|
|
Reich Farm Health Assessment
(Dover Township) Toms River, New Jersey
|
Discussion
This Discussion will review the history of remedial activities conducted in relation to the RF site and the findings of investigations of environmental contamination. Based on these findings, an analysis of exposure pathways will be presented. The Discussion will conclude with an assessment of the public health implications of completed exposure pathways.
Remedial History
Subsequent to the unauthorized deposition of wastes on the RF property, the UCC removed all visible drums in 1972. In addition, buried drums and 1, 100 cubic yards of contaminated soils were removed in 1974 under the supervision of the NJDEP. In 1982, the USEPA included the RF site on the National Priorities List of sites being remediated under the Superfund program.
A Remedial Investigation (RI) was performed for the RF site by the NUS Corporation for the USEPA in 1986 (NUS, 1986; NUS, 1985a; NUS, 1985b). A supplemental Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS) was completed for the RF site by the Ebasco Corporation in 1988 (Ebasco, 1988a; Ebasco, 1988b; Ebasco, 1988c). The remedial investigations confimicd
the presence of on-site soil and on-site and off-site groundwater contamination (see "Environmental Contamination" section below). Goals of the remedial actions were listed as reduction of volatile organic compounds (VOCS) in groundwater (for example, trichloroethylene to less than 1 part per billion, or ppb), reduction of VOCs to less than 1 part per million
(ppm) in soils, reduction of bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (BEHP) to less than 10 ppm in soils, and prevention of contaminant transport from soils to groundwater.
In response to the discovery of contamination of certain wells at the Parkway well field, the TRWC installed a packed tower aeration (air stripper) treatment system for the output of two wells (#26 and #29) at the well field in 1988, as a treatment method to remove VOC contamination.
In September 1988, the USEPA issued a Record of Decision (ROD) for the RF site describing the selected remedy for the contaminated soils and groundwater (USEPA, 1988). The ROD specified additional soil and groundwater sampling to further delineate contaminants, the excavation and thermal desorption of VOCs and semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCS) from contaminated
soils, and the installation of a groundwater pumping, treatment, and re-injection system designed to remove VOCS. The excavation and treatment of over 14,000 cubic yards of contaminated soils was completed by the USEPA in May 1995.
Subsequent to the ROD, the UCC conducted predesign activities from 1991 to 1993 (Malcolm Pirnie, 1992; Malcolm Pirnie, 1993). The predesign groundwater evaluation led the USEPA to a reevaluation of the state of the groundwater contamination. It was determined that a contaminant plume existed which extended beyond the RF site's boundary, which consequently made
on-site pumping, treatment, and reinjection of groundwater unfeasible.
The contaminant plume was documented as extending to the Parkway well field of the United Water Toms River (UWTR) community water supplier (formerly Toms River Water Company, or TRWC). The plume was estimated to have been approximately 400 feet wide at the RF site, and approximately 1,500 feet wide at the Parkway well field. In 1993, the centroid of the plume
was estimated to be 700 feet up-gradient of the Parkway well field, with 50 percent of the contaminant mass in the aquifer estimated to be 4,000 feet south of the RF site in the vicinity of Dugan Lane, approximately 1,000 feet up-gradient of the Parkway well field. The high rate of pumpage at the Parkway well field was influencing the movement and spatial
distribution of the contaminant plume (see Figure 8).
In September 1995, the USEPA issued an Explanation of Significant Difference (ESD), which modified the groundwater remedy selected in the 1988 ROD (USEPA, 1995). This document presented USEPA's decision to abandon plans for an up-gradient groundwater treatment system. Instead, the existing Parkway well field wells and treatment system would continue to be used
to capture and treat the groundwater plume emanating from the RF site. In addition, the treated groundwater would not be re-injected, but instead would continue to be distributed to the community water supply, dependent upon water quality meeting Federal and State drinking water standards. Based upon the predesign evaluation (Malcolm Pirnie, 1993), the USEPA
concluded that air stripping alone was necessary to meet New Jersey's drinking water standards. As part of the ESD, the UCC agreed to finance the operation and maintenance of the UWTR air stripper and committed to a program of effectiveness monitoring for the treatment system at the well field.
In 1996, RF site-related non-target semi-volatile compounds were discovered by the NJDEP (in conjunction with the laboratories of the USEPA and the NJDHSS) in water from two wells (#26 and #28) of the Parkway well field (see "Environmental Contamination" section below). As a result, the entire Parkway well field was temporarily taken out of service in November
1996. The treatment system for wells #26 and #28 was then enhanced to include activated carbon contactors for the removal of organic chemicals. Wells #26 and #28 (and a new well #26B installed in late June 1999) are considered to be controlling the RF plume, with their effluent being treated and pumped to waste. (In times of high water demand, treated output from
wells #26 and #28 may be pumped to the Parkway well field point of entry.) Well #29 has also shown evidence of sporadic contamination by the RF plume. In response to detected contamination in this well in July 1998 (see "Environmental Contamination" section below), the State of New Jersey provided for the construction of additional activated carbon treatment for
well #29 and the nearby well #22. Treatment was initiated in June 1999, with treated water entering the distribution system.
|
 BACK
||
CONTENTS
||
NEXT
||
|
|
|
