACK VILLAGE DISTRICT MERRIMACK C 15500 3.0 4.0 1531010-002 MERRIMACK VILLAGE DISTRICT MERRIMACK C 155i20 3.0 4.0 1531010-003 MERRIMACK VILLAGE DISTRICT MERRIMACK C 15500 REFERENCE 8 RESIDENTIAL DRINKING WATER SUPPLY SURVEY Date: /* V Street Address: 7 g &/ T 1 A //4* S 1 . Homeowner's Name: 2. Homeowner's Address: )& &i7lRn,'t4A City/Town: Ji'tetio ^______State & Zip: flS l-t 0^060 ' * f *f Telephone #: gPJ g.?4 2 j /"? 3. Your Name (If different): ______4. Your Telephone #: ______5. Well Information Type of Drinking Water Supply (/ one): Shallow Dug Well ;X~ Depth ^?5 tt. Shallow Drilled Well ^ Depth ______tt. Bedrock/Artesian Well ______Depth ______ft. Surface Water Supply ______We are Provided Water from a Municipal System ______ 6. If you obtain water from a private/residential well, please answer the following questions: a. Year well installed: b. Well installer or driller: fjhn c. Number of residents: 1- adults ____ children d. Please describe any water treatment system (filter, softener, aerator) you are currently using: . ^ o -Ma »» c " / jVgoT/t»£i 3 6.0 ______ e. Comments (bad taste, smell, staining of fixtures) related to your water quality: Please return to: State of New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services 6 Hazen Drive Concord, New Hampshire 03301-6509 Attn: Joseph N. Donovan, WMEB Thank you for your assistance. r - . , T, Environment:.. - 4 C V— '=-_ Services RESIDENTIAL DRINKING WATER SUPPLY SURVEY Date: rtf\T <$ ' fy Street 1 . Homeowner's Name: j£ U6 , J/€ 2. Homeowner's Address: /77?>/W 6. If you obtain water from a private/residential well, please answer the following questions: a. Year well installed: 3 b. Well installer or driller: c. Number of residents: / adults ____ children d. Please describe any water treatment system (filter, softener, aerator) you are currently using: e. Comments (bad taste, smell, staining of fixtures) related to your water quality: Please return to: State of New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services 6 Hazen Drive Concord, New Hampshire 03301-6509 Attn: Joseph N. Donovan, WMEB Thank you for your assistance. REFERENCE 9 State of New Hampshire DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Lal-.cr atsry Services Unit Sample Analysis Report C.~.MO1 C Ml IMOCO OO.ie ^.1-11 II »__ » I rj T ij T c r nf.i — Nj'Y-^H'.JA M!"jHAL!!-' TANNERY M!-iCA til PERSON S"rtPi. I Nil JOF DCNOVAN DATlT. LCiTiGSD IN = 10-06-9A, 15 : 09 DATE C!?.MP!.ETFD 10-21-94 ?S NAME *^S ~ CITY OR TCli:?; D; !F' ! WATER us t .mis Result Detect. Lim. oenic mg.'L < 0.005 . 0.005 dmium mg-'L < 0.001 0.001 rcmiurr-. . mg.'L < 0.010 0.010 ad mg.'L < 0.005 0.005 ler.iuns nsc.'L < 0.005 0.005 EPA METHOD '524.2 USED FOR VGA'S. > « greater than, < less than mg,'l= milligrams per liter 10-25-94,10:07 SAMPLE 284569 State of New Hampshire DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES VOLATILE ORGANIC REPORT Extended Drinking Water List SAMPLE NUMBER 284569 DATE SAMPLED - 10-05-94 LOCATION = PROGRAM ID =72.07 SITE ID SAMPLER = JOE DONOVAN ANALYTE Result Detection Limit MCL (PPB) Benzene ppb BD 0.50 5 Bromobenzene ppb Bromochloromethane ppb Bromodichloromethane ppb BD 0.50 Bromoform ppb BD 0.50 Bromomethane ppb BD 0.50 n-Butylbenzene ppb sec-Butylbenzene ppb tert-Butylbenzene ppb Carbon tetrachloride ppb BD 0.50 5 "' ''orobenzene ppb BD 0.50 100 oroethane ppb BD 0.50 fen! oroform ppb BD 0.50 Chloromethane ppb BD 0.50 2-Chlorotoluene ppb 4-Chlorotoluene ppb Dibromochloromethane ppb BD 0.50 l,2-Dibromo-3-chloro- ppb propane 1, 2-Dibromoethane ppb Dibromomethane ppb 1, 2-Dichlorobenzene ppb 600 1 , 3-Dichlorobenzene ppb 1, 4-Dichlorobenzene ppb 75 Dichlorodifluoromethane ppb 1,1-Dichloroethane ppb BD 0.50 1, 2-Dichloroethane ppb BD 0.50 5 1,1-Dichloroethene ppb BD 0.50 7 cis-1 , 2-Dichloroethene ppb 70 trans-1, 2-Dichloroethene ppb 100 1 , 2-Dichloropropane ppb BD 1.00 5 1, 3 -Dichloropropane ppb 2 , 2-Dichloropropane ppb 1,1-Dichloropropene ppb "* s-l , 3-Dichloropropene ppb BD 1.00 .ns-1, 3-Dichloropropene ppb BD 1.00 -nylbenzene ppb BD 0.50 700 Report continued on next page... State of New Hampshire DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES VOLATILE ORGANIC REPORT Extended Drinking Water List continued SAMPLE NUMBER 284569 DATE SAMPLED 10-05-94 LOCATION = PROGRAM ID 72.07 SITE ID SAMPLER = JOE DONOVAN ANALYTE Result Detection Limit MCL (PPB) Hexachlorobutadiene ppb Isopropylbenzene ppb 4 -IsopropyItoluene ppb Methylene chloride ppb BD 1.00 5 Naphthalene ppb n-Propylbenzene ppb , Styrene ppb BD 0.50 100 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ppb 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ppb BD 0.50 Tetrachloroethene ppb BD 0.50 5 Toluene ppb BD 0.50 1000 i ^,3-Trichlorobenzene ppb 4-Trichlorobenzene ppb BD 0.50 70 *^-., 1-Trichloroethane ppb BD 0.50 200 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ppb BD 0.50 5 Trichloroethene ppb BD 0.50 5 Trichlorofluoromethane ppb BD 0.50 1.2.3-Trichloropropane ppb 1.2.4-TrimethyIbenzene ppb 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ppb Vinyl chloride ppb BD 0.50 2 Xylenes (total) ppb BD 0.50 10000 Methyl-t-butyl ether ppb BD 0.50 Comments CALDWELL EPA METHOD 524.2 USED FOR VOA'S. BD = Below Detection Limit ; PPB= parts per billion MCL = Maximum Contaminant Level > = greater than, < = less than lank space for result = analyte was looked for but is below detection. State cf New Hampshire DEPARTMENT OF ENUIRONMENTAL SERU1CES It _ O- »-•••u,.- «„. w ->.'_* * ,-' „ y*. .-^t O.i3 * ,•..,;«• t »_.« G A C«,. L.M«" -t •• «.+ _.. *-*«C J- .*t«t_ ~.» «» E1 0 ^1i£)• * ij• In wS 1> • i«i S» * « * » 'D--— jj. O - -' r •* c MI i-^ i M T c t n».t 4 ** • ta* A V.I* * Nr.SHUA, MOHAUK TANNERY, MSCA;L! PRCHRAr* CR HLJ I 7" CT"1 FSRSCH SAMPLING JOE "DONQUAM D«TE SAHPLED DATE LGC.CFD !M c • DATE COMPLETED 1C-21-94 CLSNERS NAME APnRF=S CITY CR TGLJN SA:~-LES COMMENT PI CAR ILLC WATER >st Name Result Detec t . Lim -sen ic . mg-'L < 0. 005 0 ^ 005 3dm i Ui75 mg/L < 0. 001 0 • 001 •jrotn ; Lim mrj.'L < - - 0. 010 0 .010 2ad mg XL < 0. 005 0 .005 :len ;um mg.'L < 0. 005 • o • 005 Analyst Comments : EPA METHOD 524.2 USED FOR UOA'S. > • greater- than, < • less than mg/l= mi11;grams—per liter 10-25-94,10:07 .SAMPLE 284570 State of New Hampshire DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES VOLATILE ORGANIC REPORT Extended Drinking Water List SAMPLE NUMBER 284570 DATE SAMPLED = 10-05-94 LOCATION = PROGRAM ID = 72.07 SITE ID * SAMPLER - JOE DONOVAN ANALYTE ' Result Detection Limit MCL (*>DC!) Benzene ppb BD 0.50 5 Bromobenzene ppb Bromochloromethane ppb Bromodichloromethane ppb BD 0.50 Bromoform ppb BD 0.50 Bromomethane ppb BD 0.50 n-Butylbenzene ppb sec-Butylbenzene ppb tert-Butylbenzene ppb Carbon tetrachloride ppb BD 0.50 5 r' * orobenzene ppb BD 0.50 100 iroethane ppb BD 0.50 Ciixoroform ppb BD 0.50 Chloromethane ppb BD 0.50 2-Chlorotoluene ppb 4 -Chlorotoluene ppb Dibromochloromethane ppb BD 0.50 1, 2-Dibromo-3-chloro- ppb • propane 1, 2-Dibromoethane ppb Dibromomethane ppb 1, 2-Dichlorobenzene ppb 600 1, 3-Dichlorobenzene ppb 1, 4-Dichlorobenzene ppb 75 Dichlorodifluoromethane ppb 1, 1-Dichloroethane ppb BD 0.50 .._ 1, 2-Dichloroethane ppb BD 0.50 5 1, 1-Dichloroethene ppb BD 0.50 7 cis-1 , 2-Dichloroethene ppb 70 trans-l, 2-Dichloroethene ppb 100 1, 2-Dichloropropane ppb BD 1.00 5 1, 3-Dichloropropane ppb 2 , 2-Dichloropropane ppb 1, 1-Dichloropropene ppb *-• s-1 , 3-Dichloropropene ppb BD 1.00 ns-1 , 3-Dichloropropeneppb BD 1.00 ^-nylbenzene PPb BD 0.50 700 Report continued on next page. State of New Hampshire DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES VOLATILE ORGANIC REPORT Extended Drinking Water List continued SAMPLE NUMBER 284570 DATE SAMPLED 10-05-94 LOCATION PROGRAM ID 72.07 SITE ID SAMPLER = JOE DONOVAN ANALYTE Result Detection Limit MCL (PPB) Hexachlorcbutadier.e ppb Isopropy Ibenz ene ppb 4-Isopropyltoluene ppb Methylene chloride ppb BD 1.00 5 Naphthalene ppb n-Propylbenzene ppb Styrene ppb BD 0.50 100 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ppb 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ppb BD 0.50 Tetrachloroethene ppb BD 0.50 5 Toluene ppb BD 0.50 1000 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ppb * n,4-Trichlorobenzene ppb BD 0.50 70 ,1-Trichloroethane ppb BD 0.50 200 *j L,2-Trichloroethane ppb BD 0.50 5 Trichloroethene ppb BD 0.50 5 Trichlorofluoromethane ppb BD 0.50 1.2.3-Trichloropropane ppb 1.2.4-Trimethylbenzene .ppb 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ppb Vinyl chloride ppb BD 0.50 2 Xylenes (total) ppb BD 0.50 10000 Methyl-t-butyl ether ppb BD 0.50 Comments » ^ ^ • ^ •» MB •• VB M» ^ ———' •• ^ ^ ^ ^ •• ——— ——— •• ••» ^ •• • ^ ^ ^ «• •• ^ «»^ « PICARILLO EPA METHOD 524.2 USED FOR VOA'S. BD » Below Detection Limit ; PPB= parts per billion MCL = Maximum Contaminant Level > = greater than, < = less than Blank space for result = analyte was looked for but is below detection, REFERENCE 10 FROSTASSOCIATES——— ...... P.O. Box 495, Essex,Connecticut 06426 (203) 767-7644 Fax(203) 767-7069 Mar 14, 1994 Wayne Ives Waste Management New Hampshire Dept. Of Environmental Services 6 Hazen Drive Concord, NH 03302-0095 Fr: Bob Frost Frost Associates P.O. Box 495 Essex, Conn 06426 Tel: (203)767-1254 Fax: (203)767-7069 Sub: Mohawk Tannery Nashua, Hillsborough, Cty, NH CERCLIS: NHD981889529 Job: 2 Site Longitude: 71-29-15.89 71.487747 Site Latitude : 42-45-56.29 42.765640 The CENTRACTS report below identifies the population, households, and private water wells of each Block Group that lies within, or partially within, the 4, 3, 2, 1, .5, and .25, mile "rings" of the latitude and longitude coordinates above. CENTRACTS may have up to ten radii of any length. 1000 block groups, and 15000 block group sides. CENTRACTS uses the 1990 Block Group population and Block Group house count data found in the Census Bureau's 1990 STF-1A files. The sources of water supply data are from the Bureau's 1990 STF-3A files. The boundary line coordinates of the Block Groups were extracted from the Census Bureau's 1990 TlGER/Line Files. CENTRACTS reports are created with programs written by Frost Associates, P.O. Box 495, Essex, Conn. The code was written using Microsoft's Quick-Basic Ver. 4.5. Latitude and Longitude coordinates identifying a site are entered in degrees and decimal degrees. One or more county files holding Block Group boundary lines are selected for use by CENTRACTS by determining whether the site coordinates fall within the minimum and maximum Lat\Lon coordinates of each county in the state. Each Block Group line segment has Lat\Lon coordinates representing the "From" and "To" ends of that line. All coordinates from the selected county files are read and converted from degrees, decimal degrees to X\Y miles from the site location. Each line segment is then examined whether it lies within or partially within the maximum ring from the site. The unique Block Group ID numbers of each line segment that lie within the maximum ring are retained. All Block Group boundary lines matching the Block Group numbers are then extracted from the respective county files to obtain all sides of the in eluded Block Groups. Boundary records are then sorted in adjacent side order to determine the shape and area of each Block Group polygon. vt Mohawk Tannery Nashua, Hillsborough Cty,, NH NHD981889629 . method to solve for the area of a polygon is to take one-half the sum of the pro ducts obtained by multiplying each X-coordinate by the difference between the adja cent Y-coordinates. For a polygon with coordinates at adjacent angles A, B, C, D, and E. The formula can be expressed: Area = 1/2{Xa(Ye-Yb)+ Xb(Ya-Yb)* Xc(Yb-Yd)+ Xd(Yc-Ye)* Xe(Yd-Ya)} For each ring, the selected Block Groups will be inside, outside, or intersected by the ring. When a polygon is intersected, the partial Block Group area within that ring is calculated using the method described below. When a ring intersects a Block Group, the intersect points are solved and plotted at the points where the ring enters and exits the shape. The chord line, a line within the circle connecting the intersect points is determined. This chord line is used to calculate the segment area, the half moon shape between the chord line and the ring, and the sub-polygon created by the chord line and the Block Group boundaries that lie outside the ring. The segment area is subtracted from the sub-polygon area to determine the area of the sub-polygon outside the ring. The area outside the ring is then subtracted from the area of the entire polygon to arrive at the inside area. This inside area is then divided by the tract's total area to determine the percentage of area within the ring. This process is repeated for each block group that is intersected by one of the rings. The total area, partial area, and percentage of partial area of those block groups within, or partially within a ring, are held in memory for the report. On occasion, the algorithm described above is unable to determine the area of the partial area. Within the report program is a "Paint" routine which allows an enclosed shape to be highlighted. Another routine calculates the percentage of highlighted screen pixels to the pixels within the polygon. A manual entry is allowed. Both the "paint" method and manual entry method over ride the calculated method. CENTRACTS lists, starting on page 4, all Block Groups in State, County, Census Tract, and Block Group ID order that lie within, or partially within, the maximum ring. Each Block Group is identified by a City or Town name and by the Block Group's State, County, Tract and Block Group ID number. Following is the Block Group's 1990 populu tion and house count extracted from the Census Bureau's 1990STF-1A files. The next four columns display water source data from the 1990 STF-3A files. The first column is "Units with Public system or private company source of water", followed by "Units with individual well, Drilled, source of water"; "Units with individual well, Dug, source of water" and "Units with Other source of water". For each ring, CENTRACTS then shows the Block Groups that are within that ring, the Block Group's total area in square miles, the partial area of the Block Group within that ring, and the partial percentage within the ring. The areas of the included Block Group and the partial areas are then totaled. The last section tallies the demographic data within each ring. The percentage of area for each Block Group is multiplied times the census data for that Block Group and totaled for all Block Group's within the ring. Ring totals are then determined by subtracting the three mile data from the four mile, the two mile from the three mile, one from the two, etc... Population on private wells is calculated using the formula: ((Drilled * Dug Wells) / Households) * Population Mohawk Tannery Nashua, Hillsborough Cty, NH NHD981889629 Block Blk Grp House Public Drilled Dug People Holds Water Wells Wells Other NO. City Group ID 33011 0101 1 635 221 225 0 0 0 1 Nashua 0 0 0 2 Nashua 33011 0101 2 822 284 278 33011 0101 3 922 367 384 0 0 0 3 Nashua 12 0 4 Nashua 33011 0101 4 1207 424 405 12 33011 0101 5 679 238 226 0 5 0 5 Nashua 0 0 0 6 Nashua 33011 0101 6 579 187 183 33011 0101 7 257 104 95 0 0 0 7 Nashua 13 34 0 8 Nashua 33011 0102 9 6013 2866 2819 33011 0103 1 1848 703 680 0 30 0 9 Nashua 0 0 0 10 Nashua 33011 0103 2 2288 821 803 33011 0103 3 2429 954 946 0 0 0 11 Nashua 0 82 0 12 Nashua 33011 0103 4 2313 881 818 33011 0104 1 1129 471 455 5 29 0 13 Nashua 0 3 0 14 Nashua 33011 0104 2 934 433 419 33011 0104 3 659 258 244 0 0 0 15 Nashua 0 0 0 16 Nashua 33011 0104 4 477 184 194 33011 0104 5 459 201 186 0 0 0 17 Nashua 5 6 0 18 Nashua 33011 0104 6 1365 533 534 33011 0105 1 744 338 332 0 0 0 19 Nashua 0 0 0 20 Nashua 33011 0105 2 653 275 265 33011 0105 3 250 121 128 0 0 0 21 Nashua 0 0 0 22 Nashua 33011 0105 4 485 251 241 33011 0105 5 328 181 200 0 0 0 23 Nashua 0 0 0 24 Nashua 33011 0105 6 265 110 108 528 220 212 0 0 0 25 Nashua 33011 0105 7 0 33011 0105 8 627 351 356 0 5 26 Nashua 0 0 0 27 Nashua 33011 0106 1 1241 650 623 1459 665 DOcm 1 0 0 0 28 Nashua 33011 0106 2 0 33011 0106 3 1372 571 567 0 0 29 Nashua 467 0 0 0 30 Nashua 33011 0106 4 993 467 1 471 332 333 0 0 0 31 Nashua 33011 0107 0 33011 0107 2 378 220 225 0 0 32 Nashua 0 0 0 33 Nashua 33011 0107 3 600 402 424 4 331' 177 164 0 0 0 34 Nashua 33011 0107 0 0 33011 0108 1 . 717 308 299 0 35 Nashua 0 0 0 36 Nashua 33011 0108 2 827 355 370 1206 535 543 0 0 0 37 Nashua 33011 0108 3 0 33011 0108 4 1479 683 654 0 0 38 Nashua 0 0 0 39 Nashua 33011 0108 5 1086 522 539 6 896 383 381 0 0 0 40 Nashua 33011 0108 0 0 33011 0109 1 750 290 307 0 41 Nashua CQ1 0 0 0 42 Nashua 33011 0109 2 1549 686 ool 352 340 0 0 0 43 Nashua 33011 0109 3 1003 0 33011 0109 4 1891 645 630 0 0 44 Nashua 0 0 0 45 Nashua 33011 0109 5 979 356 371 1 1672 562 557 0 0 0 46 Nashua 33011 0110 2 5 33011 0110 2 1319 387 377 0 47 Nashua 0 0 0 48 Nashua 33011 0110 3 484 185 194 350 349 0 0 0 49 Nashua 33011 0110 4 845 0 33011 0110 5 670 264 264 0 0 50 Nashua 0 0 0 51 Nashua 33011 0111 1 6066 3612 3612 Mohawk Tannery Nashua, Hillsborough Cty,NH NHD981889629 52 Nashua . 33011 0112 1 2078 623 608 0 5 0 53 Nashua 33011 0112 2 172 61 59 0 0 0 54 Nashua 33011 0112 3 1093 355 347 0 0 0 55 Nashua 33011 0112 4 1235 587 577 9 21 0 56 Nashua 33011 0113 1 668 129 128 0 0 0 57 Nashua 33011 0113 2 1444 450 452 0 0 0 33011 0113 3 1319 406 413 0 6 0 58 Nashua 0 59 Nashua 33011 0113 4 861 261 227 6 14 60 Nashua. 33011 0113 5 562 171 158 0 13 . 0 61 Nashua 33011 0114 1 772 270 245 0 26 0 62 Nashua 33011 0114 2 3768 1375 1352 0 48 0 63 Nashua 33011 0114 9 4051 1669 1465 78 145 0 64 Nashua 33011 0115 1 1664 712 678 0 15 0 65 Nashua 33011 0115 2 796 378 295 21 36 0 66 Hudson 33011 0121 7 1408 450 46 20 367 0 67 Hudson 33011 0121 a 3066 1091 768 69 275 0 68 Hudson 33011 0122 1 1378 486 475 0 20 0 69 Hudson 33011 0122 2 1329 561 550 35 10 0 33011 0122 3 1130 469 429 9 10 0 70 Hudson 0 71 Hudson 33011 0122 4 1780 702 699 0 0 72 Hudson 33011 0122 5 2009 742 714 0 9 0 33011 0123 8 2141 706 237 49 418 10 73 Hudson 0 74 Hudson 33011 0123 9 3412 1082 531 103 438 1336 391 316 31 49 0 75 Litchfield 33011 0131 3 O 4 O 33011 0131 4 1625 625 279 89 248 0 76 Litchfield 0 77 Merrimack 33011 0141 4 802 377 360 0 15 33011 0143 1 2754 926 840 24 74 0 78 Merrimack 130 0 79 Merrimack 33011 0143 3 1914 582 448 19 33011 0143 4 569 220 171 0 35 0 80 Merrimack 206 81 Nashua 33011 0171 3 879 292 7 65 Nashua 33011 0171 4 1291 437 0 75 375 0 82 107 233 6 83 Nashua 33011 0171 5 1023 355 0 33011 0171 6 780 291 16 58 200 11 84 Nashua 48in8n 0 85 Nashua 33011 0171 9 1732 631 3 148 Totals:" " " 112020 44799 39581 1050 4137 40 Mohawk Tannery Nashua, Hillsbcrough Cty, NH NHDS81889629 Census Tract House Public Drilled Dug Other City Tract ID People Count Water Wells Wells Wells Hudson 33011 0123 9 3412 1082 531 103 438 0 1130 469 429 9 10 0 Hudson 33011 0122 3 0 Hudson 33011 0121 7 ' 1408 450 46 20 367 3066 1091 768 69 275 0 Hudson 33011 0121 8 0 Hudson 33011 0122 1 1378 486 475 0 20 56t 550 35 10 0 Hudson 33011 0122 2 1329 0 Hudson 33011 0122 5 2009 742 714 0 9 4 1780 702 699 0 0 0 Hudson 33011 0122 10 Hudson 33011 0123 8 2141 706 237 49 418 Sub Totals: 17653 6289 4449 285 1547 10 1336 391 316 31 49 0 Litchfield 33011 0131 3 0 Litchfield 33011 0131 4 1625 625 279 89 248 Sub Totals: 2961 1016 595 120 297 0 569 220 171 0 35 0 Merrimack 33011 0143 4 0 Merrimack 33011 0143 3 1914 582 448 19 130 4 802 377 360 0 15 0 Merrimack 33011 0141 0 Merrimack 33011 0143 1 2754 926 840 24 74 Sub Totals: 6039 2105 1819 43 254 0 1 635 221 225 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0101 0 Nashua 33011 0101 2 822 284 278 0 0 1365 533 534 5 6 0 Nashua 33011 0104 6 0 Nashua 33011 0105 1 744 338 332 0 0 2 653 275 265 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0105 0 Nashua 33011 0105 3 250 121 128 0 0 4 485 251 241 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0105 0 Nashua 33011 0105 5 328 181 200 0 0 922 367 384 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0101 3 0 Nashua 33011 0101 4 1207 424 405 12 12 679 238 226 0 5 0 Nashua 33011 0101 5 0 Nashua 33011 0101 6 579 187 183 0 0 257 104 95 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0101 7 0 Nashua 33011 0102 9 6013 2866 2819 13 34 1 1848 703 680 0 30 0 Nashua 33011 0103 0 Nashua 33011 0103 2 2288 821 803 0 0 954 946 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0103 3 2429 ao 2313 881 818 0 Of, 0 Nashua 33011 0103 4 0 Nashua 33011 0104 1 1129 471 455 5 29 2 934 433 419 0 3 0 Nashua 33011 0104 0 Nashua 33011 0104 3 659 258 244 0 0 477 184 194 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0104 4 0 Nashua 33011 0104 5 459 201 186 0 0 522 539 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0108 5 1086 0 Nashua 33011 0108 6 896 383 381 0 0 Mohawk, "annecy Nachi." , 4.L.1 ] sb , N't! NHD98I ashua 33011 0109 1 750 290 307 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0109 2 1549 686 681 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0109 3 1003 352 340 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0109 4 1891 645 630 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0109 5 979 356 371 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0110 1 1672 562 557 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0110 2 1319 387 377 0 2 5 Nashua 33011 0110 3 484 185 194 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0110 4 845 350 349 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0110 5 670 264 264 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0111 1 6066 3612 3612 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0112 1 2078 623 608 0 5 0 Nashua 33011 0112 2 172 61 59 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0112 3 1093 355 347 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0112 4 1235 587 577 9 21 0 Nashua 33011 0113 1 668 129 128 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0113 2 1444 450 452 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0113 3 1319 406 413 0 6 0 Nashua 33011 0113 4 861 261 227 6 14 0 Nashua 33011 0113 5 562 171 158 0 13 0 Nashua 33011 0114 1 772 270 245 0 26 0 Nashua 33011 0114 2 3768 1375 1352 0 48 0 Nashua 33011 0114 9 4051 1669 1465 78 145 0 Nashua 33011 0115 1 1664 712 678 0 15 0 Nashua 33011 0115 2 796 378 295 21 36 0 Nashua 33011 0105 6 265 110 108 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0105 7 528 220 212 0 0 0 iashua 33011 0105 8 627 351 356 0 5 0 Nashua 33011 0106 1 1241 650 623 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0106 2 1459 665 681 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0106 3 1372 571 567 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0106 4 993 467 467 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0107 1 471 332 333 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0107 2 378 220 225 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0107 3 600 402 424 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0107 4 331 177 164 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0108 1 717 308 299 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0108 2 827 355 370 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0108 3 1206 535 543 0 0 0 Nashua 33011 0108 4 1479 683 654 0 o - 0 Nashua 33011 0171 3 879 292 7 65 206 8 Nashua 33011 0171 4 1291 437 0 75 375 0 Nashua 33011 0171 5 1023 355 0 107 233 6 Nashua 33011 0171 6 780 291 16 58 200 11 Nashua 33011 0171 9 1732 631 3 148 488 0 Sub Totals: 85367 35389 32718 602 2039 30 Na^iU-L, riiilsborough Cty^, rtH NHD981889629 For Radius of 4 Mi., Circle Area = 50.265482 Block Total Partial % Within No. City Group ID Area Area Radius 1 Nashua 3301.1 1011 0.429297 0.429297 100.00 2 Nashua 33011 1012 0.228999 0.228999 100.00 3 Nashua 33011 1013 0.662266 0.662266 100.00 4 Nashua 33011 1014 0.778657 0.778657 100,00 5 Nashua 33011 1015 0.195548 0.195548 100.00 6 Nashua 33011 1016 0.116636 0.116636 100.00 7 Nashua 33011 1017 0.040374 0.040374 100.00 8 Nashua 33011 1029 4.931290 4.930838 99.99 9 Nashua 33011 1031 0.543484 0.543484 100.00 10 Nashua 33011 1032 0.667475 0.667475 100.00 11 Nashua 33011 1033 0.729241 0.729241 100.00 12 Nashua 33011 1.034 1.009635 1.009635 100.00 13 Nashua 33011 1041 0.471016 0.471016 100.00 14 Nashua 33011 1042 0.178670 0.178670 100.00 15 Nashua 33011 1043 0.145244 0.145244 100.00 16 Nashua 33011 1044 0.181290 0.181290 100.00 17 Nashua 33011 1045 0.133805 0.133805 100.00 18 Nashua 33011 1046 0.358100 0.358100 100.00 19 Nashua 33011 1051 0.041857 0.041857 100.00 20 Nashua 33011 1052 0.054777 0.054777 100.00 21 Nashua 33011 1053 0.036910 0.036910 100.00 22 Nashua 33011 1054 0.026753 0.026753 100.00 23 Nashua 33011 1055 0.039626 0.039626 100.00 24 Nashua 33011 1056 0.027026 0.027026 100.00 25 Nashua 33011 1057 0.035889 0.035889 100.00 26 Nashua 33011 1058 0.067296 0.067296 100.00 27 Nashua 33011 1061 0.257683 0.257683 100.00 28 Nashua 33011 1062 0.164262 0.164262 100.00 29 Nashua 33011 1063 0.166438 0.166438 100.00 30 Nashua. 33011 1064 0.374959 0.374959 100.00 31 Nashua 33011 1071 0.062428 0.062428 100.00 32 Nashua 33011 1072 0.056671 0.056671 100.00 33 Nashua 33011 1073 0.090449 0.090449 100.00 34 Nashua 33011 1074 0.110872 0.110872 100.00 35 Nashua 33011 1719 10.717721 0.019057 0.18 36 Nashua 33011 1082 0.092839 0.092839 100.00 37 Nashua 33011 1083 0.055868 0.055868 100.00 38 Nashua 33011 1084 0.061112 0.061112 100.00 39 Nashua 33011 1085 0.072707 0.072707 100.00 40 Nashua 33011 1086 0.081490 0.081490 100.00 41 Nashua 33011 1091 0.186317 0.186317 100.00 42 Nashua 33011 1092 0.175169 0.175169 100.00 43 Nashua 33011 1093 0.121919 0.121919 100.00 44 Nashua 33011 1094 0.326167 0.326167 100.00 45 Nashua 33011 1095 0.299553 0.299553 100.00 46 Nashua 33011 1101 0.955135 0.955135 100.00 Nashua, Hiij. NHD981889629 0.465891 0.465891 100.00 47 Nashua 33011 1102 100.00 48 Nashua 33011 1103 0.115483 0.115483 0.129797 0.129797 100.00 49 Nashua 33011 1104 100.00 50 Nashua 33011 1105 0.277119 0.277119 33011 1111 1.813425 0.446544 24.62 51 Nashua 1.416204 89.75 52 Nashua 33011 1121 1.577927 0.064498 0.064498 100.00 53 Nashua 33011 1122 100.00 54 Nashua 33011 1123 0.304931 0.304931 0.993092 0.519044 52.27 55 Nashua 33011 1124 100.00 56 Nashua 33011 1131 0.232438 0.232438 0.279499 0.279499 100.00 57 Nashua 33011 1132 100.00 33011 1133 0.334280 0.334280 58 Nashua 0.171354 100.00 59 Nashua 33011 1134 0.171354 33011 1135 0.113139 0.113139 100.00 60 Nashua 0.398615 . 100.00 61 Nashua 33011 1141 0.398615 1.133230 1.133230 100.00 62 Nashua 33011 1142 61.96 33011 1149 4.087126 2.532390 63 Nashua 1.215543 100.00 64 Nashua 33011 1151 1.215543 0.421192 0.312313 74.15 65 Nashua 33011 1152 5.67 33011 1217 3.504211 0.198675 66 Hudson 3.050494 75.21 67 Hudson 33011 1218 4.056146 0.981149 0.981149 100.00 68 Hudson 33011 1221 100.00 69 Hudson 33011 1222 0.373927 0.373927 33011 1223 0.384794 0.384794 100.00 70 Hudson 0.655134 100.00 7 1 Hudson 33011 1224 0.655134 0.713856 0.713856 100.00 72 Hudson 33011 1225 10.90 73 Hudson 33011 1238 6.428186 0.700548 5.413658 1.471887 27.19 74 Hudson 33011 1239 8.82 75 Litchfield 33011 1313 2.971058 0.261964 4.022493 2.676525 66.54 76 Litchfield 33011 1314 78.38 77 Merrimack. 33011 1414 3.091441 2.422992 33011 1431 3.565128 0.073229 2.05 78 Merrimack 0.847733 30.80 79 Merrimack 33011 1433 2.752589 2.186451 1.596080 73.00 80 Merrimack. 33011 1434 85.48 33011 1713 5.365623 4.586404 81 Nashua 0.019667 0.25 82 Nashua 33011 1714 7.806599 4.130684 0.586883 14.21 83 Nashua 33011 1715 41.35 33011 1716 3.577368 1.479176 84 Nashua- 0.860249 100.00 85 Nashua 33011 1081 0.860249 ===—== Totals: 103.530228 50.265476 For Radius of 3 Mi., Circle Area = 28.274334 % Within Block Total Partial Area Radius No. City Group ID Area 100.00 33011 1011 0.429297 0.429297 Nashua 0.228999 100.00 Nashua 33011 1012 0.228999 0.662266 0.662266 100.00 Nashua 33011 1013 100.00 33011 1014 0.778657 0.778657 Nashua 0.195548 100.00 Nashua 33011 1015 0.195548 Mohawk Tanneri Nashua, Hillsboroug~ L. :, NHD981889.629 6 Nashua 33011 1016 0.116636 0.116636 100.00 --- 7 Nashua 33011 1017 0.040374 0.040374 100.00 8 Nashua 33011 1029 4.931290 3.455551 70.07 9 Nashua 33011 1031 0.543484 0.543484 100.00 10 Nashua 33011 1032 0.667475 0.667475 100.00 11 Nashua 33011 1033 0. 729241 0. 729241 100.00 12 Nashua 33011 1034 1.009635 1.009635 100.00 13 Nashua 33011 1041 0.471016 0.471016 100.00 14 Nashua 33011 1042 0.178670 0.178670 100.00 15 Nashua 33011 1043 0.145244 0.145244 100.00 16 Nashua 33011 1044_ 0.181290 0.181290 100.00 17 Nashua 33011 1045 0.133805 0.133805 100.00 18 Nashua 33011 1046 0.358100 0.358100 100.00 19 Nashua 33011 1051 0.041857 0.041857 100.00 20 Nashua 33011 1052 0.054777 0.054777 100.00 21 Nashua 33011 1053 0.036910 0.036910 100.00 22 Nashua 33011 1054 0.026753 0.026753 100.00 23 Nashua 33011 1055 0.039626 0.039626 100.00 24 Nashua 33011 1056 0.027026 0.027026 100.00 25 Nashua 33011 1_057 0.035889 0.035889 100.00 26 Nashua 33011 1058 0.067296 0.067296 100.00 27 Nashua 33011 1061 0.257683 0.257683 100.00 28 Nashua 33011 1062 0.164262 0.164262 100.00 29 Nashua 33011 1063 0.166438 0.166438 100.00 30 Nashua 33011 1064 0.374959 0.374959 100.00 31 Nashua 33011 1071 0.062428 0.062428 100.00 32 Nashua 33011 1072 0. 056671 0.056671 100.00 33 Nashua 33011 1073 0.090449 0.090449 100.00 34 Nashua 33011 1074 0.110872 0.110872 100.00 36 Nashua 33011 1082 0.092839 0.092839 100.00 37 Nashua 33011 1083 0.055868 0.055868 100.00 38 Nashua 33011 1084 0.061112 0.061112 100.00 39 Nashua 33011 1085 0. 072707 0.072707 100.00 40 Nashua 33011 1086 0.081490 0.081490 100.00 41 Nashua 33011 1091 0.186317 0. 186317 100.00 42 Nashua 33011 1092 0.175169 0.175169 100.00 43 Nashua 33011 · 1093 o.i21919 o.·121919 100.00 44 Nashua- 33011 1094 0. 3261·67 0.326167 100.00 45 Nashua 33011 1095 0.299553 0.299553 100.00 - 46 Nashua 33011 1101 0.955135 0.729674 76.39 47 Nashua 33011 1102 0.465891 0.285747 61. 33 48 Nashua 33011 1103 0.115483 0.115483 100.00 49 Nashua 33011 1104 0.129797 0.129797 100.00 50 Nashua 33011 1105 0.277119 0.277119 100.00 52 Nashua 33011 1121 1. 577927 0.456320 28.92 53 Nashua 33011 1122 0.064498 0.008442 13.09 54 Nashua 33011 1123 0.304931 0.150606 49.39 55 Nashua 33011 1124 0.993092 0.000859 0.09 56 Nashua 33011 1131 0.232438 0.231043 99.40 57 Nashua 33011 1132 O.279499 0.279499 100.00 58 Nashua 33011 1133 0.334280 0.231577 69.28 59 Nashua 33011 113 4 0.171354 0.066800 38.98 61 Nashua 33011 1141 0.398615 0.398615 100.00 62 Nashua 33011 1142 1.133230 0.640281 56.50 Mohawk Tannery Nashua, Hillsborough Cty, NH NHD981889629 25.88 63 Nashua 33011 1149 4.087126 1.057691 1.215543 1.016041 83.59 64 Nashua 33011 1151 36.55 67 Hudson 33011 1218 4.056146 1.482360 0.981149 0.539392 54.98 68 Hudson 33011 1221 100.00 69 Hudson 33011 1222 0.373927 0.373927 0.384794 0.249648 64.88 70 Hudson 33011 1223 47.94 71 Hudson 33011 1224 0.655134 0.314089 0.713856 0.324560 45.47 72 Hudson 33011 1225 0.91 74 Hudson 33011 1239 5.413658 0.049412 4.022493 0.492267 12.24 76 Litchfield 33011 1314 42.86 77 Merrimack 33011 1414 3.091441 1.325041 79 Merrimack 33011 1433 2.752589 0.049894 1.81 2.186451 0.182516 8.35 80 Merriraack 33011 1434 42.70 81 Nashua 33011 1713 5.365623 2.291313 3.577368 0.253468 7.09 84 Nashua 33011 1716 100.00 85 Nashua 33011 1081 0.860249 0.860249 Totals: 62.058899 28.276052 For Radius of 2 Mi., Circle Area = 12.566371 Block Total Partial % Within Area Radius No. City Group ID Area 33011 1011 0.429297 0.096555 22.49 1 Nashua 0.220308 96.20 2 Nashua 33011 1012 0.228999 0.662266 0.659013 99.51 3 Nashua 33011 1013 81.24 4 Nashua 33011 1014 0.778657 0.632614 0.195548 0.195548 100.00 5 Nashua 33011 1015 100.00 6 Nashua 33011 1016 0.116636 0.116636 0.040374 0.040374 100.00 7 Nashua 33011 1017 27.64 8 Nashua 33011 1029 4.931290 1.362903 0.543484 0.543484 100.00 9 Nashua 33011 1031 100.00 10 Nashua 33011 1032 0.667475 0.667475 0.729241 0.729241 100.00 11 Nashua 33011 1033 69.92 12 Nashua. 33011 1034 1.009635 0.705935 0.471016 0.463532 98.41 13 Nashua 33011 1041 100.00 14 Nashua 33011 1042 0.178670 0.178670 0.145244 0.145244 100.00 15 Nashua 33011 1043 100.00 16 Nashua 33011 1044 0.181290 0.181290 0.133805 0.133805 100.00 17 Nashua 33011 1045 100.00 18 Nashua 33011 1046 0.358100 0.358100 0.041857 0.041857 100.00 19 Nashua 33011 1051 100.00 20 Nashua 33011 1052 0.054777 0.054777 0.036910 0.036910 100.00 21 Nashua 33011 1053 100.00 22 Nashua 33011 1054 0.026753 0.026753 0.039626 0.039626 100.00 23 Nashua 33011 1055 100.00 24 Nashua 33011 1056 0.027026 0.027026 0.035889 0.035889 100.00 25 Nashua 33011 1057 100.00 26 Nashua 33011 1058 0.067296 0.067296 0.257683 0.219698 85.26 27 Nashua 33011 1061 94.62 28 Nashua 33011 1062 0.164262 0.155420 Mohawk Tannery Nashua, Hillsborough Cty( NH NHD981889629 29 Nashua 33011 1063 0.166438 0.070225 42. 19 30 Nashua 33011 1064 0.374959 0.049153 1 3. 11 31 Nashua 33011 1071 0.062428 0.062428 100.00 32 Nashua 33011 1072 0.056671 0.056671 100.00 33 Nashua 33011 1073 0.090449 0.090449 100.00 34 Nashua 33011 1074 0.110872 0.110872 100.00 36 Nashua 33011 1082 0.092839 0.092839 100.00 37 Nashua 33011 1083 0.055868 0.055868 100.00 38 Nashua 33011 1084 0.061112 0.061112 100.00 39 Nashua 33011 1085 0.072707 0.072707 100.00 40 Nashua 33011 1086 0.081490 0.081490 100.00 41 Nashua 33011 1091 0. 186317 0.186317 100.00 42 Nashua 33011 1092 0.175169 0.175169 100.00 43 Nashua 33011 1093 0.121919 0.121919 100.00 44 Nashua 33011 1094 0.326167 0.326167 100.00 45 Nashua 33011 1095 0.299553 0.212176 70.83 46 Nashua 33011 1101 0.955135 0.010223 1.07 49 Nashua 33011 1104 0.129797 0.077782 59.93 50 Nashua 33011 1105 0.277119 0.147838 53.35 56 Nashua 33011 1131 0.232438 0.040927 17.61 57 Nashua 33011 1132 0.279499 0.000785 0.28 61 Nashua 33011 1141 0.398615 0.396000 99.34 62 Nashua 33011 1142 1.133230 0.071226 6.29 63 Nashua 33011 1149 4.087126 0.075927 1.86 64 Nashua 33011 1151 1.215543 0.681529 56.07 67 Hudson 33011 1218 4.056146 0.130765 3.22 69 Hudson 33011 1222 0.373927 0.082621 22. 10 77 Merrimack 33011 1414 3.091441 0.083598 2.70 81 Nashua 33011 1713 5.365623 0.054153 1 . 01 85 Nashua 33011 1081 0.860249 0.860249 100.00 ======Totals: 37.343952 12.675159 For Radius of 1 Mi., Circle Area = 3.141593 , Block Total Partial I Within No. City Group ID Area Area Radius ------ ---- 3 Nashua 33011 1013 0.662266 0.004878 0.74 4 Nashua 33011 1014 0. 778657 0.040785 5.24 5 Nashua 33011 1015 0.195548 0. 100664 51. 48 6 Nashua 33011 1016 0. 116636 0.107858 92.47 7 Nashua 33011 1017 0.040374 0.040374 100.00 8 Nashua 33011 1029 4.931290 0.135513 2.75 9 Nashua 33011 1031 0.543484 0.387178 -71.24 11 Nashua 33011 1033 0.729241 0.261934 35.92 14 Nashua 33011 1042 0.178670 0. 11197 4 62.67 15 Nashua 33011 1043 0.145244 0.038399 26.44 16 Nashua 33011 1044 0.181290 0.181290 100.00 17 Nashua 33011 1045 0.133805 0.133805 100.00 18 Nashua 33011 1046 0.358100 0.358100 100.00 21 Nashua 33011 1053 0.036910 0.025099 68.00 Mohawk Tannery Nashua, Hillsborough Cty, NH NHD981889629 22 Nashua 33011 1054 0.026753 0.026753 100.00 23 Nashua 33011 1055 0.039626 0.035089 88.55 24 Nashua 33011 1056 0.027026 0.000040 0. 15 31 Nashua 33011 1071 0.062428 0.000593 0.95 36 Nashua 33011 1082 0.092839 0.086562 93.24 37 Nashua 33011 1083 0.055868 0.022204 39.74 38 Nashua 33011 1084 0.061112 0.000096 0. 16 41 Nashua 33011 1091 0.186317 0. 020715 11 . 12 64 Nashua 33011 1151 1.215543 0.209845 17.26 85 Nashua 33011 1081 0.860249 0.811845 94.37 ======Totals: 11.659273 3.141593 For Radius of . 5 Mi., Circle Area = 0.785398 Block Total Partial % Within No. City Group ID Area Area Radius ----- ------ ----- -- ---- 9 Nashua 33011 t031 0.543484 0.027973 5. 15 11 Nashua 33011 1033 0. 729241 0.063896 8.76 16 Nashua 33011 1044 0.181290 0.012858 7.09 17 Nashua 33011 1045 0.133805 0.082698 61. 81 18 Nashua 33011 1046 0.358100 0.273625 76.41 64 Nashua 33011 1151 1.215543 0.019106 1.57 85 Nashua 33011 1081 0.860249 0.305241 35.48 ======Totals: 4.021712 0.785398 For Radius of .25 Mi., Circle Area = 0.196350 Block Total Partial % Within No. City Group ID Area Area Radius ------ ------ --- ------ 18 Nashua, 33011 1046 0.358100 0.113584 31.72 85 Nashua 33011 1081 0.860249 0.082766 9.62 -- ====== ======Totals: 1.218349 0.196350 Mohawk Tannery Nashua, Hillsborough Cty, NH NHD981889629 ======site Data ======Population: 87827.14 Households: 35287.93 Drilled Wells: 403.47 Dug Wells: 1445.16 Other Water Sources: 18.33 :======Partial (RING) data ======* Within Ring: 4Mile(s) and 3 Mile(s) —— Population: 20762.80 Households: 8077.47 Drilled Wells: 239.73 Dug Wells: 853.57 Other Wells: 11.07 ** Population On Private Wells: 2810.29 :—— Within Ring: 3 Mile(s) and 2 Mile(s) —— Population: 23525.02 Households: 8877.86 Drilled Wells: 128.41 Dug Wells: 384.05 Other Wells: 7.18 ** Population On Private Wells: 1357.97 * Within Ring: 2Mile(s) and 1 Mile(s) —— Population: 33662.21 Households: 14241.02 Drilled Wells: 29.34 Dug Wells: 171.55 Other Wells: 0.08 ** Population On Private Wells: 474.86 * Within Ring: 1Mile(s) and .5 Mile(s) ——- Population: 7928.07 Households: 3306.78 Drilled Wells: 2.17 Dug Wells: 29.61 Other Wells: 0.00 ** Population On Private Wells: 76.19 Mohawk Tannery Nashua, Hillsborough Cty, NH NHD981889629 .—— within Ring: .5 Mile(s) and .25 Mile(s) - Population: 1447.09 Households: 586.10 Drilled Wells: 2.23 Dug Wells: 4.46 Other Wells: 0.00 ** Population On Private Wells: 16.53 —— Within Ring: .25 Mile(s) and 0 Mile(s) —— Population: 501.94 t Households: 198.69 ; Drilled Wells: 1.59 Dug Wells: 1.90 Other Wells: 0.00 ** Population On Private Wells: 8.81 ** Total Population On Private Wells: 4744.S / REFERENCE 11 State of New Hampshire DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 6 Hazen Drive, P.O.Box 95, Concord, NH 03302-0095 603-271-3503 FAX603-271-2867 TDD Acceu: Relay NH 1-800-735-2964 December 29, 1993 Ms. Ruth Leabman MSCA Coordinator Waste Management Division, HSS-CAN7 USEPA, Region I JFK Federal Building Boston, MA 02203 Re: Mohawk Tannery Site, Expanded Site Inspection, Nashua, NH Dear Ms. Leabman: ' The following is the Expanded Site Inspection (ESI) for the Mohawk Tannery Site, NHD981889629, prepared by the NewHampshire Department of Environmental Services (NHDES), in accordance with the Multi-Site Cooperative Agreement of January, 1985. Due to the limited extent of this sampling effort weare submitting the ESI in a letter report format. The ESI was conducted by the Waste Management Engineering Bureau which is responsible for site assessment work under the Cooperative Agreement. Introduction The purpose of this ESI was to collect additional environmental samples needed to assess the potential threat to human health and the environment that may have resulted from a long term deposition of the Mohawk Tannery's waste stream into the Nashua River via the effluent pipe(s) located on the eastern bank of the Nashua River on the Mohawk Tannery property. Discussion The section of the Nashua River sampled during this ESI is located in an area of the river where natural river flow can be altered by two dams. The Jackson Plant Dam is located approximately twomiles downstream from SP-1 and the Mine Falls Dam is located approximately 2.4 miles upstream of SP-1(Figures 1,2,3). In the past, flow in the area of SP-1 is believed to have been more of a flood and drain situation as these two hydro dams alternately opened and closed to generate electricity. The suspected effluent pipe (SP-1) reportedly replaced a previous pipe which prior to 1970, discharged untreated tannery wastes (Ref.1 - Telecon with P. Heirtzler). The exact location of the outfall of this previous_pipe is unknown. AIR RESOURCES DIV WASTE MANAGEMENT DIV. WATER RESOURCES DIV. WATER SUPPLY 4 POLLUTION CONTROL DIY. 64 No. MamStreet 6 Hazen Dnve 64 No. Main Siren P 0. Box 95 Caller Box2033 Concert. N H. 03301 „ PO. Box200* Concert. N. H. 03302-0095 Concert. N.H. 03302-2035 Tel. 603:271-2900 W D Coocort. N.H. 03302-200* Tel. 603-271-3J03 Tel. 603-n-l370 Fax 603-271-2456 Tel. 603-271-3406 Fax 603-271-2181 Fax 603-271-1381 Fax 603-271-65*1 REFERENCE 12 TELECON NOTE CONTROL NO.: DATE: TIME: 1-31-95 10:15 DISTRIBUTION: BETWEEN: OF: PHONE: Diane Henderson Lowell Water (508)970-4166 Lab Director Utility AND: Joseph Donovan NHDES-WMD DISCUSSION: ___On the above referenced date and time I contacted Mrs. Henderson to inquire about water analysis conducted on the surface water (Merrimack River) entering the Lowell water utilities drinking water intake. Mrs. Henderson stated that no MCL's were exceeded and that the only water quality problem they experience is elevated Iron levels. ACTION ITEMS: REFERENCE 13 Reference 20 TELECON NOTE CONTROL NO: DATE: TIME: 2/21/95 3:18 DISTRIBUTION: BETWEEN: OF: PHONE: Supervisor of Fish Hatcherie; NH Fish S Came Dept. (603) 271-2501 AND: Joe Donovan NHDES-WMD DISCUSSION: According to Mr. Fawcett, the Merrimack River was stocked in 1994upstream from its confluence with the Nashua River at one location in Concord and another in Manchester as described below: Manchester Concord Total Brook Trout 613 613 Brown Trout 1,500 1,140 2,640 Rainbow Trout 761 609 1.370 Shad 1.618 1,618 Mr. Fawcett also stated that the NashuaRiver's tributaries are stocked regularly with trout, however the Nashua River was stocked in 1994 with 600 Alewives. Also in 1994 200 Shad were transferred from the Connecticut River into the Nashua River. ACTION ITEMS: REFERENCE 14 Get Net Fishing Waters Results of Subscribe to \WILDLIF T 7 Nl'"' H"'"!"'1""' E New Hampshire ^JOURNAL lor outdoor enthusiasts fishing for information about programs, species, aquatic ecology, angling techniques, and more, they'll catch it in New Hampshire Wildlife Journal — the state's only magazine devoted exclusively to fish and wildlife and their associated habitats. Published six rimes a year, Wildlife Journal contains articles about: • Fish and wildlife management programs. • Issues affecting the state's natural resources • Profiles of the state's many interesting wildlife species. • Updates on changes in hunting and fishing sea sons and regulations. • News about public policy impacting outdoor sports, wildlife and habitat. • Features on the state's many beautiful wild lands. Subscribe Today! New Hampshire Fill out the form on page 56 and mail with your check for $10.00. Ffsh and, Game Pepartment REFERENCE 15 ..- -•".:-; • '. >>J"-,.^ :••'- /II^XJ SPECIAL NOTE This document was prepared primarily by stereoscopic SYMBOLOGY EXAMPLE analysis of high altitude aerial photographs. Wetlands were 1000 :'0oo wo ?ooo ftti identified on the photographs based on vegetation, visible hydrology, and geography in accordance with Classifica- SYSIfcM KilOM£I[R tion of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United SUOSYSILM States (FWS/DBS 79/31 December 1979) The aerial Cl ASS photographs typically reflect conditions during the specific L2EM2F year and season when they were taken. In addition, there SUUCLASS is a margin of error inherent in the use of the aerial photographs. Thus, a detailed on the ground and historical UPLAND (NON '?' I analysis of a single site may result in a revision of the 10 acres 20 »cre» wetland boundaries established through photographic ACREAGE GUIDE interpretation. In addition, some small wetlands and those obscured by dense forest cover may not be included on this document. Federal. State and local regulatory agencies with jurisdic- R2OWH irmation including a narrative report concerning the tion over wetlands may define and describe wetlands in a ILINIAH Dt fcl'WATEl. flil(i>rnnl manner than that used in this inventory There is • it...- m»i>n - :.^f::;rf ; r "'r^^rr \ ,^^^-'^^^^^^^^,\(: /^'cJ3i ^ m-fi:] ivrr^^^-'.%V.>i^^xiV'^^^i?« NASHUA SOUTH, N.H.-MASS. fiim i H ii i Ml l (MA , , ) ^r\s*tsx ,,3. *J&£U REFERENCE 16 Reference 16 is available in NewHampshire Department of Environmental Services Waste Management Division Files. REFERENCE 17 TO v' C SUBJEC I . —.-— MESSAGE tf-v-^4^vvi _^v^_o^. NK dtau Ctr*JU~ . SIGNED > DATE REPLY SIGNED RECIPIENT: REPLY ON PINK COPY — RETAIN WHITE COPY REFERENCE 18 STATE O. r'-a•/,^K.-S:;o DEPARTMENT of RESOURCES and ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NATURAL HERITAGE INVENTORY 172 Pembroke Road P.O.Box1856 Concord, New Hampshire 03302-1856 WILLIAM S.BARTLETT, JR. FAX: 603^-271-2629 Commissioner DAVID MOORE Ma* 27 • 1994 Coordinator f Mr. Joseph N. Donovan !'r'!r ^ 5 I W NHDES .• i;-: 1 6 Hazen Drive V UAV o ,IOCM Concord, NH 03302 - MAT 3 | 1994 RE: Mohawk Tannery Hazardous Waste Site JOEPAR:MENIOCC.,..C-..,.-,-"•- . Dear Mr. Donovan, Thank you for consulting the New Hampshire Natural Heritage Inventory (NHI) regarding the presence of rare plants, animals, and exemplary natural communities (hereafter referred to as "elements") in your Nashua study area. The NHI collects and analyzes data on the status and distribution of rare native plant and animal species and exemplary natural communities in the state. Using our database, we review projects with regard to impacts on these species and communities. The NHI also administers the NH Native Plant Protection Act (RSA217-A), which lists 300 plant species as Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern. The database of the inventory indicates that there are known element occurences in the study area. Please refer to the list of scientific names, common names, last observed date, and state and global ranks. A ranking explanation sheet has also been attached. NHI tracks elements primarily in New Hampshire. Some of the elements listed are just over the border in Massachusetts but since the study area goes into Massachusetts on the river we suggest you contact Massachusetts Natural Heritage Inventory for elements also. Please note, NHI data is only partially the result of comprehensive field surveys. In addition, this information is based on data available at the time of this review; more data on this area may become available as the Inventory expands with ongoing fieldwork and research. Please contact NHI Data Manager/Biologist David Moore at 271-3623 if you have further questions regarding this review. NHI Approval # W342 HI TDD ACCESS: RELAY NH1-800-735-2964 @ «cyefedp«per 60J-271-3623 -OZ Scientific Name Common Name Last Qbs. SiB filE Heterodon platirhinos eastern hognose snake 1936 S3 G5 /f- Hesperia metea cobweb skipper 1985 S3 G4 /T Gavlussacia dumosa var huckleberry 1992 S2 G5 biaeloviana iv Rhododendron viscosum swamp azalea 1992 S2 G5 cSMetarranthis apiciaria a geometric! moth 1973 SI GU /S"Zanthoxvlum americanum northern prickley ash 1956 51 G5 (I Enneacanthus obesus banded sunfish 1938 52 G5 frAmbystoma laterale blue-spotted 1938 S4 G5 salamander "7 Hemidactvlium scutatum four-toed salamander 1938 S3 G5 %flo Viola pedata birds foot violet 1993 52 G5 *y Chenchrus lonaispinus burgrass 1984 53 G5 °l Liatris borealis northern blazing star 1989 SI G4 o\ Sericocarpus linifolius white-topped aster 1985 51 G5 £• Hvpoxis hirsuta hairy stargrass 1903 52 G5 if. /^ Prunus americana American plum 1965 S2 G5 ' 3 Crotalaria saaittalis arrow-headed rattle- 1958 SH G5 box niora river birch 1985 S2 G5 \l» Tephrosia virainiana goat's-rue 1956 SI G5 - f7Allium canadense wild garlic 1956 51 G5 /7 Cassia hebecarpa wild senna 1890 SH G5 schoenoprasum Siberian chives 1956 52 G5 var sibiricum tf Northern New England Level Bog 1993 52 ^ Pitch Pine/Scrub Oak Barrens 1985 JLSouthern New England Lake Sediment/River 1985 53 Terrace Forest L .. M.' ^ f^ -• •••»•*' ' -r "..v--'•••- )--J 0 Q 0 0 0 Q-J-g 0 VV'tQ-_ ? ——.._;.-,—— i.,--.——— .--..-..-.'——— .. .'———. • •- .-'_l, '.,,-...... _ :. -...,.- -.-..-.•:...... •..-.-«.•-. - -.- ••-- : -•' . ...'•;: '•••- .-•:•..••••:::•---.,.-- .y-:^.-.-.. --:-..1-..- v^-;- ^''^-^ ••-:•-••^" -.-•:--.--•':" •••-. .••.-•.••..-.•-.•- -^- :-^. :..r,^;?.::^y-;^:, ".::;. ;.. - /•;... • : -:...-.••.. .-.•-. ••-^-^^.^.~^:: - .- •->'--.•,..- JTATE ELEMENT RANKS: 51 = Critically imperiled in state because of extreme rarity (5 or fewer occurrences or very few remaining individuals or acres) or because of some factor of its biology making it especially vulnerable to extirpation from the state. [Critically endangered in state.] 52 = Imperiled in state because of rarity (6 to 20 occurrences or few remaining individuals or acres) or because of other factors demonstrably making it very vulnerable to extirpation from the state. [Endangered in state]. 53 = Rare in state (on the order of 20+ occurrences). [Threatened in state]. 54 = Apparently secure in state. 55 = Demonstrably secure in state. SA = Accidental in state, including species which only sporadically breed in state. SE = An exotic species established in state; may be native elsewhere in North America (e.g., house finch). SH = Of historical occurrence in the state with the expectation that it may be rediscovered. SU = Possibly in peril in state but status uncertain; need more information. SX = Apparently extirpated from state. The New Hampshire Natural Heritage Inventory primarily inventories elements in the SI and S2 categories plus several selected elements ranked S3. REFERENCE 19 TELECON NOTE CONTROL NO.: DATE: TIME: 1-30-95 10:45 DISTRIBUTION: BETWEEN: OF: PHONE: Environmental Review Mass. National (617)727-9194 Assistant Heritage Diane Lauber AND. Joseph Donovan NHDES-WMD DISCUSSION: ___On the above referenced date andtime I contacted Mrs. Lauber to inquire the presence of endangered species along the Merrimack River from the NH-Mass State line to a point about V/zmiles upstream of the Pawtuket Dam. Mrs. Lauber stated that the only endangered species known to exist in the area of concern are the short nosed sturgeon and the Bald Eagle. ACTION ITEMS: Hit REFERENCE 20 ,3• ' Ij State of New Hampshire Fish and Game Department 2 Hazen Drive, Concord, NH 03301 TDD Access: Relay NH 1-800-735-2964 (603)271-3421 July 15, 1994 Donald A. Normandeau, Ph.D. Executive Director Joseph N. Donovan Environmentalist Waste Management Engineering Bureau Department of Environmental Services 6 Hazen Drive Concord, New Hampshire 03302-0095 Dear Mr. Donovan: The New Hampshire Fish and Game Department has reviewed your request for the presence of state threatened and endangered wildlife species which may occur near the Mohawk Tannery hazardous waste site. We have also included a habitat sheet which could help determine the potental presence of other species not listed. The state threatened and endangered wildlife species we currently have records for in the Hollis, Hudson, Merrimack and ~~ Nashua areas include the following bird species; bald eagle, peregrine falcon, northern harrier, northern goshawk, common nighthawk, purple martin and the osprey. Most of these records are of migrants observed in the area. Species with potentially undocumented nest locations would include the northern goshawk (see the enclosed habitat description). The persius dusky wing skipper, a state endangered species, and the Karner blue butterfly, a state and federally endangered species, historically occurred with in the area, but are not currently thought to occur in the project area. We suggest that you also contact the Department of Resources and Economic Development and the Natural Heritage Inventory for information on locations of the state threatened and endangered plant species. If you have any further questions please contact biologist, John Kanter or Ecologist, William Ingham, Jr. at 271-2462. Sincerely, Kanter Nongame Project Coordinater JPM/JK cc: William Ingham, Jr \\c£ Discover' New Hampshire Status List Report o/ Townsnip - 14 JUL 1994 5 Species Listed. SPECIES.ID NAME ...... Status ...... NY J55 Eagle, Bald State Endangered USFS Indicator Federal Endangered See Comments Federal Migratory NH043065 Falcon, Peregrine Federal Migratory State Endangered Federal Endangered Biological Indicator Other federal or state designatic See Comments NH043090 Goshawk, Northern Federal Candidate Biological Indicator Federal Migratory USFS Indicator State Nongame-Protected NH043187 Nighthawk, Common State Threatened Federal Migratory NH043198 Osprey USFS Indicator Other federal or state designatic State Threatened Federal Migratory Status List Report by Township - 14 JUL 1994- 5 Species Listed. SPECIES.ID NAME...... Status ...... NH' 55 Eagle, Bald State Endangered USFS Indicator Federal Endangered See Comments Federal Migratory NH043065 Falcon, Peregrine Federal Migratory State Endangered Federal Endangered Biological Indicator Other federal or state designatio See Comments NH043090 Goshawk, Northern Federal Candidate Biological Indicator Federal Migratory USFS Indicator State Nongame-Protected NH043171 Martin, Purple State Threatened Federal Migratory NH043187 Nighthawk, Common State Threatened Federal Migratory iZD Status List Report by Township "• *- J'-'L- 1994 7 Species Listed. SPECIES.ID NAME ...... Status...... NI D55 Eagle, Bald State Endangered USFS Indicator Federal Endangered See Comments Federal Migratory NH043065 Falcon, Peregrine Federal Migratory State Endangered Federal Endangered Biological Indicator Other federal or state designatio See Comments NH043090 Goshawk, Northern Federal Candidate Biological Indicator Federal Migratory USFS Indicator State Nongame-Protected NH043187 Nighthawk, Common State Threatened Federal Migratory NH043198 Osprey USFS Indicator Other federal or state designatic State Threatened Federal Migratory NH083101 Skipper, Persius Dusky Wing State Endangered NH103007 Butterfly, Karner Blue Federal Endangered Federal Candidate State Endangered iZI Status List .Report by Township 14 Jc. 394 o Species Listed. SPECIES.ID NAME...... Status...... NK J55 Eagle, Bald State Endangered USFS Indicator Federal Endangered See Comments Federal Migratory NH043065 Falcon, Peregrine Federal Migratory State Endangered Federal Endangered Biological Indicator Other federal or state designatio See Comments NH043090 Goshawk, Northern Federal Candidate Biological Indicator Federal Migratory USFS Indicator State Nongame-Protected NH043187 Nighthawk, Common State Threatened Federal Migratory NH043198 Osprey USFS Indicator Other federal or state designatic State Threatened Federal Migratory NH103007 Butterfly, Karner Blue Federal Endangered Federal Candidate State Endangered Status List Report by Township - 14 JUL 1994 - c SPECIES.ID NAME...... Status, Nl 355 Eagle, Bald State Endangered USFS Indicator Federal Endangered See Comments Federal Migratory NH043065 Falcon, Peregrine Federal Migratory State Endangered Federal Endangered Biological Indicator Other federal or state designatio See Comments NH043090 Goshawk, Northern Federal Candidate Biological Indicator Federal Migratory USFS Indicator State Nongame-Protected NH043171 Martin, Purple State Threatened Federal Migratory NH043187 Nighthawk, Common State Threatened Federal Migratory NH043198 Osprey USFS Indicator Other federal or state designatic State Threatened Federal Migratory 1 Skipper, Persius Dusky Wing State Endangered i TOO? Butterfly, Karner Blue Federal Endangered Federal Candidate State Endangered REFERENCE 21 FICUKt i Chromium in Nashua Riv sediments at oulet of Suspect Effluent Pipe(SP Mohawk Tannery Nashua. NH Direction of Flow Notes: > = greater than < = less than DUP= duplicate sample IZS Results exoressed as mg/Kg dry weight FIGURE 2 Lead in Nashua River sedir at outlet of Suspected Efflu Pipe (SP-1) Mohawk Tannery, Nashua, Direction of Flow Notes: > = greater than <= less than DUP= duplicate sample Results expressed as mg/Kg dry weight FIGURE 3 Cadmium in Nashua River sediments at outlet of Susepct Effluent PipetSP Mohawk Tannery Nashua, NH Direction of Flow > = greater than <= less than DUP= duplicate sample Results expressed as mg/Kg dry weight STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES TABORATORY Chain of Custody Form D.E.S. SAMPLE DATE/TIME NUMBER (s) SAMPLED SAMPLE LOCATION TESTS REQUESTED STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES T.&BQRATORY Chain of Custody Form D.E.S. SAMPLE DATE/TIME SAMPLE LOCATION TESTS REQUESTED NUMBER (S) SAMPLED 251087 CCT1193 251069 TrT11 91 251090 CCT1193 Re<:e>vea oy Kennquisnea o Date/Time _ Keixnquisnea dy State of New Hampshire DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES - LABORATORY SERVICES Solid Sample Analysis Report SAMPLE NUMBER 251071 SAMPLE I3RQUP 11 -) Waste Management COST ACCOUNT CODE 72.87 DATE SAMPLED 18-08-33 DATE LOGGED IN 10-11-93,10:41 DATE COMPLETED 11-08-93 PERSON SAMPLING CWIVES/MR/JD/CB OUNER3 NAME ADDRESS CITY OR TOWN iMPLER COMMENTS SED-l-L SOIL Test Name Result Date Cadmium 5.3 11-08-93 Chromium 39.0 11-08-93 Lead 65.5 11-08-93 Lab Comments > = greater than, < = less than Results are expressed as tng/Kg dry weight unless noted otherwise. 11-09-93,10:49 SAMPLE 251071 130 - LPBOPSTOHY SERIES DEPART** OF Solid Sample analysis Report SftMPLE NUMBER 251072 Waste Management SftMPLE GROUP COST P.CCOUNT CODE 72.07 SP.MPLED 10-08-93 DflTE LOGGED IN 10-11-93,10:50 DOTE COMPLETED 11-08-93 PERSON SPMPLING CWIVES/MR/JD/CB OWNERS NOME ADDRESS CITY OR TOWN 1PLER COMMENTS SED-l-M SOIL Date Test Name Result 1.0 11-08-9: Cadmium 5.3 11-08-9: Chromium 7.0 11-08-9: Lead Lab Comments > = greater than, < = less than Results are expressed as mg/Kg dry weight unless SflMPLE 2511372 (31 State of New Hanpshire DEPORTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LABORATORY SERVICES Solid Sample Analysis Report SAMPLE NUMBER !1073 SAMPLE SRQUP 11 -) Waste Management COST OCCOUNT CODE 72.07 DOTE SAMPLED 10-08-33 DOTE LOGGED IN 10-11-33, 10:50 DOTE COMPLETED 11-08-33 PERSON SfiMPLING CWIVES/MR/JD/CB OWNERS NOME ODDRESS CITY OR TOWN A MPLER COMMENTS SED-l-R SOIL Test Name Result Date Cadniurn 6.7 11-08-3C Chromium 174.8 11-08-3: Lead 95.3 11-08-3: Lab Comments > = greater than, <. = less than Results are expressed as ing/Kg dry weight unless SflMPLE £51073 3,2 State of New Hampshire DEPORTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LABORATORY SERVICES Solid Sample Analysis Report SAMPLE NUMBER £51874 SAMPLE GROUP 11 Waste Management COST ACCOUNT CODE 7E.07 DOTE SAMPLED 10-08-93 DATE LOGGED IN 10-11-93, DATE COMPLETED 11-08-93 PERSON SAMPLING CWIVES/MR/JD/CE OWNERS NAME ADDRESS CITY OR TOWN 1PLER COMMENTS SED-2-L SOIL Test Name Result Date Cadnium 9.0 11-08-93 Chromium 57.0 11-08-93 Lead 87.6 11-08-93 Lab Comments > = greater than, < = less than Results are expressed as mg/Ka dry weiaht unless noted otherwise. 11-09-93,10:49 SAMPLE £51074 12>3 State of New Hampshire DEPORTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LABORATORY SERVICES Solid Sample Analysis Report SAMPLE NUMBER £51875 SAMPLE GROUP 11 ————) Waste Management COST ACCOUNT CODE 78.07 DOTE SAMPLED 10-08-93 DATE LOGGED IN 10-11-93, 10:57 DATE COMPLETED 11-08-93 PERSON SAMPLING CWIVES/MR/JD/CB OWNERS NftME ADDRESS CITY OR TOWN COMMENTS SED-2-M SOIL Test Name Result Date Cadmium ( 1.0 11-08-93 Chroaium 8. £ 11-08-93 Lead 1£. 0 11-08-93 Lab Comments > « greater than, < = less than Results are expressed as ing/Kg dry weioht unless noted otherwise. 11-09-93,10:49 SflMPLE 851075 State of New Hampshire , , , CFRUTCFS DEPORTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES - LABORATOR rtnr DO nDYV SERVICES Solid Sample Analysis Report SAMPLE NUMBER £51076 Waste Management SAMPLE GROUP = 11 COST ACCOUNT CODE = 7£.07 DATE SAMPLED 10-08-93 DATE LOGGED IN 10-11-93,10:57 DATE COMPLETED 11-08-93 PERSON SAMPLING CWIVES/MR/JD/CE OWNERS NAME ADDRESS CITY OR TOWN AMPLER COMMENTS SED-2-R SOIL Date Test Name Result 11-08-93 Cadmium 92.3 11-0S-93 Chromium 39. 0 11-08-93 Lead Lab Comments > = greater than, < = less than Results are expressed as mg/Kg dry weight unless not SAMPLE £51076 State of New Hampshire DEPORTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LABORATORY SERVICES Solid Sample Analysis Report SAMPLE NUMBER £51077 SAMPLE GROUP 11 ———— > Waste Management COST ACCOUNT CODE 72. 07 DATE SAMPLED 1(3-08-93 DATE LOGGED IN 10-11-33,10:58 DATE COMPLETED 11-08-93 PERSON SAMPLING = CWI VES/MR/ JD/CB OWNERS NAME ftDDRESS CITY OR TOWN MPLER COMMENTS SED-3-L SOIL Test Name Result 11-08-93 Cadmium 9.0 54. 9 11-08-93 Chromium 11-08-93 Lead 86.9 Lab Comments > = greater than, < = less than Results are expressed as mg/Kg dry weight unless SAMPLE £51077 ill* State of New Hampshire nRflTORY SERVICES DEPORTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LABORATORQB Y * Solid Sample flnalysis Report SAMPLE NUMBER 251078 Waste Management SAMPLE GROUP = 11 COST ACCOUNT CODE = 72.07 DATE SAMPLED 10-08-93 DATE LOGGED IN 10-11-93,10:58 DATE COMPLETED 11-08-93 CWIVES/MR/JB/CB PERSON SAMPLING OWNERS NAME ADDRESS CITY OR TOWN PLER COMMENTS SED-3-M SOIL Date Test Name ™ 11-08-93 < 1.0 Cadmium C 11-08-93 9 11-08-93 Chromium 5.0 Lead Lab Comments . ——— _ > = greater than, <- = less than Results are expressed as mg/Kg dry weight unless SftMPLE £51078 DEPBRTMENT OF RON ^ORATORY SLICES Solid Sample analysis Report SRMPLF NUMBER £51079 Waste Management SfiMPLE GROUP = 11 COST ACCOUNT CODE = 7£.07 DOTE SRMPLED 10-08-93 DOTE LOGGED IN 10-11-93,10:58 DfiTE COMPLETED 11-08-93 PERSON SftMPLING CWIVES/MR/JD/CB OWNERS NAME RDDRESS CITY OR TOWN MPLER COMMENTS SED-3-R SOIL Date Test Name Result 1.8 11-08-9; Cadmium 313. 0 11-08-9: Chromium 57.0 11-08-9; Lead Lab Comments > = greater than, < - less than Results ar. expressed as .B/«B dry -eight unless SflMPLE £! State of New Hampshire DEPORTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES - LABORATORY SERVICES Solid Sample Analysis Report SAMPLE NUMBER £51080 SAMPLE GROUP =11 ————> Waste Management COST ACCOUNT CODE = 7£.07 DATE SAMPLED = 10-08-93 DATE LOGGED IN = 10-11-93,10:58 DATE COMPLETED = 11-08-93 PERSON SfiMPLING = CWIVES/MR/JD/CB OWNERS NAME - ADDRESS CITY OR TOWN = AMPLER COMMENTS = SED-4-L SOIL Result Date —————————————————————————— • 1.0 " 11-08-93 Cadmium 7 5 11-08-93 Chroaium 1A.0 11-08-93 Lead Lab Comments > = greater than, < = less than Results are expressed as mg/Kg dry weight unless SAMPLE £51080 State of New Hampshire «nr,B«TnDv DEPORTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LABORATORY Solid Sample Analysis Report SAMPLE NUMBER 251081 Waste Management SAMPLE GROUP 11 —— COST ACCOUNT CODE 72.07 DATE SAMPLED ita-06-93 DATE LOGGED IN iei-n-93, DOTE COMPLETED 11-08-93 PERSON SflMPLING CWIVES/MR/JD/CB OWNERS NAME ADDRESS CITY OR TOWN MPLER COMMENTS SED-4-M SOIL Date Test Result 11-08-9: Cadmium 1.0 5.0 11-08-9: Chromium 11-08-9: Lead 6. 0 Lab Comments > = greater than, < = less than Results are expressed as rag/Kg dry weight unless SAMPLE £51081 State of New Hanpshire DEPORTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LABORATORY SERVICES Solid Sample Analysis Report SAMPLE NUMBER 251882 SAMPLE GROUP 11 -> Waste Management COST ACCOUNT CODE 72.07 DATE SAMPLED 10-08-93 DATE LOGGED IN 10-11-S3,10:59 DATE COMPLETED 11-08-93 PERSON SAMPLING = CWIVEE/MR/JD/CB OWNERS NAME ADDRESS CITY OR TOWN ^MPLER COMMENTS SED-4-R SOIL Test Name Result Date Cadmium £.6 11-138-93 Chromi urn 4.0 11-08-93 Lead 84.3 11-08-93 Lab Comments > = greater than, < = less than Results are expressed as ran/Kg dry weight unless noted otherwi.se. U d 11-09-93,10:49 SAMPLE £51082 mi State of New Hampshire DEPORTMENT OF ENUIRONMENTfiL SERVICES - LftBORftTORY SERVICES Solid Sample Analysis Report SPMPLE NUMBER £51082 SfiMPLE GROUP 11 •> Waste Management COST ftCCOUNT CODE 7£. 07 DfiTE SftMPLED 10-08-93 DfiTE LOGGED IN 10-11-93,10:59 DflTE COMPLETED 11-08-93 PERSON SAMPLING CWIVES/MR/JD/CB OWNERS NflME flDDRESS CITY OR TOWN >1PLER COMMENTS SED-4-RDYS SOIL Test Name Result Date Cadmium 7.6 11-08-93 Chromi-urn 150.0 11-08-93 Lead 94. 4 11-08-93 Lab Comments > = greater than, < = less than Results are expressed as ng/Kg dry weinht unless noted otherwise. 11-09-93,10:49 SflMPLE £51083 State of New Hampshire DEPORTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LABORATORY SERVICES Solid Sample Analysis Report SAMPLE NUMBER £51084 SAMPLE GROUP 11 ————) Waste Management COST ACCOUNT CODE 72.07 DATE SAMPLED 10-08-33 DATE LOGGED IN 10-11-93,10:59 DATE COMPLETED 11-08-93 PERSON SAMPLING = CWIVES/MR/JD/CB OWNERS NAME ADDRESS CITY OR TOWN 1PLER COMMENTS SED-5-L SOIL Test Name Result Date Cadmium 11-08-9: Chromium 82.2 11-08-9: Lead 162. 0 11-08-9; Lab Comments > = greater than, < = less than Results are expressed as ng/Kg dry weight unless noted otherwise. 11-09-93, 1(3:49 SAMPLE £51064 State of New Hampshire DEPORTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LABORATORY SERVICES Solid Sample Analysis Report SAMPLE NUMBER £51085 SAMPLE GROUP 11 ————> Waste Management COST ACCOUNT CODE 72.07 DATE SAMPLED 10-08-33 DATE LOGGED IN 10-11-93,10:59 DATE COMPLETED 11-08-93 PERSON SAMPLING CWIVES/MR/JD/CB OWNERS NAME ADDRESS CITY OR TOWN AMPLER COMMENTS SED-5-M SOIL Test Name Result Date Cadmium < 1.0 11-08-93 Chromium 63.6 11-08-93 Lead 7.3 11-08-93 Lab Comments > = greater than, < = less than Results are expressed as mg/Kg dry weight unless noted otherwise. 11-09-93,10:49 SAMPLE £51085 State of New Hampshire DEPORTMENT OF ENUIRQNMENTAL SERVICES LABORATORY SERVICES Solid Sample Analysis Report SAMPLE NUMBER S1086 SRMPLE SRQUP 11 •> Waste Management COST ACCOUNT CODE 72.07 DATE SAMPLED 10-08-93 DATE LOGGED IN 10-11-93,10:59 DATE COMPLETED 11-08-93 PERSON SAMPLING = CWIVES/MR/JD/CB OWNERS NAME ADDRESS CITY OR TOWN MPLER COMMENTS SED-5-R SOIL Test Name Result Date Cadmium 18.7 11-08-93 Chromium 81.2 11-08-93 Lead 1£3. 0 11-08-93 Lab Comments > = greater than, < = less than Results are expressed as ing/Kg dry weight unless noted otherwise. 11-09-93,10:4 SAMPLE 251086 State of New Hampshire DEPORTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LABORATORY SERVICES Solid Sample Analysis Report SAMPLE NUMBER £51087 SAMPLE GROUP 11 ————> Waste Management COST ACCOUNT CODE 7£. 87 DATE SAMPLED 10-08-93 DATE LOGGED IN 10-11-93,11:00 DATE COMPLETED 11-08-93 PERSON SAMPLING CWIVE3/MR/JD/CB OWNERS NAME ADDRESS CITY OR TOWN MPLER COMMENTS SED-6-L SOIL Test Name Result Date Cadmium 6.9 11-08-93 Chromium 38.5 11-08-93 Lead 7£.7 11-08-93 Lab Comments > = greater than, < = less than Results are expressed as mg/Kg dry weight unless noted otherwise. 11-09-93,10:49 SAMPLE £51087 Nip State of New Hampshire « TnRv qpRUTTPS DEPORTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LABORATORQriDQ Y SERVICES Solid Sample analysis Report SAMPLE NUMBER £51388 Waste Management SAMPLE GROUP 11 COST ACCOUNT CODE 7£. 137 DATE SAMPLED 10-08-33 DATE LOGGED IN 10-11-33, DATE COMPLETED 11-08-33 PERSON SflMPLING CWIVES/MR/JD/CB OWNERS NAME PDDRESS CITY OR TOWN MPLER COMMENTS SED-6-M SOIL Date Test Name Result 1.0 11-08-33 Cadmium * 8.7 11-08-33 Chromium 8.0 11-08-33 Lead Lab Comments __ — > = greater than, < = less than Results are expressed as mg/Kg dry weight unless SAMPLE £51088 State of New Hampshire DEPORTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LABORATORY SERVICES Solid Sample analysis Report SAMPLE NUMBER ;i089 SAMPLE GROUP 11 •> Waste Management COST ACCOUNT CODE 7£. 07 DATE SAMPLED H3-08-93 DATE LOGGED IN 10-11-93, DATE COMPLETED 11-08-93 PERSON SfiMPLING CWIVES/MR/JD/CB OWNERS NAME ADDRESS CITY OR TOWN 4MPLER COMMENTS SED-6-R SOIL Test Name Result Date Cadmium 1.6 11-08-93 Chromium 11.8 11-08-93 Lead 17.0 11-08-93 Lab Comments > = greater than, < = less than Results are expressed as mg/Kg dry weight unless noted otherwise. 11-09-93,10:49 SAMPLE £51089 State of New Hampshire , , nRY SERVICES DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LABORATORrtt nDQT Y SERVICE D Solid Sample Analysis Report SAMPLE NUMBER £51090 Waste Management SAMPLE GROUP 11 ———— > COST ACCOUNT CODE 72.07 10-08-93 DATE SAMPLED 10-11-93,11:00 DATE LOGGED IN DATE COMPLETED 11-08-93 CWIVES/MR/JD/CB PERSON SAMPLING OWNERS NAME ADDRESS CITY OR TOWN 1PLER COMMENTS SP-1 SOIL Date Result Test Name 3.5 11-08-93 Cadmium 11-08-93 3290.0 11-08-93 Chromium £2.0 Lead Lab Comments > = greater than, < = less than Results are expressed as mg/Kg dry weight unless notjd_oth.rwis SAMPLE 251090 REFERENCE 22 \6b RECEIVED APR 7 1992 r> Db.'ifMENTOF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES SITE INVESTIGATION REPORT/ REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN TANNERY SLUDGE LANDFILL FIMBEL DOOR CORPORATION MARCH 1992 --;-•-- Prepared by: WOODARD & CURRAN INC. Consulting Engineers . ivr 41 Hutchins Drive \J tr Portland, Maine 04102 (207)774-2112 March 1992 161 REFERENCE 23 (52. DATA REPORT - FIRST SAMPLING ROUND HYDROGEOLOGIC STUDY AND CONCEPTUAL CLOSEOUT PLAN FIMBEL LANDFILL NASHUA, NEW HAMPSHIRE Prepared for: Fairmount Height Associates Nashua, New Hampshire Prepared by: Goldberg-Zoino 6 Associates, Inc. Manchester, New Hampshire September 1985 File No. D-5227 REFERENCE 24 41 Hutchins Drive WOODARD Portland, ME 04102 (207) 774-2112 • 800-426-4262 &CURRAN Fax: (207) 774-4751 ENVIRONMENTAL-SERVICES'- FAX Transmittal Sheet TO: FAX NO. FROM: DATE: -Ti/ No. of Pages, Including Cover. __ Hard Copy to Follow in Mail: Yes .X__ No COMMENTS I JUL24BS WASTOI-tNVIRONMENTAE MANARPMCMT fcffiL j Note:This message is intended only for the use of theindividual of enuty named aboveand may oontiin inftnmarion thai is privileged, confidemiaJ. and exempt ftrun dixdoture under theapplicable law. If yon are not theintended rrcipiesn or the employee or agcat responsiblefor delivering the messageto the intended recipient, pieaseratify us immediately byvetephoe*andreturn theohgmai. to us byposol service atthe address noted on this stationery ^ny dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication by anyone other than the intended recipient is roictly prohibhed. Thank you! ______Portland, ME • Bangor, ME • Dedham, MA 166 WOODAHD &CURRAN M ETN T A L t t H V I (' July 21, 1995 Mr. Stergios Spancs State of New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services Waste Management Division 6 Hazen Drive Concord. NH 03301 -6509 SuDject Report on Additional Characterization of Landfill Sludge at Depth Rmbel Door Landnn. Nashua. Mew Hampshire DES Site #840400 Dear Stergios: Cr. June 21. 1995 a field investigation prcgram was compietea at the rimbei Door Landfill >n Nashua. New Hampshire in accordance with our proposed aian provided to you in our June 3. 1995 letter. As a part of this program rwo sludge samples were ccilecScn from a aepth cf 14 to 16 feet oetaw «he landfill surface ana were characterized to determine if material should be ciassifieo as a hazardous waste according to NHDE3 protocol. In addition, samples iron five grou-idwate.- monitoring wells, and from the ieachate pond were sampled and analyzed to assess current site conditions. Gnry five of the existing aight monitoring wells were sampled for reasons oudinsd below. The purpose of tnls latter is to rapcrt the findings of the fteld program. Pertinent -nfcrmation collected during the field program are provided as attachments to (Ms letter. They are as follows: Attachment 1: Field Boring Logs Attachment 2. Groundwater Reid Data Sheets Attachment 3: Analytical Laboratory Data LANDFILL SLUDGE CHARACTERIZATION Borings within the landfill were completed using a Mobile Drill Track-Mount Rig (Model 8-33) witn soil/sludge samples collected with a 2-foot long, stainless-steel, split-spoon sampler. The cohesive narture of the soil/sludge mixture resulted in the borehole remaining open as tne sampling progressed. Therefor*, there was no need to place augers in tne ground to keep tne ocrehote open. This resulted in a relatively quick and clean ssmpfing of the sal/sludge material. Prior to the collection of the analytical samples, the sampler was decontaminated using a soap & water solution with water and Dl water rinse. Boring Logs for each of the three borings were prepared and are provided as Attachment' to this letter report. The approximate location of tne borings are shown on Figure 1. Typically, observations of the samples collected from iha borings showed a S-inch to 8-inch cover of silly sand material. The remainder of the samples snowed alternating layers of black tannery sludge and sandy material. This makes sense sinca the sludge was deposited in (ayere and intermittently covered with soil to control odcrs and stabilize Iha sludge. <'n the two borings furtnast away from the leacnate pond (Boring 1 and 3). the sludge became wet at a deotfc cf about '5 feet cetow me surface, in the bonng closest to the leacnate pond (Boring 2) ffe sludge became wet at aoout •} to 10 feet betow the surface, it appears that water from tne iaacnate pcnd seeps into iris sludge along the more porous sand layers. The water level in the pond was estimated to be at an elevation of aoout 52 feet. Compared with ootrcrn of liner depth at 45 feet trus indicates inat trm rteignt of me water in the pond is sbout 7 feet above ihe liner. This compares fgvcratie with the 41 HLTCHENS DRIVE • PORTLAND, MAINE C4102 • 207-774-Z112 •T X V I R O N V. Mr. Stergios Spanos July 21, 1995 Page 2 water depth observed in the borings which indicate the height of water above tie liner to be between 5 and 10 feet. Samples of sludge were collected in Borings 1 and 3 at depths of n to 16 feet beiow the surface. The samples were analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs. Pesticides/PCEs. total F.CSA metals, flashpoint pH. lota) cyanide, total suffice, and TCLP RCRA metals. The results of this analyses are summarized in the attached Table 1. Results indicate that the two samoles collected are somewhat homogeneous anc contain similar compounds to those samples analyzed during the Marcr. 1992 characterization, except that the 'avals are generally lower in the more recently collected samples. The only compound observed at higher levels is total suffice. This compound was observed at 1.400 and 2.300 mg/Kg during the recant program compared with 750 mg/Kg dunrg the 1992 study. W&C believes that these higher levels cf total sutfide obser/ed at depth do net create an unstable condition tor disposal of the sludge since the pH cf the sludge is consistent/ greacer than 8. and the sludge is mono-disposed. QROUNDWATCR AMD LEACHATE POND WATER CHARACTERIZATION As a part of this program, W&C proposed to sample the eight groundwater monitoring wells :c assess recent groundwater quality. At the time of coileciten. He older monitcnng wells (F-t through F-4} were found to be unlocked, and in some cases wfth no covers, in addition, just prior to collection. NHDES recc/nmendad That a number cf other parameters oe analyzed. Because of these reasons, the groundwater monitoring program was modified to collect samples frc.-n monitonng wells F-1. F-4-, F-3. F-7 and F-8, and to. collected a sample of the leachate pond water for characterization. Collection of the groundwater TOOT these five wells is consistent with that recommended by NHDES Groundwater Protection Rules. Monitoring well F-3 serves as the upgradient or background wed; F-1. F-a and F-7 serve as .mmeaiaie downgradient weds, ;ind F-6 serves as an additional downgradient well. Orcundwater monitoring data sheets are included 35 Attachment #2. In addition to the analyses proposed (VOCs and RCRA metals), miscellaneous testing recommended by NHDES (alkalinity, chloride, sulfate. sultide. TDS and COD) was also completed. Results of the analyses of the cofected groundwater are summarized in Table 2 Results tor RCRA metals are similar to those observed in 1992 with slightly higher levels of arsenic observed in F-1 and levels of arsenic in F-7 now exceeding NHDES Ambient Groundwater Quality Standards (AGQS). In addition, 1,1-dichtoroethane was detecteo at low levels in =-4. F-7 and F-8; 1.1.1- trichtorosthane was detected in F-* and F-8: and MTBE and toluene were detected in =-6. Of the VOCs detected in groundwater during this recent sampling, only 1,1,1-tricnloroethane was detected in the 1992 sampfing. No AGQS for the observed VOCs were exceeded. Water levels in all eight monitonng wells were measured, and a new groundwater table map was constructed.' The recent groundwater table map is depicted in Figure 1. with groundwater etevattons for each monitoring well shown next to each well. Tea water level measured in F-3 is not consistent with historical information, and '.hus is considered erroneous. Ground water flow patterns across the landfill are similar to those observed previously ana appear 10 be in *ast ?c southwest direction toward the Nashua River. A sample of water was collected from *he leachate pond to confirm characterization for disposal, and was analyzed for Total RCRA Metals. VOCs. SVOCs. Pesticides/PCSs, COD, TDS. alkalinity, chloride, sullate. and sulfide. The results of these analyses are summarized in Table 3. Results are simitar to those observed during 7992 sampling. .Arsenic was cetected at 0.05 nyL chrcrniuri at 0.08 mg/L. and silver at C.01 mg/L. All detected values are at cr below MCL values, in addition, no VOCs. SVOCs or pesticsdes/PCSs were detected in Jhe most recsnt sample, while iraca lovels of phenol and deJta-3HC were detected during the 1992 sampling. WOODARD&CURING E.N V « R O N W E N T > L Mr. Stergios Spanos Juiy 21. 1995 Page 3 RECOMMENDATIONS Based upon results of the additional investigation. W&C baiieves that the samples of sludge collected from the deeper portions of the landfill are similar in characteristics to tnose collected :n the ^992 report. We further believe that the material is not a Hazardous waste, and recommend thai the landfill be closed as a soiid waste facility. Sampling of groundwater indicates thai the impacis to groundwarer from the landfiB are not significantly different from ihose observed in 1992. We believe that closure of the landfill, and removai of the ieachate from the pond both during anc following closure wfll reduce any possible future impacts to groundwater. We do not 2elicvs that active remediation of the groundwater is warranted. A groundwater monitoring program to assess groundwater conditions on a regular basis vril be initiated as part of Thelandfill closure activities. We look forward to hearing from your to discuss this information, and hope thai we can neve this protect along » the Solid Waste Group is a timely manner. Please contact me II you nave any questions, comments, or if you require additional' information. I can be rescued at 4282. Sincerely, WCODARD & CL'RRAN, iNC Gerald F. Fordham. P.E Project Enginear /GFF 95076.01 ATTACHMENTS figure 1: Groundwater Table and MCL Exceedances Table 1: Landfill Sludge Characterization Table 2: Groundwater Chemical Characterization Table 3: Leachate Pond Chemical Charactenzaiton Attachment 1: Field Boring Logs Attachment 2 Groundwater Raid Data Sheets Attachment 3: Analytical Laboratory Data cc: D. Pinsonneauit (Winer and Bennett) E. FimbelJr. (Fmbel Door) S. Sauter (Stone & Webster) 5B IilIIMci s \ 013N3TH TABLET LANDRLL SLUDGE CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION JUNE 21. 1995 SAMPLING TANNERY SLUDGE LANDRLL riMBEL DCCR CCRFORATION VDRINfl-3 Aoatytlcai-Pwaimtor tW'^^1 Volatile Crgancs i.2-ienioro3snzwie L^fkg cCO zaco l.-i-dJcriiorQoanzBno ua-kg 17C 480 tetraG>**!orceth8fi9 ugfkg :sc 130 tatuene ugrttg 5C fC gasa Neutrals NO t€> Acic Eflranattea prsno- ug>kg 2S.COO sacoo i Pssticcsa/PCSs i .NO !*O 1 Traca Msaia TciaiV : 1 mane mg^kg •-.3 tari^r mg/kg T3.0 •70 sacmun (rg^kg i <2.5 <05 * ctmmiurr me/kg Z!£G 3£50 ieac mgrkg 3.3 •7.2