Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
0035 WASHINGTON STREET - Health
3 5 Washington Street-, Hyanuls ti= o� 0 1 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS BARNSTABLE, ss. SUPERIOR COURT C.A. No. BACV2014-00033 BARNSTABLE COUNTY MUNICIPAL ) MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY as ) Subrogee of FELISBERTO BARREIRO Plaintiff, ) V. ) HOP ENERGY, LLC d/b/a THE OIL ) EXPRESS ) Defendant. ) AFFIDAVIT FOR RECORDS As custodian of the attached records, I hereby certify that the.enclosed (number of pages) are a true, complete and accurate copy of records relatin to 35 Washington . Street, Hyannis, MA 02601 for the period covering / �o to S D% These records are produced in response to the duly-issued Subpoena of the defendant, HOP Energy, LLC d/b/a The Oil Express. I further certify that it is the regular practice of the Town of Barnstable, Health Division to make such records; that these records are maintained by the Town of Barnstable, Health Division in the regular course of business; that these records were made contemporaneous to the event(s) which they describe; and made by a persons) with knowledge of the event(s) described therein. Subscribed and sworn under the pains and penalties of perjury this / day of ) 2014. ignature --- r Printed Name Title o; c-y ti COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS O 2Oy BARNSTABLE,ss. SUPERIOR COURT C.A.No.BACV2014-00033 g ,i BARNSTABLE COUNTY MUNICIPAL ) MUTUAL.INSURANCE COMPANY as ) Subrogee of FELISBERTO BARREIRO ) M.R.C.P. Plaintiff, ) RULE 30(a)AND RULE 45 V. ) ) HOP ENERGY,LLC d/b/a THE OIL ) EXPRESS ) Defendant. ) RUE CO ST APR 014 TO: . Keeper of Records _ Town of Barnstable G P_L17lf SW_RJFF Regulatory Services Department Health Division 200 Main Street Hyannis,MA 02601 N c� Greetings: _ YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED in the name of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in accordance with She provisions of Rules 30(a) and 45.of the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure to appear and testify'on behalf of the defendant,HOP Energy,LLC d/b/a The Oil Express,before a Notary Public of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,at the office of BARTON GILMAN,LLP,Attorney Greg Vanden-Eyke1,160 Federal Street,i u.ihe '.' City of Boston,on May 8,2014 at 10:00 a.m.,and to testify as to your knowledge,at the taking of the deposition in.the -} above-entitled action. "gig) .And you are further required to bring with you all documents requested on the attached.Schedule A. IN LIEU OF A PERSONAL APPEARANCE, COPIES OF THESE RECORDS MAY BE MAILED WITH THE ATTACHED AFFIDAVIT CERTIFYING THAT SAME ARE TRUE AND CORRECT COPIES OF ALL REPORTS AND RECORDS ON FILE. HEREOF FAIL NOT AS YOU WILL ANSWER YOUR DEFAULT UNDER THE PAINS AND PENALTIES IN THE LAW IN THAT BEHALF MADE AND PROVIDED Dated:April 17,2014 Edward Sho B.B.O.No. 555483 NOT P LIC eshoulkin@bartongilman.com My Commission Expires: Greg Vanden-Eykel I B.B.O.No. 682397 �t _•_.�Y f gvandeneykel@bartongilman.com �- a'0 ..c BARTON GILMAN,LLP' 160 Federal Street Boston,MA 02110 ; ;:.vr. (617) 654=8200 (617)482-5350-.Fax ,L I BRAD PARKER 53-7107-2113 - 4387 j DEPUTY'SHERIFF BOX 61.4'OENTERV.ILLE,MA,02632 -; w sad of14 $ pe 4 g C^////��a'�pe P.O.aox,0 6 WdORLEANS.MA 02553 - .. !.: 2 13 7 L0 ?Bl: 8B 60 7 54 L SHE 4 38 7 ., I IF { ] a SCHEDULE A 1. All documents and communications concerning Felisberto Barreiro and/or the property located at 35 Washington Street, Hyannis, Massachusetts 02601 ("Property") between January 1, 2007 and the date upon which the Health Division responds to this subpoena. 2. All documents, including but not limited to, reports, memoranda, journals, notes, and public health and safety code citations, concerning the Property between January 1, 2007 and the date upon which the Health Division responds to this subpoena. 3. All documents concerning the Aboveground Storage Tank ("AST") and/or the heating equipment located on the Property between January 1, 2007 and the date upon which the Health Division responds to this subpoena. 4. All photographs, videos, and/or other recordings concerning the AST, heating equipment, and/or the Property. 5. All communications (written and/or electronic) between the Health Division, and Felisberto Barreiro, his tenants, and/or any contractors working Mr. Barreiro's behalf concerning the AST, the heating equipment, and/or the Property between January 1, 2007 and the date upon which the Health Division responds to this subpoena. 6. All communications (written and/or electronic) between the Health Division and any person not identified in the preceding paragraph concerning the AST, the heating equipment, and/or the Property between January 1, 2007 and the date upon which the Health Division responds to this subpoena. 7. All other documents and/or things concerning and/or relating in any way to the Property between January 1, 2007 and the date upon which the Health Division responds to this subpoena. As used herein, the terms "documents," "communications," "concerning," and "persons" shall be defined as set forth in Superior Court Standing Order 1-09, where appropriate. Further the terms "documents" and "communications" shall be deemed to include both hard copy and Electronically Stored Information, including but not limited to e-mails, text messages, and/or social media postings. B A R T ❑ N O G I L M A N PLEASE RESPOND TO BOSTON GREG VANDEN-EYKEL gvandeneykel@bartonoman.com www.bartongilman.corn April 17, 2014 Keeper of Records Town of Barnstable Regulatory Services Department Health Division 200 Main Street Hyannis, MA 02601 Re: Barnstable County Municipal Mutual Insurance Company as Subrogee of Felisberto Barreiro v. HOP Energy, LLC, d/b/a The Oil Express Barnstable Superior Court, C.A. No. 14-00033 Dear Sir or Madam: We represent the defendant, HOP Energy, LLC d/b/a The Oil Express,in the above-referenced action. Attached to this letter is a subpoena requiring you to produce all records relating to Felisberto Barreiro and/or the property located at-35 Washington Street,Hyannis,-Massachusetts, as identified in the Schedule A attached to the subpoena. The date of this deposition isi May,8,,2014, at 10:00 a.m. at our Boston office. However,we will not require your actual appearance at the deposition if you provide us with a copy of the records. If you choose to produce the records in lieu of appearing for the. deposition, please notify us of your intent to do so. We are also enclosing an Affidavit for Records. Please sign the affidavit and return it along with a complete copy of the requested records. This affidavit will serve to authenticate the records in lieu of your appearing to do so. Please contact my paralegal,Jeff McDonald, upon receipt of the subpoena if you have any questions or comments. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Very truly yours, Greg Vanden-Eykel GVE/jcm Enclosures Barton o Gilman ttP 160 Federal Street o Boston,MA 02110 o P 617.654.8200 o F 617.482.5350 a 10 Dorrance Street o Providence,RI 02903 o P 401.273.7171 o F 401.273.2904 f �oF1HE Town of Barnstable BARNSTABLE, Public Health Division y MASS. `bA 039• 200 Main Street, Hyannis MA 02601 rfD Mp'I A OFFICE: 508-862-4644 FAX: 508-790-6304 INVOICE: # 35Washin toncopies DATE: May 7, 2014 TO: Greg Vanden-Eykel Barton Gilman LLP 160 Federal Street Boston, MA 02110 RE: Barnstable Counjy Municipal Mutual Insurance Company as Subrogee of Felisberto Barreiro v HOP Energy, LLC, d/b/a The Oil Express Barnstable Superior Court, C.A. No.14-00033 Property: 31 Washington Street, Hyannis Dear Mr. Vanden-Eykel: The expenses for the file copies of 31 Washington Street, Hyannis, mailed 5/07/14 are: ITEM RATE COST Supplies: 112 Copies Std 8 t/z x 11 $ 0.20 (incl.double sided) 22.40 2 Copies Larger size $ 0.40 0.80 1 Plan Small size $ 3.00 3.00 Postage 5.32 1.75 hours Labor $ 17.80/hr $ 31.15 TOTAL INVOICE $ 62.74 Received Payment"Witness Fee" dated 4/22/14 applied: - 8.00 Balance Due $ 54.67 PAYABLE TO: TOWN OF BARNSTABLE Thank you. Sincerely, Sharon Crocker Administrative Assistant Q:\Legal\Let-INVOICE copies for 91 Barnstable Rd Jan2011.doc \j \j �-IYIAL '��&PuYC'j ?Cn-r Co"Te--Q _ i � 1 w � . 4 t r �y t as 4 S • 1 e 1 p: ( tizeri Web Request Page 1 of 2 �i he cesrhi�y�i Citizen Request Management - Internal Use Request ID: 33543 Created: 2/3/2011 10:20:35 AM Status: Closed Assigned To: Miorandi, Donna Health Office Anonymous: No Category: Chapter 108 Hazardous Materials E.C. Date: 2/17/2011 Created By: Parvin, Lindsay Citations: Health Office Time Worked: 4.00 Response Time: 0.25 Requestor Details: Email: Request Location: 35 WASHINGTON STREET Hyannis, Ma 02601 Parcel Number: Map: 309 Block: 199 Lot: 000 Request: Hyannis Fire Department requested a health inspector for an #2 Fuel spill at 35 Washington Street,Hyannis Request Work History: Entered on 2/4/2011 9:50:32 AM by Miorandi, Donna DZM was called at 10 AM by the Hyannis Fire Dept. for an oil spill. The source was an above ground outside oil tank. Oil Express has been delivering oil since December of 2010 and have been using a lot of oil. They thought it was an inefficient furnace to be using so much oil. Upon delivery of a new furnace on 2/3/11 Oil Express(Ron McVay) noticed the tank has a large leak from the bottom of the tank. He put a magnetic plug on it to slow it down. On Dec. 4th they had 63 gal delivered, Dec. 30th-177 gal; Jan. 13, 2011-173 gal; Jan 21, 2011-203 gal; Jan 29-113 gal. Therfore a total of over 660 gallons.Tenants complained initially of no heat on Dec. 31st. Oil Express(1-800-822-6400) primed the pump and delivered more fuel at that time. Allegedly they have had no heat for the past two weeks. Tenants on the first floor using space heaters and possibly the electric oven as it was left open unpon our arrival.This is a two family dwelling that is an unregistered rental.The owner is Felisberto Barreiro of Fifth Ave.,W. Hyport. He is also the owner of Albertos Restaurant on Main St., Hyannis. Capt. Farrenkopf of HYFD was in command and also Lt. John Cosmo. DEP was called and Bob Murphy(508-946-2794)arrived on site about 11:30 am. With an estimate of 600 plus gallons spilled he told Felis(owner)to hire an LSP and call his insurance company. He issued him an NOR(Notice of Responsibility). The basment had no working smoke detector and the smoke dector on the 1st floor apartment was chirping indicating http://issgl2/intemalwrs/WRequestPrint.aspx?ID=33543 5/6/2014 CNtizeri Web Request Page 2 of 2 low battery. According to the tenant, many of the electrical outlets do no work and at time they have sparked.The door to the unit was broken into and has not been repaired or replaced.The wall tiles around the bathroom shower are falling off and there is much trash in the backyard. These are just a few of the violations observed and have forwarded this complaint to the housing isnpectors to have it registered and fully inspected. Lt. John Cosmo, approx. 1 year ago,told owner, Felis, to hire an electrician and address electrical problems at the time and he has done nothing. House is also on a septic system and shall check as to why they are not on sewer. Internal Note History: System entry on 2/3/2011 10:20:35 AM: Assigned to Miorandi, Donna Entered on 2/4/2011 9:50:32 AM by Miorandi, Donna Tenant, Megan Hildreth, has not called me as she stated she would. I have called her on her cell (508-280-0819)and have not received a return call from my message that I left on her cell. System entry on 2/4/2011 9:50:32 AM: Request Closed by miorandd i hftp://issgl2/intemalwrs/WRequestPrint.aspx?ID=33543 5/6/2014 ,n Fee Ld t THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Entered in computer: PUBLIC HEALTH DIVISION - TOWN OF BARNSTABLE., MASSACHUSETTS Yes ZIpplicatlon for MiOp $af *pttem Construction Permit Application for a Permit to Construct( )Repair( Vl/upgrade( )Abandon( ) ❑Complete System ❑Individual Components Location Address or Lot No. r-ii-tvv� Owner's Name,Address and Tel.No. Assessor's Map/Parcel 0rk— \"i ` 1 " Installer's Name,Address,and Tel.No. Designer's Name,Address and Tel.No. Type of Building: Dwelling No. of Bedrooms�� Lot Size sq.ft. Garbage Grinder( ) Other Type of Building No. of Persons Showers( ) Cafeteria( ) Other Fixtures Design Flow gallons per day. Calculated daily flow j j C> gallons. Plan Date Number of sheets Revision Date Title Size of Septic Tank 1 7!5(M Type of S.A.S. —r y G 0—c' Description of Soil Nature of Repairs or Alterations(Answer when applicable) -CJ2 S S J 0U SZ' l [� - '7-- (soy L( y- =-2f K e,Le-5 Date last inspected: l Agreement: The undersigned agrees to ensure the construction and maintenance of the afore described on-site sewage disposal system in accordance with the provisions of Title 5 of the Environmental Code and not to place the system in operation until a Certifi- Cate of Compliance has been issued bv this Bo f Health. Signed Date Application Approved by .�° Date `s°'xi Application Disapproved for the following reasons Permit No. Date Issued m r THE COMMONWEALTH''OF MASSACHUSETTS. BARNSTABLE, MASSACHUSETTS Certificate of Compliance THIS IS TO CERTIFY'` thennOn-site a Pisposal System Constructed( )Repaired ( (/)"Upgraded( ) Abandoned( )by ✓ at a w S has been constructed in accordance with the provis ��jjo Title 5 and the for Disposal System Construction Perrrut No. dated `''. , Installer Designer The issuance of this permit shall Rop be'eonstrued as a guarantee that the systrr will function as designed. Date I / Inspector No. "-' ,•^'?..y�. � Fee - . THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC HEALTH DIVISION - BARNSTABLE., MASSACHUSETTS M.5p65ar *p5tem Construction permit Permission is hereby granted to Construct( )Repair(V Upgrade( )Abandon( ) System located at ?S$ i.,v!?,5�,,� tay._ ►4 u-� and as described in the above Application for Disposal System Construction Permit.The applicant recognizes his/her duty to comply with Title 5,and the following local provisions or special conditions. Provided: Construction must be completed within three years of the date of this t.. .Date: �?Z— Approved b C-o BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL ASS66D S, INC. LICENSED SITE PROFESSIONALS,ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS,GEOLOGISTS,ENGINEERS \ 1573 Main Street,P.O.Box 1743 (508)896-1706 Brewster,MA 02631 fax(508)896-5109 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL TO: DATE: JOB NUMBER: -7:1 Mr.Robert Murphy,Case Officer 04/05/2011 BEAU-10302 MA DEP-SERO Bureau of Waste Site Cleanup(BWSC) 20 Riverside Drive REGARDING: Lakeville,MA 02347 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION PLAN Commercial Property,RTN 4-23092 35 Washington St.—Hyannis,MA[Assessor's Map 309,Parcel 199] SHIPPING METHOD: Regular Mail Pick Up Priority Mail ❑ Hand Deliver Express Mail ❑ Other uploaded ❑X Certified Mail ❑ Green Card/RR COPIES DATE DESCRIPTION 1 03/31/2011 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION PLAN Commercial Property,RTN 4-23092 _ 35 Washington St.—Hyannis,MA[Assessor's Map 309,Parcel 1991 For review and comment: For approval: As requested: ❑ For your use: REMARKS: cc: Felisberto Barreiro-Property Owner Thomas McKean-Barnstable Board.of Health(narrative,title page,site plan`only) „ John Klimm—Barnstable Town Manager(narrative,title page,site plan only) Deputy Chief Francis M.Pulsifer—Barnstable Fire Department(narrative,title page,site plan only) FROM: John Tadema-Wielandt/gjb If enclosures are not as noted,kindly notify us at once 15' P Pf�SESSORS MAP NO: �-V-1 Commonwealth of IMassachuse��) PARCEL NO: Title 5 Official Inspection Fora Subsurface Sewage Disposal System Form -Not for Voluntary Assessments 35 Washington Street Property Address Marcos Souza Owner Owners Name information is required for Hyannis MA 02601 08/03/09 every page. Cityrrown State Zip Code Date of Inspection Inspection results must be submitted on this form. Inspection forms may not be altered in any way. �I 56A Important:When filling out A. General Information forms on the computer,use 1. Inspector only the tab key to move your Michael Kellett cursor-do not Name of Inspector use the return key. Aardvark Environmental Inspection Company Name P.O. Box 896 Company Address East Dennis MA 02641 City/Town State Zip Code 508-385-7608 S13742 Telephone Number License Number B. Certification I certify that have personally inspected the sewage disposal system at this address and that the information reported below is true, accurate and complete as of the time of the inspection. The inspection was performed based on my training and experience in the proper function and maintenance of on site sewage disposal systems, 1 am a DEP approved system inspector pursuant to Section 15.340 of Title 5(310 CMR 15.000).The system: Z Passes ❑ Conditionally Passes ❑ Fails ❑. Needs Further Evaluation by the Local Approving Authority G --� __........ 08/05/09 Inspector's Signature Date The system inspector shall submit a copy of this inspection report to the Approving Authority(Board of Health or DEP)within 30 days of completing this inspection. If the system is a shared system or has a design flow of 10,000 gpd or greater, the inspector and the system owner shall submit the report to the appropriate regional office of the DEP. The original should be sent to the system owner and copies sent to the buyer, if applicable, and the approving authority.. ""This report only describes conditions at the time of inspectionrand under the conditions of use at that time.This inspection does not address how the system will perform in the future under the same or different conditions of use. h ��o USGS•12/07 Title 5 Official Inspection Form.Subsurface S ge Disposal System-Page 1 of 15 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection � g WELL DRILLER Please specify work performed: Address at well location: New Well Street Number: Street Name: --- -- 35 WASHINGTON STREET Please specify well type: Building Lot#: Assessor's Map#: Monitoring Assessor's Lot#: ZIP Code: Number Of Wells: — 02601 13 City/Town: Well Location BARNSTABLE In public right-of-way: GPS (GPS for the deepest well) Yes No North: West: L_es 41.65479 170.28456 Subdivision/Property/Description:. Mailing Address: • click here if same as well location address: Property Owner: Street Number: Street.Name: 35 WASHINGTON STREET -- - -- -' .----- ..----_... ---..... ...--- _...._.. City/Town: State: Engineering Firm: BARNSTABLE C MASSACHUSETTS �BENNETTENVIRONMENT ZIP Code: 02601 Board of health permit obtained: • Yes • Not Required Permit Number: Date Issued` Page 1 of 1 Map Page 1 of 1 Town of Barnstable Geographic Information System New Search Home I Help Parcel Viewer Custom Map Abutters Map Size (3 Zoom Out I M,In •• Y y 1Q _ _ ��� 0 = JPG Map: 309 Parcel: 199 Full Property Location: 35 WASHINGTON STREET Info Owner: BARREIRO,FELISBERTO k Location Information Map&Parcel 309199 a; Location 35 WASHINGTON STREET �tk Acreage 0.18 acres Owner Mailing Address BARREIRO,,FELISBERTO 253 FIFTH AVE xsa 3081g0. 1 ' �• ,g�.�,., M36 , ."k•• � ��.} -- WEST HYANNISPORT,MA 02672 l J ri Appraised Value(FY 2011) 11 7 - a", Extra Features $7,200 'f Out Buildings $0 Land $63,600 f T'`* ' '` Buildings $111,000 m,r . ✓ ��• Total Appraised $181,800 Assessed Value(FY 2011),_Tu_ _' � A �y '`h ' a Extra Features $7,200 Q Out Buildings $0. ti _ Land $63,600 i $111,000 Total Assessed $181,800 Set.Scale 1"= 38 Apr11.2008 -D MAP DISCLAIMER Copyright 2005-2010 Town of Barnstable,MA All rights reserved.Send questions or comments to GIS. - s BarnstableMA V1.2.4015 [Production] ] f t i 1 1 http://66.203.95.236/are ms/appgeoapp/map.aspx?propertyID=309... 2/4/2011 Message Page 1 of 1 Miorandi, Donna From: McKean, Thomas on behalf of Health Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 2:57 PM To: Miorandi, Donna; Martin, Cynthia Subject: FW: Barreiro RTN 4-23092 ----7Original Message----- From: Kara Risk [mailto:krisk@bennett-ea.com] Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 12:36 PM To: Health; dmelanson@hyannisfire.org Cc: David Bennett Subject: Barreiro RTN 4-23092 Please be advised that demolition and soil removal operations are set to begin this week at 35 Washington Street, Hyannis, MA (RTN 4-23092). If you have any questions or concerns please do hesitate to contact David Bennett at this.office. Thank you, Kara Kara Risk, PM, IRS Business Manager, Associate BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES, INC. 1573 Main Street/P.O. Box 1743 Brewster, MA 02631 508-896-1706 508-896-5109 fax http://bennett-ea.com Confidentiality Notice: This electronic mail message and any attached files contain information intended for the exclusive use of the individual or entity to whom it was addressed and may contain information that is proprietary,privileged,confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any viewing,copying,disclosure or distribution of this information may be subject to legal restriction or sanction. Please notify the sender,by electronic mail or telephone,of any unintended recipients and delete the original message without making any copies. Go Green! Consider the environment before printing this email. 8/1/2011 Page. 1 of 1 ' r 3092846 Jr fi `g oar' i 'rry i�•{xe�+::Y �.� �` �, * d =x '1°� S Y' �� .` �'�o; "' 'ear � .✓...,, � i .. ��'4"1 ra a� ,,���� 309195+ �"�. �' �'� x •['` r`4� i �� e .i xA„�„`" +uw : ,a"s, y. r ip 46 w 309199 a .�,, P k . ✓ 0, z ..'�' fit._ �` '�3 • .r � w. �� y I J n, http://66.203.95.236/ArcIMS/output/AppGeoApp_gisweb491621... 2/4/2011 Health Master Detail Qom- Page I of I =u' Logged In As: Friday, February 4 TOWN\miorandd Health Master Detail 2011 Application Center Parcel Lookup Selection Items Parcel Septic Perc Well Fuel Tank Parcel: 309-199 Location: 35 WASHINGTON STREET, HYANNIS Owner: BARREIRO, FELISBERTO Business name: _ Business phone: Rental property: C Deed restricted: r. Number of bedrooms Contaminant released:f Fuel storage tank permit: r � Save Parcel Changes `:=� Return'to:�Lookup_- Parcel info Parcel ID: 309-199 Developer lot: PARCEL A Location: 35 WASHINGTON Primary frontage: 70 STREET Secondary road: Secondary frontage: Village: HYANNIS Fire district: HYANNIS Sewer acct: Road index: 1786 Asbuilt Septic Scan: 309199_1 Interactive map Town zone of contribution.AP (Aquifer Protection Overlay District) State zone of contribution:OUT Owner Info Owner: BARREIRO, Co-Owner: FELISBERTO Streetl: 253 FIFTH AVE Street2: City: WEST HYANNISPORT State: MA Zip: , 02672 Country: Deed date: 08/24/2009 Deed reference:23983/299 Land Info Acres: 0.18 Use: Two Zoning: OM Neighborhood: Family 0104 Topography: Road: Utilities: Location: Construction Info Building No ear Buil Gross Area11367 Living Area Bedrooms Bathrooms 1 1860 2733 14 Beclrooms2 Full Buildings value: zc111.,000.00 Extra features: o7,200.00 Land value: 063,600,00 http://is sgl2/intranet/healthMaster/HealthMasterDetail.aspx?ID=3... 2/4/2011 AsBuilt dam -- Page 1 of 1 . A V ri 1'1 VT Dl1Al�J 1 f91)i_.LJ LOCATION �LS SEWAGE# c � 'Y4A_ GE ASSESSOR'S MAP&LOT.30 INSTALLER'S NAME&PHONE NO. tar _ SEPTIC TANK CAPACITY LEACHING FACILITY: (ty;x) -✓�h-�..��£_, NO.OF BEDROOMS r_ BUILDER OR OWNER PERMITDATE: 1 -,Y -9 7 CO1,1PLIANCE DATE: 7 Separation Distance Between the: Maximum Adjusted Groundwater Table and Bottom of leaching Facility Feet Private Water Supply Well and Leaching Facility (If any wells exist on site or within 200 feet of leaching facility) Feet Edge of Wedand and Leaching Facility(If any wetlands exist within 300 feet of leaching facility) Feet Furnished by IL O p T � O ly J W `y http://issgl2/intranet/propdata/prebuilt.aspx?mappar=309199&seq.,.. 2/4/2011 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS § EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AF S'qA ' a , DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTI I Y 2 6 240 p u:: ONE WINTER STREET,BOSTON MA 02108(61.7)292-5.50Q 704N � TRUDY CORE . DAVUU STRUHS ARGEO PAUL CELLUCCI - Governor SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PARTA CERTIFICATION Property Address: #35 Washington Avenue,Hyannis,MA Name of Owner: Mr. Sam Abrahanni Date of Inspection: 5/17/00 Address of owner: 300 Barnstable Road Hyannis, MA 02601 Name of Inspector:(Please Print) Mr.Carmen E. Shay I am a DEP approved system inspector pursuant to Section 15.340 of Title 5(310 CMR 15.000) Company Name: CARMENE. SHAY-Environmental Services, Inc. Mailing Address: 34 Thatchers Lane, East Falmouth, MA 02536 Telephone Number:508-548-0796 CERTIFICATION STATEMENT I certify that I have personally inspected the sewage disposal system at this address and that the information reported below is true,accurate and complete as of the time of inspection.The inspection was performed based on my training and experience in the Rrgper.function and maintenance of on-site sewage disposal systems.The system: S H OF q�4 XX Passes g CARMEfV cyG Conditionally Passes o E. `n v N Needs Further Evaluation By the Local Approving Authority Fails FS/ Inspector's Signature: C- Date: 5/17/0 0 The System Inspector shall submit a copy of this inspection report to the Approving Authority(Board of Health or DEP)within thirty(30)days of completing this inspection. If the system is a shared system or has a design flow of 10,000 gpd or greater,the inspector and the system owner shall submit the report to the appropriate regional office of the Department or-Environmental'Protection.The original should be sent to the system owner-and copies sent to the buyer,if applicable,and the approving authority. NOTES AND COMMENTS This Certification of this septic system is for the inspection performed of the system on this date only and implies no warranty of future performance under different loadings. revised 9/2/98 Pagel of 11 co 3 COMMONWE TH OF MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION t RECEIVE® y. NOV 4 Z003 TOWN OF BARNSTABLE HEALTH DEPT. TITLE 5 OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM-NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM FORM. PAkT A CERTIFICATION f AAP 3 Property Address: 35 Washington Street PARCEL Hyannis LOT Owner's Name: Celio Souza Owner's Address: Date of Inspection: 10/23/2003 Name of Inspector: (please print) Kevin J. Sullivan Company Name: Ready Rooter Mailing Address: P.O.Box 371 Sandwich,MA 02563 Telephone Number: (508)888-6055 CERTIFICATION STATEMENT I certify that I have personally inspected the sewage disposal system at this address and that the information reported below is true,accurate and complete as of the time of the inspection. The inspection was performed based on my training.and experience in the proper function and maintenance of on site sewage disposal systems. I am a DEP approved system inspector pursuant to Section 15.340 off Title 5(310 CMR 15.000). The System: j. Passes Conditionally Passes Needs Further Evaluation by the Local Authority Fails Inspector's Signature:. /k Date: /0 The system inspector shall submit a copy of this inspection report to the Approving Authority(Board of Health or DEP)within 30 days of completing this inspection.If the system is.a shared system or has a design flow of 10,000 gpd or greater,the inspector and the system owner shall submit the report to the appropriate regional office of the DEP. The original should be sent to the system owner and copies sent to the buyer,if applicable,and the approving authority. _ Notes.and Comments I O C T 3 1 2"0,, H i jEPT. i 91 ****This report only describes conditions at the time of inspection and under the conditions of use at that time.This inspection does not address how the system will perform in the future under the same or different conditions of use. BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES, INC. LICENSED SITE PROFESSIONALS,ENVIR49NMENTAL SCIENTISTS,GEOLOGISTS,ENGINEERS h 1573 Main Street,P.O.Box 1743 � r (508)896-1706 Brewster;MA 02631 fax(508)896-5109 1 LETTER OF TWk MI �� TO: DATE: JOB NUMBER:Mr.Robert MA DEP(SE O)Murphy,Case Officer 12/21/201 T BEAU-10302 f BWSC 20 Riverside Drive REGARDING: Lakeville,MA 02347 IRAC REPORT WITH CLASS-A2 RAO RTN 4-23092 SHIPPING METHOD: Regular Mail ❑ Pick Up ❑ Priority Mail ❑ Hand Deliver ❑ Express Mail ❑ Other uploaded ❑X Certified Mail ❑ Green Card/RR ❑ COPIES DATE DESCRIPTION 1 I2/7/2011 Immediate Response Action Completion Report with Class-A2 Response Action Outcome`: 35 Washington Street 9 Hyannis,MA For review and comment: ❑ For approval: ❑ As requested: ❑ For your use: ❑ REMARKS: cc: Felisberto Barreiro-Property Owner.(report on CD) Cosmo Gallinaro,LSP Consultant to BCMIC(report on CD) Thomas McKean-Barnstable Board of Health(narrative,title page,and site plan only) John Klimm-Barnstable Town Manager(narrative,title page,and site plan only) Deputy Chief Dean Melanson-Hyannis Fire Department(narrative,title page,and site plan only) FROM: JTW/dc If enclosures are not as noted,kindly notify us at once fi Health Master Detail 1 S Page 1 of Rd - f - till A i W _ H. 1 m AII Logged In As TOWN\crockersh Health Master Detail Wednesday, May 7 2014 Application Center Parcel Lookup Selection Items Reports Parcel Septic Perc Well Fuel Tank Parcel: 309-199 Location: 35 WASHINGTON STREET, HYANNIS Owner: BARREIRO, FELISBERTO Business name: Business phone: Rental property: F Deed restricted: f Number of bedrooms F 0 - Contaminant released: F Fuel storage tank permit: F- Save Parcel Changes I Return to Lookup Parcel Info Parcel ID: 309-199 Developer lot:PARCEL A .Location:35 WASHINGTON STREET Primary frontage:70 Secondary road: Secondary frontage: village:HYANNIS Fire district:HYANNIS Town sewer exists at this address: No Road index: 1786 E Asbuilt Septic Scan: 309199_1 Interactive map Town zone of contribution:AP (Aquifer Protection Overlay District) State zone of contribution:OUT Owner Info Owner: BARREIRO, FELISBERTO Co-Owner: Streetl:PO BOX 47 Street2: City:WEST HYANNISPORT State:MA Zip: :02672 Country: Deed date:8/24/2009 Deed reference:23983/299 Land Info Acres: 0.18 Use: Vac Land MDL-00 Zoning:OM Neighborhood: 0104 Road: Topography: Location: Utilities: Construction Info Buildinq NoYear Built Gross AreaLivinq Area BedroomsBathrooms Buildings value:$0.00 Extra features: $0.00 Land value: $63,600.00 CD q1 r'� 7i•""' M ' /lnI A Health Master Detail Page�lof ; .. HealRthM:aster . _ Logged In As: TOWN\crockersh Health Master Detail Wednesday,May 72014 Application Center Parcel Lookup Selection Items Reports Parcel Septic Perc Well Fuel Tank Parcel: 309-199 ion:35 WASHINGTON STREET,HYANNIS Owner: BARREIRO,FELISBERTO Septic 1,1/6/1997 New Septic.._ I Permit number: 1997005 Permit type: Select type Complete system: F Permit number: F1-9 Issue date : 1/6/1997 Complete date: 1/10/1997 I Septic tank size:�— Type/Size of SAS: i Installer:I Select Installer Card on file: F I/A service type: Select service - Innovative/Alternative Technology type: Select IA type Variance date : Abandon complete date : Abandon permit number: iRepair deadline date � Repair notification date Keyw ord: Comments: sl UPGRADE TWO 50'TRENCHES Delete Septic I ,---Inspection--------8/3J2009-------- T Inspection 10/27/200 New Inspection.. I Number Inspection Date Inspector Result i' 5620 8/3/2009 Kellett,Michael,Aardvark Environmental P(Pass) Received.Date Comments F- IICI Delete Inspection j Save Septic Changes I Return to Lookup Health Master Detail Page3 of 5 r Logged In As: TOWN\crockersh Health Master Detail Wednesday, May 7 2014 Aoolication Center Parcel Lookup Selection Items Reports Parcel Septic Perc Well Fuel Tank Parcel: 309-199 Location: 35 WASHINGTON STREET, HYANNIS Owner: BARREIRO, FELISBERTO New P-�rc... Permit number: Test date Test result: Select result code Comments: I i j Save Perc Changes Return to Lookup I Health Master Detail Pagef .of. Logged In As: TOWN\crockersh Health Master Detail Wednesday, May 7 2014 Application Center Parcel Lookuu Selection Items Reports Parcel Septic Perc Well Fuel Tank Location: 35 WASHINGTON STREET, HYANNIS Owner: BARREIRO, FELISBERTO Well 1 I�New Well... I I ermit W_No 2011 Issue date : Complete date : 2/9/2011 number: Well type: Select well type Destruction permit number: Comments: Desmond Well Drilling - 3 monitoring wells ordered by -- Delete Well iBennett Engineering i New Well Test... j Date: Result: Select result Comments: isl Save Well Changes I Return to Lookup w. Health Master Detail Page'of .� :H fa11 agith =ster _. Logged In As: TOWN\crockersh _ Health Master Detail Wednesday, May? 2014 Application Center Parcel Lookup Selection Items Reports Parcel Septic Perc Well Fuel Tank Parcel: 309-199 Location: 35 WASHINGTON STREET, HYANNIS Owner: BARREIRO, FELISBERTO Well 1 New Well.. I }�b� V �/t, Permit ( 1 I number. Issue date : Complete date Well type: Select well type Destruction permit number: Comments: I _ � New Well Test... jDate: Result: Select result Comments: _I l Save Well Changes I Return to Lookup { eT 4 �5 1 BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES, INC. LICENSED SITE PROFESSIONALS,ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS,GEOLOGISTS,ENGINEERS 1573 Main Street,P.O.Box 1743 (508)896-1706 Brewster,MA 02631 fax(508)896-5109 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL TO: DATE: JOB NUMBER: Mr.Robert Murphy,Case Officer 06/03/2011 BEAT 1-10302 MA DEP-SERO BWSC 20 Riverside Drive REGARDING: Lakeville,MA 02347 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION STATUS REPORT I Commercial.Property,RTN 4-23092 35 Washington St.—Hyannis,MA[Assessor's Map 309,Parcel 199] SHIPPING METHOD: Regular Mail ❑ Pick Up ❑ Priority Mail ❑ Hand Deliver ❑ Express Mail ❑ Other uploaded ❑X Certified Mail ❑ Green Card/RR ❑ COPIES DATE DESCRIPTION 1 05/31/2011 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION STATUS REPORT I ; Commercial Property,RTN 4-23092 35 Washington St.—Hyannis,MA[Assessor's Map 309,Parcel 1991 For review and comment: ❑ For approval: ❑ As requested: ❑ For your use: ❑x REMARKS: cc: Felisberto Barreiro-Property Owner Thomas McKean-Barnstable Board of Health (narrative,title page,site plan only) John Klimm—Barnstable Town Manager(narrative,title page,site plan only) Deputy Chief Dean Melanson—Hyannis Fire Department(narrative,title page,site plan only) FROM: John Tadema-Wielandt/gjb If enclosures are not as noted,kindly notify us at once P BE'NNETTENVIRONMENTALAssoCIATES, INC. LICENSED SITE PROFESSIONALS & ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS b GEOLOGISTS 6 ENGINEERS 1573 Main Street-P.O. Box 1743, Brewster, MA 02631 & 508-896-1706 & Fax 508-896-5109 www.bennett-ea.com BEA 11-10302 May 31, 2011 Mr. Robert Murphy, Case Officer MA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION(MA DEP) Southeast Regional Office(SERO) Bureau of Waste Site Cleanup (BWSC) 20 Riverside Drive Lakeville, MA 02347 RE: IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION STATUS REPORT I Commercial Property, RTN 4-23092 35 Washington St. —Hyannis, MA [Assessor's Map 309, Parcel 199] Dear Mr. Murphy, BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES, INC. (BEA) has prepared the following Immediate Response Action Status I (IRAS I) Report with Supporting Documentation as a summary of response actions and environmental monitoring undertaken to mitigate potential human exposures and environmental impacts over the 60 day reporting period. Response actions previously reported under the IRA Plan are presented herein to orient the reviewer to ongoing response actions. For detailed documentation of prior response actions the reader should review the IRA Plan, dated March 31, 2011, as is part of the public record. In the April-May 2011 reporting period response actions have included the continuing recovery of an additional 37 gallons of free product via the product recovery system with constant rate suppression control. This volume brings the estimated total recovery of oil off the groundwater to 110 gallons as a significant portion of the estimated release (25%+). With the decrease in LNAPL recovery, plans and permitting are underway through the owner's contractor, Oceanside Construction, to demolish the dwelling to facilitate soil removal to the groundwater in a 15' x 15' area to a depth of 20' +/-. As such, this IRA Status Report includes a request to extend the estimated volume of contaminated soil removal and recycling to 200 yards (300 tons). Soil removal will be followed by in-situ chemical oxidation treatment with Regenox. The excavation will be further equipped with a soil venting system in washed stone. This system can be used for the delivery of additional remedial additives or retrofitted for additional treatment of groundwater if necessary. As part of the recovery system operation, maintenance and monitoring, effluent intermediate samples have been taken between the activated carbon drums to monitor for any petroleum hydrocarbon breakthrough of water being treated and discharge upgradient from the 1 EMERGENCY SPILL RESPONSE 6 WASTE SITE CLEANUP 6 SITE ASSESSMENT 6 PERMITTING 6 SEPTIC DESIGN&INSPECTION WATER SUPPLY DEVELOPMENT,OPERATION&MAINTENANCE 6 WASTEWATER TREATMENT,OPERATION&MAINTENANCE 44 MAY 31,2011 BARREIROBEAI I-10302 PAGE 2 OF 16 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION STATUS I,RTN 4-23092 release area. This testing has show that the GAC system is treating impacted groundwater to GW-1 standards for upgradient discharge in accordance with the provisions of 310 CMR 40.0045. However, in the reporting period, the discharge line was pinched which caused excessive pressure buildup in the system and deformed the GAC canisters. Based on a threat of leakage, the drums were replaced with new drums and discharge line repaired and further marked and protected from damage. Quarterly groundwater sampling and analysis of the perimeter monitoring wells was also conducted in the reporting period (4/26/11). Although no olfactory or sheen noted, low level fractional EPH and related PAHs were reported in the downgradient monitoring well MW-3. The concentrations detected in MW-3 are significantly below the applicable GW-3, Method 1 Characterization Standards. All other monitoring wells continue to report all fractional EPH compounds and target analytes as Below Reporting Limits (BRL). The reported conditions indicate that the suppression control system has effective hydraulic control in isolating dissolved phase groundwater impacts and protecting against Substantial Release Migration. This analytical data, combined with solute transport modeling and evaluation of exposure risks continue to document that there is no Imminent Hazard condition or any and Critical Exposure Pathways. The information contained herein serves as the technical rationale and justification for the environmental assessment and response actions previously conducted and those further activities proposed within. This work has and will continue to precede under direct LSP supervision in a manner consistent with the MCP Response Action Performance Standards (RAPS) pursuant to 310 CMR 40.0191 and the QA/QC policies of BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES, INC. The facts and statements herein are, to the best of our knowledge, a true and accurate representation of the Site activities, remedial response actions and environmental conditions associated with the project and LSP Opinions acknowledged by the certification on the attached BWSC-103 and BWSC-105 Transmittal Forms. SITE DESCRIPTION [Refer to Appendix A] The subject property at 35 Washington Street is noted as Map 309, Parcel 199 on the Barnstable Assessor's Maps and is located on the western side of Washington Street, approximately 200 feet south of the intersection of Louis Street and Washington Street in the village of Hyannis, Town of Barnstable, MA [Refer to Figure 1]. The UTM coordinates for the Site are North 4612255 and East 393038. The property contains approximately 0.18 acres of land area and is developed by a two-story two-family apartment building and a small shed at the edge of the Hyannis downtown area. The surrounding area is heavily developed in similar use as characterized by residential properties to the north, south and east and a commercial business (medical centre)to the west. Additional commercial properties are also located in the area to the south, east and west. Environmental assessment activities have identified a discrete lateral extent of significant soil impact greater the applicable Method 1 — Risk Characterization standards underlying the I� i MAY 31,2011 BARREIROBEAI I-10302 PAGE 3 OF 16 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION STATUS I,RTN 4-23092 release area adjacent to the northwest corner of the subject dwelling to groundwater at 21' bgs. Free-phase product up to 12" thick has been observed in the RW-1 well as within the release area. Recently minor groundwater impact has been identified in the downgradient MW-3 monitoring well. No groundwater impact has been realized in any other of the monitoring wells at the time of this reporting. As such the Site, as a portion of the subject property, is defined by the release area at the back of the dwelling and the monitoring wells where fuel oil has been released or has come to be located in soils and groundwater. ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS [Refer to Appendix A] Hydrologic references indicate groundwater exists at 13' NGVD (+/-) as projected within some 22' of grade surface wherein regional groundwater contours indicate a south-southeasterly flow direction towards Hyannis Inner Harbor/Lewis Bay and Nantucket Sound beyond [Refer to Figure 2]. During the subsurface investigation at the property groundwater was encountered between 21' and 22' bgs. Site-specific groundwater flow has been documented to the south with minor fluctuations to the east and west as consistent with regional flow. Based on the observed groundwater flow direction, the Hyannis Inner Harbor and Lewis Bay represent the primary potential environmental receptors in consideration of Method 1 —Risk Characterization. According to the MA DEP BWSC GIS mapping program, the subject property is not located within the Zone II Protective Radius of a Public Water Supply (PWS), nor is it located within the Zone A protective radius of any surface water reservoir. No private wells are known to exist within 500' of the Site wherein the area is serviced by the Barnstable municipal water supply and distribution system. The subject property is located within a Non-Potential Drinking Water Source Area (NPDWSA) based on the relative density of development, as within downtown Hyannis. Based on this mapping, as well as the proximity to groundwater and reported hydrogeologic conditions, the GW-3 groundwater category is considered under Method 1 — Risk Characterization, per 310 CMR 40.0974. Based on Site conditions relative to frequency/intensity of use and accessibility of soils, the S-2/S-3 (GW-3) Method 1 — Risk Characterization standards are applicable to soil impact in accordance with the provisions of 310 CMR 40.0975. In review of all foreseeable future uses and activities at the Site, the most restrictive S-1/S-2/S-3 (GW-1/GW-2/GW-3), Method 1 — Risk Characterization standards are further evaluated. These standards were developed in consideration of potential ingestion, inhalation, dermal contact and environmental exposures, and in review of potential leaching of contaminants to groundwater. The subject dwelling is currently unoccupied wherein electric power and water service have been shut-off. Over the reporting period, the temporary fuel oil AST and the oil-fired furnace has been removed from the basement of the structure in preparation for razing the building. As such, there is no heat, or domestic water services in the dwelling that is currently uninhabitable. The identified potential human receptors are worker and visitors at the property, as well as the abutting neighbors to the south of the subject property. Based on the condition of the property as uninhabitable, with engineering controls in conjunction with the physical testing MAY 31,2011 BARREIROBEAII-10302 PAGE 4 OF 16 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION STATUS I,RTN 4-23092 of soil, and groundwater, there is presently no Imminent Hazard or apparent Critical Exposure Pathways to the human receptors. As such, a condition of No Substantial Hazard exists under current conditions. Additional response actions are necessary to mitigate all potential risk in review of foreseeable future activities and uses of the subject and surrounding properties. Further remediation and environmental monitoring is proposed herein over the next six months to remove contaminant source and monitor potential exposure risks to human and environmental receptors in consideration of No Significant Risk to meet project closure objectives to support a Class A, Response Action Outcome within the initial one-year deadline to avoid Tier Classification. BACKGROUND [Refer to Appendix B] Excessive fuel usage was noted by the property owner and reported to the oil company (Oil Express) that had an automatic delivery contract for the property. On review of the fuel use records, Oil Express suggested that the fuel use was related to the condition of the burner and suggested the burner be replaced. On February 3, 2011 an Oil Express technician was at the property to install a new oil-fired furnace in the basement of the subject dwelling. Upon inspection of the 275-gallon AST, the technician noted fuel leaking from the bottom of the vessel. The technician placed a magnetic patch over the leak and notified the company's dispatch. The Oil Express subsequently called the Hyannis Fire Department and the MA DEP, both of which responded to the scene. Mr. Robert Murphy of the MA DEP subsequently issued a field Notice of Responsibility to the property owner, Mr. Felisberto Barreiro. Based on observed conditions, the MA DEP classified the release as 2-Hour reporting condition (Sudden Release), and assigned Release Tracking Number (RTN) 4-23092 outlining the requirement to engage a Licensed Site Professional and conduct an Immediate Response Action. The Oil Express subsequently installed a temporary tank and transferred the remaining fuel from the leaking tank. A forensic engineer, working for Mr. Barreiro's insurance company, later removed the leaking tank from the property. Mr. Barreiro contacted BEA the next day on February 4, 2011 to provide LSP Oversight and professional services. Based on the fuel delivery records, and past oil consumption, it is estimated that there was a release of some 500+/- gallons of fuel oil. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT [Refer to Appendix B] Soil On February 4, 2011, BEA personnel traveled to the subject property to meet with the property owner and environmental contractor to discuss proposed remedial response activities and to perform environmental assessment activities. On this date, BEA personnel performed two hand borings in the area of release. Two-foot soil samples were collected with a 4" stainless steel bucket auger, from grade, to a maximum depth of 8' bgs. Refusals were encountered during the hand borings as attributed to rocky subsurface conditions. MAY 31,2011 BARREIROBEAI 1-10302 PAGE 5 OF 16 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION STATUS 1,RTN 4-23092 The collected soil samples were placed in 8-ounce glass jars, sealed with aluminum septa and agitated to develop organic vapors. The soil samples were then field screened for total organic volatiles (TOV) with a photoionization detector (PID) [Thermo Environmental 580B OVM, 10.6 eV lamp, calibrated to benzene standard] by "jar headspace" method as consistent with the MA DEP Soils Policy (WSC-94-400). Field screening of soil samples reported significantly elevated TOV concentrations from grade to 8' bgs. Based on the initial environmental assessment and field screening conducted, significant soil impact was indicated to at least 8' bgs in a 8'x 6'area centered on the area of the former AST. BEA personnel returned to the Site on February 7 and 8, 2011 to direct test borings with the installation of groundwater monitoring wells as well as the installation of a recovery well and constant rate suppression well. Soil samples were collected during the installation of the recovery well (RW-1) to document subsurface conditions in the area of release. Samples collected to depth exhibited TOV concentrations in excess of 150ppm indicating significant soil impact all the way to the groundwater interface at 21' bgs. Representative soil samples from hand borings and test borings were submitted to the laboratory to qualify field results in review of an appropriate remedial response. At the time of sampling, BEA also collected a soil sample "Stockpile Composite" for TPH analysis in review of waste characterization and disposal options. TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF TPH/EPH/VPH LABORATORY ANALYSIS- METHOD 1,2,3 -RISK CHARACTERIZATION: SOIL [µg/g=ppm] Exposure Point RESULTS S-1 SOIL STD. S 2 SOIL'STD,: S 3,SOIL STDj # cDIR CONTACT SUPPER CONC Location&Analyte (µg/g=ppm) (µg/g=ppm) 16ig/g ppm) r STDS, LIMITS s 5g sa F1ir6 ". -x .2 310 CMR 310 CMR fi 310 CMRi ,(µg/g ppm) 40.0975(6)(a) .40 0975(6)(a)t' 4� .h40 0975(6)(a) 310 CMR 40 0985(6) depthbelow grade surface GW-3 ,�"'GW 3 . . GW 3; R 13 2/S3, 1.310 CMR40'D996(7 40 +. : TPH �k HB-1(TB4:0-8' 9,100 1,0003,000t W_r. �c.`, 5,000 �t *3,000%5,000t �t ^ 10,000 ,r� 157 k# x TPH ;W Contaminated Stockpile 14,000 1,000 i :3 000 ' 4 1' <5 000W (� 3 000/5 000 4t r 10 OOOJI� EPH a a d .y tii x .r ,� n "` X TB 9-2 1' ' h > 1 ;, e 1 r �+ i 0V. ate ', <i '� C9-C18 Aliphatics 6,300 1,000 t� 3 OD0 s ° 3��5 000j+ (l� 3 000/5 000 20 000 C19-C36 Aliphatics 1,600 3,000 5 000 � �y5 00� 0 1'' 5 0003 00 � `i 20 UO t i..ih Y .li ++ z r Cl 1-C22 Aromatics 4,500 1,000 3 000 $ $ 5 000,Et3 000/5 000; .410000 Target PAHs detects only) NO" 7 Naphthalene 21 500 �]�0�0 r 3 000 11 000/3 000`r �10 0�00� 2-Methylnaphthalene 110 300hr" - 500 r500 �' s �� 00/500 e ,5-000 Acenaphthylene 4.8 10 1 c *+ Ot �`�3 00/3 000Ir4 10 0 0 i Acenaphthene 12 11000 3 000 r � `1'S 000 �+( �3 000/0 0 00 Fluorene 11 11000 .3}000 '� 51 OOO r '�3 000/5 000 "1Or000 henanthrene 15 500 1,0003 000 MAY 31,2011 BARREIROBEA1 I-10302 PAGE 6 OF 16 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION STATUS 1,RTN 4-23092 VPH y �} S k U y TB 4:9-21 a� lj s � C5-C8 Ali hatics 250 100 .50011., r a 500/500, r i 25 00.0 3 000 ; 5 000 a + < 3 000/5 OOOs C9-Cl2 Aliphatics 590 1,000 � , 4. { a� r� r ' , � i+s a I5 C9-CIO Aromatics 1,200 100 ' !:,500 m 500 a r' 4 500/500;4 r y� ` 5 OOO r y -01 Target BTEX � tj MtBE BRL <0.58 100 500 +F 500 r "" 500/500,', b t` 5 060 t 900 4,.Y 200/900it ObOR- Benzene 1.6 30 a Ayw' 4 Toluene 23 500 f` ' 1000 »»t 3 000 11 000/3 0`00 1W0 p00R '{ Ethylbenzene 21 500 1 000 a5t� ; �s, 3 000, 00 �4 m/-X lene 82 500 r`I 000� , 3i000 1 000/3 000 yi f 10 OQO r, P Y5 s wry v " i �:*_,� o-Xylene 38 500 ;1000 _ 3 Mu `>* 31 000/3 0,00 r 10 000,x �T y 1 000 s' 3 OOOg F x ]000/3,0. Naphthalene 88 500 � TPH=Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons VPH=Volatile Petroleum Hydrocarbons,BTEX=Benzene/Toluene/Ethylbenzene/Xylene EPH=Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons,BRL=Below Reportable Limit Shaded areas represent applicable MCP criteria. Laboratory analytical results received February 16, 2011, reported significant EPH/PAH, TPH and VPH/BTEX contamination in each of the samples submitted, indicating significant soil impact to the groundwater interface at 21' bgs. A summary of the analytical results is represented above in Table 1. Groundwater. BEA personnel were at the Site on February 7 and 8, 2011 to direct test borings and the installation of monitoring wells, a recovery well and suppression well, as performed by Desmond Well Drilling of Orleans, MA [Refer to Site Plan]. Boring locations were selected as based on presumed groundwater flow direction, proximity to the release area and as intermediate to identified receptors. On February 7, 2011, test boring TB-1 (MW-1 was advanced north of the release area as clearly upgradient and to help establish site-specific groundwater flow direction. Test boring TB-2 (MW-2) was located southeast of the subject dwelling as potentially downgradient as consistent with regional groundwater flow direction. Test boring TB-3 (MW-3) was located to the south-southeast of the release area as potentially downgradient and intermediate to abutting residential dwellings. Soil sampling and field screening at the groundwater interface at these test boring locations (MW-1, MW-2 and MW-3) reported no elevated TOV concentrations and were consistent with background conditions as indicating no significant soil or groundwater impacts [Refer to Geologic Borehole Logs, Appendix B]. The monitoring wells were finished below grade with locking gripper plugs and steel, bolt-down road boxes. BEA personnel returned to the property on February 8, 2011 to install the recovery well and a constant suppression well in anticipation of the installation and operation of a Light Non- 1 i MAY 31,2011 BARREIRO/BEAI 1-10302 PAGE 7 OF 16 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION STATUS 1,RTN 4-23092 Aqueous Phase Liquid (LAPL) recovery system. Test boring TB-4 (RW-1) was located within the release area and was advanced within the same hole as hand boring HB-1. Split spoon soil sampling was performed from 9'bgs to the groundwater interface at 21' bgs. TOV concentrations in the 19-21' bgs sample reported 158 ppm, indicating significant impact at the groundwater interface. The recovery well (RW-1) was set at 26' bgs. The constant suppression well (CSW-1 was then advanced approximately 2' west of the recovery well. CSW-1 was advanced to a depth of 33' bgs and a T-2 inch, stainless steel screen was installed at depth as fully penetrating the aquifer at a depth of 6-7' below the accumulated LNAPL. The borehole was backfilled with clean#2 silica sand to 2l' and was then backfilled with natural material to grade. BEA personnel subsequently recorded static water level measurements and surveyed the top-of-casing elevations to a common vertical datum in order to qualify local groundwater flow direction. BEA returned to the subject property on February 10, 2011 to conduct monitoring well development and sampling. Upon arrival, static water level measurements were recorded at each monitoring well towards purge calculations and Site-specific groundwater flow determination [Refer to Appendix B]. Each of the monitoring wells was then developed and subsequently sampled in review of environmental impact and risk characterization. The constant suppression well CSW-1 was sampled for EPH and VPH including target analytes to perform carbon-use calculations for system effluent treatment. The remaining monitoring wells were sampled for TPH as screening tool for the presence of petroleum hydrocarbons. The groundwater samples were collected in appropriately preserved laboratory containers for EPHNPH/TPH analyses and field preserved on ice. BEA also conducted a series of slug tests at upgradient monitoring well MW-1 on February 10, 2011, in order to characterize the aquifer in consideration of solute fate and transport. The Geraghty and Miller 4QTESOLV program was employed to interpret the results of the slug tests wherein a hydraulic conductivity of 469.77 feet per day was computed. Based on 20%retardation,the Times of Travel from the release area to the down gradient monitoring wells MW-3 and MW-4, were computed as 4.74 days, and 4.33 days, respectively (refer to Appendix B). Static water level measurements and calculated local groundwater flow directions have established the utility of monitoring well MW-4 as directly down gradient from the release area monitoring well MW-3 is positioned marginally outside the eastern extent of the projected solute pathway- Given that the date free product reached groundwater is unknown, the sequence of the initial groundwater sampling relative to the Time of Travel is unqualified. Regardless, based on a release discovery date of February 3, 2011, and wherein groundwater impacts were recorded on February 7, 2011 the next quarterly groundwater monitoring was performed within the calculated solute Time of Travel. With active hydraulic control at the site, downgradient groundwater impact migration has been slowed and minimized. Laboratory analytical results from the initial groundwater-sampling event were reported on February 17, 2011. Concentrations of TPH in monitoring wells MW-1, MW-2 and MW-3 MAY 31,2011 BARREIROBEAI I-10302 PAGE 8 OF 16 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION STATUS I,RTN 4-23092 were reported as BRL wherein the reporting limits were less than the applicable (GW-3) and most stringent (GW-1) Method 1 Risk Characterization standards. Concentrations of EPH and VPH concentrations and target analytes reported in the constant suppression well (CSW-1) were also reported below the applicable GW-3 standards with the exception of C 11 to C22 Aromatics. However, as stated earlier, the testing of CSW-1 was to qualify carbon use rates for system effluent treatment and not to qualify Significant Risk. Static water-level measurements established local groundwater flow in a southerly direction, differing from regional flow, as based on three rounds of groundwater gauging data. As such, on March 8, 2011, BEA personnel returned to the Site to install a fourth groundwater monitoring well (MW-4) in a clearly downgradient direction. Monitoring well MW-4 was installed south of the release area and intermediate to abutting residential properties and as intermediate to the nearest environmental receptor. Monitoring well MW-4 was subsequently sampled on March 10, 2011 for EPH and VPH with target analytes. Results of the analyses reported concentrations of EPH, VPH and all target PAHs and BTEX analytes as BRL. Additional Groundwater Monitoring BEA returned to the subject property on April 26, 2011 to conduct quarterly groundwater monitoring. Upon arrival, static water level measurements were recorded at each monitoring well towards purge calculations and Site-specific groundwater flow determination [Refer to Appendix B]. Each of the monitoring wells was then purged until parameter stabilization and subsequently sampled in review of environmental impact and risk characterization. The monitoring wells were sampled for EPH including target PAHs. BEA personnel also collected groundwater samples for wet chemistry analysis for baseline concentrations of sodium, sulfate and total iron in anticipation of the proposed Regenox remedial additive applications. All groundwater samples were collected in appropriately preserved laboratory containers and field preserved on ice. Laboratory analytical results from the April groundwater-sampling event were reported on May 3, 2011 for EPH results and May 9, 2011 for wet chemistry results. Concentrations of EPH and target PAHs in monitoring wells MW-1, MW-2 and MW-4 were reported as BRL wherein the reporting limits were less than the applicable (GW-3) and most stringent (GW-1) Method 1 Risk Characterization standards. Concentrations of fractional EPH as well as target analytes were reported in monitoring well MW-3, slightly above the method response limits, but below the applicable GW-3 and most stringent GW-1 Method 1 Risk Characterization Standards. The constant suppression well (CSW-1) was not tested during the quarterly sampling event. The previous testing of CSW-1 was to qualify carbon use rates for system effluent treatment and not to qualify Significant Risk. A summary of petroleum-related groundwater analytical results is included below in Table 2. MAY 31,2011 BARREII20/BEA11-10302 PAGE 9 OF 16 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION STATUS 1,RTN 4-23092 TABLE 2: SUMMARY OF TPH/EPHIVPH LABORATORY ANALYSIS METHOD 1,2,3—RISK CHARACTERIZATION: GROUNDWATER_[ug/L=ppm] Exposure Point RESULTS RESULTS GW-1 STD. GW-2 STD '�GWQ STMI Location (µg/g=PPm) (µg1g=PPm) (µPS-=PPm) (µP l--PPm) (Depth below grade surface 2/10/11 4/26/11 310 CMR 40.0974(2) 310 CMR 40.0974(2) 310`CNIR 40 0974 sf'*V" m t MW-1 TPH ,� � BRL(<200) 200 5,000 SD00i EPH ^' t C9-C18Ali Aliphatics BRL <110 , * A p ( ) 700 5 000 A+ t,��50 000 C19-06 Aliphatics BRL(<110) 14,000 NA �t50 000 Cl 1-C22 Aromatics BRL(<110) 200 50,000 t 5000 r jv,^ Target PAH(detects onl)l All BRL Various Various Vanous - r MW-2 TPH : . 3 aka 4,ryM . BRL(<200) 200 5,000 S;00001 nE�4 EPH C9-C18 Aliphatics BRL(<110) 700 5,000 p 50 000 } ua C19-06 Aliphatics BRL(<110) 14,000 NA Cl 1-C22 Aromatics BRL(<110) 200 50,000 l r1 s5 00 * 4 Target PAH(detects onlvl All BRL Various Various MW-3 TPH BRL(<200) 200 5,000 .�. 5 0q001 a v , b EPH C9-C18 Aliphatics BRL <100 700 5,000 C19-06 Aliphatics 120 14,000 NA L u�50000r . Cl 1-C22 Aromatics 110 200 50,0004t5 00 ✓. +"; Target PAH detects only) r 1 a ' Naphthalene 4.1 140 1,000 20Oooyg 2-Meth lna hthalene 4.6 10 2,000 2Q 000 s MW4 PH " C9-C18 Aliphatics BRL(<100) BRL(<110) 700 5,000 wvp50 000g t` �R C19-C36 Aliphatics BRL(<100) BRL(<116) 14,000 NA ,Y 50 000 n,k Cl 1-C22 Aromatics BRL(<I00) BRL(<110) 200 50,000t OOOj "- Target PAH detects onl All BRL All BRL a ry a VPH x, SO 000 CS-C8 Aliphatics BRL(QO) NT 300 3,000 C9-C12 Aliphatics BRL(<20) 700 5,000 50 000 { 50 000 t `4 ' C9-C10 Aromatics BRL(<20) 200 7,000 A #, Taz et BTEX detects only) All BRL MAY 31,2011 BARREIRO/BEAI 1-10302 PAGE 10 OF 16 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION STATUS I,RTN 4-23092 TABLE 2: SUMMARY OF TPH/EPHNPH LABORATORY ANALYSIS METHOD 1,2,3-RISK CHARACTERIZATION: GROUNDWATER[ug/L=ppm] Exposure Point RESULTS RESULTS GW-1 STD. GW-2 STD � '4' L�GW-3 STD F Location (µgig=ppm) (µgig=ppm) (µg/L=ppm) (lt€!L=ppm) €lei 4° •. (Depth below grade surface) 2/10/11 4/26/11 310 CMR 40.0974(2) 310 CMR 40.0974(2) =, jot, 40 0974(2 ', CSW-1 P. ,f *� h EPH C9-C18 Aliphatics 11,000 NT 700 5,000 50 000 C19-06 Aliphatics 3,300 14,000 NA -,X000, 1 i C I 1-C22 Aromatics 5,600 200 50,000 Target PAH(detects only) " , Naphthalene 6 140 1,000 20 0004 " 2-Methy1naphthalene 72 10 2,000 2000073' F Fluorene 18 30 NA Phenanthrene 16 40 NA10;000 CSW-1WH � a C5-C8 Aliphatics 520 NT 300 3,00050 00�0€ � 700 5,000 C9-C12Aliphatics 250 �• 200 7,000 50000��'s. 1 C9-CI0 Aromatics 270 _ •. . � t Target BTEX A MtBE BRL(<5) 70 50,000 ^ 5 0 000 1 5 2,000 1:000 .. Benzene BRL(<I) 1,000 50,000 40 000 `' ' Toluene BRL(<5) ' 700 20,000 �5 00Q- Ethylbenzene BRL(<5) 10,000 9,000 5,000�', m/p-Xylene BRL(<5) 10,000 9,000 ` a5'Oo0c1�E ' • o-Xylene BRL(<5) 140 1,000 •20 000 1 Naphthalene 11 ,�a TPH=Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons EPH=Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons,PAH=Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons BRL=Below Reportable Limit Shaded areas represent applicable MCP criteria. Concentrations of inorganic compounds in groundwater at the site reported sulfate between 12.8 and 15.2 mg/L, sodium between 35.3 and 60.2 mg/L, and total iron between BRL (<0.01) and 0.24 mg/L. In general, only sodium was noted as higher than concentrations normally found in the area. Product Recovery System tem Authorization was granted by the DEP to begin the piloting of the LNAPL recovery i MAY 31,2011 BARREIRO/BEAI1-10302 PAGE I I OF 16 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION STATUS I,RTN 4-23092 system with groundwater suppression on March 2, 2011. As such, on March 4, 2011 BEA personnel traveled to the site to assemble the different components of the groundwater suppression system. The system consists of a jet pump installed in CSW-1 and plumbed into two 200-pound drums of granulated activated carbon (GAC) in series and eventually discharged into a leach pit in the northeastern portion of the property, previously installed by Global Remediation. The pump has a throttle valve on the output pipe, which is adjusted to limit the flow of water to 10 gallons per minute(gpm). A pump test was performed to determine an effective radius of influence to control the flow of contaminants downgradient. The pump test was performed while running the pump at 10 gpm and measuring, over time, drawdown in the adjacent recovery well, and groundwater monitoring wells a the Site. After the 90-minute pump test, deflection was observed at all of the groundwater monitoring wells at the Site. In addition, significant product accumulation (4") was also observed after the pump test was complete. As such, it was determined that 10 gpm was an effective pumping rate to control the migration contaminants off-site. The product recovery system, in conjunction with the groundwater suppression well, has been operating non-stop since March 4, 2011 with regular inspections conducted to note the amount of product collected, to adjust the skimmer to static water level (SWL) and to collect samples of the intermediate effluent discharge to determine when the primary carbon drum should be changed out. Initial carbon use estimates from the samples collected from CSW-1 indicated 16 lbs of carbon per day at 20 gpm. However, an influent sample collected from CSW- 1 on March 8, 2011 reported concentrations of EPH and VPH as BRL. The absence of petroleum hydrocarbons in the fully penetrating well is to be expected. As such, carbon usage is anticipated to be significantly greater than originally projected and drum change out is based on the first observed breakthrough in the intermediate sample. On April 6, 2011, it was observed that the two drums of granulated activated carbon (GAC)were bulging and leaking due to the effluent discharge line being kinked. The system was temporarily shut down on April 11, 2011. Both drums were subsequently replaced on April 14, 2011, with two fresh GAC drums. The spent GAC vessels were drained and eventually picked up by Carbon Filtration for recycling by thermal re-activation. At the time of this reporting, the certificate for recycling is pending. Samples of the intermediate effluent discharge were collected on March 30, April 14 and May 12, 2011 and sent to a MA certified laboratory for TPH (March 30) as well as EPH and VPH analysis with target analytes. Results of the March 30 and April 14 sampling event reported TPH, EPH and VPH and all target analytes as BRL, wherein the reporting limits of the analysis are below the most restrictive Method 1 GW-1 Risk Characterization Standards. Results of the May 12 sampling event were reported on May 19, 2011. The results reported concentrations of C19-C36 Aliphatics at 160 ug/L as representing breakthrough of the primary GAC unit in use for 38 days at 10 gpm. However, based on the initial carbon usage estimates the drums were supposed to last for up to 60 days. As such, the effluent intermediate was re-sampled on May 24, MAY 31,2011 BARREIROBEAII-10302 PAGE 12 OF 16 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION STATUS I,RTN 4-23092 2011. Results of the effluent intermediate re-sampling were reported on May 26, 2011. The results reported no concentrations of fractional EPH/PAHs or VPH/BTEX, as apparently identifying a field sampling or laboratory error. As such, the change out of the carbon drums was deemed unnecessary and the system continues to operate. As of the date of this writing, over 110 gallons of free product has been collected in by the LNAPL recovery system. The amount of product collected per day has slowed from up to 5- gallons a day to approximately a gallon a week. The skimmer system will still be in operation up to the time when the contractor begins to demolish the building. At that time, the system will be suspended until the demolition debris has been removed. The system will then be placed back on-line and in operation throughout the soil removal operations. Notes from the recovery system inspections are included in the product recovery log included for reference in Appendix B. RISK CHARACTERIZATION/IMMINENT HAZARDS [Refer to Appendix D] Soil As presented, the S-2 and S-3 (GW-1/GW-2/GW-3) soils categories are applicable in consideration of Method 1 - Risk Characterization, as consistent with the provisions of 310 CMR 40.0933. These standards were developed to evaluate potential ingestion (S-1), inhalation (S-2) and environmental (S-3) exposures, and in of potential leaching of contaminants to groundwater(GW-1/GW-2/GW-3). For the purposes of risk characterization,the most restrictive S-1/S-2/S-3 (GW-1/GW-2/GW-3), Method 1 - Risk Characterization standards are considered in review of ingestion, inhalation and dermal contact exposures related to foreseeable future uses and activities at the Site. Field screening and subsequent laboratory analysis has indicated significant petroleum impact, in excess of the applicable S-2 and S-3/GW-3 Method 1 Risk Characterization Standards, in soils to the groundwater interface at 21' bgs, thereby confirming the need for remedial response actions at the Site. Pending soil removal, this area has been isolated by construction of the product recovery system inside a-plywood structure and capped with a poly tarp against rainfall infiltration. Additionally, downspouts have been diverted away from the area of release. Based on these structures and engineering controls, a Condition of No Substantial Hazard currently exists relative to potential exposure risks and further leaching of contaminants to the groundwater. Groundwater Based on the NPDWSA designation and proximity to groundwater, only the GW-3 groundwater category is applicable in consideration of Method 1 - Risk Characterization, as consistent with the provisions of 310 CMR 40.0932. The GW-1, GW-2, GW-3 standards were developed to evaluate potential ingestion (GW-1), inhalation (GW-2) and environmental (GW-3) exposures. Groundwater sampling and associated laboratory analysis reported significant impact in the constant suppression well CSW-1 above the applicable GW-3 Method 1 Risk MAY 31,2011 BARREIROBEAI 1-10302 PAGE 13 OF 16 II MEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION STATUS I,RTN 4-23092 Characterization Standards, as within the release area, thereby confirming significant groundwater impact as requiring remedial response and Site clean up activities. Results of the April 2011 quarterly sampling event showed minor petroleum hydrocarbon impact at downgradient monitoring well MW-3. Concentrations of C19-C36 Aliphatics and C11-C22 Aromatics as well as Naphthalene and 2-Methylnaphthalene were reported below the applicable GW-3 and most stringent GW-1 Method 1 Risk Characterization Standards. Based on these analytical results and engineering controls, a Condition of No Substantial Hazard currently exists relative to potential groundwater exposure risks. However, the migration of dissolved- phase impact outside of the area of release emphasizes the need to perform the proposed response activities. IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION STATUS [Refer to Appendix B] Remedial Response Actions -Update Over the reporting period, the client has decided to demolish dwelling. Based on similar costs to shore the dwelling, the insurance adjuster has agreed to cover the cost of demolition. The client has also chosen a contractor to perform demolition work as well as impacted soil removal. The contractor is currently in the process of obtaining all the necessary permits for the demolition of the building, which is expected to begin in early June. The mechanical removal of soils remains the preferred remedial strategy to absolve risks and meet project closure objectives. A tracked excavator will still be utilized to facilitate the removal of impacted soils. However, since the dwelling is being demolished, BEA is now proposing to dig to groundwater at a depth of approximately 21' bgs, instead of the 15' originally proposed. As such the size of the actual excavation is likely to be 30' x 30' instead of the 15' x 15' area originally proposed. The excavator will remove contaminated soils with direct load into standing dump trucks such that there will be no laborers in the excavation in consideration of worker safety. BEA will direct the removal of up to 200-cubic yards of impacted soils and stockpile any clean overburden on-site, as required. Field PID screening and Dexsil field-testing will be utilized as technical guidance in support of excavation operations. All impacted soils will be transported directly on an executed Bill of Lading to the Aggregate Industries facility in South Dennis, MA for asphalt recycling. At which point field screening indicates the effective removal of all significant soil impact, end- point samples will be collected along the sidewall and bottom of hole areas and preserved for MA Certified analysis of EPH/PAH and VPHBTEX in review of remedial response performance and risk characterization. TPH analysis may be used as a cost saving measure wherein field- testing indicates petroleum impacts are likely absent. After sample collection and field screening, a trench box in the bottom of the hole will allow for the Regenox Oxidizer Complex (660 lbs of Part A, powder) to be mixed with standing water and capillary fringe soils in the excavation. Double washed stone will be added to the MAY 31,2011 BARREIROBEAI I-10302 PAGE 14 OF 16 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION STATUS I,RTN 4-23092 bottom of the hole to stabilize the area. Subsequent to constructing the SVE system, BEA will apply the Regenox Activator Complex (Part B, gel), in an approximate 10% solution,to the stone aggregate along the entire area of excavation to initiate chemical oxidation of low-level residuals. Such application will trigger oxidation-reduction reactions for the destruction of any residual petroleum hydrocarbons. On-Site BEA workers entering the "Hot Zone" will don appropriate Level C PPE in review of potential inhalation and direct contact exposure hazards associated with fugitive powder. Level C PPE specifies chemically resistant boots, gloves and suits with full-face respirators. Gas monitoring of the open excavation for 02 is required. The SVE/sub-slab venting system will be constructed and installed in the excavated area of release following the remedial additive application. The venting system will be constructed of 4 x 4"perforated PVC pipe laterals, as set in washed stone along the bottom-of-hole area(refer to site plan). A 4" solid piece of PVC riser will be plumbed to the lateral components, run outside the footprint of the building and connected to a wind turbine for the passive venting of residual petroleum volatiles outside the building. The venting system will serve to evaluate degradation of residually impacted soils at depth. The venting system will also provide the flexibility to deliver additional remedial additives in the future, as may be necessary to mitigate residual impacts. The further treatment of soils and/or impacted groundwater will be evaluated from the results of end-point soil sampling and future quarterly groundwater assessment. Specifications of potential remedial equipment, operations and maintenance, or use of chemical oxidation treatments will be further represented as a modification of the IRA, if applicable, to be reported in subsequent IRA Status (IRAS) reports. All such work will be compiled on "Inspector's Daily Record of Work Progress" reports and documented in the following IRA report to be submitted within 6-months of this filing. Environmental Monitoring As previously reported, BEA will perform groundwater monitoring in all monitoring wells for in-situ field parameters (pH, temperature, conductivity) twice in the first week following the Regenox application to qualify potential groundwater quality degradation as a result of the remedial additive usage. Groundwater samples for iron, sodium and sulfate concentrations will be collected from the monitoring well network approximately 2 weeks and 4 weeks following the Regenox application, and quarterly thereafter, until background conditions have been demonstrated. Subsequent to the proposed remedial response and Site restoration, BEA will monitor TOV concentrations at the venting system riser in consideration of risk characterization, natural degradation of residuals. The reported TOV concentrations will be recorded in order to track the degradation of residuals towards background and in review of the potential for adverse impact to indoor air quality. Quarterly groundwater monitoring of petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH, EPH/PAH) in monitoring wells will continue over the next MAY 31,2011 BARREIROBEA11-10302 PAGE 15 OF 16 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION STATUS I,RTN 4-23092 reporting period in review of potential groundwater impact and risk characterization, wherein such analyses will be subject to the analytical results associated with end-point soil samples.. Groundwater monitoring of TPH and/or EPH/PAH will be conducted through at least two quarters following treatment in order to qualify impact to groundwater, in accordance with the provisions of MA DEP Policy WSC-02-411. During sampling events, static water level measurements will be recorded to further qualify groundwater flow direction. Olfactory and visual observations, and the field-testing of pH, dissolved oxygen, conductivity and temperature will be reported on Monitoring Well Sampling Logs. Field inspections will be conducted and documented on "Inspector's Daily Record of Work Progress" reports will be completed to document Site inspections and environmental monitoring as consistent with the QA/QC Policies of BEA outlined within Appendix G. Personal protection and safety standards for BEA are specified in-the Site Specific Health and Safety Plan outlined in Appendix F. CONCLUSIONS Continued LNAPL recovery and discussion of logistics to facilitate soil removal has dominated over the reporting period. The client has chosen to demolish the existing structure and the permitting process is underway by the contractor. Based on the planned razing of the structure, BEA has proposed additional soil removal to groundwater at approximately 21' bgs, as opposed to the 15' originally proposed. Preliminary response actions and the implementation of engineering controls have served to isolate the release area and attempt to immobilize groundwater impact. However, in the reporting period low-level groundwater impact, below applicable Risk Characterization Standards have been observed in a down gradient well. Regardless, there have been no Substantial or Imminent Hazard conditions present despite the impacts reported. The Immediate Response Action Plan represented by the previous IRAP (3/31/2011), as now increased up to the excavation of 200 cubic yards (+/-) of contaminated soils, employs an aggressive source removal strategy as followed by chemical oxidation groundwater treatment. Based on recent conversations with the general contractor, this work is anticipated within the next 30 days based on the permitting process already underway. The second IRA Status Report (IRAS II) with results of soil removal and quarterly groundwater monitoring will be submitted within 6-months of this filing. Subsequent IRA Status Reports will be filed every six months thereafter until a preponderance of physical evidence supports a condition of "No Significant Risk" and Response Action Outcome (RAO) objectives are met as supporting an IRAC Completion Statement. The findings of this investigation, as represented herein, set forth the rationale and technical justification for the LSP Opinions offered, as established by the certifications made on the attached Immediate Response Action Transmittal Form (BWSC-105). The LSP Opinions are based on available data and regulations in effect at the time of this reporting specific to the subject Site. MAY 31,2011 BARREIROBEAI 1-10302 PAGE 16 OF 16 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION STATUS I,RTN 4-23092 Should the Department have any questions regarding this project, please contact our office at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, B T FFWRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES,IWTa av1 ett, LSP . &an al nior Project Manager Encl: - Supporting Documentation [Appendices A-F] cc: Felisberto Barreiro - Property Owner Thomas McKean- Barnstable Board of Health' John Klimm—Barnstable Town Managers Deputy Chief Dean Melanson—Hyannis Fire Departments 1 Narrative,Title Page and Site Plan provided under public notice distribution requirements pursuant to paperwork reduction policy. Full copies of reports(electronic or paper)provided on written request. INtMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION STATUS REPORT I SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION RTN#4-23092 Residential Property 35 Washington St.—Hyannis, MA [Assessors Map 309, Parcel 199] MAY 31,2011 Prepared For: MA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Southeast Regional Offices: Bureau of Waste Site Cleanup/Emergency Response Section 20 Riverside Drive-Lakeville,MA 02347 Robert Murphy, Case Officer Prepared By: BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES,INC. 1573 Main Street- Brewster,MA 02631 David C. Bennett, LSP On Behalf O£ Felisberto Barreiro,Property Owner P.O. Box 47—West Hyannisport,MA 02672 APPENDIX A: Reference Plans -Figure 1: Site Locus Plan [USGS Topographic Quad., Hyannis,MA. 1998] (excerpt) -Figure 2: Ground-Water Resources of Cape Cod, MA [LeBlanc et al, 1986] (excerpt) -Figure 3:MA DEP BWSC GIS Map [2011] - Site Plan entitled,"Immediate Response Action Plan..."Prepared by BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES,INC., dated March 11, 2011 (rev. 5/25/11). APPENDIX B: Field Reports -Inspectors Daily Record of Work Progress [#1 (3/30/2011)through#10(5/24/2011)] -Monitoring Well Sampling Logs [4/6/2011,4/26/2011] -Product Recovery Log APPENDIX C: Environmental Records/Permits -BWSC-105: Immediate Response Action Transmittal Form w/eDEP Submittal Summary and Receipt -Hazardous Waste Manifest [(004120975 JJK) 110 gallons of waste oil from product recovery operations] APPENDIX D: Laboratory Analysis -Groundwater Analytical,Inc. [GW Treatment System-Intermediate Effluent(4/4/11)] #140788] -Groundwater Analytical, Inc. [GW Treatment System-Intermediate Effluent(4/21/11)] #141189] -Groundwater Analytical, Inc. [Groundwater(5/3/11)] # 141448] -Groundwater Analytical, Inc. [GW Treatment System-Intermediate Effluent(5/19/11)] #141847] -Groundwater Analytical, Inc. [GW Treatment System-Intermediate Effluent(retest)(5/24/11)] #142123] -Envirotech Laboratories, Inc. [Groundwater—Wet Chemistry Analysis(5/9/11)] APPENDIX E: Health and Safety Plan APPENDIX F: Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan Tyh Crocker, Sharon From: Cyocker, Sharon Sent: �fhursclay, July 31, 201 4:53 PM -- -- -`-� To: !Croc er, Sharon Subject: j FW: RgL. "Re for Records"- 35 Washington St, Hy For the Files: Tim O'Connell also responded to email. He did not go to property. He believes he was on family leave at the time and the tenants moved immediately and as of Aug 2011, the house was demolished. There was no need to sign them up to the rental program. Sharon -----Original Message----- From: Crocker,Sharon Sent: Thursday,July 31,2014 4:51 PM To: Parziale,Jim Subject: FW: RE: "Request for Records"-35 Washington St, Hy Ok, thanks for getting back to me. -----Original Message----- From: Parziale,Jim Sent: Thursday,July 31,2014 4:15 PM To: Crocker,Sharon Subject: RE: RE: "Request for Records" 35 Washington St, Hy I have not had anything to do with this address. According to my records -----Original Message----- From: Crocker,Sharon Sent: Thursday,July 31,2014 2:32 PM To: O'Connell,Timothy; Parziale,Jim Subject: RE: "Request for Records"-35 Washington St, Hy Jeffrey McDonald,Attorney at Barton Gilman Law Firm (617-654-8200) had requested copies of file records for an upcoming trial. I sent them along. Upon reviewing Complaint#33543 dated Feb 3, 2011, Donna had stated she was sending the housing violations to the housing inspectors and that the rental was unregistered. I do not see any information in the rental database or file of either of you seeing it. Please let me know if either of you were involved and what documentation we may have to forward to their request. He will need the information by mid-week next week. Thank you. Sharon 1 i BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES, INC. LICENSED SITE PROFESSIONALS,ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS,GEOLOGISTS,ENGINEERS 1573 Main Street,P.O.Box 1743 (508)896-1706 Brewster,MA 02631 fax(508)896-5109 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL TO: DATE: JOB NUMBER: Mr.Robert Murphy,Case Officer 04/05/2011 BEAI 1-10302 MA DEP-SERO --71 Bureau of Waste Site Cleanup(BWSC) 20 Riverside Drive REGARDING: Lakeville,MA 02347 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION PLAN Commercial Property,RTN 4-23092 35 Washington St.—Hyannis,MA[Assessor's Map 309,Parcel 199] SHIPPING METHOD: Regular Mail ❑ Pick Up Priority Mail ❑ Hand Deliver ❑ Express Mail ❑ Other uploaded ❑X Certified Mail ❑ Green Card/RR ❑ COPIES DATE DESCRIPTION 1 03/31/2011 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION PLAN Commercial Property,RTN 4-23092 35 Washington St.—Hyannis,MA[Assessor's Map 309,Parcel 199] For review and comment: ❑ For approval: ❑ As requested: ❑ For your use: REMARKS: cc: Felisberto Barreiro-Property Owner Thomas McKean-Barnstable Board of Health(narrative,title page,site plan only) John Klimm—Barnstable Town Manager(narrative,title page,site plan only) Deputy Chief Francis M.Pulsifer—Barnstable Fire Department(narrative,title page,site plan only) r FROM: John Tadema-Wielandt/gjb If enclosures are not as noted,kindly notify us at once BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES, INC. LICENSED SITE PROFESSIONALS 0 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS 0 GEOLOGISTS & ENGINEERS 1573 Main Street-P.O. Box 1743, Brewster, MA 02631 & 508-896-1706 6 Fax 508-896-5109 www.benneft-ea.com BEA11-10302 March 31, 2011 Mr. Robert Murphy, Case Officer MA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (MA DEP) Southeast Regional Office (SERO) Bureau of Waste Site Cleanup (BWSC) 20 Riverside Drive Lakeville,MA 02347 RE: IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION PLAN Commercial e Prop _ RTN 4-23092 35 Washington St. —Hyannis,MA [Assessor's Map 309, Parcel 199], Dear Mr. Murphy, BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES, INC. (BEA)has prepared the following written Immediate Response Action Plan.(IRAP) with Supporting Documentation as a summary of release discovery, response actions and environmental assessment undertaken to mitigate potential human exposures and environmental impacts: associated with the release of a reported 500-gallons of #2 fuel oil from .an aboveground storage tank {AST):at the above referenced property. This report, with supporting`docu rientat on, represents initial remedial response actions, inclusive of environmental assessment activities, conducted since Release Notification on February 3, 2011 In this period response actions have included 1) the capping of the release area against rainfall .infiltration and potential direct contact exposures, 2) the collection and testing of representative soil samples to define the extent and magnitude of significant soil impacts, 3) the installation::and testing::.of groundwater monitoring wells to qualify associated groundwater impacts, and 4),the installation, operation and maintenance of a LNAPL recovery system with a constant rate suppression system for the,accumulation of oil at the recovery well and for hydraulic control over further release migration. 'As of the date of this submittal 73 gallons of fuel oil has been collected off the groundwater and no indication of any dissolved or free phase groundwater impacts have been realized in the down gradient monitoring wells as within 30' of the point of release. During the coarse of this work, BEA has requested and received verbal authorization for the excavation and recycling of up to 125 cubic yards of contaminated soils as anticipated towards source reduction and project closure objectives. This IRAP also includes the installation of sub-slab venting/SVE manifold system within the proposed 15' x 15' x 15' (D) excavation for the application of the remedial additive Regenox for future chemical oxidation treatment of impacted soils beyond the extent of the extent of excavation and for the treatment of impacted 1 EMERGENCY SPILL RESPONSE & WASTE SITE CLEANUP & SITE ASSESSMENT PERMITTING & SEPTIC DESIGN&INSPECTION WATER SUPPLY DEVELOPMENT,OPERATION&MAINTENANCE & WASTEWATER TREATMENT,OPERATION&MAINTENANCE MARCH 31,2011 BARREIRO/BEAI1-10302 PAGE 2 OF 13 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION PLAN,RTN 4-23092 groundwater. The excavation of soils and chemical oxidation treatment is anticipated within the next 30 days as contingent upon significantly decreased LNAPL recovery rates and logistics associated with tenancy of the building and local permitting requirements. Future environmental assessment/monitoring activities will dictate the need for any additional remedial measures to be represented in future IRA Status reports to be filed within 60 days of this IRA Plan, and then to be filed in every six months hereafter, until a IRA Completion Report is filed. Remedial response activities proposed herein, and potentially to follow, are intended to mitigate all Critical Exposure Pathways and to facilitate a Permanent Solution in order to advert all potential risks to identified human and environmental receptors in support of a Class A, Response Action Outcome (RAO). It is the objective to offer an RAO within the one- year statutory deadline as dependent on concentrations of any residual soil impacts and/or the identification of any significant groundwater impacts in adjacent down gradient monitoring wells. The information herein serves as the technical rationale and justification for the environmental assessment and response actions previously conducted and those further activities proposed within. This work has and will continue to be conducted under direct LSP oversight in a manner consistent with the MCP Response Action Performance Standards (RAPS) pursuant to 310 CMR 40.0191 and the QA/QC policies of BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES, INC. The facts and statements herein are, to the best of our knowledge, a true and accurate representation of the Site activities, remedial response actions and environmental conditions associated with the project and LSP Opinions acknowledged by the certification on the attached BWSC-105 Transmittal Form. SITE DESCRIPTION [Refer to Appendix A] The subject property at 35 Washington Street is noted as Map 309, Parcel 199 on the Barnstable Assessor's Maps and is located on the western side of Washington Street, approximately 200 feet south of the intersection of Louis Street and Washington Street in the village of Hyannis, Town of Barnstable, MA [Refer to Figure 1]. The UTM coordinates for the Site are North 4612255 and East 393038. The property contains approximately 0.18 acres of land area and is developed by a two-story two-family apartment building and a small shed. The surrounding area is heavily developed in similar use as characterized by residential properties to the north, south and east and a parking lot for commercial businesses to the west. Additional commercial properties are also located in the area to the south, east and west. Environmental assessment activities have identified a discrete lateral extent of significant soil impact greater the applicable Method 1 — Risk Characterization standards underlying the release area adjacent to the northwest corner of the subject dwelling to groundwater at 21' bgs. Free-phase product up to 12" thick has been observed in the RW-1 well as within the release area. No groundwater impact has been identified in any other monitoring wells at the site at the time of this reporting. As such, it is believed that the area of impact is still localized to the area MARCH 31,2011 BARREIROBEAII-10302 PAGE 3 OF 13 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION PLAN,RTN 4-23092 of release at this time. These areas which fuel oil has been released or has come to be, located in soils and groundwater, at concentrations above the promulgated standards, currently define the Site as a portion of the subject property. At the time of this filing, access to the Site is unrestricted with low frequency/low intensity of use with children potentially present. The on-Site residents and visitors to the property are identified as the primary potential human receptors to petroleum hydrocarbon related exposures at the Site. ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS [Refer to Appendix A] Hydrologic references indicate groundwater exists at 13'NGVD (+/-) as projected within some 22' of grade surface wherein regional groundwater contours indicate a south-southeasterly flow direction towards Hyannis Inner Harbor/Lewis Bay and Nantucket Sound beyond [Refer to Figure 21. During the subsurface investigation at the property groundwater was encountered between 21' and 22' bgs. Site-specific groundwater flow has been documented to the south with minor fluctuations to the east and west as consistent with regional flow. Based on the observed groundwater flow direction, the Hyannis Inner Harbor and Lewis Bay represent the primary potential environmental receptors in consideration of Method 1 —Risk Characterization. According to the MA DEP BWSC GIS mapping program, the subject property is not located within the Zone II Protective Radius of a Public Water Supply (PWS), nor is it located within the Zone A protective radius of any surface water reservoir. No private wells are known to exist within 500' of the Site wherein the area is serviced by the Barnstable municipal water supply and distribution system. The subject property is located within a Non-Potential Drinking Water Source Area (NPDWSA) based on the relative density of development, as within downtown Hyannis. Based on this mapping, as well as the proximity to groundwater and reported hydrogeologic conditions, the GW-3 groundwater category is considered under Method 1 — Risk Characterization, per 310 CMR 40.0974. Based on Site conditions relative to frequency/intensity of use and accessibility of soils, the S-2/S-3 (GW-3) Method 1 — Risk Characterization standards are applicable to soil impact in accordance with the provisions of 310 CMR 40.0975. In review of all foreseeable future uses and activities at the Site, the most restrictive S-l/S-2/S-3 (GW-1/GW-2/GW-3), Method 1 — Risk Characterization standards are further evaluated. These standards were developed in consideration of potential ingestion, inhalation, dermal contact and environmental exposures, and in review of potential leaching of contaminants to groundwater. BACKGROUND [Refer to Appendix B] On February 3, 2011 an Oil Express technician was at the property to install a new oil- fired furnace in the basement of the subject dwelling. Upon inspection of the 275-gallon AST, the technician noted fuel leaking from the bottom of the vessel. The technician placed a magnetic patch over the leak and notified the company's dispatch. The Oil Express subsequently MARCH 31,2011 BARREIROBEA11-10302 PAGE 4 OF 13 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION PLAN,RTN 4-23092 called the Hyannis Fire Department and the MA DEP, both of which responded to the scene. Mr. Robert Murphy of the MA DEP subsequently issued a field Notice of Responsibility to the property owner, Mr. Felisberto Barreiro. Based on observed conditions, the MA DEP classified the release as 2-Hour reporting condition (Sudden Release), and assigned Release Tracking Number (RTN) 4-23092 outlining the requirement to engage a Licensed Site Professional and conduct an Immediate Response Action. The Oil Express subsequently installed a temporary tank and transferred the remaining fuel from the leaking tank. A forensic engineer, working for Mr. Barreiro's insurance company, later removed the leaking tank from the property. Mr. Barreiro contacted BEA the next day on February 4, 2011 to provide LSP Oversight and professional services. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT [Refer to Appendix B] Soil On February 4, 2011, BEA personnel traveled to the subject property to meet with the property owner and environmental contractor to discuss proposed remedial response activities and to perform environmental assessment activities. On this date, BEA personnel performed two hand borings in the area of release. Two-foot soil samples were collected with a 4" stainless steel bucket auger, from grade, to a maximum depth of 8' bgs. Refusals were encountered during the hand borings as attributed to rocky subsurface conditions. The collected soil samples were placed in 8-ounce glass jars,sealed with aluminum septa and agitated to develop organic vapors. The soil samples were then field screened for total organic volatiles (TOV) with a photoionization detector (PID) [Thermo Environmental 580B OVM, 10.6 eV lamp, calibrated to benzene standard] by "jar headspace" method as consistent with the MA DEP Soils Policy (WSC-94-400). Field screening of soil samples reported significantly elevated TOV concentrations from grade to 8' bgs. Based on the initial environmental assessment and field screening conducted, significant soil impact was indicated to at least 8' bgs in a 8'x 6' area centered on the area of the former AST. BEA personnel returned to the Site on February 7 and 8, 2011 to direct test borings with the installation of groundwater monitoring wells as well as the installation of a recovery well and constant rate suppression well. Soil samples were collected during the installation of the recovery well (RW-1) to document subsurface conditions in the area of release. Samples collected to depth exhibited TOV concentrations in excess of 150ppm indicating significant soil impact all the way to the groundwater interface at 21' bgs. Representative soil samples from hand borings and test borings were submitted to the laboratory to qualify field results in review of an appropriate remedial response. At the time of sampling, BEA also collected a soil sample "Stockpile Composite" for TPH analysis in review of waste characterization and disposal options. MARCH 31,2011 BARREIROBEAII-10302 PAGE 5 OF 13 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION PLAN,RTN 4-23092 TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF TPH/EPH/VPH LABORATORY ANALYSIS- METHOD 1,2,3-RISK CHARACTERIZATION: SOIL [µg/g=ppm] Exposure Point RESULTS S-1 SOIL STD. S 2 SOILS TD TD , St3:SOILaS aDIR CONTACT SUPPER CONC 4 Location&AnalYto (µg/g—PP m) (µ�B=PP m �) (µS/g PP )m (µ6B PPS) S ADS e 310 CMR ��f�31y0 CMR�;u� � 310 CMR (µg/g PP) 40.0975(6)(a) 400975(6)�,a) y400975(6)(aj 310CMR400985(6) (µg/g�^ppm)a (depth below de surface GW-3 :GW2/S 3 , 310 CMR 40 0996(7 TPH HB-1 TB-4:0-8' 9,100 1,000 t-�, .300_0TPH a5,000�_ 3,000/5,000 10,000� 4 Contaminated Stockpile 14,000 1,000 �w 3 000 DSO 3 000 00 10 000 EPH Ov TB 4:9-21' c x kp C9-C18 Aliphatics 6,300 11000 �Ps 000 :� '"t �5 000 :W 3f�0 0/5 000 Y i20 U00 C19-C36 Aliphatics 1,600 3,000 ' 4 ;5 000 1,' '`r5 000120 00 r fi 1;. ar Fs a y�a � a,.: w:,ti � i. e C11-C22 Aromatics 4,500 1,000 4 :. 3 000/5,000 i ti ' � 3 00C 5 000,E * 10;000 Target PAHs(detects only) Naphthalene 21 500 2-Methylnaphthalene 110 300 500 ` Opt.°�' 500/SOOr ;' �+000 I �+'4.8 10 L Acenaphthylene 1f0'. 0,"s Acenaphthene 12 1,000 3 000 " 5 000 ;; '+`� 3 000/5,000 10 000 ` Fluorene 11 1,000 , 3 000, OOO� a is� 3 00 0/5 000 1��l0,Og0, Phenanthrene 15 500 " 000 1 .3 OOOgo, 1 000/3 000 ��10,000az_ VPH " 9 TB-4:9-21' �° �ti�vx r � ;465� yrtFa :s ` C5-C8 Aliphatics 250 100 �imSOOy SOOTY �� t�p ' a 5 /SOq0/5 1,000 &3 000 .{ c' S 000 ,� ' 3 00 000 20 000 C9-C12Aliphatics 590 ', Jr, s C9-C10 Aromatics 1200, 100 Target BTEX w A � r` " ` �� t . MtBE BRL(<0.58) 100 SOO�r 500 * i 5001500' }' 5;0:00 ** Benzene 1.6 30 "a '�200 ¢ � 900� *i xF 200/9QQ 9,000 500 11 �r"� '1 000 1 1 300 � " 0001 0 " _ 10,000 Toluene 23 " ,�� ' • � y,. :1 � 500 R 1 000 3 000 1 000/3 000S�y10,000 Ethylbenzene 21 *•. ,� �"`� �` 500 s 00 3 000 a G 1"'4 1 000/3 000*° 10.000 m/p-Xylene 82 ate, 500 t,1000 � 4 3 000• �x 1 000/3 000 1 00 00 o-Xylene 38 € 500 1 00 0' 3 OOQ 100o/3!000 ' 10 0`00 ' Na hthalene 88 TPH=Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons VPH=Volatile Petroleum Hydrocarbons,BTEX=Benzene/Toluene/Ethylbenzene/Xylene EPH=Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons,BRL=Below Reportable Limit Shaded areas represent applicable MCP criteria. MARCH 31,2011 BARREIROBEAI 1-10302 PAGE 6 OF 13 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION PLAN,RTN 4-23092 Laboratory analytical results received February 16, 2011, reported significant EPH/PAH, TPH and VPH/BTEX contamination in each of the samples submitted, indicating significant soil impact to the groundwater interface at 21' bgs. A summary of the analytical results is represented above in Table 1. Groundwater BEA personnel were at the Site on February 7 and 8, 2011 to direct test borings and the installation of monitoring wells, a recovery well and suppression well, as performed by Desmond Well Drilling of Orleans, MA [Refer to Site Plan]. Boring locations were selected as based on presumed groundwater flow direction, proximity to the release area and as intermediate to identified receptors. On February 7, 2011, test boring TB-1 (MW-1 was advanced north of the release area as clearly upgradient and to help establish site-specific groundwater flow direction. Test boring TB-2 (MW-2) was located southeast of the subject dwelling as potentially downgradient as consistent with regional groundwater flow direction. Test boring TB-3 (MW-3) was located to the south-southeast of the release area as potentially downgradient and intermediate to abutting residential dwellings. Soil sampling and field screening at the groundwater interface at these test boring locations (MW-1, MW-2 and MW-3) reported no elevated TOV concentrations and were consistent with background conditions as indicating no significant soil or groundwater impacts [Refer to Geologic Borehole Logs, Appendix B]. The monitoring wells were finished below grade with locking gripper plugs and steel, bolt-down road boxes. BEA personnel returned to the property on February 8, 2011 to install the recovery well and a constant suppression well in anticipation of the installation and operation of a Light Non- Aqueous Phase Liquid (LAPL) recovery system. Test boring TB-4 (RW-1) was located within the release area and was advanced within the same hole as hand boring HB-1. Split spoon soil sampling was performed from 9'bgs to the groundwater interface at 21'bgs. TOV concentrations in the 19-2l' bgs sample reported 158 ppm, indicating significant impact at the groundwater interface. The recovery well(RW-1) was set at 26' bgs. The constant suppression well (CSW-1 was then advanced approximately 2' west of the recovery well. CSW-1 was advanced to a depth of 33' bgs and a 3'-2 inch, stainless steel screen was installed at depth as fully penetrating the aquifer at a depth of 6-7' below the accumulated LNAPL. The borehole was backfilled with clean#2 silica sand to 21' and was then backfilled with natural material to grade. BEA personnel subsequently recorded static water level measurements and surveyed the top-of-casing elevations to a common vertical datum in order to qualify local groundwater flow direction. BEA returned to the subject property on February 10, 2011 to conduct monitoring well development and sampling. Upon arrival, static water level measurements were recorded at each monitoring well towards purge calculations and Site-specific groundwater flow determination [Refer to Appendix B]. Each of the monitoring wells was then developed and subsequently sampled in review of environmental impact and risk characterization. The constant suppression well CSW-1 was sampled for EPH and VPH including target analytes to perform carbon-use MARCH 31,2011 BARREIRO/BEA1 I-10302 PAGE 7 OF 13 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION PLAN,RTN 4-23092 calculations for system effluent treatment. The remaining monitoring wells were sampled for TPH as screening tool for the presence of petroleum hydrocarbons. The groundwater samples were collected in appropriately preserved laboratory containers for EPH/VPH/TPH analyses and field preserved on ice. BEA also conducted a series of slug tests at upgradient monitoring well MW-1 on February 10, 2011, in order to characterize the aquifer in consideration of solute fate and transport. The Geraghty and Miller AQTESOLV program was employed to interpret the results of the slug tests wherein a hydraulic conductivity of 469.77 feet per day was computed. Based on 20%retardation,the Times of Travel from the release area to the down gradient monitoring wells MW-3 and MW-4, were computed as 4.74 days, and 4.33 days, respectively (refer to Appendix B). Static water level measurements and calculated local groundwater flow directions have established the utility of monitoring well MW-4 as directly down gradient from the release area monitoring well MW-3 is positioned marginally outside the eastern extent of the projected solute pathway. Given that the date free product reached groundwater is unknown, the sequence of the initial groundwater sampling relative to the Time of Travel is unqualified. Regardless, based on a release discovery date of February 3, 2011, and wherein groundwater impacts were recorded on February 7, 2011 the next quarterly groundwater monitoring will be performed within the calculated solute Time of Travel. However, with active hydraulic control at the site, BEA is optimistic that groundwater impact will remain localized immediately surrounding the release area. Laboratory analytical results from the initial groundwater-sampling event were reported on February 17, 2011. Concentrations of TPH in monitoring wells MW-1, MW-2 and MW-3 were reported as BRL wherein the reporting limits were less than the applicable (GW-3) and most stringent (GW-1) Method 1 Risk Characterization standards. Concentrations of EPH and VPH concentrations and target analytes reported in the constant suppression well (CSW-1) were also reported below the applicable GW-3 standards with the exception of C11 to C22 Aromatics. However, as stated earlier, the testing of CSW-1 was to qualify carbon use rates for system effluent treatment and not to qualify Significant Risk. A summary of groundwater analytical results is included below in Table 2. Static water-level measurements established local groundwater flow in a southerly direction, differing from regional flow, as based on three rounds of groundwater gauging data. As such, on March 8, 2011, BEA personnel returned to the Site to install a fourth groundwater monitoring well (MW-4) in a clearly downgradient direction. Monitoring well MW-4 was installed south of the release area and intermediate to abutting residential properties and as intermediate to the nearest environmental receptor. Monitoring well MW-4 was subsequently sampled on March 10, 2011 for EPH and VPH with target analytes. Results of the analyses reported concentrations of EPH,VPH and all target PAHs and BTEX analytes as BRL. MARCH 31,2011 BARREIRO/BEAI 1-10302 PAGE 8 OF 13 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION PLAN,RTN 4-23092 TABLE 2: SUMMARY OF TPH/EPH/VPH LABORATORY ANALYSIS METHOD 1,2,3-RISK CHARACTERIZATION: GROUNDWATER[ug/L=ppm] Exposure Point RESULTS GW-1 STD. GW-2 STD. ) GW 3 STD Location (µg/g=ppm) (µg/L=ppm) (µg/L=ppm) (depth below grade surface 310 CMR 40.0974(2) 310 CMR 40.0974(2) 310 CMR 4'0 097 MW-1 TPH BRL <200 200 5,000 5k0 � MW-2 " TPH BRL <200 200 5,000 t 5000 MW-3 TPH BRL <200 200 5,000 5,0.00 CSW-1 a �' EPH ils ✓ C9-C18 Aliphatics 11,000 700 5,000 iya � ^ Cl9-C36 Aliphatics 3,300 14,000 NA � 50 OOOk Cl 1-C22 Aromatics 5,600 200 50,000 . 5,000k ? '' � + Y Target PAH(detects onlvl 'r Naphthalene 6 140 1,000 2-Methylnaphthalene 72 10 2,000 1 � 20 000 Fluorene 18 30 NA henanthrene 16 40 NA 10000 CSW-1 VPH ! C5-C8 Aliphatics 520 300 3,000 " St);000 } ` C9-C12 Aliphatics 250 700 5,000 50 000 C9-C10 Aromatics 270 200 7,000 F 50 0001 ' Target BTEXn s LL v MtBE BRL(<5) 70 50,000 t a;, 50 — d Benzene BRL(<1) 5 2,000 1Q,000 Toluene BRL(<5) 1,000 50,000 40;000 �a� Ethylbenzene BRL(<5) 700 20,000 x� 51000 m/p-Xylene BRL(<5) 10,000 9,0005,000 _ o-Xylene BRL(<5) 10,000 9,000 € 5,090 i .yam t• ,tr Naphthalene 11 140 1,000 20;000 �' TPH=Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons, EPH=Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons,PAH=Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons BRL=Below Reportable Limit,Shaded areas represent applicable MCP criteria. MARCH 31,2011 BARREIROBEAI 1-10302 PAGE 9 OF 13 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION PLAN,RTN 4-23092 Product RecoveryS,System Authorization was granted by the DEP to begin the piloting of the LNAPL recovery system with groundwater suppression on March 2, 2011. As such, on March 4, 2011 BEA personnel traveled to the site to assemble the different components of the groundwater suppression system. The system consists of a jet pump installed in CSW-1 and plumbed into two 200-pound drums of granulated activated carbon (GAC) in series and eventually discharged into a leach pit in the northeastern portion of the property, previously installed by Global Remediation. The pump has a throttle valve on the output pipe, which is adjusted to limit the flow of water to 10 gallons per minute (gpm). A pump test was performed to determine at what flow rate the pump should be run, to produce an appropriate radius of influence to control the flow of contaminants downgradient. The pump test was performed while running the pump at 10 gpm and measuring, over time, drawdown in the adjacent recovery well, and groundwater monitoring wells a the Site. After the 90-minute pump test, deflection was observed at all of the groundwater monitoring wells at the Site. In addition, significant product accumulation (4") was also observed after the pump test was complete. As such, it was determined that 10 gpm was an effective pumping rate to control the migration contaminants off-site. Results of the pump test are included for reference in Appendix B. The product recovery system, in conjunction with the groundwater suppression well, has been operating non-stop since March 4, 2011 with regular inspections conducted to note the amount of product collected to adjust the skimmer to static water level (SWL) and to collect samples of the intermediate effluent discharge to determine when the primary carbon drum should be changed out. Initial carbon use estimates from the samples collected from CSW-1 indicated 16 lbs of carbon per day at 20 gpm. However, an influent sample collected from CSW- 1 on March 8, 2011 reported concentrations of EPH and VPH as BRL. The absence of petroleum hydrocarbons in the fully penetrating well is to be expected. As such, carbon usage is significantly greater than projected and drum change out will be based on the first observed breakthrough in the intermediate sample. Samples of the intermediate effluent discharge were collected on March 8, 10, 15 and 22 and sent to a MA certified laboratory for EPH and VPH analysis. Each time the analyses were reported as BRL, wherein the reporting limits of the analysis are below the most restrictive Method 1 GW-1 Risk Characterization Standards. As of the date of this writing, over 73 gallons of free product has been collected in by the LNAPL recovery system, with approximately 1 to 2 gallons of product being collected per day. Notes from every inspection are included in the product recovery log included for reference in Appendix B. MARCH 31,2011 BARREIROBEAI I-10302 PAGE 10 OF 13 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION PLAN,RTN 4-23092 RISK CHARACTERIZATIONAMMINENT HAZARDS [Refer to Appendix D] Soil As presented, the S-2 and S-3 (GW-1/GW-2/GW-3) soils categories are applicable in consideration of Method 1 - Risk Characterization, as consistent with the provisions of 310 CMR 40.0933. These standards were developed to evaluate potential ingestion (S-1), inhalation (S-2) and environmental (S-3) exposures, and in consideration of potential leaching of contaminants to groundwater(GW-1/GW-2/GW-3). For the purposes of risk characterization,the most restrictive S-1/S-2/S-3 (GW-1/GW-2/GW-3), Method 1 - Risk Characterization standards are considered in review of ingestion, inhalation and dermal contact exposures related to foreseeable future uses and activities at the Site. Field screening and subsequent laboratory analysis has indicated significant petroleum impact, in excess of the applicable S-2 and S-3/GW-3 Method 1 Risk Characterization Standards, in soils to the groundwater interface at 21' bgs, thereby confirming the need for remedial response actions at the Site. Groundwater Based on the NPDWSA designation and proximity to groundwater, only the GW-3 groundwater category is applicable in consideration of Method 1 - Risk Characterization, as consistent with the provisions of 310 CMR 40.0932. The GW-1, GW-2, GW-3 standards were developed to evaluate potential ingestion (GW-1), inhalation (GW-2) and environmental (GW-3) exposures. Groundwater sampling and associated laboratory analysis reported significant impact in the constant suppression well CSW-1 above the applicable GW-3 Method 1 Risk Characterization Standards, as within the release area, thereby confirming significant groundwater impact as requiring remedial response and Site clean up activities. IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION PLAN [Refer to Appendix E] Remedial Response Actions At the time of this filing, the owner has not decided if the dwelling will be demolished or structural support provided to dig under portions of the dwelling. Regardless, soil removal and the placement of remedial systems is to absolve risks and meet project closure objectives. A tracked excavator will be utilized to facilitate the removal of impacted soils in a 15' x 15' area of identified impact to a depth of 15'. The excavator will remove contaminated soils with direct load into standing dump trucks such that there will be no laborers in the excavation in consideration of worker safety. BEA will direct the removal of an estimated 125 yards of contaminated soils from the projected area of soil removal as approximately 15'x 15' x 15' (D). MARCH 31,2011 BARREIROBEAI 1-10302 PAGE 11 OF 13 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION PLAN,RTN 4-23092 Field PID screening and Dexsil field-testing will be utilized as technical guidance in support of excavation operations. All impacted soils will be transported directly on an executed Bill of Lading to the Aggregate Industries facility in South Dennis, MA for asphalt recycling. At which point field screening indicates the effective removal of all significant soil impact, end- point samples will be collected along the sidewall and bottom of hole areas and preserved for MA Certified analysis of EPH/PAH and VPH/BTEX in review of remedial response performance and risk characterization. TPH analysis may be used as a cost saving measure wherein field- testing indicates petroleum impacts are likely absent. After sample collection and field screening, the Regenox Oxidizer Complex (Part A, powder) [refer to Appendix E] will be mixed standing water for contact native soils in a local area to maximize contact with residual hydrocarbons. On-Site workers will don appropriate PPE in review of potential inhalation and direct contact exposure hazards associated with fugitive powder. The powder-infused area will then be backfilled with washed stone aggregate to stabilize the excavation and provide substantial interstitial pore space towards future venting and remedial additive applications. Contaminated soil removal will progress as described until field screening indicates the effective removal of all significant soil impact. Subsequent to backfill with stone aggregate, BEA will apply the Regenox Activator Complex (Part B, gel), in an approximate 10% solution, to the stone aggregate along the entire area of excavation to initiate chemical oxidation of low- level residuals. Such application will trigger oxidation-reduction reactions for the destruction of any residual petroleum hydrocarbons and generate carbon dioxide and water as requiring chemically resistant suits and full-face respirators. An SVE/sub-slab venting system will be constructed and installed in the excavated area of release following the remedial additive application. The venting system will be constructed of 4 x 4"perforated PVC pipe laterals, as set in washed stone along the bottom-of-hole area(refer to site plan). A 4" solid piece of PVC riser will be plumbed to the lateral components, run outside the footprint of the building and connected to a wind turbine for the passive venting of residual petroleum volatiles outside the building. The venting system will serve to evaluate degradation of residually impacted soils at depth. The venting system will also provide the flexibility to deliver additional remedial additives in the future, as may be necessary to mitigate residual impacts. The further treatment of soils and/or impacted groundwater will be evaluated from the results of end-point soil sampling and future quarterly groundwater assessment. Specifications of potential remedial equipment, operations and maintenance, or use of chemical oxidation treatments will.be further represented as a modification of the IRA, if applicable, to be reported in subsequent IRA Status (IRAS) reports. All such work will be compiled on "Inspector's Daily Record of Work Progress" reports and documented in the IRA Status Report I (IRAS 1) to be submitted within 60 days of this filing. MARCH 31,2011 BARREIROBEAI I-10302 PAGE 12 OF 13 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION PLAN,RTN 4-23092 Environmental Monitoring BEA will perform groundwater monitoring in all monitoring wells for in-situ field parameters (pH, temperature, conductivity) twice in the first week following the Regenox application to qualify potential groundwater quality degradation as a result of the remedial additive usage. Groundwater samples for iron, sodium and sulfate concentrations will be collected from the monitoring well network approximately 2 weeks and 4 weeks following the Regenox application, and quarterly thereafter, until background conditions have •been demonstrated. Subsequent to the proposed remedial response and Site restoration, BEA will monitor TOV concentrations at the venting system riser in consideration of risk characterization, natural degradation of residuals. The reported TOV concentrations will be recorded in order to track the degradation of residuals towards background and in review of the potential for adverse impact to indoor air quality. Quarterly groundwater monitoring of petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH, EPH/PAH) in monitoring wells will continue in the next reporting period in review of potential groundwater impact and risk characterization, wherein such analyses will be subject to the analytical results associated with end-point soil samples. Groundwater monitoring of TPH and/or EPH/PAH will be conducted through at least two quarters following treatment in order to qualify impact to groundwater, in accordance with the provisions of MA DEP Policy WSC-02-411. During sampling events, static water level measurements will be recorded to further qualify groundwater flow direction. Olfactory and visual observations, and the field-testing of pH, dissolved oxygen, conductivity and temperature will be reported on Monitoring Well Sampling Logs. Field inspections will be conducted and documented on "Inspector's Daily Record of Work Progress" reports will be completed to document Site inspections and environmental monitoring as consistent with the QA/QC Policies of BEA outlined within Appendix G. Personal protection and safety standards for BEA are specified in the Site Specific Health and Safety Plan outlined in Appendix F. CONCLUSIONS Preliminary response actions and the implementation of engineering controls have served to isolate the release area and immobilize groundwater impact such that there have been no Substantial or Imminent Hazard conditions present despite the significant impacts reported. The Immediate Response Action Plan, represented by this filing, will employ an aggressive soil removal strategy for the excavation and disposal of approximately 125 yards (+/-) of significantly impacted soils from the area of release adjacent to the northwest corner of the dwelling. Field PID screening and Dexsil testing will be used by BEA personnel to provide technical assistance and direct excavation operations. Additionally, Regenox oxidizer and activator complexes will be applied to the area of contaminated soil removal for low intensity chemical oxidation towards polishing any residual impacts. A passive SVE-type system will be constructed and set in washed stone aggregate prior to final restoration for Level 1 Soil Gas Screening, venting of residual petroleum hydrocarbons, and/or future remedial additive MARCH 31,2011 BARREIROBEA11-10302 PAGE 13 OF 13 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION PLAN,RTN 4-23092 applications is necessary. This work is intended to eliminate the contaminant source and associated exposure risks to identified human and environmental receptors towards achieving a condition of No Significant Risk in support of a permanent solution. Based on the verbal and written authorizations provided by the Department, this work is anticipated within the next 30 days based on the amount of free-product collection over that time period and issuance of appropriate permits. The first IRA Status Report (IRAS 1) with any proposed modifications will be submitted within 60 days of this filing. Subsequent IRA Status Reports will be filed every six months thereafter until a preponderance of physical evidence supports a condition of"No Significant Risk" and Response Action Outcome (RAO) objectives are met as supporting an IRAC Completion Statement. The findings of this investigation, as represented herein, set forth the rationale and technical justification for the LSP Opinions offered, as established by the certifications made on the attached Immediate Response Action Transmittal Form (BWSC-105). The LSP Opinions are based on available, data and regulations in effect at the time of this reporting specific to the subject Site. Should the Department have any questions regarding this project, please contact our office at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, K-N�4ETTr4kNVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 y Davi ennett, LSP J D. Tad m - an , ES lncipa S nior Project Manager Encl: - Supporting Documentation [Appendices A-F] cc: Felisberto Barreiro - Property Owner Thomas McKean- Barnstable Board of Health' .John Klimm-Barnstable Town Manager' Deputy Chief Francis M. Pulsifer-Barnstable Fire Department' I Narrative,Title Page and Site Plan provided under public notice distribution requirements pursuant to paperwork reduction policy. Full copies of reports(electronic or paper)provided on written request. IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION PLAN SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION RTN#4-23092 Residential Property 35 Washington St.—Hyannis,MA [Assessors Map 309,Parcel 199] MARCH 31,2011 Prepared For: MA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Southeast Regional Offices: Bureau of Waste Site Cleanup/Emergency Response Section 20 Riverside Drive-Lakeville,MA 02347 Robert Murphy,Case Officer Prepared B - BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES,INC. 1573 Main Street-Brewster,MA 02631 David C.Bennett,LSP On Behalf Of- Felisberto Barreiro,Property Owner P.O.Box 47—West Hyannisport,MA 02672 APPENDIX A: Reference Plans -Figure 1: Site Locus Plan [USGS Topographic Quad.,Hyannis,MA. 1998] (excerpt) -Figure 2: Ground-Water Resources of Cape Cod,MA[LeBlanc et al, 1986](excerpt) -Figure 3:MA DEP BWSC GIS Map [2011] -Site Plan entitled,"Immediate Response Action Plan..."Prepared by BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES,INC.,dated February 16,2011. APPENDIX B:Field Reports -Field Response Log -Hyannis Fire Department Incident Report -Hyannis Health Department—Citizen Request Management -Geologic Borehole Logs(TB-1/MW-1,TB-2/MW-2,TB-3/MW-3,TB-4/RW-1) -Monitoring Well Sample Logs(2/8/11,2/10/11,3/7/11,3/10/1.1,3/28/11) -Borehole Permeability Test/Aqtesolv Calculations/Solute Transport/Time of Transport Calculations -Pump Test Results -Product Recovery Log APPENDIX C:Environmental Records/Permits -BWSC-101:Release Log Form -BWSC-102:Release Amendment Forms(2/3/11,2/10/11,2/28/11,3/28/11) -BWSC-103:Release Notification Form w/eDEP Submittal Summary and Receipt -BWSC-105:Immediate Response Action Transmittal Form w/eDEP Submittal Summary and Receipt APPENDIX D: Laboratory Analysis -Groundwater Analytical,Inc. [Soil(2/16/11)]#139649 -Groundwater Analytical,Inc. [Groundwater(2/17/11)]# 139712 -Groundwater Analytical,Inc. [Intermediate/Effluent(3/11/11)]#140244 -Groundwater Analytical,Inc. [Influent/Intermediate(3/16/11)]#140301 -Groundwater Analytical,Inc. [Groundwater(3/18/11)]# 140304 -Groundwater Analytical,Inc. [Intermediate(3/23/11)]#140413 -Groundwater Analytical,Inc. [Intermediate(3/25/11)]#140539 APPENDIX E:Remediation Information -Clean Environmental Equipment Selective Skimmer System -Regenesis Project Evaluation Form/Regenox Data Sheet/MSDS Part A and Part B APPENDIX F:Health and Safety Plan APPENDIX G: Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan Citizen Web Request Page 1 of 2 �j � i Lti3 fAl L_,I i I tt� � { yji Citizen Request Management - Internal Use Request ID: 33543 Created: 2/3/2011 10:20:35 AM ' Status: Closed Assigned To: Miorandi, Donna Health Office i Anonymous: No Category: Chapter 108 Hazardous Materials E.C. Date: 2/17/2011 i Created By: Parvin, Lindsay Citations: Health Office Time Worked: 4.00 Response Time: 0.25 —S Requestor Details: Email: Request Location: 35 WASHINGTON STREET Hyannis, Ma 02601 Parcel Number: Map: 309 Block: 199 Lot: 000 Request: Hyannis Fire Department requested a health inspector for an #2 Fuel spill at 35 Washington Street,Hyannis Request Work History: Entered on 2/4/2011 9:50:32 AM by Miorandi, Donna DZM was called at 10 AM by the Hyannis Fire Dept. for an oil spill.The source was an above ground outside oil tank. Oil Express has been delivering oil since December of 2010 and have been using a lot of oil. They thought it was an inefficient furnace to be using so much oil. Upon delivery of a new furnace on 2/3/11 Oil Express (Ron McVay) noticed the tank has a large leak from the bottom of the tank. He put a magnetic plug on it to slow it down. On Dec. 4th they had 63 gal delivered, Dec. 30th-177 gal; Jan. 13, 2011-173 gal; Jan 21, 2011-203 gal; Jan 29-113 gal. Therfore a total of over 660 gallons.Tenants complained initially of no heat on Dec. 31st. Oil Express(1-800-822-6400) primed the pump and delivered more fuel at that time. Allegedly they have had no heat for the past two weeks.Tenants on the first floor using space heaters and possibly the electric oven as it was left open unpon our arrival. This is a two family dwelling that is an unregistered rental. The owner is Felisberto Barreiro of Fifth Ave., W. Hyport. He is also the owner of Albertos Restaurant on Main St., Hyannis. Capt. Farrenkopf of HYFD was in command and also Lt. John Cosmo. DEP was called and Bob Murphy(508-946-2794)arrived on site about 11:30 am. With an estimate of 600 plus gallons spilled he told Felis(owner)to hire an LSP and call his insurance company. He issued him an NOR(Notice of Responsibility).The basment had no working smoke detector and the smoke dector on the 1st floor apartment was chirping indicating http://issgl2/intemalwrs/WRequestPrint.aspx?ID=33543 5/6/2014 f' Citizen Web Request Page 2 of 2 low battery. According to the tenant, many of the electrical outlets do no work and at time they have sparked.The door to the unit was broken into and has not been repaired or replaced.The wall tiles around the bathroom shower are falling off and there is much trash in the backyard. These are just a few of the violations observed and have forwarded this complaint to the housing isnpectors to have it registered and fully inspected. Lt. John Cosmo, approx. 1 year ago,told owner, Felis, to hire an electrician and address electrical problems at the time and he has done nothing. House is also on a septic system and shall check as to why they are not on sewer. •Internal Note History: System entry on 2/3/2011 10:20:35 AM: Assigned to Miorandi, Donna Entered on 2/4/2011 9:50:32 AM, by Miorandi, Donna Tenant, Megan Hildreth, has not called me as she stated she would. I have called her on her cell (508-280-0819)and have not received a return call from my message that I left on her cell. System entry on 2/4/2011 9:50:32 AM: Request Closed by miorandd http://issgl2/intemalwrs/WRequestPrint.aspx?ID=33543 5/6/2014 .r ASSESSORS MAP NO: Commonwealth of Massachusetts PARCEL NO: Title 5 Official Inspection Form Subsurface Sewage Disposal System Form -Not for Voluntary Assessments M , 35 Washington Street Property Address Marcos Souza Owner Owner's Name information is required for Hyannis MA 02601 08/03/09 every page. City/Town State Zip Code Date of Inspection Inspection results must be submitted on this form. Inspection forms may not be altered in any way. ""t When filling out A. General Information When forms on the computer,use 1. Inspector: only the tab key to move your Michael Kellett cursor-do not Name of Inspector use the return key. Aardvark Environmental Inspection Company Name P.O. Box 896 Company Address East Dennis MA 02641 City/Town State Zip Code 508-385-7608 S13742 Telephone Number License Number B. Certification I certify that I have personally inspected the sewage disposal system at this address and that the information reported below is true, accurate and complete as of the time of the inspection. The inspection was performed based on my training and experience in the proper function and maintenance of on site sewage disposal systems, I am a DEP approved system inspector pursuant to Section 15.340 of Title 5(310 CMR 15.000).The system: ® Passes ❑ Conditionally Passes ❑ Fails ❑ Needs Further Evaluation by the Local Approving Authority 08/05/09 Inspector's Signature Date The system inspector shall submit a copy of this inspection report to the Approving Authority(Board of Health or DEP)within 30 days of completing this inspection. If the system is a shared system or has a design flow of 10,000 gpd or greater, the inspector and the system owner shall submit the report to the appropriate regional office of the DEP. The original should be sent to the system owner and copies sent to the buyer, if applicable, and the approving authority. ****This report only describes conditions at the time of inspection and under the conditions of use at that time.This inspection does not address how the system will perform in the future under the same or different conditions of use. LUSGS•12107 Title 5 Official Inspection Forth:Subsurface S ge Disposal System•Page 1 of 15 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Title 5 Official Inspection Form Subsurface Sewage Disposal System Form-Not for Voluntary Assessments ,M 35 Washington Street Property Address Marcos Souza Owner Owner's Name information is required for Hyannis MA 02601 08/03/09 _ every page. Cityrrown State Zip Code Date of Inspection B. Certification (cont.) Inspection Summary: Check A,B,C,D or E/always complete all of Section D A) System Passes: ® I have not found any information which indicates that any of the failure criteria described in 310 CMR 15.303 or in 310 CMR 15.304 exist. Any failure criteria not evaluated are indicated below. Comments: B) System Conditionally Passes: ❑ One or more system components as described in the"Conditional Pass" section need to be replaced or repaired. The system, upon completion of the replacement or repair, as approved by the Board of Health, will pass. Answer yes, no or not determined (Y, N, ND) in the ❑for the following statements. If"not determined," please explain. ❑ The septic tank is metal and over 20 years old*or the septic tank(whether metal or not) is structurally unsound, exhibits substantial infiltration or exfiltration or tank failure is imminent. System will pass inspection if the existing tank is replaced with a complying septic tank as approved by the Board of Health. *A metal septic tank will pass inspection if it is structurally sound, not leaking and if a Certificate of Compliance indicating that the tank is less than 20 years old is available. ND Explain: ❑ Observation of sewage backup or break out or high static water level in the distribution box due to broken or obstructed pipe(s)or due to a broken, settled or uneven distribution box. System will pass inspection if(with approval of Board of Health): El broken pipe(s)are replaced ❑ obstruction is removed USGS•12107 Title 5 Official Inspection Form:Subsurface Sewage Disposal System•Page 2 of 15 is Commonwealth of Massachusetts Title 5 Official Inspection Form Subsurface Sewage Disposal System Form-Not for Voluntary Assessments 35 Washington Street Property Address Marcos Souza Owner Owner's Name information is required for Hyannis MA 02601 08/03/09 every page. City[Town State Zip Code Date of Inspection B. Certification (cont.) B) System Conditionally Passes(cont.): ❑ distribution box is leveled or replaced ND Explain: ❑ The system required pumping more than 4 times a year due to broken or obstructed pipe(s). The system will pass inspection if(with approval of the Board of Health): ❑ broken pipe(s)are replaced ❑ obstruction is removed ND Explain: C) Further Evaluation is Required by the Board of Health: ❑ Conditions exist which require further evaluation by the Board of Health in order to determine if the system is failing to protect public health, safety or the environment. 1. System will pass unless Board of Health determines in accordance with 310 CMR 15.303(1)(b)that the system is not functioning in a manner which will protect public health, safety and the environment: ❑ Cesspool or privy is within 50 feet of a surface water ❑ Cesspool or privy is within 50 feet of a bordering vegetated wetland or a salt marsh 2. System will fail unless the Board of Health (and Public Water Supplier,if any) determines that the system is functioning in a manner that protects the public health, safety and environment: ❑ The system has a septic tank and soil absorption system (SAS) and the SAS is within 100 feet of a surface water supply or tributary to a surface water supply. ❑ The system has a septic tank and SAS and the SAS is within a Zone 1 of a public water supply. ❑ The system has a septic tank and SAS and the SAS is within 50 feet of a private water supply well. USGS•12/07 Title 5 official Inspection Form:Subsurface Sewage Disposal System•Page 3 of 15 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Title 5 Official Inspection Form Subsurface Sewage Disposal System Form-Not for Voluntary Assessments 35 Washington Street Property Address Marcos Souza Owner Owner's Name information is required for Hyannis MA 02601 08/03/09 every page. Cityrrown State Zip Code Date of Inspection B. Certification (cont.) C) Further Evaluation is Required by the Board of Health (cont.): ❑ The system has a septic tank and SAS and the SAS is less than 100 feet but 50 feet or more from a private water supply well". Method used to determine distance: This system passes if the well water analysis, performed at a DEP certified laboratory, for coliform bacteria indicates absent and the presence of ammonia nitrogen and nitrate nitrogen is equal to or less than 5 ppm, provided that no other failure criteria are triggered.A copy of the analysis must be attached to this form. 3. Other: D) System Failure Criteria Applicable to All Systems: You must indicate"Yes" or"No"to each of the following for all inspections: Yes No ❑ ® Backup of sewage into facility or system component due to overloaded or clogged SAS or cesspool ❑ ® Discharge or ponding of effluent to the surface of the ground or surface waters due to an overloaded or clogged SAS or cesspool ❑ ® Static liquid level in the distribution box above outlet invert due to an overloaded or clogged SAS or cesspool ❑ ® Liquid depth in cesspool is less than 6" below invert or available volume is less than 1/2 day flow ❑ ® Required pumping more than 4 times in the last year NOT due to clogged or obstructed pipe(s). Number of times pumped: ❑ ® Any portion of the SAS, cesspool or privy is below high ground water elevation.. ❑ ® Any portion of cesspool or privy is within 100 feet of a surface water supply or tributary to a surface water supply. USGS•12/07 Title 5 Official Inspection Form:Subsurface Sewage Disposal System•Page 4 of 15 + Commonwealth of Massachusetts Title 5 Official Inspection Form Subsurface Sewage Disposal System Form-Not for Voluntary Assessments ,M r 35 Washington Street Property Address Marcos Souza Owner Owner's Name information is required for Hyannis MA 02601 08/03/09 every page. City/Town State Zip Code Date of Inspection B. Certification (cont.) D) System Failure Criteria Applicable to All Systems(cont.): Yes No ❑ ® Any portion of a cesspool or privy is within a Zone 1 of a public well. ❑ ® Any portion of a cesspool or privy is within 50 feet of a private water supply well. ❑ ® Any portion of a cesspool or privy is less than 100 feet but greater than 50 feet from a private water supply well with no acceptable water quality analysis. [This system passes if the well water analysis, performed at a DEP certified laboratory,for fecal coliform bacteria indicates absent and the presence of ammonia nitrogen and nitrate nitrogen is equal to or less than 5 ppm, provided that no other failure criteria are triggered.A copy of the analysis and chain of custody must be attached to this form.] ❑ ® The system is a cesspool serving a facility with a design flow of 2000gpd- 10,000gpd. ❑ ® The system fails. I have determined that one or more of the above failure criteria exist as described in 310 CMR 15.303, therefore the system fails. The system owner should contact the Board of Health to determine what will be necessary to correct the failure. E) Large Systems: To be considered a large system the system must serve a facility with a design flow of 10,000 gpd'to 15,000 gpd. For large systems, you must indicate either"yes"or"no"to each of the following, in addition to the questions in Section D. Yes No ❑ ❑ the system is within 400 feet of a surface drinking water supply ❑ ❑ the system is within 200 feet of a tributary to a surface drinking water supply ❑ ❑ the system is located in a nitrogen sensitive area(Interim Wellhead Protection Area—IWPA)or a mapped Zone II of a public water supply well If you have answered"yes"to any question in Section E the system is considered a significant threat, or answered"yes" in Section D above the large system has failed. The owner or operator of any large system considered a significant threat under Section E or failed under Section D shall upgrade the system in accordance with 310 CMR 15.304. The system owner should contact the appropriate regional office of the Department. USGS•12107 Title 5 Official Inspection Form:Subsurface Sewage Disposal System-Page 5 of 15 Commonwealth of Massachusetts _ Title 5 Official Inspection Form Subsurface Sewage Disposal System Form-Not for Voluntary Assessments M , 35 Washington Street Property Address Marcos Souza Owner Owner's Name information is Y required for Hyannis MA 02601 08/03/09 every page. Cityrrown State Zip Code Date of Inspection C. Checklist Check if the following have been done. You must indicate"yes"or"no"as to each of the following: Yes No ® Pumping information was provided b the owner, occupant, o B r f❑ r Board o Health P 9 P Y ❑ ® Were any of the system components pumped out in the previous two weeks? ® ❑ Has the system received normal flows in the previous two week period? ❑ ® Have large volumes of water been introduced to the system recently or as part of this inspection? ® ❑ Were as built plans of the system obtained and examined? (If they were not available note as N/A) ® ❑ Was the facility or dwelling inspected for signs of sewage back up? ® ❑ Was the site inspected for signs of break out? ® ❑ Were all system components, excluding the SAS, located on site? ® ❑ Were the septic tank manholes uncovered, opened, and the interior of the tank inspected for the condition of the baffles or tees, material of construction, dimensions, depth of liquid, depth of sludge and depth of scum? ® ❑ Was the facility owner(and occupants if different from owner) provided with information on the proper maintenance of subsurface sewage disposal systems? The size and location of the Soil Absorption System(SAS)on the site has been determined based on: ® ❑ Existing information. For example, a plan at the Board of Health. ® ❑ Determined in the field (if any of the failure criteria related to Part C is at issue approximation of distance is unacceptable) [310 CMR 15.302(5)] USGS-12107 Idle 5 Official Inspection Form:Subsurface Sewage Disposal System•Page 6 of 15 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Title 5 Official Inspection Form Subsurface Sewage Disposal System Form-Not for Voluntary Assessments M 35 Washington Street Property Address Marcos Souza Owner Owner's Name information is required for H annis MA 02601 08/03/09 y every page. City/Town State Zip Code Date of Inspection D. System Information Residential Flow Conditions: Number of bedrooms(design): 5 Number of bedrooms(actual): 4 DESIGN flow based on 310 CMR 15.203 (for example: 110 gpd x#of bedrooms): 550 Number of current residents: 5 Does residence have a garbage grinder? ❑ Yes ® No Is laundry on a separate sewage system? [if yes separate inspection required] ❑ Yes ® No Laundry system inspected? ❑ Yes ® No Seasonaluse? ❑ Yes ® No Water meter readings, if available(last 2 years usage(gpd)): Sump pump? ❑ Yes ® No Last date of occupancy: current Date CommerciaUlndustrial Flow Conditions: Type of Establishment: Design flow(based on 310 CMR 15.203): Gallons per day(gpd) Basis of design flow(seats/persons/sq.ft., etc.): Grease trap present? ❑ Yes ❑ No Industrial waste holding tank present? ❑ Yes ❑ No Non-sanitary waste discharged to the Title 5 system? ❑ Yes ❑ No Water meter readings, if available: Last date of occupancy/use: Date Other(describe): USGS•12/07 Title 5 Official Inspection Form:Subsurface Sewage Disposal System•Page 7 of 15 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Title 5 Official Inspection Form Subsurface Sewage Disposal System Form -Not for Voluntary Assessments 35 Washington Street Property Address Marcos Souza Owner Owner's Name information is required for Hyannis MA 02601 08/03/09 every page. City/Town State Zip Code Date of Inspection D. System Information (cont.) General Information Pumping Records: Source of information: Was system pumped as part of the inspection? ❑ Yes ® No If yes, volume pumped: gallons How was quantity pumped determined? Reason for pumping: Type of System: ® Septic tank, distribution box, soil absorption system ❑ Single cesspool ❑ Overflow cesspool ❑ Privy ❑ Shared system (yes or no) (if yes, attach previous inspection records, if any) ❑ Innovative/Alternative technology. Attach a copy of the current operation and maintenance contract(to be obtained from system owner) ❑ Tight tank. Attach a copy of the DEP approval. ❑ Other(describe): Approximate age of all components, date installed (if known)and source of information: 07/09/09 per BOH Were sewage odors detected when arriving at the site? ❑ Yes ® No USGS-12107 Title 5 Official Inspection Form:Subsurface Sewage Disposal System-Page 8 of 15 I' Commonwealth of Massachusetts Title 5 Official Inspection Form Subsurface Sewage Disposal System Form-Not for Voluntary Assessments M 35 Washington Street Property Address Marcos Souza Owner Owner's Name information is required for Hyannis MA 02601 08/03/09 every page. Cityrrown State Zip Code Date of Inspection D. System Information (cont.) Building Sewer(locate on site plan): Depth below grade: 2.1feet Material of construction: ❑ cast iron ®40 PVC ❑ other(explain): Distance from private water supply well or suction line: feet Comments(on condition of joints, venting, evidence of leakage, etc.): Septic Tank(locate on site plan): Depth below grade: 1.7 feet Material of construction: ®concrete ❑ metal ❑fiberglass ❑ polyethylene ❑other(explain) If tank is metal, list age: years Is age confirmed by a Certificate of Compliance? (attach a copy of certificate) ❑ Yes ❑ No -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dimensions: 1500 gal Sludge depth: 411 Distance from top of sludge to bottom of outlet tee or baffle 28" Scum thickness 3" Distance from top of scum to top of outlet tee or baffle 6" r Distance from bottom of scum to bottom of outlet tee or baffle 15" . How were dimensions determined? measured LUSGS-12/07 Title 5 Official Inspection Form:Subsurface Sewage Disposal System•Page 9 of.15 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Title 5 Official Inspection Form Subsurface Sewage Disposal System Form-Not for Voluntary Assessments M 35 Washington Street Property Address Marcos Souza Owner owner's Name information is Y required for Hyannis MA 02601 08/03/09 every page. City/Town State Zip Code Date of Inspection D. System Information (cont.) Comments(on pumping recommendations, inlet and outlet tee or baffle condition, structural integrity, liquid levels as related to outlet invert, evidence of leakage, etc.): The tank was sound and tight with tees in place and liquid at outlet invert. Grease Trap(locate on site plan): Depth below grade: feet Material of construction: ❑ concrete ❑ metal ❑ fiberglass ❑ polyethylene ❑other(explain): Dimensions: Scum thickness Distance from top of scum to top of outlet tee or baffle Distance from bottom of scum to bottom of outlet tee or baffle Date of last pumping: Date Comments(on pumping recommendations, inlet and outlet tee or baffle condition, structural integrity, liquid levels as related to outlet invert, evidence of leakage, etc.): Tight or Holding Tank(tank must be pumped at time of inspection)(locate on site plan): Depth below grade: Material of construction: ❑concrete [] metal ❑fiberglass ❑ polyethylene ❑ other(explain): USGS•12107 Title 5 official Inspection Form:Subsurface Sewage Disposal System•Page 10 of 15 S\ Commonwealth of Massachusetts Title 5 Official Inspection Form Subsurface Sewage Disposal System Form-Not for Voluntary Assessments M 35 Washington Street Property Address Marcos Souza Owner Owner's Name information is required for Hyannis MA 02601 08/03/09 every page. City/Town State Zip Code Date of Inspection D. System Information (cont.) Tight or Holding Tank(cont.) Dimensions: Capacity: gallons Design Flow: g gallons per day Alarm present: ❑ Yes ❑ No Alarm level: Alarm in working order: ❑ Yes ❑ No Date of last pumping: Date Comments(condition of alarm and float switches, etc.): *Attach copy of current pumping contract(required). Is copy attached? ❑ Yes ❑ No Distribution Box(if present must be opened) (locate on site plan): Depth of liquid level above outlet invert even Comments(note if box is level and distribution to outlets equal, any evidence of solids carryover, any evidence of leakage into or out of box, etc.): The box was level and tight with no sign of carryover. Pump Chamber(locate on site plan): Pumps in working order: ❑ Yes ❑ No Alarms in working order: ❑ Yes ❑ No LUSGS,-12/07 Title 5 Official Inspection Forth:Subsurface Sewage Disposal System•Page 11 of 15 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Title 5 Official Inspection Form Subsurface Sewage Disposal System Form-Not for Voluntary Assessments y 35 Washington Street Property Address Marcos Souza Owner Owner's Name information is required for Hyannis MA 02601 08/03/09 every page. Citylrown State Zip Code Date of Inspection D. System Information (cont.) Comments(note condition of pump chamber, condition of pumps and appurtenances, etc.): Soil Absorption System (SAS) (locate on site plan, excavation not required): If SAS not located, explain why: Type: ❑ leaching pits number: ❑ leaching chambers number: ❑ leaching galleries number: ® leaching trenches number, length: 2@ 50'x4' ❑ leaching fields number, dimensions: ❑ overflow cesspool number: ❑ innovative/alternative system Type/name of technology: Comments(note condition of soil, signs of hydraulic failure, level of ponding, damp soil, condition of vegetation, etc.): The system has two stone lined trenches which are fifty feet long by four feet wide. There was no sign of ponding or failure in the stones. USGS•12/07 Title 5 Official Inspection Form:Subsurface Sewage Disposal System•Page 12 of 15 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Title 5 Official Inspection Form Subsurface Sewage Disposal System Form -Not for Voluntary Assessments �M 35 Washington Street Property Address Marcos Souza Owner Owner's Name information is Y required for Hyannis MA 02601 08/03/09 every page. Cityrrown State Zip Code Date of Inspection D. System Information (cont.) Cesspools (cesspool must be pumped as part of inspection) (locate on site plan): Number and configuration Depth—top of liquid to inlet invert Depth of solids layer Depth of scum layer Dimensions of cesspool Materials of construction Indication of groundwater inflow ❑ Yes ❑ No Comments(note condition of soil, signs of hydraulic failure, level of ponding, condition of vegetation, etc.): Privy(locate on'site plan): Materials of construction: Dimensions Depth of solids Comments(note condition of soil, signs of hydraulic failure, level of ponding, condition of vegetation, etc.): LUSGS•12107 Title 5 Official Inspection Form:Subsurface Sewage Disposal System•Page 13 of 15 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Title 5 Official Inspection Form Subsurface Sewage Disposal System Form-Not for Voluntary Assessments 35 Washington Street .- Property Address Marcos Souza Owner Owner's Flame inforrnation required fo `� Hyannis MA 02601 08/03/09 required for Y every page- Cityrrown State tip Code We of Inspection D. System Information (corn.) Sketch Of Sewage Disposal System:Provide a sketch of the sewage disposal system including ties to at least two permanent reference landmarks or benchmarks. Locate all wells within 100 feet Locate where public water supply enters the building. 47 s Tme 5 offidw IrePedion Fam SubNofaae Sewage oispoW Sydw•Pap 14 0115 USW•12(07 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Title 5 Official Inspection Form Subsurface Sewage Disposal System Form-Not for Voluntary Assessments 35 Washington Street Property Address Marcos Souza Owner Owner's Name information is required for Hyannis MA 02601 08/03/09 every page. Cityfrown State Zip Code Date of Inspection D. System Information (cont.) Site Exam: ® Check Slope ❑ Surface water ® Check cellar ❑ Shallow wells 20.0 Estimated depth to high ground water: feet Please indicate all methods used to determine the high ground water elevation: ❑ Obtained from system design plans on record If checked, date of design plan reviewed: Date ❑ Observed site (abutting property/observation hole within 150 feet of SAS) ❑ Checked with local Board of Health -explain: ❑ Checked with local excavators, installers-(attach documentation) ® Accessed USGS database-explain: You must describe how you established the high ground water elevation: USGS maps show an elevation of over twenty feet. F USGS•12107 Title 5 Official Inspection Form:Subsurface Sewage Disposal System•Page 15 of 15 I �3 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION RECEIVE® NOV 4 2003 TOWN OF BARNSTABLE HEALTH DEPT. TITLE 5 OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM—NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM FORM PART A q CERTIFICATION MAP 3® 1 Property Address: 35 Washington Street PARCEL Hyannis LOT Owner's Name: Celio Souza Owner's Address: Date of Inspection: 10/23/2003 Name of Inspector: (please print) Kevin J. Sullivan Company Name: Ready Rooter Mailing Address: P.O.Box 371 Sandwich,MA 02563 Telephone Number: (508)888-6055 CERTIFICATION STATEMENT I certify that I have personally inspected the sewage disposal system at this address and that the information reported below is true,accurate and complete as of the time of the inspection. The inspection was performed based on my training and experience in the proper function and maintenance of on site sewage disposal systems.I am a DEP approved system inspector pursuant to Section 15.340 off Title 5(310 CMR 15.000). The System: /;, Passes Conditionally Passes Needs Further Evaluation by the Local Authority /Fails Inspector's Signature: AZ!11�d_,__ �� _ Date: /cq142 7fp The system inspector shall submit a copy of this inspection report to the Approving Authority(Board of Health or DEP)within 30 days of completing this inspection.If the system is a shared system or has a design flow of 10,000 gpd or greater,the inspector and the system owner shall submit the report to the appropriate regional office of the DEP.The original should be sent to the system owner and copies sent to the buyer,if applicable,and the approving authority. RECEIi/ED Notes and Comments OCT 3 1 2003 TOWN uF HEALTH DEPT.BLE ****This report only describes conditions at the time of inspection and under the conditions of use at that time.This inspection does not address how the system will perform in the future under the same or different conditions of use. 1 Page 2 of 11 OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM-NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART A CERTIFICATION (continued) Property Address: 35 Washington Street Hyannis Owner: Celio Souza Date of Inspection: 10/23/2003 Inspection Summary: Check A,B,C,D or E/ALWAYS complete all of Section D C. System Passes: have not found any information which indicates that any of the failure criteria described in 310 CMR 15.303 or in 310 CMR 15.304 exist. Any failure criteria not evaluated are indicated below. Comments: B. System Conditionally Passes: One or more system components as described in the"Condition .ass"section need to be replaced or repaired.The system,upon completion of the replacement or repair, approved by the Board of Health,will pass. Answer yes,no or not determined (Y,N,ND)in the for a following statements.If"not determined"please explain. The septic tank is metal and over 20 years old*o he septic tank(whether metal or not)is structurally unsound,exhibits substantial infiltration or exfiltratio r tank failure is imminent.System will pass inspection if the existing tank is replaced with a complying septic as approved by the Board of Health. *A metal septic tank will pass inspection if it is s cturally sound,not leaking and if a Certificate of Compliance indicating that the tank is less than 20 years old ' available. ND explain: Observation of sewage backup or b eak out or high static water level in the distribution box due to broken or obstructed pipe(s)or due to a broken,se led or uneven distribution box.System will pass inspection if(with approval of Board of Health): broken pipe(s)are replaced obstruction is removed distribution box is leveled or replaced ND explain: The system required umping more than 4 times a year due to broken or obstructed pipe(s).The system will pass inspection if(with a roval of the Board of Health): broken pipe(s)are replaced obstruction is removed ND explain: Page 3 of I 1 OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM-NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART A CERTIFICATION (continued) Property Address: 35 Washington Street Hyannis Owner: Celio Souza Date of Inspection: 10/23/2003 C. Further Evaluation is Required by the Board of Health: Conditions exist which require further evaluation by t Board of Health in order to determine if the system is failing to protect public health,safety or the environmen . 1. System will pass unless Board of Health det mines in accordance with 310 CMR 15.303(1)(b)that the system is not functioning in a manner wh' will protect public health,safety and the environment: _Cesspool or privy is within 5/feet a surface water Cesspool or privy is within 5f a bordering vegetated wetland or a salt marsh 2. System will fail unless the Board of Health(and Public /feet lier,if y)determines that the system is functioning in a manner that protects the public heald a ronment: The system has a septic tank and soil absorption system SAS is within 100 feet of a surface water supply or tributary to a surface water supply. _The system has a septic tank and SAS and the SAS is w 1 of a public water supply. _The system has a septic tank and SAS and the SAS is w of a private water supply well. _The system has a septic tank and SAS and the SAS islefeet but 50 feet or more from a private water supply welly°. Method used to determine di ance "This system passes if the well water analysis,perfo ed at a DEP certified laboratory,for coliform bacteria and volatile organic compounds indicates that th ell is free from pollution from that facility and the presence of ammonia nitrogen and nitrate nitrogen i equal to or less than 5 ppm,provided that no other failure criteria are triggered.A copy of the analysis in be attached to this form. 3. Other: i Page 4 of 1 l OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM—NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART A CERTIFICATION(continued) Property Address: 35 Washington Street Hyannis Owner: Celio Souza Date of Inspection: 10/23/2003 D. System Failure Criteria applicable to all systems: You must indicate"yes"or"no"to each of the following for all inspections: Yes No Backup of sewage into facility or system component due to overloaded or clogged SAS or cesspool Discharge or ponding of effluent to the surface of the ground or surface waters due to an overloaded or clogged SAS or cesspool _/ Static liquid level in the distribution box above outlet invert due to and overloaded or clogged SAS or cesspool �/Liquid depth in cesspool is less than 6"below invert or available volume is less than 'h day flow _i Required pumping more than 4 times in the last year NOT due to clogged or obstructed pipe(s).Number of times pumped __Z Any portion of the SAS,cesspool or privy is below high ground water elevation. Any portion of cesspool or privy is within 100 feet of a surface water supply or tributary to a surface water supply. _.IL Any portion of a cesspool or privy is within a Zone 1 of a public well. Any portion of a cesspool or privy is 50 feet of a private water supply well. Any portion of a cesspool or privy is less than 100 feet but greater than 50 feet from a private water supply well with no acceptable water quality analysis. [This system passes if the well water analysis, performed at a DEP certified laboratory,for coliform bacteria and volatile organic compounds indicates that the well is free from pollution from that facility and the presence of ammonia nitrogen and nitrate nitrogen is equal to or less than 5 ppm,provided that no other failure criteria are triggered.A copy of the analysis must be attached to this form.] ,J(9 (Yes/No)The system fails. I have determined that one or more of the above criteria exist as described in 310 CMR 15.303,therefore the system fails.The system owner should contact the Board of Health to determine what will be necessary to correct the failure. E. Large Systems: To be considered a large system the system must serve a faci ' with a design flow of 10,000 gpd to 15,000 gpd- You must indicate either"yes"or"no"to each of the follow' g: (The following criteria apply to large systems in addition t the criteria above) yes no the system is within 400 feet of a surface dr' king water supply _the system is within 200 feet of a tributa to a surface drinking water supply _the system is located in a nitrogen se itive area(Interim Wellhead Protection Area—IWPA)or a mapped Zone H of a public water supply we If you have answered"yes"to any questi in Section E the system is considered a significant threat,or answered "yes" in Section D above the large syste has failed.The owner or operator of any large system considered a significant threat under Section E or led under Section D shall upgrade the system in accordance with 310 CMR 15.304.The system owner should co ct the appropriate regional office of the Department. Page 5 of 11 OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM-NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART B CHECKLIST Property Address: 35 Washington Street Hyannis Owner: Celio Souza Date of Inspection: 10/23/2003 Check if the following have been done. You must indicate"yes"or"no"as to each of the following: Yes No _IZ"_ Pumping information was provided by the owner,occupant,or Board of Health Were any of the system components pumped out in the previous two weeks? _ Has the system received normal flows in the previous two week period? Have large volumes of water been introduced to the system recently or as part of this inspection? Were as built plans of the system obtained and examined?(If they were not available note as N/A) Was the facility or dwelling inspected for signs of sewage back up? Was the site inspected for signs of break out? Were all system components,excluding the SAS,located on site? Were the septic tank manholes uncovered,opened,and the interior of the tank inspected for the condition of the baffles or tees,material of construction, dimensions,depth of liquid,depth of sludge and depth of scum ? Was the facility owner(and occupants if different than owner)provided with information on the proper maintenance of subsurface sewage disposal systems? The size and location of the Soil Absorption System(SAS)on the site has been determined based on: Yes No _ Existing information.For example,a plan at the Board of Health. Determined in the field(if any of the failure criteria related to Part C is at issue approximation of distance is unacceptable)[310 CMR 15.302(3)(b)] Page 6 of 11 OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM—NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART C SYSTEM INFORMATION Property Address: 35 Washington Street Hyannis Owner: Celio Souza Date of Inspection: 10/23/2003 FLOW CONDITIONS RESIDENTIAL Number of bedrooms(design): :57 Number of bedrooms(actual): DESIGN flow based on 310 CMR 15.203 (for example: 110 gpd x#of bedrooms): SSA E? Number of current residents: _ Does residence have a garbage grinder(yes or no): Is laundry on a separate sewage system (yes or no):K-T::[if yes separate inspection required] Laundry system inspected(yes or no):= Seasonal use: (yes or no):Alp Sc L = \ �. �•��� Water meter readings,if available(last 2 years usage(gpd)): Sump Pump(yes or Last date of occupancy: COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL Type of establishment: Design flow(based on 310 CMR 15.203)• gpd Basis of design flow(seats/persons%sgft tc.): Grease trap present(yes or no):_ Industrial waste holding tank pres t(yes or no):_ Non-sanitary waste disch/avaii e Title 5 system (yes or no):_ Water meter readings,ife: Last date of occupancy/u OTHER(describe): GENERAL INFORMATION Pumping Records Source of information: Q5Ab, --_r• ti ,fit Q :��•,d Was system pumped as part of the inspection (yes or no): If yes,volume pumped: gallons--How was quantity pumped determined? Reason for pumping: TYPE OF SYSTEM -teleptic tank,distribution box,soil absorption system _Single cesspool _Overflow cesspool —Privy _Shared system (yes or no)(if yes,attach previous inspection records,if any) _Innovative/Alternative technology.Attach a copy of the current operation and maintenance contract(to be obtained from system owner) —Tight tank _Attach a copy of the DEP approval —Other(describe): Approximate age of all components,dates installed(if known)and source of information: �- firm ��!t?JC �4']T�-,-� Were sewage odors detected when arriving at the site(yes or no):,LJCD Page 7 of 11 OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM—NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART C SYSTEM INFORMATION (continued) Property Address: 35 Washington Street Hyannis Owner: Celio Souza Date of Inspection: 10/23/2003 BUILDING SEWER(locate on site plan) Depth below grade: i q A Materials of construction:_cast iron PVC_other(explain): Distance from private water supply well or suction line: &D t _ Comments(on condition of joints,venting,evidence of leakage, etc.): SEPTIC TANK:3zrlocate on site plan) Depth below grade: 1- Material of construction:_,eeo-ncrete_metal_fiberglass_polyethylene _other(explain) If tank is metal list age:- Is age confirmed by a Certificate of Compliance(yes or no):—(attach a copy of certificate) Dimensions: 1 C�•.� x ,� •�' �� — ( e'er F�.�s. Sludge depth: Distance from the top of sludge to bottom of outlet tee or baffle: 3( Scum thickness: " ,;r •,.,-v E Z Ar. 40'3SYt" ' Distance from top of scum to top of outlet tee or baffle: G '` Distance from bottom of scum to bottom of outlet tee or baffle:�o j S" How were dimensions determined:i,At�� N\t+ASJ .. �`,a �' Comments(on pumping recommendations,inlet and outlet tee or baffle condition,structural integrity, liquid levels as related to outlet invert,evidence of leakage,etc.): �Yc,c�. il�.ara•-�•�,�..c.,�� iu�.e>>w.�L•.r.� SzJ�..�.,e».i� r-- fit")-c� usr GREASE TRAP:_(locate on site plan) Depth below grade: Material of construction:_concrete_metal fiberglass_polyethylene_other (explain): Dimensions: Scum thickness: Distance from top of scum to top of outlet or baffle: Distance from bottom of scum to bottom f outlet tee or baffle: Date of last pumping: Comments(on pumping recommen ons,inlet and outlet tee or baffle condition,structural integrity,liquid levels as related to outlet invert,evidence leakage,etc.): Page 8 of 11 OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM-NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART C SYSTEM INFORMATION (continued) Property Address: 35 Washington Street Hyannis Owner: Celio Souza Date of Inspection: 10/23/2003 TIGHT or HOLDING TANK: (tank must b pumped at time of inspection)(locate on site plan) Depth below grade: Material of construction:_concrete metal fiberglass_polyethylene_other(explain): Dimensions: Capacity: gallons Design Flow: gallon ay Alarm present(yes or no): Alarm level: Alarm in wor mg order(yes or no): Date of last pumping: Comments(condition of alarm float switches,etc.): DISTRIBUTION BOX: jZ(if present must be opened)(locate on site plan) Depth of liquid level above outlet invert: Comments(not if box is level and distribution to outlets equal,any evidence of solids carryover,any evidence of leakage into or out of box,etc.): PUMP CHAMBER: (locate on site plan) Pumps in working order(yes or no): Alarms in working order(yes or no): Comments(note condition of pump chain ,condition of pumps and appurtenances,etc.): • Page 9 of 11 OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM—NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART C SYSTEM INFORMATION(continued) Property Address: 35 Washington Street Hyannis Owner: Celio Souza Date of Inspection: 10/23/2003 SOIL ABSORPTION SYSTEM (SAS):—4.Z61ocate.on site plan,excavation not required) If SAS not located explain why: Type leaching pits,number:leaching chambers,number: leaching leaching galleries,number: _,.-,leaching trenches,number, length: — y' x 5Xp leaching fields,number,dimensions: overflow cesspool,number: innovative/alternative system Type/name of technology: Comments(note condition of soil,signs of hydraulic failure,level of ponding,damp soil,condition of vegetation, etc.): Trz...y�✓ �cnlr� � atfcT' CESSPOOLS: (cesspool must be pump as part of inspection)(locate on site plan) Number and configuration: Depth—top of liquid to inlet invert: Depth of solids layer: Depth of scum layer: Dimensions of cesspool: Materials of construction: Indication of groundwater inflo (yes or no): Comments(note condition of il,signs of hydraulic failure,level of ponding,condition of vegetation,etc.): PRIVY: (locate on site plan) Materials of construction: Dimensions: Depth of solids: Comments(note condition of soil,s' s of hydraulic failure,level of ponding,condition of vegetation,etc.): Page 10 of 11 OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM—NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART C SYSTEM INFORMATION (continued) Property Address: 35 Washington Street Hyannis Owner: Celio Souza Date of Inspection: 10/23/2003 SKETCH OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM Provide a sketch of the sewage disposal system including ties to at least two permanent reference landmarks or benchmarks.Locate all wells within 100 feet.Locate where public water supply enters the building. s r rI r ® O l 3 '53 = �. I Page 11 of 11 OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM—NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART C SYSTEM INFORMATION (continued) Property Address: 35 Washington Street Hyannis Owner: Celio Souza Date of Inspection: 10/23/2003 SITE EXAM Slope Surface water Check cellar 6,0"- Shallow wells Estimated depth to ground water, ►a feet Please indicate(check)all methods used to determine the high ground water elevation: _j/�btained from system design plans on record—If checked,date of design plan reviewed: Observed site(abutting property/observation hole within 150 feet of SAS) Checked with the local Board of Health-explain: Checked with local excavators,installers-(attach documentation) _/Accessed USGS database-explain: ry-_o,,« Y r, t,X_sc's, . You must describe how you nestablished the high ground water elevation: �� �°. !"®�.a•.w.�/o, :��.aC'Ct-.a- i J�C'r..a�:e'3�., i w C.e��t.\.A r � V Yr► BENNETT ENVIRONMENTA-L ASSOCIATES INC. LICENSED SITE PROFESSIONALS,ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS,GEOLOGISTS,ENGINEERS 1573 Main Street,P.O.Box 1743 (508)896-1706 Brewster,MA 02631 fax(508)896-5109 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL TO: DATE: JOB NUMBER: Mr.Robert Murphy,Case Officer 12/21/2011 BEAI I-10302 MA DEP(SERO) BWSC 20 Riverside Drive REGARDING: Lakeville,MA 02347 IRAC REPORT WITH CLASS-A2 RAO RTN 4-23092 SHIPPING METHOD: Regular Mail ❑ Pick Up ❑ Priority Mail ❑ Hand Deliver ❑ Express Mail ❑ `Other uploaded ❑X Certified Mail El Green Card/RR ❑ COPIES DATE DESCRIPTION 1 12/7/2011 Immediate Response Action Completion Report with Class-A2 Response Aceidn Outcome::;" 35 Washington Street - Hyannis,MA j 173 c'g"7 For review and comment: For approval: ❑ As requested: ❑ For your use ❑ REMARKS: cc: Felisberto Barreiro-Property Owner(report on CD) Cosmo Gallinaro,LSP-Consultant to BCMIC(report on CD) Thomas McKean-Barnstable Board of Health(narrative,title page,and site plan only) John Klimm-Barnstable Town Manager(narrative,title page,and site plan only) Deputy Chief Dean Melanson-Hyannis Fire Department(narrative,title page,and site plan only) FROM: JTW/dc If enclosures are not as noted,kindly notify us at once HENNETTENVIRONMENTALAsSOCIATES, INC46 LICENSED SITE PROFESSIONALS ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS & GEOLOGISTS & ENGINEERS 1573 Main Street-P.O. Box 1743, Brewster, MA 02631 508-896-1706 O Fax 508-896-5109 www.bennett-ea.com BEAI I-10302 December 7, 2011 Mr. Robert Murphy, Case Officer MA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (MA DEP) Southeast Regional Office(SERO) Bureau of Waste Site Cleanup(BWSC) 20 Riverside Drive Lakeville, MA 02347 RE: IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION COMPLETION CLASS A-2 RESPONSE ACTION OUTCOME STATEMENT Commercial Property, RTN 4-23092 35 Washington St. Hyannis, MA [Assessor's Map 309, Parcel 199] Dear Mr. Murphy, BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES, INC. (BEA) has prepared the following Immediate Response Action Completion, Class A-2 Response Action Outcome Statement Report, with Supporting Documentation, as a summary of environmental monitoring and remedial response actions performed at the above referenced property These response actions have been conducted to .mitigate potential human exposures and environmental impacts associated with the release of approximately 500 gallons (+/) of,No. 2 Fuel Oil from a leaking aboveground storage tank (AST). This report is an addendum to the original IRA Plan filed with the MA DEP, dated April 5, 2011 and the subsequent IRA Status Report (May 31, 2011) as an essential part of the public record to document remedial response actions undertaken and compliance history of the project. Historic response actions discussed in previous reports are summarized herein to orient the reviewer as they pertain to the most recent waste site cleanup operations and exposure risk considerations. Remedial response actions for Site cleanup over the past 10 months have included the installation and operation of a product recovery system, contaminated soil removal and in-situ chemical oxidation. This work has been accompanied by environmental monitoring for the evaluation treatment performance and review of potential exposure risk evaluation to identified human and environmental receptors. All remedial response actions have proceeded under MA DEP verbal authorizations (Robert Murphy, Case Officer) and/or presumptive approvals under the IRA Plan and subsequent IRA Status Reports. Environmental monitoring and laboratory analyses under Method 1 Risk Characterization have indicated that there are no Critical Exposure Pathways nor any Imminent or Substantial Hazards present under existing conditions and that at the time of this filing and preponderance of physical evidence supports a finding of No Significant Risk for foreseeable activities and use of the Site without restriction. Therefore, a Permanent Solution has been achieved as supporting the following Immediate Response Action j Completion Statement with a Class A-2 Response Action Outcome towards project closure. 1 EMERGENCY SPILL RESPONSE & WASTE SITE CLEANUP 6 SITE ASSESSMENT 0 PERMITTING 0 SEPTIC DESIGN&INSPECTION WATER SUPPLY DEVELOPMENT,OPERATION&MAINTENANCE & WASTEWATER TREATMENT,OPERATION&MAINTENANCE i IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION COMPLETION REPORT WITH CLASS-A2 RESPONSE ACTION OUTCOME AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION RTN#4-23092 Residential Property. 35 Washington Street—Hyannis, MA BEA11-10302 DECEMBER 7, 2011 DECEMBER 7,2011 BARREIROBEAI I-10302 PAGE 2 OF 22 IRA COMPLETION/A2 RAO,RTN 4-23092 The information herein serves as the technical rationale and justification for the response actions previously conducted, and further monitoring and remedial response actions proposed within. This work has and will continue to precede under direct LSP oversight in a manner consistent with the MCP Response Action Performance Standards (RAPS)pursuant to 310 CMR 40.0191 and the QA/QC policies of BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES, INC. The facts and statements herein are, to the best of our knowledge, a true and accurate representation of the Site activities, remedial response actions and environmental conditions associated with the project and LSP Opinions acknowledged by the certification on the attached BWSC-104 and BWSC-105 Transmittal Forms. SITE DESCRIPTION/ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS [Refer to Appendix A] The subject property at 35 Washington Street is noted as Map 309, Parcel 199 on the Barnstable Assessor's Maps and is located on the western side of Washington Street, approximately 200 feet south of the intersection of Louis Street and Washington Street in the village of Hyannis, Town of Barnstable, MA [Refer to Figure 1]. The UTM coordinates for the Site are North 4612255 and East 393038. The property contains approximately 0.18 acres of vacant land, at the edge of the Hyannis downtown area. The property was formerly developed by a two-story two-family apartment building and a small shed. The surrounding area is heavily developed in similar use as characterized by residential properties to the north, south and east and a commercial business (medical centre) to the west. Additional commercial properties are also located in the area to the south, east and west. Hydrologic references indicate groundwater exists at 13' NGVD (+/-) as projected within some 22' of grade surface wherein regional groundwater contours indicate a south-southeasterly flow direction towards Hyannis Inner Harbor/Lewis Bay and Nantucket Sound beyond [Refer to Figure 2]. During the subsurface investigation at the property groundwater was encountered between 21 and 22' bgs. Site-specific groundwater flow has been documented to the south with minor fluctuations to the east and west as consistent with regional flow. Based on the observed groundwater flow direction, the Hyannis Inner Harbor and Lewis Bay represent the primary potential environmental receptors in consideration of Method 1 — Risk Characterization. The former tenants, trespassers, construction and utility workers are the identified potential human receptors for potential exposure risk considerations. According to the MA DEP BWSC GIS mapping program, the subject property is not located within the Zone II Protective Radius of a Public Water Supply (PWS), nor is it located within the Zone A protective radius of any surface water reservoir. No private wells are known to exist within 500' of the Site wherein the area is serviced by the Barnstable municipal water supply and distribution system. The subject property is located within a Non-Potential Drinking Water Source Area (NPDWSA) based on the relative density of development, as within downtown Hyannis. Based on this mapping, as well as the proximity to groundwater and reported hydrogeologic conditions, the GW-3 groundwater category is considered under Method 1 Risk Characterization, per 310 CMR 40.0974. Based on Site conditions relative to frequency/intensity of use and accessibility of soils, the S-2/S-3 (GW-3) Method 1 — Risk i DECEMBER 7;2011 BARREIRO/BEAI I-10302 PAGE 3 OF 22 IRA COMPLETIONAA2 RAO,RTN 4-23092 Characterization standards are applicable to soil impact in accordance with the provisions of 310 CMR 40.0975. In review of all foreseeable future uses and activities at the Site, the most restrictive S-1/S-2/S-3 (GW-1/GW-2/GW-3), Method. I Risk Characterization standards are further evaluated. These standards were developed in consideration of potential ingestion, inhalation, dermal contact and environmental exposures, and in review of potential leaching of contaminants to groundwater. Disposal Site Map The Disposal Site, as the subject of RTN.4-23092, is defined by those areas impacted by the fuel oil release as qualified by soil and groundwater testing conducted throughout the IRA. As such the Site is a portion of the subject property represented on the Site Plan in Appendix A. The area of significant soil impact underlying the former AST was confined to an approximate 15' x 15' x 16' (D) area off the northwest corner of the former dwelling in the central portion of the subject property. Groundwater flow direction was established in a southerly direction. During the IRA, significant groundwater impacts greater than the applicable GW-3 Method 1 Risk Characterization thresholds, were historically documented only in the immediate area of release at the CSW-1/RW-1 locations. During the course of the IRA, groundwater impacts were documented in the downgradient MW-3 and MW-4 monitoring wells as included within the defined Site. None of these wells reported concentrations of fractional EP14 and target analytes. at concentrations above the applicable GW-3 standards. As such, some groundwater impacts (< GW-2 and GW-3) may extend beyond the physical property boundary to the south however the requested placement and testing of monitoring wells on the abutting property was specifically denied and hence the Site is defined accordingly. The Defined Site, inclusive of significant soil and groundwater impacts,is presented as an approximate 25' x 55' area(1,500 SF +/-) as including the area of release and soil excavation to the north and running to the to the south by MW-3 and MW-4. The Area of Class A-2 Response Action Outcome is the same as the Defined Site [Refer to Site Plan]. I BACKGROUND [Refer to Appendix B] Excessive fuel usage was noted by the property owner and reported to the oil company (Oil Express) that had an automatic delivery contract for the property. On review of the fuel use records, Oil Express suggested that the fuel use was related to the condition of the burner and suggested the burner be replaced. On February 3, 2011 an Oil Express technician was at the property to install a new oil-fired furnace in the basement of the subject dwelling. Upon inspection of the 275-gallon AST, the technician noted fuel leaking from the bottom of the i vessel. The technician placed a magnetic patch over the leak and notified the company's dispatch. The Oil Express subsequently called the Hyannis nnis Fire Department and the MA DEP i both of which responded to the scene. Mr. Robert Murphy of the MA DEP subsequently issued a field Notice of Responsibility to the property owner, Mr. Felisberto Barreiro. Based on i observed conditions, the MA DEP classified the release as 2-Hour reporting condition (Sudden Release), and assigned Release Tracking Number (RTN) 4-23092 outlining the requirement to j engage a Licensed Site Professional and conduct an Immediate Response Action. i f i DECEMBER 7,2011 BARREIROBEAII-10302 PAGE 4 OF 22 IRA COMPLETION/A2 RAO,.RTN 4-23092 The Oil Express subsequently installed a temporary tank and transferred the remaining fuel from the leaking tank. A forensic engineer, working for Mr. Barreiro's insurance company, later removed the leaking tank from the property. Mr. Barreiro contacted BEA the next day on February 4, 2011 to provide LSP Oversight and professional services. Based on the fuel delivery records, and past oil consumption, it is estimated that there was a release of some 500+/- gallons of fuel oil. IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTIONS [Refer to Appendix B] In the first 60 days from Release Discovery, BEA performed hand borings, directed test borings for the installation of groundwater monitoring wells and performed soil and groundwater assessment. BEA also installed a constant-rate groundwater suppression system in conjunction with an LNAPL-recovery system, for product recovery from the surface of the groundwater. Laboratory analysis reported significant fuel oil-related impact (EPH/VPH/TPH) in discrete soil samples and a composite Stockpile sample as greater than the applicable S-1/S-2/S-3 (GW-3), Method 1 — Risk Characterization standards, within the area of release to the groundwater interface at approximately 2V bgs. Laboratory analytical results from the initial groundwater-sampling event reported concentrations of TPH in monitoring wells MW-1, MW-2 and MW-3 as BRL wherein the reporting limits were less than the applicable (GW-3) and most stringent (GW-1) Method 1 Risk Characterization standards. Concentrations of EPH and VPH concentrations and target analytes reported in the constant suppression well (CSW-1) were also reported below the applicable GW- 3 standards with the exception of C11 to C22 Aromatics. However, the testing of CSW-1 was to qualify carbon usage rates for system effluent treatment and not to qualify Significant Risk as the well was fully penetrating and not intended to be representative of the upper 10' portion of the aquifer where petroleum impacts were present. Static water-level measurements established local groundwater flow in a southerly direction, differing from regional flow, as based on three rounds of groundwater gauging data. As such, BEA personnel returned to the Site to install a fourth groundwater monitoring well (MW-4) in a clearly downgradient direction. Monitoring well MW-4 was installed south of the release area and intermediate to abutting residential properties and as intermediate to the nearest environmental receptor. Monitoring well MW-4 was subsequently sampled for EPH and VPH with target analytes. Results of the analyses reported concentrations of EPH, VPH and all target PAHs and BTEX analytes as BRL. BEA also conducted a series of slug tests at upgradient monitoring well MW-1 in order to characterize the aquifer in consideration of solute fate and transport. The Geraghty and Miller AQTESOLV program was employed to interpret the results of the slug tests wherein a hydraulic conductivity of 469.77 feet per day was computed. Based on 20% retardation, the Times of Travel from the release area to the down gradient monitoring wells MW-3 and MW-4 were computed as 4.74 days, and 4.33 days, respectively. This information was critical in establishing DECEMBER 7,2011 BARREIRO/BEAI I-10302 PAGE 5 OF 22 IRA COMPLETION/A2 RAO,RTN 4-23092 the representativeness and usability of groundwater data from the MW-3 and MW-4 monitoring wells: BEA installed the recovery well RW-1 the constant suppression well(CSW-1) within the release area. The recovery well (RW-1) was set at 26' bgs. The constant suppression well was then advanced approximately 2' west.of the recovery well. CSW-1 was advanced to a depth of 33'bgs and a 3' 2-inch stainless steel screen was installed at depth as fully penetrating the aquifer at a depth of 6-T below the accumulated LNAPL. The borehole was backfilled with clean #2 silica sand to 21'and was then backfilled with natural material to grade. Authorization was granted by the. DEP to begin the piloting of the LNAPL recovery system with groundwater suppression on March 2, 2011. On March 4, 2011 BEA personnel traveled to the site to assemble the different components of the groundwater suppression system. The system consists of a jet pump installed in CSW-1 and plumbed into two 200-pound drums of granulated activated carbon (GAC) in series and eventually discharged into a leach pit in the northeastern portion of the property,previously installed by Global Remediation. The pump was adjusted to limit the flow: of water to 10 gallons per minute (gpm) based on a pump test performed to determine an effective radius of influence to control the flow of contaminants downgradient away from the release area. BEA operated the product recovery system in conjunction with the groundwater suppression well with regular inspections to note the amount of product collected, adjust the selective skimmer to static water level (SWL) and to collect samples of the intermediate effluent discharge to determine when the primary carbon drum should be changed out. On April 6, 2011, it was observed that the two drums of granulated activated carbon (GAC) were bulging and leaking due to the effluent discharge line being kinked. The system was temporarily shut down on April 11, 201 L Both drums were subsequently replaced on April 14, 2011, with two fresh GAC drums. The spent GAC vessels were drained and eventually picked up by Carbon Filtration for recycling by thermal re-activation. Samples of the intermediate effluent discharge. were collected regularly to determine breakthrough of the carbon vessels. Results of these sampling events reported TPH, EPH and i VPH and all target anal es as BRL, with the exception of the May 12 2011 sampling wherein g Yt P Y p g the results reported concentrations of C19-06 Aliphatics at 160 ug/L as representing breakthrough of the primary GAC unit in use for 38 days at 10 gpm. However, based on the initial carbon usage estimates the drums were supposed to last for up to 60 days. As such, the effluent intermediate was re-sampled on May 24, 2011. Results of the effluent intermediate re- sampling reported no concentrations of fractional EPH/PAHs or VPH/BTEX, as apparently identifying a field sampling or laboratory error. As such, the change out of the carbon drums was deemed unnecessary and the system continued to operate. The product recovery system operated from March 4, 2011 up until July 25, 2011, just 1 before the dwelling was demolished. At that time, a total of 120.76 gallons of fuel oil/water mix was recovered. The operation of the system was then suspended until the demolition of the I i DECEMBER 7,2011 BARREIROBEA11-10302 PAGE 6 OF 22 IRA COMPLETION/A2 RAO,RTN 4-23092 dwelling and soil removal activities was complete. Charts showing product recovery over time as well as notes from the recovery system inspections are included in the product recovery log included for reference in Appendix B. BEA returned to the subject property on April 26, 2011 to conduct quarterly groundwater monitoring. The monitoring wells were sampled for EPH including target PAHs, as well as wet chemistry parameters for baseline sodium, sulfate and total iron concentrations of in anticipation of the proposed Regenox remedial additive applications. Laboratory analytical results for the April sampling reported concentrations of EPH and target PAHs in monitoring wells MW-1, MW-2 and MW-4 as BRL. Concentrations of fractional EPH as well as target analytes were reported in monitoring well MW-3, slightly above the method response limits, but below the applicable GW-3, and most stringent GW-1 Method 1 Risk Characterization Standards. Concentrations of inorganic compounds in groundwater at the site reported sulfate between 12.8 and 15.2 mg/L, sodium between 35.3 and 60.2 mg/L, and total iron between BRL (<0.01) and 0.24 mg/L. In general, only sodium was noted as higher than concentrations normally found in the area. BEA returned to the Site on July 6, 2011 to perform quarterly groundwater monitoring at the property. Static water level measurements confirmed a southerly groundwater flow direction (Refer to Site Plan). No odor or sheen was reported in any of the monitoring wells. All samples were collected in appropriately preserved laboratory containers and set on ice in a cooler. Laboratory analysis reported TPH concentrations as BRL in MW-1, wherein the reporting limits were less than the most restrictive GW-1, Method 1 Risk Characterization criteria. Laboratory analysis further reported all fractional EPH and target PAH concentrations BRL in monitoring wells MW-2 and MW-4. In fact, only MW-3 reported detectable amounts of Naphthalene (1.9 ppm)and 2-Methylnaphthalene (1.9 ppm) as less than the strictest GW-1 (140/10) and applicable GW-3 (20,000/20,000) thresholds. This testing documented the effectiveness of the product recovery and suppression control system in preventing a condition of Substantial Release Migration and source recovery. As indicated in the previous IRA Status report the client decided to demolish dwelling. Based on similar costs to shore the dwelling, the insurance adjuster agreed to cover the cost of demolition. The contractor worked through the months of May, June and July to secure the necessary permits for the demolition of the building. IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION COMPLETION [Refer to Appendices B and C] Soil Removal The subject dwelling was demolished and all debris removed from the site on July 25, 2011. As such, on July 28, 2011, BEA personnel traveled to the site to oversee the beginning of soil removal activities and to discuss logistics and scheduling of soil removal activities with the contractor. The soil removal contractor Pastore Excavation of Sandwich, MA used a tracked excavator and three dump trucks to facilitate the removal of impacted soils. On this day, the DECEMBER 7,2011 BARREIRO/BEA11-10302 PAGE 7 OF 22 IRA COMPLETION/A2 RAO,RTN 4-23092 excavation was advanced to 6'bgs in preparation to install a shoring box the following day. BEA subsequently collected samples from the 0-3' interval, for TPH analysis, in consideration of significant risk to surf cial.soils. Samples from the 3-6'interval were also collected, but were not submitted wherein PID screening did not indicate any soil impacts in the sidewall areas at this depth. Results of the TPH analysis from the 0-3' soil samples reported all sidewalls as BRL wherein the response limits of the analysis were below the most stringent S-1/GW-1 and applicable S-2/GW-3 Method 1 Risk Characterization Standards. On this day three loads of impacted soil totaling 98.75 tons were transported to Aggregate Industries facility in South Dennis, MA for asphalt batching, under an approved Bill of Lading. TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF TPH LABORATORY ANALYSIS-END POINT SAMPLES METHOD 1,2,3-RISK CHARACTERIZATION: SOIL [ug/g=ppm] . Exposure Point RESULTS S-1 SOIL STD. S-2 SOIL STD.- S-3 SOIL STD. DIR.CONTACT Location&Analyte (µg/g=ppm) (µgig=ppm) (µgig=ppm) (µgig=ppm) STANDARDS (99/9=ppm) 310 CMR 40.0975(6)(a) 310 CMR 40.0975(6Xa) 310 CUR 40.0975(6Xa) 310 CUR 40.0985(6) (depth below grade surface) GW-3 GW-3 GW-3 S-1/S-2/S-3 TPH SW-N:0-3' BRL(<62) .1,000. 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 TPH SW-S:0-3' BRL(<65) 1,000 . _ 3,000 '5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 TPH SW-E:0-3' BRL(<69) 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 TPH f SW-W:0-3' 1. BRL(<60) 1,000 1 3,000 5,000' 1 1,000/3,000/5,000 TPH=Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons EPH-Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons,PAH=Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons j BRL=Below Reportable Limit r Shaded areas represent applicable MCP criteria. j The contractor used the next few days to secure a large enough trench box and to position the trench box in the excavation. The removal. of impacted soils continued on August 2, 2011. I The excavation continued from 6' bgs to approximately 16' bgs at which time the operator was instructed to level off the bottom of the excavation in preparation to collect endpoint soil samples. Soil samples were collected from the sidewall and bottom of hole areas from each I quadrant of the excavation. The collected soil samples were placed in 8-ounce glass jars, sealed with aluminum septa and agitated to develop organic vapors. The soil samples were then field screened for total organic volatiles (TOV) with a photoionization detector (PID) [Thermo n Environmental 580B OVM, 10.6 eV lamp, calibrated to benzene standard] by far headspace , method as consistent with the MA DEP Soils Policy. (WSC-94-400). Field screening of soil samples from the sidewalls of the excavation reported TOV concentrations from background(1.5 ppm) to 145 ppm in the southeastern sidewall sample [SW-S (E)]. Field screening of soil j samples from the bottom, of hole areas of the excavation reported TOV.concentrations from background (1.5 ppm) in the BOH-N (W) sample to 257 ppm in the BOH-S (E) sample. However, Dexsil PetroFlag testing indicated that elevated PID readings.in the sidewall areas i. DECEMBER 7,2011 BARREIROBEAI I-10302 PAGE 8 OF 22 IRA COMPLETION/A2 RAO,RTN 4-23092 equated to a TPH concentrations that in a 60/40 fractional breakdown of risk based EPH, could result in a EPC that would meet the S-1/GW-3 standards. Regardless, further excavation was precluded by the limitations of the in-place trenching and equipment. Representative endpoint samples were preserved in the field and sent to a MA Certified Laboratory for EPH with PAH analysis. Subsequent to the collection and field screening of endpoint soil samples, 420 lbs of Regenox Oxidizer Complex (Part A, powder) was mixed with residually impacted soil in the bottom of excavation. BEA then applied 2401bs of Regenox Activator Complex (Part B, gel), in an approximate 10% solution, to the bottom of hole area to initiate a chemical oxidation reaction for the destruction of low-level residual impact. The excavation was then stabilized with two feet of double-washed stone. The following day, the sub-slab venting system was constructed and installed in the excavation area. The venting system was constructed of 4" diameter perforated PVC pipe laterals, set in washed stone along the bottom-of-hole area(refer to site plan). A 4" solid piece of PVC riser was then plumbed to the lateral components and connected to a turbine vent for the passive venting of residual petroleum volatiles. Results of the EPH testing of endpoint soil samples were reported on August 10, 2011. With the exception of the BOH-SE: 16-17' samples, laboratory results reported all concentrations of fractional EPH and target PAHs as BRL or a low level concentrations. In each case, the reported concentration, or reporting limit concentration, was less than the most restrictive S- 1/GW-3 Method 1 - Risk Characterization Standard. The BOH-SE:16-17' sample did report concentrations of fractional C9-C18 Aliphatics and CI I-C22 Aromatics above the S-1/GW-3 but below the applicable S-2 and S-3/GW-3 Method 1- Risk Characterization Standard Standards. The laboratory analytical results associated with the confirmatory soil samples collected from the extent of excavation are presented in Tables 2 below. The significance of these results is further discussed in the Risk Characterization section of this report. TABLE 2: SUMMARY OF EPH LABORATORY ANALYSIS-END POINT SAMPLES METHOD 1,2,3-RISK CHARACTERIZATION: SOIL [ug/g=ppm] Exposure Point RESULTS S-1 SOIL STD. S-2 SOIL STD. S-3 SOIL STD. DIR.CONTACT Location&Analyte (µg/g=ppm) (µg/g=ppm) (µg/g=ppm) (µg/g=ppm) STANDARDS (11€/9=PPm) 310 CMR 40.0975(6xa) 310 CMR 40.0975(6xa) 310 CMR 40.0975(6xa) 310 CMR 40.0985(6) (depth below grade surface) GW-3 GW-3 GW-3 S-1/S2/S-3 SW-S(W):3-15' EPH C9-C 18 Aliphatics BRL(<20) 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000, + C19-C36 Aliphatics BRL(<20) 3,000 5,000 5,000 2,500/5,000/5,000. C11-C22 Aromatics BRL(<20) 1,000 .3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000' ar et PAH All Target Analytes BRL(<0.50) 0.7 4 _10 ?0.7/4/30 DECEMBER 7,2011 BARREIROBEA11-10302 PAGE 9 OF 22 IRA COMPLETION/A2 RAO,RTN 4-23092 TABLE 2: SUMMARY OF EPH LABORATORY ANALYSIS-END POINT SAMPLES METHOD 1,2,3-RISK CHARACTERIZATION: SOIL [ug/g=ppm] Exposure Point RESULTS S-1 SOIL STD. S-2 SOIL STD. S-3 SOIL STD. DIR.CONTACT Location&Analyte (µg/g=ppm) (µg/g=ppm) (µg/g=ppm) (µg/g=ppm) STANDARDS 619/9=PPm) . 310 CMR 40.0975(6xa) 310 CUR 40.0975(6xa) 310 CMR 40.0975(6xa) 310 CMR 40.0985(6) (depth below grade surface GW-3 GW-3 GW-3 S-1/S-2/S-3 SW-W(S):3-15' C9-C18 Aliphatics BRL(<20) 1,000 3,000 1.5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 C19-06 Aliphatics BRL(<20) 3,000 5,000 5,000 ,,2,500/5,000/5,000 C11-C22 Aromatics BRL(<20) 1,000 3,000 R 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 Target PAH f , All Target Analytes BRL(<0.50) 0.7 4 ti',10 >0.7/4/30 SW-W(N):3-15' , EPH ' C9-C18 Aliphatics BRL(<20) 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 C19-C36 Aliphatics BRL(<20) 3,000 5,000 t 5,000 2,500/5,000/5,000 Cl 1-C22 Aromatics BRL(<20) 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 Target PAH All Target Analytes BRL(<0.50) 0.7 4 10 2:0.7/4/30 , SW-N(W):3-15' EPH C9-Cl8 Aliphatics BRL(<21) 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 C19-C36 Aliphatics BRL(<21) 3,000 5,000 5,000 2,500/5,000/5,000 Cll-C22Aromatics BRL(<21) 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 Target PAH All Target Analytes BRL <0.52) 0.7 4 10 >0.7/4/30 BOH-N(W):16-17' EPH C9-C18 Aliphatics BRL(<21) 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 C19-06 Aliphatics BRL(<21) 3,000 5,000 5,000- 2,500/5,000/5,000 . C I I-C22 Aromatics BRL(<L1) 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,600/3,000/5,000 Tar et PAH All Target Analytes BRL(<0.52) 0.7 4 10 >_0.1/4/30 BOH-S(W):16-17' r EPH C9-C18 Aliphatics 870 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 ` C19-C36 Aliphatics 260 3,000 5,000 5,000 2,500/5,000/5,000 C11-C22 Aromatics 770 1,000 3,000 5,000 11000/3,000/5,000, Target PAHs(Detects only) Naphthalene 1.0 500 1,000 3,000.- 500/1,000/3,000 2-Methylnaphthalene 10.0 300 500 500 300/500/500! . I Acenaphthene 0.54 10 10 10 1,000/3,000/5,000• j Acenaphthene 1.6 1,000 3,000 5,000, �1,000/3,000/5,000! r i I . I DECEMBER 7,2011 BARREIROBEA11-10302 PAGE 10 OF 22 IRA COMPLETION/A2 RAO,RTN 4-23092 TABLE 2: SUMMARY OF EPH LABORATORY ANALYSIS-END POINT SAMPLES METHOD 1,2,3-RISK CHARACTERIZATION:SOIL [ug/g=ppm] Exposure Point RESULTS S-1 SOIL STD. S-2 SOIL STD. S-3 SOIL STD. DIR.CONTACT Location&Analyte (µg/g=ppm) (µg/g=ppm) (µg/g=ppm) (µg/g=ppm) STANDARDS (99/9=ppm) 310 CMR 40.0975(6xa) 310 CUR 40.0975(6xa) 310 CUR 40.0975(6xa) 310 CMR 40.0985(6) (depth below grade surface) GW-3 GW-3 GW-3 S-1/S-2/S-3 Flourene 2.1 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000- Phenanthrene 2.5 500 1,000 3,000 500/1,000/3,000 Anthracene 0.59 1,000 3,000 5,000_ 1,000/3,000/5,000' SW-S(E):3-15' EPH C9-C18 Aliphatics 360 1,000 3,0004 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 C19-C36 Aliphatics 110 3,000 5,000' 5,0001 2,500/5,000/5,000 C11-C22 Aromatics 280 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 Target PAHs(Detects only) Naphthalene 0.68 500: 1,000 3,600 500/1,000/3,000` 2-Methyhnjphthalene : 5.4 300 500 500 300/500/500 Acenaphthene 0.57 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,00015,000 Flourene 0.99 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 Phenanthrene 1.3 500 1,000 3,000 -, 50011,000/3,000 SW-E(S):3-15' EPH C9-C18 Aliphatics BRL(<20) 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 C19-06 Aliphatics BRL(<20) 3,000 5,000 5,000 2,500/5,000/5,000 C11-C22 Aromatics :13RL(<20) 1,000. k 3,000, f 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 Target PAH All Target Anal es BRL <0.51) 0.7 .4 -10 >_0.7/4/30 SW-E(N):3-15' EPH C9-C18 Aliphatics BRL(<20) 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 C19-06 Aliphatics BRL(<20) 3,000 5,000 5,000 2,500/5,000/5,0.00 C I 1-C22 Aromatics BRL(<20) 1,000 ! 1000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 Target PAH All Target Analytes BRL(<0.50) 0.7 4,• 10 ?0.7/4/30 SW-N(E):3-15' " it EPH C9-C18 Aliphatics BRL(<20) 1,000 3,000 5,000• { 1;000/3,000/5,000 C19-C36 Aliphatics BRL(<20) 3,000 5,000 5,000 2,500/5,000/5,00'0 CI1- 22 Arm - C Aromatics BRL <20 1 000( ) 3;000 5,000' 1,000/3,000/5,000 Target PAH r All Target Anal es BRL(<0.50) 0.7 41 10 ?0.7/4/30 _ BOH-N(E):16-17' EPH C9-C18 Aliphatics BRL(<20) 1,000 3,000 51000 ___I,000/3,000/5,000 DECEMBER 7,2011 BARREIROBEA11-10302 PAGE 11 OF 22 IRA COMPLETION/A2 RAO,RTN 4-23092 TABLE 2: SUMMARY OF EPH LABORATORY ANALYSIS-END POINT SAMPLES METHOD 1,2,3-RISK CHARACTERIZATION: SOIL [ug/g=ppm] Exposure Point RESULTS S-1 SOIL STD. S-2 SOIL STD. S-3 SOIL STD. DIR.CONTACT Location&Analyte (µg/g=PPm) (µgig=PPm) (µg/i=PPm) (µgtg=PPm) STANDARDS (Ng/B=PPm) 310 CMR 40.0975(6xa) 310 CMR 40.0975 fta) 310 CMR 40.0975(6xa) 310 CMR 40.0985(6) (depth below grade surface) GW-3 GW-3 GW-3 S-1/S-2/S-3 C19-C36 Aliphatics BRL(<20) 3,000 5,000 5,000 , 2,500/5,000/5,000 Cll-C22 Aromatics BRL(<20) 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 Target PAH i All Target Anal es BRL(<0.51) 0.7 4 10 >0.7/4/30 BOH-S(E):16-17' EPH C9-C18 Aliphatics - 2,200 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 C19-C36 Aliphatics 590 3,000 5,000 5,000 2,500/5,000/5,000 C11-C22 Aromatics 2,400 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 Target PAHs(Detects only) Naphthalene 8.8 500 1,000 3,000• . 500/1,000/3,000 2-Methylnaphtltalene 55.0 300 500 500+ 300/500/500 Acenaphthene 5.6 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 Flourene 7.5 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 Phenanthrene 8.6 500 1 1,000 1 .3,000 500/1,000/3,000 Computed EPC EPH C9-C18 Aliphatics 293 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 C19-C36 Aliphatics 86.75 3,000 5,000 5,000 2;500/5;000/5,000 CII-C22 Aromatics 295 1,000 3,000 5,000 1,000/3,000/5,000 _ TPH=Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons ! EPH=Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons,PAH=Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons BRL=Below Reportable Limit Shaded areas represent applicable MCP criteria. BEA returned to the Site on August 10, 2011 to perform a general site inspection subsequent to soil removal and treatment activities at the Site. The monitoring wells were located and checked for viability. Upon checking the condition of monitoring well MW-3, approximately 6" of LNAPL were observed in the well via a disposable bailer. The product was bailed from the well and placed into a 55-gallon drum already on site. None of the other groundwater monitoring wells exhibited any odor or petroleum sheen. Recovery well RW-1 was also inspected with 6" of LNAPL also observed. RW-1 was subsequently bailed of product, with the remedial waste placed into the same 55-gallon drum. Upon learning of the accumulation of product at MW-3, BEA personnel immediately contacted the LSP of record, David Bennett. David Bennett instructed BEA field personnel to reconstruct and' activate the constant-rate suppression well (CSW-1), in an attempt to draw the product back towards the area of release i and to setup the product.recovery system. As such, CSW-1 was reactivated on this day with � I DECEMBER 7,2011 BARREIROBEAl 1-10302 PAGE 12 OF 22 IRA COMPLETION/A2 RAO,RTN 4-23092 plans to return the following day to install the product recovery system in both RW-1 and MW-3. BEA returned the following day, on August 11, 2011 to re-install the selective skimmer system in RW-1 and to install a second selective skimmer in monitoring well MW-3,. On this day RW-1 contained approximately 2" of LNAPL when checked with a bailer, while MW-3 contained approximately 3/8" of LNAPL. The skimmer systems were set at static water level and left to operate. BEA personnel also collected a sample from the influent of the constant suppression well (CSW-1) and the intermediate effluent in review of carbon breakthrough as part of the establish.OM&M protocols. Results of the influent sample as well as the intermediate sample both reported all concentrations of EPH/PAHs and VPH/BTEX as BRL. Although it is not uncommon to realize rebound following chemical oxidation, the stripping of petroleum hydrocarbons below the extent of excavation to the groundwater was intended for the treatment of residual soil and groundwater impacts. "BEA returned to the Site on a weekly basis over the next several weeks to perform system operation and maintenance on the LNAPL recovery system and to evaluate the persistence of LNAPL accumulations and monitor groundwater conditions for remedial additives and petroleum impact. The product accumulation in MW-3 .diminished .quickly and completely. On August 23rd, the suppressions system was shutdown to re-evaluate rebound. In subsequent inspections,. no LNAPL accumulations were evident in MW-3 and the skimmer system was removed from MW-3.on August 30, 201,1 and replaced with an absorbent sock. After the slug of product was captured in the MW-3 monitoring well in the weeks following the chemical oxidation treatment, no additional.product was observed in MW-3 following the placement of the absorbent sock. BEA personnel were at the site on September 1, 2011 to meet Auto Body Solvent Recovery Corp. (ABSRC) to pump out the two partially full product recovery drams. ABSRC pumped a total of 50 gallons of oil-water mix from the two drums and transported the waste to Murphy's Waste Oil Service in Woburn, MA. A copy of the Hazardous Waste Manifest is included for reference in Appendix C. BEA personnel continued to operate the product recovery system in RW-1 without. suppression controls over the next several weeks. On October 11,2011 BEA personnel returned to the Site to perform a system O&M. Based on a decreasing amount of product being recovered from RW-1, the suppression and product recovery systems were suspended and an:absorbent sock was placed in the well. No additional product accumulation was:observed in RW-1 following the placement of the absorbent sock in RW-1 collection. During the,course of operation from March 4, 2011 to October 11, 2011, the LNAPL recovery system recovered more than 143 gallons of product and water, which was later transported off-site under various Hazardous Waste Manifests. Spent absorbent socks and a small amount of oily water were added to impacted soils as was drummed at the site. This final drum was manifested and transported off the property December 7, 2011 [Refer to Appendix C]. Additionally, the activated carbon drums were drained and collected by Carbon Filtration for recycling(reactivation). The receipts for the removal of drummed remedial waste and activated DECEMBER 7,2011 _BARREIRO/BEA11-10302 PAGE 13 OF 22 IRA COMPLETION/A2 RAO,RTN 4-23092 carbon are presented in Appendix C. BEA personnel also performed monthly groundwater sampling on this date, in review of closure objectives. Static-water level measurements.again demonstrated a southerly groundwater flow direction towards Barnstable Harbor (Refer to Site Plan). At the time of sampling,no odor or sheen was reported in any of the monitoring wells. All samples were collected in appropriately preserved laboratory .containers and set on ice in a cooler. Laboratory analysis reported concentrations of C-19 to C-36 Aliphatics in MW-1 (150 ppm) and MW-2 (120 mg/L) as below the most stringent GW-1 and applicable GW-3 Method 1 Risk Characterization Standards. MW-4 reported all fractional EPH and target PAHs as BRL, wherein the reporting limits were less than the most restrictive GW-1 and applicable GW-3, Method 1 Risk Characterization criteria. Concentrations of fractional EPH and target analytes were reported in monitoring well MW-3, however these concentrations were also below the applicable GW-3 and ; the most stringent GW-1 criteria. BEA also collected wet chemistry samples in review of remedial additive impact. Results . of the wet chemistry analyses reported concentrations of Sulfate, Total Iron and Sodium concentrations as generally consistent with concentrations previously observed. It was noted, however that sodium concentrations in monitoring wells MW-1 and MW-4 decreased significantly from the previous baseline sampling event in April 2011. This may have to do with the application of salt to roadways and parking lots in the winter months. Regardless, no adverse impact to groundwater was noted in the remedial additive testing conducted through the time of travel following Regenox application. BEA continued to make weekly inspections of the recovery well. During the November 2, 2011 weekly inspection, BEA removed the absorbent sock from RW-1 in anticipation of the next monthly groundwater sampling event. BEA personnel returned to the Site on November 7, 2011 to perform additional monthly groundwater sampling subsequent to soil removal activities and remedial additive application as within the time of travel projections from the shutdown of the suppression system. Monitoring wells MW-1 through MW-4, as well as the recovery well (RW-1) were _sampled for EPH with target PAHs. Static water level measurements again demonstrated a southerly groundwater flow direction towards Barnstable Harbor (Refer to Site Plan). At the time of sampling, a moderate petroleum odor and slight petroleum sheen was observed in monitoring well MW-3 as well as in recovery well RW-1. Laboratory analysis reported all fractional EPH and target PAHs in monitoring wells MW-1 and MW-2 as BRL, wherein the reporting limits were less than the most restrictive GW-1 and applicable GW-3, Method 1 Risk Characterization criteria. Monitoring well MW-3 reported trace concentrations of Naphthalene and 2-Methylnaphthalene below the applicable GW-3 and most stringent GW-1 standards. Concentration of EPH fractional C-I I to C-22.Aromatics and target PAHs were detected in monitoring well MW-4 and RW-1 above the most stringent GW-1 standards, but significantly below the applicable GW-3 Method 1 Risk Characterization Standards. Groundwater analytical results are summarized in Table 3 below. h DECEMBER 7,2011 BARREIROBEA11-10302 PAGE 14 OF 22 IRA COMPLETION/A2 RAO,RTN 4-23092 TABLE 3: SUMMARY OF TPH/EPH/VPH LABORATORY ANALYSIS METHOD 1,2,3-RISK CHARACTERIZATION: GROUNDWATER[ug/L=ppm] Exposure Point RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS. RESULTS RESULTS GW-1 STD. GW-2 STD, GW-3 STD Location (mg/L==ppm)(mg/L=ppm)(mg/L=ppm)(mg/LF=ppm)(mg/L=ppm)(mg/L=ppm) (MeUL ppm) (MA;=Ppm) (mg/L=ppm) . 310 CMR 310 CMR 310 CMR 2/10/11 4/26/11 7/6/11, 8/30/11 10/11/11 11/7/11 40.0974(2) 40.0974(2) 40.0974 2 . MW-1 TPH TPH BRL(<200) BRL(<200) 200 5,000 5,000 EPH C9-C18 Aliphatics BRL(<110) BRL(<100) BRL(<100) BRL(<100) 700 5,000 50,000 C19-06 Aliphatics BRL(<110) 150 BRL(<100) BRL(<100) 14,000 NA '50,000 C11-C22 Aromatics BRL(<110) BRL(<100) BRL(<100) BRL(<100) 200 50,000 5,000 Target PAH(detects only) All BRL All BRL All BRL All BRL various various various.. MW-2 TPH BRL(<200) 200 5,000 5,000 EPH C9-C18 Aliphatics BRL(<110) BRL(<100) BRL(<100) BRL(<100) BRL(<100) 700 5,000 50,600 C19-06 Aliphatics BRL(<110) BRL(<100) 120 BRL(<100) BRL(<100) 14,000 NA 50,000 Cl 1-C22 Aromatics BRL(<110) BRL(<100) BRL(<I00) BRL(<100) BRL(<100) 200 50,000 5,000 All BRL Target PAH detects only) All BRL (<0.5) All BRL All BRL All BRL various various various MW-3 TPH BRL(<200) 200 5,000 5,000 EPH C9-C18 Aliphatics BRL(<100). BRL(<100) 120 BRL(<100) BRL(<100) 700 5,000 50,000 v C19-C36 Aliphatics. 120 BRL(<100) 140 BRL(<100) BRL(<100) 14,000. NA 50,060' Cl 1-C22 Aromatics 110 BRL(<100) 230 BRL(<100) BRL(<I00) 200 50,000 5,000 Target PAH detects only) Naphthalene 4.1 1.9 5.5 BRL(<0.4) 1.27 140 1,000 20,000 2-Methylnaphthalene 4.6 1.9 8.5 BRL(<0.4) 1.34 10 2,000 20,606 Flourene BRL(<0.5) BRL(<O.5) 0.6 BRL(<0.4) BRL(<0.4) 30 NA 40 Phenanthrene BRL <0.5 BRL <0.5 1.0 BRL <0.4 BRL <0.4 40 NA 10,000!, MW-4 EPH C9-C18 Aliphatics BRL(<100) BRL(<110) BRL(<100) BRL(<100) BRL(<100) BRL(<100) 700 5,000 50,000 C19-06 Aliphatics BRL(<l00) BRL(<l 10) BRL(<100) BRL(<100) BRL(<100) BRL(<100) 14,000 NA 50,000 Cl 1-C22 Aromatics BRL(<100) BRL(<110) BRL(<100) BRL(<100) BRL(<100) 261 200 50,000 5,000 All BRL All BRL All BRL All BRL Target PAH(detects only) (<0.5) (<0.5) (<0.5) (<0.5) E Naphthalene 2.8 20.7 140 1,000 20,000 2-Methylnaphthalene 3.58 27.1 10 2,000 20,000 Acenaphthene BRL(<0..4) 0.935 20 NA 6,000 Flourene BRL(<0..4) 0.8 30 NA y 40) Phenanthrene BRL <0..4) 1 0.915 40 NA 10,000 DECEM 3ER 7,2011 BARREIROBEA11-10302 PAGE 15 OF 22 IRA COMPLETION/A2 RAO,RTN 4-23092 .TABLE 3: SUMMARY OF TPH/EPH/VPH LABORATORY ANALYSIS METHOD 1,2,3-RISK CHARACTERIZATION: GROUNDWATER [ug/L=ppm] Exposure Point RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS RESULTS GW-1 STD. GW-2 STD. GW-3 STD. Location (rneDwm)(mg/L=ppm)(mg/L=ppm)(mg/L=ppm)(mg/LF:Ppm)(mg/LF=Ppm (mg/L=ppm) (mg(L=ppm) (-g(LL=ppm) 310 CMR 310 CMR 310 CMR' 2/10/11 4/26/11 7/6/11 8/30/11 10/11/11 i inn 1 40.0974(2) 40.0974(2) 40.0974(2 MW-0 VPH C5-C8 Aliphatics BRL(<20) NT NT NT . NT NT 300 3,000 50,000 C9-Cl2 Aliphatics BRL(QO) 700 5,000 50,000 C9-C10 Aromatics BRL(<20) 200 7,000 50,000 Target BTEX All BRL CSW-1 8/11/2011 RW-1 EPH O-C18 Aliphatics 11,000 NT NT BRL(<160) NT BRL(<100) 700 5,000 50,000 C19-06 Aliphatics 3,300 BRL(<160) BRL(<100) 14,000 NA 50,000 C11-C22 Aromatics 5,600 BRL(<160) 369 200 50,000 5,000• Tam et PAH detects only) Naphthalene 6 - BRL(<5) 19.6 140 1,000 20,000 2-Methylnaphthalene: 72 BRL(<5) 28.4 10 2,000 20,000 Acenaphthene BRL BRL(<5) 1.42 20 NA 6,000 Flomene 18 BRL(<5) 1.65 30 NA 40 Phenanthrene 16 13RL(<5) 2.33 40 NA 10,000 CSW-1 8/11/2011 VPH C5-C8 Aliphatics 520 NT NT BRL(<20) NT NT 300 3,000 50,000 C9-C12 Aliphatics 250 BR,(<20) 700 5,000 50,000 C9-C10 Aromatics 270 BRL(<20) 200 7,000 50,000 Tareet BTEX 70 50,000 50,000 MtBE BRL(<5) BRL(<5) Benzene BRL(<1) BR,(<1) 5 2,000 10,000 Toluene BRL(<5) BRL(<5) 1,000 50,000 40,000 Ethylbenzene BRL(<5) BR,(<5) 700 20,000 Si000 m/p-Xylene BRL(<5) BRL(<5) 10,000 9,000 5,000 o-Xylene BRL(<5) BRL(<5) 10,000 9,000 5,000 Naphthalene 11 BR <5) 140 1,000 20,000 TPH=Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons 0 o dro arbors y EPH=Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons,PAH-Po1 nucle ar Aromatic Hydrocarbons BRL=Below Reportable Limit Shaded areas represent applicable MCP criteria. I , i 1 DECEMBER 7,2011 BARREIROBEAI.1-10302 PAGE 16 OF 22 IRA COMPLETION/A2 RAO,RTN 4-23092 RISK CHARACTERIZATION [Refer to Appendix D] Soil As presented, the S-2 and S-3 (GW-3) soils categories are applicable in consideration of Method 1 - Risk Characterization, as consistent with the provisions of 310 CMR 40.0933. These standards were developed to evaluate potential ingestion, inhalation and environmental/dermal contact exposures, and in consideration of potential leaching of contaminants to groundwater (GW-3). For the purposes of risk characterization, the most stringent S-1 (GW-3), Method 1 - Risk Characterization standards are considered for all foreseeable future use and activities at the property. Laboratory analytical data associated with the extent of excavation, did report one area of residual EPH/PAH impact greater than the strictest S-1/GW-3, Method 1 — Risk Characterization standards. This discrete area is isolated as being more than 15' below the existing grade and hence any practical exposure to humans is unlikely. Regardless, in order to qualify potential exposure risks associated with residual impacts in contiguous soils, an Exposure Point Concentration was developed in accordance with the provisions of 310 CMR 40.0926. The computed EPC reported that the simple average wherein more than 90% the samples meet the aforementioned standards, the averaged EPH/PAH concentrations are significantly less than the applicable and most restrictive S-1 (GW-3) Method 1 — Risk Characterization standards. As such, wherein no hotspots are reported and greater than 75% of the data points meet the applicable Method 1 — Risk Characterization criteria, the EPC has demonstrated a condition of No Significant Risk for potential exposures with regard to soil conditions at the Site following soil removal operations without any Activity or Use Limitations. Groundwater Based on the NPDWSA designation and proximity to groundwater, only the GW-3 groundwater category is applicable in consideration of Method 1 - Risk Characterization, as consistent with the provisions of 310 CMR 40.0932. The GW-3 standards are developed to evaluate dermal contact exposures and significant environmental impacts to receiving waters and natural resources. Product recovery and chemical oxidation treatments have removed free phase oil (LNAPL) from the groundwater interface. Dissolved phase groundwater impacts and downgradient migration has been monitoring by the period testing of monitoring wells and the treatment systems recovery and suppression wells throughout the IRA. Most importantly, in consideration of cleanup performance and exposure risks to soil removal and chemical oxidation treatments, three rounds of groundwater sampling have been conducted at the monitoring wells In August, October and November 2001. In the most recent November sampling, an additional groundwater sample was collected from the former LNAPL recovery well immediate below the area of release, soil removal and chemical oxidation treatment as critical to evaluation of remedial performance and exposure risk to support project closure. Results of these groundwater sampling events reported concentrations of fractional EPH and target PAHs at low level concentrations or as below the reporting limits of the analysis. In DECEMBER 7,2011 BARREIRO/BEAl 1-10302 PAGE 17 OF 22 IRA COMPLETION/A2 RAO,RTN 4-23092 all cases, the reporting limit concentrations or reported concentrations were below the applicable GW-3 Method l - Risk Characterization Standards. Likewise, the testing of the former recovery j well, RW-1, as a positively biased sampling location, also reported all fractional EPH and target PAH analyte concentrations below the applicable GW-3,. Method 1 - Risk Characterization Standards. Based on these analytical results a condition of No Significant Risk is apparent in consideration of potential exposures .and environmental impacts in support of the Class A-2, response Action Outcome Statement included herein. Indoor Air As previously noted groundwater at the property is located at a depth greater than 15' P Y below the existing surface grades at the subject property and surrounding area. As such, the potential for vapor entry from contaminated groundwater into occupied structures under the consideration of the GW-2, Method 1 — Risk Characterization standards is not considered a foreseeable exposure. Notwithstanding, the post remedial testing of groundwater has reported fractional EPH and target analyte concentrations as less than the GW-2, Method 1 — Risk Characterization standards: In accordance with the provisions of 310 CMR 40.0942(l) (d), if one or more VOCs is present in vadose zone soil adjacent to an occupied structure (i.e. within 6' horizontally from the wall of the structure or 10' vertically from the basement floor) then the soil has the potential to result in significant indoor air concentrations of OHM and Method 1 alone cannot be used to characterize risk at the Site. Based on endpoint sampling, it would appear the any residual petroleum hydrocarbon impacts would meet the vertical and horizontal separation distances and that no indoor air quality degradation is foreseeable. However, as a precautionary measure to further qualify any adverse impacts to indoor air quality are unlikely, BEA conducted Method 2, i Level 1 — Soil Gas Screening via the sub-slab venting system constructed in the bottom of the I excavation as consistent with the provisions of MA DEP Policy WSC-02-411,Implementation of the MA DEP VPH/EPH Approach and the more recent Standard Operating Procedures for Indoor Air Contamination (SOP BWSC-07-01). Photoionization was conducted twice following the final round of groundwater sampling. The TOV concentrations in the piping manifolded i from the bottom of the' excavation to the surface were reported as less than 0.02 ppmv. Such measurements were significantly less than the strictest response standard (ethyl benzene) for the instrument used [PID, 10.6 eV lamp], as reported in "Table 4-9: Soil Gas PID/FID Screening Levels for Evaluating Indoor Air Impacts" of the Implementation of the MA DEP VPH/EPH ! Approach (Policy#WSC-02-411, 10/31/02). i Based on the results of the Level I — Soil Gas Screening, impacts to indoor air are not likely, in accordance with the provisions of Section 4.3.1.1 of the above referenced policy. As such, Method 1 Standards, in conjunction with Level 1 — Soil Gas Screening, have established that residual petroleum concentrations in isolated and potentially accessible soils have not, and will not contribute to any significant degradation of indoor air quality within any future building I to be constructed on the property. Method 2, Level 1 — Soil Gas Screening have demonstrated that no Imminent or Substantial Hazard conditions are present wherein environmental monitoring f DECEMBER 7,2011 BARREIRO/BEA1I-10302 PAGE 18 OF 22 IRA COMPLETION/A2 RAO,RTN 4-23092 and laboratory analysis have established a condition of No Significant Risk with respect to potential indoor air quality degradation and inhalation exposures at the subject Site as related to the subject fuel oil release in accordance with the current regulations and policies in effect at the time of this filing. DATA USABILITY ASSESSMENT & REPRESENTATIVENESS EVALUATION The following presents a discussion of the Site information used to support the RAO as required by 310 CMR 40.1056(2) (k) and incorporating the guidance provided in MADEP Policy WSC-07-350. It provides an evaluation and demonstration of the adequacy of the spatial and i temporal data sets used to support the RAO and makes conclusions on the accuracy, precision and sensitivity of the data used. Conceptual Site Model During the winter of 2010-2011, the 275-gallon fuel oil AST at the subject property was discovered to be leaking. Based fuel delivery records, and past oil consumption, it was estimated that there was a release of some 500+1- gallons of fuel oil. The oil leaked onto the ground immediately beneath the AST and infiltrated into subsurface soils. Based on test borings conducted within the area of release, the oil infiltrated soils to the groundwater interface at approximately 21' below grade and accumulated as free phase LNAPL on the surface of the groundwater and as dissolved impact to groundwater. Such impacts were subject to migration in a southerly downgradient direction as controlled on a temporary basis by suppression control. Suppression control also facilitated product recovery pending soil removal and chemical oxidation treatment. Mass balance computations of oil recovery as LNAPL and through soil are comparable to estimated loss as evidence of source removal. Subsequent testing of endpoint soil samples and groundwater samples through the estimated time of travel confirm the effectiveness of remedial efforts wherein residual soil impacts remain isolated below 15' and groundwater concentrations meet the prescribed GW-3, Method 1 Risk Characterization standards to support project closure. Field Screening ,PID screening and observations were used to qualify significant impact in soils and to make informed dynamic decisions in the field in advance of submitting samples for MA Certified analyses. In some cases, Dexsil PetroFlag testing was conducted to qualify TPH concentration iri the field. Samples with higher levels of odor or PID were assumed to be more contaminated than those samples with lower levels. Comparison of visual, PID, Dexsil PetroFlag testing and observations indicates the field screening data correlates with the analytical data and was useful in dynamic decision making to direct soil removal operations and to select worst case samples for more detail and costly analysis. DECEMBER 7,2011 BARREIRO/BEA11-10302 PAGE 19 OF 22 IRA COMPLETION/A2 RAO,,RTN 4-23092 Sampling Locations Hand boring locations for environmental :assessment of petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations in soils_ were selected as based on proximity to the point of release wherein medium-coarse grained sands facilitated general uniform infiltration routes in all directions from the points of release at the tank. Based on the magnitude of significant impact and the hand/test boring locations, an approximate IT x 15' x 21'D area of impact was qualified as representing the area of prescribed soil removal operations (Refer to Site Plan). PID screening and Dexsil field- testing were used to qualify the extent of contaminated soil removal. Confirmatory soil samples were preserved for laboratory analysis of risk-based EPH and target PAH concentrations. Sixteen soil samples were collected for analyses from the extent of soil removal wherein the bottom-of-hole samples were collected as some 5' (+/-) above groundwater. Sidewall samples were taken from the 0-3' interval in consideration of exposure risks to surficial (S-2) soils and the 3-16' interval in consideration of exposure risks to potentially accessible (S-3) soils. Field duplicates or trip blanks were not collected or considered necessary because the disposal Site was small, the soil removal operations had produced clean conditions and QA/QC protocols were employed and documented. After collection, the samples were placed in appropriately preserved laboratory containers and stored on ice in a cooler, and subsequently within a refrigerator, pending shipment to the laboratory under a properly executed chain-of-custody. Monitoring well locations were selected as based on the known source location and understanding of solute transport mechanism wherein a southerly groundwater flow direction was defined. The horizontal and vertical extent of impacted groundwater was defined by the monitoring and treatment wells constructed. Testing of the suppression well as having significant groundwater penetrations showed that in the absence of active pumping,groundwater impacts were restricted to the upper 10' section of the unconfined shallow aquifer. Field duplicates or trip blanks were not collected or considered necessary in the sampling of the monitoring wells as based on data validation and usability analysis. After collection, the samples were placed in appropriately preserved laboratory containers and stored on ice in a cooler, and subsequently within a refrigerator, pending shipment to the laboratory under a properly executed chain-of-custody. Temporal Data Due to the nature of soil removal as the primary remedial strategy, temporal data for soils was not necessary and a single set of initial and extended end point samples were relied on for soil risk characterization. In consideration of aquifer characteristics and solute transport mechanisms, temporal samples were critical to such evaluation relative to representativeness and usability of the data as relying on clearly downgradient sampling locations sampled beyond the projected time of travel following the suspension of suppression controls. The results of these post remediation groundwater sampling events on 8/30/11, 10/11/11 and 11/7/11 reported concentrations of EPH and target PAH analytes as BRL or significantly less than the applicable GW-3 Method 1, Risk Characterization Standards as supporting a finding of No Significant Risk under a Class A-2, RAO. i i i DECEMBER 7,2011 BARREIROBEA11-10302 PAGE 20 OF 22 IRA COMPLETION/A2 RAO,RTN 4-23092 Field Completeness The analytical data set is complete. Data from the sidewall and the bottom-of-hole areas was obtained as representing the extent of significant impact and the limits of contaminated soil removal. Data from the monitoring well network was developed over ten months as representing groundwater conditions over time wherein all petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations are reported as significantly less than the applicable GW-3, Method 1 —Risk Characterization standards. The complete data set supports the RAO wherein all QA/QC thresholds and Presumptive Certainty requirements were met or technically justified. Data Inconsistency No data inconsistencies noted between field testing and analytical results. Data Not Used The complete analytical data set associated with confirmatory end-point soil samples was used to support the RAO as representative of Site and environmental conditions subsequent to the excavation of significantly contaminated soils. Analytical data associated with soil assessment, as representative of the identified impact, was used for disposal characterization. Field screening of significantly impacted soil samples collected during environmental assessment was used to select appropriate soil samples for laboratory analysis in review of remedial response actions and risk characterization. All analytical data from groundwater monitoring was reported and considered in review of risk characterization to human and environmental receptors. Data Usability The laboratory results used to support the RAO are found in Appendix D as tabulated on Tables 1, 2 and 3. The analytical methods utilized(TPH and EPH with PAH analytes)respond to the contaminants of concern identified in the release and are appropriate for the investigation of fuel oil impacts in a NPDWSA. Each analytical report was reviewed relative to the QA/QC protocols and note deficiencies evaluated relative to CAM requirements. The analytical data used was validated and justified as representative of environmental conditions. Sidewall and bottom of hole soil samples at the extent of excavation were collected as representing discrete exposures in representative soil categories as a measure of frequency and intensity of use. Additionally, well gauging and slug testing was used to characterize solute transport mechanisms to validate data as representative of groundwater conditions and potential environmental impacts through the r time of travel Based on the nature of fuel oil as lighter than water and temporal considerations and proximity of testing relative to distance from the release area to the downgradient wells, the . installation and testing of partially penetrating monitoring wells was appropriate and representative of groundwater conditions without the need for vertical profiling. Based on the Representativeness Evaluation, the analytical data quality of all of the final DECEM 3ER 7,2011 BARREIROBEA11-10302 PAGE 21 OF 22 IR.A COMPLETION/A2 RAO,RTN 4-23092 end-point soil samples has been reviewed. The analytical data provided in support of this RAO have met the method quality control requirements and performance standards for "Presumptive Certainty" as described in CAM VH A, Section 2.0 (a), (b), (c), and (d) or have been evaluated as comparable to CAM requirements. (Refer to Appendix D). The validity and defensibility of the analytical data used to support the findings of the RAO for this Site with respect to accuracy, precision and completeness pursuant to 310 CMR 40.1056(2)(k)have therefore been satisfied. It has been determined that the Site data is sufficiently representative of actual Site conditions and may be used to support this Class,A-2 RAO. Based on the Representativeness Evaluation, the analytical data quality of all of the final end-point soil samples, and the analytical data quality of all of the past quarterly/monthly groundwater water has been reviewed. BACKGROUND FEASIBILITY EVALUATION A review of cost and feasibility to.meet background conditions through additional soil or groundwater treatments was considered as part of this IRA, in accordance with the provisions of 310 CMR 40.1020. The residual EPH impact in soil is reported as significantly less than the applicable S-3 (GW-3) Method 1 - Risk Characterization standards, with the exception of a single bottom of hole sample located 16' below grade, wherein the calculated EPC indicates no Significant Risk. Furthermore, wherein laboratory analytical data reports residual EPH/PAH concentrations in groundwater have been reported as significantly less than the applicable GW-3 Method 1 Risk Characterization standards in all down gradient wells, as well as within the release area, additional soil and/or groundwater treatment is not justified wherein no significant reduction in risk would be accomplished. As such, current environmental conditions associated with residual low-level EPH and PAH concentrations in soil, as a non-persistent, naturally degrading compound, meet the "Conditions of Categorical Infeasibility" established in Section 9.3.2 of the MA DEP policy "Conducting Feasibility Evaluations Under the MCP" (WSC=04-160), as specifically pertaining to Section 9.3.2.3, "Remediation of Degradable (Non-persistent) Contaminants". Environmental conditions associated with a residual, low-level C-11 to C22 Aromatics and PAH target analytes (naphthalene, 2-methylnaphthalene) in MW-3, MW-4 and RW-1, as non-persistent, naturally degrading compounds, meet the "Conditions of Categorical Infeasibility" established in Section 9.3.2 of the MA DEP policy "Conducting Feasibility Evaluations Under the MCP" (WSC-04- 160), as specifically pertaining to Section 9.3.2.3, "Remediation of Degradable (No persistent) Contaminants". Based on a Site-specific cost-benefit evaluation, treatment towards background EPH and PAH concentrations without significant risk reduction is considered infeasible, and financially unjustified, as consistent with the provisions of Section 9.3.3, Site-Specific Evaluation of the Feasibility to Achieve or Approach Background". As such, a condition of No i Significant Risk has been qualified as representing a Permanent Solution in support of the Class A-2 Response Action Outcome. j i CONCLUSIONS Product recovery, soil removal and chemical oxidation treatment with Regenox was effective in eliminating the petroleum source material as contributing to groundwater I DECEMBER 7,2011 BARREIROBEA11-10302 PAGE 22 OF 22 IRA COMPLETION/A2 RAO,RTN 4-23092 contamination. The Exposure Point Concentration in end point soil samples report all sidewall and bottom of hole areas as meeting the applicable, Method 1 —Risk Characterization standards. The placement and regular testing of representative monitoring wells beyond remedial efforts and projected time of travel has been used to demonstrate the effectiveness of groundwater treatment and document that groundwater meets the GW-3,.method 1 —Risk Characterization standards. Based on the endpoint soil sampling and the post remedial groundwater analysis, a condition of No Significant Risk is apparent in support of an IRA Completion Statement and a Class A-2,Response Action Outcome for project closure. Such represents a Permanent Solution without any restriction of activities or use of the property for the foreseeable future. The findings of this investigation, as represented herein, set forth the rationale and technical justification for the LSP Opinions as established by the certifications made on the attached BWSC-104 and BWSC-105 Transmittal Forms. The LSP Opinions are based upon available data and regulations in effect at the time of this reporting. If you have any questions, or need additional information, please contact us directly at your earliest convenience. _ Very truly yours, ETT VIRONIVIENTAL ASSOCIATES, INC. y Dave nnett, LSP rnior D. ad ma-Wie dt, ES. Pres' nt Project Manager Encl: -Supporting Documentation[Appendices A-E] cc: Felisberto Barreiro -Property Owner Cosmo Galiinaro, LSP—Consultant to BCMIC Thomas McKean-Barnstable Board of Health' John Klimm—Barnstable Town Manager' Deputy Chief Dean Melanson—Hyannis Fire Department' 'Narrative,Title Page and Site Plan provided under public notice distribution requirements pursuant to paperwork reduction policy. Full copies of reports(electronic or paper)provided on written request. it ' _1 l� COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS f �VfO EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AF ,, SMA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTI 2 s 20 ` ONE WINTER STREET,BOSTON MA 02108(617)292- �5 rO4*or oo ' TRUDY COXE 1^ ]Secreta'ryrqy�` \ �4' `DAVID�B STRUHS ARGEO PAUL CELLUCCI Governor SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PARTA CERTIFICATION Property Address: #35 Washington Avenue,Hyannis,MA Name of Owner: Mr. Sam Abrahanni Date of Inspection: 5/17/00 Address of owner: 300 Barnstable Road Name of Inspector:(Please Print) Mr.Carmen E.Shay Hyannis, MA 02601 I am a DEP approved system inspector pursuant to Section 15.340 of Title 5(310 CMR 15.000) Company Name: CARMENE. SHAY-Environmental Services, Inc. Mailing Address: 34 Thatchers Lane, East Falmouth,MA 02536 Telephone Number:508-548-0796 CERTIFICATION STATEMENT I certify that I have personally inspected the sewage disposal system at this address and that the information reported below is true,accurate and complete as of the time of inspection.The inspection was performed based on my training and experience in the roper.funncction and maintenance of on-site sewage disposal systems.The system: ��P�ZN OFAgsS9 XX Passes ? O �o CARMEN zN Conditionally Passes o E. c� Needs Further Evaluation By the Local Approving Authority Fails � BSI Inspector's Signature: C- Date: 5/17/0 0 The System Inspector shall submit a copy of this inspection report to the Approving Authority(Board of Health or DEP)within thirty(30)days of completing this inspection. If the system is a shared system or has a design flow of 10,000 gpd or greater,the inspector and the system owner shall submit the report to the appropriate regional office of the Department or-Environmental'Protection:The original should be sent to the system owner-and copies sent to the buyer,if applicable,and the approving authority. NOTES AND COMMENTS This Certification of this septic system is for the inspection performed of the system on this date only and implies no warranty of future performance under different loadings. revised 9/2/98 Pagel of 11 li SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART A CERTIFICATION(continued) Property Address:35 Washington Avenue,Hyannis,MA Owner: Mr.Sam Abrahanni Date of Inspection: 5/17/00 INSPECTION SUMMARY: Check A,B.C,01 D: A. SYSTEM PASSES: X I have not found any information which indicates that any of the failure conditions described in 310 CMR 15.303 exist.Any failure criteria not evaluated are indicated below. COMMENTS: B. SYSTEM CONDITIONALLY PASSES: One or more system components as described in the"Conditional Pass"section need to be replaced or repaired.The system, upon completion of the replacement or repair,as approved by the Board of Health,will pass. Indicate yes,no,or not determined(Y,N,or ND).Describe basis of determination in all instances. If"not determined",explain why not. The septic tank is metal,unless the owner or operator has provided the system inspector with a copy of a Certificate of Compliance(attached)indicating that the tank was installed within twenty(20)years prior to the date of the inspection;or the septic tank,whether or not metal,is cracked,structurally unsound,shows substantial infiltration or ex-filtration,or tank failure is imminent. The system will pass inspection if the existing septic tank is replaced with a complying septic tank as approved by the Board of Health. Sewage backup or breakout or high static water level observed in the distribution box is due to broken or obstructed pipe(s) or due to a broken,settled or uneven distribution box.The system wilt pass inspection if(with approval of the Board of Health). broken pipe(s)are replaced obstruction is removed distribution box is leveled or replaced The system required pumping-more than four times a year-due to broken or abstracted pipe(s).The system will pass inspection if(with approval of the Board of Health); broken pipe(s)are replaced obstruction is removed revised 9/2/98 page 2 of 11 SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART A CERTIFICATION(continued) Property Address:35 Washington Avenue,Hyannis,MA Owner: Mr.Sam Abrahanni Date of Inspection: 6/17/00 C. FURTHER EVALUATION IS REQUIRED BY THE BOARD OF HEALTH: Conditions exist which require further evaluation by the Board of Health in order to determine if the system is failing to protect the public health,safety and the environment. 1) SYSTEM WILL PASS UNLESS BOARD OF HEALTH DETERMINES IN ACCORDANCE WITH310 CMR 15.303 11Kb)THAT THE SYSTEM IS NOT FUNCTIONING IN A MANNER WHICH WILL PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY AND THE ENVIRONMENT Cesspool or privy is within 50 feet of surface water Cesspool or privy is within 50 feet of a bordering vegetated wetland or a salt marsh. 2) SYSTEM WILL FAIL UNLESS THE BOARD OF HEALTH (AND PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIER. IF ANY) DETERMINES THAT THE SYSTEM FUNCTIONING IN A MANNER THAT PROTECTS THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY AND THE ENVIRONMENT: The system has a septic tank and soil absorption system(MS)and the SAS is within 100 feet of a surface water supply or tributary to a surface water supply. The system has a septic tank and soil absorption system and the SAS is within a Zone I of a public water supply well. The system has a septic tank and soil absorption system and the SAS is within 50 feet of a private water supply well. The system has a septic tank and soil absorption system and the SAS is less than 100 feet but 50 feet or more from a private water supply well,unless a well water analysis for coliform bacteria and volatile organic compounds indicates that the well is free from pollution from that facility and the presence of ammonia nitrogen and nitrate nitrogen is equal to or less than 5 ppm.Method used to determine distance (approximation not valid). 3) OTHER revised 9/2/98 page 3 of 11 SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART A CERTIFICATION(continued) Property Address:35 Washington Avenue,Hyannis,MA Owner: Mr.Sam Abrahanni Date of Inspection: 5/17/00 D. SYSTEM FAILS: You must indicate either"Yes"or"No"to each of the following: I have determined that one or more of the following failure conditions exist as described in 310 CMR 15.303.The basis for this determination is identified below.The Board of Health should be contacted to determine what will be necessary to correct the failure Yes No Backup of sewage into the facility or system components due to an overloaded or clogged SAS or cesspool. Discharge or ponding of effluent to the surface of the ground or surface waters due to an overloaded or clogged SAS or cesspool. Static liquid level in the distribution box above outlet invert due to an overloaded or clogged SAS or cesspool. Liquid depth in cesspool is less than 6"below invert or available volume is less than 1/2 day flow. Required pumping more than 4 times in the last year NOT due to clogged or obstructed pipe(s). Number of times pumped— Any portion of the Soil Absorption System,cesspool or privy is below the high groundwater elevation. Any portion of a cesspool or privy is within 100 feet of a surface water supply or tributary to a surface water supply. Any portion of a cesspool or privy is within a Zone I of a public well. Any portion of a cesspool or privy is within 50 feet of a private water supply well. Any portion of a cesspool or privy is less than 100 feet but greater than 50 feet from a private water supply well with no acceptable water quality analysis. If the well has been analyzed to be acceptable,attach copy of well water analysis for *coliform bacteria,volatile organic compounds,ammonia nitrogen and nitrate nitrogen. E. LARGE SYSTEM FAILS: You must indicate either"Yes"or"No"to each of the following: The following criteria apply to large systems in addition to the criteria above: The system serves a facility with a design flow of 10,000 gpd or greater(Large System)and the system is a significant threat to public health and safety and the environment because one or more of the following conditions exist: Yes No The system is within 400 feet of a surface drinking water supply The system is within 200 feet of a tributary to a surface drinking water supply. The system is located in a nitrogen sensitive area(Interim Wellhead Protection Area-IWPA)or a mapped Zone II of a public water supply well) The owner or operator of any such system shall upgrade the system in accordance with 310 CMR 15.304(2). Please consult the local regional office of the Department for further information. revised 9/2/98 page 4 of 11 SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PARTB CHECKLIST Property Address:35 Washington Avenue,Hyannis,MA Owner: Mr.Sam Abrahanni Date of Inspection: 6/17/00 Check if the following have been done:You must indicate either"Yes"or"No"as to each of the following: Yes No X _ Pumping information was provided by the owner,occupant,or Board of Health. X _ None of the system-components have been pumped for at least two-weeks and the system has been receiving normal flow rates during that period.Large volumes of water have not been introduced into the system recently or as part of this inspection. X _ As built plans have been obtained and examined.Note if they are not available with N/A. X _ The facility or dwelling was inspected for signs of sewage back-up. X _ The system does not receive non-sanitary or industrial waste flow. X _ The site was inspected for signs of breakout. X _ All system components,excluding the Soil Absorption System,have been located on the site. X _ The septic tank manholes were uncovered,opened,and the interior of the septic tank was inspected for condition of baffles or tees,material of construction,dimensions,depth of liquid,depth of sludge,depth of scum.The size and location of the Soil Absorption System on-the site has be determined based on: X _ Existing information. For example. Plan at B.0.H. X _ Determined in the field(if any of the failure criteria related to Part Cis at issue,approximation of distance is unacceptable)(15.302(3)(b) X _ The facility owner(and occupants, if different from owner)were provided with information on the proper maintenance of Sub-Surface Disposal S revised 9/2/98 page 5 of 11 SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PARTC SYSTEM INFORMATION Property Address:35 Washington Avenue,Hyannis,MA Owner: Mr.Sam Abrahanni Date of Inspection: 5/17/00 FLOW CONDITIONS RESIDENTTAL: Design flow: 110_g.p.d./bedroom. Number of bedrooms(design): 3 Number of bedrooms(actual): 3 Total DESIGN flow 330 gpd Number of current residents: 3 Garbage grinder(yes or no): No Laundry(separate system) (yes or no): No ; If yes,separate inspection required Laundry system inspected(yes or no) N/A Seasonal use(yes or no): No Water meter readings, if available(last two year's usage(gpd): 1998- gallons 1999- gallons Sump Pump(yes or no): No Last date of occupancy: Currently Occupied COMMERCIALANDUSTRIAL: Type of establishment: Design flow: gpd(Based on 15.203) Basis of design flow: Grease trap present:(yes or no)_ Industrial Waste Holding Tank present:(yes or no)_ Non-sanitary waste discharged to the Title 5 system:(yes or no) Water meter readings,if available: Last date of occupancy: OTHER:(Describe) Last date of occupancy: PUMPING RECORDS and source of information: Not Pumoed Since System Was Installed in 1997 System pumped as part of inspection:(yes or no) No If yes,volume pumped: gallons Reason for pumping: TYPE OF SYSTEM X Septic tank/distribution box/soil absorption system Single cesspool Overflow cesspool Privy Shared system(yes or no)(if yes,attach previous inspection records, if any) I/A Technology etc.Attach copy of up to date operation and maintenance contract Tight Tank Copy of DEP Approval Other APPROXIMATE AGE of all components,date installed(if known)and source of information:_ 2+Years-per Board of Health Records Sewage odors detected when arriving at the site:(yes or no) No revised 9/2/98 page 6 of 11 SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PARTC SYSTEM INFORMATION (continued) Property Address:35 Washington Avenue,Hyannis,MA Owner: Mr.Sam Abrahanni Date of Inspection: 6/17/00 BUILDING SEWER: (Locate on site plan) Depth below grade: 1.0 feet Material of construction: cast iron XX 40 PVC other(explain) Distance from private water supply well or suction line 16' Diameter 4" Comments:(condition of joints,venting,evidence of leakage,etc.) Building sewer line appeared to be in good condition with no obvious signs of cracks or other problems. SEPTIC TANK: X (locate on site plan) Depth below grade: 1.0 feet Material of construction: X concrete_metal_Fiberglass_Polyethylene—other(explain) If tank is metal,list age_Is age confirmed by a Certificate of Compliance_(Yes/No) Dimensions: 5'wide by 10 feet long and 5 feet deep (1,500 gallon) Sludge depth: 4.5' Distance from top of sludge to bottom of outlet tee or baffle: 2.5' Scum thickness: 1 1/2" Distance from top of scum to top of outlet tee or baffle: 8" Distance from bottom of scum to bottom of outlet tee or baffle: 16.5" How dimensions were determined: Measured Comments: (recommendation for pumping,condition of inlet and outlet tees or-baffles,depth of liquid level in relation to outlet invert,structural integrity, evidence of leakage,etc.) Structural integrity of tank is good with no notable cracks or leaks(Used mirror and Light). No evidence of water infiltrati exfiltration. Inlet&Outlet Tees in good condition. Liquid level equal to outlet invert. GREASE TRAP: N/A (locate on site plan) Depth below grade:_ Material of construction:_concrete_metal_Fiberglass_Polyethylene_other(explain) Dimensions: Scum thickness: Distance from top of scum to top of outlet tee or baffle: Distance from bottom of scum to bottom of outlet tee or baffle: Date of last pumping: Comments: (recommendation for pumping;condition of inlet and outlet tees or baffles,depth of liquid level in relation to outlet invert,structural integrity, evidence of leakage,etc.) revised 9/2/98 page 7 of 11 SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PARTC SYSTEM INFORMATION (continued) Property Address:35 Washington Avenue,Hyannis,MA Owner: Mr.Sam Abrahanni Date of Inspection: 5/17/00 TIGHT OR HOLDING TANK: N/A (Tank must be pumped prior to,or at time of,inspection) (locate on site plan) Depth below grade:_ Material of construction:_concrete_metal_Fiberglass_Polyethylene—other(explain) Dimensions: Capacity: gallons Design flow: gallons/day Alarm present Alarm level: Alarm in working order:Yes_No— Date of previous pumping: Comments: (condition of inlet tee,condition of alarm and float switches,etc.) DISTRIBUTION BOX: X (locate on site plan) Depth of liquid level above outlet invert: equal on all laterals Comments: (note-if level and distribution is equal,evidence of solids carryover,evidence of leakage into or out of box,etc.). D-box is 2 feet below grade with no riser. Recommend that a riser and steel cover to grade be installed for future inspection/service work. Riser not required to pass inspection. PUMP CHAMBER: N/A (locate on site plan) Pumps in working order:(Yes or No) Alarms in working order(Yes or No)_ Comments: (note condition of pump chamber,condition of pumps and appurtenances,etc.) revised 9/2/98 page 8 of 11 SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART C SYSTEM INFORMATION (continued) party Address:35 Washington Avenue,Hyannis,MA ner: Mr.Sam Abrahannl to of Inspection: 6117100 SOIL ABSORPTION SYSTEM(SAS): X (locate on site plan,if possible,excavation not required,location may be approximated by non-intrusive methods) If not located,explain: leaching pits,number:_ leaching chambers,number._ leaching galleries,number:_ leaching trenches,number,length: 2 Trenched each are 4 feet wide by 50 feet in length. leaching fields,number,dimensions overflow cesspool,number:_ Alternative system: Name of Technology: Comments: (note condition of soil,signs of hydraulic failure,level of ponding,damp soil,condition of vegetation,etc.) No sign of hydraulic failure.ponding or stressed vegetation. System is 2.5 feet below grade. CESSPOOLS: NIA (locate on site plan) Number arid configuration: Depth-top of liquid to Inlet invert: Depth of solids layer: Depth of scum layer: Dimensions of cesspool: Materials of construction: Indication of groundwater: inflow(cesspool must be pumped as part of inspection) Comments: (note condition of soil,signs of hydraulic failure,level of ponding,condition of-vegetation,etc.) PRIVY: NIA (locate on site plan) Materials of construction: Dimensions Depth of solids: Comments: (note condition of soil,signs of hydraulic failure,level of ponding,condition of vegetation,-etc.) revised 9/2/98 Page 9ofII SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PARTC SYSTEM INFORMATION (continued) Property Address:35 Washington Avenue,Hyannis,MA Owner: Mr.Sam Abrahanni Swing Ties: Date of Inspection: 5/17/00 SKETCH OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM: A- Tank In-28 include ties to at least two permanent reference landmarks or benchmarks B- Tank In- 13' locate all wells within 1 00'(Locate where public water supply comes into house) A- Tank Out 29.5' B- Tank Out -16.5' A- D-Box-22.5' B-D-Box-46' Driveway W A A S H D-Box I N Exist. 3 Bedroom House G Septic Tank T O N O A V E B Leaching Trenches revised 9/2/98 page 10 of 11 !I y SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORI PARTC SYSTEM INFORMATION (continued) Property Address:35 Washington Avenue,Hyannis,MA Owner: Mr.Sam Abrahanni Date of Inspection: 5/17100 NRCS Report name Soil Type_ Typical depth to groundwater USGS Date website visited Observation Wells checked Groundwater depth:Shallow___Moderate Deep SITE EXAM Slope Surface water X Check Cellar X Shallow wells Estimated Depth to Groundwater 15'+ Feet Please indicate all the methods used to determine High Groundwater Elevation: Obtained from Design Plans on record Observed Site(Abutting property,observation hole,basement sump etc.) X Determined from local conditions _Checked with local Board of health -_Checked FEMA Maps Checked pumping records X Checked local excavators,installers Used USGS Data Describe how you established the High Groundwater Elevation.(Must be completed) Bottom of SAS was determined to be approximately 3.5 feet below grade. Based on the USGS Barnstable Quadrangle, the depth to groundwater is approximately 15 feet. Additionally, site is elevated approximately 15 feet above Hyannis Harbor. revised 9/2/98 page 11 of 11 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection �- Bureau of Resource Protection V WELL DRILLER Please specify work performed: Address at well location: New Well _ Street Number: Street Name: i 35 {WASHINGTON STREET Please specify well type F Building Lot#: —Assessor's Map#: f_'(Monitoring I _ -----r--— Assessor's Lot#: ZIP Code: Number Of Wells: 02601 City/Town: Well Location BARNSTABLE In public right-of-way: -GPS (GPS for the-deepest well) North: West Yes No : 41.65479 [70.28456 Subdivision/Property/Description: —"-- Mailing Address: • click here if same as well location address Property Owner: Street Number: Street Name: i �— • 35_ IWASHINGTONSTREEr City/Town: State: Engineering Firm: 113ARNSTABLE6 eMASS,Ac,C,HUSETTS BENNETT ENVIRONMENT; ZIP Code: "I 02601 _ Board of health permit obtained: • Yes Not Required Permit Number: Date Issued: L V Page 1 of 1 r y Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection ,u Bureau of Resource Protection-Well Driller Program Well Completion Reports(Monitoring) Well Driller - Monitoring Form DRILLING METHOD _- Overburden Direct Push Bedrock Choose Bedrock- �, WELL LOG OVERBURDEN LITHOLOGY From To(ft) Code Color Comment Drop`In Extra fast or slow Loss or_addition of (ft) drill stem drill rate fluid 20 Fine To Coarse Sand Brown •_Yesi Fast Slow Loss Addition'; 20 29 Fine To Coarse Sand Brown Yes. Fast Slow Loss Addition PERMIT INFORMATION DEP 21 E RTN# DEP Groundwater Discharge# ADDITIONAL WELL INFORMATION Developed Yes • No Are these wells nested? Yes No Surface Seal Type Concrete Area of group(sq.ft) 2500 Total Well Depth 29 Depth to Bedrock �- . 0 1 i vground?] From:' To: CASING • Is Cas n abo a 9 From To- Type Thickness Diameter 19 Polyvinyl Chloride Is—chedule 40 SCREEN, No Screen _ From To Type Slot Size Diameter 19 29 Continuous Wire PVC 0-010 R WATER-BEARING ZONES Yield From To Imo-' ��(gpm) -- ANNULAR SEAL/FILTER PACK •From To Material 1 Weight Material 2 Weight Water(gal) Batch 1Method Of Placement 2 3 Bentonite Chips/Pellets Choose Matenal Gravity ICE- WATER LEVEL Date Measured Static Depth BGS(ft) Flowing Rate(gpm) Page 1 of 2 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection w. Bureau of Resource Protection—Well Driller Program a - Well Completion Reports(Monitoring) 4 COMMENTS WELLS ARE TEMPORARY WELL DRILLERS STATEMENT This well was drilled or altered under my direct supervision,according to the applicable rules and regulations,and this report is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Driller E DESMOND III Registration# 764 --� Supervising Driller Signature CDESMOND lil,THOMAS,E Firm CDESMOND WELL DRILLIN Rig Permit# 025 - _ Date Job Complete 2/9/201 1 r . NOTE:Well Completion Reports must be filed by the registered well driller within 30 days of well completion. i Page 2 of 2 fi. - Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection—Well Driller Program ts Well Completion Reports(Addendum) : WELL DRILLER - ADDENDUM FORM WELL COMPLETION ADDENDUM FORM MONITORING WELLS Corresponds with Well Completion Report#: Screen 'n-,- Screen Well ID Well Depth GPS Coordinates(WGS 1984)Degree Decimals Interval FROM Interval TO - n 1 20.5 10.5 a 20.5 North: 41.65494 West: 70.28463 2 29 19 29 North: 41.65485 West: 70.28446 NOTE:Well Completion Reports must be filed by the registered well driller within 30 days of well completion. .. . — _. Page 1-of 1 f Map Page 1 of 1 Town of Barnstable Geographic Information System New Search I Home I Help Parcel Viewer Custom Map Abutters Map Size ® [3 E] Zoom Out j 11 1I fl fl®In -----__ -....-. _.. ......._ Ado a I� B_)PG Map: 309 Parcel: 199 Full A `zC ',ar ra ! Q a .._...�. l Property 309282 _ 'Yyt' s * 'S q r. x Location: 35 WASHINGTON STREET Info ate ' '° Owner: BARREIRO,FELISBERTO R- a - a ' e� } r k Location Information -- _ Map&Parcel 309199 Location 35 WASHINGTON STREET Acreage 0.18 acres -" ,fir �'t mt` a3z Current Owner Mailing Address BARREIRO,FELISBERTO s _ �` ' " k� � � 253 FIFTH AVE 309199 � - E WEST HYANNISPORT,MA 02672y 4R �APPraised Value(FY 2011) Extra Features $7,200 z Out Buildings $0 � Land $63,600 � - �� �, * Buildings $111,000 .- SSS Total Appraised $181,800 t_ - 709198 ,y Assessed Value FY 2011) �.• '" Extra Features $7,200 ; 3�7050 Out Buildings $0 Land $63,600 , Buildings $111,000 Total Assessed $181,800 Set Scale 1"= 38 rApnl 2008 IE MAP DISCLAIMER Copyright 2005-2010 Town of Barnstable,MA All rights reserved.Send questions or comments to GI BarnstableMA V1.2.4015 [Production] t 9 r http://66.203.95.236/arcims/appgeoapp/map.aspx?propertyID=309... 2/4/2011 Message Page 1 of 1 Miorandi, Donna From: McKean, Thomas on behalf of Health Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 2:57 PM To: Miorandi, Donna; Martin, Cynthia Subject: FW: Barreiro RTN 4-23092 -----Original Message----- From: Kara Risk [mailto:krisk@bennett-ea.com] Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 12:36 PM To: Health; dmelanson@hyannisfire.org Cc: David Bennett Subject: Barreiro RTN 4-23092 Please be advised that demolition and soil removal operations are set to begin this week at 35 Washington Street, Hyannis, MA(RTN 4-23092). If you have any questions or concerns please do hesitate to contact David Bennett at this office. Thank you, Kara Kara Risk, PM, IRS Business Manager, Associate BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES, INC. , 1573 Main Street/P.O. Box 1743 Brewster, MA 02631 508-896-1706 508-896-5109 fax htti)://bermett-ea.com Confidentiality Notice: This electronic mail message and any attached files contain information intended for the exclusive use of the individual or entity to whom it was addressed and may contain information that is proprietary,privileged,confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any viewing,copying,disclosure or distribution of this information may be subject to legal restriction or sanction. Please notify the sender,by electronic mail or telephone,of any unintended recipients and delete the original message without making any copies. Go Green! Consider the environment before printing this email. d 8/1/2011 Page 1 of 1 309262 w Aj �:,.« `d'� :«ate o-�.. "�' s "a 3P s F^� 'E:+f '�• 4"w- � x u �.a z� 4 W � !,p $°' �+ �Y � b..-..,.: — �CMS Y k l� • - 0 C ',A a + y1 t F http://66.203.95.236/ArcIMS/output/AppGeoApp_gisweb491621... 2/4/2011 i Health Master Detail Page 1 of 1 F tdiu JlItl P Logged In As: Health Master Detail Friday, February 4 TOWN\miorandd 2011 Application Center Parcel Lookup Selection Items Parcel ISeptic Perc I Well IFuel Tank Parcel: 309-199 Location: 35 WASHINGTON STREET, HYANNIS Owner: BARREIRO, FELISBERTO i . Business name: _ _ __.) Business phone: --... Rental property: G Deed restricted: G Number of bedrooms Contaminant released: 1 Fuel storage tank permit: C j Save Parcel Changes F�kefurn to Lookup J Parcel Info Parcel ID: 309-199 Developer lot: PARCEL A Location: 35 WASHINGTON Primary frontage: 70 STREET Secondary road: Secondary frontage: Village: HYANNIS Fire district: HYANNIS Sewer acct: Road index: 1786 Asbuilt Septic Scan: 309199_1 Interactive map rw.. Town zone of contribution:AP (Aquifer Protection Overlay District) State zone of contribution:OUT Owner Info Owner. FELISBERT O Co-Owner: ELISB 'Streetl: 253 FIFTH AVE Street2: City:WEST HYANNISPORT State: MA Zip;, 02672 Country:, Deed date:08/24/2009 Deed reference:23983/299 Land Info Acres: 0.18 Use: Two Zoning: OM Neighborhood: Family 0104 Topography: Road: Utilities: Location: Construction Info Building NoYear Buil Gross Area Living Area Bedrooms Bathrooms `1 1860 12733 11367 4 Bedrooms2 Full Buildings value: tt111,000.00 Extra features: tt7,200.00 Land value: 063,600.00 s v http://issgl2/intranet/healthMaster/HealthMasterDetail.aspx?ID=3... 2/4/2011 AsBuilt Page 1 of 1 - 1 V ri 1`I yr D!u\1vJ 1�1U LL LOCATIONJWZ SEWAGE VILLAGE ASSESSOR'S MAP&LOT.30 INSTALLER'S NAME&PHONE NO. SEPTIC TANK CAPACITY! I-`^ aD Az LEACHING FACILITY: (type) ✓�Y�.G.(��r�,(size) /DD 7)4 L NO.OF BEDROOMS ) r BUILDER OR OWNER PERMTTDATE: 1 —'Y -9 7 COhIPLIANCE DATE: Z p • 9 7 Separation Distance Between the: Maximum Adjusted Groundwater Tale and Bottom of Leaching Facility Feet Private Water Supply Well and Leaching Facility (If any wells exist on site or within 200 feet of leaching facility) Feet Edge of Wetland and Leaching Facility(If any wetlands exist within 300 feet of leaching facility) Feet Furnished by 1 0 Y ,y http://issgl2/intranet/propdata/prebuilt.aspx?mappar=309199&seq... 2/4/2011 TAll C/W'` tv my ..� _ ��.:r,'kyi� a�: '��M�. ! :'�•N5 �'{ �j 7,�.,����, - �r/"e � F"�Y'�•�'�Rf' {#sPr�' -j•' .�*.* O '�� .4ti.,,, F ��� � e,�: 1 .�; ��*/q){� ..C� _ ray �• �t y. M 1iis,.tie�4 r 1 "€ �•, ti 42 • •� - � x �.' • wv � v , f A \ � Ned^. _,- - ���_ar• �� �� �+� fir"�• �*���' � ,,��> t 1 �. N 1 y, M� r l ^ry rw— w ! a a t _ 4� � � r'} � ��� � �" ���g6r.' 4K'WK•;� � q`�y,~ _»� per, �� „a (`/� _. ,. � ;91. �`.�'"�, �•�T.(4 v r.''ir""+.. w�v � _�yam`. �"''G..,,s�`.�w _ pppi ^r 5 F f 4 4 �a a If t it tL p{p% ^ +Al }£ S .t r/ h Ulcear, ' - '�f,�.7f�F 4 Syt 4iey a 1 # er a F rOT F AAA qy t rf 4 0 — f •.q a + Y V _ 'Y� �f,5r e•. ��nr�7` ,J ;�^ 6f � .✓_ -/.]'�w � ern �i. ,��••I� I .'1 .. .✓ j r � p i ' sr k p• i tr ��sh i r.. Q a* a� 5 w • 2 � A 1 F a F ut y fie. . k, r s E ' 4 �j 4f' 'V # 1 i � a AO of --, s a• r r fad f'* � ' �'"ey. Wn _ 3 t � � a ! f cq 1 V III !P r J g� FY f ;;� mod- �y �, _� '�''ts '"•, �- � '4 $'4'1 Ft,fa l « FYr t fxU A' S 0 x fq 4 4,#✓� �„?� �+o ''e dam, ���- 1 .. � � r $ v } i p �F r .i 4,4 41 rl k a r';4FA ,4 r; .. Ckck ' y 1 o �;, ,.`.:�.. Y: �_x z < .�.. �' :� y„ i ,'. ..� - y a .. .. +,,fit:. � .. ��.. .. s < N .. '�f� �. - ... e .. _. ^® \. � � � i { � I n��jrx,rt�` gyp, � �I� -s � u. may,•.,.�++� �� `tt 4N,F'1L .^H �•, � fib,..' �,e��,s rt ' r . x i1 {;� •V i y. ,� Y # 1(ice �_, — } I r. r � � sari '.��t3 r1 � •� 41. 1 � I � ♦ ax :. K �. '�" �ytr ,y � LAB ��,Mr• '�`• wi' 4 f y U K X i 1, a �r r+� willds i 4 -------------- m ..F X ' t S� 1 a f r � f fr �. n° w 7 r A o ad , ar L u e 0 - U av g� o .F6 '�"- , 3y do . � 9 •b.y�,,,_ r * 12, a v �o lb . 3 i N x 1 10 20,, 30 50 60 70 80 90 F 1 - FAN SYSTEM Auto On Coot OB Heat N r 41 Pli-I 4 *... i` s y F �^,'' P .' s•��yF ,t ( y/ r y•' 1 y r r�irt fl !, ��,? „,� � •vim. q�� • 1 � V w , d + f - d i s, �$aM .' ,R..,., - � �, .+f f h..rn��� � ••y�e�k,:ram: 'f w,_, �"_",,. .. x Y t '4a.• ,M c.� '4 per�f �- .rX+��` � _ ��s,a.� . 11 {f e v �4 a r z � e t1s �2 �-E rr F r $+Ns +t � a ��j oil .�i�-� vi1���;��� ���'� i Health Master Detail Page 1 of� l Health Master Logged In As: TOWN\crockersh Health Master Detail Wednesday, May 7 2014 Application Center Parcel Lookup Selection Items Reports Fa�rcelSeptic Perc Well Fuel Tank Parcel: 309-199 Location: 35 WASHINGTON STREET, HYANNIS Owner: BARREIRO, FELISBERTO Business name: T —� Business phone: J Rental property: r Deed restricted: 1- Number of bedrooms : 0 Contaminant released: F Fuel storage tank permit: r Save Parcel Changes I Return to Lookup Parcel Info Parcel ID: 309-199 Developer lot:PARCEL A Location:35 WASHINGTON STREET Primary frontage:70 Secondary road: Secondary frontage: Village:HYANNIS Fire district:HYANNIS Town sewer exists at this address: No Road index: 1786 Asbuilt Septic Scan: 309199_1 Interactive map:u1s r' Town zone of contribution:AP (Aquifer Protection Overlay District) State zone of contribution:OUT Owner Info Owner: BARREIRO, FELISBERTO Co-Owner: Streetl:PO BOX 47 Street2: City:WEST HYANNISPORT State:MA Zip: 02672 Country: Deed date:8/24/2009 Deed reference:23983/299 Land Info Acres: 0.18 Use: Vac Land MDL-00 Zoning:OM Neighborhood: 0104 Topography: Road: Utilities: Location: Construction Info Building NoYear Built Gross ArealLivinq Area BedroomsBathrooms Buildings value:$0.00 Extra features: $0.00 Land value: $63,600.00 ,AU C,.J3 http://issgl2/intranet/healthMaster/HealthMasterDetail.aspx?ID=309199 5/7/2014 Health Master Detail Page2-01 Health Master Logged In As: TOWN\crockersh Health Master Detail Wednesday,May 7 2014 Application Center Parcel Lookup Selection Items Reports Parcel Septic Perc Well I Fuel Tank Parcel:309-199 Lion:35 WASHINGTON STREET,HYANNIS Owner: BARREIRO,FELISBERTO Septic 1,1/6/1997 New Septic... Permit number:11997005 Permit type:I Select type - Complete system: Issue date : 1/6/1997 0 Complete date : 1/10/1997 Septic tank size:F— Type/Size of SAS: Installer:I Select Installer Card on file: I/A service type: Select service Innovative/Alternative Technology type: JSelect IA type Variance date:I A Abandon complete date :I Abandon permit number: Repair deadline date : F—A Repair notification date :F — Keyword: Comments: UPGRADE TWO 50'TRENCHES Delete Septic Inspection 8/3/2009 Inspection 10/27/2003 New Inspection... Number Inspection Date Inspector Result 5620 8/3/2009 1 Kellett,Michael,Aardvark Environmental P(Pass) Received Date Comments Delete Inspection Save Septic Changes I Return to Lookup http://issgl2/intranet/healthMaster/HealthMasterDetail.aspx?ID=309199 5/7/2014 Health Master Detail Page of Health Master Logged In As: TOWN\crockersh Health Master Detail Wednesday, May 7 2014 Application Center Parcel Lookup Selection Items Reports Parcel Septic Perc Well Fuel Tank Parcel: 309-199 Location::,3{5 WASHINGTON STREET, HYApN/N�IS Owner: BARREIRO, FELISBERTO New Perc... T Cl/ 7 Permit number: Test date : I � Test result: Select result code Comments: V. Save Perc Changes ' Return to Lookup http://issgl2/intranet/healthMaster/HealthMasterDetail.aspx?ID=309199 5/7/2014 Health Master Detail PagefofE- Health Master Logged In As: TOWN\crockersh Health Master Detail Wednesday, May 7 2014 Application Center Parcel Lookup Selection Items Reports Parcel Septic Perc Well Fuel Tank ParceL: -199 Location: 35 WASHINGTON STREET, HYANNIS Owner: BARREIRO, FELISBERTO Well 1 New Well... Permit number: W-No 2011 Issue date : Complete date : 2/9/2011 Well type: I Select well type T Destruction permit number: Comments: Desmond Well Drilling - 3 monitoring wells ordered by �" Delete Well Bennett Engineering New Well Test. Date: Result: Select result; Comments: Save Well Changes I Return to Lookup http://issgl2/intranet/healthMaster/HealthMasterDetail.aspx?ID=309199 5/7/2014 Health Master Detail Page§of T ' Health Master Logged In As: TOWN\crockersh Health Master Detail Wednesday, May 7 2014 Application Center Parcel Lookup Selection Items Reports Parcel Septic Perc Well Fuel Tank Parcel: 309-199 Location: 35 WASHINGTON STREET, HYANNIS Owner: BARREIRO, FELISBERTO Well 1_C New Well... Permit Issue date : F Complete date number: Well type: Select well type Destruction permit number: Comments: New Well Test... Date: F Result: I Select result Comments: f.Y Save Well Changes , Return to Lookup http://issgl2/intranet/healthMaster/HealthMasterDetail.aspx?ID=309199 5/7/2014 TOWN OF BARNSTABLE LOCATION r SEWAGE # _ VILLAGE ASSESSOR'S MAP & LOT D INSTALLER'S NAME&PHONE NO. SEPTIC TANK CAPACITY LEACHING %-ACILITY: (type.; . 7—t/'�y+.• `,. (size) ge �, 1077 �. NO.OF BEDROOMS T_ r BUILDER OR OWNER PERMITDATE: I -CY '9 7 COMPLIANCE DATE:_,Z f 7 9� Separation Distance Between the:' > Maximum Adjusted Groundwater Table and Bottom of Leaching Facility Feet Private Water Supply Well and Leaching Facility (If any wells exist on site or within 200 feet of leaching facility) Feet Edge of Wetland and Leaching Facility(If any wetlands exist within 300 feet of leaching facility) Feet Furnished by 1 �1 1 i V No. Fee F THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Entered in computer: Yes PUBLIC HEALTH DIVISION - TOWN OF BARNSTABLE., MASSACHUSETTS ZppYication for Digaar *potent Conotruction Permit Application for a Permit to Construct( )Repair( viluopgrade( )Abandon( ) ❑Complete System ❑Individual Components Location Address or Lot No. Owner's Name,Address and Tel.No. Assessor's Map/Parcel �— `�� p"/�0�o* �� a Installer's Name,Address,and Tel.No. Designer's Name,Address and Tel.No. Type of Building: Dwelling No.of Bedrooms Lot Size sq. ft. Garbage Grinder( ) Other Type of Building No.of Persons Showers( ) Cafeteria( ) Other Fixtures Design Flow S gallons per day. Calculated daily flow >J 0 gallons. Plan Date Number of sheets Revision Date Title Size of Septic Tank Type of S.A.S. Description of Soil h".-G o S � Nature of Repairs or Alterations(Answer when applicable) 1S,00 sr l ( Date last inspected: Agreement: The undersigned agrees to ensure the construction and maintenance of the afore described on-site sewage disposal system in accordance with the provisions of Title 5 of the Environmental Code and not to place the system in operation until a Certifi- cate of Compliance has been issued b this Bo f Health, Signed Date Application Approved by Date Application Disapproved for the following reasons Permit No Date Issued °'� » r�r&K '�.rr�f^'T�6�,}..�,_^s"v"""� , •r. .q:N. ,'.Y 4, .ry:,, .�-'ti .�^r'v �.. '� ....M1 :.., - `.�+ , _`y r No.- °� a. Fee 4., - THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Entered in computer: Yes PUBLIC HEALTH DIVISION -TOWN OF BARNSTABLE., MASSACHUSETTS 1 ZIPP ication for Migaal *pgtem Con$truction Permit Application for a Permit to Construct( )Repair( ►/51upgrade( )Abandon( ) O Complete System ❑Individuat Components,—, Location Address or Lot No. (/1i�1 0-�—IGV Owner's Name,Address and Tel...No. Assessor's,Map/Parcel, '3 '_ Installer's Name,Address,and Tel.No. Designer's Name,Address and Tel.No. 'off .- I� 6p ►- , �,, Type of Building: Dwelling No.of Bedrooms & N a;l r`b.Lot Size sq.ft. Garbage Grinder( ) Other Type of Building No.of Persons Showers( ) Cafeteria( ) Other Fixtures. Design Flow S gallons per day. Calculated daily flow j d gallons. Plan Date Number of sheets Revision Date Title Size of Septic Tank Type of S.A.S. "'T G t^-G S Description of Soil Nature of Repairs or Alterations(Answer when applicable) . e t i--rc Sy 5 ( S OO sZ" L i 1� o y- —t W o 7 Q r Date last inspected: ' Agreement: The undersigned agrees to ensure the construction>and maintenance of the afore described on-site sewage disposal system in accordance with the provisions of Title 5 of the Environmental Code and not to place the system in operation until a Certifi- cate of Compliance has been issued t �Bof Health �tr Signed �� Date Application Approved by Date jop Application Disapproved for the following reasons N i Permit No. :' Date Issued - j f{ Y. THE COMMONWEALTH'OF MASSACHUSETTS ` BARNSTABLE, MASSACHUSETTS t Certificate of Compliance THIS IS TO CERTIFY` the On-siteSrwa e Disposal System Constructed( ' )Repaired (►,�pgraded( ) Abandoned( )by at a µ 'S has been constructed in accordance a with the provisiodLoffitle 5 and the for Disposal System Construction Permit No. X4, dated Installer ' T�S Designer The issuance of this permit hall o•be--construed as a guarantee that the system will function as designed. Date `� / Inspector ------------------ No. ---- ------_—. Fee-----THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC HEALTH DIVISION - BARNSTABLE. MASSACHUSETTS Mi5po5a[ *p-5tem.ctCon5truction Permit Permission is hereby granted to Construct( )Repair(V Upgrade( )Abandon( ) System located at '�Ste " (,v 145�•K u.—ro v_ r4 U_e and as described in the above Application for Disposal System Construction Permit. The applicant recognizes his/her duty to comply with Title 5 and the following local provisions or special conditions. t Provided:Construction must becompleted within three years of the date of this it.. Date: % /•� .5 Approved b C i/ 1 TO OF BARNSTABLE '`.LOCATION � � SEWAGE # VILLAGE ASSESSOR'S MAP& 'INSTALLER'S NAME&PHONE NO. ` :':SEPTIC TANK CAPACITY /�/ y� L1-ACHING FACELnY: (typr) =Vt!'k'e. (si e) /Dd L NO.OF BEDROOMS BUILDER OR OWNER �} �V'► G►a P :..:_<:' PERMTTDATE: l rY 'q 7 COMPLIANCE DATE: 7-_p • 7 g� Separation.Distance Between the: M'X'umum Adjusted Groundwater Table and Bottom of Leaching Facility Feet 'Private Water Supply Well and Leaching Facility (If any wells exist ..1.6n site or within 200 feet of leaching facility) Feet Edge of Wetland and Leaching Facility(If any wetlands exist -within 300 feet of leaching facility) Feet Furnished by 00, 00, h - -d i O `v .t NOTICE:This Form is to be used for the Repair of Failed Septic Systems Only CERTIFICATION OF SKETCH AND APPLICATION FOR A DISPOSAL WORKS CONSTRUCTION PERMIT (WITHOUT DESIGNED PLANS) I, �� ,hereby certify that the application for disposal works construction permit signed by me dated 1 — L -q7 , concerning the property located at WASA %aw Pays& `�`� meets all of the following criteria: • There are no wetlands within 300 feet of the proposed septic system • There are no private wells within 150 feet of the proposed septic system • The observed groundwater table is 14 feet or greater below the bottom of the leaching facility • There is no increase in flow and/or change in use proposed • There are no variances requested or needed. k SIGNED: DATE: — LICENSED SEPTIC SYSTEM INSTALLER IN THE TOWN OF BARNSTABLE NUMBER [Attach a sketch plan of the proposed system.Also if the'licensed installer posesses a certified plot plan, this plan should be submitted]. I � j xcrt C i � _ Q� V Iv • , ♦ ti � H Al\N'`[S. REFERENCEMA -BARNSTABLE ASSESSOR'S MAP 309 PARCEL 199 -PLAN T11 M*PLM OF LAND INHYAM4%MASS_"DATED LW46BYHERBERTRICHARDSON.crALBuanuum, PLAN VIA/ LOCUS SURVEYOR .LOCATION OF wmc SYSPIT W AS PERII4SPECPM ON L9/97 5C4LE V—I a BY JEROME D[1NIM40 m4 9 MM I=M PLAN WM Wr PREPARED FRM ANY ° IIi91>Q MGNr SUZV]gY AMID LWER NO C AtIC88 8B9DIIIa MM VWrAW= BEARB'ICi ANDUR 071131t .cme FEATURES SHOWN TIC US® TO ENZAELM PYOFEnT Lam KEY MAP 411 ' IMEND f MONUORMWELL REOOVffitY SYSPBM WlRd. FORMER AST i rQ� umzryPOLE AREA OF 5TAINING LEACH PIT (-O.OG Dravdoxn) MW I 69 x 4U PRECAST H-1 O m LEACH PIT WITH I'OP ro �0u I O i W--;W��W-. S _ %, O O or moroelD LOCUS Z Ift"K 35 WA5HINGTON STREET '',' 19 19x19D (n GAC GROUNDWATER TREATMENT PORARYTANK p I 1 2754ALAST MW4 5Y5TEM SCHEMATIC (-0.04 wdown) (-0.03 1 NOT TO 5C.A = - - i TWO ACTIVATED CONTROL PANEL COMP 550K \ t UUNIT9 ARBAA�� 1/2 HP WATER (400 Ibs) PUMP 10-20 GPM i 55 GAT.PRODUCT TO LEACH PIT i RECOVERY DRUM 5OLUTE TRAN5PORT 5AMPLPTAF(r-tr.) 5AMPLE TAP(TYP.) PATHWAYD7' DNFWDM RTN#4-23092 CRAWL 5PACE Pl** coHrayiwmb -: FIMBERTO BARRERRO SOIL TO BE AREA OF HYDRAULIC REMOVED 5, CONTROL ,lA.HDZ47-WESI'B:YAl�II�T.11A006/2 BLADDER PUMP' The t DadEDIATE RESPONSE ACTION - �- 'IIiWA8�PO1�i117�P-SYAtII�MALL'1601 p + i + + +; ! a 21'bcp + Iq <t7508-2 5KIMMER R1MP'CLEAN BE'1�I NE 1 1 019ACE 1 AL AREA OF REMEDIAL ADDRIVE APPLICATION T AIRONMENT ENGINEERS- REGENOX OXIDIZER r0MPLJ X PART A 121O LB5 x 3 APPLICAMON51 ASSOCIATES INC. gs REGENOX ACTIVATOR:C`OMPUX PART B[120 L215 x 3 APPLICAMON51 $$A LECE1M)Sn$PROFESS<ONAL3,ffi1<�ONM@TCALSCMMVM 990 LB5 *T , OEOL UM.EN(�S -3d bcp O 10 20 30 1373 MAIN STREET.P.O.BOX 1743.BREWSTBB.MAU2961 CEM 1l1�llr�rfi9li x�2� ]E�pgMi0lr ai/11/11 k AsNoeed nwls D® zw la om E I I i .. . is - � S HYAMUN RENCE MA -B�ARNSTABL AS>B;SWR'S MAP 309 PARCEL 199 -PLAN TITLED MM OF LAND INBYAIM MASS DATED , Q`' IRW46BYBRRBBATRICHARDSC)N.aviLENG fit, PLAN VIE SURVEYOR -LOCATION OF SEPTIC SYSTEM AS PERlNSPECTMT ON 1/9/97 SCALE V-10 it LOCI7$ BY HR&OME DUNN1NO WM T'HIB=PLAN WAS NO?PMARED PRM ANY G r f A - SURVEY AND 1EIDM NO C0bQAI6P4NCBB mmmi) Tm D96PAmm BEABIIm Amm OTT FEATURES SOWN BE USED TO ESPAffiSK PYOIPBRTY a Lam C . KEY MAP v LEGEND MOIWrO2BNOWML FORMER AST �G 4 c L � $BOOV UTRMPOLEERY SYST�d WE[d. G � �Q�0 AREA OF STAINING � e n LEACH Q MW-1 ' 6'0 x 4D PRECAST ST H-I O ' SEPfiG COMPONENTS FITm(-0.06 OramdoWA) _ LEACH PiT WITH POP (TO BE REMOVED) c STONE � G � 1 W�W— V � 3 cW�� C. O NJ° O - W N j'Mir 1('r m BLfILDiNG TO 5E RAZED I j Q t ; lilll' I J Q LOCUS I 35 W INGTON 5TRREET C 1�71 GAC GROUNDWATER TREATMENT AREA OFPItOM51D 1 SOIL REMOVAL 0 MW-4 MW-3 / p - 5Y5TEM 5CHEMATIC 3a x 3a x z I'D c-0.04 Drawamu c, (-0.03 NOT TO SCALE • G I TWO ACTIVATED CONTROL PANEL COMPRESSOR \ CARBON ABSORPTION 1/2 HP WATER / UNRSCARBATROLL-I - (400 Ibs) PUMP 10-20 GPM j 55 GAL PRODUCT ' TO LEACH FIT t RECOVERY DRUM 5OLLITE TRAN5PORT 5AMPLE TAP(W) 5AMPL!TAP OW.) — ///J PATHWAY RTN#423092 (EFFLUENT] UNFLUENT] C5W--I RYV-I " RHN5/LS111•BevieeAmaof Bacavalim,abawsepflc lobo imnomdmdbmldi=tDbe add 8owdbaetirm CONTAMINAT® CRAWL SPACE F��� �i TQDTa1�TA D A T�T�Tr7ilsO SOIL TO BE AREAOF:HYDRIWLIC PALBM47-M l r DlNW.MiW REMOVED I PAL HOts47-WBSPSYAIIIil.1/At8812 BLADDER PUMP INK + + : B04EDIATE RESPONSE ACTION 35 WAslMxlTaaLsaEEa'-SYAZ'RM1fAIN601 +: 2vIv + + + + - AREA OF REMEDIAL ADDiTNE APPLICATION D'•'NNE 1 1/•vr�'��` 'a`�OTlr�1TrlGlr 1�'•'•' REGENOX OXIDIZERR COMPID(PARTA[21 O LB6 x 2 APPUCAn0" ASSOCIATES INC. 42G yy, REGENOX ACTIVATOR COMPLE)T PART B 1120 LB5 x 2 APPUCATION51 $$ LICENSEOD SEPROFESSIONAL%i AL GGO LB5 CIBOLOGISST.ENGDOMIRS -3O bp 5052 SKIMMER PUMP'CLEAN O 10 20 30 1373 MAIN STREET;P.O.BOX 1743.BREWSIs.MAcm NVI ERONMENT I3ONEEIV mm""Bkm �"�� some nm �p 03Ji1/11 AsNolod 71Wh D® EMM 10-03M r CB HL'Y�1NNI. ' MA -BABNSTABLE ASSESSINS MAP 309PARC33L 199 -PLAN TnT D"P "OP LAND INSYANM%MARL'DATED 1A&46 BY EIERBEIltT B1GBA1t INN',CiviL ENGUMM PLAN VIEW Sc11LvsY0®L ioc�s -LOCATKIN OF SEPW SYffrZ [AS PBRIIMECTI O N ON L9V97 SCNE I%-10' BY>ERO01d8DtNNM i NOTE: THIS SITE PLAN WAS NOT PREPARED FROM ANY ° INSTRUMENT SURVEY AND UNDER NO C &CUMSTANCE3 4 SHOULD THE DISTANCES, BEAM0 AND/OR OTHER FEATURES SHOWN BE USED TO ESTABLISH PROPERTY LINES. 4 Q ®. KEY MAP ® 4' ° . LEGEND 4' Q WELL ] FORM AST q ' a BBOomY SYSTBs[WBii+ 4 4� AREA OF STAINING ,� d ® ° LEACH PIT �A w l © A 4 GO x'4V PRECAST H-1 O F C Q LEAdi PIT Willi I'OF COMPONMTS MMD) < to STONE q a j 4� W w- _aW— JA I e e e 35 WASHINGTON STR r .., 0 0 �•�,� ER ON-SITE 5UIL.DING Z [RAZED] � I' Ve O _`Q = EXTENT OF EXCAVATION ° p [ITx I8 x IG'D] (n i I .I MW-4 5UB-5LAB VENTING 5Y5TEM ER [RAZED] SCHEMATIC 4 4 NOT TO SCAM AREA OF CLAW M2 f�eanouf: N 5PON5E AGT10N OUTCOME (RTN 4-23092 15M (r and Y Fames) 1 vent ROW System Grade Surface(a bo RTN# 4-23092 BARREIRO AREA Of CONTAMINATED SOIL REMOM& ,. PADMI-�IB'aTBlAmwelawn (7/2611 1 TO 801 1) 280 TONS-187 YARDS 1' IA& EDIATE RESPONSE ACTION COMPLETION _.'` --;= rt`',,. s AREA OF REMEDIAL ADDITIVE APPLICATION (8/2/! I) CLASS A 2 RESPONSE ACTION OUTCOME j - REGENOX OXIDIZER COMPLEX PART A[420 L55 x I APPLICATION] REGENOX ACTIVATOR COMPLEX PART B [240 L55 x I APPLICATION]j� min -SlAt��>i� l I5 :a<` _ x TOTAL REMEDIAL ADDITIVE APPLICATION=GGO LB5 BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN VIEW ASSOCIATES INC. 20 „ L13MIED SITS izv, 1'PAL b,(�) c�eotoc�sra 5 -2 I O 10 20 30 iSn MA]N SI'BBBT,PAX BOA[1743, MA 03361 >llOI�p1811ii1�1i wowi■.Mrwe� pl+sriilr 25 Washed Aggmpte WA 1%-10 1iwA7S W" >fri cll [ 7r�111a! i J1I AWN" Me Um BM0-lo0oa