FIELD INVESTIGATION OF EFFECTIVENESS
OF SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION TECHNOLOGY
Prepared by
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
1 Weston Way
West Chester, Pennsylvania 19380-1499
EPA Contract No. 68-03-3450
Project Officer
Janet M. Houthoofd
Waste Minimization, Destruction, and Disposal Research Division
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
RISK REDUCTION ENGINEERING LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
-------
DISCLAIMER
This material has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency under contract No. 68-03-3450 to Roy F. Weston, Inc. It has been subject
to the Agency's review and it has been approved for publication as an EPA document.
Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
11
-------
FOREWORD
Today's rapidly developing and changing technologies and industrial products and
practices frequently carry with them the increased generation of materials that, if improperly
dealt with, can threaten both public health and the environment. The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) is charged by Congress with protecting the Nation's land, air, and
water resources. Under a mandate of national environmental laws, the Agency strives to
formulate and implement actions leading to a compatible balance between human activities
and the ability of natural systems to define our environmental problems, measure the im-
pacts, and search for solutions.
The Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory is responsible for planning, imple-
menting, and managing research, development, and demonstration programs to provide an
authoritative, defensible engineering basis in support of the policies, programs, and regu-
lations of the EPA with respect to drinking water, wastewater, pesticides, toxic substances,
solid and hazardous wastes, and Superfund-related activities. This publication is one of the
products of that research and provides a vital communication link between the researcher
and the user community.
This publication represents an evaluation of the soil vapor extraction (SVE) tech-
nology. SVE is an emerging technology for the remediation of soils contaminated with vola-
tile organic compounds (VOCs). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness
of soil vapor extraction in reducing the concentrations of VOCs. The approach taken was
to examine both soil concentration data and operational data at two sites where SVE sys-
tems have been in operation for an extended period of time.
E. Timothy Oppelt, Director
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
iii
-------
ABSTRACT
A research project was undertaken to study the effectiveness of soil vapor extraction
(SVE), an emerging technology for remediation of soils contaminated with volatile organic
compounds (VOCs). As part of the project, two soil vapor extraction systems, Site D and
Site G at the Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant, New Brighton, Minnesota, were selected
for evaluation. ;
The approach of the project was to gather and compare site information regarding
residual soil concentrations before and after treatment, and obtain operational data to
evaluate the performance of the systems. The residual levels of volatile organics before and
after treatment are compared for magnitude and distribution. Operational data are
analyzed to present the performance of the systems and the progression of treatment with
tune. Capital and operating and maintenance costs are presented.
Results of the evaluation indicate that SVE has been effective in reducing the
residual concentrations, generally by several orders of magnitude. In most cases, residual
concentrations were nondetectable. Samples taken in silty clays and waste materials showed
the highest residual concentrations. Operational data indicated that mass removal rates
decreased rapidly during the first few days of treatment, and within a few months reached
a level one-tenth of the initial rates.
This report was submitted in mlfillment of Contract Number 68-03-3450 by Roy F.
Weston, Inc. under sponsorship of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. This report
covers a period from May 1989 to July 1990, and work was completed as of September 1991.
IV
-------
CONTENTS
Foreword ^
Abstract iv
Figures ^
Tables ' viii
Acknowledgments ix
1. Introduction 1
Technology background 1
Project overview 2
Objectives and approach 3
Site selection 3
2. Site D System ........... 7
Background .. 7
SVE operational history 11
Soil sampling methodology 17
Results 22
Soils 22
Operations 32
3. Site G System 37
Background 37
SVE operational history 40
Soil sampling methodology 43
Results 47
Soils 47
Operations 50
4. Summary and Conclusions 61
Appendices
A. Soil analytical results prior to treatment, Site D 65
B. Sampling and analysis program for soil borings prior to treatment,
Site D and Site G .69
C. Mass removal rate and cumulative mass removal equations 73
D. Site D boring logs 75
-------
CONTENTS
(Continued)
E. WESTON Analytics soil boring analytical deliverables, Site D
and Site G 83
F. EPA RREL soil boring analytical deliverables, Site D and Site G .... 117
G. Site G boring logs 139
VI
-------
FIGURES
Number
1 Surficial geology, Site D, TCAAP 8
2 Extent of VOC soil contamination prior to remediation, Site D, TCAAP . 10
3 Location of pilot study systems, Site D, TCAAP 12
4 Schematic of pilot study systems, Site D, TCAAP 13
5 Schematic of full scale systems, TCAAP 14
6 Full-scale SVE system layout, Site D, TCAAP 16
7 Soil boring locations, Site D, TCAAP 18
8 Locations of post-treatment soil borings relative to pretreatment soil
borings, Site D, TCAAP 19
9 Typical split-spoon sampler with brass sleeve inserts 21
10 Mass removal rate vs. time, Site D, TCAAP 33
11 Cross-section of surficial geology, Site G, TCAAP 38
12 Extent of VOC contamination, prior to remediation, Site G, TCAAP ... 41
13 Full-scale SVE system layout, Site G, TCAAP 42
14 Soil boring locations, Site G, TCAAP 44
15 Locations of post-treatment borings relative to pretreatment borings,
Site G, TCAAP 45
16 Mass removal rate vs. time, Site G, TCAAP 57
vu
-------
TABLES
Number Page
1 Summary of pretreatment soil analytical results, Site D, TCAAP 9
2 Post-treatment soil analytical results, Site D, TCAAP 23
3 Post-treatment EPA RREL and WAL soil analytical results,
Site D, TCAAP 26
4 Estimated construction and operation cost summary, Site D, TCAAP . 34
5 Pretreatment soil analytical results prior to treatment, Site G, TCAAP 39
6 Post-treatment soil analytical results, Site G, TCAAP 49
7 Post-treatment EPA RREL and WAL soil analytical results,
Site G,TCAAP 51
8 Estimated construction and operation cost summary, Site G, TCAAP . 59
vui
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The work described in this report was undertaken by the Risk Reduction Engineering
Laboratory (RREL) of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The project was
conducted by Roy F. Weston, Inc. (WESTON) under contract to the EPA. The EPA
project manager was Janet M. Houthoofd. The WESTON project manager/director was
Peter A. Ciotoli. The WESTON project team included Michael H. Corbin, Nancy A.
Metzer, and Michael F. Kress. Review comments on this report were provided by Paul R.
de Percin, Janet M. Houthoofd, Brigid O'Toole, Herbert R. Pahren, and Guy F. Simes of
the EPA RREL. The project staff would like to thank the Twin Cities Army Ammunition
Plant of the U.S. Army for its cooperation in allowing access to its field sites.
IX
-------
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
TECHNOLOGY BACKGROUND
Soil vapor extraction (SVE) technology is an emerging technology for remediation
of soils contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The remediation is
accomplished by mechanically drawing air through the contaminated soils in the vadose
(unsaturated) zone. An array of subsurface vents is installed in the contaminated area. A
vacuum pump is then manifolded to the vents to induce air flow. The VOC-laden air is
drawn from the soils to the vents, through the manifold and pump, and is either discharged
to the atmosphere or treated prior to discharge, depending on specific site considerations.
Typically, the contaminant concentrations in the effluent air stream are monitored during
SVE operations.
Initially, attempts at determining the effectiveness of the technology used a mass
balance approach. This involved a preremediation site characterization to determine the
quantity (in Ib) of contaminants in the soils, measurement of the total mass of contaminant
removed during remediation, and a post-remediation site characterization to determine the
quantity of residual contaminants remaining in the soils after treatment. Treatment
effectiveness would then be quantified by dividing the mass of the contaminants prior to
treatment by the mass of contaminants removed during treatment, indicating the percent
removed (% removed). Comparison of the expected residual concentration (calculated
using a mass balance) to the actual residual concentrations (measured during the post-
remediation site characterization) indicates the precision of the mass balance approach.
-------
Due to the high cost of soil sampling and analysis and the heterogeneous nature of soil
contamination, the mass balance cannot be accomplished with much precision unless
extensive resources are expended. This has not proven to be a reliable, cost-effective means
of assessing the system's effectiveness.
Subsequent efforts have focused on determining the residual concentrations of
contaminants remaining in the soil after the effluent air contaminant concentrations drop
to a very low level in comparison to the initial concentrations. The premise behind this
approach is that if the soils have low or nondetectable levels of contaminants, they can be
considered clean. Although quantitative determination of treatment effectiveness (e.g.. %
removed) is not performed, the success of the SVE treatment can still be verified. Many
Superfund site remediation plans specify soil cleanup concentration levels using risk-based
analysis or regulatory standards. To date, there have not been any full-scale SVE systems
documented in the literature that have reached a final site cleanup based on stipulated soil
cleanup levels and post-treatment sampling. Other factors may be used to evaluate SVE
performance and will be discussed further in this report.
PROJECT OVERVIEW
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Risk Reduction Engineering
Laboratory (RREL) has conducted a study to evaluate the SVE technology application at
hazardous waste sites. The objective of the project, Field Investigation of Effectiveness of
Soil Vapor Extraction Technology, is to characterize and assess the effectiveness of induced
draft in situ ventilation in reducing the concentrations of VOCs in soils. Due to the variety
of terms used in the application of this technology (i.e., soil venting, in situ volatilization,
soil gas extraction, vacuum extraction, and soil stripping), in this report the technology will
be hereafter referred to as SVE.
The project involved the identification of SVE sites for potential evaluation, selection
of sites, soil sampling at the sites, sample analysis, data collection and analysis, evaluation
-------
of the effectiveness of the selected SVE systems in reducing soil contamination, and
preparation of this report on the project.
OBJECTIVES AND APPROACH
The purpose of this project was to characterize and assess the effectiveness of SVE
in reducing the concentration of VOC soil contamination. The following approach was
identified to meet the project objectives:
• Sites at which an SVE system has been in operation for a minimum of several
months were identified. The VOC removal rate should be very low in
comparison to initial removal rates, indicating that the system may be nearing
completion of treatment.
• Site information regarding soil VOC concentrations prior to treatment was
obtained.
• Operational data from the system owners/ operators was obtained and
evaluated with respect to system performance.
• A soil sampling program to evaluate the residual contamination levels
remaining in the treated soils was performed.
• The initial and current contamination levels in terms of magnitude and
distribution of contamination were compared.
SITE SELECTION
All SVE systems identified in the course of a literature search and internal projects
were considered for possible inclusion in this project. Due to the lack of detail given in some
of the literature write-ups, it was difficult to fully assess the applicability of these systems
for this project.
-------
Several criteria were used in selecting the sites for inclusion in this project. These
criteria included the following:
• Duration of SVE system operation.
• Quality of the initial site characterization.
• Amount and availability of operational data.
• Willingness of site owners/operators to participate in the project.
• Site characteristics such as soil type, contaminant type, and size.
Based on these considerations, the evaluations were conducted on two SVE systems,
referred to as Site D and Site G. Both are located at the Twin Cities Army Ammunition
Plant (TCAAP), New Brighton, Minnesota, and are the longest operating and largest SVE
systems to date. TCAAP has maintained operating information on both systems.
Site D was a solvent leaching pit/burn area, and the SVE system at the site has been
in operation almost continuously since July 1986. It covers an area of approximately 0.5 acre.
The site was first characterized during the remedial investigation work, and further
information on soil contamination was gathered during an earlier SVE pilot study. The air
emissions have been monitored throughout the system operations, initially on a daily basis
and then on a weekly basis. The soils at Site D are silicate sands, which should absorb very
little of the solvent contaminants.
Site G is an inactive/closed landfill. The SVE system at Site G has operated, with
some interruptions for activated carbon changeouts, since September 1986. It covers
approximately 1.5 acres. The remedial investigation found limited solvent contamination in
the landfill materials. As with Site D, air emissions have been monitored throughout the
system operation. The fill materials are a heterogeneous mix of building materials, office
trash, and industrial wastes. The native soils beneath the fill are clays underlain by sands.
-------
It was expected that comparison of SVE systems from a relatively homogeneous soil
site (Site D) and the very heterogeneous landfill (Site G) could yield valuable information
on the potential range of SVE applications. Finally, the facility had previously been very
cooperative in responding to various inquiries concerning the remedial efforts at the plant.
-------
-------
SECTION 2
SITE D SYSTEM
BACKGROUND
Site D is the location of former leaching/burn pits where solvents, explosive primer
wastes, and other combustibles were disposed through open burning. The initial remedial
investigation was carried out by the Army in 1984. During this investigation a total of 43
soil borings was conducted on the site, ranging from 10 to 170 ft in depth. The surficial
geology of the site consists of the Arsenal sand, stained sediments, and residues from
burning activities. The Arsenal sand consists of brown-gray, fine to coarse sands and
gravels. The stained sediments and residues consist of dark gray to black, fine to coarse
sands and silts. The Arsenal sand extends below the site to a depth of approximately 120
ft. The Hillside sand lies below this. Groundwater lies approximately 165 ft below ground
surface (bgs). A cross-section of the surficial geology is shown in Figure 1.
Prior to treatment, the contamination observed at Site D consisted primarily of
VOCs, although polychlorinated biphenols (PCBs) and metals (barium and lead) were also
detected. The total VOC concentrations in the soils ranged from ND to 8,000 mg/kg,
indicating the wide distribution of contaminant concentrations. A summary of the
pretreatment analytical results is shown in Table 1; a complete listing of the analytical
results is given in Appendix A Trichloroethylene (TCE) and 1,1,1-trichloroethane (TCA)
comprised 71 and 20%, respectively, of the total VOCs and as such were the primary
contaminants. An overview of the sampling and analysis program is presented in Appendix
B. Other VOCs included toluene and trans-1,2-dichloroethylene. The PCB-contaminated
soils were excavated and removed from the area and were not part of the SVE treatment.
A plan view of the maximum VOC contamination extent and the soil boring locations at
Site D are given in Figure 2. Porosity and permeability were also measured and were found
in the ranges of 36.7 to 39.0% and 5.7 x W4 to 3.5 x 10'3 cm/sec, respectively.
-------
0
>
3
m
I
I
ffi
>
i
u.
1030-
1028-
1026-
1024-
1022-
1020-
1018-
1016-
1014-
1012-
1010-
1008-
1006-
1004-
1002-
1000-
998-
996-
Arsenal Sand
Stained
Sediments
Scale In Feet
0 10' 20'
TD = 50.5'
Figure 1. Surficial geology, Site D, TCAAP.
-------
o
£
~
3
CO
2
co
o
f.
CO
co
1
0)
(0
co
|
CO
§
o g
o «
.= >.
0)
- 2
• _o
£
O
g
ja
^
c5
§2 =
2 o •-'
i- js
.0
•O
l_
o 5 ~t
Q * =
O g
o c
oifiil
9i-s
• o 1
o
.
„
Q
O)
I
m
iiiiiSiiiiiiii-i«iiigggg.gggg|ggggg
-Z--Z. -z.-z.-z.-z.
IllllSlffiallsllilllllsllll
0eJCD(D(3<3(3O(DCJeJ
"•0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:
UJlULULIIlilUJUJUJUJUJ
00 (N
o o
co
g I
Q
Q F
n C/3
r Lll
£ 5
iS
Q W II
0:^0
111 5 H
-------
Legend
Shallow Bore
Deep Bore
Boring Location With Volatile
Organic Concentrations >50 PPM
Surface Contour
Woods Line
Plan View Illustration of Maximum
Extent of Volatile Organic Contamination
Requiring Remedial Action
Figure 2. Extent of VOC soil contamination prior to remediation, Site D, TCAAP.
10
-------
SVE OPERATIONAL HISTORY
In November 1984, a pilot SVE study was conducted to assess the feasibility of the
technology and develop design relationships to optimize the use of the technology. Two
separate pilot systems were installed at Site D to test several design and performance
variables. System 1 was designed to evaluate TCE removals from soils with relatively low
VOC contamination (less than 2.3 mg/kg). This system operated at an extraction rate of
40 to 55 cfm and had a vent pipe spacing of 20 ft. The second, larger system (System 2) was
designed to study TCE removal from soils with higher VOC concentrations (up to 5,000
mg/kg). System 2 operated at an extraction rate of 200 to 220 cfm and had a vent spacing
of 50 ft. For both systems, in-line continuous monitoring of air flow rate, moisture content,
temperature, pressure, and hourly TCE concentrations was accomplished. A plan view of
the pilot systems location is given in Figure 3 and a system schematic is given in Figure 4.
The applicability of the SVE technology to the site-specific conditions was
successfully demonstrated, as nearly 1,650 Ibs (750 kg) of TCE and other solvents were
removed from the contaminated soils during the pilot program. Soil sampling and analysis
indicated that TCE removals from stained, less porous soils were not as effective as from
the unstained soils.
During 1985, the Army took several steps towards the remediation of Site D. The
first action was the excavation and removal of the PCB-contaminated soils. Second, after
these soils were removed and the excavation backfilled with onsite soils, the site was covered
with low permeability soil. The soil cover consisted of an 18-in. layer of clay compacted to
a permeability of 10"8 cm/s with a 6-inch cover layer of granular native soils. The full-scale
SVE system was installed at Site D following placement of the soil cover. The SVE system
consists of 39 air extraction vents, an air collection manifold, four centrifugal blowers, and
a building to house the blowers and the motor control center. A schematic is given in
Figure 5. The full-scale system installation was completed in January 1986 with vents
11
-------
763250N
2214500E
T
C+OO
—— L^_.
A+OO
7629SON _ I
2214500E 1+00
-A.
System -
\ No. 1
1 Study Area
I
/ System -
I No. 2
I Study Area
\
I 762950N
2214800E
3+00
4+00
100
Scale in Feet
Legend
Location of Vacuum :
Extraction Pipe Vent
Systems for Pilot Study
Plan View Illustration of :
Maximum Extent of Volatile
Organic Contamination
Figure 3. Location of pilot study systems; Site D, TCAAP.
12
-------
Contamination
1. Electric Air Flow Heater 8.
2. Forced Draft Injection Fan 9.
3. Injection Air Bypass Valve 10.
4. Injection Air Sampling Port 11.
5. Injection Air Flow Meter 12.
6. Extraction Manifold 13.
7. Injection Manifold 14.
Slotted Vertical Extraction Vent Pipe (typ)
Slotted Vertical Injection Vent Pipe (typ)
Extraction Air Sampling Port
Extraction Air Flow Meter
Extraction Air Bypass Valve
Induced Draft Extraction Fan
Vapor Carbon Package Treatment Unit
Figure 4. Schematic of pilot study systems; Site D, TCAAP.
13
-------
Soil
Contamination
1. Slotted Verticle Extract Vent Pipe (Typ.)
2. Extraction Manifold
3. Extraction Air Sampling Port
4. Extraction Air Bypass Valve
5. Induced Draft Extraction Fan
6. Vapor Carbon Treatment Unit (Site G Only)
Figure 5. Schematic of full scale systems, TCAAP.
14
-------
ranging in depth from 34 ft to 54 ft bgs. Effluent air concentrations were monitored using
an organic vapor analyzer (OVA) for real-time results, and carbon tube samples were
analyzed in the laboratory with a gas chrbmatograph for compound-specific results. Air flow
rates and the system's negative pressure were monitored using magnehelic gauges.
The full-scale system was started and operated during February 1986. A system
layout and designation of the 20 vents that were initially operated are shown in Figure 6.
The system was then shut down for approximately 5 mo., resumed operation in July 1986,
and has been in operation almost continuously since 7 July 1986. On 17 September 1986,
all 39 vents were opened to increase the system's areal influence. To compensate for
decreasing daily removal rates, a second blower was brought on-line on 3 October 1986.
A third blower was added on 25 February 1987, and the fourth was added on 3 April 1987
to expedite the remediation. All vents were opened farther on 27 May 1987 and were
completely opened on 26 June 1987.
The system was shut down at night and on weekends between 21 August 1987 and
2 November 1987 in response to complaints about the noise level from nearby residents.
Noise reducers were installed on 3, 4, and 5 November 1987, after which time the system
resumed continuous operation. Operations are ongoing as of June 1990.
As of June 1990, a cumulative total of 108,460 Ib of VOCs had been removed from
the soils at Site D. The equations used to calculate cummulative mass removals, and mass
removal rate are presented in Appendix C. Initial removal rates were on the order of
several hundreds of pounds per day and varied as system operations were modified. Since
July 1987, the first full month when all vents were completely opened, the removal rates
have been generally decreasing. During the first 4 mo. of 1990, the daily removal rate
ranged between 16 and 31 Ib per day. A deep vent (150 ft) was installed and connected to
the Site D system. When it was brought on line (7 May 1990), the system removal rate
increased to 53 Ib per day.
15
-------
25 50
Scale in Feet
Legend
Q^- Initial Operational Vents With Flow Rates
Measured on January 29th After Flow Balancing.
Flow Rates Are Given in Cubic Feet Per Minute (CFM).
• Closed Vent :
Figure 6. Full-scale SVE system layout, Site D, TCAAP.
16
-------
SOIL SAMPLING METHODOLOGY
As part of this performance evaluation program, soil samples from the Site D
treatment area were obtained and analyzed to determine the extent of the soil treatment.
Numerous soil borings have been previously installed at TCAAP's Site D during the initial
and pilot-scale investigations. Seven borings were installed to a depth of 30 ft. The soil
borings were located where contamination was defined by previous borings and soil analysis
to facilitate comparison of the pretreatment and post-treatment VOC concentrations in the
soils. The soil borings were labeled DSB-01 through DSB-07 (DSB = Site D Soil Boring).
An additional flag was added to the sample identification code to denote sample depth.
The soil boring locations are denoted with a triangle in Figure 7. Figure 8 shows the
locations of the post-treatment borings relative to the pretreatment borings.
The seven soil borings were installed with a truck-mounted hollow-stem auger drill
rig using nominal 4-in. inner diameter auger flights. In order to minimize the possibility
of cross-contamination, the auger flights were decontaminated prior to use and between
each soil boring. Decontamination consisted of a thorough steam cleaning of all equipment
that contacted the soils during drilling activities. Each soil boring was advanced to a depth
of 30 ft. Upon completion of each soil boring, drill cuttings were placed back into the bore
hole, and the bore hole was grouted to ground level. Each boring was logged. The boring
logs are present in Appendix D.
Three split-spoon samples were obtained from each of the seven soil borings for a
total of 26 samples. This includes five quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) samples
(i.e., field duplicates and matrix spikes). Note that field and trip blanks were also collected.
Samples were taken from each soil boring at depths of 10, 20, and 30 ft. In borings DSB-01
and DSB-03, the 30-ft sample was taken at 34 to 35 ft due to poor sample recovery at 30
ft. Each boring was visually logged to record the subsurface soil profile.
17
-------
c+oo
A+00
B+00
A Soil Boring Location
H-;
Scale in Feet 4+00
"saa
25 50
Figure 7. Soil boring locations, Site D, TCAAP.
18
-------
Extent of Clay Cap
Former Maximum
Extent of VOC
Contamination
r
BD2 • '' DSB-OS [•JDSB-06
Post-treatment Boring
Pre-treatment Boring
(Total VOCs > 50 ppm)
Pre-treatment Boring
(Total VOCs < 50 ppm)
Scale In Feet 4+00
5SS
25 50
Figure 8. Locations of post-treatment soil borings relative to
pretreatment soil borings, Site D, TCAAP.
19
-------
The soil samples taken from DSB-01 through DSB-07 were collected in accordance
with ASTM Method D 1586-84, with the exception that split-spoon samplers (18; to 24 in.
in length) lined with brass tubes were substituted for conventional split-spoon samplers.
A typical split-spoon sampler using brass sleeves is presented in Figure 9. After the soil
boring was advanced to the desired sampling depth, the split-spoon sampler was attached
to the sampling rods and placed down the open bore hole. The sampler was driven into the
undisturbed soil by a 140-lb hammer and blow counts were recorded. Samples were
retrieved from the split spoon by taking a brass tube and placing teflon liners followed by
plastic caps on each end of the brass tube. The caps were then sealed on the brass tubes
with tape.
The split-spoon samplers were decontaminated prior to each sample.
Decontamination consisted of a soap and water wash, followed by a water rinse and a final
deionized water rinse. A sample of the deionized water (DSB-DW) was collected and
analyzed to check for contamination. The results are reported with the Site D field and trip
blank results. No contaminants were detected in the deionized water.
The split-spoon samplers were specified for two reasons:
The chance of cross-contamination of the sample was minimized
because the soil never came in contact with the split spoon or a
sampling device (trowel, scoopula, etc.).
The soil sample was not removed from the tube, so the effect of soil
aeration was minimized (reducing the loss of VOCs during sample
handling).
Samples were sent to WESTON's Analytics Division Lionville, Pennsylvania,
laboratory and analyzed for TCE, TCA (EPA Method 5030/8010), and moisture content.
The above chemical compounds comprised the majority of the initial soil contamination.
Moisture content was checked to determine the effects of the SVE system on this
20
-------
Brass Sleeve After Sample Collection
Head assembly
18" Split Spoon (typ.)
Spacer
Shoe
Brass Sleeve Inserts
Brass Sleeve After Sample Collection
Plastic Cap
Electrical Tape
Brass Sleeve
Figure 9. Typical split-spoon sampler with brass sleeve inserts.
21
-------
parameter. In addition, duplicates of each sample were sent to the EPA Risk Reduction
Engineering Laboratory (RREL) in Cincinnati, Ohio, for full VOC analysis (EPA Method
8240).
Soil and quality QA/QC samples were placed in coolers and maintained at 4°C for
shipment. The coolers were shipped overnight by a common courier (Federal Express) in
accordance with Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulations.
RESULTS
The results of the sampling/analysis and other data gathering efforts have been
organized into two general areas: soils and operational results. The VOC concentrations
in the soils are compared to pretreatment levels. The operational results were used to
examine the system's performance.
Soils
A summary of the WESTON Analytical Laboratory (WAL) analytical results for soil
samples are presented in Table 2. These results indicate that the soil concentrations of TCE
and TCA have decreased significantly compared to their pretreatment levels. The complete
laboratory deliverables from the WESTON laboratory and EPA RREL are presented in
Appendices E and F.
In a broad sense the concentrations have been reduced by four to five orders of
magnitude to levels that are generally not detected or in the very low ppb. Direct
quantitative comparison of specific pre and post-treatment borings is not practical due to
the variability hi VOC contamination levels and differences in sample collection and analysis
methods between 1984 and 1989.
22
-------
Table 2. Post-treatment soil analytical results, Site D, TCAAP.
Sample ID
DSB-FB-01
DSB-FB-02
DSB-DW
DSB-TB-01
DSB-01-10
DSB-01-11
DSB-01-20
DSB-01-35
DSB-02-10
DSB-02-20
DSB-02-30
DSB-02-31
DSB-03-10
DSB-03-20
DSB-03-34
DSB-03-34
DSB-04-10
DSB-04-20
DSB-04-21
DSB-04-30
DSB-05-10
DSB-05-20
DSB-05-30
DSB-05-30
DSB-06-10
DSB-06-20
DSB-06-30
DSB-07-10
DSB-07-20
DSB-07-30
Location Depth
<*n
DSB-01 10
10
20
35
DSB-02 10
20
30
30
DSB-03 10
20
34
34
DSB-04 10
20
20
30
DSB-05 10
20
30
DSB-06 10
20
30
DSB-07 10
20
30
TCE (1)
(ug/kg)
ND
ND
ND
ND
1
0.7 J
4
ND
2
29
ND
1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.6 J
0.6 J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TCA(2)
(tig/kg)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.8 J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Moisture
Content
(%)
7.2
14.0
4.3
3.6
6.7
7.3
5.1
8.2
8.1
4.5
6.0
2.0
6.1
7.2
1.7
11.7
4.2
2.5
11.7
' 8.7
' 4.1
6.6
2.9
2.4
Comments
Field Blank
Field Blank
Decon Water
Trip Blank
Field Dup
MS/MSD
Field Dup
Lab Dup
Field Dup
MS/MSD
Lab Dup
NOTE: Reported results are from samples sent to WESTON Analytical Laboratories only.
Detection Limit = 1 ug/kg.
(l)Triohloroethene,
(2)1,1,1-Trichloroethane
ND = Not detected above minimum detection limit.
J = Estimated value.
MS/MSD = Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate.
23
-------
In most of the May 1989 post-treatment samples, TCE was not detected above the
minimum detection limit of 0.001 mg/kg (1 ppb). Samples from soil borings DSB-01 and
DSB-02 contained concentrations of TCE above the detection level. The highest
concentration, 0.029 mg/kg, was found in sample DSB-02-20. Pretreatment concentrations
of TCA ranged from not detected (ND) to 1,000 mg/kg. The only post-treatment sample
in which TCA was detected was DSB-02-10, at an estimated concentration of 0.0008 mg/kg.
TCA was not detected above 0.001 mg/kg in any of the other Site D post-treatment
samples. These results show that the soil concentrations are relatively uniform, suggesting
that treatment has not been localized to specific areas. In comparison, pretreatment levels
of TCE ranged from ND to 7,000 mg/kg (ppm).
The moisture content of the soils ranged from 1.7 to 14% and averaged
approximately 6.1%. This may be compared to pretreatment levels of 3.3 and 4.6% in two
samples collected and analyzed during the initial site investigation. These results do not
indicate a significant change in the soil moisture content over the treatment period. This
is interesting in that considering the large volume of air which has been passed through
these soils, one would anticipate a significant decrease in the soil moisture. However, since
the site is capped, the air was forced to flow through a large volume of uncapped soil before
reaching the treatment area. Therefore, the total volume of soil the air passed through was
too large to be significantly dried. Finally, the moisture content results are consistent with
the previous description of well drained soils.
TCE and TCA were not detected in the field blanks (DSB-FB-01 and DSB-FB-02),
trip blank (DSB-TB-01), or the decon water blank (DSB-DW), indicating that cross-
contamination from the sampling equipment, decon water, or during sample shipping and
handling did not occur. The quality of the analytical data met the QA objective of 80%
completeness for both the organics (TCE and TCA, completeness = 85%), and inorganics
(moisture content, completeness = 81%). Completeness is a measure of the relative
number of sample points that meet all the acceptance criteria, including accuracy, precision,
and other criteria required by the specific analytical method.
24
-------
A summary of the EPA RREL analytical laboratory results are presented in Table
3. The complete laboratory deliverable is presented in Appendices E and F. The WAL
results are also presented in this table to allow comparison of the two laboratories' results.
The "U" data qualifier used on the table indicates that the compounds was analyzed for but
not detected. The minimum detection limit is reported with the "U" data qualifier. It
should be noted that the RREL detection limits are 100 times greater than the WAL
detection limits for the soil samples. This is due to a difference in the analytical methods
that were used. RREL used a methanol extraction followed by gas chromatograph/mass
spectrometer (GC/MS, EPA Method 8240) analysis. WAL used a purge and trap extraction
(EPA Method 5030) followed by a gas chromatograph (GC, EPA Method 8010) analysis.
In general, the RREL results are more reliable at the higher end of the concentration range
(i.e., above 0.100 mg/kg), and the WAL results are more reliable at lower concentrations
(i.e., less than 0.100 mg/kg).
Overall, no TCE or TCA was detected in the RREL analyses. The levels that were
detected in the WAL analyses are below the RREL detection limits Several other
compounds were detected in samples DSB-06-20 and DSB-06-30. Sample DSB-06-20
contained trans-1,2-dichloroethene at 6.58 mg/kg, ethylbenzene at 29.8 mg/kg, styrene at
1.48 mg/kg, toluene at 15.3 mg/kg, and total xylenes at 54.2 mg/kg. Sample DSB-06-30
contained ethylbenzene at 0.573 mg/kg and total xylenes at 0.292 mg/kg. The results from
the two laboratories are consistent. The TCE and TCA levels have been reduced to
concentrations in the low parts per billion (ppb or ug/kg) range. This is a significant
reduction from pretreatment concentrations in the hundreds and thousands of parts per
million (ppm or mg/kg).
An attempt was made to locate the post-treatment borings near the pretreatment
borings in an effort to support a spatial comparison of pre and post-treatment contaminant
concentrations. However, due to the difficulties of maneuvering a drill rig near the SVE
pipe manifold, it was not possible to locate the post-treatment borings as planned. In
general, borings DSB-01 and DSB-02 were within the more highly impacted area, and it is
25
-------
*
Q.
j2
o
H
a
CD
**
(0
c/T
•*•*
S
to
£
S
If,
15
i
—
Q
_J
^J
fe;
•o
ra
i
in
CC
cc
^
CL
III
c
CD
13
£
3
0
Q.
*
CO
O
«M
(0
r"
V™
-i £ j?
§91
o
i *•" O"
< 5§
iml
S
o
Gill
EC 'B E
Q
5
< m "&
> to ~*
Q
O
_J CQ ~I
S 4* ?>
CO
a
CM
_, 9
CC ED -
Q
o
<%i
CO
a
-J if
E • ti
a co
Q
9
< P ^
5 m =
Q
T"
O
M CD J
E ^T D
K to 3
a
{2
^
a
-
333333333333333333333
CMT-t— T-C\leMT-l-T-CMCMl-C\lT-T- T- t- 1- T- -I- T-
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
333333333333333333333
8 LO IO IO O O IO if) IO O O tO O IO IO U) IO IO IO W5 IO
T- O r- T— •*—
Ur)ID^Z)O^Z)^Z}33Z)Z33Z3Z>Z)r30^
8LOLf)lOOOLOLC)tOOOLOOLOU)LOLOtOtOLOLO
T— O t— i— T-
T- -l-
r3Z)Z3rD3Z)Z5r)Z5Z3rDr3ZDZ)OID3Z)Z)3^
SU5 tO IO O ^ to IO to O O to o IO to IO to to to to to
T- O T- 1- T-
o
x. me
o J o III
i o! 1 i § § §1 ill
O c «=^c« cO^^^'SSo-C
o to '3SSa>2>- io6i5^"T-"W'|i:r-"c3|i:
3 -^
I S •
o p;
3
o o
o o
0 0
333C03333333333
^ !
O ^ O O O O O O O O O
3 3
T_ ^_ !
f
3 3
33333333333333
toggtoiotototoiototooom
3 3
•^ *-,
33333333333333
in S m T-
3 3
i- t-
•
333333333333 3' 3
05 to to T—
0)
C !
<8
(D f~
ll i g 11
CQ)^-O 25? OOji;*^'tJ'o
| ||I||| §II||||
U w 4 2 co i-~ i^ i^ T-' w fz > >|^
o"
'a.
£
(0
£•
'§
1
.3
01
C
1 ffl
11-
111 CQ
'O
§ .8
c >.
§ < .
'%-z. %
tr P s
^
^ c
1 II O
iij -i u-
tr £ M
a: g CQ
-a
'g
a.
£
j=
is
•w
JB
IB
J.J-
1
~=
1
ffl
1
i§
JE
!i=
15 §S
glJ
'ij -a Q.
jB o Q.
•8 2 2
2 £ o
°V^
-=: LU II
3 4 Z
05
UJ
O
•a
o
_c
s
o
0
26
-------
(0
_j|o
= il
8
o
CM
l?1
8 E
id if
£ i (
8
o
ill
OT =
Q
0
uj||>
i
1 2 O1
~l ^" .s
ssf
8s
in
_i f a,
E ? 1
£ ® ?
8
_
cji
u 5 e
cm I
8s
o
CM
I3=)=3
o" o' o* o" d o" o' d d o"
Z)Z)Z)Z3ZDZ)OnDZ)^IDZ5
o* d o" o' o" o* d o" o' o"
o" d d d d d d d d d
o fc
® O C*
§ glil ii^llll
oSlii-So^SS-e?
!ic!<§Jicfiiiic!i
N ^^^^^^^^^mo^rso^^o.
d o' d d o' o' o' d o" o' 3 ° o o o" d o" d
o'
H) -D
§ 1
d d
^^^^D^ooziorascozsoaorj^r)"
o o' d d d d d d d o' S3 d d d d d d o'
o"
S S
111 °
co d
333033033UZ)3CQ03Z)3Z3UZ3-
ooooooooo'd ^ddddooo
d
3 3
o o
0 0
o d
^ooo3Z3Z3r3333 z) m ozjraozjrjzjzj
d d d d d d d o' d o' $2 d d d o' d d d
o"
3Z3O^O33O33O3mZ3r5OZ333Z3r5
oooooooooo !§oo'o'o"do'o'
d
3
i I
d d
^=)O3=)33Z)cQ^3O3ar3or)
o o o o o o o o" o' d g o' d d o" d d d
d
(D
(DC (D
g !§§- ffi |
Isssf ill 1* lo U
£<0<0(D5Q-o^ .2'= 2 c S£
i 1 i-*-;:- 1 *- a 1 1 1| || 3 1 1 5 ? 1 1
5 a 3
d o
) ZD 3
• C\J i—
d o
-3 .^
CM *—
d o
0 ^
d o
-3 — 3
CM i—
d o'
3 3
CM T-
0 0
I £
0 §
ll
a
a.
E
ra
(0
13
0
A
D)
'§
ft
c 5^
™ »3
.i "s"
•g 2 "^
ir P s
^ S ~
^ g c
id J£
a: < ii
a: S CD
T3
*£
O
Q.
(D
1
.2
8
*
•fc-T
1
"^
•2
o
S
•§
£
C
ffl 9 -H
TO 3 _Q
1 1 .i
"O T3 Q.
B S CL
2 £ t5
o '-g z
Z Ul II
" u <
^3 ~3 "Z,
in
I
"Z.
,
0)
3
•JJ
§
^
27
-------
.
T>
C
O
^ ^
CO
ffl
s
ra
en
cc
1
J
5
HI
O*
J
£
UI
DC
1
_1
<
^
<
S
m r
a E
to
A "•
w ^
Q
TT
s 1
tn |
Q
s ra
S3 ^?
OQ £
g
0
1 1
m c
to
Q
S
S S
?1
S
0
1 Q
I!
w e
Q
o
||
1 ^
5
*? tl
|S
o
If
s
{2
2
3
CMT-i-T-CMCMT-T-r-CMCM
O O O O d O O O O
=>=> = => = => = = =>=>=>
oooo ooooo
— J . . ^J ^J ^J Zj . . ^D ^J
CMi-T-T-CMCJi-i-T-c\IOJ
d d d d d d d d d
d o' d o d o" o" d d
oooo o' o' d o' d
«
1 i i s § g >.
iE£g.2-ssS£
..m-algoClPmSg
£cf'ficc:(-.-j3m2
gmOoo^o§§ppo
"Silllmfflllio
T- CV1
o' d
^^
0 0
J ^
o o
0 O
0 0
Chloroform
Chloromethane
........
oooooooo
........
oooooooo
. . ^2 ^D . Z3 ^2 .
oooooooo
........
oooooooo
........
oooooooo
_
ffl
O C
^ C 03 = = =,=,
d Jiidddddd
d
§
o
...m......
o" '"idddddd
o
3
o
o
d
.
T-
8
o
o
g £ mo
§| | g ||
S*^ O ^ Q) Q) Q)
S 0 £ gg
•>, m ® s £ WI 2 § ^ CH.
^.^
0
= =
o
.
8
O
"^ ~
o
3
o
o
d
3:3
o
.
o
o
o'
3:3
o
8
d
.
T_
o
o
o'
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Acetate
CM i—
v\i T—
O O
= =
O O
. ~
CM ^~
d o
1
i
CM t—
p o
CM i~
O O
'
_Vinyl Chloride
Xylenes (Total)
'5) 5-
iS ffl
1 I
s .y
|t
1 ^
«P
;g W
5
._! »
ir ^
IT g
•ri
•^
o
a.
£
.**
'e
1
.2
-S
1
c
I
CD
-S
£
3
£
E
~
"O 03
S >
IS
_
-------
T?
4"J
0
^
«0
_o>
£
o
Q
o
1 C
«J U) j
2 • 7
CO ^
0
0
uj S 1
K 2 C
DC «•• J«
2
e
_j «? B
ill
8s
-«i »
*gE
,_
Ol
_j ^. 5
rf O ^!
5 ml
s£
^,
a A
Q
O
= = = = 3 = => = = =,?=,?=,33:,3=,=,3=)=)in33=)=)3-)-)
d odd d d d o" d d d d d d d d d d o' d m d d d d d o" d
d
i
3 =>
•
S'" 0
0
o o"
' ^33^J3^)3Z33O3r>oor3Z5ao3rjr)z)r)
oooo o d o o o o d o d o o d d d d d o d d d d d d d
o'
3 3
8 8
d d
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = „„=,„„„„ =
d d d d o' d d d o" o" d d d o' d d o' d o' d d d d d o" d d d
^ ^
0 0
o o
d d
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = * = = = = = „„•„„„„ =
oooo o o o o o d o o o d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d
3 -3
o o
0 0
d d
rjzirjorJo^rjsrj^rjo^a^DaoonosDozj^szjrjooo
d d d o" d o" d d o" d d o' d d d o o' d o' o" d d d o' d d d d
0 0
0 0
o d
CD
"- CD C CD
1 CD!= Jlclol
1 o -sl. 1 Jillllll Is IB 11
1 i.liigl |lf I I |l||i.ii 11 §|is
llllllllllllll!-l!jlil|||i|l||l|||
DOZ
O C
3 rs =
0 0
333
- £
3
>
"5.
E
«
3
o
^2
CO
D)
C
c •»'
§1"
LLJ CO
= 1
:i
8 "° CL
Z UJ II
II || ,3-
in
UJ
0
"Z.
^
CD
J
C
8.
29
-------
g-
s
£,
m
ra
•""
s|i
rr EQ c
8E
o
-I CO 8
1 g i
85 ^
Q
o
nj 2 &
tt dt 1
Q
S
< ? i
w ^
iS
o
gf 1
11 S
o
T m
< ? "ft
O
s|i
tt ci
o
gll
1 E
0
QC CQ P
_
j iA S1
§**~ * p
C
{2
2
3
333
. d d d cri g
d
d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d g
d
333333333333333333333
d dddddddddddddddd d
CD
i- CD C
CD C CD CD
Jq CD oca.
<» S c5 £mg.2 g
1 1- f,!lc2|2§- |.§
©— •— ccSc3a)OQ-X"o jS ~
!ili!ilii!l11!!iiMi
l!llllllll!-s?-l?-IIi!!f
33333
O O O O O
3
0
o
d
33333
O O O O O
3
o
o
d
33 3
t d o" u> d
3
o
o
d
33333
O O O O O
3
8
o
33333
00000
3
T—
O
O
o'
o
c
CO
£ CD
CD c
2 CD ™
o c £
j— CD CD
o £ 2
CO Q) Q
ISlIS
3
d
3
O
3
O
3
0
3
o
-T! ^«
o •*
m
333
0 0
333
o' d
i
1
i
Acetate
Chloride - .. .
es (Total)
*H
> > X
oi
'a.
E
CO
CO
>*
2
CO
1
D)
'§
g JS
II
•a w
i 8
*w ™
C >.
.2 to
13 ^
IP
;« w
ii
_j ii
ijj -J
ir ^
ir 5
•§
o
f
1
c
•2
Q
.2
Q)
•D
;1
c
o
1
o
•D
J
E"~
.
'ca §
•D (C
"5 -o
Q) 0)
:§ 1
| =§
.2 UJ
11 II
3 -3
OT
UJ
H
0
^
c
_co
tC
c
£
Ll_
ii
CO
o
1
a.
a.
<
o
•z.
II
z;
•a
CD
3
C
tS
C
8.
30
-------
^
*;
O
•Q
m
3
£
_J *? 01
ui fe |
DC ' 01
n- 00 c
a
o
fM \
^ w ^
Q
0
ui o ££
cr tt> s
a
o
< I f
5§ f
J2
z
*"5 -•5 ~) ~j "5 --5 "5 — E ^ ^ ^^ ^ ^ —} "^ ^ ^ ^ ^ •** ^ ^ ^ — -| — -i ^ ^^ ^^ — ^ ^ ^ — * ^ — • ^
—* —* —* —* ^ ^ ^J ^J -~J —J —t —* —* —i —1 —J *J —J —1 —j —j _J ^ =j _J ^j _J J _j j ^j ^j j ^j i
o o* o* o o' o o o' o' o o o' o' o o' o' o' o o o' o o' o' o o' o' o' o o' o'
0 0
0 0
o' o"
33I33Z)r3D3r)Z333r3Z333OZ)30aZ33333OOr333I33r3r)
o' o' o o o o o' o" o o o' o o o o' o" o' o o o' o o' o' o o o' o' o o' o'
3 3
§*~ 0
0
o' o
(D
i- 0) C I- i. I f cc
i .i t fiiiiiii iiisii
S CD T3-K >^'
31
CD
Q.
E
as
CO
£-
Is
o
3
D)
•c
a
go
CD g-
uj ca
ra =
c 'S.
0 ffl
"O 2 ^
•^ oo .s
i— til -Q
^ c
II ^ 3
uj^
•DC 5 m
13
I
2
1
CD
1
C
p
'o
•a
|
£
'c
'E .
~ CD a
cfl 3 .a
"Si. 8
S TI B:
•*— ._ o
^ "55 z
ll II <
^ -i Z
in
LU
-------
consistent that the samples from these borings contained slightly elevated TCE and TCA
concentrations.
Operations
During the SVE remedial operations the primary operational parameter that was
monitored to demonstrate the performance of the systems was the VOC removal fate over
tune. The removal rate (Ib/day) is plotted against the days of operation in Figure 10. Note
that the days of operation data do not include periods when the system was shut down. The
removal rate at the beginning of operations was approximately 1,200 Ib/day. It dropped to
several hundred Ib/day within 1 week and continued to decline with time.
When the system was initially started, 20 of the 39 vents were on-line (see Figure 6).
Due to the higher than anticipated removal rates at both Sites D and G, the systems were
shut down for several months in order to perform air modeling. The Site D system resumed
operation in July 1986. To limit air emissions, a limit on the daily removal rate of 275 Ib
was designated. Subsequent operations were focused on maximizing the remediation, i.e.,
removal rates, while not exceeding the emissions limit.
The operational data plotted in Figure 10 suggest a logarithmic decay in the removal
rate. Two curves which approximate the decay are shown on the graph. The first curve, y
= 895.7 - 305.64* log (x), is a logarithmic function. The second curve, y = (1000 + 3 x)/(l
+ 0.09 x), is a hyperbolic function. Both curves simulate the high initial removals, the rapid
decrease, and the tailing in later treatment. The hyperbola indicates a long period of later
treatment characterized by low removals, while the logrithmic decay indicates "zero" removal
at approximately 900 days of operation. '
The estimated construction and operations costs for the Site D system are presented
in Table 4. All cost information was provided by TCAAP. The estimated installation cost
is $257,000. This cost does not include design or construction management costs. The
32 :
-------
spy
O
Q"
0)
4-£
tf)
of
p
V)
(0
cr
1
o
0)
DC
V)
CA
o
£
0)
33
-------
O
•*
Q
(D
CO
i
(0
to
O
o
c
a
o
T3
O
1
I
o
u
•u
&
as
uu
.£
CO
c
0)
£
o
O
co
"in —~^
•4^ -^
£ ""*
W -V
o w
o
•••*
'E
13 *-.
co •""
o
to
£
3
*
Description
o
£.
TO
'co
CD
•a
a>
3
o
•5
i
0
Q
O
o
o
fe
CM
.0
Ta
frt
1 CAPITAL
System Instc
c
0
]co
CD
§•
CO
c
.0
"Q
3
"CO
1
o
o
o
K
in
CM
SUBTOTAL
^f.
CN
HI
U
•2
H
1
a
II OPERATIONS AN
LABOR (3)
m"
O)
o o
o o
0 0
§m"
"3-
=5 =5
O O
in co
co co
•C <~
o o
§o
in
T~ """
o
Jj
Professional
> Craft Labor
SUBTOTAL
OPERATIONS
CD
"co
T3
^
c
•*
.55
CD
3
1
•*?
c
co
0)
a
o o
0 0
?^ CM
_CD
i I"
•^- in
o r*^
o T~
CO
CD
co 7;
^ &
>. c
^> CO
-^ CO
o o
o co
O T-
o"
h~
"•-"
TO
|
0
^ ^
•1 1
£ I
HI CO
TO
C
•c
*w
'c
g
^,
CD
CO
o
TO
.C
"o.
cc
CO
o
o
o
of
O)
SUBTOTAL
g
m
DC
§
LU
V)
LJJ
OC
DL
34
in
o
O CO
I- HI
' c\
-------
operations and maintenance costs are for the total operations period from February 1986
to May 1990. The labor costs were estimated at 70% of the Site G system costs, since
specific information for the Site D system labor was not available. The estimated present
worth was calculated using a 4% inflation rate compounded annually and an additional 15%
design/construction management cost on the capital costs. The estimated volume of soil
treated, assuming a 17-ft radius of influence for each vent, is 35,000 yd3. Using the
estimated present worth of $573,000 and the estimated volume of soil treated, the treatment
cost per yd3 is $17.
35
-------
36
-------
SECTION 3
SITE G SYSTEM
BACKGROUND
Site G was an active landfill from the 1940s to the 1970s. It is irregularly shaped with
approximate area dimensions of 500 by 350 ft. The initial remedial investigation was carried
out in 1984, when a total of 26 soil borings was conducted on the site. These borings ranged
in depth from 10 to 135 ft. Along with sand and clay soil, several borings encountered fill
material such as cinders, slag, tar, brick, glass, metal, wood, etc. Prior to drilling, a
magnetometer survey was conducted to detect potential areas of bulk metallic wastes or
buried drums. Since the landfill was located on a hillside, the thickness of the fill ranged
from 0 to 30 ft. Underlying the fill materials is a silty clay (Twin Cities Formation till).
There were some indications that the silty clay is continuous throughout the site. Beneath
the silty clay are the fine to medium-grained Arsenal and Hillside sands. These sands were
encountered to a depth of 135.5 ft bgs. Groundwater is 130 ft bgs at the site. A cross-
section of the surficial geology is presented in Figure 11.
Prior to treatment, the contamination observed at Site G consisted primarily of
VOCs, although some metals (lead, chromium, and cadmium) were also detected. The
VOCs were detected in five borings with total VOC concentrations ranging from ND to 960
mg/kg, as shown in Table 5. Most of the samples with high total VOC concentrations were
taken from the waste material. Both the waste material and the soils showed a high degree
of VOC concentration variability. TCE was detected in all five borings with VOC
contaminants and comprised 16 to 88% of the total VOC concentration. Other VOCs
37
-------
6J.-SO
ez-so
a;
4-«
CO
5^
D)
5
o
0)
o>
"S
'o
O
c
o
CO
CO
CO
o
o
O)
iZ
38
-------
CL
<
U
H
(3
0)
.12
CO
«f
3
w
£
"re
u
"te^
re
re
'o
ta
c
0)
4-f
re
£
£
0.
in
0)
JQ
c
If
•J
i S
£ §
III
III
^
. s
III
^ — *
o
E ^
o 'c
1 *
2 *S
u
o
c
0)
CN "5. ^
*- s s
s o i
2 .2 -§
u
a
2
| 2 I
o , -^
£ £ £ S °
3 & B ° —
CO CO CO 'CO
CO CO Ctt
§00 QQQ
,
5 CO
S o
Q Q
Z Z
Q Q
Z Z
Q Q
Z Z
Q Q
Z Z
Q Q
Z Z
Q Q
Z Z
Q Q
Z Z
in
"* 05
CO CO
CM C\l
w w
O O
CO CO
silly clay
waste materi
waste materi
8 S 8
1- T- CO
h- S S
t5 Z ^
QQQ
ZZZ
088
iii
QQQ
ZZZ
in
isi
o> o>
•* "* ^
CM CM CVJ
WWW
O O O
13 co
mill
•£* -^* CD CD =" CO
'co co co co *co
in Q Q co Q Q
0 Z Z CO Z Z
Q Q Q Q Q Q
Z Z Z Z Z Z
Q Q Q Q Q Q
Z Z Z Z Z Z
Q Q Q Q Q Q
Z Z Z Z Z Z
U? Q Q Q Q
0 Z Z " Z Z
Q Q Q co Q Q
Z Z Z o Z Z
Q Q Q Q Q Q
Z Z Z Z Z Z
*P 5— T ^? °? 'P
CM CVJ CM CM CM CM
(3 CO C5 CD (3 O
CQ CO CD CD CO CD
,
^_:
£
c
o
jm detect!
£
ted above mir
f
Q
t5
Q
z
39
-------
detected included trans- 1,2-dichloro-ethylene, TCA, toluene, and 1,1-dichloroethylene. With
regard to metals contamination, lead was detected in five samples and only one sample
contained chromium and cadmium. An overview of the sampling and analysis program is
presented in Appendix B. A plan view of the maximum VOC contamination and soil boring
locations are given in Figure 12.
SVE OPERATIONAL HISTORY
As a result of the successful removal of VOCs demonstrated in the pilot study
conducted at Site D, a full-scale SVE system was designed and installed at Site G, Prior to
the installation of the SVE system, a low permeability soil cover was placed ;over the
VOC-contaminated area of Site G. The cover consisted of 18 inches of clay wiih a 6-in.
granular soil cover. The area to be covered was first cleared of trees and other vegetation
then graded for proper drainage. The clay layer was then installed and compacted to a
permeability of 10"8 cm/s. Finally, the soil cover was placed over the clay. The SVE system
was then installed after the cover was completed. The vents were placed through the cover
and sealed to the clay with grout to prevent leakage.
The full-scale system installed at Site G consisted of 89 air extraction vents, ranging
in depth from 32 to 54 ft bgs; an air collection manifold; four centrifugal blowers; and a
building to house the blowers and motor controls. The system installation was completed
in February 1986. The system operated for 1 wk before being shut down because of the
higher than expected VOC removal rates. The system layout, showing seven vents which
were initially operated, is presented in Figure 13. Site monitoring was conducted to
determine whether there was a health hazard onsite due to the high VOC removals. In
addition, air quality modeling was conducted to determine if a health hazard existed at a
distance from the site. Both efforts revealed no short-term hazard either onsite or offsite.
Nevertheless, it was decided to add an activated carbon vapor control to the system. This
delayed the restart of the system until September 1986. Subsequent system operations were
40
-------
0 50 100
WOODED
AREA
N
Legend
Shallow Bore
) Deep Bore
H Boring Location With Volatile
Organic Concentrations >50 PPM
Surface Contour
Woods Line
Plan View Illustration of Maximum
Extent of Volatile Organic Contamination
Requiring Remedial Action as Described
by Computer GPS Plotting
Figure 12. Extent of VOC contamination prior to remediation, Site G, TCAAP.
41
-------
E+00 A 1
D+00
C+00
H—+-H--+—h-4-
_ I I I
I" I T I T
j I
Building
—i \-
_| I
4—h-7
B+OO
A+00
Extent of Clay Cap
Legend
(•) Operational Vent
Closed Vent
0,1 Vent Identification Codes
N
Figure 13. Full-scale SVE system layout, Site G, TCAAP.
42
50 : 100
Scale In Feet
-------
periodically interrupted for carbon change out. Sixteen batches of carbon totalling 264,000
Ib of activated carbon were used for off-gas treatment. In April 1989 the activated carbon
off-gas treatment was discontinued due to the lower removal rates.
Initial removal rates for the Site G SVE system were on the order of thousands of
Ib per day. In general, the removal rate has decreased. The decrease was very sharp during
the first few months of operation and more gradual during later operations. During the first
6 mo. of 1990 the removal rate has ranged from 1 to 10 Ib per day. As of 17 May 1990,
approximately 96,668 Ib of VOCs have been removed from Site G since remediation began
in January 1986. The equations used to calculate cummulative mass removals, and mass
removal rates are presented in Appendk C.
SOIL SAMPLING METHODOLOGY
Several soil borings were installed in the Site G SVE treatment area during the
previous pretreatment site investigations. Seven post-treatment soil borings labeled GSB-01
through GSB-07 (GSB = Site G Soil Boring) were installed during this post-treatment
evaluation. An additional flag was added to the sample identification codes to denote
sample depth. An attempt was made to locate the borings where pretreatment borings were
installed. Limited drill rig access due to the vent manifold, and the steep slopes at the
boundary of Site G made it impossible to locate the post-treatment borings at the same
locations as the pretreatment borings. The soil boring locations are denoted with a triangle
in Figure 14. Figure 15 shows the locations of the post-treatment borings relative to the
pretreatment borings.
The seven soil borings were installed with a truck-mounted hollow-stem auger drill
rig using nominal 4-in. inner diameter auger flights. Upon completion of a soil boring, drill
cuttings were placed back into the bore hole and the bore hole was grouted to ground level.
In order to minimize the possibility of cross-contaminations, the auger flights were
43
-------
Extent of
Clay Cap
Legend
A Soil Boring Location
Scale in Feet
0 50 100
Figure 14. Soil boring locations, Site G, TCAAP.
44
-------
Post-treatment Boring
Pre-treatment Boring
(Total VOCs > 50 ppm)
Pre-treatment Boring
(Total VOCs < 50 ppm)
Former Maximum Extent
of VOC Contamination
j ,—
— i -
Scale in Feet
0 50 100
Figure 15. Locations of post-treatment soil borings relative to
pretreatment soil borings, Site G, TCAAP.
45
-------
decontaminated prior to use and between each soil boring. Decontamination consisted of
I
a thorough steam cleaning of all equipment that contacted the soils during drilling .activities.
A total of 24 post-treatment soil samples was collected, including six QA/QC
samples. Originally, samples were to be collected at depths of 15, 30, and 45 ft. However,
due to actual conditions in the field, such as poor sample recovery and auger refusal,
samples were collected at depths from 15 to 60 ft. Each boring was visually logged !to record
the subsurface soil profile. The boring logs are presented in Appendix G.
As with the Site D soil sampling, the soil samples from GSB-01 through GSB-07 were
collected in accordance with ASTM Method D 1586-84, with the exception that split-barrel
samplers (18 to 24 in. in length) lined with brass tubes were substituted for conventional
split-spoon samplers. After the soil boring was advanced to the desired sampling depth, the
split-barrel sampler was attached to the sampling rods and placed down the open bore hole.
The sampler was driven into the undisturbed soil by a 140-lb hammer and blow counts were
recorded. Samples were retrieved from the split-barrel by taking a brass tube arid placing
teflon liners followed by plastic caps on each end of the brass tube. The caps were then
sealed on the brass tubes with tape. The split-spoon samplers were decontaminated prior
to each sample. Decontamination consisted of a soap and water wash, followed by a water
rinse and a final deionized water rinse. This split-barrel sampling was specified for two
reasons: i
The chance of cross-contamination of the sample was minimized because the
soil never came hi contact with the split spoon or a sampling device (trowel,
scoopula, etc.)
The soil sample was not removed from the tube, so the effect of soil aeration
was minimized (reducing the loss of VOCs during sample handling).
Samples were sent to WESTON's Analytics Division Lionville, Pennsylvania,
laboratory and analyzed for TCE, TCA (EPA Method 5030/8010), and moisture content.
The above chemical compounds comprised the majority of the initial soil contamination.
46
-------
Moisture content was checked to determine the effects of the SVE system on this
parameter. In addition, duplicates of each sample were sent to the EPA RREL Laboratory
in Cincinnati, Ohio, for full VOC analysis (EPA Method 8240).
Soil and QA/QC samples were placed in coolers and maintained at 4°C for
shipment. The coolers were shipped overnight by a common courier (Federal Express) in
accordance with DOT Regulations.
RESULTS
The results of the sampling/analysis and other data gathering efforts have been
organized into two general areas: soils and operational results. The VOC concentrations
in the soils are compared to pretreatment levels. The operational results were used to
examine the system's performance.
oils
Split-spoon samples were obtained from each soil boring installed at Site G. The
number of samples collected from each boring varied because of the subsurface conditions
encountered as the borings were advanced, e.g., a tar-like layer was encountered at
approximately 25 to 30 ft in borings GSB-04 and GSB-05. When this layer was encountered,
it was not possible to advance the auger through the layer. One sample (GSB-04-20) was
collected at 20 ft in boring GSB-04, and one sample (GSB-05-15) was collected at 15 ft in
boring GSB-05. Three split-spoon samples were collected from GSB-01, GSB-02, and
GSB-03 at depths of 15, 30, and 45 ft. Split-spoon samples were collected at depths of
approximately 15, 30, 45, 50, and 60 ft at borings GSB-06 and GSB-07. The samples at
approximately 50 and 60 ft were collected in order to adjust for the samples that could not
be collected at borings GSB-04 and GSB-05. Sampling at depths of 50 and 60 ft is
reasonable at Site G because several vents extend to 55 ft. Sample GSB-07-52 was taken
at 52 ft because refusal (due to a rock) was encountered at 50 ft. Additionally, 11 QA/QC
47
-------
samples were collected, including three trip blanks, two field blanks, three field duplicates,
and three lab duplicates.
The WAL analytical results for these post-treatment soil samples are presented in
Table 6. The complete laboratory deliverables from WAL and EPA RREL are presented
in Appendices E and F. Concentrations of post-treatment total VOCs ranged from
nondetectable (samples from GSB-01, GSB-03, and GSB-07) to 0.420 mg/kg (15 ft at
GSB-02). TCE and TCA were detected at maximum concentrations of 0.420 mg/kg
(GSB-02-15) and 0.200 mg/kg (GSB-03-15 and GSB-04-20) respectively. In comparison, the
maximum concentrations of TCE and TCA in the pretreatment samples were 400 and 100
mg/kg respectively, roughly three orders of magnitude greater than after treatment
Of the -21 samples, TCE or TCA was detected in 15 samples; however, only six
samples showed concentrations above the detection limit (the other results were estimated
values). Of the six samples showing concentrations above the detection limit, all were
comprised of either a waste material or had components of silt or clay. The other samples
were generally comprised of sandy soils. This is consistent with the variability of VOC
concentrations encountered in the pre-treatment samples. This would be expected because
the volatile compounds should absorb more strongly to silts, clays, and waste materials and
would therefore be more difficult to remediate. Also, air flow through these materials
would be much less than through sandy soils. Therefore, the VOCs would be removed more
easily from the sand.
TCE and TCA were not detected in the field blanks (GSB-FB-01 and GSB-FB-02)
or the trip blanks (GSB-TB-01, GSB-TB-02, and GSB-TB-03), indicating that cross-
contamination did not occur from the sampling equipment or during sample shipping and
handling. The quality of the analytical data met the QA objective of 80% completeness for
organics (TCE and TCA, completeness = 85%). The completeness of the inorganics
(moisture content) was 67%. Although this does not meet the QA objective, these data are
still usable for qualitative comparison purposes.
48 ;
-------
Table 6. Post-treatment soil analytical results, Site G, TCAAP.
Sample ID
GSB-FB-01
GSB-TB-01
GSB-TB-02
GSB-FB-02
GSB-TB-03
GSB-01-15
GSB-01-16
GSB-01-30
GSB-01-30
GSB-01-45
GSB-02-15
GSB-02-30
GSB-02-45
GSB-03-15
GSB-03-16
GSB-03-30
GSB-03-30
GSB-03-45
GSB-04-20
GSB-05-15
GSB-06-20
GSB-06-21
GSB-06-30
GSB-06-45
GSB-06-50
GSB-06-60
GSB-07-15
GSB-07-15
GSB-07-30
GSB-07-45
GSB-07-52
GSB-07-60
Location Depth
(ft)
, GSB-01 15
15
30
45
GSB-02 15
30
45
GSB-03 15
15
30
30
45
GSB-04 20
GSB-05 15
GSB-06 20
20
30
45
50
60
GSB-07 15
30
45
52
60
TCE(1)
(ug/kg)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.5 J
ND
0.4 J
ND
420
0.3 J
0.3 J
210
200
0.8 J
0.8 J
ND
200
60
180
140
0.8 J
0.4 J
0.4 J
0.6 J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TCA (2)
-------
A summary of the RREL results are presented in Table 7. The complete laboratory
deliverable is presented in Appendices E and F. The WAL results are also presented on
this table to allow comparison of the two laboratories' results. As previously stated, the
RREL extractional and analytical methods differed from the ones used by WAL, resulting
in different detection limits. The RREL results are more reliable at higher concentrations
(above 0.100 mg/kg) while the WAL results are reliable at the lower concentrations. In
i
general, the compounds detected in the WAL analyses were below the detection limit of the
method used by RREL. TCE and TCA were detected in only one sample, GSB-06-20, at
concentrations of 132 and 10.3 mg/kg respectively. Other compounds detected in the RREL
analyses included 1,1-dichloroethane in GSB-04-20 and GSB-06-20 at 5.72 and 14.7 mg/kg
respectively, and trans-l,2-dichloroethene in GSB-04-20 and GSB-06-20 at 31.1 and 49.6
mg/kg, respectively. Again, these samples were waste materials and, as mentioned above,
may more strongly absorb contaminants or allow less air flow which would result in higher
residual contaminant levels.
An attempt was made to locate the post-treatment borings near the pretreatment
borings in an effort to support a spatial comparison of pre and post-treatment contaminant
concentrations. However, due to the difficulties of maneuvering a drill rig near the SVE
pipe manifold and the edge of the fill, it was not possible to locate the post-treatment
borings as planned.
Operations
As with Site D, the primary indicator used to measure soil treatment was the VOC
mass removal rate over time. The mass removal rate (Ib/day) is plotted against time (days
of operation) in Figure 16. The maximum daily mass removal rate, 5015 Ib/day, was
encountered on the second day of operations. Within 2 wk of operation, the mass removal
rate was below 1000 Ib/day. It must be noted that the mass removal rates were intentionally
reduced during the initial stages of operations. The removal rates were decreased by taking
a number of vents off-line (leaving only seven open) and disconnecting vents from the
50 :
-------
-li
lii
8
CT
LU ° «J
DC *T '
^g =
(3
CM
O
5 m =
(3
CM
id £ =!
DC 00 -
(a
O
2
— J CD ^
5 m =
CO
o
M
nj ii ,j
r *7 c
"I
o
-j m j
ISS
a
^-
uj ^ =!
'"I"
9
< m =!
I S =
a
a co
O
CO
1-
•z.
3
003303 :3333003=33003D03030
ginininoomininooinoinininininininininoc
330330030030033000000000
ginininogininmooinoinminininininininoo
OOOOOO3333333333OOOO3333
gininmooioininooinoinininintninioininoo
-
333333333333300003333333
ginininoointninoomomintoininininininQo
oinininoQicininoomoininininmininminoo
o '"S T--I-T- Bin
0 i
a m § c Q.
f— Q) — W Js •?• ,-i
J ^ J § SQg.2 |
•§ 1 a> 1 1 a = I1 ™ollia§-i~c.
11
TJ -2.
C P
^f P~
ir g
nj .11
DC 5
•6
o
a.
2
1
c
o
"55
•a
J-r
E
|
o
•8
E
I
'c
'E .
4_, Q) Qj
~n T3 en
0 > .«
O TD Q.
!i*
2 £ o
| =82
z m n
n n <
o ^ z
w
UJ
o
•z.
E
§
1
"°
E
3
1
E
0)
0
-a
Detected i
u
HI
0)
,c
I
" —
51
-------
in
< C3 I
O
in
TJ-
cc * c
fr? m r
13
in
• 2 01
ill
o
in
-i A 01
HI
o
ill
-!«
DC * C
^^ E
(O
_1 2 °
li *
(§
u>
i *^ tr
tii *~ 5
ft* ^* n
^S s
a
in
3 m c
w fc
a
in
T"
|j T~ V
{2
z
—}
ZJZ)ZJZJZ5Z>ZJZ>
CMt-T-i-CMCMt-T-
O O O O O O
.
Z>Z)Z)Z)Z)Z>Z}3
CMi-i-1— CMCMi-i-
O O O O O O
Z>Z)Z)Z)Z>Z>Z>Z)
CMT-T-t-CMCMi-i-
O O O O O O
ZJZ>Z>Z>Z>Z>Z)Z)
CMT-i-T-CMCMr-,-
O 0 0 0 O O
CM<— T-7-CMCMT-T-
d d d d d d
§ •§
0> o
H o -g 2
S leg
o <2 _ 3 2
j— C ^7 Q* W "Sjl
_ en
O CM
d d
o' o' d o' o" o' d d d d d o' o' o" d d o' d d d d d do
3 °
8 1
d d
~"1 "~i ~^ ^^ ~™1 ~™l ~™1 ~1 **1 *~1 "^ "^ ~"^ "~^ ~^ "^ "^ ~™t "^ ""^ ~^ ~^ ~™» ~^ *™s *^ -^
—t __r **s ^i ^ ^ ^ ^j ^j ^i _^ ^ _j ^j ^ _y _{ ^ _^ „. j ^ ^ ^ _j flfj _^j __,
d d d d d d d d d d dodo d d o* d d d d d do
-, -,
8 8
d d
o* d d d o" o' d o" d d d d d o* do" o* o* d o" o" o* o" d
-3 -3
LLJ LU
•^ 10
U^)^)^>^3^i^3^^)|^)^ ") ~ ) ~ ) ~ ) ~ ) !3 ~ "y "^) ~ ) ~ ? n? IZ >!~?~ )""?!"*?"" ?
o o* o* o* d d d o' d o* d o" d o* d d d o* d d d o* d o"
8 8
d d
•^ ^J J ^ ^J ^J J i-J — J J ^J J -J Hj ^j ^j ^D ^j ZD j j _j ^ HD H3 ID ^
oo'o'o'oddddddddo" o'ddddddd do*
Q)
g 0) S g
« 0) Q) C H. CO
S § ~fflg.2 g £ ma)
g.Cg§ffl"S5^^C\I_^QCOgofiJg |^0 "O^^ffi^S
1 111 I liSSfi-Iilfil&l s ? S 1 - - i
-c -c 9 -= -c .-9 T ^ ^ 2 "H .2 2 S 3f 2 'S ^, ^ -5 -2 r-~ T-" .g c1 c1 -2
t
£•
o
M
JS
D)
S •
It
LU ca
ll
.2 "co
t3 S
3 <
in co
:= LU
o: >
' ^
cc g
a: §
73
•c
CL
g.
*-«
£
|
0)
-S ^
£.— .
e*
~ c
S £
'•C3 O
O 0)
S t5
0) •§
73 "
1 i
1 'S
^- 0) Q) a)
to 3 s >
73 en to o
.9 -9
t3 73 "5. _
0) Q) Q. ^
Q) to ^ ^
2 E "o ^
Z m || Q
II II < II
Z> -j Z LU
CO
LU
O
z
=0
0)
c
••g
8.
52
-------
sil
CO ^
o
CO
§ m (
8
u>
j A S
<
I 9
°. LU
0 CO
3333333333
d o' o" o' o' d d d d
Z
d
c
£ 0 CD
CD c C
2 CB jS JS
o c S £
^ CD CD CD CD
If) liji.2-811
•?O 7=-;=£cO'CO
^fe -g-ggtJoS
CDi^CD£E2§-=W
C > g
CD'
"5.
CO
CO
£•
°
2
1
2
o>
£
CD
If
LU CO
= 8
« S
o •*
•*-* c
T3 ^
D?g
"co w
D?y
11 ^"
Ji II
UJ r^
DC S
or 5
S
o
Q.
£
'§
c
O
1
£
c
_o
£z
CD
T3
E
3
jc
<- CD CD
CO 3 o
T3 CO CO
is > .y
O -O CL
.2 CD CL
Sl«
o '-5 z
z LU II
» M <
3 -> Z
CO
LU
l_
O
^3
E
o
1
o
•a
£
§
-------
cvi
^f O '
tn
en
vy
o
CS
_1 to t
5 m j
(3
o
_j g a
§j
tn
-.Ss
Im'
W
in
T*
o
? en
^ "5.
o <§ 's SH S § ^
islillUlil
§S?i2SooS2-2
Illllllllli
0 2
d d
^ 00
d d
333 33 33333333333 3 333
_ .
U3 (O
0 0
d d
333333333333333333333333
o o o d d d d odd d d d d d d d d o
CM CM
d o"
333 33 33333333333333333
in-'-iflcvimtni-LOLnmioinioininioioinioiLoinm-'-in
o of":oo-r-dddd ddo'ddddd d
10 co
3 3
O O
0 0
o" d
333333333333333333333333
ooooooooooo ooooooo oo
^ -3
0 S
^ LU
O QQ
0) C
-------
a>
| l
(5
0
ii^
i E
_,? w
= 1 '
s
o
— 1 CO '
< ° ^
ift i
o
o
119
uiil
£ CO s
a
U)
, A t
< 9 ^
(3
in
JU o £l
£«1
O
ill
<§
00
ill
Is
o
-i 2 «
j 0 |
W
1—
Z
3
33333333333333333333333333333333333
o o o o d d d d o' d d d d d d d o" d d d d d d d d d d d do
3 -5
§ S
O co
^^-^^^^— ^-- — — ._ — . _ . _ . — _
d o d d d d d d o" d d d d d d d o" d d d do* o" d d o* o" d do
^ -3
^
§ s
o o o o o o o o o o d o" o* o" d o* o" o" d d o" d d d d d o* o" do
^ —f
§ S
O *3<
333333333333333333333333O3333333333
d odd d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d o' d d d o" o" d d
33333333333333333333333333333333333
CNl-T-T-CMCXjT-T-T-CMPJ-^CMl-T-T-T-^T-
d d d o" d o" d d o" d d d o' d d d d d d d o" o" d o' d d o" o" d
3 -3
is
d co
=)::3::3^=)=>^^333333333333333333333333333
d d d d d d o" d d d d d d d o" d d d o" d d d d d o' o" d d d
Q)
(DC • .
.9 CB
o 5
1 2=
DC P
|s
^ g
II
LU -J
o: s
DC •>
Q)
tr
o
Q.
£
'E
P
u
.§
s s Q-
^— E o
o S z
"^ *0 ^^
Z UJ II
11 II <
3 -r> Z
-------
_, J? c
111
to c
(3
§
-> £ °
rr" CD c
"• to e
(3
CM
-J li 5
«r o ^
5 • 0
5 m c
to fc
O
CM
ni £ 1
CC * D
rr* CQ C
tt to =
C3
in
_j J7 o
iml
to fc
(3
to
_1 jj O
^l1
o
ep
< . CDCCCCCOQ.S
ff ^ CD1^ C CCflcncDOQ-rtO
o ? •a'o? > 2o£££SS5^
lElgll|lt£Hl||s||5lg
«>g=§lii?i!lfo|g§iii~-i9^ig
Illlllllllllllllllllll!
o o
o o
o" d
rsoonrjn^rJDiDDs
oooooooo oo
13 3
o o
0 O
d d
DZJD^^rjorjDDOO
oooooooo oo
^3
CO *—
§o
0
d d
0 = D Z3 = = ^ ^ D Z3 Z3 3
oooooooo oo
3 D
r- r-
o o
0 0
d d
oooooooo oo
^ 3
T— T—
8 8
d d
1
g £ CO CD
§* 2 CD ||
.2 •= o c £ £
C O j~ Q) Q) Q) Q)
£§ gf i iia-Sf
* S 1 § IliSIS
ttsSl 2f=P §4?g 8
if I^llt-i-ll-l-I
•*5Wi--|-i-T--,-"i->>x
CD
Q.
E
(0
ra
£•
to
E
01
C
§ •
.1 -§
01 =!-
tS ffl
1|
c >-.
o "Si
|z
tr p
"" ffi
ir 5
ii >
LU -1
CC S1
EC >
-
u>
^-*
O
CL
CD
I
C
•§ ^
±f 'g
:== c
s 1
S3 O
^J "S
: 0) "D
: I £
E 3
1 -i
I 3
'c £
4-» CD CD Q
CO .3 J3 >
T3 CO CO O
f^"* •— cn
"P S- 73
— S S- CD
CD tS < -g
2 £ o s
° '« Z °>
z m ii Q
II II < II
=> -3 Z W
to
LLI
f—
5
•z.
56
-------
_ §
o
1
0.
fc
>-
o
o
1
0>
O 0-
o O
in %
o
§
CM
8
3
U)
CO
oT
0)
13
tr
o
0)
QC
co
co
ra
co
spy pAOLuay XJJDQ
57
-------
manifold to supply ambient air for dilution purposes. This was done as a precaution, to
avoid any potential health impacts, until air modeling was performed. After the
installation of the vapor treatment system, no ambient air was supplied. The total VOC
mass removal rate continued to decrease and reached a removal rate of approximately 200
Ib/day after 76 days of operation. The removal rate dropped below 50 Ib/day after 195 days
of operation. The system, as of 21 May 1990, has removed 97,727 Ib of VOCs. The mass
removal rate for the first 5 mo. of 1990 ranged from 1 to 10 Ib/day.
As with Site D, hyperbolic and logarithmic functions were used to approximate the
operational data. The equations of these lines are y=(1500-1. lx)/(l + 0.08x) and
y=2357.4-922.53*log(x) for the hyperbolic and logarithmic functions respectively. ^Although
these functions can represent the general trends seen during the SVE system operation,
these functions skew from the actual data because they are unable to simulate the sharp
decline of mass removal rates during the initial operation while still simulating the
asymptotic nature of the curve during later stages of operations. Additionally, the
operational data vary unpredictably because .of periods of inoperation and initial
l
manipulation of the operating parameters to control the mass removal rate. !
After September 1986, the Site G system was operated with a vapor treatment
system. The vapor treatment system consisted of two beds of carbon, initially containing
6,500 to 9,600 Ib of carbon. The length of tune the system was shut down for changeouts
varied greatly due to logistical factors. The carbon treatment system was deactivated in
April 1989 as the mass removal rate dropped below a level where VOC emissions would
pose any health threat. Through April 1989, a total of 248,000 Ib of carbon wa$ spent at
Site G. • . I
The estimated construction and operations costs for the Site G system are presented
in Table 8. The table shows a cost of approximately $257,000 for the installation of the
58
-------
^
*•••*'
a
3
a"
S
CO
>;
co
£
3
CO
(0
0
o
c
o
1
CD
a.
o
•o
jS«
*-
3^
^^
"E
^^ &
Description
o
c cf
O5 O
'co 'co
CD '5
-a £.
|l
^ CO
O £-
.£ o
C 3
W 'JJ
<^ c
£ 8
o
0
o
o"
I1-.
0 0
o o
o o
fe $2
CM CM
^
111
CAPITAL
System Installation
Vapor Treatment System
SUBTOTAL
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
LABOR
—i =1
CD
15
3
is> C
C O
•— ~
- c
CO 0
1 E
CD '55
"O **—
-2 w
.£ o
1 °>
CO Q.
0) £
Q co
0 0 O 0
o o & o
O_ o O O
^o" co' 01"
co co cp. cv
§o ' o o o
o o o o
<-J. o o o
p" co" co" co" o>"
>- co en co CM
CM
CD CD
-j- "5. g>
£ != ^ « •§
^ ^ =£ -^2 -£J
S 8 328
0 "^ "_
T—
CO CO
co — §)
22 III
•C -E ^ CO O
O O O O CO
O O o CO T-
S 81 §- "
o
CM"
-° ~ 9 --«
CO ^ CD CO
1 o o | H
.2 -Q w ^ 2 o g
1 1 i 1 1 1 I i ^ i
II m °l 11
w
TJ
C
co
"8 B
TJ CO
§ 8
R ]s
E '5.
O CO
0 0
CD" ^~
^ r—
. S" e= O
Cost information supplied by TCAAP
Total over operating period (2/86-5/9
Assumes 4% average annual inflatioi
for design and construction supervisi
o£i£2.
59
-------
system. This cost does not include the design or construction management of the system;
these data were not obtainable from the TCAAP records. The capital cost of implementing
the vapor control system was $213,000, bringing the total capital costs to $467,000.
Operation and maintenance (O&M) costs include labor, power, system monitoring and
carbon changeouts (removing and regenerating the spent carbon). These O&M costs
totalled $500,000 for 4 yr of operation (February 1986 through June 1990). The present
worth was calculated based on 4% inflation rate, compounded annually, and 15% design and
construction costs for the capital costs. Therefore, the total cost to apply the SVE
technology to remediate Site G in 1990 dollars would be $1,121,000. The estimated volume
of soil treated, assuming a 17-ft radius of influence for each vent, is 91,000 yd3. Treatment
costs may be expressed as dollars per yd3 of soil treated to date. For Site G, the treatment
costs are $13/yd3 of soil treated.
60
-------
SECTION 4
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The SVE systems at TCAAP were installed to remediate VOC-contaminated soils
without using the conventional remedy of excavation and removal. The purpose of this study
was to evaluate the effectiveness of the SVE technology in reducing VOC concentrations
in soils. To accomplish this, a broad comparison of pretreatment and post-treatment
conditions was made. Other components that can be used to evaluate the technology
performance including cummulative mass removals, mass removal rates, and capital and
operating and maintenance costs were also examined. The two SVE systems at TCAAP
(Site D and Site G) were selected for this study because pretreatment site characterization
and operational data were available, the systems had been in operation for several years,
and the owners/operators of the site were willing to participate in the project.
Soil samples collected during the 1984 remedial investigation revealed high
concentrations of VOCs, primarily trichloroethylene (TCE) and trichloroethane (TCA), at
both sites. Site D primarily received VOC-contaminated liquid wastes, and the native soils
at the site consist of highly permeable sands. The conditions at Site G consist of .more
variable silty clays, sandy soils and waste material. This site was operated as a landfill which
received various solid wastes from the plant. The SVE system at TCAAP Site D, has been
in operation since January 1986 and the ISV system at Site G has been in operation since
February 1986.
61
-------
The following conclusions can be made from the results of the technical evaluation
and the soil sampling and the operational information which were collected for the sites:
1. SVE treatment at both Site D and Site G effected significant treatment.
Comparison of pretreatment and post-treatment data shows that TCE and
TCA concentrations have decreased by several orders of magnitude in both
sites. However, the residual concentrations of TCE and TCA varied at each
site due to different soil conditions.
2. At Site D, which consisted of a uniform sand, most of the soils have non-
detectable TCE and TCA concentrations (16 of 21 samples), with a highest
detected concentration of 0.029 mg/kg TCE. Prior to treatment, the highest
concentration of TCE was 7.000 mg/kg. Similar results were noted for TCA,
where the highest post-treatment concentration was 0.0008 mg/kg (an
estimated value), and the highest pretreatment concentration was 1,000
mg/kg.
3. At Site G, which consisted of a more variable strata including sands, clays,
and waste material, the residual concentrations of TCE and TCA were more
variable. TCE and TCA concentrations were below the detection limit in 15
of 21 samples, with maximum concentrations of 0.420 mg/kg and 0.200 mg/kg,
respectively. Prior to treatment, the highest detected concentration of TCE
was 400 mg/kg, and the highest concentration of TCA was 100 mg/kg. All
of the samples showing maximum concentrations (both pretreatment and
post-treatment) were taken from waste material. The higher residual TCE
and TCA concentrations that were found in the waste material and clays at
Site G may indicate that:
• The less permeable materials or materials with a higher organic
content tend to absorb or retain the contaminants to a grea.ter
degree than the sands.
• The air flow through the sands is greater; therefore, the
contaminants are removed from them more readily.
Site G is still operating and residual levels may decrease further with time.
4. The mass removal rate for VOCs varies significantly over time. Initially, the
mass removal rate is very high, but within days it decreases rapidly and,
shortly within a few months, reaches levels that are one-tenth of the initial
rates. This has important implications for the design of air emissions
treatment units for SVE systems. An emissions treatment unit sized for the
initial mass removal rates would be completely oversized for the majority of
62 ;
-------
the systems' operational lifetime, while a unit sized for the later low removal
rates could not handle the initial removals.
5. The Site D system removed a total of 108,460 Ib of solvents between January
1986 and May 1990 at an estimated present worth total cost of $573,000 or
$17/yd3 soil ($5.28/lb VOC) treated, for costs incurred as of May 1990. Air
emission controls were not required for the Site D system.
6. The Site G system removed a total of 98, 727 Ib of solvents between February
1986 and May 1990.
The Site G soils have been treated at an estimated present worth total cost
of $1,121,000 or $13/yd3 soil ($11.35/lb VOC) treated, for costs incurred,as
of May 1990. Air emission controls were implemented at Site G.
7. Treatment costs for other sites will depend upon:
• Site size and areal extent.
• Regulatory requirements for approvals, design, permitting and
operations.
• Air emission controls.
• Site and chemical specific conditions.
• Site cleanup criteria.
Treatment costs for other sites will likely be higher due to stricter regulatory
requirements, more detailed design requirements, and more emissions
monitoring requirements. Therefore, treatment costs for other sites should
be evaluated on a site-by-site basis.
63
-------
64
-------
APPENDIX A
SOIL ANALYTICAL RESULTS PRIOR TO TREATMENT, SITE D
a
^
o
i-
a~
0)
55
£
3
(0
2
8
!.
CO
c
<0
»
'o
(0
0)
to
2
OL
^
,x
c
0)
a.
Q.
s^s «
1 2«
O fl)
£ 7>
o f r
•E « •*
H *
O
— ra
"7 f «
T O
5. s =
o
E
2 :
o ^
£
U
0)
A-
lf !
,2 o -S
O
•o
§'
d> *->
J^
t
^ ^
A
T-
i S -
2 I .J
5 |"3
T™
J 1 oi
l-o S
15~
a
|e
9
O)
2
i
QOQQ
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiisiiiiiii iiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiii
§
CO
w
CO
o'
00 CM
0 O
U}
o
CQ
d
00
d
CO CD
d d
CO Q)
o^ i
f 8 .i
P S 5 o
•B oc < g
« § ^o •§
11 is i
o g §3 S
'S Q I « Q
op. n
a ffi a
uj g uj
11
Q
65
-------
^
c
0
^
s
'"5
a.
•a
— jj M -~
i2| > 1
6 o
o g S
||1
o
± g
311
;•• s
0
§
o •=
*•• Q:
8 'S
IE "~
O
o
A|
111
0
•D
1
2
.2 o —
S^^
° "
T~
O ®
ill
3 £ S
T"
S«~
^>, **- "§
P- rO O)
1 5s
•-
j
.|g
Q
c
o
m
Q Q
z z
Q Q
Z Z
Q Q
Z Z
Q Q
Z Z
Q Q
Z Z
Q Q
Z Z
Q Q
Z Z
Q Q
Z Z
O O
DC DC
LU LU
in
m V
-* m
cri
CO CO
CO CO
z z
CM
10
§
8
Q
CM
Q
Q
Z
Q
Z
C3
DC
11!
CD
in
Tt
CO
Z
in Q § 8 8 p Q Q Q Q „,
o'Z'glSco^'*22221"
inaSSSo^QQQQQ
°t»-COCO ZZZZZ
aaSggaaaaaaa
QaaaQQaaaaaa
zzzzzzzzzzzz
iisiziiiiii"
QQgaaaaaaaaa
ZZZZZZZZZZZZ
QQQQQQQQQQQQ
ZZZZZZZZZZZZ
QQQQQQQQQQQQ
ZZZZZZZZZZZZ
DcccaroroccccrcrccocDCQ:
LULULULUHILULULULULULULU
«>. £ „, "* «». _ u>. «>. „ _ 2 to.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZ
s
^
8
CM
Q
Z
§
Q
Z
Q
Z
Q
Z
DC
LU
in
CO
Z
Q
Z
Q
Q
Q
Z
i
Q
Z
Q
Z
Q
Z
or
LU
i
0
•
z
Q
z
Q
Q
Q
Z
i
Q
Z
Q
Z
Q
•^
cc
LU
in
0
•
Z
Q
Q
Q
Z
-
Q
Z
Q
Z
Q
Z
CC
LU
i
1_
i
Z
Q
Z
Q
Q
Q
Z
i
Q
Z
Q
Q
Z
DC
LU
S
T_
•
z
Q Q Q Q Q 0 to
Z Z Z Z Z ^
Q Q Q Q Q g 0
Q Q Q Q Q g o
Q Q Q Q Q Q ,.,
Z Z Z Z Z Z w
Q Q Q Q Q c> f*.
£Z£ ^ « -Z£ ^ ~ LQ
Q Q Q Q Q Q Q
Z .Z Z Z Z Z Z
Q Q Q Q Q Q ..
Z Z Z Z Z Z ^
Q Q Q Q Q Q ,,,
Z Z Z Z Z Z "
z z
a a o a a 2 2
DC tr DC EC DC fc m
LU LU LU LU LU LU LU
5 5
in "? in in
>»' in "°. ^t in ^ in
cri 22 cri cri
CM CM CM CO CO
11111 C/D (/)
Z Z Z Z Z a Q
T3
m
O m O > J»
f Q "5 II S
O -?• C -?• ^,
"m rt LU n O
a2 n P i
m CO a CO II
DC y DC !±! Q
LU 5 LU 3 Z
66
-------
o jg o
-
2
o
o>
Q.
a.
i-^ —
O
O
a
2 o
I.
J= £ •?
Q \0 ^*-
5 «
o
ili
51" =
a>
•o
s _
0)
1
m
iiiiiii-iiiiiiiiiigiiiiiiii
C\l CV1 CO CO
C\IC\IC\1C\1C\1CMC\1C\1C\1
00 CM
O 0
U)
o
co
o
00
0
CO CD
0 0
•2
E
1 '•§
(0
II
si
ra 5.
|1
?g
E
ntin
w S
-III T;
E
c
ted above
5
0)
a
ii
Q
67
-------
a
p"
1=
o
<
.£
•D
C
CD
Q.
0.
•a
5 15
o GJ
H* ©
O
0
_0
jaa
o
£
if
,jr
*"
A.
V
£•
SH
H
g
_o
Q
^-t
T"
Q
|
Jj
Q
T*1
I
£
J!
mil
Xl
(U
_l
£
cu
&
o •§
o §>
> 5.
CO
J 5
>* u)
£ 3
« ^
is •§
o S^
J> —
u
=5
!"&
o <5-
c -^
If
£ •££
o
i«
— §
o """
g
o
o>
_c
Q
m
t~
•
OQQOOQQQQO^OopQoQSg
{2 21 ^Z, ^SL tfSt
m
6
CO
Q
Z
a
z
o
z
a
z
Q
Z
Q
Z
0
Q
Z
CD
CC
LLJ
in
CM
in
cri
in
§
Q
Z
o
z
o
z
Q
Z
Q
Z
o
z
Q
Q
Z
CD
CC
LLJ
in
S
V
in
S'
in
§
Q
Z
Q
Z
Q
Z
O
z
o
z
o
a
Q
z
CD
CC
LLJ
in
in
§
in
6
TJ. :
o' *~ ,
co :
o
CO CM
0 0 '
in
c> *~
:
co ;
o
CO
o
CO 8 . 1 £3 §
.is ' 1^ 1
t3 O | •> 11 Q
IP if | 1
(Tj CO ' CD CO
g LU ' £ UJ Q
UJ 5 LU S Z
68
-------
APPENDIX B
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PROGRAM FOR SOIL BORINGS
PRIOR TO TREATMENT, SITE D AND SITE G
Drilling of soil borings at the TCAAP site began on 12 January 1984 and was
completed on 22 February 1984.
All soil borings were completed using 4-in. dry hollow stem augers. The auger stems
were decontaminated prior to each boring by cleaning with steam. Two drilling rigs were
utilized in completing the shallow (10 ft and 20 ft) borings at the site. All deep borings (50
ft or more) were completed using the truck-mounted CME-75 rig.
Sample collection was accomplished by using a 1.5 ft to 2-ft split-spoon sampler. The
split-spoon samplers were driven by a standard 140-lb hammer, and the blow counts were
recorded on the drilling logs. Each sampler was decontaminated prior to use by washing
with hexane, followed by a water rinse. Carbon-filtered water from the TCAAP water
treatment plant was used for spoon rinsing.
Samples for chemical analyses were taken along the entire length of the sample
recovered with a decontaminated steel spoon and placed into appropriately prepared sample
bottles. Three bottles were used for sample collection. These included one 40-mL glass
septum bottle with a screw-cap (Environmental Research Group analysis), a glass septum
bottle with an aluminum crimp-top cap (WESTON analyses) for volatile organic analyses,
and a 2-liter brown glass jar for all other analyses on composite samples. One septum bottle
was filled approximately one-third full for WESTON head space analysis. The bottles
69
-------
assigned to ERG for liquid/liquid extraction analysis were filled completely. Each bottle
was labeled with the boring number, sample number, sampling interval, and date.
The analytical program for the TCAAP soil and groundwater samples was* performed
using two USATHAMA certified laboratories, the Environmental Research Group (ERG)
in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and WESTON in West Chester, Pennsylvania.. In order to
expedite analytical performance and to minimize the time required for field sampling efforts,
the soil boring samples were split between the two laboratories for analysis. Both
laboratories initiated an analytical program which paralleled the one incorporated during
previous Phase n soil and groundwater sampling performed by Soil Testing Service (STS).
Four analytical categories were incorporated for the specific soil samples and waste
composite samples collected during the field investigations program. These included:
Category 1: Volatile organic analyses of all soil and groundwater samples
through the "head space" method by WESTON, USATHAMA Method 2J for
soil and for water, the "water extraction" method by ERG. The samples were
screened using gas chromatography (GC) for nine specific volatile organic
compounds (analytes), which included:
Methylene chloride
1,1-Dichloroethylene
1,1-Dichloroethane :
Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene
Chloroform
1,1,1-Trichloroethane •
Carbon tetrachloride
Trichloroethylene
Tetrachloroethylene
Category 2: Analysis of all groundwater and only composite soil samples for
cyanides (WESTON used USATHAMA method 9E). j
70
-------
• Category 3: Metals analysis of all groundwater and only composite soil
samples using USATHAMA methods 3U and 2D. The specific metal
compounds (analytes) included:
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Zinc
• Category 4: Deleted from TCAAP analytical program in August 1983, since
no method for tetracene was developed.
• Category 5: Organic priority pollutant screening of groundwater and only
composite soil samples using gas chromatography, mass spectroscopy
(GC/MS). In addition to GC/MS analysis, HPLC and GCEC methods were
used. The analyses included:
Base Neutral Organics (USATHAMA method 9G)
Pesticides/PCBs (USATHAMA method 9F)
Phenolics (USATHAMA method 9K)
71
-------
72
-------
APPENDIX C
MASS REMOVAL RATE AND CUMULATIVE MASS REMOVAL EQUATIONS
Mass Removal Rate:
! , 144()= , J_f *
™ 454^
where: M = Mass removal rate in Ib per day
Cppm = Concentration in parts per million (ppm)
MW = Molecular weight
MV = Molecular volume
Q = Air flow rate in ft3 per minute
Cumulate Mass Removal:
Mc (Ib) = SM (Ib/day) x T (days)
where: Mc = Cumulative mass removal in Ib
M = Mass removal rate in Ib per day
T = Time in days
73
-------
74
-------
APPENDIX D
DIT'E D BORING LOGS
s
in
. o
z 5J o
>-< "71 oo
co •" •
ricM1
SoS
CO
ca
o
o
UJ C
CO O
3,1
o> en
CM CM
LO in *
i
1
5!
co cj
CD CO I
,g
J_ _.
O 2
a;
U1
i CD en
>-i O
o: --3
IS
O _l '
>-
0 CJ
o c-
m m
»3J« fc-i.
o
•p
CO B
fl
C
!'
O O
-M O
1C C
1
C- II
CO CJ
1
0-1 1
OJ-U
1 «
1 C
1 «
O-
1l
_i
t- S3
O 3
8.2
o; CD
c c
o o
£ g
« CO
at a
O- CO
ai
ID 0)
CO Z
«- g
o •»-
4-* >
a. a>
O UJ
Q.
IQ d
CO 31
(- c:
cu -^-
4-*
0) 4-»
E ta u.
o cu co
t- h- i—
4-1
i a
> O "O U-
OJ S- C
0£ CU T
CO
t
. ,
CD [ *
u_
CO
CM
CO
*
O
I—
g
t-
u_
o_
1 '
•5 2-
|Ti
0 ^
0) -M
c -^
i-S
£ S
ca a>
CO
"*
.0
O)
o
«3
1
1
at u
09
« ^>
«5 CO V
- 1
-M -fJ — 1
3 •— Z
-Q f-
n -
1 CD
S 2 S"
1
1
*^
^
CM
*^
1
CO
CO
^
•"*
CO
CO
o
•—1
^-1
«
oJ
•—1
CO
"*
in
en
v-4
0
-
a_
CO CO
01
CO r~
(
•«- 1
to cr
O 0)
C r-
4
-
CO
i
OL-
IO
1
CO
^^
z
m CM
O 0
CM in
CJi CV
CO 0
CO
CO
o
«— 1
CO
LO
a>
CM
CO
4-»
5
1
O
1
c/
1
1
^J
z
CO
«"•
^J,
^
*— *
«— 1
»— 1
CO
CO
o
CO
co
lf>
CO
-3-
<
^
**"
<
4
a
o
CO
CO
ea
JC
u
75
-------
a- o ».
UJ
CO C
=3 O
UJ
_ I
o
g
CO
I—
CO
: O to CM
o; t»- en
erf . .
UJ Of O O
_1 UJ Z Z
I O.
•-i _l tD CO
X +•>
91 V>
O 13
f~~ C
T:^
0 0
en ~»
o c— a> -^ o» o»
> •— c c ••
0) r— -^- -r- C
» W _J •»• •— t- O
rf « « t- CL O ••-
i— 0) M CQECO-M
-^ c c •-• S a;
v) *O ^~ O 91^ ft) CL
S'jE^Jc S !E Ti
-M 0
£ S
4-> -C
CO U
J'
°r
i
Ou
ac -C
4-*
OI
C
-1
TO
s i
u u
a> •—
a: co
c c
•2 g
-u o
id co
01 •—
c < —
0) o
O- CO
O)
tJC
0)
co ac
c
I- O
o •—
.E 10
O. 0)
CD UJ
01
a.
ra o
CO Z
ometer
s-
o
S
C£
Zo
.
CO
•
CO
.
CO
o
1—
t-
u.
c
en u.
01 CO
*~ *~
01
0>
TO LL.
(U -
t
t
.
4J
U.
CM
1
i
0)
r—
*j
E r—
^+J-
s ^
in
S.
0) +J 0-
C +J CO
ijl ^ ^
§- 0)
T3 >
t, 5 £
co cn cn
CO
in
cn
o
i
i
03
V
•*» CO
ja i
•M
i •—
|J
00 O
I
'
^
""*
1
(v»
CD
00
CO
o
1— t
*— t
in
cn
,
«— i
3
in
i-H
C3
•—I
•—I
z
1
0)
CO
t
0.
1
n
to
1
1
01
o
CO
CO
CO
CM
CM
CO
t~4
CO
CO
in
*— i
CM
If)
*~*
.
CM
in
01
CM
if)
CM
§
J) +J
" "o *
4->
119 - 3
o o
o • t-
C — I Ol
-Q «
CO 0)
1 O "O O
LU ^0) «
oo co H-
-------
. o
= 2 •
« J. «•«.
S-s
CO
t—
•a:
CM CM
in in
a
UJ
C3 I—
UJ UJ
CO CJ
I
CO CD I
O
z:
o
z
. a?
in CM
. t^ CT>
o co
*-« o
or •-}
0> 1
CJ I
f '- - :•'
^^
a
o f- a> ^ ra ra
i 8) •— -- — C
1 (4 10 )-»-i — i-O
«) ca t- a. o -^
j-r- a) o> cog m -M -p
f- c c i-< «3 a) 5
C Oji! J^ ffltO !-•—*>
Q o i— >— iH t— cj 3r « to
g
•il-
CO „
)
>
o
•0 U
-M e
K) C
n
t. a
CO CJ
Q- f
O *•
a
c
a
t- c
01 i-
1 +j
: e « u_
1 O Ol CO
0-5-1—1—
a. -c
c
c
a
"S „
8 1
rv CC
c: c
o c
••- c
•M O
10 cr
t.
•M -1-1
C <—
01 C
o, cr
01
c
: ^ |
) O ~O U_
o 01
a) i- c
CK O) -^
!o f
t
CO •+->
u_
s
CO
eg
: 4
CO
4.
^ "o
o- J=
E -*-1
c
I- O
0 -2
•g to
a. a
C3 UJ
_»
a o
CO Z
^-
U.
|
JQ - 9)
C C J->
01 « *J
0. I 1
« »-
O.T3 -M
•— O <°
O +» 41 •—
•— 01
- 01 -M >
O C •!-> US
• f- -r- S.
TH "t- •— 01
3
LO
en
o
1
O-
co
CO
i
i
ir>
CO
CO
CO
o
•"*
t— (
m
en
*~*
CO
LO
CD
•-*
O
«— 1
4J
"I~ 3P
V) jF^
r co
•-< E
4.3
o
> i-
£ o
01 a>
o "ia
1 U E
S>
-------
in
o
•a-
oi
J
I
CO CO
CO CO
I I I
o
Of C£ U.
C3 O U-
UJ Q£ O O
d£zz
i~« _J O CO
£«J
fc. •*-
O -J
r— ^
r— o
0
*S.ti
*S
a
a cu
->-• cn
t- ia
CO CJ
^
II
J.
1-
1 a>
T «
0 *
&? CO
0 0
£ g
-!-> 0
O. CU
Q UJ
a)
r—
CO Z
o
r- 0>
oi
n o
I"
S « co
»- I— i—
4-*
1 CU
> flj
O 13 U.
0 »
CU t- C
ce « —
fn »
t
CD JJ
CD
CNJ
S ^
10 .
I
,2
ifc
: i
M
g 5
^
^g 3
0-
co
g '
Ji> "c
C 0)
.S |
CL-O
>> o
O 0) «
to «t- E
S
m
o
1
cn
Ef f
t- a. o
o g co
cu co t-
2"c £
S ,
-O
>,
«-
£
a.
CO
g
«.
g
1
1
O)
CSJ
01
CO
CO
0
rt
in
cn
CSJ
.
co
"2
^z
jl
^
XI
-T3
O «
• •«->
CO O
CO TD
O C
78
-------
QJ +j - o
i to in ~o oj
f-t-r~-.cs-
M-
-B O 3 O- «
S •* •
: 2 o
• "* oo
•-< o =s
CO
a:
o
"o
UJ
«« T
inmog
I I I O
i
a
UJ
a i—
UJ UJ
ggt
CO CO O
I I 1 I
oi • -
UJ Of O O
—I LU -E 3C
_j a.
«—( i tj oO
gill )_« «•""}
a: o: -3
cu *
O —
^1
0 U
» i .'••-; -'
01
o c- o> ••- cn cn
> r~* C C ••
• •' •• 4) r«> •*— >v» rr-
« M _1 — •— i- O
« m f- Q. o •*-
f — 0) 0> CO^OQ-M
•»- c c •-• 3 a
o jt j* at co i. i— •
« o •— o cB^- a»g.
I— -1— U. )— O 3e r—
O UJ
,2
1" 0
co 2:
1
to
I
CO
CO
CO
0
i-£
t
t
•M
CsJ
4
1
U-
•
5
s
a> 1
n. S r—
IO t- CU
O T3 >
s-1!
•— o
O -n 0)
(D 4-"
0 C +J
*-l t4_ i —
O
i— i
CO
.n
r~-
c=
o
^
JJ T- p.
* — co
C^ 1
on i
^ 1 "si
"~*
CL.
CO
.
§ 'o
•*- >
S= Ol
O •)
«5 >,
c •»- s-
cij,
o c -»-
s- id «
CD « <*-
o
•—I
CO CO
•< CO
m ca
Ol •-!
^-« CM
co to
t— * •— 1
CM
CO
m
01
CvJ
CO
OJ
CL.
CO
w
co
CJ
*— 1
CSJ
CO
CSJ
CO
*— 1
CO
CO
CO
CO
in
CSl
co
if
a
4;
to
"C
(t
o«
•— t «~~
«£
g S
UJ CC
79
-------
•• T3
. o
i
CO CO
LT> ir> i
CO O
CO CD
o;
CD
8
r-*
cn
X 4-»
V tn
t- -r-
O — 1
^ s
t- _c
a o
c
4! 4J
a
«s ea
4-1 CT
« c
-&.S
CO CJ
Q- 1
C
0)
O.
i c- a) ~- cn 01
> •— c c ••
0) •— •<- •»- C
M CO — 1 ••- « — t. O
cn cn t- a. o •*-
^•- C c >-« a _« -'-t34-»g"O
h-t-U.1- CJ3« «tO«J
i
i- C
eu —
4-1
m 4_i
E cn LL.
5 cu co
1-c i a)
-M > o
a. co
cn
10 a
co a:
t- o
o •»-
4-» >
OL OJ
a uj
a>
t -
a o
CO Z
fV* Q} ^~
— *
CD T
t
S
CD 4->
U.
-
CD
C\J
CD
i
^_
„
Lu
i
2 ' 4-1
-Q O- CU
"O co O 2
C C 4->
CU IO 1 1
jS cn cu
•*"" e *«> -S lo
o. 3 > o c
>> £ o
«J
o
£
4-1
^
>»
r— 03
0 "o
x i
•r- O
09
§-a
c
t- «o
co cn
tn
cn"
i
*-«
i
i
fs^
o
CO
CO
CO
o
«-H
«-*
tn
a>
•— <
•o
c
tn i
§CL.
CO
T3 1
V
° £
0) Dl
^
4->
C -M -M
I- "*««. Q
co 3: £
o
«— 1
CO
•*
IO
C7>
•— t
.O
«— f
"*
^j
M
i
i
o.
1
fi
CO
^.
^
*.
1
i
o
CVJ
O)
CO
CO
CO
C3
.— 1
CsJ
in
cn
*-*
CM
*a
r~
,»_
4J til
M J^
il
O CD
Q. • 4->
CO -H 3
CO O
m a Ol
(5 o c
CO LU IO
^ ,
^
in
•—1
1
1
o
•-4
CO
CO
a
LO
cn
CM
o
CM
80
-------
o a.
uj «£
CO 3
o o
(*3 CO
in m o
i i i
a
LU
Q I—
UJ UJ
o
gcu u.
o u.
OO CQ O ,
o tf> cj
o^ r^ en
£«; • •
UJ otS O O
_l UJ Z Z
—I CX
•-« _l CD CO
01 UJ >-t O
Q 3C a; --3
s +
O _J
.
-
•— o
•r- 0}
C. JC
0 U
r -1 S '
•<
Z
Ol
i — C ••
O C- 4) -^ Ol Ol
«•—•»- »- c
« eo _j •»- •— u o
0} «) t. O. O **-
r- 0) 0) C O E OQ 4-= -O
— c c •-• B a> o
coor— 0 «•— CU "o. 3
o-E---jS n IE c £S(-
t— K-U.I— t_) ^ «
a
c
t-
0]
*•
«L,
|4-> >
1 01 0
11= U
1 0) 0)
•o
c- W
0 3
O G
93 • —
C£ CO
C C
o o
BJ
C •—
OL r—
O UJ
a:
.
CO
.
CD
to
CO
O
1 —
c
4->
Ifi U.
0) CO
1— 1—
4-1
1)
-a uf
c. C
0) --
t
t
^
1 1
CO
i
i
U
u.
to o
CO =
C 4J
-Q C E
C 0> -
« •— .
4J 3 >
•»- «
to v en '
o t=
«"5 4J
* — 4-*
O
C >!
4-1 t-
-O <0
-------
82
-------
APPENDIX E
WESTON ANALYTICS SOIL BORING ANALYTICAL DELIVERABLE
SITE D AND SITE G
WESTON Analytics - Dedicated Lab
CLIENT
RFW #
W.0.#
OHMSETT TCAAP
8905L216
3189-03-13-0000
DATA QUALIFIER
The following qualifiers are used on the data summary:
U - Indicates that the compound was analyzed for but not
detected. The minimum detection limit for the sample (not
the method detection limit) is reported with the U
(e.g., 10U).
J - Indicates an estimated value. This flag is used in
cases where a target analyte is detected at a level less
than the lower quantification level. If the limit of
quantification is 10 ug/L and a concentration of 3 uq/L is
calculated, it is reported as 3J.
BS - Indicates blank spike in which reagent grade water is
spiked with the CLP matrix spiking solutions and carried
through all the steps in the method. Spike recoveries are
reported.
BSD - Indicates blank spike duplicate.
MS - Indicates matrix spike.
MSD - Indicates matrix spike duplicate.
DL - Indicates that surrogate recoveries were not obtained
because the extract had to be diluted for analysis.
NA - Not applicable.
DF - Dilution .factor.
NR - Not required.
I - Interference.
i Mr
J. Michclei iaylor D7TTE
Project Director
Lionville Analytical Laboratory
83
-------
CO
r— 1
»—
>•"
_1
r—
CJ
10
I-H
CM
_l
to
0
cn
CO
**
s_
.s
E
ZJ
Z
-C
(J
at
CO
3
LL.
as
LO «3-
CO O
r-H CD
O
1
CO
CO
a
o
CM O
r-l CO
O E
1
CQ CO
CO O
Q 0
O
CM
r-H CO
o s:
i
CO CO
CO O
O 0
o co
CM CD
r-l O
o
CQ
CO
a
i-H CM
•— ( CD
r-l O
O
1
ca
CO
o
r— t i-H
0 0
I-H O
o
1
CO
CO
a
O=*te
r— 1 3E
1 *
4-> a:
t/>
3
U
CO
1,
of
CO
_J
r— 1
O
CO
,^J
t-H
o
CO
I
r— 1
O
CO
_l
H— 1
O
CO
_l
r-H
O
CO
1
H-H
O
CO
X
•r—
s-
4^J
eO
z:
CJ
o
r*
•fj
ra
i.
o
c
-H
r-l CD
\
CD
•-H CD
sx
\
CD
f"*H
fH CD
S/f
"N^
CD
*~^
»-H CD
^rt^
*X^
CD
r-H CD
sx
^^^
CD
r-H CD
CD
•
U- 4->
O *C
=>
r_
(4»
II
II
II
. II
II
11
II
II
II
r— .
14-
II
II
II
11
II
II
II
II
It
r—
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
f4_
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
l*j-
||
||
|j
j|
||
||
||
||
pH
t[
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
It
11
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
||
II
II
II
||
U
II
II
II
II
II
11
II
II
II
II
II
It
II
II
II
II
II
II
&5
•(J-
CO
^5
cn
^D
SS
CO
to
^5
r-H
r»>.
as
CO
10
&S
h~
CO
CO
c
ca
-C
a>
0
s-
o
^^
u
o
o
CQ
CO
CO i.
en
i- O
&- u
3 Q)
CO O£
r—
•+.
II
II
II
II
||
II
II
II
r— •
ti-
ll
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
lt_
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
It
'[
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
||
**J-
II
||
II
||
jj
I)
||
||
*t
||
II
II
||
II
||
II
||
II
II
II
II
It
II
II
II
||
II
jj
II
II
It
jj
||
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
• =3 n
r-H r-
SS fe1
o c
IO l£
ss ^
CM C
IO l£
— ^
r-H «J
=> >-s
r-H f«.
O
— ^
r-H r—
CO
c
_i
I-H O r-l
CO O O
O CO
1
CQ
CO
a
r-l CO — 1
CO O r-H
CM 0 O
CD CO
i
CQ
CO
O
CD 1 — 1
co o •— i
CM O O
O CO
1
CQ
CO
o
CD CO —I
CM O r-H
CM O O
o co
1
CQ
CO
o
o to _i
r— 1 O r— 1
CM O O
o co
1
ca
CO
o
• • • • • •
a =»*= x
r— 1 3 >r—
U_ i-
4-9 Q£ 4-^
V> . CO
3 Z
O
g^
0
•r—
4->
CO
a> E
r— ^
Q. 0
E M-
re c
CO •— i
LTI
n
i— i CD II
^ II
\ II
CD II
=3 II
II
II
II
II
"H CD II
Ski II
\ II
CD II
=) II
II
II
II
II
r-l CD II
^ II
^^ II
CD II
Z3 II
II
II
II
II
i— I CD II
±£ II
^^ II
CD II
2 II
11
II
II
[*Z
II
r-l CD II
^ II
CD II
=> II
II
II
II
cjl
II
r-l CD II
**S ||
•^v II
CD II
=3 II
II
II
II
II
• • • • II
• V) II
Ll_ +•> II
• •!- II
O C II
=3 II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
||
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
ss
CM
CO
ss
o
CO
ss
CO
CO
&s
IUO
CO
ss
o
cr>
&s
'
CD
CO
CO
CO
-C
CO
- E
o
i.
o
;»
J^
u
jjjZ
0
s-
CQ
ss
CO
4^ ^>
CO i-
en cu
o >
S~ 0
i. U
•s a>
CO CrT
tH •=> -
i!
II r-H r-
II
II
1
II
II
II
II
Zr- Z3 =
II
II r-H I-
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II r-H i—
II
II
II
II
II
II
II;
fi *-^ ^— .
ii
n "~
n
n
u
n
n
ir
C ID
II
ii r— i cn
II CSJ
n
II
n
n
"I
M,
<£• <-3
II
II CO CM
II •
II O
II
II
III
II
II,
II
II
II
II
II
II i
M:
n
H
"i
n
it
II
II:
u ; co
II C
II CO
II ' i ^
n: co
n ; o eo
n s- c
it i o co
II |r— -C
II ' U CO
II -r- O
II i. i.
II 1— O
111 1 r—
II r-H .E
II ~ O
II . i— 1 •I'-
ll •> S-
II r-H |—
84
-------
II
II CM
II
II ••
II d)
II D)
II tO
II 0-
II
II
H
II
II
H
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
H
II
II
11
||
II
OO II
OO OH
0>- 2 II
I-H or :s n o_
H- - s: o- u <£
— i s z: no
< => o it i—
Z II •!->
II C
II CO
II -I'-
ll r--
11 0
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II 10
H «-H
II CM
U —J
II in
II 0
ii en
II CO
n
n ••
II S_
II CD
II -Q
II E
II 3
II Z
II
»— _
J^
II O
II •»->
II to
II QO
II
II ^B
II U_
II OH
^—
II
O to — 1 I-H CD II
CO •-« 1— 1 ^ II
•<*• o o \ ii
O OO CD H
• Z3 II
CO II
00 ||
0 II
tj
II
-H "«3- _l I-H O II
CM I-H I-H ^ II
•* 0 0 \ II
o oo on
i => ii
CO II
00 ||
0 II
51
O CO _l i— I CD II
CM f-H I-H i^ jj
•«f O O \ H
O OO CD II
' Z3 II
QQ ||
00 ||
0 II
ti-
ll
O CM — 1 f-H CD H
i-H f— -I I-H ^ jj
•«*• o o \ ii
O OO O II
00 = U
00
0 ||
II
«<»• _l I-H CD II
OO Q- I-H xy. jj
PO ^ O \ II
O Q OO CD II
1 O II
00 f-H ||
00 I-H ||
QO ||
U
<<*• I-H _J f-H CD H
CO f-H I-H iX. ||
CO 0 O \ II
O OO O II
1 13 II
CO
00 ||
Q II
II
• • •• •• •• •• II
O =tte X • 00 ||
U_ £ • -r- ||
•0-* OH -4-* f**^ C. jj
«/> « =1 II
=> z: ii
0 II
II
II
II
H
||
II
H
II
II
II
jj
II
II
II
II
||
§ !!
•i~ n
•«-> H
* n
CO S II
•— s- ii
• — O ||
E t- ||
« C ||
00 f-H ||
as
^-
CO
Jfctt
00
s§
esj
^^
°
10
00
as
CO
en
as
en
CO
CO
c
(O
CD
^=
O
z_
o
u
0
o
QQ
as
CO
to i.
O) CO
o >
S- 0
S- U
3 CO
OO OH
II
II I-H f
II
II
jj
II
jj
jj
II
tl^ _•>, _
H
II f-H f-
jj
jj
jj
jj
jj
jj
II
O— ^-» —
H
II •— i i-
jj
ii
ji
jj
ii
u
n
f . -_ _
u
II I-H f—
II
jj
II
||
||
J|
||
||
H f-H •—
II
II
H
II
II
II
II
51 =3-ZJ
II f-H f-H
II
jj
jj
jj
jj
|J
||
||
jj
II
jj
||
jj
II
||
II
ii
H
11
ii
II CO
ii f—
II tO
II J=
II 1 "*
II CO
II 0 CO
H S- C
H O CO
jj f—* t—
II JZ •»->
II U CO
II -r- 0
II S- S-
II (— 0
II 1 r-
II f-H -C
II " (J
II f-H •!—
II - S-
II f-l (—
II
O — J f-H O II
CO O_ i— i •*/ ii
i« 3 O "^11
O O CO CD II
1 o II
COCO II
•00 -H ||
Q o ii
51
II
O OO — 1 •— i CD II
CO I-H f-H ^S ||
moo \ ii
O OO CD II
1 3 II
QQ II
OO ||
Q ij
<+-
II
O — 1 f-H CD II
CM O I-H ^ ||
LO OO O \ H
O S OO CD II
1 3 II
CQ 1^. ||
00 .-H ||
Q 0 ||
51
II
O —1 I-H CD II
CM l-H ^||
m oo o \ ii
o s: oo CD n
QQ Is- II
00 I-H ||
00 II
51
II
or-. — i f-H CD ii
CM I-H I-H ^ j)
moo \ ii
O OO CD II
1 O H
CO
00 ||
O jj
5^
II
O IO — 1 I-H CD II
f— 1 f— H f-H XX jj
moo \ li
O OO CD II
1 3 II
CO 1
00 ||
Q II
II
• • •• •• •• •• II
O =«= X • l/> II
1— 1 3 -f- U_ 4-> II
u_ s- •• •<- ii
4-» OH -M Q c: II
V> to =3 II
=5 z: ii
f ^ jj
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
H
II
II
C II
0 II
•1- II
•»-> II
to ii
CO S II
i— S- II
Q. 0 II
EM- ||
to a n
00 I-H ||
as
00
as
o
00
as
CO
as
0
00
as
CT)
1 —
as
f-H
CO
CO
c
to
-C
4^
CO
0
i.
o
r^
J^
o
o
£
o
s_
CO
as
CO
^J ^t
n> S-
cr> o>
o >
S- 0
S- (J
3 CO
OO OH
II
II f-HO
II '
II O
II
jj
JI
jj
II
51 =3 =>
II
II i-H f-H
II
jj
II
jj
ii
II
II
II
II «i- CM
ii r-- r^
jj
II
jj
ii
jj
II
5^ as as
II
II f*. 10
II CO 00
jj
II
II
jj
jj
II
51 => 13
II
il f-H f-H
IJ
II
H
jj
li
ii
II .
51 =D 13
II
II f-H f-H
jj
H
II
jj
jj
ij
H
II
jj
II
jj
jj
II
H
H
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II CO
II C
II to
II -C
II -f->
II CO
II O CO
n s- c
II O CO
II i — -C
II -C -l->
II U CO
II -r- 0
n i. i.
II 1— O
II 1 r—
II f-H .C
II *• O
II -ii
II f-H |—
85
-------
II
ii co
N
II ••
11 (U
ii cn
II (O
II 0.
II
n
n
n
n
II
U
H
II
II
II
II
It
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
It
H
II
II
II
n
H
u
H
H
H
00 H
OO OH
C_J >• Z H
»-« 0£ =3 H 0-
H-«cgO N rf
>- sj a. u «a;
-JESE H 0
> H 4J
11 C
U
II rd
II CQ
II
H 3:
H U_
II C£
m
4_
II
O «*• —1 t— i CD II
CO CM •— i v«i ||
l-» 0 O \ 11
O 00 CD II
1 => II
CQ II
00 II
0 II
r—
II
O CO — i i— 1 CD II
CM CM •— * S£ II
r^- o o \ ii
O 00 CD II
t =3 H
CQ H
00 II
O II
tj^
II
O CM _1 r-i CD II
«-H CM •— i v^ ii
r-~ o O \ H
O OO CD II
1 => II
CQ II
OO II
a ii
4!
II
O i— i _J f-i CD II
co CM HH $£ n
to o o ^.ii
O 00 CD II
CQ =3 11
OO II
a n
n
«i
O O — 1 r-1 CD l!
CM CM H- < ^£ ti
10 O O \ II
O OO CD II
' => II
CQ II
OO II
O 11
51
It
O CT» —J r- 1 CD II
t— < T-H »-H ^>* ||
IO O O \ II
o c/> CD ii
1 3> II
CQ II
00 II
a ii
II
Q=tte X • V) ||
»— i 3: -i- u_ +J H
U. S- • i- H
•»-> a; 4-> Q cr n
f) «J =J H
=3 E 11
0 ||
II
jj
II
II
II
II
jj
jj
II
II
jl
jj
II
II
11
II
£= U
0 II
•r- ||
4_> jj
CQ jj
0) E II
r— S- 11
a. o ii
S 4- II
« C II
OOl-H II
&5
LO
^s
CSJ
00
&§
*4*
p*^
ss
o
OO
^p
o
OO
N^
o
(U
C
(O
[ ^
<1J
o
s_
o
<—
u
o
o
CQ
&5
O)
(& ^~
O)
S- 0
S- U
=7 0)
oo a:
II
II i—I VO
II
H O
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
I)
U
II
II
It
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
CD
C
ta
CD
O CD
i- C.
o a)
i— j=
-c +->
U CD
•r- O
S- i.
I— O
I 1—
I—1 -C
- o
^ s-
II I—11—
2»£ Cn Q£. >-*
a. co LU
OO \l—
00 <
^£> *^ *^
_J ^
.CO LO
o
^ cn ce: I-H
z: co LU
Q
V) (O
=3 z:
(_>
C
o
•1—
•4^
(0
a> E
"a. o
E 4-
^s ^z
OO i— <
4-
II
—1 H
\ H
CD II
=3 II
II
II
II
II
II
—1 II
\ II
CD II
=3 II
II
II
II
II
51
II
—1 II
\ II
CD II
=3 II
II
II
II
II
51
II
— 1 II
\ H
CD II
=> II
II
II
II
II
II
— 1 II
CD H
=3 II
II
II
II
II
II
— 1 II
^ II
CD II
II
II
II
II
II
•• II
0 II
+^ II
«^~ H
C II
=D II
II
11
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
||
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
||
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
ss
0
|»^
as
o
CO
CD
C
re
•Q.J
re %-
at CD
0 >
%- o
I- U
3 O>
00 0£
5- &9 •••
II
ii »* ^a
H crt cc
u
n
H
n
n
n
tv=j=
II 1— 1 1-
II
II
II
H
II
II
II
5- Z3 ~
||
H ^H r-
II
II
II
||
II
||
II
5- ZD 3
II
II' *—* i—
II
II
II
II
II
II
53 => 3
II I— 1 1—
II
II
II
II
II
II;
II1
II ^H ^H
II:
II
III
II
H,
II
II
tt\
||
U I
II '
ll'
II
II!
II
II,
II
H1
II CD
II C
II (O
II -C
II 4->
H CD
II O CD
II S_ C
II O CD
II r— JZ
II -C 4-»
II U CD
II -r- 0
n s- i.
II (— O
II I r—
II , j*^t f"
II ^ O
II '^H -1-
II - S-
II —1 (—
-------
u
n ^t-
n
n ••
II CU
II CT>
II 03
II £X
II
II
II
II
II
II
H
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
GO II
GO Q II
0>- Z II
>-• a: rs ii o-
1— - S Q. II ec
— 1 S S HO
fC=i O II H-
Z GO O II .
«x ii <:
«=C LU II d.
z: t— — i ii LU
O «C "— i II GO
h- Q h- II =J
00 <£ II
LU (_3 _l II
3 03 O II • •
> II +J
II C
II CU
II •!-
II 1 —
II O
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II i-H
II CO
II CM
II — 1
II in
II O
II Of
II CO
If
Ufc
• •
II s-
II CU
II -0
II E
II 3
II "Z.
II
II -C
II U
II •*->
II CO
11 CO
II
II 3
II U_
II OH
*
^ en a:
a. oo LU
GO \|—
CO LO
o
s£a> ce
•Z. CO LU
*t *S*'w f™*"
_J OX
CO O 3
LO"
o
• * • • * •
O =tfc X
*-H ^g -r-
U_ S-
3 "Z.
0
Sample
Information
r-.
tj
n
ii
n
n
n
n
r—
M
n
u
n
n
N
n
n
n
u
ti-
ii
n
u
n
n
n
n
n
ii
u
n
n
n
n
n
jj
ji
rj
M
«-l — J II
Cfl II
=3 II
II
II
II
U
^H _J ||
"V. II
cs ii
•=> II
II
II
II
II
.. .. II
• (/) II
U_ +-> ||
• -I- II
a c ii
13 n
u
H
n
ii
jj
n
n
n
n
n
u
ii
n
n
n
n
n
n
u
n
n
it
n
ii
n
u
n
3*«9
vv
0
0)
as
LO
CU
a
*
4_>
CU
o
J-
o
o
o
1
CO
Surrogate
Recovery %
t.
n
ji
ii
n
u
n
n
n
jj
i.
u
n
H
u
n
n
jj
jj
ii
5,
n
jj
n
jj
n
n
n
ji
H
**u
II
II
II
II
II
jj
\^ o ,
^~> O^ S*1
ii co cr
n en CT
n
n
u
ii
jj
n
£ => =3
II l-H ^H
»
II
II
II
II
II
||
II
jj
II
||
II
II
II
II
II CU
He"*
^B
II 03
II -£=
II 4->
II CU
II 0 CU
II S- C
II O CU
II I -£=
1, 1,1-Trich
Trichloroetl
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
ti-
ll
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
ti-
ll
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
r—
ti-
ll
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
H
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
jj
• • •• •• •• •• ||
a =»t= x • v> u
•— i 3 -i- U_ +J ||
LU S- . — ||
-M a: -t-> o e n
«/> re 3 II
=3 s: n
0 II
n
u
u
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
ii
n
n
<= u
0 II
•>- n
tO II
CU £ II
i— S- II
a. o u
E '*- II
OS C II
00 I-H ||
CU
c
.c
4^
CU
£
o
^
o
r^
fm
U
0
S
o
CO
55
CU
(0 S_
D> CU
O >
S- 0
3 CU
OO Q£
ti-
ll
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
j|
II
II
II
jj
II
II
II
jj
II
II
II
II CU
II C
II tO
ii .e
II -M
II CU
II O CU
II S- C
II 0 CU
II r— _C
II f -1-3
II (J CU
II •<- 0
II S- S.
H I— 0
II 1 r—
II — » _£=
II - O
II r-H -i-
II - S-
II •— l (—
87
-------
WESTON Analytics - Dedicated Lab
CLIENT
RFW #
W.0.#
USEPA TCAAP
8905L249
3189-03-13
DATA QUALIFIER
The following qualifiers are used on the data summary:
U - Indicates that the compound was analyzed for but not
detected. The minimum detection limit for the sample (not
the method detection limit) is reported with the U :
(e.g., 10U).
J - Indicates an estimated value. This flag is used in
cases where a target analyte is detected at a level less
than the lower quantification level. If the limit of
quantification is 10 ug/L and a concentration of 3 ug/L is
calculated, it is reported as 3J.
BS - Indicates blank spike in which reagent grade water is
spiked with the CLP matrix spiking solutions and carried
through all the steps in the method. Spike recoveries are
reported. ;
BSD - Indicates blank spike duplicate. !-
MS - Indicates matrix spike.
MSD - Indicates matrix spike duplicate. (
DL - Indicates that surrogate recoveries were not obtained
because the extract had to be diluted for analysis.
NA - Not applicable.
DF - Dilution factor.
NR - Not required. '.
I - Interference.
0.
_
J. Mcaael Taylor DATE
Project Director
Lionville Analytical Laboratory
88
-------
II
II 1— 1
II
II •
II CU
ii en
II 03
II O-
11
n
ii
n
n
n
u
n
u
n
n
u
n
n
n
n
u
n
n
u
n
n
n
u
n
n
u
n
it
u
n
n
n
u
OO II
oo a ii
o >- ~z. n
•— i O± =) || CL.
1— «=C O II «C
>- 2T CL. || et
— j s: 2: 11 o
«c => o n i—
2: oo o ii
«=t II «=C
— i II OO
1— Q t— II =>
00 . •=£ II
UJ O — 1 11
3 II 4->
II £1
II CU
II •I'-
ll i —
II O
II
j|
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
ii en
II CM
ii _j
II LO
II 0
ii en
II CO
u
u ••
II i-
II CU
II -Q
II E
II =3
u z:
n
He™
*-
11 0
Urrt
*9
II CQ
II
II 2
II ti-
ll C£
r—
II
O Q — 1 r— < CS II
co co >— i i*: n
•— < s: o \ n
o oo cs n
i co rs ii
CQ 0 II
co o u
43 ||
II
O CO — J i — co II
CO S i— i ±£ II
•— < O \ II
O CO CO CD II
i O 13 II
CQO II
00 ||
0 j||^
<4—
II
O Q 1 i — i CS 11
£2 Q 0 \ II
o oo cs n
1 CO ^> U
CQ 0 ||
00 0 II
43 ||
tj
II
o co — 1 1— i 43 ii
co o >— < i*: n
•— ' o o \ n
O CO 45 II
1 ZD \l
CQ u
00 ||
43 jj
1 1
U
VO CSJ 1 r-H CJ3 II
t— < O "— i 2^ ||
•— < o o — ii
O OO 43 II
1 — -1 II
CO ||
CO ||
f.
II
LO i — 1 1 i— < 43 II
i— i O •— i ±*Z. II
•— ' O O \ II
o oo 43 ii
1 Z3 II
CO I)
00 ||
«J II
II
Q =*fc X • v> II
•— • 3 'i- U_ 4^ ||
U- S- • -r- ||
+-> a: +j o c n
to 03 ^^ n
=32: ii
0 ||
n
u
n
u
n
n
u
ii
n
n
u
u
n
n
n
n
C ||
O II
•1— II
+J II
fo II
•— s- "
Q- 0 ii
E 4- II
05 C ||
CO t-H ||
^*5
°
LO
en
ss
CO
55
^.
en
^s
°
«s^i
vo
^^o
ox
O
O
i-H
^g
OX
CO
CU
£=
f—
CU
o
i.
o
0
o
0
CQ
55
CU
-U >i
<& S*
CD CU
o >
i- O
i- O
13 CU
CO C£
f I ^ft ^^
OX ^x
II Cf\ f—4
II r^ 00
II
jj
jj
jj
jj
II
V5555
II (x, r-x
u vo 10
||
jj
||
||
||
II
C ZD -D
II
II
II 0
II
jj
U
jj
II
t, __ — -
T™~ — J —J
II
II i — > 1— i
jj
jj
jj
jj
U
II
'tt
iT ** "^
II ^- LO
II * •
» 0 0
u
n
ii
n
^ .
ii
n
n
n
u
u
it
n
u
ii
ii
n
u
n
n
n
II 0)
II £~
II co
II J=
II 0)
II O CU
II S- C
II 0 CU
11 -f -i-ji,^
II 0 CU
II •<- 0
II S- S-
II t— 0
II 1 r—
ii i— i .e
II - O
ii i— i -i—
u ~ s_
II »-l 1—
i^ en _i <-
s: co I-H
—i en co
CQ O
^v^^
LO
C3
•— i rx. Q; i-
O O UJ
CO 0 t—
1— <:
i 2
CQ
OO
C5
-H 10 a: —
C3 C3 LU
CQ 0 t—
U_ et
CQ
OO
CJ3
LO LO _J O
•— < O I— < LO
C\J 0 O
o co
1
CO
CO
0
in LO — i LO
»— i o t— i
CM O O
O CO
CQ
oo
03
LO «*• 1 •— <
*d- o >— i
•— i O O
o oo
i
CO
L/)
«2
=1 =«*= X '
1 1 £_ .
•*-> a: 4-> a
V> '<9
rs s?*
M^
C
o
•r~
4->
05
CU E
i — S-
CL o
E 4-
03 C
OO "—I
II
-i O II
^ II
^ 11
C2 II
ZD II
II
II
II
i 1 ||
\ II
U II
=3 II
||
II
II
p]!_
LI- '
u
—i n
O3 II
II
II
r-"
Lj—
O II
i^ II
"x, II
O II
Z3 II
II
II
II
CS II
^ II
^x II
CS II
Z3 II
||
II
U
O II
^*S ||
\ II
O 11
Z3 II
II
U
II
E
o
i.
o
^
0
o
EEz
0
SK
CQ
55
CU
-I-5 >1
O3 S—
en cu
o >
S- 0
S- 0
=r a>
co a:
r—
u
|| r_ ( ,_
II
|j
II
11
||
jj
II
<4- rs rs
u
n -—i — i
ii
n
n
ii
u
n
u
^ =3 =2
||
II .— < r-<
||
||
II
||
||
|j
II
II '
II
-------
11
II CM
II
II ••
II 0)
ii cn
II cO
It 0-
II
n
n
n
II
ii
it
it
II
II
II
n
u
u
it
it
n
u
n
it
it
n
it
ii
n
II
it
ii
H
it
11
n
it
u
it
OO II
00 Q H
o >- as ii
•— i a: =s n a-
1— «£ O It <=t
>- S o- It — i n oo
r— 0 h- II =5
00 eC II
UJ 0 — 1 II
3 CD O II ••
S> It 4J
II C
II O)
II -I'-
ll f—
It 0
H
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
It
II
it cn
n **J-
11 CM
11 — J
11 If)
II 0
II CT>
II CO
II
II ••
It i-
II CO
II -Q
II E
II 3
N Z
II
11 -C
It (J
11 4-9
It CO
U CO
11
II 3
II ti-
ll C£
i,^ Cn 1 i— ( CD
a. co i—i i«£
CM OO CJ3
S£ *-< =3
co in
o
*£ cn _i <—t CD
2E CO >— i v^
^C *^^C5 *^NS
— 1 CM oo CD
ca t-< rs
in
o
i»£ cn _1 •— I CD
Q_ CO •-< i^
OO \O \
cn oo CD
^ o ;D
-J \
CQ UO
0
.. .. .. .. ••
O =tfc X « co
1— 1 3 'I— LJ- 4->
U_ S_ • •!—
4-9 oi 4-* o c
co co rD
3 s:
o
c
o
• !•—
J ^
CO
CD E
i — 5-
Q. O
E4-
co c:
00 >-<
r—
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
<£
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
i— '
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
^_
n
u
u
n
n
n
u
u
IO
1 —
cu
CO
*~*
4-9
CD
E
O
s-
o
I—
f—
0
0
E
O
s-
co
^5
O)
4-* >1
fO S»
cn oj
o >
S- 0
s- u
3 Q)
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
||
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
cn o
cn o
r— i
0)
£=
f—
4-3
0)
o a>
s- c
O
•i- O
S- S-
1— O
1 f_
i— I _C
- o
r— 4 »f—
- S-
oo a:
• *
O
1— f
-t_>
CO
3
0
*• •• •• ••
=«fc X •
U_ S- • -r-
a: +j Q =
co rs
2£
C
o
•r—
-t-d
CO
O> E
r— S_
a. o
E 4—
CO C.
OO i— i
r— ••
H-
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
tjl
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
11
II
II
a>
£=
CO
^^
CD
jj=
O
S-
o
^CZ
(„>
o
E
0
CO
0) ^
-t-J >)
CO S-
cn a>
o >
s- o
S- 0
3 O)
oo a:
ii1
ii1
If
u
u
n
u
n
44
II
II
II
II.
II
II
II
II
"!
<+3 •
ii;
n
u1
ii
II:
n
n
n
n
4-
II;
III
II
II
II
II
II
II:
II :
II'
II
II
11:
II
"1
II1
II
II;
4!
II
II i
II
II
II
II
II
II ;
II >
II
II ,
ll :
II '
ii ;
u
u
n
ii i
ll !
n ;
ii i
n
n ,
n
n : a>
II '• £=
II ' CO
n j=
u +->
n , a>
II ] O
II ! i-
ii ; o
n r—
II 1 U
n •I'-
ll ; s-
H I —
H ; i
ll 'i— i
n ' ••
n If— (
ii : -
u -*
QJ
C
QJ
-C
•+— J
O)
o
i.
o
f
o
s_
t—
90
-------
WESTON Analytics - Dedicated Lab
CLIENT
RFW #
W.0.#
USEPA TCAAP
8905L294
3189-03-13
1.
DATA QUALIFIER
The following qualifiers are used on the data summary:
U - Indicates that the compound was analyzed for but not
detected. The minimum detection limit for the sample (not
the method detection limit) is reported with the U
(e.g., 10U).
0 - Indicates an estimated .value. This flag is used in
cases where a target analyte is detected at a level less
than the lower quantification level. If the limit of
quantification is 10 ug/L and a concentration of 3 uq/L is
calculated, it is reported as 3J.
BS - Indicates blank spike in which reagent grade water is
spiked with the CLP matrix spiking solutions and carried
through all the steps in the method. Spike recoveries are
reported.
BSD - Indicates blank spike duplicate.
MS - Indicates matrix spike.
MSD - Indicates matrix spike duplicate..
DL - Indicates that surrogate recoveries were not obtained
because the extract had to be diluted for analysis.
NA - Not applicable.
DF - Dilution factor.
NR - Not required.
I - Interference.
D.
Taylo
Project Director
Lionville Analytical Laboratory
DATE
91
-------
II
H I-H
II
n ••
II CU
n cn
11 n)
H 0_
n
n
n
u
n
n
u
H
u
n
II
it
it
n
n
n
u
n
n
n
u
u
n
u
n
u
n
n
n
u
u
n
H
II
It
CO 11
CO Q 11
(_)>-2: jj
*— < o£ rs no.
H^gO H g
— jMfE II S
«C=>O H h-
ZCOO It
«C H
CO II 4-»
II C
II CU
II -r-
II i—
II O
II
II
11
H
II
11
11
11
11
11 «5f
H cn
II CM
11 —1
u in
II 0
ii cn
11 CO
u
u ••
II i~
II CU
II -Q
U E
II S
ii z
u
u J=
II U
H •»->
II C3
II CO
II
II 3
II U.
II C£
,—
ti-
ll
00 I.-HCD II
CO Q O \ II
O CO CD II
1 LO =3 II
COO II
COO II
CD II
tt_
II
o in _i I-H CD u
COOI-H ix. n
CO 0 O --x. II
O CO CD 11
1 ID It
CO II
CO II
CD 11
1— •
tfv
It
I-H *""* H— 4 XX jj
COOO ^x, II
0 CO CD II
i =3 II
CO II
CO It
CD II
(4_
n
LOCO— itncD n
t-H O •— 1 b£ II
CO 0 O \ II
O 00 CD 11
i r? n
CO II
CO II
CD II
1—
tf_
II
in CM— i i—i CD ii
CM O O \ II
O OO CD II
I => U
CQ II
CO II
CD II
t[
II
O I-H __l r— 1 CD II
coo I-H *a n
CMOO \ II
O CO CD II
1 => II
CQ II
CO II
CD 11
II
Q =tte X • II
>— ' 3 •<— Ll_ 4-» U
U_ S- .t- U
4->C£4->a £= II
w re rs ii
3 s: n
CJ II
n
ii
n
n
H
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
11
II
II
II
C 11
O II
•r- II
•fj 11
to II
cu E ii
i— S- H
Q.O H
E<4- II
rO C II
CO I-H ||
o>
ss
—ICO
^HOO
00
II
II 00
II Or—1
II Cxi CM
II
II
II
II
II
1-HCO
55
o
00
CU
c
(O
J3
4^
o
£
o
i.
o
1—
o
o
£
o
i.
CQ
ss
CU
(0 S-
cncu
0 >
S- O
i. U
3 CU
II
II
II ~~
II I—
II
n
II
n
n
n
u
n
ii
n
n
n
u
n
n
ii
n
ii
ii
n
u
H
II CU
n^-
t^
ii -c:
II 4-1
II CU
II O
n i-
II 0
n i—
II CJ
II •<-
II S-
H f—
n i
II -H
II •
II i-H
II •
• •^
icr
o
cu
c
CU
CU
o
o
r—
• o
• S-
ocn— i
CMO>— i
IOOO
o oo
1
CO
CO
CD
in co _i
^HO>— 1
moo
o oo
i
CO
oo
o
Ol 1
CM O>— I
^^ C* C*
o co
i
CO
oo
CD
into i
*^ C* *-H
cooo
o oo
i
CO
oo
CD
OO— 1
cooo I-H
COSIO
o co
i in
coo
ooo
CD
000—1
co y **H
CO O
oinoo
i O
coo
oo
CD
O=«= X
1— 1 3-r-
u_ s-
4->O£-l->
to fO
3 ^.
0
c
o
•r™
4- *
ro
c,) E
r~* i—
0.0
E t+—
fO f-
COl-H
4-
II
m CD ii
m II
•^v. II
CD II
=> II
II
II
II
II
XX ||
\ II
CD II
^ II
II
II
II
II
in CD ii
±£ n
^ H
CD II
=> II
II
II
II
II
i-H t *** ||
^. II
^V, II
CD II
=3 II
II
II
II
JJI
II
•—i CD II
XX |j
^x^ H
CD II
II
II
II
l*Z
II
^HCD II
^ II
\ II
CD II
=} II
II
II
II
• VI II
LJ-4-> II
O C II
=> II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
11
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
11
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
s«
1-^
Crt
ss
^^
r-.
»s
CO
cn
SS
CO
S5
fx.
to
&s
in
to
CU
c
ro
+j
CU
E
o
i.
o
^^
o
o
E
0
&-
CO
s^
CU
(0 &»
C71CU
O >
S- 0
i. U
3 CU
co ex:
5£
H
HOC
II i-HCC
II I-H I-
II
||
II
||
II
II
HOC
ii in ic
n
n
n
n
ii
n
n
HOC
HOC
II CMCS
II
II
II
II
II
M-^ra
n
II i-Hi—
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
£fc«fcS
II Cxli— I
n in in
n
ii
n
n
n
n
ii °
II CMO
u in in
H
H
n
u
ii
n
n
n
n
n
H
ii
ii
H
n
n
n
ii
n
n
II
II CU
II C
II (0
H -c:
ii +•>
II CU
II O CU
» i. s:
II O CU
II i — JC
II -C •(->
II U CU
II ••- O
II 4- i-
II t— 0
II i r-
II •— UC
II -0
II i-H-r-
II - S-
II 1— <(—
92
-------
II 1 ,_
II CM 1 t|_ -k9
II i H
ii •• i CM LOO;— <_j n o
n cu i Of— iuj \ ii ^
ii cn i i o i— on «
II fO i CD ^ ^ -If
II O. i u_ 3 II
II I CO
ii i oo n
II ! ° JL
II : *iT *
H I O ^ — J — I O II i— i
II i to i— < i— i ^ ii o
II I J£> 0 O ^11 — 1
i i o oo o^ n
II I I 3 ||
II I CO
II I 00 H
I! ' 0 ||
II I r—
!! ' «*- 6$
' ' II
i OCO—l-HO II CM
ii i tr>i— ii— i ^j u r-j
Jj ' w> o 0 \ I! 2
n i o oo o ii
II I i 33 ||
II i 03
II i 00 H
II i O
II 1 r—
II 1 <+_ vg
II 1 II
J| i mcM_j— 10 ii -H
H ' *^ *™H F-H SX jj ff\
II I ID 0 0 \ II
i o oo o n
II II — » II
II i CO
II 1 00
oo ii i o i
oo o u i JL
O>-Z II i JJI 55
£-^ i— I ^|| rr»
> II +J I ID 0 0 \ II W
« C 1 O 00 0 N
H CU i i ^ ;!
II -r- 1 CO
ii •— i oo jt
H O I O
II 1 II
H i o*t= x . v> n
II ' «-i3-i-U-4J II
H 1 IM. &. • *t« Q
ii i-*-»Q£4JQc:a cu
II I v> (O 3 H c
Jl i o ^ i! W
n i « 5
II cn 1 ,'! i
S3! I! i
II — J 1 1 «__
us: " o
H 2 ' II r-
II Oi 1 t| .^
5"! s 1
j :• ' n s
n s- i n 5
II CU i P
ili '• "
II Z i c ||
ii i o ii >s>
" -c ' •»- a.
ii ^ ! -^ i * >>
H CO ! *" ^ " ^»^
8 3 ! leg |i g |
!| fe ' "» = I! =eu
ii a: i oo >- 1 n 4,50;
^™ ^-|^
**•• ^J ^D
II i— ii— <
n
JJ
II
4-^^^
ii i— «vo
u «
ii ^^
u
j!
"
F™"
|| ^
II 0*
|| '
|J
||
II
^"* ...
iT ~^
|j t .
11
jj Q
ij
H
"
**-IO'~3
II —ICO
II
II 0
D
II
II
u
H
II
U OO
H 'a-«s-
II
R
u
II
II
II
u
jj
II
H
II
II
II
II
U CU
II C
II (0
H -C
II 4->
II CU
II O CU
II S- C
II 1 — J=
II -C +J
II U CU
u ••- o
II S- S-
II 1— 0
II 1 r—
II i— IJZ
II -U
H 1— l-r-
II - S-
H -HI—
LT)
O
^£ en _i i— i
a. co i— i
VOOO
O
ro
$£&> I —i o II
- *!
ii
cn
en
— JU30O O
in
o
^ en — i •— i
o
0
IT)
O
OO
OVO
OO
CMIOQ:
O— ILU
' OH-
CO <£
— 3
CO
oo
o
Q=tt X
i-H3;.r-
Lu ^
4-) o; +j
V) f8
3 Z
CJ
^3
O
•^"
<4^
CU E
r— S-
0.0
C ^^
fO C
/ J^ •-- -
II
— «— 1 II
^, II
CU
g
o
^t
o
r>—
J=
U
O
E
0
s_
CO
>5
CU
4^ ^)
cncu
0 >
S- 0
i- U
3 CU
II ""
II —
II
II
![
jj
II
II
II
II
n
II
H
g
II
II
u
II
u
H
II
ii eu
II C
II fQ
II 4=
II -t->
II CU
II O
II i-
II 0
II 1 —
II JZ
II U
II -p-
H 1-
H r-
II 1
II -H
II -
II •— 1
II -
5=!
eu
c
CU
_c
4.1
CU
o
S-
0
u
•»•
S-
93
-------
CO
CO Q
t^i j^« 2E
*"""* Q^ ^™>
H™ ^C CD
>- y! Q~,
r..- 1 5r^ yr
o
zco<_>
^p
cCLU
Zh- -J
o-«
CO
H C
H CU
H i-
H i—
11 O
11
11
II
U
It
N
II
II
II
H •"*•
H CTl
U CU
H — 1
u in
n o
II CD
11 CO
n
it ••
n s-
U CO
II -Q
ii m
II =3
II S=
II
II JC
II (J
II 4->
II ro
II 03
II
H 3
11 U-
U CU
(j
\+*m
II
II
11
II
11
II
II
II
II
Ifl
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
C^.
II
II
II
It
II
II
II
II
II
(4—
II
II
H
II
II
11
II
II
II
(4_
II
II
It
II
II
II
U
II
II
(^
II
{fi *NX,*^D <*s">» It
COCO 0 II
^r-t ID II
COLO U
0 11
H
Q^fc X • 00 II
i— 1 3C T- U_ -4-> II
LI- S- ••!- II
•4JC£-MQ C U
V) ro 3 II
=J S II
U II
11
II
II
II
II
II
II
11
II
II
II
11
II
II
II
II
S= II
O II
•<- 11
+•» 11
rd II
0) E II
r- i- 11
O.O It
(0 C II
CO»-< II
ss
CO
1— 1
I— 1
CU
ro
-,_fi?
+^
Q>
ps
o
i.
o
^^
u
o
o
s-
03
ss
eg
re s-
O)0)
o >
S- 0
s- u
3 CU
coo;
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
ii CM at
II i— IO
II t-4^1
II
II
II
u
II
u
II
u
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
ii a>
II C
II ro
II JC
II CU
II 0 CU
II S- C
II O CU
II r— .C
n^" -*--*
-t^ ^— *
II U CO
II T- O
II S- i-
II H- 0
II 1 I—
II i— I.C
It "0
It — l-r-
II -i.
II -Hi—
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
i—
ti-
ll
||
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
r—
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
O=tt= X • CO II
1— l3->-U_-4J II
U_ i_ ••r-ll
•+•» Q£ +J Q C II
• «/» ro 3 II
=5 s: u
0 II
n
n
n
u
H
u
n
n
n
n
n
n
u
n
n
n
C II
0 II
•r- II
-M II
ro II
CU E II
•— S- II
0.0 II
E1*- II
(0 C II
COi— i II
CU
C
ro
J=
4->
O)
o
i-
o
JC
u
o
e
0
s-
CQ
^5
0)
re s-
CTJ CU
O >
s- o
s- u
13 CU
CO Q£
r—
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
11
II
iT
n
u
n
ii
n
n
i~
n
H
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
It
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II CU
II C
II rO
II -C
II 4->
II CU
II 0 CU
II S- 1=
Ii O CU
II r— .E
II -C-M
II U O
II -i- O
It i- i-
II t— O
II I i—
II *->J=
n *• u
II 1— fi-
ll "S-
II — H H™
94
-------
WESTON Analytics - Dedicated Lab
CLIENT
RFW #
W.0.#
USEPA TCAAP
8905L311
3189-03-13
1.
DATA OUALIFIFR
The following qualifiers are used on the data summary:
U - Indicates that the compound was analyzed for but not
detected. The minimum detection limit for the sample (not
the method detection limit) is reported with the U
(e.g., 10U).
J - Indicates an estimated value. This flag is used in
cases where a target analyte is detected at a level less
than the lower quantification level. If the limit of
quantification is 10 ug/L and a concentration of 3 ug/L is
calculated, it is reported as 3J.
BS - Indicates blank spike in which reagent grade water is
spiked with the CLP matrix spiking solutions and carried
through all the steps in the method. Spike recoveries are
reported.
BSD - Indicates blank spike duplicate.
MS - Indicates matrix spike.
MSD - Indicates matrix spike duplicate.
DL - Indicates that surrogate recoveries were not obtained
because the extract had to be diluted for analysis.
NA - Not applicable.
OF - Dilution factor.
NR - Not required.
I - Interference.
Project Director
Lionville Analytical Laboratory
95
-------
CO
CJ 5>™
t-tC£.
h-
c=
CO
f— —
o
1— 1
r»4
CO
_J
in
o
Cn
CO
• *
i_
CO
«o
pz
3
2=
J=
«J
•*J
to
CQ
3:
u_
CC
in — J
^^" CO *— <
r-.oo
OOGO
i
CO
GO
CD
OCSJ— J
COOCH
r^oo
O GO
I
CQ
GO
CD
LOO— J
i— 4CO>— •
t>-SO
Oi— ICO
1 O
CQO
GO
CD
in GO _i
1—4 y HH
t-..— to
OOCO
1 O
CO
GO
CD
in a — i
f^» *""* t~*
Or-HGO
1 O
cao
GO
CD
LOi— (_J
I— 4O I—I
t*°* *^* C3
CD GO
1
ca
GO
O=*te X
I-O: -I'-
LL, i.
-4->C£4->
CO ro
s s:
o
C
o
•!••
4->
O3
(U E
r— S-
0.0
03 S=
i—l CD
sx
\
CD
r3
t-HCD
Sj^
^v.
CD
=3
.— ICD
SX
^x
CD
r-H CD
S/j?
^•v.
CD
=3
r-fCD
*S^
CD
=3
v>«4 f ri
NX
*Xw
CD
=3
•
• »i—
ca c
=3
^_
lt_
II
II
II
. H
II
II
11
II
II
r™*
tf*—
||
|j
n
n
n
u
u
u
u
r—
ti-
ll
II
||
II
II
II
II
II
II
^-*
II
11
||
II
II
II
II
II
II
r—
t^»
II
H
II
II
II
II
II
II
L^.
II
II
n
n
n
u
u
u
n
u
u
u
H
u
n
n
n
n
n
u
u
n
n
n
n
it
u
n
u
n
u
u
n
ii
n
it
n
n
it
It
u
as
cr>
CO
as
en
^^
as
f_t
CO
^^
*-J"
f-i*.
as
CSJ
CO
as
00
O)
CO
,_f^7
•4-*
0>
s_
o
JE:
o
o
E
O
&.
co
CO
as
Dl
O
S-
GO
sS
>J
s~
CO
o
u
CO
a;
^
^M
n
n
n
u
it
n
n
n
II
tH
n
II
n
H
II
II
II
II
II
£
II
II
II
II
II
It
II
II
II
C
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
It
r—
C^M
II
II
II
II
It
II
II
II
II
'[
II
II
U
II
U
II
11
II
II
It
It
II
H
II
H
II
H
U
II
II
II
U
It
II
||
II
II
II
II
II
II
U
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
—
CT>i—
*
CM
=3Z3
1— »«-H
as as
CO CM
COCO
*^S jsi
IOOO
f^» f***ll
^5 j^2
I-H f-H
~"i •— ;
I— 4 r— 4
CO
c
at
JS.
CO
O CO
s- c
O CO
g"* ^J
U CO
•i- O
1— O
— * r~
~ o
" ^
•— r^<^
• r-H
S^ "s^^
-Jin
CD
*v^ o^ _j
3^ OO *™™^
^C "^x^^3
i f*^ ^^
COt-H
^x^
LO
covoo;
OOLU
cool—
(—
CO ro
S 3£
O
C
o
•^
+J
«
0) E
i— S-
O.O
EM-
GO i—i
1-4 CD
XX
^>v
CD
r>
r-ICD
^f
^x.
CD
=3
1—4 CI3
*s«^
•*v>
~^
I— t — 1
CD
13
^HCD
s^
^x^
CD
^
^H CD
sx
"s^
CD
• (/>
U-+J
» "^"
O C
=3
II
II
II
. II
II
II
II
II
II
£
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
!!
n
n
n
u
n
ii
n
n
n
u
u
n
u
^
n
n
u
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
H
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
as
in
o
i— i
as
en
CT)
as
CO
as
o
CD
t—4
as
^.
CO
as
en
CO
CO
c
(O
f*
^_3
CO
g
o
o
r—
_c:
U
o
E
O
S-
CO
as
CO
-I-3 >)
03 i.
cnco
o >
I- 0
i. U
=3 CO
CO O£.
ql
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
51
II
II
II
H
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
It
II
It
II
*£
j|
jj
j|
||
II
II
II
II
II
II
It
II
II
II
II
II
i+I
11
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
H
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
H
II
It
II
II
U
H
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
=5 =
T—4 r—
as as
010
oo
«— 1 r— I
=3=3
1— 1 f-H
=3=3
f— 1 f—H
=3=3
i— ( r—t
=3=3
p— 4 f— 4
CO
c
at
_^
+•>
CO
O CO
i- (=
O CO
!c4->
U CO
•f- o
i~ J-
1— O
1— If
- o
~ J-
r-l|—
96
-------
II
II CNJ
II
II ••
II O>
II CD
II fO
II 0.
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
OO II
00 0 II
O>-Z II
•— H o.
h~-« ii oo
h- Oh- II =>
00 «t II
UJ<_>_ 1 II
3C3O II ••
H C
H O)
II -i-
II i—
II O
II
jj
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II i— I
II i— i
II CO
H —1
II in
II O
u en
II CO
n
n • •
u s-
II 0)
II -Q
II E
II Z3
II SI
II
II -£Z
II U
11 -M
II -«
cooo
VX f-^
.^J ^*s-
COLO •
0
o=a= x
^H ^fc »^
U- S-
4->O£+->
bt (0
3 SI
M)
c
o
•r™
(O
n
U.4J H
••!- U
0 C II
=5 II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
11
II
u
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
^^
CO
1— 1
f— 4
O>
c
to
.£=
(U
o
s-
o
f
u
o
o
CO
ss
O)
to s-
cncu
o >
L. 0
i. U
=3 O>
OOO£
£
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
H
f^~
11
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
F~
II
II
II
jj
II
II
II
II
t.
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
53
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
U— 5sP >«
II
II CVJCTl
II r-HO
jj fv^^H
II
H
jj
II
II
H
1)
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
U (U
ii o a>
II S- {=
II 0
i- 0
S- U
3 d)
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
H
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II O!
II C
II to
II -C
II ^^
II 0)
II 0
II i-
II O
II 1 —
ii -c:
II U
II •!-
II S-
II h-
II 1
II 1—4
II '
II <— 1
II '
O)
0>
^J
o>
o
i.
o
r«"
.C
>rM
i-
97
-------
ROY F. WESTON INC.
LIONVILLE LABORATORY
CLIENT: USEPA TCAAP' SAMPLES RECEIVED: 05-04-89
RFW #: 8905L2-r6^
W.O. #: 3189-03-13-0000
INORGANIC NARRATIVE
The following is a summary of the quality control results and a
description of any problems encountered during the analysis of
this batch of samples:
1. All sample holding times as required by 40CFR136 were met
for water samples. Note: Holding times for soil samples
have not been promulgated by the USEPA.
2. All replicate results were within the 20% guidance; limit.
3. The analytical methods applied by the laboratory, unless
otherwise requested, for all inorganic analyses are derived
from the USEPA Method for Chemical Analysis of Water and
Wastes (USEPA 600/4-79-020), and Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater 16 ed. Methods for the
analysis of solid samples are derived from Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste (USEPA SW846).
NOTE: For solid samples, all results are reported on a dry
weight basis. :
Mark F. Saunders Date Debra K. White
Wet Lab Unit Leader Inorganic Section Manager
Lionville Analytical Laboratory Lionville Analytical Laboratory
98
-------
ROY F. WESTON, INC.
GLOSSARY OF TERMS - INORGANIC REPORTS
DATA QUALIFIERS
U - Indicates that the parameter was not detected at or
above the reported limit. The associated numerical
value is the sample detection limit.
* ~ f£dicate!Lthat the Ori9inal sample result is greater
than 4x the spike amount added. The USEPA-CLP has
determined that spike results on samples where this
occurs may be unreliable and, therefore, the control
limits are not applicable.
ABBREVIATIONS
MB
MS
MSD -
REP -
LC
NC
Method or preparation blank.
Matrix Spike.
Matrix Spike Duplicate.
Sample Replicate.
Indicates a method LCS or Blank Spike.
Not calculable, result below the detection limit,
LABORATORY CHRONOLOGY AND HOLDTIME REPOPT
The test code listed indicates the specific analysis or
preparation procedure employed. The codes mav be
interpreted as follows:
MAAW -
MAAS -
MICW -
MICS -
M**TO-
M**SO-
Metals prep test for AA digestion, water matrix.
Metals prep test for AA digestion, soil matrix.
Metals prep test for ICP digestion, water matrix.
Metals prep test for ICP digestion, soil matrix.
M™ indicates a total metal analysis
MAGTO indicates an analysis for total silver) .
indicates a soluble metal analysis
indicates an analysis for soluble silver)
This type of code indicates an EPTOXICITY metals
silver)"3 (e9' MAGEP indicates an analysis for eptox
This type of code indicates a non-metallic total
analysis. There is also a complimentary soluble
analysis for each of these codes (eg. ICNTO
indicates an analysis for total cyanide) .
A suffix of -R or -S following these codes indicates a
replicate or spike analysis respectively. naicates a
M**EP-
I**TO-
99
-------
ROY F. WESTON INC.
INORGANICS DATA SUMMARY REPORT 05/22/89
CLIENT: USEPA-TCAAP
WORK ORDER: 3189-03-13-0000
WESTON BATCH #: 8905L216
REPORTING
SAMPLE
SS £3 « SS S3 S3 S5
-001
-002
-003
-004
-005
-006
-007
-008
-009
-010
-Oil
-012
SITE ID
DSB-01-10
DSB-01-11
DSB-01-20
DSB-01-35
DSB-02-10
DSB-02-20
DSB-02-30
DSB-02-31
DSB-03-10
DSB-03-20
DSB-03-34
DSB-04-10
ANALYTE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
RESULT UNITS
7.2 %
14.0 %
4.3 %
i
3.6 %
6.7 %
i
73 °/
/ * w /o
5.1 %
8.2 %
8.1 %
4.5 f«
6.0 %
2.0 %
i M_ i ^^ t x I AIIWI
LIMIT :
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
d.io
0.10
0.10
b.io
0.10
0.10
0.10
100
-------
ROY F. WESTON INC.
INORGANICS DATA SUMMARY REPORT 05/22/89
CLIENT: USEPA-TCAAP '
WORK ORDER: 3189-03-13-0000
WESTON BATCH #: 8905L216
SAMPLE
-013
-014
-015
-016
-017
-018
-019
-020
-021
-022
-023
-024
SITE ID
DSB-04-20
DSB-04-21
DSB-04-30
DSB-05-10
DSB-05-20
DSB-05-30
DSB-06-10
DSB-06-20
DSB-06-30
DSB-07-10
DSB-07-20
DSB-07-30
ANALYTE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
RESULT
6.1
7.2
1 7
•L * /
11.7
4.2
2.5
11.7
8.7
4 1
^ . i
6 6
\J • \J
9 Q
c. • y
2.4
REPORTING
UNITS LIMIT
% 0.10
% 0.10
%A 1 A
U. 10
% 0.10
% 0.10
% 0.10
% ' 0.10
% 0.10
%rt in
0.10
01 f\ 1 f\
10 0.10
O/ f\ T f\
'o 0.10
% 0.10
101
-------
ROY F. WESTON INC.
INORGANICS PRECISION REPORT 05/22/89
CLIENT: USEPA-TCAAP
WORK ORDER: 3189-03-13-0000
SAMPLE SITE ID
-001REP
-010REP
-020REP
DSB-01-10
DSB-03-20
DSB-06-20
ANALYTE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
WESTON BATCH #: 8905L216
INITIAL
RESULT
7.2
4.5
8.7
REPLICATE % DIFF
6.2
5.2
10.2
15.7
14.6
16.6
102
-------
ROY F. WESTON INC.
LIONVILLE LABORATORY
CLIENT: USEPA TCAAP SAMPLES RECEIVED: 05-06-89
RFW #: 8905L249
W.O. #: 3189-03-13-0000
INORGANIC NARRATIVE
The following is a summary of the quality control results and a
description of any problems encountered during the analysis of
this batch of samples:
1. All sample holding times as required by 40CFR136 were met
for water samples. Notei Holding times for soil samples
have not been promulgated by the USEPA.
2. All replicate results were within the 20% guidance limit.
3. The analytical methods applied by the laboratory, unless
otherwise requested, for all inorganic analyses are derived
from the USEPA Method for Chemical Analysis of Water- *nrf
Wastes (USEPA 600/4-79-020) , and Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater 16 ed. Methods for the
analysis of solid samples are derived from Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Wastg (USEPA SW846) . " ~~
NOTE: For solid samples, all results are reported on a drv
weight basis. *
^^^ ...„ ^ ^,**,,
aunders Date D^rkl WhitT /Date
7 L??,UnJt ^f?^ Inorganic Section Manager
Lionville Analytical Laboratory Lionville Analytical Laboratory
103
-------
ROY F. WESTON, INC.
GLOSSARY OF TERMS - INORGANIC REPORTS
DATA QUALIFIERS
U - Indicates that the parameter was not detected at or
above the reported limit. The associated numerical
value is the sample detection limit.
* - Indicates that the original sample result is greater
than 4x the spike amount added. The USEPA-CLP has
determined that spike results on samples where this
occurs may be unreliable and, therefore, the control
limits are not applicable. • - •;••••-• -
ABBREVIATIONS
MB
MS
MSB -
REP -
LC
NC
Method or preparation blank.
Matrix Spike.
Matrix Spike Duplicate.
Sample Replicate.
Indicates a method LCS or Blank Spike.
Not calculable, result below the detection limit.
LABORATORY CHRONOLOGY AND HOLDTIME REPORT
The test code listed indicates the specific analysis or
preparation procedure employed. The codes may be
interpreted as follows: !
Metals prep test for AA digestion, water matrix.
Metals prep test for AA digestion, soil matrix.
Metals prep test for ICP digestion, water matrix.
Metals prep test for ICP digestion, soil matrix.
This type of code indicates a total metal analysis
(eg. MAGTO indicates an analysis for total silver).
This type of code indicates a soluble metal analysis,
(eg. MAGSO indicates an analysis for soluble silver),
This type of code indicates an EPTOXICITY metals
analysis (eg. MAGEP indicates an analysis for eptox
silver).
This type of code indicates a non-metallic total
analysis. There is also a complimentary soluble
analysis for each of these codes (eg. ICNTO
indicates an analysis for total cyanide). !
A suffix of -R or -S following these codes indicates a
replicate or spike analysis respectively. i
MAAW -
MAAS -
MICW -
MICS -
M**TO-
M**SO-
M**EP-
I**TO-
104
-------
ROY F. WESTON INC.
INORGANICS DATA SUMMARY REPORT 05/19/89
CLIENT: USEPA TCAAP
WORK ORDER: 3189-03-13-0000
SAMPLE
-001
-002
-003
-004
-005
SITE ID
GSB-01-15
GSB-01-16
GSB-01-30
GSB-01-45
GSB-02-15
ANALYTE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
WESTON BATCH #: 8905L249
REPORTING
RESULT. UNITS LIMIT
6.8 % oTlO
14.0 % 0.10
16.3 % 0.10
15.4 % o.lO
7-2 % 0.10
105;-
-------
ROY F. WESTON INC.
INORGANICS PRECISION REPORT 05/19/89
CLIENT: USEPA TCAAP
WORK ORDER: 3189-03-13-0000
SAMPLE SITE ID ANALYTE
-001REP GSB-01-15 % MOISTURE
WESTON BATCH #: 8905L249
INITIAL : !
RESULT REPLICATE % DIFF ;
6.8
5.6
20.0
106
-------
ROY F. WESTON INC.
LIONVILLE LABORATORY
CLIENT,: USEPA-TCAAP^ """" SAMPLES RECEIVED: 05-11-89
RFW ».; OD05L29^—-" ~
W.O. #:~~1T89-03-13-0000
INORGANIC NARRATIVE
The following is a summary of the quality control results and
a description of any problems encountered during the analysis
of this batch of samples:
1. All sample holding times as required by 40CFR136 were met
for water samples. Note: Holding times for soil samples
have not been promulgated by the USEPA.
2. All replicate results were within the 20% guidance limits.
3. The analytical methods applied by the laboratory, unless
otherwise requested, for all inorganic analyses are derived
from the USEPA Method for Chemical Analysis of Water and
Wastes (USEPA 600/4-79-020), and Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater 16 edT Methods for the
analysis of solid samples are derived from Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste (USEPA SW846).
NOTE: For solid samples, all results are reported on a dry-
weight basis.
Mark F. Saunders Date Debra K. White 7Date~
Wet Lab unat Leader Inorganic Section Manager
Lionville Analytical Laboratory Lionville Analytical Laboratory
107
-------
ROY F. WESTON, INC.
GLOSSARY OF TERMS - INORGANIC REPORTS
DATA QUALIFIERS
U - Indicates that the parameter was not detected at or
above the reported limit. The associated numerical
value is the sample detection limit.
* - Indicates that the original sample result is greater
than 4x the spike amount added. The USEPA-CLP has
determined that spike results on samples where this
occurs may be unreliable and, therefore, the control
limits are not applicable.
ABBREVIATIONS
MB - Method or preparation blank.
MS - Matrix Spike.
MSB - Matrix Spike Duplicate.
REP - Sample Replicate.
LC - Indicates a method LCS or Blank Spike.
NC - Not calculable, result below the detection limit.
LABORATORY CHRONOLOGY AND HOLDTIME REPORT ;
The test code listed indicates the specific analysis or
preparation procedure employed. The codes may be '
interpreted as follows:
MAAW -
MAAS -
MICW -
MICS -
M**TO-
Metals prep test for AA digestion, water matrix.
Metals prep test for AA digestion, soil matrix.
Metals prep test for ICP digestion, water matrix.
Metals prep test for ICP digestion, soil matrix.
This type of code indicates a total metal analysis
(eg. MAGTO indicates an analysis for total 'silver).
This type of code indicates a soluble metal analysis,
(eg. MAGSO indicates an analysis for soluble silver),
This type of code indicates an EPTOXICITY metals
analysis (eg. MAGEP indicates an analysis for eptox
silver).
This type of code indicates a non-metallic jtotal
analysis. There is also a complimentary soluble
analysis for each of these codes (eg. ICNTO,
indicates an analysis for total cyanide). '
A suffix of -R or -S following these codes indicates: a
replicate or spike analysis respectively.
M**SO-
M**EP-
I**TO-
108
-------
ROY F. WESTON INC.
INORGANICS DATA SUMMARY REPORT 05/23/89
CLIENT: USEPA-TCAAP
WORK ORDER: 3189-03-13-0000
SAMPLE
-001
-002
-003
-004
-005
-006
-007
-008
-009
-010
-Oil
-012
-013
-014
SITE ID
GSB-02-30
GSB-02-45
GSB-03-15
GSB-03-16
GSB-03-30
GSB-03-45
GSB-04-20
GSB-05-15
GSB-06-20
GSB-06-21
GSB-06-30
GSB-06-45
GSB-06-50
GSB-06-60
ANALYTE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
WESTON
RESULT
2.2
4.5
11.6
8.7
4.0
5.0
9.7
14.8
7.8
13.4
6.3
19.6
2.2
2.0
BATCH #: 8905L294
REPORTING
UNITS LIMIT
% 0.10
% 0.10
% 0.10
% 0.10
% 0.10
% 0.10
% 0.10
% 0,10
% 0.10
% 0.10
% 0.10
% 0.10
% 0.10
% 0.10
109
-------
ROY F. WESTON INC.
INORGANICS PRECISION REPORT 05/23/89
CLIENT: USEPA-TCMP
WORK ORDER: 3189-03-13-0000
SAMPLE SITE ID
WESTON BATCH #: 8905L294
-001REP
-010REP
6SB-02-30
6SB-06-21
ANALYTE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
INITIAL
RESULT
2.2
13.4
REPLICATE % DIFF
2.2
12.5
1.1
7.0
110
-------
ROY F. WESTON INC.
LIONVILLE LABORATORY
SAMPLES RECEIVED: 05-12-89
W.O. #: 3189-03-13-0000
INORGANIC NARRATTVK
The following is a summary of the quality control results and
a description of any problems encountered during the analysis
of this batch of samples:
1. All sample holding times as required by 40CFR136 were met
for water samples. Note: Holding times for soil samples
have not been promulgated by the USEPA.
2. All replicate results were within the 20% guidance limits.
3. The analytical methods applied by the laboratory, unless
otherwise requested, for all inorganic analyses are derived
from the USEPA Method for- Chemical Analysis of water
"—-— (USEPA 600/4-79-020) , and St^dard"
NOTE:
Examination of Water and WastewateT- ie ed. Methods for the
analysis of solid samples are derived from Test Methods fn-r
Evaluating Solid Wasi-^ (USEPA SW846) . £noas_ror
For solid samples, all results are reported on a dry
weight basis. *
. ^';&V~^/
Mark F. Saunders Date bebra K. white M*
Wet Lab unit Leader Inorganic^iction Manager
Lionville Analytical Laboratory Lionville Analytical Laboratory
ill
-------
ROY F. WESTON, INC. ;
[ I
GLOSSARY OF TERMS - INORGANIC REPORTS :
DATA QUALIFIERS i
U - Indicates that the parameter was not detected at or
above the reported limit. The associated numerical
value is the sample detection limit.
Indicates that the original sample result is greater
than 4x the spike amount added. The USEPA-CLP has
determined that spike results on samples where this
occurs may be unreliable and, therefore, the control
limits are not applicable. !
ABBREVIATIONS , j
MB - Method or preparation blank.
MS - Matrix Spike. i
MSD - Matrix Spike Duplicate.
REP - Sample Replicate.
LC - Indicates a method LCS or Blank Spike.
NC - Not calculable, result below the detection limit,
LABORATORY CHRONOI
The test code listed indicates the specific analysi^ or
preparation procedure employed. The codes may be j
interpreted as follows: [
MAAW - Metals prep test for AA digestion, water matrix.
MAAS - Metals prep test for AA digestion, soil matrix.
MICW - Metals prep test for ICP digestion, water matrix.
MICS - Metals prep test for ICP digestion, soil matrix.
M**TO- This type of code indicates a total metal analysis
(eg. MAGTO indicates an analysis for total•silver).
M**SO- This type of code indicates a soluble metal analysis,
(eg. MAGSO indicates an analysis for soluble silver)
M**EP- This type of code indicates an EPTOXICITY metals
analysis (eg. MAGEP indicates an analysis for eptox
silver).
I**TO- This type of code indicates a non-metallic;total
analysis. There is also a complimentary soluble
analysis for each of these codes (eg. ICNTO
indicates an analysis for total cyanide).
A suffix of -R or -S following these codes indicates a
replicate or spike analysis respectively.
112
-------
ROY F. WESTON INC.
INORGANICS DATA SUMMARY REPORT 05/23/89
CLIENT: USEPA-TCAAP
WORK ORDER: 3189-03-13-0000
SAMPLE
-001
-002
-003
-004
-005
SITE. ID
GSB-07-15
GSB-07-30
GSB-07-45
GSB-07-52
GSB-07-60
ANALYTE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
% MOISTURE
WESTON BATCH #: 8905L311
REPORTING
RESULT UNITS LIMIT
14.3 % o.lO
4-2 % o.lO
9-2 % o.lO
1-4 % 0.10
2-1 % 0.10
113 -
-------
ROY F. WESTON INC.
INORGANICS PRECISION REPORT 05/23/89
CLIENT: USEPA-TCAAP
WORK ORDER: 3189-03-13-0000
SAMPLE SITE ID
SESBSS^SES 3ss!srs=ss===srr25s 33:55
-001REP GSB-07-15
ANALYTE
% MOISTURE
WESTON BATCH #: 8905L311
INITIAL
RESULT REPLICATE % DIFF
14.3
13.1
9.2
114
-------
Roy F. Weston, Inc. - Lionville Laboratory
LABORATORY CHRONOLOQY i HOLDTIHE REPORT
SAMPLE
PRODUCED ON 05/22/89 AT 12:07
PAGE 1
TEST DATJREP DAT_ANAL HOLDJJAT DATE.COL DATEJEC RATRIX CLIJD
8903.311-00100 IZMST 05/16/89
8905L311-00100 IZHSTR 05/16/89
8905L311-00200 IZMST 05/16/89
8905L311-00300 I2HST 05/16/89
8905L311-00400 IM1ST 05/16/89
8905L311-00500 IZHST 05/16/89
6 SELECTIONS QUALIFIED
05/16/89 06/10/89 05/11/89
05/16/89 05/11/89
05/16/89 06/10/89 05/11/89
05/16/89 06/10/89 05/11/89
05/16/89 06/10/89 05/11/89
05/16/89 06/10/89 05/11/89
05/12/89 SOIL
05/12/89 SOIL
05/12/89 SOIL
05/12/89 SOIL
05/12/89 SOIL
05/12/89 SOIL
GSB-07-15
GSB-07-15
GSB-07-30
•6SB-07-45
SSB-07-52
6SB-07-60
115
-------
116
-------
APPENDIX F
EPA RREL SOIL BORING ANALYTICAL DELIVERABLES
SITE D AND SITE G
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS FOR VOLATILE COMPOUNDS IN SOIL SAMPLES BY GC-MS
Laboratory procedure
Method 8240 in SW-846 was used for samples preparation, extraction and analysis.
Purge and trap parameters
Purge time 12 min
Desorb time 4 min
Bake time 15 min
GC-MS parameters
Column - 1% sp-1000 60/80 Carbopack pack column (Supelco)
Temp program - initial temp 45 degree C, held for 3 min; then 8 degree C ramp to
210 degree C/min and held for total run time 35 min.
Injector temp 210 degree C
MS Interface temp 275 degree C
Mass range 35 to 260
Sample extraction for soil samples
One to five grams of soil samples were extraxtion with 10 mL methanol for two min.;
then 100 to 500 ul of methanol extracts were spiked into deionized water with total
volume Of 5 ml.
All results for soil samples were reported as wet weight.
Report index
Page
Sample results for water 1
Sample results for soils 2-3
Lab blank for water 9
Lab blank for soils 10
Percent surrogate recovery for water 11
Percent surrogate recovery for soils 12,1J
Percent MS/MSD recovery for water 14
Percent MS/MSD recovery for soils 15-18
Percent moisture content 19,20
117
-------
PAGE 1
SUMMARY REPORT OF GC-MS FOR VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
MATRIX : water ANALYST: WN
VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
Concentration as ug/L, (ppb)
COMPOUND
DATE SAMPLING
DATE RECEIVED
DATE ANALYZED
Acetone
Benzene
Bromodichlororaethane
Bcanofom
Brcmone thane
2-Butanone
Carbon Disulfide
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
2-Chloroethylvinylether
Chloroform
Chloromethane
DibromocWLorome thane
1 , 1-Dichloroethane
1 , 2-Dichloroe thane
1 , 1-Dichloroethene
Trans-1 , 2-Dichloroe thene
1 , 2-DicWLoropropane
cis-1 , 3-Dicnloropropeise
Trans-1 , 3-Dichloropropene
Ethylbenzene
2-Kexanone
4-Msthyl-2-Pentanone
Hathylene Chloride
Styrene
1 , 1 , 2, 2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethene'
Toluene
1 , 1, 1-Trichloroethane
1,1,2-Trichloroethane ;
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Acetate
Vinyl Chloride
Xylenes (Total)
DSB
TB-01
5/3/89
5/4/89
5/9/89
< 100
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 10
< 100
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 10
< 10
< 5
< 10
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 50
< 50
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 50
< 10
< 5
DSB
. FB-01
5/3/89
5/4/89
5/9/89
< 100
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 10
< 100
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 10
< 10
< 5
< 10
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 50
< 50
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 50
< 10
< 5
DSB
FB-02
5/3/89
5/4/89
5/9/89
< 100
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 10
< 100
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 10
< 10
< 5
< 10
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 50
< 50
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 50
< 10
< 5
GSB
FB-01
5/5/89
5/8/89
5/9/89
< 100
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 10
< 100
< 5
< 5
< 5
'< 10
< 10
< 5
< 10
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 50
< 50
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< is
< 50
< 10
< 5
GSB
TB-01
5/5/89
5/8/89
5/9/89
< 100
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 10
< 100
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 10
< 10
< 5
< 10
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 50
< 50
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 50
< 10
< 5
GSB
TB-02
5/10/89
5/11/89
5/11/89
< 100
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 10
< 100
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 10
< 10
< 5
< 10
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 50
< 50
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 50
< 10
< 5
GSB
FB-02
5/10/89
5/11/89
5/11/89
< 100
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 10
< 100
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 10
< 10
< 5
< 10
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 50
< 50
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 50
< 10
< 5
GSB
TB-03
5/11/89
5/12/89
5/16/89
< 100
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 10
< 100
< 5
<*s •
< 5
< 10
< 10
< 5
< 10
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 50
< 50
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 5
< 50
< 10
< 5
118
-------
PAGE 2
SUMMARY REPORT OF GC-MS FOR VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
MATRIX : SOIL ANALYST: WN
VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
Concentration as mg/KG, (ppm)
COMPOUND
r>
DATE SAMPLING
DATE RECEIVED
DATE ANALYZED
Acetone
Benzene
Bromodichloromethane
Bromoform
Bromomethane
2-Butanone
Carbon Disulfide
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorofaenzene
Chloroe thane
2-Chloroethylvinylether
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Dibromochloromethane
1 , 1-Dichloroethane
1 , 2-Dichloroethane
1 , 1-Dichloroethene
Trans-1 , 2-Dichloroethene
1 , 2-Dichloropropane
cis-1 , 3-Dichloropropene
Trans-1 , 3-Dichloropropene
Ethylbenzene
2-Hexanone
4-Methyl-2-Pentanone
Methylene Chloride
Styrene
1,1,2, 2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
1,1, 2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Acetate
Vinyl Chloride
Xylenes (Total)
DSB
01-10
5/2/89
5/4/89
5/10/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0;1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
1.27 B
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
DSB
01-20
5/2/89
5/4/89
5/10/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0-1
< 0.1
< 0.2 .
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
0.395 B
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
DSB
01-21
5/2/89
5/4/89
5/10/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
0.453 B
<_O.l
<' 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
DSB
01-35
5/2/89
5/4/89
5/10/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
0.137 B
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
DSB
02-10
5/2/89
5/4/89
5/10/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
0.444 B
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
DSB
02-20
5/2/89
5/4/89
5/10/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
•c'o.l
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
0.232 B
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
DSB
02-30
5/2/89
5/4/89
5/10/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
0.145 B
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
B - The analyte is also detected in a method blank; the values reported are already substracted
from the blank.
119
-------
PAGE 3
SUMORY REPORT OF GC-MS FOR VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
MATRIX : SOIL ANALYST: VJN
VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
Concentration as mg/KG, (ppm)
COMPOUND
DATE SAMPLING
DATE RECEIVED
DATE ANALYZED
Acetone
Benzene
Brcwcdichlorome thane
Bromoform
Bromome thane
2-Butanone
Carbon Bisulfide
Carbon Tetrachlocide
Chlorobenzene
Chloroe thane
2-Chloroethylvinylether
Chloroform
Chlorone thane
Dibcoraochlorome thane
1 , 1-Dichloroethane
I , 2-Dichloroe thane
1 , 1-Dichloroethene
Trans-1 , 2-Dicnloroethene
1 , 2-Dichloropropane
cis-1 , 3-Dichloropropene
Trans-1 , 3-Dichloropropene
Ethylbenzene
2-Hexanone
4-Hethyl-2-Pentanone
Methylene Chloride
Styrene
1,1,2, 2-Tetrachloroe thane
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
1,1, 2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Acetate
Vinyl Chloride
Xylenes (Total)
DSB
03-10
5/2/89
5/4/89
5/10/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
0.150 B
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
DSB
03-20
5/2/89
5/4/89
5/10/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< O'.l
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
0.122 B
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
DSB
03-34
5/2/89
5/4/89
5/11/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< b.i
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< 0.1
CO.l
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< o'.i
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
DSB
03-35
5/2/89
5/4/89
5/11/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
DSB
04-10
5/3/89
5/4/89
5/11/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
0.0615 B
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
DSB
04-20
5/3/89
5/4/89
5/11/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
DSB "
04-21
5/3/89
5/4/89
5/11/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
B - The analyte is also detected in a method blank; the values reported are already substracted
from the blank.
120
-------
PAGE 4
SUMMARY REPORT OF GC-MS FOR VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
MATRIX : SOIL ANALYST: WN
VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
COMPOUND
' DATE SAMPLING
. i DATE RECEIVED
', DATE ANALYZED
Acetone
| Benzene
Bromodichloromethane
r Bromoform
: Bromomethane
! 2-Butanone
1 Carbon Disulfide
: Carbon Tetrachloride
j Chlorobenzene
1 Chloroethane
, 2-Chloroethylvinylether
• Chloroform
' Chloromethane
'. Dibromochloromethane
! 1,1-Dichloroethane
'. 1 , 2-Dichloroethane
i 1 , 1-Dichloroethene
Trans-1 , 2-Dichloroethene
: 1 , 2-Dichloropropane
i cis-l,3-Dichloropropene
! Trans-1, 3-Dichloropropene
! Ethylbenzene
! 2-Hexanone
4-Methyl-2-Pentanone
i Methylene Chloride
Styrene
1 1,1,2, 2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
' Toluene
1 1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
1 , 1 , 2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Acetate
i Vinyl Chloride
I Xylenes (Total)
1
| B - The analyte is also
• from the blank.
i
Concentration as mg/KG, (ppm)
DSB
04-30
5/3/89
5/4/89
5/11/89
< 2
< O.-l
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
detected in a
DSB
05-10
5/3/89
5/4/89
5/15/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
0.208 B
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
DSB
05-20
5/3/89
5/4/89
5/15/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< .0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
0.131 B
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
method blank; the
12
DSB
05-30
5/3/89
5/4/89
5/15/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
DSB
06-10
5/3/89
5/4/89
5/15/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
0.0966 B
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
values reported are
1
DSB
06-20
5/3/89
5/4/89
5/15/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
6.58
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
29.8
< 1
< 1
0.0672 B
1.48
< 0.1
< 0.1
15.3
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
54.2
already
f
DSB
06-30
5/3/89
5/4/89
5/15/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1 '
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1 ,
< 0.1
0.573
< 1
< 1
0.0286 B
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
0.292
substracted
-------
PAGE 5
SUMMARY REPORT OF GC-MS FOR VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
MATRIX : SOIL
ANALYST: WN
VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
Concentration as mg/Kg, (ppm)
COMPOUND
DATE SAMPLING
DATE RECEIVED
DATE ANALYZED
Acatone
Benzene
Brotnodichlorome thane
Bccmoform
Bromome thane
2-Butanone
Carbon Disulfide
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroe thane
2-Chloroethylvinylether
Chloroform
Chlorcrnethane
Dibranochloromethane -
I, 1-Dichloroe thane
1 , 2-Dichloroethane
1 , 1-Dichloroe thene
Trans-1 , 2-Dichloroe thene
1 , 2-Dichloropropane
cis-1 , 3-Dichloropropene
Trans-1 , 3-Dichloropropene
Ethylbenzene
2-Hexanone
4-Mathyl-2-Pentanone
Mathylene Chloride
Styrene
1,1,2, 2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroetnene
Toluene
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
1,1,2-Tricnloroethane
Trichloroe thene
Vinyl Acetate
Vinyl Chloride
Xylenes (Total)
DSB
07-10
5/3/89
5/4/89
5/15/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
DSB
07-20
5/3/89
5/4/89
5/15/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< a.i
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
DSB
07-30
5/3/89
5/4/89
5/16/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< 0.1
C 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< O'.l
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
GSB
01-15
5/5/89
5/8/89
5/16/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
'< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0;.l
< 0.1
< 0,1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< o!.i
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
GSB
01-16
5/5/89
5/8/89
5/16/89
< 2 •
< 0.1 •
< 0.1 •
< 0.1 •
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1.
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
GSB
01-30
5/5/89
5/8/89
5/16/89
< < 2
C < 0.1
C < 0.1
< < 0.1
< < 0.2
< < 2
< < 0.1
< < 0.1
< < 0.1
< < 0.2
< < 0.2
< < 0.1
< < 0.2
< < 0.1
< < 0.1
< < 0.1
< < 0.1
< < 0.1
< < 0.1
< < 0.1
< < 0.1
< < 0.1
< < 1
< < 1
< < 0.1
< < 0.1
< < 0.1
< < 0.1
< < 0.1
< < 0.1
< < 0.1
< < 0.1
< < 1
< < 0.2
< < 0.1
GSB
01-45
5/5/89
5/8/89
5/16/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
122
-------
PAGE 6
SUMMARY REPORT OF GC-MS FOR VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
MATRIX : SOIL
ANALYST: WN
VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
Concentration as rag/Kg, (ppm)
COMPOUND ,
DATE SAMPLING
DATE RECEIVED
DATE ANALYZED
Acetone
Benzene
Bromcdichloromethane
BLOiiiofonn
Bromome thane
2-Butanone
Carbon Disulfide
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
2-Chloroethylvinylether
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Dibromochlorome thane
1 , 1-Di chloroethane
1 , 2-Dichloroethane
1 , 1-Dichloroethene
Trans- 1 , 2-Dichloroethene
1 , 2-Dichloropropane
cis-1 , 3-Dichloropropene
Trans-1 , 3-Dichloropropene
Ethylbenzene
2-Hexanone
4-Methyl-2-Pentanone
Methylene Chloride
Styrene
1,1,2, 2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
1,1, 1-Tri chloroethane
1,1, 2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Acetate
Vinyl Chloride
Xylenes (Total)
GSB
02-15
5/5/89
5/8/89
5/19/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< o.i
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
GSB
02-30
5/9/89
5/11/89
5/19/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
GSB
02-45
5/9/89
5/11/89
5/19/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
<,0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
<. 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
GSB
02-46
5/9/89
5/11/89
5/19/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< '0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
GSB
03-15
5/9/89
5/11/89
5/19/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
GSB
03-30
5/9/89
5/11/89
5/22/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0,2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 4
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
B 0.110
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0,1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
GSB
03-45
5/9/89
5/11/89
5/22/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 4
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
.< 0.1
B - The analyte is also detected in a method blank; the values reported are already substracted
from the blank.
123
-------
PAGE 7
SUMMARY REPORT OF GC-MS FOR VOLATILE "COMPOUNDS
MATRIX : SOIL
ANALYST: WN
VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
COMPOUND
DATE SAMPLING
DATE RECEIVED
DATE ANALYZED
Acetone
Benzene
Bromodichloromethane
Bccoofocm
Bromone thane
2-Butanone
Carbon Disulfide
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobcnzcne
Chloroa thane
2-Cnloroethylvinylether
Chloroform
Chlorome thane
Dibcomochlororae thane
1 , 1-Dichloroethane
1 , 2-Dichlorcethane
1 , 1-Dichloroethene
Trans-1 , 2-Dichloroethene
1 , 2-Dichloropropane
cis-1 , 3-Dichloropropene
Tr*flnQ**l 1— Tl^ f*Yi 1 orTV*imT>ano
ifeCUl.3 X f J UJLULLU£U£?£W£?>»in3
Ethylbenzene
2-Hexanone
4-Methyl-2-Pentanone
Mathylene Chloride
Styrene
1 , 1,2, 2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
1,1, l-TcichLoroe thane
1,1, 2-Trichloroe thane
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Acetate
Vinyl Chloride
Xylenes (Total)
Concentration as mg/Kg, (ppm)
GSB
04-20
5/9/89
5/11/89
5/22/89
< 10
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 1
< 10
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 1
< 1
< 0.5
< 1
< 0.5
5.72
< 0.5
< 0.5
31.1
< 0.5
< 0.5
s r\ c
^ U. 3
< 0.5
< 5
< 5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 5
< 1
< 0.5
GSB
05-15
5/9/89
5/11/89
5/22/89
< 10
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 1
< 10
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 1
< 1
< 0.5
< 1
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
s n c
>.
-------
PAGE 8
SUMMARY REPORT OF GC-MS FOR VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
MATRIX : SOIL
ANALYST: HN
VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
COMPOUND
DATE SAMPLING
DATE RECEIVED
DATE ANALYZED
Acetone
Benzene
Bromodichloromethane
Bromofonn
Bromomethane
2-Butanone
Carbon Disulf ide
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroe thane
2-Chloroethylvinylether
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Dibromochloromethane
1 , 1-Dichloroethane
1 , 2-Dichloroe thane
1 , 1-Dichloroethene
Trans-1 , 2-Dichloroethene
1 , 2-Dichloropropane
cis-1 , 3-Dichloropropene
Trans-1 , 3-Dichloropropene
Ethylbenzene
2-Hexanone
4-Methyl-2-Pentanone
Methylene Chloride
Styrene
1,1,2, 2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
1 , 1 , 1-Trichloroethane
1,1, 2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Acetate
Vinyl Chloride
Xylenes (Total)
Concentration as tag/Kg, (ppm)
GSB
07-15
5/11/89
5/12/89
5/22/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
' < 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
GSB
07-30
5/11/89
5/12/89
5/23/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
<'0-2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
GSB
07-45
5/11/89
5/12/89
5/23/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.'2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
GSB
07-52
5/11/89
5/12/89
5/23/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
'< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
GSB
07-60
5/11/89
5/12/89
5/23/89
< 2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.1
c 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.2
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 1
< 0.2
< 0.1
125
-------
PAGE S
SUWfflRX REPORT OF GO-MS FOR VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
MATRIX: Water
VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
Concentration
as mg/L, (ppm)
COMPOUND
DATE ANALYZED
Acetone
Benzene
Bromodichlorome thane
Bromoform
Brenwne thane
2-Butanone
Carbon Disulfide
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chlotoa thane
2-Chlocoethylvinylether
Chloroform
Chlocone thane
Dibromochlorome thane
1 , 1-Dichloroe thane
1 , 2-Dichloroe thane
1 , 1-Dichloroethene
Trans-1 , 2-Dichlon3ethene
1 , 2-Oicnlocopropane
Trans-1 , 3-Dicnloropropene
Ethylbenzene
2-Hexanone
4-Hethyl-2-Pentanone
Mathylene Chloride
Styrene
1,1,2, 2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane !
1,1, 2-Trichloroe thane
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Acetate
Vinyl Chloride
Xylenes (Total)
LAB
BLANK
D.I. H20
5/9/89
< 0.1
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.01
< 0.1
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.01
< 0.01
< 0.005
< 0.01
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.05
< 0.05
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.05
< 0.01
< 0.005
LAB
BLANK
D.I. H20
5/11/89
< 0.1
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.01
< 0.1
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.1305
< 0.01
< 0.01
< 0.005
< 0.01
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.05
< 0.05
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.05
< 0.01
< 0.005
LAB
BLANK
D.I. H20
5/16/89
< 0.1
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.01
< 0.1
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.01 .
< 0.01
< 0.005
< 0.01
< 0.005
I < 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.05
< 0.05
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.05
< 0.01
< 0.005
126
-------
PAGE 10
SUMMARY REPORT OF GC-MS FOR VOLATILE CCMPOUNDS
MATRIX: Soil
VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
Concentration as mg/L,
(ppm)
COMPOUND
DATE ANALYZED
Acetone
Benzene
Bromodichlorome thane
Bromoform
Bromomethane
2-Butanone
Carbon Disulfide
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
2-Chloroethylvinylether
Chloroform
Chlorotne thane
Dibromochlorome thane
1 , 1-Dichloroethane
1 , 2-Dichloroethane
1 , 1-Dichloroethene
Trans-1 , 2-Dichloroethene
1 , 2-Dichloropropane
Trans-1 , 3-Dichloropropene
Ethylbenzene
2-Hexanone
4-Methyl-2-Pentanone
Hethylene Chloride
Styrene
1,1,2, 2-Tetrachlorcethane
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
1,1, 2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Acetate
Vinyl Chloride
Xylenes (Total)
LAB
BLANK
10 % MeOH
5/10/89
< 0.1
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.01
0.287
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.01
< 0.01
< 0.005
< 0.01
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.05
< 0.05
0.00992
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
0.00815
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.05
< 0.01
< 0.005
LAB
BLANK
10% MeOH
5/11/89
< 0.1
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.01
0.339
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.01
< 0.01
< 0.005
< 0.01
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.05
< 0.05
0.0147
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
0.00920
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.05
< 0.01
< 0.005
LAB
BLANK
10% MeOH
5/15/89
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
< 0.1
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.01
0.455
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.01
0.01
0.005
0.01
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.05
0.05
< 0.0147
<
<
<
0.
<
<
<
<
<
<
0.005
0.005
0.005
00987
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.05
0.01
0.005
LAB
BLANK
2% MeOH
5/16/89
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
< 0.1
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.01
< 0.1
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.01
0.01
0.005
0.01
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.05
0.05
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.05
0.01
0.005
LAB
BLANK
10% MeOH
5/16/89
< 0.1
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.01
0.320
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.01
< 0.01
< 0.005
< 0.01
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.05
< 0.05
0.0176
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
0.0110
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.05
< 0.01
< 0.005
LAB
BLANK
10% MeOH
5/19/89
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
<
< 0.1
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.01
0.315
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.01
0.01
0.005
0.01
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.05
0.05
0.0168
<
<
<
0.
<
<
<
<
<
<
0.005
0.005
0.005
.00900
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.05
0.01
0.005
LAB
BLANK
10% MeOH
5/22/89
< 0.1
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.01
0.324
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.01
< 0.01
< 0.005
< 0.01
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.05
< 0.05
0.247
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
0.00975
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.05
< 0.01
< 0.005
LAB
BLANK
10% MeOH
5/23/89
< 0.1
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.01
8-. 279
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.01
< 0.01
< 0.005
< 0.01
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.05
< 0.05
0.0178
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
0.00874
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.05
< 0.01
< 0.005
127
-------
PAGE 1.1
QC REPORT OF GC-MS ANALYSIS
MATRIX Watec
TOTE Volatile compounds
Percent Recovery o£ Surrogates
QC Limit Range
SAMPLE I.D.
DS8-TB-01
DS8-FB-01
DS8-FB-02
GSB-TB-01
GSB-TB-02
GSB-TB-03
ANAALYSIS 1,2-Dichlo- Toluene-d8 BFB
DATE roathane-d4
(76-114) (88-110) (86-115)
5/9/89
5/9/89
5/9/89
5/9/89
5/11/89
5/16/89
GSB-FB-01 5/9/89
GSB-FB-02 5/11/89
LAB BLANK D.I. H20 5/9/89
LAB BLANK D.I. H20 5/11/89
LAB BLANK D.I. H20 5/16/89
DS8-TB-01 HAT. SPIKE 5/9/89
DS8-TB-01 HAT. SPIKE DUP 5/9/89
93.5
88.4
93.0
96.3
97.2
97.0
92.3
108
86.7
77.5
89.4
93.2
94.8
108
104
105
101
100
110
103
108
98.1
88.6
108
100
103
108
107
104
99.0
102
97.6
102
113
102
91.9
121
102
109
128 ,
-------
QC REPORT OF GC-MS ANALYSIS
PAGE 12
MATRIX Soil
TYPE Volatile compounds
Percent Recovery of Surrogates
QC Limit Range
SAMPLE I.D.
DSB-01-10
DSB-01-20
DSB-01-21
DSB-01-35
DSB-02-10
DSB-02-20
DSB-02-30
DSB-03-10
DSB-03-20
DSB-03-34
DSB-03-35
DSB-04-10
DSB-04-20
DSB-04-21
DSB-04-30
DSB-05-10
DSB-05-20
DS8-05-30
DSB-06-10
DSB-06-20
DSB-06-30
DSB-07-10
DSB-07-20
DSB-07-30
LAB BLANK 10% MeOH
LAB BLANK 10% MeOH
LAB BLANK 10% MeOH
LAB BLANK 10% MeOH
LAB BLANK 2% MeOH
DSB-02-io MAT: SPIKE
DSB-02-10 MAT. SPIKE DUP
DSB-05-20 MAT. SPIKE
ANALYSIS
DATE
5/10/89
5/10/89
5/10/89
5/10/89
5/10/89
5/10/89
5/10/89
5/10/89
5/10/89
5/11/89
5/11/89
5/11/89
5/11/89
5/11/89
5/11/89
5/15/89
5/15/89
5/15/89
5/15/89
5/15/89
5/15/89
5/15/89
5/15/89
5/16/89
5/10/89
5/11/89
5/15/89
5/16/89
5/16/89
5/11/89
? 5/11/89
5/16/89
P 5/16/89
1,2-DichlO-
roethane-d4
(70-121)
80.7
80.7
81.5
72.9
80.7
78.1
80.1
81.2
79.9
96.9
77.0
79.3
80.5
81.2
74.1
93.8
88.0
89.7
107
86.9
81.5
82.6
84.7
106
73.7
88.5
86.3
96.5
95.1
78.1
78.1
85.9
89.6
Toluene-d8
(81-117)
101
97.9
99.2
87.2
98.2
96.3
97.2
97.1
95.6
. 90.4
90.0
90.5
92.7
94.4
91.4
90.0
91.8
98.6
114
99.0
85.6
92.5
98.6
113
79.9
91.1
97.2
113
112
93.2
94.4
107
109
BFB
(74-121)
99.0
104
104
95.9
113
113
113
101
105
116
93.1
91.5
92.2
94.6
89.5
102
96.0
103
118
110
111
107
98.2
106
88.4
94.5
103
114
114
99.1
93.1
116
106
129
-------
QC REPORT OF GC-MS ANALYSIS
MATRIX Soil
TYPE Volatile compounds
Percent Recovery of Surrogates
PAGE 13
QC Limit Range
SAMPLE I.D.
GSB-01-15 '
GSB-01-16 "
GSB-01-30
GS8-01-45
GSB-02-15
GSB-02-30
GS8-02-45
GSB-02-46
GSB-03-15
GS8-03-30
GSB-03-45
GSB-04-20
GSB-05-15
GSB-C6-20
GSB-06-30
GSB-06-31
GSB-06-45
GSB-06-50
GSB-06-60
GSB-07-15
GSB-07-30
GS8-07-45
GSB-07-52
GSB-07-60
LAB BLANK 10% MeOH
LAB BLANK 2% MeOH
LAB BLANK 10% MeOH
LAB BLANK 10% MeOH
LAB BLANK 10% MeOH
GSB-01-30 MAT. SPIKE
GSB-03-15 MAT. SPIKE
GSB-03-15 MAT. SPIKE DOP
ANALYSIS
DATE
5/16/89
5/16/89
5/16/89
5/16/89
5/19/89
5/19/89
5/19/89
5/19/89
5/19/89
5/22/89
5/22/89
5/22/89
5/22/89
5/22/89
5/22/89
5/22/89
5/22/89
5/22/89
5/22/89
5/22/89
5/23/89
5/23/89
5/23/89
5/23/89
5/16/89
5/16/89
5/19/89
5/22/89
5/23/89
5/19/89
' 5/19/89
5/22/89 •
' 5/22/89
1,2-Dichlo-
roethane-d4
(70-121)
96.1
93.4
92.7
90.7
88.2
87.2
82.7
92.8
93.2
96.1
102
98.7
99.6
99.2
91.5
92.1
96.3
88.4
94.1
89.4
71.7
84.6
80.7
75.3
96.5
95.1
85.6
97.1
71.5
93.7
90.0
97.5
103
Toluene~d8
(81-117)
114
112
114
111
103
98.6
105
99.7
96.4
110
113
110
109
110
111
107
107
116
111
116
89.3
100
97.1
98.1
113
112
97.8
106
84.8
106
105
104
109
BFB
(74-121)
109
104
110
110
103
99.0
109
104
101
110
110
104
92.2
104
94.6
80.9
98.9
87.4
91.1
92.3
86.4
90.7
92.1
88.9
114
114
96.6
98.5
80.0
105
113
110
115
130
-------
PAGE 14
QC REPORT OF GC-MS ANALYSIS
SAMPLE I.D: DSB-TB-01 ANALYSIS DATE: 5/9/89
MATRIX: Water TYPE: Volatile Compounds
Percent Recovery of Matrix Spike
COMPOUND Cone. Spk. Sample Cone. Spk.
Added result Recov.
(ug/L) (ug/L)
1,1-Dicholoroethene 40 0 33.8
Trichloroethene 50 0 44.0
Benzene 50 0 41.5
Toluene 20 0 18.8
Chlorobenzene 40 0 36.6
•
%Rec. Cone. Spk. % Rec RPD* QC LIMIT QC LIMIT
Recov.
Dup.
84.4 34.8 87.0
88.0 45.4. 90.8
83.0 40.7 81.4
94.0 20.3 101.5
91.5 37.5 93.8
RPD %Rec.
3 14 61-145
3 14 71-120
2 11 76-127
8 13 76-125
«s.
2 13 75-130
* RELATIVE PERCENT DIFFERENCE
131
-------
PAGE 15
QC REPORT OF GC-MS ANALYSIS
SAMPLE l.D: DSB-02-10 ANALYSIS DATE: 5/11/89
MATRIX: Soil TYPE: Volatile Compounds
Percent Recovery of Matrix Spike
COMPOUND Cone. Spk.
Added
1 , 1-Dicholoroethene
Trichloroathene
Benzene
Toluene
Chlocobenzene
(ug/L)
40
50
50
20
40
Sample Cone. Spk. %Rec. Cone. Spk. % Rec
result Recov. Recov.
(ug/L) Dup.
0 39.0 97.5 39.1 97.8
0 50.9 102 54.2 108
0 48.6 97.2 50.7 101
9.20 32 112 31.5 112
0 42 104 41.6 104
RPD* QC LIMIT
RPD
0 22
6 24
4 21
0 21
0 21'
QC LIMIT
%Rec.
59-172
I
62-137
66-142
59-139
60-133
* RELATIVE PERCENT DIFFERENCE
132
-------
PAGE 16
QC REPORT OF GC-MS ANALYSIS
SAMPLE I.D: DSB-05-20 ANALYSIS DATE: 5/16/89
MATRIX: Soil TYPE: Volatile Compounds
Percent Recovery of Matrix Spike
COMPOUND Cone. Spk.
1 , 1-Dicholoroethene
Trichloroethene
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
Added
(ug/L)
40
50
50
20
40
Sample
result
(ug/L)
0
0
0
11.0
0
Cone. Spk.
Recov.
29.3
45.5
42.1
27.9
37.0
%Rec. Cone. Spk. % Rec
Recov.
Dup.
73.3 35.7 89.3
91 49.3 98.6
84.2 49.4 98.8
84.5 29.8 94
92.5" 44.5 111
RPD* QC LIMIT
RPD
20 22
8 24
16 21
11 21
•*».
18 21
QC LIMIT
%Rec.
59-172
62-137
66-142
59-139
60-133
* RELATIVE PERCENT DIFFERENCE
133
-------
PAGE 17
QC REPORT OF OC-MS ANALYSIS
SAMPLE I.D: GSB-Ol-30 ANALYSIS DATE: 5/19/89
MATRIX: Soil TYPE: Volatile Compounds
Percent Recovery of Matrix Spike
COMPOUND Cone. Spk.
Added
1, l-Dicholoroethene
Trichloroethene
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
(ug/L)
40
50
50
20
40
Sample Cone. Spk.
result Recov.
(ug/L)
0 31.1
0 43.2
0 45.9
9.00 29.7
0 37.8
%Rec. Cone. Spk. % Rec
Recov.
Dup.
77.8 36.6 91.5
86.4 47.4 94.8
91.8 49.8 99.6
104 32.6 118
- 94.5 41.7 104
RPD* QC LIMIT
RPD
16 22
9 24
8 21
13 21 .
10 21
QC LIMIT
%Rec.
!
59-172
62-137
66-142
59-139
I
60-133
* RELATIVE PERCENT DIFFERENT
134
-------
PAGE 18
QC REPORT OF GC-HS ANALYSIS
SAMPLE I.D: GSB-03-15 ANALYSIS DATE: 5/22/89
MATRIX: Soil TYPE: Volatile Compounds
Percent Recovery of Matrix Spike
COMPOUND Cone. Spk.
Added
(ug/L)
1 , 1-Dicholoroethene
Trichloroethene
Benzene
Toluene
Chlorobenzene
40
50
50
20
40
Sample
result
(ug/L)
0
0
0
9.75
0
Cone. Spk.
Recov.
41.5
52.8
51.6
31.7
40.3
%Rec. Cone. Spk. % Rec
Recov.
Dup.
104 37.1 92.8
106 50.2 100
103 47.6 95.2
110 30.5 104
101' 39.8 100
RPD* QC LIMIT
RPD
11 22
5 24
8 21
6 21
1 21
QC LIMIT
%Rec.
59-172
62-137
66-142
59-139
60-133
* RELATIVE PERCENT DIFFERENCE
135
-------
PERCENT MOISTURE OF SOIL SAMPLES
PAGE 19
SAMPLE I.D.
%HOISTURE
Dsn-oi-io
DSB-01-20
DSB-Ol-21
DS8-01-35
7.56
4.56
3.61
3.92
DSB-02-10
DSQ-02-20
DS8-02-30
7.82
7.62
6.01
DSn-03-10
DS8-03-20
DSB-03-34
DSB-03-35
4.59
5.25
2.46
1.98
OSB-04-10
DSB-04-20
DSB-04-21
DSB-04-30
9.22
4.67
6.32
2.34
DS8-05-10
CC8-OS-20
DGB-05-30
5.89
5.95
3.23
DSB-06-10
DSO-06-20
DSB-C6-30
S.03
4.59
4.73
DS8-07-10
DS8-07-20
DSB-07-30
5.61
2.43
2.55
136
-------
PERCENT MOISTURE OF SOIL SAMPLES
PAGE 20
SAMPLE I.D.
%MOISTURE
GSB-01-15
GSB-01-16
GSB-01-30
GSB-01-45
9.22
8.11
8.80
1.47
GSB-02-15
GS8-02-30
GSB-02-45
GSn-02-46
8.97
4.01
4.43
3.13
GSB-03-15
GSB-03-30
GSB-03-45
8.45
4.28
4.94
GSB-04-20
10.42
GSB-05-15
17.78
GSB-06-20
GSB-06-30
GSB-06-31
GSB-06-45
GSB-06-50
GS8-06-60
14.60
3.87
2.29
1.90
1.94
1.36
GSB-07-15
GSB-07-30
GSB-07-45
GSB-07-52
GSB-07-60
7.99
5.81
2.40
1.57
2.56
137
-------
138 ;
-------
APPENDIX G
SITE BORING LOGS
= S •*
z 05 o
•-. 71 oo
""
£2 2 =
_i =~ -
P ;= «*
a co
tu
LU Q£ O O
—J LU = 3=
—i ci-
t—i I O CD
Q£ UJ »-* O
o :c a£ r>
II <=> 2= |
|| • cn |
|| CO r— C ••
|| o i~, cu — 01 cn
*•*• .. .. S--5 .£ c
II CU CO CO CO _l T- i— i. O
|J t. •»- CO CO • t- O. O •I'-
ll O —J •— CU CUCOg D3+JT3
"- C C •-" IO CU 01
' — O CO O ' — O 0)i — CUO.Z3
T- CU O. ••- •— -i- . :> — -0 OJ!=ri
£5 £;E
c
o
'a. °L
. « «
Q.
to a)
+•> cn
. IO C
II *~ ra
1] GO O
ij f C £= CO U_
(I 1 CU O CU CO
|| a- (. i — i —
a: -c i a
•*-* > a
cn o "O u.
c u cu
cn a) t. c
— J a? o) ••"
•a : t
S- CO CD
8 1 f
cu «— r
Q£ CO CD 4->
c: c
o o
••- o t
-i-i a CD
|| IO CO OJ
£+•
c - r 4,
II CU O CO
|J (X COl J,
D)
c
IO 0)
CO Z
c o
t- o t—
O t-
|
c:
*4- O
CO
4-> CU
co ai
o I
to. c >
" §5
r2 J; **~
CJ CO
- -a -a
o -a c
• cu re
co ae. co
o
CO
GO
a
•>*
•-H
O
O
>,
t-
5
cJo
CO CO
(D I
to v
2£
*— 1
I
t— 1
OJ
00
^
IO
c >
iH i
>>,>
W (O
tl_
c
to
CD
cn
OJ
0
o •'
OJ
(1)
-M
-M
T3
S
0)
C
CSi
CO (0
" -2=
IX)
f-1
1
OJ
CO
o
OJ
CD
OJ
to
to
0
*— 1
CO
o
CO
OJ
OJ
CL.
to
I
0)
to
o
^!
*^"
CD
^
co
(U 0)
w >
t- (0
03 t-
o cn
o
o £ •
-M -t->
(4- i <
tf-
' C CO
3 ~O
O £=
s-
-------
S
ev,
C
_
uj >
ai
IS
0 Zj
•— 0
f— Q)
a u
c
o
«-t O-
CO "
ai
a
ID 0)
-M Dl
(O tZ
^5
CO O
J'
IS
1 01
ex.
o
g
"U
t- to
0 3
or: co
c C
O o
T- O
4-1 a
ffl CO
$-
eu --
cu o
O_ CO
en
M— ~C
r— O
II
CO 3£
(. 0
0 •£
52
a. a
cu i—
O UJ
^QJ
2=
cn
o c-* cu •«— en en
.. .. o)^--^- -r-c
CO W _J •»- " — J- O
CO W 1- O- O •«-
i — Ol CU C Q E CO 4-i "O
^- c c »— i to o cu
O_2 J2 CUCOt-r- 4-»
to O ^~ O CU •"— CU O- 2 '
O. •»— i — ••— > "^ TU +J E O
t^l-LIl- 03 «
§-M
[O U-
0) CO
S- 1 — 1 —
O T3 U-
3 £ C
i*v 0} -^«
s T
CO
CO -4-i
»
CO
S 1
CO
J.
^
Lu
(0 O
CO =
-a
c
iT3
>> W ••- (_ o
Q.4-1 3 T3 __
O i- 0) Ol >> «
M 1- X •— 0
CJ -- i— O) JO 1
O
-(J
r— i— C.
01 O
>, > T3
18 1O O
1— i.
o o> o
-tJ O 1
i— ns
« 4-> O
C - -*J
3 T3 W
o c •*-
S- (O O
CO W E
o
«-4
36
0)
C3
1
•-1
ao
o
•"*
CO
CO
in
in
*-*
o
•^
•—1
C/l
o
^
m
in
i
i
•— -a
•*- c
(0 (O
CO •)->
« 4J §
d -+J
C_ *r- 4J
O i—
4- c cn
(O
C W M-
3 O
o cu
.*-- c a>
4-* O)
^: >, $-
cn s- o
_i > •—
Ol LO
r^ CM
""'
O r-4
*"H *^
CO
CO
O
CO
LO
CSJ
CO
LO
*— 1
CNJ
*"~^
r— 1
•' '
CO
CO
LO
iri
^
W
C-*
CO
o
UJ
140
-------
S
LO
. O
S Jj '
,LO ,
=3
I
g:
51
o
2
1
Cn CD g
lo loo m
I I J <0
o
z
en
•"."._;
CD CD 1^1 '
_j a.
t-< I CD CQ
Di LU t—I O
cs :n a: --3
3
ai
5-
CJ
•
+J
M
•f™
_J
A
00
z •
O *>• 0) T- 0) O)
> •— c c • •
M M _i •»- r— t- a
m w t- Q. o *^-
i — 0) 0) COE QQ-t-> "O
•*- C C *-* co 01 0)
O ^ \x -g} to J>- «~~ +J
WO" — o a)« — a)O.n
1— H-Lul— O 3 1C «
W U.
0) CO
1— 1—
-*->
a>
01
i- c:
01 -r-
t
t
4->
CM
i
4.
i-5
re
CO
<_
o
x:
-M
a.
&
CL
E
CO
CO
o
O ra 4-> >, .
+-> S- -U
O) 0) r—
01 C i-
C T3 -r- (0
<<^ co >»
C 01
2 c= o >
QX ^
t/)
^J-
LO
-
CO
LO
LO
*— 1
0
•—I
CM
U
ai
it
«_
D)
£
M-
O
01
O
CO
1—
CO
01
c
in
0)
O
01
•r—
«*-
01
• C
CO CC
z
if
0)
o
0)
" C
f~ £
a
•M
_C 0)
D) C
LO
*— 4
LO
*~*
^.
»-l
2
CO
CO
LO
.-4
CO
O
0
CO
CO
03
c
re
p;
rc
(C
CO
LO
^J-
^-
CO
-------
- =
== 2 °
»-H "7* CO
»
—i *! I
o n eo
a. «o .-<
«c CM
« ^*
UJ
z *~» •
CO *? Z
ils
H-t
Of LJJ •—<
a a: a-
5
u
o
Q
0}
CO
r— c C ••
Q) 1— .r- ^- C
« CO — J f • — t- O
« W S- OL O -^*
r-O) (U C Q E CQ4J-C
•^ c c >-» « a) a
O-*£ ^ 0)00 *_•—+-
COUI — CJ fl)f— 0) O. =
oJE^-iE
-M
J-
1
o
u
(U
r
CD
S
CD
.
CO
.
CO
W Lt_
QJ CO
1 — h-
-s
01
01
t- C
t
t
f
JJJ
u,
OJ
^
4
Dl
O.
E
ta
CO
s-
o
J=
'Q
01
a
1
CO
1
(D
31
C
O
0)
UJ
d
z
£
u_
D.
(O
O
>>
O
O
CO
CO
0
CO
o
CD
0)
C/l
t-
ra
o
u
M
-o
c
(0
»
0
1
u. w
1= 0)
5 >
o m
U J-
00 D)
*=;
CO
CO
i
t_ c
i>
O 0 "
• a)
LO J-
01
>
•^
CO
4->
01
C -D ^
r— O
•^ O
I- 0)
O -Q
o
CO
-> 01 01
t- t- t-
•— S o o
"- CO Ol 4-»
H- -i-i c: o
r- 0 E
- 03 t_
CU -C -M CO
Dl Q. w i-
ia co
ja 18 co -M
s- re =i
re t- J= ja
0
O)
LO
1^^
CO
•sr
CO
o
CO
CO
CO
o
«— 1
CM
O
*~*
«— t
O
CO
ca
o
UJ
-C CO
•M S- JZ
i- ra 4->
4J T3 CL
id Ol Id "O
Dl 01
r— Dl -C J^
re 3 o re
•»- r— i- O
S- OLJZ CO
01 S
4-» t- CZ
« 3 T3 01
E O> t- 01
3 re ja
•2 "* Ja 0)
-t-J - C- 03
O fl> JZ
+j • ja <-
•r- F^ -r- 0 10
in CM 4- +-> +j
142
-------
* -I-1
01 CO
U s-l
rl
OJ O)
o A cu **- oi cn
> i— c c ••
0) •— *»- •«- c
W W __l •»- r— J. O
W CO t- Q. O *»-
r- fl) QJ C O £ CO 4-> T3
•r- C C »-* rtl 0) 0)
oj«c -^ *•— ~O 4-* £ O
o .c •*- jc fO -d c t*_ 5 *-
I— I— U- I— O 3 <0 - •». —
§ 0 C
O O CX
31 -»-> £
13 iii
g> a '
§ o£
ej UJ uj o
co g st ^
en c_) *~^
CO CD LU ^
^ z en C"
oi oi u.
CO CQ O ^
0
03
^j t**
o co in cvj
a; co i^ cjj
i i i i
O£ • •
uj a: o o
_J 0.
>-i 1 O CO
Qi LU K-i O
a jc o; —i
c
o
cu T^
§ "*•
0)
a
10 cu
+J en
CO CJ
t- c:
1 CU ••-
+j +->
0) 0) -4-"
c g co u.
(U
1 Ot O "U U.
1 C CJ ] i
cn
c
•i- T3
t-C
IU
COZ
c o
0 -° *~
JZ IQ
Q. CD O
a> «— s-
C3 UJ U_
QJ
a.
« 0
en ^
O
-M
• 0 O > -
to r^ vt • *— - * t- w
£-*-H(OCO tt) •— « -3
W O — ' 3 (-
* CO W - (T3 CO t- O CD O
i — OJ -M q}O
(d > > -a t- *« o
"§.£ £ °o oE-a-^"c
CO 4_> 4J r— C •— 4->
»Q) O'«-i — •»- cO« — >t
-• « tfl «r— 0)" — CO 03 _ii
i-~ T3 t- O O > " — 3JZOC3
tZ coo o~a o>woi«3 WCM
LO
'~*
r**.
CO
CO
CO
en
^3
ljf>
r-t
O
s
143
-------
•.s.
o^co
i2i
ri!
CO
o
/EL OBSERVATIONS: None
_i
1
#
4-»
CO
1 C
31 o
1 +->
to
O O)
CO 1
=> 0-
s|
S'
UJ
CO
i i i <3
UJ
CO O 2
SS"S
COCOOg
cn
o r**
OC CJ LO CM
lit)
£
OJ
o
c
o
TI
u
CO
ai
c
18
O
4
g
a.
,
I
CO
CO
o
CO
a
CO
-a
j=
c
o
03
LU
&
t-
t-
o
u
0)
o:
CD
CD
;
CD
0
u.
CO
Hole appears
contami-nated
c
"co u.
•s
ra
%£
t
t
£
CM
i
4.
Thickness: 29.0
CL
U
1C
o
CO
CD
CO
0
a
U £
0) •—
i •*-
c a
0
CO
c c •
^ 'Hi
to i-
CO 4-
(o a
i 11
-a i—
§^
>. c
•a «
c • —
ra ^_
•— 'io
u > a>
r- t- re
co cn E
CO
o
•-H
o
CO
Grouted
Same - some material
appears pitch-like
:
0
•-H
CO
CO
pH
O
-
1
to
'
1 1
CM
1
1
CO
CO
CD
. CO
CO
1
i CO
. CO
LO
CD
CM
O
cn
T— 1
ra
*~4
1
CD
CM
re
"O
o
ra co
CO CM
CO
LO
en
CM
CD
CM
Q_
CO
1
~a
C
re
s-
OJ T3
C
H
CO 1
o
en
.r
i
CO
CD
-
y,
LO
CD
CO
LO
cn
CM
CM
01
%.
0
LO
CD
CO
Of
4-
Q-
CO
1
O)
re t-
r^.
i
CO
«— i
r-l
CM
CO
CO
LO
LO
O
CO
1
CO
CO
0
cn
LO
to
t-
o_
CO
0)
CO
t
1
CM
*— 1
CM
.— 1
CO
CO
LO
O
LO
O
cn
-
CO
o
cn
LO
in
o
LO
01
CO
ra >i
sz
O 10
4-1 fr
01 -
c: a.
.r- CO
<»-
i
ii >>
t-. re u
OQ CO IS
o
cn
LO
CO
i
i
cn
CM
CM
LO
*— 1
CO
CD
CD
O
s
in
144
-------
•«*•
«^r
to
to
z en
•-" *7" OD
So
r^ -T—
52
CO*
E
QJ
CO
1
O
0 g
LU 4-»
to co
~~5 ay
2t
CD 1
CO 5
i- 01 on
> •— c c ••
o> •— ••- •— c
» CO _1 i- r- S- O
w eo t. o. o ••-
i — 0) O) COE CQ-MT)
•r- c n >-H co o> o>
oj^ _*: o>co c_i — ^j
o.E-'-jE ro ^ c £ o t-
1— h- U-t— O3lO«tOO3
ft
"g
OJ
a
4J
t-
CO
D_
O
'
t_
O
CJ
0)
0£
c
o
(0
4-1
CD
a_
O»
—
CO
t-
o
•C
4J
0)
0)
1-
e:
(O
CO
0)
o
c
CJ
1
"S
c
0)
°"
S-
QJ
Q
t-
en o
c o
ai ai
CO
^
CO
c
o
a
CO
^J
"Q
CO
TJ
^
0)
=
O
>
QJ
LU
d
ZE
.
to
.
to
to
to
"-
c
CO U-
0) CO
1— 1—
-M
OJ
0)
-a u.
0)
&- c:
O) *>~
t
t
4^
U.
CM
I
I
LI.
a.
a
o
o
CO
**
o
CO
^3
-a
c -
c: co
10 -C
w *x^ at
2 ->->
m 01
E ••- c. — .
c o o
•— 0)
j* eu f— -
U > J3 T3
(O (O *"* O
•— t- 3 O
cn en t- 2
CO
**
LO
^j>
•-H
CO
CQ
• c-
Q) -r-
•f— '[
<4-
O 1
2 co
c- 1
-a c >,
0)
s
«-H
R9
^ 0>
m
r- Q)
o o
(O
to -d
2 w
I- 0)
JQ •—
1 4-»
T3 4-»
0) -r-
Di i—
0
1^
*~*
to
"*
o
f^
CXI
^
to"
1
C O-
(C CO
CO
4-1
0) ca
C "-
if! E
C 1
O 4-1
CO 0)
-a 4-»
•a 4^
0) -r-
0
f^
CXI
CO
> E
CO i i
cxi ta
4-1 O CO
o_
CU C 1
0) t- E
jQ
-------
5
m
in
as 2 "*
ss§
= 4°?
-s -^
to «o «r
»-« jjj r^
O ^ oo
D- «" «-t
2: ~ tu
sll
» Q_
UJ CO
I
«?
1
CO
II
r— CO
:£:£
Q
S o
O H- =s
12 S s
«8f-l
s s *"
C|£ C£ J~
COCOO §
SK
Kl CJ 1 CM
O o£ O O1
lilt
o; • •
UJ Of O O
_j uj 2: :zr
_J o«
H-4 _J CO CO
Pf* jjj i«4 C3
2
g
CJ
r—
ZZ
t.
o
Q)
e
CO
a
O)
c
IU
— J
«
CD
C
o
o
CO
Q
CO
0)
oi
t-
i
3
0
CO
CO
>
CO
CO
a) -^- en ra
S ^ ^ -S c
CO CO _l f- i — J- O
-co co (-0.0-^-
r— 0) 0) C Q E C04->
•t- c C »-« S Q>
O .^ ^ 0) co t- «~
g_.^jz^ >^-o -Si"
i— >— ul H- o ^ m
W U-
•2 {2
O)
QJ
TD U.
0)
$- C.
E
M
3
_Q
- OJ
E O
co m
CJ
o
CO
CO
«— i
CO
0
CJ
CO
CO
o
»— 1
IT)
in
o
W
QJ
O
JQ
m
to
o
CM
CO
m
*— i
CO
•— 1
in
CO
to
to
in
si
o
C?
LO
m;
«-i
2
LO
to
CO
0
CO
LO
C71
in
CO*
T3
s
V3
>>
^_
CO
o
t-
co
c-
"S
r—
4-
•^
CJ
(O
-Q
O O)
•— I 13
CD O
c-
1 CF)
CO T3
O C
uj m
146
-------
_ -
0 S <
D- t! >-«
LO LO
I I
a; o; u.
o o ta-
rn oa o
o
r^
O)
>-i _i ID co
a: uj H-> o
a a: a; -3
s-
o
a
01
CO
1
-V
c
0]
JC
o
c
o
i . i
i— t?
O 0) ••- Ol Dl
> •— C C ••
0) r— ^- -r- c
CO CO 1 •»- ' — S- O
CO CO t- O- O •<-
•—0)01 c o E m 4-1
f- c c: >-• «3 fl)
O ^ .^ 0) CO , t- « —
MO' — OCU' — COO.
O."- •— ••- > f T3 -I-1 g
OJZ---JC (D -C C M-5
t— 1— U. 1— O3IO
0)
c:
0)
a.
U
01
$_
O) O
c u
cu cu
— i
S
o
CO
g
g
CO
"a
CO
•a
C£
_
.
CD
CD
co
C
CO Lu
0) CO
1— 1—
T3 Ll-
a>
t- E
0) -•-
t
t
.
4->
CM
*
*
r— • o
CLJC
CO
fc
0
f-
4->
01
3E
c
o
m
O. 01
°
at
§"
CO
LU
O
o
i —
§
u.
CL
10
o
<0
o
CO
o
o
CO
' — CO
•— IO
M- b>
' — O
0) O •—
c- i si
D> 0)
(0 4->
C *0 E
ia •«-
(- JC
T3 0) O
CO £ O
CO
o
^H
f-;
o
e
4-* (O
(O CO
-^
JC CU
O CO
D- O
CO
CO
LD
LO
O
1-1
^
^
**
£
IO
CO
^*
1-1
CM
«— 1
00
CO
CO
LT>
LO
O
*"•
«— 1
II
f^
CQ
CO
CD
t-
o
CO
a.
CO
IO
O — 1
1 — •-<
LO
LO <
-0
-------
------- |