Initial Site Investigation Report O’Malley’s Pet Supply / The Pharmacy, Bennington, Vermont

March 2011 VTDEC Site #2010-4107

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................1

2.0 SCOPE OF WORK ...........................................................................................................1

3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION.........................................................................................................1

3.1 SITE AND VICINITY...........................................................................................................1 3.2 SITE AND AREA FEATURES, TOPOGRAPHY, SURFACE WATER BODIES, AND DRAINAGE......1 3.3 ABUTTERS AND NEARBY PROPERTIES..............................................................................2 3.4 UTILITIES ........................................................................................................................2 3.5 PREVIOUS HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RELEASES AND SITE HISTORY...................................2

4.0 HISTORICAL INFORMATION..........................................................................................3

5.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY ANALYSES ............................3

5.1 PRE-DRILLING ACTIVITIES ...............................................................................................3 5.2 MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION AND FIELD SCREENING OF SUBSURFACE SOILS............3 5.3 GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION AND GRADIENT ...........................................................4 5.4 GROUNDWATER SAMPLING AND LABORATORY ANALYSIS..................................................5

6.0 SITE HYDROGEOLOGY ..................................................................................................6

6.1 CONTAMINANT DISTRIBUTION ..........................................................................................6 6.1.1 Soil............................................................................................................................6 6.1.2 Groundwater ............................................................................................................6

7.0 CONCEPTUAL HYDROGEOLOGIC MODEL ..................................................................7

7.1 SITE CONDITIONS............................................................................................................7 7.2 GEOLOGY .......................................................................................................................7 7.3 HYDROGEOLOGY ............................................................................................................7 7.4 APPARENT SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION .........................................................................8 7.5 CONTAMINANT TRANSPORT.............................................................................................8 7.6 SENSITIVE RECEPTOR RISK ASSESSMENT .......................................................................8

7.6.1 Buildings in the Vicinity..........................................................................................8 7.6.2 Utility Corridors .......................................................................................................9 7.6.3 Surface Water Bodies .............................................................................................9 7.6.4 Public Water Supplies.............................................................................................9

7.7 IMPACTED THIRD PARTIES...............................................................................................9

8.0 CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................................9

9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................................................10

10.0 REFERENCES................................................................................................................11


March 2011 VTDEC Site #2010-4107

APPENDICES Appendix A. Maps Appendix B. Soil Boring Logs and Monitoring Well Construction Diagram Appendix C. Liquid Level Monitoring Data Appendix D. Groundwater Quality Summary Data Appendix E. Groundwater Analytical Laboratory Report Appendix F. Site Photographs


March 2011 i VTDEC Site #2010-4107

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY An Initial Site Investigation has been completed by KAS, Inc. (KAS) at the O’Malley’s Pet Supply / The Pharmacy property in Bennington, Vermont. O’Malley’s Pet Supply / The Pharmacy property (herein referred to as “Site”) is located at 108 Gage Street in Bennington, Vermont (VTDEC Site #2010-4107). The Site property is currently used as a pharmacy on the west and a retail pet supply store on the east. Contamination was encountered in soils beneath the Site during the removal of two (2) #2 fuel oil underground storage tanks (USTs) on October 5 and 8, 2010. Soils in the vicinity of the USTs were reported to have concentrations of up to 397 parts per million volume (ppmv) when subjected to headspace soils testing using a properly-calibrated photoionization detector (PID). The former UST locations are shown on the Site Map in Appendix A. Information collected to date suggests that the petroleum contamination noted in October 2010 occurred from a historic release from the two USTs. Both USTs were observed to have holes. There are no other known potential sources of contamination at this time. As part of this Initial Site Investigation, KAS supervised the installation of two groundwater monitoring wells at the Site (MW11-01 and MW11-02) on January 11, 2011. Three failed attempts were made to complete SB11-03 into a monitoring well. PID soil screening results during drilling ranged from 0.0 to 343 parts per million volume (ppmv). Petroleum odors were noted in soils during the advancement attempts from SB11-03. No petroleum odors were noted in any of the soil samples collected during the installation of monitoring wells MW11-01 and MW11-02. Groundwater analytical data collected at the Site in January 2011 indicate that no dissolved petroleum constituents (VOCs) are present at concentrations above Vermont Groundwater Enforcement Standards (VGES) in groundwater in the vicinity of MW11-01 and MW11-02. Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) were not reported above laboratory reporting limits in groundwater samples collected from MW11-01 and MW11-02. The groundwater flow, gradient and full extent of the contaminant plume have not been defined during the initial site investigation and additional data is needed to determine whether off site impacts are present. No sensitive receptors, other than soil and groundwater have been positively identified as being at risk to petroleum contamination originating form the Site. However, vapor intrusion to the onsite buildings remains a low possibility and should be checked in the future. Based on the results of this initial site investigation, KAS is recommending an additional subsurface investigation be conducted in April 2011 to fully define the groundwater flow, gradient and contaminant plume. This should include the advancement of two additional monitoring wells on site using an air hammer and hollow stem auger drill rig. Indoor air screening of both on-site buildings should also be conducted.


March 2011 1 VTDEC Site #2010-4107

1.0 INTRODUCTION This report provides a summary of the methodology, results, conclusions, and recommendations completed as part of the Initial Site Investigation at the O’Malley’s Pet Supply / The Pharmacy property located at 108 Gage Street in Bennington, Vermont (see Site Location Map, Appendix A). This work was performed in accordance with the Work Plan and Cost Estimate for an Initial Site Investigation at the referenced property dated November 5, 2010 prepared by KAS, Inc. (KAS). The Initial Site Investigation was approved by Mr. Gerold Noyes of the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (VTDEC) in an electronic mail message (email) to the Molloy and O’Neill Partnership dated December 6, 2010.

2.0 SCOPE OF WORK This Initial Site Investigation was conducted to assess the degree and extent of petroleum impact to soil and groundwater in the vicinity of two former fuel oil underground storage tanks (USTs) located on the Site property. Petroleum impact was encountered in soils beneath the Site during soil field screening during the removal of (2) 1,000 gallon No. 2 fuel oil USTs on October 5 and 8, 2010. Results of the following investigative tasks performed by KAS are presented: soil boring advancement and monitoring well installation; soil screening; groundwater sampling and analysis; historic land use research; and evaluation of sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the Site.

3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

3.1 Site and Vicinity The Site is located on the north side of Gage Street and east of Route 7 in Bennington, Vermont (Site Location Map, Appendix A). The Site buildings are in use as a pharmacy on the west and a retail pet supply store on the east. A paved parking lot, where the two USTs were located, lies between the two buildings. The USTs were adjacent to the on-site buildings. The Site Map (Appendix A) shows the Site and relevant Site features.

3.2 Site and Area Features, Topography, Surface Water Bodies, and Drainage Based on a review of the topographic map and aerial photograph included in Appendix A, the Site lies at an approximate elevation of 714 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The coordinates of the property at the site entrance are approximately 42o 52’ 54.72” North Latitude and 73o 11’ 46.98’’ West Longitude. Topography on the Site property is generally flat throughout with a very slight slope to the south and west. The property lies between the Main Branch of the Walloomsac River to the south and the Roaring Branch of the Walloomsac River to the north. The main branch is nearest to the site and flows to the west approximately 300 to the south. Based on Site and area topography, the surface drainage from the Site was anticipated to flow to the south and west towards Main Street. However, groundwater data collected from MW11-01 and MW11-02 suggests that groundwater may flow to the north-northwest.



3.3 Abutters and Nearby Properties The land use surrounding the Site consists of a mixture of commercial and residential properties (see Aerial Map, Appendix A). Land uses adjacent to the subject property during this initial site investigation were as follows. The property is abutted on the north by a commercial parking lot, a thrift store and bank; on the east by a residential property; on the south by a nongovernmental organization, and on the west by a commercial property. An aerial photograph showing the site vicinity is included in Appendix A.

3.4 Utilities Public utilities in the area include telephone, electricity, water, and sewer. Electric and telephone lines are located overhead. Water and sewer are obtained from the City of Bennington and are located underground. The on site buildings are served by municipal water supply and wastewater disposal systems.

3.5 Previous Hazardous Materials Releases and Site History Contamination was encountered in soils beneath the Site during the removal of two (2) #2 fuel oil tanks (USTs) on October 5 and 8, 2010. Soils in the vicinity of the USTs were reported to have concentrations of up to 397 parts per million volume (ppmv) when subjected to headspace soils testing using a properly-calibrated photoionization detector (PID). The former UST locations are shown on the Site Map in Appendix A. Information collected to date suggests that the petroleum contamination noted in October 2010 occurred from a historic release from the two USTs. Both USTs were observed to have holes. There are no other known potential sources of contamination at this time. Petroleum is composed of aliphatic hydrocarbons, olefinic hydrocarbons, and aromatic hydrocarbons. The main contaminants of concern from the suspected petroleum release at the Site are benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene, and naphthalene. No other releases of hazardous materials are known to have occurred on the Site and thus no other contaminants of concern are noted. A material safety data sheet (MSDS) for #2 fuel oil is available on line at www.msds.com/.



4.0 HISTORICAL INFORMATION Deeds for the subject property were reviewed on January 7, 2011 at the Bennington City Clerk’s Office in Bennington, Vermont.1 Formal ownership of the property was traced to 1877. Table 1 provides a summary of title search information for the Site.

Table 1 History of Subject Property Ownership

O’Malley’s Pet Supply / The Pharmacy property 108 Gage Street

Bennington, Vermont VTDEC No. 2010-4107

Date Grantor Grantee Volume Page 9/27/79 PJ O’Neill & EP Molloy EE Feinberg 225 187 10/9/44 KH Hussey PJ O’Neill & EP Molloy 85 153 10/9/44 KH Hussey & SF Huling,

Trustees for SH Huling PJ O’Neill & EP Molloy 85 154

10/3/14 W Hawks, Inc. SH Huling 70 574 2/11/14 GM Hawks Estate of WE Hawks, Inc. O-3 35 4/25/1877 GB Sibley WE Hawks 49 568 Based on information obtained through deed research the Site property may have been used for commercial use from approximately 1914 to present and possibly for residential use in the late 1800’s to early 1900’s. No DEC UST notifications were found in the land records. KAS examined two aerial photographs dated 1993 and 2011.2,3 Both maps show the subject property and the immediately adjacent properties in a similar configuration.

5.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY ANALYSES

5.1 Pre-Drilling Activities Prior to the initiation of subsurface activities at the Site, a Health and Safety Plan (HASP) was prepared for the Site in accordance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements. The Site property was pre-marked on January 3, 2011. DigSafe Number 2011-020-1296 was obtained prior to the drilling. The City of Bennington was also contacted for clearance of drilling locations related to any underground utilities that may be in the area.

5.2 Monitoring Well Installation and Field Screening of Subsurface Soils Two soil borings of the three attempted at the site on January 7, 2011, were completed as monitoring wells and designated MW11-01 and MW11-02. The third soil boring (SB11-03) was advanced to approximately 11.5 feet below grade before it was abandoned after meeting refusal. A fourth soil boring could not be advanced due to 1 Bennington City Clerk’s Office, Land Records 2 www.msrmaps.com 3 Google Maps



time constraints. The soil borings were advanced at the Site by T&K Drilling of Troy, New Hampshire under the direct supervision of a KAS geologist. The soil borings were advanced using a hollow stem auger drill rig. The monitoring well and soil boring locations are indicated on the Site Map (Appendix A). During borehole advancement, a two-foot split spoon sampler was advanced ahead of the augers approximately every five-foot run. Soil samples collected from the borings with the split spoon sampler were logged by the supervising geologist and screened for the presence of Volatile Organic Compound (VOCs) with a calibrated PID equipped with a 10.6 eV UV lamp. Soils were screened using the KAS Jar/Polyethylene Bag Headspace Screening Protocol. Soil characteristics and contaminant concentrations were recorded by the geologist in detailed well logs, which are included in Appendix B. Monitoring well MW11-01 was installed at the approximate location of The Pharmacy UST at the southwestern corner of the parking lot; MW11-02 was installed north of MW11-01 and west of the O’Malley’s UST. Soil boring SB11-03 was advanced in the approximate location of the O’Malley’s UST at the northeast corner of the parking lot. Photographs of the drilling activities are included in Appendix F. VOCs were measured in the headspace of soil samples collected from the soil borings at concentrations ranging from 0.2 to 343 ppmv. Petroleum odors were noted locally in soil samples collected from the SB11-03 soil boring. The highest VOC reading was detected in the headspace of the soil sample collected from soil boring SB11-03 at a depth of 5 to 7 feet below grade. Subsurface Sediments Subsurface sediments encountered in the soil borings consisted mostly of silty sand with gravel and silty gravel with local cobbles. Groundwater was observed at approximately 11 to 12 feet below grade on the day of drilling. No bedrock was encountered in the soil borings to a maximum depth of 17 feet below grade. The monitoring wells were installed at a depth of 15 feet below grade. Refusal was encountered during the advancement of MW11-02 and SB11-03. Monitoring well MW11-02 encountered two refusals at a depth of 7 feet below grade before successfully being completed as a monitoring well. Three failed attempts were made to complete SB11-03 into a monitoring well. It is believed that refusal was encountered because of large localized cobbles and not bedrock.

5.3 Groundwater Flow Direction and Gradient Depth to groundwater measurements were collected from the two monitoring wells on January 11, 2011. The well locations are shown on the Site Map in Appendix A. The depth to water was subtracted from the top-of-casing elevation to obtain the relative water table elevation. No light non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) was measured or observed in the two monitoring wells. Depth to groundwater ranged from 8.79 feet below top of casing (btoc) in MW11-01 to 10.33 feet btoc in MW11-02. Liquid level monitoring data are presented in Appendix C.



Water table elevations were plotted on the Site map (see the Groundwater Elevation Map, Appendix A). Neither groundwater flow direction nor the gradient can be determined with only two well points, so these were not calculated for this site at this time. However, the groundwater elevation data collected from MW11-01 and MW11-02 suggests that groundwater may flow toward the north or northwest at the site and not the south/southwest flow that was originally anticipated. If this hypothesis is correct, MW11-02 is located cross-to downgradient of the former fuel oil USTs. MW11-01 is located in the immediate vicinity of The Pharmacy’s UST. An additional subsurface investigation is needed to confirm the groundwater flow and gradient.

5.4 Groundwater Sampling and Laboratory Analysis Groundwater samples were collected from the newly installed wells on January 11, 2011. A summary of the measured depths to water and calculated groundwater elevations is provided in Appendix C. No LNAPL was measured or observed in the site monitoring wells during the January 11, 2011 sampling event. During the sampling event, groundwater samples were collected using disposable bailers. For Quality Assurance/ Quality Control (QA/QC) purposes, one trip blank and one duplicate sample were submitted along with the groundwater samples collected during the sampling event. The groundwater samples collected on January 11, 2011 were submitted to Endyne for laboratory analysis of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8021B and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) via EPA Method 8015-DRO. The groundwater analytical results for the January 11, 2011 sampling event were compared to the Vermont Groundwater Enforcement Standards (VGES). Tabulated groundwater results can be found in Appendix D. A copy of the laboratory report is included in Appendix E. Two compounds (Benzene and Toluene) were reported above laboratory reporting limits but below the VGES in the groundwater sample collected from MW11-02. No compounds were detected above laboratory reporting limits in the sample collected from MW11-01 on January 11, 2011. TPH was not reported above laboratory reporting limits in the groundwater samples collected from MW11-01 and MW11-02 on the sample date. The results of the laboratory analysis of the duplicate sample were analyzed using a relative percent difference (RPD) analysis. The RPD is defined as 100 times the difference in reported concentration between sample and duplicate, divided by the mean of the two samples. A small RPD indicates good correlation between sample and duplicate. For the initial sampling event, the duplicate sample was collected from monitoring well MW11-02. An RPD ranging from 4.4% to 11.8% was calculated for the sample and duplicate indicating good precision. A tabular presentation of duplicate sample data and RPD results is included in Appendix D. Lack of spurious influence on sample results was demonstrated by none of the tested VOCs reported above detection limits in the trip blank.



6.0 SITE HYDROGEOLOGY

6.1 Contaminant Distribution

6.1.1 Soil Based on a review of field screening data collected at the Site, it appears high levels of petroleum impacts to soils (adsorbed contamination) are present in the vicinity the UST pit located to the northwest of O’Malley’s Pet Supply at a depth ranging from 5 to 7 feet bsg (soil boring SB11-03). Petroleum odors were not noted in any of the soil samples collected at varying depths during the installation of monitoring wells MW11-01 or MW11-02. Detailed descriptions of these findings are available in Appendix B. PID readings decreased significantly within the silty sand and localized cobbles collected from soil boring SB11-03. It is unknown what is restricting the vertical movement of the contamination as soils exhibited very similar characteristics throughout the of SB11-03. It is possible that the water table is between 5 -7 feet below grade during times of the year in the vicinity of SB11-03 based on the elevated PID readings and moist samples recorded. An additional subsurface investigation should take place to fully define the contamination plume beneath the site.

6.1.2 Groundwater Groundwater analytical data collected at the Site indicates that two compounds (Benzene and Toluene) were reported above laboratory reporting limits but below the VGES in groundwater in the vicinity of monitoring well MW11-02. No compounds were detected above laboratory reporting limits in the sample collected from MW11-01 on January 11, 2011. TPH was not reported above laboratory reporting limits in the groundwater samples collected from MW11-01 and MW11-02 on the sample date. Based on the Contaminant Concentration Map included in Appendix A, the full extent of the dissolved phase contaminant plume has not been fully defined and its direction is unknown at this time. Groundwater data collected from MW11-01 and MW11-02 suggests that groundwater may flow toward the north or northwest at the Site. An additional subsurface investigation is needed to determine the groundwater flow and gradient. The presence of low levels of contamination at MW11-02 suggests VOCs are migrating away from one of the former UST locations. Given the low level impacts noted at MW11-01, the most likely source is from the former O’Malley’s UST. The presence of VOCs in this well may suggest a westerly flow at times of the year.



7.0 CONCEPTUAL HYDROGEOLOGIC MODEL

7.1 Site Conditions A paved parking lot, where the two former USTs were located, lies between the two on-site buildings. Both on site buildings are built on slab construction with only a portion of the Pharmacy building (west of the former USTs) having a basement. The Site is bordered to the south by Gage Street and to the north is a vacant lot used for parking. The closest off site buildings are at least 50 feet away from the area of contamination. The nearest surface water is the main branch of the Walloomsac River located approximately 300 feet to the south/south-west of the Site. The Site and surrounding area are serviced by municipal water and sewer.

7.2 Geology Surficial deposits in the vicinity of the Site are indicated to be either Glacial Till or Glaciofluvial Outwash according to the Surficial Geological Map of the State of Vermont4. Bedrock is indicated as being Cambrian aged sedimentary rocks, either Winooski Dolomite or Monkton Quartzite according to the Centennial Geological Map of the State of Vermont5. Surficial soils encountered during the Site Investigation activities consisted primarily of silty sand with gravel and silty gravel with local cobbles. Based on a review of field screening data collected at the Site, saturated soils beneath the Site have moderate to high permeability consisting of silty sand/gravel with local cobbles. No bedrock was encountered in the soil borings to a maximum depth of 17 feet below grade. Monitoring well MW11-02 was successfully completed after two failed attempts were encountered. Three failed attempts were made to complete SB11-03 into a monitoring well. These refusals were believed to be from large cobbles and not bedrock.

7.3 Hydrogeology Depth to groundwater beneath the Site was measured; however, neither groundwater flow direction nor the gradient can be determined with only two well points, so these were not calculated for this site. The groundwater data collected from the two well points (MW11-01 and MW11-02) suggests that groundwater may flow toward the north or northwest at the site and not the south/southwest flow that was originally anticipated. If this hypothesis is correct, MW11-02 is located cross-to downgradient of the former fuel oil USTs. MW11-01 is located within the former Pharmacy’s UST pit. Given the presence of contamination at MW11-02 a possible westerly flow is present as well. An additional subsurface investigation is needed to confirm this hypothesis.

4 Surficial Geologic Map of Vermont 5 Centennial Geologic Map of Vermont



7.4 Apparent Source of Contamination Petroleum contamination was first noted during the removal of two (2) #2 fuel oil USTs on October 5 and 8, 2010. Both USTs were observed to have holes. Subsurface petroleum contamination that is present beneath the Site is believed to be attributed to a release from the two former fuel oil USTs removed in October 2010. There are no other known potential sources of contamination at this time.

7.5 Contaminant Transport It was believed prior to this initial site investigation that based on surface topography and the location of the Main Branch Walloomsac River to the south, groundwater flow direction was likely toward the south/southwest. However, the groundwater elevation data that could be collected from MW11-01 and MW11-02 suggests that groundwater may flow to the north or northwest at the site. If this flow is correct, petroleum contamination would predominantly migrate in a general north/northwesterly direction away from the Walloomsac River. These groundwater measurements could suggest the Walloomsac River is currently higher than normal due to seasonal variations. An additional subsurface investigation is needed to confirm the groundwater flow and gradient and to define the full extent of the contaminant plume.

7.6 Sensitive Receptor Risk Assessment

7.6.1 Buildings in the Vicinity Both onsite structures are built on slab construction with only a portion of The Pharmacy building having a basement. Petroleum impact to shallow soils on site has been observed at approximately 5-7 feet bsg in SB11-03 in close proximity to the former UST and O’Malley’s Pet Supply. Due to time constraints The O’Malley’s Pet Supply building was not screened for VOCs using a PID during the initial site investigation on January 11, 2011. Given its construction, the immediate and future risk to the building from the migration of petroleum vapors is considered to be low. However, due to the high PID readings in shallow soils near the building; the ambient air inside the building should be screened for VOCs in the future when access is available to confirm petroleum vapors are low. Due to the PID readings above background levels in the vicinity of MW11-02 (east of The Pharmacy building) and the low overall source strength at the former Pharmacy’s UST location, risk to The Pharmacy building is considered low at this time. In October 2010, during the UST removal, PID readings were measured the basement of the Pharmacy and were reported at 0.0 ppm. The closest off site building is located approximately 50 feet east of the source area across Route 7. It is unknown if this building contains a basement. This building it not believed to be at risk to vapor intrusion at this time. However, additional data is needed.



7.6.2 Utility Corridors Public utilities in the area include telephone, electricity, water, and sewer. Electric and telephone lines are located overhead. Water and sewer are obtained from the City of Bennington and are located underground. The on site buildings are served by municipal water supply and wastewater disposal systems. Given the location of the source are and the measured depth to groundwater the utility corridors are not believed to be at risk at this time.

7.6.3 Surface Water Bodies The nearest surface water is the Main Branch of the Walloomsac River, located approximately 300 feet south of the Site. There does not appear to be risk to the Walloomsac River given the distance between the Site and the surface water. No wetlands or other surface water has been observed in close proximity of the Site.

7.6.4 Public Water Supplies The Site and surrounding properties are serviced by the public water system. No supply wells were observed in the immediate vicinity of the site. Information available online via the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation, Water Supply Division (viewed on line at http://maps.vermont.gov/?site=ANR_wswelldriller ) indicates eleven private wells are identified within ½ mile of the site. The nearest supply well is located approximately 500-600 feet away from the Site in a presumed cross-gradient location. None of the nearby supply wells are considered to be at risk at this time.

7.7 Impacted Third Parties Based on PID readings above background levels recorded in the shallow soil samples collected in the vicinity of the Pharmacy’s UST the potential does exist for off site contamination migration. Additional data is needed to fully define the contaminant plume and to definitively determine whether off site impacts are present.

8.0 CONCLUSIONS 1. Based on the results of the initial site investigation, KAS concludes that a release of

petroleum has occurred at the Site. The amounts and duration of the release(s) are unknown; however, PID readings above background were observed in soil samples collected from two of the three borings at various depths;

2. Two soil borings of the three attempted on January 7, 2011, were completed as

monitoring wells and designated MW11-01 and MW11-02. The third soil boring (SB11-03) was advanced to approximately 11.5 feet below grade before it was abandoned after meeting refusal. A fourth soil boring could not be advanced due to time constraints;



3. Subsurface sediments encountered in the three soil borings consisted mostly of silty sand with gravel and silty gravel with local cobbles. The elevated PID readings ranged from 3.5 to 343 parts per million volume (ppmv);

4. Neither groundwater flow direction nor the gradient could be determined at this time.

However, the groundwater elevation data collected from MW11-01 and MW11-02 suggests that groundwater may flow toward the north or northwest at the site and not the south/southwest flow that was originally anticipated. Furthermore, given the presence of contamination at MW11-02 this suggests a possibly westerly flow as well.

5. Groundwater analytical results indicate Benzene and Toluene were reported above

laboratory reporting limits but below the VGES in the groundwater sample collected from MW11-02. No compounds were detected above laboratory reporting limits in the sample collected from MW11-01. TPH was not reported above laboratory reporting limits in the groundwater samples collected from MW11-01 and MW11-02;

6. The full extent of the contaminant plume, groundwater flow and gradient have not

been defined during this initial site investigation; and 7. No sensitive receptors, other than soil and groundwater have been positively

identified as being at risk to petroleum contamination originating from the Site. However, vapor intrusion to the onsite buildings remains a low possibility and should be checked in the future.

9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the results of the initial site investigation conducted at the O’Malley’s Pet Supply / The Pharmacy property, KAS recommends in order to better define the groundwater flow, gradient and contaminant plume an additional subsurface investigation should be conducted. This should include the advancement of two additional monitoring wells on site using an air hammer and hollow stem auger drill rig. Indoor air screening of both on-site buildings should also be conducted. A work plan and cost estimate to conduct this work should be prepared.



10.0 REFERENCES

1. Underground Storage Tank Closure Assessment, O’Malley’s Pet Supply/ The Pharmacy, Gage and North Street, Bennington, VT, October 12, 2010.

2. Bennington City Clerk’s Office, Bennington, VT, Land Records, January 11,

2011. 3. Microsoft Research Maps, www.msrmaps.com

4. Google Earth Imagery, 2011

5. Doll, Charles G., ed., 1961, Centennial Geologic Map of Vermont, Vermont

Geological Survey.

6. Doll, Charles G., ed., 1970, Surficial Geologic Map of Vermont, Vermont Geological Survey.

KAS Job Number: 410100398SMS #2010-4107Source: USGS Mapping Mapserver, 2001. http://mapserver.mytopo.com/api/GetImage.asp?fname=19736&local_server_ip=83

Date: 11/05/10 Drawing No. 1 Scale: 1:24,000 By: JR

USGS Mapping

108 Gage StreetO'Malley's Pet Supply/The Pharmacy

Bennington, VermontSite Location Map

NORTH

SUBJECTPROPERTY

NTS

KAS Project: 412100409Source: USGS images on http://terraserver.microsoft.com

Date:3/11/11 By: SD

O'Malley's Pet Supply/Pharmacy Buidling

Bennington, Vermont

Aerial Map

Drawing No.

Route 7

Site

Nor

th

Soil Boring Logs and Monitoring Well Construction Diagrams

Well No: MW11-01 THE PHARMACY / O'MALLEY'SBENNINGTON, VT

KAS Project #: 412100409 Date Installed: 01/07/11Drilled by : T&K Drilling Drilling Method: HSA

Driller: Sean McGarry and Kevin Singleton Boring Diameter.: 8.25"Supervised by: TK Development Method: N/A

Logged by: TK Screened Length: 10 feetPen/Rec (") Interval (') Soil Characteristics

Grade = 0 Blow Count PID (ppm) Asphalt

0.5

1.0

1.5 Ft<Grade N/A 1'-2' SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM) -- SM2.0 N/A 0.0 moist, light brown2.5 sampled off auger flight (AF)3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5 24"/15" 5'-7' SILTY SAND (SM) -- SM6.0 3-3-5-7 0.0 moist, light brown6.5 silt in a layer at the top of the spoon7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

9.0 8.79'9.5 1/11/11

10.0

10.5 11' 24"/6" 10'-12' SILTY GRAVEL WITH SAND (GM) -- GM11.0 1/7/11 16-20-17-21 0.2 wet, light brown, cobbles11.5

12.0

12.5

13.0

13.5

14.0

14.5

15.0

15.5 24"/9" 15'-17' SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM) -- SM16.0 25-18-20-17 0.4 wet, light brown16.5

17.0

17.5 17' End of Exploration18.0

18.5

19.0

19.5

20.0

20.5

21.0

21.5

22.0Legend

Road Box with Bolt Down Cover, Set in Cement. Locking Plug.Existing Surface. 2" ID, Schedule 40 PVC Riser.Bentonite Seal Placed in Annulus. 2" ID, Schedule 40 PVC, 0.010"-Slotted Well ScreenDrill Cuttings Placed in Annulus. Plug PointGrade #1 Silica Sand Pack Placed in Annulus. Static Water LevelNM - Not Measured N/A - Not Applicable Approximate Water Level During Drilling

BORING LOG AND WELL CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAM

Well Construction

Gra

phic

Sym

bol

Lette

r Sym

bol

Well No: MW11-02THE PHARMACY / O'MALLEY'SBENNINGTON, VT



Logged by: TK Screened Length: 10 feetPen/Rec (") Interval (') Soil Characteristics


0.5

1.0


3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5 18"/6" 5'-7' SILTY GRAVEL WITH SAND (GM) -- GM6.0 13-6-14-8 0.3 moist, light brown, cobbles6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

9.0

9.5

10.0

10.5 10.33' NM 10'-12' SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM) -- SM11.0 1/11/11 NM 3.5 moist, light brown11.5

12.0

12.5

13.0

13.5

14.0

14.5

15.0

15.5 15' 24"/6" 15'-17' WELL-GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) -- GM16.0 1/7/11 11-6-11-8 0.6 wet, light brown16.5

17.0 17' End of Exploration17.5

18.0Legend

Road Box with Bolt Down Cover, Set in Cement. Locking Plug.Existing Surface. 2" ID, Schedule 40 PVC Riser.Bentonite Seal Placed in Annulus. 2" ID, Schedule 40 PVC, 0.010"-Slotted Well ScreenDrill Cuttings Placed in Annulus. Plug PointGrade #1 Silica Sand Pack Placed in Annulus.

LNAPL light non-aqueous phase liquid Static Water LevelNM - Not Measured N/A - Not Applicable Approximate Water Level During Drilling


Well Construction

Gra

phic

Sym

bol

Lette

r Sym

bol

Boring No: SB11-03THE PHARMACY / O'MALLEY'SBENNINGTON, VT



Logged by: TK Screened Length: N/APen/Rec (") Interval (') Soil Characteristics


0.5

1.0


3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5 24"/9" 5'-7' SILTY SAND (SM) -- SM6.0 14-29-17-18 343 moist, medium brown, petroleum odor6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

9.0

9.5

10.0

10.5 17"/7" 10'-12' SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM) -- SM11.0 11' 22-39-30/5.75" 1.6 wet at 11', light brown/rust11.5 1/7/11 Refusal at 11' 6" in this boring, made 2 more12.0 attempts to complete the well but was12.5 unsuccessful.13.0 11.5' End of Exploration13.5

14.0

14.5

15.0

15.5

16.0

16.5

17.0

17.5

18.0Legend

Road Box with Bolt Down Cover, Set in Cement.Existing Surface.Bentonite Seal Placed in Annulus.Drill Cuttings Placed in Annulus.Grade #1 Silica Sand Pack Placed in Annulus.

LNAPL light non-aqueous phase liquid Static Water LevelNM - Not Measured N/A - Not Applicable Approximate Water Level During Drilling


Well Construction

Gra

phic

Sym

bol

Lette

r Sym

bol

Liquid Level Monitoring Data

KAS, Inc. The Pharmacy / O'Malley'sBennington, VT

Liquid Level Monitoring DataMonitoring Date: 1/11/11

Top Specific CorrectedWell I.D. of Casing Depth to Depth to Product Gravity Hydro Depth Water Table

Elevation Product Water Thickness of Product Equivalent to Water ElevationMW11-01 99.56 - 8.79 - - - 8.79 90.77MW11-02 100.00 - 10.33 - - - 10.33 89.67 All values reported in feet. NM = Not Measured FP/Sheen = Free product/thickness (in feet)

Historic Liquid Level Monitoring Data

Monitoring Date:Well I.D. 1/11/11MW11-01 90.77MW11-02 89.67 All values reported in feet. NM = Not Measured FP/Sheen = Free product/thickness (in feet)

VTDEC Site # 2010-4107

Groundwater Quality Summary Data


Groundwater Quality Summary1/11/11

PARAMETER MW11-01 MW11-02 VGESMTBE ND(2.0) ND(2.0) 40

Benzene ND(1.0) 2.2 5Toluene ND(1.0) 1.6 1000

Ethylbenzene ND(1.0) ND(1.0) 700Xylenes ND(2.0) ND(2.0) 10000

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND(1.0) ND(1.0)1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND(1.0) ND(1.0)

Naphthalene ND(2.0) ND(2.0) 20Total Targeted VOCs ND 3.8 -

TPH (mg/L) ND(0.40) ND(0.40) ---

All values reported in ug/L (ppb) unless indicated otherwise.Values greater than or equal to the applicable VGES are shadedAnalytical results expressed to 3 significant digitsVGES - Vermont Groundwater Enforcement Standard, Source VT Groundwater Protection Rule and Strategy, 2/26/2007TBQ(1) - Trace Below Quantitation Limit (Quantitation Limit)ND(1000) - Not Detected (Detection Limit)Detections are BoldNA - Not Analyzed

350



QA/QC Data Table

Sample Date: 1/11/11Duplicate

Parameter Trip Blank MW11-02 MW11-02 RPDMTBE ND(1.0) ND(2.0) ND(2.0) -

Benzene ND(1.0) 2.2 2.3 4.4Toluene ND(1.0) 1.6 1.8 11.8

Ethylbenzene ND(2.0) ND(1.0) ND(1.0) - Xylenes ND(5.0) ND(2.0) ND(2.0) -

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND(1.0) ND(1.0) ND(1.0) - 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND(1.0) ND(1.0) ND(1.0) -

Naphthalene ND(2.0) ND(2.0) ND(2.0) - Total Targeted VOCs ND 3.8 4.1 ---

RPD: Relative Percent DifferenceND( ): Not detected (detection limit)


Groundwater Analytical Report

Laboratory Report

412100409 Pharmacy/O'Malley'sPROJECT:

DATE RECEIVED:WORK ORDER:

DATE REPORTED:

100306KAS, Inc.PO Box 787Williston, VT 05495

Atten: Tim Kelly SAMPLER:January 17, 2011

1101-00457

Tim Kelly

January 12, 2011

Enclosed please find the results of the analyses performed for the samples referenced on the attached chain of custody located at the end of this report.

The column labeled Lab/Tech in the accompanying report denotes the laboratory facility where the testing was performed and the technician who conducted the assay. A "W" designates the Williston, VT lab under NELAC certification ELAP 11263; "R" designates the Lebanon, NH facility under certification NH 2037 and “N” the Plattsburgh, NY lab under certification ELAP 11892. “Sub” indicates the testing was performed by a subcontracted laboratory. The accreditation status of the subcontracted lab is referenced in the corresponding NELAC and Qual fields.

This NELAC column also denotes the accreditation status of each laboratory for each

reported parameter. “A” indicates the referenced laboratory is NELAC accredited for the parameter reported. “N” indicates the laboratory is not accredited. “U” indicates that NELAC does not offer accreditation for that parameter in that specific matrix. Test results denoted with an “A” meet all National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program requirements except where denoted by pertinent data qualifiers. Test results are representative of the samples as they were received at the laboratory.

Endyne, Inc. warrants, to the best of its knowledge and belief, the accuracy of the analytical

test results contained in this report, but makes no other warranty, expressed or implied, especially no warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.

Reviewed by:

Harry B. Locker, Ph.D.Laboratory Director

160 James Brown Dr., Williston, VT 05495Ph 802-879-4333 Fax 802-879-7103 ELAP 11263

www.endynelabs.com

NH203756 Etna Road, Lebanon, NH 03766 Ph 603-678-4891 Fax 603-678-4893

Laboratory Report

KAS, Inc.

Page 2 of 3

CLIENT:PROJECT: 412100409 Pharmacy/O'Malley's

WORK ORDER:DATE RECEIVED:

1101-0045701/12/2011

1/17/2011REPORT DATE:

001 Date Sampled: 1/11/11Site: Trip Blank 1/13/11 KAWWAnalysis Date:10:17

QualNelacUnitResultParameterQualNelacUnitResultParameter

TEST METHOD: EPA 8021B

Nug/LMethyl-t-butyl ether (MTBE) < 2.0 Nug/LBenzene < 1.0Nug/LToluene < 1.0 Nug/LEthylbenzene < 1.0Nug/LXylenes, Total < 2.0 Nug/L1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene < 1.0Nug/L1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene < 1.0 Nug/LNaphthalene < 2.0N%Surr. 1 (Bromobenzene) 104 NUnidentified Peaks 0

002 Date Sampled: 1/11/11Site: MW11-01 1/14/11 MDPWAnalysis Date:15:07



UExtraction Mod. EPA 3510C Completed Umg/LC7-C10 TPH < 0.40Umg/LC10-C26 TPH-DRO < 0.40 Umg/LC26-C40 TPH < 0.40Umg/LTot. Petroleum Hydrocarbons < 0.40 UHydrocarbon Window NA

002 Date Sampled: 1/11/11Site: MW11-01 1/13/11 KAWWAnalysis Date:15:07



Nug/LMethyl-t-butyl ether (MTBE) < 2.0 Nug/LBenzene < 1.0Nug/LToluene < 1.0 Nug/LEthylbenzene < 1.0Nug/LXylenes, Total < 2.0 Nug/L1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene < 1.0Nug/L1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene < 1.0 Nug/LNaphthalene < 2.0N%Surr. 1 (Bromobenzene) 104 NUnidentified Peaks 0

003 Date Sampled: 1/11/11Site: MW11-02 1/14/11 MDPWAnalysis Date:15:22



UExtraction Mod. EPA 3510C Completed Umg/LC7-C10 TPH < 0.40Umg/LC10-C26 TPH-DRO < 0.40 Umg/LC26-C40 TPH < 0.40Umg/LTot. Petroleum Hydrocarbons < 0.40 UHydrocarbon Window NA

003 Date Sampled: 1/11/11Site: MW11-02 1/13/11 KAWWAnalysis Date:15:22



Nug/LMethyl-t-butyl ether (MTBE) < 2.0 Nug/LBenzene 2.2Nug/LToluene 1.6 Nug/LEthylbenzene < 1.0Nug/LXylenes, Total < 2.0 Nug/L1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene < 1.0Nug/L1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene < 1.0 Nug/LNaphthalene < 2.0N%Surr. 1 (Bromobenzene) 99 NUnidentified Peaks > 10

Laboratory Report

KAS, Inc.

Page 3 of 3

CLIENT:PROJECT: 412100409 Pharmacy/O'Malley's

WORK ORDER:DATE RECEIVED:

1101-0045701/12/2011

1/17/2011REPORT DATE:

004 Date Sampled: 1/11/11Site: Dup 1/13/11 KAWWAnalysis Date:15:28



Nug/LMethyl-t-butyl ether (MTBE) < 2.0 Nug/LBenzene 2.3Nug/LToluene 1.8 Nug/LEthylbenzene < 1.0Nug/LXylenes, Total < 2.0 Nug/L1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene < 1.0Nug/L1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene < 1.0 Nug/LNaphthalene < 2.0N%Surr. 1 (Bromobenzene) 98 NUnidentified Peaks > 10

Site Photographs

MW11-01 Installation

MW11-02 Installation

Soil boring SB11-03 attempts

View of drill bit (left) upon advancement attempts

initial site investigation report

Documents