REPORT TO U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF WASTE PROGRAMS ENFORCEMENT
TES IV
CONTRACT NO. 68-01-7351
WORK ASSIGNMENT NO. 8
PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OF PART 2
OFFSITE SOIL, SEDIMENT, AND SURFACE WATER:
FIELD DATA AND ANALYTICAL RESULTS
1
TECHNICAL OVERSIGHT AND FEASIBILITY STUDY
MONTROSE CHEMICAL CORPORATION
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
EPA REGION IX
SITE ACCOUNT NO. 6TGB09K626
April 1987
Revised August 1987
JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP INC. PROJECT NO. 05-A005-08
-------
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 1
BACKGROUND 2
EVALUATION CRITERIA 7
OFFSITE SOILS 8
Implementation of Sampling Plan 8
Results 10
McDonnell Douglas Property 10
Jones Chemical Property 11
Southern Pacific Railroad Property 12
Los Angeles Power Easement 12
Normandie Avenue Drainage Ditch 14
Farmers Brothers Property 17
Neighborhood Soils 17
Preliminary Recommendations 19
SEDIMENTS 21
Implementation of Sampling Plan 21
Results 21
Kenwood Drain 22
Torrance Lateral 22
Dominguez Channel 23
Consolidated Slip 24
Preliminary Recommendations 24
SURFACE WATER 25
Implementation of Sampling Plan 25
Results 26
Preliminary Recommendations 27
FATE AND TRANSPORT 28
General 28
DDT Isomers and Transformation Products 30
General Comments 30
Soil 32
Sediments 34
Transport 34
Fate 35
Surface Water 35
Transport 35
BHC 37
General 37
Soils 38
Transport 38
Fate 39
Sediment 39
Transport 39
-------
CONTENTS (Concluded)
Chlorobenzene 40
Soil 40
Transport 40
Sediment 40
Surface Water 40
Dichlorbenzene Isomers 40
Benzene 41
Chloroform 41
Acetone 41
REFERENCES 41
APPENDIX
A QUALITY ASSURANCE REVIEW
B SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT CONTAMINANT RESULTS IN SOIL
C SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT CONTAMINANT RESULTS IN SEDIMENT
-------
PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OF PART 2
OFFSITE SOIL, SEDIMENT, AND SURFACE WATER:
FIELD DATA AND ANALYTICAL RESULTS
INTRODUCTION
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)
Region IX requested Metcalf & Eddy to provide technical review
and analysis of the Part 2 offsite soil, sediment, and surface
water reports submitted by Montrose Chemical Corporation. The
following documents have been included in this review:
Preliminary Field Data from Round 1 Offsite Sampling,
Montrose Site, Torrance, California. June 3, 1986.
Raw Analytical Data, Round 1 Offsite Sampling, Montrose
Site, Torrance, California. June 27, 1986.
Field Data from Round 2, Off-Site Sampling, Montrose
Site, Torrance, California. June 2, 1986.
Raw Analytical Data, Round 2 Off-Site Sampling, Montrose
Site, Torrance, California. July 25, 1986.
Field Data Round 2 Off-Site Sampling, Montrose Site,
Torrance, California - Revised Identification of Split,
Background, Trip, Rinseate-Blank Samples. February 18,
1987.
Revised Field Data, Round 1 Off-Site Sampling, Montrose
Site, Torrance, California. February 18, 1987.
This review was performed under contract to Jacobs Engineering
Group under USEPA Contract No. 68-01-7351, Work Assignment
No. 8. Technical review and analysis of these documents reflect
the combined views of Candice Tal, Marianne Strickfaden, Ron
Lubke, and Jim Graydon of Metcalf & Eddy.
Evaluation of these data is considered preliminary since the wet
weather surface water sampling data are not complete and USEPA
2392-461
-------
QA/QC reviews are not yet available. The evaluation of all
offsite data will be finalized when these documents are
available.
The data evaluation is divided into three sections: Soil,
Sediments, and Surface Water. Within each section, the comments
address three areas. First, how closely the field sampling
activities adhered to the Offsite Sampling Plan (dated March 7,
1986) and the Quality Assurance Project Plan (dated March 7,
1986) is addressed; any data deficiencies or deviations are
noted. Second, results of the sampling program are summarized,
and significant findings are highlighted. Third, preliminary
recommendations for further action are presented where
appropriate. A Sampling Audit of the Part 2 Offsite field work
was performed by Ecology and Environment dated June 24, 1986.
Sampling Audit comments have been reviewed and incorporated in
this evaluation as appropriate. Quality assurance review of the
reports submitted by Montrose is provided in Appendix A.
Summaries of significant contaminant concentrations (above state
and federal action levels) are provided for soils in Appendix B,
sediment in Appendix C, and surface water in Appendix D.
BACKGROUND
The Montrose Chemical Corporation manufactured DDT from 1947 to
1982 at a 13-acre site along Normandie Avenue in Torrance,
California, 15 miles south of Los Angeles (Figure 1). Industrial
complexes and residential neighborhoods occupy the area around
the site.
The site consisted of a central DDT processing area, a surface
impoundment (waste recycling pond), transport areas, warehouses,
and offices, among other facilities (Figure 2).
2392-461
-------
LOS ANQELE9
\ o
o
j L
\ X
SAN ' \
1 \
FRANCISCO^
LOS ANGELES1i
LOS ANGELES
HARBOR
(Th
I90TH ST. y /
JTROSE CHEMICAL CO /SITE
FRANCE LATERAL
O
TORRANCE _I
CARSON ST.
CARS
DOMI
CHAh
NQUEZ
NEL
LOMITA
CONSOLIDATED
.Aw
LOS ANGELES HARBOR
SAN PEDRO
8CALE
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
-------
The surface impoundment was reported to have an area of approxi-
mately 2,400 square feet and a volume of 2,667 cubic yards
(40 feet by 60 feet by 30 feet deep). It received contaminated
process wastes that overflowed from two underground storage tanks
and stormwater runoff from the central processing area. Storm
runoff flowed through onsite drainages to the Normandie Avenue
drainage ditch, into a storm drain beneath Kenwood Avenue, and
then through the Torrance Lateral, Dominguez Channel, and
Consolidated Slip to Los Angeles Harbor (Figure 1). For the
purposes of the RI, these drainageways are considered to
represent the distal boundaries of contaminant impact from the
Montrose site.
A variety of environmental problems exists both onsite and
offsite including groundwater contamination, shallow and deep
onsite soil contamination, shallow offsite soil contamination,
and offsite sediment contamination in surface drainage pathways.
Wastewater inspections by the Los Angeles County Sanitation
District (LACSD) in the 1970s and 1980s indicated high DDT
concentrations in the sanitary sewer system at a location close
to the site. Waste stream discharge to the sanitary sewer ended
in 1972; subsequently, process wastes were hauled offsite. Prior
to 1970, the main surface impoundment was unlined and its
contents were free to percolate down into the underlying
sediments. The impoundment was lined with concrete in 1970 and
remained in use until the plant was closed in 1982 when the plant
buildings were dismantled. Montrose reports that closure of the
pond included removal of sludge and crushing of the concrete pond
lining which was subsequently placed in large crushed concrete
piles onsite.
A USEPA investigation in 1982 found DDT in surface water runoff
and sediments leaving the Montrose property. This resulted in
issuance of simultaneous enforcement orders by the USEPA and the
2392-461
-------
California Regional Water Quality Contr'pl Board (CRWQCB) which
required prevention of DDT discharge from the property and plans
for remedial action.
Montrose engaged a consultant to perform an initial site
investigation. In the summer of 1983, Montrose constructed a
berm to prevent stormwater runoff from leaving the site,
presented results of the initial investigation, and submitted
plans to construct an asphalt cap over the entire site as part of
a property redevelopment plan. USEPA reviewed the plans and
found them to be unacceptable. In April 1985, Montrose regraded
the site, produced raised building pads, and paved the site with
asphalt in an effort to prevent the contamination of surface
runoff and infiltration of contaminated stormwater.
In 1984, the USEPA began a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility
Study (Rl/FS) in order to delineate the extent and degree of site
contamination and to select an appropriate remedial action. The
USEPA conducted the RI Part 1, Onsite, as well as all other
Superfund enforcement activities conducted since early 1984,
using a TES I subcontractor, Metcalf & Eddy. In October 1985,
Montrose began conducting the remainder of the RI under the terms
of a Consent Order. Until June 1986 (completion of TES I
contract), Metcalf & Eddy provided oversight of Montrose
including technical review of sampling documents and observation
of field activities. Since the TES I contract expired, USEPA has
been using the FIT contractor for field observation and has
provided in-house review of all sampling documents.
The RI Part 2, Onsite, and Part 1, Offsite, were conducted by the
PRP, Montrose Chemical Corporation, from late 1986 to March
1987. Under the new TES IV contract, Metcalf & Eddy has resumed
providing enforcement support to USEPA for the Montrose site.
Preliminary results of the RI indicate that onsite and offsite
contamination is more complex than previously considered.
2392-461
-------
The major results of the investigative work so far include:
Significant contamination, greater than 1 mg/kg, exists
in the top 6 feet of onsite soils and in the top 2 to
3 feet of soils immediately offsite (called nearsite
soils). Beneath the former surface impoundment,
contamination extends to depths greater than 60 feet.
Groundwater in the Bellflower Aquitard and Gage Aqufer is
contaminated beyond action levels. Contaminant
concentrations are highest near the water table and
decrease with depth.
Significant levels of DDT exist in sediments in
drainageways downstream from the Montrose site.
Significant levels of DDT exist in attic duct and surface
soils within at least 0.5 mile of the Montrose site.
Additional investigations have been proposed in order to better
define the extent of contamination and to support the Feasibility
Study.
EVALUATION CRITERIA
The California State Department of Health Services total
threshold limit concentration (TTLC) of 1.0 ppm and the soluble
threshold limit concentration (STLC) of 0.1 mg/L will be applied
to assess environmental significance of total DDT in soil and
water, respectively. The TTLC amd STLC apply to the sum of the
isomers of DDT, DDD, and DDE (referred to herein as total DDT).
Other criteria used to evaluate contaminant levels include the
State of California Drinking Water Action Levels (1-12-1987) and
the water quality criteria listed in the Clean Water Act for
human health adjusted for drinking water.
2392-461
-------
OFFSITE SOILS
Implementation of Sampling Plan
Offsite soil sampling performed by Montrose was done in general
accordance with the sampling plan. Sample locations are shown in
Figure 3 (bound at the end of this report) and background soil
sample locations are shown in Figure 4. However, sampling has
not been performed at Transects T1 and T2 which are located in
the historical drainage area. Access to perform sampling at
these locations was denied.
Two of the four transects (T4 and T6) were relocated during the
sampling program. Transect T4 was sampled approximately 40 ft
north of the location shown in the sampling plan. Transect T6
was laid out and sampled approximately 100 ft south of the
location shown in the sampling plan. Updated surface profiles of
these transects have not been provided. This information would
be of assistance in determining the areas of the ditch which
actually carry flow.
The numbering system for borings reported by Montrose is not in
accordance with the numbering system provided in the Sampling
Plan dated March 7, 1986.
A number of actual sampling sites are at locations differing by
as much as 100 ft from those shown in the Sampling Plan. The
reasons for such offsets are probably not critical if locations
differ by 20 feet or less. However, the actual location of
Transect T6 is over 100 ft south of the location shown in the
sampling plan; location of T6 was intended to intercept soils
before entering the Kenwood Drain. Other sampling locations
which differ by 40 ft or more are SP1, SP2, and MD2. The reasons
for these changes should be provided.
2392-461
-------
I
7W3
-j| -
r JL ,~i
:T.V I \ -El: \b~ "ZD"' ฆ>'"
- ฆ ฆ ป ซTT. r- f 4 ซ "It. : J ' ซ>ป * p *a% ;
^ *""S H # j 1 j ปฆ ป**.~ -4 IC'M ซ| r tm
D ซ ^ '(*ฃ ^ J IJ.Mir 5' ' .. I ^ ^ hjc i*1
'v'T- , : if-" -? ~rri7L r r
EMERALD ST
i TRAFFIC LIGHT
,?^nk. -,i
r.-i ,tป -n"
"itm
.' ' *11 'ฆin 1 in i
-J r - , ; , - -
1.. :
i I I l *ฐ" " fc!
__yj-v^;
i I vhy-j-H- P
! 4ซM>t!ซ I ? Hi A >- I.-'--!^ . ,
n .
1 'J U '. ฆ B ฆ
( D 0 M I N G I
1
0
1
IB 1B
OAK
o
<
>
X
(& 20-ฉ
*000'
01
H
X
ALLEY
n
n
H
'
po*cซ
roLf
f
o 5
t> M
X Q)
^ I 9 II .'e. .
u\">> h
5-5-S(0)AL~.V.'. ft
5 >A\4l ฆ! S a fiป
'^Tinr-OT^vi'';! H %
'".Hi- itiu.1
fciJfc
-'v rJ:~:::
V :s! :-.r--'g:i:jl
5 >jOI! I1"
!je. Uฃs,Ve
W- J*
~7.r**?*' "
*7* ^T' *,
i^rin is
V. w ' *ฆ
P^sTCTA'
r-o- i'VvVj"^ -his
iiJ-R-M :5
ซ " - .
EXPLANATION
5-8-S(B)
(3 BACKGROUND SOIL SAMPLE
LOCATION
tooo 2000 3000 4000
FCCT
FIGURE 4. BACKGROUND SOIL SAMPLE LOCATIONS
(from llargis and Associates, Inc., Revised JK IIAI?OIS I ASSOCIATES, II I*"
Analytical Data Round 1 Off-Site Sampling,
-------
Apparent errors in sample identification are as noted:
Sample MD1-3.0 in the analytical data report is not
identified in the Field Data report which identifies MD1-
2.5. Analytical results are provided for MDl-3.0 but not
for MD1-2.5.
Sample MD6-2.5 in the analytical report is not identified
in Field Data reports which lists MD6-3.0. Analytical
results are provided for MD6-2.5 but not for MD6-3.0.
Sample T33-3.75 in the analytical report is not
identified in the Field Data report.
Sample T61-4.5 in the analytical report is not identified
in the Field Data report.
Sample T61-5.75 in the analytical report is not
identified in the field report which lists T61-5.25.
Analytical results are provided for T61-5.75 but not for
T61-5.25.
Results
The results of offsite soil sampling broadly indicate the need
for additional soil characterization to delineate the offsite
extent of DDT contamination.
This evaluation is based on soil samples taken at these
locations:
McDonnell Douglas property
Jones Chemical property
Southern Pacific Railroad property
Los Angeles Department of Water & Power easement
Normandie Avenue drainage ditch
Farmers Brothers property
Neighborhood soils
McDonnell Douglas Property. Soil sampling was performed in six
borings (MD1 through MD6) drilled to a maximum depth of
6.25 ft. Total DDT in excess of 1 mg/kg was found at borings
2392-461
-------
MD1, MD4, and MD5. Significant values of total DDT (1 mg/kg or
greater) in relation to depth sampled are listed in Table 1.
Table 1. TOTAL DDT, MCDONNELL DOUGLAS PROPERTY
Boring Total DDT, mg/kg Depth sampled, ft
MD1 3.70 0.5-1.0
MD4 2.90 0.0-0.25
MD5 120.00 0.5-1.0
The data suggest the following:
1. Elevated levels of DDT are randomly dispersed along the
west and north sides of the site perimeter with the
possible exception of MD5 which may be near or at a
former drainageway. As discussed below, high levels of
DDT were found in samples collected in known
drainageways.
2. Significant levels of total DDT are found at a depth of
less than 1 ft.
Jones Chemical Property. Soil sampling was performed in five
borings (JC1 through JC5) drilled to a maximum depth of
6.75 ft. Total DDT in excess of 1 mg/kg was found at all borings
with the exception of JC4. Total DDT of 1 mg/kg or greater in
relation to depth sampled are listed in Table 2.
Table 2. TOTAL DDT, JONES CHEMICAL PROPERTY
Boring
Total DDT, mg/kg
Depth sampled, ft
JC1
1.60
1.5-2.0
JC2
100.00
0.5-1.0
JC3
760.00
1.25-1.75
JC3
560.00
1.75-2.25
JC3
170.00
2.25-2.75
JC5
590.00
0.5-1.0
JC5
1.10
2.0-2.5
2392-461
-------
The data suggest the following:
1. Significant levels of DDT are randomly dispersed along
the site perimeter with the possible exception of boring
locations JC3 and JC5 which are located near or at a
former drainageway.
2. Significant levels of total DDT are found at a depth of
less than 2.75 ft.
3. MCB was found in detectable concentrations in Borings JC1
and JC5; however significant concentrations of MCB were
detected only at borehole JC5 and at boring T52A during
this sampling program. MCB was present at a depth of 2
to 3.25 ft in JC1 and from 0.5 to 3.5 ft in JC5.
Significant concentrations were detected at the sampling
intervals and concentrations shown in Table 3.
Southern Pacific Railroad Property. Soil sampling was performed
in three borings: SP1, SP1A, and SP2, which were drilled to a
maximum depth of 7.75 ft. Significant total DDT levels were
found at boring SP2 at a concentration of 11.00 mg/kg in the soil
interval 0.5-1.0 ft. Although DDT levels did not exceed 1 mg/kg
at boring SP1, soil samples were not collected in the depth
interval 0 to 2.75 ft. Therefore, additional sampling is
required to ascertain DDT levels above a depth of 2.75 ft. Based
on the analytical results at other perimeter locations,
significant levels of DDT typically are found in the 0 to 2 ft
depth interval.
Los Angeles Power Easement. Soil sampling was performed at 14
boring locations, LAI through LA14. Total DDT levels of 1 mg/kg
or greater was detected in samples at all locations except LA2,
Table 3. MCB, JONES CHEMICAL PROPERTY
Boring MCB, mg/kg Sampling interval, ft
JC5
JC5
JC5
JC5
2.00
7.00
0.90
1.00
0.5-1.0
2.0-2.5
2.5-3.0
3.0-3.5
2392-461
-------
LA5, LA7, LA8, and LA12. Total DDT concentrations (1 mg/kg or
greater) in relation to depth sampled are listed in Table 4.
Table 4. TOTAL DDT, LOS ANGELES POWER EASEMENT
Boring Total DDT, mg/kg Depth sampled, ft
LAI
64.00
0.5-1.0
LAI
1.10
1.5-2.0
LA3
240.00
1.0-1.5
LA4
2.70
0.5-1.0
LA6
53.00
0.5-1.0
LA9
1.00
0.0-0.5
LA10
1.40
0.25-0.75
LA11
1.10
0.75-1.25
LAI 3
630.00
0.75-1.25
LAI 3
13.00
1.25-1.75
LAI 4
35.00
0.75-1.25
LA14
3.90
1.25-1.75
Acetone was also detected at borings LA2 and LA13 at the sampling
intervals and concentrations shown in Table 5.
Table 5. ACETONE, LOS ANGELES POWER EASEMENT
Boring Acetone, mg/kg Depth sampled, ft"
LA2 6.00 2.5-3.0
21.00 3.0-3.5
7.00 3.5-4.0
LAI3 4.00 1.25-1.75
This is the only incidence of acetone detected in the offsite
soil samples. Acetone is not associated with high levels of the
compounds of primary concern at either of these locations.
2392-461
-------
BHC in excess of 1 mg/kg was detected at Boring LA13 at a
concentration of 17.00 mg/kg in the sampling interval of 0.75 to
1.25 ft. Other values of BHC exceeding 1 mg/kg were detected
only in soil samples collected at transects located in the
Normandie Avenue drainage ditch.
The data suggest the following:
1. Significant levels of total DDT are found at a depth of
less than 2 ft.
2. Highest concentrations of total DDT are found at borehole
LA-13 which is located at or near a historical
drainageway.
3. A random distribution of significant DDT levels is found,
with the exception of LA13 which is located near a
historical drainageway.
4. Some of the borings may be located in areas where runoff,
originating from the Montrose site, had ponded.
5. Benzene was detected in samples at boring JC5; acetone
was detected at borings LA2 and LA13; BHC was detected at
borings LA13 and SP2.
6. Other target chemicals including dichlorobenzene (all
isomers), chlorobenzene, and chloroform were found at or
below analytical detection limits.
Normandie Avenue Drainage Ditch. Soil samples were obtained from
borings made at transects T3, T4, T5, and T6 as identified in the
sampling plan. The borehole number for each transect is shown as
the second digit, i.e., Borehole 3 within Transect 1 is shown as
T13. Three borings were drilled in Transect T3 (T31, T32, T33);
five borings at Transect T4 (T41 through T45); four borings at
2392-461
-------
Transect T5 (T51 through T54); and four borings at Transect T6
(T61 through T64). The data suggest the following:
1. Total DDT in excess of 1 mg/kg was found at all transect
borings with the exception of T51 and T61. The
distribution of total DDT with the soil intervals sampled
is shown in Table 6, except for soil samples collected at
T51 and T61.
2. DDT levels beneath the drainageway display maximum values
higher than those observed at most other boring sites
which are not located in drainageways.
3. Transect 6 is believed to be located on a railroad
bedding and may not be representative of soil conditions
beneath the Normandie Avenue drainage ditch.
4. The occurrence of DDT levels within soils beneath the
drainage ditch is irregular with elevated total DDT
concentrations found at the maximum depth sampled in a
number of borings including T33, T42, T44, and T52A. At
these boring sites, it is likely that significant levels
of DDT occur at depths greater than those sampled.
5. Detectable concentrations of total BHC were observed in
10 of the 16 soil borings: T31, T32, T33, T41, T42, T43,
T44, T45, T52, and T54. The highest levels were found in
T42, T43, T45, and T52 with the highest being 81 mg/kg in
the 3.75-ft sample at T52
6. The reason for the irregular occurrence of DDT is not
known but may be related to a greater opportunity for
downward displacement or migration of DDT by runoff
infiltration in association with the type soil matrix
through which migration takes place. A description of
the soil sampled, however, is unavailable and attributing
concentration levels based on soil descriptions provided
would be highly conjectural because of the variabilty in
soil particle sizes as suggested from the reported soil
data. Greater vertical mobility of DDT from runoff also
may occur if the runoff contained solvents.
2392-461
-------
Table 6. TOTAL DDT, NORMANDIE AVENUE DRAINAGE DITCH
Total DDT,
Depth
Total DDT,
Depth
Boring
mg/kg
sampled, ft
Boring
mg/kg
sampled, ft
T31
4.7
1.5-2.0T43
T45
35.00
0.5-1.0
1400.00
2.25-2.75
190.00
1.0-1.5
0.87
3.25-3.75
8600.00
1.5-2.0
9.00
4.25-4.75
0.39
2.75-3.25
7.80
4.75-5.25
<0.03
3.75-4.25
0.85
5.25-5.75
<0.03
5.25-5.75
T32
590.00
0.5-1.0
T52
3600.00
1.5-2.0
4.60
1.5-2.0
490.00
3.25-3.75
5.80
2.75-3.25
T52A
160.00
0.75-1.25
4.10
3.75-4.25
12.00
2.75-3.25
0.86
5.25-5.75
8.50
3.75-4.25
T33
0.38
0.5-1.0
T53
1.20
0.5-1.0
1.10
1.5-2.0
0.41
1.5-2.0
70.00
2.75-3.25
<0.03
2.5-3.0
5.60
3.75-4.25
<0.03
3.5-4.0
12.00
5.25-5.75
<0.03
4.5-5.0
T41
1.40
1.0-1.5
T54
1.10
0.5-1.0
0.07
1.5-2.0
0.36
1.5-2.0
<0.03
3.0-3.5
<0.03
2.5-3.0
<0.03
4.25-4.75
<0.03
3.5-4.0
<0.03
4.75-5.25
<0.03
4.5-5.0
0.04
5.25-5.75
T62
620.00
0.25-0.75
T42
<0.03
0.5-1.0
6.10
1.25-1.75
17.00
1.0-1.5
0.56
2.25-2.75
1.30
1.5-2.0
<0.03
3.25-3.75
<0.03
2.75-3.25
<0.03
4.5-5.0
<0.03
3.75-4.25
T63
79.00
0.75-1.25
2.10
4.75-5.25
6.40
1.25-1.75
T43
87.00
1.0-1.5
0.15
2.25-2.75
910.00
1.5-2.0
0.04
3.25-3.75
0.88
3.25-3.75
0.03
4.75-5.25
0.51
4.5-5.0
T64
12.00
0.5-1.0
<0.03
5.0-5.5
12.00
1.5-2.0
<0.03
5.5-6.0
3.40
2.5-3.0
T44
17.00
0.5-1.0
0.33
3.5-4.0
140.00
1.5-2.0
0.16
4.75-5.25
120.00
3.25-3.75
98.00
3.75-4.25
66.00
5.25-5.75
-------
7.
BHC was detected at levels of 1 mg/kg or greater in soil
samples from borings T42, T43, T45, and T52; the
concentrations are as follows:
Boring BHC, mg/kg Sampling depth, ft
T42
T43
T45
T52
2.20
1.10
1.80
4.40
81.00
1.0-1.5
1.5-2.0
1.5-2.0
1.5-2.0
3.25-3.75
The data suggest that the presence of benzenehexachloride
is more typical for soils located in drainageways than in
non-drainageways and may account for its presence in
soils at the site of borings LA13 and JC5, both of which
are located at a suspected drainageway.
8. Other analytes were found at or below analytical
detection limits.
Farmers Brothers Property. Borings intended at Transects Tl and
T2 as required by the Sampling Plan were not made since access to
these sites was denied by Farmers Brothers. Since the transects
are located in historical drainageways which contained runoff
from the Montrose site, further efforts to obtain access are
required to more fully characterize soils underlying these
portions of the drainageways.
Neighborhood Soils. The neighborhood soil samples (NS series)
are shallow soil samples obtained in apparently undisturbed areas
to a depth of approximately 3 inches. Neighborhood soil sampling
locations are shown in Figure 5 (bound at the end of this
report). All sampling locations on the first radius (approxi-
mately 2000 feet from the perimeter) show total DDT levels at or
above the TTLC. Sample points NS1, NS2, and NS5 had concen-
trations greater than 10 mg/kg. Five of the nine points in the
outer radius (approximately 4000 feet from the perimeter) had
significant total DDT levels; the highest being 7.6 mg/kg at
NS-13. A summary of significant neighborhood soil sample results
is presented in Appendix B.
2392-461
-------
The backaround sample, 5-20-S(B), detected total DDT at 2.1 mg/kg
although other background samples, 5-5-S(B) and 5-8-S(B), did not
show significant levels of total DDT. The latter two samples,
however, were taken at a depth interval of 0.5 to 1.0 ft, whereas
sample 5-20-S(B) was collected from the 0 to 0.25 ft interval.
Attic dust and soil samples were taken in September 1986 during
an offsite sampling program to assess air dispersion of DDT
[11]. Samples were collected from residential and industrial
sites located within 0.5 mile of the Montrose site. These
samples exhibit DDT concentrations of up to 250 mg/kg in attic
dust samples and up to 98 mg/kg in nearsite soils. Background
soil and dust samples taken 2 miles west of the site also show
significant DDT concentrations.
The data suggest that:
1. DDT is widely dispersed at significant levels (greater
than 1 mg/kg) throughout most of the area sampled.
2. The highest levels of DDT were found at locations within
3,000 ft to the northeast, southeast, and east of the
site. Highest concentrations found during the Part 2
offsite sampling were located at NS-5 (10 mg/kg) NS-1 (17
mg/kg) and NS02 (18 mg/kg).
3. Within a 4,000-ft radius from the site, the highest level
of DDT was 7.6 mg/kg located southeast of the site
(Sample NS-13).
4. Based on the background sample, 5-20-S(B), DDT dispersal
at significant levels probably occurs greatly beyond the
4,000-ft radius of sampling established during this
sampling program. Areas to the northwest of the Montrose
site were not sampled. However, areas situated more than
2 miles west of the site exhibit DDT concentrations
between 0.059 and 1.5 mg/kg.
5. The available data do not provide a significant
statistical basis for establishing the distributed levels
of DDT in the area surrounding the Montrose site.
2392-461
-------
6. Only one of the 17 neighborhood soil samples showed
detectable concentrations of total BHC. A mixture of the
beta, gamma, and delta isomers was found at NS9
approximately 4,000 ft southwest of the site. No BHC was
detected in the background soil sample. The low level
(0.1 mg/kg) and lack of detectable residues from other
samples make it likely that this measurement is isolated
and not related to the Montrose site.
Preliminary Recommendations
Results of the Part 2 offsite soil sampling indicate that total
DDT is randomly distributed at significant levels (1 mg/kg or
greater) along the perimeter of the Montrose site including the
Los Angeles Department of Water & Power easement. Maximum levels
of total DDT were found in soils in the Normandie Avenue drainage
ditch. Based on the data evaluation, an additional sampling
effort to more fully characterize offsite soils is recommended.
Proposed additional sampling is recommmended for each of the
areas investigated to date:
1. Normandie Avenue drainage ditch and other drainageways.
The high DDT levels of up to 8,600 mg/kg found in some
samples at the Normandie drainage ditch suggest that DDT
levels occur at higher concentrations in soils beneath
near-site drainageways and therefore the need to
investigate near-site historical drainageways is
essential. A more immediate impact is the potential of
residual DDT and benzenehexachloride in soils underlying
drainageways to contaminate or to contribute to ground-
water contamination. As previously mentioned, the
highest DDT and a higher incidence of benzenehexachloride
appears to be associated in soils at or near
drainageways. To more fully characterize the drainage-
ways, the following is recommended:
a. Transects should be established at a minimum 100-ft
interval along identified drainageways for a distance
of at least 500 ft from the Montrose site. Borings
along each transect be spaced at 25-ft intervals.
Each boring should be sampled to a depth of 5 ft. If
DDT or benzenehexachloride are found at concen-
trations greater than 1 mg/kg within the lower 4 to 5
ft of sampling depth, the boring should be sampled to
a depth of 60 ft or close to the top of the
groundwater table.
2392-461
-------
b. Borings should be taken to provide a more detailed
characterization of soils underlying the Normandie
Avenue drainage ditch. Deeper borings are
recommended at the sites of borings T33, T42, T44,
and T52 where significant DDT levels were found at
the maximum depth sampled. The recommended borings
for each of the sites should be sampled to a depth of
20 ft with a minimum sampling frequency of every
3 ft. Where DDT and/or BHC are detected at
significant concentrations, the borings should be
extended to a total depth of 60 ft. Sampling will
not be required in the 0-5 ft interval.
c. In order to assess the migration of DDT both
vertically and by surface sediment transport, it is
recommended that soil samples collected at the
Normandie Avenue drainage ditch and at the other
boring sites be described in terms of their
lithology. Grain size analyses should be performed
for selected samples of the T series borings in order
to establish whether a relationship exists between
particle size and observed contaminant
concentrations.
d. Subsequent analyses of soil samples should be limited
to DDT isomers and metabolites; however, BHC and
isomers should be analyzed in addition at drainageway
sample locations.
2. The high incidence of significant levels of DDT in the
neighborhood soil samples indicates a sampling program is
needed to characterize DDT contamination more extensively
in offsite soils. This program should incorporate an
aerial dispersion model to provide a statistical basis
for evaluating DDT distribution in soils. Development of
additional sampling locations should be based on all
information available from other agencies that may
describe additional DDT sampling, and present and past
land use activities that may provide an indication of the
mechanics of DDT dispersion.
2392-461
-------
SEDIMENTS
Implementation of Sampling Plan
Offsite sediment sampling locations are shown in Figure 5.
Offsite sediment sampling generally conforms to the sampling plan
requirements. However, no sieve analyses were conducted.
Apparently the sediments found were fairly uniformly graded;
therefore, separate chemical analyses on the different size
fractions were not needed. However, at least one sieve analysis
is required to provide information for sediment transport
modeling. If sediment samples are still being held by the
laboratory, a sieve analysis should be requested. If sediment
samples are no longer available, a sieve analysis should be
specified as part of any subsequent sampling effort. If further
sampling is not conducted, the individual who described the
sample should be requested to estimate the grain size as closely
as possible.
The field data description for sediment sample SED10 does not
have an Extent-of-Sediment entry. The quantity of sediment at
that location should be estimated and provided.
Sediment sample SED30 is listed as being a split sample for both
samples SED19 and SED10 in the Round 2 field data. The original
field note pages or other means of clarification need to be
provided.
Sediment samples SEDll, SED12, and SED13 are not listed as
composites on the laboratory sheets.
Results
Sediment samples were obtained from four major flow channels
downgradient from the site. These are, in order, the Kenwood
2392-461
-------
Drain, the Torrance Lateral, the Dominguez Channel, and
Consolidated Slip.
DDT isomers and their transformation products were above
detection limits in sediment samples from all areas. Significant
concentrations of DDT (above 1 mg/kg) were found in the Kenwood
Drain, Torrance Lateral, and Dominguez Channel. BHC (alpha and
beta) was the only target chemical found above detection limits
(one sample) in the Consolidated Slip but is not likely to be
related to activities at the Montrose site since gamma BHC was
the isomer detected in the Montrose soil. Alpha and beta BHC are
is not traceable to the site through the drainage path.
Kenwood Drain. Sediment samples taken in the Kenwood Drain (a
storm sewer) all have significant DDT concentrations ranging from
6 to 87 mg/kg. Visual description of the quantity of sediment
indicates sediment is present in significant quantities. Since
water prevents full visual inspection of the sediments present in
the Kenwood Drain, video inspection of the storm sewer to further
document sediment quantities is not warranted. The Kenwood Drain
design documents in conjunction with the description of sediment
extent can be used to estimate sediment quantities for the
feasibility study. Sediments in the Kenwood Drain contain
significant levels of DDT and will continue to provide
contaminant-laden sediment to downstream receiving waters.
Sediment removal and measures to prevent recontamination from the
Normandie Avenue drainage ditch runoff should be undertaken.
Torrance Lateral. The Torrance Lateral sediment samples have DDT
concentrations ranging from 0.24 to 1.2 mg/kg. The presence of
higher DDT levels in sediments both upstream and downstream from
the Torrance Lateral may indicate higher average stream
velocities or sampling in areas where deposition of clay-sized
particles was minimal. Future remedial actions for sediments
will need to be based on a better estimate of the mass of
2392-461
-------
sediment containing concentrations at or above the TTLC. The
quantity of sediment in the Torrance Lateral could be fully
quantified visually by walking the length of the channel.
Dominguez Channel. The Dominguez Channel sediment samples have
DDT concentrations ranging from detection limit of 0.03 to 13
mg/kg. The highest upstream concentration is 2.2 mg/kg. The
highest downstream concentration is 13 mg/kg found at location
SED13, which is the first depositional area downstream from the
confluence with the Torrance Lateral. Two locations sampled
further downstream showed no detectable DDT.
The quantity of sediment near the SED 13 location is not known
and cannot be estimated with the current data. Quantification is
warranted due to the significant concentrations found. Since the
samples obtained represent only the top of deposited sediment, it
is likely that significant DDT concentrations would be found at
greater depths. Previous discussions with Los Angeles County
Flood Control District (LACFCD) personnel indicate that the
sediment deposition point just downstream of the confluence of
Torrance Lateral and Dominguez Channel persists year-round.
Discussions with LACFCD personnel are warranted to investigate
means of further delineating sediment character and quantities in
the Dominguez Channel which would be acceptable to the LACFCD.
The channel bottom is a 3-ft thick clay layer and the LACFCD
concern is that the channel bottom not be disturbed. The primary
area for focusing efforts is the sediment bar at SED13. Any
other major sediment deposition areas in Dominguez Channel should
be checked; however, the sediment bar at SED13 is expected to
have the highest quantity of sediment originating from Montrose
because it is the first location where stream velocities in the
drainage path are apparently low enough to permit deposition.
Smaller sediment particles not depositing at SED13 may remain
suspended until reaching Consolidated Slip or other harbor
waters.
2392-461
-------
Consolidated Slip. Consolidated Slip sediment samples all have
DDT concentrations below 1 mg/kg, ranging from 0.03 to 0.58
mg/kg. These values are of the same order of magnitude as the
upstream Dominguez Channel sediments. Four of the sediment
samples obtained during Round 2 of the offsite sampling contained
detectable levels of BHC isomers. SED15, the lowest sampling
point in the Dominguez Channel, contained trace amounts of the
alpha isomer. SED20, SED21, and SED24 showed 0.46 to 1.0 mg/kg
with the beta isomer being the dominant one. Further
characterization of Consolidated Slip and Los Angeles Harbor
sediment is beyond the scope of the current investigation.
Preliminary Recommendations
Montrose should be requested to clarify and provide information
as noted in the Implementation of Sampling Plan.
Kenwood Drain sediments are characterized to the maximum extent
practical. The information obtained during Round 2 sampling in
the Feasibility Study should be used to determine the cost
effectiveness of sediment removal along this structure.
Torrance Lateral sediment quantities appear to be limited.
Visual examination of the Torrance Lateral should be conducted to
confirm this assumption; if confirmed, existing information can
be used in the Feasibility Study to determine cost effectiveness
of removal. If quantities found are more extensive than
expected, then further sampling and quantification can be
included in a Part 2, Phase 2A Offsite Sampling Plan and QAPP.
Dominguez Channel sediments need further delineation as to
quality and quantity to properly evaluate options in the
Feasbility Study. Sampling options should be discussed with
LACFCD to determine the feasibility of a follow-up sampling
2392-461
-------
effort. A Part 2, Phase 2A Offsite Sampling Plan and QAPP should
be prepared. At a minimum, the Sampling Plan should attempt to
identify the quantity of sediment in Dominguez Channel
approximately 2,000 feet upstream and 4,000 feet downstream of
the confluence with Torrance Lateral. (The remaining downstream
portion of Dominguez Channel should be examined for sediment bars
and other features of sediment deposition?)
Selected cores of the deepest sediment should be obtained and
analyzed for DDT (isomers and metabolites) at 6-in. intervals.
At a minimum, one sediment sample should be analyzed by sieve
analysis. A background sediment sample should be obtained above
the tidal influence in Dominguez Channel and should be located
outside the area influenced by aeolian depositon from the
Montrose site. At least six locations along the 6,000 lineal
feet reach should be chosen for sampling. Composites of two or
three samples at each location should be obtained for analysis.
Where sufficient sediment permits, additional composites at depth
should also be analyzed.
SURFACE WATER
Implementation of Sampling Plan
Surface water sampling locations are shown in Figure 5. In
general, the surface water sample number system was changed from
the one presented in the Samplng Plan. Documentation of the new
correlation should be provided. It appears that sample numbers
SW-11 to SW-15 were skipped to allow sample number agreement
between consolidated slip water and sediment samples.
The Round 2 sampling data were taken during a period of dry
weather conditons; however, it is apparent that sufficient
surface water flow was present to allow water samples to be taken
in the Torrance Lateral.
2392-461
-------
The Sampling Plan (page 25) states that the flowrates where
surface water samples are obtained will be estimated. The dry
weather (base flow) flowrates should be estimated to allow for
better comparison with wet weather flowrates when determined. If
tidal exchange information was calculated, it should also be
provided.
As noted in the Sampling Audit, some of the Consolidated Slip
water samples were obtained at 0.2 and 0.8 depth rather than 0.3
and 0.6 as specified in the QAPP. The Sampling Audit lists only
two major departures: (1) the laboratory composited the surface
water and sediment samples to make sampling less complicated, and
(2) sample bottles were not prerinsed with sample water to avoid
oil and grease buildup. These deviations are not judged to be
significant or to impair the usefulness of the data.
The USEPA letter of modification to the QAPP specifies filtered
and unfiltered samples are to be analyzed for sample location SW4
(as well as for other locations). SW4 was not so analyzed,
instead SW5 and SW7 were analyzed in this manner. Explanation of
this deviation is required.
The reported detection limit for benzene of 4.4 ug/L is above the
DHS Applied Action Level of 0.7 ug/L (ppb) for water.
Results
The surface water data obtained in Round 2 are dry weather
results. Wet weather data are not available currently. These
data will be compared with the wet weather Round 3 results and
historical water quality measurements.
Although four of the surface water samples (SW5, SW7, SW8, and
SW24) showed concentrations of total DDT ranging from 0.64 to 6.7
2392-461
-------
ug/L, subsequent reanalysis of these samples gave below detection
limit results in all cases. These reanalyzes were subject to a
detection limit of 2 ug/L as opposed to 0.1 or 0.2 ug/L typically
applied during the other analyses. Explanation for this should
be provided.
DDT is the only target chemical found consistently above ^
detection levels. DDT concentrations ranged from less than 0.10
to 6.7 ug/L. Concentrations of DDT above 1 ug/L were found in
each of the sampling areas (Torrance Lateral, Dominguez Channel,
and Consolidated Slip.)
One Consolidated Slip sample indicated acetone contamination of
16 ug/L. Acetone was detected in sample SW-19; however, this
result is in doubt because of the high acetone contamination
detected in rinseate from the benthic sampler used on the same
day.
The BHC isomers were not detected in any of the Round 2 surface
water samples. Assessment of BHC concentrations in surface water
will be continued when the Round 3 wet weather results are
available.
Preliminary Recommendations
Recommendations regarding water quality will be provided pending
receipt and analysis of wet-weather surface water data.
2392-461
-------
FATE AND TRANSPORT
The following review comments address the transport and
environmental fate of the target compounds based on reports
prepared for Montrose Chemical Corporation by Hargis and
Associates, Inc.
General
Transport of the target chemicals from the Montrose site and
their ultimate environmental fate is governed by the complex
interactions of each compound with its physical, chemical and
biological environment. The results of their interactions are a
function of both the physico-chemical properties of the compound
and the environmental conditions to which it is exposed.
Since the Montrose site was capped in April 1985, onsite sources
of additional DDT in soil are not expected to impact offsite
areas. However, the DDT isomers and transformation products
currently distributed in the nearsite soil profiles will continue
to be affected by the same weathering and transport phenomena
that emplaced them. Areas which receive runoff may be eroded,
thus resuspending particulate and moving the contaminants ^
downstream to depositional environments. Areas which experience
standing water and infiltration will have deeper penetration of
the soil column by the contaminants. Areas with fine-grained,
loose soils will be eroded by the wind with the sorbed
contaminants being deposited under quiescent conditions.
A summary of the physico-chemical properties of the target
chemicals is presented in Table 7. The table lists the
laboratory measurable properties that are most frequently applied
to qualitative predictions of transport and fate. Data from the
literature are cited when available. Where data are not
available, accepted methods of estimation are applied and cited.
-------
Table 7. SUMMARY OF PHYSICO-CHEMICAL PROPERTIES
Qienlcal nana
Onical Halting Balling Density, V&por
form la point point q/mL pressure
In
ซater
Solubility
Coefficient
In
solvgita
Hปter
partltlai
Adsorption
Bio- Aqueous
corwt. photo-
factar lvsla H."
1.1.1-trlChlcro- CMFWns 108.5- V/Pz
2.2-bla 109 .tft
(4-d>lorepheny 1) -
ethane (OUT)
Sblid
1. l-dlchloro-
2.2-bls
{4-dilorophenyl) -
ethane (CCD)
1.1-didilaro-
2.2-bia
(p-dilorcpheny 1) -
ethylene(DOE)
ttnochloro-
benzene (MC8)
cM"ltfS* llj0c -b
c14(Vn4 88^
SOlld
1.5*1(T7
an 14
(at ZPC)
10.2*10"'
OB
(at XPc)
0.0017 ppn Acettnei log R_.
at 25ฐC 58 g/100 mL - 5.96
Bmzoiei
78 g/100 at,
Oiloro-
bcixawi
74 g/100 ttL
0.002 ppn
Similar
to DOT
C^i%a -45ฐC
SOlld 6.5*10"*
SB
(at xPa
1.1058 11.80
0.087 ppn Similar log IL-.
(est.) to OCT - 5.6le
0.13-31.4
n at
25ฐC
26 tnol/L
diloroform
Soluble in
alcohol,
benzene
ether.
carbon
tetra-
dilorlde
Soluble in
alcohol.
dilorofora.
ether,
cartxn
tetra-
diloride,
acetone
Sslifele In
alcohol,
chloroform
2.5ฎ
log
- 2.8tr
(eat.)
3.4C
3.4
3.4=,
iฐ?>
2 .If
SaltUle in
g/100 g at
ZPCi
acetone 43.5r
beizene 28.9>
dtlerofora 29.Or
ether 20.8i
ethanol 6.4.
3.6-3.8
235.
000
iฐ!> fo.a
241,000
(eat.)
473,000
(est.)
(est.)
701
(eat.)
Sss"
(est.)
fe"
(est.)
BCF ซ
29.400
at 32
days
Olrectt
1/2
life of
150 yr.
Indirect1
<1 t*
2x10'
i-J
BCP - 1/2
21,000 life of
(eat.) 150 yr
BCP - 1-6
51,000 at days
32 fays
BCT -
450 at
28 days
BCP -
89 at
14 days
BCP ซป
66 at
14 days
BCT -
CO at
14 days
6 at
14 days
BCT
12.6
_b
b
0.11
6.2x10'
0.13
_b _
2x10"
a. It. " dloenstanlesa tfcnry's law Ocnstant.
b. Ohavallabia.
c. Iknadi I Leo (1979) [6].
2392-461
-------
Transportation of contaminants in the environment is represented
schematically in Figure 6. The environmental compartments of
concern and the mass transfer pathways linking them are shown as
two dimensions. The third dimension which must be considered is
the bulk transport of the media within each compartment (i.e.,
the transport of suspended solids or the dispersion of air-borne
particulates to which contaminants are adsorbed). Air, water,
and soil are the three main compartments, with sediment situated
between the water and soil compartments depending on the degree
of saturation or desiccation. Within each compartment, at least
two distinct phases are depicted: vapor and sorbed phases are
dominant in air; soluble and sorbed phases are dominant in
water. Saturated soil and air contain a third phase during
precipitation events. Colloids in water may be considered a
separate phase where adsorption to colloidal materials is a
dominant process. The transport processes shown are limited to
those considered important for the target chemical compounds.
Fate processes are frequently dependent on pH, oxidation-
reduction conditions, oxygen concentrations, the presence of
primary substrates, and the presence and competency of microbial
populations.
DDT Isomers and Transformation Products
General Comments. The compounds within this group exhibit low
vapor pressures (less than 10"^ torr), low water solubility (less
than 0.1 mg/L), and high affinity for organic carbon and clay
fractions in soil. Within any environmental compartment, DDT
isomers and their primary transformation products, DDD and DDE,
will preferentially adsorb to solid surfaces. This adsorption is
due to hydrophobic or Van der Waals interactions as opposed to
ion exchange phenomena that dominate the soil interactions of
ionic and polar species. Although the vapor pressures are low,
2392-461
-------
AIR
SORBED PHASE
(condensation
VOLATILIZATION
VAPOR PHASE
SOIL
WATER 4oX \
INTERSTITIAL
VAPOR PHASE
SOLUBLE PHASE
DESORPTION ADSORPTION
SOURCE
VOLATILIZATION CONDENSATION
SORBED PHASE
SORBED PHASE
ADVECTION
RE SUSPENSION
SEDIMENTATION
NON-AQUEOUS
PHASE LIQUIDS
SEDIMENT
DISSOLUTION
ADVECTION
INFILTRATION TO GROUNDWATER
FIGURE 6. SCHEMATIC OF CONTAMINANT TRANSPORT
-------
dissolved phase DDT will partition into the atmosphere by
volatilization. Volatilization is generally a function of the
Henry's Law Constant (Hc) which takes into account both vapor -
pressure and water solubility.
Soil. Two primary mechanisms are proposed to account for the
observed distribution of total DDT in the perimeter soil borings:
-------
contaminated onsite soils and powders from the grinding and
packing processes. This mode of transport is responsible for the
DDT distribution characterized by significant levels in the
uppermost sampling depth but none greater than 0.1 mg/kg at
depths of 2 ft or below. Included in this category are JC2, MD5,
LA4, LA6, LA7, and LA8. The contaminant distributions indicate
deposition with very little penetration of the soil profile.
Concentration maxima in the transect borings are at locations
deeper in the soil profile than those from the site perimeter
borings. Erratic distribution of contaminants with depth is
noted for borings T31, T33, T43, T44, and T45. This phenomenon,
often referred to as "fingering," is defined for the present
purposes as a contaminant profile exhibiting concentration
increases of tenfold or greater at the deeper of two adjacent
sampling depths. It is noted that borings T33, T42, T44, and T52
show DDT levels in excess of the TTLC at the deepest point
sampled. Further borings in the Normandie Avenue drainage ditch
should be carried out to assess the complete contaminant profile.
All of the transect borings are associated with surface water
drainageways downgradient from the Montrose site. Although the
exact streambed profiles for transects T5 and T6 are unavailable,
it can generally be stated that the borings showing the highest
levels are at the low points of the profiles (i.e., through which
the majority of the flow would occur). The boring with highest
levels found at the 2-ft depth in T45 had a concentration of
8,600 mg/kg, nearly 1% total DDT. However, the full transect
profile for T4 was not given in the sampling plan. A topographic
sheet with resolution to 1-ft contour intervals would greatly aid
in determining transport mechanisms as well as estimating mass of
contaminants present.
Sorbed phase surface runoff followed by deposition and/or
infiltration into the soil profile are the proposed mechanisms to
2392-461
-------
account for the observed distribution of total DDT. Surface
runoff collected by drainageways on the south and west sides of
the site converge to form the Normandie Avenue Drainage Ditch
immediately north of transect T3. Backwater conditions in the
main drainage ditch may create depositional environments in which
the coarser and, at lower velocities, the finer suspended solids
settle out. DDT isomers and transformation products will be
strongly adsorbed to inorganic microparticales and organic
macromolecules [2]. These fine materials and colloids will
largely remain suspended and may be transported into the soil
interstices with the bulk movement of the water. This transport
will be aided by the presence of organic co-solvents in the
aqueous phase.
The "fingering" depth distributions observed may be attributable
to historical spill events which carried the contaminants deeper
into the soil profile. The "fingering" may be caused by a
chromatographic effect in which the hydrophobic solutes are
selectively retained in certain soil horizons. Sieve analyses
and organic carbon determinations were not performed for any of
the samples, hence the most obvious correlations cannot be
assessed.
Ponding water in the ditch will increase the depth penetration of
the solutes. Any resuspension of solids and desorption of DDT
from the solids into the soluble phase will make that DDT
available for volatilization to the atmosphere. The more likely
scenario, however, is resuspension of solids and transport
downstream to another depositional environment as noted above.
Sediments.
Transport. The distribution of DDT and its hydrophobic
transformation products in sediments is a function of the
sedimentation process. The factors that control sedimentation
2392-461
-------
(stream velocity, turbulence, particle density', ionic strength)
will obviously control the deposition of particle-associated
organics. As channel profiles change or storm events occur,
sediments may be resuspended and carry their associated organics
downstream.
Fate. Sediments are typically anaerobic within a few
centimetres of their surface. Anaerobic conditions allow a
variety of transformations of DDT in the presence of
microorganisms. Figure 7 presents some of the transformation
products that have been observed in laboratory studies.
Biotransformation of DDT occurs more readily under anaerobic than
aerobic conditions. DDD formation is favored under anaerobic
conditions although DDD has also been found to occur along with
DDE in aerobic systems [1].
Surface Water.
Transport. Surface water is the transport medium that
carries particulate-bound DDT from the Montrose site. For DDT in
aquatic systems, sorption to suspended solids and subsequent
deposition into anaerobic sediment systems appears to be the
dominant fate process. While the majority of the DDT will be
sorbed to particulates, that which is in the soluble phase is
available for volatilization or indirect photolysis.
Volatilization is considered an important fate process for
soluble phase DDT as there are no mass transfer limitations.
Half-lives of several hours to several weeks have been
extrapolated from laboratory studies. Indirect photolysis in the
presence of certain sensitizers may be a significant fate process
with a half-life on the order of 1 week [1].
2392-461
-------
ANAEROBIC
AEROBIC
COMPLETE
MINERALIZATION ?
DDCO
DDTOH
4-CHL0R0PHENYL
ACETIC ACID
DDMU
DDNU
DDMS
H
DDCHO DDOH DDNU-EPOXIDE
-------
In aerobic surface water, DDE will be the primary product of
biodegradation. DDE is very stable to further degradation but
may dechlorinate under reducing conditions to DDMU (see
Figure 7).
Assessment of the DDT concentrations in filtered and unfiltered
surface waters will be reviewed when the results from the Round 3
(wet weather) samples are available.
BHC
General. BHC is the common name given to the family of
hexachlorocyclohexane isomers. There are 17 stereoisomeric forms
and 4 of these are of environmental concern. The main
insecticidal component of the technical mixture is the gamma
isomer (lindane). These isomers exhibit a range of physico-
chemical properties but, in general, can be considered to be of
low volatility (vapor pressure 10"^ to 10"^ torr), low water
solubility (less than 30 mg/L), and low polarity (log Kow ranges
from 3.7 to 4.1). Both vapor pressure and water solubility
estimates vary over two orders of magnitude for the various
stereoisomers.
The greater water solubility of BHC as compared to DDT not only
decreases the affinity toward sorption but also diminishes the
role of volatilization (as illustrated by the low Henry's Law
Constant).
Biodegradation is apparently the dominant fate process of the BHC
isomers. Biodegradation is more rapid under anaerobic conditions
than aerobic.
2392-461
-------
Soils.
Transport. The boring with the highest level of total BHC
(LA13) is very closely associated with a historic drainage
pathway. LA12 is also close to a drainageway, while LAI and SP2
are located 30 to 40 feet from the nearest known drainage. It is
likely that the BHC isomers were transported by surface runoff
(both in the soluble phase and the sorbed phase) to LAI2, LAI3,
and SP2. The presence of BHC throughout the profile at SP2
indicates a mobile phase carried them downward.
Comparison of the BHC results with those of DDT show
concentration maxima in the same soil sample in a given boring
indicating similar transport and deposition mechanisms at work.
The BHC data are too few to permit a more detailed analysis.
In transect borings (Normandie Avenue), the concentration maxima
for total BHC are at the same depth as for total DDT indicating
similar transport and deposition mechanisms. Notable exceptions
are T33 and T52. In T33, total BHC is highest near the surface
and tapers with depth where the DDT results are erratic. In T52,
a BHC maximum concentration is observed at 3.75 feet with no
detectable BHC above or below . Deeper samples were obtained in
T52A, approximately 2 feet from T52. The DDT distribution in T52
gives a maximum of 2.0 feet and tapers uniformly below this
depth.
While concentration maxima may be co-located for BHC and DDT,
their overall depth profiles are quite different. BHC shows
erratic vertical distribution (fingering) in only one boring
(T45). Here the concentration of DDT is so high (0.86%) at the
2.0-ft level, that BHC isomers will preferentially associate with
the DDT phase. The lack of fingering at other locations is
probably a function of the water solubility of the BHC isomers.
2392-461
-------
With water solubilities ranging from 10 t<^ 300 times that of the
DDT isomers and transformation products, BHC isomers will be less
retarded as they are transported advectively with the
infiltrating water.
Fate. BHC isomers associated with the shallow nearsite soils
may be resuspended and transported downstream by surface
runoff. Under reducing conditions and in the presence of
competent microorganisms, biodegredation will proceed. The rates
of transformation are very difficult to predict.
BHC isomers associated with shallow soils and sediments in the
drainage ditch may be resuspended and transported downstream by
surface runoff. The deeper residues may be further transported
downward with infiltrating water.
The predominant residue form observed in the drainage ditch
samples is beta BHC with alpha BHC being the most prevalent at
T41, T42, and some depths in T43. Not enough is known about the
pathways and rates of BHC degradation to make generalizations
concerning this data set.
Sediment.
Transport. It is noted that, although significant levels of
total BHC occur in the perimeter soils and transect borings, very
little is found in the downstream sediments. This is due to the
biodegradation of BHC in anaerobic systems. The rates of
disappearance decrease in the order gamma>alpha>beta>delta. It
is, therefore, not surprising to find that the gamma isomer
(Lindane) is undetected. It has been reported that alpha BHC was
a product of gamma BHC degradation in both aerobic and anaerobic
experiments [10].
Surface Water. None detected.
2392-461
-------
Chlorobenzene (MCB)
MCB is one of the reactants used in the manufacture of DDT. It
was transported to the Montrose site and stored in quantity.
Onsite groundwater samples contained up to 310,000 ug/L
(solubility limit - 500,000 ug/L).
MCB is a liquid at ambient temperatures, has a density slightly
greater than water (1.1 g/mL), a moderate vapor pressure (11.9 mm
Hg), and low water solubility (0.5 g/l).
Estimates of the log Kow range from 2.5 to 2.84. Given this set
of physico-chemcial properties, sorption, bioaccumulation, and
volatilization are expected to be competing processes in the
determination of the fate of MCB [1].
Soil.
Transport. The two locations at which MCB was detected are
not associated with drainages running offsite nor are they
adjacent to the suspected MCB storage area. The presence of MCB
in these borings may represent isolated spills or the
interception of a vadoze zone plume traveling from the highly
contaminated soils onsite.
Sediment. None detected.
Surface Water. None detected.
Dichlorobenzene Isomers
None detected.
2392-461
-------
Benzene
None detected.
Chloroform
None detected.
Acetone
Acetone is a low molecular weight solvent commonly used in the
cleaning of machinery. It readily volatilizes from solid or
soluble phases. Acetone readily biodegrades under aerobic
conditions. Its presence does support the notion of hydrophobic
compound transport by co-solvation. Relatively small amounts of
water-miscible co-solvents can decrease the retardation of
hydrophobic solvents as they travel with infiltration water. It
also illustrates the persistence of readily degradable compounds
when important factors are not present (i.e., oxygen,
microorganisms).
REFERENCES
1. Callahan, Michael, et al. Water Related Fate of 129 Priority
Pollutants, Volumes I and II. EPA-440/4-79-029. 1979.
2. Baker, Joel E., et al. Environmental Science and
Technology. 1986, 20, 1136-1143
3. Munz, Christoph and Paul V. Roberts Environmental Science
and Technology. 1986, 20, 830-835
4. Gibson, David T. Microbial Degradation of Organic
Compounds. Marcel Dekker, Inc. New York. 1984
5. Verschueren, Kanel Handbook of Environmental Data on Organic
Chemicals. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York. 1983
2392-461
-------
6. Hansch, C. and A.J. Leo Substituent Constants for
Correlation Analysis in Chemistry and Biology. John Wiley,
New York. 1987
7. Chio, W.W. and K.Y. Chen. Environmental Science and
Technology. 1976.
8. MacGregor, J.S. U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service
Fisheries Bulletin. 1976.
9. Hamelink, J.L. and R.C. Waybrant. Transactions of the
American Fisheries Society. 1976.
10. Newland, L.W. et al. Journal of the Water Pollution Control
Federation. 1969.
11. Amended CERCLA Site Sampling Plan and Sampling Documentation
Report. October 17, 1986.
2392-461
-------
APPENDIX A
-------
Appendix A
QUALITY ASSURANCE REVIEW
ADHERENCE TO THE OFFSITE SAMPLING PLAN
Number of Samples
The total number of samples taken offsite has changed from those
reported in Table 5 of the Sampling Plan (SAP):
1. For the historical drainage area, 60 samples were
actually taken (Table 5 SAP shows 40 samples).
2. Neighborhood soil samples were taken at a depth of 0-0.25
feet not 0-0.5 feet as indicated in the table.
3. The total number of borings taken at the site perimeter
is 13 giving the total proposed number of perimeter
samples as 65 not 75 as shown in Table 5 SAP.
4. The total number of borings for the Los Angeles
Department of Water & Power Company easement is 14 giving
the total proposed number of samples as 70 (instead of 60
samples shown in Table 5 SAP).
5. Sixty soil samples proposed for the historical drainage
area on Farmer Bros. Coffee property were not obtained
during sampling Rounds 1 or 2.
6. Three surface water samples (SW1-SW3) proposed for
drainage areas in the vicinity of the site were not
obtained during Rounds 1 or 2.
7. The comments contained in the Round 1 and Round 2
entitled Deviations from Sampling Protocols are noted.
2392-461M
-------
ADHERENCE TO THE QAPP
Determination of Accuracy
The accuracy formula given on page 38 of the QAPP is incorrect.
Determination of the accuracy or bias using the percent recovery
method should be calculated as:
Ai - Bi
Pi = Percent Recovery = x 100%
Tl
where: Ai = Concentration of component i determined for
spiked sample.
Bi = Concentration of component i determined for original
unspiked sample.
Ti = True value of spiked component i added to sample.
Pi = Percent recovery for component i.
Field QA/QC
1. Duplicate samples were obtained at the rate of 10% per day
per matrix except in the following instances:
a. Dominquez Channel surface water composite samples
(sampled 6/12 and 6/13/86) did not have a companion field
duplicate.
b. Consolidated slip surface water samples for 6/4/86 (a
field duplicate), SW-30, was obtained but not analyzed.
c. The 5/28/86 sediment duplicate as noted in the Deviations
from sampling protocols - Round 2.
2. Trip blanks were carried and analyzed for each day of surface
water sampling during Round 2. The QAPP calls for one trip
blank per ice chest. There is no indication of how many ice
chests were utilized per sampling day.
3. EPA split samples were provided when and where requested by
the field oversight contractor.
-------
4. One background soil sample per week was obtained and
analyzed. The reasons for the locations chosen were not
explained in the field data reports.
5. One rinseate sample per matrix per day was obtained and
analyzed except as noted here:
a. No rinseate samples were obtained on 6/4/86.
b. No rinseate samples were obtained on 6/8/86.
Laboratory QA/QC
The preliminary review of the laboratory QA/QC procedures and
performance will be completed by EPA.
Field Duplicate Precision
Using the criteria and control limits for precision established
in the QAPP, the following tables give the precision of the field
duplicates in terms of percent difference.
Table A-l
Table A-2
Table A-3
Table A-4
Table A-5
Table A-6
Table A-7
Table A-8
Table A-9
Table A-10
Field Duplicate Precision for Round 1
Trip Blanks Precision, Round 2
Rinseate and Rinseate Blanks, Round 1
Trip Blank Precision, Surface Water Sampling
Rinseate and Rinseate Blanks, Round 2
Neighborhood Soil Background Precision
Dominguez Channel Sediment Precision
Consolidated Slip Sediment Precision
Dominguez Channel Surface Water Precision
Consolidated Slip Surface Water Sample
Precision
Precision is expressed as percent difference between duplicates.
The stated quality assurance objectives for the offsite sampling
are that percent difference shall be no greater than 20% (page 9,
QAPP). This value is quite often exceeded for soil samples.
-------
Sediment samples from Round 2 stay within the control limits
(<20%) in 9 out of 19 cases that are determinable.
Due to the sampling techniques, true duplicates were not obtained
for the soil borings during Round 1 (page 19, QAPP). Soil core
duplicates were obtained from brass liners immediately above or
below the primary sampling depth in order to maintain the
integrity of the volatile constituents. The lack of true
duplicates is reflected in the poor sampling precision shown in
Table A-l. Two of 36 analytical pairs were within the acceptable
range of precision.
Three types of samples were obtained during Round 2 sampling.
Each of these (surface soil, sediment, and surface water} is
amenable to true duplicate sampling. Precision for duplicates
obtained during Round 2 is consequently better than for those
duplicates obtained during Round 1. Ten of 30 analytical pairs
were within the acceptable range of precision for the
neighborhood soil and sediment samples.
USEPA Split Samples
Field split samples were obtained by either Montrose or by the
USEPA FIT contractor and submitted to independent USEPA contract
laboratories.
The soil boring splits were obtained in the same way as the field
duplicates (page 19, QAPP). The composite field and laboratory
precision for these splits is presented as percent difference in
Table A-l.
In the neighborhood soil samples, two of 8 analytical pairs were
within acceptable precision limits. The USEPA split of the
neighborhood soil background sample [520 S(B)] showed much lower
levels of total DDT and the presence of 1.6 mg/kg chlordane. The
2392-461M
-------
chromatograms of both of these analyses should be rechecked. The
USEPA split of NS-1 also showed chlordane at 28 mg/kg.
Three of 16 analytical pairs from the sediment splits were within
acceptable precision limits. Results from the Dominguez Channel
sediment sample SED-13 (USEPA split numbers YA738 and YA739) were
particularly disparate. The sampling techniques and split
preparation of those samples should be reviewed.
Surface water samples from Round 2 were indeterminate due to the
low and frequently undetected concentrations of target chemicals.
Surface water samples SW-8 and SW-24 were below detection limit
for all parameters upon reanalysis; therefore, no precision data
can be generated. The results for Method 608 analysis of YA743
and YA749 could not be located in the USEPA split data.
2392-461M
-------
Table A-l. ROUND 1 FIELD DUPLICATE PRECISION -
PERCENT DIFFERENCE3
Primary sample No. JC2-3.25 JC3-2.25 JC5-5 LA1-5.25 LA2-3 LA2-5.5
Split sample No. JC2-3.75 JC3-2.75 JC5-5.5 LA1-5.75 LA2-3.5 LA2-6
Sampling date 5/1/86 5/1/86 4/30/86 5/8/86 5/2/86 5/2/86
Total BHC ______
Total DDT 107 67 111
Alpha BHC ______
Beta BHC _________
Gamma BHC
Delta BHC ______
p,p'-DDD 133
p,p'-DDE 166 _ _
p,p'-DDT 67 _ 13
o,p'-DDD
o,p'-DDE 170 _ _
0,p'-DDT
1.2-DC3 ______
1.3-DCB ~ _ _ _ _
1,4_DC3 ________
Acetone 111
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
-------
Table A-l (Continued)
Primary sample No. IA7-4.25 LA8-4.75 LA11-5.25 LA13-5 IA14-5
Split sample No. LA7-4.75 IA8-5.25 LA11-5.75 LA13-5.5 LA14-5.5
Sampling date 5/6/86 5/5/86 5/5/86 5/6/86 5/6/86
Total BHC ~ _ _
Total DDT 122
Alpha BHC _ _
Beta BHC __ __
Gamma BHC
Delta BHC _____ __
p,p'-DDD 125
P/P* -DDE 105
p,p*-DDT 132 ~
0,p'-DDD
O/p'-DDE
0,p'-DDT ~
1.2-DCB
1.3-DC3
1.4-DCB
Acetone
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Chlocobenzene
Chloroform
2392-461M
-------
Table A-l (Continued)
Primary sanple No. MD4-5.75 MD6-4.75 SP2-3.25 T31-5.25 T41-1.5 T42-1.0
Split sample No. MD4-6.25 MD6-5.25 SP2-3.75 T31-5.75 T41-2.0 T42-1.5
Sampling date 4/30/86 4/29/86 5/8/86 5/8/86 5/9/86 5/9/86
Total BHC 67
Total DDT 24 160 181
Alpha BHC ______
Beta BHC 67
Gamma BHC
Delta BHC ______
P/P'-DDD _ _ _ 116 _
p,p'-DDE 40 158 152
p,p'-DDT 20 158
Orp'-DDD _ _ 160
o,p'-DDE 167
o,p'-DDT _ _ _ 163 _
1.2-DCB
1.3-DCS _ _ _ _ _ _
1.4-DCB _ _ _ _ _
Acetone
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
-------
Table A-l (Concluded)
Primary sample No. T43-5.5 T45-1.0 T51-1.0 T61-2.75 T61-4.75
Split sample No. T43-6.0 T45-1.5 T51-1.5 T61-3.25 T61-5.25
Sampling date 5/9/86 5/9/86 5/9/86 5/7/86 5/6/86
Total BHC
Total DDT
Alpha BHC
Beta BHC
Gamma BHC
Delta BHC
p,p'-DDD
p,p'-DEE
p,p'-DDT
Ofp'-DDD
0,p'-DDE
0,p'-DDT
1.2-DCB
1.3-DCS
1.4-DCB
Acetone
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
127
138
11S
149
39
151
140
47
146
a. Percent difference = 2 lDi-Dol
x 100%
(D^ = first determination; D2 = second determination)
2392-461M
-------
Table A-2. POUND 2, FIELD DUPLICATE PRECISION
AS PERCENT DIFFERENCE3
Primary sample No. NS-2
Split sanple No. NS-18
Soil samples
n rrr
5/21/86 5/30/86 6/4/86
Sediment sanples"
SED-19C SED 18C SED-21C
SED-30C SED-33C SED-35C
6/5/86 6/6/86
2392-461M
-------
Table A-2 (Concluded)
Sediment samples Surface water samples
Primary sample No. SED-25C SED-14C SW-19 SW-17 SW-21C SW-25 SW-5
Split sample No. SED-36C SED-37C SW-30b SW-31 SW-35C SW-37 SW-39
Sampling date 6/7/86 6A1/86 6/4/86 6/5/86 6/6/86 6/7/86 6/12/86
Total BHC _______
Total DDT
Alpha BHC ______
Beta BHC _______
Gamma BHC
Delta BHC _____
p,p'-DDD
p,p'DDE
p,p'-DDT _____
0,p'-DDD
Ofp'-DEE
0,p'-DDT
1.2-DC2 _____
1.3-DCB _____
1.4-DCS _____
Acetone
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
D-i -D<3
a. Percent difference = 2 - x 100%
Dl+D2
(D^ = first determination; D2 = second determination)
b. SW-30 acquired but not analyzed.
2392-461M
-------
TABLE A-3. RINSEATE AND RINSEATE BLANKS, ROUND 1
ugA
Parameter MD6-R B4JH20862" 4-30-R(BV)a JC5-R(A) 4-30-5(A)
MEK
30 40
30
30
NAC
Chloroform
5
5
NA
Acetone
10
11
NA
4-3OR(B)
JC3-R (A)
5-1R (A)
5-2R (A)
LA3-R(A)
MEK3
NA
20
NA
NA
60
Total DDT
NA
5.1
NA
PfP'-DDT
NA
4.4
NA
Ofp'-DDT
NA
0.7
NA
Ethyl acetate"
NA
NA
NA
10
Chloroform
NA
NA
NA
1
5-6-5 (A)
LA3R(A)
LAllR(A)
5-5R(A)
T64R(A)
MEKb
NA
30
20
NA
30
Chloroform
NA
3
4
NA
3
Acetone
NA
22
28
NA
35
CHBrCL^
NA
1
NA
Toluene
NA
8
NA
6
Ethyl acetate
NA
10
NA
5-7-R (A)
LAl-R(B)
a T31R(A)
5-8-R(A)
MEKb
NA
20
20
NA
Chloroform
NA
5
5
NA
Acetone
NA
NA
Toluene
NA
1
NA
T52-R (A)
5-9-R(A)
MEKb
20
NA
Chloroform
4
NA
Note: Only compounds observed in rinseate samples and rinseate
blanks are listed.
a. B&JH30AN86 and 4-30-R(BV) sampled directly from organic-free
water bottle. 4-30-R(B) and LA1-R(B) sampled directly from
the organic free water dispensing system.
b. MEK and ethyl acetate are semiquantified using their respective
total ion counts.
c. NA = not analyzed; rinseate and rinseate blanks were alternately
analyzed for organochlorine pesticides (EPA Method 608) and
volatile priority pollutants (EPA Method 624).
2392-461M
-------
Table A-4. SURFACE WATER SAMPLING, TRIP BLANK PRECISION
ug/L
SW-32 SW-34 SW-36 SW-38
Sampling date 6/5/86 6/6/86 6/7/86 6/11/86
Total BHC
Total DDT
Alpha BHC
Beta BHC
Gamma BHC
Delta BHC
p,p'-DDD
p zP'-DDE
p z p'-DDT
o ,p'-DDD
O , p'-DDE
O ,p'-DDT
1.2-DCB
1.3-DCB
1.4-DC3
Acetone
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
Toluene
Total xylenes"
MEK 10
D-i -Do
a. Percent difference = 2 0^+62 * 100%
(D^ = first determination; D2 = second determination)
b. Semiquantified using total ion count.
2392-461M
-------
Table A-5. ROUND 2 RINSEATE AND RINSEATE BLANKS
ug/L
Parameter 5-30-R(A) 5-30-R(B)L 6-5-R(A) 6-6-R(A) 6-7-rW
Acetone 10 10 20
MEKa ~ 200 60
Chloroform
6-11-R(AS) 6-11-(AW) 6-12-R(AW)
Acetone
MEKa 200 50
Chloroform 2
Note: Only compounds observed in rinseates are listed.
a. Semiquantified using total ion count.
b. 5-30-R(B) is rinseate blank collected directly from
organic-free water dispensing system in the field.
2392-461M
-------
Table A-6. NEIGHBORHOOD SOIL BACKGROUND PRECISION
mg/kg
Primary Split Percent
sample sample difference5
Sample ID:
5-20-5(B)
YA732
Sampling date:
5/20/86
5/20/86
Total BHC
Total DDT
2.1
0.4
136
Alpha BHC
Beta BHC
Gamma BHC
Delta BHC
p,p'-DDD
0.6
prp'-DDE
0.4
pfp'-DDT
1.1
0.4
93
O r p* DDD
0,p'DDE
0,p'-DDT
1,2-DCB
1,3-DC3
1,4-DCB
Acetone
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
Toluene
0.014
Chlordane
1.6
2392-461M
-------
Table A-6 (Continued)
Primary Split Percent
sample sample difference9
Sample ID:
NS-1
YA733
Sampling date:
5/20/86
5/20/86
Total BHC
Total DDT
17.0
8.1
71
Alpha BHC
Beta BHC
Gamma BHC
Delta BHC
p,p'-DDD
3.0
<0.01
p,p'-DDE
2.3
2.1
9.1
p r p'DDT
6.2
6.0
3.3
O, p'-DDD
0,p'-DDE
5.6
0,p'-DDT
1,2-DCB
1,3-DCB
1,4-DC3
Acetone
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
MIBK
0.15
Chlordane
28.
2392-461M
-------
Table A-6 (Concluded)
Primary Split Percent
sample sample difference9
Sample ID:
NS-13
YA731
Sampling date:
5/20/86
5/20/86
Total BHC
Total DDT
7.60
4.8
45.2
Alpha BHC
Beta BHC
Gamma BHC
Delta BHC
pfp'-DDD
0.8
<0.01
p,p'-DDE
3.0
1.9
45
p,p'-DDT
3.6
2.9
22
Ofp'-DDD
Ofp'-DDE
0.2
0,p'-DDT
1,2-DCB
1,3-DCB
1,4-DCB
Acetone
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
MIBK
0.22
Di -Do
a. Percent difference = 2 g +Q x 100%
2392-461M
-------
Table A-7. DOMINGUEZ CHANNEL SEDIMENT PRECISION
ing/kg
Primary Split Percent
sample sample difference3
Sample ID:
SED-11
YA735
Sampling date:
5/28/86
5/28/86
Total BHC
Total DDT
2.2
Alpha BHC
Beta BHC
Gamma BHC
Delta BHC
p,p'-DDD
0.41
<0.016
p,p'-DDE
0.94
<0.016
p,p'-DDT
0.81
<0.016
O/P'-DDD
O/p1-DDE
O/p'-DDT
1,2-DCB
1,3-DC3
1,4-DCB
Acetone
o
in
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
MeCl2
0.009
2392-461M
-------
Table A-7 (Concluded)
Primary
Split
Percent
Split
Percent
a
sample
sample No. 1
difference3
sample No.
2 difference
Sample ID:
SED-13
YA738
YA739
Sampling date:
5/30/86
5/30/86
5/30/86
Total BHC
Total DDT
13.
1.02
171
1.68
154
Alpha BHC
Beta BHC
Gamma BHC
Delta BHC
p,p'-DDD
9.8
0.65
175
0.84
168
p,p'-DDE
2.7
0.37
152
0.26
165
prp'-DDT
0.7
<0.016
0.58
19
0,p'-DDD
Ofp'-DEE
0,p'-DDT
1,2-DC3
1,3-DCB
lf4-DC3
-
Acetone
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
Ethylbenzene
0.88
0.11
Total xylenes
0.29
0.033
DiDo
a. Percent difference = 2 =- x 100%
ฐ1+d2
2392-461M
-------
Table A-8. CONSOLIDATED SLIP SEDIMENT PRECISION
rag/kg
Primary Split Percent
sample sample difference5
Sample ID:
SED-20
YA741
Sampling date:
6/06/86
6/06/86
Total BHC
0.46
Total DDT
0.32
0.63
65
Alpha BHC
0.02
Beta BHC
0.44
Gamma BHC
Delta BHC
p,p'-DDD
0.05
0.32
146
p,p'-DDE
0.13
0.31
82
p#p'-DDT
0.14
<0.023
O,p'-DDD
0,p'-DDE
O, p'DDT
1,2-DCB
1,3-DCU
1,4-DCB
Acetone
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
Aroclor 1260
1.2
Dt Do
a. Percent difference = 2 = x 100%
d1+d2
2392-461M
-------
Table A-8 (Concluded)
Primary
Split
Percent
Split
Percent
sample
sample No. 1
difference3
sample No.
2 difference3
Sample ID:
SED-24
YA744
XA745
Sampling date:
6/06/86
6/06/86
6/06/86
Total BHC
1.0
Total DDT
0.41
0.45
9.3
0.52
24
Alpha BHC
0.05
Beta BHC
1.00
Gamma BHC
Delta BHC
p,p'-DDD
0.08
0.24
100
0.26
106
Pzp'-DDE
0.18
0.21
15
0.26
36
p,p'-DDT
0.25
<0.023
<0.023
Ofp'-DDD
O^p'-DDS
O/p'-DDT
1
1,2-DCB
1,3-DCB
1,4-DCS
Acetone
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
a. Percent difference = 2
d1+d2
x 100%
2392-461M
-------
Table A-9. DOMINGUEZ CHANNEL SURFACE WATER PRECISION
ug/L
Primary Split Percent Split Percent
sample sample No. 1 difference3 sample No. 2 difference3
Sample ID:
Sampling date:
SW-8
6/12/86
YA748
6/12/86
YA749
6/12/86
Tbtal BHC
Total DDT
Alpha BHC
Beta BHC
Gamma BHC
Delta BHC
p,p'-DDD
p,p'-DDE
p,p'-DDT
O/P*-DDD
O/p'-DDE
Orp'-DDT
1.2-DCB
1.3-DCB
1/4-DCB
Acetone
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
Di Do
a. Percent difference = 2 Dj+f^ x 100%
2392-461M
-------
Table A-10. CONSOLIDATED SLIP SURFACE WATER SAMPLE PRECISION
ug/L
Primary Split Percent Split Percent
sample sample No. 1 difference3 sample No. 2 difference3
Sample ID: SW-24 YA742 YA743
Sampling date: 6/06/86 6/06/86 6/06/86
Tbtal BHC
TOtal DDT
Alpha BHC
Beta BHC
Gamma BHC
Delta BHC
p,p'-DDD
p,p'-DDE
p,p* -DDT
0,p'-DDD
O/p' -DDE
o,p'-Dcrr
1.2-DCB
1.3-DCB
1.4-DCB
Acetone
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
Di Do
a. Percent difference = 2 p^+p^ x 100%
2392-461M
-------
APPENDIX B
-------
HDNfROSE SHE Units
OFFS1TE SOIL SAMPLES ag/kq (ppul
Sacple Date Tot-BHC Tot-DDT BHC-a BHC-b BHC-d BHC-
05/20/06
-0.10
2.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
1.10
0.40
0.60
-0.30
-0.10
-O.IO
JCI-2
05/01/HA
-0.01
1.60
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
0.30
0.91
0.24
-0.03
0.14
-O.Ol
JC2-I
05/01/84
-0.50
100.00
-0.50
-0.50
-0.50
-0.50
90.00
-0.50
11.00
-3.00
-0.50
0.70
JCI-1.75
05/01/86
-1.00
760.00
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
340.00
210.00
170.00
-3.00
41.00
-1.00
JC3-2.25
05/01/86
-0.10
560.00
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
260.00
150.00
110.00
-30.00
37.00
-10.00
JC3-2.75
05/01/86
-1.00
170.00
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
130.00
14.00
22.00
-3.00
3.00
-1.00
JC5-1
04/30/86
-10.00
590.00
-10.00
-10.00
-10.00
-10.00
280.00
150.00
140.00
-30.00
-10.00
-10.00
JC5-2.5
04/30/86
-0.10
1.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
0.40
0.70
-0.10
-0.30
-0.10
-0.10
LAl-l.O
05/00/86
0.50
64.00
-0.10
0.50
0.10
-0.10
23.00
26.00
2.00
5.90
4.40
2.40
LAI-2.0
05/08/86
0.04
1.10
-0.01
0.04
-O.Ol
-0.01
0.16
0.76
-0.01
0.06
0.07
0.05
LfllO-O.75
05/05/86
-0.01
1.40
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
-O.Ol
0.27
0.97
0.08
-0.03
0.06
-0.01
LA1H.25
05/05/06
-0.01
1.10
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
-O.Ol
0.12
0.81
0.07
-0.03
0.06
-0.01
LAI3-1.25
05/06/86
17.00
630.00
-10.00
-10.00
17.00
-10.00
310.00
150.00
150.00
-30.00
20.00
-10.00
LAI3-I.75
05/06/86
-0.10
13.00
-0.10
-0.10
-O.IO
-0.10
5.90
2.90
0.10
2.50
1.20
0.10
LAI4-1.25
05/06/86
-0.10
35.00
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
23.00
7.10
5.30
-0.30
0.40
-O.IO
LAM-1.75
05/06/86
-0.10
3.90
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
1.20
1.40
0.50
-0.30
0.80
-O.IO
LA3-1.5
05/06/86
-1.00
240.00
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
170.00
44.00
26.00
-3.00
4.00
-1.00
LA4-1.0
05/02/86
-0.10
2.70
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
1.20
1.30
0.20
-0.30
0.10
-O.IO
LA6-I.0
05/06/86
-0.10
53.00
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
41.00
1.60
1.40
-0.30
8.90
-O.IO
LA9-0.5
05/05/86
-0.01
1.00
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
0.41
0.56
0.06
-0.03
-0.01
-O.Ol
HD1-I
04/30/86
-0.01
3.70
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
2.10
1.30
0.31
-0.03
-0.01
-0.01
KM-0.25
04/30/86
-0.01
2.90
-0.01
-O.Ol
-0.01
-0.01
1 .BO
0.91
0.18
-0.03
-0.01
-0.01
ND4-0.25
01/01/01
-0.01
2.90
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
1.80
0.91
0.18
-0.03
-0.01
-0.01
ND5-1
04/29/86
-1.00
120.00
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
50.00
53.00
13.00
120.00
-1.00
-3.00
NS-I
05/20/86
-0.10
17.00
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
6.20
2.30
3.00
-0.30
5.60
-O.IO
NS-II
05/20/86
-0.10
2.10
-0.10
-o.io
-0.10
-0.10
1.30
0.60
0.20
-0.30
-O.IO
-0.10
NS-I2
05/20/86
-0.10
2.80
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
1.70
0.30
0.50
-0.30
0.20
-O.IO
NS-13
05/20/86
-0.10
7.60
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
3.60
3.00
0.80
-0.30
0.20
-O.IO
NS-15
05/20/86
-0.10
1.30
-0.10
-o.to
-0.10
-0.10
0.60
0.40
0.30
-0.30
-O.IO
-0.10
NS-17
05/20/86
-0.10
1.20
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
0.80
0.20
0.20
-0.30
-O.IO
-O.IO
NS-18
05/20/86
-0.10
14.00
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
9.80
1.80
2.30
-0.30
0.20
-O.IO
MS-19
05/21/86
-0.01
1.30
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
-O.Ol
0.97
0.23
0.03
O.lt
-0.01
-O.Ol
NS-2
05/20/86
-0.10
18.00
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
14.00
1.90
2.50
-0.30
-O.IO
-O.IO
HS-3
05/20/86
-0.10
1.30
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
0.60
0.40
0.30
-0.30
-0.10
-O.IO
NS-4
05/20/86
-0.01
1.00
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
0.53
0.25
0.12
-0.03
0.11
-0.01
NS-5
05/20/86
-0.10
10.00
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
4.00
3.20
2.10
-0.30
0.70
-O.IO
NS-6
05/20/86
-0.10
3.60
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
1.90
1.00
0.50
-0.30
0.40
-O.IO
NS-7
05/20/86
-0.10
3.20
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
2.10
0.70
0.40
-0.30
-O.IO
-O.IO
NS-8
05/21/86
-0.01
1.90
-0.01
-O.Ol
-O.Ol
-O.Ol
1.40
0.29
0.04
0.15
O.Ol
0.01
57-1.0
05/08/86
0.61
11.00
0.01
0.57
0.02
0.01
5.80
2.60
0.25
1.00
0.27
1.10
T3I-2.0
05/08/86
0.23
4.70
-0.01
0.17
0.06
-O.Ol
3.50
0.34
0.16
0.51
0.04
0.10
T31-2.75
05/08/86
0.68
1400.00
0.07
0.49
0.10
0.02
1000.00
120.00
35.00
220.00
22.00
33.00
T3I-4.75
05/08/86
0.02
9.00
-0.01
0.02
-0.01
-0.01
3.00
1.20
0.19
3.10
0.19
0.55
T31-5.25
05/08/86
0.04
7.80
-0.01
0.04
-0.01
-0.01
2.80
1.10
0.19
2.80
0.22
0.73
T32-I.0
05/08/86
-0.50
590.00
-0.50
-0.50
-0.50
-0.50
370.00
65.00
44.00
51.00
14.00
50.00
132-2.0
05/08/86
0.20
4.60
-0.01
0.12
0.08
-O.Ol
2.20
0.32
0.77
0.43
0.08
0.78
T32-3.25
05/08/86
0.15
5.80
-0.01
0.09
0.06
-0.01
2.50
0.64
0.64
1.00
0.14
0.09
T32-4.25
05/08/86
0.05
4.10
0.01
0.04
0.01
-0.01
1.20
0.55
0.12
1.50
0.12
0.06
133-2.0
05/08/86
0.17
1.10
-0.01
0.12
0.05
-0.01
0.53
0.15
0.08
0.24
0.03
0.09
133-3.25
05/08/86
0.13
70.00
-0.01
0.10
0.03
-0.01
42.00
6.50
1.40
17.00
2.30
0.94
- = detection limit value.
-------
Staple Date Tot-BHC lot-ODT BHC-a BHC-b BUC-d BC-q p-DDT p-DDE p-DDD o-OOI o-DDE o-DDD
TJ3-3.75
05/09/86
0.03
120.00
0.01
0.03
0.01
0.01
92.00
2.60
2.50
18.00
0.52
0.78
T33-4.25
05/08/84
0.02
5.40
-o.oi
0.02
-O.OI
-O.OI
2.50
0.81
0.16
1.70
0.12
0.34
T33-5.75
01/01/01
0.04
13.00
-0.10
0.04
-0.01
-0.01
6.90
1.50
0.40
3.00
0.20
0.50
TJ3-5.75
05/08/84
0.04
12.00
-0.01
0.04
-0.01
-0.01
6.90
1.50
0.38
3.00
0.22
0.45
T4I-1.5
05/09/84
0.55
1.40
0.18
0.13
0.11
0.13
0.54
0.44
0.41
-0.03
-0.01
-O.OI
MM .5
05/09/84
2.20
17.00
1.20
0.45
0.20
0.30
8.70
0.75
1.10
5.10
0.27
0.78
T42-2.0
05/09/84
1.10
1.30
0.60
0.18
0.21
0.14
0.40
0.10
0.15
0.32
0.01
0.30
T42-2.0
01/01/01
1.10
1.30
0.60
0.18
0.21
0.14
0.40
0.10
0.15
0.32
0.01
0.30
142-5.25
05/09/84
0.03
2.10
0.03
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
1.60
0.15
0.15
0.12
0.01
0.03
T43-I.5
05/09/84
0.74
87.00
0.05
0.49
0.18
0.02
60.00
6.30
4.40
12.00
1.60
3.10
T43-2.0
05/09/84
1.80
910.00
0.67
0.73
0.24
0.16
690.00
10.00
36.00
150.00
4.40
28.00
I4M .0
05/09/84
-0.10
17.00
-0.10
-0.10
-O.IO
-O.IO
9.40
2.60
0.61
3.10
0.46
0.49
T44-I.0
01/01/01
-0.01
17.00
-0.01
-O.OI
-0.01
-0.01
9.40
2.60
0.61
3.10
0.46
0.4?
T44-2.0
05/09/04
0.10
140.00
-0.05
0.10
-0.05
-0.05
110.00
3.00
3.00
20.00
0.57
(.10
T44-3.75
05/09/84
0.03
120.00
-0.01
0.03
-O.OI
-O.OI
92.00
2.60
2.50
18.00
0.52
0.78
144-4.25
05/09/84
0.10
98.00
-0.05
0.10
-0.05
-0.05
78.00
1.60
2.40
15.00
0.34
0.65
T44-5.75
05/09/84
0.04
64.00
-O.OI
0.04
-O.OI
-0.01
49.00
1.30
1.30
14.00
0.29
0.60
T45-I.0
05/09/84
0.04
35.00
-0.01
0.04
-O.OI
-0.01
18.00
7.60
0.45
7.10
0.87
0.60
T45-1.5
05/09/84
0.18
190.00
0.01
0.15
0.02
-O.OI
130.00
5.10
3.10
45.00
1.40
3.40
T45-2.0
05/09/84
4.40
8400.00
0.60
-0.50
I.OO
2.80
6100.00
140.00
240.00
2000.00
39.00
130.00
152-2.0
05/09/84
-10.00
3400.00
-10.00
-10.00
-10.00
-10.00
2300.00
710.00
530.00
-30.00
41.00
-10.00
T52-3.75
01/01/01
81.00
490.00
0.80
33.00
26.00
21.00
390.00
6.10
28.00
55.00
1.70
8.10
T52-3.75
05/09/84
81.00
490.00
0.76
33.00
26.00
21.00
390.00
6.10
28.00
55.00
1.70
8.10
T52A-1.25
05/09/84
-1.00
160.00
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
105.00
25.00
30.00
-3.00
3.00
-1.00
T52A-3.25
05/09/84
-0.10
12.00
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
2.70
4.40
2.70
-0.30
1.70
-0.10
T52A-4.25
05/09/84
-0.10
8.50
-o.io
-O.IO
-0.10
0.10
2.40
3.10
2.00
-0.30
1.00
-0.10
T53-1.0
05/09/84
-0.01
1.20
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
0.44
0.43
0.24
-0.03
0.06
-O.OI
T54-1.0
05/09/84
0.01
1.10
-0.01
0.01
-0.01
-0.01
0.54
0.33
0.05
0.13
0.01
0.03
T62-0.75
05/07/84
-10.00
620.00
-10.00
-10.00
-10.00
-10.00
180.00
250.00
130.00
-30.00
55.00
-10.00
TA2-1.75
05/07/84
-0.10
6.10
-O.IO
-O.IO
-0.10
-0.10
2.90
1.80
1.20
-0.30
0.20
-0.10
163-1.25
05/07/84
-0.10
79.00
-0.10
-O.IO
-0.10
-O.IO
34.00
3.20
24.00
-30.00
18.00
-10.00
T63-1.75
05/07/84
-0.01
6.40
-O.OI
-O.OI
-O.OI
-0.01
3.50
0.14
1.60
-0.03
1.20
-0.01
T64-I.0
05/07/84
-0.10
12.00
-o.io
-0.10
-O.IO
-0.10
4.30
0.30
0.20
2.30
1.30
3.80
T44-2.0
05/07/B4
-0.10
12.00
-O.IO
-O.IO
-0.10
-O.IO
4.50
0.30
0.30
2.50
1.00
3.70
T64-3.0
05/07/84
-o.oi
3.40
-O.OI
-O.OI
-O.OI
-0.01
1.90
0.96
0.49
-0.03
0.08
-O.OI
= detection limit value.
-------
fwrrosE site Uuts
OFFSIFE SOIL SAWLE5 aq/kq (ppซ)
Saซple Date " Tot-SC Tot-DOT BHC-a BHC-b BHC-d BHC-q p-ODI p-DDE p-DDD o-DDT o-DDE o-DOD
101-1.0
05/08/86
0.50
64.00
-0.10
0.50
0.10
-0.10
23.00
26.00
2.00
5.90
4.40
2.40
LA1-2.0
05/08/86
0.04
1.10
-0.01
0.04
-0.01
-O.Ol
0.16
0.76
-0.01
0.06
0.07
0.05
LAI2-5.25
01/01/01
0.06
0.22
0.04
0.02
-0.01
-0.01
0.13
0.05
0.04
-0.03
0.01
-0.01
IAI2-5.25
05/06/86
0.06
0.22
0.04
0.02
-0.01
-0.01
0.13
0.05
0.04
-0.03
0.01
-0.01
IA13-I.25
05/06/86
17.00
630.00
-10.00
-10.00
17.00
-10.00
310.00
150.00
150.00
-30.00
20.00
-10.00
NS-9
05/21/86
0.10
0.75
-0.02
0.03
0.01
0.06
0.56
0.09
0.02
-0.03
0.08
-0.01
SP2-I.0
05/08/86
0.61
11.00
0.01
0.57
0.02
0.01
5.80
2.60
0.25
1.00
0.27
1.10
SP2-2.0
01/01/01
0.02
0.03
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.01
-0.03
0.03
-0.01
-0.03
-0.01
-O.Ol
SP2-2.0
05/08/86
0.02
0.03
-0.01
0.02
-0.01
-O.Ol
-0.03
0.03
-0.01
-0.03
-0.01
-O.Ol
SP2-3.75
05/08/86
0.02
0.39
-0.01
0.02
-0.01
-0.01
0.19
0.12
-0.01
0.08
-0.01
-0.01
SP2-4.25
05/08/86
0.19
-0.03
-0.01
0.19
-0.01
-0.01
-0.03
-O.Ol
-0.01
-0.03
-0.01
-O.Ol
T31-2.0
05/08/86
0.23
4.70
-0.01
0.17
0.06
-0.01
3.50
0.34
0.16
0.51
0.04
0.10
131-2.75
05/08/86
0.68
1400.00
0.07
0.49
0.10
0.02
1000.00
120.00
35.00
220.00
22.00
33.00
T3I-3.75
05/08/86
0.11
0.87
-O.Ol
0.09
0.02
-0.01
0.47
0.10
0.06
0.16
0.02
0.06
T3M.75
05/08/86
0.02
9.00
-0.01
0.02
-0.01
-0.01
3.80
1.20
0.19
3.10
0.19
0.55
T3I-5.25
05/08/86
0.04
7.80
-0.01
0.04
-0.01
-0.01
2.80
1.10
0.19
2.80
0.22
0.73
T3I-5.75
05/08/86
0.02
0.85
0.01
0.02
-0.01
-O.Ol
0.33
0.13
0.05
0.24
0.02
0.08
131-5.75
01/01/01
0.02
0.85
-0.01
0.02
-O.Ol
-O.Ol
0.33
0.13
0.05
0.24
0.02
o.oe
T32-2.0
05/08/86
0.20
4.60
-0.01
0.12
0.08
-0.01
2.20
0.32
0.77
0.43
0.08
0.78
T32-3.2S
05/08/86
0.15
5.80
-0.01
0.09
0.06
-0.01
2.50
0.64
0.64
1.00
0.14
0.89
T32-4.25
05/08/86
0.05
4.10
0.01
0.04
0.01
-0.01
1.20
0.55
0.12
1.50
0.12
0.06
T32-5.75
05/08/86
0.02
0.86
-0.01
0.02
-0.01
0.01
0.10
0.17
0.08
0.17
0.03
0.31
133-1.0
05/08/86
0.18
0.38
-0.01
0.13
0.05
-0.01
0.20
0.05
0.03
.0.07
-0.01
0.03
T3J-2.0
05/08/86
0.17
1.10
-0.01
0.12
0.05
-0.01
0.53
0.15
0.08
0.24
0.03
0.09
T33-3.25
05/08/86
0.13
70.00
-0.01
0.10
0.03
-0.01
42.00
6.50
1.40
17.00
2.30
0.94
133-3.75
05/09/86
0.03
120.00
0.01
0.03
0.01
0.01
92.00
2.60
2.50
18.00
0.52
0.78
T33-4.25
05/08/86
0.02
5.60
-0.01
0.02
-0.01
-0.01
2.50
0.81
0.16
1.70
0.12
0.34
T33-5.75
01/01/01
0.04
13.00
-0.10
0.04
-0.01
-0.01
6.90
1.50
0.40
3.00
0.20
0.50
T33-5.75
05/08/86
0.04
12.00
-0.01
0.04
-0.01
-0.01
6.90
1.50
0.38
3.00
0.22
0.45
141-1.5
05/07/86
0.55
1.40
0.18
0.13
0.11
0.13
0.54
0.44
0.41
-0.03
-0.01
-0.01
T4I-3.5
05/09/86
0.03
-0.03
-0.01
0.03
-0.01
-0.01
-0.03
-0.01
-0.01
-0.03
-O.Ol
-O.Ol
T42-I.5
05/09/86
2.20
17.00
1.20
0.45
0.20
0.30
8.70
0.75
1.10
5.10
0.27
0.78
T4Z-2.0
01/01/01
1.10
1.30
0.60
0.18
0.21
0.14
0.40
0.10
0.15
0.32
0.01
0.30
T42-2.0
05/09/86
1.10
1.30
0.60
0.18
0.21
0.14
0.40
0.10
0.15
0.32
0.01
0.30
T42-3.25
05/09/86
0.45
-0.03
0.30
0.06
0.04
0.05
-0.03
-0.01
-0.01
-0.03
-0.01
-0.01
T42-4.25
05/09/86
0.04
-0.03
0.04
-0.01
-O.Ol
40.01
-0.03
-0.01
-0.01
-0.03
-0.01
-O.Ol
T42-5.25
05/09/86
0.03
2.10
0.03
-0.01
-0.01
-O.Ol
1.60
0.15
0.15
0.12
0.01
0.03
T43-I.5
05/09/86
0.74
B7.00
0.05
0.49
O.IB
0.02
60.00
6.30
4.40
12.00
1.60
3.10
143-2.0
05/09/86
1.80
910.00
0.67
0.73
0.24
0.16
690.00
10.00
36.00
150.00
4.60
28.00
T43-3.75
05/09/86
0.11
0.88
-0.01
0.09
0.02
-0.01
0.47
0.10
0.06
0.17
0.02
0.06
143-5.0
05/09/86
0.13
0.51
0.11
-0.01
-O.Ol
0.02
0.34
0.03
0.04
0.10
-0.01
-O.Ol
T43-5.5
05/09/86
0.05
-0.03
0.05
-0.01
-O.Ol
-0.01
-0.03
-O.Ol
0.02
-0.03
-0.01
-O.Ol
144-2.0
05/09/86
0.10
140.00
-0.05
0.10
-0.05
-0.05
110.00
3.00
3.00
20.00
0.57
1.10
T44-3.75
05/09/86
0.03
120.00
-0.01
0.03
-0.01
-0.01
92.00
2.60
2.50
18.00
0.52
0.78
T44-4.25
05/09/86
0.10
98.00
-0.05
0.10
-0.05
-0.05
78.00
1.60
2.40
15.00
0.34
0.65
T44-5.75
05/09/86
0.04
66.00
-0.01
0.04
-0.01
-0.01
49.00
1.30
1.30
14.00
0.29
0.60
T45-1.0
05/09/86
0.04
35.00
-0.01
0.04
-0.01
-0.01
18.00
7.60
0.45
7.10
0.87
0.60
T45-I.5
05/09/86
0.18
190.00
0.01
0.15
0.02
-O.Ol
130.00
5.10
3.10
45.00
1.40
3.40
145-2.0
05/09/86
4.40
8600.00
0.60
-0.50
1.00
2.80
6100.00
140.00
240.00
2000.00
39.00
130.00
145-3.25
05/09/86
0.02
0.39
-O.Ol
-0.01
-0.01
0.02
0.29
0.02
0.01
0.07
-0.01
-0.01
detection limit value
-------
Sasple Date Tot-flHC Tot-DDT BHC-a BHC-b BHC-d BHC-q p-DDT p-ODE p-DOD o-DDf o-DDE o-OOD
T52-3.75
01/01/01
81.00
490.00
0.80
33.00
26.00
21.00
390.00
6.10
28.00
55.00
1.70
8.10
T52-3.75
05/09/86
81.00
490.00
0.76
33.00
26.00
21.00
390.00
6.10
28.00
55.00
1.70
8.10
T54-I.0
05/09/04
0.01
1.10
-0.01
0.01
-0.01
-o.oi
0.56
0.33
0.05
0.13
0.01
0.03
I
- = detection limit value.
-------
APPENDIX C
-------
nONFROSE SITE Uhits
OFFSITE SEDIMENT SAIff.ES ag/kq (ppซl
Saaple Oate Tot-BHC Tot-ODT BC-a BHC-b BHC-d BHC-q p-DOT p-OOE p-OOD o-ODT o-DDE o-ODO
KD-I
05/29/84
-1.00
59.00
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
33.00
16.00
10.00
-3.00
-1.00
-1.00
KD-3
05/29/84
-0.10
12.00
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
-0.10
1.90
5.40
4.50
-0.30
-0.10
-0.10
(CQ-4
05/29/84
-0.10
12.00
-0.10
-O.IO
-0.10
-O.IO
3.90
3.40
4.50
-0.30
-0.10
-O.IO
KD-5
05/29/84
-0.10
4.00
-0.10
-O.IO
-0.10
-O.IO
0.40
1.50
4.10
-0.30
-O.IO
-0.10
KO-6
05/29/84
-0.10
15.00
-O.IO
-O.IO
-O.IO
-0.10
5.40
1.40
7.40
-0.30
-0.10
-O.IO
KD-7
05/29/84
-1.00
87.00
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
-1.00
41.00
11.00
15.00
-3.00
-1.00
-1.00
Sed-10
05/30/84
-0.01
1.20
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
0.80
0.23
0.21
-0.03
-0.01
-0.01
Sed-II
05/28/84
-0.0!
2.20
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
0.81
0.94
0.41
-0.03
-0.01
-O.IO
Sed-IJ
05/30/84
-0.10
13.00
-0.10
-O.IO
-0.10
-0.10
0.70
2.70
9.80
-0.30
-O.IO
-0.10
Sed-8
05/29/84
-0.01
1.20
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
0.69
0.30
0.22
-0.03
-0.01
-0.01
-------
MONTROSE SITE Uhits
OFFSITE SEDIMENT SAMPLES eg/kg (ppซl
Saซple Date Tot-BHC Tot-DOT BHC-a BHC-b BHC-d BHC-g p-DOT p-ODE p-DOD o-ODT o-DDE o-DDD
Sed-15coซp
06/11/86
0.02
-0.03
0.02
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
-0.03
-O.OI
-0.01
-0.03
-0.01
-0.01
Sed-20coซp
06/06/06
0.46
0.32
0.02
0.44
-0.01
-0.01
0.14
0.13
0.05
-0.03
-0.01
-O.OI
Sed-2lcซp
06/06/86
0.86
0.37
0.06
0.80
-0.01
-0.01
0.02
0.16
0.06
-0.03
-0.01
-0.01
Sed-24coซp
06/06/86
1.00
0.41
0.05
1.00
-0.01
-0.01
0.25
0.18
0.08
-0.03
-0.01
-O.OI
Sed-35coซp
06/06/86
1.00
0.58
0.05
1.00
-0.01
-0.01
0.30
0.20
0.08
-0.03
-0.01
-0.01
- = detection limit value.
-------
APPENDIX D
-------
mm site
OFFSITE SURFACE WATER SAMPLES
Outs
uq/L (ppb)
Sa.ples Date Tot-BHC Tot-DDT BHC-a BHC-b BHC-d BHC-g p-DDT p-DDE p-DDO o-DDT o-ODE (HDD
5-2-fl(A)
05/02/64
-0.05
5.10
-0.05
-0.05
-0.05
-0.05
4.40
-0.05
-0.05
0.70
-0.05
-0.05
SK-24 UnU
06/06/84
-O.50
6.70
-0.50
-0.50
-0.50
-0.50
-1.00
6.70
-0.50
0.00
-0.50
-0.50
SW-5 fill
01/01/01
-0.05
1.50
-0.05
-0.05
-0.05
-0.05
0.90
0.3?
0.23
-0.10
-0.05
-0.05
SH-5 Filt
06/I2/B6
-0.05
1.50
-0.05
-0.05
-0.05
-0.05
0.90
0.3?
0.23
-0.10
-O.05
-0.05
SH-7 FUt
06/12/86
-0,05
1.50
-0.05
-0.05
-0.05
-0.05
1.20
0.14
0.17
-0.10
-0.05
-0.05
- = detection limit value.
-------
------- |