NIAGARA FALLS REGIONALGROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT

VOLUME I-TEXT

Du Font ChemicalsOccidental Chemical CorporationOlin Chemicals

JUNE 1992REF. NO. 4639 (1)This report printed on recycled paper

WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS

CONESTOGA-ROVERS & ASSOCIATES

303375

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Du Pont Chemicals (Du Pont), Occidental Chemical Corporation

(OxyChem), and Olin Chemicals (Olin) have joined in a cooperative effort to

assess groundwater quality in Niagara Falls, New York from a regional

perspective. The companies retained Woodward-Clyde Consultants (WCC)

and Conestoga-Rovers & Associates (CRA) to prepare this Regional

Groundwater Assessment (RGA). The objectives of the RGA were as follows:

1. To evaluate the presence of chemicals of industrial origin in

groundwater throughout the regional study area based on existing data;

and

2.- To identify gaps in the regional groundwater database.

Available groundwater data were compiled for sites identified by

regulatory authorities as potential sources of groundwater contamination.

These data and brief Site Summary Reports are presented in Appendix A.

From a regional perspective, horizontal migration of chemicals in

groundwater is confined primarily to the bedrock groundwater flow regime.

Groundwater flow in the overburden is extremely limited due to low

transmissivity and interception by the many sewers and tunnels traversing

the city. Therefore, the assessment of regional groundwater conditions is

focused on bedrock groundwater conditions, specifically the Lockport

Dolomite water-bearing fracture zones. The RGA presents both

potentiometric data and chemical concentration data for groundwater in the

Lockport Dolomite.

ES-1 303376

The primary factors affecting groundwater flow in the Lockport

Dolomite are the Niagara River and Gorge, the New York Power Authority

(NYPA) Power Conduits and Forebay Canal, the Falls Street Tunnel (FST) and

NYPA Reservoir. The NYPA Power Conduits and Falls Street Tunnel are the

major collectors of bedrock groundwater discharge within the RGA study area

and groundwater flow is generally toward these structures.

The isoconcentration contour maps prepared for the RGA show

that chemicals in groundwater are concentrated close to the probable source

areas and much less concentrated with increased distance from the sources.

Where migration has apparently occurred, the directions of transport were

generally found to be consistent with the known patterns of groundwater

flow. Based on these findings, additional data are not required for

investigation of regional transport.

Based on the isoconcentration maps, investigations of the

following 11 sites have identified substantially elevated concentrations of

chemicals in groundwater:

i) BFI/CECOS Landfill;

ii) Du Pont Necco Park Landfill;

iii) Du Pont Niagara Plant;

iv) Frontier Chemical;

v) OxyChem Buffalo Avenue Plant;

vi) OxyChem Durez Niagara Plant;

303377ES-2

vii) OxyChem Hyde Park Landfill;

viii) OxyChem S-Area Landfill;

ix) Olin Buffalo Avenue Plant;

x) Olin Industrial Welding; and

xi) 3163 Buffalo Avenue Site (Solvent Chemicals).

Eight of these sites either have groundwater remediation

programs in place, under construction or are in the latter stages of planning

and design:

i) BFI/CECOS Landfill;

ii) Du Pont Necco Park Landfill;

iii) Du Pont Niagara Plant;

iv) Frontier Chemical;

v) OxyChem Buffalo Avenue Plant;

vi) OxyChem Durez Niagara Plant;

vii) OxyChem Hyde Park Landfill; and

viii) OxyChem S-Area Landfill.

Migration of "the chemicals within the plumes associated with

the sites is expected to be controlled by the remedial programs at each site.

This will minimize further chemical migration into and through the bedrock

groundwater. The comparatively small mass of chemicals present in the

bedrock groundwater beyond the influence of these remediation programs is

expected to eventually reach the Niagara River primarily via the NYPA

Power Conduits and the FST. Currently, 70 percent of water flowing in the

Es-3 303378

FST during dry weather is treated at the Niagara Falls Wastewater Treatment

Plant (NFWWTP) prior to discharge to the Niagara River.

Three sites are still in the process of being investigated to

determine remedial requirements:

i) Olin Buffalo Avenue Plant;

ii) Olin Industrial Welding; and

iii) 3163 Buffalo Avenue Site (Solvent Chemicals).

303379ES-4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................................ES-1

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

2.0 AREADESCRIPTION...........................................................................................2-12.1 STUDY AREA............................................................................................ -12.2 AREA USAGE............................................................................................2-223 SITE SUMMARIES..............................................-....................................2-3

3.0 REGIONAL SETTING..........................................................................................3-13.1 PHYSIOGRAPHY AND CLIMATE ........................................................3-13.2 REGIONAL GEOLOGY .............................................................................3-23.2.1 Surficial Geology........................................................................................3-23.2.2 Bedrock Geology........................................................................................3-43.2.2.1 Lithology...................................................................................................3-43.2.2.2 Structure ...................................................................................................3-733 REGIONAL HYDROGEOLOGY ..............................................................3-103.4 STUDY AREA HYDROGEOLOGY .........................................................3-17

4.0 FACTORS AFFECTING GROUNDWATER FLOW......................................4-14.1 NIAGARA RIVER.....................................................................................4-24.2 NYPA POWER CONDUITS AND FOREBAY.....................................4-44.2.1 NYPA Power Conduits.............................................................................4-44.2.2 Forebay.........................................................................................................4-74.3 FALLS STREET TUNNEL........................................................................4-94.4 NYPA RESERVOIR...................................................................................4-124.5 UNDERGROUND TUNNELS AND SEWERS...................................4-144.5.1 New Road Tunnel .....................................................................................4-154.5.2 Gorge Interceptor Tunnel ........................................................................4-154.5.3 Adams Tailrace Tunnel............................................................................4-164.5.4 Schoellkopf Tunnel...................................................................................4-174.5.5 South Side Interceptor Sewer..................................................................4-184.5.6 Diversion Sewer.........................................................................................4-184.6 GROUNDWATER PRODUCTION/EXTRACTION WELLS...........4-194.7 BEDROCK GROUTING............................................................................4-254.7.1 NYPA Reservoir Grout Curtain.............................................................4-254.7.2 NYPA Forebay Grout Curtain.................................................................4-264.7.3 NYPA Conduit and Intake Grout Curtain Wall.................................4-264.7.4 Necco Park Landfill Grout Curtain Wall..............................................4-274.8 NYPA INTAKE WALL FOR POWER CONDUITS............................4-274.9 HYDRAULIC CANAL..............................................................................4-28

30338C

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Pa

4.104.11 BUILDING AND STRUCTURE FOUNDATIONS.............................4-30

5.0 RGA BEDROCK GROUNDWATER CHEMISTRY DATABASE ................5-15.1 DATABASE DEVELOPMENT ................................................................5-25.2 SUMMARY OF BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

ANALYTICAL DATA...............................................................................5-35.2.1 Data Availability ...................................................................................... ..5-35.2.1.1 BH/CECOS...............................................................................................5-55.2.1.2 Chisholm-Ryder.....................................................................................5-55.2.13 City of Niagara Falls Buffalo Avenue Site .................................. ......5-65.2.1.4 Du Pont Necco Park Landfill .............................................................. ..5-65.2.1.5 Du Pont Niagara Plant...........................................................................5-65.2.1.6 Frontier Chemical...................................................................................5-75.2.1.7 Niagara Co-Generation Site (Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co.) ......5-75.2.1.8 Hydraulic Canal.......................................................................................5-75.2.1.9 64th Street South Site............................................................................5-85.2.1.10 New Road Site.........................................................................................5-85.2.1.11 Occidental Chemical Corporation - Buffalo Avenue Plant...........5-85.2.1.12 Occidental Chemical Corporation - Durez Niagara Plant..............5-95.2.1.13 Occidental Chemical Corporation - Hyde Park Landfill. ............ ....5-105.2.1.14 Occidental Chemical Corporation - S-Area Landfill .......................5-105.2.1.15 Olin Buffalo Avenue Plant..................................................................5-105.2.1.16 Olin Industrial Welding Site................................................................5-ll5.2.1.17 Silbergeld Junkyard Site ........................................................................5-115.2.1.18 Solvent Chemical (3163 Buffalo Avenue Site)................................5-ll5.2.1.19 Union Carbide - Carbon Products Division Republic Plant ........ ..5-125.2.1.20 USGS Monitoring Wells.......................................................................5-125.2.2 Statistical Summary Of Analytical Data................................................5-1253 CHEMICAL GROUPS FOR DETAILED MAPPING .......................... ..5-1353.1 Group 1 - Chlorinated Volatile Aliphatic Compounds.....................5-145.3.2 Group 2 - Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene.... ............. ..5-15533 Group 3 - Acetone and 2-Butanone ..................................................... ..5-1553.4 Group 4 - Phenol and Methylphenols....... ................................ ............5-165.3.5 Group 5 - Chlorophenols .........................................................................5-1653.6 Group 6 - Chlorobenzenes and Chlorotoluenes .................................5-1753.7 Group 7 - Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons ..................................................5-1853.8 Group 8 - Hexachloroethane, Hexachlorobutadiene,.. ................... ....5-19

Hexachlorocyclopentadiene and Octachlorocyclopentene................5-1953.9 Group 9 - Phthalates..................................................................................5-1953.10 Group 10 - Pesticides/PCBs .................................................................. ....5-20

30338J

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

5.3.11 Chemicals Considered Individually......................................................5-205.3.12 Other Detected Organic Chemicals.........................................................5-215.4 DATABASE LIMITATIONS....................................................................5-22

6.0 PRESENCE OF CHEMICALS IN BEDROCK GROUNDWATER................6-16.1 GROUP 1CHEMICALS.............................................................................6-26.2 GROUP2CHEMICALS.............................................................................6-463 GROUP 3 CHEMICALS............................................,................................6-66.4 GROUP4CHEMICALS.............................................................................6-76.5 GROUP5CHEMICALS.............................................................................6-86.6 GROUP6 CHEMICALS............................................................................6.7 GROUP 7CHEMICALS.............................................................................6-116.8 GROUP8CHEMICALS.............................................................................6-116.9 GROUP9CHEMICALS.............................................................................6-126.10 GROUP 10 CHEMICALS...........................................................................6-136.11 CHEMICALS CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY....................................6-146.11.1 Benzoic Acid...............................................................................................6-146.11.2 N-Nitrosodiphenylamine........................................................................6-146.11.3 Lead...............................................................................................................6-156.11.4 Mercury........................................................................................................6-156.11.5 Barium.........................................................................................................6-166.12 FALLS STREET TUNNEL AND NYPA CONDUITS.........................6-166.13 REGIONAL DATA GAPS ........................................................................6-19

7.0 GROUNDWATER REMEDIATION PROGRAMS.........................................7-17.1 BFI/CECOSLANDFILL.............................................................................7-27.2 DU PONT NECCO PARK LANDFILL...................................................7-37.3 DU PONT NIAGARA PLANT...............................................................7-47.4 FRONTIER CHEMICALS.........................................................................7-57.5 OXYCHEM BUFFALO AVENUE PLANT............................................7-57.6 OXYCHEM DUREZ NIAGARA PLANT ..............................................7-67.7 OXYCHEM HYDE PARK LANDFILL ....................................................7-77.8 OXYCHEM S-AREA LANDFILL.............................................................7-87.9 OLIN BUFFALO AVENUE PLANT......................................................7-97.10 OUN INDUSTRIAL WELDING.............................................................7-107.11 SUMMARY.................................................................................................7-10

8.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS.................................................................................8-1

REFERENCES ...............................................'......................................................................R-l

303382

LIST OF FIGURES

FollowingReport

FIGURE 3.1

FIGURE 3.2

FIGURE 3.3

FIGURE 3.4

FIGURE 3.5

SURFICIAL GEOLOGY

BEDROCK GEOLOGY

GENERALIZED STRATIGRAPHIC SECTIONNIAGARA FALLS

LOCKPORT DOLOMITE PRODUCTION WELLSYIELDING MORE THAN 50 GPM

POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE CONTOURS OFGROUNDWATER IN THE UPPER LOCKPORTDOLOMITE MEASURED ON MARCH 24-25,1985,

FIGURE 3.6

FIGURE 3.7

FIGURE 3.8

FIGURE 4.1

FIGURE 4.2

FIGURE 4.3

FIGURE 4.4

POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE CONTOURS OFGROUNDWATER IN THE UPPER LOCKPORTDOLOMITE MEASURED ON OCTOBER 30 -NOVEMBER 3,1989

POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE CONTOURS OFGROUNDWATER IN THE UPPER LOCKPORTDOLOMITE MEASURED ON MARCH 27-29,1990

POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE CONTOURS OFGROUNDWATER IN THE UPPER LOCKPORTDOLOMITE MEASURED ON JUNE 26-27,1990

FACTORS AFFECTING NIAGARA RIVER WATERLEVELS

PROFILE OF NYPA POWER CONDUITS AND FOREBAYCANAL

CROSS SECTION 1 - NYPA CONDUITS ATBUFFALO AVENUE

CROSS SECTION 2 - NYPA CONDUITS ATFALLS STREET TUNNEL

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 4.5

FIGURE 4.6

FIGURE 4.7

FIGURE 7.1

FollowingReport

CROSS SECTION 3 - NYPA CONDUITS ATPORTER AVENUE

PLAN, PROFILE AND TYPICAL SECTION -NYPA INTAKE STRUCTURES

RIVER BED CHANNELIZATION ANDTRAINING DYKE

C-ZONE POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE DURINGEXTRACTION WELL OPERATION -DU PONT NECCO PARK

303384

LIST OF TABLES

FollowingReport

TABLE 2.1 IDENTIFIED SITES

TABLE 2.2 SITES WITH BEDROCK GROUNDWATER DATA

TABLE 3.1 CLIMATE DATA FOR BUFFALO, NEW YORK

TABLE 4.1 FACTORS AFFECTING GROUNDWATER FLOW

TABLE 4.2 CHIPPAWA - GRASS ISLAND POOLWATER ELEVATION RESTRICTIONS

TABLE 4.3 PRODUCTION AND EXTRACTION WELLSUMMARY

TABLE 5.1 STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF VOLATILE ORGANICCOMPOUNDS ANALYZED

TABLE 5.2 STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICCOMPOUNDS ANALYZED

TABLE 5.3 STATISTICAL SUMMARY OFPESTICIDE/PCB COMPOUNDS ANALYZED

TABLE 5.4 STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF METALS ANALYZED

TABLE 5.5 NUMBER OF CHEMICALS ANALYZED IN EACHGROUP FOR INDIVIDUAL SITES

303386

LIST OF PLANS

PLAN 1 SITE LOCATIONS

PLAN 2 HYDRAULIC INFLUENCES

PLAN 3 UPPER LOCKPORT BEDROCK WELL LOCATIONS

PLAN 4 MIDDLE LOCKPORT BEDROCK WELL LOCATIONS

PLAN 5 LOWER LOCKPORT BEDROCK WELL LOCATIONS

PLAN 6 UPPER LOCKPORT BEDROCK GROUNDWATER CONTOURS

PLAN 7 MIDDLE LOCKPORT BEDROCK GROUNDWATER CONTOURS

PLAN 8 UPPER LOCKPORT CHLORINATED VOLATILE ALIPHATICCOMPOUND CONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 9 MIDDLE LOCKPORT CHLORINATED VOLATILE ALIPHATICCOMPOUND CONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 10 UPPER LOCKPORT BENZENE, TOLUENE, ETHYLBENZENE ANDXYLENE CONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 11 MIDDLE LOCKPORT BENZENE, TOLUENE, ETHYLBENZENEAND XYLENE CONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 12 UPPER LOCKPORT ACETONE AND 2-BUTANONECONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 13 MIDDLE LOCKPORT ACETONE AND 2-BUTANONECONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 14 UPPER LOCKPORT PHENOL AND METHYLPHENOLCONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 15 MIDDLE LOCKPORT PHENOL AND METHYLPHENOLCONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 16 UPPER LOCKPORT CHLOROPHENOL CONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 17 MIDDLE LOCKPORT CHLOROPHENOL CONCENTRATIONS

30330S

LIST OF PLANS

PLAN 18 UPPER LOCKPORT CHLOROBENZENE AND CHLOROTOLUENECONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 19 MIDDLE LOCKPORT CHLOROBENZENE AND CHLOROTOLUENECONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 20 UPPER LOCKPORT HEXACHLOROETHANE,HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE, HEXACHLOROCYCLOPENTADIENEAND OCTACHLOROCYCLOPENTENE CONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 21 MIDDLE LOCKPORT HEXACHLOROETHANE,HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE, HEXACHLOROCYCLOPENTADIENEAND OCTACHLOROCYCLOPENTENE CONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 22 UPPER LOCKPORT PESTICIDE AND PCB CONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 23 MIDDLE LOCKPORT PESTICIDE AND PCB CONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 24 UPPER LOCKPORT LEAD CONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 25 MIDDLE LOCKPORT LEAD CONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 26 UPPER LOCKPORT MERCURY CONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 27 MIDDLE LOCKPORT MERCURY CONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 28 UPPER LOCKPORT BARIUM CONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 29 MIDDLE LOCKPORT BARIUM CONCENTRATIONS

PLAN 30 UPPER LOCKPORT BEDROCK GROUNDWATER REMEDIATIONWELL LOCATIONS

PLAN 31 MIDDLE LOCKPORT BEDROCK GROUNDWATERREMEDIATION WELL LOCATIONS

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX A SITE SUMMARY ATTACHMENTS

303387

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Due to its history as a major industrial center, and its proximity

to the Great Lakes, the quality of groundwater in some areas of the City of

Niagara Falls, New York is of concern to environmental regulators. Since

about 1980, several Niagara Falls companies have conducted subsurface

investigations at or near their properties. These studies have generally

focused on groundwater quality near a potential chemical source area. More

recently, companies have been conducting groundwater sampling off their

properties, more distant from source areas.

In industrial sections of Niagara Falls, as a groundwater study is

extended from a chemical source property, there is a substantial possibility of

overlapping other source study areas (or chemical plumes). To minimize the

potential for duplication of effort and to identify data needs from a regional

perspective, Du Pont has been asked by the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) to initiate a study to compile and interpret relevant

groundwater data available from sites throughout a regional study area.

Du Pont presented a proposal for conducting the RGA and

invited all major industrial companies located in the study area (defined in

Section 2.0) to participate by contributing funding and/or groundwater

analytical data. Of the 18 invited companies, only two, Occidental Chemical

Corporation (OxyChem) and Olin Chemicals (Olin), agreed to participate with

Du Pont in conducting the RGA.

303388

Du Pont, OxyChem and Olin have shared the funding of the

project. Woodward-Clyde Consultants (WCC) and Cones toga-Rovers &

Associates (CRA) were retained to jointly prepare the RGA.

The objectives of the RGA were as follows:

1. To evaluate the presence of chemicals of industrial origin in

groundwater throughout the regional study area based on existing data;

and

2. To identify gaps in the regional groundwater database.

The RGA is presented in eight sections. Section 2.0 presents a

description of the RGA study area. Sections 3.0 and 4.0 discuss the study area

geology and groundwater hydrology, with a focus on factors affecting

groundwater flow. Section 5.0 describes the groundwater chemistry database

compiled for the project and Section 6.0 presents an interpretation of these

data. Ongoing and planned groundwater remediation programs are discussed

in Section 7.0. Section 8.0 summarizes the findings of the RGA.

3033891-2

2.0 AREA DESCRIPTION

2.1 STUDY AREA

In order to assess the regional bedrock groundwater

characteristics of the Niagara Falls area, a study area was established. The

RGA Study Area was defined as the area bounded by the New York Power

Authority (NYPA) Forebay Canal to the north, the Niagara River to the

south, the upper Lockport bedrock groundwater divide to the west and

Interstate 1-190 to the east (Study Area). The study area boundary is shown on

Plan 1. It encompasses portions of the Town of Niagara and the City of

Niagara Falls. The Forebay Canal and Niagara River are known

recharge/discharge areas for groundwater in the Lockport bedrock and thus

were selected as the north and south study area boundaries. The groundwater

divide was selected as the west study area boundary because it represents a

regional groundwater high from which groundwater either flows west

towards the Niagara Gorge or east towards the NYPA Power Conduits which

run south to north through the center of the Study Area. The eastern

boundary (Interstate 1-190) was selected because it is approximately the eastern

limit of the main industrialized area of the City of Niagara Falls and Town of

Niagara and that no migration is known to exist east of this boundary.

Previous studies in the Niagara Falls area have identified the

Lockport Group bedrock unit (uppermost bedrock group) as the major

waterbearing formation in the area. The overlying overburden materials and

underlying bedrock groups exhibit low transmissivity in comparison to the

2-1 303300

Lockport Group bedrock and do not have the potential for significant regional

groundwater migration. Thus, the vertical extent of the Study Area for the

RGA was established as the entire Lockport Group bedrock which is on the

order of 80 to 160 feet thick through the Study Area. The underlying bedrock

unit, the Rochester Formation, has been shown to be an aquitard which

severely restricts vertical and horizontal groundwater movement.

Consequently it provides an appropriate lower boundary for the Study Area.

2.2 AREA USAGE

The portions of the Town of Niagara and the City of Niagara

Falls within the Study Area are generally industrialized. The industrialized

areas within the Study Area, as indicated by area usage designations, are

shown on Plan 1. The industrialization is a result of the establishment of

industries in the area during the last 100 years that were brought to the area by

the abundant and convenient source of water and hydroelectric energy for

various industrial processes. The area usage patterns shown on Plan 1 w.ere

determined from zoning maps obtained from the Town of Niagara and City

of Niagara Falls. For ease of presentation, Town and City zone designations

have been combined into two major groups: industrial/commercial and

residential/parkland.

Within the City of Niagara Falls, the industrial and commercial

areas are generally located to the south along the Niagara River and east

along Interstate 1-190. Within the Town of Niagara the industrial and

2-2 303391

commercial areas are generally located in the south and the residential and

parkland areas in the north. In general, the Sites discussed in the RGA are

located within the industrial areas.

23 SITE SUMMARIES

A review of NYSDEC records showed that a total of 39 sites

located within or immediately surrounding the Study Area had been

investigated to some extent. The sites are listed in Table 2.1 and are located

on Plan 1. Available information for each site was obtained from the

individual site owners, the NYSDEC and the USEPA concerning overburden

and groundwater conditions. This information was reviewed and a

summary of the data for each site was produced. Each site summary contains

an introduction describing the history of the site including past

investigations, a description of the site's geology/hydrogeology, chemical

presence at the site and recommendations for future investigations or work

to be conducted at the site. The site summaries are presented in Appendix A

followed by a list of documents upon which they are based.

9033922-3

The 39 sites consisted of the following types:

Site Identification Number of Sites

• Operating Landfills 1

• Closed Landfills 6

• Former Disposal or Fill Areas 12

• Closed Industrial Facilities 3

• Operating Industrial Facilities 1739

Specific information was not available for the following sites:

• Apollo Steel Corporation;

• Cascades - Niagara Falls Inc.;

• Union Carbide Corporation - Linde Division; and

• Whirlpool site - City of Niagara Falls.

As shown on Plan 1, the sites are primarily located within

industrial and commercial areas.

Bedrock ground water data were available for the 18 sites listed in

Table 2.2. The data from these sites was used in the RGA evaluations. The

USGS installed and sampled 13 bedrock wells within the Niagara Falls area as

part of the 1985 study entitled "Preliminary Evaluation of Chemical

Migration to Groundwater and the Niagara River from Selected

303393

Waste-Disposal sites/' Hydrogeologic and chemical data from these wells has

been incorporated into the RGA.

3033942-5

3.0 REGIONAL SETTING

3.1 PHYSIOGRAPHY AND CLIMATE

Niagara Falls lies within the Niagara Escarpment Physiographic

Region. The dominant landform in the area is the exposed crest of the

escarpment. At Niagara Falls, the escarpment is characterized by steep sided

cliff faces with typical relief on the order of 250 feet. The Niagara River flows

over the Niagara Escarpment and through the Niagara Gorge to discharge

into Lake Ontario. The surface topography within the City of Niagara Falls

slopes gently toward the Niagara River. This topography is typical of glacial

ground moraines.

The climate of the Niagara Falls area is classified as humid

continental, consisting of cool, wet winters and hot, wet summers. Mean

monthly temperatures and precipitation data for the Buffalo meteorological

station, which is located at Buffalo International Airport, are presented in

Table 3.1. The mean annual temperature is 47°F, with the coldest average

monthly temperature occurring in January (25°F) and the warmest in July

(70°F). The mean annual precipitation is 36 inches, which is evenly

distributed throughout the year.

303385

3.2 REGIONAL GEOLOGY

3.2.1 Surficial Geology

The natural surficial geology of the Niagara Falls area has been

described by Muller (1977). The natural surficial materials can be divided into

three units based upon depositional environments as shown on Figure 3.1.

These units include: Recent Alluvium, Lacustrine Sediments and Glacial

Deposits.

Recent Alluvium

The Recent Alluvium consists of sand, silt and gravel deposited

along modern river and stream courses. These deposits are generally thin

and of limited lateral extent. These sediments normally lie unconformably

above the Lacustrine Sediments or Glacial Deposits.

Lacustrine Sediments

The Lacustrine Sediments are comprised of silt, clay and sand

deposits laid down by glacial lakes. The ancestral lakes include, from

youngest to oldest, Lake Tonawanda, Lake Iroquois, Lake Warren and Lake

Whittlesey. At Niagara Falls, the surficial sediments are associated with

glacial Lake Tonawanda. These deposits are relatively thin and consist of

laminated silt, sand and clay extending eastward into Orleans and Genesee

Counties. In many areas within the study area, the Lacustrine Sediments are

32 303396

primarily silty clays. Although these deposits are relatively thin in nature,

the Lacustrine Sediments in the Niagara Falls are thicker than the other two

deposits (Recent Alluvium and Glacial Till). Because of their thickness and

fine-grained nature, these deposits act as aquitards, restricting vertical

groundwater movement. Remnant beach strands are commonly associated

with these deposits.

The sediments of former Lake Tonawanda are underlain by

sediments of similar texture associated with glacial Lake Iroquois to the north

and Lakes Warren and Whittlesey to the south. The Lacustrine sediments

normally lie on top of Glacial Deposits or bedrock.

Glacial Deposits

Sediments of glacial origin overlie bedrock in much of the

Niagara Falls area. An extensive ground moraine comprised of a thin silty

clay to sandy till occurs over much of the area. The ground moraine is

normally marked by end moraines composed of materials of similar texture

as well as sand and gravel deposits formed in ice-marginal positions or as

outwash. In general, the Glacial Deposits are thin and lie unconformably atop

the Paleozoic bedrock. These deposits in conjunction with the Lacustrine

Sediments also act as an aquitard restricting vertical groundwater movement.

3033973-3

Fill Materials

In addition to the above natural geologic deposits, a man-made

deposit has affected the surficial geology of the Niagara Falls area in the form

of fill materials placed on top of the natural deposits. Also, as a result of the

construction of buildings, roads and utilities, natural deposits have been

excavated, changing the surface of the natural deposits. In general, fill

materials are primarily composed of the natural deposits found in the area

but also contain vegetation, wood and man-made materials such as building

debris, crushed rock and slag.

3.2.2 Bedrock Geology

3.2.2.1 Lithology

The Niagara Falls area is underlain by a thick succession of

Paleozoic sedimentary rocks which form the northern flank of the Alleghany

basin. The Paleozoic strata dip toward the south at a slope of approximately

30 feet per mile (Yager and Kappel, 1987). Bedrock exposure is controlled by

glacial erosion as expressed by broad west trending bands subparallel to the

south shore of Lake Ontario as shown on Figure 3.2. This pattern is

interrupted by the Niagara Escarpment where much of the succession is

exposed.

303398

The stratigraphic succession beneath Niagara Falls consists of

rock ranging in age from Middle Silurian to Late Ordovician. A schematic

stratigraphic section illustrating the characteristics of these rock units and

their stratigraphic relationships is presented on Figure 3.3. Stratigraphic

nomenclature has been based upon the recommendations of Rickard (1975).

Within the study area, the upper bedrock units belong to the

Lockport Group. Underlying the Lockport Group, the principal bedrock units

belong to the Clinton and Medina Groups, and the Queenston Formation.

The characteristics of the individual formations are discussed in the

following sections.

Lockport Group

At Niagara Falls, the Lockport Group is comprised of four

distinct dolostone formations. In descending order, the formations are Oak

Orchard, Eramosa, Goat Island and Gasport Formations. The stratigraphic

characteristics of these formations are summarized on Figure 3.3.

The Oak Orchard Formation is considered to be time equivalent

with the Guelph Formation in southern Ontario, but is distinguished due to

minor textural variations (Zenger, 1965). The Oak Orchard Formation is

exposed at the surface beneath the study area, except in the vicinity of the

Niagara River Gorge. The hard resistant Oak Orchard Formation forms the

cap rock of the Niagara Escarpment and underlies most of the Niagara Falls

area.

3-5 303399

Clinton Group

The Clinton Group consists of an alternating succession of

dolostone, shale and limestone. Six formations are recognized within the

Clinton Group. These are the Decew, Rochester, Irondequoit, Reynales,

Neagha and Thorold Formations. The thickness and characteristics of these

units are summarized on Figure 3.3. In general, rocks of the Clinton Group

tend to occur in thinner units and contain a higher limestone content in

contrast to the dolostone content in the Lockport Group and the underlying

clastic Medina Group. The upper and lower contacts of the Clinton Group are

marked by erosional unconformities as are several contacts between

individual formations within the Group. Several formations within the

Clinton Group are not present in the Niagara Falls area.

Clinton Group rocks are exposed at the Niagara River Gorge and

along the face of the Niagara escarpment, but do not outcrop at the surface in

the Niagara Falls area.

Medina Group

The rocks of the Lower Silurian Medina Group underlie the

Clinton Group at Niagara Falls. The Medina Group is comprised of the

Grimsby, Power Glen and Whirlpool Formations. Rocks within this Group

are clastic in nature with sandstone and shale being the dominant lithologies.

Erosional unconformities occur at the upper and lower contacts of the

303400

Medina Group. The characteristics of the Medina Group rocks are

summarized on Figure 3.3.

Oueenston Formation

The Ordovician Queenston Formation is the oldest formation

observed in the Niagara Falls area. The actual thickness of this unit is

approximately 900 feet. The Queenston Formation is a laterally extensive,

uniform, soft red-brown mudstone with minor sandstone interbeds.

3.2.2.2 Structure

The stratigraphic units in the area are generally flat lying

between the Niagara Escarpment and Niagara Falls, New York. The regional

dip is to the southeast at approximately 30 feet /mile between Niagara Falls

and Lake Erie.

Successive periods of tectonic activity during the Paleozoic,

particularly the Appalachian Orogens (Acadian, Alleghenian), were

responsible for the changes in the stress fields that have resulted in the

fracturing of the bedrock underlying the Niagara Region. Glacial rebound is

also a factor in the development of bedrock fractures. The fracture system

may also be affected by the contemporary regional stress field in the Michigan

and Allegheny Basins. The fractures in the Silurian and Devonian bedrock

consist of joints and faults. Two types of joints have been mapped in the

303401

region: bedding joints, which are parallel to the bedding of the rock, and

vertical joints which cut across the bedding at approximately right angles

(Johnston, 1964). These fractures are responsible for the waterbearing capacity

of the bedrock. The waterbearing capacity of the bedrock is also enhanced by

the glacial rebound and solutioning.

In the Lockport Group, Johnston (1964) mapped up to seven

separate horizontal fracture zones during the construction of the New York

Power Authority (NYPA) Power Conduits, which were excavated using open

cut methodology. The bedding fractures are planar structures that are

laterally extensive and were found to extend over distances of one to four

miles. The bedding fractures consist of single joints or areas of rock up to

one-foot thick which contain several individual joints. The effect of these

bedding fractures on groundwater beneath the study area has been illustrated

by the results of several studies conducted by government agencies and local

companies. These studies generally investigated the geology/hydrogeology of

the Lockport bedrock beneath several sites within the Study Area and also

evaluated hydraulic conditions of several man-made features. The studies

showed that groundwater in the bedrock beneath the Study Area, because of

bedding plane fractures, is influenced by several man-made features. The two

major features are the Power Conduits and the Falls Street Tunnel, both of

which are described in more detail in Section 3.3.

Vertical joints in the bedrock are most common where fractures

have been enlarged or created through stress relief. Previous studies of

vertical joint sets in the Niagara Falls area have consisted of limited outcrop

3-8 303402

mappings. Johnston (1964) reported two prominent vertical joint sets in the

Niagara Falls area, one oriented N 65°E and the other N 30°W. A more

detailed study by the USGS (Yager and Kappel, 1987) indicated that the

predominant fracture directions in the Lockport are to the northeast and

northwest. Recent studies discussing fractures in the Lockport have been

conducted by Tepper etal. (1990) and Gross and Engelder (1991).

At outcrops, the vertical joints along the face of the outcrop, are

spaced 10 to 80 feet apart and range up to 0.3 feet in width. A zone of tensile

stress exists along the Niagara Escarpment and adjacent to the Niagara Gorge,

which has enhanced vertical fracturing (International Joint Commission,

1974).

The vertical jointing in the Lockport Group and other bedrock

formations was formed parallel to a horizontal compressive stress field. The

stress field was possibly due to pateotectonic events. However, a

contemporary stress field exists in the Niagara Falls area and is oriented

between N 50°E and N 60°E (International Joint Commission, 1974). Gross

and Engelder (1991) suggest that the northeast orientation of joint sets in the

Niagara Falls area are directly related and parallel to the N60°E contemporary

stress field and concluded that the joints set were caused by neotectonic

events.

A structural map of the base of the Rochester Formation in

southwestern Ontario has been prepared by Sanford et al (1985). This map

shows evidence of a vertical displacement fault trending in a northeast

3-9303403

direction near Chippewa, Ontario. According to the USGS (Yager and Kappel,

1987), this feature may be related to a northeast trending band of high yield

wells in the Niagara Falls area identified by Johns ton (1964).

3.3 REGIONAL HYDROGEOLOGY

Most of the early work on groundwater migration in the Niagara

Falls area focused on groundwater resource studies (e.g. Johnston, 1964).

More recently, studies have been conducted by the USGS (Yager and Kappel,

1987) on the regional hydraulic parameters of the Lockport Group.

Environment Canada (Novakowski and Lapcevic, 1989) also has conducted

studies on the Canadian side of Niagara Falls to determine the regional flow

in the underlying Silurian and Ordovician bedrock. The following section of

this report presents regional data pertaining to the hydraulic properties and

groundwater flow in the various geologic units.

The overburden materials in the Niagara Falls area are not

important sources of domestic or industrial water. For the most part, the

overburden materials consist of fine-grained lacustrine and glacial deposits.

Given the low hydraulic conductivities of these materials, they are considered

regional aquitards and groundwater flow within these units is restricted. The

fine grained lacustrine and glacial deposits typically exhibit hydraulic

conductivities on the order of 1 x 10' cm/sec or less and consequently

severely retard groundwater movement. Thin seams of silty or sandy

materials within these units allow minor horizontal groundwater

303404

movement, although the seams are infrequent and typically not laterally

extensive. The recent alluvium material overlying the fine-grained

lacustrine deposits is sometimes a perched waterbearing zone. Due to the

thin and shallow nature of the recent alluvium, it is primarily dependent

upon surface water infiltration for its water source. The horizontal migration

of groundwater through the recent alluvium does occur but is greatly reduced

by the flat slope of the land surface and the groundwater preference to remain

isolated in the depressed areas formed by the surface of the fine grained

lacustrine deposits. Horizontal migration has also been impeded by the

networks of underground utilities which disrupt the continuity of the

horizontal layers. Consequently, overburden groundwater flow remains

localized. In some instances, however, the bedding of underground utilities

may act as a preferential pathway for overburden groundwater flow.

Although vertical flow of groundwater from the overburden to the bedrock

occurs, particularly where the natural soil has been disturbed, vertical flow

rates are generally not sufficient to significantly impact regional flow

conditions in the bedrock.

Groundwater sources are not extensively utilized in the Niagara

Falls area due to the naturally poor water quality and the proximity of the

Niagara River. Transmissive fracture zones in the Lockport Group are

capable of relatively high yields. However, groundwater obtained from the

Lockport often contains elevated sulfur and other mineral content and is not

used as a potable water supply. Groundwater from the Lockport is used for

industrial purposes (i.e. cooling) within the Study Area. Groundwater occurs

within the Lockport Group in the following types of openings:

3-11 3034°5

i) weathered surface fractures;

ii) bedding joints;

iii) vertical joints; and

iv) small cavities and vugs.

There are essentially two ways in which groundwater can flow

through bedrock, horizontally and vertically. Horizontally, groundwater

moves primarily through bedding plane fractures but also to some extent

through small cavities and vugs. Johnston (1964) identified bedding joints as

the primary conduits of groundwater flow through this unit. The bedding

plane fractures have been found to be areally extensive over several miles

and these fractures are known to affect groundwater flow several miles away.

Several waterbearing bedding planes have been identified in the Niagara Falls

area.

In the vertical direction, groundwater flows through vertical

fractures or faults generally created through stress relief caused by tectonic

events and glacial rebound. Vertical movement of groundwater within the

Lockport bedrock is quite prevalent. Hydraulic monitoring of well clusters at

various sites within the Study Area have shown both upward and downward

vertical gradients throughout the Lockport. Some wells show gradient

reversal due to the effect of the Power Conduits and Niagara River.

Downward migration of groundwater from the Lockport Group to underlying

bedrock formations, however, is minimal because of the immediately

3-12 303406

underlying Rochester Shale (Clinton Group). The Rochester Shale acts as a

confining layer or aquitard, restricting downward groundwater migration.

When horizontal and vertical fractures occur in the same area,

the waterbearing capacity of the bedrock is substantially increased. Such a

zone (as identified by a zone of high yielding wells) was identified by

Johnston (1964) within the Lockport Group. The zone is located

approximately two miles from the Falls, is approximately one-half mile wide

and trends north-eastward. Johnston attributed the high yields to induced

infiltration. Recent geophysical investigations have shown that the high

transmissivity in this zone is also related to more extensive vertical

fracturing (Yager and Kappel, 1987). The vertical fractures interconnect the

horizontal bedding fractures, resulting in a higher transmissivity. To further

study this zone, the USGS conducted a Cross-Hole Hydraulic Testing Program

at a site within the high transmissivity zone (Tepper et.al., 1990). The results

of the program confirmed the presence of vertical connections between

horizontal fractures and a correspondence between the directions of highest

transmissivity and the orientations of observed high angle fractures. The

location of the zone of high yielding wells is shown on Figure 3.4.

In general, regional groundwater flow in the Lockport Group is

toward the Niagara Gorge and Niagara River. Recharge occurs at the Niagara

Escarpment and groundwater flows towards the Niagara River. In the City of

Niagara Falls, groundwater flow in the Lockport bedrock is influenced by

several natural and man-made features.

3034073-13

The primary natural influences are the Niagara River and

Gorge. Upstream of the Falls, the upper Niagara River acts as a source of

bedrock groundwater recharge within the Study Area. Recharge from the

River to the bedrock is most prevalent immediately upstream of the Falls

where swift currents have eroded sediments from the river bed exposing the

bedrock surface. A secondary source of groundwater recharge may be other

surface water courses within the Study Area such as Gill Creek. The

headwaters of Gill Creek are located in the vicinity of the NYPA Reservoir

northeast of the Study Area. Gill Creek generally flows in a north to south

pattern through the City of Niagara Falls and discharges to the upper Niagara

River. Flow in Gill Creek is supplemented by a 1.6 mgd discharge from the

NYPA Reservoir, generally between the months of May and October. The

amount of recharge from Gill Creek to the bedrock groundwater is unknown

as recharge to the bedrock is dependent upon the thickness and type (clay as

opposed to gravel) of overburden material separating the surface water from

the bedrock. Downstream of the Falls, the lower Niagara River acts as a line

sink for discharge of the bedrock groundwater due to the exposed bedrock face

of the Niagara Gorge. Another secondary natural influence on bedrock

groundwater flow is the zone of highly transmissive bedrock identified by

Johnston (1964). This zone may be related to extensive vertical fracturing

(Yager and Kappel, 1987) and lineaments/faults along the alignment of the

zone. The highly transmissive zone may provide a preferential pathway for

bedrock groundwater flow.

There are also man-made features that affect groundwater flow

in the Lockport bedrock. The major regional influences are the NYPA

314 303408

reservoir, the NYPA Power Conduits and the Falls Street Tunnel (FST). The

locations of these features are shown on Plan 2. These features have

significantly altered the natural pattern of bedrock groundwater flow. The

NYPA reservoir is a source of recharge to the Lockport bedrock, while the

Power Conduit and FST are areas of bedrock groundwater discharge (Miller

and Kappel, 1987). Figure 3.5 shows the pattern of groundwater flow for the

upper bedrock as described above.

A study conducted by the City of Niagara Falls in 1987

determined that the location where the NYPA power conduits and the FST

crossed was the major discharge point for upper bedrock groundwater within

an eleven square mile area. In an effort to reduce the amount of bedrock

groundwater entering the FST at the crossing, repairs were performed on the

FST in September 1989. The repairs to the FST have affected the regional

shallow bedrock by raising the groundwater level approximately five feet in

the vicinity of the intersection of the FST and the NYPA conduits.

Figures 3.6, 3.7 and 3.8 show the upper bedrock groundwater levels measured

on October 29 through November 3, 1989, March 27 to 29, 1990, and from

June 26 to 27, 1990, respectively. These figures indicate that the FST and

NYPA conduits continue to act as line sinks for the regional upper bedrock

groundwater flow. A detailed discussion on all factors affecting regional and

local hydraulic conditions relevant to the Study Area are presented in

Section 4.0.

Investigations into the hydraulic characteristics of the Clinton

and Medina Groups are limited. Environment Canada determined that

303409

groundwater flow in the over pressured Clinton-Upper Medina Group is

minimal by comparison to the Lockport Group. The flow directions were

found to be vertically upwards except near the Gorge where stress relief

fracturing has enhanced horizontal and vertical hydraulic conductivities.

Several studies of the Rochester Formation of the Clinton Group have been

conducted within the Study Area; however, the lack of well data on a regional

scale makes it difficult to study this unit. These studies have been conducted

at the following RGA sites:

Du Pont Chemicals

- Niagara Plant

- Necco Park Landfill

Occidental Chemical Corporation

Buffalo Avenue Plant

- Hyde Park Landfill

The Rochester Formation underlies the Lockport Group bedrock.

Permeability testing of wells installed into the Rochester Formation has

indicated that the Rochester Formation is of extremely low permeability and

is considered to be an aquitard restricting further vertical groundwater

migration.

A zone of low hydraulic conductivity was identified at the Lower

Medina/Upper Queenston contact. Groundwater flow in this zone is in a

lateral direction, likely westward toward the Niagara Gorge.

i3-16 303410

3.4 STUDY AREA HYDROGEOLOGY

The Study Area for the Regional Groundwater Assessment

(RGA) has been established to include the area encompassed by the Forebay to

the north, the Niagara River to the south, the groundwater divide as defined

in the upper Lockport Bedrock to the west and Interstate 1-190 to the east. The

study area boundary is shown on Plan 1. The vertical study area for the RGA

has been established as the entire Lockport Group bedrock which has been

identified as the major aquifer in the area. The study area does not extend

deeper than the Lockport because of the underlying Rochester Formation

which is considered an aquitard.

For the purpose of assessing the groundwater flow in the

Lockport bedrock for the Study Area, the Lockport bedrock has been divided

into the following three units:

Upper Lockport (0 to 45± ft Below Top of Rock (BTOR))

Middle Lockport (45 to 100± ft BTOR)

Lower Lockport (100 to 160± ft BTOR)

The upper unit was established as the upper 45 feet of Lockport

bedrock because, in general, the upper 45 feet is highly fractured and vertically

interconnected with depth. The middle and lower units are much less

3-17 303411

fractured and were arbitrarily established as the 45 to 100 foot and 100 to

160 foot intervals of the Lockport bedrock, respectively.

A comprehensive database of wells that monitor the Lockport

bedrock which are relevant to the Study Area has been compiled. The

locations of these wells are presented on Plans 3, 4 and 5 for the upper, middle

and lower Lockport, respectively. Groundwater potentiometric surface

contours have been generated for the upper and middle Lockport bedrock

units and are presented on Plans 6 and 7, respectively. Insufficient

information was available to generate potentiometric surface contours for the

lower Lockport. The contours were constructed using water level

information collected in June 1990 as part of a USGS study. This data set is

the most comprehensive collected to date; however, the data set does not

cover the entire Study Area. As a result, the June 1990 data set shown on

Figure 3.8 was supplemented with water level data collected at various sites

between 1982 and 1991 to produce the potentiometric surface contours shown

on Plans 6 and 7. While combining data from a nine year period may not

yield a precise representation of groundwater conditions, it is sufficient to

present generalized groundwater patterns within the Study Area and to fill

key voids in the June 1990 data set.

3-18 303412

4.0 FACTORS AFFECTING GROUNDWATER FLOW

The Niagara River, Niagara Gorge and a number of man-made

structures have been identified as factors which influence the groundwater

flow in the bedrock beneath the Study Area. The man-made structures

include:

i) NYPA Power Conduits and Forebay;

ii) Falls Street Tunnel;

iii) NYPA reservoir;

iv) underground tunnels/sewers;

v) groundwater production/extraction wells;

vi) bedrock grouting;

vii) NYPA intake wall for power conduits;

viii) hydraulic canal;

ix) landfills; and

x) building and structure foundations.

The following discusses the effects that the Niagara River and

man-made structures listed above have on groundwater flow and the

piezometric surface in the bedrock. Plan 2 shows the locations of the major

hydraulic influences throughout the Study Area. Each of the hydraulic

influences presented above have varying potential to affect regional

groundwater flow. Table 4.1 ranks each item in descending order as to the

degree to which it affects regional groundwater flow.

3034)34-1

4.1 NIAGARA RIVER

The flow in the Niagara River is determined by the elevation of

Lake Erie at the head (inlet) of the Niagara River. When the elevation of the

eastern end of the Lake rises due to wind or to a general rise in lake level, the

discharge to the Niagara River increases. The discharge of river water over

Niagara Falls, however, is regulated by joint Canadian-American power

authorities who divert water from the River to hydroelectric stations located

in Canada and the United States. The flow in the Niagara River above the

falls is approximately 200,000 to 300,000 CFS, of which 100,000 to 150,000 CFS is

diverted to Canadian and American hydroelectric stations. Approximately

50,000 to 75,000 CFS is diverted to the NYPA Power Conduits. During the

tourist season (April 1 through October 31), a minimum flow over the Falls of

not less than 100,000 CFS is maintained during the daylight hours. In the

evening and throughout the winter, the flow of water over the Falls can be

decreased to a minimum of 50,000 CFS. In addition to maintaining a

minimum flow over the Falls, regulations also control the maximum rate of

change in river stage that can be induced by flow regulation over a 24-hour

period. The regulation states that in no case is the variance between the

maximum and minimum water elevation, as measured on the hour, allowed

to exceed one and one-half feet over any given 24-hour period. Control is

based on river elevations as measured at the International Control Structure

in the Grass Island Pool (see Table 4.2) which is located approximately one

mile upstream from the Falls.

303414

Figure 4.1 depicts the features which influence water levels in

the upper Niagara River. The opening and dosing of the sluice gates controls

the flow of water over the Falls. When the gates are closed, water backs up in

both channels of the River in an area known as the Grass Island Pool and the

River level behind the gates rises. When the water rises, the volume of water

in the Grass Island Pool increases and the flow over the Falls decreases. The

volume of water used by the power projects is determined by the number of

penstocks used by the power projects. Conversely, when the gates are opened,

flow over the Falls increases and the volume of the water in the Grass Island

Pool decreases.

Changes in the Niagara River water level due to these regulatory

practices are observable along the southern portion of the Study Area.

The Niagara River has a considerable impact on the movement

of bedrock groundwater. The upper Niagara River (upstream of the Falls

within the Study Area) acts as a groundwater recharge source while the lower

Niagara River (downstream of the Falls), because of the Niagara Gorge, acts as

an area of discharge for the bedrock groundwater regime. Groundwater

recharge from the upper Niagara River is enhanced by the NYPA Power

Conduits which transport water to the Robert Moses Generating Station.

These Power Conduits dewater the upper bedrock along their length. This

lowering of the upper bedrock groundwater level increases the hydraulic

gradient which induces more recharge from the River to the upper bedrock.

This is discussed further in the following section.

3034154-3

The River itself and the manipulation of the river level by the

power authorities are not the only factors influencing the groundwater flow

regime. A study conducted by OxyChem at its Buffalo Avenue Plant

determined, through continuous measurement of the river level in

conjunction with water levels in various bedrock monitoring wells, that the

groundwater level in the bedrock fluctuated not only due to the diurnal

variation of the River but also due to water fluctuations observed in the

NYPA Power Conduit exterior drain system and Forebay. The influence of

the NYPA Power Conduits and and Forebay is discussed in Section 4.2.

4.2 NYPA POWER CONDUITS AND FOREBAY

4.2.1 NYPA Power Conduits

The twin Power Conduits which divert river water from the

upper Niagara River to the Robert Moses Generating Stations affect the

overburden and bedrock groundwater regimes. These conduits were

constructed of poured concrete in two separate parallel open cut trenches each

52 feet wide and penetrate into the bedrock to a depth of between 100 feet

(Niagara River) and 160 feet (Forebay) below ground surface. The location of

the power conduits and key invert elevations are provided on Plan 2. A

profile of the power conduits is presented on Figure 4.2. Cross-sections of the

conduits at Buffalo Avenue, the Falls Street Tunnel and Porter Avenue are

presented on Figures 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5, respectively. The deepest section of the

Power Conduits is at the intersection with the Falls Street Tunnel.

4-4303416

Surrounding each conduit is a drain system which is designed to

reduce the hydrostatic pressure on the outside walls of the conduit. This

drain system is comprised of six-inch vertical drains placed every ten feet

along both sides of each conduit which drain into two corner drains. These

corner drains are connected to semi-circular floor drains located beneath the

full length of the conduit. The drains were formed into the concrete-conduit

structure and are open to the excavation face. The drains, however, are not

directly connected to the River or the Forebay.

This drain system is hydraulically connected to the Power

Conduits at two pumping stations: one immediately south of the Robert

Moses Generating Station' Forebay (Pump Station B), and the other

immediately south of Royal Avenue (Pump Station A). Each pumping

station is equipped with a set of balancing weirs which allows water to flow

into the Conduit drain system if the hydraulic head in the Power Conduits

exceeds the elevation of the weir. The elevation of the balancing weir at

Pump Station A is 560 feet, while the elevation of the balancing weir at Pump

Station B is 550 feet.

The Power Conduit drain system, because it is exposed directly to

the bedrock, significantly influences the bedrock groundwater flow regime.

The construction of the Power Conduits has altered natural groundwater flow

in such a way that the Power Conduits drain system acts as an area of

groundwater discharge for the Upper Lockport bedrock along the entire

length of the Power Conduits (Miller and Kappel, 1987). Blasting during

4-5 3034 J 7

construction of the Power Conduits may have enhanced dewatering of the

bedrock by generating additional vertical and horizontal fracturing of the

bedrock in localized areas along the length of the Power Conduits.

Groundwater collected in the drain system is believed to discharge to the Falls

Street Tunnel or to the Forebay via fractures. A study conducted by OxyChem

at its Buffalo Avenue Plant determined that the Power Conduits (in the area

adjacent to the Plant) also may act as a source of recharge to the lower

Lockport bedrock by providing a hydraulic link from the upper to lower

bedrock. The study indicated that the Lockport bedrock was dewatered by the

Power Conduits to the elevation of the conduit drain system. However,

because the Power Conduit drain system is also connected to the underlying

bedrock, it was postulated that the groundwater collected in the drain system

from the overlying bedrock (above the conduit drain invert) may be

recharging the underlying bedrock (below the conduit drain invert). This

postulation was supported by the observation of gradient reversals in well

clusters at the Buffalo Avenue Plant. The gradient reversals are believed to

occur due to the more rapid and larger extent of groundwater level responses

in the lower bedrock wells, to fluctuations in the Power Conduit drain system

water levels compared to the slower and smaller responses of the upper

bedrock wells.

A study to determine flow patterns within the Power Conduit

drain system was conducted by the USGS in August 1990. The study consisted

of simultaneously monitoring water levels in seven conduit wells, the

Niagara River, Forebay Canal and the Reservoir over a nine day period. The

study determined that the average gradient along the drain system is from the

4-6 3034J8

River towards the Forebay. However, when the water level in the Forebay is

rising (0800 to 1200 hours), the drain system gradient reverses between the

Forebay and approximately Porter Road. Following the peak water level in

the Forebay, the drain system's gradient returns to the original south to north

pattern. The end point of the gradient reversal may be related to the fact that

a high point in the bedrock surface is located in this area.

4.2.2 Forebay

The Forebay is located between the Robert Moses Generating

Station and the NYPA Reservoir as shown on Plan 2. The Forebay is

approximately 4,000 feet long, 500 feet wide and 110 feet deep and is generallysituated within the Lockport bedrock except in the east end in the vicinity of

the Power Conduits where it penetrates into the Rochester Shale. The walls

and floors of the Forebay are unlined. Water enters the Forebay via the

Power Conduits and is either diverted to the Robert Moses Generating Station

or to the Reservoir depending upon the power generation schedule.

The water level in the Forebay is regulated on a daily schedule

and is generally dependent upon the seasonal diversion schedule, power

demand and the Niagara River. During peak power demand periods(8:00 AM to 4:00 PM), water is released from the reservoir, increasing the

water level in the Forebay. During periods of low power demand, water ispumped from the Forebay into the Reservoir lowering water levels in the

Forebay. In the summer and fall during low flow conditions in the Niagara

3034 J 9

River, the water level in the Forebay has been observed to fluctuate as much

as 25 feet (Miller and Kappel, 1987). In the spring during high flow conditions

in the Niagara River, when more water can be diverted from the River, the

water level fluctuation in the Forebay is significantly less than the summer

and fall periods, ranging from five to ten feet (Miller and Kappel, 1987).

As stated previously, the walls and floor of the Forebay are

unlined. Based on observed seepage into the Forebay and water level

monitoring of wells in the vicinity of the Forebay, the Forebay receives

groundwater discharge from the Lockport bedrock. Water level fluctuations

in the Forebay have been observed to cause near-instantaneous water level

fluctuations in wells along the Power Conduits up to 3.4 miles away (Miller

and Kappel, 1987). It is also expected that the water level fluctuation in the

Forebay affects bedrock groundwater conditions in the vicinity of the Forebay.

The effect of water level fluctuations on the conduits can be

summarized as follows. Rising water levels in the Forebay raises the

hydraulic head in the Power Conduit drains which reduces groundwater

infiltration into the Power Conduit drains. Falling water levels in the

Forebay lowers the hydraulic head in the Power Conduit drains which

increases groundwater infiltration into the Power Conduit drains.

4-8 303420

4.3 FALLS STREET TUNNEL

The Falls Street Tunnel (FST) is a gravity sewer that was

constructed in the early 1900s. It extends from 56th Street and John Avenue

to its outfall on the lower Niagara River near the Rainbow Bridge. It consists

for the most part of a 16,000-foot long unlined rock tunnel except for a

500-foot section crossing over the NYPA Power Conduits. In that section, the

FST consists of 84-inch diameter concrete pipe, of which 300 feet is encased in

a concrete vault. The tunnel was constructed using a drill and blast method

and is located almost entirely within the Lockport Dolomite. The tunnel

functioned as a combined sewer until 1985 when it was converted to a storm

sewer to discharge stormwater runoff and groundwater to the Niagara River.

The location of the FST and key invert elevations are provided on Plan 2.

In March 1987, the City of Niagara Falls began Phase I of a FST

Study. Phase I of the FST Study provided a review of background

information previously collected on the tunnel and a physical examination of

the tunnel itself. The objectives of the Phase I study were to define the FST in

terms of hydraulics and loadings of specified chemicals, under dry and wet

weather conditions. The scope of work included:

1) Parshall flume evaluation,

2) Flow and Pollutant data collection and evaluation,

3) Point source identification,

4) Regular inspection,

5) NYPA conduit sampling,

4-9 303481

6) Drop shaft inspection, and

7) Wet weather sampling.

The study identified the FST as the major groundwater discharge

point for an eleven square mile area, the north/south axis of which is the

NYPA Power Conduits. The major infiltration point into the FST was

identified as the 300-foot section which crosses over the NYPA Power

Conduits. Approximately 8.8 mgd of infiltration was estimated to occur in

this section (pre-September 1989). This represented approximately 75 percent

of the normal dry weather end-of-pipe flow. The groundwater infiltrated into

the FST through faulty bulkheads in the vault and seals in the pipe joints.

The quantity of infiltration into the FST was a direct result of the methods

used to construct the FST where it crosses the Power Conduits.

This infiltration to the FST at the NYPA Power Conduit crossing

results in a lower hydraulic head in the drain system which in turn causes

water in the Power Conduit drain system to flow south from the area near the

Forebay (dependent upon the hydraulic head in the Forebay), and north from

the Niagara River to the FST. The amount of water that flows along the

Power Conduit drain system to the FST is unknown. It should be noted that

the average hydraulic head in the Power Conduit drain system is from south

to north. In addition, the lower hydraulic head in the drain system causes

water in the overburden and in the Lockport Dolomite on both the east and

west sides of the Power Conduits to flow toward the drain system.

4-10 303422

Chemical testing for volatile organics in the FST showed that the

bulk of the chemical loading comes from infiltration at the Power

Conduits/FST crossing and the area east of the Power Conduits. The

infiltration rate in the western portion of the FST was found to be relatively

low and therefore no significant addition to total chemical loading was

expected. The portion upstream of the Power Conduits was estimated to

contribute 5 Ibs/day of volatile organics and the infiltrate at the Power

Conduits/FST crossing was estimated to contribute 28 Ib/day of volatile

organics.

A preliminary investigation to be performed following FST

repairs was outlined in a letter dated August 10, 1988 as part of the

remediation program. The objectives of this investigation were:

1) Simulate, observe, and monitor subsurface hydrologic conditions

which will exist following repairs.

2) Isolate the section of the FST at the NYPA Power Conduit crossing to

further identify the groundwater infiltration within this area.

3) Monitor the effects repairs may have on groundwater infiltration into

the south side interceptor sanitary sewer.

4) Obtain information of low flow conditions which will assist in design

of repairs.

FST repairs were completed in September 1989. Subsequent to

the repairs, groundwater level measurements were performed to evaluate the

effectiveness of the FST repairs from October 29 through November 3, 1989,

4-11303423

from March 27 to 29, 1990, and from June 26 to 27, 1990 in cooperation with

the USGS.

Various companies and government agencies were involved in

the collection of groundwater level data. This data was collated by the USGS.

The three rounds of groundwater levels indicated an approximate 5-foot rise

in the groundwater level in the intersection area of the FST and the NYPA

Power Conduits and along the FST east of 27th Street. As discussed in

Section 3.3, this rise in the groundwater level has not eliminated the FST and

NYPA Power Conduits as line sinks for regional shallow bedrock

groundwater flow. Currently it is estimated that four to five mgd of

infiltration enters the FST in the vicinity of the FST/Power Conduit

crossover according to City of Niagara Falls personnel (Roll, 1992).

4.4 NYPA RESERVOIR

The NYPA Reservoir is located just northeast of the regional

study area as shown on Plan 2. The reservoir covers an approximate area of

three square miles and can store up to 60,000 acre-feet of water. The reservoir

containment dike is approximately 55 feet high and constructed of a

compacted clay core capped by crushed rock and topsoil. During the

construction of the reservoir, the existing overburden material was stripped

down to the top of the bedrock. The exposed bedrock forms the floor of the

Reservoir. No floor liner was ever installed. Beneath the dike is a bedrock

4-12303424

grout curtain which surrounds the reservoir. Details of the grout curtain are

presented in Section 4.7.1.

Water levels in the reservoir fluctuate daily and range between

620 feet AMSL and 650 feet AMSL. The average water level is approximately

640 feet AMSL.

As stated previously, the reservoir is a regional source of

groundwater recharge to the Lockport bedrock. Within three weeks following

the first filling of the reservoir in October 1961, bedrock groundwater levels

increased by approximately 1.6 to 17.0 feet in the surrounding area. It was also

observed that several bedrock wells southwest of the reservoir began

exhibiting artesian conditions (Johnston, 1964). These conditions were

attributed to seepage through exposed joints in the unlined reservoir floor

and the grout curtain wall.

Subsequent to the initial filling, the fluctuating water level in

the reservoir was observed to have a minor effect on the surrounding

bedrock groundwater elevation. South and southwest of the reservoir, a

fluctuation of 0.1 to 1.0 feet was observed in surrounding wells (Miller and

Kappel, 1987). The degree of fluctuation observed in these wells was most

likely dependent upon the location of the well, the effectiveness of the grout

curtain in that area and whether the well intersects bedding planes or

fractures that extend to the unlined reservoir floor.

303425

4.5 UNDERGROUND TUNNELS AND SEWERS

In addition to the Falls Street Tunnel, there are several tunnels

and sewers throughout the Niagara Falls area that affect bedrock groundwater

flow. These tunnels and sewers were installed into the bedrock at the various

locations shown on Plan 2. In general, these tunnels and sewers act as line

sinks for bedrock groundwater, however, their influence is generally localized

to the immediate area along the length of the sewer. A brief description of

each of these tunnels and sewers is provided below. Key invert elevations of

the sewers and tunnels discussed below are provided on Plan 2. The key

invert elevations and other miscellaneous information on the sewers and

runnels was obtained from a written communication from Kappel, 1991.

In addition to the sewers and tunnels discussed below, because of

the relatively thin overburden layer found within the study area, it is likely

that minor sewers may also penetrate into the bedrock. Past and current

studies have indicated that upper weathered bedrock groundwater levels in

the area outside of the City of Niagara Falls are generally above the bedrock

surface while within the Niagara Falls area, groundwater levels are generally

below the bedrock surface, possibly indicating the effect of natural and

man-made drains throughout the area.

Several tunnels and sewers discussed in this section are outside

the Study Area such as the Gorge Interceptor Tunnel, the Adams Tailrace

Tunnel and the Schoellkopf Tunnel. These tunnels are discussed in this

4-14 303426

section because of their effect on regional groundwater flow conditions

within the Study Area.

4.5.1 New Road Tunnel

The New Road Tunnel extends from a location slightly north of

Porter Avenue to the Falls Street Tunnel at 47th Street as shown on Plan 2.

The section north of Porter Avenue is constructed of 42-inch concrete pipe,

backfilled with shot rock and fill (Kappel, 1991). From Porter Avenue to the

FST, the tunnel is rock-cut into the Lockport bedrock as a five-foot by six-foot

unlined tunnel. Air shafts are located along the length of the tunnel.

A study conducted by Frontier Chemicals of their site at the

intersection of Royal Avenue and 47th Street indicated that the New Road

Tunnel in conjunction with the FST dewaters the upper bedrock in the

southeast portion of their Site.

4.5.2 Gorge Interceptor Tunnel

The Gorge Interceptor is a rock cut tunnel in the Rochester Shale

that extends along the Niagara Gorge as shown on Plan 2. The tunnel varies

in size from five feet by six feet to nine feet by seven feet. Air shafts extending

to the ground surface are located along the length of the tunnel. The tunnel•

is divided into two sections; one with a southerly gradient and one with a

4-15 303427

northerly gradient to a low point located at the Gorge Pumping Station. Flow

from the tunnel is collected at the pumping station and pumped via the

Gorge Forcemain (See Plan 2) to the Niagara Falls Wastewater Treatment

Plant (NFWWTP). The combined average flow rate through both sections of

the tunnel prior to March 1989 was estimated to be 6 mgd (Kappel, 1991). In

March 1989, additional flows from the FST were diverted to the south branch

of the Tunnel. At present, approximately 6 mgd is diverted from the FST to

the Tunnel for a combined average flow rate of 12 mgd.

The effect of the tunnel on groundwater flow in the Lockport

bedrock is unknown but is probably limited due to the tunnel's proximity to

the Niagara Gorge.

4.5.3 Adams Tailrace Tunnel

The Adams Tailrace Tunnel begins at an ice shaft located at the

NFWWTP. The shaft drops 180 feet into the Rochester Formation. From the

NFWWTP, the tunnel continues in a northwest direction toward the Niagara

Gorge. The tunnel drains to the Gorge (in the vicinity of the Rainbow Bridge)

from the Irondequoit/Reynales Formations. Flow in this tunnel is composed

primarily of discharge flow from the NFWWTP (35 mgd) and discharge from

the Diversion Sewer (20 mgd). Other flows to the tunnel include discharge of

approximately 6 to 7 mgd from the Schoellkopf Tunnel and groundwater

infiltration. The amount of groundwater infiltration into the tunnel is

4-16 303428

unknown, however, it is expected that the majority of infiltration into the

tunnel will occur in the ice shaft as it penetrates the Lockport Dolomite.

The effect of the tunnel on groundwater flow in the Lockport

bedrock is unknown.

4.5.4 Schoellkopf Tunnel

The Schoellkopf Tunnel extends from the upper Niagara River

to the location of the former Schoellkopf Power plant as shown on Plan 2.

The tunnel is rock cut (brick lined) and is located entirely within the Lockport

bedrock. The tunnel is approximately 32 feet in diameter.

In the early 1960s, the tunnel ends were sealed with reinforced

concrete plugs. The tunnel is now used to collect stormwater runoff via

several newly installed dropshafts. Water collected in the runnel is diverted

to the Adams Tailrace Tunnel through two 30-inch diameter gate valves and

a six-foot unlined tunnel. Groundwater flow in the tunnel is estimated to be

approximately 6 to 7 mgd (Kappel, 1991).

The effect of the tunnel on groundwater flow within the

Lockport bedrock is unknown, however, it is expected that the tunnel acts as a

line sink for Lockport bedrock groundwater because of the way in which, the

Tunnel was constructed.

3034294-17

4.5.5 South Side Interceptor Sewer

The South Side Interceptor Sewer was constructed

approximately parallel to the FST to divert sanitary flows from the FST to the

NFWWTP. The sewer extends from approximately 47th Street to the

NFVVWTP as shown on Plan 2. All dry-weather flow in the FST east of the

Power Conduits is diverted to the South Side Interceptor Sewer. The sewer

was constructed using five-foot diameter concrete pipe placed in a

bored/rock-cut tunnel and then grouted in place. The estimated total flow in

the sewer is approximately 20 to 25 mgd (Kappel, 1991).

The effect on bedrock groundwater flow caused by the sewer is•

expected to be minimal due to the sealing of the bedrock tunnel with grout,

however, there may be a potential for localized groundwater infiltration

where the sewer crosses the power conduits. This is based on the fact that the

sewer has the same construction as the FST at the crossover and that the FST

is a known source of groundwater infiltration at the crossover. Studies have

not been conducted to determine if groundwater is infiltrating into the sewer

at the crossover.

4.5.6 Diversion Sewer

The Diversion Sewer is a 36-inch to 60-inch diameter concrete

sewer that runs westwards toward the NFWWTP from the intersection of

4-is 303430

A Street and 47th Street as shown on Plan 2. The sewer was constructed using

cut and cover methods and backfilled with excavated materials. East of Gill

Creek, the sewer is situated within the overburden. West of Gill Creek, the

sewer gradually cuts into the Lockport bedrock (Kappel, 1991).

Flows to the sewer generally consist of non-contact cooling

waters and discharge from on-site treatment plants from various industrial

sites in the area. The flow in this sewer is estimated to be approximately

20 mgd. The capacity of the sewer has been estimated to be 35 mgd. The

sewer discharges to the Adams Tailrace Tunnel via an ice shaft located at the

NFWWTP.

Because of its method of construction and the fact that the sewer

extends into the bedrock west of Gill Creek, it is expected that the Diversion

Sewer may act as a localized groundwater line sink west of Gill Creek.

4.6 GROUNDWATER PRODUCTION/EXTRACTION WELLS

Throughout the regional study area, there are several industries

that extract large quantities of water from the Lockport bedrock for various

purposes including as a source of cooling water. Several industries also

remove or plan to remove substantial volumes of groundwater from the

Lockport bedrock as part of groundwater remediation programs which are

being conducted at their sites. Table 4.3 presents a summary of production

4-19 303431

and extraction wells located within the study area. Their locations are shown

on Plan 2.

The operation of production and extraction wells serves to

dewater the bedrock, however, the extent of the capture zones are usually

very localized by comparison to the regional bedrock groundwater flow.

It is often difficult to estimate the exact areal and vertical extent

of the bedrock groundwater influenced by pumping at a bedrock well. This is

attributable to the random nature of:

i) fracture apertures;

ii) fracture orientation;

iii) fracture occurrence; andi

iv) fracture interconnection.

Groundwater generally flows into a well via the fracture

network that the well intersects. The fracture network in the Lockport is

predominantly horizontal although the upper 30 feet of bedrock does contain

numerous vertical fractures due to the effect of weathering. The pumping

capacity of the well is related to the amount of horizontal fractures the well

intersects, the interconnection of the horizontal fractures by vertical fractures,

the extent of the fractures, the aperture size of the fractures and the

availability of groundwater contained within the bedrock. Wells installed in

fractures which are poorly interconnected or not connected to a substantial

water source will be low producing wells. Wells installed in heavily fractured

4-20 303492

bedrock segments which are connected to substantial water sources via open

fractures will be high producing wells.

A brief description of the ground water production/ extraction

systems existing at the various sites presented in Table 4.3 is presented in the

following.

Olin Buffalo Avenue Plant

Olin currently uses two production wells located within the

western portion of its Buffalo Avenue Plant. Operation of these two wells is

the major factor influencing bedrock groundwater flow beneath the Site.

Pumping these wells creates a cone of depression extending beneath most of

the plant. The two Olin production wells are located approximately 10 feet

apart. The wells are 24-inch diameter, cased from 25 to 28 feet below grade

(536 feet AMSL), and open in the bedrock down to 110 feet total depth. Only

one well is pumped at a time. Pumping rates are approximately 600 gpm.

The production wells and associated treatment system are currently an

integral part of the Du Pont Groundwater Remediation Program as described

in Section 7.0.

Du Pont Niagara Plant

A groundwater recovery and treatment system has been

installed at the Du Pont Niagara Plant. The system consists of 22 recovery

wells, 17 of which penetrate 3 to 5 feet into bedrock. Five of the wells pump

4-21 30CT433

only the overburden. The system became operational in the fourth quarter of

1991. The system was designed to control off-site chemical migration from

the Du Pont Niagara Plant in the overburden and weathered top-of-bedrock

zones and to reduce the source of chemicals migrating vertically to deeper

zones.

Du Pont Necco Park Landfill

Groundwater remediation at Necco Park currently consists of a

groundwater recovery and treatment system located downgradient of a

three-sided bedrock grout curtain barrier wall, which surrounds the

upgradient sides of the site. Currently, two recovery wells, located along the

south perimeter of the site, pump a total of approximately 30 gpm from the

upper Lockport. A third recovery well, which will pump from the middle

Lockport, is currently in the start-up phase. Plan 6 shows the typical

potentiometric surface during recovery well operation. The current recovery

wells create a hydraulic barrier to off-site groundwater flow in the upper

Lockport.

Frontier Chemicals

Frontier Chemicals is in the process of initiating the installation

and operation of one groundwater extraction well. The extraction well will be

located on the south boundary of the Plant and will pump water from the

upper Lockport bedrock. The extraction well is scheduled to begin operation

in 1992.

4-22 303434

OxyChem Buffalo Avenue Plant

OxyChem is in the process of conducting a feasibility study for a

Phase I groundwater extraction system at its Buffalo Avenue Plant. The

Phase I system will involve pumping groundwater from water bearing zones

within the upper, middle and lower Lockport bedrock. Operation of the

Phase I system is planned to begin in 1996 or 1997. Additional phases that

may be added to the system are discussed in Section 7.0.

OxyChem Durez Niagara Plant

Groundwater remediation at the Durez Niagara Plant currently

consists of three purge wells installed into the upper Lockport in the

southeast corner of the plant. One well pumps water from the upper 15 feet

of bedrock, the second from the upper 30 feet and the third from the 30 to

45 feet interval of bedrock. These wells are pumped at a combined rate of 5 to

15 gpm. These wells have created a cone of depression extending beneath

most of the plant.

OxyChem Hyde Park Landfill

OxyChem is currently testing a Phase I groundwater extraction

system at its Hyde Park Landfill. The Phase I system consists of two clusters .of '

three wells. Each duster has a well in the upper, middle and lower Lockport

bedrock units straddling all observed waterbearing zones at each depth. The

303435

system has been designed to operate at a pumping rate up to 40 gpm. The

system is scheduled to begin operation in the summer of 1992. Additional

phases that will be added to the system are discussed in Section 7.0.

OxyChem S-Area Landfill

OxyChem is constructing a Phase I groundwater extraction

system at the Buffalo Avenue Plant's S-Area Landfill. The Phase I system

consists of 16 wells in the upper 30 feet of the Lockport bedrock. Eight of the

wells will recover NAPL and will operate at a maximum pumping rate of

5 gpm each. The other eight wells will recover APL and will operate at a

maximum pumping rate of 150 gpm each. The system is scheduled to be

completed in the fall of 1992. Additional phases that may be added to the

system are described in Section 7.0.

BFI/CECOS Landfill

A groundwater recovery and treatment system is currently in

operation at the BFI/CECOS Landfill. The system consists of twenty wells

which pump water from both the overburden and bedrock. There are

currently eight bedrock extraction wells in the system. Seven of these wells

are installed into the upper three to five feet of bedrock and the eighth is

installed slightly deeper. The system is described in more detail in Section 7.0.

3034M4-24

4.7 BEDROCK GROUTING

In several locations within the study area, various portions of

the Lockport bedrock have been grouted to form a groundwater flow barrier.

These grout curtain walls reduce groundwater flow but do not provide a

completely impermeable barrier to groundwater flow. Grout curtains within

the study area, shown on Plan 2, generally have a localized effect on bedrock

groundwater. Specifics of the grout curtains within the study area are

discussed below.

4.7.1 NYPA Reservoir Grout Curtain

The NYPA reservoir is surrounded with a grout curtain wall.

The wall was installed by drilling 100-foot deep holes into the upper 10 feet of

the Rochester Shale at 15-foot spacings and filling the holes with grout under

pressure. As discussed in Section 4.4, the reservoir acts as a regional source of

groundwater recharge. The intent of the grout curtain was to prevent water

stored in the reservoir from infiltrating into the bedrock. Studies have

shown (Johnston, 1964; Miller and Kappel, 1987) that water does infiltrate into

the bedrock beneath the reservoir and flows outward through the grout

curtain. The overall effect of the grout curtain on surrounding groundwater

is to limit the hydraulic impact of recharge from the reservoir.

3034*7

4.7.2 NYPA Forebay Grout Curtain

The NYPA Forebay Grout Curtain is located along the west edge

of the Forebay and extends southerly as shown on Plan 2. The grout curtain

was designed to reduce hydrostatic pressure against the Robert Moses

Generating Station. The curtain was installed by drilling 300-foot deep holes

into the upper 10 feet of Queenston Shale and filling the holes with grout

under pressure. Primary spacing of grout holes was at 80 feet with

intermediate spacings of 40, 20 and 10 feet. The grout curtain is believed to

have a pronounced impact on the local groundwater flow in the Lockport

bedrock, however, specifics are unknown.

4.7.3 NYPA Conduit and Intake Grout Curtain Wall

The NYPA Conduit and Intake Grout Curtain wall completely

surrounds the NYPA water intake structure on the upper Niagara River as

shown on Plan 2. The grout curtain was constructed to reduce groundwater

infiltration during construction of the Power Conduits and the Intake

Structure. The curtain wall was installed by grouting the upper 100 feet of

bedrock along the alignment of the walls. It should be noted that the Power

Conduits extend through the northern portion of the wall. The grout curtain

wall is believed to have a pronounced impact on the local groundwater flow

in the Lockport bedrock, however, specifics of the impact are unknown.

3034364-26

4.7.4 Necco Park Landfill Grout Curtain Wall

In 1989, Du Pont completed construction of an upgradient grout

curtain barrier designed to improve groundwater containment in the

bedrock. The Necco Park grout curtain consists of a single line of grout holes

installed around .the western, northern, and a portion of the eastern

perimeters of the landfill site. The line of grout holes was installed to form a

vertical grout (barrier) wall approximately 2,400 lineal feet in length. The

wall extends from approximately top of bedrock to a depth of 80 feet below•

ground surface.

Based on hydraulic head data collected after construction, the

grout curtain appears to be performing as designed. The cones-of-depression

associated with the groundwater recovery wells have been substantially

enhanced, effecting a hydraulic barrier to off-site groundwater flow in the

upper Lockport. The cones-of-depression have also been extended several

hundred feet off site. This is expected to induce some recovery of chemical

presence in the groundwater that has migrated off site.

4.8 NYPA INTAKE WALL FOR POWER CONDUITS

The water intake structure for the NYPA power project

significantly alters groundwater flow characteristics along the southwestern

portion of OxyChem's Buffalo Avenue Plant. The Intake Structure consists of

a reinforced concrete wall which is keyed into bedrock. Plan 2 shows the

4-27303439

location of the Intake Structure, while Figure 4.6 presents a plan, profile and

typical section of the structure.

The bedrock underlying the headwall was grouted to a depth of

approximately 100 feet below top of bedrock. Therefore, the potential for

bedrock groundwater migration through the grouted bedrock is expected to be

impaired. This forces bedrock groundwater to flow around the west and east

ends of the grouted bedrock to recharge the volume of bedrock groundwater

lost to the Power Conduit drain system. It should be noted that the integrity

of the grout curtain in the area of the Power Conduits could have been

affected by blasting during construction of the Power Conduits.

At the time the Intake Structure was constructed, the river bed

in the vicinity of the Intake Structure was reshaped and a training dyke was

constructed in the River in order to increase the effectiveness of the Intake

Structure. The training dyke is located adjacent to the industrial wharf

approximately 800 feet offshore. The reshaping of the river bed included the

excavation of some bedrock resulting in a direct connection between the

Niagara River and the Lockport bedrock fracture network. Figure 4.7 shows

the training dyke as well as the details of the River bed channelization.

4.9 HYDRAULIC CANAL

Prior to 1956, the Hydraulic Canal was used to convey water

from the Niagara River to the Schoellkopf Power Plant for hydroelectric

4-28 303440

power production. The former location of the Hydraulic Canal is shown on

Plan 2. In 1956, use of the Hydraulic Canal was discontinued and the Canal

was used by the City of Niagara Falls as a disposal site for municipal refuse

and demolition debris. The Hydraulic Canal was completely backfilled and is

currently covered with pavement, buildings and soil cover. The Hydraulic

Canal was approximately 4,600 feet long by 100 feet wide with a depth of

35 feet. A drain connection existed between the Hydraulic Canal and the

Schoellkopf Tunnel. The Hydraulic Canal extended into the bedrock

approximately 16 to 29 feet.

No assessment has been made regarding groundwater migration

through the Hydraulic Canal fill to the bedrock. However, since sections of

the Hydraulic Canal are below the top of rock, it is expected that groundwater

migration pathways to the bedrock exist.

4.10 LANDFILLS

There are several landfills located within the regional study area.

Throughout the study area, the shallow coarse grained overburden materials

are generally separated from the underlying bedrock by a fine-grained

confining layer of clay and/or glacial till. The confining layer acts as an

aquitard limiting overburden groundwater infiltration into the bedrock.

However, during landfilling operations at the various landfills, it is possible

that the confining layer may have been disturbed or removed altogether

providing a groundwater migration pathway from the overburden to the

4-29 303441

bedrock. It is believed that any migration pathways caused by landfill

operations would result in localized recharge of the bedrock groundwater

flow regime.

As stated in Section 4.6, there are several landfills within the

study area that have remedial groundwater pumping systems currently in

operation or planned to be in operation in the near future. These systems

extract groundwater from the bedrock for treatment. Since it is possible that

landfilling operations have disturbed or removed the confining layer of soil

above the bedrock, it is possible that the operation of these pumping systems

will also affect overburden groundwater flow. However, since the

overburden materials throughout the study area are generally of a tight

nature, the effect on overburden groundwater flow will be limited to the

immediate area of each pumping system and the proximity to confining layer

discontinuities.

4.11 BUILDING AND STRUCTURE FOUNDATIONS

A factor which may influence localized bedrock groundwater

flow is the presence of building and structure foundations. Since the

overburden thickness in many portions of the study area is not substantial, it

is possible that the construction of building and structure foundations may

have disturbed or removed the confining overburden layer that overlies the

bedrock, creating a vertical groundwater migration pathway from the

overburden to the bedrock.

4-30 303442

Often dewatering systems are installed around buildings to

remove water from around the foundations. Because of the limited

overburden thickness in the area, it is possible that some dewatering systems

may be situated in the upper segments of the bedrock. Two known such

situations are found at the Great Lakes Carbon Site where groundwater

sumps have been installed, and at OxyChem's Energy From Waste Facility,

where a foundation dewatering system was installed on top of the bedrock.

3034434-31

5.0 RGA BEDROCK GROUNDWATER CHEMISTRY DATABASE

An objective of the RGA is to assess the distribution of chemicals

in bedrock groundwater within the RGA study area. Available records for

each of the 39 sites identified in Section 2.0 were reviewed and all available

bedrock groundwater data were compiled. The compiled data were entered

into a database using the dBASE IV management system for IBM compatible

computers. Bedrock groundwater sampling and analyses were found to have

been performed for eighteen of the sites. For sites where more than one

round of sampling and chemical analyses had been performed, the event

with the most extensive analyses (in terms of number of analytes) was

selected for use in the RGA, regardless of the date of sampling. Thus, one

listing of analytical results was compiled for each bedrock monitoring well

used in the RGA. The most extensive chemical analyses were conducted in

the early stages of many of the on-going groundwater studies. Therefore, the

dates of the chemical analyses compiled in the RGA span approximately the

last 10 years.

Based on review of the compiled data, it was determined that

different analytical parameters were analyzed at different sites. A total of 218

different parameters have been analyzed at one or more sites. In order to

prepare maps showing chemical distributions and also maintain continuity

among the individual sites, chemicals with similar chemical characteristics,

or associated with similar types of sources, were grouped together. For

example, volatile aromatic hydrocarbons (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and

xylene) were grouped together. Each of these chemicals is potentially

303444

associated with petroleum-based products such as gasoline. The totaled

concentrations of chemicals in each group were plotted on a map of the study

area to assess the chemical distribution (see Section 6.0). The following

subsections describe the database structure and use, summarize the available

bedrock groundwater data, and present the chemical groups which were used

for the assessment of chemical presence in bedrock groundwater. The

limitations of the database are also discussed.

5.1 DATABASE DEVELOPMENT

The bedrock groundwater analytical data, compiled as described

above, was entered into dBASE IV, a database management software package

distributed by Ashton-Tate Corporation. A coordinate system was developed

for the RGA and each monitoring well was assigned an east and north

coordinate in accordance with its location: The database was structured such

that each groundwater sample and its associated data make up one record.

Analytical results for a total of 850 bedrock groundwater samples are included

in the RGA database. For each sample, the following information is included

in the record:

Well identification number;

Site name;

East coordinate;

North coordinate;

3034455-2

Strata of Lockport Dolomite monitored (upper, middle or lower: see

Section 4.0);

Date sampled; and

Chemical concentrations for all chemical analyses performed.

An application program was written to calculate statistical

parameters for each of the chemicals included in the database. The results of

the statistical analyses are presented in Subsection 5.3.

Application programs were also developed to write selected data

from the RGA database into x,y,z format, with x and y being the east and

north coordinates, respectively, and z being the concentration of a particular

chemical or group of chemicals. These files were used to prepare the

chemical distribution maps presented in Section 6.0.

5.2 SUMMARY OF BEDROCK GROUNDWATERANALYTICAL DATA

5.2.1 Data Availability

Analytical results for bedrock groundwater samples were

available for the following sites:

BFI/CECOS;

Chisholm Ryder;

City of Niagara Falls Buffalo Avenue Site;

5-3 303446

Du Pont Necco Park Landfill;

Du Pont Niagara Plant;

Frontier Chemical Plant;

Niagara Co-Generation Site (Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co.);

Hydraulic Canal;

64th Street South Site (La Salle Area Monitoring Wells);

New Road Site;

OxyChem - Buffalo Avenue Plant;

OxyChem - Durez Niagara Plant;

OxyChem - Hyde Park Landfill;

OxyChem - S-Area Landfill;

Olin - Buffalo Avenue Plant;

Olin - Industrial Welding;

Silbergeld Junkyard;

Solvent Chemical (3163 Buffalo Avenue Site); and

Union Carbide - Carbon Products Division Republic Plant.

In addition, analytical results for bedrock groundwater samples

collected from 13 USGS wells within the City of Niagara Falls were included

in the RGA database.

The data available and used in the RGA database are briefly

summarized below for each site. A more detailed presentation of the site

investigations and results is presented in the Site Summary Reports included

in Appendix A.

303447

Many samples were analyzed for standard lists of analytical

parameters. These included the Priority Pollutant List (PPL), the Hazardous

Substance List (HSL) and the Target Compound List/Target Analyte List

(TCL/TAL). Other samples were analyzed for site-specific lists of indicator

chemicals.

5.2.1.1 BFI/CECOS

A records search of the publicly available BFI/CECOS documents

at NYSDEC Region 9 was conducted in October 1991. The most

comprehensive analytical results for organic chemicals in the available files

were generated from a series of investigations conducted in 1989-1990 to•

characterize volatile organic compounds and phenolics in groundwater at the

site. These data were available for 43 bedrock wells, all monitoring the upper

Lockport zone. Parameters analyzed and analytical results are tabulated in the

Site Summary Report presented in Appendix A. No pesticide data were

found to be available for these monitoring wells.

5.2.1.2 Chisholm-Ryder

Three bedrock groundwater monitoring wells, all monitoring

the upper Lockport zone, are located at the Chisholm-Ryder Site. The wells

were sampled in January 1988 and analyzed for HSL organic chemicals and

HSL metals.

5-5 303448

5.2.1.3 City of Niagara Falls Buffalo Avenue Site

Seventeen bedrock monitoring wells have been installed and

sampled at the City of Niagara Falls Buffalo Avenue Site. All monitor the

upper zone of the Lockport Dolomite. Samples were analyzed for the

TCL/TAL.

5.2.1.4 Du Pont Necco Park Landfill

Analytical results for groundwater samples obtained from a total

of 116 bedrock monitoring wells were compiled for the Du Pont Necco Park

Landfill. Sixty-one of these monitor the upper zone of the Lockport

Dolomite, 42 monitor the middle Lockport, and 13 monitor the Lower

Lockport. The wells were sampled between 1984 and 1987, depending on

when the wells were installed. Samples were analyzed for either PPL organics

and metals or HSL organics and metals.

5.2.1.5 Du Pont Niagara Plant

Analytical results for groundwater samples obtained from a total

of 49 bedrock monitoring wells were compiled for the Du Pont Niagara Plant.

Twenty-nine of these monitor the upper Lockport, 19 monitor the middle

303449

Lockport and one monitors the Lower Lockport. In 1983 through 1986,

depending on the date of installation, the wells were sampled for either PPL

organics and metals or HSL organics and metals.

5.2.1.6 Frontier Chemical

Groundwater samples from 51 bedrock monitoring wells have

been analyzed for the Frontier Chemical Site investigations. All wells

monitor the upper Lockport zone. The analytical data compiled for use in the

RGA are the results of volatile organic and phenolic compound analyses

performed on bedrock groundwater samples obtained in 1986 and 1988.

5.2.1.7 Niagara Co-Generation Site (Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co.)

Four bedrock groundwater monitoring wells all monitoring the

upper Lockport zone, have been sampled for chemical analyses at the Niagara

Co-Generation Site. Results of TCL and TAL analyses conducted in 1991 were

entered into the RGA database.

5.2.1.8 Hydraulic Canal

Four bedrock groundwater monitoring wells (installed by the

USGS) have been sampled at the Hydraulic Canal Site. One well monitors

5-7 303450

the upper Lockport zone, one monitors the middle zone and two monitor all

three Lockport zones. Samples were analyzed for selected volatiles, semi-

volatiles, pesticides and metals.

5.2.1.9 64th Street South Site

In the La Salle Section of Niagara Falls (west of 1-190), located in

the eastern part of the RGA study area, 18 bedrock monitoring wells (15 upper

Lockport zone and 3 middle Lockport zone) were installed and sampled by the

USEPA. The ground water samples, collected in 1986, were analyzed for the

HSL organics and metals.

5.2.1.10 New Road Site

Two bedrock monitoring wells (upper Lockport zone) have been

installed at the New Road Site. Samples were collected and analyzed for the

TCLandTALinl991.

5.2.1.11 Occidental Chemical Corporation - Buffalo Avenue Plant

Analytical data from 107 bedrock ground water monitoring wells

installed by OxyChem for the Buffalo Avenue Plant investigations were

incorporated into the RGA database. Sixty-eight of these monitor the upper

303451

Lockport zone, 20 monitor the middle Lockport zone, and 19 monitor the

lower Lockport zone. Depending on the date and purpose of the well

installation, samples were obtained from 1979 through 1991. The most recent

samples (1991) were obtained from wells installed as part of an investigation

of off-site groundwater. Samples were analyzed for site-specific indicator

chemicals including selected volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds,

pesticides, and metals.

5.2.1.12 Occidental Chemical Corporation - Durez Niagara Plant

The OxyChem Durez Niagara Site investigations have included

installation and sampling of 14 bedrock groundwater monitoring wells. Ten

of these monitor the upper Lockport zone, three monitor the middle

Lockport zone, and one monitors the lower Lockport zone. Some of these

wells were sampled from several isolated 15-foot intervals, after which the

wells were converted to monitor a specific interval.

Analytical results used in the RGA were generated from samples

collected from 1984 through 1991. Samples were analyzed for site-specific

indicator chemicals including several volatile organic compounds,

chlorinated benzenes, phenols, barium and chromium.

5-9 303452

5.2.1.13 Occidental Chemical Corporation - Hyde Park Landfill

Data from 49 bedrock survey wells sampled from 1982 through

1984 were used in the RGA database. Individual wells were sampled from

several isolated 15-foot intervals, after which the wells were

decommissioned. Samples were analyzed for site-specific indicator chemicals

including selected volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds and

gamma-hexachlorocyclohexane (g-BHC).

5.2.1.14 Occidental Chemical Corporation - S-Area Landfill

A total of 20 bedrock survey wells were sampled for the

OxyChem S-Area investigations during 1987 and 1988. These wells were each

sampled from several isolated 15-foot intervals, after which the wells were

converted to monitor the lower Lockport zone. Samples were analyzed for

site-specific indicator chemicals, primarily chlorobenzene compounds. In

addition, twelve historical monitoring wells (upper Lockport) were sampled

and analyzed for the Priority Pollutant List during 1979 and 1980.

5.2.1.15 Olin Buffalo Avenue Plant

A total of 18 bedrock ground water monitoring wells at the Olin

Buffalo Avenue Plant were sampled in 1991 and analyzed for the TCL,

510 3034^3

additional chlorinated phenols and mercury. All of these wells monitor the

upper Lockport zone.

5.2.1.16 Olin Industrial Welding Site

Ten bedrock monitoring wells have been installed and sampled

at the Industrial Welding Site, all in the upper Lockport zone. Samples from

four wells were analyzed for all TCL organics and mercury. Samples from six

wells were analyzed for TCL volatiles, TCL pesticides and mercury. The wells

were sampled in 1989 and 1991.

5.2.1.17 Silbergeld Tunkyard Site

Five bedrock monitoring wells have been installed and sampled

at the Silbergeld Junkyard Site. All of these wells monitor the upper Lockport

zone. Samples were obtained from all five wells in 1991 and analyzed for the

TCL and TAL.

5.2.1.18 Solvent Chemical (3163 Buffalo Avenue Site)

Nine bedrock (upper Lockport zone) monitoring wells have

been sampled at the Solvent Chemical Site, also referred to as the 3163 Buffalo

3034545-11

Avenue Site. The sampling was performed in 1990 and samples were

analyzed for the TCL and TAL.

5.2.1.19 Union Carbide - Carbon Products Division Republic Plant

Six bedrock monitoring wells have been installed and sampled

at the Union Carbide Carbon Products Division Republic Plant. Samples were

collected in 1988 and analyzed for HSL organics and selected inorganics.

5.2.1.20 USGS Monitoring Wells

In addition to the USGS wells identified in Section 5.2.1.8, nine

other USGS wells located in the study area have been sampled for chemical

analysis. The samples were collected and analyzed for the PPL in 1982-1983.

5.2.2 Statistical Summary Of Analytical Data

Analytical data from a total of 854 bedrock groundwater samples

were entered into the RGA database. Tables 5.1, 5.2, 5.3 and 5.4 present a

statistical summary of the presence of each volatile, semi-volatile,

pesticide/PCB and metal parameter analyzed in at least one well.

3034555-12

These tables include the number of wells in which the chemical

was detected, the mean of measured concentrations above detection limits,

the median of measured concentrations above detection limits, and the range

of measured concentrations above detection limits. Results reported below

detection limits were not used in the calculations. Therefore, the statistics are

not representative of the entire dataset, but only of the subset containing

results above detection limits.

5.3 CHEMICAL GROUPS FOR DETAILED MAPPING

Chemicals detected in bedrock groundwater samples were

categorized into groups of similar chemicals. Chemicals with similar

properties, or derived from similar types of sources, were grouped together

for detailed mapping (Section 6.0). Since most individual chemicals were

sporadically distributed (or analyzed for), the approach of mapping chemical

groups provided a presentation of regional groundwater quality with better

continuity between the individual site study areas.

Ten chemical groups were developed for detailed mapping. In

addition, five chemicals were selected for mapping individually because they

were not appropriate for inclusion in a chemical grouping due to distinctive

chemical or source characteristics. In some samples, chemical concentrations

were reported for both individual isomers and as the total of all isomers.

Where this occurred, the value for the total of all isomers was used to

calculate the group total. A summary of the number of chemicals analyzed in

5-13 303456

each chemical group for individual sites is presented in Table 5.5. The

chemical groupings are presented in detail below.

5.3.1 Group 1 - Chlorinated Volatile Aliphatic Compounds

All chlorinated volatile aliphatic compounds detected in any

well were grouped together for detailed mapping of totalled concentrations.

Group 1 chemicals were:

Chemical Number Analyzed

Trichloroethene 442Tetrachloroethene 432Chloroform 341trans-l,2-Dichloroethene 277Methylene Chloride 351Vinyl Chloride 3511,1-Dichloroethene 3511,1,2-Trichloroethane 3511,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 354Carbon Tetrachloride 3601,2-Dichloroethane 3511,1,1-Trichloroethane 3511.1-Dichloroethane 4041.2-Dichloroethene (total) 120Bromodichloromethane 351Trichlorofluoromethane 168Chloromethane 351cis-l,2-Dichloroethene 16Chloroethane 351

Number Detected

274205171161155979167625756413627162221

3034575-14

5.3.2 Group 2 - Benzene. Toluene. Ethylbenzene and Xylene

Benzene, toluene/ ethylbenzene and xylene (BTEX) were

grouped together for detailed mapping due to chemical similarity and

association with petroleum-based products such as gasoline. The number of

analyses and number of detections were as follows:

Chemical Number of Analyses Number of Detections

Benzene 485 174Toluene 478 132Xylene 269 . 59Ethylbenzene 404 44

5.3.3 Group 3 - Acetone and 2-Butanone

Acetone and 2-butanone, two non-chlorinated volatile solvents,

were grouped together. Both chemicals are also common laboratory

contaminants. The number of analyses and number of detections were as

follows:

Chemical Number of Analyses Number of Detections

Acetone 264 872-Butanone 263 42

9034585-15

5.3.4 Group 4 - Phenol and Methylphenols

Phenol and methylphenols were grouped together. Group 4

chemicals were:

Chemical Number of Analyses Number of Detections

Phenol 558 1862,4-Dimethylphenol 297 214-Methylphenol 162 142-Methylphenol 163 9

5.3.5 Group 5 - Chlorophenols

All chlorinated phenolic compounds (Chlorophenols) detected

were grouped together for detailed mapping. Chlorophenols detected in one

or more bedrock groundwater monitoring wells were:*

Chemical Number of Analyses Number of Detections

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 305 32Trichlorophenols, total 213 24Pentachlorophenol 306 202,4-Dichlorophenol 297 172,4,5-Trichlorophenol 223 112-Chlorophenol 297 73,4-Dichlorophenol 18 32,3,6-Trichlorophenol 18 22,3,4,5-Tetrachlorophenol 18 13-Chlorophenol 18 1

303459

5.3.6 Group 6 - Chlorobenzenes and Chlorotoluenes

Chlorobenzene and chlorotoluene compounds were grouped

together for detailed mapping. These chemicals included:

Chemical Number of Analyses Number of Detections

Chlorobenzene 7831,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 437Chlorotoluenes, total 2681.2-Dichlorobenzene 4221.3-Djchlorobenzene 403Trichlorobenzenes, total 3041.4-Dichlorobenzene 422Tetrachlorobenzenes, total 3022-Chlorotoluene 784-Chlorobenzotrifluoride 78Monochlorobenzotrifluoride 2204-Chlorotoluene 78Hexachlorobenzene 4782,4/2,5-Dichloro toluene 78Dichlorobenzenes, total 772,4-Dichlorobenzotrifluoride 781,2,3-Trichlorotoluene 782,3/3,4-Dichlorotoluene 782,6-Dichlorotoluene 781,2,3,4-Tetrachlorobenzene 781,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 782-Chlorobenzotrifluoride 782,4,5-Trichlorotoluene 78

211106988885858485534940373633302827272322201716

3034605-17

Chemical Number of Analyses Number of Detections

Chlorobenzoic Acids, total 1692,3,6-Trichlorotoluene 783,4-Dichlorobenzotrifluoride 78Dichlorotoluenes, total 114-Chlorobertzoic acid 782-Chlorobenzoic acid 78

141312554

5.3.7 Group 7 - Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons

Polyaromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) compounds were grouped

together for detailed mapping. PAH compounds detected were:

Chemical Number of Analyses Number of Detected

NaphthaleneFluorantheneFluorene _ChrysenePhenanthreneAcenaphthenePyreneBenzo(a)anthraceneAnthraceneBenzo(b)fluorantheneBenzo(a)pyreneIndenod ,2,3-cd)pyreneBenzo(g,h,i)peryleneDibenz(a,h)anthracene

297297297292297297297297297281281281296281

145332221111111

3034615-18

5.3.8 Group 8 - Hexachloroethane, Hexachlorobutadiene,Hexachlorocvclopentadiene and Octachlorocyclopentene

Four highly chlorinated non-aromatic semi-volatile compounds

were grouped together for detailed mapping. Group 8 chemicals were:

Chemical Number of Analyses Number of Detected

Hexachlorobutadiene 469 107Hexachloroethane 282 59Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 573 28Octachlorocyclopentene 178 12

5.3.9 Group 9 - Phthalates

Phthalate compounds were grouped together for detailed

mapping. Phthalate compounds detected in at least one well were:

Chemical Number of Analyses Number of Detected

bis(2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate 301 56Di-n-Butyl Phthalate 293 5Butylbenzyl Phthalate 297 4Di-n-Octyl Phthalate 301 2

5-19303462

5.3.10 Group 10 - Pesticides/PCBs

Chemical Group 10 includes all pesticide and PCB compounds

detected in at least one bedrock groundwater monitoring well. These

chemicals included:

Chemical Number Analyzed Number Detected

gamma-BHC 545 112alpha-BHC 347 85beta-BHC 343 78delta-BHC 343 78Heptachlor 260 16Aldrin 256 11Total BHC 103 114,4'-DDT 256 10Heptachlor Epoxide 256 3Endosulfan I 262 3Arochlor-1254 255 3Mirex 232 34,4'-DDE 242 2Endosulfan Sulfate 256 2

5.3.11 Chemicals Considered Individually

Five chemicals were considered individually because they have

distinct chemical properties or source characteristics. These included:

3034635-20

Chemical Number Analyzed Number Detected

Lead 323 154Barium 271 112Mercury 338 46N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 297 13Benzoic Acid 226 11

Lead, barium, and mercury were the metals selected for detailed

mapping. Other metals detected were considered to be naturally occurring,

had limited distributions, or did not exceed New York State Water Quality

Standards.

5.3.12 Other Detected Organic Chemicals

Several organic chemicals were not placed into a group or

mapped individually. These chemicals were either infrequently detected or

were not appropriate for inclusion in any of the 10 chemical groups based on

chemical similarity.

Three volatile organic chemicals fell into this category:

Chemical Number Analyzed Number Detected

4-Methyl-2-pentanone 212 21Carbon Bisulfide 151 16Vinyl Acetate 151 1

3034645-21

Nine semi-volatile organic chemicals were not placed into a

group or mapped individually. These included:

Chemical Number Analyzed Number Detected

Aniline 61 54-Chloroaniline 152 5Benzyl Alcohol 161 4Chlorendic Acid 78 3Benzeneacetic Acid 9 2Nitrobenzene 306 2Pyridine 22 22-Chloronaphthalene 297 14,6-Dinitro-o-cresol 187 1

Although these chemicals were not included in the chemical

groups and were not mapped individually, their concentrations were

included in total organic chemical distribution maps presented in Section 6.0.

5.4 DATABASE LIMITATIONS

In the following Section, chemical distribution maps are

presented and interpreted. The interpretation of these data with respect to

regional groundwater quality is limited by the monitoring well network.

Most wells are located at or in the immediate vicinity of a small number of

sites where extensive investigations have been conducted. There is

comparatively little data available for other potential source areas and for

non-industrial areas. Furthermore, most of the available groundwater

5-22 303465

analytical data is from samples obtained from the upper Lockport zone. Of

the 854 groundwater samples compiled for the RGA, 576 (18 sites) were from

upper Lockport zone samples, 196 (nine sites) were from middle Lockport

zone samples and 80 (six sites) were from lower Lockport zone samples. For

the middle Lockport zone, the distribution of chemical presence can only be

presented based on data from the nine sites with monitoring wells

penetrating this zone. In the chemical distribution maps for the middle

Lockport (presented in the following Section), areas where no chemical

distribution is shown generally reflect lack of data rather than the results of

chemical analyses. Assessment of the lower Lockport is further limited due

to the fewer number of wells sampled and very little interpretation from a

regional perspective is possible.

Several sites analyzed only for site-specific lists of indicator

parameters rather than the more general lists of parameters. For some site

investigations, this may have prevented identification of low levels of

chemicals which could have been present due to off-site sources. However,

the impacts of the different analytical lists on the comparisons between sites

are probably not a major consideration because site-specific indicator chemical

lists are generally developed to account for most known contaminants at the

site.

5-23 303466

6.0 PRESENCE OF CHEMICALS IN BEDROCK GROUNDWATER

To assess the distribution of chemicals in bedrock groundwater,

chemical concentrations were totaled for each Chemical Group identified in

Section 5.0. These group totals (and concentrations of the five chemicals

considered individually) were plotted on maps of the RGA study area and

isoconcentration contour lines were drawn. When totaling chemical

concentrations, results reported as not detected were assumed to be zero. The

individual maps show only those wells from which samples were analyzed

for the parameters plotted. If no wells are plotted in an area, it indicates there

is no data for this area. In cases where two or more wells at the same location

monitor different intervals of the same zone, the well with the highest

analytical result was plotted.

At some sites, analytical results may have been influenced by the

presence of non-aqueous phase liquid (NAPL) in the groundwater flow

regime. In general, NAPL observations were limited to monitoring wells in

the vicinity of major source areas. Off-Site NAPL migration in the bedrock

has been documented in only a few isolated locations. In these cases, the

NAPL remained in close proximity to the Site boundaries. NAPL presence is

discussed on a Site-by-Site basis in the Site Summary Attachments

(Appendix A).

Maps were prepared for the upper and middle Lockport zones.

Since only a few wells in the study area monitor the lower Lockport, there

was insufficient data for preparation of regional isoconcentration contour

303467

maps for this zone. In the following subsections, the word plume is used to

refer to a volume of groundwater which contains detectable concentrations of

the chemicals identified in Section 5.0. Plumes, as defined in this report, are

not necessarily a result of a single source area, but rather represent volumes

where groundwater quality has been impacted. The association of a specific

site with a plume does not necessarily mean that the site contributed

significantly to that plume.

6.1 GROUP 1 CHEMICALS

The distribution of Group 1 chemicals (chlorinated volatile

aliphatics) in the upper Lockport zone is presented on Plan 8. This map

shows four major Group 1 chemical plumes in the upper Lockport. One

plume is located in the southwest section of the study area based on samples

from wells at the Du Pont Niagara Plant, Olin Buffalo Avenue Plant, Solvent

Chemical Site and the Industrial Welding Site. The highest concentrations of

Group 1 chemicals occur west of Gill Creek at the Du Pont Niagara Plant and

Olin Buffalo Avenue Plant. Lower concentrations occur north of Buffalo

Avenue and east of Gill Creek suggesting some migration toward the Falls

Street Tunnel and NYPA Conduits has occurred.

A second Group 1 chemical plume in the upper Lockport is

located in the southeast section of the study area based on samples from wells

at the OxyChem Buffalo Avenue Plant. Higher concentrations of Group 1

chemicals are limited primarily to the immediate vicinity of the Plant.

6-2 303468

Migration from this site could be contributing to the lower levels of Group 1

chemicals detected in the vicinity of the Falls Street Tunnel and NYPA

Conduits.

A third Group 1 chemical plume in the upper Lockport is

indicated by the results of analyses of groundwater samples from the Frontier

Chemical Site. Higher levels of Group 1 chemicals occur on-site. Migration

from this site could be contributing to the lower levels of Group 1 chemicals

detected in the vicinity of the Falls Street Tunnel and NYPA Conduits.

A fourth Group 1 chemical plume in the upper Lockport is

indicated by the results of groundwater samples obtained from the Du Pont

Necco Park investigations. The higher concentrations of Group 1 chemicals

occur in the immediate vicinity of the site. Lower levels to the south and

southwest suggest some migration toward the John Avenue Tunnel and

NYPA/FST has occurred.

Groundwater analytical data suggest that less extensive isolated

Group 1 chemical plumes may also be present in the upper Lockport at the

BFI/CECOS and OxyChem S-Area Sites.

In the middle Lockport zone, the assessment of chemical plumes

(Plan 9) is limited because fewer monitoring wells penetrated this zone (see

Section 5.4).

6-3 303469

Group 1 chemicals were analyzed in the lower Lockport zone

wells during three site investigations. Concentrations were reported for

lower Lockport groundwater samples from the Du Pont Niagara Plant, Du

Pont Necco Park and OxyChem Buffalo Avenue Plant investigations.

Reported concentrations were generally lower in the lower Lockport zone

than in the upper and middle zones.

Plans 8 and 9 indicate that, for each of the identified plumes, the

highest concentrations of Group 1 chemicals occur at or near the probable

source areas. Lower levels of Group 1 chemicals occur more distant from the

probable source areas, primarily in the direction of the NYPA Conduits and

Falls Street Tunnel. These structures were identified in Section 4.0 as major

collectors of groundwater seepage. Some chemical migration in groundwater

toward these structures has likely occurred.

6.2 GROUP 2 CHEMICALS

The distribution of Group 2 chemicals (benzene, toluene,

ethylbenzene and xylene) within the upper Lockport zone is shown on Plan

10. Five Group 2 chemical plumes were indicated. In the southwest portion

of the study area, a Group 2 chemical plume was indicated by the results of

analyses from monitoring wells located at the Du Pont Niagara Plant, Olin

Buffalo Avenue Plant, Solvent Chemical Site and Industrial Welding Site. A

second plume was indicated by analytical results from sampling of the

OxyChem Buffalo Avenue Plant monitoring wells. The inferred extent of

303470

chemical presence of Group 2 chemicals extends further to the east than that

for Group 1 chemicals. The third plume was identified based on results from

sampling monitoring wells at the Frontier Chemical Site. The fourth

Group 2 chemical plume in the upper Lockport was identified based on

analytical results from the Du Pont Necco Park monitoring wells. The

Group 2 chemical plume based on these data is less areally extensive than the

Group 1 plume. The fifth upper Lockport Group 2 chemical plume was

identified based on analytical results from the OxyChem Durez Plant

monitoring wells. Another, lower concentration plume within the upper

Lockport zone is potentially present based on data from groundwater

monitoring at the OxyChem S-Area Landfill.

For each of these identified plumes, the highest concentrations

occur in the immediate vicinity of the probable source areas. Some lower

concentrations were reported more distant from the probable sources.

Plan 11 presents the Group 2 chemical distribution for the

middle Lockport monitoring wells. As for the Group 1 chemicals, this map

indicates that some downward migration of Group 2 chemicals has occurred.

For the lower Lockport zone, Group 2 chemicals were analyzed

during four site investigations. Group 2 chemicals were reported above

detection limits in one or more wells during the Du Pont Necco Park,

Du Pont Niagara Plant, OxyChem Buffalo Avenue Plant and OxyChem Durez

Investigations. Reported concentrations were generally lower than for the

middle and upper zones.

6-5 303471

6.3 GROUP 3 CHEMICALS

The distribution Group 3 chemicals (acetone and 2-butanone) in

the upper Lockport zone is shown on Plan 12. The distributions of these two

commonly used chemicals (and also common laboratory contaminants) is

heavily skewed by the limited number of analyses for these parameters. Plan

12 shows the presence of five Group 3 chemical plumes based on data from

monitoring wells installed for the Goodyear Co-Generation Site, Frontier

Chemical Site, BFI/CECOS, City of Niagara Falls Buffalo Avenue Site and Du

Pont Necco Park Off-Site investigations.

Plan 13 presents the distribution of Group 3 chemicals in the

middle Lockport zone based on limited data. The documented presence of

elevated Group 3 chemicals in the middle Lockport zone is limited to wells

north of Niagara Falls Boulevard and one well north of Packard Road.

Group 3 chemicals were analyzed for lower Lockport zone

samples only for the Du Pont Necco Park Off-Site and OxyChem Durez

investigations. Concentrations were reported in both investigations.

6-6 303472

6.4 GROUP 4 CHEMICALS

The distribution of Group 4 chemicals (phenol and

methylphenols) in the upper Lockport zone is shown on Plan 14. Five

plumes were discernible based on the available data. In the southwest

portion of the study area, sporadic detections of Group 4 chemicals were

reported for Solvent Chemical, Olin Buffalo Avenue Plant and Du Pont

Niagara Plant upper Lockport monitoring wells. A second plume of Group 4

chemicals in the upper Lockport was indicated based on the results from the

BFI/CECOS and Du Pont Necco Park investigations.

The third Group 4 chemical plume was identified based on data

from the OxyChem Durez Site investigations. In this case, results for the total

phenolic compound analyses were used rather than individual chemical

analyses, because the latter were not performed. These results indicate

Group 4 chemicals in the immediate vicinity of the Durez Site. A fifth Group

4 chemical plume is indicated by the OxyChem Hyde Park Landfill

groundwater sampling and analyses. For each of these plumes, the higher

concentrations were limited primarily to the immediate vicinity of the sites.

Plan 15 presents the distribution of Group 4 chemicals in the

middle Lockport zone based on a limited monitoring well network.

Chemical concentrations were reported for the Du Pont Necco Park,

BFI/CECOS, OxyChem Durez, and OxyChem Hyde Park Landfill

investigations.

303473o-/

Group 4 chemicals were analyzed for lower Lockport

groundwater samples during four site investigations. Concentrations were

reported above detection limits for Du Pont Necco Park and OxyChem Durez

investigations.

6.5 GROUP 5

The distribution of Group 5 chemicals (chlorophenols) in the

upper Lockport zone is shown on Plan 16. Three plumes were indicated

based on the available data. One was identified based on data from the Du

Pont Niagara Plant, Olin Buffalo Avenue Plant and Solvent Chemicals

investigations. The presence of detectable concentrations was primarily in

samples from wells located at the Solvent Chemical Site and at the eastern

portion of the Olin Buffalo Avenue Plant.

A second plume is indicated based on Necco Park groundwater

analytical data. Elevated levels of Group 5 chemicals were detected in wells

along the western border of the landfill.

A third plume is indicated based on groundwater analytical

results from the OxyChem Hyde Park investigations. Elevated levels are

limited primarily to the immediate vicinity of the landfill.

Isolated low level detections of Group 5 chemicals were also

reported in the western portion of the OxyChem Buffalo Avenue Plant.

6-8 303474

Plan 17 presents the distribution of Group 5 chemicals in the

middle Lockport zone. Concentrations were reported for OxyChem Hyde

Park middle Lockport monitoring wells and for middle Lockport monitoring

wells located west and south of Necco Park.

Group 5 chemicals were analyzed for lower Lockport

groundwater samples during four site investigations. Concentrations were

reported for 2 of 13 Du Pont Necco Park monitoring wells and 1 of 32

OxyChem Buffalo Avenue Plant monitoring wells.

6.6 GROUP 6 CHEMICALS

Plan 18 presents the distribution of Group 6 chemicals

(chlorobenzenes and chlorotoluenes) in the upper Lockport zone. Five major

Group 6 chemical plumes were identified based on the available data. In the

southwest portion of the study area, data from the Du Pont Niagara Plant,

Olin Buffalo Avenue Plant and Solvent Chemical Site investigations indicate

the presence of a Group 6 chemical plume.

A second plume was identified based on data from the OxyChem

Buffalo Avenue Plant investigations, primarily in the western portion of the

plant, north of Buffalo Avenue. A third plume was identified based on data

from the OxyChem S-Area landfill investigations. A fourth plume was

6-9303475

identified based on data from the Frontier Chemicals Site. A fifth plume was

identified based on data generated from the Hyde Park Landfill investigations.

Three lower concentration plumes of Group 6 chemicals were

suggested to occur based on data from the Du Pont Necco Park, BFI/CECOS

and OxyChem Durez investigations.

Plan 19 presents the distribution of Group 6 chemicals in the

middle Lockport zone. Some downward migration of Group 6 chemicals

from the upper Lockport to the middle Lockport zone has occurred based on

data from sites with middle Lockport monitoring wells.

As with the other chemical groups discussed, higher

concentrations of Group 6 chemicals were reported to occur in wells at or in

the immediate vicinity of probable source areas. Concentrations were much

lower with increased distance from the sources.

Group 6 chemicals were analyzed for lower Lockport zone

groundwater samples during six site investigations. Concentrations were

reported for the Du Pont Niagara Plant, OxyChem Buffalo Avenue Plant,

OxyChem S-Area Landfill, OxyChem Durez, and OxyChem Hyde Park

Landfill Sites.

3034766-10

6.7 GROUP 7 CHEMICALS

No substantial plumes of Group 7 chemicals (PAHs) were

indicated based on the mapped concentration data. Isolated low level

detections were reported for a few wells at the sites for which these chemicals

were analyzed. PAH compounds were not detected in lower Lockport zone

ground water samples.

6.8 GROUP 8 CHEMICALS

The distribution of Group 8 chemicals (hexachloroethane,

h e x a c h l o r o b u t a d i e n e , hexach lo rocyc lopen tad iene , and

octachlorocyclopentene) is presented on Plan 20. Plan 20 indicates the

occurrence of five Group 8 chemical plumes.

In the southwest portion of the study area, data from the Du

Pont Niagara Plant, Olin Buffalo Avenue Plant and Solvent Chemical Site

investigations indicate the presence of a Group 8 chemical plume. A second

plume was identified based on data from the OxyChem Buffalo Avenue Plant

investigations, primarily in the western portion of the site, north of Buffalo

Avenue. A third plume is indicated based on data from the OxyChem S-Area

Landfill investigations. A fourth Group 8 chemical plume was identified

based on data from the Necco Park investigations. A fifth plume was

indicated based on data from the OxyChem Hyde Park Landfill investigations.

6-n 303477

Within each Group 8 chemical plume, higher concentrations were limited

primarily to the immediate vicinity of the sites.

Plan 21 presents the distribution of Group 8 chemicals based on

the limited middle Lockport data. Downward migration from the upper

Lockport zone has occurred, based on data from the Du Pont Niagara Plant,

OxyChem S-Area Landfill, Du Pont Necco Park Landfill and OxyChem Hyde

Park Landfill investigations.

Group 8 chemicals were analyzed for lower Lockport zone

groundwater samples during three site investigations. Concentrations were

reported for the Du Pont Necco Park Landfill, Du Pont Niagara Plant and

OxyChem Buffalo Avenue Plant.

6.9 GROUP 9 CHEMICALS

No substantial plumes of Group 9 chemicals (phthalates) were

indicated based on the mapped concentration data. Phthalate compounds are

common sampling and laboratory contaminants. Sporadic low level

detections were reported in several wells at sites for which these analyses

were performed.

6-12 303478

6.10 GROUP 10 CHEMICALS

Plan 22 presents the distribution of Group 10 chemicals

(pesticides/PCBs) in the upper Lockport zone. Three Group 10 chemical

plumes were identified. Based on data from the Du Pont Niagara Plant and

Olin Buffalo Avenue Plant investigations, a Group 10 chemical plume exists

in the vicinity of Gill Creek between the Robert Moses Parkway and Buffalo

Avenue. A second plume was identified based on data from the OxyChem

Buffalo Avenue Plant, primarily limited to the western portion of the Plant.

A third plume was indicated based on data from the OxyChem Hyde Park

Landfill investigations.

Lower concentration plumes are also indicated based on data

from the OxyChem S-Area Landfill and Du Pont Necco Park Landfill

investigations.

Plan 23 presents the distribution of Group 10 chemicals in the

middle Lockport zone. This figure indicates that limited downward

migration from the upper Lockport zone has occurred.

Group 10 chemicals were analyzed for lower Lockport

groundwater samples during six site investigations. Concentrations were

reported for the Du Pont Niagara Plant (near Gill Creek), OxyChem Buffalo

Avenue Plant, and OxyChem S-Area Landfill investigations.

6-13 303479

6.11 CHEMICALS CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY

As described in Section 5.0, five chemicals are not appropriate for

inclusion in any of the chemical groups and were therefore considered

separately.

6.11.1 Benzoic Acid

No substantial plumes of benzoic acid were indicated based on

the mapped concentration data. Reported detections of benzoic acid were

generally isolated. There were 11 reported concentrations above detection

limits: eight were from monitoring wells located south of the Du Pont Necco

Park Landfill, two were from Olin Buffalo Avenue Plant monitoring wells,

and one was from an OxyChem Buffalo Avenue Plant monitoring well.

Benzoic acid was detected in one lower Lockport monitoring well.

6.11.2 N-Nitrosodiphenylamine

No substantial plumes of N-nitrosodiphenylamine were

identified based on the mapped concentration data. There were 13 detections

of N-nitrosodiphenylamine: 11 detections in Necco Park off-site monitoring

wells and two detections in Du Pont Niagara Plant monitoring wells.

M4 303480

6.11.3 Lead

Plan 24 presents the lead distribution map for the upper

Lockport zone. Lead is naturally occurring in this formation. Reported

concentrations exceeded 0.01 mg/L in monitoring wells installed for the

Solvent Chemical Site, City of Niagara Falls Buffalo Avenue Site, 64th Street

South Site, BFI/CECOS, Du Pont Necco Park Landfill, and USGS

investigations.

Plan 25 presents the lead distribution map for the middle

Lockport zone. This map indicates that downward migration of lead may be

occurring. The degree to which naturally occurring lead is influencing these

results has not been determined.

No lead concentrations above 0.01 mg/L were reported for the

lower Lockport zone.

6.11.4 Mercury

Plans 26 and 27 present the upper Lockport and middle Lockport

concentration distribution maps for mercury. Mercury was reported at

concentrations greater than 0.01 mg/L for monitoring wells located at the

Olin Buffalo Avenue Plant, Industrial Welding Site, and OxyChem Buffalo

Avenue Plant.

303481

No mercury concentrations above 0.01 mg/L were reported for

the lower Lockport zone.

6.11.5 Barium

Figures 28 and 29 present the barium distribution maps for the

upper and middle Lockport zones, respectively. Concentrations reported

above 10 ppm (mg/L) were limited primarily to Necco Park monitoring wells

in the upper Lockport zone in the immediate vicinity of the site.

Barium was analyzed for lower Lockport groundwater samples

during three site investigations. Concentrations were reported for two lower

Lockport zone monitoring wells at the Du Pont Necco Park Landfill and for

one well at the Du Pont Niagara Plant.

6.12 FALLS STREET TUNNEL AND NYPA CONDUITS

Chemicals in groundwater have reached the NYPA Conduits

and Falls Street Tunnel. In a study by O'Brien and Gere (1987), during which

the Falls Street Tunnel was sampled and analyzed 20 times (during dry

weather), 12 organic chemicals were identified as having significant

concentrations in outfall samples. Chemical loading rates were calculated by

O'Brien and Gere based on an average dry weather flow in the Falls Street

6-16 303482

Tunnel of 11.5 mgd. These twelve chemicals, the mean concentrations, and

calculated loading rates were as follows:

Mean Concentration EstimatedChemical at FST Outfall (ug/L) Loading Rate (Ibs/day)

Group 1 Chemicals:

Chloroform 55.9 5.4

trans-l,2-Dichloroethene 83.8 8.0

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 16.6 1.6

Tetrachloroethylene 58.6 5.6

Trichloroethene 168.2 16.1

Vinyl chloride 7.2 0.7

Group 2 Chemicals:

Benzene 3.4 0.3

Toluene 3.5 0.3

Group 6 Chemicals:

Chlorobenzene 12.3 1.2

Chlorotoluenes 7.7 0.7

Monochlorobenzotrifluorides 5.8 0.6

Dichlorobenzene 28.3 2.7

The highest chemical concentrations at the Falls Street Tunnel

outfall were for Group 1 chemicals. Two Group 2 chemicals and four Group 6

chemicals were also detected.

303483

Two wells installed by NYPA in 1958 adjacent to the east exterior

drain of the east conduit were sampled in 1992 as part of the Du Pont Neccoi

Park off-site investigations. These water samples are expected to be

representative of groundwater discharging to the drain system from the east.

The following chemicals were detected:

NYPA-139NYPA-162 (Near Falls

Chemical (Near Witmer Road) Street Tunnel)

Group 1 Chemicals:

Trichloroethene 920 420

Tetrachloroethene 290 81

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 380 ND

cis-l,2-Dichloroethene 1,000 27

Methylene Chloride 70 ND

Chloroform 1,100 ND

Group 8 Chemicals:

Hexachloroethane 43 ND

Hexachlorobutadiene 180 ND

Group 10 Chemicals:

gamma-BHC 0.13 ND

The highest reported concentrations observed along the NYPA

conduits were for the Group 1 chemicals. Hydraulic data concerning the

6-18303484

drain system and adjacent fractured rock are not available and, therefore,

loading rates to the system cannot be reliably estimated.

6.13 REGIONAL DATA GAPS

In this report, regional data gaps refer to additional information

which is necessary for understanding the regional transport patterns of

chemicals in groundwater within the RGA study area. The isoconcentration

contour maps presented in this section show that chemical concentrations in

groundwater are highest at or in the immediate vicinity of the probable

source areas. Concentrations are generally lower by 90 percent or more

within approximately 1000 feet of source areas. Where migration has

apparently occurred, the directions of transport have generally been

consistent with the known patterns of groundwater flow presented in Section

4.0. Based on these findings, additional data are not required for investigation

of regional transport.

One limitation of the database is that several sites analyzed only

for site-specific lists of indicator parameters rather than the more general lists

of parameters. However, the impacts of the different analytical lists on the

comparisons between sites are probably not a major consideration because

site-specific indicator chemical lists are generally developed to account for

most known contaminants at the Site.

3034856-19

7.0 GROUNDWATER REMEDIATION PROGRAMS

Groundwater remediation programs have been initiated at

several sites in the RGA Study Area. This Section describes the current status

of remediation in the Study Area. This section also describes the potential

impact of the remediation programs on groundwater quality within the Study

Area. The other sites within the Study Area have not been required to

perform bedrock investigations, have not had bedrock remedial

investigations completed or are not ready to proceed with remediation. Since

these sites represent a large number of the sites included in the RGA, there

are many areas where bedrock groundwater data are limited or do not exist.

Therefore, a complete determination cannot be made on groundwater quality

impacts on a regional scale. Groundwater conditions presented in Section 6.0

are based for the most part on unremediated groundwater data. In the near

future, several groundwater remediation projects will begin operation or will

have been in operation long enough to alter groundwater conditions in most

of the identified source areas.

Groundwater remediation programs are in place, under

construction or are being evaluated at the following Sites:

i) BFI/CECOS Landfill;

ii) Du Pont Necco Park Landfill;

iii) Du Pont Niagara Plant;

iv) Frontier Chemical;

v) OxyChem Buffalo Avenue Plant;

3034867-1

vi) OxyChem Durez Niagara Division;

vii) OxyChem Hyde Park Landfill;

viii) OxyChem S-Area Landfill;

ix) Olin Buffalo Avenue Plant; and

x) Olin Industrial Welding.

7.1 BFI/CECOS LANDFILL

A groundwater recovery and treatment system has been in

operation at the BFI/CECOS site since 1990. The program was implemented

as an Interim Corrective Measure to remediate a release from a wastewater

storage lagoon located in the central portion of the site. The system utilizes

20 wells for recovery. Ten are pumped during the winter months (November

to March). Of these, four pump from the overburden (rates average

approximately 0.5 gpm per well), five pump from the top-of-rock zone (rates

average approximately 1.3 gpm per well), and one pumps from the upper

Lockport bedrock (average rate of 0.3 gpm). All twenty wells are pumped

during the summer months (April to October). Of these, 11 pump from the

overburden (rates average approximately 1.2 gpm per well), eight pump from

the top-of-rock zone (rates average approximately 1.2 gpm per well), and one

pumps from the upper Lockport bedrock (average rate of 0.4 gpm). Recovered

groundwater is treated on-site.

3034877-2

7.2 DU PONT NECCO PARK LANDFILL

A groundwater remediation program is in place at the Du Pont

Necco Park Landfill. The program consists of bedrock groundwater pumping

from recovery wells located downgradient of a three-sided vertical grout

curtain barrier wall. In 1988-1989, a vertical grout curtain barrier wall was

constructed within the upper and middle Lockport zones. The purpose of the

grout curtain is to divert upgradient groundwater around the area and

increase the hydraulic impact of the recovery wells on the downgradient

groundwater flow regime. Two upper Lockport zone groundwater recovery

wells have operated continuously since mid-1982. A third recovery well,

designed to pump from the middle Lockport zone, was completed in 1991 and

began operation in early in 1992. Plan 3 shows the location of the recovery

wells and grout curtain.

Groundwater hydraulic head measurements indicate that the

system is performing as designed. Figure 7.1 shows the upper bedrock

potentiometric surface during the recovery well operation. The capture zone

extends throughout the site, and approximately 500-1,000 feet off-site. This is

expected to induce recovery of chemicals in groundwater that has previously

migrated off-site.

A NAPL recovery program has been in place since 1989. NAPL

is removed monthly from wells where it accumulates. In 1991, two pilot

NAPL recovery wells were installed to further investigate NAPL recovery

techniques.

7.3 303488

7.3 DU PONT NIAGARA PLANT

A groundwater remediation program is ongoing at the Du Pont

Niagara Plant. There are two components to the program:

1) Overburden/top-of-bedrock groundwater recovery; and

2) Bedrock groundwater recovery.

The overburden/top-of-bedrock groundwater recovery system

consists of 22 recovery wells, 17 of which penetrate three to five feet into

bedrock. Five of the wells pump only the overburden. The system was

designed to control off-site chemical migration in the overburden and

weathered top-of-bedrock zones and to reduce the source of chemicals which

could migrate vertically to deeper zones. The locations of the recovery wells

are shown on Plan 3.

The bedrock groundwater recovery program utilizes the two

Olin Buffalo Avenue Plant groundwater production wells. One well is

pumped at a time and the pumping rate is approximately 600 gpm. The wells

maintain a cone-of-depression in the upper and middle Lockport zones

extending throughout most of the western portion of the Du Pont Niagara

Plant. The eastern extent of the cone-of-depression is in the vicinity of Gill

Creek.

303-1897-4

7.4 FRONTIER CHEMICALS

Frontier Chemicals is in the process of initiating an interim

corrective measure (ICM). The ICM consists of installing and operating one

groundwater extraction well. The extraction well will be located on the south

boundary of the Plant and will pump water from the upper Lockport bedrock.

The intent of the extraction well is to create a 300-foot cone of depression

beneath the southern portion of the Plant.

The NYSDEC has indicated that the extraction system is

scheduled to come on-line in 1992.

7.5 OXYCHEM BUFFALO AVENUE PLANT

A groundwater remediation program is in the feasibility study

phase for the OxyChem Buffalo Avenue Plant. There are three components

to the program:

1) Overburden groundwater recovery;

2) Bedrock A-Well NAPL recovery; and

3) Bedrock groundwater recovery.

The overburden system is expected to consist of several draintile collection

systems installed at various locations throughout the Plant.

3034907-5

Bedrock A-Well NAPL recovery will involve pumping NAPL

from three existing wells installed in the lower Lockport bedrock. NAPL will

be recovered from these wells on a monthly basis. Operation of the NAPL

recovery system is planned to begin in 1992.

The bedrock groundwater system will consist of several

extraction wells installed to pump groundwater from the upper and middle

segments of the Lockport bedrock and from the upper portion of the lower

Lockport bedrock. Completion of the bedrock system will occur in phases.

The first phase will be a pilot system which will be developed into a final

system. Phase I is planned to begin operation in 1996 or 1997. The second

phase will be initiated following a performance evaluation of the Phase I»

system.

7.6 OXYCHEM DUREZ NIAGARA PLANT

A groundwater remediation program is in place at the OxyChem

Durez Niagara Plant. The program consists of three purge wells installed into

the upper Lockport bedrock in the southeast corner of the plant. One well

pumps water from the upper 15 feet of bedrock, the second from the upper

30 feet and the third from the 30 to 45-foot interval of bedrock.

The system has been in operation since February 1989 and the

three wells are pumped at a combined rate of 5 to 15 gpm. Semi-annual

7-6 303491

monitoring of the system has shown that the system has created a

cone-of-depression extending beneath most of the plant and that significant

reductions in site chemical concentrations in the bedrock groundwater have

occurred.

7.7 OXYCHEM HYDE PARK LANDFILL

OxyChem is currently operating and/or constructing the Hyde

Park Landfill's groundwater remediation program. There are three

components to the program:

1) On-Site Source Control Wells;

2) Overburden Draintile Collection System; and

3) Bedrock Purge Wells/Recirculation Wells.

The overburden is addressed by both source control wells which

have been installed into the landfill and two perforated draintile systems.

The source control wells are in operation. In 1978, a draintile which encircles

all four sides of the landfill was constructed on the landfill perimeter. A new

Overburden Draintile Collection System was constructed in 1989/90 and has

been in operation since the fall of 1990. The new draintile encircles three

sides of the landfill outside and deeper than the 1978 draintile system.

The main bedrock system will consist of purge and recirculation

wells installed in phases. Phase I (currently being tested) consists of two

7-7 303492

clusters of three extraction wells. Each duster has a well in the upper, middle

and lower Lockport bedrock units straddling all observed waterbearing zones

at each depth. The system has been designed to operate at a pumping rate up

to 40 gpm. The Phase I system is scheduled to begin operation in the summer

of 1992. The second phase will consist of two additional clusters of three

extraction wells. These wells will be installed following an evaluation of the

performance of the Phase I system. The Phase II system is scheduled to be

installed in the fall of 1992 and begin operations in the summer of 1993. The

third phase will consist of two clusters of three injection wells to flush Hyde

Park chemicals towards the extraction wells. Construction of the Phase III

system is scheduled to begin after the completion of a Phase II performance

evaluation.

7.8 OXYCHEM S-AREA LANDFILL

OxyChem is constructing the groundwater remediation program

for the S-Area landfill. The S-Area is located in the southeast corner of the

Buffalo Avenue Plant. There are four components to the program:

1) Overburden draintile collection system;

2) Overburden NAPL recovery wells; and

3) Bedrock purge wells for APL and NAPL recovery; and

4) Bedrock NAPL recovery wells.

7.8 303493

The overburden will be addressed by a draintile collection

system which will be installed in the landfill and a network of 23 NAPL

recovery wells within and south of the landfill. The well system is scheduled

to be completed in the summer and fall of 1993. The draintile installation

will commence during the following winter.

The bedrock system will consist .of NAPL recovery and APL

purge wells installed in three phases. Phase I (currently being installed)

consists of 16 wells in the upper 30 feet of the Lockport bedrock. Eight of the

wells will recover NAPL and will operate at a maximum pumping rate of

5 gpm. The remaining eight wells will recover APL and will operate at a

maximum pumping rate of up to 150 gpm. The Phase I system is scheduled

to be completed in the fall of 1992. The second phase will consist of additional

extraction wells based on the results of a performance evaluation of the

Phase I system. Phase II construction is scheduled for 1993. A third phase will

involve additional extraction wells in the middle and lower bedrock units,

based on the results of a supplemental investigation. Phase III is planned to

be installed concurrent with Phase II.

7.9 OLIN BUFFALO AVENUE PLANT

Olin is currently conducting a RCRA Facility Investigation (RFI)

at its Buffalo Avenue Plant. The RFI includes a groundwater investigation

and will assess the need for corrective action. The RFI is expected to be

completed in 1993.

30349*

As noted in Section 7.3, Olin currently operates cooling water

supply wells which also serve as a bedrock groundwater pumping and

treatment system under contract to the adjacent Du Pont Niagara Plant. The

cone-of-depression effected by the pumping well in the upper and middle

Lockport zones extends throughout most of the Olin Plant.

7.10 OLIN INDUSTRIAL WELDING

A remediation program to address the groundwater conditions

at the site is currently in the Feasibility Study phase.

7.11 SUMMARY

Groundwater remediation programs have been initiated at ten

sites within the RGA Study Area. The programs are either ongoing, under

construction or in the latter stages of planning/design. Nine of the ten sites

currently have or will have bedrock groundwater remedial systems in full or

partial operation by 1996. These remedial systems are located in all the areas

of major chemical presence as identified in Section 6.0.

The majority of identified chemical presence areas within the

Study Area are contained in the Upper Lockport bedrock. Migration of the

chemical plumes associated with these areas is expected to be controlled by the

7-10 303495

remedial programs at individual sites. This will minimize further chemical

migration into and through the bedrock groundwater. The comparatively

small mass of chemicals present in the bedrock groundwater beyond the

influence of these remediation programs is expected to eventually reach the

Niagara River primarily via the Falls Street Tunnel or discharge via the

NYPA Power Conduit drain system.

3034967-11

8.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

This report was prepared and completed in accordance with the

Scope of Work document dated October 1990. The objectives of the RGA were

to evaluate groundwater chemistry within the Study Area based on existing

data and to identify gaps in the regional groundwater database. These

objectives were achieved by the compilation and assessment of available

existing data. The following is a summary of the major RGA observations.

A review of NYSDEC records showed that a total of 39 sites

suspected of having chemical presence are located within or immediately

adjacent to the RGA Study Area. Available information for each site was

obtained from the individual site owners, the NYSDEC and the USEPA. A•

total of 18 sites have bedrock groundwater data available. In addition, bedrock

groundwater data were available for thirteen USGS wells installed in the

study area in 1985.

Within the Niagara Falls area, groundwater occurs in two units,

the overburden and bedrock. Overburden groundwater flow, due to the

fine-grained nature of the overburden materials, the flat slope of the land

surface and the presence of underground utility networks, remains localized

and is not a regional network. The uppermost bedrock unit, the Lockport

Group, has been identified as the major aquifer in the Study Area. The

bedrock groups below the Lockport exhibit low transmissivity in comparison

to the Lockport Group bedrock and do not have the potential for significant

regional groundwater migration.

30349?8-1

The primary structures affecting groundwater flow in the

Lockport bedrock are the Niagara River and Gorge, the NYPA Power

Conduits and Forebay, the Falls Street Tunnel and NYPA Reservoir. The

Falls Street Tunnel and NYPA Power Conduits are the main collectors of

Lockport bedrock groundwater within the RGA Study Area. These collectors

have a significant influence on Lockport bedrock groundwater flow and, in

combination with the fractured nature of the Lockport bedrock, create

complex groundwater migration pathways.

Bedrock groundwater sampling and analyses had been

performed at 18 of the 39 Study Area sites. The data were reviewed and

compiled into a database that contained a listing of analytical parameters for

each bedrock monitoring well.

From the list of analytical parameters, chemicals with similar

chemical characteristics or associated with similar types of sources were

combined together to form 15 groups. These groups provide the means to

compare chemical presence from one site to another. The chemical groups

used in the RGA include: Total Chlorinated Volatile Aliphatic Compounds;

Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene; Acetone and 2-Butanone;

Phenol and Methylphenols; Chlorophenols; Chlorobenzenes and

Chlorotoluenes; Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons; Hexachloroethane,

H e x a c h l o r o b u t a d i e n e , H e x a c h l o r o c y c l o p e n t a d i e n e and

Octachlorocyclopentene; Phthalates; Pesticides and PCBs; Benzoic Acid;

N-Nitrosodiphenylamine; Lead; Mercury; and Barium.

3034988-2

The concentrations of chemicals in each of the groups were

plotted as isopleth concentration contours on a map of the Study Area to

assess the chemical distribution within the RGA Study Area.

The assessment of the data presented on the isopleth

concentration plans showed eleven areas of elevated bedrock groundwater

chemical presence within the Study Area. The eleven areas are associated

with the eleven sites presented below:

i) BFI/CECOS Landfill;

ii) Du Pont Necco Park Landfill;

iii) Du Pont Niagara Plant;

iv) Frontier Chemical;

v) OxyChem Buffalo Avenue Plant;

vi) OxyChem Durez Niagara Plant;

vii) OxyChem Hyde Park Landfill;

viii) OxyChem S-Area Landfill;

ix) Olin Buffalo Avenue Plant;

x) Olin Industrial Welding; and

xi) 3163 Buffalo Avenue Site (Solvent Chemical).

These eleven sites have had remedial investigations completed

and at eight of the eleven sites, remediation is in progress. There are an

additional seven sites that have bedrock groundwater quality data. These

sites either have lower chemical presence than the eleven sites or remedial

8-3 303499

investigations that are incomplete. The remaining sites have not conducted

bedrock remedial investigations and therefore bedrock groundwater chemical

presence at these sites could not be evaluated.

The plotted isoconcentration contour maps show that chemical

concentrations in groundwater are highest at or in the immediate vicinity of

the probable source areas. Concentrations are generally lower by 90 percent or

more within approximately 1000 feet of source areas. Where migration has

apparently occurred, the directions of transport have generally been

consistent with the known patterns of groundwater flow. Based on these

findings, additional data are not required for investigation of regional

transport.

Groundwater remediation programs have been initiated at eight

of the eleven sites exhibiting elevated chemical presence:

i) BFI/CECOS Landfill;

ii) Du Pont Necco Park Landfill;

iii) Du Pont Niagara Plant;

iv) Frontier Chemical;

v) OxyChem Buffalo Avenue Plant;

vi) OxyChem Durez Niagara Plant;

vii) OxyChem Hyde Park Landfill;

viii) OxyChem S-Area Landfill;

303500

These programs are either in operation, under construction or in

the latter stages of planning/design. Of the eight sites, all have or will have

Lockport bedrock groundwater remedial systems. The remaining three sites

are still in the process of being investigated to determine remedial

requirements.

The majority of the chemicals within the plumes associated with

the sites will be controlled by the on-site remedial programs at each site,

respectively. This will prevent further chemical migration into and through•

the regional groundwater formation in the Lockport. The remaining

chemical presence in the bedrock groundwater beyond the influence of these

remediation programs would eventually reach the Niagara River. The

NYPA Power Conduits and the FST are the main collectors of Lockport

groundwater and provide a pathway for chemicals in the groundwater to

reach the Niagara River. Most of the groundwater entering the FST is treated

at the NFWWTP prior to discharge to the Niagara River. Collection and

treatment of the groundwater entering the FST in combination with the

on-site remedial programs will substantially reduce the amount of chemicals

with potential to enter the Niagara River.

General Summary

Within the RGA Study Area, chemical presence has both a

localized and a regional component. The majority of chemical presence

within the Study area is a localized presence. Localized chemical presence is

generally attributable to a specific site and as such is being or will be

s-s 303501

remediated on an individual basis. The identified sites with elevated

chemical presence have currently initiated or will soon initiate groundwater

remediation programs and therefore the major areas of localized chemical

presence are being addressed.

The relatively smaller amount of regional chemical presence can

be attributed to off-site chemical migration from the localized areas. Within

the RGA Study Area, groundwater flow and the associated chemical

migration in the Lockport bedrock is intercepted by the FST and NYPA Power

Conduits, except for areas where groundwater remediation systems are in

operation. The FST captures groundwater from the upper Lockport bedrock

while the NYPA Power Conduits captures groundwater from the upper,

middle and lower Lockport bedrock. Some chemicals in the upper Lockport

bedrock are captured by the FST. Approximately 70% of the total dry weather

flow in the FST (which is primarily groundwater) is diverted to the

NFWWTP and treated. According to City personnel, all dry weather FST flow

will be diverted to the NFWWTP in 1993. Currently, all the dry weather FST

flow east of the NYPA Power Conduits is diverted to the NFWWTP and

treated. Therefore, the FST is operating as an effective upper Lockport

groundwater collector. The amount of groundwater and associated chemical

presence that is intercepted by the NYPA Power Conduits is unknown.

Groundwater intercepted by the Power Conduits is discharged to the Niagara

River via the Forebay Canal.

303502

REFERENCES

Fisher, D., W., and others, Geologic Map of New York State, Niagara Sheet,New York State Museum and Science Service, Map and Chart SeriesNumber 15, Albany, New York, 1970.

Fisher, D. W., Correlation of the Hadrynian, Cambrian and Ordovician Rocksin New York State, New York State Museum and Science Service, Mapand Chart Series Number 25, Albany, New York, 1977.

Gross, M. R., Engelder, T., "A Case for Neotectonic Joints Along the NiagaraEscarpment", Tectonics, Vol. 10, No. 3, Pages 631-641, June, 1991.

International Joint Commission, "Preservation and Enhancement of theAmerican Falls at Niagara, Apperidix C, Geology and Rock Mechanics",Niagara Falls, New York, American Falls International Board, 79 p.,1974.

Johnston, R.H., "Groundwater in Niagara Falls Area, New York withEmphasis on the Water-bearing Characteristics of the Bedrock", NewYork State Conservation Department Bulletin GW-53, 93 p., 1964.

Kappel, W.M., "Niagara Falls Area Anthropogenic Features - Sewers,Conduits and Other Bedrock Intrusions", Written Communication,November 1991.

Kilgour, W.J., Middle Silurian Clinton Relationships of Western New Yorkand Ontario, New York State Geological Association Guidebook, 38thAnnual Meeting, Buffalo, New York, 1966.

Koszalka, E.J., Paschal, J.E., Miller, T.S., and Duran, P.B., "PreliminaryEvaluation of Chemical Migration to Ground Water and the NiagaraRiver from Selected Waste-Disposal Sites", U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, EPA-905/4-85-001, March 1985.

Liberty, B.A., Paleozoic Geology of the Bruce Peninsula Area, Ontario, Canada,Geological Survey Memoirs, Number 360, 1971.

Liberty, B.A., "Structural Geology". In Colossal Cataract; The Geologic Historyof Niagara Falls University of New York Press, Albany, New York,1981.

303503

Miller, T.S. and Kappel, W.M., "Effect of Niagara Power Plant Project onGroundwater Flow in the Upper Part of the Lockport Dolomite,Niagara Falls Area, New York", U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations, Report 86-4130, 31 p., 1987.

Muller, E.H., Quaternary Geology of New York, Niagara Street, New YorkState Museum and Science Service, Map and Chart Series Number 28,Albany, New York, 1977.

Novakowski, K.S. and Lapcevic P.A., "Regional Hydrogeology of the Silurianand Ordovician Sedimentary Rock Underlying Niagara Falls, Ontario,Canada", Journal of Hydrology, 1989.

O'Brian and Gere Engineers, Gradient Corporation, GeoTrans Inc., "Phase IFalls Street Tunnel Study", City of Niagara Falls, New York,October 1987.

Rickard, L.V., Correlation Chart of the Devonian Rock in New York State,New York State Geological Survey, Map and Chart Series Number 4,1964.

Rickard, L.V., Correlation Chart of the Silurian and Devonian Rock in NewYork State, New York State Geological Survey, Map and Chart SeriesNumber 24, Albany, New York, 1975.

Roll, R.R., City of Niagara Falls Wastewater Treatment Plant, PersonalCommunication, February 1992.

Sandford, B.V., Thompson, F.J., and McFall, G.H., "Plate Tectonics - a possiblecontrolling mechanism in the development of hydrocarbon traps insouthwest Ontario", Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology,Volume 33, No. 1, 1985.

Tepper, D. H., Goodman, W. M., Gross, M. R., Kappel, W. M., and Yager, R.M.,"Stratigraphy, Structural Geology, and Hydrogeology of the LockportGroup: Niagara Falls Area, New York", in Lash, G. G., ed., New YorkState Geological Association 62nd annual meeting September 1990Field trip guidebook: Western New York and Ontario: New York,Fredonia State University College, p.Sun. B1-B25, 1990.

Yager, R.M. and Kappel, W.M. "Characterization of Fractures in the LockportDolomite, Niagara County, New York", In Proc. Third GroundwaterTechnology Conference, September 1987, City University of New York,New York, 1987.

R-2 303504

Zenger, D.H., "Stratigraphy of the Lockport Formation (Middle Silurian) inNew York State", New York State Museum and Science Service,Bulletin Number 404, 1965.

303505R-3

••9] MCEMT AUUVUU -^ ' M.T,Mm,aiuvciEgjSggj ueunniNe __....""" sitT.s»w.«» curt;XvXj auciw. DBwrra -

GmiMD MOMINtS, CNO MORAMCS,KC-CONTJKT DCMSm. OUTWASH U.T,CUT, UNO. MMEL, OUCI»L TILL

^^^ KOMCX

AOAPTEO FMM HULUM (WTT)

figure 3.1SURFICIAL GEOLOGY

Niagara Falls Regional Groundwatw Assessment

COOCOenoO)

4e390)-IMIt.1B/»2-KCV.O

;»rn ONGNDACA' UHESTONE

SAUNA OMWPfigure 3.2

BEDROCK GEOLOGYNiagara falls Regional Groundwater Assessment

^3 OUBWS1WE LAKE • ERIE

COow01CRA/WCC46310 )-MAR.18/»2-f*CV.O

101

0 *> r^ |! i s b

IM» r-

^c.

Sn

5:r

£<S

S'^

?S-'o.^

Ii

s *«

« «-*

rSi

«o *«J VJI

1 ]

^•

-1 -

4

'=•

2:2:

n o

o '

• T

J •

888

J

SOURCES:

-n -n

w

wy y

1*

*o «

o•«J

*J

-^ o

™*

**

i* "jo

* --

. -S

x « a

T>

-oo

a T

1 » •%

a^

S

S°-

-S

3""1

S

Szi

J

0

1:1

§•3?

i -

_ ^

c

•?,,

? 3

i« 5

7 3 08 w

-*• a

3*

*—

W

?3

8 z

" i7 IO a T a ? a a

^ 8

a««

m

5>

m4

>1^

-Q

N

5.

m o§ i

s§

3)

* 3

Q

0-»

•_ 3

J^

->

^ >

-o

IkO

T I

K) >

o(A 3

) °

JJ ^

W

"IA

-r, rn

55

i o

3 >

H

3r

—(-

O•

.M

"Z.

s ? a -4- < 5" c e» LA OJ

OR

DO

VIC

IAN

j

SILU

RIA

N

1 -O C A A J£ i § 1 Kl

O O sf

3*

M

.-i f

l» s=

?*^

i"*

8 *

« i-

?3

23 i *

rs =

~ • »

^ 2

=-llty, random partings

tddlsh brown, locally), extensively fractu n.i a

s*•5

-^?

» :•

« =• =

tt

3_

? 3 *

r* ^ J H>

! % m o

] z >

Whirlpool \j» i M OB I/I a 3 Ok $ g a •+

-»*

— 3

3 a £? h(

X•o

•S

o±3 nw Ck i» —

a— i

n c

ka • 2S IS -? I ^

•o 2 T Cl a 3 Z 1 J> O>

i!« — 3

"-*

a5i"

§».

1 1 ami net a Ok -* M W a w a 3idy calcareous shale. •t -+• 3" 3 a •o T a 3 A GX M a 3 o. M 0 3 a 3 ? V s. M

0 IT 3- x * M 1 \M _\M

Sandstone' tShat* s? i; 3 a 5

3 •»a W "

13 a Q

k

i? -f a'!

itltlc) sandstone withsandstone Interbeds

«

I h i r-

P

'' S

. 1 z

Thorold |

if £ (0 a

1 < (

Kl t O Sandstone .* 3 a -* o < 3 a IO T a 3 a Ok

3- a -> Ok i N T n 3"

*O 3"

-+•

ID n a -< w o a o a 3 A 3 -»•

m trt 3- a a T

» a -»• «< *4> O IA IA •T (A O -+• , dark greenish gray, 3 1 to T 9 -< I M O 3 a

Reynates

DxC

Zo

— /

a"* Q

J n

3 X

T

— •

<• o)

•*

i n

\ •*

<•*

</

O(

0 i Ul Limestone -> 3

-

3 Or a Ck_ a. a Ok

* o o a -i VI a -+• o i Ok •S a 3 a Ok o T *< M -+•

a 3 a Q.

0 T 7C ID -l a •< ^ o* o 0 VI -»• n o i (O B r> 8 C wt

O 1 W Limestone medium U T a 3 a Ok

0 T •< W -f a 3* a V c -*• O ID T a -< | tr 1 absent

3j o X a X o Doloston* c 1 ^ a £ 3" a -+• a Ok •* 3 a • a s * o* c •+ 0 ID T a •< -+ ftographlc • 8 n w 3" a a* T» O n •+• 3 to w

Irondequolta o* i ^ Limestone 0.

V a | Ok

« I -t o I a. •3 5" it a. f •*> O I ex 1 5 q -< a a £ 3 « g (A ™ a -i

Rochester | U»

Ul 1 OX o f! thin- be Ok s- Ok

Ok a n yr ID T a << calcareous shale, nu 3 a I w ID 1 a •< i" a M -+ 0 3 -f A -» W a B*

j?

i /^

: S

> 3) H

Gasport

Ul 1 _• w Dolostone 3 a ID T a 3* a Ok

* o n * a ~ ne, argillaceous, med P» s- ye ID 1 a -< .

* w 3* a •T TO a -» -* 3 IO w

W i A Ul Llmeston* t 1

Doloston* 1 •* 3 • ? J a •? « S * w•wlcrystel ll.ne. crlno Ok a f -+. O i Ob ID 1 a •< < e to 5

o o a •+• w a 3 a » 1 vn N Dolostone S-3 u r^ O

k w -

*

?s i • a ?3* •

cxo.

a

crystalline, light toit upper contact

Ok a T 3T •S a -<

Eramosa •u i x Dolostone < 3 a m T a | (1 T *< W -+ a J ID T ? O* i 'w 3* S a -< 8 O n 3- a i -* 1 c A M " M IT 0 a •w o

•-i 3 IO V

I

Oak Orchard/Guelph KJ o i * o Dolostone s:

i-*

• O

k.c

•

3*

O

J*

gS

- h ji a o. n • 2*ted. grained, brownish

-. stromatolltlc

-f o a. a -i 3T ID n 5 *

I -t) o> *» Z f

Vernon M §•

(/> 3"

0 a" 3 M M <" a T3 | •< n -f •n l ™ i" Qk

V ID 9 R n o. o I -»• a 3" a_ •+ a

Syracuse o o • Shale & 1Dolostone 1 «o T a c s M ? i M 8 n fr [ -f ^a a 3 3

*-< ^ -f a 3- a -*• a

0 a 3 C w 0* o 1 o 0 * l/» 3*

V a" «O ~\ a c 3 o* M W -*. 3 C W 8 9 i -f _a a 3 3*

•< OkI -f 9 Slltstoni •

(9 •* a* A m * Dolostone 1 massive •+ o 1 3 a -* a Ok ^^ 3 | 3 a Ok

0.

JT -».

O IO 3*

H-

•o T a -< 0 w w E a n §

SYSTEM a 3) i FORMATION X CD S •

"sH

? X

••* n

i u> DOMINANTLITHOLOOY DESCRIPTI o

80SC

OC

78* 58' 30'

FALLS STREETTUNNEL

4000 8000ft

110 • SCALE: T - 8000*

LEGEND/ ZONE OF HIGH TRANSMISSMTY

// IDENTIFIED BY JOHNSON (1964) -

, DASHED WHERE EXTRAPOLATED IN/ THIS STUDY

100 PRODUCTION WELL - NUMBER IS• WELL YIELD. IN GALLONS PER

MINUTE

NIAGARA EXCARPMENT

NIAGARA GORGE

___ CONTACT BETWEEN GEOLOGICFORMATION OR GROUP

S» SILURIAN SAUNA GROUPSI SILURIAN LOCKPORT GROUPSmc SILURIAN MEDINA AND CLINTON GROUPSOq ORDOVldAN QUEENSTON FORMATION

SOURCE: R.M. YAGER AND W.M. KAPPEL, "DETECTIONAND CHARACTERIZATION OF FRACTURES ANDTHEIR RELATION TO GROUNDWATER MOVEMENT IN THELOCKPORT DOLOMITE. NIAGARA COUNTY. NEW YORK"

figure 3.4LOCKPORT DOLOMITE PRODUCTION

WELLS YIELDING MORE THAN 50 G.P.M.Niagara Falls Regional Groundwater Assessment

- CRA/WCC4639(1 )-M AR.18/92-REV.O

303510

550 — — POTBJTIOMETRIC CONTOUR-- shows measuredwater level m wells m ujipcr part of LockoortDolomite. March 26-27. 1985. Contour interval

\ 10 feet. Datum in NGVD of 1929. Arrows snow. direction of ground-uatcr flow

.* ( o53"58 WSX AND V.ELL NUMBER--m which water-levelVc measured duruuj March 26-27. 1985

\\ • . • • GHOUND-WATER DIVIDE

CONDUITINTAKES

SOURCE: MODIFIED FROM PLATE 1A.MILLER AND KAPPEL, 1987

I— CRA/WCC

figure 3.5POTENT1OMETRIC SURFACE CONTOURS

OF GROUNDWATER IN THE UPPER LOCKPORTDOLOMITE MEASURED ON MARCH 24-25, 1985

Niagara Falls Regional Groundwater Assessment

46390)-MAR.18/92--REV.O

303511

Explanation

_T___Potentiometric Contour - ibow*niMMtdwitertevclmuppeipmofLocfcponDolomitt.Oa30-Nov2.1989. Contourinterval is 10 feet (solid line), mdSfoot(dotAtasb). Datum in NOVD of 1929. Arrowssnow direction of ground-wiier flow.

• Well - in which water-level was measuredduring October 30-November 3,1989.

57 580590

SOURCE: USGS LETTER. W. KAPPELfigure 3.6

POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE CONTOURSOF GROUNDWATER IN THE UPPER LOCKPORT

DOLOMITE MEASURED ON OCT. 30-NOV. 3, 1989Niagara Falls Regional Groundwater Assessment

— CRA/WCC4639(1 )-M AR.18/92-REV.O

303512

Explanation

___ T __ _ PotaniomeuicCotUour-«faowimeasured waw t«v«l in upp*r put of Lockport Dotormtt.March 27-29. 1990. Contour inufval i* 10 tot (*oMUna), mapi 555 foot contour (dotfdasn). Datum inNGVOof1929. AnowctnowdraOionofgreund-wUBrflow.

• Wal- in which waMr-tovd wu measured duringMuch 27-29. 1990.

690

SOURCE: USGS LETTER. W. KAPPEL

«—CRA/WCC

figure 3.7POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE CONTOURS

OF GROUNDWATER IN THE UPPER LOCKPORTDOLOMITE MEASURED ON MARCH 27-29. 1990

Niagara Falls Regional Groundwater Assessment

4639(1 )-MAR.18/92-REV.O

303513

Explanation

___ T____ Potentiofnetric Contour - ffaowtnwasurad wsttr tov«l in uppw put of Lockport Momta,Jun« 26-27.1080. Contour intwval to 10 teM (soWbw).MMptS55 loot contour (dotfdatft). OaluminNGVOof1929. Arrows show dnction of greund-wiiirflow.

Wel • in which «MMr-toM< «MM nwawrad duringJUIM 26-27.1990.

SOURCE: USGS LETTER. W. KAPPEL figure 3.8POTENT10METRIC SURFACE CONTOURS

OF GROUNDWATER IN THE UPPER LOCKPORTDOLOMITE MEASURED ON JUNE 26-27, 1990

Niagara Falls Regional Groundwater Assessment— CRA/WCC

4639(1)-MAR.18/92-REV.O

\ NIAGARA FALLS/NEW YORK\

NYPA WATERINTAKES

HORSESHOE FALLS\

INTERNATIONALCONTROL STRUCTURE

ONTARIO HYDROWATER INTAKES

figure 4.1FACTORS AFFECTING NIAGARA RIVER WATER LEVELS

Niagara Falls Regional Groundwater AssessmentCRA/WCC4639(1 )-MAR.18/92-REV.O

RO

SS S

ECTI

ON

AVEL

CR

OS

S S

ECTI

ON

2

BUA

VEL° C

RO

SS

SE

CTI

ON

1

ALT

ITU

DE

IN

F

EE

T A

BO

VE

SE

A L

EV

EL

600

575

Ill

ifcUl

52S

gsoo

475

4SO

425 L-

6 TOPSOIL.3 OVERBURDEN UNCLASSIFIED FILL

VERTICAL WEEP HOLESAT Id CENTRES ALONG ROCK FACE _——§DRAIN TO MAIN COLLECTOR DRAINS »

SUP JOINT

MAIN COLLECTORDRAINS CONDUIT CROSS SECTION

N.T.S.

NOTE.-CONDUIT IS TWINNED-STRUCTURE DEWATERING PROTECTION CONSISTS OF

VERTICAL WEEP HOLES ALONG LENGTH OF CONDUIT AT K> CENTERS.

ILLUSTRATION SOURCE'. COPIED FROM N.Y.P.A. DRAWINGS.

CRA/WCC

4.3CROSS-SECTION 1

N.Y.P.A. CONDUITS AT BUFFALO AVENUENiagara Falls Regional Groundwater Assessment

COoCOenO)4639(1)-MAR.18/92-REV.O

600

575

JJJSSO

oCO

fcin

525

500

475

450

425ROCHESTER FORMATION

CONDUIT CROSS SECTIONN.T.S.

NOTE:-CONDUIT is TWINNED-STRUCTURE OEWATERtNO PROTECTION CONSISTS OF

VERTICAL WEEP HOLES ALONG LENGTH OF CONDUITILLUSTRATION SOURCE: COPIED FROM N.Y.P.A. DRAWINGS.

CRA/WCC

figure 4.4CROSS-SECTION 2

N.Y.P.A. CONDUITS AT FALLS STREET TUNNNELNiagara Falls Regional Groundwater Assessment

4639(1)-MAR.18/92-REV.O

600

575

550UJ

ItUl

525

O 500

475

450

425 L-

WELL 84-9WELL OW-152

VERTICAL WEEP HOLESAT Id CENTRES ALONO ROCK FACEDRAIN TO MAIN COLLECTOR DRAINS

LOCKPORT DOLOMITE

SUP JOWT

MAIN COLLECTORDRAINS CONDUIT CROSS SECTION

N.T.S.

NOTE:-CONDUIT is TWINNED-STRUCTURE DEWATERIN6 PROTECTION CONSISTS OF

VERTICAL WEEP HOLES ALONG LENGTH OF CONDUIT AT K>' CENTERS

ILLUSTRATION SOURCE! COPIED FROM N.Y.P.A. DRAWINGS.

CRA/WCC

figure 4.5CROSS-SECTION 3

N.Y.P.A. CONDUITS AT PORTER AVE.Niagara Falls Regional Groundwater Assessment

COoCO

GO4639(1 )-M AR.18/92-REV.O

48"00xyChem SEWEROUTFALL 001

48 00xyChem SEWEROUTFALL 005

84 * UNION CARBIDECORPORATION OUTFALL10"* SEWER—H

INTAKE N»2 INTAKE N« I

PROFILETOP OF WALL - 570.5WtST RIVER WALL

INTAKE Nft I (700)INTAKE N«2 (700 )

OUTFALLSTRUCTURE I -?-

TOP OF WALL ELEV. 570.SO

NORMAL WATER SURFACE ELEV. 563.00"

ALUM. RAILINGFINISH GRADE ELEV. 570.0'

TYPICAL SECTIONEXISTINOJBRAOE

ROCK SURFACE

CRA/WCC

XELEV. VARIES FROM/ 512.84' TO 488.0

figure 4.6PLAN, PROFILE S TYPICAL SECTION

N.Y.P.A. INTAKE STRUCTURESNiagara Falls Regional Groundwater Assessment

4639(1)-MAR.18/92-REV. 1

CO

IQQ-.I SLOPE ^

E X C A V A T E DTO 543.0

'"e

0' 100' 200'

CRA/WCC

figure 4.7RIVER BED CHANNELIZATION AND

TRAINING DYKENiagara Falls Regional Groundwater Assessment

COoCO0110

4639(1 )-MAR.18/92-REV.O

800ft

CRA/WCC

figure 7.1C ZONE POTENT10METRIC SURFACE

DURING EXTRACTION WELL OPERAT10N-DUPONT NECCO PARK

Niagara Falls Regional Groundwater Assessment4639(1 )-MAY20/92-REV.O

TABLE 2.1

IDENTIFIED SITESNIAGARA FALLS REGIONAL GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT

Site Name

Adams Generating PlantApollo Steel CorporationBasic CarbonBFI/CECOS International IncorporatedCarbon/Graphite Group IncorporatedCarborundum Building 82Carborundum Globar PlantCascades - Niagara Falls IncorporatedChisholm RyderCity of Niagara Falls Buffalo Avenue SiteDibacco Site #2Du Pont Necco Park LandfillDu Pont Niagara PlantForest Glenn SubdivisionFrontier Chemical Waste ProcessFrontier FoundriesGoodyear Tire and Rubber CompanyGreat Lakes CarbonHydraulic CanalNational Fuel Gas DistributionNew Road Landfill SiteNiagara Co-Generation SiteOccidental Chemical Corporation - Buffalo Avenue PlantOccidental Chemical Corporation - Durez Niagara PlantOccidental Chemical Corporation - Hyde Park LandfillOlin - Buffalo Avenue PlantOlin - Industrial Welding SitePyron Metal CorporationRobert Moses ParkwaySilbergeld Junkyard SiteSKW Alloys and Airco Carbon LandfillsSolvent Chemical (3163 Buffalo Avenue Site)TAM CeramicsTown of Niagara LandfillUnion Carbide - Carbon Products Division Republic PlantUnion Carbide - Linde DivisionWhirlpool Site - City of Niagara FallsWitmer Road Site64th Street South Site

Site Identification

Former Disposal or Fill AreaOperating Industrial FacilityFormer Disposal or Fill AreaOperating LandfillOperative Industrial FacilityFormer Industrial FacilityOperating Industrial FacilityFormer Industrial FacilityClosed LandfillFormer Disposal or Fill AreaFormer Disposal or Fill AreaClosed LandfillOperating Industrial FacilityFormer Disposal or Fill AreaOperating Industrial FacilityOperating Industrial FacilityOperating Industrial FacilityOperating Industrial FacilityFormer Disposal or Fill AreaOperating Industrial FacilityClosed LandfillFormer Disposal or Fill AreaOperating Industrial FacilityOperating Industrial FacilityCosed LandfillOperational Industrial FacilityFormer Disposal or Fill AreaOperational Industrial FacilityFormer Disposal or Fill AreaFormer Disposal or Fill AreaCosed LandfillFormer Industrial FacilityOperating Industrial FacilityClosed LandfillOperational Industrial FacilityOperational Industrial FacilityFormer Disposal or Fill AreaFormer Disposal or Rll AreaFormer Disposal or Fill Area

30352!

TABLE 2.2

SITES WITH BEDROCK GROUNDWATER DATANIAGARA FALLS REGIONAL GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT

BFI/CECOS InternationalChisholm RyderCity of Niagara Falls Buffalo Avenue SiteDu Pont Necco Park LandfillDu Pont Niagara PlantFrontier Chemical Waste ProcessHydraulic CanalNew Road Landfill SiteNiagara Co-Generation SiteOccidental Chemical Corporation - Buffalo Avenue PlantOccidental Chemical Corporation - Durez Niagara PlantOccidental Chemical Corporation - Hyde Park LandfillOlin - Buffalo Avenue PlantOlin - Industrial Welding SiteSolvent Chemical (3163 Buffalo Avenue Site)Union Carbide - Carbon Products Division Republic Plant64th Street South Site

303523

TABLE 3.1

CLIMATE DATA FORBUFFALO, NEW YORK

(1936-1988)

Month

JanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecember

MeanDaily MaxTemp (°F)

31 .431.439.651.663.272.478.176.870.559.146.235.3

MeanDaily MinTemp (°F)

18.517.625.235.346.257.062.661.054.544.233.823.7

MeanMonthlyTemp (°F)

25.024.532.443.454.864.770.468.962.651.740.029.5

MeanMonthly

Precipitation(inches)

3.072.702.752.692.882.812.913.172.993.053.273.21

Annual 54.61 40.01 47.31 35.502

Notes:1 Mean Annual2 Total Annual

903524

TABLE 4.1

FACTORS AFFECTING GROUNDWATER FLOWNIAGARA FALLS REGIONAL GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT

Niagara River and GorgeNYPA Conduits and Forebay

Falls Street TunnelNYPA Reservoir

Underground Tunnels and SewersGroundwater Production and Extraction Wells

Bedrock GroutingNYPA Intake Wall

Hydraulic CanalLandails

Building and Structure Foundations

Note:

Each item is placed in descending order, based on the degree to which each itemaffects regional groundwater flow (i.e. the Niagara River and Gorge affect regionalground water flow the most).

303S2S

TABLE 4^

CHIPPAWA-GRASS ISLAND POOLWATER ELEVATION RESTRICTIONS

Minimum Pool Elevation

Maximum Pool Elevation

Maximum Pool Elevation* Special Conditions

Minimum Pool Elevations•* Special Conditions

InternationalGreat Lakes

Datum

5595

5625

563.0

559.0

United StatesGeodetic Survey

Datum

557.7

560.7

561.2

557.2

Notes:

* Water levels in the range of 5625 to 563.0 (IGLD) are allowable only after four consecutivehours of flow off Lake Erie in excess of 270,000 cfs. Water must be restored to a level below562.5 within twelve hours.

** Water levels in the range of 559.0 to 5595 (IGLD) are allowable only after four consecutivehours of flow off Lake Erie less than 150,000 cfs.

The maximum allowable daily change in the river stage is 15 feet as measured on the hour.

303526

TABLE 4.3

GROUNDWATER PRODUCTION/EXTRACTION WELL SUMMARYNIAGARA FALLS REGIONAL GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT

Location Well Type Number of Wells Bedrock Monitored

Olin Chemicals Production Lockport

Du Pont Chemicals

Niagara Plant

- Necco Park Landfill

Extraction

Extraction

175

LockportOverburden

Lockport

Occidental Chemical Corporation

Durez Niagara Plant

- Hyde Park Landfill *

- S-Area Landfill •

BFI/CECOS Landfill"

Extraction

Extraction

Extraction

Extraction

3

6

16

812

Lockport

Lockport

Lockport

LockportOverburden

Note:

These wells are currently being installed or tested.Only ten of these wells are pumped during winter months.

303527

TABLE 5.1

STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS ANALYZEDNIAGARA FALLS REGIONAL GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT

Page 1 of 2

COoCJ

Compound

TrichloroetheneChlorobenzeneTetrachloroetheneBenzeneChloroformtrans-l,2-DichloroetheneMethylene ChlorideTolueneChlorotoluenes, totalVinyl Chloride1,1-DichloroetheneAcetone1,1,2-Trichloroethane1,1,2,2-TetrachloroethaneXylene, totalCarbon Tetrachloride1,2-DichloroethaneEthylbenzene2-Butanone1,1,1 -Trichloroethane1,1 -Dichloroethane1,2-Dichloroethene, total4-Methyl-2-PentanoneBromodichloromethaneCarbon DisulfideChloromethane

NumberAnalyses

442783432485341277351478268351351264351354269360351404263351404120212351151351

NumberDetected

27421120517417116115513298979187676259575644424136272116162

Mean ofDetected

(ug/L)

Median ofDetected

(ug/L)

25,5922,6767,7796,54838,9655,99019,9584067,1752,3568581,8435,50514,6171,0258,4378791951,2397,6401,0693,481877540738470

64311947480610850500406486802601101,3401,6151381,6003202612533030582068039570470

Range ofDetected

(ug/L)

1 to 800,0001 to 43,0001 to 130,0001 to 310,0000.3 to 4.2E61.3 to 1.2E51 to 1.8E60.5 to 5,20010 to 95,0005 to 49,0001 to 14,0001 to 28,0005.6 to 43,0003 to 120,0002 to 12,0006.8 to 72,0002 to 6,2001.16 to 1,7872.1 to 7,3005 to 150,0002 to 8,4001 to 17,0001.3 to 4,10011 to 1,6001 to 6,450210 to 730

oCJen

TABLE 5.1

STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS ANALYZEDNIAGARA FALLS REGIONAL GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT

Page 2 of 2

Compound

Trichlorofluoromethanecis-1,2-DichloroetheneVinyl AcetateChloroethaneBromomethane1,2-Dichloropropanecis-l,3-DichloropropeneDibromochloromethanetrans-l,3-DichloropropeneBromoform2-HexanoneStyreneAcroleinAcrylonitrile2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether1,3-Dichloropropene, totalBis(Chloromethyl)EtherDichlorodifluoromethane

NumberAnalyses

168161513513363512343362833361691491991992781224848

NumberDetected

221100000000000000

Mean ofDetected

(ug/L)

9.051488865

Median ofDetected

(ug/L)

9.0514

Range ofDetected

(ug/L)

4 to 13.927 to 1,000

65

CO

TABLE 5.2

STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF SEMIVOLATILE COMPOUNDS ANALYZEDNIAGARA FALLS REGIONAL GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT

Page 1 of 5

CJOCJC/lc*

Number NumberCompound Analyses Detected

Phenol 558 186Hexachlorobutadiene 469 1071,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 437 1061.2-Dichlorobenzene 422 88Trichlorobenzenes, total 304 851.3-Dichlorobenzene 403 851.4-Dichlorobenzene 422 84Tetrachlorobenzenes, total 302 85Hexachloroethane 282 59Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)Phthalate 301 562-Chlorotoluene 78 534-Chlorobenzotrifluoride 78 49Monochlorobenzotrifluoride 220 404-Chlorotoluene 78 37Hexachlorobenzene 478 362,4/2,5-Dichlorotoluene 78 332,4,6-Trichlorophenol 305 32Dichlorobenzenes, total 77 302,4-Dichlorobenzotrifluoride 78 28Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 573 282,3/3,4-Dichlorotoluene 78 271,2,3-Trichlorotoluene 78 27Trichlorophenols, total 213 242,6-Dichlorotoluene 78 231,2,3,4-Tetrachlorobenzene 78 22

Mean ofDetected

(ug/L)

Median ofDetected

(ug/L)

Range ofDetected

(ug/L)

44,5066161,5032,2181,0944971,6523341731153,321170381559779043210,54356933726432511145

4602336328818404026.518100983.59515301023,60052192697413

3 to 4.2E60.9 to 33,0000.2 to 47,0001 to 120,0004 to 61,0001 to 20,0001 to 75,0001 to 6,9202 to 1,7003.2 to 1,9001 to 42,0001 to 4,60011 to 3,7001 to 3,9000.1 to 8301 to 1,1003.1 to 3,4004 to 41, 0001 to 3701 to 1,1001 to 3601 to 2,00015 to 1,5001 to 661 to 1,900

TABLE 5.2

STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF SEMIVOLATILE COMPOUNDS ANALYZEDNIAGARA FALLS REGIONAL GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT

Page 2 of 5

COOCOenCO

Number NumberCompound Analyses Detected

2,4-Dimethylphenol 297 21Pentachlorophenol 306 201,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 78 202,4-Dichlorophenol 297 172-Chlorobenzotrifluoride 78 172,4,5-Trichlorotoluene 78 164-Methylphenol 162 14Chlorobenzoic Acids, total 169 14Naphthalene 297 14N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 297 132,3,6-Trichlorotoluene 78 133,4-Dichlorobenzotrifluoride 78 12Octachlorocyclopentene 178 122,4,5-Trichlorophenol 223 11Benzoic Acid 226 112-Methylphenol 163 92-Chlorophenol 297 74-Chloroaniline 152 5Aniline 61 5Dichlorotoluenes, total 11 5Di-n-Butylphthalate 293 5Fluoranthene 297 54-Chlorobenzoic Acid 78 5Benzyl Alcohol 161 4Butylbenzylphthalate 297 4

Mean ofDetected

(ug/L)

Median ofDetected

(ug/L)

Range ofDetected

(ug/L)

353,44547359111152738.616.3735168302423715022.438.8638229.24987138

134007.51436.543.53.35.05.42415.511825028.61522.85.882182.92004541

3.6 to 1603 to 25,0001 to 5203.7 to 1501 to 731 to 3611 to 6100.5 to 1,5001.6 to 312.1 to 1301 to 341 to 2001 to 81013 to 134013.5 to 2,20010.9 to 4003.7 to 27016.4 to 264.2 to 15022 to 2,6908.6 to 432.3 to 35110 to 1,50013 to 1807.8 to 61

TABLE 5.2

STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF SEMIVOLATILE COMPOUNDS ANALYZEDNIAGARA FALLS REGIONAL GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT

Page 3 of 5

COOCOenCO

Compound

2-Chlorobenzoic AcidFluoreneChrysene3,4-DichlorophenolChlorendic Acid2,3,6-TrichlorophenolDi-n-Octyl PhthalatePyreneNitrobenzenePyridineAcenaphthenePhenanthreneBenzeneacetic AcidBenzo(a) AnthraceneAnthracene2-Chloronaphthalene2,3,4,5-Tetrachlorophenol3-Chloropheriol4,6-Dinitro-o-CresolBenzo(b)FluorantheneBenzo(a)PyreneIndenod ,2,3-cd)PyreneDibenz(a,h) AnthraceneBenzo(g,h,i)PeryleneBis(2-Chloroethyl)Ether

NumberAnalyses

782972921878183012973062229729792972972971818187281281281281296297

NumberDetected

4333322222222111111111110

Mean ofDetected

(ug/L)

3302.9461236201371013.16.5367.59.355.5302.936222441198.7107.76

Median ofDetected

(ug/L)

2352.643263501371013.16.5367.59.355.5302.936222441198.7107.76

Range ofDetected

(ug/L)

200 to 6502.3 to 3.737 to 5813 to 330310 to 1,20013 to 2607.3 to 132.2 to 244.4 to 8.514 to 583 to 126.6 to 1211 to 100

TABLE 5.2

STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF SEMIVOLATILE COMPOUNDS ANALYZEDNIAGARA FALLS REGIONAL GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT

Page 4 of 5

COOCOtn

Number NumberCompound Analyses Detected

Bis(2-Chloroisopropyl)Ether 282 0Isophorone 297 02-Nitrophenol 297 0Bis(2-Chloroethoxy)Methane 297 0Acenaphthylene 297 04-Chloro-3-Methylphenol 106 02-Methylnaphthalene 146 02-Nitroaniline 146 03-Nitroaniline 146 0Dimethyl Phthalate 297 02,6-Dinitrotoluene 282 02,4-Dinitrophenol 282 04-Nitrophenol 297 0Dibenzofuran 146 02,4-Dinitrotoluene 282 0Diethylphthalate 297 04-Chlorophenyl-Phenylether 282 04-Nitroaniline 146 04,6-Dinitro-2-Methylphenol 100 04-Bromophenyl-Phenylether 297 03,3-Dichlorobenzidine 297 0Benzo(k)Fluoranthene 278 0Benzidine 228 0N-Nitroso-Dimethylamine 190 04-Chlorophenol 23 0

Mean ofDetected

(ug/L)

Median ofDetected

(ug/L)

Range ofDetected

(ug/L)

CO

COoCO

TABLE 5.2

STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF SEMIVOLATILE COMPOUNDS ANALYZEDNIAGARA FALLS REGIONAL GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT

Page 5 of 5

Compound

2,5-Dichlorophenol3,5-Dichlorophenol2,3,4-Trichlorophenol2,3/5-Trichlorophenol3,4,5-Trichlorophenol2,3,5,6-Tetrachlorophenol2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol1,2-Diphenylhydrazinep-Chloro-m-Cresol3-Chlorobenzoic AcidBenzeneacetonitrileChloropyridinesN,N'-DimethylacetamideMethylanilinesMethylcyclopentanol

NumberAnalyses

181818181818181901877899999

NumberDetected

000000000000000

Mean ofDetected

(ug/L)

Median ofDetected

(ug/L)

Range ofDetected

(ug/L)

CO•u

TABLE 5.3

STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF PESTICIDE/PCB COMPOUNDS ANALYZEDNIAGARA FALLS REGIONAL GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT

Page 1 of 2

CompoundNumberAnalyses

NumberDetected

Mean ofDetected

(ug/L)

Median ofDetected

(ug/L)

Range ofDetected

(ug/L)

GOoCO

gamma-BHC (Lindane)alpha-BHCbeta-BHCdelta-BHCHeptachlorAldrinTotal BHCs4,4'-DDTHeptachlor EpoxideEndosulfan IAroclor-1254Mirex4,4'-DDEEndosulfan sulfateDieldrinEndrinEndrin AldehydeEndosulfan II4,4'DDDMethoxychlorEndrin Ketonealpha-Chlordanegamma-ChlordaneToxaphene

5453473433432602561032562562622552322422562562562212562561851349292240

112857878161111103333220000000000

82471019181.11051.10.40.04148120.030.73

111.91.22.10.350.29320.20.080.046050.030.73

0.01 to 14000.01 to 7700.03 to 1500.01 to 4400.01 to 1600.02 to 712 to 4900.05 to 5.420.04 to 10.03 to 0.0424 to 3603 to 280.01 to 0.050.15 to 1.3

en

TABLE 5.3

STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF PESTICIDE/PCB COMPOUNDS ANALYZEDNIAGARA FALLS REGIONAL GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT

Page 2 of 2

CompoundNumberAnalyses

NumberDetected

Mean ofDetected

(ug/L)

Median ofDetected

(ug/L)

Range ofDetected

(ug/L)

Arochlor-1016Arochlor-1221Arochlor-1232Arochlor-1242Arochlor-1248Arochlor-1260Chlordane

240240240255240255205

0000000

COOCOC/lCOO

TABLE 5.4

STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF METALS ANALYZEDNIAGARA FALLS REGIONAL GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT

Compound

MagnesiumCalciumSodiumZincLeadChlorideCopperSulfatePotassiumBariumChromiumCyanideNickelArsenicIronSilverManganeseAluminumMercuryCadmiumAntimonySeleniumBerylliumThallium

CO VanadiumO CobaltSi, Thiocyanate

NumberAnalyses

178172207194323186217175130271298267279352102217926233824421421718117868663

NumberDetected

173172172167154151144138118112109969390595650484631181664430

Mean ofDetected(mg/L)

1078919571.00.152,9040.08566072440.0425.20.0470.0310.90.020.489.30.0860.030.040.110.0070.0260.150.18

Median ofDetected(mg/L)

53.94732140.180.0366750.025425240.380.0210.130.020.0132.70.0130.212.00.00090.0110.020.00350.0080.0230.1040.037

Range ofDetected(mg/L)

0.05 to 3,1704.3 to 11,2000.43 to 15,5000.017 to 300.0006 to 3.613 to 54,0000.004 to 2.54.6 to 3,5806.0 to 9100.014 to 2,0700.005 to 0.4030.01 to 2900.005 to 0.460.001 to 0.380.02 to 1350.001 to 0.1280.012 to 4.460.059 to 1390.0001 to 2.50.003 to 0.3190.001 to 0.2980.001 to 0.90.0006 to 0.010.011 to 0.0450.036 to 0.3670.013 to 0.48

TABLE 5.5

NUMBER OF CHEMICALS ANALYZED IN EACH GROUP FOR INDIVIDUAL SrTES(1)

NIAGARA FALLS REGIONAL GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT

Page 2 of 3

Group?Group Total: 14

(PAHs)Site

CECOS/BFI 14Chisolm Ryder 14Niagara Falls Buffalo Avenue 14Du Pont Necco Park 14Du Pont Niagara Plant 14Frontier Chemical 0Niagara Co-Generation 14Hydraulic Canal 14La Salle Area (64th Street) 14New Road 14OxyChem Buffalo Avenue 0OxyChem Durez 0OxyChem Hyde Park 0OxyChem S-Area(2) 0Olin Buffalo Avenue 14Olin Industrial Welding 14Silbergeld Junkyard 14Solvent Chemical 14Union Carbide 14USGS Wells 14

Number of Chemicals Analyzed in Each Chemical GroupGroupS GroupS Group 10

Group Total: 4 Group Total: 4 Group Total: 13(HCE, HCBD, (Phthalates) (Pesticides/ N-Nitrosodi-HCCP, OCCP) PCBs) phenylamine

COOCOen

Notes:

(1)(2)(3)

33333033333012333233

44444044440000444444

0121212120121212124012121212121212

At some Sites not all wells were analyzed for the indicated number of parametersTwelve wells from S-Area were analyzed for the Priority Pollutant ListTotal phenolic compounds analyses were used

11111011110000111111

Barium

11111011110100001101

GO

TABLE 5.5Page 3 of 3

NUMBER OF CHEMICALS ANALYZED IN EACH GROUP FOR INDIVIDUAL SITES(1)

NIAGARA FALLS REGIONAL GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT

Number of Chemicals Analyzed in Each Chemical GroupSite Lead Mercury Benzole Acid

CECOS/BFI 1 0 0Chisolm Ryder 1 1 1Niagara Falls Buffalo Avenue 1 1 1D u Pont Necco Park 1 1 1D u Pont Niagara Plant 1 1 0Frontier Chemical 0 0 0Goodyear Tire 1 1 1Hydraulic Canal 1 1 0La Salle Area (64th Street) 1 1 1New Road 1 1 1OxyChem Buffalo Avenue 1 1 1OxyChem Durez 0 0 0OxyChem Hyde Park 0 0 0OxyChem S-Area(2) 0 0 0Olin Buffalo Avenue O i lOlin Industrial Welding O i lSilbergeld Junkyard 1 1 1Solvent Chemical 1 1 1Union Carbide 1 1 1USGS Wells 1 1 0

Notes:

(1) At some Sites not all wells were analyzed for the indicated number of parameters(2) Twelve wells from S-Area were analyzed for the Priority Pollutant List(3) Total phenolic compounds analyses were used

c/i3

TABLE 5.5

NUMBER OF CHEMICALS ANALYZED IN EACH GROUP FOR INDIVIDUAL SITES(1)

NIAGARA FALLS REGIONAL GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT

Page 1 of 3

Sif<?

CECOS/BFIChisolm RyderNiagara Falls Buffalo Avenue.Du Pont Necco ParkDu Pont Niagara PlantFrontier ChemicalNiagara Co-GenerationHydraulic CanalLa Salle Area (64th Street)New RoadOxyChem Buffalo AvenueOxyChem DurezOxyChem Hyde ParkOxyChem S-Area^Olin Buffalo AvenueOlin Industrial WeldingSilbergeld JunkyardSolvent ChemicalUnion Carbide .USGS Wells

Group 1Group Total: 18(Chlorinated

Volatiles)

161614171717171616162000161416211616

Number of Chemicals Analyzed in Each Chemical GroupGroup! Group 3 Group 4 Group 5

Group Total: 4 Group Total: 2 Group Total: 4 Group Total: 10(BTEX) (Acetone/ (Phenols) (Chlorophenols)

2-Butanone)

44443444442400444444

22220220220200222222

24422044440

10444444

455440555510201055555

Group 6Group Total: 29

(Chlorobenzenes/Chlorotoluenes)

666663666622434666666

Notes:

(1)(2)(3)

At some Sites not all wells were analyzed for the indicated number of parametersTwelve wells from S-Area were analyzed for the Priority Pollutant ListTotal phenolic compounds analyses were used