RAMAPO LANDFILL
RAMAPO, ROCKLAND COUNTY, NEW YORK
APPENDIXES
Figures
Tables
Ramapo Landfill.
Summary of On-Site Shallow Soil Data (0-8 inches).
Remedial Investigation.
[All values in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg)]
| Compound Name | Frequency of Detection | Range of Detection (excluding non-detects) | Typical Background Range* | Comparison Values for Soil** | Source**** |
| Semivolatile Organics | |||||
| 1,4-Dichlorobenzene | 1/9 | .370 | ND | 0.4 | NYS CREG |
| 1,2-Dichlorobenzene | 1/9 | .094 | ND | 324 | NYS RfG |
| Benzo(a)anthracene | 4/9 | .042-.200 | *** | NA | |
| Benzo(a)pyrene | 4/9 | 0.062-.160 | <1-1.3 | 0.005 | NYS CREG |
| Benzo(b)fluoranthene | 5/9 | 0.073-0.170 | *** | NA | |
| Benzo(ghi)perylene | 4/9 | 0.048-0.130 | *** | NA | |
| Benzo(k)fluoranthene | 5/9 | 0.061-0.180 | *** | NA | |
| Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate | 4/9 | 0.048-.480 | ND | 2.3 | NYS CREG |
| Chrysene | 4/9 | 0.064-0.230 | *** | NA | |
| Acenaphthene | 1/9 | .190 | *** | 235 | NYS RfG |
| Fluoranthene | 5/9 | 0.064-0.442 | *** | 746 | NYS RfG |
| Fluorene | 1/9 | 0.170 | *** | 328 | NYS RfG |
| Indeno(123cd)pyrene | 3/9 | 0.061-.140 | *** | NA | |
| Naphthalene | 1/9 | 1.10 | ND | 1.4 | NYS RfG |
| Phenanthrene | 4/9 | 0.081-.390 | *** | NA | |
| Pyrene | 5/9 | 0.073-0.310 | *** | 67 | NYS RfG |
| 2-Methylnaphthalene | 1/9 | .200 | ND | NA | |
| Dibenzofuran | 1/9 | .150 | ND | NA | |
| N-nitrosodiphenylamine | 1/9 | 0.110 | ND | 0.4 | NYS CREG |
| Anthracene | 1/9 | 0.043 | *** | 7,470 | NYS RfG |
| Butylbenzylphthalate | 3/9 | 0.100-0.160 | ND | 3,220 | NYS RfG |
| Di-n-octylphthalate | 1/9 | 0.043 | ND | 489 | NYS RfG |
| Inorganics | |||||
| Aluminum | 9/9 | 4610-16,900 | 7,000-100,000 | NA | |
| Arsenic | 9/9 | 0.93-2.3 | 10-20 | 50 | ATSDR EMEG |
| Barium | 9/9 | 27.4-122 | 300-500 | 3,500 | USEPA RfD |
| Cadmium | 3/9 | 0.84-1.7 | <0.5-1 | 10 | ATSDR EMEG |
| Calcium | 9/9 | 805-10,000 | 100-400,000 | NA | |
| Chromium | 9/9 | 12.6-22.7 | 10-40 | 250 | USEPA RfD |
| Cobalt | 9/9 | 4.0-9.6 | <0.3-70 | NA | |
| Copper | 9/9 | 8.6-48.3 | <1-25 | 6,500 | USEPA RfD |
| Iron | 9/9 | 17,200-47,000 | 10,000-40,000 | NA | |
| Lead | 9/9 | 5.3-15.9 | 10-300 | NA | |
| Magnesium | 9/9 | 1,500-4,710 | 50-6,000 | NA | |
| Manganese | 9/9 | 88.1-335 | 500-3,000 | 5,000 | USEPA RfD |
| Antimony | 3/9 | 4.7-7.3 | 0.6-10 | 20 | USEPA RfD |
| Beryllium | 1/9 | 0.24 | <1-7 | 0.16 | ATSDR CREG |
| Selenium | 3/9 | 0.22-0.65 | 0.1-4 | 150 | ATSDR EMEG |
| Nickel | 9/9 | 10.9-19.8 | <5-20 | 1,000 | ATSDR EMEG |
| Potassium | 9/9 | 511-1,430 | 50-30,000 | NA | |
| Sodium | 9/9 | 113-857 | 3,000-50,000 | NA | |
| Vanadium | 9/9 | 14.6-40.8 | 3-500 | 350 | USEPA RfD |
| Zinc | 9/9 | 26.2-76.6 | 50-100 | 10,000 | USEPA RfD |
| Pesticides/PCBs | |||||
| Heptachlor Epoxide | 1/9 | .026 | ND | 0.02 | NYS CREG |
| Dieldrin | 1/9 | .0034 | 0.001-0.049 | 0.001 | NYS CREG |
| alpha-chlordane | 1/9 | .016 | ND | 0.1 (total) | NYS CREG |
| gamma-chlordane | 1/9 | .020 | 0.34 | 0.1 (total) | NYS CREG |
| Volatile Organics | |||||
| 2-Butanone | 1/9 | .190 | ND | 2 | NYS RfG |
| Benzene | 1/9 | .042 | ND | 0.05 | NYS CREG |
| 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane | 1/9 | .002 | ND | 0.01 | NYS CREG |
| Chlorobenzene | 1/9 | .730 | ND | 26.5 | NYS RfG |
| Ethylbenzene | 2/9 | .260 | ND | 200 | NYS RfG |
| Total xylenes | 1/9 | .570 | ND | 4,620 | NYS RfG |
NA = not available
ND = not determined
Note: Only detected results are reported
*References: Adriano (1986); Clarke et al. (1985a,b); Connor et al. (1957); Davis and Bennett (1983); Dragun (1988); Frank et al. (1976); Klein (1972); McGovern (1988); Schacklette and Boerngen (1984)
**Comparison values for volatile and semi-volatile organics based on ingestion of soil and homegrown vegetables; comparison values for metals (inorganics) based on ingestion of soil.
***Based on reported background levels for total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons of <1 to 13 milligrams per kilogram in soil (ATSDR, 1990e; Edwards, 1983).
****NYS CREG = New York State Cancer Risk Evaluation Guidelines
NYS RfG = New York State Risk Reference Guideline
NYS EMEG = New York State Environmental Media Evaluation Guide
ATSDR CREG = ATSDR Cancer Risk Evaluation Guidelines
ATSDR EMEG = ATSDR Environmental Media Evaluation Guide
USEPA RfD = USEPA Risk Reference Dose
Ramapo Landfill.
Summary of Off-site Surface Water Data.
Remedial Investigation.
[All values in micrograms per liter (mcg/L)]
(see Table 7 for Comparison Values)
| Compound Name | Frequency of Detection | Range of Detection (excluding non-detects) | Concentration Detected in Upstream Samples |
| Volatiles | |||
| Benzene | 1/8 | 0.08 | ND;ND |
| Toluene | 2/8 | 0.08;0.2 | ND;ND |
| Vinyl chloride | 2/8 | 0.7;2 | ND;2 |
| Inorganics | |||
| Aluminum | 4/8 | 120-995 | ND;120 |
| *Antimony | 1/8 | 38 | ND;ND |
| Arsenic | 1/8 | 2 | ND;ND |
| Barium | 8/8 | 9-83 | 12;14 |
| Calcium | 8/8 | 3,190-110,000 | 3,190;4,570 |
| Copper | 3/8 | 3-6 | ND;ND |
| *Iron | 7/8 | 74-2,630 | 93;163 |
| Lead | 6/8 | 1-3 | ND;2 |
| Magnesium | 8/8 | 853-33,100 | 853;1,100 |
| *Manganese | 8/8 | 7-1,120 | 20;45 |
| Mercury | 5/8 | 0.3-1 | ND;4 |
| Nickel | 1/8 | 25 | ND;ND |
| Potassium | 8/8 | 260-42,100 | 259;432 |
| Sodium | 8/8 | 2,700-109,000 | 2,700;2,740 |
| Vanadium | 1/8 | 5 | ND;ND |
| Zinc | 6/8 | 4-55 | ND;36 |
| *Thallium | 2/8 | 5 | ND;5 |
ND - Not detected
Note: Only detected results are reported
*Contaminant selected for further evaluation.
Ramapo Landfill.
Summary of Off-site Sediment Data.
Remedial Investigation.
[All values in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg)]
| Compound Name | Frequency of Detection | Range of Detection (excluding non-detects) | Concentration Detected in Upstream Samples | Comparison Value* (Soil Contaminants) | Source** |
| Semivolatile Organics | |||||
| Benzo(k)fluoranthene | 1/7 | 0.071 | ND | NA | |
| 4-Methylphenol | 1/7 | 0.19 | ND | NA | |
| Benzo(a)anthracene | 1/7 | 0.065 | ND | NA | |
| Benzo(b)fluoranthene | 1/7 | 0.150 | ND | NA | |
| Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate | 2/7 | 0.045-0.120 | ND | 2.3 | NYS CREG |
| Chrysene | 1/7 | 0.083 | ND | NA | |
| Fluoranthene | 2/7 | 0.040-0.140 | ND | 746 | NYS RfG |
| Phenanthrene | 1/7 | 0.075 | ND | NA | |
| Pyrene | 2/7 | 0.046-0.160 | ND | 67 | NYS RfG |
| Benzoic Acid | 1/7 | 0.42 | ND | 1,470 | NYS RfG |
| Benzo(a)pyrene | 1/7 | 0.070 | ND | 0.005 | NYS CREG |
| Inorganics | |||||
| Aluminum | 8/8 | 4050-6470 | 4660;4270 | NA | |
| Arsenic | 8/8 | 0.70-1.5 | 0.79;1.2 | 50 | ATSDR EMEG |
| Barium | 8/8 | 19.9-72.3 | 19.9;30.1 | 3,500 | USEPA RfD |
| Beryllium | 6/8 | 0.27-0.99 | 0.99;0.38 | 0.16 | ATSDR CREG |
| Cadmium | 5/8 | 1.3-4.3 | ND;3.4 | 10 | ATSDR EMEG |
| Calcium | 8/8 | 773-13,300 | 1660;773 | NA | |
| Chromium | 8/8 | 5.9-13.0 | 7.0;5.9 | 200 | ATSDR EMEG |
| Cobalt | 8/8 | 2.1-11.2 | 2.1;3.9 | NA | |
| Copper | 8/8 | 3.8-24.6 | 3.8;4.5 | 6,500 | USEPA RfD |
| Iron | 8/8 | 9510-25,400 | 14,800;9510 | NA | |
| Lead | 8/8 | 3.7-22.2 | 6.0;4.5 | NA | |
| Magnesium | 8/8 | 1260-8590 | 1260;1680 | NA | |
| Manganese | 8/8 | 86.7-2970 | 86.7;203 | 5,000 | USEPA RfD |
| Nickel | 7/8 | 6.8-32.4 | 9.0;ND | 1,000 | ATSDR EMEG |
| Potassium | 8/8 | 421-958 | 515;448 | NA | |
| Sodium | 8/8 | 39.3-214 | 114;65.1 | NA | |
| Thallium | 1/8 | 0.65 | ND;ND | 4 | USEPA RfD |
| Vanadium | 8/8 | 9.9-23.9 | 10.4;9.9 | 350 | USEPA RfD |
| Zinc | 8/8 | 26.0-82.9 | 53.6;33.5 | 10,000 | USEPA RfD |
| Pesticides/PCBs | |||||
| gamma-Chlordane | 1/7 | 0.012 | ND | 0.1 | NYS CREG |
NA - Not available
ND - Not detected
Note: Only detected results are reported.
*Comparison values for volatile and semi-volatile organics based on ingestion of soil and homegrown vegetables; comparison values for metals (inorganics) based on ingestion of soil.
**NYS CREG = New York State Cancer Risk Evaluation Guidelines
NYS RfG = New York State Risk Reference Guideline
NYS EMEG = New York State Environmental Media Evaluation Guide
ATSDR CREG = ATSDR Cancer Risk Evaluation Guidelines
ATSDR EMEG = ATSDR Environmental Media Evaluation Guide
USEPA RfD = USEPA Risk Reference Dose
Ramapo Landfill.
Summary of Off-Site Subsurface Soil Data.
Remedial Investigation.
[All values in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg)]
| Compound Name | Frequency of Detection (off-site samples) | Range of Detection (excluding non-detects) | Typical Background Range* | Comparison Values for Soil** | Source**** |
| Semivolatile Organics | |||||
| Benzo(a)anthracene | 1/5 | 0.042 | *** | NA | |
| Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate | 1/5 | 0.043 | ND | 2.3 | NYS CREG |
| Chrysene | 1/5 | 0.043 | *** | NA | |
| Fluoranthene | 1/5 | 0.075 | *** | 746 | NYS RfG |
| Phenanthrene | 1/5 | 0.040 | *** | NA | |
| Pyrene | 1/5 | 0.072 | *** | 67 | NYS RfG |
| Volatile Organics | |||||
| Acetone | 4/6 | 0.013-0.028 | ND | 2 | NYS RfG |
| Toluene | 1/6 | 0.002 | ND | 230 | NYS RfG |
| Inorganics | |||||
| Aluminum | 6/6 | 6100-11,600 | 7,000-100,000 | NA | |
| Antimony | 1/6 | 5.2 | 0.6-10 | 20 | USEPA RfD |
| Arsenic | 6/6 | 1.2-2.9 | 10-20 | 50 | ATSDR EMEG |
| Barium | 6/6 | 26.9-50.7 | 300-500 | 3,500 | USEPA RfD |
| Beryllium | 1/6 | 0.23 | <1-7 | 0.16 | ATSDR CREG |
| Cadmium | 1/6 | 0.93 | <0.5-1 | 10 | ATSDR EMEG |
| Calcium | 6/6 | 1150-15,100 | 100-400,000 | NA | |
| Chromium | 6/6 | 11.1-31.8 | 10-40 | 250 | USEPA RfD |
| Cobalt | 6/6 | 4.7-9.4 | <0.3-70 | NA | |
| Copper | 6/6 | 10.3-25.9 | <1-25 | 6,500 | USEPA RfD |
| Iron | 6/6 | 16,000-32,000 | 10,000-40,000 | NA | |
| Lead | 6/6 | 1.5-11.2 | 10-300 | NA | |
| Magnesium | 6/6 | 2620-5170 | 50-6,000 | NA | |
| Manganese | 6/6 | 155-382 | 500-3,000 | 5,000 | USEPA RfD |
| Nickel | 6/6 | 10.3-14.2 | <5-20 | 1,000 | ATSDR EMEG |
| Potassium | 6/6 | 866-1410 | 50-30,000 | NA | |
| Sodium | 6/6 | 70.4-240 | 3,000-50,000 | NA | |
| Vanadium | 6/6 | 15.1-34.5 | 3-500 | 350 | USEPA RfD |
| Zinc | 6/6 | 17.7-35.3 | 50-100 | 10,000 | USEPA RfD |
| Selenium | 1/6 | 0.51 | 0.1-4 | 150 | ATSDR EMEG |
| Thallium | 1/6 | 1.5 | NA | 4 | USEPA RfD |
NA = not available
ND = not determined
Note: Only detected results are reported
*References: Adriano (1986); Clarke et al. (1985a,b); Connor et al. (1957); Davis and Bennett (1983); Dragun (1988); Frank et al. (1976); Klein (1972); McGovern (1988); Schacklette and Boerngen (1984)
**Comparison values for volatile and semi-volatile organics based on ingestion of soil and homegrown vegetables; comparison values for metals based on ingestion of soil.
***Based on reported background levels for total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons of <1 to 13 milligrams per kilogram in soil (ATSDR, 1990e; Edwards, 1983).
****NYS CREG = New York State Cancer Risk Evaluation Guidelines
NYS RfG = New York State Risk Reference Guideline
NYS EMEG = New York State Environmental Media Evaluation Guide
ATSDR CREG = ATSDR Cancer Risk Evaluation Guidelines
ATSDR EMEG = ATSDR Environmental Media Evaluation Guide
USEPA RfD = USEPA Risk Reference Dose
Table 5.
Ramapo Landfill.
Summary of Groundwater Data (Off-Site Monitoring Wells) - Round 1.
Remedial Investigation.
[All values in micrograms per liter (mcg/L)]
(see Table 7 for Comparison Values)
| Compound Name | Frequency of Detection | Range of Detection |
| Semi-volatile Organics | ||
| *Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate | 10/16 | 2-30 |
| Diethylphthalate | 2/16 | 3-5 |
| Volatile Organics | ||
| 1,1-Dichloroethane | 2/17 | 3-5 |
| Benzene | 5/17 | 1-3 |
| Chlorobenzene | 2/17 | 1-3 |
| Chloromethane | 2/17 | 3 |
| Toluene | 1/17 | 1 |
| Carbon disulfide | 1/17 | 2 |
| 4-Methyl-2-pentanone | 2/17 | 3-4 |
| 2-Hexanone | 1/17 | 2 |
| 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane | 1/17 | 2 |
| Inorganics | ||
| *Aluminum | 16/17 | 138-18,900 |
| Arsenic | 2/17 | 2.8-26 |
| Barium | 17/17 | 9-441 |
| Calcium | 17/17 | 22,100-187,000 |
| *Chromium | 17/17 | 16.1-587 |
| Cobalt | 1/17 | 17.8 |
| Copper | 14/17 | 3.1-78 |
| *Iron | 16/17 | 406-229,000 |
| Lead | 16/17 | 1.2-11.8 |
| Magnesium | 17/17 | 5,690-42,700 |
| *Manganese | 17/17 | 51.9-8,700 |
| *Nickel | 15/17 | 15-331 |
| Potassium | 17/17 | 1,050-34,200 |
| *Sodium | 17/17 | 11,400-166,000 |
| Vanadium | 4/17 | 5.3-51.6 |
| Zinc | 17/17 | 7.1-79.33 |
| Pesticides/PCBs | ||
| delta-BHC | 1/17 | 1.9 |
| gamma-BHC | 1/17 | 0.06 |
Ramapo Landfill.
Summary of Groundwater Data (Off-Site Monitoring Wells) - Round 2.
Remedial Investigation.
[All values in micrograms per liter (mcg/L)]
(see Table 7 for Comparison Values)
| Compound Name | Frequency of Detection | Range of Detection |
| Semivolatile Organics | ||
| *Di-n-octylphthalate | 1/22 | 130 |
| *Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate | 4/22 | 2-9 |
| Diethylphthalate | 3/22 | 2-5 |
| Naphthalene | 1/22 | 3 |
| Butylbenzylphthalate | 1/22 | 2 |
| Volatile Organics | ||
| Chloromethane | 1/22 | 2 |
| Benzene | 10/22 | 2-2.9 |
| *Chlorobenzene | 4/22 | 1.2-16 |
| Toluene | 2/22 | 0.3-0.6 |
| Acetone | 3/22 | 23-35 |
| 1,1-Dichloroethane | 5/22 | 0.5-2.8 |
| 1,2-Dichloroethane | 2/22 | 0.1-0.2 |
| Dichlorodifluoromethane | 1/22 | 0.2 |
| cis-1,2-dichloroethene | 4/22 | 0.1-0.9 |
| ortho-Xylene | 1/22 | 0.7 |
| Isopropylbenzene | 5/22 | 0.5-3.7 |
| Propylbenzene | 2/22 | 0.5-0.8 |
| 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene | 3/22 | 1.8-1.9 |
| tert-Butylbenzene | 1/22 | 1.5 |
| 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene | 2/22 | 0.8-1.4 |
| p-Isopropyltoluene | 2/22 | 1.2-1.7 |
| 1,2-Dichlorobenzene | 2/22 | 0.9-1.2 |
| Naphthalene | 3/22 | 0.3-4.2 |
| 1,4-Dichlorobenzene | 1/22 | 1.1 |
| Inorganics | ||
| *Aluminum | 19/22 | 165-19,000 |
| Arsenic | 6/22 | 2.4-20.5 |
| Barium | 21/22 | 3-559 |
| Cadmium | 1/22 | 4.9 |
| Calcium | 22/22 | 7,300-219,000 |
| *Chromium | 22/22 | 5.5-1,290 |
| Cobalt | 12/22 | 9.8-42.3 |
| *Iron | 22/22 | 145-43,800 |
| *Lead | 20/22 | 1.7-34.1 |
| Magnesium | 22/22 | 1,920-51,100 |
| *Manganese | 22/22 | 14.6-31,200 |
| *Nickel | 17/22 | 17.6-153 |
| Potassium | 22/22 | 717-196,000 |
| *Sodium | 22/22 | 2,250-147,000 |
| Vanadium | 9/22 | 5.9-40 |
| Zinc | 22/22 | 3.7-107 |
| Copper | 18/22 | 3.2-62.3 |
| Mercury | 4/22 | 0.2-2 |
*Contaminant selected for further evaluation.
Note: Only detected results are reported.
Ramapo Landfill
Public Health Assessment Comparison Values for Contaminants
Found in Sources of Drinking Water.
[all values in micrograms per liter (mcg/L)]
| Chemical | Standards/Guidelines | U.S. EPA | Comparison Values | Source*** | ||
| NEW YORK STATE | ||||||
| Ground Water | Surface Water | Drinking Water | Drinking Water | |||
| Volatile Organics | ||||||
| 1,1-Dichloroethane | 5 | 5g | 5 | -- | 700 | EPA RfD |
| Benzene | 0.7 | 0.7 | 5 | 5 | 0.7 | NYS CREG |
| Chlorobenzene | 5 | 20 | 5 | 100 | 140 | EPA RfD |
| Chloromethane | 5 | -- | 5 | -- | 3 | EPA LTHA |
| Toluene | 5 | 5g | 5 | 1,000;40ps | 1,000 | EPA LTHA |
| Carbon disulfide | -- | -- | 50 | -- | 700 | EPA RfD |
| 4-Methyl-2-pentanone | 50 | 50g | 50 | -- | 350 | EPA RfD |
| 2-Hexanone | 50g | 50g | 50 | -- | -- | |
| 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane | 5 | -- | 5 | -- | 1.3 | ATSDR CREG |
| Vinyl chloride | 2 | 0.3g | 2 | 2 | 0.02 | EPA CPF |
| Acetone | 50 | -- | 50 | -- | 700 | EPA RfD |
| 1,2-Dichloroethane | 5 | 0.8 | 5 | 5 | 0.38 | ATSDR CREG |
| Dichlorodifluoromethane | 5 | -- | 5 | -- | 1,000 | EPA LTHA |
| cis-1,2-Dichloroethene | 5 | -- | 5 | 70 | 70 | EPA LTHA |
| ortho-Xylene | 5 | 5g | 5 | 1,000;20ps | 10,000 | EPA LTHA |
| Isopropylbenzene | 5 | -- | 5 | -- | -- | |
| Propylbenzene | 5 | -- | 5 | -- | -- | |
| 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene | 5 | 5g | 5 | -- | -- | |
| para-Isopropyltoluene | 5 | -- | 5 | -- | -- | |
| 1,2-Dichlorobenzene | 4.7e | -- | 5 | 600;10ps | 600 | EPA LTHA |
| 1,4-Dichlorobenzene | 4.7 | 30 | 5 | 75;5ps | 1.5 | EPA CPF |
| tert-Butylbenzene | -- | -- | 5 | -- | -- | |
| 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene | 5 | 5g | 5 | -- | -- | |
| Semi-Volatile Organics | ||||||
| Di-n-octylphthalate | 50g | 50g | 50 | -- | 140 | EPA RfD |
| Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate | 50 | 4g | 50 | 6 | 2.5 | EPA CPF |
| Diethylphthalate | 50g | 50g | 50 | 4 | 5,000 | EPA LTHA |
| Naphthalene | 10g | 10 | 50 | -- | 20 | EPA LTHA |
| Butylbenzylphthalate | 50g | 50g | 50 | 100p | 1,400 | EPA RfD |
| Pesticides | ||||||
| delat-BHC | ND | 0.01 | 5 | -- | -- | |
| gamma-BHC | ND | 0.01 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.03 | EPA CPF |
| Inorganics | ||||||
| Aluminum | -- | -- | -- | 50-200s | -- | |
| Antimony | 3g | 3g | -- | 6 | 3 | EPA LTHA |
| Arsenic | 25 | 50 | 50 | 50 | 11 | EPA RfD |
| Barium | 1,000 | 1,000 | 2,000 | 2,000 | 2,000 | EPA LTHA |
| Cadmium | 10 | 10 | 5 | 5 | 5 | EPA LTHA |
| Calcium | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | |
| Chromium | 50 | 50 | 100 | 100 | 100 | EPA LTHA |
| Cobalt | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | |
| Copper | 200 | 200 | 1,000 | 1,300 | -- | |
| Iron | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300s | -- | |
| Lead | 25 | 50 | 50 | 15* | -- | |
| Magnesium | 35,000g | 35,000 | -- | -- | -- | |
| Manganese | 300 | 300 | 300 | 50s | 3,500 | EPA RfD |
| Mercury | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | EPA LTHA |
| Nickel | -- | -- | -- | 100 | 100 | EPA LTHA |
| Potassium | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | |
| Sodium | 20,000 | -- | ** | -- | -- | |
| Thallium | 4g | 4g | -- | 2 | 0.4 | EPA LTHA |
| Vanadium | -- | -- | -- | -- | 20 | EPA LTHA |
| Vinyl chloride | 2 | 0.3g | 2 | 2 | -- | |
| Zinc | 300 | 300 | 5,000 | 5,000s | 2,100 | EPA LTHA |
e = applies to total of 1,2- and 1,4-isomers
g = guidance value
p = proposed maximum contaminant level (MCL)
s = secondary MCL
*Maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG) of zero for lead and an action level of 15 mcg/L at the tap.
**No designated limit; water containing more than 20,000 mcg/L should not be used for drinking by people on severely restricted sodium diets; water containing more than 270,000 mcg/L should not be used for drinking by people on moderately restricted sodium diets.
***ATSDR CREG = ATSDR Cancer Risk Evaluation Guide
EPA LTHA = EPA Drinking Water Lifetime Health Advisory
EPA CPF = EPA Cancer Potency Factor
EPA RfD = EPA Reference Dose
NYS CREG = NYS Cancer Risk Evaluation Guideline
RAMAPO LANDFILL
RESPONSES TO PUBLIC COMMENTS
Comment #1
One local resident asked how the data gap involving on-site air monitoring would be solved.
Response #1
Additional on-site monitoring will be performed prior to, during and following remedial construction activities at the site. The proposed landfill cap design includes the installation of a gas venting system. Landfill gas emissions from this system will be monitored for methane, as well as other contaminants. If necessary, appropriate measures will be taken to treat emissions to ensure protection of human health and the environment.
Comment #2
A question was raised concerning the Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC) section of the report. Specifically, how did the QA/QC violations occur involving pesticides and PCB analysis of several leachate and subsurface soil samples collected during the remedial investigation.
Response #2
According to the remedial investigation report, pesticides and PCBs data had to be rejected for a number of samples due to holding time violations by the laboratory and could not be re-sampled.
Comment #3
The summary discusses the increased risk to persons on the landfill resulting from xylene and ethylbenzene in ambient air; however, the Pathways Analyses section (page 23) indicates the VOCs tested for are present at levels typical of normal atmospheric conditions.
Response #3
As indicated on page 23 of the report, testing of ambient air for toxic chemicals has been limited to the on-site baler building and pistol range and one off-site location. These limited data indicate that VOCs tested for at these specific locations are present at levels typical of normal atmospheric conditions. The statement included in the summary involving a discussion of risk to persons on the landfill resulting from xylene and ethylbenzene in ambient air relates to a sample taken within an open piezometer which exists about 350 feet west of the baler building. A piezometer consists of a plastic pipe (1 1/2" - 2" diameter) installed within an open hole augered into the
ground. Piezometers are primarily used to obtain groundwater level readings to determine groundwater flow patterns. Selected piezometers installed on-site were also used to obtain landfill gas data during the air monitoring program performed at the site in 1990. The actual risk to a person standing next to the piezometer cannot be assessed as a sample of the ambient air (outside of the piezometer) was not collected. Although persons are not known to frequent the piezometer areas, the landfill gas emissions escaping from the piezometer may contain elevated concentrations of toxic gases. These contaminants, once released to ambient air, will likely be dispersed and diluted to levels which would not be expected to cause adverse health effects.
Comment #4
Air sampling data have not been provided so that an evaluation of the conclusions cannot be made.
Response #4
The "Ambient Air and Soil Gas" subsection includes a discussion of the three air monitoring activities conducted during the remedial investigation and presents a range of concentrations or maximum concentrations for methane and volatile organic compounds. A complete list of the chemicals tested for and the testing results are included in the remedial investigation report. This report is available for public review at the Suffern Free Library at Washington and Maple Avenues, Suffern, New York and the Finkelstein Memorial Library at 24 Chestnut Street, Spring Valley, New York.
Comment #5
On page 14 "comparison values" need to be defined and the rationale for selection needs to be provided.
Response #5
Comparison values are one of the factors used to evaluate if the contaminants at a site are likely to pose a health threat. Each environmental medium (air, soil, water) has its own comparison value for a contaminant. If a contaminant concentration is above its comparison value, the contaminant is evaluated further to determine if exposure is of public health significance. A general discussion of comparison values and the selection of contaminants for further evaluation is provided on page 11. In the absence of specific comparison values for contaminants in leachate, the sampling results discussed on page 14 were compared to comparison values for drinking water, and to standards or guidelines for groundwater, surface water, and drinking water (Table 7). The potential for exposure is evaluated in the exposure pathways analysis (pp. 22-26) and the potential for health effects is discussed in the toxicological evaluation (pp. 26-29).
Comment #6
The results for LPSS-1 need to be provided.
Response #6
One purpose of the public health assessment is to determine what chemicals are present at concentrations which could result in adverse health effects if exposure was to occur. As such, the Environmental Contamination section is intended to inform the reader about the type of contamination and to determine which site-related contaminants need to be evaluated for cancer and noncancer health risks. A complete list of the chemicals tested for in the various media sampled and the testing results are included in the remedial investigation report.
Comment #7
The detection of bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate in the upgradient MW-5 monitoring well, along with the inconsistency of the concentrations detected in other wells between rounds suggests that the presence of bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate is questionable. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)-phthalate is a common laboratory contaminant and is commonly found in samples as a result of laboratory contamination. The discussion of bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate as a contaminant of concern may not be appropriate if bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate is a laboratory contaminant.
Response #7
The Quality Assurance and Quality Control section of the report has been revised and now includes a discussion of bis(2-ethylhexyl)-phthalate relative to this comment. As suggested, the presence of this chemical in various media is suspect given its frequent occurrence (at low concentrations) and that it is frequently due to laboratory contamination.
Comment #8
"Level of Concern" needs to be defined for air contaminants in ambient air. The presence of xylene and ethylbenzene at 1.77 and 0.28 ppm, respectively, in air samples would not appear to be "typical" atmospheric levels.
Response #8
The term "Levels of Concern" has been deleted from the ambient air/soil gas pathways analysis section. The intended meaning of this phrase in this section is to state that no chemical was detected at a level exceeding its comparison value. As noted in Response #3, xylene and ethylbenzene were detected inside a piezometer and not in open air. Therefore, these data are descriptive of soil gas quality and not ambient air quality.
Comment #9
The reference to vinyl chloride as a toxic gas possibly carried by methane should be eliminated. There is no evidence that vinyl chloride exists on-site; this statement implies it does.
Response #9
The reference to vinyl chloride as a toxic gas passible carried by methane has been removed from both the Pathways Analyses and Public Health Implications sections.
Comment #10
The response to question #1 of the community concerns indicates that drinking water standards would have to be significantly exceeded in residential wells before bottled water would be provided. This is inconsistent with recommendations on page 32, which indicate that bottled water will be provided to residents with wells contaminated above drinking water standards.
Response #10
Statements in the assessment relative to this comment have been revised to indicate that bottled water will be provided to residents with wells contaminated above drinking water standards. This provision is not considered an acceptable long-term measure and therefore would remain in effect until treatment and/or a permanent, alternate water supply is made available.
Comment #11
Provide further data about the landfill's construction. I assume by its origins that there's no liner.
Response #11
Detailed information concerning the landfill's construction is not included in any of the references reviewed by the NYS DOH during the preparation of the report. As with many landfills of similar origin, regulations in effect at the time did not require the placement of impermeable liners beneath the fill.
Comment #12
What about performing a statistical cancer evaluation regarding a ratio of cancer and mortality rates to the general population prior to the start-up of landfill operations, during the operational period, and now.
Response #12
Available data do not indicate that residents have been exposed to levels of contaminants that would cause disease. An evaluation of cancer cases in the area would not be useful since there is no site specific exposure information
which could be linked to cases of cancer.
Comment #13
When did the NYS DEC classify the Ramapo River as a source of drinking water supply? Has the classification changed based upon the landfill study and public health assessment findings?
Response #13
According to information obtained from the NYS DEC Division of Water, Bureau of Water Quality Management, the section of the Ramapo River near the site was classified as a Class "A" surface water in 1966. New York State water quality regulations indicate that the best use of Class "A" surface water is as a source of water supply for drinking, culinary or food processing purposes and any other usages. Treatment of Class "A" water so as to make it suitable for drinking water include full treatment equal to coagulation, sedimentation, filtration and disinfection, with additional treatment if necessary to reduce naturally present impurities. The water supply itself will be considered satisfactory for drinking water purposes only after all New York State Department of Health drinking water standards are met.
Comment #14
How do you address the physical and psychological aspects of living next to a landfill?
Response #14
The NYS DOH is aware of the psychological impacts of living in a community near a landfill
and in June 1992 we co-sponsored a workshop with the ATSDR to discuss this issue. If anyone
would like additional information, they may contact the Health Liaison Program at 1-800-458-1158 extension 402.
