United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Emergency and
Remedial Response
EPA/ROD/R01 -83/003
July 1983
EPA
Superfund
Record of
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO. \2. 3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
'IO''Dl. ,~,,~ IRe) 1 - 8 3/003
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. REPORT DATE
SUPERFUND RECORD OF DECISION: 0711 r:: Ic?
McKin Site, ME 6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
1,. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS 13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
u. S. Environmental Protection Agency ",' ., ...,,,....
401 "M" Street, S. W. 14. Sl'olllS"OFHf'fG AGE'NCY CODE
Washington, D. C. 2,0460 800/00
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
The McKin site is located approximately 1.5 miles east of Gray center on the
Mayall Road in Gray, Maine. The site includes approximately 6 acres and is sur-
rounded by residences, the closest being within 200 feet. The site lies in an
abandoned sand and gravel pit and currently consists of a fenced enclosure, 21 tanks
(12 of which are outside the fence), an incinerator, a concrete block building, an
asphalt lined lagoon and other debris. In 197~ liquid wastes were removed from the
site, however, non-pumpab1e sludges were left on-site. Most of the tank contents
(33,500 gallons) and 165 fifty-five gallon drums of oil and chemical wastes were
removed under the supervision of the Maine Department of Environmental Protection.
Air monitoring in 1982 showed high levels of volatile organics around the tanks.
Remaining materials in the tanks were found to contain concentrations \ up to 20%)
of dichloroethylene, freon, trichloroethylene and xylene.
Selected actions for this Initial Remedial Measure (IRM) include: on-site
cleaning of the tanks, transport of empty tanks off-site for salvage, and transport of
liquids and sludges off-site for disposal. Estimated capital cost for this IRM is
$47,000.
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
a. DESCRIPTORS b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
Record of Decision:
Si te Name: McKin site, ME
Contaminated media: gw, sw, soil, air
Key contaminants: volatile organics
(freon, xylene), solvents (TCE, DCE)
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT 19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report) 21. NO. OF PAGES
None 11
20.SECURITY CLASS (Tllispage) 22. PRICE
None
EPA Fo,m 2220-1 (R.... 04-77)
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
,.
REPORT NUMBER
Insert the EPA report number as it appears on the cover of the publication.
LEAVE BLANK
.2.
3.
RECIPIENTS ACCESSION NUMBER
Reserved for use by each report recipient.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Title should indicate dearly and briefly the subje~'t coverage of the report. and be display,'d I'Hlminenlly. s,.t suhlitk, if USl"\. in smalkr
- type or otherwise subordinate it to main title. When a report is prepared in mor,' than on~' volumc. n'l"~at th,' I'rimilry till~', illld vulun1l'
-.' number and include subtitle for the specific title.
6.
REPORT DATE
Each report shan carry a date indicating at least month and year. Indkate II". hilsis on whkh it "'ilS s..ok,.t,'d (1'.1:.. dat.. of/m/I'. Jatl' of
approval. date of preparation. etc.).
.PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
Leave blank.
6.
7.
AUTHORIS)
Give name(s) in ~'onventional order (John R. Doc, J. Roba( Doc, ('(c.). list author's affiliation if it ,IiIT,'rs fflllll Ih~' p~'rfurllling ...rgani,
zation.
8.
PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER
Insert if performing organization wishes to assign this number.
9.
PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Give name, street, city, state, and ZIP code. list no more than two levels of an organizational hireardlY.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
Use the program element number under which the report was prepared. Subordinate numb~'rs 111:1)' be indll\kd in pilr~'nlhl's~'\.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NUMBER
Insert contract or grant number under which report was prepared.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Include ZIP code.
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Indicate interim final, etc., and if applicable, dates covered,
14. SPONSORING AGI::NCY CODE
Insert appropriate code.
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Enter information not included elsewhere but useful, such as:
To be published in, Supersedes, Supplements, etc.
Prepared in ~'ooperation with, Troll1slation of, I'rc\l'nl~'d al l'I.nll'I,'n,',' or.
16. ABSTRACT
Include a brief (200 words or less) factual summary of the mosl signifkant information ~'ontain~',\ in Ih,' fI'l'm!. II Ih,' fI'l'0n nllll:lin\ a
significant bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
(a) DESCRIPTORS - Select from the Thesaurus of Engineerin~ and Scientifk Teflm the proper aUlhoril.,'d II'rllls Ihat identify Ihe major
concept of the research and are sufficiently specific and precise to be used as index entries for catalo!!lI1g.
(b) IDENTlrIERS AND OPEN.ENDED TERMS, Use identifiers for project nanK~. code names. equipmenl d~'~il!nalors. ell:. U~e open,
ended terms written in descriptor form for those subjects for which no descriptor exists.
(c) COSA TI HELD GROUP - Field and group assignments are to be taken from the J 965 ('OSA 1'1 Suh.i~.~.t ('all'Vory List. Sinn' the ma.
jority of documents are multidisciplinary in nature. the Primary Field/Group assignment(s) will be sp~'~'i"i~' disl'iplin~', arl'a of human
endeavor, or type of physical object. The application(s) will be cross-rcfercnced with ~el'Ondary I. il'ld/C ;lIJUP a\\lj!nll1elll\ tha I \\'ill 1'0110\\
the primary posting(s).
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Denote releasability to the public or limitation for reasons other than security for cxample "Rl'Ieasc lJlllilllil~'d:' ('jl~' allY availilhilil)' III
the public, with address and price.
19.8120. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
DO NOT submit classified reports to the National Technical Information servke.
21. NUMBER OF PAGES
Insert the total number of pages, including this one and unnumbered pages, but exclude dhtribution list, if any.
22. PRICE
Insert the price set by the National fechnicallnformation Service or the Government I'rinting Office, if knuwn.
-------
'. '
. ,
,
JUL. I 5 j~.3
Record of Decision
Initial Remedial Measures Alternative Selection
Site:
Mckin Site, Gray, Maine
-
Analysis Reviewed:
I have reviewed the following documents describing the
analysis of cost effectiveness of remedial alternatives at
the Mckin site:
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of Initial Remedial
Measure Alternatives at Mckin, Gray, Maine, May 1983.
Remedial Action Master Plan for Mckin,
GraYr Maine, April 1983.
Description of Selected,Option:
", ,.--'
, - On-site cleaning of tanks.
Transport empty tanks off-site for salvage.
.
Transport liquids & sludges off-site for disposal.
Declarations:
,"
Consistent with the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), and the
National Contingency Plan (40 CFR PART 300), I have determined
that the selected option for the Mckin site is a feasible and
cost-effective remedial action necessary to protect public
health and the environment. I have also determined that the
action being taken is appropriate when balanced against the
need to use Trust Fund money at other sites. In addition,
I have determined that the off-site transport of hazardous
substances is more cost-ef,fective than other remedial actions
and therefore consistent w~th Section 101(24) of CERCLA.
,
Office of
e M. Thoma
Assistant Administrator
-------
. .
COST-EFFECTIVENESS EVALUATION OF
INITIAL REMEDIAL MEASURE ALTERNATIVES
AT McKIN SITE, GRAY, ME
BACKGROUND
The MCKin site is located approximately 1.5 miles east cf
Gray center on the Mayall Road in Gray, Maine. The site includes
approximately 6 acres and is surrounded by residences, the
closest being within 200 feet. The site lies in an abandoned
sand and gravel pit and currently consists of a fenced enclosure,
21 tanks: (12 of which are outside the fence (figure 1», an
incinerator, a concrete block building, an asphalt lined lagoon,
and other debris. During the summer of 1979, the Maine Department
of Environmental Protection (DEP) supervised the removal of
liquid waste,from the site by Maine Waste Oil (MWO) of Buckfield,
Maine. However, sludge not removable by pumping was left on-site.
MWO contracted Cannon Engineering to drain the large tanks and
165 fifty-five gallon drums and to remove all contents to the
Cannon facility in Bridgewater, Massachusetts. Aproximately
33,500 gallons of oil and chemical waste were removed from the
site to the Cannon facility. This accounted for all liquid
stored above g~ound in tanks or drums. In addition, a number
of empty 55-gallon drums, found south of the site in the woods,
were moved to the enclosed area. A magnetometer survey was
performed shortly after the drums were moved; no buried drums
were located in the woods, but some were found in the northwest
corner of the site.
- .
In August, 1982, EPA monitored the air at the Mckin site.
As shown on the site map (figure 1), a number of tanks lie
outside of the enclosed area. Some of these tanks have open
nozzles and some have up to 18 inGh square openings cut or
punched into them. -Tank No. 10 at the northern end of the
site has an open nozzle and air readings within the nozzle
~ndicate 150 to 200 ppm of volatile organics (as measured by
EPA on July 9, 1982, and verified by EPA's contractor on
September 2, 1982). Similarly, Tank No. 12 within the fenced
enclosure had a volatile organics reading of about 700 ppm.
Air readings outside of the site indicate background levels of
between 2 and 6 ppm volatile organics. Ambient air readings
throughout the site were also in that range. These values are
not absolute and are used for comparison onlv.
In March 1983, the Maine ~epartment of Environmental
Protection (DEP) went onsite and tested the materials left
in the tanks. Concentrations of dichloroethylenes, freons,
trichloroethylenes, and xylenes of up to 20% were found in
four of the tanks. These tanks vary from good to poor condition
Some are very ~usty and possibly leaking. (See Attachment 1
for individual tank discriptions and analysis results). Several
-------
. .
2
Tank 1 is outside the fence and has an opening in the top,
there is a hazard of direct human contact. Tanks 11 and 12,
inside the fence, are rusted and may be leaking, presenting a
direct contact hazard and a potential contribution to further
ground water contamination. Removal and disposal of all liquids
and sludges is recommended by the RAMP in order to mitigate
the threat of direct contact and further ground water ~ontamination.
While not all the tanks appear to be in a leaking or deteriorating'
condition, the presence of the tanks on the site will hamper the
investigation scheduled for the site. Their presence limits
work that can safely be conducted on the site. In addition, it
is not cQntemplated that any final remedy would include leaving
the tanks permanently on the site.
The public has been thoroughly involved with this site for
several years. The draft RAMP was available for public comment
during a two 'week period in January 1983. The alternatives
considered for the Initial Remedial M~asures were discussed at
a public meeting held on March 8, 1983. Both at the meeting
and during the comment period following the meeting, all public
comments supported the removal of the liquids, sludges, and
tanks from the site.
RECOMMENDATION FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION
To consider the available alternatives for dealing with
the hazards posed by the liquids, sludges, and the tanks them-
selves, EPA analyzed the six different potential actions. The
summaries of each of these six potential actions are presented
below in two "source" categories, in order to facilitate a
clear comparison of the alternatives.
o
EPA considered the following three alternatives for the
problems posed by the liquids and sludges:
1.
On-site incineration. of liquids and sludges.
EPA analyzed the possibility of mobilizing portable
equipment for incineration of the approximately 6500
gallons of liquids and sludges. The option was not
considered viable for two reasons. First, the cost
of this alternative including mobilizing the incineration
equipment was estimated to be $100,000. Considering
the limited amount of liquids and sludges to be
incinerated, s~ch an expense was not considered to be
cost-effective.
Second, the close proximity of the site to a residential
area created public health concerns with respect to
the use of the incinerator.
The availability of other alternatives not presenting
these public health concerns influenced the Agency
-------
. .
2.
o
3
On-site storage of liquids and sludges in secure
containers.
An analysis of the possibility of repacking liquids
and sludges in secure containers to protect public
health and the environment without removing the hazardous
materials from the site indicated that the approach is
feasible but that it increased the logistical and safety
problems already of concern on the site.
The RAMP anticipates time delays in the RI/FS and,
thus, increases in the total costs that would result
from the need to move tanks around the site in order
to sample the soil beneath them.
3.
Transport liquids and sludges off-site for disposal.
This is the recommended alternative for liquids and
sludges.
The estimated cost of draining, transporting,
and disposing of liquids and sludges is $15,400.
This cost incorporates personal safety protection
that includes respiratory protection as necessary,
and waste compatability testing.
With respect to the tanks, EPA considered the following
three alternatives:
1.
Transport contaminat~d tanks off-site for disposal.
This alternative presents a major logistical problem,
in that, several of the tanks are too large to be
transported on highways without being cut up.
This problem, in addition to the high cost of
transportation to and disposal at a secure landfill,
eliminates this alternative from serious consideration.
The cost of various scenarios possible in this
alternative would range roughly from $100,000 tn
$500,000.
2.
On-site cleaning of tanks and temporary on-site
storag~ of tanks.
This alternative would minimize threats to public
health and the environment from the tanks on-site.
The problems with this alternative are that relocating
the tanks on-site may be necessary to facilitate
operations at the site, and additional mobilization
and decontamination of the tanks may be required before
they could be removed and the site closed.
A complete costing of this alternative is not possible
-------
. .
. .
!
.
4
3.
Clean tanks on-site and transport tanks off-site
as salvage.
This is the recommended alternative for the disposal
of tanks.
'The estimated cost of $31,400 includes the on-site
'draining and cleaning of all tanks present. The
~tank cleaning will include scrubbing, triple rinsing,
'and certification as gas free. Oversized tanks
will be cut up to sizes suitable for over-the-road
transportation.
These costs are based on personal safety protection
including respiratory protection as necessary, with
only one mobilization of contractors for cleaning and
handling of the tanks instead of the two or more
mobilizations that would be required under other
alternatives.
This alternative is compatible with the recommended
alternative for liquids and sludges.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Liquids and sludges:
Transport off-site for disposal (alternative 3
Tanks: Clean on-site and transport off-site as salvage(alternative 3
The total cost for this alternative would be approximately
$47,000 and are itemized to illustrate the varied cost for
-------
-.
. .
. .
.
5
Estimated Costs Of The Recommended Alternatives.
Known Contaminated
Untested liquids
Empty
Total
Liquids and Sludges:
Transport of-site for disposal
(including cleaning solutions)
$14,000
$1,000
$400
$15,400
Tanks:
Clean on-site 10,200 4,000 1,200 15,400
Transport off-site 4,000 7,000 5,000 16,000
as salvage
$28,200 $12,000 $6,600 $46,800
*Cost estimates provided by Maine DEP
-------
. 1
,
I
I
~
I
~
I
'.
~ MONITORING
I WE'u.. (1f1=!) ,
, .
! .
~ Q \}~~~~~~~~
l' \ 2.-
)~ -
\ INC:NEFiA7~R. I 31..C:::< 3L:G.
, !'
l' --"""""!' !' '~-!,,~""'lIrd~'" .
<. . ~...,\...'r:_~I.'_'"
1 ,.,0 r- : 1.1e::::! r; i,~ : iAN)( ( 7':'? ~
~\ \.:.,./!! I S:=-' .~ =UE;.. T~,'J;( =:L.:" ::q::~
, J3'i I ; --!...;-- J , :;
, 1J>!..::./ 1 ' 1 ! \-' ~'. UNiDENi:FiE: ~I;:E
~~f~~CLE~ ; '~ I jl~ I;; .
{ ! ~. a j;~
\ :-.----- !'I
~ II( .._i~ ;_+-~E~~~,~;~~~NG)
I " I \ ' '-~
" .\. J ',--' ~I- I -.--
I . . : -~~"""I--., :-',,J- I'':'
) i i ~ ~AMF .
{ I! \ i I f
{e 1\ ) \; I 1/
~ . \ I " \
\ II \~GOCN. i I ~/: . -; 'Jo,T!C~C ""K !7YeJ
~ \G ~-/J / I !~~AI~LiNK
Lti-J I~~NC-
, \ \, ' SOTTOM OF SJ.,OPE
TOP OF SLOPE
'- I\.yA7E~ SUPPLY
IWELL
<7". .
--:0 \
~~ \
\ '(.". \
\ '\
\ \ 0'
\ \
\ .
\' \
\ \
\ -
.
;
1
'~
i
'~
I
~
!1
'"
~
.:
~
"
. .
T'
t
,
I :'P?~OXIMAT:: ~JG::
:-; OF C:..E).RED ':"~::A
e
!
~??RCXIMAT::
SCAL::: j"-: 100'
Me KIN SITE:
MAINE
~
i~~ ~y
"""I\~I ,
~,
4"
C~WP CRESS~ & Joic:KEŁ tNe.
-------
J . H!' ~~ I")
,
. ,
2,
3.
I
...,
s.
r. .
"I
, .
8.
9,
10
11.
Al'pt.o)( imate
Siz.e
..-._- -......_~-
5'3" x 18"
(2,900 gals)
5'3""'.18'
(2,900 gals)
5 t Y' x 24 I
0,900 8815)
5 '3'1 x ~4 1
(3,900 gals)
5')" X 24'
(J,900 8315)
)')" x 24'
(3,900 gals)
513" x 2L.'
0,900 g31g)
5'3" x 24'
(3,900 gals)
5 ' 3".x 18'
(1,900 ga 15)
5')" )( 18'
(2,900 gal s )
5' 3" x 18'
(2,900 gals)
4TTACHM~W-r
,.
. .'
S,wpl ~
t:, i :'; .1 t:' ~ " r i ~ l I " "
-. ....
\l~~I'\ 1 q(!!\~~;"1
P!'!S1 Y ~:,PI';
f.:F. Al llRY
NO!.I ,IG
DETECTED
V~\\ ! 0(.1",- ,', J
h 1. ~ (I, t ;~1 t' ~"} , \ , 1.-
I i ~: .:. !II .:i ~ Ł t' i ;1l
S0ur tRnk botrnm-
1 i.k? ~r'1ell
CI1'~" 'dt!: ~V()
HI') n :); \J.' t c r '
likl:' liq'iJ
t~'11 \.".';', If'
. :;/\'11'1, ~ NG
\/,1;' 1 (l60~)i;
dri.:d grcac.y
SC '.I'r.
DP r' !I LiH .
Il;~ I :1,dd
] e.av~$ I
'/0,\ 106051 \iET;
odd-smelling s1udg~
('omp:>sito;;
svn IO;)I~S?
BONE DRY
bla~k, l~rr1-1ike
!,',1t"l lJJ
\'(.1, 1 (\(,()~!
'"
1
) ; \1'
Commel1ttl
-
S.'!mple obta i.ned throu~h
glJaging opening; approx. 12"
~f mnterial in rear of tank;
tnok TILTED DOWN AT NORTH
END. estimated volume of
m~terial: IS gallons
Tilted down at north end,
could get down to botton of
tank at south end. but could
not check the north end.
)" of material Bt north end
of trtok, TANK TILTED slightly
~t north end; eStLmate of
'/olume: 20+ gallons
-
.
2" at deepest; tank tilted a:
north end. Estim3ted volume
of material: 20+ g~lloos
t
I
---------
Clingage materiRl tha~
re~~ined on inside w311 of
tank
--------..
8 few g
-------
LL
14.
15.
16.
17 .
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
IlCt' '"
J 2 t
10' x 36'
(21,000 gals)
10'6" X 3D'
(19.500 gals)
10' x 25'
(11.,'00 gals)
IO'x25'
04,700 gals)
10')(25'
(14,700 gals)
10' X 25'
(14,700 gals)
8'0" X 30'
(12,700 "cIs)
8 'fi" x 30'
( 1 2, 700 g 8 1 s )
5'3'1 X 18'
25,000 gals
25,000 tats
, I.
r.. .-;. ! \ ' I (:.t1J ~ ':onL iuued)
I; 1 :. '. \t, t" 'J; II Ii:
dl!,.1~'rj ': "1j~'~1~1
.
("', (':
~;()A ) rl(.O~,1
{' c. '.I' J t;,.~ f t e
I: :j:!"ple
~pp".,(;; Lt, he
n {1 "I !1 ~t \;/;1 t \~ r
'10 S ,,!rnple
rtr) !; ';.:,1 pIe
110 S ;}dlple
o.} :;;,' Jf 1 "',
r; (' !I! $1:' i n a !: (, J
w,H(:r; C01'lp,ll;j l.:
~lImrll: 5\T0 lC!50';2
no 9.:'1mrle
no sl3mple
no [;iY/Jlple
Large L~nk 1n poor condition;
tank half-buried; very (usty;
mnybe le~kingt SOlvent-like
odor very noticable around
this tank. E&ti~8ted volume
of remaining waste: 6,000
gallons.
Rusting tank; pOor condition;
12" of sludge/water in tank;
estimated volume left in
tank: 1,000 gallons.
2 1/4" of oil/water mix;
estimate of material left in
tank: 150 gallons.
DRy
DRY
-
.
t
,
DRY
vertical tank; could not g~ln
access. Tank empty
(dctermin~d this by hitting
the outside of the tank).
12" of contaminated water.
vertical tank
DRY
00 access;
appears empcy
no accessj
-------
.
i ',: \ i'~ . '. 'I.. i
DATE: 3/23/83
!:,~;frt.TS TO:-1i.: Aho
I A!:: AtJALYS'i:
.,....-
, ,< . ;, ,:',/' I.MY)HATORY SERVICES
T. PottŁE.:.>~~=: '...'I.~ ~ ,'UJ'F: '.._~~!'y}f10W~Et1TAL PROTECTION
'-1'[ " I
)
. ,IH.HS
~ i:/-IPLE LOCATION
Tanks From McKint Cray
- ----. _..~ . . ...- 1"__-'- ,... - ...--
:: ~;:: =: =~::: :=::::;.'::::::::::: ==F:=::: ~ =: -. ~ : .;, .. :"":~::-;:.- . .~" =:: ~::::: =:::: =.::: ::==:==:: =:::===~:=:;:: =:=
DATE SMI?LED: 3/17/83
.._.~ n.~ .. ..~...
DAlE RECEIVED:
3/17/83
Par-crneter '1 Vo 18 t i l:~~; 'vT~t'~~ ._~----- '-i
....,~~~~,........~~-::. --;;,('-:.-:":'-- -.) ,---:,. r- '"""!.~ .....",!.:-~ ~...'."'::'":~
S~,:nple :~at"ix I Oil - SlIJ'h.::' ! I
. .--=----- ..-- ---...... . "'..-.'- '- -...
. /. I
t,;j,"~Z!ic~J!eth'Jd I GC ~ !::;~:!__.!j:~::; iJ:'~.\'..:,---_.._--- '
I
L
J ~I-
I
I
1
Date P,r.~l '/Zed I 3/22/83"'-- ""('-'" -------.--..."/' I
~~--"=-~-I==~~..:~:'!~;a;'8 :-~-~~T- -I
SAIWLE I 1060,,3 ! 106076 I I
~,i'ilaER" ; J060~_~-' ;(';:~-\- -T- I
! ::::;~-----~-~~~-~= [~- ~t
1
-..-.-...
J
j
! -
.
I I
I
"I I
J
i
-J
');;: e Extracted
IE SULTS:.
--'-"""-
t-;o \loldtilC' $olVl:!1ls "let(. ':kter.:tcd in san:plC's 106043. 106096, IOGO.5I.
.... -. ."'-....-....-.,...- ........-.-------""'-
106076.
1'he l'stimaterJ dctCCtlO:1 limil bas(~d On /,1,1 Trichloroethane Wc1S
..~--~ - .------ ------.-... ~....-
10 rill ir,:r.1!11S per 'kllogr(Jm.
I - "''''''-''''''''. '---""""'''''.--'''.,--....
The following compounds \~er(~ fr.'UI1d in l.bC' r(.'maining samples:
_.._._~---
--
(OVet)
,..--. -
, ... _. -, -----..- ..--..-.,.-
.._--_O-_~---- .,,,.-,
... ....., . ". '. --
.... --.q
-
-"'-""----
.. --- .
-... . .....-.'. "'''.'," ..'. .
.-----...-.... -.-...-
--'..-.
GC = \;a:.; CcJI-c:n.:Jte>:.;r'lj:'
1'!'3 =; "),:':;:'; :~p~;~lr':.'i1C~J
fID :: ! It'l.'T1c >ni ;:Jtion
LCD: Llc:ctrurl c.:Jpt.urc>
I~T : l~rge a~d Trap
t I ~ ~ '-.:'
I' ; ~':: 111;,):"1
L ; I.': /~:ttcr rn~trl
.J ;:; '\ri'-OX1T:1~tely
-------
.
...:J
,j
\}
C,) n (: ~ j I L rat i 011
(I: I.') '.: :).,\I!
:'!:.:\\P le Number Dicld(ll(~(:th) l( p,~; I' '\)1t~ Trichlorol'thylcnes Xylcfles
106048 ~ .1.1. ". I 10 tv 20 O. )
10')095 O. I !~. D. O. J 0.2
1(;6053 N.D. ~:. D. 2 O. J
106054 N.J). H,b. 0.5 N.D.
* N.D. indicated not d~tected
NotE: that the only oil 18yer '...',!S ftn~lYHr! ...n saniple 106095. A hydrocarbon
mixture chromatographically fiNiJar to f~~oline was also found in this sample.
IJ,+c. :
~m pOb,.-Jt;.. S ~I'>" F' It;.
lit ~ l!JI-1;:/'1 ~"..,{.f;v
l/OC ~
J.J A he -it' E:T S' /te /~
T;I-.x.
12.
.II
I
-
,
t
I
~ ,. '.i ~
. .
. ;~:-; .
------- |