PB95-963116
EPA/ESD/R10-94/089
March 1995
EPA Superfund
Explanation of Significant Difference
for the Record of Decision:
Yakima Plating Superfund
Site, Yaldma, WA
4/22/1994
-------
"
Explanation of Significant Difference
Yakima Plating Superfund'Site
Yakima, Washington
I. INTRODUCTION
The Yakima Plating Superfund site has met all groundwater remedial action objectives
specified in the Record of Decision (ROD). This Explanation of Significant Difference
(ESD) documents a change in the post-remedial groundwater monitoring plan
specified in the ROD, as required by the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Uability Act (CERCLA), Section 117(c), and the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), Section 300.435 (c)(2)(i).
EPA and the State of Washington Department of Ecoiogy (Ecology) agree that' ,
groundwater concentrations of plating constituents meet health-based standards and
that the site is now eligible for deletion from the National Priorities Ust (NPL).
II. SUMMARY OF SITE CONDITIONS
SITE LOCATION AND HISTORY
The Yakima Plating ,site is located 'in Yakima, Washington. The Yakinia Plating facility
occupied the western 0.94 acres of a' 2-:acre parcel shared with a separate auto repair
business. The site is located approximately 3 miles northeast of the Yakima Municipal
'airport in central Yakima County, Washington in a mixed light commercial and
residential neighborhood, as seen in Figure 1 on the next page.
The facility conducted electroplating operations of automobile bumpers from the early
1960's until 1990. Yakima Plating operated from three buildings including a concrete
block structure used for plating operations, a corrugated metal-sided structure used as
an office and for storage, and a wood-frame, plywood-sided structure also used for
storage. During its operation, the facility discharged plating wastes to an on-site
sedimentation tank and drain field. These wastes contained a variety of metals
including nickel, cadmium, and chromium.
REMEDIAL PLANNING/PRE-RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) ACTIVITIES:
A Preliminary Assessment (PA) was completed at the Yakima Plating facility by
Ecology in 1984. The PA indicated that there was a fairly high potential that-shallow
groundwater was contaminated with some metals. As a result of thIs determination, a
site investigation was conducted in June, 1986, by Ecology and Environment (E&E),
an EPA contractor. This investigation indicated that the drain field likely contained
elevated concentrations of several inorgarJic substances, particularly chromium,
copper, nickel, zinc, and cyanide, which had the potential to migrate from the drain
-------
SUMMIT VIEW AVE
,
wi-ST
W YAKIMA AVE
'Z
11£TON DRIVE
~
<
;::
CQ
ilETON DR
II>
~
N
W NOS HIU. BLW
W PI~C£ ST
~
<
;::
CQ
-
APPROX. SCALE
1" = 3/4 MJ.
II> WASHINGTON A \IE
~
<
o
It:
f')
II>
L
LOWER AHTAH".J'" RD
(fj) ecology and environment, inc.
[f International Specialists In the Environment
FIGURE. 1
LOCA TlON MAP
YAKIMA PLA l1NG
YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
-------
field into the surrounding soils and groundwater. Findings of this investigation were
presented in the Site Inspection Report for Yakima Plating Company, Inc., dated
October 29, 1986. As a result of the findings of this study, the Yakima Plating site was
proposed to the NPL on June 24, 1988 (53 FR 23978), and was added to the final list
on March 31, 1989 (54 FR 13296).
On May 7, 1990, E&E initiated field work for the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility
Study (RI/FS) at the site. The results of this investigation indicated elevated levels of
metals in surface and subsurface soils, elevated levels of metals in two groundwater
monitoring wells, the presence of a variety of containerized plating related wastes, and
plating related wastes associated with the drain field system. The soil contaminants
posed the greatest risk to human health through possible direct contact and as a
continuing potential source of groundwater contamination. With the exception .of two
wells1, all. on-site and off-site monitoring wells had relatively low levels of organics and
inorganics and were below federal and state drinking water standards.
RECORD OF DECISION:
A Record of Decision for the site was issued on September 30, 1991, which selected
the following remedy: .
: Uquids and sludges .that were in .tanks and containers wo~ld be removed..
to be treated and disposed of at a permitted hazardous waste facility, off-
site.
.
.
Underground tanks would be uncovered and decontaminated using
either a solvent or water wash solution, and abandoned in place. .
.
Contaminated soils above cleanup levels would be excavated and
disposed of at a permitted hazardous waste landfill.
.
Institutional controls would be implemented to minimize potential
exposure to the release of hazardous substances, since contaminated
soils above Washington Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) cleanup levels'
could remain beneath the Yakima Plating building.
1 Analytical results from MW-2 indicated elevated levels above the State of Washington Model Toxies Control Act
(MTCA) method B groundwater levels. MW-7 had elevated levels of chromium, above federal and state standards, during one
sampling round. Both wells exhibited an insurgence of silt, which may have affected the results.
2
-------
.
A groundwater comJ;>liance monitoring program would be implemented
until contaminant levels in all wells allowed for unlimited use ar:1d
unrestricted exposure.
The ROD specified that the soil and groundwater cleanup levels would be based upon
the more stringent of NCP and MTCA standards, at the time the ROD was signed.
The EPA established the following cleanup levels consistent with the MTCA Method B
regulatory requirements:
I Table 1: Cleanup levels I
Constituent Soil [mg/kg] Groundwater [pg/L]
. .
Arsenic* 20 5.
Barium 4,600 800
Cadmium 40 8
Chromium 400 80
Lead 250 50
Nickel 1,600 320
Selenium 240 .. 48'.
Cyanide 1,600 320
DDT2 2.9 0.26
The selected remedy eliminated the primary threat posed by the conditions at the site
by reducing the potential for human exposure to metals in the site soils.
REMOVAL ACTIVITIES:
Because the RifFS indicated that the extent of site contaminants was clearly defined
and that excavation and off-site disposal would be straightforward, site remediation, as
outlined in the ROD, was accomplished through the EPA removal program, as a
Superfund Accelerated Cleanup Model (SACM) pilot project. The specific factors
considered in coming to the decision to use removal authorities included the following:
2 As discussed in the ROD, orchard contaminants appear to be an area wide problem and therefore
these contaminants would be removed only if they co-occurred with soil contaminated above cleanup goals for
plating associated wastes.
3
-------
.
The remedy primarily involved excavation and off-site disposal of soils,
which could be easily and quickly implemented.
.
There were no requirements for design of treatment systems and no long
term operation and maintenance for the site.
.
Standard EPA protocols existed for sampling and analysis of metal
contaminated soils, which would enable the use of field screening
techniques and rapid turnaround of laboratory analysis.
.
Action levels for site cleanup were outlined in the Record of Decision for
the site.
.
The costs and delays associated with a remedial design could be
. minimized. in addition, a aremoval approach a offered more flexibility in
handling changes in site conditions, which are typically encountered
during soil excavation work.
The Removal was formally initiated on June 15, 1992, upon approval of the Action
Memorandum.
EPA and Ecology conducted a final inspection on September 30, 1992. Removal
activities included:' '. . .
.
Excavating 2,567 cubic yards of contaminated soil, gravels, and the drain
field pipe to the cleanup levels specified in the ROD, followed by off-site
disposal.
.
Excavation and removal to a hazardous waste landfill of three
sedimentation tanks.
.
Demolition and removal of three on-site buildings.
.
Neutralization and containerization of approximately 34. drums of
miscellaneous plating-derived waste for off-site disposal.
During the above removal actions, three significant differences from the ROD occurred
as a result of a greater degree of subsurface contamination being discovered than
indicated in the RI. These were: 1) a higher excavated soil volume, 2) building
demolition, and 3) the absence of institutional controls. These differences were a
result of further contamination being discovered during the removal, and were
documented in the Preliminary Closeout Repott (PCOR)/Explanation of Significant
Differences (ESD), dated September 30, 1992.
4
-------
During soil excavation, appropriate measures were taken, including air monitoring for
total particulates and respirable particulates and.dust suppression, to ensure that
contaminated materials did not become airborne.
Confirmatory sampling verified that the ROD soil deanup objectives were achieved.
Backfilling of the site with clean soil provided further assurance that the soil no longer
posed any threat to human health or the environment.
SACM PILOT EVALUATION:
Measurement of SACM pilot success used two primary indicators: 1) timeliness and 2)
cost. The goal of the SACM program was to help minimize the above two factors by
. substituting the Remedial Design/Remedial Action (RD/RA) process with a more
expedited approach. . .
Timeliness: It actually took 4 months to complete the removal (June - September,
1992). Region 10 estimates the time to conduct a RD/RA for this site would have
been approximately 16 months. This estimate of 16 months is based on FS estimates
and best professional judgement considering the scope and complexity of the
cleanup; it included 1 month for preparation of a remedial design scope of work, 2
months to develop the RD workplan, 3 months to develop the actual RD, 4 months for
.' the bid process, and 6 months to implement remedial action.' The estimated time
saved by conducting a removal at this site was approximately 12 months.
Cost: As documented in EPA cost. summaries, the actual costs incurred during the
period of the pilot project were $924, 758 ~ncluding removal costs, contractor costs,
disposal costs, EPA personnel costs, state support, etc.). For the purpose of
evaluating the cost effectiveness of the expedited action, however, only those
extramural costs directly related to the removal will be compared to estimated RD /RA
costs. The reason for this is that FS estimates, which are the primary basis for
predicted RD /RA costs, did not consider EP A intramural expen.ses such as .
salary/benefits, travel,' state support, A TSDR support, and other costs.' Based on . EP A
cost summaries, the actual extramurai costs to EPA for implementing the post-ROD
removal were approximately $886,399.
Presented in Table 2, below, are National and Regional extramural remedial costs
compared to the removal costs at Yakima Plating. This information was supplied to
the Region by EPA Headquarters. Although this comparison may not be conclusive
because site conditions and cleanup requirements at various sites can be quite
. diverse, the analysis does indicate that the cleanup of the Yakima Plating site was
accomplished at costs well below the National"and Regional average.
5
-------
Table 2: RD/~ costs
Type of Cost National Average/$ Regional Average/$
Extramural Costs of RD 694,176 1,000,500
Extramural costs of RA 4,105,828 5,496,188
Total RD/RA costs 4,800,004 6,496,688
Total RD/RA for Yakima
Plating 886,399
Based on both timeliness and cost, the SACM pilot projE3ct was a very effective means
of cleanup at the Yakima Plating Superfund site. The Final Evaluation for the Yakima
Plating Site Pilot Project (December, 1993) presents further evaluation under a wider
range of criteria than briefly presented here. The following sections will address the
effectiveness of the remedy in terms of ground,«ater impact.
POST-REMOVAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING:
In order to ensure that the selected remedy of soil excavation, and off:-site disposal
remains protective of human health and the environment, EPA conducted
confirmational groundwater monitoring. The groundwater monitoring program entailed
the sampling of six domestic wells and nine on-site monitoring wells3. To date, five
sampling rounds have been conducted. All plating related constituents have been
found to be at or below the established ROD remediation goals, as monitored at the
locations pictured on the following page, in Figure 2. The ensuing discussion will
describe the concentratiQn,trends for each contaminant from the RifFS to present, .
comparing unfiltered sample concentrations to the ROD goals in order to establish that
, these goals have been attained. Pre-ROD data is included to further establish a basis
for existing groundwater'trends. To assure that meeting the goals set.out by the ROD
signifies not only project, completion, but also, protectiveness of the public health and
the environment, current federal maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) will also be
compared with groundwater data, where possible. The last groundwater sampling
3 Of the original 15 wells on the site and nearby, 10 remain. MW-2 was abandoned as a result of
the removal, and PH's 2, 3, 4, and 7 were abandoned by nearby property owners as city water became
available .
6
-------
..
00000
.... - ...... ......_. 8-""" ,...-.- ..-................-.....
,...- .-~"-I-'" --..
-.-----~.. ,. I I
Q
n
.<
n
c.-
o.
"0
QI
"0
~ .
AIITO IlOO I tS
~
1
I,..)
...--
T'
.,
-
;'
:;
BUS 1 Nt.U
~ -
B I!>UIO
17 ,)
LILAC I\(!)o[ . - ---
Q'UI fI [LQ
VAC.WI. .LOT
~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0
'" ... '" '" ..
~ '" '" '" '" '" '"
I
~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ I
""'1 J-!~~L~
1020.02 I
I AS~W.T I I
I
1019.70 I I
.f
J
.--T--.J
J
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PNlKINO LOT
I
I
101 O. J~ I
1
I
I
il
1
41- I
--~. _~-L-
'~~.. '~~
- E[- ~
BUS "jUS I!> I'W4
( W-4
---.-.---
~tA
I!UIII/[n
181184T11
AVE
PRJCT MOR:
LO
DRAWN BY:
EGM
~
~
ORA VEl.
~
-I.
IICODIII III LL 'OaIIC
40 I W 'llUH I /laTCII
. '--.7
.(~)
I~
-....---
. ~ ,~,~B'-
W LOT
PNlKINO lOT
"
L£GDlO
~ QWj LHI rt>I<%
- P!la>(A!'T 8OUIIOMY
e IIOHI'ORIIfO IW. (!11th)
. 1I0NITaal/0 'IO.J. (51)
I!> OOWUTIC 'IO.J.
~ trTtJIV,\1; 0.10 rrt1
N
PMKINO lOT
~
R
a
i 0 60 100
..a, ",..,
;; PMK I NO LOT
ecology and environment, Inc.
International Speclall,t. In the EnVIronment
j
B
~
REV. ~
o a
FIGURE 2
GROUNDWA TER CONTOURS FROM WATER LEVEL
DATA (EXCLUDING MW-3) OCTOBER 1<4,1992
YAKIMA PLATING
YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
. PPROVEO BY: PRJCT/JOB NO.
. JF' ZP6901 . .
OA TE: OIR NO.
12-08-92 CORP.ZP6901
-------
round conducted, quarter five, occurred on November 16, 19934. Table 3, below,
describes fifth quarter averages and highest concentrations detected, sitewide.
Arsenic. lead. and DDT are not related to the plating process, but with the historical
use of pesticides associated with the orchard that formerly occupied the site.
The arsenic goal listed in the ROD was 5 pg/L, or 5 parts per billion (ppb). To date,
monitoring wells (MW) 1, 3, 5A, and 6 as well as private wells (PW) 2 and 6 have
exhibited concentrations at or below the goal of 5 pg/L for every round of sampling
since the Rio Among other wells, the highest level exhibited has been 17 pg/L in an
unfiltered October, 1992, sample from MW-4. Arsenic concentrations have been
decreasing at the site, and the average concentration5 was 3.94 pg/L during round
five, which is below the ROD goal. In addition, quarter five arsenic ,concentrations are
below the MCL for arsenic of 5 ppb.
. .
Lead has a ROD goal of 50 pg/L The highest level of lead detected to date was 27.1
pg/L (MW-7, unfiltered) during the April, 1991, sampling rour)d. Also, MW-1 detected
lead at 21.6 pg/L during the May, 1993, sampling round. Currently, the highest
concentration of lead.is 15.4 pg/L in MW-4. All detections have been below the ROD
goal to date, and the average concentration among the six detects of lead during the
fifth sampling round was 5.35 pg/L. Since the ROD was signed, a federal "action
level" of 15 pg/L was established for lead in drinking water. Other than the above two
detections, concentrations have, been consistently at or below the 50 pg/L ROD goal
and the 15 pg/L federal action level. .
Pesticides including 4,4'-DDT, 4,4'-DDE, Endosulfan, Aldrin, and Beta-SHC were
analyzed in the first post-removal. sampling round. The above contaminants were
detected only once each across the site, from monitoring wells 4 and 5A only. The
pesticides were found .there at low levels, the highest of which was Endosulfan at
0.011 pg/L in MW-4.
4. Groundwater elevation is highest during the October-November period. As e result of the vadose
zone flushing action, this time of year has been shown to have consistently higher concentrations of all
constituents than any other sampling period.
5 "Average concentration" is the sitewide mean among we~ls detecting a particular constituent.
Non-detects are not included in the mean calculation as zero concentrations.
7
-------
Table 3: FIfth Quarter Monitoring Well Data fpg/L]
"ROD "MCL Fifth Qtr. Fifth Qtr. # of
Goal average. high hits
Constituent
Arsenic 5 50 3.94 5.78 10/10
Lead 50 15" 5.35 15.4 6/10
DOT 0.26 na na na na
Barium 800 200 17.4 51.6 10/10
Cadmium 8 5 NO" NO 0/10
Chromium 80 100 5.2 5.2 1/10
Nickel 320 100 77.7 164 3/10
Selenium 48 50 NO NO 0/10
Cyanide 320 200 na na na
NOTEs:
" - Averages include detected concentrations only, excluding non-detects.
" .." - The "listed value of 15 pg/L is an "action level," not an " enforceable MCL
na - Constituent was not sampled for.
ND - Constituent was not detected in any wells during the sampling round.
DOT was only found in MW-4 at a concentration of 0.0075 pg/L (estimated), which is
two orders of magnitude below the risk based, ROD remediation goal of 0.26 pg/L.
No MCLs have been promulgated for these pesticides, based on the low levels and
frequency of detection further analysis was dropped after the first post-removal
monitoring event.
Barium is a plating related constituent with a ROD goal of 800 pg/L. In all wells,
barium has stayed below the ROD goal. 8arium has been highest at MW-2, where it
was detected at 472 and 229 pg/L on June, 1986, and September, 1988, respectively.
In addition to meeting the ROD goal, all wells have stayed below the MCL of 200 pg/L,
except in the above two instances. At present, the unfiltered, average concentration
(see footnote number 2) is 17.4 pg/L in monitoring wells detecting barium.
Cadmium has a ROD goal of 8.0 pg/Llt has not been detected in monitoring wells"
"58,8, 7: 8, or in any private wells. In the remaining monitoring wells, the highest
detection was 19.8 pg/L in MW-1 during the October, 1992, sampling round, which did
exceed both the ROD goal and the MCL of 5.0 pg/L. However, cadmium was not
8
-------
detected in any wells during the second, third, fourth, or fifth quarters of post-removal
monitoring.
Chromium has a ROD goal of 80 pg/L in the ROD. With three exceptions, chromium
has met the ROD goal historically. MW-2 had concentrations of 340 and 102 pg/L
during September, 1988, and December, 1991, respectively. A chromium
concentration of 150 pg/L was detected at MW-7 during the April, 1991, sampling,
round. In addition, the MCL of 100 pg/L has been met at all wells during all sampling
events with the exception of the three instances noted above. Chrome was only
detected in MW-8 at 5.2 ppb during the fifth quarter.
Nickel has met the ROD goal of 320 pg/L consistently, except in MW-2 and MW-4.
Between June, 1986, and April, 1991, when MW-2 was abandoned, nickel
concentrations decreased from 720 to 276 pg/L During the same time period,
concentrations at MW-4 ranged from 69 to 260 pg/L. with an abnormal spike of 1340
pg/L during the October, 1992, sampling event. This high concentration is believed to
have been caused by siltation in MW-4 due to improper purging. The average
concentration in monitoring wells detecting nickel from fifth quarter sampling was 77.7
pg/L, and the highest nickel detection was 164 pg/L at MW-4. This high unfiltered
nickel level could be due in part to the high groundwater elevation during November.
Nickel in MW-4 has been fluctuating at or near the MCL for several quarters, and
continues to exhibit a decreasing trend. Even at peak fluctuations during round five,
, ,the unfiltered nickel concentration in MW-4 has a hazard index (HI)' of approximately,
0.1. All wells are below' the ROD goal. In addition, all detections meet the MCL of '100
pg/L, with the exception of MW-4.
Selenium has a ROD goal of 48 pg/L This constituent has had only one detection to
date in MW-7, at 2 pg/L, during an April, 1991, sampling round.
Cvanide has historically met the ROD goal of 320 pg/L It has been detected only
once in an October, 1992, sample in MW-4 at a level of 21.7 pg/L During the fourth
quarter of post-removal sampling in July, 1993, cyanide was dropped from further
. analysis. . .
As shown in the contaminant specific discussions above, site groundwater meets all
ROD remediation goals. By comparing averages from unfiltered samples in monitoring
wells during seasonally high groundwater elevation (October-November), site
groundwater has been evaluated on a worst-case basis. Four constituents including
cyanide, selenium, barium, and DDT have not been quantified above the ROD goals at
any time since the RI. All other contaminants have met the ROD goals after five
rounds of post-removal sampling. Since site groundwater meets both ROD goals and'
9
-------
current MCLs6, it is protective of the public health and the environment, and allows for
unlimited use and unrestricted exposure. .
III.
Explanation of Significant Difference
It is EPA's position that five quarters of post-remedial groundwater data is sufficient to
show protectiveness of the public health and the environment. This represents a
change from the ROD prescribed post-remedial monitoring of eight quarters. A
change in the number of quarters is warranted given that:
1) Groundwater monitoring at this site was initiated as a cautionary measure
and not as a result of existing contamination. Historical data has never shown
significant contamination from the plating operation. .
2) Several quarters of post-remedial data have continued to demonstrate
concentrations consistently at or below remedial objecti\(es. With the source of
plating contamination removed, there is a negligible potential for Mure plating
related groundw~ter problems.
Due to the low concentrations detected sitewide as described in the site summary, as
well as the consistency in such obserVations, EPA deems five quarters of post-
remedial monitoring to be sufficier:'lt in establishing that the HOD goals have be~n met.
IV.
Support Agency Comments
The following is the Ecology position on the discontinuation of groundwater
. monitoring:
Ecology concludes that the source of metals contamination has been removed. All of
the metals of concern listed in the ROD are approximately half, to less than half, of the
. levels for groundwater in the ROD, except for one marginal exeeedence of arsenic. .
Arsenic appears to be somewhat endemic to the area, apparently due to its
application in orchards as discussed in the Explanation of Significant Difference, dated
September 30, 1992. Ecology has determined that the arsenic exceedence is not
representative of a contaminant source at the site and that further monitoring is not
warranted.
6 Or has been otherwise shown to pose minimal risk. as in the case of Nickel in MW-4. which
possesses a HI of roughly 0.1.
10
-------
V.
Public Participation Activities
Community Relations activities for this site have included the following: development
of a community relations plan, meetings with local governmental officials, public
meetings during the RI and remedy selection process, a public comment period for
the proposed plan, and routine publication of progress fact sheets. A fact sheet will
be issued concurrently with the ESD process, summarizing the results from the
groundwater monitoring as well as the decision to discontinue sampling. A second
fact sheet will be prepared to solicit comments for the National Priorities Ust deletion
of the site. .In general, there has been very little public interest associated with the
site. .
VI.
. .
Affirmation of Statutory Determinations
Five quarters of confirmational monitoring of groundwater demonstrate that the
groundwater ROD goals have been consistently met Based on the removal of
contaminated equipment and excavation of contaminated soil, EPA and Ecology
believe that hazardous substances have been removed from the Site so as to allow for
unlimited use and unrestricted exposure within the Site, that the Site is protective of
. public health and the environment, and that no further remedial action or institutional
controls are needed at the Site. Therefore, the five-year review requirement of Section
121 (c) of SARA is not applicable. Accordingly, the HOD post-remedial monitoring plan
will not be carried to its completion of eight sampling rounds.
-fJ$7P
Randall F. Smith, Director
Hazardous Waste Division
if/.2 ~3. ~
Date
11
-------
APPENDIX A.
. . ..
-------
50
40
~
:;]
........, 30
c
.2
~
b
c
8 20
c
o
()
10
Historical Analytical Data: Monitoring Well 3
1022
1021
1020 ,...."
C;;
E
1019 E
=
........,
c
1018 .g
~
>
~
. 1017 f.IJ
1016
1015
May 1990 Dee 1990 April 1991 Oa 1992 Jan 1993 May 1993 July 1993 Nov. 1993
ill Arsenic (ROD: 5 ug/l) fIB. Cadmium (ROD: 8 ug/l) fB Chromium (ROD: 80 ug/l)
"-
"-
"-
"
"-
"
"
u
o
-a- Water Lcvel Elevation
300
2SO
~200
:;]
........,
c
o
.~ 150
b
c
o
o
c
8 100
50
- Cadmium ROD
j: analyte positively identified but value may not be consistent with amount present
"-
"-
"
"
"-
"
"
o
u
May 1990 Dee 1990 April 1991 Oa 1992 . Jan 1993 May 1993 Iuly 1993 Nov. 1993
II Lead (ROD: 50 ug/I) II Nickel (ROD: 320 ug/l)
-a- Water Level Elevation
Ian 93: not sanpled Dashed Line: inCc=d
u: indicates analyte not dc:Icc:I.c:d .al quantitation limit. uj: indicates anaIyte not dClcacd as essimascd quansisasion limit
1022
1021
1020
,...."
C;;
E
t019 0
~
........,
c:
o
1018 .::;
~
>
o
@
1017
1016
1015
-------
~
::s
'--" 30
c::
o
.-
.....
tI:S
I-c
E
G) 20
(,) ,
.. c::
o
CJ
'"' 200
~
='
.......
c
o
.~ ISO
b
c
o
o
c
8 100
Historical Analytical Data: Monitoring Well 6
50
40
10
o
May 1990 Dc:c 1990 April 1991 Oct 1992 Jan 1993 May 1993 July 1993 Nov. 1993
III Arsenic (ROD: 5 ug/l) II Cadmium (ROD: 8 ug/l) I@IJ Chromium (ROD: 80 ug/l)
-0- WalCr Level Elev;ltion
- Arsenic ROD
300
2SO
50
,()
May 1990 Dc:c 1990 April 1991 Oct 1992
II Lead (ROD: 50 ug/l)
-0- Water Level Elevation
Jan 1993 May 1993 July 1993 Nov. 1993
f8 Nickel (ROD: 320 ug/l)
u: indicates analytc not dcu:acd at cIetccUon limil. uj: indicates analyte not detected at estimated quantiuti~ limir.
1021
1021
1020 ~
-
CIJ
8
.....
1019 ~
c.+;;.
'--"
c::
1018 .9
.....
tI:S
>
G)
1011 Uj
1016
1015
1022
1021
1020
'"'
C;;
E
1019 U
.£
.......
c
o
1018 .~
>
o
i1j
1017
1016
1015
-------
1/5/94 . Manchester Environmental Lahoratory. P:\gc 1
Final Report
Project Code ' TEC.2961 Collected . 11/16/93
. .
I'roject Name YAKIMA PLATING QUARTERLY SAMP. MAlrix : Liqllld.Dis~,
Project Officer, : BILL ADAMS SAItIJllr. Nllltlher . 93474171
.
Accollnl Code : 41'F A IOPUE2 Type .: Reg snl1llllc
StAlion OC!icrirtion: PW.6
Analyle Result Units Qlrr Annlyle Result tJnits Qlrr
MET
IIg
Mercl1ry 0.2 ug/L U
ICP
Aluminllm 20 IIgIL IJ AnlimollY 20 IIg/L II
Barium II,S IIg/L ' nCf)'lIilllll 0.511 IIg/1. II
Cadmium 2,11 1Ig/1. U Calch:f1I 42200 IIgll.
Chromillm 5.0 I1g1L U Cobnll S.II IIglL II
. Copper 7.3 I1g1L ~ Iron 5.n IIgll. II
M'Ig'nesillOl (JOIIO IIg/1. Mallg:lIIcsc 5.32 IIg/L
Nickcl 10 I1g1L U Polas~illm 4610 IIgIl.
Silver 3.0 IlgiL U Sodillm 1720n IIgIl.
Vanadillm 10.9 IIgIL Zillc 90ft 1Ig/1.
ICP/MS
Arsenic 2.1: ugIL Lc.,d 1.0 IIgIL II
Selenillm 1.0 1Ig/L U ThJ! II i 11111 0 liS llgiL t.J
:Q
\ ~l"\~
\ \
rmm~j,~ 1~ i 1 ~~\~~i~I}h1 ~I~~m~nn
-------
1/994 Manchester Environmental Lahoratory Pngc I
Final Report
Project Code : TEC-2961 Collected . 11/16/93
.
Project Name . YAKIMA PLATING QUARTERLY SAMP. Matrix : Llquid.Diss.
.
Project Officer . Bill ADAMS Sample Number . 93474175
. .
Account Code : 4TF A IOPUE2 Type ' Reg sample
.
Stnlion UC!icription: PW-S QAlQr.
Analyte Result Units Qlrr Allnlyte Result Unit!i Qlrr
MET ------- -_.
IIg
Mercmy 0.2 IIglL U
Icr
Aluminllm 20 IIg/I. U Antimon)' 2() IIg/L II
Barium 10.0 IIgIL BerylliuIII OJII ug/l. tJ
Cadmium 2.0 IIglL U Calcillll1 403110 IIg/L
Ch'romiull1 5.0 IIg/L U Cob:!11 5.0 IIgll. 11
, Copper 3.0 IIglL U Iron 2R.9 ug/I.
Magnesium 12ROO IIglL M:lIIgnncsc 0.50 ugll. lJ
Nickcl 10 IIgIL U ' PO\:lssium 4220 IIglL ,
Silvcr 3.0 IIgIL U Sodillm 164011 IIg/L
V:lnndiu111 12.3 1Ig/L Zinc 4.6 II!\IL ~-
ICP/MS
Arsenic 2.22 IIgIL Lead 1.0 IIglL U
Selcnillm 1.0 IIglL U Tlml1i1l1l1 0,05 II/!IL II
-D-'-:::"
, "
,
. ,
, \ 0. .)
\\~'
, \
i><'W'~'t 'i '7" '1 j',' , ~' .. "", ""~,,,'''''~''''r,<''''''
!:nh'?,"" it,' ;),;I\I!\'t Utflpl~;1%'~
-------
II ~/94 . Manchester Enviro.nmenJal Laboratory Pngc I
Final Report
Project Code. : TEC.2961 Collecte" : .
Project Name : YAKIMA PLATING QUARTERLY SAMP. Matrb . Liquld.Diss.
.
Project Officer . BILL ADAMS SAmple Numhtr : 9341411551
.
Account Code : 4TFA IOPUE2 Type ' Matrix Spike
.
SI AI ion Oescripti~n:
Analyte Result Units Qlfr Analyte Result Unils Qlrr
MET
ICP
AluminulII 115 % AnlilllulIY 98 ~~
Barium 110 t}1t BerylliulII 114 .'
,.
CadllliulII 104 . 01 CII Id II III NAF
10
Chromilllll 101i % Cobalt. 110 %
Copper 110 % Iron 1111 ~~
Magnc~illm NAF Mllng:lllese 109 %
Nickel lOR % POltlSSitl1ll NAF
Silver 95 % SodiulII NAF
VnMdill1ll 113 % Zinc 112 %
ICP/MS
Arsenic 113 % Lend 105 %
Selenium 106 .. % Timllillln 105 ~o
\:'~~~1~. f7~~ lrJittii'tj i'~~inal\nF'
-------
1/ 5/94 Manchester Environmental Laboratory' Pngc I
Final Report
Project Code. : TEC-2961 Collected 11116/93
Project Name. . YAKIMA PLATING QUARTERLY SAMP. Matrix . Llqllid.r>is~.
. .
Project Officer . BILL ADAMS Sample Numher. . 93474181
. .
Account Code . 4TFAIOPUE2 Type ' Reg sample
. .
Stillion Description: DW-F
Anlllyte Result Units Qlrr Analyle Result Unils Qlrr
MET
Ug
MerclIf)' 0.2 1Ig/L U
ICP
Aluminllm 20 IIg/L lJ AnlilnollY 20 ng/L tJ
Barium 1.0 . uglL U Beryllium OJU ug/I. - II
Crtdmium 2.0 ug/I. U C:J Icil If 11 40.2 ug/I.
Chromillm 5.0 nglL lJ Cob:!'t 5.0 IIgll. \I
. Copper . 3.0 ug/L U I roll 5.0 ug/L II
..
Magnesium 20 ug/L U Mangallese 0.50 uglL U
Nickel 10 -ug/L U POllIssiul1l 400 ugIL IJ
Silvcr 3.0 ugIL U Sodium 186 IIgIL
Vlll13dium 3.0 ugIL U Zinc 4.0 uglL U
ICP/MS
Arsenic 0.5 ug/L U Lc.1d 1.0 ug/L U
Selenium 1.0 ugIL U Thalliul1l 0.05 ugll. lJ
~.
\\\1t'iJ
.~..
!'Hn~j4ia t ~rrt~a~iffi~i~mmmt
.
-------
1/994 . Manchester Environmental Lahoratory P:\ge I
Final 'Report
Project Code TEC-2961 CoJ/eelcll 11/16/93
Project Name . YAKIMA PLATING QUARTERLY SAMP. Malrix : Liquid-nis~,
.
Project Officer : BILL ADAMS Snmple Nllmher . 93474177
.
Account Code 4TF A IOPUE2 Type Reg sample
StAlion Deseripllon:. MW.SO
Analyte Result Units Qlrr AnAlyle Result Vllils Qlrr
MET
ICP
AlulI1inllm 2() uglt U Allliltwlty 20 uAiI. II
Barium 9,27 IIg/1. OeryJliullt Q,50 IIg/1. \I
Cadmium 2.0 IIg/1. U C:1lcillm 37600, IIglL
Chromium s,n IIgIL U Cob:1!! s,n ugll. lJ
Copper 3.0 IIglL U Iron ,~ 5,0 ugiL U
Magnesium 10500 ugIL Manganese 0,50 IIgli. IJ
Nickel 10 Itg/t tJ POlnssium 44S0 IIglL
Silver 3.0 IIgIL U Sodium 14200, IIg/L
Vnn:ldillll1 7.9 IIg/t :J" Zinc 4.0 ,lIg/L II
ICP/MS
Ar!>Cnic s,ns IIglL Lc:1d I.n IIg/L II
Selenium 1.0 ugfL U Th:1 IIi II III O,OS IIg/L U
~(~
~-~t4~
\l~
\
. .
rT:f9j~ 741 1im'a.h'ri'l~irr:~1?}
-------
II 5/94 Manchester Environ.mental Laboratory Pngc I
Final Report
Project Code . TEC-2961 Collected . 11116/93
. .
Project Name . YAKIMA PLATING QUARTERLY SAMP. Matrix . Llquid-Diss.
. .
Project Officer. . BILL ADAMS Sample Number : 93474185
.
Account Code : 4TF A IOPUE2 Type ' Reg sample
.
Station IJescription: MW-3
Analyte Result . Units Qlrr Analyte Result Units Qlfr
MET
fig
Mercury 0.2 ugIL U
ler
Aluminum 20 ugIL 'U Anlimony 20 ug/L U
Barium 1003 ugIL Beryllium 0.50 ug/L II
Cadmium 2.0 ug/L U Calc!~I!" 39000 ug/I.
Chromillm 5.0 ugIL U Cobalt 5.0 ug/L U
. Copper 3.0 ugIL lJ Iroll 5.0 IIg/l. U. .
Magnesiul11 10700 ug/L Mal~ganese I.J ug/I. .T
Nickel '10 ~lglL U Potassium 4410 uglL
Silver 3.0 ugIL U Sod iu III t4500 ug/I.
Vl\nadiurn 8.0 ugIL :J Zinc 4,n lIglL 1I
ICP/MS
Arsenic 4.45 ugIL Lead 1.0 ug/L U
Selenium 1.0 1Ig/L U ThalliulII 0.05 ugll. LJ
~.
"~ q- t1~
\ \
1"''''','
-------
r~191 Manchcstcr Environmcntal Lahoratory Pilgc I
Final Report
I'roject Code : TEC.2961 Collerte.1 : 11/20/93
Project N ante : YAKIMA PLATING QUARTERLY SAMP. Matrix . Liqllid-Oiss.
.
Project Officer . BILL ADAMS Snmple Number .. 93474189
.
Account Code : 41TA J!)PUE2 Type : Reg sample
StAtion Description: MW.7D
Analyte Result Units Qlrr Analyte Result Units Qlrr
MET
III:
Mercliry 0.2 . IIg/L U
ICI'
Alliminum 211 ng/I. IJ Alitilllony 211 IIg/l. II
Bnriurn 10.5 IIg/L Beryll ill III (!.SO IIg/1. "
Cadmium 2.n IIg/L tJ Cnlcilllll 41J(j()() IIg/I.
Chromillm s.n 1Ig/1. U Cob:! II s.n IIg/I. II
. Copper 3.11 IIg/L U Iron .5.0 IIgll. II
Mngncsilllll I Hino IIg/L Mn/lgallese OJn IIg/L II
Nickel 10 ugIL \J POlnssium 4270 IIglL
Silver 3.0 IIgIL U Sodilllll 1.5800 IIgIL
VanAdium 6.7 IIgIL :J Zinc 4.0 IIg/I. II
ICP/MS
Arsenic 3.82 IIgIL Lend 1.0 IIg/L II
Sclenilln1 1.0 ug/L U Thnllilllll 11.05 1Ig/1. tJ
a.
"-
\'. '''-.;> \t.j "';1
V!
. .
j?WU~7;i i 8~';Rr~:Uffi~if'?~;:
-------
1/ 5/94 Manchester Environmental Laboratory Pngc I
Final Report
~'"
Project Code. . TEC-2961 Collecled . 11/17/93
. .
Project Name . YAKIMA PLATfNG QUARTERLY SAMP. Matrix . Liquid-Diss.
. .
Project Officer : BILL ADAMS Sam pip. Numher : 93474193
Account Code . 4TF A IOPUE2 Type : Reg sample
Stntinn Oescription:' MW-I
Analyte Result Units Qlrr Annlyte Result Units Qlrr
MET
ff~
Mcrtllry 0.2 IIglL U
fCr
Alurni/1I111I 20 IIg/L U Anlimon)' 20 IIgll. II
Barilllll 10.6 IIglL Ocryllill fII 0.511 IIg/1. "
Cadmium 2.0 . IIglL LJ Calc:aln 40ROO ng/L
Chromium 5.0 IIg/L U Coball 5.0 IIglL II
Copper 3.0 IIg/1.. IJ Iron 5.0 IIgll. lJ
Magncsillm f/400 IIg/L Mang:lIIcsc 0.50 IIg/1. lJ
. Nlckcl 10 IIgIL U Pol~ssilll11 4760 IIgll.
Silvcr . 3.0 IIgIL U Sodillm 15400 IIglL
V:I n:ldi II 111 9.2 uglL J Zinc 4.0 II/VI. "
ICP/MS
Arsenic 4.10 ugIL Lcad 1.0 IIglL II
Selenium 1.0 ug/L U Thnllitllll IU'5 IIWI. lJ
~\... \~J
\1
\
«>.
rnt:~j414 j 9j~fti'if _aHIf1j~~'~1r:)':V.
-------
.
1/ 5/94 Manchester Environinental Laboratory Page I
Final Report
Project Code . TEC-2961 Collected
.
Project Name . YAKIMA PLATING QUARTERLY SAMP. Matrix . Liqllid.Diss.
. .
Project Officer . BILL ADAMS Sample Number . W931129ABL
. .
Account Code : 4TFAIOPUE2 Type : Bll\J1k
StAtion Description:
Analyte Result Units Qlrr Analyte Result Units Qlrr
MET
fCP
Aluminum 20 IIgIL U Antimony 20 ugfL U
Barium 1.0 ugfL U Beryllium 0.50 IIg/1. II
CadmiulII 2.0 . ug/L U CalciuJl1 2.0 ltg/I. IJ
ChrollliulII 5.0 uglL lJ Cob:!11 5.0 I/g/l. (J
Copper . 3.0 ug/L U Iron 5.0 ug/l. II
MagnesiulII 20 ug/L U M:!ng:!/lcse 0.50 ug/l. IJ
Nickel 10 I/g/L lJ POIAssiuIII 400 ugll. II
Silver 3.0 . ugIL U SodiulII 20 ug/L LJ
VnnadiulII 3.0 ug/1. U Zinc 4.0 ug/I. 1I
ICP/MS
Arsenic 'V.5 ug/L U Lc.1d 1.0 uglL 1I
Selenium "...
1.0 ugIL U Thnllium 0.05 ug/t lJ
!ti\':i1i'il'~i\"I"ti ~W1. i"~~ k ;:mu~wmnmr
~~.?:~"..~ ~?'~ ...~.':~. ':I. .::::~'::::~::::::~:;.:
-------
II 5194
Manchester Environmental Laboratory
. Final Report
rage I
MET
IIg
Project Code
Project Name.
Project Officer
Account Code
Analyte
: TEC.296\
: YAKIMA PLATING QUARTERLY SAMP.
: BILL ADAMS
: 4TF A IOPUE2
Collected
Matrix .
Sample Number: W931203CBL
Type :. Blank
Stillion Description:
.
..
Result
Units
Qlrr
Analyte
Result
Unils
Qlfr
Mercury
0.2
ug/L
u
!Jj~12.6jt ti t:tj i~H~:Tn:mFnr;...
...
------- |