March 1988
EPA-700/8-88-038
Hazardous Waste Ground-Water
Task Force
Evaluation of
Texaco Refining And Marketing,
Anacortes, Washington
U.S. Environmental Prediction Agency, Region
Washington State Department of Ecology
-------
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
MAY 5 —
OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATION
AND RESOURCES
MANAGEMENT
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Hazardous Waste Collection
.
FROM: Barbara S. Roth, Acting Chief
Information Services Branch
TO: See Addressees
This package contains the following report which is to be
included in your Hazardous Waste Collection:
Hazardous Waste Ground-Water Task Force - Evaluation
of Texaco Refining and Marketing, Inc., Anacortes,
Washington.
EPA-700/8-88/038, March 1988.
If you have any questions, please contact Jean Davis at
FTS 475-7705.
Attachment
-------
ADDRESSEES;
EPA Librarians — Regions 1-10; Edison, NJ; RTF, NC; Cincinnati,
OH; Ada, OK; Las Vegas, NV; NEIC, Denver, CO;
and Headquarters:
Peg Nelson, Region 1
Dennis Carey, Region 2
Diane McCreary, Region 3
Gayle Alston, Region 4
Lou Tilley, Region 5
Nita House, Region 6
Connie McKenzie, Region 7
Dolores Eddy, Region 8
Linda Sunnen, Region 9
Julienne Sears, Region 10
Dorothy Szefczyk, Edison, NJ
Libby Smith, RTP, NC
Jonda Byrd, Cincinnati, OH
Stanley Shannon, Ada, OK
Doreen Wickman, Las Vegas, NV
Dorothy Biggs, NEIC, Denver, CO
Mary Hoffman, Washington, DC
-------
MARCH 7, 1988
UPDATE OF THE HAZARDOUS WASTE GROUND WATER TASK FORCE EVALUATION OF
TEXACO REFINING AND MARKETING, INC. ANACORTES, WASHINGTON FACILITY
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 10 and the
Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology), 1n conjunction with the EPA
Hazardous Waste Ground Water Task Force (Task Force), conducted an evaluation
of the ground water monitoring program at the Texaco Refining and Marketing,
Inc. hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal facility in Anacortes,
Washington. The Texaco facility, which engages in the land treatment of
hazardous waste, is located approximately 70 miles north of Seattle. The
on-site field inspection was conducted on December 17, 1986 and from
January 12 - 16, 1987.
Texaco is one of 58 facilities that have been evaluated by the Task
Force. The purpose of the Task Force evaluations was to determine the
adequacy of a facility's ground water monitoring program in regard to the
applicable state and federal ground water monitoring requirements. The Task
Force effort came about in response to concerns as to whether operators of
hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal facilities were complying with
such requirements.
-------
The inspection at Texaco resulted 1n findings that include the following,
which are discussed fully in the text of the report:
1. The hydrogeologic characterization of the site was inadequate.
2. The ground water monitoring network was inadequate.
3. Improvements to the facility's sampling and analysis plan were needed.
4. Further analyses were determined to be necessary to determine whether
the presence of certain Inorganic constituents (metals) 1n
downgradient wells are indicative of a release from the land
treatment units or are naturally occurring.
Pursuant to the findings of the Inspection, on September 30, 1987, Ecology
issued an order to Texaco regarding the first three items listed above. A
penalty of $6,000 was also assessed for the regulatory violations involved.
Texaco was ordered to submit a proposal to Improve its hydrogeologic
characterization of the site, and to subsequently install an adequate
monitoring system. An improved sampling and analysis plan was also required.
Although Texaco is appealing the penalty. It has agreed to comply with the
terms of the order. A revised Sampling and Analysis Plan was submitted 1n
October 1987. A proposal for site characterization work was submitted to
Ecology on November 24, 1987. Ecology responded to that proposal on December
31, 1987. Texaco 1s now expected to proceed with the necessary site
characterization and monitoring efforts needed for the facility to come Into
compliance with state and federal regulations.
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 10
and
THE WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
HAZARDOUS WASTE GROUND WATER TASK FORCE INSPECTION
Texaco Marketing and Refining, Inc,
Anacortes, Washington
March 1988
Marcia L. Bailey,
Project Coordinator
RCRA Compliance Section
U.S. EPA Region 10
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Kc-piun 5, Library (5PL-16)
?-•-'} S. Dearborn Street, Room 1670
CiJ.cr.go, 1L 60604
-------
Acknowledgements
w
The substantial written contributions made to this report by
Denis Erlckson and Will Abercromble are gratefully acknowledged.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i
INTRODUCTION 1
THE INSPECTION
Review of Records and Documents 5
Field Activ1 ties 7
SITE HISTORY AND OPERATIONS
Overvl ew 11
Permi ts H1 story 12
Compliance History 12
Facility Description 14
GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY
Sett i ng 16
Regional Geology 16
Regional Hydrogeology 17
Site Geology 17
Site Hydrogeology 29
Hydrogeologic Characterization Deficiencies 24
GROUND WATER MONITORING NETWORK 26
GROUND WATER SAMPLING AUDIT
Introduction 29
Sampling and Analysis Plan Review 29
Observation of Field Procedures 35
WASTE ANALYSIS PLANS
General Comments 37
March 1984 Waste Analysis Plan 39
October 1984 Waste Analysis Plan 40
November 1985 and December 1986 Waste Analysis Plans 40
WASTE TRACKING AND CHARACTERIZATION
Waste Tracking 41
Conclusions 45
SAMPLE DATA RESULTS
Inspection Data 47
Review of Ground WAter Data Generated By Texaco 49
Conclusions 54
-------
Table of Contents, .cont.
Figures
after page
la.b Setting 16
2a,b Locations of Borings, Wells, Piezometers and Lyslmeters 17
3-9 Cross-Sections 18
10-16 Hydrogeologlc Profiles.. 20
17 Water Table Contour Map 22
18 Existing Wells Acceptable for Monitoring Purposes 28
19 Texaco Form R-500 (Waste Tracking) 41
Tables after page
1 Summary Description of Sampling Activities 8
2 Order of Sample Collection; Containers and Preservatives 9
3 Wei 1 Construction Summary 26
4-26 Summary Tables, Waste Application 42
27 Ski nner Li st of Ref 1 nery Constl tuents 45
28 Hazardous Waste Prof 11 e 45
29 1985 Texaco Study: Inorganics 1n Land Treatment Zone 46
30 Constituents Found in Task Force Samples Obtained at Texaco..48
Appendices
A Field Parameters and Well Depth Measurements
B Analytical Parameters for Task Force Samples Obtained at Texaco
C Well Logs and As-Built Diagrams
D Waste Analysis Plan Compliance Checklists
E Summary of Concentrations for Substances Reported in Samples
Obtained During the Task Force Inspection at Texaco
F Data Usability Summary
G 1987 Semi-annual Ground Water Sample Data Submitted by Texaco
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
This report describes the comprehensive ground water monitoring Inspection
conducted at Texaco Refining and Marketing, Inc. Puget Sound Plant (Texaco), a
petroleum refinery 1n Anacortes, Washington. The Inspection was conducted 1n
January 1987 by Region 10 of the United States Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) and the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology), in conjunction with
<*•
the EPA Hazardous Waste Ground Water Task Force.
Texaco is an operating hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal
facility which engages in the land treatment of hazardous waste generated from
its refinery operations. The facility is subject to the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (as amended) and to the interim status and permit application
standards promulgated and enforced by the state of Washington. The facility
is seeking a final permit for its hazardous waste management activities,
Including land treatment. Texaco certified that It was in compliance with
applicable ground water monitoring and financial assurance regulations by
November 1985, as required by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of
1984, in order to to continue to engage in land treatment activities under
interim status until a final permit -determination Is made.
-------
-11-
The Texaco refinery, 1n operation since 1958, Is situated two miles east
of the city of Anacortes on the southern portion of March Point, a north-south
oriented peninsula about 1.3 miles wide and 2.6 miles long. Hazardous and
non-hazardous wastes have been disposed in the two land treatment units now
designated only for hazardous waste. A third land treatment unit receives
only non-hazardous waste. The two regulated units received hazardous waste
both prior to and after November 19, 1980. Hazardous wastes applied to the
land treatment units Include slop oil emulsion solids, API sludge, leaded tank
bottoms, refinery scale and refinery oily wastes. Texaco currently generates
DAF float and heat exchanger bundle cleaning sludge, and plans to land treat
DAF float/slop oil emulsion mixtures.
Objectives of the evaluation of Texaco included determining if:
(1) The ground water monitoring system is capable of immediately
detecting any statistically significant amounts of hazardous waste or
hazardous waste constituents that may migrate from the waste management
units to the aquifer which is uppermost in the vicinity of each waste
management unit;
(2) Designated RCRA monitoring wells are properly located and constructed;
(3) Texaco has developed and is following an adequate plan for ground
water sampling and analysis, and 1f well purging and sampling are
appropriately conducted;
-------
-111-
(4) Required analyses and statistical tests have been conducted on
samples from the designated RCRA monitoring wells;
(5) Ground water contamination currently exists;
(6) The hydrogeology of the site and the geochemistry of the ground water
,have been appropriately characterized; and
(7) Hazardous waste is appropriately characterized by Texaco prior to
placing in the land treatment units.
The investigation team consisted of personnel from EPA Region 10; Ecology;
EPA Headquarters; and contract personnel provided by EPA Headquarters for
obtaining samples. To accomplish.the objectives, the investigation team
reviewed records. Inspected the ground water monitoring system, conducted
interviews with appropriate facility representatives, and collected samples
from selected ground water monitoring wells, lysimeters and surface waters for
extensive chemical analyses.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
1. Texaco's hydrogeologic characterization of the facility is
inadequate. The hydrogeologic units defined by Texaco are based on
stratlgraphic boundaries rather than similarities of lithology and
hydrogeologic properties. This approach has not defined the
preferred pathways for ground water and contaminant movement.
-------
-IV-
2. Four hydrogeologic units at the facility are defined in this report:
Shallow Zone, Upper Aquitard, Outwash Aquifer, and Lower Aquitard.
These units are defined based on existing information, and will
likely require refinement as additional hydrogeologic information is
obtained through required site characterization efforts.
3. Extensive field studies including drilling and the installation of
additional monitoring wells are needed to define the hydrogeology at
both land treatment units and the seep area west of the west land
treatment unit. The field studies should be designed to define the
detailed lithology and hydrogeologic properties of all units
including the Lower Aquitard.
4. The ground water monitoring network at Texaco does not satisfy
interim status requirements, as described in 40 CFR §§ 265.90, 265.91
and 265.92. Although it is not possible to fully evaluate the
adequacy of the monitoring network until the hydrogeology has been
characterized, obvious deficiencies exist in the monitoring network.
These deficiencies include inappropriate screening intervals (W-15,
H-17), unknown well construction details (W-l, W-2, W-3), potentially
broken casing (W-16), wells contaminated with grout sealant (W-ll,
W-l2, W-l3 and W-l4), and inadequate well spacing.
5. The Sampling and Analysis Plan, along with a few sample collection
procedures, required modifications. Appropriate instruments for
obtaining pH values of samples 1n the field (as opposed to the
-------
-V-
laboratory) should be acquired by Texaco, to avoid changes in sample
chemistry which may occur when exposing the samples to air for even
brief periods of time.
6. Texaco1s current (at the time of the inspection) Waste Analysis Plan
appeared to meet regulatory requirements.
7. Texaco should perform its required statistical tests using upgradient
wells individualized to each of the two land treatment units, since
the units are likely distinct geochemically, and upgradient water
chemistry would not be expected to be the same at each unit.
I
8. A few inorganic hazardous constituents which are common to refinery
wastes, and which have been identified in waste streams that are
disposed in Texaco1s land treatment units and in soil within the
treatment zone, were detected during this inspection in various
downgradient wells but not in background wells. These Include
cobalt, vanadium, cadmium, nickel and lead. These metals have been
detected in some background soil cores and lyslmeter samples obtained
and analyzed by Texaco. Once an improved ground water monitoring
network has been installed, appropriate analyses for these
constituents should be made at all monitoring wells, to determine
whether a release has occurred from the land treatment units or 1f
such metals are naturally occurlng 1n ground water at the observed
levels.
-------
INTRODUCTION
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is charged with
administration of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), which
regulates operations at hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal
facilities. Such facilities are subject to RCRA (as amended) and to
regulations promulgated thereunder, found at 40 CFR Parts 260 through 268, and
implemented through the hazardous waste permit program of 40 CFR Part 270.
These facilities are also subject to applicable state regulations, and in some
cases, state hazardous waste management programs may be in effect in lieu of
federal rules and regulations. Such Is the case in the state of Washington,
which received Phase I authorization in August 1983 and full authorization in
January 1986 to conduct its hazardous waste management program in lieu of the
federal government*. The Department of Ecology (Ecology) is the state agency
responsible for administration of state dangerous waste laws and regulations
in Washington. The Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA), and
the regulations promulgated pursuant to those amendments, continue to be
administered and enforced only by EPA in Region 10.
* Although Washington statutes and regulations use the term "dangerous waste"
instead of "hazardous waste," the latter term is used in this report to
describe the subject wastes at the Texaco facility.
-------
The federal and state statutes and regulations are intended to address
hazardous waste management operations in a manner that ensures that, hazardous
waste is properly and safely managed. Ground water monitoring requirements
for land disposal facilities are included as part of these regulations, and
are intended to ensure that releases from hazardous waste management units
will be immediately detected, and that when such a release is known or
detected, that the nature and extent of the contamination will be fully
characterized, to enable prediction of contaminant movement and to facilitate
corrective action.
Facilities which engage in land disposal of hazardous waste are being
evaluated throughout the United States to determine compliance with ground
water monitoring requirements and to evaluate the degree to which such
facilities are protecting the ground water beneath their sites. The
inspections are being conducted in conjunction with the EPA Hazardous Waste
Ground Water Task Force (Task Force). The Task Force was
established by the EPA Administrator to address rising concerns regarding
discoveries across the nation of incidents of serious ground-water
contamination. Hazardous waste land disposal facilities are a potential
source of contamination which occurs when pollutants such as toxic chemicals
seep through the soil into underlying aquifers. Depending on the nature of
both the aquifer and the contaminant, such contamination may move off-site
with the ground water and cause serious consequences for downgradient users of
the aquifer water and other environmental receptors.
-------
The Task Force effort has two major goals: to determine whether
regulated hazardous waste disposal facilities are meeting applicable state and
federal requirements to protect ground water from contamination by hazardous
waste and hazardous waste constituents; and to Identify and evaluate causes of
any defldences In compliance and recommend measures to amend such
deficiencies.
This report describes the Task Force Inspection at the Texaco Refining
and Marketing, Inc. Puget Sound Plant (Texaco), a petroleum refinery In
Anacortes, Washington, which engages 1n the land treatment of hazardous waste
generated on-s1te.
Objectives of the evaluation of Texaco Include determination of
compliance with the requirements of WAC-173-303-400(3)(a), which Incorporates
by reference 40 CFR Part 265, Subparts F through R (Including Interim status
requirements for ground-water monitoring and operations at land treatment
facilities); and WAC-173-303-806(4)(a)(xx), which describes ground water and
other hydrogeologlc characterization Information required to be submitted with
a facility's Part B permit application. Specific objectives of the evaluation
at Texaco Included determining If:
(1) The ground water monitoring system Is capable of Immediately
detecting any statistically significant amounts of hazardous waste or
hazardous waste constituents that may migrate from the waste management
units to the aquifer which Is uppermost 1n the vicinity of each waste
management unit;
-------
(2) Designated RCRA monitoring wells are properly located and
constructed;
(3) Texaco has developed and is following an adequate plan for ground
water sampling and analysis, and if well purging and sampling are
appropriately conducted;
(4) Required analyses and statistical tests have been conducted on
samples from the designated RCRA monitoring wells;
(5) Ground water contamination currently exists;
(6) The hydrogeology of the site and the geochemistry of the ground
water have been appropriately characterized; and
(7) Hazardous waste is appropriately characterized by Texaco prior to
placing 1n the land treatment units.
The Investigation team consisted of personnel from EPA Region 10;
Ecology; EPA Headquarters; and contract personnel provided by EPA Headquarters
for obtaining samples. To accomplish the objectives, the Investigation team
reviewed records, inspected the ground water monitoring system, conducted
interviews with appropriate facility representatives, and collected samples
from selected ground water monitoring wells, lysimeters and surface waters for
extensive chemical analyses.
-------
THE INSPECTION
The Inspection of the Texaco facility consisted of the following
activities:
Review and evaluation of records and documents from the Region 10
office, Ecologyt and Texaco;
Physical inspection of the facility on December 17, 1986, and from
January 12 through 16, 1987, which Included further review of
records and obtaining ground-water, lysimeter and surface-water
samples; and
Analysis of samples and subsequent evaluation of all available
ground water sampling data.
Participants In the Inspection team consisted of the following: Denis
Erickson, Will Abercrombie, Dave Davies and David Frank, Ecology; Marcia
Bailey, EPA Region 10; Brian Lewis, EPA Headquarters; and Mark McElroy, John
Hatcher and Dennis Shea, the Versar sampling team.
REVIEH OF RECORDS AND DOCUMENTS
Records and documents from the EPA Region 10 and Ecology offices,
compiled by an EPA contractor, were reviewed prior to and during the on-site
inspection. Pnor to the inspection, company personnel were requested to make
-------
available specific, additional records during the inspection, including all
ground water monitoring data not previously submitted to EPA. Requests for
other records were requested during the inspection. A few records were
requested by and mailed to EPA subsequent to the inspection.
During the inspection, a review of selected facility records was
conducted to determine the nature, extent, and reliability of waste analyses
and waste location records prepared by Texaco since the RCRA regulations came
into effect in 1980. Facility representatives were interviewed to aid in
identifying documents of interest and to discuss the contents of documents,
and to discuss facility operations. A special session was held during the
inspection in which the hydrogeologic characterization of the site was
discussed among EPA, Ecology and facility representatives.
Records selected for review were copied by Texaco and made available to
the inspectors. They included waste analysis plans used by Texaco from 1984
through the inspection dates; and a selection of the following records
prepared from 1982 to the time of the inspection: waste analysis records for
waste generated on-site and off-site, manifests, waste location records,
lysimeter installation reports, material safety data sheets, waste
minimization practices, waste stream characterizations, landfarm records and
lab reports. Later supplied to EPA were the facility's ground water
monitoring results and statistical evaluations for 1987.
-------
FIELD ACTIVITIES
Field activities Included Identifying current waste management units and
surface drainage routes, verifying monitoring well locations, obtaining ground
water elevation and well depth measurements, collecting samples from 12 ground
water monitoring wells, six lysimeters, and two surface drainage routes; and
observing Texaco personnel purge and sample several monitoring wells.
Field Team Sampling Activities
On the first day of the inspection, organic vapor readings (using an HNU
meter) and depth-to-water measurements were made by the field team at the
ground water monitoring wells and piezometers. In all cases, attempts were
made to Identify and use the same measuring point on the well that the
facility utilizes for such measurements. Total depth of wells and piezometers
were measured where no dedicated pumps or bailers were present (results are
reported in Appendix A). On subsequent days of the inspection, additional
water level measurements were made at each well to be sampled.
Samples from 12 ground water monitoring wells, six lysimeters and two
surface water drainage points were obtained by the field team during the
inspection. Duplicates or replicates of samples from each well and of blank
samples (trip and field) were provided to Texaco representatives. Texaco
declined to obtain split samples from some lysimeters where the small quantity
of water precluded sufficient sample collection. Duplicates of surface water
samples were provided to Texaco.
-------
A summary description of the sampling activities of the field team at
each well is given in Table 1. Wells were purged and sampled using dedicated
bladder-type pumps. Lysimeters were sampled using a bicycle-type vacuum pump
and dedicated tubing for each lysimeter, provided and operated by Texaco.
Task Force personnel operated the well equipment for purposes of purging and
sample collection. Surface samples were obtained by Task Force personnel by
holding the appropriate containers in a current of surface water.
Typically, samples were collected by the field team pursuant to the
following procedures at each well:
- A depth-to-water measurement was made using an electrical tape
designed for this purpose. The probe was cleaned subsequent to
each use.
- The height of the water column was calculated from the measured
depth to water and the depth to the bottom of the well (using the
value reported in Texaco well-construction records).
- The volume of standing water in the casing was calculated.
- The well was purged of the volume of water indicated in Table 1.
Purging activities at some wells required time lapses between
subsequent purges and/or sampling events, depending upon individual
well yields and casing volumes.
-------
Table 1. Well and Lvsimeter Sample Collection Locations and Descriptions
Depth to Depth of
Sample
East Land Treatment
Unit Wells
W-Z(Background)
W-21
W-22
W-23
W-l
West Land Treatment
Unit Wells
W-31 (background)
W-16
W-l 7
Water
Date Measured.
1/13 31.6
1/15 3.67
1/14 2.63
1/15 3.07
1/15 57.81
1/15
1/16
1/12 16.4
1/12 52.75
1/13
1/13 50.17
1/13
1/14
1//14
1/14
Well Casing Purge Purge Collection
ft. Reported. ft. Vol.. g Vol..g Time, hr Time, hr
46.63 2.4 8 1445-1511 1515-1600
28.25 4 12 1138-1200 1205-1235
27.95 4.1 12.5 1337-1406 1422-1525
27.74 11.84 12 1003-1032 1042-1107
V
72.41 2.3 7 0850-0930 0935-0941
1245-1307
0920-0934
29.38 2/08 6.5 1115-1136 1140-1220
60.91 1.3 4 1407-1427 1438-1512
1118-1159
62.03 1.9 5 liters 0905-0925 1046-1100
(to dryness)
1340-1432
0915-0926
1204-1210
Samples
Collected Ufltfii
All (See Appendix B and Table 2)
All plus matrix spike
All plus duplicate & matrix spike
All
VOC.POC.POX
TOX, TOC, ext. org., metals, phenols
Balance of samples
All Purge water foamy
turbid
VOC.POC.POX.TOX.TOC
Balance of samples
VOC.POC.POX, TOC
TOX, ext. org.
Ext. org., metals
Balance of samples
-------
Table 1 (cont.l Well and Lvsimeter Sample Collection Locations and Descriptions
West Land Treatment
Unit Wells, cont.
W-33
W-32
W-24
Depth to Depth of
Water Well Casing
Date Measured. ft. Reported.ft. Vol.. q
1/13 53.48 60.93 1.2
1/13
1/13
1/14
1/13 40.02 48.21 1.3
1/14
1/15
1/15
1/16
1/14 37.5 41.8 0.53
1/15
1/16
Sample
Purge Purge Collection
Vol . . g Time Time
3.6 0957-1020 1023-1030
1239-1317
1451-1525
0935-0945
4 1230-1300 1315-1345
1014-1109
1115
1250-1315
0948-0954
2 1145-1230 1230-1220
1055-1105
1542-1551
Samples
Collected
VOC.POC. POX
TOX, ext org.
Ext. org., metals
Balance of samples
VOC. POC, POX, TOX.
Extr.org.. TOC
None
Metals
Motes.
Air being drawn
into well
well drying up
control box not
functional
Insufficient for further samples
VOC, POC, POX, TOC.
TOX
Stopped cycling after 200 ml; no samples
Extr. org. metals
W-15
1/15 19.75
53.83
5.5
17
1355-1435 1445-1505
all
Surface Water Samples
West Land Treatment
Unit Runoff Ditch 1/13
1210-1300
all
East Land Treatment 1/14
Unit Curtain Drain
1400-1500
all
-------
Table 1 (cont.l Hell and Lvsimeter Sample Collection Locations and Descriotions
Location
West Land Treatment Unit
Lysimeters
L-86-BG-TK1
(background)
L-ll
L-8
L-9
L-12
East Land Treatment Unit
Lysimeters
L-6E
Date
1/13
1/13
1/14
1/15
1/16
1/13
1/14
1/15
1/16
1/14
1/15
1/15
1/13
1/14
1/15
1/16
1/13 -
1/13
1/14
1/15
1/16
Time (hr)
0945
1603
0930
0926
0923
0935
0920
0905
0914
0900
0850
0900
0920
0913
0910
0909
0955
0410
1000
. 0940
0932
Activity
400 ml total metals, 500 ml dissolved metals. Applied vacuum.
VOCs, POC, POX, 500 ml total metals. Applied vacuum.
600 ml dissolved metals. Applied vacuum.
VOCs. POC, POX. 300 ml BNSs. Applied vacuum.
400 ml BNAs.
500 ml metals; applied vacuum.
0 vacuum, but no water present.
0 vacuum, appeared frozen; 50 ml obtained, not kept.
Less than 10 ml obtained; no samples.
0 vacuum but no water. Applied vacuum. (Last sampled 12/85.)
0 vacuum. Apparently functional but no water present.
0 vacuum. Lysimeter or line appeared plugged. No sample obtained.
Applied vacuum.
200 ml dissolved metals. Applied vacuum.
VOCs. POC. POX. Applied vacuum.
TOC
900 ml metals. Applied vacuum.
VOCs, POX, POC. Applied vacuum.
POX, 920 ml BNAs. Applied vacuum.
TOC, 600 ml phenols. Applied vacuum.
1 liter herbicides, 900 ml phenols.
-------
Table 1 (cont.l Well and Lvsimeter Sample Collection Locations and Descriptions
Location
East Land Treatment Unit
Lysimeters. cont.
L-86-1
L-86-BG-SE
(Background)
Date
1/13
1/13
1/14
1/14
1/15
1/13
1/13
1/14
1/15
Time (hr)
1008
1610
1015
1555
0950
1011
1630
1022
1005
Activity
500 ml dissolved metals, 400 ml total metals. Applied vacuum.
VOCS, POC. Applied vacuum.
800 ml BNS. Applied vacuum.
200 ml phenols. Applied vacuum.
POX, TOC, 300 ml phenols.
400 ml dissolved metals, 400 ml total metals. Applied vacuum.
VOCs. POX, POC. Applied vacuum.
850 ml BNAs. Applied vacuum.
TOC, 500 ml phenols.
-------
- Sample aliquots were collected three or more times during purging.
Field measurements (water temperature, pH and specific conductance)
were obtained from these aliquots (and are reported in Appendix A).
- Samples were obtained as soon as practicable after purging was
completed. Containers were filled in the order shown in Table 2.
- Sample containers were filled directly from the pump discharge line,
- Samples were placed in an ice chest and returned to the Task Force
staging area for shipment preparation. Samples obtained for the
analysis of metals, TOC and total phenols were preserved (Table
2). Split samples for Texaco were similarly prepared and turned
over to facility personnel at the end of each day.
- Each day, samples which had been obtained that day (and/or the
afternoon of the previous day) were packaged and shipped, under
chain-of-custody, to the EPA contract laboratories. Shipping
procedures were according to applicable U.S. Department of
Transportation regulations (40 CFR Parts 171-177). All samples
were considered "environmental" for shipping purposes.
Samples were analyzed by the EPA contract laboratories for the parameter
groups shown in Table 2. Specific analytes are listed in Appendix B.
Complete sample sets were not obtained from the lysimeters due to Insufficient
volume available. One field blank was obtained, and a trip blank which
-------
Table 2
ORDER OF SAMPLE COLLECTION;
CONTAINERS AND PRESERVATIVES
Parameter
Bottle
Preservative*
(Concentration)
1. Volatile organic analysis (VOA)
2. Purgeable organic carbon (POO
3. Purgeable organic halogens (POX)
4. Total organic halogens (TOX)
5. Total organic carbon (TOO
6. Extractable organlcs
7. Total metals
8. Dissolved metals
9. Phenols
10. Anions
11. Carbonate/Bicarbonate
12. Sulfate/chlorlde
2 40-ml VOA vials
1 40-ml VOA vials
1 40-ml VOA vials
1 1-qt. amber glass
1 4-oz. glass H2S04 (95-98t)
4 1-qt. amber glass
1 1-qt. plastic HN03 (95-98%)
1 1-qt. plastic HN03 (95-98%)
1 1-qt. amber glass H2S04 (95-981)
1 1-qt. plastic
1 1-qt. plastic
1 1-qt. plastic
Volume added to each sample was 5 ml except for TOC, where about 1 ml was
added.
-------
10
accompanied the Versar personnel to the site was also submitted for analysis.
The trip blank was composed of high purity water subjected to high performance
liquid chromatography. Two sets of duplicate samples were obtained for
analysis.
-------
11
SITE HISTORY AND OPERATIONS
OVERVIEW
The Texaco Puget Sound Plant, a petroleum refinery, is an operating
treatment, storage and disposal facility which is subject to RCRA, to the
interim status and permit application standards promulgated and enforced by
the state of Washington, and to applicable regulations promulgated pursuant to
the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The facility is
seeking a final permit for its hazardous waste management activities,
including land treatment.
The location of the Texaco facility is on the southern portion of March
Point, approximately two miles east of Anacortes, Skaglt County, Washington.
Anacortes is approximately 70 miles north of Seattle.
The majority of Texaco1s wastes are, and historically have been, treated
and disposed on-slte in land treatment units. The method of disposal, land
treatment or landfarming, involves spreading wastes over a soil field, and
tilling them into the soil. Soil bacteria and microbes digest the organic
fraction of the waste, while the inorganic fraction (mostly heavy metals) 1s
reduced and bound to soil particles. Landfarming of hazardous waste is a
common practice at refineries in Washington.
The Texaco Puget Sound Plant began operation in the fall of 1958.
Texaco has engaged in land treatment of hazardous waste both before and after
-------
12
November 19, 1980, and the facility certified that it was in compliance with
applicable ground water monitoring and financial assurance regulations by
November 1985, as required by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of
1984, enabling the facility to continue to engage in land treatment activities
under interim status, until a final permit determination is made.
PERMITS HISTORY
Texaco1s Part A permit application was received by EPA on November 17,
1980. EPA called for Texaco's Part B permit application on September 21,
1983. The Part B application was received on March 26, 1984. A Notice of
Deficiency (NOD) and warning letter was sent to Texaco May 24, 1984. Texaco
resubmitted its Part B application on October 1, 1984. EPA sent a second NOD
to Texaco on July 18, 1985. Texaco made new Part B application submittals on
November 9, 1985 and on January 6, 1987. The land treatment demonstration
portion of the permit application was submitted in September 1987.
COMPLIANCE HISTORY
The following compliance orders had been Issued to Texaco regarding its
hazardous waste management activities:
January 31, 1984: Ecology ordered Texaco to install vadose
monitoring. A penalty of $1,000 was assessed.
-------
13
February 7, 1984: Ecology ordered Texaco to submit a ground water plan
capable of Immediately detecting any significant amounts of hazardous
waste or hazardous waste constituents, Including a sampling and analysis
plan. A ten thousand dollar penalty was assessed. Texaco appealed that
order on March 19, 1984, and the order and penalty were rescinded on May
15, 1984. Both parties then agreed to the terms of a stipulation that
included the installation of five additional wells at Texaco.
September 14, 1984: EPA and Texaco entered into a Consent Agreement
and Final Order for Texaco's failure to submit a complete Part B permit
application with the period specified in EPA's NOD.
December 4, 1984: Ecology Issued an order requiring Texaco to install
replacement wells and issued a penalty of $10,000 for failure to
properly install a ground-water monitoring system. The Pollution
Control Hearings Board reduced the penalty to $1,500.
April 23, 1987: Ecology Issued an order to Texaco to comply with
several hazardous waste management regulations regarding the designation
of dangerous waste, accumulation of dangerous waste, inspection
procedures, personnel training, container management and discharge of
solvents. A penalty of $20,000 was assessed and is being appealed by
Texaco.
September 30, 1987: Ecology ordered Texaco to rectify many of the
ground water monitoring and hydrogeologic characterization deficiencies
-------
14
Identified as a result of the Task Force inspection. A penalty of
$6,000 was assessed and is being appealed by Texaco.
FACILITY DESCRIPTION
The Texaco Puget Sound Plant refines crude oil into a variety of
marketable products, primarily motor gasoline, diesel fuel, home heating oil
and jet fuel. Liquefied petroleum gas, heavy industrial fuel oil, and
petroleum coke are also produced. The rated plant production capacity is
78,000 barrels per day. The major processing units include: Atmospheric and
Vacuum Distillation, Butane De-asphalting, Fluid Catalytic Cracking, Hydrogen
Desulphurlzation, Catalytic Reforming, Alkylation and Coking.
The petroleum refining operations occupy the central portion of the
property. Two water reservoirs are located in the north-central portion of
the property, and land treatment units (landfarms) are located east and west
of the reservoirs. The western flank of the site Is characterized by
pastureland-type vegetation interspersed with low, shrubby growth and
deciduous trees. The eastern flank Is characterized by mixed forest near the
site boundaries. Grading activities associated with the development of the
plant have disturbed a large portion of the site over the past 25 years.
Consequently, there is not a common depth to the base of the treatment zone in
each plot. Just north of Texaco's refinery on the same peninsula is Shell's
March Point Oil Refinery. The facilities share a common fence line.
-------
15
The regulated land treatment units consist of two landfarms. The east
landfarm consists of 9 cells encompassing a total of 7.14 acres, and the west
landfarm consists of 7 cells encompassing a total of 6.17 acres. A landfarm
for the treatment of non-hazardous wastes Is located adjacent and south of the
west hazardous waste landfarm. Prior to April 1985, hazardous and
non-hazardous wastes were not segregated, and both waste types were disposed
in the east and west landfarms. A separate landfarm was brought into use at
that time, and has been used since then for land treatment of non-hazardous
wastes. At the time of this Inspection, the east landfarm had not received
waste since September 1984, due to problems with the high water table in that
area. At the same time, the west landfarm reportedly had last received waste
in October 1986. At the time of the inspection, there were no known solid
waste management units which accepted hazardous waste prior to, but not after,
November 19, 1980.
-------
16
GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY
SETTING
The Texaco Refinery Is located In northwestern Washington at the
northern extent of the Puget Sound Lowland. The topography of the peninsula
ranges from a maximum elevation (Mean Sea Level) of about 190 feet near the
center of the peninsula to sea level. The topographic expression of the
peninsula Is asymmetric with a steeper slope on the west side and a more
gradual slope on the east side. Figures la and Ib deptict the refinery
setting.
REGIONAL GEOLOGY
The regional geology of the vicinity is characterized by glacial
sediments that were deposited by multiple glacial episodes in the Puget Sound
area. The last glacial advance receded about 10,000 years before the
present. The existing topography and most of the deposits observed beneath
the refinery were formed during this most recent glacial episode. The
deposits consist of interlayered mixtures of gravel, sand, silt, and clay.
The deposits show rapid lateral and vertical variations in texture which are
typical for glacial deposits. The bedrock in the vicinity consists of
pre-Tertiary sedimentary and metasedimentary rocks. It does not outcrop at
the facility and has not been observed in any borings drilled on-site. The
existing data suggest that bedrock does not significantly influence the
hydrogeology of the facility as it pertains to ground water monitoring at the
regulated units.
-------
17
REGIONAL HYDROGEOLOGY
The regional ground water system has not been clearly defined. Based on
the proximity to base level (sea level), the area can be characterized as a
regional discharge area. Hydraulically, the deep aquifer systems would be
expected to show vertical upward gradients as ground water flows toward base
level. Because March Point is surrounded by sea level surface water on three
sides, ground water beneath the peninsula most likely has limited hydraulic
connection with regionally extensive aquifers.
A number of private water supply wells are known to exist on March
Point. Prior to 1955, ground water on the peninsula was used for domestic
supplies and irrigation. In 1955, the city of Anacortes extended its
distribution system to the peninsula, and ground water use was discontinued.
Springs on the Shell property to the north are used for stock watering.
Northwest Petrochemical, also located on March Point, operated injection wells
for industrial wastes, but reportedly those wells have been sealed or grouted.
SITE GEOLOGY
The site geology is known from geologic logs of about 50 geotechnical
soil borings, monitoring wells, and piezometers in the vicinity of the
regulated units. The locations of the borings, wells and piezometers are
shown in Figures 2a and 2b. Texaco has identified four geologic units:
glacial till, outwash sand, interglacial sediments, and older glacial drift.
The subsurface relationship of these units is shown in geologic
-------
37'JO"
122-Sp'
FENCE
if -HAZARDOUSWASTE
FACILITIES
Figure la
USGS MAP—ANACORTES SOUTH
XIII-5
-------
Figure Ib
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
WITH SURROUNDING LAND USE
XIII-23
-------
JM[ ! ! !j L „
^M !L;!' '! IP'j.s ac
Hazardou
!i |j jj jj I
!! I 'i ii'
Approximate location
of explorations;
information on each
exploration is keyed td
numerical designations
in Table XV-A-1
Location of
tion
Locations uncertain:
27, 28. 32, .16, 43,
72, 73, 74, 81,
96, 97, 98, 99, 100,
108.
Revision 3
December 31, 1986
TEXACO
PUGET SOUND PLANT
:_ ANACORTES. WASH.
GEOTECHNICAL- EXPLORATIONS
AND
CROSS-SECTION LOCATIONS
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
I Deference:
I i»a$« map provided
|by Texaco - undated.
-------
* K~i.
>»«0>
»ve jr tAvw-w* nftfru *T'B
(^^.o^^j .;S
^ifSf-*»«**r
D
)
O
O
*t
-j
rl
l
i
1
1
'
1't.tott i ***• *• ** T
,' «)., 1. '*( fK.U«t »V S
1 1 < OH LCH-M IOH Cf f
1 1 ! | 1 P •« TMKour^ A 0
V !' l| I AVT LANFFMtri
yir^-Uttfl
i*ii ,^,
Hi?, i!U!u.0
ft>« MMtt.
«rc«Ttws
*r
LEGEND
^N
PltrOMCTER
•f uici i c »un PIF7OMFTFRS
5O 66 12
-------
18
cross-sections, Figures 3 through 9, from Texaco1s Part B application. The
distribution and properties of the units are described below.
Glacial Till and/or Glaciomarine Drift (Diamicton)
The till or glaciomarine drift consists of a dense, compact mixture of
boulders, cobbles, gravel, sand, silt and clay. The unit is characterized by
poor sorting and low hydraulic conductivity. It appears to be continuous
beneath most of the facility and ranges up to 30 feet in thickness. It is
significant to the site hydrogeology because its low hydraulic conductivity
limits the amount of recharge to underlying water-bearing zones. At the east
land treatment unit, weathered portions of this unit have been defined as the
uppermost water-bearing zone by Texaco.
Outwash Sand
The outwash sand consists of medium to coarse-grained sand with
occasional lenses of gravel, silt and clay. The outwash is continuous beneath
the west land treatment unit, but its extent beneath the east land treatment
unit is not well defined. The outwash unit ranges up to 30 feet thick, and is
significant because it represents the uppermost aquifer beneath the west land
treatment unit and may exist at depth beneath the east land treatment unit.
-------
180 -
j 120-
60-
0-
-60-1
«en L>nd F«rm
(Hazardous)
iHazardous)
A'
Actificint rill
'.-15
Glacial Till
Inierglaclal Sedimtnts
Outuash Sand
ken Side Spring
East Side Spring
Older Glacial Drift
tpper and lover water-bearing zones.
Water level in upper water-bearing zone on 26 July
Horitontal Scale 1" * 600'
Vertical Scale 1" - 00'
Vertical Exaggeration - lOx
P.ean Louer Low v-iier
Datum
1. Reference to the text of the subr.itl«l Is
necessary for * proper undemanding of
subsurface conditions.
2. Soil investigations did not aluavs utilize
tnt sair.e classification system; therefore
some interpretation was neceisarv.
3. Cross-Sections Location ier-!ic:ec: on
Figures XV-2 *nd XV-t.
Revision 3
December 31, 1SS6
XV-19
TEXACO INC.
fnJJJJo) PUGET SOUND PIANT
_*^_ ANACORIES. WASH. ^Z!
CROSS-SECTION A-A'
LANDAU
ASSOOATES
SCALE Noted
FIGURE 3
-------
*>
S
180-
120-
60-
0-
-60-1
if
West Landfarm i i heserxolr
(Hazardous)
P-2 B-65
East
I Landfarn L
(Hazardous)
cial Till
Attlflcl
Spring
Oldti Glacial Urift
L(((nd
\%%%A UPP" *ni l°utr water-bearing rones.
tatct level In upper water-bearing tone on 26 July
Horizontal Scale 1" - 600'
Vertical Scale 1" - 60'
Vertical Exaggeration - lOx
(HLLV) - Kean Lower Low Vater
Datum
liotei:
1. Reference to the text of the lubnlttel U
necessary for a proper understanding of
subsurface conditions.
2. Soil Investigations did not always utlllie
the same classifications systecs; therefore,
some Interpretation was necessary.
3. Crc3»-3»ctlon locitlons depicted on
Figures XV-2 ind XV-*.
B'
Revision 3
Deceinber 31, .1986
XV-21
TEXACO INC.
£JgJ PUGET SOUND PLANT I
^_ ANACCRTES. WASH. .
CROSS-SECTION B-B*
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
CCAI.C Noted
FIGURE 4
-------
IfcO—1
160-
120-1
60-
o-
-60-1
c'
West Landfarm
Reservoir
Artificial FilU
b-29
B-28
East
Lanafarm
(Hazardous)
cl.l Till
Outwash
ng
Legend
/'//''", Upper and lower water-bearing tone.
»ater level In upper water-bearing xone on 2e July 1VS5.
Horlzonttl Sc«l« 1" - 600'
Vertlcd Scale 1" - 60'
Vertical Exaggeration - lOx
(HLLW) - Kean Lower Low Uater
liatun
Kotcs:
1. Ktference to the text of the >ubmtttal li
ncce»ary for a proper understanding of
subsurface conditions.
2. Soil Investigations did not always utilise
the sane classification systens; therefore,
sane Interpretation was necessary.
3. Croas-sestlon locations depicted on
Figures XV-2 and XV-».
XV-23
Revision 3
Dacercber 31. 1986
TEXACO INC.
j^teaj PUGET SOUND PIANI
_!?!_ ANACORIES. WASH.
CROSS-SECTION C-C'
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
SCALE Notei:
FIGURE 5
-------
180-
120-
u.
c
c
o
60-
D
D
,
"T
Kt s
Dutvash Sand
Interglacial
Sediments
5-74
Glacial Till W-33
V-26
V.-2i
Artificial Fii
^§^dsss3Sisifei!
''//:'yss/''//f
"/..;•/. -vx -
Older Glacial Drift
Upper and lower water-bearing zone*
Water level in upper weter-bearir-e zone on 2t- July 19&5.
Horizontal Scale 3" « 600'
Vertical Scale 1" « 60'
Vertical Exaggeration - lOx
(MLLV) * Mean Lower Low water
Latin. •
Notes:
1. Reference to the text of the submittal is
necessary for a proper understanding of
subsurface conditions.
2. Soil investigations did not always utilize
the same classification systems; therefore,
some interpretation was necessary.
3- Cross-section locations depicted on
Figures XV-2 and XV-4.
XV-2S
TEXACO INC.
£j PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES, WASH.
CROSS-SECTION D-Q*
FIGURE 6
LAK?DAU
ASSOCIATES
SCALE
Revision 3
December 31, 1986
-------
X
c
240-
180-
120-
60-
0-
. Hestrvoir.
Intergl.cial Sediments
Cl.ci»l Till
3-33
W-31
nd lower water-bearing zo.Tes.
Water level In upper water-bearing zone on 26 July 19E5.
Hoillontal Sctle 1" - 600*
Verticil Scile 1" - 60'
Vertical Exaggeration - lOx
(KLLW) • Mean Lower Low Vater
Kotefj
1. Reference to the te«t of the submlual li
neceasar/ for a proper understanding of
subsurface conditions.
2. Soil Investigations did not always utlllie
the same classification svltms; therefore
some Interpretation was necessary.
3. Cross-sfcticn locations depicted on
Figures XV-? and XV-k.
Revision 3
December 31, 19S5
TEXACO INC.
;0| PUGET SOUND PLANT K
ANACORTES. V.'ASK. _
CROSS-SECTION E-E'
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
SCALE Soted
FIGURE 7
-------
2^0-1
180-
5
_J
X
120-
c
o
fl
>
V
0-
-60-1
i
Keservo jr.,
Intergiacial Sediments,
Outwash S*ndN
Glacial Till,
Older Glacial Drift
Legend
Upper and lower water-bearing zone.
Water level in upper water-bearing zone on 26 July 1985.
Horizontal Scale 1" - 600*
Vertical Scale 1" - 60'
Vertical Exaggeration - lOx
(MLLW) - Mean Lower Low Water
Da turn
Notes:
1. Reference to the text of the submlttal is
necessary for a proper understanding of
subsurface conditions.
2. Soil investigations did not always utilize
the same classification systems; therefore
some interpretation was necessary.
3- Cress-section locations depicted on
Figures XV-2 and XV-H .
XV-2 9
TEXACO INC.
PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES. WASH.
CROSS-SECTION F-F*
FIGURE 8
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
SCALE Noted
Revision 3
Dece.T±>er 31, 19SG
-------
240—1
180-
Cx,
C
c
o
V
«rf
UJ
120-
60-
0-
East Landfarm
(Hazardous)
Interglacial Sediments
V-22
W-ll
V-2
J
Older CUcial Drift
Upper and lower water-bearing zones.
Water level in upper water-bearing zone on 26 July 1985.
Horizontal Scale 1" - 600*
Vertical Scale 1" - 60*
Vertical Exaggeration - lOx
(MLLW) « Mean Lower Low Water
Da turn
Notes:
1. Reference to the text of the submittal is
necessary for a proper understanding of
subsurface conditions.
2. Soil investigations did not always utilize
the same classification systems; therefore,
some interpretation was necessary.
3. Cross-section locations depicted on
Figures XV-2 and XV-iJ.
XV-30
TEXACO INC.
;0] PUGET SOUND PLANT
_IZI^I ANACORTES. WASH.
CROSS-SECTION G-G*
FIGURE 9
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
SCAUE Noted
Revision 3
DecerrJber 31, 19S6
-------
19
Interglaclal Sediments
The interglacial sediments consist of hard, thinly-bedded clay, silt,
and fine sand with occasional layers of peat and gravel. They underlie the
outwash sand, or if the outwash sand is not present, they underlie the till or
glaciomarine drift. There is no reliable information available to estimate
the distribution or thickness of this unit. Only the upper portion of this
unit Is saturated according to Texaco, and it represents part of the uppermost
aquifer beneath the land treatment units.
Older Glacial Drift
The older glacial drift consists of undifferentiated glacial deposits, a
dense, heterogeneous mixture of gravel, sand, and silt. No wells or borings
penetrate the entire unit, and consequently its thickness is unknown. The
permeability is probably highly variable, considering the wide variation of
texture in the unit. The older glacial drift is significant because it has
been designated as a water-bearing zone that underlies the uppermost aquifer
by Texaco. The degree of hydraulic interconnection between this zone and the
uppermost aquifer has not been defined by Texaco.
SITE HYDROGEOLOGY
Because Texaco's interpretation of the existing hydrogeologlc
information was judged to be incomplete, a thorough evaluation of the existing
information was conducted by EPA and Ecology. Included in this evaluation
-------
20
were the geotechnical boring logs which had not been provided in a detailed
form until this inspection. Based on this review, four hydrogeologic units
have been identified that, for discussion purposes, are designated as
follows: the Shallow Zone, the Upper Aquitard, the Outwash Aquifer, and the
Lower Aquitard. The subsurface relationship of these units is shown in seven
hydrogeologic profiles (Figures 10 through 16). The locations of the profiles
in relations to the site are shown in Figure 2a. The distribution and the
hydrogeologic properties of the units are discussed below.
Shallow Zone
The Shallow Zone consists of either artificial fill or deposits formed as
recessional outwash or beach deposits. The fill consists of a wide variety of
mixtures of gravel, sand, silt and clay. The recessional.outwash/beach
deposits consist of sand and gravel. The Shallow Zone is thin and
discontinuous across the site. The maximum observed thickness is about 10
feet (well W-17). The lateral extent of this unit has not been defined and
saturation of this unit has not been reported. No wells or piezometers have
been completed in the Shallow Zone. The unit is of potential significance
because where saturated it could serve as a source of recharge to underlying
water-bearing zones and may transmit contaminants laterally. The Shallow Zone,
which has not been addressed by Texaco, may be contributing to the seeps on
the slopes of the peninsula.
-------
170
135
100
69
-40
WEST LAND TREATMENT FIELD
M-31
H-14
Swd Pick Innnd
170
135
100 >
M
o
30
J-40
250
500
750
1000
1250
1500 1750
DISTANCE (FT)
2000
2250
2500
2750
3000
3250
LEGEND | x SHL
- - SILT
[''••"••'] SILTY SAND \°d°o° \ SAND/GRAVEL
[^j^J SAND-FINE [ooooo | GRAVEL
II I 11111 •BW~~~^iM
[••]••] SAND FN-MED Lj^-J SILT-CLAY
|| I '•'•] SAND MED-CR j:::::::| SILT/SAND L
DIAMICTON
•(••«•+++ I
PROJECT: TEXACO
FILE: HA0009276197
LOCATION: ANACORTES
FIGURE: 10
GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION
HA-HA -
WASHINGTON DEPT. OF ECOLOGY
-------
170
140
s
_ 110
L.
BO
50
20
-10
WEST LAND TREATMENT FIELD
P-2
P-3
S>nd ten InurMl
170
140
m
m
no >
BO
so
20
-10
250
500
750
1000
1250
1500 1750
DISTANCE (FT)
2000
2250
2500
2750
3000
3250
LEGEND
. SWL
FILL
PEAT
I SILTY SAND
I SAND-FINE
°6°6? I SAND/GRAVEL
00000 I r-n>uci
00000 I 6RAVEL
SAND FN-MED SILT-CLAY
DIAMICTON
V V V
V V
- - SILT
• • • ;|SAND MED-CR |::::::: |SILT/SAND L
PROJECT: TEXACO
FILE: HAD009276197
LOCATION: ANACOHTES
FIGURE:11
GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION
KBNB*
KASHIN3TON D£PT. Or ECOLOGY
-------
iao
160
140
UJ 120
100
80
60
WEST
• LAND TREATMENT FIELD • 8-29
B-28
P-3
Sand Pick InMrvtJ
I BO
160
M.
£
100
80
J 60
ISO
300
450
600
750
900 1050
DISTANCE (FT)
1200
1350
1*00
1650
1800
1950
LESEMJ
. SWL
- - SILT
SILTY SAND I?6T6?
[;;;;;;;;;: SAND-FINE 1888001 GRAVEL
SAND FN-MED SILT-CLAY
SAND MEO-CR :."::" SILT/SAND L
OIAMICTON
PROJECT: TEXACO
FILE: WAD009276197
LOCATION: ANACORTES
FIGURE: 12
GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION
HC-HC"
WASHINSTON DEPT. OF ECOLOGY
-------
*•« M m
en en en to
8
—r~
ELEVATION (FT ASL)
i §
to 5
WASHINGTON DEPT
OF HCO'-OSY
r- TI T3
o w aj
n i- o
> m c_
-H •• m
M O
TEXACO
HAD0092
OH
76197
TES
EOL
CROSS SECT
D-WD1
GURE: 13
g § i
) NOIlVA3n3
-------
1BO
160
>_ 140
1
120
100
60
B-73
fend f«ck Inunal
180
160
140
120
100
BO
J 60
O
z
250
500
750
1000
1250
1500 1790
DISTANCE (FT)
2000
2250
2500
2750
3000
3250
LEGEND TTSKL
| FILL
PEAT
I SILTY SAND |?6?6? I SAND/GRAVEL
DIAHICTON
( I
:zzz TILL
- - SILT
!• • ' • I
SAND-FINE
SAND FN-MED
SAND MED-CR
100000 I -o,uc,
looooo I GRAVEL
SILT-CLAY
SILT/SAND L i
PROJECT: TEXACO
FILE: HAD009276197
LOCATION: ANACORTES
FIGURE: 14
GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION
WE-WE'
WASHINGTON DEPT. Or ECOLOGY
-------
100
70
<
>
29
10
B-21
K-13
..n.n.A.A^.,
i A A A.A/
,A.A.A A A,
^"^4=1
AAA$^
^AAAA'A
M-21 "-11
N-23
IT
SSS&
J6666*
ttftf&fa
\AAAAA.AA/
A A A A.A.,
A.A.A.A.A^
K-12 "-'11-22
JZuJZ&Z
..A.A.A.A.
^4^,
-£&
......... ...
A.A.A.A.A.A.A.AAA.AAA^
100
85
p
70 >
IH
i
40
10
125
250
375
500
629
750 87S
DISTANCE (FT)
1000
1129
1290
1379
1629
LEGEND | x SML
FILL
PEAT
P~~~ TILL
- - SILT
I SILTY SAND
!SAND-FINE
SAND FN-MED ^j—•
I SAND MED-cfl I::::::; I SILT/SAND L
IAAAAAI OIAMICTON
[+++++1 —
ixxxxx
Ixxxxx
Ixxxxx I
PROJECT: TEXACO
FILE: HAD009276197
LOCATION: ANACORTES
FIGURE:15
GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION
EA-EA'
WASHINtSTON DEPT . OF ECOUOSY
-------
170
140
t- 110
i.
§
80
so
20
-JO u
11-31 SHALLOW ZONE
B-63
B-64
EAST LAND TREATMENT FIELD
170
140
110 >
« 85
50
-10
200
600
800
1000
1200 1400
DISTANCE (FT)
1600
1800
2000
2200
2400
2600
LEGEND
. SHL
['••''••'] SILTY SAND f.6.6°. ] SAND/GRAVEL
SAND-FINE !8oooo | GRAVEL
SAND FN-MED [~—H SILT-CLAY
•'••'••'•
L
DIAMICTON
V V V
V V
+++++
+++-ft
jj • • I j SAND MED-CR fHff^H SILT/SAND L
jxxxxx I —
PROJECT: TEXACO
FILE: HAD009276197
LOCATION: ANACORTES
FIGURE: 16
GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION
EB-EB'
WASHINGTON DEPT. Or ECOLOGY
-------
21
Upper Aqultard
The Upper Aquitard consists of diamicton (a dense unsorted mixture of
gravel, sand, silt, and clay) and interlayered silt and clay. This unit
corresponds to the glacial ti11/glaciomarine drift unit described by Texaco,
but also includes silt and clay layers that are interlayered with the
till/glaciomarine drift. The unit appears to be continuous over the site and
ranges in thickness from about 10 to 60 feet. The unit thickens toward the
east on the east slope of the peninsula. This thickening accounts for the
more gradual slope of the topography on the east side. Beneath the west land
treatment unit, the Upper Aquitard is unsaturated and acts as a partial
barrier to the downward migration of infiltrating water. On the east side,
the upper portions of the Upper Aquitard are reported to be saturated and have
been designated as the uppermost water-bearing zone beneath the east land
treatment unit. Fracturing and weathering of the upper portions of this unit
were observed in borings and in the excavation of an 18-foot-deep french drain
immediately west and north of the east land treatment unit. The purpose of
the french drain is to lower the seasonal high water-table beneath the east
land treatment unit to satisfy regulatory requirements. Strong vertical
downward hydraulic gradients exist in the Upper Aquitard as shown by water
levels in the W-1/W-12/W-22 well cluster. The downward hydraulic gradient was
calculated from well W-l and W-22 to be about 1.2 feet/foot.
-------
22
Outwash Aquifer
The Outwash Aquifer consists of the saturated portions of the advance
outwash. The Outwash Aquifer underlies the Upper Aquitard and appears to be
continuous. It consists of two facies. The first facies consists of
fine-to-coarse sand with occasional gravel. The second facies consists of
fine sand interlayered with silt or clayey silt. The second facies may
coincide with the interglacial sediments unit designated by Texaco. In
general, the coarser, sandy facies overlies the second facies, but at some
locations it is absent. When the more permeable coarser facies is saturated,
it represents the preferred pathway of migration for the two facies. Beneath
the west land treatment unit, a number of wells have penetrated the Outwash
Aquifer and the hydrogeology is fairly well defined. On the east side,
however, only one monitoring well, W-l, is believed to extend into the Outwash
Aquifer. At most locations, the Outwash Aquifer is unconfined, but at W-l it
appears to be confined as shown in Figures 15 and 16.
The direction of ground-water flow in the Outwash Aquifer is controlled by
a number of factors that include the location and rates of recharge, the
variation of hydraulic conductivity within the aquifer, and the surface
expression of the top of the underlying Lower Aquitard. A water-table contour
map, based on water levels in piezometers and wells screened in the Outwash
Aquifer, is shown in Figure 17. This figure shows that the direction of
ground-water flow in the Outwash Aquifer mimics the topographic expression of
the peninsula and flows radially from the center of the peninsula. At the
west land treatment unit, the flow is toward the west and southwest. The
-------
TEXACO, OUTWASH AQUIFER, 12/17/86
1500 -
1000 -
500 -
500
1000
1500 2000
SCALE 1*300 feet
2500
3000
3500
FIGURE 17
WATER-TABLE CONTOUR
MAP
-------
23
ground-water flow beneath the east land treatment unit is toward the east and
southeast.
Seep activity that occurs downslope from the west land treatment unit has
been attributed by Texaco to represent an outcrop of the outwash sand.
However, it is likely that the seeps are only local discharge areas for the
Shallow Zone. Investigations by Texaco to define the hydrogeology of the
seeps were too shallow to be conclusive. However, the investigations did
encounter diamicton rather than advance outwash, which supports the
interpretation that the seeps are related to the Shallow Zone.
Recharge to the Outwash Aquifer occurs as infiltration of precipitation
and leakage from the city reservoirs located near the center of the peninsula
(Figures 2a and 2b). Texaco, in the past, had estimated the leakage rate from
the reservoirs to be 50 gallons per minute, but revised this estimate to 10
gallons per minute based on water balance calculations. The infiltration rate
from precipitation has been estimated by Texaco to be about five inches per
year.
Lower Aquitard
The Lower Aquitard underlies the Outwash Aquifer and consists of
interlayered diamicton, silty sand, silt and clayey silt. The unit probably
corresponds to the lower portion of the interglacial sediments designated by
Texaco; however, the thickness and hydrogeologic properties have not been
defined in detail. At boring B-28 the Lower Aquitard appears to be greater
than 45 feet thick.
-------
24
HYDROGEOLOGIC CHARACTERIZATION DEFICIENCIES
Based on the review of existing data, a number of deficiencies have been
identified in the characterization of the hydrogeology at Texaco. These
deficiencies are listed as follows:
1. The hydrogeologic units designated by Texaco are based on
stratigraphic boundaries rather than similarity of lithology and
hydrogeologic properties. The stratigraphic boundaries at Texaco do
not coincide with hydrogeologic unit boundaries. As a result,
preferred ground water and contaminant pathways are not adequately
defined. In addition, the stratigraphic boundaries for interglacial
deposits and older glacial drift have poor geologic control and are,
for the most part, speculative. Also, the basis for defining the
locations of the unsaturated zones in the interglacial deposits has
not been provided by Texaco.
2. Significant sand layers (Outwash Aquifer) are identified at
depth in geotechnical soil borings located west of the east land
treatment unit. These sand layers may extend beneath the east land
treatment unit, may significantly influence the ground water flow
pattern, and may be the preferred location for ground water
monitoring for portions of the east land treatment unit. The extent,
thickness, and hydrogeologic properties of these hydrogeologic units
must be defined in detail, as well as vertical and horizontal
hydraulic gradients. Extensive field investigations are needed, both
-------
25
upgradient and downgradient of the east land treatment unit. The
drilling program should be designed to penetrate the entire thickness
of the Outwash Aquifer. Well completions at multiple depths will be
necessary to define the vertical gradients. Quantitative flow nets
must be prepared to identify preferred pathways for ground water and
contaminant migration.
3. Additional exploration is needed to define the entire thickness
of the Outwash Aquifer and the hydrogeologic characteristics of the
Lower Aquitard beneath the west land treatment unit.
4. Evidence exists that suggests that the Outwash Aquifer beneath
the west land treatment unit may out-crop at Fidalgo Bay rather than
discharging at springs west of the west land treatment unit as
interpreted by Texaco. Additional deep exploration of the seep area
is needed to verify the hydrogeology. The responses of selected
wells known to show air flow reversals should be monitored over tidal
cycles.
5. Texaco's presentation of the hydrogeology in its Part B
application is inadequate. Detailed hydrogeologic profiles should be
prepared that show hydrogeologic units based on lithologic and
textural variations rather than stratigraphic boundaries. Also, the
profiles should show well construction details such as screened
intervals, gravel pack, and seal locations.
-------
26
GROUND WATER MONITORING NETWORK
At the time of the inspection, 20 monitoring wells and 8 piezometers had
been installed at Texaco (Figure 2b>. A well construction summary is shown in
Table 3 which has been updated from Table XV-B-1 in the Part B application.
Logs and as-built drawings for all wells and soil borings used in this report
are shown in Appendix C.
Although it is not possible to fully evaluate the adequacy of the ground
water monitoring network until the hydrogeology of the site has been
adequately characterized, some deficiencies in the existing monitoring network
have been identified. These deficiencies are described as follows:
1. The sand pack interval was not measured during the installation of
wells W-l, W-2, W-3, and W-4. It is necessary to know the detailed
monitoring well construction to interpret the water quality and water
level data obtained from the wells. Lengths of sand pack intervals
in some wells are excessive compared with respective screen lengths.
2. Wells W-11, W-l2, W-l3 and W-l4 were contaminated with cement grout
during well installation and are unsuitable for ground water sampling
because of high pH in the samples.
3. Well W-16 reportedly had a broken casing, and as a result, cement
grout entered the well during the well installation. Portions of
this grout had to be drilled out. A 2-inch PVC well casing was
-------
t-
in
• u
ros
LU u
*
*^
w
m
c
0
*4
>
«f
u
0 V
*• 2
^
\.
t
u
t •
to "O
to C
o •
B M
O
c
E «,
to to
•< U
0 10
B
5£
0 U
h- M
jr
- b
o •
a v
3 C
in
A.
c
^a V
O c
O to
3
O
tl
T> U
C •
O to
to 3
U 10
M *•
0 —
£
; ^ - • 7 s i
v. . y ^. •* i^
^" "«i "^ i ^
1 i ' » ^ *
c M f> S3 f*
3
^J O **• O
"\1 ^ ^ *
il ** 5 9«
p( m » u
Ijo^ v
U
**5>*** C?*.frv*^^h^4'*rt ^ 9h t&
C**x^ *C^^^***** N*^
tft**^*"! ^ ~* m *\ ^ *+ ~i ^ e* ^ ^w » r- rti«9^Amt«iAf^ 09*^
"zi** •"">s::- """-i- S22--2S-: ^ t ".
< *
»i •*"'
i
e
•
«
to
U
>
e
IT
A
«rf
C
41
•
K
to
a
•»
to
• •
•
to
O
e
to >
r *~°
• > E
O O
.J J-
4*
to O
4. £
>
0 O
>1 to
C D.
• * —
> X. m
.S
**
to
to •
*> *< e
•. 3 »
• O 0
to e
«• <
• o c
e a
— o *
f ••
•
» • •
» O 1
— to <
M k. •
• A O
*)
%
_ r
«T
*
•
V
I
t
0
J
c
r
U
*
r
e
r*.
o
4
f*
XV-B-4
Revision 3
December 31, 1986
-------
27
installed inside the 4-inch PVC casing to attempt to reduce the
amount of fines entering this well. Water quality results from this
well remain questionable due to the grout installation problem.
4. As-built drawings for all wells that have been modified should be
submitted to Ecology and EPA. Wells W-l through W-3 and W-4 through
W-17 were modified with 2-inch casing inserts. As-built drawings for
only W-l6 and W-17 have been submitted.
5. Well W-l5 is screened only in the lower portion of the Outwash
Aquifer. Another potential pathway for contaminant movement is
through the upper portion of the Outwash Aquifer.
6. Well W-17 is screened too high. The well should be.screened about 8
to 10 feet lower in a saturated portion of the Outwash Aquifer.
Water levels from W-17 have been reported that are lower than the
screened interval. This information is unreliable, as are all water
quality results from this well when the water level was below the
screen.
7. There are no monitoring wells upgradient of the east land treatment
unit. Upgradient monitoring wells must be installed closer to the
regulated unit to characterize the detailed hydrogeology, to define
vertical and horizontal gradients, and to define the quality of water
that is moving beneath the facility. Furthermore, the east and west
land treatment units should be represented individually by separate
-------
28
upgradlent wells for statistical comparison purposes, since the two
units are likely distinct geochemically, based on the different
lithologies which have been observed, and would not be expected to
demonstrate comparable water quality characteristics.
8. The locations of wells that are suitable for water quality monitoring
are shown in Figure 18. Considering the complexity of the
hydrogeology, this spacing of wells is not sufficient to adequately
monitor the release of contaminants from either regulated unit.
9. The screening intervals for wells at the east land treatment unit
cannot be evaluated until the hydrogeologic characterization is
completed. Preliminary data indicate that monitoring wells will
probably be needed in the upper portion of the Upper Aquitard and in
the Outwash Aquifer if it is found to exist beneath the east land
treatment unit. This determination should be based on the
identification of preferred pathways for contaminant migration.
-------
r~i i ~T
i |i l(
-------
29
GROUND WATER SAMPLING AUDIT
INTRODUCTION
A ground water sampling audit was conducted at Texaco on December 17,
1986, as part of the Hazardous Waste Ground Water Task Force Inspection. The
ground water sampling audit team consisted of Will Abercrombie (Ecology) and
Marcia Bailey (EPA). The following tasks were accomplished as part of the
sampling audit:
1. Review of the groundwater Sampling and Analysis Plan.
2. Observation of well purging, sampling, and field analysis techniques
at wells W-3, W-15, W-16, W-31, and W-33. Sampling at well W-16 was
not completed during the audit due to low well yield.
3. A review of Texaco1s sample handling and chain-of-custody procedures.
4. An exit interview with Ken Brown, Vern Stevens, and Mike Meeuwsen,
representing Texaco.
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN REVIEW
The interim status Sampling and Analysis Plan reviewed for this audit was
not available prior to conducting the inspection. It was received from Texaco
on December 18, 1986, and is titled "Detailed Well Sampling Procedures,
December 1986, Texaco Puget Sound Plant."
-------
30
The Sampling and Analysis Plan lacks sufficient detail. The plan should
be a stand-alone document with enough detail to allow an individual who is
unfamiliar with the procedures to sample the wells in a manner that 1s
consistent with previous sampling exercises. The plan needs to be rewritten
in a format that allows it to be used as a field tool and guide. Certain
areas of the plan need clarification, and 1n some cases the plan lacks
specific elements. The following documents areas in the plan where
modifications are required:
1. Quality control/quality assurance procedures for sampling, field
analysis, and contract laboratory analysis should be identified and
followed.
2. Analytical methods should be included in the plan. This Information
is found in the Part B submittal, but it should also be part of the
interim status Sampling and Analysis Plan in order to make it a
stand-alone document, as well as to reflect current practices.
3. Pump and well maintenance procedures and schedules should be part of
the plan. This is especially important due to past problems with
some wells and the use of dedicated pumps.
4. Table 1 (Sample Containers) on page 2 of the Plan is confusing and
needs clarification.
5. The Plan does not detail procedures for obtaining water levels from
piezometers and wells which do not have dedicated pumps.
-------
31
6. Inaccurate well coordinates listed on the map located on page 6
should be corrected.
7. Table 4 on page 7 should be modified as follows:
0 The order of collection should be modified. Samples for
total organic carbon (TOO and total organic halogen (TOX)
should be collected Immediately after those for volatile
organic compounds (VOCs). Pesticide samples should be
collected along with other base, neutral, and acid
extractables (i.e., semi-volatile organics).
* The derivation of subsample numbers listed in the first
column ("subsample number") needs to be clarified in the
text.
0 Not all samples are listed as requiring Ice as a
preservative. All samples, Including laboratory pH and
specific conductance samples, require ice as a
preservative. Field pH and specific conductance samples do
not require Ice if analyzed immediately upon collection.
/
The asterisk next to the volume for subsamples B and E
needs to be explained.
-------
32
0 Sample containers requiring septa, teflon liners, etc.
should be identified on the Table to aid in verifying
sample containers prior to sampling.
0 The parameter identified as "others" should be clarified
and the appropriate columns need to be filled in.
8. The method of sealing containers and ice chests in order to detect
tampering should be specified.
9. Information required in the field notebook should be compiled into a
list so the sampler can easily ensure that all required information
has been recorded.
10. The example of the chain-of-custody form on page 9 of the Plan
appears to indicate that a maximum/minimum thermometer is used to
record sample temperatures during shipment. If this is correct, it
should be so indicated in the text of the Plan.
11. On page 12, a statement is made that dedicated pumps must be removed
from the well before measuring the total depth of the well. These
procedures need to be identified in the Plan and a schedule for
measuring well depths should be part of the well maintenance program.
12. Table 6 on page 14 is a handy reference guide, but it should not be
used to determine pore volumes for purging. Pore volumes should be
-------
33
calculated using accurate depth-to-water measurements each time the
well is sampled. The recharge rates listed in the last column of the
Table does not represent the time it takes to recharge to static
levels.
13. The following items refer to section E, titled "Well Sampling",
located on pages 15 through 18 in the Sampling and Analysis Plan:
0 This section should include procedures for addressing
problems that are known to occur or are likely to occur
during sampling, such as leaks in the sample tubing while
taking dissolved metals samples with in-line filters, what
to do if a sample container is not full when the well goes
dry (i.e., discard or fill later), how to obtain water
levels if the depth-to-water is below the pump, etc.
Provisions need to describe where to obtain spare sample
containers if one breaks or becomes contaminated.
0 The purge rate needs to be slow enough to prevent aeration
of water as it cascades down the inside of the well
screen. Ideally, the purge rate should not exceed the
recharge rate of the well. Some wells at Texaco will go
dry even if purged very slowly. The Plan needs to take the
foregoing into account and include appropriate purge rates
for each well being sampled.
-------
34
The plan recommends that volatile organlcs be sampled at a
rate of less than 100 ml/mln. The flow rate must be low
and the same at each well to prevent error induced due to
variable sampling rates. The sampler should not be given
an option in this matter. This also applies to other
aeration-sensitive samples.
Procedures for checking the accuracy of the thermometer
used for measuring sample temperatures should be provided.
The Plan should caution against touching or otherwise
contaminating the inside of containers, septa, and cap
liners. Procedures should be provided describing what to
do If this occurs.
The plan states that an extra volatile organics sample is
collected and will be analyzed, if needed, to guard against
false positive results due to analytical error. False
negative results are just as likely, yet this possibility
is not addressed, nor are acceptable holding times prior to
extraction of the extra sample.
The plan should alert the sampler not to overfill
containers which contain preservatives and should describe
what to do if this should occur.
-------
35
14. Sample holding times need to be identified in the Plan and the method
for ensuring that holding times are not exceeded should be
described. This is to include a method for ensuring the contract
laboratory does not exceed holding times. Procedures to be followed
should holding times be exceeded should also be noted.
OBSERVATION OF FIELD PROCEDURES
This section documents discrepancies between the Sampling and Analysis
Plan procedures and observed field procedures noted during the sampling
audit. Any other inappropriate sampling activity that was observed is also
listed. The following items all require correction.
1. Temperature, pH, and specific conductance are determined 1n the
field. Additional samples are obtained and analyzed for pH, specific
conductance, and turbidity in the Texaco laboratory. Laboratory
values for specific conductance and pH are used by Texaco for the
statistical tests required at 40 CFR § 265.93(b). Texaco claims that
laboratory values are used because they are more reliable due to the
nature of the field equipment used. It was observed that the pH and
specific conductance meter appears to go out of calibration during
well sampling. Although calibration frequencies are adequate, it
appeared that the meter was not operating properly or is not accurate
enough for ground water monitoring purposes. Texaco should procure
equipment that allows for accurate and reliable field measurements so
that these can be used in statistical tests. This is particularly
critical for pH, which can change rapidly once exposed to air.
-------
36
2. The Sampling and Analysis Plan states that laboratory pH and specific
conductance samples are to be delivered to the Texaco laboratory for
analysis immediately after being collected. During the audit many of
the pH and specific conductance samples were not taken to the lab
until the end of the day.
3. On at least two occasions, sample containers with preservatives were
overfilled. These samples should have been discarded or additional
preservative should have been added.
4. Well purge volumes were those listed in Table 6 of the Plan. Purge
volumes should be based on water level measurements obtained
immediately prior to commencement of purging activities.
5. In some cases, low-yielding wells were not sampled immediately after
purging. Samples should be obtained as soon as enough volume is
available to fill a container and in accordance with the sampling
hierarchy.
-------
37
WASTE ANALYSIS PLANS
Four waste analysis plans developed by Texaco were obtained during the
Inspection and subsequently reviewed. These plans, which pertain to waste
stream characterization, were reviewed for compliance with regulatory
requirements in 40 CFR Part 265. The plans reviewed include the original,
dated March 1984, and three successive revisions: October 1984, November 1985,
and December 1986. The two latest revisions of the waste analysis plan are
virtually identical.
Regulations relating to waste analysis for all interim status hazardous
waste facilities are set forth in 40 CFR § 265.13. This section requires that
a detailed chemical and physical analysis of a representative sample from all
hazardous wate streams be conducted, and that a written waste analysis plan be
developed. Waste analysis requirements specific to owners and operators of
land treatment facilities are described in 40 CFR § 265.273.
GENERAL COMMENTS
Compliance checklists for the individual waste analysis plans were
completed for reference and are presented in Appendix D. The following
comments apply to all four plans and address sections of the plans where it is
not clear whether the applicable requirements are being met.
Each plan should contain the results of the comprehensive waste analysis
required by 40 CFR § 265.13(a), but these results are found only in the most
-------
38
recent revision (December 1986). The original plan and the first two
revisions were taken from Texaco1s RCRA Part B application that did not
include the comprehensive waste analysis found in a different section of the
RCRA Part B application.
One of the requirements of the comprehensive waste analysis is that "it
must contain all the information which must be known to treat, store, or
dispose of the waste ..." C40 CFR 265.13(a)(l)]. All four plans should
provide this information, but they contain little on what is necessary to
determine whether a waste can be landfarmed. This lack of information is
particularly true of the first two plans (March and October 1984). Although
the two most recent revisions briefly discuss "rate limiting constituents" and
"capacity limiting constituents," little or no specific criteria are included.
All of the plans call for a "fingerprint" analysis of all hazardous wastes
to be contained in Texaco's land treatment units. This fingerprint analysis
includes selected parameters that are intended to characterize the waste. The
only organic parameter is total oil content, which may not be sufficient to
characterize the waste for treatment purposes. In addition, the
fingerprinting analysis may not satisfy 40 CFR § 265.273(b), which requires
that "the concentration of any substances which caused the waste to be listed
as a hazardous waste" be determined.
Texaco's annual hazardous waste reports for the most recent three years
were reviewed. Considerable variations in the composition of wastes was
found. Therefore, comprehensive waste analysis, especially for organic
-------
39
compounds, should be performed more often. This frequency would provide
better data on what organic compounds are being applied to the land treatment
units at Texaco1s Puget Sound Plant.
MARCH 1984 HASTE ANALYSIS PLAN
The March 1984 plan is the least complete of the four. While it calls for
detailed chemical and physical analyses of the wastes, the list of parameters
provided is not complete and excludes many of the organic compounds typically
found in oil refinery wastes. Also, the plan does not provide the necessary
information on the treatment, storage, or disposal of the refinery wastes in
accordance with 40 CFR Part 265. Other apparent areas of non-compliance are
listed below:
0 Sampling methods are not provided. SW 846 (U.S. EPA 1986) sampling
methods are referenced but should be described in the report.
0 The frequency of repetition for the initial comprehensive analysis is
included but is vague. A specific minimum number of years should be
given.
0 Routine analysis for compounds that exceed the maximum concentrations
(EP toxicity) given in Table 1 of 40 CFR § 261.24 is not addressed
for all wastes. This table includes heavy metals and pesticides.
-------
40
OCTOBER 1984 HASTE ANALYSIS PLAN
The first revision of October 1984 is a considerable improvement on the
original waste analysis plan. Only two areas of non-compliance were noted.
First, the plan does not provide guidelines for dealing with wastes generated
off-site that are to be disposed at the Texaco land treatment units. (Texaco
infrequently received waste from off-site generators and reportedly has not
done so since 1984.) Second, substances that caused the waste to be listed in
40 CFR Part 261 Subpart D are not routinely analyzed for in all cases.
Certain oily wastes are listed because of elevated levels of polyaromatic
hydrocarbons, but this parameter is excluded from the list for routine
analysis.
NOVEMBER 1985 AND DECEMBER 1986 HASTE ANALYSIS PLANS
The two most recent revisions appear to meet the 40 CFR Part 265
requirements. Although provisions for the evaluation of hazardous waste
received from off-site generators is still absent, as long as Texaco does not
accept off-site hazardous wastes, this is not an area of non-compliance.
-------
41
WASTE TRACKING AND CHARACTERIZATION
During the Inspection, certain waste tracking reports and chemical
analyses of hazardous wastes were obtained and subsequently reviewed. The
review included identifying and quantifying the types of hazardous waste and
hazardous waste constituents disposed on-site since 1984. In the following
narrative, the Texaco refinery's landfarm system, information sources, and
reliability of the data are discussed.
HASTE TRACKING
Texaco1s Anacortes refinery operates three land treatment units (see
Figure 2). Two of the land treatment units are designated for hazardous
waste, while the. third receives non-hazardous waste. Each land treatment unit
is subdivided into individual landfarms or plots. The two hazardous waste
land treatment units consist of 16 landfarms totaling approximately 13 acres.
The non-hazardous waste land treatment unit consists of 7 landfarms totaling
approximately 7 acres.
According to Texaco records and procedures, when a waste is applied to one
of the land treatment units, a pollution control form (Texaco Form R-500, see
Figure 19) must be completed. Form R-500 is the basis of Texaco1s waste
tracking system. Information from these forms is summarized in Texaco's
annual hazardous waste report. The annual hazardous waste reports contain
information concerning date, quantity, and location of waste application, and
data on waste composition. It was assumed for the purposes of this review
-------
FIGURE 19
POLLUTION CONTROL FORM
SUBMIT BEQUEST PROMPTLY TO POILDTIOH COOHDDCATO1
UNIT OR AREA: JtLK*t jf
- DlAT
E5T1MATEP
REQUEST
PROPOSED DATE OP DISPOSAL; /, £ f.
•START OF RELEASE, TIME AND DATE:
•mupifnrti e» OTHMCT TIMP AMH TMTP. /ZOO — /-27- !¥•
*8
Oo)S
SUPERS
RECOMMENDATIONS^
f
APPROVED.
PCUUTIQ
TANT PLANT MANAGER
Texaco Rjrm R-500, Pollution Control Form.
-------
42
that all hazardous wastes applied to the land treatment units since 1984 have
been Identified In Texaco's annual hazardous waste reports.
For this report, a summary table was prepared for each of the 23 landfarm
plots, using Texaco1s annual hazardous waste reports (Tables 4-26). The total
estimated quantity of each constituent applied since 1984 is noted. Source of
the constituent and calendar year it was applied are also shown. The
constituents listed in the summary tables were selected on the basis of
availability of analytical data. All analytical data used were assumed to be
accurate [e.g., correct analytical metod was used, adequate quality
assurance/quality control (QA/QC) was performed].
Constituents originated from one or more of the following categories of
refinery waste (called "source" in the tables):
API - American Petroleum Institute (API) separator sludge (K051)
or other wastes generated at the API separator
0 SOES - Slop oil emulsion solid and other related wastes generated
from Tanks 61 and 62
' RS - Refinery scale, including any waste Identified as a tank or
roof scale
0 ROH Refinery oily wastes, including miscellaneous oily waste
such as tank bottoms and certain spent catalysts
-------
TABLE 4. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 1
Constituent
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium (total )
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
Source Years Applied
API,
API,
ROW
API,
SOES
API,
SOES
API,
API,
API,
SOES
SOES
API,
API
API,
API,
API,
SOES
SOES
API
SOES
METALS
SOES
SOES
RS,
, MS
RS,
, MS
SOES
SOES, RS
SOES
ORGANICS
SOES
SOES
SOES
SOES
1984, 1985
1984, 1985
1985
1984, 1985
1984, 1985
1984, 1985
1984, 1985
1984, 1985
1985
1985
1984, 1985
1984
1984, 1985
1984, 1985
1984, 1985
1985
1985
1984
1985
Total Quantity
Applied (Ib)
1
147
<1
304
60
14
125
1
1,860
203
18
36
187
125
38
46
329
103
4
-------
TABLE 5. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 2
Constituent
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmi urn
Chromium (total )
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
Total Quantity
Source Years Applied Applied (Ib)
METALS
MS 1984 <1
MS 1984 3
NO — —
MS, RS 1984 2
MS, RS 1984 23
MS 1984 <1
MS 1984 1
NO — ~
ORGANICS
MS 1984 103
NO ~
ND —
ND —
ND —
ND —
ND —
ND —
ND —
ND
ND ~
-------
TABLE 6. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 3
Constituent
Source
Years Applied
Total Quantity
Applied (Ib)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium (total)
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
METALS
1984
1984
RS
RS
ND
MS, SOES, RS
MS, SOES, RS
RS
RS
RS
ORGANICS
SOES 1984
SOES 1984
SOES 1984
ND —
SOES 1984
SOES 1984
SOES 1984
SOES 1984
SOES 1984
ND
SOES 1984
1984, 1985
1984, 1985
1984
1984
1984
86
25
1,100
168
3
81
42
6
37
271
-------
TABLE 7. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 4
Constituent
Source
Years Applied
Total Quantity
Applied (Ib)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmi urn
Chromium (total)
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
METALS
API 1984
API 1984
NO
API, SOES, MS 1984
API, SOES, MS 1984
API 1984
API 1984
API 1984
ORGANICS
API, SOES
SOES
API, SOES
API
API, SOES
API, SOES
API, SOES
SOES
SOES
API
SOES
1984
1984
1984
1984
1984
1984
1984
1984
1984
1984
1984
81
37
8,980
545
9
2
267
141
21
122
883
6
11
-------
TABLE 8. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 5
Constituent
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium (total )
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
Source
API
API, RS
API
API, RS,
API, RS
API, RS
API, RS
API
API, MS
NONE
API
API
API
API
API
NONE
NONE
API
NONE
Years
hCTALS
1984
Applied
, 1985
1984, 1985
1984
MS 1984
1984
1984
1984
1984
ORGANICS
1984
1984
1984
1984
1984
1984
1984
, 1985
, 1985
, 1985
, 1985
, 1985
, 1985
, 1985
, 1985
, 1985
, 1985
Total Quantity
Applied (Ib)
<1
117
<1
183
37
11
100
1
•
6,800
—
17
43
107
89
38
—
—
125
—
-------
TABLE 9. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 6E
Constituent
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium (total )
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Vanadium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
Total Quantity
Source Years Applied Applied (1b)
METALS
ND
ND —
ND — ~
API 1985 61
API 1985 7
ND —
ND —
ND —
ND —
ORGANICS
ND
ND
API 1985 10
API 1985 24
API 1985 60
API 1985 50
API 1985 21
ND —
ND — —
API 1985 70
ND — —
-------
TABLE 10. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 6W
Constituent
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmi urn
Chromium (total)
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Vanadium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz ( a )anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresol s
Total Quantity
Source Years Applied Applied (Ib)
METALS
NO
ND
ND —
API 1985 53
API 1985 6
ND — —
ND —
ND — —
ND — —
ORGANICS
ND —
ND
API 1985 8
API 1985 21
API 1985 51
API 1985 43
API 1985 18
ND —
ND —
API 1985 59
MfJ
-------
TABLE 11. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 6WC
Constituent
Source
Years Applied
Total Quantity
Applied (1b)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmi urn
Chromium (total)
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
METALS
NO WASTE APPLIED SINCE 1984
ORGANICS
NO WASTE APPLIED SINCE 1984
-------
TABLE 12. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 6W
Constituent
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium (total)
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Vanadium
Source Years Applied
METALS
Kin —
nu
NO
ND
MS 1985
MS 1985
ND —
ND
ND
ND
Total Quantity
Applied (Ib)
—
—
65
18
—
—
—
-_
ORGANICS
PAH (total) ND
Anthracene ND
Benz(a)anthracene ND
Chrysene ND
Naphthalene ND
Phenanthrene ND
Pyrene ND
Benzene ND
Toluene ND
Methyl ethyl ketone ND
Cresols ND
-------
TABLE 13. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 7
Constituent
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium (total)
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
Source
METALS
SOES, MS
MS
ND
API, SOES, MS
API, SOES, MS
SOES, MS
SOES, MS
SOES, MS
ORGANICS
SOES
SOES
SOES, API
API
SOES, API
SOES, API
SOES, API
SOES
SOES
API
SOES
Years
1984,
1984
—
1984,
1984,
1984,
1984,
1984,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985
1985,
Applied
1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
Total Quantity
Applied (Ib)
1
2
—
952
33
23
23
3
29,000
1,520
28
4
743
390
55
341
2,460
11
29
-------
TABLE 14. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 8
Constituent
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmi urn
Chromium (total)
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
Source
METALS
SOES, MS
ND
ND
SOES, API, MS
SOES, API, MS
SOES, MS
SOES, API
SOES, MS
ORGANICS
SOES
SOES
SOES, API
API
SOES, API
SOES, API
SOES, API
SOES
SOES
API
SOES
Years
1984,
—
—
1984,
1984,
1984,
1986
1984,
1986
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
Applied
1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
Total Quantity
Applied (Ib)
2
—
—
815
80
16
32
3
42,300
2,300
56
43
1,200
660
120
510
3,700
120
44
-------
TABLE 15. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 9
Constituent
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium (total)
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz ( a ) anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
Source
METALS
SOES, API, MS
NO
SOES
SOES, API, MS
SOES, API
SOES, API, MS
SOES, API
SOES, API, MS
ORGANICS
SOES, API
SOES
SOES, API
API
SOES, API
SOES, API
SOES, API
SOES
SOES
API
SOES
Years
1984,
—
1985
1984,
1985,
1984,
1985,
1984,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1986
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1986
1985,
Applied
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1986
1985, 1986
1986
1985, 1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
Total Quantity
Applied (Ib)
1
—
<1
820
32
14
215
1
23,400
1,300
35
33
710
400
74
290
2,100
96
25
-------
TABLE 16. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 10E
Constituent
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium (total )
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
Total Quantity
Source Years Applied Applied (Ib)
SOES,
API
SOES
SOES,
SOES,
SOES,
SOES,
SOES,
SOES,
SOES
SOES,
API
SOES,
SOES,
SOES,
SOES
SOES
API
SOES
METALS
API 1984,
1984
1985
API, MS 1984,
API, MS 1984,
API 1984,
API, MS 1984,
API, MS 1984,
ORGANICS
API 1984,
1985,
API 1984,
1984
API 1984,
API 1984,
API 1984,
1985,
1985,
1984
1985,
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1986
1986
1986
2
12
<1
441
41
8
333
1
23,890
1,920
35
8
946
500
73
430
3,110
23
37
-------
TABLE 17. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 10W
Constituent
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmi urn
Chromium (total)
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
Total Quantity
Source Years Applied Applied (Ib)
SOES,
API
SOES
SOES,
SOES,
SOES,
SOES,
SOES,
SOES,
SOES
SOES,
API
SOES,
SOES,
SOES,
SOES
SOES
API
SOES
METALS
API 1984,
1984
1985,
API, MS 1984,
API, MS 1984,
API 1984,
API, MS 1984,
API, MS 1984,
ORGANICS
API 1984,
1985,
API 1984,
1984
API 1984,
API 1984,
API 1984,
1985,
1985,
1984
1985,
1985, 1986
1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1986
1986
1986
1
12
<1
416
37
7
317
1
26,590
1,590
30
8
786
416
72
355
2,570
23
31
-------
TABLE 18. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 11
Constituent
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium (total)
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
Source
METALS
SOES, RS
ND
ND
SOES, API,
RS, MS
SOES, API,
RS, MS
SOES
SOES, API,
RS, MS
SOES, API,
RS, MS
ORGANICS
SOES, API
SOES
SOES, API
API
SOES, API
SOES, API
SOES, API
SOES
SOES
API
SOES
Years
1985,
—
—
1984,
1984,
1986
1984,
1984,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
Applied
1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
Total Quantity
Applied (Ib)
1
—
—
406
51
3
171
1
33,500
1,570
53
66
910
533
110
350
2,550
190
30
-------
TABLE 19. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 12
Constituent
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmi urn
Chromium (total )
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
Xyl enes
Source
METALS
SOES, API, MS
SOES, RS
SOES, API,
MS, RS
SOES, API,
MS, RS
SOES, API,
MS, RS
.SOES
SOES, API,
RS, MS
SOES, API
ORGANICS
SOES, API
SOES
SOES, API
API
SOES, API, MS
SOES, API
SOES, API
SOES
SOES
API
SOES
MS
Years
1985,
1984,
1984,
1984,
1984,
1986
1984,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985,
1985
Applied
1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
1986
Total Quantity
Applied (Ib)
1
4
<1
360
31
2
160
1
17,900
800
34
50
546
128
70
180
1,300
140
18
40
-------
TABLE 20. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 13
Constituent
Source
Years Applied
Total Quantity
Applied (Ib)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmi urn
Chromium (total)
Lead
Mercury
.Nickel
Selenium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
METALS
MS 1984
ND —
NO —
MS, RS
MS, RS
MS
MS
ND
ORGANICS
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
<1
1984, 1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1984
1985, 1986
693
17
11
37
-------
TABLE 21. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 14
Constituent
Source
Years Applied
Total Quantity
Applied (Ib)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium (total)
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
METALS
MS
MS
MS
MS, ROW
MS
MS
MS
MS
ORGANICS
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
1984, 1985 12
1985 74
1985 2
1984, 1985, 1986 5,260
1985, 1986 150
1984 1
1984, 1985, 1986 420
1986 <1
-------
TABLE 22. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 15
Constituent
Source
Years Applied
Total Quantity
Applied (Ib)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmi um
Chromium (total)
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
METALS
ND
ND
ND
MS
MS
MS
MS
MS
ORGANICS
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
1984, 1985, 1986 2,060
1985, 1986 95.6
1984 1
1986 72
1984 2
-------
TABLE 23. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 16E
Constituent
Source
Years Applied
Total Quantity
Applied (Ib)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium (total)
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
METALS
ND
ND
ND
MS, RS
MS, RS
ND
MS, RS
ND
ORGANICS
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
1985, 1986
1986
1986
1,440
138
178
-------
TABLE 24. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 16W
Constituent
Source
Years Applied
Total Quantity
Applied (Ib)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium (total)
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
METALS
ND
ND
ND
MS, RS
MS, RS
ND
MS, RS
ND
ORGANICS
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
1985, 1986
1986
1986
1,600
39
150
-------
TABLE 25. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 17
Constituent
Source
Years Applied
Total Quantity
Applied (Ib)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium (total)
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
/
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
METALS
ND
ND
ND
MS, RS
MS, RS
ND
MS, RS
ND
ORGANICS
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1986
2,100
60
120
-------
TABLE 25. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 17
Constituent
Source
Years Applied
Total Quantity
Applied (Ib)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmi urn
Chromium (total)
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
/
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
METALS
NO
NO
NO
MS, RS
MS, RS
ND
MS, RS
ND
ORGANICS
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
NONE REPORTED
1985, 1986
1985, 1986
1986
2,100
60
120
-------
TABLE 26. HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS APPLIED TO LANDFARM 18
Constituent
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmi urn
Chromium (total)
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
PAH (total)
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzene
Toluene
Methyl ethyl ketone
Cresols
Total Quantity
Source Years Applied Applied (Ib)
METALS
ND
ND
ND
MS 1985, 1986 825
MS 1985, 1986 67
ND
MS 1985, 1986 290
ND —
ORGANICS
NONE REPORTED —
KIOKir* DCDftDTCft _•_« ™«
NUNt KtrUK 1 tU —
NONE REPORTED
KlftKlf DCDr\DTFI^ ___ — —
NUnt KtrUK 1 tU
NONE REPORTED —
NONE REPORTED —
NONE REPORTED
Kinwc DFDDDTFn
NUNt KtrUK 1 tlJ
NONE REPORTED —
NONE REPORTED — —
NONE REPORTED — —
-------
43
MS - Miscellaneous wastes, including filter materials, spent
catalysts, contaminated solid, and various sludges.
Where "ND" appears in the "Source" column of the tables, calculated
quantity of waste constituent in the plot was less than 0.1 Ib.
Metals
The quantities of metals reported in the summary tables were calculated
using only data from the annual hazardous waste reports. Tables in the 1984
report provided the concentration of each constituent in each application of
waste, and weight of the application. Total mass of the constituent was not
provided. Total mass of the constituent was calculated by multiplying
concentration times total weight of waste, after making the necessary unit
corrections. For example, if a 50-ton batch of separator sludge contained 500
mg/kg of chromium, the concentration would be converted to Ib/ton (500 mg/kg *
1 Ib/ton) and multiplied by 50 tons for a total chromium mass of 50 Ib in the
batch.
Tables in the 1985 and 1986 reports include total mass of each constituent
for each waste application. Several of these calculated mass values were
recalculated using other data in the reports and found to be accurate.
The metals quantities reported in the summary tables are considered to be
reasonably accurate for those metals which were analyzed. Almost all wastes
generated since 1984 have been analyzed for chromium and lead, commonly found
-------
44
in significant concentrations in refinery wastes. Reportedly, when a waste
was suspected of containing high levels of nickel or vanadium, it was also
analyzed for these constituents. Materials that typically contain high levels
of nickel and vanadium Include catalyst wastes, specifically from the
fluidized catalytic cracker unit (FCCU). Waste samples were infrequently
analyzed for the remainder of metals (25-35 percent of the time).
Vanadium is not included in the summary tables because it was not an
analyte in 1984 and only infrequently an analyte in 1985 and 1986. Most
vanadium applied to the land treatment units reportedly is contained in FCCU
waste, which has not been applied to the hazardous land treatment units since
1985. However, waste characterization Information provided in Texaco's Part B
permit application indicate that vanadium Is present to some extent in most of
the hazardous waste streams applied to the land treatment units.
Orqanlcs
The quantities of organic constituents reported in the summary tables were
calculated using data from the comprehensive waste characterization performed
by Texaco in 1985 and from the annual hazardous waste reports. The annual
reports contain limited data on organic constituents found in wastes. Only
total polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) were analyzed, and this only
10-20 percent of the time.
To estimate the amount of organic compounds that has been applied since
1984, data from Texaco1s comprehensive waste characterization was needed.
-------
45
This characterization included an analysis of waste for "Skinner list"
compounds. The Skinner list (Table 27) is an EPA index of constituents
considered likely to be found in petroleum refinery wastes. The only wastes
generated at the Texaco refinery that showed significant concentrations of
organic compounds were API separator sludge and slop oil emulsion solids. The
concentrations of compounds identified in these wastes are shown in Table 28.
Total quantities of organic constituents applied to land treatment units in
waste were calculated using the same procedure described for metals.
Quantities of organic compounds reported in the summary tables may not be
reliable, because it is not clear whether the profiles shown in Table 28 are
representative of all API and SOES wastes. The total PAH levels reported for
SOES waste varied from 0 to 7.3 percent. Concentrations of other organic
compounds are also unlikely to remain constant. The values shown in the
summary tables should be considered rough estimates. The actual values for
organic compounds are probably higher because most wastes that contain organic
compounds were probably not analyzed for them regularly.
CONCLUSIONS
From available Texaco records, it is possible to discern to varying
degrees of accuracy and precision the quantities and identities of
constituents which have been disposed in the hazardous waste landfarms in the
past few years. Since the facility has operated since 1958, and since
hazardous as well as non-hazardous refinery wastes were placed together in the
units until 1985, it is of course not possible to determine in a meaningful
-------
Table 27. Constituents of Petroleum Refining Wastes
1. Metals
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryl 1i urn
Cadmium
Chromium
Cobalt
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Vanadium
2, Volatiles
Benzene
Carbon disulf'-de
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
1,2-Oichloroethane
1,4-Dioxane
Ethyl benzene
Ethyl ene dibromide
Methyl ethyl ketone
Styrene
Toluene
Xylene
3. Semivolatile Base/Neutral
Extractable Compounds
Anthracene
Benzo (a) anthracene
4.
Benzo(b)f1uoranthene
Benzo(k)f1uor anthene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Bi s(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Chrysene
01benz(a»h)acridine
Oibenz(a,h)anthracene
Oichlorobenzenes
01 ethyl phthalate
7,12-Oimethylbenz(a)anthracene
Dimethyl phthalate
01(n)butyl phthalate
D1(n)octyl phthalate
Fluoranthene
Indene
Methyl chrysene
1-Methyl naphthalene
Naphthalene
Ph.enanthrene
Pyrene
Pyrldine
Quinoline
Semivolatile Ac id-Extractable
Compounds
Benzenethlol
Cresols
2,4-0 imethylpheno1
2,4-Oinitrophenol
4-N1trophenol
Phenol
-------
TABLE 28. HAZARDOUS WASTE PROFILE
SLOP OIL EMULSION SOLIDS
Compound Concentration (mg/kg)
Benzene 650
Toluene 4,700
Anthracene 2,900
Naphthalene 1,400
Benz(a)anthracene 49
Phenanthrene 730
Pyrene 100
Cresols 56
Also contains trace levels (0.05 - 0.07 mg/kg) of volatile sulfur compounds.
API SEPARATOR SLUDGE
Compound Concentration (mg/kg)
Methyl ethyl ketone 430
Benz(a)anthracene 60
Chrysene 150
Naphthalene 370
Phenanthrene 310
Pyrene 130
Also contains trace levels (0.1-0.4 mg/kg) of volatile sulfur compounds.
-------
46
way the total quantities of constituents which have been disposed. Prior to
the implementation of RCRA regulations beginning in 1980, records of such
disposal were not required of Texaco.
Soil core samples obtained as part of Texaco1s land treatment
demonstration provide a better understanding of the nature of the inorganic
constituents which have been placed in the units and which are present within
and below the zone of incorporation. In 1985, Texaco conducted a
reconnaissance sampling effort to assess soil conditions at the land treatment
units, both hazardous and nonhazardous. Soil cores were collected at 26
randomly chosen locations in the east and west land treatment units and in the
background areas. Seven depth intervals were sampled at each location: 0-15
cm, 15-45 cm, 45-90 cm, 90-150 cm, 200-250 cm and 250-305 cm. One result of
the study (Table 29) was a demonstration of values of the following waste
constituents to be above background levels at various discrete depths:
antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, lead,
mercury, nickel and vanadium. While it should be noted that most of the
metals had decreased to background levels at the deepest measured depths, all
values greater than background serve as an Indication of the identity of
inorganic constituents which have been treated in these units. Since organic
constituents are biodegraded, rather than immobilized, in the land treatment
process, it is not possible to draw similar conclusions from core samples
analyzed for organic constituents.
-------
Table 29
07a-l8. Metal Concentrations by Depth That Exceed Background Values for the Texaco IT Unit (1989).
Parameter
Depth , CM
Sample Number
Hazardous Units
. East- 1,2
East-3,4
East-5, 6
West North- 1,2
West North-3,4
West North-5,6
Nonhazardous Units
West South-1,2
West South-3,4
West South-5,6
Parameter
Depth
Sample Number
Hazardous Units
East- 1,2
East-3,4
- *-5,6
North-1,2
West North-3,4
West North-5,6
Nonhazardous Units
West South-1,2
West South-3,4
West South-5,6
Parameter
Depth
Samp 1 4 Number
Hazardous Units
East- 1,2
East-3,4
East-5, 6
West North-1,2
West North-3,4
West North-5,6
Nonhazardous Units
West South-1,2
West South-3,4
West South-5,6
Antimony
0-45 45-150 150-200 200-305
200
150
84
22
Bery 1 1 1 urn
0-45 45-150 150-200 200-305
0.75
1
0.84 0.49
0.71 0.46
0.83
0.59 0.49
Cobalt
0-45 45-150 150-200 200-305
26 16
27 15
18 14
23 16
23 15
20 19
31
Arsen 1 c
0-45 45-150 150-200 200-305
18 10 10
17
18
18 8
12 98
16 23 20 22
12 12
15
Cadmium
0-45 45-150 150-200 200-305
1.5
1.6
4 1.6
2
Lead
0-45 45-150 150-200 200-305
38 10
39 11
47 12
49 It
50 16
52 13 11
79 10
99
0-45
0-45
158
248
164
276
325
376
229
493
109
0-45
1.1
1.7
t.4
1.1
9.1
0.45
0.95
Barium
45-150 150-200 200-305
V
88
Chromium
45-150 150-200 200-305
53 46
66 69
56
39
89
80 43
39
Mercury
45-150 150-200 200-305
0.25
0.35 0. 1
O.I
0.1
0.35
0.45 O.I
Continued —
47
-------
Table 29, cent.
Table 07a->8. Continued.
Parameter
Depth
Sample Number
Hazardous Units
East-1,2
East-3,4
East-5,6
West North- 1,2
West North-3,4
West North-5,6
Nonhazardous Units
West South- 1,2
West South -3, 4
West South-5,6
Parameter
Depth
Sample Number
Hazardous Units
East-1,2
East-3,4
East-5,6
West North- 1,2
West North-3,4
West North-5,6
Nonnazardous Units
West South- 1,2
West South -3, 4
West South-5,6
Nickel
0-45 45-150 150-200 200-305
270 62
283
161
141 72
180 72
134 55 60 58
115 57
108
Vanadium
0-45 45-150 150-200 200-305
238 75
253
212
174
167 74
129
Selenium
0-45 45-150 150-200 200-305
*
Silver
0-45 45-150 150-200 200- ]
*
1.7
-------
47
SAMPLE DATA RESULTS
INSPECTION DATA
The analytical results obtained from gro.und water, lyslmeter and surface
water samples during this Inspection are summarized In Appendix E. The
organics samples obtained from lysimeter L-ll were not received by the
analytical laboratory. A summary of the usability of the data is reproduced
in Appendix F. Most of the results reported for metals, volatiles and
semi-volatiles were judged to be quantitative. Results for arsenic, cadmium,
antimony, lead and total magnesium and aluminum were judged to be
semi-quantitative, while total barium was rated as qualitative. TOX was
judged to be quantitative, while TOC was semi-quantitative.
The results for organic compounds were largely unremarkable, as were those
for indicator parameters, except for TOX values of 248 ug/1 in well W-15 and
91 ug/1 in well W-17. Trichlorofluoromethane was reported in W-15 at an
estimated value of 1 ug/1, and the sample from W-17 reportedly contained
1,1,1-trichloroethane at an estimated value of 2 ug/1. Neither of the
constituents was reported at a level that would account for the TOX values.
Various phthalate compounds were reported in several wells, and are also on
the Skinner list of refinery waste constituents. Although such compounds are
commonly found in samples from wells which have been constructed of PVC, as
are the Texaco wells, it is recommended that, in order to demonstrate that a
release has not occurred, future wells installed at Texaco be constructed of
stainless steel, at least in the saturated zone.
-------
48
Skinner List constituents (Table 27) which were reported above detection
limits in the samples obtained at Texaco are presented in Table 30. Both of
the west side lysimeters that were sampled showed the presence of cobalt above
detection levels, whereas the west side background lysimeter showed none.
Cobalt, nickel, mercury, vanadium, and lead were detected in the surface water
run-off sample from the west land treatment unit, while none of those
constituents were found in either west side background well W-31 or in east
side background well W-2. Downgradient west side wells which showed the
presence of some or all of the Skinner list constituents found in the run-off
sample include W-32 (lead) and W-17 (nickel and cobalt). On the east side,
lysimeters L-6E and L-l were reported to contain lead, chromium, nickel and
cobalt, none of which were found above detection levels In background
lysimeter L-BGTl. Lysimeter L-l additionally showed the presence of antimony,
arsenic and vanadium, not found above detection limits in the background
lysimeter. East side downgradient wells which showed Skinner list
constituents not found in background wells (but present in the landfarm runoff
sample) include W-22 (cobalt); W-23 (cadmium); W-l (lead, nickel, cobalt and
vanadium); and W-21 (lead, nickel, cobalt and vanadium). The east side
curtain drain accepts fresh water in a cutoff system before the east land
treatment unit, as part of the effort to dewater that unit. The analytical
results from that sample were unremarkable, as would be expected.
Of the inorganic constituents noted above, only cadmium is present, in
W-23, at a level exceeding the ground water protection standard, which for
cadmium is 10 ug/1. While the levels of the other constituents noted do not
necessarily represent an environmental threat, they are constituents of the
-------
I . J
TABLE 30
SKINNER LIST CONSTITUENTS FOUND ABOVE DETECTION
LIMITS DURING THE GWTF INSPECTION AT TEXACO"
detection limits
West Landfarm Wells
W-31 (background)
W-32
W-17
W-16
W-33
W-24
W-15
Surface Water Run-
off from west
land treatment units
West Landfarm Lysimeters
L-ll
L-12
L-BG-SE (background)
Barium Lead
DL=3 DL=5
170/57
144/96 — /2.5
26/82
110/63
107/66
196/46
147/90
86/63 4.9/21.6
127/93
174/89
158/65 —/1 7. 4
Antimony Arsenic Chromium Nickel Cobalt Vanadium Cadmium
DL=3 DL=10 DL=6 DL=23 DL=7 DL=8 DL=5
ll/— 14/10.8 12/—
9/__ 67/— — /9
7/_
6/~
62/26.7 — 20/7 89/58 8/18 27/18
ll/— — __/i9
7.8/11.7 — 6/— — — /16
ll/— — 16/~
* Values are shown as Total/Dissolved, all in ug/1. Blanks indicate below detection limit.
-------
TABLE 30, continued
SKINNER LIST CONSTITUENTS FOUND ABOVE DETECTION
LIMITS DURING THE GWTF INSPECTION AT TEXACO"
detection limits
QA Samples
Field Blank
Trip Blank
East Land farm Wells
W-2 (Background)
W-22
W-2 2 (Duplicate)
W-23
W-l
W-2 1
East Curtain Drain
Barium Lead Antimony Arsenic Chromium Nickel Cobalt Vanadium Cadmium
DL=3 DL=5 DL=3 DL=10 DL=6 DL=23 DL=7 DL=8 DL=5
46/15
L. 1 1 ~™ ™ ™ __• «•« — — — _v_ ___ w_w
52/13 — 12/—
ff/2~l - — — — — 15/— - /12 — —
138/28 15/— 8/—
41/4 18/44.1
79/__ 4.9/— 23/— 33/— ~/8 33/--
128/— 5.3/— 25/— 23/— — /8 28/—
63/40 6/~ ~/7
Surface Water
East Landfarm Lysimeters
L-BGT1 (background) 69/70
L - 6E 132/75 0/29.7
L -1 182/111 —/38.4
21/—
10/-
9.1/— 21/-
26/—
63/— 33/17
12/—
-------
49
hazardous (and non-hazardous) wastes Texaco has disposed In its land treatment
units, according to the waste characterization information presented in
Texaco1s Part B permit application. As such, and since background conditions
(as represented by this sampling event) do not indicate the presence of those
'constituents, a preliminary assessment would indicate that they may be present
in downgradient wells as a result of a release or releases from the land
treatment units. To confirm or deny this, additional analyses with
appropriately low detection limits should be obtained for the constituents in
question. This is further discussed below.
Texaco has informed EPA and Ecology since the inspection that the newest
set of lysimeters, which were installed 5.5 feet below ground surface in 1986,
has since been determined to be within, rather than below, the treatment
zone. The soil pore water sample data generated from these lysimeters
therefore is not useful in demonstrating the efficacy of land treatment at
Texaco. Since the lysimeters do not collect soil pore water immediately
beneath the land treatment zone, they do not meet the unsaturated zone
monitoring requirements of WAC 173-303-655(6)(d). Consequently, a new set of
lysimeters must be installed pursuant to the permitting process.
REVIEH OF GROUND HATER DATA GENERATED BY TEXACO
Indicator Parameters
On June 24, 1986, Texaco informed Ecology and EPA in writing that required
statistical analyses indicated that specific conductance values for W-23,
-------
50
downgradient of the east land treatment unit, were significantly higher than
background values found in wells P-3 (west side) and W-2 (east side). Texaco
proposed a ground water quality assessment program to investigate that
phenomenon. Texaco later concluded that no ground water contamination had
occurred, based on monitoring quarterly for a list of refinery waste
constituents; and on information from a new background well, W-2. By virtue
of W-2 showing relatively high specific conductance values (and additional
statistical tests incorporating such values), Texaco concluded that the values
observed in W-23 were in fact not statistically significant, and were
therefore not indicative of a release of contamination to ground water.
Because of the new background monitoring well, which replaced P-3, Texaco
compiled four quarters of new background data for statistical comparison
purposes. Background values now used are from wells W-31 and W-2, obtained
during the months of August 1986; October 1986; December 1986; and April
1987. In December 1987, and upon request, Texaco submitted ground water data
which had been generated since the Task Force inspection. These data include
ground water results from April and September 1987 (reproduced as received in
Appendix G), conducted in accordance with the semi-annual monitoring
requirements of 40 CFR § 265.93(d)(2). Statistical comparisons of indicator
parameter results were made using the averaged-replIcate t-test. Texaco
combined the results from both background wells for comparison with Individual
downgradient wells in both land treatment units. No statistically significant
differences were found, except TOX In September, in wells W-3, W-15, W-17,
W-24 and W-2 and W-31 (the latter two being background wells). Additional
t-tests incorporating current background data into the background data set
-------
51
(that is, using five quarters of background data instead of four) showed no
statistically significant differences. Subsequent sampling in October 1987
demonstrated that all wells contained less than 10 ug/1 TOX, with no
statistically significant differences existing, using the original four
quarters of background data for comparison.
Because the two background wells actually represent individual units, that
is, either the east or the west land treatment unit, statistical tests were
performed for this report using Texaco's background data from only W-31 for
comparison with west land treatment unit downgradient wells and from only W-2
for comparison with east land treatment unit downgradient wells. The results
of the averaged replicate t-tests using this method indicate statistical
differences exist (at the 0.99 confidence level) in the following instances:
April 1987: pH, W-l (east side); W-3, W-15, W-16, H-17,
W-24 and W-33 (west side).
Conductance, W-22 (east side); W-17 (west side).
Sept. 1987: pH, W-22 (east side); wells W-3, W-15, W-17, and
W-24 (west side).
Conductance, W-22 (east side).
In the case of pH, all values which were significantly different were
higher than background, except in the case of W-24, which showed pH lower than
background. It is of interest to note that pH values obtained by Texaco's lab
appear to be consistently higher than those obtained in the field. The same
-------
52
phenomenon exists for specific conductance. Although both values are provided
in Texaco's submittals, only laboratory values were used (by Texaco and for
this report) in the required statistical tests. In any case, W-22, which
caused Texaco to temporarily engage in assessment monitoring in 1986,
continues to demonstrate specific conductance values out of proportion to any
other east side well.
It is difficult to interpret these results. Having background results
from only one well for comparision with downgradient wells places the facility
at a greater risk of encountering false positives, that is, having indicator
parameter values which demonstrate statistical significance when in fact no
contamination exists. However, this fact does not justify combining values
from background wells which represent two geologically and hydraulically
distinct units. Rather, Texaco should install more than one background well
truly representative of each unit, and use values from those wells in the
comparisons with wells downgradient of each respective unit. The need for
more appropriate background wells is described in this report in the section
"Ground Water Monitoring Network."
Haste Constituents
Texaco's analytical results for organic constituents, including volatile
organics and certain Skinner list compounds, historically have been
unremarkable. This was also the case for results from the Task Force
inspection. However, as described above, results from this inspection effort
indicate the possible presence of several inorganic refinery waste
-------
53
constituents in some downgradient wells where they are not also present in
background wells. These constituents are lead, nickel, cobalt, cadmium and
vanadium. In 1985 and 1986, Texaco tested ground water samples quarterly for
several metals, including cadmium, lead, vanadium and nickel. The detection
limits for vanadium and nickel during those sampling events were high: 500
ug/1 for nickel and 500-1000 ug/1 for vanadium. Detection limits for lead
were 50 ug/1 and 10 ug/1 for cadmium. None of these constituents were
detected in upgradient or downgradient wells. In August 1986, detection
limits were lower, and vanadium was reported in W-l at 50 ug/1; W-2
(background) at 40 ug/1; W-24 at 10 ug/1; and W-33 at 10 ug/1. The detection
limit was 10 ug/1. Nickel was reported at low levels in many wells but was
also found at a relatively high level of 40 ug/1 in the trip blank, obviating
the value of the well sample results. Lead was reported in W-l at 1 ug/1 and
in W-32 at 1 ug/1, the detection limit. The only other metals tested at all
wells were chromium, found in all wells at low levels, and antimony, found in
no wells. In April 1987, Texaco sampled lysimeter water and found nickel and
cobalt to be present in some lysimeters, including three background lysimeters,
In Texaco's two routine 1987 sampling events (Appendix G), vanadium was
not an analyte. Nickel, chromium and lead (as well as iron, zinc and
manganese, not of concern in this discussion) were tested. Chromium again was
ubiquitous at low levels. Lead was also present in many wells including
background wells, all at low levels. Nickel was reported In all wells at
levels between 1 ug/1 and 38 ug/1, except for W-17, which showed a level of
203 ug/1 in the April sampling event and 518 ug/1 in the September sampling
event.
-------
54
CONCLUSIONS
The historical analytical results for inorganic constituents indicate that
vanadium may be a natural constituent in ground water upgradient from the land
treatment units; however, Texaco1s single sampling event in 1986 with
appropriately low detection levels is insufficient to draw such a conclusion
with confidence, given the results of the Task Force inspection, which found
vanadium in downgradient wells only. It is recommended that vanadium be an
analyte in one or more future sampling events. While nickel appears to be a
natural constituent in upgradient ground water, Texaco1s results for the most
recent two quarters (April and September 1987) show W-17 to contain high
levels of nickel relative to all other wells. (According to Texaco1s land
treatment demonstration document, nickel is the single constituent which may
present a concern at unit closure because it is present in the treatment zone
at levels which could potentially cause a phytotoxic reaction in the cover
crop at closure.) The presence of nickel at the levels observed in the last
two quarters in W-17 may indicate a release from the west land treatment unit.
No conclusions can be drawn from the presence of cobalt and cadmium above
detection limits in certain downgradient wells during the Task Force
inspection, since cobalt has never been a Texaco analyte, and cadmium has not
recently been one. Cadmium should be an analyte, at least in W-23, where it
was reported in the Task Force inspection results. Cobalt and vanadium are
also constituents of Texaco's refinery wastes, and as such could potentially
provide important information regarding the release of constituents from the
land treatment units. Once an improved ground water monitoring system is
-------
55
Installed at each of Texaco's land treatment units, appropriate analytical
studies should be made to determine definitively the nature of the occurrence
of these metal constituents, that is, whether they represent natural phenomena
or are sourced in Texaco's land-treated wastes.
-------
APPENDIX A
FIELD PARAMETERS AND
WELL DEPTH MEASUREMENTS
-------
Appendix A
Field Parameters
Ground Water Task Force Inspection
Texaco
Well 1
Temperature,
°C
Specific Conductance,
umhos/cm
PH
Well 2
Temperature,
°C
Specific Conductance,
umhos/cm
PH
Well 15
Temperature,
°C
Specific Conductance,
umhos/cm
PH
Well 16
Temperature,
°C
Specific Conductance,
umhos/cm
pH
Well 17
Temperature,
ec
Specific Conductance,
umhos/cm
PH
Well 21
Temperature,
8C
Specific Conductance,
umhos/cm
PH
Well 22
Temperature,
°C
Specific Conductance,
umhos/cm
PH
Trial 1
10.8
617
7.9
10.1
699
8.0
10.6
552
7.7
11.0
505
7.4
10.8
1098
7.2
10.8
823
7.1
10.7
1753
6.9
Trial 2
11.2
543
8.1
10.7
688
7.7
10.6
552
7.3
11.0
423
8.6
10.8
1372
7.2
11.0
819
7.0
11.1
1736
7.1
Trial 3 Trial 4
9.8 10.5
705 691
8.5 8.0
10.7
688
7.8
10.4
555
7.1
11.0
450
8.6
—
—
—
10.7
825
7.2
11.6
1747
7.2
-------
Appendix A, continued
Trial.1
Nell 23
Temperature, 10.2
°C
Specific Conductance, 906
umhos/cm
pH 7.4
Well 24
Temperature, 10.3
•C
Specific Conductance, 1599
umhos/cm
pH 6.4
Well 31
Temperature, 12.2
°C
Specific Conductance, 926
umhos/cm
pH 6.9
Well 32
Temperature, 9.5
°C
Specific Conductance, 653
umhos/cm
pH 7.0
Well 33
Temperature, 10.4
°C
Specific Conductance, 555
umhos/cm
pH 7.4
Surface Water - West Ditch
Temperature, 4.1
°C
Specific Conductance, 999
umhos/cm
pH 7.7
Surface Water - East Curtain Drain
Temperature, 7.4
°C
Specific Conductance, 602
umhos/cm
pH 7.3
Trial 2
10.3
938
7.1
11.3
813
6.0
12.3
1056
7.0
Trial 3 Trial 4
10.3
556
7.0
10.2
836
7.2
6.0
12.1
1061
7.0
10.0 9.7
561 565
7.0 7.1
-------
MEASURED DEPTHS OF WELLS & PIEZOMETERS COMPARED
WITH DEPTHS REPORTED IN TEXACO LOGS
Location
P-l
W-26
P-2
P-3
W-14
P-4
P-5
P-6
P-7
P-8
W-11
Reported
Depths, Ft.
28.82
51.25
29.48
21.56
34.95
14.67
15.17
14.58
15.33
14.83
53.14
Measured
Depth. Ft.
22.6
52.1
24.75
19.35
34.14
14.80
14.87
14.92
14.87
14.90
49.6
-------
-------
APPENDIX B
ANALYTICAL PARAMETERS FOR
TASK FORCE SAMPLES OBTAINED AT TEXACO
-------
ANALYTICAL PARAMETER LIST
..jy i:.. '.j
APPENDIX IX - GROUND WATER MONITORING LIST
Systematic Name
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthylene, 1,2-dihydro-
•. i
Acetamide, M-(4 ethoxyphenyl)-
Acetamide. M-9H-f luoren-2-yl-
Acetic acid ethenyt ester
Acetic acid, (2,4.5- trichlorophenoxy)-
Acetic acid, (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)-
Acetonitrile
AluminuM
Anthracene
Antimony
Aroclor 1016
Aroclol- 1221
Aroclor 1232
Aroclor 1242
Aroclor 1248
CAS RN
208 96-8
83-32-9
62 44 2 •
53 96 3
108-05-4
93-76-5
94-75-7
75-05-8
7429-90-5
120-12-7
7440-36-0
12674-11-2
11104-28-2
11141-16-5
53469-21-9
12672-29-6
Common Name
Acenaphthalene
Acenaphthene
Phenacetin
2-Acetylaminof luorene
Vinyl acetate
2.4.5 I
2,4-DichlorophenoKyacetic acid
Acetonitrftt
Aluminum (total)
Anthracene
Antimony (total)
Aroclor 1016
Aroclor 1221
Aroclor 1232
Aroclor 1242
Aroclor 1248
-------
May IS, 1986
APPENDIX IX -- GROUND-UATEI MONITORING LIST
Systematic Name
Aroclor 1254
Aroclor 1260
>. <
Arsenic
Barium
Benz (a) anthracene. 7,12-dimethyl •
Benzljlaceanthrytene, 1 ,2-dihydro- J-methyl •
Benz te) acephenanthrytene
Benzamide. 3. 5-dichloro-M- ( 1. 1 -dimethyl -2-propynyl )•
Benz (al anthracene
Benzenamine
Benzenamine, 2-methyl -5-nitro-
Benzenamine, 2-nltro-
Benzefiamlne, 3-nitro-
Benzenamint, 4-chloro-
Benzenamine, 4-nitro-
Benzenamine, 4>*-methylenebis(2-chloro-
CAS UN
11097-69-1
11096-82-5
7440-38-2*
7440-39-3
57-97-6
56-49-5
205-99-2
23950 58-5
56-55-3
62-53-3
99-55-8
88-74-4
99-09-2
106-47-8
100-01-6
101-T4-4
Common Name
Aroclor 1254
Aroclor 1260
Arsenic (total)
Barium (total)
7, 12-0 imethylbent [a] anthracene
3-Methylcholanthrene
Benzo tb] f t uor anthene
Pronamide
Benz (a] anthracene
Aniline
5-Nitro-o-toluidine
2-Nitroanilinc
3-Nitroaniline
p-Chloroaniline
p-Nitroaniline
4.4*-NethylenebU(2-chloroaniUne)
-------
Nay 15, 1986
APPENDIX IX -- GROUND-WATER MONITORING LIST
Systematic Name
Benzenamine, N-nitroso-H-phenyl-
Benzenamine, N-phenyl-
Benzenamine, N,N- dimethyl -4-(phenylazo)-
Benzene
Benzene, 1-bromo-4-phenoxy
Benzene, l-chtoro-4-phenoxy-
Benzene. 1 -methyl -2,4-dini tro-
Benzene, 1,1' -(2, 2, 2- trichloroethyl idene)bis 14 -chloro-
Benzene, 1,1 ' -(2.2.2-trichtoroethyUdene)b
-------
Nay 15, IV06
APPENDIX IX -- GROUMD-WATER MOM HOMING LIST
Systematic Name
Benzene, 1.4-dinitro-
Benzene, 2- methyl • 1,3 dinitro-
i •
Benzene, chloro-
Benzene, dimethyl-
Benzene, ethenyl -
Benzene, ethyl-
Benzene, hexachloro-
Benzene, methyl-
Benzene, nitro-
Benzene, pentachloro-
Benzene, pentachloronf tro-
Benzeneacatlc acid, 4-chloro-c<-|4-chlorophenyl)-tf<-hydroxy-,
qthyt astar
f
1,2-Benzanadlcarboiiylic acid, bis(2-ethythexyl) ester
1,2-BenzencdicarboKyt ic acid, butyl phenylmethyl ester
CAS >N
100-25-4
606-20-2
108-90-7 '
1J30 20-7
100-42-5
100-41-4
118-74-t
108-68-3
98 95-3
608-93-5
82-68-8
510-15-6
117-81-7
85-68-7
Common Name
meta-Oinitrobenzene
2,6-0 initrotoluene
Chlorobenzene
Xylene (total)
Styrene
Ethyl benzene
Hexachlorobenzene
Toluent
Nitrobenzene
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachloroni trobenzene
Chi orobenz Hate
•is{2 ethylhexyl) phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, dibutyl ester
84-74-2
Di-n-butyl phthalate
-------
Nay IS, 1966
APPENDIX IX •• GROUND-WATER MONITORING LIST
Systematic Naaie
1,2-Benzenedicarboxyl ic acid, diethyl ester
1,2-BenzenedicarboNyl ic acid, dlaiethyl ester
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, dioctyl ester
1,3-Benzenediol
Benzeneethananine, X.X-di*ethyl •
Benzenenethanol
Benzenethiol
1,3-Benzodioxole, 5- ( 1 -property 1 )-
1 ,3-Benzodioxole, 5-(2-propenyl )-
Benzolklf luoranthene
Benzole acid
Benzotrstlpentaphene
Benzo (jgh 1 1 ptry I ant
Benzotalpyran*
Beryl liua)
11,1' Biphenyll *.*• diaoine. J.V dichloro
CAS RH
84-66-2
131 II 3
117-84-0 '
108-46-3
122-09-8
100-51 6
108 98 5
120-58-1
94-59-7
207-08-9
65-85-0
189-55-9
191-24-2
50-32-8
7440-41-7
91-94-1
CoaMon Naa>e
Diethyl phthalate
Oiaiethyi phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Resorcinol
alpha, alpha -Oi«ethytphenethyla«ine
Benzyl alcohol
Benzenethiol
Isosafrole
Safrole
BenzoC k ) f I uoranthene
Benzole acid
Oibenzola. ilpyrene
Benzo(ghi )perylene
Benzo(a)pyrene
BerylliiM (total)
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine
-------
nay I... . /oo
APPENDIX IX •- GROUND WATER MONITORING LIST
Systematic Name
{1.P BiphenylJ 4.4'-diamine, 3,3'-dimethoj
-------
May IS, 1986
APPENDIX IX -- GROUND WATER MONITORING LIST
Systematic Naaw CAS RN
Cyanide 57-12-5
2,5 Cyclohexadiene 1,4 dione 106-51-4
>, I
Cyclohexane, 1,2,3,4,5.6-hexachloro- . ( 1 °<.2*<.3 ^ ,4o*.5 A.6 £)- 319-84-6'
Cyclohexane. 1,2,3,4,5.6-hexachloro-. <1«i,2 p.3e<,4 ^, Serf, 6 £)- 319-85-7
Cyclohexane, 1,2,3,4,5,6-hexachloro-,
-------
.....
May IS, 1986
APPENDIX IX •- GROUND-WAIEd MONITORING IIST
Systematic Name CAS ftN
i «
2,7:3,6-Dimethanonaphth(2,3-b)oxirene, 3,4,5,6,9,9-hexachloro- la. 60-57-1
2.2a.3.6.6a,7,7a octahydro-. <1a<*,2 A,2a«*,3 A, 6 A.6ao<,
7£.7a*> K P P
2.7:3,6 Oiiaethanonaphth{2.3-b}ox Irene, 3.4,5,6.9,9-hexachtoro la, 72-20-8
2,2a,3.6,6a,7.7a octahydro . (lao'.Z A,2a A.3erf,6*<,6a A,
ifi.r***- r
1,«:5,a Oi««thanonaphthal«ne, 1,2,3,*, 10, 10-hexachloro- 1,4,4a.S,8. 309-00-2
Ba hexahydro-, (1o<,4
-------
'••" - •' f ' I. ..4 !„...,,.'.
nay 15, i »«»6
APPENDIX IX •• GROUND WATER MONITORING LIST
Systematic Naaie
Ethane. 1 , 1 ,2- tr ichloro-
Ethane, 1, 1.2,2- tetrachloro-
Ethane, 1 ,2-dibro»o-
Ethane, 1 ,2-dichloro-
E thane, chloro-
Ethane, hexachloro-
Ethane, pentacMoro-
1.2-Ethanedia»lne, N.N-dinethyl •»' -2 pyridinyl •«•• - (2- thienylwethyl )-
Ethanone, 1-phenyl-
Ethene, (2-ehtoroethoxy)-
Ethene, 1, 1 -dichloro-
Ethene, 1,2-dichloro- . (E)
Ethen«, chloro-
Ethene, tttrachloro-
Ethene, trichloro-
Fluoranthene
CAS RN
79-00-5
79-34-5
106-93-4 *
107-06-2
75 00-3
67-72-1
76-01-7
91-80-5
98-86-2
110-75-8
75 35-4
156-60-5
75-01-4
127-18-4
79-01-6
206-44-0
Conaon Nam
1,1,2-THchloroethane
1, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
1,2-OibroMocthane
1,2-Dichloroethane
Chloroethan*
Hexachloroethane
Pentachloroethane
Nethapyrilcne
Acetophtnont
2-Ch(oroethyt vinyl ether
1,1-Oichlorotthylcnc
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
Vinyl chloride
Tetrachloroethene
Trichloroethene
Fluoranthene
-------
Nay 15, iv«6
APPENDIX IX •- GROUND WATER MONITORING LIST
Systematic Nam
Fluoride
9B - F 1 uorene
2-Hexanone
Hydrazine. 1,2-dlphenyl •
1 ndeno 1 1 . 2 . 1 • cdl py rene
Iron
Lead
Magnesiun
Manganese
Mercury
Methanaa>ine, N-aethyl -N-nltroso-
Nethane, broam-
Methane, broaxxilchloro-
Methane, chloro-
Methane, dibrowo-
Methane, dibroerachtoro-
CAS RN
16984-48-8
86-73-7
591 78 6 '
122-66-7
193-39-5
7439-89-6
7439-92-1
7439-95-4
7439-96 5
7439-97-6
62-75-9
74-83-9
75-27-4
74-87-3
74-95-3
124 48-1
CoiMaon Naaw
Fluoride
Fluor en*
2-Hexanone
1,2-Diphenylhydraslne
lndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Iron (total)
Lead (total)
MagncciuB (total)
Manganese (total)
Mercury (total)
N-Nttrosodiawthylaiaine
•roaHMacthan*
•roatod i ch t oroawthana
Chloroawthant
OibroaKMMthane
ChlorodibroaMMM thane
10
-------
fc. .--J
Hay la, 1986
APPENDIX IX •• GROUND-WATER NONITORING LIST
Systematic Nane
Methane, dichloro-
Metha,ne, dichlorod.if tuoro-
Methane, iodo-
Methane, tetrachloro-
Me thane, tribroaio-
Methane, trlchloro-
Methane, trichlorof luoro-
Methanesulfonic acid. Methyl ester
Methanethiol, trichloro-
4.7-Methano-1H- indene, 1 .2.4,5.6.7,8,8 octachloro- 2,3. 3a. 4. 7, 7a
hexahydro-
4.7-Methano-1N-indene. 1.4.5,6. 7,8,8 -heptach I oro-3a, 4.7, 7a- tetra-
hydro-
2.5 Methano-2N lndeno{1.2 bloxirene, 2,3,4,5,6.7,7 heptachloro la.
6,9 Hethano-2,4,3 b«n*odioxathiepin, 6,7,8,9. 10, 10-hexachloro- 1.5.
5a,6,9,9a hexahydro-, 3 oxide, (3o^,5« f>.6e*,9o(.9» A)-
CAS RN
75-09-2
75-71-8
74-88-4*
56-23-5
75 25-2
67-66-3
75-69-4
66-27-3
75-70-7
57-74-9
76-44-8
1024-57-3
959-98-8
Co«Mon Nam
Dichloromthane
Dichlorodif (uoroaethane
lodo«e thane
Carbon tetrachtoride
Tribrwaoacthane
Chlorofor*
T r i ch 1 orowonof I uor oaie thane
Methyl aethanesulfonate
Trichloroawthantthiol
Chlordane
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Endosulfan 1
6,9 Methano 2.4,3 beniodioxathiepin, 6.7.8,9,10,10-hexachloro-1.5. 33213-65-9
5a.6.9.9a hexahydro , 3 oxide. (3
-------
nay 1j,
APPENDIX IX -• GROUND-WATER MONITORING LIST
Systematic Name
1,3,4 Metheno-2H- eye lobuta(cd) pent alen- 2 -one, 1.1a,3,3a,4.5,5,5a,
5b,6-decachlorooctahydro-
1,2,4 Nethenocyclopentalcdlpentalene-5-carboxaldehyde, 2,2a.3,3,4,
7R*>- r r r r r r r
Morpholine, 4-nitroso-
1 -Naphtha I enaaiine
2-Naphthalena*ine
Naphthalene
Naphthalene, 2-chloro-
Naphthalene, 2-aiethyl-
1,4 Naph thai *nedione
Naphtho|1,2,3,*-def)chryaene
Nickel
Osmi ui*i
Oxirane
2-Pentanone, *-*ethyt-
Phenanthrene
CAS RN
1*3-50-0
7*21-93-*
59-89-2
134 32 7
91-59-8
91-20-3
91-58-7
91-57-6
130-15-4
192-65-4
7440-02-0
74*0-0* -2
75-21-8
108-10-1
85-01-8
Coaaon Naa>e
Kepone
Endrln aldehyde
N-Nitroaoararpholine
1-Naphthylaaiine
2-Naphthylaaiine
Naphthalene
2-Chloronaphthalene
2-Nethylnaphthalene
1 , * - Naph thoqulnone
0 i benso la, e] pyrene
Nickel (total)
Osaiuai (total)
Ethylene oxide
* - Methyl - 2 • pent anone
Phenanthrene
12
-------
Nay 15, ivi»6
APPENDIX IX -- GROUMD-UATEft MONITORING LIST
Systematic Name
Phenol
Phenol , 2*(1-methylpropyt)-4,6-dinitro-
Phenol, 2-chloro-
Phenol, 2 methyl -
Phenol, 2 methyl-4,6-dinitro-
Phenol, 2-nltro-
Phenol, 2,2' methylenebi* [3,4.6 trichloro-
Phenol, 2,3,4.6- tetrachloro-
Phenol, 2.4-dichloro-
Phenol, 2.4-dimethyl
Phenol, 2,4-dimethyl •
Phenol, 2,4-dlnitro-
Phenol!. 2,4,5-trlchloro-
Phenol, 2,4,6- trichloro-
Phenol, 2,6-dichloro-
Phenol , 4-chloro-3-methyl -
CAS RN
108-95-2
88-85-7
95-57-8
95-48-7
534-52-1
88-75-5
70-30-4
58-90-2
120-83-2
105-67-9
105-67-9
51-28-5
95-95-4
88-06-2
87-65-0
59-50-7
Common Name
Phenol
2-sec-lutyl -4,6-dinitrophenol
2 • Ch I orophenol
ortho-Cresol
4,6-Olnltro-o-cre»ol
2 Nitrophenol
Heiiach I orophena
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol
2,4-Oichlorophenol
2.4-Dimethylphenol
2,4 Oimethylphenol
2,4-Olnitrophenol
2,4,5-Trlchlorophenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophtnol
2,6-Oichlorophenol
p-Chloro-m-cre*ol
-------
May 15, iv<16
APPENDIX IX •- GROUND-WATiR MONITORING LIST
Systematic Nane
Phenol. 4-Mthyl-
Phenol, 4-nitro-
\ •
Phenol, pentachtoro-
Phosphorodithioic acid, 0,0-diethyl S- t(ethylthto)Mthyl) etter
Phosphorodithioic acid. 0,0-diethyl S-(2-(ethylthio)ethyt] eater
Phosphon-othioic acid, 0- C4- l(di«ethylaa)ino)aulfonyllphenyl]
O.O-diaethyl eater
Phosphorothloic acid, 0,0-diethyt 0-(4-nitrophenyl} eiter
Phosphorothioic acid, 0,0-diethyl 0-pyrailnyl eater
Phosphorothioic acid, 0,0-dfaiethyl 0-(4-nitrophenyl) eater
Piperidine, 1-nitroso-
Potassiuai
l-Pro^anaaine, N-nitroao-N-propyt •
f
Propane, l,2-dlbro»o-3-chloro-
Propane, 1,2-dlchloro-
Propane, 1,2,3- trichtoro-
CAS RN
106-44-5
100-02-7
87-86-5 '
298-02-2
298-04-4
52-85-7
56-38-2
297-97-2
298-00-0
100-75-4
7440-09-7
621-64-7
96-12-8
78-87-5
96-18-4
CoMon Naaw
para-Creaol
4-Nitrophenol
Pentachtorophenot
Phorate
Oiautfoton
Fanphur
Parathlon
0,0-Diethyt 0-2-pyraiinyl phoaphoroth-
ioate
Methyl par at hi on
N-Nitroaopiperidine
Potaaaiua) (total)
Di -n-propylnitroaaa)ine
1.2-Oibroax»-3-ch(oropropane
1 , 2 • 0 1 ch 1 oropr opane
1,2,3-Trichloropropane
14
-------
..-y 15. .,36
APPENDIX IX -• GROUND-WATER MONITORING LIST
Systematic Name
Propane, 2,2' -oxybisd -chloro-
Propanedini tri le
Propaneni trite
Propanenitrile, 3-chloro-
Propanoic acid, 2- (2, 4, 5- t rich tor ophenony)-
1-Propanol, 2,3-dibroMO- , phosphate (3:1)
1-Propanot, 2-«ethyl-
2-Propanone
2-Propenal
1-Propene, 1.3-dichtoro- , (£)•
1 Propene. 1.3 dlchloro- , (2)
1-Prooene, 3-chloro-
2-Propenani trite, 2-Mthyl-
2-Propenenitrlte
2-Propenoic acid, 2-awthyl-, ethyl ester
CAS RN
108-60-1
109-77-3
107-12-0*
542-76-7
93-72-1
126-72-7
78-83-1
67-64-1
107-02-8
1888-71-7
10061-02-6
10061-01-S
107-05-1
126-98-7
107-13-1
97-63-2
Cowaon Naaw
•is(2-chloroisopropyl) ether
Nalononi trite
Ethyl cyanide
3- Chloropropioni trite
Si I vex
Tris(2>3-dibroawpropyt) phosphate
Isobutyl alcohol
Acetone
Acrolein
Hexachtoropropene
trans -1.3 -Of chloropropene
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene
3-Chtoropropene
NethacrylonitrlU
Acryloni tri le
Ethyl atethacrytate
15
-------
Nay IS. 1966
APPENDIX IX •- GROUND WATER MONITOR IMG LIST
Systematic Na«e
2-Propenoic acid, 2-*ethyl-, Methyl ester
2-Propen- l-ol
2-Propyn-1-ol
Pyrene
Pyridine
Pyridine, 2 ••ethyl -
Pyrrol idine. 1-nitroso-
Seleniu*
Silver
SodiiM
Sulfide
CAS RN
80-62-6
t07-16-6
107-19-7 '
129-00-0
110-86-1
109-06-8
930-55-2
7782-49-2
7440 22-4
7440-23-5
18496-25-8
Cowaon Na«e
Methyl etethacrylatc
Ally! alcohol
2-Propyn- 1-ol
Pyrene
Pyridine
2-Picoline
N-Nitroaopyrrol idine
Seleniu* (total)
Silver (total)
Sodiuai (total)
SulMde
Sulfurout acid. 2-chloroethyl 2-|4-(1,1-diMethylethyl)phenoxy) -1-
•ethylethyl ester
140-57-8
Araaiite
Thallil
7440-28-0
Thalliua (total)
Thiodiphosphoric acid (UNO)^ P(S)l^O), tetraethyl ester
3689-24-5
Tetraethyldithiopyrophosphate
Tin
7440-31-5
Tin (total)
16
-------
)•. i V,. . :.<< I. _
nay , ITOO
APPENDIX IX •- GROUND-WATER MONITORING LIST
Systematic Naa>e
CAS RN
Comon Naaw
Toxaphene
8001-35-2
Toxaph«n«
Vanadiuia
7440-62-2
Vanadiuai (total)
line
7*40-66-i
Zinc
-------
-------
TABLE I
Comparison of CLP and SW-846 Analytical Methods
Legendt
IN-ORG:
PROCEDURE:
METHOD:
ANALYTE:
CLP-No:
SW-846:
Inorganic or organic method
Type* of procedure
Sample prep[aration]
Determlinative]
Description of method
Analyzed for (if appropriate)
Unique identifier for CLP method
Unique identifier for SW-846 method
-------
*,
s.
I
C
S O(\J
in M —• <\J
lliilili 1 lllllilllllll
szjz^A^AAA £. £££££££ £££&*.£
s(
S -» -« -«
-» j-« -« tvi
-------
57
31
99
60
61
'2
J
64
65
66
67
6fi
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
ai
82
83
84
85
86
87
•^
)
#
91
92
93
94
95
%
97
96
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
M3
•
I
I
I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
detere.
deter*
detere.
attraction
extraction
extraction -
attraction
extraction
extraction
extraction
extraction
extraction
extraction
extraction
extraction
cleanup
cleanup
cleanup
cleanup
cleanup
cleanup
cleanup
cleanup
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere.
detera.
detere,
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere/txtm
deter*.
dctcrv.
determ.
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere.
detere.
flaw aa V * «
furnace aa v t «
flaee aa Zn . • •
extraction 1 taeple prep.
MO. funnel liq-liq
continuous liq-liq
acid/baie cleanup
Soxhlet
•onication
coluen cleanup of petroleue Matte
vusi rurye am trap aupn prep.
headtpace
_, x
purge-ano-trap
direct injection
solvent dilution
cleanup, gen
alumna coluen
alueina coluen, petrol Mattes
Floriiil coluen
silica gel
gel-pereeation
acid-base partition
sulfur
gc, gen.
t ?
(P-lla,-l£a) various
(P-llb,-12b) various
t ?
t various
(P-l3a,-14a) various
t ?
* (
t •
(D-3a) HSO/NeflH
t H20
f eethyleneCl/hexane
t *
Pllc,13b,14b various
* various
* various
• various
(P-14c) eethylene Cl
• various
Plld,13c,14d ?
(0-2) ?
gc, halogenated volatile organic RX X
gc, nonhalogenated vol. organic* R t
gc, aromatic vol. organic* Ar/ArCl •
gc, acrolein, acryl-,acetonitril ACT *
gc. hexadecane ext-scr, purgeables ? (P-15,0-1)
gc, phenols ftrOH t
gc, phthalate esters phtn. *
gc, organo-Cl pesticides i PCBs RCl/PCBs (D-5)
gc, nitroaroe. ( cyclic ketones nitr/ket t
t 1 ' i l_ __l 4- f
gc, poiynuci. aroeat. nyorocarbon >
tiHs *
gc, chlorinated hydrocarbons RCl/Ar/Cl •
gc, organophosphorus pesticides RP »
gc, chlorinated herbicides RC1 *
gc/es, volatile organic* vol. org. (D-3b)
gc/es, packed col., seeivolatiles «-vol. org t
gc/es, capillary col., seeivolat. s-vol. org (0-4)
gc/es, capillary col. 2378-TCDD (0-6)
HPLC, polynuc. arc*, nydrocarb. PAHs
adsorp., eicrocouloeetry RX (TOX)
adsorp., anttron activation RX (TOX)
titrieetric, iodine S—
colorie., auto., chloroanilate S04
color ie., auto., eethylthyeolblue S04
turbidieetric S04
cuebustion or oxidation C (TOC)
spectrophot., eanual, 4-MP/dist. phenols
colorie., auto., 4-MP/dist. phenols
spectrophot., MBTH/dist. phenols
gravie., sep. funnel extr'n. oil/gr liq
grav/. Soxhlet extHn. oil/gr sol
eultiple tube f mentation coiifonrt
eeebrane filter colifore-t
colorie., eanual, brucine ND3
colorie., auto., Ft (CN) 6, MI Cl
wxane/MeOH
Meth.UM
Neth.UM
Htth.HW
?
40CFR13B
40CFR136
?
?
EPA 600-4-M
?
Cf
Cf
40CFR136
?
?
i«ii /Mr
JM U^U
40CFR136
40CFR136
40CFR136
40CFR136
CRL-Ci
•t
?
40CFR136 •
40CFR136 '
Cf
Cf
40CFR136
i
40CFR136
40CFR136
40CFR136
40CFR136
40CFR136
40CFR13S
cf
cf
40CFR136
40CFR136
40CFR136
CLP
40CFS136
EMSL-Ci
7
aaufl
nrT^
NettuUM
Neth.UW
Neth.UW
Pteth.WW
Neth.UIU
Heth.MU
Neth.l4U
Htth.HW
S.M.E.UM
M.N.M.&
N.N.M.L
Neth.WM
Neth.yW
2B6.1
266.2
289. 1
?
625
625
7
7
027
7
7
7
624
7
?
3600
7
7
7
?
7
7
7
601*
601
7
?
603
7
604
606
608
609
610
612
7
7
624
625
625
(IK)
610
7
?
427+
375.1
375.2
375.4
415.1
420.1
420.2
420.3
4111
502A
7
7
352.1
325.1
7910
7911
7950
3500
3510
3520
3530
3540
3550
3570
3720
5020
5030
5040
5050
3600
3610
3611
3620
3630
3640
3650
3660
6000
8010
8015
8020
8030
8035
8040
8060
8080
8090
8100
8120
8140
8150
8240
8250
8270
*
8310
9020
9022
9030
9035
9036
9038
9060
9065
9066
9067
9070
9071
9131
9132
9200
9250
-------
.16
117
UB
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
dtt<
dtt
dtt
dtt
dtt
dtttra.
dtttra.
dtttri.
dtttra.
dtttra.
dtttm
dtttra.
dtttra.
Ottfrm.
txtraction
•xtraction
ignitability
ignitability
corroiivity
toxicity
sampling
sampling
Mipling
colorIB., auto., Ft(CN)6, Mil
titritttric, Mrcuric nitrati
rtiio.
tlKtrovtric
tltctroattric
iptcific conductanct
m acttatt difpiactwnt
acttatt displactatnt
iMtrsion tnt, ••brant lintrt
paint filttr_tt«t •
•at'd. hydraul. cond.t ptrwabil.
radio., tvaporation
radio., prtcipitation
•ultiplt, acid rain
oily Mastts, Soxhltt
Ptnsky-Martin cloctd cup
Sttaflash clostd-cup
wight Ion
txtr'n proctdurt(EP)toxicity
sampling train, todifitd
•ourct ustsutnt
vol. org. twpling train
Cl
Cl
Ra-228
PH
pH
pH in Mil
conduct anc
cat. tx. cap
cat. tx. cap
lintn
filttrt
t
alphalbtta
alpha Ra
itttl
organic!
PQHCs
, *
\
1
i
i
i
K
4
1
1
feth.UM
Ntth.UM
S.M.E.UW
Ntth.UM
?
?
&M.E.UM
N.S.A.
K.S.A.
?
?
SU-846
?
S.M.E.UM
CAC/H2S04/HN03 ?
tf/tolutnt/HOAc ?
» ASTM STD
» ASTNSTD
\ NflCE-TM-
Ote ?
f 40CFR60? *
• 40CH60
1 ?
325.2
325.3
707
150.1
?
?
205
p. 891
p. 891
?
?
9100
?
705 ?
?
?
0-93*
D327B
01-69
'.»
5
?
?
9251
9252
9320
9040
9041
9045
9050
9080
9081
9090
9095
9100
9310
9315
1320
1330
1010
1020
1110
1310
0010
0020
0030
-------
TABLE II
Appendix IX, 5/15/86
Proposed for groundwater monitoring in 51FR 26632
Legend:
SYST-NAME:
CLP-NAME:
Q-Anal:
CAS-RN:
MS:
HSL:
Systematic name in Appendix IX
Name in CERCLA CLP Invitation for Bid (IFB)
Analytical feasibility questioned in 51FR26632
Chemical Abstracts Service number
Mass Spectrum in latest EPA/NIH Data Base?
(True or False)
CERCLA "Hazardous Substance List" 'identifier
from ITD "list-of-lists". An entry in this
column indicates that the substance is listed
on a current IFB.
Z indicates metal
Number indicates organic compound
Xi added for this data base
CRDL-CLP: Contract Required Detection Limit under
CLP IFB
-------
SVSTJMC
Acmphthylm
Acmphthylm, 1,2-dihydro-
Acttaaudt, K-(4-*thoxyph«yl)-
Acttaudf, K-SH-fluortn-e-yl
Antic acid tthtnyl attar
flcttic acid, (2,4,5-tricMorophmny)-
Acftic acid, (2,4-rfichlorophfnoxy)-
Acftonitrili
Aiunnui
Anthracm
Antiiony
Aroclor 1016
Araclor 1221 ...
Aroclor 1232
Aroclor 1242
Aroclor 1246
Aroclor 1254
Aroclor 1260
Arwnic
Bariiai
tenzUanthracm, 7, 12-dia»thyl-
BmzCjJactanthrylm, l,2-dihydro-3-«thyl-
BHizManphtnaRthrylm
BmzMidt, 3,5-dichloro-«Ml,l-di»thyl-2-prooyiiyl
BmzEaJanthracm
Benzenaiint
Banzanaiina, 2-atthyl-5-nitro
Bmztnaiinf, 2-nitre
Banzanaiint, 3-nitro-
BmzanaMint, 4-diloro
Btnztn»int, 4-nitro-
Btnzanaiint, 4,4*-wthylif»bif[2-chloro-
Banzmaiina, N-nitroao N phtnyl-
Btnzcnttint, M-phtnyl-
Btnunaiiw,
Bcnzint
Benztnt, 1 broao 4 phtno»y-
Btnztm, l-diloro-4-phtnoxy-
Btnzm, l-«thyl-2,4-dinitro-
Bratnt, l,lf-(2,2,2^richlorotthylidtm)biiC4ttcl
BMIZM, l,l1-(2f2,2-trichlorotthylidm)bisC4itc2
Btnzim, l,l*-(2,2-dictilororttiylidmi)bisC4-chloro
Bmzm, 1, 11 -(dichlorortinnylidiM)bis[4-chloro-
BBRZVM, 1,2-didiloro-
BmzM, 1,2,4-trichloro-
Bnutm, 1,2,4,5-tttrachloro-
Bmzm, 1,3-dichloro-
OPJttC
Acmphthm
Phmacitin
2-Acttylaiinofluorm
Vinyl acttati
2,4,5-T
2,4H>idilorophtnMyacttic acid
Acttonitrili
AluBinuB(total)
Antinny (total)
Aroclor 1016
Aroclor 1221
Aroclor 1232
Aroclor 1242
Aroclor 1241
Aroclor 1294
Aroclor 1260
Anmie (total)
BariuBftoUl)
7, 12-OiMthylbtRzCalanth
BmzotU f lucranthm
Pronaud*
BmzoCaJanthracm
Anilint
5-Nitro-o-toluidini
3Htttroanilim
4-Chloroanilim
4-MtroaniliM
4,4l-«thylmbif(2-chloroanilint)
N-NitroMdiph«iylannt
p-OiawtnylaunoazoDBitzinff
4 Di'OKiphtnyl phtnyl ttlwr
4-Qtlorophwyi phtnyl tthtr
2, 4-Dinitrotolu
4, 4' -DDT
Bmzmt, 1,3-dinitro-
Bttatnt, 2-*»thyl-l,3-dinitro-
BwiZMf cnloro"
Bmzm, diwthyl-
Bmzm, ithyl-
Bmzm, htxachloro-
4,V-ODO
4, 4' -ODE
1,2-Dictilorobtnzm
1,2,4-Trichlorobanzm
1,2, 4,5-Tttrachlorobanztw
1,3-Oichlorobmzmt
1,4-Oichlorobtiom
•ta-DiRitrotanzm
2,6-Oinitrotolum
QilorooMzm
Xylmn(total)
Styrmt
Ethyl bmzini
Htxachlorobtnztnt
Q.ANAL
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
CAS III
208-96-6
83-32-9
62-44-2
53-96-3
108-05H
93-76-5
94-75-7
75-05-6
7429-90-5
120-12-7
7440-36-0
12674-11-2
11104-26-2
11141-16-5
53469-21-9
12672-29-6
11097-69-1
11096-62-5
7440-36-2
7440-39-3
57-97-6
56-49-5
205-99-2
23950-56-5
56-55-3
62-53-3'-
•* ••_ a
VJ 39 0
6S-74-4
99-09-2
106-47-6
100-01-6
101-14-4
66-30*6
122-39-4
60-11-7
71-43-2
101-55-3
7005-72-3
121-14-2
50-29-3
72-43-5
72-54-6
72-5M
95-50-1
120-62-1
95-94-3
541-73-1
106-46-7
100-25-4
606-20-3
106-90-7
1330-20-7
100-42-5
100-41-4
118-74-1
* HSL
.T. 540
.T. 550
.T.
.T.
.T. 125
.T.
.T.
.T.
.F. 213
.T. 645
.F. Z51
.1. 925
.T. 930
.T. 935
.T. 940
.T. 945
.T. 950
.T. 955
.F. Z33
.F. Z56
.T.
.T. '•
.T.'TES
.T.
.T. 730
.T.
.T.
.T. 530
.T. 545
.T. 455
.T. 595
.T.
.T. 615
.T.
.T.
.T. 165
.T. 625
.T. 585
.T. 570
.T. 885
.T. 910
.T. 870
.T. 655
.T. 350
.T. 445
.T.
.T. 335
.T. 340
.T.
.T. 575
.T. 235
.T. 250
.T. 245
.T. 240
.T. 630
CRDL.CLP
10.00
10.00
0.00
0.00
10.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
200.00
10.00
60.00
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
1.00
1.00
10.00
200.00
0.00
0.00
10.00
0.00
10.00
0.00
0.00
50.00
50.00
10.00
50.00
0.00
10.00
0.00
0.00
5.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
0.10
0.50
0.10
0.10
10.00
10.00
0.00
10.00
10.00
0.00
10.00
5.00
100
100
100
10.00
-------
57
58
59
"0
62
63
64
65
66
S7
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
-107
108
109
110
•thyl-
nitro-
Benzene, pentachloro-
Benzene, pentachloronitro-
Benzeneacetic acid,*4-chloro-al|fa-(4-diloro ftc
1,2-Benzenedicartoxylic acid,bit(2-*thylhtxyl) etc
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, butyIphenyleethy etc
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic Kid, dibutyl ester
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, ditthyl ester
1,2-flenzenedicarboxylic acid, diiethyl ester
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, dioctyl ester
1,3-BenztMdiol
Benzeneethanaiine, alpha,alpha-diaethyl-
Benzaneamthanol
Benzemthiol .
1,3-Benzodioxole, S-(l-propenyl)-'
1,3-Benzodioxole, 5-(2-proptnyD-
BenzoCldfluoranthene
Benzole acid
BenzoCnt] pentaphene
BenzoCghiJperylene
BenzoUlpyrene
Berylliw
[l,l*-Biphenyl]-4,4*iiiaune, 3,3'-dichloro-
Cl,l*^iphenyl]-4,4*-diaiine, 3,31-dieethoxr
Cl, lf -0iphenyl]-4,4' -diaaine, 3,3* -diwthyl-
a,l'-BiphenyU-4-Mine
[1,1* -Biphenyl]-4,4* -diarint
l,3-But»dimt, 1,1,2,3,4,4-hexachloro-
1,3-Butadiene, 2-chloro-
l-ButanaiiM, M-butyHH»itroso-
2-fiutanone
2-Butm, 1,4-dichloro-, (£)-
Cadiitv
Calciw
Carbon disulfide
Oiranui
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cyanide
2,5-Cyclohexadiene-l, 4-tlione
Cyclohexane, 1,2,3,4,5,6-twxachloro- etcl
Cyclohexane, 1,2,3,4,5,6-fcexadiloro- etc2
Cyclohexane, l,2,3,4,S,6-he»adiloro> etc3
Cyclohexane, 1,2,3,4,5,6-hexachloro- etc4
2-Cyclohexen-l-one, 3,5,5-trieathyl-
1,3-Cyclopentadiene, lf2f3,4,S,5-hexachloro-
Dibeiuta, Manthracene
DibenzoCb,e3a,4]dioxin, 2,3,7,8-tetrachloro-
Oibenzotb, deflchrysene
Dibenzofuran
Toluene
Nitrobenzene
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachloronitrobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Bis(2-^hylhexyl) phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Di-rrbutyl phthlate
Oiethylphthlate
Dieethyl phthlate
Oi-n-octyl phthalate
Resorcinol
Alpha, alpha-diiethylphenethylaaiini
Benzyl alcohol
Benzenethiol
Isosafrole
Safrole
Btnzo(k)fluoranthene
Benzoic acid
DibenzoCa, ilpyrene
Benzo(ghi)ptrylene
BenzoCaJpyrene
BrrylliuB (total)
3,31-0ichlorobenzidine
3,3*-Dieethoxybenzidine
3,3'-OiMthylbenzidine
4-Aiinobiphenyl
Benzidine
Hexachlorobutadiene
2-Chloro-l,3-butadiene
M-Nitrosodi-n-butylaeine
2-Butanone
trans-1,4-Oichloro-2-butene
Cadiiue(total)
Calciui (total)
Carbon disulfide
Qireauw (total)
Chrysene
Cobalt (total)
Copper (total)
Cyanide
p Denzoquinone
alpha-BHC
beta-OC
delta-BHC
Lindane
Isophorone
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Dibenz Ca,h]anthracene
2,3,7, B-Tetrachlorodibenzo-ptlioxin
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
Pentochlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
Tetrachlorodibenzp-D-dioxins
OibenzoCa,hjpyrtne
Dibenzofuran
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
108-88-3
96-95-3
606-93-5
ao r* m
OK WPO
310-15-6
117-81-7
85-68-7
84-74-2
ft rent
M V/tTC
131-11-3
117-84-0
108-46-3
122-09-8
100-51-6
108-98-5
120-58-1
94-59-7
207-08-9
65-85-0
189-55-9
191-24-2
50-32-8
7440-41-7
91-94-1
119-9
-------
u
12
13
14
5
ttcl
ttc2
l,4iS,8-Di^hanona|*thalii», 1,2,3,4,10,10-ttcl
I,4i5,8-0i»thanonaphthal«», I,2,.3,4,10,10-«tc2
1,4-Dioxam
Ethanaunt, N-tthyl-tHiitroio
EthanMint, N-wthyHrnitroio-
Ethane, 1,1-dichloro-
Etham, l,l'-tathyl»«bii(oxy)3bi*[2-«hloro-
Etham, l,l«-oxyois£2-chloro-
Etham, 1,1,1-trichloro- . .
Ethan*, 1,1,1,2-tttrichloro-
Ethm, 1,1,2-trichloro-
Ethant, 1,1,2,2-titracnloro-
Etham, 1,2-dibrow
Ethant, 1,2-dichloro-
Etham, chloro-
Ethani, htxachloro-
Ethant, pmtachloro-
l,2-€thaMdia«i«, M,l*-di»thyl-N«-ttc
Ethanont, 1-phtnyl
Ethmt, (2-ctiloroethoxy)-
EttwM, 1,1-dichloro-
EthflM, 1,2-diehlotv, (E)-
EthffM, dtloro-
Ethmc, tttrachloro-
Ethtnt, trichloro-
Fluoranthm
Fluoridt
9H-FluorflM
HydraziM, l,2-tiiph«nyl-
Iron
Nangamw
Ntrcury
Htthanwin*, N-Mthyl-N-nitrofo-
Htthan> brcao
Ntthant, brondichloro-
Nrtham, chloro-
fetham, dibroav
Mrtham, dibroHchlort^
Mtthaiv, dicttlorv-
Nrtiwm, dichlorodifluoro-
MrthaM, iodo-
fetham, titrachloro-
MtthaM, tribroBo-
NrthaM, trichloro-
tatham, trichlorofluoro-
Nrthamtulfonic acid, avthyl tstir
Hnachlorodibmzofuran*
Ptntachlorodibtnzofurtw
TfftrachlorodilMraofuram
Ditldrin
Endrin
Rldrin
Ifodrin
1,4-Dioxam
N-MitroMditthylMiw
N-MitroMwthylithylaiini
1, lH)ichloro«than>
Bit (2-chlorocthoxy ) Mtham
Bista-dilorotthyl) ffthtr
1,1,1-Trichlorotthant
1, 1, l,e-Titrachlorotthani
1, 1,2-TrichlorotthaM
1, 1, 2, 2-Titrachloroatham
1,2-Dibramtham
1, 2-Didilorocthant
Chlorottham
Hixachlorocthant
Pfittachlorottham
(%th«pyriltt»
2-ChlortMthyl vinyl liter
1,1-Oichloroithm
trara-1, 2-OichlorotthM
Vinyl chloridt
TitrachloroithiM
Trichlorotthtni
Fluoranthtnt
Fluoridt
Fluorttv
a-Hi«anont
1, 2-Oiphmylhydrazint
Indmo ( 1, 2, 3-cd) pyrm
Iron (total)
Lead (total)
Nwpmiui (total)
MangantH (total)
Mnrcury (total)
N-MitrosodiMthylMint
BroHHtham
Brondidilornvtham
Chlorowthan*
Oi broMchloroMthaM
Nttnylim chloridt
Dichlorodiflttorovtham
lodoHtnant
Carbon titrachloridt
nroMOfori
Chlorofom
TrichloronnofluoroHtham
Mvthyl HthanMttlfonati
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
60-57-1
72-20-6 '
309-00-2
465-73-«
123-91-1
55-18-5
10595-95-6
75-34-3
111-91-1
111-44-4
71-55-6
630-20-6
79-00-5
79-34-5
106-93-4
107-06-2
75-00-3
67-72-1
76-01-7
91-60-5
98-66-2
110-75-8
75-35-4
156-60-3-
75-01-4
127-18-4
79-01-6
206-44-0
16984-48-8
86-73-7
591-78-6
122-66-7
193-39-5
7439-69-6
7439-92-1
7439-95-*
7439-96-5
7439-97-6
62-75-9
74-63-9
75-27-4
74-67-3
74-95-3
124-48-1
75-09-2
75-71-8
74-8*4
56-23-5
75-25-2
67-66-3
75-69-4
66-27-3
.F.
.F.
.F.
.T. 850
.T. 860
.T. 835
.T.
.T.
.T.
.T.
.T. 050
.T. 435
.T. 325
.T. 115
.T.
.T. 160
.T. 225
.T.
.T. 065
.T. 025
.T. 375
.T.
.T; , :; •
.T; •
.T. 175
.T. 045
.T. 055
.T. 020
.T. 220
.T. 150
.1. 655
.F.
.T. 590
.T. 210
.T.
.T. 780
.F. Z26
.F. Z82
.F. Z12
.F. Z25
.F. ZB6
.T.
.T. 015
.T. 130
.T. 010
.T.
.T. 155
.T. 030
.T.
.T.
.T. 120
.T. 180
.T. 060
.T.
.T.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.10
0.10
0.05
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5.00
10.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
5.00
5.00
0.00
5.00
10.00
10.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
10.00
5.00
5.00
10.00
5.00
5.00
10.00
0.00
10.00
10.00
0.00
10.00
100.00
5.00
5000.00
15.00
0.20
0.00
10.00
5.00
10.00
0.00
5.00
5.00
0.00
0.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
0.00
0.00
-------
70
i/l
172
73
.74
175
.76
.77
178
'.79
JO
i81
IK
63
iB4
185
•ias
157
188
109
190
191
192
193
fethamthiol, trichloro-
4,7-Nrthano-lH-indmi, 1,2,4,5,6,7,8,8- ttc
4,7-arthano-lH-indmt, 1,4,5,6,7,8,8- ttc
2,5-«hai»-2H-indmo[l,2-Uo«irtnt, ttc
6,9-Mtttuno-2,4,l-bMzodimtthitpin, ttcl
6,9HMhano-214,3-tanzodiouthiipin, ttc2
1, 3, 4-^hmo-ai-eyclo6utaIcd3pmtalm- ttc
1,2,* >
7421-93-4
59-8«
134-32-7
91-59-fl
91-20-3
91-5B-7
91-57-6
130-15-4
192-65-4
7440-02-0
7440-04-2
75-21-8
108-10-1
85-01-6
108-95-2
88-85-7
95-57-8
9H8-7
534-52-1 ,
88-75-5'
70-34-4
5B-90-2
120-83-2
105-67-9
51-28-5
** ft* A
JJ JJ ^
88-06-2
87-65-0
59-50-7
106-44-5
100-02-7
87-86-5
298-02-2
298-04-4
52-«-7
56-3A-fi
297-97-2
298-00-0
100-75-4
7440-09-7
621-64-7
96-12-8
78-87-5
96-18-4
108-60-1
109-77-3
107-12-0
542-76-7
.F.
.T. 915
.T. 830
.T. 840
.T. 845
.T. 865
.T.
.T.
.T.
.T.
.T.
.T. 450
.T. 525
.T. 470
.T.
.T.
.F. Z28
.F.
.T.
.T. 215
.T. 640
.T. 315
.T. :.'•
• '• '
.T. 330
.T. 355
.T. 13
.T. 420
.T.
.T.
.T. 440
.T. 425
• T. 555
.T. 520
.T. 515
.T.
.T. 465
.T. 365
.T. 560
.T. 635
.T.
.T.
.T.
.T.
.T.
.T.
.T.
.F. Z19
.T. 370
.T.
.T. 140
.T.
.T. 360
.T.
.T.
.T.
0.00
0.50
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
10.00
10.00
-10.00
0.00
0.00
40.00
0.00
0.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
0.00
10.00
10.00
50.00
10.00
0.00
0.00
10.00
10.00
50.00
50.00
10.00
0.00
10.00
10.00
50.00
50.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5000.00
10.00
0.00
100
0.00
10.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-------
21.
2
»3
Propamic acid, 2-(2,4,5-trichloroph«no«y)-
1-Aropaml, 2,3-dibrw, phosphate (3:1)
1-Propanol, 2-«thyl-
c 'PropanoM
2-Propmal
1-Proptm, 1,1,2,3,3,3-hwachloro--
1-Proptnt, 1,3-dichloro-, (EJ-
l,Ppoptnt, 1,3-dichloro-, (ZJ-
1—PropM, 3*uhloro*
2-PropiMRitrilf, 2-«thyl-
2-Propmmitrilt
2-Preptnoic acid, 2-vthyl-, tthyl Mtcr
2-Proptnoic acid, 2-»thyl-, «thyl tittr
2-Propwl-ol • . -
2-Propyn-l-ol
Pyridint
Pyridiw, 2-wthyl-
PyrrolidiM, 1-nitroio-
Stlmiui
Silvtr
Sodiua
Sulfidf
Sulfuroui acid, 2-chlorovthyl 2- ttc
Thiodiphotphoric acidl...), titratthyl tster
Tin
Toxaphtnt
Vanadiwi
Zinc
Silvn
Tri*(2,3-dibrc«opropyl) phocphati
Isobutyl alcohol
flctiom
Acroliin
HvxachloropropM
trant-1,3-Dirtloroprootm
cii-1,3-Oicftloroproptnt
3-OiloropropiM
Ntthacrylonitrilt
flcrylonitrilt
Ethyl Hthacrylati
Nrthyl wthacrylatt
filly 1 alcohol
2-Propyirl-cl
Pyridim
2-Picolim
N-Mitrosopyrrolidint
Stlmiui (total)
Silver (total)
Sodiia (total)
Sulfid*
Arautt
Thalliua (total)
Tttratthyldithiopyrophotphati
Tin (total)
Toxaphm
Vanadiw (total)
Zinc (total)
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
93-72-1
186-73-7
76-83-1
67-64-1
107-02-8
1848-71-7
10061-08-6
10061-01-9
107-05-1
126-98-7
107-13-1
97-63-2
80-62-6
107-18-€
107-19-7
129-00-0
110-66-1
109-06-6
930-55-fi
7782-49-e
7440-22-*
7440-23-5
18496-23-8
140-57-6
7440-26-0
VIM ti m
JutrJ'CT1 3 /
7440-31-6
8001-33-2
7440-62-2
7440-O-6
.T.
.T.
.T.
.T. 035
.T.
.T.
.T. 145
.T. 170
.T.
.T.
.T.
.T.
.T.
.T.
.T.
.T. 715
.T.
.T.
.T.
.F. Z34
.F. Z47
.F. Zli
.F;..-.;
.T.
.F. zai
.T.
.F.
.T. 920
.F. Z23
.F. Z30
0.00
0.00
0.00
10.00
0.00
0.00
5.00
5.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
10.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5.00
10.00
5000.00
0.00
0.00
10.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
50.00
20.00
-------
L SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS
SAS No. 1653-HQ
Case Nos. 45*1, 4582, 4583, 4586 & 4587
1.
2.
4.
5,
7.
8.
Effective Date:
Type of Agreement:
Data Turnaround:
Adjustment/
Penalty Schedule:
Scheduled Sample
Description:
3une27, 1985
Firm, fixed, per-unit price, with penalties assessed as stated
herein for late receipt of data.
Hardcopy data is due within thirty (30) days from the latest date
of receipt of samples at LAB per Case.
LAB shall employ all procedures, including air express if
necessary, to ensure that all Program Principals receive the data
by the required deliverable date.
One percent (1%) of the SAS per-sample bid price for each day
late.
LAB shall analyze up to forty-five (45) low concentration
aqueous samples, including QC.
Matrix Spike St. One (1) matrix spike sample and one (1) matrix spike duplicate
Duplicate Frequency:sample per Case per twenty (20) samples of similar matrix and
concentration per week.
Shipment Schedule
to LAB:
Analytical
Requirements:
9. Protocol/Method:
Shipment during the week of Duly 15 .
Lab shall immediately return the shipping coolers.
Analyze for Total and Dissolved Metals, Cyanide, TOC, TOX,
Chloride, Total Phenols, Sulfate, Nitrate, Ammonia, POX, and
POC.
Total Metals, CN - IFB WA 84-3092
Dissolved Metals - IFB WA84-J092 without the digestion
TOC - SW846 Method 9060
TOX - SWS46 Method 9020
Chloride - SW846 Method 9252
Total Phenols - SW846 Method 9066
Sulfate - SWS46 Method 9036 or 9038
Nitrate - SWS46 Method 9200
Ammonia - "Methods for Chemical Analyses of Water and
Wastes," (MCAWW), USEPA EMSL/Cinn, 3/83, Method 350.1 or
350.3
POX - EPA 600/4-84-008 previously sent to the LAB.
POC - Groundwater, Vol. 22, p. 18-23, 1984, using Dohrman
equipment, previously sent to the LAB.
LAB shall contact the designated SMO and Regional Technical
Officer(s) if any modifications to the referenced methods ar»
required. LAB shall report and document any modifications to
the protocol/method, in the Data Package.
-------
10. Detection Limit As specified in the protocol(s)/method(s) listed in Item 9. More
Requirements: speciically,
TOC - Img/L TOX - 5ug/L
Chloride - Img/L Phenols - lOug/L
Suliate - Img/L Nitrate - 300ug/L
Ammonia - IDOug/L POX - 5ug/L
POC- lOug/L
Report and document actual detection .limits attained in the Data
Package.
11. EFB Reference: WA 84-3092 ior document control, sample handling and chain-of-
custody procedures, and all applicable JFB requirements. See
item 9. for specific methods.
12. Technical Officers: Headquarters Paul Friedman 202/382-4796
13. Data Package /Number of Copies and Distribution:
A. Client/Region -'One Copy
USEPA
Office of Solid V» aste and Emergency Response
401 M Street, SW
Mail Stop WH-562-A
Washington, DC 20460
I Attn: Greg Marion
B. Sample Management Office - One Copy
Sample Management Office
300 North Lee Street, Suite 200
Alexandria, Virginia 22314
Attn: Linda Haas Soynton
C. EMSL/LV - One Copy
USEPA EMSL/LV
Executive Center, Room 226
944 East Harmon Avenue
Las Vegas. Nevada 89109
Attn: Data Ajdit Staff
D. Life Systems - One Copy
Life Systems
24755 Highpoint Road
Cleveland, Ohio 444122
Attn: Tim Owens
Viar
-------
APPENDIX C
TEXACO WELL LOGS AND AS-BUILT DIAGRAMS
-------
-------
Boring W-1
Boring W-2
K»TM IN rtrt
o
ELEVATION 5$ t (97.25 TOP or CASING!
IN
ELEVATION 1»i3 t (U$.66 TOP OF CASING)
10 •
15
20
25'
30-
35
50'
55
1?
39
to
• fffl
38
70
80
SM
ML
ML
SM
SM
BROWN SILTY SAND WITH
OCCASIONAL CRAVCL (MEDIUM*"
(FILL)
BROUN AND GRAY SANDY SILT
WITH GRAV£L (MEDIUM STIFF TO
STIFF)
GRADES TO CRAY
GRAY SILT WITH OCCASIONAL
FINE TO MEDIUM SAND (STIFF)
GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM
LSAMD (DENSE)
GRAY SILT AND SANDY SILT
JITH OCCASIONAL GRAVEL (STIFF)
GRAY SILT WITH OCCASIONAL ZONES
OF SANDY SILT AND SHELL
FRAGMENTS (STIFF TO VERY STIFF)
10
15
20
25
30
35
1.0
•50
20.54-
108
17.2*-
116
DARK CRAY SILTY FINE SAND WITH
OCCASIONAL ORGANIC MATTER
(VERY DENSE)
DARK CRAY SILTY FINE SAND WITH
OCCASIONAL ORGANIC MATTER (VERY DENSE)
BORING COMPLETED 8-27-81
GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED AT
68' DEPTH DURING DRILLING
MONITORING WELL INSTALLED ON
8-27-81
* Mean Lower Low Water
75-
Note:
Elevation
Datum
Adapted froa DAatc & Moore report entitled
A«-Built Ooditioni, Ground Water Monitoring
.Wella and Lyri-aeten, Texaco March Point
Refinery, Anacortes, Washington, for Texaco,
Inc., dated November 18, 195].
XV-B-5
19
33
£
65
•
66
•
56
95
ML
ML
SM
ML
SM
BROWN AIIO CRAY SILT UITM A
TRACE OF ORGANIC MATTER AND
OCCASIONAL GRAVEL (STIFF)
(TOPSOIL IN UPPER 6 INCHES.
MOTTLED IN UPPER 7j FEET)
GRAY SANDY SILT WITH OCCASIONAL
GRAVEL (MEDIUM STIFF TO STIFF)
CRAY SILTY FINE SAND AND CLAY£Y
SANDY SILT WITH OCCASIONAL
GRAVEL (DENSE AND STIFF)
__
OF _LLLI, (DENSE)
BORING COMPLETED 8-31-Bl
GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED AT
tli1 DEPTH DURING DRILLING
MONITORING WELL INSTALLED ON
8-31-81
TEXACO INC.
;qj PUGET SOUND PLANT
_ZnT_ ANACORTES. WASH.
LDGS OF WELLS
W-l THROUGH W-2
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
SCALE 1" » 10'
Revision 2
November 8. 1965
-------
Boring VY-3
KM* IK rtri ELEVATION US - (147.16 TOP OF CASING)
1* rcn
10
15
20
25
30
35
to
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
155
no
60
200
10
230
fc
SM
SM
SP
SM
ML
ML
ML
SM
S.M
§p
BROWN SILTY SANO WITH GRAVEL
AND OCCASIONAL ORGANIC MATTER
(MEDIUM DENSE) (TOPSOIL IN
UPPER 6 INCHES)
BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM
SAND WITH OCCASIONAL GRAVEL
(DENSE)
GRADES COARSER
BROWN FINE TO MEDIUM SAND
(VERY DENSE)
5
10
15
,20'
25
30'
35
40 '
34.51-
88
36.li-
87
GRAY SILTY FINE SANO AHD SANDY
SILT WITH OCCASIONAL GRAVEL
(VERY DENSE AND HARD)
GRAY CLAYEY SILT WITH A TRACE OF
FINE SAND (HARD)
GRADES WITH OCCASIONAL GRAVEL
GRAY SANDY SILT AND SILTY FINE
SAND (HARD AND VERY DENSE)
36.Si-
87
50
Boring W-4
ELFVATIOn 17 t (19.33 TOP OF CASIN
Note:
Elevation
Datum
CRAY SILTY SAND AND SILTY
FINE TO MEDIUM SANO (VERY DENSE)
BORING COMPLETED 9-3-81
GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED AT 73' DEPTH
DURING DRILLING
MONITORING WELL INSTALLED ON
9-3-81
Hcan Lower Low Water
.Adapted froa Dames & Moore report entitled
As-Built Conditions, Ground Water Monitoring
Wells and Lysimeters, Texaco March Point
Refinery, Anacortes, Washington, for Texaco,
Inc., dated November 16, 1931.
XV-B-6
17
12-
10
ML
ML
CL
BROWN AND GRAY SANDY SILT
OCCASIONAL FINE TO COARSE SAiu?
AND SOME ORGANIC MATTER
(STIFF)
GRADES WITH LESS SAND
BROWN AND GRAY SILTY CLAY (SOFT)
GRAY CLAY (SOFT)
BORING COMPLETED 9-9-81
GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED AT
42'.DEPTH DURING DRILLING
(SEE DISCUSSION IN TEXT OF
REPORT)
MONITORING WELL INSTALLED 0"
9-9-81
TEXACO INC.
PUGET SOUND PLAKT
ANACORTES. WASH.
LOGS OF WELLS
W-3 THROUGH W-4
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
SCALE 1"
Revision 2
November 8. 1935
Figure XV-B-!:
-------
'/Jells to-/j
Lo- 'S),
r, -v.
C\J
i
•j
n
•H
1.
re
>
CVJ
i
TIT
>
O
.0
+
IT>
O
•^
n
0)
£.
ra
. \ . v ^
^
f™^^™ "^
I
1
/^
^ N
' \'
r^
"*."••*'
.' ••* *•".
•» •
£•'
•..
'*/*
.'•;':•
* •**
"»•
^™«
>:^
A'7-l
• * *<
"•*•**
•:*
• • '
^
r
s
P
^
5
S
-j
?
— <£
•VM^^
•W^HM
=
^_i^«
n«*M^^
x^
- r
^ ^
\ r
'.::.::
si
•I::
• • •
• • *
>• •
• • •
* • •
• ••
• *•
>
•
• *
•
•
• «* •
i
• • •
• •:•
^
1
^
**
•
*••
::~
r~
.*—
• »^
fc£
^*
•— -
— ,
_
^_
p^
^.
^^- Slip Cap
„ Steel Casing
X ' ' ( '\/ ^ ^ J
(Cement-Bentonite grout and
upper bentonite pellet seal
placed for rigidity and
liquid seal)
Sandpack (No. 20 filter Sand)
installation drawings.
/
Set to match seal on A" well casing
Sandpack (No. 20 Filter Sand)
oua.inj.ess oteei centering Device
"*^ Stainless Steel Centering Device
Not to scale
XV-B-62
Revision 3
December 31, 1986
TEXACO INC,
PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES, WASH.
LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC.
Two-Inch Weil Casir.r Ir.ser» Tori.".
-------
WELL W-ll
AS BUILT
^ cap
10-
^20-
v
40-
50
22
a
j
60
a
55
T"
a
14
a
21
a
47
a
48
a
50
a
50
6"
a
Elevation 96.65 (MLLW)
4//
W
'///
%
V7;
1
s/fi
///
yy,
%
f
y//
W,
V7/
S/J
w
r
ML
CL
' CL
' w
^ \
1
^
/
f
/
I
/
f
* .CL
f
/
/
/
/
^
/
/
/
/
/
/
f
S
X
^
ML
SK
Grayisn-brown silt and clay
wi tn trace gravel (stiff to
very stiff) (fill)
Mottled gray-brown silty clay
with trace sand and gravel;
shows laminations in places
i (very stiff to hard)
' Water Level 6 June ^964
Gray silty clay with some fine
to medium sand; grades to silt
with depth (hard Co stiff)
33.0-
34 0 —
Gray sandy silt and 6ra>' silty
sand; contains clay and gravel
in places (till-like) 36.0-
40.0
\»
^ '
/ \ •
*%-;
s'^
* \-.
*v
^ /
i '.
^ \
,> i
_\ /
/^_\
\ ^™
^
, / —
TV
", '
''•r::':
• :/..•
•.'.•%"
•i';-V
v.:.:.
'•'•'•• '*
V'/'-
*;•!?•
'•'.'.'•
•Si
z£
HHH
•=-
•zr
•^="
"="
•E-
•ji
^s
0
7'x
*» \
•£»
- -^
**'\
~,v
.V;:v:
•JJ-V:
/,'jifc
6" steel protec
tive casing
-tt" PVC Pipe
• faentoni te grou
•jentoni t.e sta i
-4" PV'_ slotted
screen (.020
slci)
-Pea Grave-
dorin^ completed May 25, 19o4
Note:
Water level encountered during
drilling was 38* below ground
surface on 25 May 1984.
(KLLW; - Mean Lower Low Water
batutr.
XV-B-14
TEXACO INC
S| PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES. WASH.
LOG OF WELL W-! I
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
SCALE
1"
Revision 2
November 8, 1985
—'_-• VM n a
-------
WELL W-12
AS BUILT
-Locking cap
r\
10
^20
w
u.
_
•^
5"
~* •»"
— JU
40
50
/
21 ^
a >
y
/
63 ^
0 /
/
", ^
>
17 /
a /
/
/
/
tf/ ^
V7
ol
a
59
a
£2
89
11"
a
#
^
%
^
^
1
«
v/,
%
r
CL
CL
\
\
ML
CL
SK
Elevation 96.11 (ML1.W)
Mottled gray-brown cls; with
trace sand and gravel; silty
in places, some iron stain-
ing on fracture surfaces
Cray silty clay with trace
fine to coarse sand (stiff
to hard)
i
^
"*•*.**.
• i •* *•*,
•"".'•*'
^
••:f.\:
8
j.-^!:
::••':•'
~o" steel protec-
tive casinh
-u" PVC pipe
— Bentonite grout
-M" PVC slotted
screen (.020 in.
slot)
-rea gravel
J
drilling war 15' below ground
surface cr, 5 June 1964.
(MLLVO * Mean Lower Low Water
La tur.
XV-5-15
TEXACO INC
PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES, WASH.
LOG OF WELL W-12
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
10'
SCALE 1"
Revision 2
November 8, 1985
-------
WELL W-13 AS BUILT
T — 'Locking cap
n
10
JJ
u.
c
JS
o.
41
30
1 i '
3B
a
s
43
60
a
27
-a
77
a
bl
a
Elevation 99.10 (MLLW)
j • OL
•7
ML
,CL
-
ML
Black. Clayey Organic silt;
(soft) (topsoil)
Water level 6 June 1984
Mottled brown clayey silt
grading to gray-brown sllty
clay with traces of sand and
gravel (very stiff to hard)
19 0
± f • V •»
20.0-
Cray clayey silt' very thinly
bedded, trace shell fragments 23«°~
(vcry stiff to hard)
33.0-
\^~
\£
'{'•'"
1 ** *
'\'~
i''
t^»
««T
"•*•:•*
*"/•.*'•
'!/*••*.
"•*": V
*.*.**•*•*
X'A
•'I'sft*
'*'* " "
^V-
— .
^
A
"^7-,
MM
•~
,^
^T
1
s
N ^ '
^" i
1 ^
_^ /
V IS
V /.
*v /
\l
-\,
"7.
**;*•'.
':'!:•.
"'*} •*
; :t •.'
•V.'.';
V:|\:
-fc" steel pro*, r.
tive casing
-4" PVC pip«
Bentoni te grooi
-Bentoni te seal
-4" PVC slottfc'
re r ecn (0.02v
:.• ! o i /
-He a Drivel
Boring completed Kay 25, 19b^ """"
Note:
Water level encountered curing
ir
drilling was 16.5' below ground
surface on 25 Mav 1964.
(MLLW)
Datum
Ke^n Lowej Low '..atci
XV-B-16
TEXACO INC.
PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES, WASH.-
LCX3 OF WELL W-13
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
SCALE 1" - If
Revision 2
November 8. 1985
-------
WELL W-14 AS
Elevation Lb7 . 25 (KLLV)
10
•
u.
c
£
a.
V
30
/•%
66
a
a
32
a
32
a
56
a
66
9"
a
32
a
'///
%
fit
///
fit,
fit
fifif
'//y
///,
v
CL
ML
CL
SF
-^W Gray sandy gravel ( loose) ( fi 1 1 )
^brown mottled with gray silty
clay; iron staining on
fracture surfaces (hard
grading to very stiff)
"plater level o June 1964
Cray silty clay with trace
sand and gravel (very stiff)
20.0-
Cray interbedded silt, clay 21'°
and fine sand (very stiff to
hard) (dense to very dense) 25.'.- —
•
33.0-
Soring completed June 4, 1984 34.5-
»
1/1 .v
^ \
^i
M"
i::
V I
\ '
* S
£
.*.".* \\
* •' ' ',.
;•:•?.
::'::•.
•/.V:'.'
BL
— __
•="
— ,
_TT_i
_—
MLT
__-•— Locking cap
^7-
t-*
^ X
^'~
~ '-
\/
*\*T
^^
_ «»
\* '
=-£-
• "«'•••"•
• 1 .* «
r •'"•/.
Vi ;.
-*'v''-
iV-"i
:'.'.:;.
w/:'- •'••••• '•":'•:
-fc" steel protec-
tive casing
•4" PVC pipe
•Bentonite grout
"Bentonite seal
-Pea gravel
-4" PVC slotted
screen (.020
in. slot.)
Note:
Water level encountered during
drilling was 24' below ground
surface on U June 1954.
(MLLW) = Kean Lower L '.«'•• i\atcr
Lia turn
ec.
XV-E-17
TEXACO INC.
;0] PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES. WASH.
LOG OF WELL W-14
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
SCALE 1" « 10'
Revision 2
November 8. 1985
-------
WELL W-15
AS BUILT.
10
20
V
V
30
0.
OJ
40
50
29
a
1
«
tf
50
a i
69
a
50
6"
a
Ii
Oil
7
a
34
a
59
a
a
ML
GK
. ' SM
ML
SM
*- V
*•
*
ML
CL
SP
Elevation 146.77 (KLLW)
bark brown sandy silt with
gravel and wood debris (fill)
•Gray silty medium sand (dense)
Gray-brown silty sand and
«andy silt with gravel;
occasional cobbles- and
boulders (very dense/hard)
Brown fine to medium sand
(very dense)
Water Level 6 June 1981
.— — ••«.
Gray interbedded silt, clay : _
ana fine sand (nard/very dense) \
sand wet \
36.0-
11 n
J / .U
42.0-
52.0-
i •
/ „,
V"
£1
i
&
1
i
i — i
>
S"
^^^
. .^u
r"
^
N^
V"
*f
1S"-
r=^
?v
•v/
1
^
'; •*•«'
ilSJ
•y,'iii
•
-6" steel protet
tive casing
-4" PVC pipe
-Ben ton! te grout
-bentonite seal
J
-4 PVC slotted"
screen ^ .020 in.
slot)
•Pea gravel
60
Note:
Water level encountered during
drilling was 27' below ground
surface on 30 Kay 1984.
(MLLW) - Mean Lower Low Water
Datum
XV-B-18
INC.
PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES/WASH;
LOG OF WELL W-15
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
SCALE. 1"
1C'
Revision 2 ,~
November 8, 1965
-------
to- /s),
r, -vv.\ . v> ' /
CM
i
c\j
n
u
•H
(5
>
C\J
1
fc
>
o
£>
•s.
+
ir.
0
c:
«
t.
«3
S> —5
1
1
^ X
* v
/ •*
§
wV
A.
"^
i
=
|
^
—
5
t
f*
^.
:=:
=
MBB^BI
^^
- l^
X ^
\ ^
"•••
>*• •
1
'•':••
••"."'
••*.'•
• •" *
'^:*:
.v."
;V-i
•"•c
"•'•"^
* *^
r^*
g
lv
^^— Slip Cap
^ Steel Casing
•'•''" ' ' % t * ^_J
-^.
m~
t__
p
t
|-
£
r^
(Cenent-oer.tonite grout and
usper bentor.ite pellet seal
placed for rigidity and
liquid seal)
•Sancp c
H' c
XV-3-62
Revision 3
Dece~.ber 31, 19S6
TEXACO INC.,
TD£CO] PUGET SOUND PLAN1!
^S'ACORTES, WASH.
LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC.
-------
WELL W-16 AS
Elevation 143. 4o (MLLW) r
10
20
u-30
CJ
o>
•A*
-*-*
_^
IAO
C rt
bO
70
48
a
51
a
57
a
95
11"
a
93 .
10"
a
56
a
79
11"
a
84
11"
a
77
ir
a
65
a ,
50
5"
a
66
11"
a
50
5"
a
50
5"
Q.
J+U.
•••(
• • .
0.
0 *
0,i
• •»•*
.;:::i
• • •••
>•••••
• • •• • •
»•••••
••••••
:::::
::::::
:5^
•
I
ML
CL
i SP
/ \
' V (
ML
SP
-T'iL Dark, brown sandy silt with
gravel (topsoil?)
•^Kust brown fine to medium
sand and fine to medium
gravel (dense)
Mottled brown sandy silt and
clay with trace gravel (hard)
Brown medium sand; silty in
places, trace coarse sand
in places (very dense) o.
•Water Level 6 June 1984 ...-•
\'
ft
/^-*-? Xtc/.^ ^7
£cr *"**** ffj
, ,: 44.0-
iJir.-y f ifc 45>0_
46.0-
^c
Gray clayey silt and gray fine \ ^~
to medium sand, trace fine ^&\\
gravel in places ^ , ^ -,
!<• \
• '\
>,"»
,vr.
r/
/^
*» •*
/V
\ /
\~
v NX
tf;
i -
* \,
X \
*»
V i
^1^
-1 N.
^
^X
XX"7
r~l •*
:c«
;^>
. > *>
, *• <•
^'
^.-*r
'«"'.""."
." *I*I*
•'/*;.:
•* •*',
-6" steel protec-
tive casing
•4" PVC pipe
-Bentoni te grout
— 5 en ton i te seal
-4" PVC slotted
screen (.020 in.
slot)
•4" i-VC pipf
-Fea gravel
~kft r r/MT. r A r\
Boring completed Kay 31, 1984 ""•-• -"*•
•
\
Note:
,!Wa_ter level encountered during.
drilling was 38* below ground ^ •• »^
• urf*ce on 31 Kay 1984. gyo)
fEX/
PUGET
ANACC
^CO INC.
SOUND PLANT ^jjcol
)RTESr WASH. "^
DatU!P ., ,r , . LOG OF WELL W-16
5r« Ai-^-l^ M*«r.Vtfc «*•**'
n
M
-------
Depths Below
Ground Surface
(Feet)
270
1.0
12.0
18.0
52.
68.5
•Steel Casing
- Slip
" ; ' T ^ i "vS
Slip Cap
•Cement-Bentonite (5%)Grout
•Bentonite Pellet Seal
1" Casing
•Sandpack (No. 20 Filter Sand)
•2" PVC Blank Well Casing
•Bentonite Pellet Seal
-Sar.dpack (No. 20 Filter Sand)
.2" PVC Schedule 10 Well Casing
0.010-inch Slotted Screen
Seasonal High Water Level
"Stainless Steel Centering Device
-Threaded End Cap
.N'ct to scale
XV-B-63
Revision 3
December 31, 19E6
TEXACO INC
PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES. WASH.
LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC.
W-16: Two-Inch Casir.s Ir.sert
I.-.staliaticr. Dr?.wir.r (July
-------
WELL W-17
AS BUILT
10
20-
30
.c
j_>
c.
50
60
Elevation 133.73 (KLLV>)
KL Gray-brown sandy silt anc
30 [|| | [[I SX silty sand witn gravel (fill)
B H H III HI" Lark brown sandy silt witn
SP\ organics (topsoil)
30 Eriiii: \Tan fine sand (medium dense) 'L
a ;:::!:: •"1
yff> CL Cray-brown silty clay with
66 /fa trace land and gravel (hard)
™ 1/ssA ~' j>
Y//A
75
a Y///\-v .
Water Level 6 June 198H
^ K20
11" XXZ
a -^wC
SP drown sano; graces fro::, silty
„ j. SK fine sand to clean fine to i/
O ::::::: coarse sand, ^ravellv ir
t...... places, till-like in'places
22 ::::::: (very dense) 32.0-
a ijjjjjj 33-°-
_5_o niiilii 3o.o-
_50
a
12
5"
a
12
5"
a !BS!=
a" ft ^IJl Sb*n Srown silt and fine sa:'-a,
50 • "j ML some medium to coarse sand,
some gravel (very dense)
(till?) 61.5-
Boring completed June 1, 19S4
Note:
Water level encountered during
drilling vac 32* belov gr»und
jxurface on 1 June 198A.
•
-------
Depths Below
Ground Surface
(Feet)
(,/-.-»/'- N
2.0
3-5
31.5
33.0
37.3-
41.5-
17.3-
C 1 ^
.? 1 .5~-
62.0
62.8
s
— —
- — E
^••n^™
-^.
*
\ ',
••^
• *
*"r*
• •
*»
h^
^
^
±
«j
** .
u
^
Si
' * »
•^^^M
.•MM.
•C^**
"^T-
'."• *•
"•T7
• • •
• • '
• • i
• • •
• • ,
•
•
'•£?!
F"^
",*^
3
•;^
^
" "•'
* •".
••\
^^
— —
— —
x
~
»
•_
ZI
r
- —
Protective Steel Cssing
.Slip f-ap
- * •• ' • ' ~ 'i
"~~~ Cement-Bentonite (5%) Grout
' — Upper Bentonite Pellet Seal
ini p-. _.•__.
•x-anrin^rlr ftf?0 Filte^ Ssnd )
Lower Bentonite Pellet Seal
(Set to match position of
seal on 4" well)
^Sandpack (#20 Filter Sand)
-==- Seasonal High Water Level
___ — Stainless Steel Centering Device
0.010-inch Slotted Screen
2" PVC Blank Wrll rasi'ntr
~ Threaded End Cap
^
(
Not to scale
XV-B-64
Revision 3
December 31, 1986
TEXACO IN
PUGET SOUND PLANTT
ANACORTES, WASH.
LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC.
v~'>7:
-------
PIEZOMETER PI AS
Elevation 193.42 (MLLW)
'-*^ r\ ..ii .1 -
*.10
41
h.
C
Q.
«
Q20
30
63
C
66
IT"
C
61 " "
11"
C
-30
D
42 "
••
50 :
6" :
B ;
*
1! !"
1C
••
••
cv
X
^
SP
XX. Cray- brown silty, sanov
gravel (fill)
^Brown silty fine sand with
occasional layers of
sandy silt (very dense)
- Uater level 6 lune 1 QAi
l S n
iJ.U
it n -_
lo.U
Dark gray fine sand with 23 0 —
2s. 0-
3orin& coir.pltiea June 5, 19bi 2A.5
^ i_
'S*
- i •
i *
' \
^
•" v»*
'"•".*/
• *.•*•*.'
".***.*• :
••::;
':.''•::
BUILT
.— .
IT-
^r*
^l
^l
\ —
\
' ^
r^
» „ /
J*jj
V-'':.
=Ar-
r.v** •*
V;»:';
;•;.;;.:
I*-.*'
-2 !".'_ pipe
-Bentonite grout
-tientonite seal
-Pea gravel
2" PVf" si o 1 1 prf
screen (.020 in.
slot)
Note:
Vater level encountered during
drilling v&i !7.5' below ground
surface on 5 June 1984.
(K1LW) = y.eap Lower Low Water
XV-B-21
TEXACO INC.
PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES. WASH.
LOG OF PIEZOMETER P-l
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
SCALE 1" - 10'
Revision 2
November 8, 1985
-M,r«* XV-B-T
-------
PIEZOMETER P2
AS BUILT.
V
V
u.
JC
<_>
ex
30-
82
a
43
a
_75
87
a
7*1
a
50
P7
a
^« •
:::
:::
:::
»•*•
•-•1
• • •
:::
Hi-
ML
CL
^
5Pv
KL
CL
Elevation 182.42 (KLLW)
Dark brown sandy silt wi tn
gravel ( topsoil)
Brown silt and clay with trace
sand and gravel; some iron
staining on fracture surface*
(hard to very stiff)
_ UA t * r 1 e v » 1 (\ Tun* l o R /.
14.0 —
VBrown to gray interbedded fine 15.0 —
•and and gray silt and clay
(hard/very dense)
23.0-
28. C_
t \
>'•'
l«w'
W
V \.
v'i
1 S'
^>
-^
• \*
" s
4^
r^
•%* ".""
'*/: ".'*
•".V.";
;/:'^
. 'X •
,
j=.
^^^•*
, /
\' <
0.
<~,
"/
«
:'.\
^
i <>'
/ X
fl •-
2
••r.'.:-4
i|
•'•'•'.
••'•*"
**.•*.!
-Cap
-2" PVC pipe
-Bentonite grout
.Bentoni te seal
Pea gravel
2" PVC slotted
screen (.020 ii
slot)
Note:
Water level encountered during
drilling was 13.3' below ground
surface on 5 June 1984.
= v'.ear. Lower I ov Water
-a turr
XV-B-22
TEXACO INC.
•CJ PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES. WASH.
LOG OF PIEZOMETER P-2
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
SCALE i"
Revision 2
November 8, 1985
•^^••^•^•••••IK. -*m * * ^^_^^^
-------
PIEZOMETER P3
.AS BUILT
51
3
£.
*j
O.
Q
20
«0
a
78
a
IT"
a
_
11"
a
y
y
\JL
'/
1
V,
ft
• <
« 'i
i j
* »
CL
^7
\
SH
KL
Ground Elevation 165. 1'-^ (KLLK)
Brown silty clay with trace
sand and gravel; irong
staining on some fracture
surface (hard)
^Water level 15 June 1984. g 0_
"
Cray fine to medium silty *•
•and (medium dense)
Dark gray sandy silt (hard) 15.0-
20.0-
7^ .n
',-}'
\ / •
3
[£
)fl^
*.'.''.•'.'•
,-.•>;-;
::'-,':.v •
§6
'.".•"**.*'••
;*•*" *"•
V* *••'•'•
'$&
; i'l;'.:'*.
s
II
yV-*
V:-v
••".*.•-
i
--*^
j ^
^
'4
^
— \
/.
^^?
" fY.
*•*•*
.••v
'• *.'.'
!"••
• >V:
**. '**
***«* "
||
:-:VC'-:.
vVI
t*.*" •
^;:.:
-Steel casing
-2" PVC Pipe
— Bentonite grout
Bentonite s<"cil
-2" PVC slotted
screen (.020 in.
slot)
-Pea gravel
30-
Boring completed June o, 1954
Note:
Water level encountered curing
drilling was 15' below ground
surface or. 6 June 1984.
Note:
(MLLW>
Uaturr-.
Kear L.owri
v.atet
XV-B-23
TEXACO INC.
;S PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES. WASH.
LOG OF PIEZOMETER P-3
UkNDAU
ASSOaATES
SCALE 1" - 10'
Revision 2
November 8, 1985
Figure XV-B-1!
-------
WELL W-21
41
th
a 20-
30
Ground Elevation 97.5'+ (MLLW)
Gray-brown fine sandy silt
with trace coarse sand and
fine gravel (very stiff to
hard) (fill)
Brown fine sandy silt with
trace clay, fine gravel
(very stiff to hard)
grades gray
Cray silty clay with trace
fine gravel (very stiff to
hard)
grades stiff
Boring completed at 26.0' on
30 Jan 85. No ground water
observed during or immediately
after drilling on 30 Jan 85.
Ground water measured 2.6' be-
low ground surface on 4 Feb 85
after open hole caved.
(MLLW) = Mean Lower Low Water
XV-B-30
AS BUILT
5.0- i
8.5.
9.5-
15.0-
25.0-
L c.- c. i: i n £ cap
S:ecl casing
\^-. • Sentoni te grout.
bentonite slurry
seal
'Bentonite pel If.
seal
•Screen
••i- aqua sand
: n n d p a c k
fnreaded end cap,
TEXACO INC.
PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES, WASH.
LOG OF WELL W-21
SCALE ]"
LANDAU
ASSOaATES
1C
Revision ^
Ncverr.ber 6. 195:
Ficure XV-B-
-------
Q.
V
a 20-
30
WELL W-22
AS BUILT
cap
66
a
65
a
z
2ft
a
Ground Elevation 9ft. 6 '+ (MLLW) |
jT
»^N
I
*j
\
xx
x/x
'SS
///.
xx/
xxx
!_
ct-
•~ —
ML
CL
Dark gray angular gravel
(dense) (fill)
Gray-brown fine sandy silt , Q
with trace gravel (very *
stiff-hard)
9.5-
10.5"
Gray silty clay with trace
gravel (very stiff to hard) 15 0 ~
grades mediuc. stiff to stiff ^, Q_
Boring completed at 26.0' on 26.0
-J
~V
1
r>r*»
"*.*:
.V"-:
;'.-.'•
*" .'I'**
• .. \
'•;::";
V.:-"
=•
_ -
~__
— •.'
=-
^^
•^
•=-
r^ «» r
1 \
> X
o
I ^k
?^
g
•**•
?K
V^
L *.".
"•**.
•>v.
• •"«
"."••"•
>
Steel casing
Bentonite grout
^
• Bentonite slurry
seal
Bentonite pellc'.
seal
•Screen
.••'h aqua sand
.c-nripack.
^•TKrea^^i^ on A * **r\
30 Jan 85. No ground water
observed during or immediately
after drilling on 30 Jan 85.
ground water measured at 0.6'
below ground surface on 4 Feb 85
after open hole caved.
(MLLW) = Mean Lower Low Water
XV-B-31
TEXACO INC.
;0l PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES. WASH.
LOG OF WELL W-22
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
»CAUE 1" - 10'
Revision 2
November 6, 1965
Figure XV-B-V
-------
10-
X
l-l
Q.
30-
58
a
41
a
34
a
14
a
27
a
WELL W-23 AS BL
Ground Elevation 94.8V (KLLW)
OL
ML,
"cT
Dark brown organic silt with
trace gravel (soft)
\}ray-brown fine sandy silt 5.0-
with trace fine gravel (hard)
9.5-
10.0-
grades clayey 15.0-
Cray silty clay with trace
shells (stiff)
grades very stiff 25.0-
26.0-
\^-
i™ ''
'.*•'••'
* "***
•B^~B
-^-^~
JILT
^-- Locking cap
'i£,
*p£
21
*" **
[\ '•
T**T
•'•"*.'
I ••*•*.'
-Steel casing
•Bentonite grout
-Sentonite slurry
seal
Bentonite pellet
seal
-Screen
-'• aqua sand
:andpack
-Threaded end cap
31 Jan 85. No ground water
observed on 31 Jan 85.
Ground water measured at 0.5'
below ground surface on 4 Feb 85
in completed well.
(MLLW) = Mean Lower Low Water
XV-B-32
TEXACO INC.
PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES, WASH.
LOG OF WELL W-23
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
SCALE
1"
1.'
Revision 2
November 6, 1965
-------
10-
- 20-
01
o
JC
_>
a.
30-
40-
50-
WELL W-24
Ground Elevation 152.0'+ (MLLW)
80
a
57
a
50
d'
50
6"
a
50
50
64
11"
a
50
50
4"
!TTriT!ri
Brown gravelly coarse sand
(loose) (fill)
Brownish-gray fine sandy silt
with trace fine gravel
(hard) (fill)
Brownish-gray medium to
vicoarse sand (very dense)
^grades with abundant gravel
^grades medium sand without
gravel
Brownish-gray fine sandy silt
(hard)
Brownish-gray medium to
coarse sand (very dense)
SJ?
ML
ML
Brownish-gray clayey silt
(very stiff)
Reddish-brown fine sand
\(very dense)
^wi th layers of sil t
>-Cray silt with trace fine
gravel (hard)
Boring completed at 41.5' on
6 Feb 85.
Ground water encountered at
37' at 0930 on 6 Feb 85.
(MLLW) - Mean Lower Low Water
AS BUILT
-Locking cap
, Q_
— \ •
f
., _
25.'0-
30.0-
40.0
41.0
g
iS
g-Ber.tonite slurry
seal
Steel casing
^•-Bentonite grout
isentonite pellet
seal
Screen
f>8 aqua sand
sandpack
Threaded end cap
XV-5-33
TEXACO INC.
PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES. WASH.
LOG OF WELL W-24
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
»CAI_C 1" - 10'
Revision 2
November 8. 1955
Figure XV-B-2
-------
WELL W-25
AS BUILT
10
20
2.
CJ
30-
40-
80
a
12
a
50
69
a
72
a
so
a
50
6"
a
50£
Locking cap
1 "
,'<
, 1
I * „
ML
CM
SM
SP\
ML
CM
ML
Ground Elevation 146.1'+ (MLLW)
Brown slightly organic sandy
silt with abundant gravel
and occasional sand layers c Q_
\(*tiff to hard)
\grades bouldery
Brownish-gray silty medium
sand with trace fine gravel
v (medium dense)
^grades yellowish-gray
(very dense)
Yellowish-gray coarse sand with -Q Q
trace gravel (very dense) 2l!o-
26.0-
Cray clayey silt with abundant
coarse gravel (hard) (till-like) 36.0-
Cray silt (hard)
Rorlno rnmn1*f*rf at UCl . 0 ' *t AD-ft —
~-i*
=T'
8
p
••ita
;*
•'*"/."
l*Vr
••••':'•
^
— ^
=
1
•^F
• •••A
'.'.'. M
P
'a
/
\
~u*
J"«
1
^3
••*••
*•'.'
.' •• ;"
•*^C-
SI
-Steel casing
-Bentonite grout
-Bentonite slurry
seal
-bentonite pellet
seal
—Screen
-#3 aqua sand
sandpack
on 31 Jan 85.
Ground water measured at 36.0*
below ground surface on 4 Feb 85.
(MLLW) = Mean Lower Low Water
^Threaded end cap
XV-B-3^
TEXACO INC.
•Q} PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES, WASH.
LOG OF WELL W-25
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
SCALE 1
10'
Revision 2
November 8, 1985
Firure XV-3-22
-------
WELL W-26
AS BUILT
10-
20-
at
u.
- 30-
Q.
O
40-
50-
60-
49
a
30
a
40
a
To"
a
il
11"
a
22
11"
-7_4-
11"
a
TT"
a
IP.
6"
a
50
50
r
SM
ML
SP
Ground Elevation 137.9'+ (MLLW)
ML/CM Brown sandy silt with gravel
(soft-stiff)
^Brownish-gray silty fine sand
with trace fine gravel
(dense to very dense)
Brownish gray fine sandy silt
with occasional gravel
(very itiff)
Cray silty clay with trace
sand
Cray-brown medium sand
(very dense)
grades coarse sand
graces medium sand
grades browr., fine to medium
sand
Cray silt ^hard)
grades with abundant grave-!
grades without gravel
Boring completed at 53.2'
or. U Feb 85.
Ground water level measured at
48.8' below ground surface
on 7 Feb 85.
(MLLW) - Mean Lower Low Water
5.0-
j; cap
33.0-
40.0-
59 n-
i
i
StL-cl casing
Bentonite grout
Bentonite slurry
seal
Bentonite pelle'
sea 1
,'-f -#5 aqua sand
sandpack
Screen
Threaded end cap
TEXACO INC.
PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES. WASH.
LOG OF WELL W-26
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
SCALE 1" = 10'
Revision 2
November 8. T985
-------
_c
tJ
Q.
O
10-
55
a
O
u.
-5 10-
£
^j
a.
o
20-
P-4
AS BUILT
Ground Elevation 119.1'+ (MLLV)
ML
Backfill soil
3.0-
Brownish-gray silt with
trace clay, fine gravel 2.5-
(hard) *•&'
10.0-
1 •> n
i •
•*!
N *•'
2|
2,
;-iv.
—
'
1 x
I\J
|
•:Ui
Boring completed at 13.0' \
on 6 Feb 85 ^
-Locking cap
-Steel casing
-venionite grout
-uentonite slurry
seal
-Bentonite pellet
seal
-Screen
•//8 aqua sand
sandpack
^Threaded end cap
Ground water measured at
1.04* below ground surface
on 7 Feb 85.
AS BUILT
Ground Elevation 119.8'+ (MLLV)
ML
backfill soil
3.0-
browni sh-gray sill, with
trace clay, fine gravel 7 5
(hard) 8*.0r
10.0-
_ . . - - . 1 1 (V
t*.
&
&£
|
Vi'l
V***
<>-x-^i-WV.I^Xli^ i,A|J
fe
^
?*
@
.•" -"*•'
-Steel casing
-atr.ton; tc groi
-iicntonilc slurry
seal
-dentonite pelle'.
seal
-Screen
-fr8 aqua sand
Boring completed at 13.0'
on 6 Feb 85.
Ground water measured at
2.4' below ground surface
on 7 Feb 85.
sandpack
•"Threaded end
(MLLW) - Mean Lower Low Water
XV-B-36
TEXACO INC.
PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES. WASH.
LOG OF PIEZOMETERS
P-4 THROUGH P-5
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
•CALE 1"
1
Revision 2
November 8. 19S5
-------
10-
Q.
U
20-
66
a
5 10-
20-
75
a
P-6
Ground Elevation 120.3V (MLLW)
AS BUILT
-Locking cap
ML
backfill soil
Brownish-gray silt with
trace clay, fine gravel
(hard)
Boring completed at 13.0' on
6 Feb 85.
Ground water measured at 1.63*
below ground surface on
7 Feb 85.
3.0-
1:8=
10.0-
13.0-
Sieel casing
bentonite grout
dentonite slurry
seal
Bentonite pellet
seal
Screen
•ft8 aqua sand
sandpack
Threaded end ca;.
P-7
AS BUILT
Craund Elcvstio-, 116.1'+ (MLLV) |
ML
backfill soil
3.0-
fcrowni sh-gray silt with
trace clay, fine gravel 7 ^_
(hard) Slo-
10.0-
i •? n-
^'/
.•M"
•^
g
g-*.,
;":*.VV
«.» >*
«••
="
~~—-i.u\.r~i\i£ i_ap
/ '
"/
•r^
1**
g
^^
••:'•?*
Steel casing
-btntonite grou'
-bentonite slurry
seal
•ben ton i te pellet
seal
•Screen
•
-------
P8
AS BUILT
41
V
U.
5 ic
Q.
V
ML
Ground Elevation 111.1'+ (KLLW)
Backfill soil
3.0-
Brownish-gray clay with trace
silt, fine gravel (hard) 7.5_
8. fl-
lC. 0-
13 0-
Boring completed at 13.0' on
1 Feb 85.
-• /
i7
.JM
§
~tH
fi( :-
• •• *
;%'.;.
Mil
=•
\
^-^
s
_i
J^
g
JC
•« *. V
:•"'/
;.'..>•!
\
'Steel casing
-Bentonite grout
'Dentonite siurrj
seal
•Bentonite pfllev
seal
'Screen
08 aqua sand
sandpack
^Threaded end ca;>
No ground water encountered
during drilling.
(:'.LLW) » Kear. Lower Low Water
XV-B-38
TEXACO INC.
PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES, WASH.
LOG OF PIEZOMETER P-8
LANDAU
ASSOQATES
• CALE 1" = 10
Revision 2
November 8, 1985
Figure XV-B-26
-------
WELL W-31
AS-BUILT
Depths Below
Ground
(Feet)
20
-Locking Monument
30
Surfac
38
40
84
62
82
52
*
e Soil Profile
Elevation 190.98 } : •. r-:
Iflll
^
::::::
///
SP
CL
^
SP
CL
SP
CL
Light to medium brown V
gravelly fine SAND 2.5
(fill) (loose)
Gray-brown silty CLAY
with sparse coarse
sand and gravel (hard)
Grading to gray 11-5
silty CLAY (hard) 12.5
Gray fine sandy SILT
with rust-colored fine 17 n
sand interbeds (hard) ' ' -u
Gray fine SAND
Gray silty CLAY (hard)
Gray fine SAND
Cray silty CLAY (hard) 27 5
Gray fine SAND (very dense)
.•'• .
v
V"!
V
—/.
=
' uover
PVC Slip Cap
'_. j
MS
EH
j*T
• • i
••I*!
•*• •
^-Concrete
—2-inch PVC Sch.
40 Blank Well
Casing
— Volclay Grout
— Bentonite Pellet
Seal
—10' Length 2"
PVC Sch. 40
Slotted Screen
(0.010" Slot)
—No. 10-20 Sand
—Threaded End Cap
Boring completed at 27.5 feet on
12 June 1986.
Ground water level measured during
drilling at 13.5 feet.
TEXACO INC.
PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES. WASH.
LOG OF WELL W-31
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
SCALE
-------
WELL W-32
AS-BUILT
Depths Below
Ground Surface
(Feet)
0
10-
20-
30-
40-
50-
12
75
60
46
•
5_0
6"
•
50
6"
•
50
6"
Soil Profile
Elevation
SP/
ML
ML
SP
ML
ML
CL
Brown sandy SILT (topsoil)
/ (loose)
, i
•{'Dark brown gravelly sandy
SILT with wood fragments
(medium dense) (fill)
Bluish gray sparsely
gravelly sandy SILT
/medium stiff")
•o
Light brown medium SAND
(very dense)
UT-
Bluish-gray clayey SILT
with minor sand and
f ravel, sparse shell
ragments (hard)
Grades to bluish-gray
laminated SILT and CLAY
Locking Steel
Monument Cover
27.5
29.0
34.2
44.7
-Volclay Grout
•Bentonite Pellet
Seal
-10' Length 2"
PVC Sch. 40
Slotted Screen
(0.010" slot)
•No. 10-20 Sand
-Threaded End Cap
Boring completed at 44.7 feet
on 6 June 1986.
Ground water not encountered
during drilling.
TEXACO INC
PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES. WASH.
LOG OF WELL W-32
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
-------
WELL W-33
AS-BUILT
Locking Steel
Cap
(Feet)
0
20
30
iJO-
50
oeiow
Surfac
6
•
ft
13
92
50
O
67
f
50
6"
49
•
51
-&?
77
51
TTT
V
™
:e
V
< c
///
%
%
ML
' SM
/
' CL
/
/
/
/
X
X
^
:
: SP
:
:
s .^^
^*^^,
ML
CL
Soil Profile
Elevation 139.02
i . • . • . - . •
Light-brown fine sandy \
SILT (loose) (topsoil) 2.5
Light rusty brown silty
fine SAND (loose)
Brownish-gray sandy
silty CLAY with sparse
gravel (stiff)
Medium brown sand with
sparse gravel (very
Grades from me.dium to
coarse SAND
41 5
42.5
Grades to brown-gray
gravelly coarse SAND ^47 5
Bluish-gray sandy SILT grading
to silty clay with sparse
gravel and shells (hard)
58 0
^.T_
£?:
xy
g
»•
g|
Si
w
•sc
_ _
r^
g
ss
••^
;Hi
£^v
TV?
''"*•
*"• •
"*"»
•"*• '
•••:
!•"",
'!•""•"'
/."•"'
-.-.
J
-c
=
—
™
^^~
^^
• i^
• • *
*
I|
^
"•
— -
-^
3
_~i
.—
^j
^^
-^
j^,
§
=i
r^
•i
•••<
.;.
*/•
.••'
""J^
(.* i
:•<
-PVC Slip Cap
." • ••.•.!
r Concrete
" Volclay Grout
— Bentonite Pellei
Seal
^10' Length of 2'
PVC Sen 40
Slotted Screen
(0. 010" Slot)
No. 10-20 Sand
k— Thr**»a H#»H Pnrl Par
Boring completed at 58.0 feet
on 12 June 1966.
Ground water level measured at 49.0
below surface during drilling.
TEXACO INC
PUGET SOUND PLANT
ANACORTES. WASH.
LOG OF WELL W-33
LANDAU
ASSOCIATES
SCALE
-------
APPENDIX D
WASTE ANALYSIS PLAN EVALUATION CHECKLISTS
-------
COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST FOR RCRA
WASTE ANALYSIS PLAN
Prepared by Texaco Oil Company
Dated March 1984
4. Does the plan require the inspection of each
hazardous waste received at the facility from
off site sources to see that it matches the
accompanying manifest? [265.13(c)]
Yes No
1. Does the plan include a detailed chemical and
physical analysis of a representative sample
of all hazardous wastes? [265.13(a)(l)]
2. Does the detailed analysis of the waste provide
all information needed to treat, store, or dispose
of the waste? [265.13(a)(l)]
3. Will the detailed analysis be repeated whenever:
a. The operation or process generating the
waste changes? [265.13(a)(3)(i )]
b. When wastes received from offsite do
not match the accompanying manifests?
i)] X
-------
5. Does the waste analysis plan specify:
a. The parameters for which each
hazardous waste will be analyzed?
C265.13(b)(l)]
b. The rationale for each parameter?
[265.13(b)(l)]
c. The analytical methods used to test
for these parameters? [265.13(b)(2)]
d. The sampling method used to obtain a
representative sample of each waste?
[265.13(b)(3)3
e. The frequency of repetition for the
initial analysis of the waste
to ensure it is up to date?
[265.13(b)(4)]
6. For wastes that will be applied to land treatment
units, has:
a. The concentration of substances that
exceed the maximum concentrations in
Table I of 40 CFR 261.21 been determined?
[265.273(3)3
b. The concentrations of any substances
that caused the waste to be listed as
a hazardous waste been determined?
[265.273(b)3
-------
COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST FOR RCRA
WASTE ANALYSIS PLAN
Prepared by Texaco Oil Company
Dated October 1984
3. Will the detailed analysis be repeated whenever:
a. The operation or process generating the
waste changes? [265.13(a)(3)(i)]
b. When wastes received from off site do
not match the accompanying manifests?
4. Does the plan require the inspection of each
hazardous waste received at the facility from
off site sources to see that it matches the
accompanying manifest? [265.13(c)]
Yes No
1. Does the plan include a detailed chemical and
physical analysis of a representative sample
of all hazardous wastes? [265.13(a)(l)] _X_
Z. Does the detailed analysis of the waste provide
all information needed to treat, store, or dispose
of the waste? [265.13(a)(l)] X
-------
5. Does the waste analysis plan specify:
a. The parameters for which each
hazardous waste will be analyzed?
[265.13(b)(l)3
b. The rationale for each parameter?
[265.13(b)(l)]
c. The analytical methods used to test
for these parameters? [265.13(b)(2)3
d. The sampling method used to obtain a
representative sample of each waste?
[265.13(b)(3)3
e. The frequency of repetition for the
initial analysis of the waste
to ensure it is up to date?
[265.13(b)(4)3
6. For wastes that will be applied to land treatment
units, has:
a. The concentration of substances that
exceed the maximum concentrations in
Table I of 40 CFR 261.21 been determined?
[265.273(a)]
b. The concentrations of any substances
that caused the waste to be listed as
a hazardous waste been determined?
[265.273(b)]
8
-------
COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST FOR RCRA
WASTE ANALYSIS PLAN
Prepared by Texaco Oil Company
Dated November 1985
1. Does the plan include a detailed chemical and
physical analysis of a representative sample
of all hazardous wastes? [265.13(a)(l)]
2. Does the detailed analysis of the waste provide
all information needed to treat, store, or dispose
of the waste? [265.13(a)(l)]
3. Will the detailed analysis be repeated whenever:
a. The operation or process generating the
waste changes? [265.13(a)(3)(i )]
b. When wastes received from off site do
not match the accompanying manifests?
4. Does the plan require the inspection of each
hazardous waste received at the facility from
off site sources to see that it matches the
accompanying manifest? [265.13(c>]
Yes No
-------
5. Does the waste analysis plan specify:
a. The parameters for which each
hazardous waste will be analyzed?
[265.13(b)(l)]
b. The rationale for each parameter?
[265.13(b)(l)]
c. The analytical methods used to test
for these parameters? [265.13(b)(2>]
d. The sampling method used to obtain a
representative sample of each waste?
[265.13(b)(3)]
e. The frequency of repetition for the
intital analysis of the waste
to ensure it is up to date?
[265.13(b)(4)]
6. For wastes that will be applied to land treatment
units, has:
a. The concentration of substances that
exceed the maximum concentrations in
Table I of 40 CFR 261.21 been determined?
[265.273(a)]
b. The concentrations of any substances
that caused the waste to be listed as
a hazardous waste been determined?
[265.273(b)] JL
10
-------
COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST FOR RCRA
WASTE ANALYSIS PLAN
Prepared by Texaco Oil Company
Dated December 1986
1. Does the plan include a detailed chemical and
physical analysis of a representative sample
of all hazardous wastes? [265.13(a)(l)]
2. Does the detailed analysis of the waste provide
all information needed to treat, store, or dispose
of the waste? [265.13(a)(l)]
3. Will the detailed analysis be repeated whenever:
a. The operation or process generating the
waste changes? [265.13(a)(3)(i)]
b. When wastes received from off site do
not match the accompanying manifests?
4. Does the plan require the inspection of each
hazardous waste received at the facility from
off site sources to see that it matches the
accompanying manifest? [265.13(c)]
Yes No
11
-------
5. Does the waste analysis plan specify:
a. The parameters for which each
hazardous waste will be analyzed?
[265.13(b)(l)]
b. The rationale for each parameter?
[265.13(b)(l)]
c. The analytical methods used to test
for these parameters? [265.13(b)(2)]
d. The sampling method used to obtain a
representative sample of each waste?
[265.13(b)(3)]
e. The frequency of repetition for the
initial analysis of the waste to
ensure it is up to date?
R65.13(b)(4)]
6. For wastes that will be applied to land treatment
units, has:
a. The concentration of substances that
exceed the maximum concentrations in
Table I of 40 CFR 261.21 been determined?
[265.273(a)]
b. The concentrations of any substances
that caused the waste to be listed as
a hazardous waste been determined?
[265.273(b)]
12
j
-------
APPENDIX E
SUMMARY OF CONCENTRATIONS FOR SUBSTANCES REPORTED
IN SAMPLES OBTAINED DURING THE TASK FORCE
INSPECTION AT TEXACO
-------
-------
APPENDIX 1
Contract Required Detection Limits and
Instrument Detection Limits for Metals,
Inorganic, and Indicator Parameters
Al-1
-------
TABLE Al-1
CONTRACT REQUIRED DETECTION LIMITS AND INSTRUMENT
DETECTION LIMITS FOR METALS, INORGANIC, AND INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Parameter
Metals
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Tin
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
Inorganic and Indicators
Bromide
Chloride
Cyanide
Fluoride
Nitrate-nitrogen
Nitrite-nitrogen
POC
POX
Sulfate
Sulfide
TOC
TOX
Total Phenols
CRDL
200
60
10
200
5
5
5000
10
50
25
100
5
5000
15
0.2
40
5000
5
10
5000
50
10
50
20
1000
1000
10
1000
300
300
10
5
1000
1000
1000
5
50
IDL
94
5
6
3
2
0.5
67
6
7
18
23
2
84
4
0.2
23
486
4 ,
r
5
163
72 .
6
8
20
50
1000
1000
300
50
20
5
500
1000
1000
5
10
concentrations are in vg/1
Al-2
-------
APPENDIX 2
SUMMARY OF CONCENTRATIONS FOR COMPOUNDS FOUND
IN GROUND-WATER AND SAMPLING
BLANK SAMPLES AT SITE 43, TEXACO, WA
The following table lists the concentrations for compounds analyzed for
and found in samples at the site. Table A2-1 is generated by listing
all compounds detected and all tentatively identified compounds reported
on the organic Form I, Part B. All tentatively identified compounds
with a spectral purity greater than 850 are identified by name and
purity in the table. Those with a purity of less than 850 are labeled,
unknown. The scan number written next to the "unknown" TICs are
approximate values. The MS library searches are compared to see if the
same unknown is detected in the samples.
Sample numbers are designated by the inorganic and corresponding organic
sample number. Inorganic sample numbers are preceded by the prefix
"MQA" organic sample numbers are preceded by the prefix "Q."
A2-1
-------
TABLE KEY
A value without a flag indicates a result above the contract
required detection limit (CROL).
J Indicates an estimated value. This flag is used either when
estimating a concentration for tentatively identified compounds
where a 1:1 response is assumed or when the mass spectral data
indicated the presence of a compound that meets the identification
criteria but the result is less than the specified detection limit
but greater than zero. If the limit of detection is 10 yg and a
concentration of 3 wg is calculated, then report as 3J.
B This flag is used when the analyte is found in the blank as well as
a sample. It indicates possible/probable blank contamination and
warns the data user to take appropriate action.
GW » ground-water
SW * surface-water
low and medium are indicators of concentration.
A2-2
-------
SITE: 43 TLXACO? WA
CASE NO! 6-2363H9
SAMPLE LOCATION? FIELI1 BLAIf TRIP PL^ ¥£LL 22 HELL 22 WELL 2 tfclL 10
SAMPLE TYPE: SW-LOU GW-LW C*-LD« ?'.* OH.OH PL* W-LOM «HQV
I'OA
2-Bl'TAf!Of€ i i i i | i i
METHYLEME CHLORI?E 1 i B ' !• B 1 12 B ! 8 B 1 6 B 1 4 JBI
Iflfl-TRICHLOROETHWC 1 ! I ! ! ! !
AM'OA TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHAWE ! 2 J ! 1 1 J 1 1 I 1
SEMI- PHEWL ! 4 J 1 2 J 1
MOA
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE I 4 J
4-M£THYLPHE«?L 1
PEST/ W HITS 1
PCB
1
HERB 2-4-5-TP 1
2?4?5-T I
CHLOROBECILATE 1
TIC- BUTYROLACTOffi 1
SEMI- TRICHLOROPROPEME 1
«.K?A
mWW AMIDE (scan 1866) 1 10 J
BICrCLOHEPTAffi.' PICHLORO 1
UHKHOW <;c2n 484) 1 10 J
UNKNOHN (£C3n 648) I ? J
5 JBI
1
60 J
10 J
i UNKHOHN («csn 811) 1 I
'JNKMNH 1 1
TOTAL ALUMINUM
METALS AHTIMOHY
ARSEMIC
BARIUM
BERYLLIUM
CADMUS
CALCIUM
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
IRON
L£A9
MA&fSSIUM
MAftjA&SE
MERaK
POTASSIUM
SELEMIUM
SILVER
SODIUM
46
477
23
133
74?
27
7*1
34
326
1080
20 J
? J
3020
77
18700
15
3180
151000
72
13800
61?00
1 ! !
4 J 1 76
1
1
1
1
1
1
(PUP 052 10 J
10 J
• i
3800 3010
138 52
1
1*0000 5°500
15 12
3780 3630
151000 60800
107 145
14200 7830
61600 30200
1
1
I
1
30 J
256
144
1
72200
5°0
44200
23
6680
20800 1
THALLIUM
A2-3
-------
ui •<•
- F!
h-i OU
-i a-
-i £.
S
•-« c i or
Cl Ci
^-. _i _i
«! ui »
£.: c.e:
c. r,
I-
*•
ei
c- —i
r- — i _
*
5
£ 3
» — i
a; ui
Si •-<
. u
UJ UJ
5.' S1
k^ <• «r>
•-• C- OLI
-o
ri Qti
«- ar> >-t
c-
-o
tf>
•o
o a>
f: -
S!
£
$
s
a: a:
§ a! i £ §-, £
tJ tJ C_i O t_» •-«
85 di e_i
uft cj
-------
O.'
E, ?.
ass
*v <=• —I
»?
i-I r»i ar.
e. r, c.
£! r! i
o. iii cfi
«: :*
SI
1 _i ^
O Ul Ui
Ci
o
-Cl
»H <• 3
Cl —• Ci
5. rii
o ui tri
1*
Oil
-*Ci
r- -• 5
s: =| i
« "* *"'
S!
Cl i ^J
£ Vj{S
S!
$
•.
• &
* ? i-
*•: r*i 3.
.1 -4-» Cl
~- f~l »-H
s* t *"
•*i t»i * t~> OL.
^ c; c» x-
-i iii tii uj
ji <_i c/i c/i tr» .
Dr. —i "I
lf~t b~> lf*i 1*1 C* *-* f*l C» *O * r*l ^<
ai — • —i — i
b~i fi c* o - cci *-• on ct -^ c* -*r c*
KI ai ^* ^ c. < e. -^ iri
f*l O< ^* *H C*
^- c. ai
<>• f^.
ttl
— , — ,
oT. S 5! S 5i §!
oti «M r*i **.•
fltl — 1
K
01 —1 01 —1 —1
g! *~* r~'. wi
—1 01 —1 —I
—i •«" C' t>. ft'-l^' C' O C-I O «• P-l C-
n ^< iri •-•»-« r-. c> «-« o>- C' »-« C'
•-< C« pi £. ITI $•
UJ
1— —.
4C -Cl Cl
—i -o a:
uj . un^-oor-i
£ E! W' >^ uj »! iJ . "^ 5i *r!
Ci fit: S? >•! ._! r« Ci UJ
zlciCi tiip 4:ujS.uj£ccc:
F: si s! 5j *s _i S cj 3 •« B Ki BI
*- ?- £7 cfQ ""^ 25 ^ l-l »— Cl Cl €.1
ri «? 4; & 2: 55 A §! r*i r i S s! &: s SI *i =• § =; ^ <£ « S «! o § S S S £ 9 iH S S 5- S! ul 17!
4: ui
~- ft f-^0! |l-l ^*
* • x: « ui 0i a:
-------
SITE: 43 TEXACO: VA
"CASE NO! P-2363HQ
-nn: u. rvj *
-SAMPLE LOCAT!0«:
SAMPLE TYPE;
; TIN I
VANADIUM i
ZINC !
\
PIS ALUMINUM !
HETALS ANTIMONY
ARSENIC
BARIUM
BERYLLIUM
CADMIUM
CALCIUM
CHROMIUM
COBALT
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ftnvTEcSlUn
MAilCAUTCT
nnntJnlTtsL
MERCURY »
NICKEL
POTASSIUM
SELENIUM
SILVER
SODIUM
THALLIUM
TIN
VANADIUM
ZINC
INOR6, BROMIDE
INDIC, BICARBONATE
CARBONATE
CHLORIDE
FLUORIDE
NITRATE NITROGEN
NITRITE NITROGEN
POC
POX
SULFATE
SIJLFIDE
TOC
TOTAL PHEMOLS
TQX
HELL 31 HELL I7
SH-LQW GW-LOU
63 ! 1
1 1
22 1 1
I 1
! 1
10,8 1 !
57 ! 52 !
1 1
1 1
128000 ! 77500
1
1 9
\
1860 15?
79100 42000
52* 241
12600 5720
46600 24900
41
1
450000 1 285000
1
40000 1 64000
1
1
I
28 ! 15
1
128000 1 122000
1
1800 ! 4200
1
10 I ?1
HELL 16
GW-LOV
!
1
23 1
£3
47200
32900
78
9660
26600
195000
20000
16000
16
30000
1300
HELL 33
5V-LOM
53 I
1
I
66
58400
43900
20
7450
21700
210000
23000
15
96000
2400
HELL 23 EAST DITCH
5H-LOH SW-LOW
1 !
1 !
! 1
1
1
1
4 1 40
1
44:1 I
90100 1 43500
I
! 7
1
1
!
74100 1 33200
1 297
1
I
8469 1 3460
I
1
42300 1 25000
1
1
1
1
425000 210000
30000 8800
410
18 13
134000 45000
£300 6200
15 25
A2-6
-------
SITE* 43 TEXACO-
CASE wn;- ?-23f?VG
- SAMPLE LOCATIOf'
SAMPLE TYPE:
"".' I'OA 2-P'JTANONE
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
1?1?1-TP.!CHLOROETHANE
-1
A.P-1'04 TRICHLQP.OFLUORDMETHA.ME
;PHI- PHENOL
'.'OA P!:'2-ETHYLHEXYL>PHTHALATE
4-METHYLPHENOL
- PEST/ MS HITS
PCP
HERB 2?4?5-TP
2f4-5-T
CHLOP.OPEHZILATE
TIC- PLTYRQLACTOME
SEMI- TRICHLDP.OPROPEXE
MOA UNKNOWN AMIDE (scan 1866)
BICYCLOHEPTAHEj DICHLDRO
UNKNOWN
-------
V, ,J
a>
:«: 3: 3 £2
f-> >3J l»
» »-1 ^
a ^S KH
»-*
1/1
•^J ->•-»
no o *3 10 -5 -3
I b
l>4
1 J »-»
,.
.....
ii ii iiii iiiiiiiiii
H*
•O
ii ii ii ii ii ii
ii ii ii ii
in LO
13 1-4
:S 5
rjl
•O
!i
n n n n r-> uj >o
— !» S. fe fe GJ g
- =5?
PSG2 ff 3 £ g §
"* i s * | '^^!«
:§
:§
•o t3
r=- i- r1
in i^i in
.—»!-«:
! ^S ^ 'I
\ n :^
i t-t
i o
i *
r- -J
r- o
l.Q
•J
O
«7> in -o
TP :§
r- '^~
13 •- 10
* «.n >-*
S
»-.
IO
•c>
O
Ti— 10
i •-»
i~ —
-3.
1-5
n ir
JO t-
f/J —
•n
;5
•°3
-------
o
o
UO
»- 10
IH*
if:?
•9 '
rn
»-<
—4
re
i**
:g
-
W
13 ^W
->| -5 Jfc Ol
• n>
-O «»
•fl
;3 !ii *H in S in i5 in i? ' '3
J> a: IT TO isi r» a: i :t>
•-< i »» — 4 •-< '— — i JS r-> u u :e .«» 19 -jj .-^ »-• 13; u
•^^.*S8 ;5 33 m
~ i5 ~ <3
• n
•TO
\
i j
O •» 0-
. s «
1 f.. l_
rn rn rn
.•j 10 '3
• -«
13
3.
1- ii. !»-
o in o
ut
"T) O
« i- in
1 1 0-
13 13
1 IM 19
r* i3j '"^
13 to 13
•C 11 * "*
ill
l/> Tl • O
i/> O
-t •>
MQA°'1/Q!501
WELL 2!
cw-LDg
• O -I
»n in
-------
Ul -C'
>- 1-1
?: ~ »
Cl Cl Ci
*-• -' T
o c! ui
sr
§' o-i
£:£'»
|;u,S
o- <»• a»
o • u cri
fifi
aci
rt UJ »
?-g:5
g: Ti
o- —J e»
ei
a*
a'! 21 i
O Ci»
1
b* *
?! »
Cl til C>
&*'> —I i
(£i
x:
^y
^:?;P: ? ^ s:
4- O-
T,
!/"• !*• O' f*- f*-' r*"» 5» f*1-
•<• ri u*i *•*• * **j 5*
ri on w» 5'
^r ri >t« «•
»— *
i**"*
^- ci r~i ^" — * c*
ci *-• c i r*t »-« e.
Cl
^* ||-i C-
JF;
v-«
o-
j?: |:Ci S:
1 5:
2 f ! s ^ |: g: ?! |
M«
r-. c. «r C. c. c-
— * £•• - S' D- ?'
r-. ai <• r. l^1
*-* r»i 5- Ui
Oti
Si r«-. c- r»i
. . c« c«
?i p' **
y ui 5:
K- ik: *f* 5f oe _i cri t-i
— J Ul ui —
.
5- I
.J-. Ol ilt I
en CJ
a: «-H
"'i r -'5 r - ^ r-*-:-i
-------
APPENDIX F
SUMMARY OF DATA USABILITY
-------
WP-1338C
INORGANIC DATA USABILITY AUDIT REPORT
Laboratory: Centec Analytical Services Total Dumber of Samples: 23
Case: B-2363 Contract Number: SAS 2363
Data User: GWMTF Region: 10 Site Number: 43
QC Number: 108 Site: Texaco. WA
Date Received at EMSL/LV: 2 / 12 / 87 Date Audited: 3 / 3/87
Date Submitted by Lab: 2/10/67 Date Reviewed: k_J 8_/_87
DATA QUALITY SUMMARY
A. Graphite Furnace AA Analysis: Sb(T) with exceptions, Pb(T), Se(T,D), and
Tl (T.D) are quantitative. As(T.D),
Cd(T.D), Sb(D), and Pb(D) are
semi-quantitative.
•B. ICP Analysis: Total and dissolved results for Be, Ca, Cr, Co, Cu, Fe,
Mn, Ni, K, AS, Na, V, and 2n are quantitative. The •
dissolved results for Ba, Al, and MS are quantitative. The
Mg(T) and A1(T) results are semi-quantitative. Ba(T) is
qualitative.
C. HS Analysis: Quantitative
D. 1C Analysis: Br~, F~, Cl~, and S04 are quantitative. NO,
and NO2 are quantitative with exceptions.
E. Phenol Analysis: Quantitative with reservations i
F. TOG Analysis: Quantitative with reservations
G. POC Analysis: Suspect
H. TOZ Analysis: Quantitative
I. POZ Analysis: Quantitative
J. Sulfide Analysis: Quantitative
K. Bicarbonate Analysis: Semi-quantitative
.L. Carbonate Analysis: Semi-quantitative
' NOTE: Usability is determined from guidelines laid out in the "Inorganic Data
Validation SOP" written by O.K. White, May 14, 1985.
Initial Audit by: Reviewed by:
M.E. Balogh Keith A. Aleckson
Senior Scientist Senior Scientist
Gail.Gibson
Data Audit Technician ^
' • ' -- 1 \ 1987 -.
Laboratory Performance Monitorins Group ....*!*
Lockheed Engineering and Management Services Co.
P.O. Box 15027 ,.. —
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114 '". ..-..=
Tel: (702) 798-3143 (FTS) 545-3143
-------
WP-1353C
Laboratory:
EMS I
ORGANIC DATA USABILITY AUDIT REPORT
Total Number of Samples
32
Case: B-2363HQ
Data User: GWMTF
Site: 43 Texaco. WA
Region: 10
4-3-87
Contract Number: SAS/2363HO
Date Audited: April 4. 6-9. 1987
Date Reviewed: 4-1Q-87
Date Received at EMSL/LV:
REPORT SUMMARY
The following is the auditors assessment of Data Quality of this case
pertaining to:
A. Volatiles and Appendix 9 Volatiles
by Purge and Trap:
B. Semivolatiles and
Appendix 9 Semivolatiles:
C. Pesticides and
Appendix 9 Pesticides:
D. Herbicides:
Initial Audit by:
Quantitative
Quantitative
Unusable for the TICs detected at
scans - 473 and - 648; unusable
for the analysis of 4-methylphenol
in Q1568; unusable for analytes
quantified using perylene-D12 (IS)
in Q1592.
Quantitative
Suspect for the heptachlor analyses
due to MB contamination. Unusable
for the kepone analysis.
Qualitative for organophoso-
herbicides due to lack of surr.
data, confirmation analysis, and
lineari£y verification.
Suspect for chloro-
herbicides.
Unusable for Chlorobenzilate
Reviewed by:
D.L. Bogen
Senior Associate Scientist
D.C. Pudvah
Senior Scientist
E.S. Moore
Scientist
Laboratory Performance Monitoring Group
Lockheed Engineering and Management Services Company
P.O. Box 15027
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
Tel: (702) 798-3143 (FTS) 545-3143
PJRAFT
APR 13 1987-
-------
APPENDIX G
1987 SEMIANNUAL GROUND WATER ANALYTICAL DATA
SUBMITTED BY TEXACO
-------
-------
WELL WATER , APRIL 1987
Water Elevations (ft) 04-07-8?
Well
Number
1
2
3
15
16
17
21
22
23
24
31
32
r 33
P-1
P-2
P-3
P-4
P-5
P-6
P-7
P-8
KWB 6EC
1 1
12
13
14
25
26
Well
Type
East Down
Up
West Down
West Down
West Down
West Down
East Down
East Down
East down
South Down
Up
West Down
West Down
•
-
Feet to
Water
56.89
31.46
44.51
19-55
52.62
49.38
5.26
3.08
3.35
37.75
16.15
39.70
53-20
12.69
14.90
7.58
8.98
10.50
11 .29
8.36
5.28
6.55
13.87
5.95
5.65
19.47
36.80
51 .48
Reference
(MLLW)
97.5
145.9
146.7
146.4
143.7
133-9
99-8
97.0
96.7
154.2
192.7
147.7
140.3
193-1
182.3
166.6
120.7
121 .9
121 .8
118.4
112.9
111 .00
99.7
96.1
96.1
187.0
147.5
138.6
Water
(MLLW)
40.61
114.44
102.19
126.85
91 .08
84.52
94.54
93-92
93.35
116.45
176.55
108.00
87.10
180.41
167.40
159.02
1 11 .72
11 1 .40
110.51
1 10.04
107.62
104.45
85.83
90.15
90.45
167.53
110.70
87.12
-------
pH,
WELL W/TER , APRIL 198?
Lab Data ." 04-07-87
Well Sample
Number Number
1
15
16
17
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2 .
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
pH Up-gradiant
8.79
8.77
8.81
8.90
8.82
0.06
4
8.01
8.02
8.04
8.00
8.02
0.02
4
7.88
8.13
8.07
8.02
8.02
0.11
4
7.89
7.86
7.85
7.85
7.86
0.02
4
9-09
8.32
8.74
9-15
8.82
0.38
4
7.43
7.57
-.64
-.58
7.55
0.09
4
7.53
0.45
. 8
7.53
0.45
8
7.53
0.45
8
7.53
0.45
8
7.53
0.45
8
7.53
0.45
8
Sig. (1)
2.67
NA
1 .01
NA
1 .02
NA
0.69
NA
2.68
NA
0.05
NA
(1) Based on two-tailed test,
\
7 degrees of freedom @0.99 and 13 wells; t = 5.714
-------
WELL WP.TEK
pH, Lab Data
Well Sample
Number Number
18*
15 Dup
19*
Res.
21
22
23
A1
. A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
APRIL 198?
04-07-87
pH Up-gradiant
Sig.
7.84
7.85
7.87
7.85
7.85
0.01
4
7.90
7.89
8.03
7.92
7.93
0.06
4
7.58
7.55
7.59
7.54
7.56
0.02
4
7.29
7.29
7.29
7.22
7.27
0.03
4
7.47
7.41
7.48
7.45
7.45
0.03
4
7
0
7
0
7
0
7
0
7
0
.53
.45
8
.53
.45
8
.53
.45
8
.53
.45
8
.53
.45
8
6.65
6
6
6
6
,68
.74
,69
,69
0.04
4
7.53
0.45
8
0.66
NA
0.84
NA
0.07
NA
0.54
NA
0.17
NA
1.75
NA
-------
PH,
WELL W/TER , APRIL 1987
Lab Data , 04-07-87
Well Sample pH
Number Number
Up-gradiant.
Sig.
31 A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
32 A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
33 AT
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
13
17
15
17
15
0.02
4
7.43
7.47
7.53
0.45
8
7-45
0.03
2
7.67
7.47
7.55
7.53
7.55
0.08
4
7.53
0.45
8
7.53
0.45
8
0.78
NA
0.17
NA
0.05
NA
Up-gradiant, Well 2 and 31
Mean 7-59
S.D. 0.46
n 8
for the Reservoir water,
* Results for Well 18 ape duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are
20 A1 9.12
A2 8.21
Year Upgradiant Results
Aug 86, Well 2
Aug 86, Well 31
Oct 86, Well 2
Oct 86, Well 31
Dec 86, Well 2
Dec 86, Well 31
Apr 87, Well 2
Apr 87, Well 31
Year Mean
Year S.D.
Year n
Apr S.D
PH
7
7.
7
1.
8
7
8
7
7
0
.82
,07
.96
,08
.01
.15
.02
.15
.53
.45
8
0
0
0
0
0
Avg
0.06
0.02
, 1 1
,02
• 38
,09
,02
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.02
0.03
0.08
0.07
-------
WELL WATER , APRIL 198?
Conductivity, Lab Data (uMHO@25)04-07-87
Well Sample
Number Number
1
15
16
17
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
Cond. Up-gradiant
Sig. (1)
700
703
717
694
704
10
4
814
803
806
808
808
5
4
715
714
718
716
716
2
4
679
679
683
683
681
2
4
451
557
515
451
494
52
4
2730
2420
2283
1280
2178
627
4
953
240
8
953
240
8
953
240
8
953
240
8
953
240
8
953
240
8
-0.98
NA
-0.57
NA
-0.93
NA
-1 .07
NA
-1 .80
NA
4.82
NA
(1) Based on one-tailed test,
7 degrees of freedom § 0.99 and 13 wells;
t = 5.276
-------
WELL W^TER , APRIL 198?
Conductivity, Lab Data (uMHO§25)04-07-87
Well Sample Cond. Up-gradiant ' t Sig.
Number Number
18* A1 690
15 Dup. A2 683
A3 688
A4 686
Mean 68? 953 -1.04 NA
S.D. 3 240
n 48
19* A1 77
Res. A2 73
A3 77
A4 76
Mean 76 953 -3-45 NA
S.D. 2 240
n 48
21 A1 889
A2 868
A3 857
A4 856
Mean 868 953 -0.33 NA
S.D. 15 240
n 48
22 A1 1844
A2 1814
A3 1840
A4 1892
Mean 1848 953 3-52 NA
S.D. 33 240
n 48
23 A1 1014
A2 1002
A3 1006
A4 1004
Mean 1007 953 0.21 NA
S.D. 5 240.
n • 4 8
24 A1 820
A2 817
A3 934
A4 930
Mean 875 953 -0.30 NA
S.D. 66 240
n 48
-------
WELL W/TER , APRIL 198?
Conductivity, Lab Data (uMHO@25)04-07-87
Well Sample
Number Number
Cond.
31 A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
32 A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
33 A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
Up-gradiant, Well 2
Mean
S.D.
n
1220
1202
1205
1206
1208
8
4
648
600
Up-gradiant'
Sig.
953
240
8
1 .01
624
34
2
669
659
609
655
648
27
4
and 31
1008
213
8
953
240
8
953
240
8
-1 .29
-1.20
NA
NA
NA
* Results for Well 18 are
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are
20 A1 8.82
A2 3.27
Year Upgradiant Results
duplicate samples obtained from
for the Reservoir water.
Aug 86
Aug 86,
Oct 86
Oct 86,
Dec 86,
Dec 86,
Apr 87,
Apr 87:
, Well
, Well
, Well
, Well
, Well
, Well
, Well
, Well
2
31
2
31
2
31
2
31
Year Mean
Year S.
Year n
.D.
Apr S.D.
uMHO
708
1230
699
1099
718
1150
808
1208
952.50
239.84
8
9.75
4.65
1 .71
2.31
51 .98
627.35
15.33
32.51
5.26
65.56
8.02
33.94
26.66
Avg 68.08
-------
WELL W/TER , APRIL 1987
Turbidity, Lab Deta (NTU) 04-07-8?
Well Sample NTU Up-gradiant t Sig. (1)
Number Number
1 A1 64.00
A2 250.00
A3 225.00
A4 302.00
Mean 210.25 71.73 5.73 0.99
S.D. 102.64 39-51
n 48
2 A1 9.50
A2 44.00
A3 76.00
A4 29.00
Mean 39.63 71.73 -1.33 NA
S.D. 28.06 39.51
n 48
3 A1 0.30
A2 0.10
A3 11.10
A4 13.00
Mean 6.12 71.73 -2.71 NA
S.D. 6.89 39.51
n 48
15 A1 0.60
A2 0.70
A3 0.80
A4 0.50
Mean 0.65 71.73 -2.94 NA
S.D. 0.13 39.51
n 48
16 A1 0.30
A2 0.00
A3 0.00
A4 0.00
Mean 0.07 71.73 -2.96 NA
S.D. 0.15 39.51
n 48
17 A1 15.40
A2 4.90
A3 3.60
A4 1.50
Mean 6.35 71.73 -2.70 NA
S.D. 6.19 39.51
n 48
(1) Based on one-tailed test,
7 degrees of freedom § 0.99 and 13 wells; t = 5.276
-------
WELL W/TER , APRIL 1987
Turbidity, Lab Deta (NTU) 04-07-8?
Well Sample NTU Up-gradiant t Sig.
Number Number
18* A1 0.40
15 Dup. A2 0.30
A3 0.30
A4 0.60
Mean 0.40 71.73 -2.95 NA
S.D. 0.14 39.51
n 4 8
19* A1 0.00
Res. A2 0.00
A3 0.10
A4 0.00
Mean 0.02 71.73 -2.96 NA
S.D. 0.05 39.51
n 48
21 A1 12.00
A2 19.40
A3 16.60
A4 4.60
Mean 13-15 71.73 -2.42 NA
S.D. 6.47 39.51
n 48
22 A1 1.60
A2 0.70
A3 0.70
A4 0.80
Mean 0.95 71.73 -2.93 NA
S.D. 0.44 39.51
n 48
23 A1 4.40
A2 1.20
A3 2.50
A4 3-50
Mean 2.90 71.73 -2.84 NA
S.D. 1.37 39.51
n 48
24 A1 68.30
A2 60.70
A3 60.00
A4 14.50
Mean 50.87 71.73 -0.86 NA
S.D. 24.54 39.51
n 48
-------
WELL W/>TER , APRIL 198?
Turbidity, Lab Data (NTU) 0^-07-8?
Well
Number
31
32
33
Sample
Number
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
NTU Up-gradiant
58.00
62.00
56.30
77.10
63-35
9.47
4
Sig.
3.10
1 .40
2.25
1 .20
2
4.30
29.00
23.80
26.50
20.90
11.27
4
71.73
39.51
8
Up-gradiant, Well 2 and 31
Mean 51.49
S.D. 17.22
n 8
71.73
39.51
8
71.73
39.51
8
-0.35
NA
-2.22
NA
-2.10
NA
* Results for Well 18 are
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are
20 A1 0.50
A2 0.20
Year Upgradiant Results
duplicate samples obtained from
for the Reservoir water.
Aug 86
Aug 86
Oct 86
Oct 86
Dec 86
Dec 86
Apr 87
Apr 87
, Well
, Well
, Well
, Well
, Well
, Well
, Well
, Well
2
31
2
31
2
31
2
31
Year Mean
Year S
Year n
.D.
Apr S.D,
NTU
137.20
43.42
122.44
40.27
86.67
40.85
39.63
63.35
71.73
39.51
8
102.64
28.06
6.89
0.13
0.15
6.19
6.47
0.44
1.37
24.54
9.47
1 .20
11 .27
15.29
-------
WELL WPTER , APRIL 1987
TOH, AM-Test Date." (ug/1) 04-07-8?
TOH Up-gradiant
17.2
Well
Number
1
2
3
15
16
17
Sample
Number
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
5.0
63
11
24
26
5
5
2
4
2
5
4
0
0
31 .6
5.0
1 1 .6
13.3
4.0
27.0
17.4
5.0
28.6
19.5
10.9
4
5.0
5.0
50.4
5.0
16.3
22.7
34.2
18.0
14.8
24.8
22.9
8.6
4
9.3
11.4
8
9-3
11.4
8.0
9.3
11.4
8
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
0.0
4
9
1 1
.3
.4
8
9.3
11.4
8
9.3
11 .4
8
t Sig. (1)
2.13
NA
0.34
NA
1.46
NA
-0.61
NA
1 .01
NA
1.95
NA
(1) Transfer blank = 37 ug/1
(2) Based on one-tailed test,
7 degrees of freedom § 0.99
(3) Detection limit = 10 ug/1
and 13 wells; t = 5.276
-------
WELL W/TER , OCTOBER 1986
TOH, AM-Test Date, (ug/1) 04-07-8?
Well Sample TOH Up-gradiant ' t Sig.
Number Number
18* A1 5.0
15 Dup. A2 5.0
A3 5.0
A 4 16.8
Mean 7.9 9.3 -0.19 NA
S.D. 5-9 11.4
n 48
19* A1 43.4
Res. A2 42.0
A3 57.8
A4 5.0
Mean 37.0 9.3 3-96 NA
S.D. 22.5 11.4
n 4.0 8.0
21 A1 25.8
A2 33-0
A3 36.0
,.4 13-8
Mean 27.1 9.3 2.55 NA
S.D. 9-9 11.4
n 48
22 A1 16.4
A2 14.2
A3 5.0
A4 5.0
Mean 10.1 9-3 0.12 NA
S.D. 6.0 11.4
n 48
23 A1 11.2
A2 5.0
A3 23.0
A4 5.0
Mean 11.0 9-3 0.25 NA
S.D. 8.5 11.4
n 48
24 A1 5.0
A2 30.4
A3 28.2
A4 52.0
Mean 28.9 9-3 2.80 NA
S.D. 19.2 11.4
n 48
-------
WELL W/TER , OCTOBER 1986
TOH, AM-Test Data (ug/1) 04-07-8?
Well Sample
Number Number
31
32
33
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
AM
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
TOH Up-gradiant
5.0
11 .6
5.0
5.0
6.6
3-3
4
Sig.
5.0
19.0
50.4
13.0
21.8
19.9
4
5
5,
5
5
5.
0
0
0
0
0
0.0
4
9.3
11.4
8
9.3
11.4
8
9-3
11.4
8
-0.37
NA
1.80
NA
-0.61
NA
Up-gradiant, Well 2 and 31
Mean 9.1
S.D. 9.1
n 8.0
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are for the Reservoir water.
Year Upgradiant Results
Aug 86, Well 2
Aug 86, Well 31
Oct 86, Well 2
Oct 86, Well 31
Dec 86, Well 2
Dec 86, Well 31
Apr 87, Well 2
Apr 87, Well 31
Year Mean
Year S.D.
Year n
Apr S.D,
TOH
3-58
14.00
13-00
11 .00
5.00
5.00
8.00
11 .6
6.6
9-27
11.44
8
26
13
10
0
22
8
9
6
8,
19
3.
19
47
30
86
00
70
58
88
01
49
21
30
88
0.00
Average of April S.D.
11 .44
-------
WELL VMTER , APRIL 198?
TOC, Texaco-Test Data (mg/1) 04-07-87
Well Sample
Number Number
1
15
16
17
D1
D2
D3
D4
Mean
S.D.
.n
D1
D2
D3
D4
Mean
S.D.
n
D1
D2
D3
D4
Mean
S.D.
n
D1
D2
D3
D4
Mean
S.D.
n
D1
D2
D3
D4
Mean
S.D.
n
D1
D2
D3
D4
Mean
S.D.
n
TOC Up-gradiant
9.8
5.4
5.1
4.8
6.3
2.4
4
5.6
3.6
8.7
3-7
5.4
2.4
4
4.9
7.4
1.3
14.7
7.1
5.6
4
5.4
6.4
7.7
5.1
6.1
1 .2
4
10.6
5.2
5.1
2.2
5.8
3.5
4
7.4
6.8
7.8
6.8
5
4
5
4
5
4
5
4
5
4
.9
• 3
6
• 9
• 3
6
.9
.3
6
.9
• 3
6
.9
• 3
6
7.2
0.5
5.9
4.3
6
Sig. (1)
0.11
NA
-0.20
NA
0.41
NA
0.07
NA
-0.06
NA
0.46
NA
(1) Transfer blank = none
(2) Based on one-tailed test,
7 degrees of freedom @ 0.99 and 13 wells; t
(3) Detection limit = 1.0 mg/1
= 5.28
-------
WELL W/TER , APRIL 198?
TOG, Texaco-Test Data (mg/1) 04-07-87
Well Sample TOC Up-gradiant ' t Sig.
Number Number
18* D1 6.4
15 Dup. D2 4.7
D3 4.8
D4 4.2
Mean 5.0 5-9 -0.34 NA
S.D. 1.0 4.3
n 46'
19* D1 1.0
Res. D2 1.1
D3 1 -2
D4 1.1
Mean 1.1 5.9 • -1.75 NA
S.D. 0.1 4.3
n 46
21 D1 12.2
D2 12.4
D3 6.5
D4 6.7
Mean 9.4 5.9 1.26 NA
S.D. 3-3 4.3
n ,46
22 D1 5.9
D2 5-2
D3 5.4
D4 5.8
Mean 5.6 5.9 -0.14 NA
S.D. 0.3 4.3
n 46
23 D1 5.6
D2 8.1
D3 6.5
D4 4.8
Mean 6.3 5.9 0.11 NA
S.D. 1.4 4.3
n 46
24 D1 11.8
D2 10.4
D3 11.8
D4 13-3
Mean 11.8 5-9 2.13 NA
S.D. 1.2 4.3
n 46
-------
WELL W/TER , APRIL 1987
TOG, Texaco-Test Data (rag/1) 04-07-8?
Well Sample
Number Number
31 D1
D2
D3
D4
Mean
S.D.
n
32
33
D1
D2
D3
D4
Mean
S.D.
n
D1
D2
D3
D4
Mean
S.D.
n
TOC Up-gradiant
8.3
6.7
8.0
8.3
7.8
0.7
4
8.1
7.1
5.4
2.3
5.7
2.5
4
5
4
5
4
.9
.3
6
.9
.3
6
5.7
6.1
1.8
7.4
5.2
2.4
Up-gradiant, Well 2 and 31
Mean 6.6
S.D. 2.0
n 8
5.9
4.3
6
Sig.
0.67
NA
-0.08
NA
-0.26
NA
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are for the Reservoir water.
Year Upgradiant Results
Aug 86, Well 2
Aug 86, Well 31
Oct 86, Well 2
Oct 86, Well 31
Dec 86, Well 2
Dec 86, Well 31
Apr 87, Well 2
Apr 87, Well 31
Year Mean
Year S.D.
Year n
20 D1 0.5
D2 0.5
D3 0.6
D4 0.5
Apr S.D
TOC
1 .60
1 .60
6.30
13.00
5.4
7.8
5.95
4.28
6
Avg
2.37
2
5
1
3
38
,64
,17
,48
0.46
3.29
0.35
1 .44
1.18
0.72
2.53
2.42
2.11
-------
pH,
WELL W/TER , APRIL 198?
Field Data 04-07-8?
Well Sample
Number Number
1
15
16
17
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
pH Up-gradiant
8.76
8.62
8.69
0.10
2
7-79
7.75
7.72
7.69
7.74
0.04
4
8.33
8.60
8.62
8.56
8.53
0.13
4
7
0
7
0
7
0
.11
.65
8
.1 1
.65
8
.11
.65
8
7.61
7.73
79
81
73
0.09
4
9.57
8.85
9.07
9.63
9.28
0.38
4
70
92
29
34
56
0.30
4
7.11
0.65
8
7.11
0.65
8
7.11
0.65
8
Sig. (1)
3.0567
NA
1.57
NA
3.54
0.99
1 .56
NA
5.42
0.99
1.13
NA
(1) Based on two-tailed test,
10 degrees of freedom § 0.99 = t of 3.17
-------
WELL W/TER
pH, Field Data
Well
Number
18*
15 Dup
19*
Res.
21
22
23
24
Sample
Number
A1
. A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
APRIL 1987
04-07-8?
pH Up-gradiant
Sig.
64
73
79
81
74
0.08
4
7.59
7.11
0.65
8
7.59
ERR
1
7.53
7.51
7.52
7.51
7.52
0.01
- 4
7.09
7.13
7.22
7.22
7.16
0.07
4
6.94
7.09
7.14
7.20
7.09
0.11
4
6.70
6.76
6.29
6.25
6.50
0.27
4
7
0
7
0
7
0
7
0
7
0
.11
.65
8
.1 1
.65
8
. 1 1
.65
8
. 1 1
.65
8
.11
.65
8
1.58
NA
0.69
NA
1 .02
NA
0.14
NA
0.04
NA
1.52
NA
-------
WELL W/TER , APRIL 198?
pH, Field Data 04-07-87
PH
6.39
6.44
6.52
6.57
6.48
0.08
4
7.97
7.98
7.11
0.65
8
Well Sample
Number Number
31 A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
32 A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
33 A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
Up-gradiant, Well 2 and 31
Mean 7.11
S.D. 0.65
n 8
Up-gradiant-
Sig.
7.97
0.01
2
8.07
7.87
7.90
7.39
7.81
0.29
4
7.11
0.65
8
7.11
0.65
8
1.57
NA
1 .67
NA
1.75
NA
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are for the Reservoir water.
-------
WELL WATER , APRIL 198?
Conductivity, Field Data (uMHO) 04-07-8?
Well Sample Cond. Up-gradiant • t Sig. (1)
Number Number
1 A1 546
A2 561
A3
A4
Mean 554 789 -1.72 NA
S.D. 11 173
n 28
2 A1 633
A2 626
A3 627
A4 628
Mean 629 789 -1.51 NA
S.D. 3 173
n 48
3 A1 569
A2 591
A3 587
A4 582
Mean 582 789 -1.95 NA
S.D. 10 173
n 48
15 A1 580
A2 580
A3 578
A4 579
Mean 579 789 -1.98 NA
S.D. 1 173
n 48
16 A1 389
A2 445
A3 • 420
A4 380
Mean 409 789 -3-59 NA
S.D. 30 173
n 48
17 A1 2170
A2 2040
A3 1788
A4 1048
Mean 1762 789 9.16 0.99
S.D. 501 173
n 48
(1) Based on one-tailed test,
10 degrees of freedom @ 0.99 = t of 2.76
-------
WELL WATER , APRIL 1987
Conductivity, Field Data (uMHO) 04-07-8?
Well Sample Cond. Up-gradiant t Sig.
Number Number
18* A1 580
15 Dup. A2 580
A3 578
A4 579
Mean 579 789 -1.98 NA
S.D. 1 173
n 48
19* A1 67.8
Res. A2
A3
A4
Mean 68 789 -3-92 NA
S.D. ERR 173
n 1 8
21 A1 712
A2 707
A3 700
A4 697
Mean 704 789 -0.80 NA
S.D. 7 173
n 48
22 A1 1455
A2 1510
A3 1506
A4 1515
Mean 1497 789 6.66 0.99
S.D. 28 173
n 48
23 A1 823
A2 790
A3 789
A4 791
Mean 798 789 0.08 NA
S.D. 17 173
n • 4 8
24 A1 535
A2 728
A3 727
A4 733
Mean 681 789 -1.02 NA
S.D. 97 173
n 48
-------
WELL WATER , APRIL 198?
Conductivity, Field Data (uMHO) 04-07-8?
Well Sample Cond. Up-gradiant • t Sig.
Number Number
31
32
33
Up-gradiant, Well 2 and 31
Mean 789
S.D. 173
n 8
1.51 NA
-1.89 NA
-2.30 NA
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
946
965
929
960
950
16
4
530
531
531
1
2
592
531
531
528
546
31
4
789
173
8
789
173
8
789
173
8
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are for the Reservoir water.
-------
WELL WATER , APRIL 198?
Temperature, Field Data (deg. F)04-07-87
Well Sample Deg Up-gradiant . t Sig. (1)
Number Number
1 A1 52
A2 52
A3
A4
Mean 52 53 -1.24 NA
S.D. 0 1
n 28
2 A1 53
A2 52
A3 52
A4 52
Mean 52 53 -1.14 NA
S.D. 1 1
n 48
3 A1 52
A2 52
A3 52
A4 52
Mean 52 53 -1.60 NA
S.D. 0 1
n 48
15 A1 52
A2 52
A3 53
A4 52
Mean 52 53 -1-14 NA
S.D. 1 1
n 48
16 A1 53
A2 52
A3 52
A4 52
Mean 52 53 -1.11* NA
S.D. 1 1
n 48
17 A1 53
A2 53
A3 53
A4 53
Mean 53 53 0.23 NA
S.D. 0 1
n 48
(1) Based on one-tailed test,
10 degrees of freedom § 0.99 = t of 2.76
-------
WELL WATER , APRIL 198?
Temperature, Field Data (deg. F)04-07-87
Well Sample deg. Up-gradiant • t Sig.
Number Number
18* A1 52
15 Dup. A2 52
A3 53
A4 52
Mean 52 53 -1.14 NA
S.D. 1 1
n 48
19* A1 51
Res. A2
A3
A4
Mean 51 53 -1.97 NA
S.D. ERR 1
n 1 8
21 A1 51
A2 51
A3 51
A4 51
Mean 51 53 -3-42 NA
S.D. 0 1
n 48
22 A1 52
A2 52
A3 51
A4 51
Mean 52 53 -2.51 NA
S.D. 1 1
n 48
23 A1* 52
A2 53
A3 51
A4 51
Mean 52 53 -2.05 NA
S.D. 1 1
n 48
24 A1 53
A2 53
A3 54
A4 52
Mean 53 53 0.23 NA
S.D. 1 1
n 48
-------
WELL W/iTER ,
Temperature, Field Data
Well Sample deg.
Number .Number
APRIL 1987
(deg. F)04-07-87
Up-gradiant
31 A1 53
A2 54
A3 53
A4 54
Mean 54
S.D. 1
n 4
32 A1 52
A2 52
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
33 A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
Up-gradiant, Well 2 and 31
Mean 53
S.D. 1
n 8
Sig.
53
1
8
1.14
NA
52
0
2
52
52
52
52
52
0
4
53
1
8
53
1
8
-1 .24
NA
-1.60
NA
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are for the Reservoir water.
-------
WELL W/TER , APRIL 198?
Purgeable Aromatics (ug/1) 04-07-87
Well
Number
1
2
3
15
16
17
21
22
23
24
31
32
33
18*
(Dup. of 15)
19*
(Res.)
Trip Blank
Benzene
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Toluene
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Ethyl
Benzene
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
VD
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Xylenes
m,p
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
o
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Detection Limit
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are for the Reservoir water.
-------
WELL WA~ER , APRIL 198?
Dissolved Metals (ug/1) 04-07-8?
Well
Number
1
2
3
15
16
17
21
22
23
24
31
32
33
18*
(Dup. of
19*
(Res.)
Trip
Blank
Cr
0.0030
0.0010
0.0008
0.0016
<.0005
<.0005
0.0021
0.0016
0.0024
0.0008
0.0105
0.0038
0.0024
0.0019
0.0070
15)
0.0027
0.0016
Pb
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
0.005
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
0.007
<0.001
Ni
0.002
0.002
<0.001
<0.001
0.006
0.003
0.203
0.002
0.001
0.001
0.008
0.007
<0.001
0.001
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.003
Fe •
0.14
<.05
0.25
0.23
<.05
<.05
0.17
0.08
0.08
0.06
<.05
1 .70
0.06
0.08
0.08
0.20
0.21
<.05
<.05
Mg
2.2
29.0
27.0
23.0
18.0
19.0
67.0
3.4
51 .0
17.0
29.0
30.0
35.0
21 .0
23-0
21 .0
15.0
1.6
0.05
Mn
0.025
0.087
0.099
0.270
0.074
0.061
0.240
<.010
<.010
<.010
0.260
0.260
0.460
<.010
<.010
0.250
<.010
<.010
Ca
6.0
15.0
35.0
39.0
32.0
35.0
103.0
102.0
31 .0
120.0
74.0
36.0
20.0
35.0
38.0
38.0
6.9
0.1
Detection
Limit 0.0005 0.001 0.001 0.01 0.003 0.01 0.10
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are for the Reservoir water.
-------
WELL WPTER , APRIL 198?
Dissolved Metals (ng/1) 04-07-87
Well
Number.
1
2
3
15
16
17
21
22
23
24
31
32
33
18*
(Dup. of
19*
(Res.)
Trip
Blank
Detection
Limit
Na
115.0
27.0
18.0
22.0
24.0
92.0
47.0
46.0
22.0
16.0
17.0
36.0
14.0
18.0
15.0
21 .0
1.8
0,4
0.10
Zn
0.033
0.033
0.050
0.028
0.020
0.015
0.020
0.037
0.037
0.024
0.033
0.024
0.020
0.033
0.028
0.042
0.042
0.001
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are for the Reservoir water.
-------
WELL W/TER , APRIL 198?
Dissolved Metals (.ng/1) 04-07-8?
Well
Number
1
2
3
16
17
21
22
23
24
31
32
33
As
0.019
0.010
0.008
18*
(Dup. of 15)
19*
(Res.)
Trip
Blank
Detection
Limit 0.003
Ba
Cd
Hg
<0.25 <.0005 0.0004
0.0004
<0.25 <.00051 <.0002
<0.25 <.00051 0.0004
Se
Ag
0.009 <.0003
0.007 <.0003
0.011 <.0003
0.25 0.0001 0.0002 0.0002 0.0003
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are for the Reservoir water.
-------
WELL W/TER , APRIL 198?
Radiation (pci/1) 04-07-8?
Well Gross Alpha Gross Beta
Number
1
2
3
15
16
17
21
22
23
24
31 -0.225 11.900
32 3-070 6.300
33 0.697 6.310
18*
(Dup. of 15)
19*
(Res.)
Trip
Blank
Detection
Limit
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are for the Reservoir water.
-------
WELL WATER , DECEMBER 1986
Non-Metals (mg/1) 04-07-8?
Well
Number
1
2
3
15
16
17
21
22
23
24
31
32
33
18*
(Dup. of
19*
(Res.)
Trip
Blank
Phenol
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
15)
<.008
<.008
Chloride Ammonia Sulfate
•
27.0
26.0
21.0
1.8
8.9
18.0
230.0
36.0
36.0
31 .0
73.0
45.0
12.0
23-0
24.0
19-0
2.3
<1 .0
2.62
0.37
1 .22
0.39
1 .00
0.08
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.03
0.15
0.04
0.04
0.38
0.02
0.01
15.0
4.9
45.0
40.0
31 .0
120.0
140.0
81 .0
800.0
130.0
160.0
130.0
110.0
100.0
91.0
40.0
7.1
<1 .0
Nitrates-
Nitrite
0.530
0.109
0.073
0.077
0.080
0.058
0.215
0.239
0.098
0.140
0.547
<.010
<.010
1.590
0.294
0.093
0.072
0.054
Detection
Limit 0.008 1.0 0.01 1.0 0.01
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are for the Reservoir water.
-------
WELL W/TER , DECEMBER 1986
Herbicides (mg/1) ' 04-07-87
Well 2,4-D
Number
1
2
3
15
16
17
21
22
23
24
31 ND
32 ND
33 ND
2,4,5-TP
Silvex'
ND
ND
ND
18*
(Dup. of 15)
19*
(Res.)
Trip Blank
Detection Limit 0.001 0.0001
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are for the Reservoir water.
-------
WELL W/.TER , DECEMBER 1986
Pesticides (rag/1)
Well Lindane
Number
04-07-87
Methoxychlor Endrin
Toxaphene
1
2
3
15
16
17
21
22
23
24
31 ND ND
32 ND ND
33 ND ND
•
ND ND
ND ND
ND ND
18*
(Dup. of 15)
19*
(Res.)
Trip Blank
Detection
Limit 0.00002
0.0005
0.00002
0.0004
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are for the Reservoir water.
-------
WELL W.'TER , SEPTEMBER 198?
Conductivity, Fie:d Data (uMHO) 09-02-8?
Well Sample Cond.
Number Number
31 A1 839
A2 839
A3 846
A4 847
Mean 843
S.D. 4
n 4
32 A1 481
A2 484
A3
A4
Mean 483
S.D. 2
n 2
33 AT 486
A2 471
A3 476
A4 487
Mean 480
S.D. 8
n 4
Up-gradiant, Well 2 and 31
Mean 706
S.D. 147
n 8
Up-gradiant
Sig.
706
147
8
1.52NA
706
147
8
-1 .93NA
706
147
8
-2.52NA
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are for the Reservoir water.
-------
WELL WMER , SEPTEMBER 198?
Water Elevations (ft) 08-28-87
A
Well
Number
1
2
3
15
16
17
21
22
23
24
31
32
33
P-1
P-2
P-3
P-4
P-5
P-6
P-7
P-8
KWB 6EC
1 1
12
13
14
25
26
Well
Type
East Down
Up
West Down
West Down
West Down
West Down
East Down
East Down
East down
South Down
Up
West Down
West Down
•
Feet to
Water
57.92
32.55
45.43
21 .10
52.85
50.83
7.32
6.02
8.35
37.80
19.97
40.54
53.72
17.30
16.77
7.88
10.87
1 1 .31
11 .75
9.60
6.97
8.59
16.28
10.46
11 .33
21 .53
37.10
52.10
Reference
. (MLLW)
97.5
145-9
146.7
146.4
143.7
133.9
99.8
97.0
96.7
154.2
192.7
147.7
140.3
193.1
182.3
166.6
120.7
121 .9
121 .8
118.4
112.9
1 11 .00
99.7
96.1
96.1
187.0
147.5
138.6
Water
(MLLW)
39.58
113-35
101 .27
125.30
90.85
83.07
92.48
90.98
88.35
1 16.40
172.73
107.16
86.58
175.80
165.53
158.72
109.83
110.59
1 10.05
108.80
105.93
102.41
83.42
85.64
84.77
165.47
110.40
86.50
-------
pH,
WELL W/TER
Field Data
Well
Number
1
2
3
15
1
16
17
Sample
Number
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
SEPTEMBER 1987
09-02-8?
pH Up-gradiant
8.84
8.86
8.90
8.68
8.82
0.10
4
7.73
7.99
8.15
8.22
8.02
0.22
4
8.78
8.80
8.88
8.89
8.84
0.06
7.67
7.77
8.02
8.14
7.90
0.22
4
9.42
9.59
9-83
9.08
9.48
0.32
4
8.41
8.70
7.50
7.77
8.10
0.56
4
7.78
0.27
8
7.78
0.27
8
7.78
0.27
8
7.78
0.27
8
7.78
0.27
8
7.78
0.27
8
t Sig. (1)
6.21 0.99
1.43NA
6.32 0.99
0.70NA
10. 17
0.99
1.87NA
(1) Based on two-tailed test,
10 degrees of freedom @ 0.99 = t of 3-17
-------
WELL W.\TER , SEPTEMBER 198?
pH, Field Data 09-02-8?
Well Sample pH Up-gradiant t Sig.
Number Number
18* A1 7.67
15 Dup. A2 7.77
A3 8.02
A 4 8.14
Mean 7-90 7.78 0.70NA
S.D. 0.22 0.27
n 48
19* A1 9.32
Res. A2 8.68
A3
A4
Mean 9-00 7.78 5.65 0.99
S.D. 0.45 0.27
n 28
21 A1 7.50
A2 7.54
A3 7.63
A4 7.70
Mean 7.59 7.78 1.15NA
S.D. 0.09 0.27
n 48
22 A1 7.34
A2 7-44
A3 7.46
A4 7.48
Mean 7-43 7.78 2.12NA
S.D. 0.06 0.27
n 48
23 A1 6.85
A2 7.45
A3 7.60
A4 7.65
Mean 7-39 7-78 2.38NA
S.D. 0.37 0.27
n 48
«
24 A1 7.87
A2 7.22
A3 6.78
A4 6.79
Mean 7.17 7.78 3-71 0.99
S.D. 0.51 0.27
n 4 8
-------
pH,
WELL WATER
Field Data
, SEPTEMBER 1987
09-02-87
Well
Number
31
32
33
Sample
, Number
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
AM
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
pH
7.28
7.58
7.61
7.71
7.55
0.19
4
7.59
7.46
7.53
0.09
2
8.59
8.31
8.33
8.47
8.43
0.13
4
Up-gr
7.78
0.27
8
7.78
0.27
8
7.78
0.27
8
Sig,
Up-gradiant, Well 2 and 31
Mean 7.78
S.D. 0.27
8
1 .43NA
1.20NA
3.84
0.99
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are for the Reservoir water.
-------
WELL WMER , SEPTEMBER 1987
Conductivity, Fie: d Data (uMHO) 09-02-8?
Well Sample Cond. Up-gradiant t Sig. (1)
Number Number
1 A1 491
A2 486
A3 490
A4 491
Mean 490 706 -2.41NA
S.D. 2 147
n 48
2 A1 575
A2 569
A3 569
A4 567
Mean 570 706 -1.52NA
S.D. 3 147
n 48
3 A1 535
A2 538
A3 539
A4 532
Mean 536 706 -1.89NA
S.D. 3 1^7
n 48
15 A1 565
A2 536
A3 543
A4 546
Mean 548 706 -1 .77NA
S.D. 12 147
n 48
16 A1 373
A2 352
A3 339
A4 393
Mean 364 706 -3-80NA
S.D. 24 147
n . 48
t
17 A1 995
A2 932
A3 768
A4 712
Mean 852 706 1.62NA
S.D. 134 147
n 48
(1) Based on one-tailed test,
10 degrees of freedom @ 0.99 = t of 2.76
-------
WELL W:TER , SEPTEMBER 1987
Conductivity, Fie." d Data (uMHO) 09-02-87
Well Sample Cond. Up-gradiant t Sig.
Number Number
18* A1 565
15 Dup. A2 536
A3 543
A4 546
Mean 548 706 -1.77NA
S.D. 12 147
n 48
19* A1 59.3
Res. A2 53-3
A3
A4
Mean 56 706 -5.59NA
S.D. 4 147
n 28
21 A1 643
A2 648
A3 637
A4 634
Mean 641 706 -0.73NA
S.D. 6 147
n 48
22 A1 1328
A2 1370
A3 1387
A4 1389
Mean 1369 706 7-36 0.99
S.D. 28 147
n 48
23 A1 720
A2 734
A3 706
A4 703
Mean 716 706 0.10NA
S.D. 14 147
n . • 4 8
*
24 A1 725
A2 683
A3 663
A4 666
Mean 684 706 -0.25NA
S.D. 29 147
n u 8
-------
WELL VTTER , SEPTEMBER 198?
Temperature, Fielc Data (deg. F)09-02-87
Deg Up-gradiant
57
Well
Number
1
2
3
15
16
17
Sample
Number
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
t Sig. (1)
53
54
55
2
4
57
54
53
53
54
2
4
58
55
55
53
55
2
4
58
54
54
54
55
2
4
54
54
54
55
54
1
4
59
54
54
56
3
3
56
2
8
-1 .OONA
56
2
8
-1 .25NA
56
2
8
-0.25NA
56
2
8
-0.50NA
56
2
8
-1.25NA
56
2
8
0.1 SNA
(1) Based on one-tailed test,
10 degrees of freedom @ 0.99 = t of 2.76
-------
WELL W,'TER , SEPTEMBER 198?
Temperature, Fielt Data (deg. F)09-02-87
Well
Number
18*
15 Dup,
19*
Res.
21
22
23
Sample
Number
A1
, A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
deg. Up-gradiant
58
Sig
54
54
55
2
4
65
66
66
1
2
56
56
55
55
56
1
4
55
56
56
56
56
1
4
58
55
54
54
55
2
4
67
58
55
55
59
6
4
56
2
8
-0.50NA
56
2
8
56
2
8
56
2
8
56
2
8
56
2
8
7.75 0.99
O.OONA
0.25NA
-0.25NA
3.25 0.99
-------
WELL WATER , SEPTEMBER 1987
Temperature, Fielc Data (deg. F)09-02-87
Well
Number
31
32
33
Sample
Number
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
deg .
58
57
56
56
57
1
4
52
52
1
59
56
55
54
56
2
4
Up-gr
56
2
8
56
2
8
56
2
8
Sig.
Up-gradiant, Well 2 and 31
Mean 56
S.D. 2
n 8
1 .25NA
-2.02NA
0.50NA
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are for the Reservoir water.
-------
pH,
WELL W.'TER
Lab Data
, SEPTEMBER 1987
09-02-87
Well
Number
1
2
3
15
16
17
Sample
Number
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
pH Up-gradiant
Sig. (1)
8.70
8.61
8.56
8.40
8.57
0. 13
4
7.96
7.92
7.94
7.92
7.94
0.02
4
7.90
7.97
7.92
7.94
7.93
0.03
4
7.75
7.73
7.67
7.71
7.72
0.03
4
8.05
9.02
9.08
8.82
8.74
0.47
4
7.66
7.71
7.61
7.65
7.66
0.04
4
7.53
0.45
8
7.53
0.45
8
7.53
0.45
8
7.53
0.45
8
7.53
0.45
8
7.53
0.45
8
2.15
NA
0.84 NA
0.83 NA
0.38 NA
2.51
NA
0.26 NA
(1) Based on two-tailed test,
7 degrees of freedom g 0.99 and 13 wells;
t = 5.714
-------
WELL WATER , SEPTEMBER 198?
pH, Lab Data 09-02-8?
pH Up-gradiant
Well
Number
18*
15 Dup
19*
Res.
21
22
23
24
Sample
Number
A1
. A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
Al
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
Al
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
Al
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
Sig.
7.72
7.70
7.76
7.70
7.72
0.03
4
7.65
7.61
7.50
7.60
7.59
0.06
4
7.51
7.46
7.43
7.48
7.47
0.03
4
7.53
0.45
8
7.53
0.45
8
7.53
0.45
8
7.26
7.21
7
7
19
17
7.21
0.04
7.28
7.37
7
7
7
0
,42
,48
6.58
6.58
6.55
6.58
6.57
0.02
7.53
0.45
8
7.53
0.45
8
7.53
0.45
8
0.39 NA
0.12
0.13
NA
0.68 NA
0.30
NA
1.99
NA
-------
WELL W\TER
pH, Lab Data
PH
Well
Number
31
32
33
Sample
Number
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
, SEPTEMBER 1987
09-02-87
Up-gradiant
7.05
7.02
7.05
7.06
7.05
0.02
4
7.38
7.25
7.51
7.53
0.45
8
7.38
0.13
3
7.48
7.40
7.35
7.45
7.42
0 06
4
7.53
0.45
8
7.53
0.45
8
Up-gradiant, Well 2 and 31
Mean 7.49
S.D. 0.47
n 8
13 A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
Year Upgradiant
Aug 86,
Aug 86,
Oct 86',
Oct 86,
Dec 86,
Dec 86,
Apr 87,
Apr 87,
8
8
8
8
0
.15
.22
.21
.19
,04
3
Results
Well 2
Well
Well
Well
Well
Well
Well
Well
31
2
31
2
31
2
31
Year Mean
Year S.D.
Year n
7.53
0.45
8
PH
1 .01
0.32
0.23
1
SeptS
7.82
7.07
7.96
7.08
8.01
7.15
8.02
7.15
7.53
0.45
8
-37
.D.
Avg
Sig
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.13
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.47
0.04
0.03
0.04
0.08
0.02
0.02
0.13
0.06
0.087
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are for the Reservoir water.
-------
WELL W^TER , SEPTEMBER 1987
pH, Lab Data 09-02-87
Well Sample pH Up-gradiant t Sig
Number Number
11 A1 11.77
A2 11.80
12 A1 11.56
A2 10.91
14 A1 11 .52
-------
WELL W'.TER , SEPTEMBER 1987
Conductivity, Lab Data (uMHO§25)09-02-8?
; Well Sample Cond. Up-gradiant t Sig. (1)
Number .Number
1 A1 675
A2 628
A3 680
A4 669
Mean 663 953 -1.14 NA
S.D. 24 240
n 48
2 A1 748
A2 752
A3 728
A4 739
Mean 742 953 -0.83 NA
" S.D. 11 240
J n 4 8
3 A1 672
A2 676
A3 730
A4 726
Mean 701 953 -0.99 NA
S.D. 31 240
n 48
*s
; 15 A1 668
A2 731
A3 674
A4 720
Mean 698 953 -1.00 NA
S.D. 32 240
n 48
16 A1 589
A2 434
A3 455
A4 459
Mean 484 953 -1.84 NA
S.D. 71 240
n 48
*
17 A1 1355
A2 1216
A3 1019
A4 958
•j Mean 1137 953 0.73 NA
^ S.D. 182 240
n 48
(1) Eased on one-tailed test,
7 degrees of freedom § 0.99 and 13 wells; t = 5.276
-------
WELL W.'TER SEPTEMBER 198?
Conductivity, Lab Data vuMHO@25)09-02-8?
Well Sample Cond. Up-gradiant t Sig.
Number Number
18* A1 707
15 Dup. A2 722
A3 725
A4 651
Mean 701 953 -0.99 NA
S.D. 34 240
n 48
19* A1 71
Res. A2 70
A3 75
A4 91
Mean 77 953 -3.44 NA
S.D. 10 240
n 48
21 A1 865
A2 813
A3 835
A4 834
Mean 837 953 -0.46 NA
S.D. 21 240
n 48
22 A1 1709
A2 1774
A3 1777
A4 1763
Mean 1756 953 3.16 NA
S.D. 32 240
n 48
23 A1 997
A2 988
A3 942
A4 934
Mean 965 953 0.05 NA
S.D. 32 240
n . • 4 8
t
24 A1 941
A2 870
A3 826
A4 857
Mean 874 953 -0.31 NA
S.D. 49 240
n 4 8
-------
WELL W.'TER , SEPTEMBER 1987
Conductivity, Lab Data (uMHO@25)09-02-87
Cond .
1212
1224
1 165
118?
1197
26
4
668
630
664
654
21
3
697
678
672
675
681
11
4
Up-gradiant, Well 2 and 31
Mean 969
S.D. 243
8
Well
Number
31
32
33
Sample
Number
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
Up-gradiant
953
240
8
953
240
8
953
240
8
n
13
Sig
0.96 NA
-1.17 NA
-1.07 NA
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
Aug
Aug
Oct
Oct
Dec
Dec
Apr
Apr
Year
Year
Year
86,
86i
86!
86,
86,
86,
87,
87,
, Well
,' Well
; Well
, Well
, Well
, Well
, Well
, Well
827
839
826
831
7
3
2
31
2
31
2
31
2
31
Mean
S.
n
.D.
953
240
8
uMHO
1
1
1
1
952
239
-0.48
SeptS. D.
708
230
699
099
718
150
808
208
.50
.84
8 Avg
NA
23
10
31
31
70
182
21
31
31
48
26
20
1 1
41
.76
.66
.26
.88
.69
.33
.39
.74
.85
.64
.32
.88
.27
.74
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are for the Reservoir water.
-------
WELL W:TER , SEPTEMBER 1987
Conductivity, Lab Data (uMHO@25)09-02-87
Well Sample Cond. Up-gradiant t Sig.
Number Number
11
12
14 A1 3700
A1
A2
A1
A2
4590
4310
3660
1370
-------
WELL W/TER , SEPTEMBER 198?
Turbidity, Lab DCta (NTU) 09-02-87
Well Sample NTU Up-gradiant t Sig. (1)
Number Number
1 A1 167.50
A2 175.50
A3 159.70
A4 206.00
Mean 177.18 71.73 4. '5 NA
S.D. 20.27 39-51
n 48
2 A1 45.00
A2 52.90
A3 30.30
A4 42.90
Mean 42.78 71.73 -1.20 NA
S.D. 9-36 39-51
n 48
3 A1 2.10
A2 0.80
A3 4.30
A4 6.50
Mean 3.^3 71.73 -2.82 NA
S.D. 2.51 39.51
n 48
15 A1 1.00
A2 1.00
A3 1.20
A4 1.20
Mean 1.10 71.73 -2.92 NA
S.D. 0.12 39.51
n 48
16 A1 2.40
A2 0.70
A3 0.80
A4 1.20
Mean 1.28 71.73 -2.91 NA
S.D. 0.78 39-51
n .48
•
17 A1 1.10
A2 2.90
A3 2.80
A4 1.70
Mean 2.13 71.73 -2.88 NA
S.D. 0.87 39-51
n 48
(1) Based on one-tailed test,
7 degrees of freedom @ 0.99 and 13 wells; t = 5.276
-------
WELL W/.TER , SEPTEMBER 198?
Turbidity, Lab Di.ta (NTU) 09-02-8?
Well Sample NTU Up-gradiant t Sig.
Number Number
18* A1 1.20
15 Dup. A2 1.00
A3 1.00
A4 1.30
Mean 1.13 71.73 -2.92 NA
S.D. 0.15 39.51
.n u 8
19* A1 0.50
Res. A2 1.40
A3 0.60
A4 0.50
Mean 0.75 71.73 -2.93 NA
S.D. 0.44 39.51
n u 8
21 A1 23-00
A2 24.60
A3 24.1C
A4 10.30
Mean 20.50 71.73 -2.12 NA
S.D. 6.83 39.51
n 48
22 A1 8.30
A2 3-20
A3 1.20
A4 1.00
Mean 3-43 71.73 -2.82 NA
S.D. 3.40 39.51
n 48
23 A1 4.80
A2 6.10
A3 4.80
A4 6.30
Mean 5.50 71.73 -2.74 NA
S.D. 0.81 39.51
n . U 8
*
24 A1 22.00
A2 9.00
A3 5.80
A4 16.40
Mean 13-30 71.73 -2.42 NA
S.D. 7.30 39.51
n 48
-------
WELL WfTER , SEPTEMBER 1987
Turbidity, Lab D; ta (NTU) 09-02-87
Well
Number
31
32
33
Sample
Number
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
AM
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
NTU
Up-gradiant
59.60
5^.60
58.70
74.00
61.73
8.47
4
2.50
2.00
3.00
2.50
0.50
3
13-90
15.90
10.70
9.60
12.53
2.90
4
71.73
39.51
8
71.73
39.51
8
71.73
39.51
8
Up-gradiant, Well 2 and 31
Mean 52.25
S.D. 13.47
n 8
13
Sig,
-0.41 NA
-2.59 NA
-2.45 NA
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
Aug
Aug
Oct
Oct
Dec
Dec
Apr
Apr
Year
Year
Year
86
86
86
86
86
86
87
87
37
81
38
52
25
, Well
, Well
V Well
, Well
, Well
, Well
, Well
, Well
.20
.20
.10
.17
.15
3
2
31
2
31
2
31
2
31
Mean
S
n
.D.
71.73
39.51
8
NTU
137
43
122
40
88
40
39
63
71
39
-0.73
SeptS. D.
.20
.42
.44
.27
.67
.85
.63
.35
.73
.51
8
NA
20
9
2
0
0
0
6
3
0
7
8
0
2
4
.27
• 36
.51
.12
.78
.87
.83
.40
.81
.30
.47
.50
.90
.93
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for Well 19 are for the Reservoir water.
-------
WELL WrTER , SEPTEMBER 1987
TOC, Texaco-Test Data (mg/1) 09-02-87
TOC Up-gradiant
Well
Number
1
2
3
15
16
17
Sample
Number
D1
D2
D3
D4
Mean
S.D.
n
D1
D2
D3
D4
Mean
S.D.
n
D1
D2
D3
D4
Mean
S.D.
n
D1
D2
D3
D4
Mean
S.D.
n
D1
D2
D3
D4
Mean
S.D.
n
D1
D2
D3
D4
Mean
S.D.
n
3.0
4.1
9.5
5.4
2.8
4
1.7
0.9
7.0
1 .2
3.9
3.6
4.4
3-9
0.4
6.0
4.3
6
2.7
2.9
4
1 .4
1 .4
1.3
1.8
1.5
0.2
4
1 . 1
1 .2
1.8
1 .9
1 .5
0.4
4
1.3
1 .4
.5
1 .5
1 .4
0.1
4
6
4
6
4
6
4
6
4
.0
.3
6
.0
.3
6
.0
.3
6
.0
.3
6
6.0
4.3
6
Sig. (l)
-0.21
NA
-1.18 NA
-1.62 NA
-1 .62
NA
-1 .64
NA
-0.74 NA
(1) Transfer blank = none
(2) Based on one-tailed test,
7 degrees of freedom § 0.99 and 13 wells; t = 5.276
(3) Detection limit = 1.0 mg/1
-------
WELL W.TER , SEPTEMBER 198?
TOC, Texaco-Test Data (mg/1) 09-02-8?
Well Sample TOC Up-gradiant t Sig.
Number Number
18* D1 1.7
15 Dup. D2 1 .7
D3 1.1
D4 2.4
Mean 1.7 6.0 -1.53 NA
S.D. 0.5 4.3
n 4 6
19* D1 2.5
Res. D2 1.8
D3 1 .4
D4 2.0
Mean 1.9 6.0 -1.46 NA
S.D. 0.5 4.3
n US
21 D1 2.4
D2 2.1
D3 2.3
D4 2.3
Mean 2.3 6.0 -1.33 NA
S.D. 0.1 4.3
n 46
22 D1 3-6 f
D2 3.4
D3 3-5
D'4 3.4
Mean 3-5 6.0 -0.90 NA
S.D. 0.1 4.3
n 46
23 D1 2.0
D2 2.7
D3 2.0
D4 2.1
Mean 2.2 6.0 -1.36 NA
S.D. 0.4 4.3
n 46
*
24 D1 7.6
D2 8.1
D3 7.0
D4 6.1
Mean 7.2 6.0 0.46 NA
S.D. 0.9 4.3
n 46
-------
WELL W;TER , SEPTEMBER 1987
TOC, TexaGO-Test Data (mg/1) 09-02-8?
Well Sample
Number Number
TOC Up-gradiant
31
32
33
D1
D2
D3
D4
Mean
S.D.
n
D1
D2
D3
D4
Mean
S.D.
n
D1
D2
D3
D4
Mean
S.D.
n
1.8
1 .7
1.9
2.3
1.9
0.3
4
3-3
2.2
2.7
2.3
2.6
0.5
4
6
4
6
4
.0
• 3
6
.0
• 3
6
1.3
2.1
1.7
1.9
1.8
0.3
Up-gradiant, Well 2 and 31
Mean 2.3
S.D. 1.9
n 8
13 A1 4.22
A2 4.26
A3 3-83
A4 4.40
Mean 4.18
0.2
Year Upgradiant Results
Aug
Aug
Oct
Oct
Dec
Dec
Apr
Apr
Year
Year
Year
20 D1
D2
D3
D4
86
86
86
86
86
86
87
87
, Well
, Well
; Well
, Well
, Well
, Well
, Well
, Well
2
3
2
3
2
3
2
3
1
1
1
1
Mean
S
n
.D.
0
0
0
0
.4
• 3
• 3
.6
6.0
4.3
6
6.0
4.3
6
-1.47
-1 .21
-1.51
TOC
Sig,
NA
NA
NA
-0.38
Apr S.D.
1.60
1 .60
6.30
13.00
5.4
7.8
5.95
4.28
6 Avg
NA
2.82
2.87
0.23
0.39
0.08
0.36
0.11
0.11
0.36
0.86
0.26
0.49
0.34
0.24
0.68
-------
WELL W/TER , SEPTEMBER 198?
TOH, AM-Test Dat; (ug/1) 09-02-8?
TOH Up-gradiant
5.0
12.6
Well
Number
1
2
3
15
16
17
Sample
Number
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
t Sig. (1)
5.0
15.0
9.4
5.2
4
53-4
62.0
67.6
56.8
60.0
6.2
4.0
46.4
66.6
46.1
40.0
49.8
11.6
4
48.8
40.8
47.2
54.0
47
5
21 .4
5.0
5.0
18.4
12.5
8.7
46.4
29-4
39-0
32.8
36.9
7.5
4
9.3
6.2
8
9.3
6.2
8.0
9.3
6.2
8
9.3
6.2
8
9.3
6.2
8
9.3
6.2
8
0.03NA
13.33 0.99
10.65 0.99
10.10 0.99
0.83NA
7.26 0.99
(1) Transfer blank = 37 ug/1
(2) Based on one-tailed test,
7 degrees of freedom £ 0.99
(3) Detection limit = 10 ug/1
and 13 wells; t = 5.276
-------
WELL W.TER , SEPTEMBER 198?
TOH, AM-Test Dat». (ug/1) 09-02-8?
Well Sample
Number Number
18*
15 Dup
19*
Res.
21
22
23
A1
, A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
TOH Qp-gradiant
26.0
24.2
20.4
30.2
Sig,
25.2
4.1
41 .8
34.0
25.4
23.6
31.2
8.4
4
9.3
6.2
8
50
30
21
26
32
12
4
19
22
16
16
18
2
2b
22
14
20
21
5
14
1 1
14
5
1 1
4
.2
.6
.6
.2
.2
.6
.0
.6
.0
.0
.8
.6
.7
4
.4
.6
.8
.0
.5
.7
4
.2
.2
.0
,0
. 1
.3
4
9
6
8
9
6
9
6
9
6
.3
.2
.0
• 3
.2
8
• 3
.2
8
.3
.2
8
9.3
6.2
8
4.19NA
6.02 0.99
2.45NA
3.20NA
0.48NA
5.77 0.99
-------
WELL W.TER , SEPTEMBER 198?
TOH, AM-Test Dat.. (ug/1) 09-02-8?
Up-gradiant
Well
Number
31
32
33
Sample
Number
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
Up-gradiant , Trfell
13
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
TOH Up
35.6
34.8
32.2
21 .6
31.1
6.5
**
19.6
10.6
16.0
20.4
16.7
4.5
4
13.2
' .0
. .0
5.0
7.1
4.1
4
2 and 31
45.5
17.6
8.0
13.2
5.0
5.0
5.0
7.1
4.1
Sig.
Year Upgradiant Results
Aug 86, Well 2
Aug 86.,' Well 31
Oct 86; Well 2
Oct 86, Well 31
Dec 86, Well 2
Dec 86, Well 31
Apr 87, Well 2
Apr 87, Well 31
Year Mean
Year S.D.
Year n
9-3
6.2
8
5.73 0.99
9.3
6.2
8
1.94NA
9.3
6.2
8
9.3
6.2
-0.25NA
Sep S.D.
TOH
1
14.00
13-00
1 1 .00
5.17
6.21
,60
,44-
5
5
,00
,00
8.00
11.6
6.6
8.69
7
2
5
4
3.58
9.28
6.2i
48
74
66
29
8.40
6.47
4.46
4.10
Average of Sept. S.D. 6.21
Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
-------
WELL W'TER , SEPTEMBER V
TOH, AM-Test Dat;. (ug/1) 09-02=8?
Well
Number
1
2
3
15
16
17
Sample
Number
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
TOH Up-gradiant
t Sig. (1)
5.0
15.0
9.4
5.2
4
53- 4
62.0
67.6
56.8
60.0
6.2
4.0
46.4
66.6
46.1
40.0
49.8
11 .6
4
16.5
17.0
10
16.5
17.0
10
16.5
17.0
10
48.8
40.8
47.2
54.0
47.7
5.4
4
21
5
,4
,0
5.0
18.4
12 .'5
8.7
4
46.4
29.4
39.0
32.8
36.9
7.5
4
16.5
17.0
10
16.5
17.0
10
16.5
17.0
10
-0.71NA
4.31NA
3.30NA
3.09NA
-0.40NA
2.02NA
(1) Transfer blank = 37 ug/1
(2) Based on one-tailed test,
7 degrees of freedom § 0.99 and 13 wells;
(3) Detection limit = 10 ug/1
t = 5.276
-------
WELL Wi'TER , SEPTEMBER 198?
TOH, AM-Test Dat< (ug/1) 09-02-8?
Well Sample
Number Number
18*
15 Dup
19*
Res.
21
22
23
A1
, A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
TOH Up-gradiant
26.0
24.2
20.4
30
25
4
Sig.
50
30,
21 .
26,
32,
12
2
6
6
2
2
6
4.0
19.6
22.0
16.0
16.8
18.6
2.7
4
28.4
22.6
14.8
20.0
21.5
5.7
4
14.2
11.2
14.0
5.0
11.1
4.3
41.8
34.0
25.4
23-6
31.2
8.4
4
16.5
17.0
10
16.5
17.0
10
16.5
17.0
10
16.5
17.0
10
16.5
17.0
10
16.5
17.0
10
0.86NA
1.55NA
0.21NA
0.49NA
-0.54NA
1 .46NA
-------
WELL W.'TER , SEPTEMBER 198?
TOH, AM-Test Dati. (ug/1) 09-02-87
Well Sample
Number -Number
31 A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
. n
32 A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
33 A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
n
Up-gradiant, Well 2 and 31
13
TOH Up-gradiant
35.6
34.8
32.2
21 .6
31.1
6.5
4
19.6
10.6
16.0
20.4
16.7
4.5
4
13.2
5.0
5.0
5.0
7.1
4.1
4
16.5
17.0
10
16.5
17.0
10
16.5
17.0
10
Mean
S.D.
n
A1
A2
A3
A4
Mean
S.D.
Sep
Sep
Aug
Aug
Oct
Oct
Dec
Dec
Apr
Apr
Year
Year
Year
87,
87,
86,
86.,
86 /
86,
86,
86,
87,
87,
Well
Well
Well
Well
1 Well
Well
Well
Well
Well
Well
45.5
17.6
8.0
13.2
5.0
5.0
5.0
7.1
4.1
2
31
2
31
2
31
2
31
2
31
Mean
S.
n
D.
16.5
17.0
10
17.04
Average of Sept. S
Results for Well 18 are
Well 15.
60
31
14
13
11
5
5
8
11
Sig.
1 .44NA
0.01NA
-0.94NA
00
10
00
00
00
00
00
00
60
-0.53NA
Sep S.D.
6.60
16.53
17.04
10
5.17
6.21
11.60
5.44
8.69
7.48
2.74
5.66
4.29
8.40
6.47
4.46
4.10
,D. 6.21
duplicate samples
obtained from
-------
WELL W.'TER , SEPTEMBER 198?
Purgeable Aromati
-------
WELL W/TER , SEPTEMBER 1987
Dissolved Metals .mg/1) 09-02-8?
Well
Number
1
2
3
15
16
17
21
22
23
24
31
32
33
18*
(Dup. of
19*
(Res. )
Trip
Blank
13
Detection
Limit
Cr
0.0222
0.0030
0.0030
0.0019
0.0016
0.0056
0.0030
0.0036
0.0062
0.0067
0.0400
0.0100
0.0010
0.0028
0.0102
15)
0.0042
0.0013
0.0030
0.0005
Pb
0.002
0.003
0.003
0.001
<0.001
0.007
0.01 1
<0.001
0.004
0.001
0.003
0.002
0.002
0.021
..002
0.003
0.003
0.001
Ni
0.015
0.008
0.004
0.001
0.004
0.518
0.009
0.007
0.001
0.038
0.013
0.007
0.009
0.004
0.001
0.007
0.004
0.001
Fe .
0.24
0.39
<0.05
0.20
0.10
0.08
0.01
0.10
0.16
0.31
2.64
0.08
0.14
0.78
0.12
0.10
<0.05
0.05
Zn
0.023
0.040
0.015
0.023
0.015
0.032
0.023
0.026
0.320
0.043
0.034
0.032
0.035
0.035
0.066
0.017
0.040
0.049
0.003
Mn
<0.030
0.080
0.080
0.240
0.042
0.061
<0.03
<0.03
<0.03
<0.03
0.200
0.460
<0.03
<0.03
0.240
<0.03
<0.03
0.042
0.03
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for'Well 19 are for the Reservoir water.
-------
WELL W.TER
Non-Metals (mg/1)
, SEPTEMBER 198?
09-02-8?
Well
Number
1
2
3
15
16
17
21
22
23
24
31
32
33
18*
(Dup. of 1
19*
(Res.)
Trip
Blank
13
Detection
Limit
Phenol
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
<.008
5)
<.008
<.008
<.008
0.008
Ammonia
2.000
0.363
1 .240
4.340
1 .030
0.060
0.059
0.015
<0.005
<0.005
<0.005
0.007
0.109
<0.005
0.033
0.412
0.034
0.026
0.064
0.005
Sulfate
19.7
6.9
52.8
47.6
30.8
147.0
69.3
847.0
132.0
168.0
156.0
119.0
123.0
102.0
47.0
6.6
<1 .0
206.0
1 .0
Nitrate
+
Nitrite
2.240
0.023
0.026
0.026
<0.010
0.036
0.290
0.124
0.052
0.019
0.439
0.443
<0.010
0.966
0.232
<.010
0.075
<.010
0.19
0.010
Nitrite
0.765
0.006
0.007
<0.010
<0.010
0.016
0.009
0.004
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
0.004
0.003
0.003
0.004
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
0.015
0.001
* Results for Well 18 are duplicate samples obtained from
Well 15.
Results for'Well 19 are for the Reservoir wat
-------
etitlon Agency
-16)
, Room. 1670 •
-------
------- |