EPA/600/R-05/002
November 2004
Mine Waste Technology Program
Remediation Technology Evaluation at the
Gilt Edge Mine, South Dakota
by
John Trudnowski
MSE Technology Applications, Inc.
Mike Mansfield Advanced Technology Center
Butte, Montana 59702
Contract No. DE-AC09-96EW96405
EPA IAG No. DW89938870-01-1
EPA Project Manager
Norma Lewis
Sustainable Technology Division
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
This study was conducted in cooperation with
U.S. Department of Energy
Savannah River Operations Office
Aiken, South Carolina 29802
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
-------
Notice
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through its Office of Research and Development funded the
research described here under IAG DW89938870-01-0 through the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
Contract DE-AC22-96EW96405. It has been subjected to the Agency's peer and administrative review
and has been cleared for publication as an EPA document. The views and opinions of authors expressed
herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the EPA or DOE, or any agency thereof. Mention of
trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
11
-------
Foreword
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is charged by Congress with protecting the Nation's
land, air, and water resources. Under a mandate of national environmental laws, the Agency strives to
formulate and implement actions leading to a compatible balance between human activities and the ability
of natural systems to support and nurture life. To meet this mandate, EPA's research program is
providing data and technical support for solving environmental problems today and building a science
knowledge base necessary to manage our ecological resources wisely, understand how pollutants affect
our health, and prevent or reduce environmental risks in the future.
The National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL) is the Agency's center for investigation
of technological and management approaches for preventing and reducing risks from pollution that
threaten human health and the environment. The focus of the Laboratory's research program is on
methods and their cost effectiveness for prevention and control of pollution to air, land, water, and
subsurface resources; protection of water quality in public water systems; remediation of contaminated
sites, sediments, and groundwater; prevention and control of indoor air pollution; and restoration of
ecosystems. The NRMRL collaborates with both public and private-sector partners to foster technologies
that reduce the cost of compliance and to anticipate emerging problems. NRMRL's research provides
solutions to environmental problems by developing and promoting technologies that protect and improve
the environment; advancing scientific and engineering information to support regulatory and policy
decisions; and providing the technical support and information transfer to ensure implementation of
environmental regulations and strategies at the national, state, and community levels.
This publication has been produced as part of the Laboratory's strategic long-term research plan. It is
published and made available by EPA's Office of Research and Development to assist the user
community and to link researchers with their clients.
Lawrence W. Reiter, Acting Director
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
111
-------
Abstract
This document reports the findings of the Mine Waste Technology Program's Activity III, Project 29, The
Remediation Technology Evaluation Project at the Gilt Edge Mine, South Dakota. This project consisted
of evaluating three emerging acidic waste rock stabilization technologies and comparing those
technologies to lime treatment of acidic waste rock. The three new technologies tested were the Silica
Micro Encapsulation (SME) Technology from Klean Earth Environmental Company (KEECO), the
Passivation Technology from the University of Nevada-Reno (UNR), and the Envirobond Technology
from Metals Treatment Technologies (MT2). Performance of the technologies was evaluated as a pilot-
scale demonstration by placing treated waste rock into isolated cells at the Gilt Edge Mine and monitoring
the leachate collected from the representative cells. The objective of the treatments was to reduce the
contaminants of concern by at least 90% or to South Dakota water discharge limits. The three technology
vendors also provided a cost estimate to treat a hypothetical 500,000-cubic yard waste rock pile at the Gilt
Edge Mine using the pilot-scale data as a guideline.
The leachate results revealed that UNR's Passivation technology and the lime treatment reduced more
contaminants of concern to the project objectives than the KEECO and MT2 technologies.
Appendices A through D are available upon request from the MSE MWTP Program Manager. Please
refer to document number MWTP-235. Email: mse-ta@mse-ta.com. Phone (406) 494-7100.
IV
-------
Contents
Page
Notice ii
Foreword iii
Abstract iv
Figures vi
Tables vi
Acronyms and Abbreviations vii
Acknowledgment viii
Executive Summary ES-1
1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Proj ect Description 1
1.2 Technology Descriptions 2
2. TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION 3
2.1 Technology Evaluation Process 3
3. WASTE ROCK RESULTS 5
4. PRESUMPTIVE REMEDY PERFORMANCE 6
5. MT2 ENVIROBOND TECHNOLOGY PERFORMANCE 13
6. UNR TECHNOLOGY PERFORMANCE 20
7. KEECO SME TECHNOLOGY PERFORMANCE 27
8. TECHNOLOGY CONCEPTUAL DESIGN AND COST EVALUATION 34
8.1 KEECO Conceptual Design 34
8.2 MT2 Conceptual Design 34
8.3 UNR Conceptual Design 34
8.4 Presumptive Remedy Conceptual Design 34
8.5 Conceptual Design Costs 34
9. QUALITY ASSURANCE 36
10. CONCLUSIONS 37
11. REFERENCES 38
Appendices are available upon request at Email: mse-ta@mse-ta.com or Phone (406)494-7100.
Document # MWTP-235
Appendix A: Leachate Results A-l
Appendix B: pH, Conductivity, Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, Turbidity, and Oxidation-
Reduction Potential of Test Cells B-l
v
-------
Appendix C: Applicable South Dakota Water Quality Criteria C-l
Appendix D: Acid-Base Accounting Results for Multicell Treatability Study D-l
Figures
Page
2-1. Project Test Cells 7-12 - View from the North (Gilt Edge Mine) 4
4-1. PR pH Trend 7
4-2. PR TDS Trend 8
4-3. PR Arsenic Trend 9
4-4. PR Zinc Trend 10
5-1. M I pi I Trend 14
5-2. MT2 TDS Trend 15
5-3. MT2 Arsenic Trend 16
5-4. MT2 Zinc Trend 17
6-1. UNRpH Trend 21
6-2. UNR TDS Trend 22
6-3. UNR Arsenic Trend 23
6-4. UNR Zinc Trend 24
7-1. KEECOpH Trend 28
7-2. KEECO TDS Trend 29
7-3. KEECO Arsenic Trend 30
7-4. KEECO Zinc Trend 31
Tables
Page
2-1. Cell Assignment of the Project Test Cells 4
2-2. SD AWQC for the Gilt Edge Site 4
4-1. PR Dosage Rates 11
4-2. PR Aluminum Percent Reduction 11
4-3. PR Iron Percent Reduction 12
4-4. PR Sulfate Percent Reduction 12
5-1. MT2 Envirobond Treatment Dosage Rates 18
5-2. MT2 Aluminum Percent Reduction 18
5-3. MT2 Iron Percent Reduction 19
5-4. MT2 Sulfate Percent Reduction 19
6-1. UNR Passivation Technology Dosage Rates 25
6-2. UNR Aluminum Percent Reduction 25
6-3. UNR Iron Percent Reduction 26
6-4. UNR Sulfate Percent Reduction 26
7-1. KEECO SME Technology Dosage Rates 32
7-2. KEECO Aluminum Percent Reduction 32
7-3. KEECO Iron Percent Reduction 33
7-4. KEECO Sulfate Percent Reduction 33
8-1. Technology Vendor's Conceptual Design Costs 35
10-1. Technology Performance Summary 37
vi
-------
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ABA
acid-base accounting
ARD
acid rock drainage
CaO
lime (dry)
CACO3
calcium carbonate (limestone)
CDM
CDM Federal Inc.
DOE
U.S. Department of Energy
EPA
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ft
foot
KEECO
Kleen Earth Environmental Company
L
liter
mg
milligram
MS
matrix spike
MSD
matrix spike duplicate
MSE
MSE Technology Applications, Inc.
MT2
Metals Treatment Technologies
MWTP
Mine Waste Technology Program
PR
presumptive remedy
PVC
polyvinyl chloride
QA
quality assurance
QC
quality control
ROD
Record of Decision
SAP
sampling and analysis plan
SD AWQC
South Dakota Applicable Water Quality Criteria
SME
silica microencapsulation
TDS
total dissolved solids
Mg
microgram
UNR
University of Nevada-Reno
yd3
cubic yard
Vll
-------
Acknowledgment
This document was prepared by MSE Technology Applications, Inc. (MSE) for the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA) Mine Waste Technology Program (MWTP) and the U.S. Department of
Energy's (DOE) National Energy Technology Laboratory. Ms. Diana Bless is EPA's MWTP Project
Officer, while Mr. Gene Ashby is DOE's Technical Program Officer. Ms. Helen Joyce is MSE's MWTP
Program Manager.
Vlll
-------
Executive Summary
The Mine Waste Technology Program (MWTP) Activity III, Project 29, Remediation Technology
Evaluation Project was a collaboration between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office
of Research and Development and EPA Region VIII. The Remediation Technology Evaluation Project
consisted of evaluating three emerging acidic waste rock stabilization technologies and comparing those
technologies to the presumptive remedy (PR) of lime treatment. The objective of EPA Region VIII was
to conduct a treatability study as part of the remedial investigation/feasibility study process for the Gilt
Edge Mine near Lead, South Dakota, providing data to help in the decision-making process supporting
the Record of Decision for the site. The objective of the MWTP was to evaluate promising new
technologies for preventing the oxidation of sulfide waste rock, which may be applicable to a large
number of mine waste sites.
The three new technologies tested were the Silica Micro Encapsulation (SME) Technology from Klean
Earth Environmental Company (KEECO), the Passivation Technology from the University of Nevada-
Reno (UNR), and the Envirobond Technology from Metals Treatment Technologies (MT2). Performance
of the technologies was evaluated as a pilot-scale demonstration by placing treated waste rock into
isolated cells at the Gilt Edge Mine and monitoring the leachate collected from the representative cells.
The leachate was monitored from the spring of 2001 to the fall of 2002. The objective of the treatments
was to reduce the contaminants of concern by at least 90% or to South Dakota water discharge limits.
The three technology vendors also provided a cost estimate to treat a hypothetical 500,000-cubic yard
(yd3) waste rock pile at the Gilt Edge Mine using the pilot-scale data as a guideline.
By evaluating the leachate parameters of pH, total dissolved solids (TDS), dissolved arsenic, aluminum,
iron, zinc, and sulfate, it was possible to ascertain if the technologies were able to achieve a 90%
reduction or the South Dakota discharge limits. Table ES-1 summarizes the results.
Table ES-1. Technology Performance Summary
Technology ¦
Achieve 90% reduction?
Achieve SD Discharge
Limits?
Cost to treat 500,000
Comments
A1
Fe
Sulfate
pH
TDS
As
Zn
yd3 of Waste Rock
PR
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
$4,774,438
Effective, but pH was
elevated above 8.8 and
will fail once lime is
exhausted
MT2
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
$4,034,750
Actually increased TDS,
sulfate, and arsenic
concentrations
UNR
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
$3,241,408
Effective and has longer
life than lime treatment
KEECO
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
$12,682,998
Expensive and failed
during second field season
By looking at the summary, it is evident that for this technology demonstration the UNR and PR
technologies were able to achieve seven of the eight objectives. However, the PR of lime treatment will
be exhausted overtime because the lime is soluble and will eventually dissolve.
The KEECO and MT2 technologies may be able to produce favorable results by making dosage
adjustments and/or using different treatments; however, additional treatment past the second field season
was beyond the scope of this technology demonstration. To confirm if the modified KEECO and MT2
treatments would be effective, another technology demonstration would need to be performed.
ES-1
-------
1. Introduction
This document is the final report for the Mine
Waste Technology Program (MWTP), Activity III,
Project 29, Remediation Technology Evaluation
(Gilt Edge Mine). This project was funded by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and
jointly administered by the EPA and the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) through an
Interagency Agreement. This project was selected
from several potential projects presented by MSE
Technology Applications, Inc. (MSE), private
industry, various government entities, and EPA
regional offices to the Technical Integration
Committee for the MWTP in April 2000.
This project was a collaboration between EPA
Region VIII and the MWTP. EPA Region VIII's
project objective was to conduct a treatability
study (Ref. 1) as part of the remedial investigation/
feasibility study process for the Gilt Edge Mine
near Lead, South Dakota, to provide data to help
in the decision-making process supporting the
Record of Decision (ROD) for the site. The
objective of the MWTP was to evaluate promising
new technologies for preventing the oxidation of
sulfide waste rock, which may be applicable to a
large number of mine waste sites. The new
technologies were compared to the presumptive
remedy of lime treatment as well as to controls in
which no treatment was performed. The technical
and economic information from the technology
evaluation are summarized in this final report,
which represents the end product of the project.
1.1 Project Description
The Remediation Technology Evaluation project
was conducted at the Gilt Edge Mine, which is a
270-acre open-pit cyanide heap leach gold mine
located approximately 5 miles southeast of Lead,
South Dakota. The immediate area was the site of
sporadic mining activity for over 100 years. The
Gilt Edge Mine was operated by Brohm Mining
Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Dakota
Mining Cooperation from February 1986 until July
1999. Brohm's activities included developing
several open pits, crushing and placing of the ore
on a heap leach pad for gold leaching by
cyanidation, and conducting Merrill-Crowe gold
recovery in an on-site mill. In July 1999, the
Dakota Mining Corporation declared bankruptcy,
resulting in the Gilt Edge site being returned to the
State of South Dakota for management. After
incurring significant costs for water treatment to
ensure no discharge of acidic mine water to the
environment occurred, the State of South Dakota
requested that EPA Region VIII take over the site
and list it on the National Priorities List as a
Superfund site. As a result, the Gilt Edge Mine is
now a Superfund site and is managed by CDM
Federal Inc. (CDM) under contract to EPA Region
VIII. The collaboration between the MWTP and
EPA Region VIII presented an opportunity to
evaluate emerging acid rock drainage (ARD)
treatment technologies while gathering data
leading to an ROD for the site. As the MWTP
administrator, MSE managed the project for the
EPA National Risk Management Research
Laboratory. As EPA Region VIII's Remedial
Action contractor, CDM managed the project for
EPA Region VIII.
MSE's responsibilities for the project included:
- providing technology vendor subcontracts;
- supporting test cell loading and treatment;
sampling the test cells with and without
CDM personnel being present;
- providing health and safety oversight;
- supporting data evaluation; and
- writing a final report.
CDM's responsibilities as EPA Region VIII's
remedial action contractor included:
- writing a sampling and analysis plan
(SAP) that included a quality
assurance/quality control (QA/QC) plan;
- constructing and loading the test cells;
- monitoring the test cells;
- sampling the test cells with and without
MSE personnel being present;
1
-------
- analyzing all samples;
- collecting and validating all the
monitoring data;
- provide data evaluation and interpretation;
and
- writing an interim status report after the
first year of operation.
1.2 Technology Descriptions
The companies that provided new emerging ARD
waste stabilization technologies to be evaluated for
this project were:
• Klean Earth Environmental Company
(KEECO)
Metals Treatment Technologies (MT2)
Mackay School of Mines, University of
Nevada-Reno (UNR)
KEECO has developed a technology for the
treatment and prevention of metals-contaminated
waters, soils, and possibly sulfidic waste rock
called silica microencapsulation (SME). This
technology encapsulates metals in an impervious
microscopic silica matrix, which essentially locks
them up in very small sand-like particles and
prevents the metals from leaching and migrating.
MT2 developed an ARD waste stabilization
technology called Envirobond that stabilizes
sulfidic waste rock using phosphate stabilization
chemistry. This technology has been applied at
mining sites, firing ranges, sediment removal sites,
and others to produce a solid treatment material
meeting EPA's Toxicity Characteristic Leaching
Procedure criteria.
UNR provided a technology known as
Permanganate Passivation. This process
essentially creates an inert layer on the sulfide
phase that prevents contact with atmospheric
oxygen during weathering of the sulfide rock, thus
preventing sulfuric acid generation.
Each treatment technology was compared to the
presumptive remedy (PR), which was adding lime
(CaO) to the sulfidic waste rock. Lime addition
buffers the ARD produced by the sulfidic waste
rock and ties up the sulfate as gypsum, which
prevents the further production of acid and
leaching of metals. However, the disadvantage of
lime is that it is soluble and will be dissolved and
leached from the waste rock over time whether or
not acid is produced.
The advantage of the Permanganate Passivation,
SME, and Envirobond technologies is that they all
treat the ARD-producing waste rock by sulfide or
metals stabilization, which requires only one
treatment and should last indefinitely.
2
-------
2. Technology Evaluation
2.1 Technology Evaluation Process
The technology evaluation process involved
loading waste rock from the Gilt Edge site into
cells built on the mine property, treating the waste
rock, and then testing leachate infiltrating through
the waste rock in the cells. A total of 12 cells
were constructed and loaded during September
and October 2000. Each cell was 40 feet (ft) long,
10 ft wide, and 5 ft high at the front and 20 ft high
at the back; constructed of wood framing and
plywood sheeting; and lined with a polyvinyl
chloride (PVC) liner (see Figure 2-1). A leachate
collection system consisting of screened PVC
covered with sand was installed in the bottom of
each cell to facilitate sampling of ambient water
infiltrating through the waste rock. Only ambient
water was used for this demonstration. KEECO,
UNR, and MT2 were each assigned two cells to
treat, while the PR and control cells each had three
cells. The cells were loaded in a series of 1-ft-
thick lifts for a total of 125 cubic yards (yd3) of
waste rock. After each lift was placed, the
technology provider would treat the waste rock of
their assigned cell. Table 2-1 is a plan view of the
project test cells.
Effluent from the leachate collection system was
collected and sampled on a regular basis for
metals, total dissolved solids (TDS), pH, and
several other parameters (see Appendices A and
B). The cells were monitored from March 2001 to
October 2002 with the cells not being sampled
during the winter months due to the cells being
frozen. Additionally, not all cells were sampled
every sampling event because of the lack of
effluent in the leachate collection system at certain
times.
According to the project SAP (Ref. 1), the primary
objective of the project was to ascertain if the
treatment technologies could:
- reduce the contaminants of concern by
90% when compared to the control cells;
or
- reduce the contaminants of concern to or
below the South Dakota Applicable Water
Quality Criteria (SD AWQC).
Many different parameters were analyzed for and
used to evaluate the treatment performances.
However, to illustrate the performance of the
treatment technologies for this report, values of
dissolved arsenic, dissolved zinc, TDS, and pH
from the treatment technologies were compared to
the control cells and the SD AWQC over time.
Table 2-2 outlines the SD AWQC limits
applicable to this report. The SD AWQC limits
are presented in Appendix C. In addition, the
unregulated parameters of dissolved iron,
dissolved aluminum, and sulfate were also
compared to the control cells by calculating the
percent reduction of contaminants for each
sampling event. The percent reduction was
calculated for each sampling event by comparing
the average of the respective treatment
technology's cells against the average of the
control cells. A statistical evaluation was
conducted for the percent reduction values to
determine if the overall mean of each treatment
technology was at least 90%. All the values that
were flagged with a qualifier in the raw data set
(Appendix A) were used as reported. In some
cases, samples were not submitted to the
laboratory due to the lack of effluent from the
cells; therefore, some percent reductions were
impossible to calculate.
3
-------
Figure 2-1. Project test cells 7-12 - view from the North (Gilt Edge Mine).
Table 2-1. Cell Assignment of the Pro ject Test Cells
Cell 1 - KEECO
Cell 7 - PR
Cell 2 - Control
Cell 8 - UNR
Cell 3 - UNR
Cell 9 KEECO
Cell 4 - PR
Cell 10 - Control
Cell 5 -MT2
Cell 11 - MT2
Cell 6 - Control
Cell 12 - PR
Table 2-2. SD AWQC for the Gilt Edge Site
Parameter
SD AWQC Discharge Limit
PH
Between 6.5 and 8.8
Dissolved Arsenic
190 micrograms per liter (Hg/L) (chronic)
Dissolved Zinc
338 (xg/L (chronic)
IDS
2,500 milligrams per liter (mg/L) (30-day average)
4
-------
3. Waste Rock Results
Multiple waste-rock samples were collected from
each cell (two to four samples per cell) while the
cells were being filled and analyzed for acid-base
accounting (ABA) parameters (Appendix D). Five
field duplicates were collected from the waste rock
as well. The ABA results show that the acid/base
potential (tons calcium carbonate (limestone)/
1,000 tons of waste rock) ranges from -21 to -130
with an average of -48, and the paste pH of all the
waste rock samples ranged from 2.1 to 5.3 with an
average of 2.75. Waste rock with an acid/base
potential of less than -20 is considered to be acid
producing; therefore, the waste rock used for this
technology demonstration is considered acid
producing.
5
-------
4. Presumptive Remedy Performance
The waste rock in the PR cells was treated with
CaO. Prior to loading the waste rock in the cells,
it was piled and mixed with CaO by a front-end
loader according to the dosage rates in Table 4-1.
The dosage rates were determine by CDM
engineers and were based on the ABA results of
the waste rock. Once the waste rock and CaO
were mixed, the material was loaded into the cells
with an excavator as nine separate, 1-ft-thick lifts
for a total of 125 yd3.
Tables 4-2 to 4-4 illustrate the performance of the
PR with dissolved aluminum, dissolved iron, and
sulfate. When compared to the control cells, the
PR did achieve at least a 90% reduction for
dissolved aluminum and iron for all the sampling
events. The mean percent reduction for dissolved
aluminum and iron was 99.96% and 100.00%
respectively. The PR did achieve at least a 90%
sulfate reduction for all the sampling events except
the April 25, 2001, event, which was 74.14%. The
mean percent reduction for sulfate was 95.32%.
Figures 4-1 to 4-4 compare the PR values of pH,
TDS, dissolved arsenic, and dissolved zinc to the
control cells and the SD AWQC over time. Figure
4-1 shows the PR pH ranged from 3.40 to 12.74
and the control cells ranged from 1.81 to 6.65.
This shows the PR did generally increase the pH;
however, the pH was above the upper discharge
limit of 8.8 for most cases. This may be due to an
overdose of the CaO.
Figures 4-2 to 4-4 show that the PR did achieve a
reduction for TDS, dissolved arsenic, and
dissolved zinc to below the discharge limits of
2,500 mg/L, 190 |ag/L, and 338 |a,g/L respectively
for the whole duration of the demonstration.
6
-------
Presumptive Remedy pH Trend
14
12
10
8.8
8
6.5
6
4
2
¦Control (2)
¦Presumptive (7)
¦Control (6)
¦Presumptive (12)
¦Control (10)
SDAWQC
Presumptive (4)
0 —
Apr-01
Jul-01
Nov-01
Feb-02
May-02
Sep-02
Dec-02
Date
Figure 4-1. PR pH trend.
-------
Presumptive Remedy TDS Trend
1.E+06
1.E+05
1.E+04
~
U)
1.E+03
<0
Q
2500 mg/L
1.E+02
¦Control (2) —¦ -Control (6) -Control (10) M PR (4)
1.E+01
•PR (7)
¦PR (12)
SD AWQC
1.E+00
Feb-01
May-01 Aug-01
Dec-01 Mar-02
Date
Jun-02 Oct-02
Jan-03
Figure 4-2. PR TDS trend.
-------
Presumptive Remedy Arsenic Trend
1.E+06
1.E+05
¦Control (2)
¦Control (10)
¦PR (7)
SD AWQC
¦Control (6)
¦PR (4)
¦PR (12)
o>
1.E+04
1.E+03
> 1.E+02
1.E+01
A
O
'•P
d)
O
£
O
o
if)
<
"O
o
if)
if)
Q
~
t
190 ug/L
\ f-
1.E+00
Feb-01
May-01
Aug-01
Dec-01
Mar-02
Jun-02
Oct-02
Jan-03
Date
Figure 4-3. PR arsenic trend.
-------
Presumptive Remedy Zinc Trend
1.E+05
1.E+04
U)
3
C
O
g 1.E+03
c
a)
o
c
o
o
c
N
"D
d)
_>
o
t/>
t/>
1.E+02
1.E+01
~
"Control (2)
"Control (6)
"Control (10)
—*— PR (4)
-W-PR (7)
» PR (12)
- - SD AWQC
338 ug/L
1.E+00
Feb-01
May-01
Aug-01
Dec-01 Mar-02
Date
Jun-02
Oct-02
Jan-03
Figure 4-4. PR zinc trend.
-------
Table 4-1. PR Dosage Rates
Cell 4
Cell 7
Cell 12
Waste rock (yd3)
125
125
125
CaO (lb)
7,050
6,700
7,000
CaO (lb) per ton of waste rock based on a waste rock
37.6
35.7
37.3
bulk density of 1.5 tons/yd3
Table 4-2. PR Aluminum Percent Reduction
Presumptive Remedy Percent Reduction of Dissolved A1 (|ig/L)
Control
Control
Control
Control
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR %
Statistical Evaluation of PR
(2)
(6)
(10)
Average
(4)
(7)
(12)
Average
reduction
% reduction
03/09/01
162,000
NS
NS
162,000
NS
NS
NS
NC
NC
Mean
99.96%
03/10/01
NS
891,000
NS
891,000
NS
NS
NS
NC
NC
Standard Error
0.02%
04/25/01
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NS
NC
NC
Median
99.99%
05/02/01
750,000
NS
698,000
724,000
NS
53
69
61
99.99%
Standard Deviation
0.06%
05/17/01
753,000
NS
189,000
471,000
NS
53
53
53
99.99%
Sample Variance
0.00%
06/14/01
386,000
NS
37,800
211,900
NS
31
14
22
99.99%
Range
0.20%
07/16/01
480,000
NS
18,600
249,300
NS
212
NS
212
99.91%
Minimum
99.80%
07/17/01
NS
NS
36,300
36,300
NS
NS
NS
NC
NC
Maximum
99.99%
08/28/01
396,000
NS
1,090
198,545
NS
756
46
401
99.80%
10/01/01
1,070,000
NS
57,100
563,550
NS
116
11
64
99.99%
10/24/01
322,000
NS
138,000
230,000
71
55
55
60
99.97%
06/04/02
3,120,000
3,170,000
2,100,000
2,796,667
139
586
540
422
99.98%
08/15/02
NS
NS
NS
NC
263
356
252
290
NC
10/22/02
2,950,000
1,870,000
338,000
1,719,333
115
161
42
106
99.99%
NS - Sampled not submitted to laboratory due to lack of effluent
NC - Percent not calculated due to lack of data
11
-------
Table 4-3. PR Iron Percent Reduction
Presumptive Remedy Percent Reduction of Dissolved Fe (|ig/L)
Control
Control
Control
Control
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR %
Statistical Evaluation of PR
(2)
(6)
(10)
Average
(4)
(7)
(12)
Average
reduction
% reduction
03/09/01
644,000
NS
NS
644,000
NS
NS
NS
NC
NC
Mean
100.00%
03/10/01
NS
554,000
NS
554,000
NS
NS
NS
NC
NC
Standard Error
0.00%
04/25/01
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NS
NC
NC
Median
100.00%
05/02/01
1,150,000
NS
488,000
819,000
NS
17
27
22
100.00%
Standard Deviation
0.00%
05/17/01
1,280,000
NS
8,860
644,430
NS
17
20
18
100.00%
Sample Variance
0.00%
06/14/01
1,250,000
NS
2,550
626,275
NS
26
19
23
100.00%
Range
0.01%
07/16/01
2,130,000
NS
6,600
1,068,300
NS
131
NS
131
99.99%
Minimum
99.99%
07/17/01
NS
NS
4,320
4,320
NS
NS
NS
NC
NC
Maximum
100.00%
08/28/01
1,070,000
NS
219
535,110
NS
102
35
68
99.99%
10/01/01
5,680,000
NS
5,040
2,842,520
NS
8
8
8
100.00%
10/24/01
9,910,000
NS
12,800
4,961,400
23
23
23
23
100.00%
06/04/02
28,300,000
35,300,000
14,700
21,204,900
145
901
145
397
100.00%
08/15/02
NS
NS
NS
NC
86
19
19
41
NC
10/22/02
29,400,000
21,400,000
53,300
16,951,100
113
49
22
61
100.00%
NS - Sampled not submitted to laboratory due to lack of effluent
NC - Not calculated due to lack of data
Table 4-4. PR Sulfate Percent Reduction
Presumptive Remedy Percent Reduction of SO4 (mg/L)
Date
Control
Control
Control
Control
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR %
Statistical Evaluation of
(2)
(6)
(10)
Average
(4)
(7)
(12)
Average
reduction
% reduction
03/09/01
27,100
NS
NS
27,100
NS
NS
321
321
98.82%
Mean
95.32%
03/10/01
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NS
NC
NC
Standard Error
2.37%
04/25/01
12
NS
2,200
1,106
NS
286
NS
286
74.14%
Median
97.41%
05/02/01
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NS
NC
NC
Standard Deviation
7.49%
05/17/01
11,700
NS
4,530
8,115
NS
271
238
255
96.86%
Sample Variance
0.56%
06/14/01
12,300
NS
3,490
7,895
NS
173
234
204
97.42%
Range
25.37%
07/16/01
16,590
NS
3,618
10,104
NS
221
NS
221
97.81%
Minimum
74.14%
07/17/01
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NS
NC
NC
Maximum
99.52%
08/28/01
14,000
NS
3,200
8,600
NS
210
390
300
96.51%
10/01/01
22,600
NS
3,850
13,225
NS
208
530
369
97.21%
10/24/01
38,000
NS
4,500
21,250
540
360
710
537
97.47%
06/04/02
91,000
110,000
17,000
72,667
210
350
490
350
99.52%
08/15/02
NS
NS
NS
NC
190
330
560
360
NC
10/22/02
77,000
66,000
19,000
54,000
280
430
3,500
1,403
97.40%
NS - Sampled not submitted to lab due to lack of effluent
NC - Not calculated due to lack of data
12
-------
5. MT2 Envirobond Technology Performance
MT2 treated each lift of waste rock by spraying a
solution onto the waste rock that covered the
surface area of each lift. The solution was mixed
in a tank by recirculation. Table 5-1 shows the
dosage rates for the MT2 Envirobond treatment.
Tables 5-2 to 5-4 illustrate the percent reduction
by the Envirobond treatment for dissolved
aluminum, dissolved iron, and sulfate. The
Envirobond treatment did achieve a 90% reduction
or greater for aluminum and iron for the duration
of the demonstration. The percent reduction mean
was 99.98% and 99.99% for aluminum and iron
respectively.
The Envirobond treatment did not achieve at least
a 90% reduction for sulfate. The Envirobond
sulfate values ranged from -2,313.89% to 88.37%,
and the Envirobond treatment did not show a
positive sulfate reduction until October 24, 2002.
The negative percent reduction indicates an actual
increase of sulfate when compared to the control
cells, which may be due to an acceleration of
sulfide oxidation from the hydrogen peroxide.
The overall sulfate reduction mean was -275.04%.
Figure 5-1 shows the pH trend from the
Envirobond treatment. The Envirobond treatment
did increase the pH to within the discharge limits
of the 6.5 and 8.8.
Figure 5-2 shows the TDS trend actually increased
when compared to the control cells for the 2001
field season, and during the 2002 field season; the
TDS declined but still did not make the discharge
limit of 2,500 mg/L. The increase of the TDS
values from the Envirobond treatment is due to the
fact that the treatment increased concentrations of
sulfate, potassium, and arsenic during the
demonstration. This may be an initial affect that
will change over time; however, it was not evident
during this demonstration.
Figure 5-3 shows a similar trend for arsenic. The
Envirobond treatment effluent had higher
concentrations of arsenic during the 2001 field
season when compared to the control cells and
then decreased during the 2002 field season. The
arsenic trend for the Envirobond treatment did not
achieve the discharge limit of 190 |a,g/L during the
demonstration. The arsenic increase from the
Envirobond treatment may be caused from the
liberation of arsenic that was originally tied with
the iron in the waste rock.
Figure 5-4 illustrates the zinc trend for the
Envirobond treatment, which was successful in
meeting the 338 |a,g/L discharge limit with the
exception of the October 1 and March 10, 2001,
sampling events.
13
-------
MT2 pH Trend
14
'Control (2)
'Control (6)
'Control (10)
12
MT2 (5)
'MT2 (11)
SD AWQC
10
8
6.5
6
4
2
0 -I
Apr-01
Jul-01
Nov-01
Feb-02
Date
May-02
Sep-02
Dec-02
Figure 5-1. MT2 pH trend.
-------
MT2 TDS Trend
1.E+06
1.E+05
1.E+04
2500 mg/L
U)
1.E+03
W
Q
I-
1.E+02
'Control (2)
'Control (6)
'Control (10)
1.E+01
'MT2 (5)
'MT2 (11)
SD AWQC
1.E+00
Feb-01
May-01
Aug-01
Dec-01
Mar-02
Jun-02
Oct-02
Jan-03
Date
Figure 5-2. MT2 TDS trend.
-------
MT2 Arsenic Trend
ir
~ /
x
1
190 ug/L
1.E+00
Feb-01
k
¦Control (2)
¦Control (10)
¦MT2 (11)
¦Control (6)
¦MT2 (5)
SD AWQC
May-01
Aug-01
Dec-01
Mar-02
Jun-02
Oct-02
Jan-03
Date
Figure 5-3. MT arsenic trend.
-------
MT2 Zinc Trend
338 ug/L
Feb-01
"Control (2)
"Control (6)
"Cunliul (10)
MT2 (5)
>H MT2 (11)
- - SD AWQC
May-01
Aug-01
Dec-01
Mar-02
Jun-02
Oct-02
Jan-03
Date
Figure 5-4. MT2 zinc trend.
-------
Table 5-1. MT2 Envirobond Treatment Dosage Rates
Treatment Material
Cell 5
Cell 11
Dosage Rate per Ton of Waste Rock Based on a
1.5 tons/yd3 Bulk Density
Waste rock
125 yd3
125 yd3
Envirobond material
11,000 1b
11,000 1b
58.7 lb/ton
Hydrogen peroxide (50%)
88 gal
88 gal
0.47 gal/ton
Water
3,731
3,525
19.3 gal/ton (avg)
Table 5.2. MT2 Aluminum Percent Reduction
MT2 Percent Reduction of Dissolved A1 (|ig/L)
Date
Control (2)
Control
Control
Control
MT2 (5)
MT2
MT2
MT2 %
Statistical Evaluation of
(6)
(10)
Average
(11)
Average
Reductio
n
% reduction
03/09/01
162,000
NS
NS
162,000
124
NS
124
99.92%
Mean
99.98%
03/10/01
NS
891,000
NS
891,000
NS
766
766
99.91%
Standard Error
0.01%
04/25/01
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NC
NC
Median
99.99%
05/02/01
750,000
NS
698,000
724,000
100
187
143
99.98%
Standard Deviation
0.03%
05/17/01
753,000
NS
189,000
471,000
53
103
78
99.98%
Sample Variance
0.00%
06/14/01
386,000
NS
37,800
211,900
5
5
5
100.00%
Range
0.08%
07/16/01
480,000
NS
18,600
249,300
7
NS
7
100.00%
Minimum
99.91%
07/17/01
NS
NS
36,300
36,300
NS
NS
NS
NS
Maximum
100.00%
08/28/01
396,000
NS
1,090
198,545
7
7
7
100.00%
10/01/01
1,070,000
NS
57,100
563,550
11
11
11
100.00%
10/24/01
322,000
NS
138,000
230,000
55
55
55
99.98%
06/04/02
3,120,000
3,170,000
2,100,000
2,796,667
139
388
264
99.99%
08/15/02
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NC
NC
10/22/02
2,950,000
1,870,000
338,000
1,719,333
28
31
30
100.00%
NS - Sampled not submitted to lab due to lack of effluent
NC - Not calculated due to lack of data
18
-------
Table 5-3. MT2 Iron Percent Reduction
MT2 Percent Reduction of Dissolved Iron (|ig/L)
Date
Control (2)
Control (6)
Control
(10)
Control
Average
MT2
(5)
MT2
(11)
MT2
Average
mt2%
Reduction
Statistical Evaluation of
% reduction
03/09/01
644,000
NS
NS
644,000
103
NS
103
99.98%
Mean
99.99%
03/10/01
NS
554,000
NS
554,000
NS
299
299
99.95%
Standard Error
0.00%
04/25/01
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NC
NC
Median
100.00%
05/02/01
1,150,000
NS
488,000
819,000
92
118
105
99.99%
Standard Deviation
0.02%
05/17/01
1,280,000
NS
8,860
644,430
54
39
47
99.99%
Sample Variance
0.00%
06/14/01
1,250,000
NS
2,550
626,275
19
19
19
100.00%
Range
0.05%
07/16/01
2,130,000
NS
6,600
1,068,300
22
NS
22
100.00%
Minimum
99.95%
07/17/01
NS
NS
4,320
4,320
NS
NS
NC
NC
Maximum
100.00%
08/28/01
1,070,000
NS
219
535,110
19
62
41
99.99%
10/01/01
5,680,000
NS
5,040
2,842,520
8
8
8
100.00%
10/24/01
9,910,000
NS
12,800
4,961,400
23
23
23
100.00%
06/04/02
28,300,000
35,300,000
14,700
21,204,900
145
145
145
100.00%
08/15/02
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NC
NC
10/22/02
29,400,000
21,400,000
53,300
16,951,100
18
18
18
100.00%
NS - Sampled not submitted to lab due to lack of effluent
NC - Not calculated due to lack of data
Table 5-4. MT2 Sulfate Percent Reduction
MT2 Percent Reduction of Sulfate (mg/L)
Date
Control (2)
Control (6)
Control
Control
MT2(5)
MT2
MT2
mt2%
Statistical Evaluation of
(10)
Average
(11)
Average
Reduction
% reduction
03/09/01
27,100
NS
NS
27,100
34,200
NS
34,200
-26.20%
Mean
-275.04%
03/10/01
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
26,400
26,400
NC
Standard Error
228.75%
04/25/01
12
NS
2,200
1,106
27,300
26,100
26,700
-2313.89%
Median
-63.39%
05/02/01
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NC
NC
Standard Deviation
723.36%
05/17/01
11,700
NS
4,530
8,115
NS
19,100
20,550
-153.23%
Sample Variance
5232.56%
06/14/01
12,300
NS
3,490
7,895
35,200
17,000
26,100
-230.59%
Range
2402.26%
07/16/01
16,590
NS
3,618
10,104
18,921
NS
18,921
-87.26%
Minimum
-2313.89%
07/17/01
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NC
NC
Maximum
88.37%
08/28/01
14,000
NS
3,200
8,600
22,000
12,000
17,000
-97.67%
10/01/01
22,600
NS
3,850
13,225
22,300
14,600
18,450
-39.51%
10/24/01
38,000
NS
4,500
21,250
20,000
12,000
16,000
24.71%
06/04/02
91,000
110,000
17,000
72,667
11,000
5,900
8,450
88.37%
08/15/02
NS
NS
NS
NC
180
NS
180
NC
10/22/02
77,000
66,000
19,000
54,000
11,000
5,300
8,150
84.91%
NS - Sampled not submitted to lab due to lack of effluent
NC - Not calculated due to lack of data
19
-------
6. UNR Technology Performance
The UNR Permanganate Passivation technology
was applied to the waste rock in two phases. The
first phase involved mixing magnesium oxide and
CaO with the waste rock with a front-end loader.
During the second phase, a mixture of water,
caustic soda, and potassium permanganate was
sprayed on the waste rock after each lift was
loaded into the cells.
Table 6-1 shows the dosage rates used by UNR.
Tables 6-1 and 6-2 show the aluminum and iron
trends for UNR's Permanganate Passivation
treatment technology. Both the aluminum and
iron trends achieved at least a 90% reduction when
compared to the control cells. The aluminum and
iron reduction means were 99.97% and 99.99%
respectively.
Table 6-3 shows that the sulfate trend for the
Permanganate Passivation technology did not
achieve 90% reduction with the exception of the
October 24, 2001, and October 22, 2002, sampling
events. The mean sulfate reduction was 73.43%
when compared to the control cells.
Figures 6-1 to 6-4 illustrate the UNR
Permanganate Passivation trends for pH, TDS,
dissolved aluminum, and dissolved iron. The
UNR Permanganate Passivation pH trend ranges
from 3.81 to 10.05 and shows a general increase of
pH when compared to the control cells with 9 of
14 sample values within the discharge limits of 6.5
and 8.8.
Figure 6-2 shows a general decrease in the TDS
concentration when compared to the control cells
and trends very close to the discharge limit of
2,500 mg/L.
The arsenic trend (Figure 6-3) shows that with the
exception of the August 15, 2002, sampling event,
the Permanganate Passivation technology did
reduce the arsenic concentrations to below the
discharge limit of 190 |ag/L.
The Permanganate Passivation technology was
successful in reducing the zinc concentration
(Figure 6-4) to below the discharge limit of
338 |jg/L for the duration of the demonstration.
20
-------
UNR pH Trend
14
'Control (2)
'Control (6)
'Control (10)
12
UNR (3)
UNR (8)
SD AWQC
10
8
6.5
6
4
2
0
Apr-01
Jul-01
Nov-01
Feb-02
May-02
Sep-02
Dec-02
Date
Figure 6-1. UNR pH trend.
-------
UNR TDS Trend
to
to
1.E+06
1.E+05
1.E+04
U)
E
w
Q
1.E+03
¦ *
~
~ ~
^ — — r ^
~
^ /T "
X
1.E+02
1.E+01
1.E+00
¦Control (2)
¦UNR (3)
¦Control (6)
¦UNR (8)
¦Control (10)
SD AWQC
Feb-01
May-01 Aug-01
Dec-01 Mar-02
Date
Jun-02 Oct-02
Jan-03
Figure 6-2. UNR TDS trend
-------
UNR Arsenic Trend
1.E+06
1.E+05
¦Control (2)
¦Control (6)
¦Control (10)
-UNR (3)
-UNR (8)
SD AWQC
1.E+04
to
OJ
o
+-»
03
<
¦O
0)
> 1.E+02
O
t/)
w
b
1.E+01
190 ug/L
k
1.E+00
Feb-01
May-01
Aug-01
Dec-01
Mar-02
Jun-02
Oct-02
Jan-03
Date
Figure 6-3. UNR arsenic trend.
-------
UNRZinc Trend
1 .E+05
1 .E+04
.E+03
338 ug/L
.E+02
'Control (2)
'Control (6)
.E+01
'Control (10)
UNR (3)
UNR (8)
SD AWQC
.E+00
Feb-01
May-01
Aug-01
Dec-01
Mar-02
Jun-02
Oct-02
Jan-03
Date
Figure 6-4. UNR zinc trend.
-------
Table 6-1. UNR Passivation Technology Dosage Rates
Treatment Material
Cell 3
Cell 8
Per Ton Basis Based on a 1.5
tons/yd3 Bulk Density
Waste rock
125 yd3
125 yd3
Water
450 gal
450 gal
2.4 gal/ton
Potassium
Permanganate
1441b
1441b
0.77 lb/ton
Caustic Soda
541b
541b
0.29 lb/ton
Magnesium Oxide
7641b
7641b
4.1 lb/ton
CaO
1,9081b
1,9081b
10.2 lb/ton
Table 6-2. UNR Aluminum Percent Reduction
UNR Percent Reduction of Dissolved Aluminum (|ig/L)
Date
Control
Control
Control
Control
UNR
UNR
UNR
UNR %
Statistical Evaluation of
(2)
(6)
(10)
Average
(3)
(8)
Average
Reduction
% reduction
03/09/01
162,000
NS
NS
162,000
144
NS
144
99.91%
Mean
99.97%
03/10/01
NS
891,000
NS
891,000
NS
NS
NC
NC
Standard Error
0.01%
04/25/01
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NC
NC
Median
99.98%
05/02/01
750,000
NS
698,000
724,000
53
53
53
99.99%
Standard Deviation
0.03%
05/17/01
753,000
NS
189,000
471,000
53
NS
53
99.99%
Sample Variance
0.00%
06/14/01
386,000
NS
37,800
211,900
43
NS
43
99.98%
Range
0.09%
07/16/01
480,000
NS
18,600
249,300
179
NS
179
99.93%
Minimum
99.91%
07/17/01
NS
NS
36,300
36,300
NS
NS
NC
NC
Maximum
100.00%
08/28/01
396,000
NS
1,090
198,545
54
NS
54
99.97%
10/01/01
1,070,000
NS
57,100
563,550
11
11
11
100.00%
10/24/01
322,000
NS
138,000
230,000
55
NS
55
99.98%
06/04/02
3,120,000
3,170,000
2,100,000
2,796,667
139
512
326
99.99%
08/15/02
NS
NS
NS
NC
268
170
219
NC
10/22/02
2,950,000
1,870,000
338,000
1,719,333
48
28
38
100.00%
NS - Sampled not submitted to laboratory due to lack of effluent
NC - Not calculated due to lack of data
25
-------
Table 6-3. UNR Iron Percent Reduction
UNR Percent Reduction of Dissolved Iron (|ig/L)
Date
Control
(2)
Control
(6)
Control
(10)
Control
Average
UNR
(3)
UNR
(8)
UNR
Average
UNR %
Reduction
Statistical Evaluation of %
reduction
03/09/01
644,000
NS
NS
644,000
559
NS
559
99.91%
Mean
99.99%
03/10/01
NS
554,000
NS
554,000
NS
NS
NC
NC
Standard Error
0.01%
04/25/01
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NC
NC
Median
100.00%
05/02/01
1,150,000
NS
488,000
819,000
17
17
17
100.00%
Standard Deviation
0.03%
05/17/01
1,280,000
NS
8,860
644,430
17
NS
17
100.00%
Sample Variance
0.00%
06/14/01
1,250,000
NS
2,550
626,275
19
NS
19
100.00%
Range
0.09%
07/16/01
2,130,000
NS
6,600
1,068,300
189
NS
189
99.98%
Minimum
99.91%
07/17/01
NS
NS
4,320
4,320
NS
NS
NC
NC
Maximum
100.00%
08/28/01
1,070,000
NS
219
535,110
20
NS
20
100.00%
10/01/01
5,680,000
NS
5,040
2,842,520
28
8
18
100.00%
10/24/01
9,910,000
NS
12,800
4,961,400
23
NS
23
100.00%
06/04/02
28,300,000
35,300,000
14,700
21,204,900
940
538
739
100.00%
08/15/02
NS
NS
NS
NC
19
66
43
NC
10/22/02
29,400,000
21,400,000
53,300
16,951,100
18
18
18
100.00%
NS - Sampled not submitted to laboratory due to lack of effluent
NC - Not calculated due to lack of data
Table 6-4. UNR Sulfate Percent Reduction
UNR Percent Reduction of Dissolved Sulfate (|ig/L)
Date
Control
(2)
Control
(6)
Control
(10)
Control
Average
UNR
(3)
UNR
(8)
UNR
Average
UNR %
Reduction
Statistical Evaluation of
% reduction
03/09/01
27,100
NS
NS
27,100
1,710
NS
1,710
93.69%
Mean
73.43%
03/10/01
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NC
NC
Standard Error
12.20%
04/25/01
12
NS
2,200
1,106
1,330
1,650
1,490
-34.71%
Median
83.42%
05/02/01
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NC
NC
Standard Deviation
38.58%
05/17/01
11,700
NS
4,530
8,115
1,660
NS
1,660
79.54%
Sample Variance
14.88%
06/14/01
12,300
NS
3,490
7,895
1,790
NS
1,790
77.33%
Range
130.91%
07/16/01
16,590
NS
3,618
10,104
1,826
NS
1,826
81.93%
Minimum
-34.71%
07/17/01
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NC
NC
Maximum
96.20%
08/28/01
14,000
NS
3,200
8,600
2,000
NS
2,000
76.74%
10/01/01
22,600
NS
3,850
13,225
1,920
2,070
1,995
84.91%
10/24/01
38,000
NS
4,500
21,250
2,100
NS
2,100
90.12%
06/04/02
91,000
110,000
17,000
72,667
15,000
1,700
8,350
88.51%
08/15/02
NS
NS
NS
NC
1,900
NS
1,900
NC
10/22/02
77,000
66,000
19,000
54,000
2,100
2,000
2,050
96.20%
NS - Sampled not submitted to laboratory due to lack of effluent
NC - Not calculated due to lack of data
26
-------
7. KEECO SME Technology Performance
KEECO applied its SME treatment as a liquid
spray similar to the MT2 treatment (i.e., mixed the
treatment material with water in a tank by
recirculation). Once each lift was placed, KEECO
personnel would spray the treatment solution on
the surface area of the waste rock. Table 7-1
shows the dosage rates for the KEECO SME
treatment.
Tables 7-2 to 7-4 outline the KEECO SME
treatment percent reduction of dissolved
aluminum, dissolved iron, and sulfate.
The SME treatment did reduce the aluminum
concentration (Table 7-2) by at least 90% during
the 2001 field season; however, it failed to do so
during the 2002 season. The SME aluminum
reduction mean is 88.14%.
The SME iron reduction (Table 7-3) had a similar
trend in that the treatment achieved at least a 90%
reduction until the last sampling event on October
22, 2002. The mean iron reduction of the SME
treatment is 94.82%.
Table 7-4 shows the sulfate trend for the SME
treatment achieved 90% reduction only once on
June 4, 2002. The SME sulfate reduction mean is
33.18%.
Figures 7-1 to 7-4 show the KEECO SME
treatment trends for pH, TDS, dissolved arsenic,
and dissolved zinc compared to the site discharge
standards and the control cells.
The SME pH trend (Figure 7-1) ranges from 7.92
to 1.99 and starts near the lower discharge limit of
6.5 but then falls below the limit during the 2002
season.
The SME TDS concentrations (Figure 7-2) stay
near the discharge limit of 2,500 mg/L during the
2001 field season but increase during the 2002
field season to above the discharge limit.
The SME arsenic trend (Figure 7-3) starts below
the discharge limit of 190 |a,g/L but then increases
to above the limit during the 2002 season.
Figure 7-4 shows the SME zinc trend is above the
discharge limit of 338 |ag/L, with the exception of
the August 28, 2001, sampling event.
27
-------
KEECO pH Trend
14
'Control (2)
'Control (6)
'Control (10)
12
KEECO (1)
KEECO (9)
SD AWQC
10
8
6.5
6
4
2
0 -I—
Apr-01
Jul-01
Nov-01
Feb-02
May-02
Sep-02
Dec-
Date
Figure 7-1.
KEECO pH trend.
-------
KEECO TDS Trend
1.E+06
1.E+05
1.E+04
2500 mg/L
U)
1.E+03
W
Q
I-
1.E+02
'Control (2)
'Control (6)
'Control (10)
1.E+01
KEECO (1)
KEECO (9)
SD AWQC
1.E+00
Feb-01
May-01
Aug-01
Dec-01
Mar-02
Jun-02
Oct-02
Jan-03
Date
Figure 7-2. KEECO TDS trend.
-------
KEECO Arsenic Trend
1.E+06
1.E+05
"Control (2)
"Control (6)
"Control (10)
H KEECO (1)
)K KEECO (9)
- - SD AWQC
O)
o
o
TO
1.E+04
<
¦D
o
1.E+03
> 1.E+02
1.E+01
190 ug/L
k
1.E+00
Feb-01
May-01
Aug-01
Dec-01
Mar-02
Jun-02
Oct-02
Jan-03
Date
Figure 7-3. KEECO arsenic trend.
-------
KEECO Zinc Trend
1 .E+05
1 .E+04
O
in
(0
Q
1.E+01
"Control (2)
"Control (6)
"Control (10)
>< KEECO (1)
)l( KEECO (9)
- - SD AWQC
338 ug/L
1 .E+00
Feb-01
May-01
Aug-01
Dec-01
Mar-02
Jun-02
Date
Oct-02
Jan-03
Figure 7-4. KEECO zinc trend.
-------
Table 7-1. KEECO SME Technology Dosage Rates
Treatment Material Cell 1 Cell 9 Per Ton Dosage Rates Based on a 1.5
Waste rock 125 yd3 125 yd3
KEECO Material 2,2501b 2,2501b 12 lb/ton
Water 1,800 gal 1,800 gal 9.6 gal/ton
Table 1-2. KEECO Aluminum Percent Reduction
KEECO Percent Reduction of Dissolved Aluminum (|ig/L)
Date
Control
(2)
Control
(6)
Control
(10)
Control
Average
KEECO
(1)
KEECO
(9)
KEECO
Average
KEECO %
Reduction
Statistical Evaluation of
% reduction
03/09/01
162,000
NS
NS
162,000
NS
NS
NC
NC
Mean
88.14%
03/10/01
NS
891,000
NS
891,000
2,040
218
1,129
99.87%
Standard Error
9.25%
04/25/01
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NC
NC
Median
98.65%
05/02/01
750,000
NS
698,000
724,000
4,350
23,400
13,875
98.08%
Standard Deviation
29.25%
05/17/01
753,000
NS
189,000
471,000
168
7,260
3,714
99.21%
Sample Variance
8.55%
06/14/01
386,000
NS
37,800
211,900
4,130
9,700
6,915
96.74%
Range
94.10%
07/16/01
480,000
NS
18,600
249,300
1,030
1,700
1,365
99.45%
Minimum
5.78%
07/17/01
NS
NS
36,300
36,300
NS
NS
NC
NC
Maximum
99.87%
08/28/01
396,000
NS
1,090
198,545
666
135
401
99.80%
10/01/01
1,070,000
NS
57,100
563,550
62
1,380
721
99.87%
10/24/01
322,000
NS
138,000
230,000
12,000
2,590
7,295
96.83%
06/04/02
3,120,000
3,170,000
2,100,000
2,796,667
598,000
198,000
398,000
85.77%
08/15/02
NS
NS
NS
NC
50,400
77,700
64,050
NC
10/22/02
2,950,000
1,870,000
338,000
1,719,333
1,620,000
NS
1,620,000
5.78%
NS - Sampled not submitted to laboratory due to lack of effluent
NC - Not calculated due to lack of data
32
-------
Table 7-3 KEECO Iron Percent Reduction
KEECO Percent Reduction of Dissolved Iron (|ig/L)
Date
Control
(2)
Control
(6)
Control
(10)
Control
Average
KEECO
(1)
KEEC
O (9)
KEECO
Average
KEECO %
Reduction
Statistical Evaluation of
% reduction
03/09/01
644,000
NS
NS
644,000
NS
NS
NC
NC
Mean
94.82%
03/10/01
NS
554,000
NS
554,000
16
818
417
99.92%
Standard Error
4.57%
04/25/01
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NC
NC
Median
99.85%
05/02/01
1,150,000
NS
488,000
819,000
2,520
9,630
6,075
99.26%
Standard Deviation
14.44%
05/17/01
1,280,000
NS
8,860
644,430
19
144
81
99.99%
Sample Variance
2.08%
06/14/01
1,250,000
NS
2,550
626,275
11,700
12,400
12,050
98.08%
Range
46.18%
07/16/01
2,130,000
NS
6,600
1,068,300
22
333
178
99.98%
Minimum
53.81%
07/17/01
NS
NS
4,320
4,320
NS
NS
NC
NC
Maximum
99.99%
08/28/01
1,070,000
NS
219
535,110
1,710
158
934
99.83%
10/01/01
5,680,000
NS
5,040
2,842,520
15
398
206
99.99%
10/24/01
9,910,000
NS
12,800
4,961,400
10,200
2,830
6,515
99.87%
06/04/02
28,300,000
35,300,000
14,700
21,204,900
929,000
127,000
528,000
97.51%
08/15/02
NS
NS
NS
NC
9,720
12,000
10,860
NC
10/22/02
29,400,000
21,400,000
53,300
16,951,100
7,830,000
NS
7,830,000
53.81%
NS - Sampled not submitted to laboratory due to lack of effluent
NC - Not calculated due to lack of data
Table 7-4. KEECO Sulfate Percent Reduction
KEECO Percent Reduction of Sulfate (mg/L)
Date
Control
(2)
Control
(6)
Control
(10)
Control
Average
KEECO
(1)
KEECO
(9)
KEECO
Average
KEECO %
Reduction
Statistical Evaluation of
% reduction
03/09/01
27,100
NS
NS
27,100
NS
NS
NC
NC
Mean
33.18%
03/10/01
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NC
NC
Standard Error
44.02%
04/25/01
12
NS
2,200
1,106
1,990
7,230
4,610
-316.78%
Median
77.91%
05/02/01
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NC
NC
Standard Deviation
132.07%
05/17/01
11,700
NS
4,530
8,115
2,050
1,970
2,010
75.23%
Sample Variance
174.43%
06/14/01
12,300
NS
3,490
7,895
2,110
1,980
2,045
74.10%
Range
407.01%
07/16/01
16,590
NS
3,618
10,104
2,059
1,609
1,834
81.85%
Minimum
-316.78%
07/17/01
NS
NS
NS
NC
NS
NS
NC
NC
Maximum
90.23%
08/28/01
14,000
NS
3,200
8,600
2,000
1,800
1,900
77.91%
10/01/01
22,600
NS
3,850
13,225
1,810
1,910
1,860
85.94%
10/24/01
38,000
NS
4,500
21,250
2,500
2,000
2,250
89.41%
06/04/02
91,000
110,000
17,000
72,667
9,100
5,100
7,100
90.23%
08/15/02
NS
NS
NS
NC
4,900
4,400
4,650
NC
10/22/02
77,000
66,000
19,000
54,000
32,000
NS
32,000
40.74%
NS - Sampled not submitted to lab due to lack of effluent
NC - Not calculated due to lack of data
33
-------
8. Technology Conceptua
As part of the requirements of the subcontract with
MSE, the technology providers were to provide a
cost estimate and conceptual treatment design to
treat a hypothetical waste rock pile at the Gilt
Edge Mine. The representative application was a
waste rock pile containing 500,000 yd3 or 750,000
tons of waste rock with the same composition that
was used for the technology evaluation. The
technology vendors designed the conceptual
treatment assuming the waste rock was being
treated while being transported and loaded into a
dry pit on the Gilt Edge site. The technology
providers were given the performance data for the
project and were allowed to use different dosage
rates for the cost estimate and conceptual design if
they felt it was to their advantage.
8.1 KEECO Conceptual Design
KEECO proposed to treat the waste rock by
building a portable enclosed structure adjacent to
the pit and treat the waste rock in batches before it
was loaded into the pit. The treatment facility
included the enclosed structure, concrete mixing
corral, slurry delivery unit, reagent delivery silos,
and a water storage tank. Based on the results
from the technology evaluation, KEECO increased
the dosage rate for the conceptual design from
0.6% to 3.0%.
8.2 MT2 Conceptual Design
The MT2 treatment procedure included spraying
the waste rock after it was dumped and spread out
into
1 -ft-thick lifts inside the pit. The equipment used
to treat the waste rock included a tractor towing a
spray unit over the waste rock, tanks, gravel pads
for mixing areas, and mixing equipment. MT2
proposed to use a material called ECOBOND for
the conceptual design. For the technology
evaluation, MT2 used a dosage rate of 3%;
however, for the conceptual design, a different
method was used to calculate the dosage rates.
MT2 felt it necessary to treat only the top 2 inches
~esign and Cost Evaluation
of each layer loaded into the pit and it would treat
that with a 1.5% dosage rate along with a new
material, ECOBOND ARD 2 at a 0.1%.
According to MT2, ECOBOND ARD 2 would
prevent the leaching of arsenic from the waste
rock.
8.3 UNR Conceptual Design
The UNR conceptual design included using a
system of silos, hoppers, and a conveyor belt to
mix the waste rock with the magnesium oxide and
CaO and then load the waste rock into the pit in 5-
ft lifts. Once the waste rock was in place, each lift
would be treated with the second phase of the
treatment using an irrigation system for 8 hours.
The dosage rates for the conceptual design were
not adjusted from the technology evaluation.
8.4 Presumptive Remedy Conceptual
Design
The PR conceptual design includes mixing the
waste rock with CaO at the same dosage rate as
the technology evaluation. The waste rock would
be mixed with CaO by a local subcontractor
adjacent to the pit prior to loading the waste rock
into the pit. The subcontractor would use CaO
silos and heavy equipment to mix the waste rock
and CaO. The assumption was made that since the
CaO has a limited life, CaO treatment would need
to be attempted in the future to prevent ARD.
8.5 Conceptual Design Costs
Costs considered by each technology vendor for
the conceptual design were reagent cost, capital,
labor, equipment rental, operation and
maintenance, engineering, permitting, disposal,
consumables, and mobilization/demobilization,
etc. Since a subcontractor would be used for the
PR, no capital or separate labor is included in the
cost. Table 8-1 shows the cost for each
technology vendor to treat the representative
application of a 750,000-ton waste rock pile.
34
-------
Table 8-1. Technology Vendor's Conceptual Design Cost
Cost component
KEECO
UNR
MT2
PR
Reagent Cost
$10,137,000
$1,859,820
$3,273,750
$899,438
Capital
$250,000
$24,300
$23,000
$0
Equipment Rental
$280,000
$324,840
$230,000
$0
Operation and Maintenance
$0
$0
$0
$0
Engineering
$0
$100,000
$41,600
$0
Subcontracts
$0
$0
$0
$3,750,000
Operating Labor
$918,000
$360,000
$366,000
$0
Other
$1,097,998
$572,448
$100,400
$125,000
Total Cost
$12,682,998
$3,241,408
$4,034,750
$4,774,438
35
-------
9. Quality Assurance
The QC activities completed during this
technology demonstration included collecting field
duplicates and extra volume for matrix spike/
matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSD) analysis,
calibrating field instruments, and decontaminating
the equipment used. A total of 20 field duplicates
and extra volume for 11 MS/MSD analyses were
submitted for a total of 110 water samples. Also,
five field duplicates and extra volume for three
MS/MSD analyses were submitted for the waste
rock samples. The field instruments were
calibrated at least on a daily basis, and the
calibration was checked at least at the end of each
day of use. The decontamination and sampling
procedures required by CDM's SAP were adhered
to throughout the investigation. All QC activities
for this investigation were in accordance with
EPA's Guidance for Data Quality Assessment,
Practical Methods for Data Analysis (Ref. 2) and
CDM's SAP (Ref. 3).
Once the samples were analyzed, the data was
evaluated, validated, and reviewed by CDM
QA/QC staff prior to using it for the technology
evaluation. Samples that were flagged with an "R"
(rejected due to poor QC) were not used for the
technology evaluation. If a sample was flagged
with other qualifiers, it was used as reported.
There were zero rejected samples for the pH, TDS,
arsenic, aluminum, iron, zinc, and sulfate data sets.
36
-------
10. Conclusions
By evaluating the parameters of pH, TDS,
dissolved arsenic, aluminum, iron, zinc, and
sulfate, it was possible to determine that some
technologies performed better than others. Table
10-1 summarizes the effectiveness of each
technology in reducing the relevant contaminants
by at least 90% or achieving the SD AWQC for
the Gilt Edge site.
The PR performed well; however, the high pH
may indicate the waste rock was overdosed, and
the CaO does have a limited life. Once the CaO is
exhausted, it may need to be reapplied, depending
on the circumstance.
The Envirobond treatment from MT2 did reduce
some contaminants; however, the fact that it
increased concentrations of arsenic, TDS, and
sulfate cannot be ignored. If the Envirobond
technology is to become a viable treatment, then
modifications would need to be made to prevent
such increases in the future. Also, the approach by
MT2 of treating only the top 2 inches of each layer
of the hypothetical waste rock for the cost estimate
is questionable since each lift is made of sulfidic
waste rock through the whole thickness not just
the top 2 inches. If MT2 were to treat the whole
thickness of each lift, the cost would increase
substantially.
UNR's Permanganate Passivation treatment
performed well, and it is cost effective compared
to the other treatments. The advantage of the
Permanganate Passivation treatment is that, in
theory, it will not degrade over time and a one-
time application is all that is required.
The SME treatment by KEECO did not perform
well past the first field season. Increasing the
treatment dosage may solve this problem;
however, it will add to the cost and make it very
expensive compared to the other treatments.
Table 10-1. Technology Performance Summary
Technology
Achieve 90%
Reduction?
Achieve SD Discharge Limits?
Cost to Treat
750,000 Tons of
Comments
A1
Fe
Sulfate
pH
TDS
As
Zn
Waste Rock
Effective, but pH was
PR
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
$4,774,438
elevated above 8.8 and will
fail once CaO is exhausted
Actually increased TDS,
MT2
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
$4,034,750
sulfate, and arsenic
concentrations
UNR
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
$3,241,408
Effective and has longer
life than lime treatment
KEECO
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
$12,682,998
Expensive and failed during
second field season
37
-------
11. References
1. CDM, Multi-Cell Treatability Study Report for 3. CDM, Sampling and Analysis Plan for Multi-
Gilt Edge Mine NPL Site, Lawrence County, Cell Acid Rock Drainage (ARD) Treatment
South Dakota, June 2002. Technological Evaluation, Gilt Edge Mine,
Lawrence County, South Dakota, April 2001.
2. EPA, Guidance for Data Quality Assessment,
Practical Methods for Data Analysis, EPA
QA/G-9, QA00 Update, EPA/600/R-96/084,
July 2000.
38
-------
Appendix A
Leachaie Results
-------
Control Cells Leachate Results
Dale
Sarrpted
pH Lab
Conductivity
Total Solids
Hardness
Turbidity
Armrnxua
Nitrate + Nitrite
Ortho-
phosphate
Cyanide
Lab
Lab
Diss,
Susp.
Total
Lab
Total
Total
Total
Total
WAD
Sample ID
Cell
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
CLP
ULSA
fsy}
(umhos/cm @ 25
C)
{mg/L @ 180
CJ
(mg/L @
105 C)
(mg/L as
CaCQ3)
(MTU)
{mg/L as N}
{mg/L as N)
{nigrt. as P)
fugt'L }
OTGE-TEO^N-0309
Ceil 02
03/09/01
2 18. H
30.000 UI,1_H
38.000 H
210 JH
6,710 _H
0.8 H
0.7 H
5UBHET HUJ
162 HJ
3.4 B J
NR •
0 "GE-TE02 N-042!i
02
04/25401
2,34
9,090 LJ
16,000 J
16
4,110 ,_J
0.8 J
0.4 J
0.25 UBH Ui
24,1 H RJ
1 U UJ
NR
01GE-TE02 N-0502
Ceil 02
05/0201
No
NS
NS i
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
20 J
KR
01GE-TE02 N-0517
Cell 02
05/17/01
2,47 J
8,590 I
16,000 . J
17
4,340
22 J
0.20
0.5 UB.H
25,5 J
1.1 B UJ
5 U
01GE-TE02-N-06 H
Ceil 02
06/14/01
2.49
7,830 I
15,000' _J
7 J
3.616
1.2
0.2
0.1 UH
38.8
4.4 B_U
10 U UJ
01GE-TEC2-NO716
Cell 02
07/16/01
2 31
9,940 I
18.3?#
31 J
4,300
0.4 U
0.21
0.1 UH R
NR
4,5 UUJ
10 u
01GE-TE02-N-0828
Cell 02
08/28/01
1.98
10.300 I
18,000 _J
38 _J
4.000
0.3 J
0.45
1.1 H J
NK
4,5 U_UJ
10 U UJR
01 GE-TEi )2-N 11)01
Cell 02
10/01/01
2.18
12,000 I
30.063 H_J
33 H JJ
4,SOT
0.5 J
0.3
0.12 UH
NR
3.1 B Ui
10 U UJ
01GE-TEQ2-N-1O24
Cefl 02
10/24/01
2.24
17,400 I
56,000
150 J
6.100
2.6
0,96
0.12 UH
NR
2,1 i J
10 U
02GE-TEO2-NWO4
Cell 02
mmm
1:.8S
18000
27000
250
6200
0.277
48
0.23 UH
fi<
3.5 U
10 U
02GE-TE0 _-N-1(122
Ceil 02
10/22/02
1.95
22100 1
130000
110
6400
0.447
54
6.3
NR
6.7 8
Nf>
02GE-TE0 >-D-1022
Cell 02
1.0/22/02
1.S5
22900 1
130000
140
6500
0.618
47
0.12 U
Nft
6,7 B
NS
01GE-TE06-14-0310
^11 06
03/10/01
NS
NS
NS
NS 'iiSS
NS
n;
NS'-'* ??rF'
NR
N5 7-'..;:-r:v
NR
01 GE»TED6-N-C828
Cellos
08/28/01
MS - .
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS -• ,
NR
NS
NR
01G6-TE66-M-10G1
Cell OS
10/01/01
NS
MS
NS
NS
NS
NS
fJS
NK
NR
NS
NR
02GE-TE06-^-C601
Cell 06
06/04/02
1.77
20000
150000
230
seoo
0..134
67
0.05 UH
NR
3,5 O
to ii
02GE-TE06-N-1022
Celt OS
10/22/02
1 97
171001
98000
87
5300
0.55
43
0.12 U
NR
6.9 B
NS
OIGE-TE10-N-0425
Cet 10
Q4/2S/01
5.36
2,7801 J
3,200 _J
190
2.050 _J
98.7 J
0,3 J
0,05 U8.HUJ
0.23 H RJ
3.9 6 J
NR
01GE-TE10-N-0502
C«fl 10
05/02/01
NS
NS
NS
m
NS
NS,-S*«C-
m
m
20 J
NS
01GE-TE10-N-0517
Cell 10
06/17/01
4.39 ^J
4,7401
5.300 J
420
3,700
803 J
020
0 05 UBH
0.52 J
7.8 B
5 U
01GE-TE10-N-0614
Cell 10
06/14/01
5.93
3,590 1
4.700 _J
130 J
3.268
67.6
0.12 U
0 05 UH UJ
0.16
4.1 U
10 U UJ
01OE-TE10-M-0716
Ceil 10
07/16/0?
5 83
2.9201
4,567
134 J
3,500
128 J
0,1
0.05 UH R
NR '
6.4 B RUJ
10 u
01 GE-TE 10^-0717
Cell 10
07/17/01
NS
NS
NS
MS
NJ
Ma
i*
NS
Nfi
4.5 U UJ
re
01GE-TE10-N-06S8
Cell 10
08/28/01
748
4,2301
4,400 _J
290 J
3,400
105
0.20
0 05 UH J
NK
4.5 0 UJ
10 U UJR
01 GE-TE 10-D-08:'S
Cei 10
08/28/01
7.22
4,180 i
4,200 _J
230 J
3.100
116
0.17
0 05 UH J
NR
4,5 U_UJ
<0U UJR
01GE-TE10-N-1001
Cel' 10
10/01/01
5.48
4.9801
5,242 H_J
333 H JJ
3,600
356 _J
0.24
22 H
NR
2: B UJ
10 0 UJ
01GE-TE1C -N-10:' t
;ell 10
1024/01
5. .31
5,120 I
6,280
330 J
3,800
359
0.2
0.06 UH,
NR
4.8 B
10 u
0.:GE-TE1C-N-O6Ot
lell 10
08/04/02
3,41
10300
221X30
1300'
4800
1740
6,4
1.6 Si
NR
3.S U
10 u
02GE-TE10-N-1022
I^ll 10
10/22/02
3.82
11300 I
28000
150
4800
88.5
3,8
1
NH
6,9 B
NS
Mote* Gu&Wef? tofOft? i are Ssboratory quaJrf&rs flf&d iiftw COM vaftdaljon Qualsfjefs
F4o«& Refute from ?GCC have no? csmptesetf Vte vaftJo&on pnscess
NR. Analysis not requested H * time €*£*$3 before analysis
Safr^te r*g» wflxttlud Jo laborcory J = €
NA- Mai aravzod ;?y lab aftfcugh requested S =
I "tfMereni pr«s(.fR U = bekwl^detec6OT&mftrepc>ft^&T¥tshc^
H - result rejected due to poof QC
£ - semi teuton ass Gusfcfe gu&#tet@5
CC = eanbriuirig calibraticsT outside protect and JaixsrslGry contra! ferrets
-------
Control Cells _eachate Results
Bcaftxxwte
Bromide
Chtoncte
Afitatnity
ULSA
ULSA
Ul.SA
((ng/L as
CaC03S
»>» afcJMJh
I ""TKlte W* pr«6«m
H « hcMtv »r«i expnd More ai%sis
j»mmaMnsiM
a = astrrstjxJ PMiA
U - MKm tm Selection nmt, repeflng imt stom
RoesullrejttMdueieptiarQC
E = serial sBuWn was amsate gwMnes
CC = ^yifcnimg ggiisr^iBcsi ouf$i€f@ pr^eef and ftsoratcry oartrsi to*
-------
Control Cells Leachate Results
Sample tO
Ceil
Date
Sampled
Calcium
Magnesium
Sodium
Potassium
Sodium
Adsofplion
Ratio
Diss.
Total
Tola!
D-ss
Total
Total
Diss,
Total
Diss.
Total
Calculated
CLP
ULSA
CLP
CLP
ULSA
CLP
CLP
CLP
CtP
CLP
(mg/L )
(mg/L )
(mg/L )
terfefcsn primer! U = below the Section Bmrt. repor&ng (apm sfKhvn
R - resell reacted due to poor QC
E = senst diufton was oufakfe guidelines
CC - contjfitsng ca&toratkn cMskte prefect and tabors Lory centres Bmrs
-------
Control Cells Leachate Results
San pie ID
Celt
Oast-
Sampled
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Banum
Ber
yilium
DrSS.
Too:
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss.
lost
Diss.
Total
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
.'3'L !
{Ufl't)
-0309
Cell 02
03/09/0!
162,COO
1,620,000
1.810
2.423
41,100
44.500 J
117 B
30 3 B...UJ
98.8
134
l0tGE-TE02-fM)425
Ceil 02
04/25-00(120
Cell 10
08/28/01
1,170
31,100
4JU
4,9 U
9 B U
24.4 U
97,5 8
29.2 B.J
5,2 ...J
8,7 J
01GF.TE1H M001
Cell 10
10101/01
57,100
67,800 _J
3 U UJ
3 U UJ
21,3 J
27.4 J
132 B J
408 J
15 8 J
18.3 JU
01 GE-TE 1J-W-1024
Cell 10
10/24/01
138.000
140,000 J
3.7 U
3,7 U
20.6. J
47.3
90-6 B
34,1 B J
17.8
19,4
C2GE-TE10-H-0604
Cell 10
06/04/02
2100000
1720000
53 U
53 U
408
1040
91 B
29-4 B
252
222
02GE-TE10.ft.102
Cell 10
10/22/02
338000
2740000
2 U
2 U
654
452
128 B
52 B
442
283
Nete- Resrts WinZXS3have notcompletedfte wkjaionsmtxm,
NP- Anttys»s no recueslo)
nc* to ia£>ara!offy
MA- Not anMyzM by tab aHhojoh ft«o«s»iXS
1 .-rtarfewif present
H • twksna Wms npnd Mtmantiyss
J •trtmMd.'wtM
B«M«fiiaiwI result
U = Wow #w {tetaaion Hm rsptrtna tol sJrawn
ft »mult MjsBttd due to poor QC
£ » sen»t dtufan was otOd# («**«
CC « eontnumfl eaftofato outwte prists and ate^aKwy control km®
-------
Control Cells Lt achate Results
Sample ID
Dei!
Date
Sampled
Cadmium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
D«ss.
Tola!
Diss
Tola!
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
(u»A- )
{ug/L )
iug/L)
(ugt)
(ug/L )
(ug/L)
(ug/L )
(ug/L }
(ug/L )
(ug/L j
01GE-TE02-N-0309
Cell 02
03/09/01
1,150
1,650
523
698
5,340
7,840
111,000
127,000
644,000 _J
5,970,000
01GE-TE02-N-0425
Cell 02
04/25/01
MS
1,170
NJ
225
NS
6,870
MS
66,600
NS
1,050,000
01GE-TE02-N-0502
Cell 02
05/02/01
1,300
1.240
110
97,7
7,300
6,960
¦ BOO
58,600
1,150,000
1,130,000
01GE-TE02-N-0517
Cell 02
05/17/01
1.210 _R
1,100
140
125
6,480
5,900
65,000
59.200
1,280,000
1,220,000
01GE-TE02-N-0614 i 3cll 02
06/14/01
652
805
99,6
129
3580
4,460
40,400
.56.400
1,250.000
1,890,000
0U5E-TE02-N-O716
Cell 02
07/16/01
814 J
873 J
145 J
153 J
4,010 J
4,380 J
56,300
58,900
2,130,000
2,270,000 J
01GE-TE02-K-O828
Cel'02
08/28/01
1,120 J
1,190 J
107 J
121 J
5,960 J
6,120 j
35,900
75,900
1,070,000
2,240,000
01GE-TE02-N-10C1
Celi 02
10/01/01
1.070 _J
994 J
313 J
298 J
5,500 J
5,320 J
78,900
78,900 J
5,680,000
4,880,000 J
01GE-TE02-N-10! 4
Cell 02
10/24/01
291
289
92.6
655
1,340
1,280
26,600
24,800
9,910,000
10,500.000 J
0 2 G E-TE02 -N -0604
C«ll 02
06/04/02
2390
1540
2390
2340
9990
9820
134000
132000
28300000
29500000
02GE-TE02 N-102I
I :e!i 02
10/22/02
2430
2790
995
923
3840
3460
114000
111000
29400000
28300000
Q2GE-TE02-D-102,'*
Cell 02
10/22/02
3260
2720
965
912
3590
3420
115000
111000
29,600,000
27900000
01GE-TE0S-N-0310
Cell IB
03/10/01
828
1,160
462
577
3,600
4,770
71.800
84.300
554,000 _J
5,330.000
01GE-TED6-N-082B
Cell 06
08/28/01
MS
2,280 J
NS;,b~
454 _J
MS ,
7,590 ...J
NS
213,000
NS . »¦
8,150,000
01G E-TE( 6-N- f 00 *
Cell 06
10/01/01
ns
1,110 _J
NS
554 J
NS
5,430 J
ns •
103,000 J
NS
11.300,000 J
02GE-TE(6-N * 04
Cell 06
06/04/02
2350
2320
3010
2570
12300
12300
128000
128000
35300000
32000000
02GE-THK5-N-1( 22
Ceil 06
10/22/02
1360
1920
933
837
3270
2900
60000
56800
21400000
20100000
01 GE-TE 11 i-N-Ck 25
Cell 10
04/25/01
NS
137
NS
10 U
NS
791
NS
4,020
NS > •
30,000
01 GE-TE 11J-M-0502
Cell 10
05/02/01
1,170
1,160
76 4
75,2
5,060
5,000
58,500
58,500
480.000
698,000
01GE-TE 10-f ,-0517
Cell 10
05/17/01
749 R
719
24 U
2.4 U
4,130
3,940
19,100
18,900
8,860
129,000
01 GE-TE 1lW 1-0614
Cell 10
06/14/01
317
345
0,5 U UJ
0.5 U
2,520
2,790
2,120
.2,410
2,550
3,220
01GE-TE10-M-0716
Cell 10
07/16/01
432 J
389 J
8 B J
7.9 B J
3,130 J
2,780 J
1,230
2,200 _J
6,600
20.400
01GE-TE10---J-0717
Ceil 10
07/17/01
346 J
330 J
12.8 J
6.5 U UJ
2,420 J
2.320 J
2,630
3,770
4,320
17,200 J
01 GE-TE 10-1+0928
Cell 10
08/28/01
409 J
399. J
0.5 U UJ
21,7 J
2.890 J
2,680 _J
128
2,660
219
23,600
01GE-TE10-D-0828
Cell 10
08/28/01
382 J
393 J
05 U J
0.5 U JU
2,670 J
2,650 J
126
2,760
.273
22,700
01GE-TE10-N-1001
Ceil 10
10/01/01
387 J
396 J
6 1 B J
8.8 B J
2,670 J
2,790_ J
5.980
5. 720 _J
5,040
16,000
01GE-TE10-N-1024
Cell 10
10/24/01
689
608
0.9 U
0.9 U
4,480
4,030
9,200
9,070
12,800
47.600 J
02GE-TE10-M-0604
Cell 10
06/04/02
1970
1630
14 U
28.7 B
9720
8070
99800
82000
14700
384000
02GE-TE10-1+1022
Cell 10
10/22/02
2420
1410
28
14
11600
7350
14000
125000
53300
51500
Note Qia&lefs. ufwJf rsc: ns are laboratory quaWiefs an# after sr© COM validation qt-eWters
Note:- R&sutt$ torn 2002' have §»l osfnptefEsS the vaidasfon process
Nfc Analysts noi tflquasM H * fao&feftg *km expired befeic® R* result rejected due to poor <2C
NS- Sample noi & Jximsd !u laboratory j = egknglacJ resiiSt E » serial diMiOfi outsits QukJftSfies
NA- Nbt arotyzsd Dy teN atffiougft ns^ suested B 3 es&rrated rest# CC = contrmsig eut$tds s^najeci and labofasory conSro? &mts
I *meftvwil 0
-------
Control Cells Leachate Results
Silicon
Mercury
Selenium
Nickel
img.1 as
Si02)
01GE-
03/09/01
29,000
N-030P
Q.t U. R
7.650
mami
01GE-
05/02/01
46.? U_UJ
56.3 U...UJ
311.000
0.1GE-TEC2
4-'l U_UJ
m
_ 7.530
2.500
Q16e-TE02-N"3?16
Qise-TEoa-N-oea
2.320 _J
3.3 U
<TE1tMMJ713
1.3 0 UJ
208.000
176.000
4.4-II UJ
0.1 U UJ
0.1 U UJ
07/16SI1
1.110 J
15.1
0.1 U.R
53.8 J
QIGE-tEIO-N-on T
01 GE-TE 10^0828
Cell 10
07/17/01
50 8 J
3.2 J
33U R
188.000
C«B 10
cwa/oi
oerawoi
1.3 U UJ
0.19 B
01 GE-TE 10 D-082E
1 3 U UJ
184,000
277,000
ceil M
01 GE-TE 10-N-1024
826E-TE1Q-W-oeW
Celt 10
10/24/01
0.1 U UJ
Oil 10
40 'J NR
Ceii 16" foami
fe&§Ritofy and-
Noli: QuaMr. w teijre am febcsratefy and after are COM vaWation sjuaftfters
¦ t.-. , ¦ fix&kp&T. 11 ...f. r-Bw-- J.. —
Most. Kg&yge rot gwug Bavf! «c* eswrpieiSQ in© vawsraoni process
NR* ArsSlysJs .net ftsitfjsl&d H = fteid^tif^€£pin^S3^^afi§t£§te
J •» esssarased: resuR
k!> ^ i . - « -J .d|b ^ .... - . *¦ ¦ « g% nn ai TjL?,iiii .H
hv fttot mmhfan ty tiD s(* kvi a - Bsomama result
I "Msffswini pwwnf O'betowthBOeteatenStm, nmonma (*m sficum
R - reo* rejectM du» to poof OC
E = serai t*MMn was outside owteWigs
CC = eootrasno causation ous«le pN|*ci and tatttwwv central tmws
-------
Control Cells Leachate Results
Sampti) id
Cell
Dale
Sampled
Stiver
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
Diss.
Tctel
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
(ug/t-)
(Ufl/L )
(ug/L )
(ugfl.)
02
Cell 02
05/02/01
45.9
46.6 J
42 5 U UJ
42.5 U
34.1 6
47.3 B
69,900
67.100
01GE-TEG2-N-0517
Cell 02
05/17/01
32.1 R
32.9
17 U
47.2 U UJ
70.8
77
61,800
56,600
01GE-TE02-N-0614 (Cell 02
06/14/01
0.7 U UJ
2B UJ
5.6 U UJ
5.6 U UJ
165 J
104
29.400
59.700
01G E - TE02-N-£I716 Cell 02
07/16/01
16.4 J
14.7 J
4.9 U R
4.9 U R
1 U UJ
1 U UJ
54,500 J
58,700 J
01GE-TE02-N-O828 | Sell 02
08/28/01
16.0
33
5.6 U UJ
5.6 U R
356 J
33 2 6
40.500 J
85.500
01GE-TE02-N-1 DO i .' :;ell 02
10/01/01
1 U JU
1 U R
4 U JUR
4 U RUJ
153 J
138
71.300 J
68,500
01GE-TE02-N-1024
Cell 02
10/24/01
1 U UJ
1 u
70.3
64,7
18 7 B
22 B
4,650
3.4o0 J
02GE-TE02-N-0604
Cell 02
06/04/02
11 U
11 u
299
193
1200
1420
66300
64200
02GE-TE02-N-102"'
Cell 72
10/22/02
165 B
40 U
1190
7 U
1.5 U
1.5 U
10900
10100
02GE-TE02-D-102:
Ceil 32
10/22/02
40 U
40 U
1440
7 U
1.5 U
1,5 U
10400
10100
01GE-T606-U-0310
Cell 06
03/10/01
3 U
30 U UJ
205 J
150 J
122
176 e
63,800 _J
63,800
01GE-TE06- 4-0828
Cell 06
08/28/01
NS
0.7 U
NS" '4,
5.6 U R
NT.
204
NS
161,000
01GE-TE06-K'-1001
Cell 06
10/01/01
NS
1 U R.
NS
4 U JUR
NS
212
NS
71,200
02GE-TE0S-N-C6O4
Cell 06
06/04/02
544
11 U
ST1
845
1130
828
70300
75400
02GE-TE06-N-1022
Cell 06
10/22/02
162 B
40 U
47
7.7 8
1.5 U
1.5 U
11800
10200
01GE-TE11-M-O425
Cell 10
04/25/01
N3
15 U UJ
Nf
?5U R
MS", ¦; •,
15 U
ns ;v'r
7,780
01GE-TE1>NJ 5 )2
Ceft 10
05/02/01
25.5
27,3 J
42.5 U UJ
42,5 U
17.7 B
31.5 B
55 500
54,700
01GE-TE10-N-0517
Cell10
05/17/01
30 2 R
29.6
18.9 U
189 U
7,4 B J
10.3 B
40.500
38.300
01GE-TE1C-N-0614
Ceil 10
06/14/01*
20.3
21.7
5.8 U
5.6 U
0,9 U UJ
0,9 U
16.800
19,400
01GE-TE1C -N-0716
Cell 10
07/16/01
1 U JU
1 U R
4 U JUR
4 U JRU
1 U J
! U
19.300
18.200
01 GE-TE 1C-N -0717
Cell 10
07/17/01
15.3 J
16.4
4.91) R
4.9 U R
1 U UJ
1 U JJJ
16.500 J
15.600 J
01GE-TE1C-N-O828
Cell 10
08/28/01
23.2
18.7
5.6 U UJ
5.6 U R
0.9 U
o.s u
14.100 J
15,200
01 GE-TE 10-0-0828
Celt 10
08/2S/01
20.5
18.2
5.6 U
5.6 U R
0.9 U
0.9 U
12.700 J
15,300
01 GE-TE 10-r J-1001
Cell 10
10/01/01
1 U JU
1 U R
4 U JUR
4 U JUR
1 SJ J
1 U
15,900
16,600
01 GE-TE 10-M-1024
Cell 10
10/24/01
7.1 0
4,8 B
189
161
0.9 U
0.9 U
47.400
44.000 _J
O2GE-TE1O-M-0i)O4
Cell 10
06/04/02
11 U
11 U
55 U
55 U
17 U
17 U
79200
68600
02GE-TE10-N-1022
Cell 10
10/22/02
0.8 U
0.8 U
532
340
1,5 U
1.5 U
12700
72200
NC*p Qiuafefiers biftore unders* art} are laboratory cjuaWiefs after arp CDiM va'todatoori: qnKiifemerr,
Ntf* Ruse detecaon limit reports*^ femt she&wi
-------
Presumpt ve Rsrnedy Celts Leachate Results
Ortho
phospfiafe
Totai Solids
pH Lab
Conductivity
T ufbtdity
Nitrate + Nrtnte
A/pmoma
0", -WHJ&
WAO
ULSA
USA
ULSA
ULSA
funtws/cfn @
25 C)
(mg/L f|
180 C)
105 C)
(ma-las
CaC03)
Date
Sampled
(mg.1 as P)
Samte ID
(mg't as N)
((Tiga, as N)
1.7901...H
1,240 H
Cell 04
01 GE-TtH-N-OSOS
7.23 H
0.4 U H
0.05 UBH HUJ
0 1 HJ
10.9 j
03WJ/01
117! 2,MUj 1,4I»1
9.77 J| " 1,060i| S6*oj
04/25/01
0.05 UBH UJ
0.09 H RJ
4.6 B J
Cell 04
01G E -T EC 4 ¦ • ~•0425
4.7 B J
Celt 04
01 3E-TEC4 N-050Z
Cell 04
01 5E-TE04-N-0517
0.04 _J
D.05WJJJ
Cell 04
013c- E04-N-06t4
10 U UJ
Ceil 04
4.5 UUJ
01GE-' E04-N-G7 te
NR
016E-TEQ4-D-Q7t6.
4.5 U UJ
mjM.
TE04-N1001
osmm
i»t®i
0.05 UH J
10 U UJR
40 H JJ
10 V UJ
6.7 6 UJ
91 H JJ
0.05 UH
10 U UJ
Call 04
10/24/01
0,05 UH
01G I" -T E04-D-1024
0.05 UH
0 39 H
02GE-TWMM815
O2C,e-TF0-,-H-1022
10/22,02
0.12 U
01CE-TEQ7-N-O42S
01GE-TE07-N-0502
0.21 H RJ 1,2 B J
Ceil 07
Gel 07
04ffiSW t
9® J
4.1 J
0.05 UBH UJ
NS
:,= 07U UJ
'C
O'GE-TEOV-N-0517
0.99 B
0.05 UBH
016E-TE07-N-C614
Cad 07
0.05 UH UJ
5.8 6 U
to u uj
1G f: -TEC 7 -N-0 716
4,5 U UJ
2.6 JU
0.05 UH
Cell 07
1.2 H^J
0 27 H J
N-0328
4,5 U UJ
10 U UJR
10 U UJR
3.3 B_ UJ
906 H J
0 096 H
0.14 H
10 U UJ
Cell 07
n-io:m
CM 07
N-0815
08/15/02
0.12 U
10/22/02
02GE-TE( 7 >1022
0taE-TE12-N-Q425
WffiSOl
Cell 12
4,420
0.05 UBH UJ
0.02 H RJ
1.8 B J
Cell 12
12-N-0i02
0.7 U UJ
1G6-TE12-&0602
Cei 12
0.7 U UJ
(1GF:-rE12-N^l7
05/17/01
12 5 J
Oil! 12
1,930 t
(1 05 UBH
0.07 J
01GE-T612-K-0614
0.06 H
4.9 B U
10 U UJ
720 J; 22 J
on 12
U1GE-TE12-N-0628
1050!
0,05 UH J
4.5 U UJ
50 U UJR
Call 12
01-Cse-TE 12-N-1001
10/01/01
1,4301
904 HJ 30 H JJ
52 B UJ
Oall 12
01GE-TE12-N-1024
10/24/01
Cell 12
Cell 12
08/1902
wiaoa
CeB 12
Cell' 12 ~j()2Gt -TE12- -j-1022
1470 1300
Htm: OuHin beam *» snowy tuMn art aft* we COM vafctaton (pities
Now: R«sufc itm XKtt hs» ne* eeraptaled fte *aWa«m psssss
NR- Analysis, not H • noong kmc to&mS b*or» analysis
MS-S»rnt»iMi jtonOM Is «nwy J - Mgmrn res*
Nft- Net Wialyac «5j> M> f*oucf flMuasM
l^nlsrtswitimcenl
9 «(BlmaiKf resuti
U * beta* the oeteetkn Wnt. repsrtma limit shown
R » result remcMd du» lo poor CC
£ • swal a*oon ««s outwfcr suKtetoes
CC ¦ eononuxB eallferaww outside pretest »<*! bborawy f.
-------
Presumptive Remedy Cells Leachate Results
Ceil
Sample ID
Date
Sampled
Acidity
Alkalinity
Bieariwnate
Cartwnate
Bromide
Chloride
Fluoride
Sulfate
SuHxfe
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
(mg/L as
CaC03)
(mcyi. as
CaC03)
(mg/L as
HC03)
(mg/L as
COS)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
(rrtglL)
Oil 04
( 1GE-TE04-N-0309
03/09/01
5 U H
32 JH
39 JH
5 U M
1 UB H
19 B H
1.3 B H
1.130 H
1 U H
Cell 04
C1GE-1E04-K-0425
04/25/0!
5U UJ
352 J
423 J
12,000 _J
1 UB
52 B
1.3 B
668 J
10 U UJ
Cell CM
01CE-7 E04-N-0502
05/02/01
Mj
NS
NS
NS
NS>
NS
MS
NS
Ins
Cell 04
01CE-TE04-N-0517
05/17/01
5 U
40
46
15
1 UB
54 B
0.9 BCC
641
1 U
C«ll 04
01GE-TE04-N-0614
06/14/01
5 U
250
7
180
1 U
55
1 2
504
0 01 u
Celt 04
01 (iE -TE04-N-0716
07/16/01
5 U
170
9
120
f U
55
1
581
1 U UJ
Cell 04
01GE -TE04-D-0716
07/16/01
•n
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS 1
NS
NJ
Celt 04
01GE-TE}MJ-0e28
06/28/01
5 U
¦¦
32 _JR 17 R 1 U UJ 48 J 11 JR
530
1 U
Celt 04
01 GE-TE 31-N-1001
10/01/01
5 U
208
5 U
5 U
1 U UJ
14
1
359
1 U UJ
Cell 04 Q1GE-TE0—D-1001
10/01/01
5 U
220
5 U
5 U
02 J UJ
11
1
363
1 U UJ
Cell 04 0" GE-TE (>;-N-1024
10/24/01
5U
320
390 R
5 U R
1 U
26
1 j
540
1 U
Cell 04 .0 GE-TE04-D-1C24
10/24/01
50
330
400 R
5 U R
1 U
38
0.96 j
540
1 u
Cell 04
01GE-TE04-N-0604
06/04/02
5 U
550
305
180
1 UH
?6 H
0 62 H
210 H
0 01 u
Cell 04
0;GE-TE04-N-0815
OB/15/02
5 U
74
65 8
12
1 U
37
0.89
190
0.01 u
Cell 04
02G 1-TE04-N-1022
10/22/02
50
126
5 U
24
1 U
24
1 2
280
001 u
Cell 0?
01G £-TE07-N-0425
04/25/01
5U UJ
712 J
862 J
24.400 J
1 UB
23 8
5 B
286 _J
1 U UJ
Cell 07
01GE-TE07-N-0502
05/02/01
m
NS
NS
MS
NS
NS .
NS ,
NS
NS
Cell 07
01G E-TE0 7-N-0517
05/17/01
5 U
706
855
15.200
2 6
406
0.8 BCC
271
0.01 u
Cell 07
01GE-TE07-N-0614
06/14/01
5 U
320
8
230
5 4 JJ
42
0,4
173
0.01 U
Cell 07
0IGE-TEI7-N-0716
07/16/01
5 U
780
8
¦ „ .
1 U
27
0.9
221
1 U UJ
Cc-N-1024
10/24/01
5 U
120
150 R
5 U R
1 U 22
0.77 J
710
1 u
Cell 12
0 'GE-TE 1;>-N-0604
06/04/02
5 U
250
61
120
1 UH 11 H
0 41 H
490 H
0.01 u
Cell 12
0,!GE-TE12-fM}315
08/15/02
5 U
44
53.6
5 U
1 U 15
0.84
560
0.01 u
Cell 12
C ^GE-Tt 12-0-0815
08/15/02
5 U
46
•56.1
SU
1 Uj 15
1,1
550
0.01 u
Ceil 12
C2GE-TE12-N-1022
10/22/02
5 U
144
5 U
45.8
1 Uj 13
1.2
3500
0.01 u
Quanta's befeve ufs0e*sc«r«s ar© laboratory quafcft^ and 3ftsr are COM vahsfesjoo Quafcftefs
No(e Results from 2502 have not compteled tt>e valsctetion process
NR- Analyse no? requested H31 hotdsfiG bme y&ptfBd befons ariaiy$c»
MS- S-arrpfc nc* su&rrs&ed to Isbcato y J - esurrsacstf resun
NA- Nc* are^sd Dy Ea& stftough requested B = estimated resume
1 sstterfefenl pres&ri U * below the descctacrs feint, reporting kut sfKMTi
R - resuft reacted due to poor QG
E * serial dilution i*bs outside gwidefenes
CC s-confanumg cakbratjon owssdo psojod ai*J Babcsaiory co
-------
Presurr pti 'o Remedy Cells Leachate Results
1
Date
Sampled
Calcium
Magnesium
Sodiym
Potassium
Sodium
Adsorption
Rate
Diss.
Teta
Total
Diss.
Total
Total
Diss,
Total
Diss.
Total
I
CtP
ULSA
CLP
CLP
ULSA
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
Calculated
Cell
Sample ID
{mg/L}
(rngfL
(mg/l)
{ma/L}
Sm9/L)
(mg/L )
img/t}
(mg/L )
(mg/L )
(mg/t 5
(urtrtfess)
Ceil 04
01G!:-TG04-N-G3Q9
03/09/01
375 J
41? H
419
41
47 H
46
40.6 J
41
12,1 j
16 8 B
0.5!
Cell 04
0IGE-TEO4-(4-0425
04/25/01
NS
401 J
428
NS
28 J
47
NS
38
Ni
37
0 47.
Cell 04
01G6-TE04 -N-0SO2
05/02/01
276
NS
315
0,177 B.JJ
M
22
35
34
21
21
0.50
Celt 04
01GE-TEC4-N-0517
05/17/01
247
263
281
?
15
16
39
41
19
21
0.54
Celt 04
01GE-TE04-N-0614
06/14/01
255
288
349
0.276 6
33
48
35,2 J
45
33.4 J
47
0.80
Cell" 04
Q16E-TE04-W16
07/16/01
197 J
256
235 J
0.0747 B J
5 U
0.575 8 J
38
41
48.9 J
57.1 J
0.74
Cell CM
01GE-T6t4-CK)716
07/16/01
223 J
NS
235 J
0.468 6 J
NE
0 534 B J
48
42
53.7 J
566 J
0,75
Cei> 04
01GE-TEC4-N-0828
06/28/01
165 J
180
148 J
0.1198 J
0.6
0.190 8 J
48.9 J
43
130
107
0 97
Cef CM
Ot3£-TE04-N-1001
10/01/01
171 J
312
174 J
0.0742 B._JU
23
0 314 8 JU
51.2 J
42
117 J
107
088
Cell 04
013E- "E04-D-K01
10/01/01
173 J
330
184 J
0.0539 B_JU
2
0,850 8 J
101 J
43
227 J
111
0.87
Cell 04
01GE- 'E04-N-1C24
10/24/01
277
280
271 RJ
0,123 B U
0.7
0.233 a J
4#
47
134 , ,J
133 J
0.79
Ceil 04
01GE-TE04*D-1024
10/24/01
287
270
291 RJ
Q.115BJJ
0.2
0-191 B J
51
47
139 J
nfj
0,76
Celi 04
l'2GE*TE04-N -0604
mmm2
255
280
337
0.139 B
1.8
6.74 B
24.3 B
21.8 B
101
107
0.4
Cell 04
O2GE-TE04-N-O815
08/15/02
12.6
17
14?
0.892 B
0,7 J
0.642 B
34.1
'33.8
134
130
2.5
Cell 04
(2GE-1E04-N-1022
10/22/02
51 7
59f 72.5
0.023 8
1 U
0,036 B
51,5
50.3
183
183
2.0
Cell 07
01iSe-TE07-N-0425
04/25/31
NS
372 J
359
* .
6 J
17 78
NS,„; ',
24.7 B
NS
S46B
035
Cell 07
01RE-T E07-N-05O2
05/02/01
582
NS
553
0 0413 U
5.23 B
23
73
0,27
Cell 07
0IGE'-TE0"*-N-0517
05/17/01
381
408
366
0.0413 U
20
2 04 B
24
22
83
57
0,32
Cell 07
0115E-TE07-N-0614
06/1401
138
152
173
0,302 B
0,6 j
0.688 B
30.3 J
37
74.3 J
104
0 77
Cen 07
Q Ki£ -TE3 A N-0716
07/16/01
240.J
312
275., j
0 0417 B J
5 LI
0,0488 B J
35
39
90 7 J
110 J
0,65
Cell 07 :OtGE-TEDr-N-0828
08/28/01
17.1 J
-
'
0.0632 B J
1.2
0.801 B J
42,7 J
41
122
124
2.20
Cell 07 0'GE-Tf Oi D-0828
08)28/01
18,1 J
41
22 6 J
0.09 B J
08
0.679 6 J
45 9 J
41
133
127
2 32
Cell 07 ;0" GE-TE-07-N-1001
10/01/01
207 J
196
193 J
0 0834 B_JU
0 19 J
0.14. :¦
sc
41
137
129
081
Cell 07 I0-GE-T607-N-1024
10/24/01
359
340
W
0 0281 BJJ
¦2
NS
4;
Ni
160 J
"
NS -
Cell 07
c;gs-teo7-n-06(w
06/04/02
3»e
390
am
0.138 U
1 U
0,885 B
22 B
18.5 B
89
71.8
0.3
Cell 07
CiG I-TEG7-N-G8 15
08/15/02
145
140
174
0 0464 B
0.06 J
0.0373 U
28 8
27.2
114
107
0.7
Cell 07
CK5H-TE07-N-1022
10/22/02
410
270
285
0.069 B
1 u
52,5
48,7
163
165
0.7
Cell 07
02GME07-IM022
10/22/02
407
280
2S7
0.078 8
1 u
0.088 B
54.5
49 3
174
171
0.7
Cell 12
01GE-TE12-N-O425
04/25/01
NS
516 J
566
NS
5 J
10-9 B
NS,
31
NS
113
0 35
Cell 12
01GE-TE12-M-0502
05/02/01
295
NS,
331
0 128 e_u
Nf.
33
20
21
55
57
0.29
Cell 12
01GE-TE12 D-0S02
05/02/01
284
fc'C
nto
330
0.0926 B
Nb
32
21
21
55
57
0.30
Cet, 12
Q1GE-TE '2-f 4-0517
05/17/01
252
243
237
0.301 B
4.0
13
24
22
64
3
Celt 12
01GE-TE 2-N-0614
06/W1
82 3
77
70,6
1.79 B
2.2
2.54 B
26.4 J
30
54 J
70
0,96
Celi 12
01GE-TE2- N-0828
oa?28/oi
100_J
99
97.9 J
1.96 B J
2 5
1.9 B_J
39.5 _J
37
90
101
1.01
Ol 12
01GE-TE12-N-1H01
icuDi/oi
159 J
156
183 J
3.15 B j
3.6
2.78 B J
47 J
40
-V
CSf
0
117
0.85
Celt 12
OfGE- fE12-N-i; 24
10/24/01
260
250
245 RJ
1.1 e
2.2
1.11 B J
50
45
142 J
133 j
0,79
Celt 12
02GE-TE12-N-0604
06/04/02
182
180
195
0.138 U
1 0
0.595 B
19 3 B
22.8 B
78.5
81 6
0.4
Cell 12
l2GE-7E12-f -0315
08/15/02
155
140
152
0.668 B
0.7 J
0.601 8
28.7
27.7
116
112
0.6
Gal) 12
•J2GE-TE12-f-0815
08/15/02
153
140
152
0.704 B
0.9 J
0.662 B
29
27.8
117
112
0.6
Cel 12
02GE-"T12-+M022
10/22/02
284
270
2S5
0.249 B
1 U
0.273 B
42.7
41.6
162
135
0.7
Notr Quotes b#n u.wwsore art iatxrewy quaMws and after are COM vaMauon quaHins
Mote Resuis from MB have noi eemfjMs) tre sWaiwn process
NR-Anal)«Kn3imauaMd K'haMngtimeaxprMlMttittanayw R = result tBieseW due to poor QC
NS-SaK**s u*srt*M»*!tslatiO!BtotY J a MMtatadresti E • momawonanoutside gunMknos
N^Natniysmlliy'ftattnuftimiuss'M B CC * eontlfMimg catoatm outside project and laboratory miM *mrts
I xwciBtntpreM* u - omo* ** onwaon *>*. roponmg mm vxmti
-------
Presumptive Remedy Cells Leachate Results
Aiumrnum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Diss
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss
Total
Diss,
Total
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
Cell
Sci.'Ti;/.' |Q
Date
Sampled
(ufl/L )
(tlQ/l )
(ug/L )
iug/l >
(ug/L )
(ug/L)
(ug/L )
: -N-0815
08/15/02
263
228
3.9 U
3.9 U
27.4
28,6
330
52.5 B
0 2 U
0.2 0
Cell 04
J23E-TE54-N-1022
10/22/02
115 B
84 B
2 U
2 U
19
20
227
62 B
0,6 B
1.6 B
Cell 07
013E-TE07-N-G425
04725/01
Ni,
946 B U
NS
120 U
NS
70 B J
NS vii v'
707B UlNS
20 U
Cell 07
0 3T-TE07-N-0502
05/02/01
53.4 U
132 B U
20 9 U UJ
20.9 U UJ
28
29,5
190 B
84.7 B 0 66 B UJ
0.99 B U
Cell 07
0 GE -TE07-N-0517
05/17/01
53,4 U
59.3 U
20.9 U R
23 2 U
24
24,5
62,8 B
59,6 B 0 58 BJJ
0,44 U
Cell 07
0'Gt:-TE07-N-06l4
06/14/01
30,6 BJJ
111 B
4.9 U. UJ
4.9 U
33
46 J
46.3 B
64.2 Bj 2.7 B U
1.3 B U
Cell 07
01GE-TE07-N-O716
07/16/01
212
211
3,8 U UJ
3.8 U UJ
32
28.3 J
98.4 B J
0,7 B U
0.6S B UJ
Cell 07
Q1GE-TE07-N-0S28
08/28/01
756
3,650
4.9 U
4.9 U
40
45.4
134. B
69.9 B j 0.43 B UJ
07B JU
Cell 07
01GE-TE07-D-0828
08/28/6?
558
3,070
49 U
4.9 U
45
13 8
344
63,8 B J 0 45 B UJ
0.7 B JU
Cell 07
01GE-TE07- *1-1001
10/01/01
116 B
810 J
30
3 U
45.2 J
¦1.- 5 J
278 J
103 B J 1 U j
1 U JU
Cell 07
Q1GE-TEC 7-IM024
10/24/01
55 U
MS '?>;:•
3.7 U
NS
27,3 J
NS
261
NS ] 0.4 U
NS
Cell 07
G2GE-TE0/¦+.-0604
06/04/02
586 B
2550
53 U
53 U
306
49.4 B
292 B
128 Bj 4.7 B
1 28
Cell 07
02< S E-T E0 7 A-0815
08/15/02
356
451
3.9 U
3.9 U
15,7
18.2
250
81 B 0.2 U
0.2 U
Cell 07
02GE-TE07-N-1022
10/22/02
161 B
354
2 U
2 U
22
27
184 B
127 B 0 42 B
1,6 B
Ooll 07
02GE-" E07-D-10I2
10/22/02
187 B
229
2 U
2 U
20
25
244
128 B| 0,4 U
1.7 B
Call 12
C1GE-TE12-N 0425
04/25/01
NS
95.8 B U
NS
30 U
r«
73.1 J
NS
85 6 B U
NS
5 U
Cell 12
C1GE-TE12-N 0502
05/02/01
69.3 B U
sea
20.9 U
20.9 U
23.6
33,4
79,7 B
53,1 B
0.77 B U
0 4 U
Cell 12
01GE-TE12-D-0502
05/02/01
53.4 U
831
20.9 U
20 9 U
21.6
29.8
68.1 B
52.5 B
0.4 U
0.4 U
Cell 12
C1GE-TE12-N-0517
05/17/01
53.4 U
550
U ¦11 U R
23 2 U
27
31 4
54.4 B
50.3 B
0.65 B U
0.44 U
Cell 12
01GE-TE12-N-0614
06/14/01
13.6 B U
101 B
4.9 U UJ
4 9 U
37
48.1 J
24.3 B
31.6 B
3.2 8 U
0,83 B U
Cell 12
01GE-TE12-N-0828
08/28/01
45.8 B_U
55.1 B
4.9 U
4.9 U
42.4
275
45.7 B J
0 36 B UJ
0 55 B JU
Cell 12
OK:£-T£12-N-1001
10/01/01
11 U UJ
53.2 B JU
3 U
3 U
60.2 J
64.9 J
246 J
58.7 B J
1 U J
1 U JU
Cell 12
0K-E -TE1S-N-1024
10/24/01
55 U
62 8 B UJ
3.7 U
3.7 U
40,7 J
47.2
139 B
71.6 B J
0.4 U
0.4 U
Cell 12
02C.E -IE l?-f1-0604
06/04/02
540 B
167 B
$3 0
53 U
21 U
21 U
200 B
43.2 B
SB
2.SB
Cell 12
02GE-TE l;,!-N-0815
08/15/02
252
181 B
3-9 U
39 U
27.7
24,7
103 8
-*¦¦¦ I:
0.2 U
0.2 U
Cell 12
32GE-TE i;>D-0815
08/15/02
223
201
3.9 U
39 U
25.4
23.3
261
49 B
0 2 U
0.2 U
Cell 12
QiSE-TE 12-H-1022
10/22/02
42 B
68 B
2 U
2 U
34
38
129 B
88 B
0.4 U
1.6 B
fixate Owafeni brfeye uj>defBcoreaf§ laboratory tjusMsgf^ and after are COM vaJidaton quafeftei^
Note: Resyfe frorc 2002 te n& coripleletf me vahdatton pfocess
fs*R- A/isfys® noi fjqitestod H s hcidsrag &me expffed beftsro R = re&dl rejected dg© lo poo* OC
^ $3fi^rKx; loetc^tcry J = gstemEed resuH E - senaE (Mi&on was outside guKteftri€&
NA- Ncn analyze bry a& ii^iough r&qy*aster*d teBGfStOfy corrtroi iirrrfe
I srrti^fef^nt pfe&snrt U - below tft® datecftori ferret, rspom>g ferrs* sficwFi
-------
Presumptive Remedy Cells Leachate Results
r
Date
Sampled
Cadmiym
Chromium
Cobalt
Copf»,r
Iron
Diss.
Total
Diss
Total
Diss
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
1
CLP
CLP
CIP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
ceil
Samp«e ID
(ug/l)
(ug/l.)
jug/L j
(u« L ;
{ug.it)
{ug/L)
(ug/L )
Cell 04
C1GE-TEW-N-0309
03/09/01
1 U
5 u
7.5 B
10 U
2 U
10 U
830 U
125 B U
18 U UJ
3980
Ceil 04
C1GS-TEQ4-NW25
04/25/01
NS
¦u
NS
10 u
NS
10 U
NS
204 u
NS
if
Cell 04
C' G E-T E04-N-0502
05/02/01
1.5 U
1.5 u
10.4 B L
7.2 B J
4,4 U
4,4 U
92
104
16.7 U
sg. 1 a u
Celt 04
016E-TE04-N-0517
0S/17/01
1.5 U R
1.7 U
4.2 B U
8.4 B
4.4 U
4.9 U
50,5 UJ
86,4
16.7 U
281
Cell 04
01GE-TE04-N-0614
06/14/01
0.4 U UJ
1.3 B
2 7 B J
5.9 8
0 7 U UJ
1 1 8
106
186
50 4 B
88,6 B
Cell 04
01GE-TE04-N-0716
07/16/01
0.5 u uj
0.SU UJ
6.5 U UJ
6,5 U UJ
1,8 U
1.8 U
87.8
118
38 9 B
131 J
Ceil 04
01GE-TE04-00716
07/16/01
0.5 U_UJ
05 U J
6.5 U UJ
6,5 U UJ
1,8 U
1,8 U
93.1
128
66.7 6
65,4 6 J
Cell 04
01GE-TEO4-N-Q828
08/28/01
0.4 U J
0.4 It JU
1.2 B UJ
1.1 B J
0,78 B J
0.7 U J
70.8
63 4
36.S8
1750
04
01GE-T&H-H-1001
icwoi/ci
1 U J
t UJ
1.2 6 J
1 U UJ
2 U J
2B J
59.4
65.3 J
8 U UJ
124 _J
CelCW
01GE-TOK.-0-1OO1
10/01/01
1 U J
1 U J
1.1 B J
1 U_JU
2 U J
2 ' B J
61.7
62 7 J
8 0 UJ
194
OJ04
01GE-TEIK-N-1024
10/24/01
0.4 U
0.4 U
2.7 B..U
2,6 B
2.3 8
2B
74.1
73.8
22 8 0
43,6 8 J
Ce< 1 04
Q'GE TEG4-O-1024
10/24/01
0.4 U
0 4 U
2.4 e U
2.9 B
2.1 6
1.5 8
76.7
73.4
22.6 U
25.8 8 J
Cell CM
02GE- rEO4-V-0fO4
06/04/02
su
8 U
14 u
14 U
13 U
13 U
178 B
18? B
145 U
839 B
Cell 04
02GE- TEO4-N-0815
08/15/02
0.6 U
06U
56
4,4 B
3 1 S
48
60.4
61.8
85.7 S
18.7 U
Cell 04
)2GE-T£04-f -1022
10/22/02
0.5 U
0.5 U
5.9 B
5.7 8
3.6 B
2.8 6
113
117
113
28 B
Cell 0?
01GE-'"F.074MJ425
04/25/01
20 U
MS
40 U
1© ' , ,w
40 U
NS
416 8 U
NS
320 U
Cell 07
01GE-TE07-N-0S02
05/02/01
1.5 U
1.5 U
6.1 8. U
4.9 B J
4,4 U
4.4 U
235
231
16 7 U
79.7 B U
ceil 07
01GE-TE07-N-0517
05/17/01
1.5 U R
1.7 U
8 3B..U
7.3 B
4,4 U
4.9 U
230
212
16,7 U
74 B
Cell 07
01GE-1EG7-N-OS14
06/14/01
0,4 U UJ
0,4 U
5,7 B
9.0 8
2 B J
350
200
256
28,3 6
147
Ceil 0?
0 f 'sC-TEO 7-N-0716
07/16/01
0.5 U UJ
0.5 U..UJ
8.3 B j
676 J
1.8 U
2 B J
178
196
131
95 3 B J
Cell or
01 if. -1 EC7-N-C32&
08/28/01
0.4 U J
04 U JU
3.1 B J
566 J
1.8 B J
2,7 B J
118
133
102
4490
Cell 07
01G(.-T£C7->0828
08/28/01
0,4 U J
6.4 U JU
368 J
8,8 B J
2,3 8 J
2,7 B J
130
127
140
3660
Cell 07
01GE-TE07-M-1QQ1
10/01/01
1 U j
1 U J
1 6 6 J
28 J
3.8 8 j
3,2 6 J
138
141 j
8U JU
1900 J
Ceil 07
01 GE-Tf-0''*N-1024
10/24/01
0 4 U
NS
4.4 8 U
NS
3.8 B
NJ-
120
N>.
22 8 U
NS
Cen or
0 -'GE-Ti ",07- N-0604
06/04/02
65.7
1
22-9 B
14 U
13 U
13 U
30.3 B
6? 2 B
901 B
5420
Cell 07
0?GE-TE07-N-031S
06/15/02
O&U
0.6 U
7.9 B
',5 8
1.9 B
1.8 B
92 7
92 9
18.7 U
227
Celt 07
02GE-TE07-N-1022
10/22/02
0.5 U
0.5 U
14
11
5,6 B
4 3B
83
06
49 B
2040
Cell 07
02GE-TE07-D-1022
10/22/02
0 5 U
osu
14
10
5.1 B
4GB
82
82
51 B
1180
Ceil 12
C IGE-TE12-N-0425
04/25/01
NS
5 U
NS-
10 u
NS
10 U
NS
2ti2
NS
144 8 U
Cell 12
&1GE-TE12-N-0502
05/02/01
1.5 U
1.5U
4.6 B U
2.2 U_UJ
4.4 U
231
288
26 5 6 U
57.6 8 U
Cen 12
01GE-TE12-O-0J02
05/02/01
1.5 U
1.SU
3.3 B 0
2.2 U UJ
44 U
4,4 U
234
285
16 7 U
48 B U
Cell 12
01GE-TE12-N-0S17
05/17/01
1.5 U Rl
1.7 U
5 7B.U
5.6 B
4.4 U
4.9 U
252
255
19.9 B U
271
Cell 12
01GE-TE12-N-0614
06/14/01
0.4 U UJ
0,4 U
5.3 B
8.3 B
1.1 8. J
2.5 B
144
195
19.4 U
64 B
Ceil 12
01GE-TEK (+0828
08/28/01
0.4 U J
0.4 U J
29 B UJ
2.5 B_J
1.2 B J
0.7 U J
53,4
65.8
34.8 B
30.3 B J
Cell 12
01GE-TE12-N-1001
10W1/01
1 U J
1 U J
4 B J
0 6 B_JU
3.6 B J
3 B J
125
133 J
8 U UJ
60.5 B JU
Cei 12
0 GE-TE12-M-1024
10/24/01
0 4 U
0.4 U
6.4 B U
8.7 S
4.3 B
3.4 B
105
100
22 6 U
22,6 U
Cell 12
OiGE 7E12-N-CK04
osmm
56 8
6 U
14 U
14 U
13 U
13 U
57.7 e
112 B
145 U
145 U
Celt 12
02GE TE12-N-0 )15
08/15/02
0,6 U
0.6 U
" b
5.3 8
2,2 B
3,1 B
53
51.8
18.7 U
41,7 B
Cell 12
02GE-TE12-0-0815
08/15/02
0.6 y
0,8 U
5.9 B
5.3 B
3.1 8
3 1 B
52.3
52.9
18.7 U
50,4 6
Cell 12
12GE-TE12-M-1022
10/22/02
0 5 U
O.SU
7.3 B
68B
5.5 B
4.8 B
74
74
22 B
18 U
Now. Quanta before underact -e at# tttawMofy qualifim and after are COM vaMalxjft quaBhre
N* Raw* tan 20®' h»*e srt eamfsiettti te vaMaiem orooess
NR-AnMnnamouemd H » ft®k*r>Q sme expmetf Mom andytft R »fesui rajsciM ** lo poor QC
MS- Sample tm SuMW to tauoranxy J -• «taM result E « ssnsl 4on *as ouisde guxjetines
W^NaaiBijwttiy tab jtowgh requested B • smmsM letuN CC =wnmiinB caftfatim outsKteprqea and laboratory control Sitkb
i ¦ rtuwto pwm Usbekwttwdsiecsaolimitfepsfangltfiiishewfl
-------
Presumptive Rjmedy CeiSs Leachate Results
Ceil
Sample ID
Date-
Sampled
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Diss,
Tola!
Diss
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CIP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
("OA.)
(Ufl/L)
(U9/L)
(ufl/L)
(ug/L >
{ug/L}
(ug/L)
(ug/l}
(ug/L )
(ug/L )
Cell 04
01GE-TE04-M-Q309
03/09/01
2 U
SOU
12.4 B
213
0.1 U R
0.1 U_R
2 B
10 u
12.9 _U
16.1 B J
Call 04
01GE-TE01-N-0425
CM/25/01
W«B*S
10 u
NS
111
N5
0.1 u
NS
12.6 B
MS
24 SB J
Cell 04
01GE-TE01- N -0502
05/02/01
0.8 U
1.38 U
0,7 U
55.3
0 1 U
0.1 U
8 9 U
14.8 B
31.6 J
32
Cell 04
01GE-TE04-U-0517
05/17/01
o.eu uj
1.1 B
0.7 U
39.5
o.t u
0.1 u
8.9 U
9.9 U
24.4
27.2
Cell 04
01GE-TE04-N-O614
06/14/01
6.2 U
5.8 J
1.1 B UJ
505
0.1 U UJ
0.1 U UJ
15.2 B
28 B
21,9
41.3 J
Ceil 04
01GE-1 E04-N-07 '6
07/16/D1
2.7 U R
3.9 J
2 B
26.7
O.T U
0,1 u
16.6 B J
17,7 B J
11.4 j
23.1 J
Celt 04
01GE-T E04-D-0716
07/16/01
10 4 J
5.1 J
6.8 B
22.9
0.1 u
0 1 u
21,1 8 J
19.3 B J
22.5 J
18 5 J
Cefl 04
CIGE-TE04-N-0828
08/28/01
1.3 U UJ
42
1 3 B
14.6 B
0.14 B U
0,14 B U
25 B J
21.2 B J
20,8
18,9 J
Cell 04
0 IGE-TE04-N 1001
10/01/01
2 U
2U
2 1 B
19.6
0,1 u
0.1 u
37.9 B J
35 B J
28.7 J
26.1 J
Celt 04
01GE-TE04-D-1001
10/01/01
2 U
2'U
1 U
19.3
0.1 u
O.f U'
38.6 B J
32,6 B J
27.3 J
26.4 J
Cell 04
01GE-TED4-N 1024
10/24/01
2.2 U
2.2 U
1,4 B U
12.1 B
0.1 U UJ
2.6
26.8 B
28 8 B
23.7
21.6
Cell 04
01GE-TE04-D-1024
10/24/01
2.2 U
2.2 U
0 76 B U
6.2 B U
0,1 U UJ
0.1 U UJ
30 B
29.6 B
23.6
23.1
Cell 04
02GE-TE04-N-0604
06/04/02
17 U
17 U
3 U
121 B
0.2 U
0 2 U
14 U
21.2 B
40 U
62.8
Cell 04
02CE-TE04-N-0815
08/15/02
2.6 U
2.6 U
0.93 B
0,93 B
0.1 u
0.1 u
8.5 B
SB
16 5
21
Cell 04
02GE TECXi-M-1022
10/22/02
1.5 U
1.5 U
0.6 U
0.84 B
0,2 U
0.2 U
24 B
24 B
25
28
Cell 07
01GE -TE0: -N-G425
04/25/01
NS
40 U
res
37 6 B
NS
0.29
No
40 U
NS
60 U R
Cell 07
J1GE -TEr)7-N-0502
05/02/01
0.8 U
0 8 U
0 7 U
4.5 B U
0.1 u
0 1 u
21,4 B J
25 2 B J
29.5 J
29.6
CeC 07
J13E-TE17 -f J-0517
05/17/01
0.8 U_UJ
1.38
0.7 U
2.9 B
0.1 u
0 1 u
22,9 B
21. B
29.5
29.3
Cell 07
01-3E-TE37-N-0614
06/14/01
2 8 B„U
3.2 J
23B UJ
4.4 B
0 1 U UJ
0.1 U UJ
23,2 8
31 6 B
26.9
54.9 j
Cel! 07
01 3E-TEJ7-N-0716
07/16/01
16,8 J
9,7 J.
2B
3.5 B
0.1 u
0 1 u
332 B J
36 B J
19,7 J
25.2 J
Cell 07
0 3E-TE07-N-0828
08/28/01
1.3 U UJ
7,5
4.1 B
132
0,13 B U
0.14 B U
36 6 B J
3/2 B J
18.7
17.7 J
Cel' 07
0 GE -TE07-D-0828
08/28TO1
1.3 UJJJ
7.7
3.6 B
115
0.18 B U
0.12 B U
38,7 B J
38.6 B J
19.9
22.3 J
Cel! 07
0'GE-TE07-K-1001
10/01/01
2 U
2 U
1 U
65.2 J
C5
c
0 1 u
60.1 J
54.6 J
24.9 J
20 7 J
Cell 07
0'Gft-TE07-N-1024
10/24/01
2.2 U
NS
044 6 U
NS
0 1 U UJ
NT,
53.3
NS
25 6
NS
Cell 07
02GE -TE07- N -0604
06/04/02
17 U
17 U
10 B
107 B
0.2 U
0 2 U
14 U
14 U
40 U
40 U
Cell 07
02GE-TE07-N-08 5
06/15/02
2.6 U
2.6 U
1.9 B
83 B
0.1 U
0 1 U
16.6 B
17 B
19
22.2
Cell 07
02GE-TE07- vl-1022
10/22/02
1.5 U
1.5 U
0.67 B
25
0.2 U
02 U
306
22 B
33
27
Cell 07
02GE-TEC MM 022
10/22/02
1.5 U
1.5 U
0.6 U
16
0,2 (J
0.2 U
28 B
21 B
34
28
Cell 12
013E-TE12^-0425
04/25/01
NL
'0U
NS
27.2 B
NS
0.1 U
NS
17,2 B
NS
21.6 B J
Celt 12
01' 3E-TE12 -N-G502
05/02/01
0.8 U
0,97 B U
0 83 B U
60.6
0.1 u
0.1 u
21.3 B
35,1 B
23.6 J
25
Cell 12
01GE-' E 12-0-05)2
05/02/01
0.8 U
08U
0.7 U U
59,5
0,1 U
0,1 u
27,3 B
40.9 B
19.4 J
25
Cefl 12
01 GE -''"E12-N-Q 517
05/17/01
o.au uj
1.1 S
3.6 8 U
123
0.1 U
0.1 u
29,4 B
30.3 B
24
24,9
Cefl 12
01GE-"'E12-N 0614
06/14/01
1.3 U
4.5 _J
5.4 B J
17.6
0.1 U UJ
0 1 U UJ
22.8 B
36.5 B
11.6
20 4 J
Cell 12
C1GE-TE12-N -0828
08/28/01
1.3 U UJ
1-3 U
3.3 B
6.2 B
0 15 B U
0.15 B U
8,9 B J
12 B J
8.4
10.8 J
Cefl 12
01GE-TE12-N-1001
10/01/01
2 U
2 U
25 3
63
0.1 U
0.1 u
35,7 B J
34 B J
22.2 _J
20 7 J
Cell 12 _|
C1GE-TE12-N-1024
10/24/01
2.2 U
2 2 U
7 B
70.6
0.1 U UJ
0.1 U UJ
37 B
35.2 B
26,2
24.4
Cell 12
C2GE-TE12-N-0604
06/04/02
17 U
26.6 B
3 U
20,5 B
0.2 U
0.2 U
14 U
28,8 B
40. U
40 U
Cell 12
02G E-TE12-N-0815
08/15/02
2,6 U
2.6 U
19
20.2
0.1 u
0,1 u
8.6 B
7.7 B
13.2
16.6
Cell 12
02C - E -TE12-D-0815
08/15/02
2.6 U
2.6 U
28.4
38.7
0.1 u
0.1 U
8.5 B
7,5 B
15.1
16.2
Cell 12
02( iE -TE12-N-1022
10/22/02
1.5 U
1.5 U
2.8 B
13 B
0.2 U
0.2 U
19 B
18 B
18
16
Mote: Qt&Mtecs feefert uncle rx?. re surg .ztv$ affegr are COM waftet&Qfr tn^fcterjj
Note' Re&ufts morn 20(32 hivt (iu« completed the vafecsateon process
m-Ammt&m&mm H»fio^^exp^isefcrEas^Es R = result rejected due to poor QC
NS- SacrpferfM S'jhnif&tf cxatorstay J - esSsrrated reswfl E = SifidE dtufeon w^$ cvte.«fe pysdeiuies
na* Hoc swabfted t>y Sab a* hos^ requested B - estjfrdt&cf re&jft CC = eonfcnusng caltbratson outside project and e&oraiory control ftnrts
l *=intBrtef©rtf p-'es snt U = be^ow Ehe d^ec&on Sifnrt, reporersg tern, shown
-------
Presumptive Remod / Cells Leachate Results
i
Cell
Sample ID
Dale Sampled
Silicon
Silver
Thallium
Vanadium
Zi nr.
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss
Total
Dim
Total
Diss
Tola!
ULSA
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CtP
CLP
(mg/L as
Si02)
(utf'L )
fug/t)
(ug/l)
fug/t)
(ugft-)
)
(ugA.)
lugt}
Cell 04
OK.E-TEOvN-0309
03/09/01
12,300 H
3 LJ
15 U UJ
5UR
25 U R
3 U
15 U
182 J
153 U
Cell 04
01GE-TEOWW1425
04/25/01
11.5 J
Nf
15 U UJ
fio
25 U R
NS
15 U
N3
149 U
Cell 04
01GE-TEOWM502
05/02/01
NS
2.8 8 U
2.1 U UJ
1.7 U UJ
1 7 U
2.4 U
24 U
6.2 8 U
2.6 8 U
Cell 04 S01GE-TKW4M517
05/17/01
21UR
3 B
1.7 U
i su
2.4 U
2.7 U
2 2 B U
2.8 B
CettW
01GE-TOM-W-0614
06/14/01
58.51
1.2 B U
0.84 B U
8 B
5 6 U
56 B U
17,8 8
4.7 6 U
48.6
Cell 04
O'GE-TECW-N-0716
07/16/01
NR
1.2 U
1.2 U
4 9 U R
4 9 U_R
5.9 8 U
3.7 B U
12,7 B J
17.3 B J
Cefl04
01GG-TE04-6-0716
07/18101
MR
1 2 U
1.2 U
4,9 U R
4.9 U R
8.2 8 U
2.6 B U
31.3 J
> J
Cell 04
01GE.TE044SMM28
0SSW1
0.84 6 y
0.73 0
SB.U
5.6 U.R
. ,4 8
;¦ ¦¦ ..
23 J
S5.9
Celt 04
016E-Ti04-N-H»1
1001/01
1 U..JU
1 U_R
4 u r
4 Oft
22.2 B J
23 ! E
5.S B_U
47 B
Cell 04
OIGE-TE04-CM001
10/01/01
vR
1 U JU
1 U, R
4 U R
4 0..R
23 B.J
2268
3 If
9.2 B
Cell 04
0I66-TEQ4-N-1O24
10/24*01
NK
1 u
1 U
5.2 U
5.2 U
10.3 8
11.4 &
9.5B..UJ
1.1 U ..UJ
Cell 04
61G&TE04-CM024
10/24®!
NR .
t u
1 u
5 2 U
5.2 U
10.8 B
11.5 6
3.3 S UJ
i.1 U UJ
Cell 04
02GE-TE04-HMI604
0WWQ2
11 u
11 u
55 0
56 U
17U
19.86
6 U
41.1 B
OeJI04
02SE-TE04-N4J815
¦' 08I1M2
1.2 U
1.2 U
4,8 U
4,9 U
13.6 8
14.3 B
4 B
1.2 U
Cell 04-
02GE-TECH-M-1022
10/22/02
NR
0.8 U
0.8 U
, ™
7U
5.9 B
1.5 U
12 e
18 B
tel. 07
|01GE«TEC7-N-042S
04/25/011 9JS,„JNS
«U UJ
N8'- •
100 U R
1*3
60 U
NS
260 B U
C-07
01 Sfef E07-M4JSJ2
O&OZK ' iNSS 2.1 U
2.1 U UJ
1.7 U UJ
1.7 U
2.4 U
24 U
69.6 J
2 3 B. UJ
CelS 0T
|01 SE«TE07-N-0£ 17
OS/17/01 f 4 2.1 U R
2.3 U
1,7 U
1.8 U
2.4 U
2,7 U
2.8 B U
12 U
Ceil 0?
feiee-'rEor-»«i*
OS/14J01 4.314 0.98 6. U
1 2B U
6.3 B
7 3 8.....U
0.9 U, UJ
0.SU
468
43.6
Cello?
|ofGE«fE07-N-07W
07/16»1|NR3i»lS 1 2 V
1.2 U
4.9 U R
6.1 B J
8,2 8 U
6.7 B_U
87 J
24.2 J
Ceil 07
id 1GE-T607-K-082S
08/28/01 |NP 1 ?B U
1.1 8 j
5,8 U
5.6U..R
5-7 B
13.4 S
28.1 .. J
47.7
Celt 07
C1GE-TE07-CMJ828
08/28/0 t|nK 6.82 SO
0.8 B
10.3 U
5.6 U.R
6.1 i
11.5 B
25 J
44,2
Cell 07
ptefe-TEor-N-iooi
10»«lfe 1 U JU
1U_K
4 U R
«LR
17 4 B,_ J
17.6 B
18.8 8 UJ
17.2 B
Colt 07
p1Gfe-TE07.N-1024
10/24/01 MB ' 1 U
Pfi- ^
5.2 U
NS
~ 10.3B
NS j j 4 B UJ
No
Cell 07
|02GE-T£07
-------
MT2 Ceits Luachate Results
Cell
S ample ID
Date
Sampled
pH Lab
Conductivity
Total Solids
Hardness
TurtKfily
Ammonia
NITRATE
NITRITE
P
ORTHOPHO
SPHATE
Cyanide
Lat>
Lab
Diss.
Susp.
Total
Lab
Total
Total
Total
Total
WAD
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
UtSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
CLP
ULSA
(su>
(umbos/cm @ 2.5
C)
{mg/L @ 180
C)
(mg/V. @
105 C>
(mg/L as
CaC03)
(NTU)
(mg/L as
N}
(mg/L as N)
(mg/L as P)
(ug-'U
(ug/L )
Cell 05
OiGE-TE05-N-030f
03/09/01
7,21 H
30,000 UI.1 H
110,000 H
160 _JH
932 H
1,4 H
5.1 H
20 UBHE_HUJ
167,000 HJ
8 1 8_J
NR ,
Cell 05
OlGE-TE06-CKnOS
03/09/01
NS .
NS . ..
NS
NS -
910 H
NS
5.3 H
NS
NS «¦
NS
NR
Cell 05
01 'SE-TE05-N-0 125
04/25/01
7,12
24,900 t J
85,000 „J
90
360 J
0,6 J
33 J
0.5 UBH UJ
7,920 H_Rj
4B J
NR
Celi 05
O1'SE-TEfi5-N-0j02
05/02/01
NS
NS
NT
«
NS
NS
w.
fofc
NS'.
0.7 u UJ
NR
Cell 05
01GE TE05-N-0317
05/17/01
7,18 J
21,(WO 1
55,030 _J
74
320
1.1 J
3
1 UBH
4,720 J
1.8 B
5 U
Celt 05
01 GE TE05-N-0314
06/14/01
6.92
28,800 1
74,000 _J
80. J
383
0.9
4.18
' U ¦
7,360
4 1 U
6 J UJ
Celi 05
O'iGE. TE05-N-0716
07/16/01
7
24,700 1
41,121
55 J
270
0.9 JU
2.1
0.25 UH R
NR
4.5 U UJ
10 U
Cefi 05
(1GE TE05-N-GB28
08/28/01
6.97
24,100 1
57,000 _ J 47 J
270
6.5
2.6
0.23 UH_J
NS
4 5 U UJ
10 U UJR
Cell 05
('1GE-7 E05-N-1001
10/01/01
7 25
21,000 1
51,316 H J
151 H JJ
300
34.8 J
0.7
0.65 H
NR
4.3 B. UJ
10 U UJ
Ce'i 05
01GF -TE05-, J-1024
10/24/01
7 03
20,8001
43,300
82 ...J
430
44
2.8
1.6 H
NR
3 B J
2
Dill 05
02GE-7 E05-rJJ)6CW
06/04/02
6.71
18000
20000
320
590
30.8
0 72
0.05 UH
NK
3.5 U
10 U
CellOS
0, GE-TEO5-I I-O015
08/15/02
6.98
17700 1
19000
20
530
2.24
0.078
0-05 U
NR
3 U
10 U
Celt 05
0;:GE-TE0 ;-N-1022
10/22/02
6.69
41.5 1
19000
96
660
11,2
0,091
0 12 U
NR
6.9 8
NS
Cell 11
01GE-TE1 i-N-0310
03/10/01
7.75 H
35.000 UM H
160,000 H
220 JH
94 H
2.9 H
3.3 H
1 UBH HUJ
25,000 HJ
4 B J
NR
Cell 11
01GS-TE11-N-042S
04/25/01
7,49
27,300 1 J
100,000 j
120
570 J
0.6 J
3.9 J
1 UBH UJ
11,400 H_ RJ
20.8 J
NR
Cell 11
01CE-TE11-N-0502
05/02/01
NS
MS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS, :-v,
NS
NS
4.7 B J
NS
Cell 11
01CE-rE11-N-0617
05/17/01
7.66 J
¦ 4001
58,000 _j
40
270
2 J
3
0.5 BH
6,220 J
5.3 B
5 U
Cell 11
01GE-TE11-FJ-0614
06/14/01
7.55
: ¦: 800 1
46,000 _J
12 J
289
1 3
2,74
1.2 UH UJ
5,220
4.1 U
6 J UJ
Celt 11
01GE-TE11-N-082S
08/28/01
8.25
27,0001
32,000 _J 47 J
140
3.5
0.07
0 23 UH J
NR
4,5 U UJ
10 U UJR
Cell 11
01GE-TE11-N-1001
10/01/01
7.82
28,000 1
34,624 H J
84 H JJ
190
8.1 J
0 54
0 12 UH
NR
6.1 8 UJ
2 J UJ
Cell 11
01GE-TE11-N-1024
10/24/01
7.53
24,S00 1
27,400
56 J
310
46
0.56
0,87 H
NR
2.9 B J
10 u
Cell 11
02GE-TE11 N Q6Q4
06/04/02
7.64
13400
13000
53
250
11 1
0.16
0.05 UH
NR
3,5 U
10 u.
Cell 11
02GE-TE11N '022
10/22/02
7.34
12500
12000
15
330
1.7
0,05 U
0,12 U
NR
7 i
m
s are lafeargs&ry and alter are COM Qu3itrfi©fs
fets* Results from 2002 ftav 2 *t;i cpftpte^ the vaSda&on process
MR* Analyse no* requested
MS- mjt su^rsB? -a to fafcosito y
NA- Moe analyst by &b sfthoogft reo jest*?d
i "snteftereifii pnsssrjl
H - expired before areryss
J - ©stmfed result
8 = es^massa resua
U s&efcwihe defee^on toril repeating Smst stajwn
R s resiift rejected due is peer QC
E " s$nal tfkition was ouBitSe guicteisrtes
CC £ ccminLsna GaS&ratten outside prefect and faboraiocy control Brmte
-------
MT Cells Leachate Results
Ceil
Sample 10
Date
Sampled
Aadny
Alkalinity
Bicarbonate
Carbonate
8rofTKte
CMonde
Fluoride
Sulfate
SufTtcte
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Tola!
Tola!
Total
LISA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
(mg/l as
CaCOS)
(mg/L as
CaCOJ)
(mg/t as
HC03)
{mg/l as
003)
(nxyD
fmgft,) |
img'l}
^ j
(m(A)
Ceil 05'
G1GE-TEOS-W-030f
03/0001
MMIH
430. JH
525..JH
5 U H
10 USE. H
"v.
2 UBE_H|
34*200 _ H!
1 U H
CMOS
01GE-TE05-D-0309
03mmi leg®§«s
NS;51s:^
NS
NSv1gsS.Pl
WS ifggltj
NS
1 U H
Cellos
01GE-TEOS-M-042S
04/2S01 740 _j| 9,570 J!
11.700 J
SUJjl
1 UB!
TBI
0.2 USf
27,300 _j|
Cell CSS
OtGE-TE&5-t+OS02
~
NS
'N'j MS I
~u ¦
Cellos
01GE-TE05-N-0517
i 05/17/01 870
7,400
9,028
'
10 us
13.1 B
4UB
22,000
1U
Cellos
016E-TE0S-N-0614
I 06/14)01 2.240
8,400
10,000
5 U
too
6
2 U
35,200
0,01 y
CcH OS
61GE-TE05-H-0716
07/1601
681
4.200
5.100
: s u
SU
; 9
1 U
18.921
1 U UJ
Cellos
01GE-TE05-N-0828
oasani
5 U
4.600
5.600 _R
5 U
1 UJJJ 17 J |
0.2 U
22,000
: 1U
CstlOS
Ot 6E-TE05-N-1001
1CVO1A01
812
4,098
5 U
SU
28 J
ti
' 0.2 U J
22,300'
1 ti 0j
Cd 05
01GS-TE05-N-1024
10/2401
734
2.700
3.300 R
SU R
1 u
13
: 0,2 u J
20.000
1 u
Cei 05" "
02G 6-TE05-N-0604
06/04102
310
200
244-
5 U
1 UH
5.8 H
0,2 UN
11000 H
0.15
cSVos
02Gc-T£ 05-N-081:i
08/15/02
170
SOT
74 f
o_u
1 u
14
0,2 U
180
0,01
CS 05
02GE-TI 05*1022
10/22/02
3801
14
17.>
5 U
1 u
9.5
0.2 U
11000
0-01 u
Cell 11
01 3E-TE11-N-C 310
03/10/01
3,500 . H
702 JH
356 _JH
5 U H
SUB H
20 B H
2 US H
26,400
1 U H
Cell 11
01 3E-TE11-N< 425
04/26/01
1.220 J
17.000 _J
20,700 J
SU UJ
1 UB
3 B
0,1 UB
26 100 J
1 U UJ
C-eti 11
01QE-TE1 ,-Nr htt achough requested
I >«M>M pre,®)
H e taking tame eapired beta® anatysts
J « esinBtss mm
0 ¦ iiimiiwil
U « Mowttc dWWxm mm, reporton fta* sNMn
R s reai* repOKJ dw to twor OC
E « serial «M>m sws euBiJtseuMsines
CC = strtmsng raitxatiori outside prqeci and laboratory at
-------
MT2 Cells -eaciote Results
Cell
Sample ID
Date
Sampled
Gaidytn
Magnesium
Sodium
Potassium
Sodium
Adsorption
Ratio
Diss.
Total
Total
Diss.
Toial
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss
Tola I
Calculated
CLP
ULSA
CLP
CLP
ULSA
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
(mg/L )
(mg/L )
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
W-1
(mg/L )
(mg/L )
(mg/L )
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
(unities*)
CeH05
G1GE-TE05-'-i- >309
03/09/01
32,1 J
93 H
7.11BJJ
72
170 H
16 6 B
469 _J
49,8 B
43,800 J
53,500
2 5
Cell 05
01GE-TE05-;>0309
Q3/D9/01
MS '
120 H
NS
ns .- ;
150 H
MS
NS
NS '
NS
NS
NS
CeflOS
01GE-TE05-W-0425
04 a 5/oi
NS
33 i
33.2
NS
67 j
68
NS
212 L
NS
44.400
4.8
Cell 05
01GE-TE05-N-0502
05/02/01
32
NS
31
81
MS r
79
210
206
39.800
39,900
4,5
Cell 35
01GE-TE J5-N-0517
05/17/01
27.2
34
25.6
52
57
49
155
144
28,900
27,700
3.9
Cell 05
01GE-TE )5-N-0614
06/14/01
15.1
33.4
21
25
73
33
264 J
440
24,800 J
3,270
14 0
Ce!105
01GE-TE05-N-0716
07/16/01
16.6 J
31.2
16.6 J
219 J
46
21.2 J
80
79
13.900 J
14,300 J
3.0
CellOS
01C.E-TE05-N-0I 28
0S/28/01
18.8 J
35
17.4 J
23 6 J
45
22.4 J
270 J
85
22,200
21.400
3.2
CeMOS
01GE-TEC 5-N-KOI
10/D1/01
32.5 J
32.2
30.2 J
32.5 J
54
53.9 _J
144
233 j
20,000
25,200 J
5.9
Cell 05
01GE- TEC5 N-1024
10/24/01
43.5
48
40 RJ
71
75
64.3 J
137
131
17.100 J
16,700 J
3.0
Cell 05
02GE-TE05-N-0604
06/04/02
80.1
84
91 8
93.6
92
62.7
58.7
46.7 6
6730
5910
1.1
Cell 05
02GE-TE05-N-Q815
08/15/02
MS v "<>V*
92
98,4
NS
74
88
NS
51.7
N3
7690
1.0
Cell 05
02GE TE05-N-1022
10/22/02
106
88
84.8
115
110
96.5
60.6
56.2
6310
7140
1.0
Cell 11
oige T';r-h j;310
03/10/01
52.1 J
140 H
102
48
140 H
109
571 j
572
67.900 J
106.000
9.4
Ce« 11
01GE-T ;11 -h-0425
04/25/01
NS
56 J
48,96
NS
105 J
83 4 B
NS
343
MS
53,200
6,9
Ml 11
013E-T~11-h'-0502
05/02/01
39.5
NS
34,8
81
NS
72
249
215
47.700
43,000
4,8
Ceil 11
01G[~:-TE11-N-0517
05/17/01
22.5
28
21.2
43
48
41
151
142
30,400
28,400
4.2
Cell 11
01GI;-TE11 -N-0614
06/14/01
12.8
32.2
16.7
18
51
23
192 J
271
178 _J
22,500
10,1
Cell 11
01Gi:-TE11-N-082B
08/28/01
10 J
16
10 2 J
13.7 J
25
13 J
75.4 J
72
12,400
11,800
3.5
Cell 11
0!G1:-TE11-N-1001
10/01/01
17.5 J
26,5
20.2 J
21.2 J
30
29.3 J
107 j
146
18,900 J
15.800
4 9
CeM 11
01GE-1E11-N-1024
10/24/01
27 3
41
27.6_RJ
35
50
33 J
94.
90
11,500 J
11.300 .J
2.7
Cell 11
02GE-VE11-N-0604
06/04/02
29.5 B
29
28.2 B
46.5 B
43
43.3 B
42-9 B
31.2 B
4710
4240
1.1
Ceii 11
02GE-TE11-N-1022
10/22/02
42.5
38
40,6
60.9
56
55.4
33 1
32.7
4510
4600
08
Hcm~ Guafefegrs befors urdsfscare am ^sactra^y «juaifier§ and after are CDkt valuation <$ue3rfte5
f<$ote Rg&uSs from 2002 l^av® ftot eofnjiteted lie validator pfDse&s
MR* Arefy$js i*jt rscpussted H ¦ ho^ig tetie espsned before analysis R s result rejected dye to poor QC
fc©» Sampie mi subrrtfttad to laboratory J =• estsrrgEgd resuft E = sera! dfeSufcon was c&Sssda guides!sf>e$
H&* No* anaiy^ad Oy lab slteygft requested B = esSmsSed rssigt CC - ceittswsg eaSbrabon outsit proged: aitd laboratory oontrcil irrits
i ssr^erterwH presert U = beliM the dei^ctk^ lint, repo?i&>Q fcmt sh®wn
-------
MT2 Cells Leac.ia ;e Results
Cell
Ssmple ID
Date
Sampled
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Diss,
Total
Diss,
Total
DISS.
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss,
Total
CIP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
!
mn)
(ug/L )
{utl'L )
(ugtf-)
(ug/t)
(ug'l )
(ug/L)
(uQl )
lug'L )
Ceil 05
01GE-TE0S-N-O3O9
03/09/01
124 B U
296 B U
6 U
120 U
104.000
11,400 J
32.4 B
20 U
3 8 B
20 U
Cell 05
? IG£ TE05-D-0309
osmm
MS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
Cell 05
01 G£ -T E05-N-0425
04/25/01
m :• .¦¦¦¦
oD U
MS
30 U
NS
54,800. .J
17,2 6 U
NS
5 U
Cell OS
C1GE-TE05-M-0502
05/02/01
99 8 B U
176 B U
20,9 U
20,9 U
54,000
53.300
25,5 B
9.6 B U
0.4 U
0,4 U
Coll 05
01GE TE05 N-05I7
05/17/01
534 U
79 4 8
20.9 U R
23 2 U
29,500
28,900
6,2 B U
848
0.4 U
0 44 U
CeilOS
oiGE-Teos-ti-oeM
06/14/01
5 U UJ
SU UJ
49 U UJ
4 9 U
47,900
68,500 J
5.5 6
7,4 B
0,1 u
0 1 u
CellOS
0 6E-Tf0;"»f^07ie
07/16/01
6.8 U UJ
6.8 U UJ
3 8 U UJ
42B UJ
22,500
22,400 .....j
3,8 B J
3,8 B J
0,2 y
0.2 U .UJ
Cell 05
O-iGc-TBK^N-0828
08/28/01
6.8 U
6.8 U
4,9 U
4i'u
32,500
30,200
34,5 8
5,8 B„J
0.1 U_J
0.1 U JU
Cell 05
01G£-f£65-N-1001
10/01/01
11 U UJ
55.3 e JU
3 U
3U UJ
24.400 j
24,500 .J
38.8 B J
4,9 B J
1.8 B J
2.5 8 JU
Celt 05
01 GE-TE05-N-1024
10/24/01
55 U
55 U UJ
3.7 U
3,7 U
25,700.. J
25,100
52.1 8
8 6 B J
0,4 U
0.4 U
Cell 05
02GS- rE05-M-O6O4
06/04/02
139 U
181 8
53 U
53 U
8340
7610
62 6 8
14 U
1 u
3.8 B
CellOS
02CiE-TE05-N-061S
08/15/02
NT.
122 B
nr.
3.9 U
N&
5130
NSvl'i- '
12.3 8
NS
0.26 8
CellOS
02GE-TE05-N-1022
10/22/02
28 U
28 U
2.5 B
2 7 B
10500
9310
SOB
9,1 8
0.4 U
1.1 B
Cell 11
01GE-TE11-N-0310
03/10/01
786
1,140 B U
6 U
120 U
80.500
77,000 _J
26 5 B U
20 U
4.3 B
20 U
Cell 11
OtGE-TEH-N-0425
04/25/01
NC
240 U
HS "^.V ¦
120 U
m,
73,900' J
N3 i
20 U
NS
20 U
C«U 11
01GE-TE1 t-N-0502
05/02/01
167 B U
181 B U
20.9 U
20.9 U
46,400
43,900
30.3 B
6.5 8 U
0,4 U
0,4 U
Cell 11
01GE-TE1 l-S 31?
05/17/01
103 8
59 3 U
23 2 U R
23 2 U
25.400
27,000
7.7 B U
6,9 B
0,44 U
0.44 U
Cell 11
01GE-TE11-N-0614
06/14/01
SU UJ
5U UJ
4.9 U UJ
4 9U
24,100
38,300 J
6 B
7,9 B
0.1 u
0 1 U
Ce« 11
C1Gr.-TF11-NH.828
08128/01
6 8 U
24,6 6 U
4.9 U
4.9 U
18.600
17,500
31.7 8
4.3 U UJ
0.1 U J
0.1 U JU
Cell 11
01GI.-TF 11-N-100
10/01/01
H U UJ
23.7 B JU
3 U
3 U
17,200 J
16,800... J
83.8 B j
59 B J
1 2B J
2B JU
¦Ceil 11
0IGE-TE 11-N-102-'
10/24/01
55 U
105 B UJ
3.7 U
3.7 U
16.000 J
16,200
47.9 8
10.2 B J
0.4 U
0,4 U
Cell 11
02GE-TE11 -N-0604
06/04/02
3® B
825 B
53 U
53 U
8650
7650
44 B
14 U
5,6 B
3.8 B
Cell 11
{©SE-TEi 1-N-1'J22
10/22/02
31 6
498
355
2 U
7140
7110
7%B
7.3 B
0.4 U
1.4 B
Nete R®s*3«ftn 2002 hav* not a*np»el»3 t»e vslMsOon oraasrf
MR- Amfyss no mjueswj M
NS-Sample not iu6>r*wi«lai»-3lory J>
Not analyst Ity lab aUxMOhiaqussMd B
I =rterf®renl prrtor IJ
9U3t#«5
K hcKfrn© SWsg ©spsfsd jnityto
SStSIKtod fBSutf
*tfgsylt
• Wow the daeetton mm. reportmfl Imi s»*»
R s res!* «i la j»« OC
E * senal dUMn was wtsrte ouideSnes
CC * conbNittg aitorafco ouMj® project ana kaboaMxy coowtmiB
-------
MTZ Cells Leachat? Results
Ceil
Sample SO
Date
Sampled
Cadmium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
Otss.
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss,
Total
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
!us>t)
{ug/L}
(ug/L)
(ug/L)
{ug/L}
(u&l )
(ug/L i
(ug/L )
(ug/L)
(ug/l)
(ug/L)
{ug/L )
Call 05
G1GE-TE05-N-0309
03/09/01
1 u
20 U
388
45.6 B1
25.3 B
40 U
141
83 5 B U
103 UJ
320 U
2 U
40 U
Cell 05
01GE-TE05-D-0309
03/09/01
MS
MS
NS
No
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
Cell 05
01G E-TE05-N -0425
04/25/01
MS
5 U
NS
236
NS ,
28 4 B
NS
104 B U
NS
80 U
NS .
10 U
CellOS
01GE-TE05-N-J502
05/02/01
499
386
328
308
31,1 B
27.8 B
99.8
99.4
92.1 B U
107 B U
3.2 U
3,2 U
Cell 05
01GE-TE05- J-1)517
05/17/01
342 _R
281
213
211
13.2 B
22.5 B
68,4
77 1
54.1 B U
86.1 B
1.6 U UJ
1.8 U
Cell 05
01GF-TE05-*! 0514
06/14/01
0.4 U_UJ
0,4 B
342
446
11.1 B
17.5 B
95.7
126
19,4 U
26 SB
3.4 U
1.3 U UJ
Cell 05
01GE-TE05-N0716
07/16/01
0.5 U_UJ
0.5 U J
160 J
155 _J
8.9 B J
8.4 0 J
60.6
61.8
22.2 U
22 2 U UJ
;7U R
27U UJ
Cell 05
01Gf--TE'S-N-O828
08/28/01
0.4 U J
0 4 U JU
178 J
182 J
8.1 B_J
7.8 B j
58,3
57,9
19 4 U
129
13 U UJ
1.3 U
Cell 05
01GE-TEJ5-N-1001
10/01/01
1 U J
1 u_ju
83 J
81.7 J
8.4 B J
6.9 B J
42,8
65.4 J
8 U UJ
70.1 B JU
2 U
2U UJ
CellOS
01GE-TE )5-N- 1C24
10/24/01
0.41 B U
0.46 B U
126
118
21.2 B
20.4 8
39.1
47,4
22. S U
22.6 U J
2.2 U
22U
Call 05
02f-iE-TE05-N-Oi«
06/04/02
S U
6 U
35.® B
20 B
33 B
268 B
10 U
22 2 8
145 U
312 B
17 U
17 U
CellOS
02(,E-TE05-N-0.,15
08/15/02
N5
0.6 U
NS
15,9
NS
35.7 B
NS
5,8 B
KG
95.9 B
NS '" :I
2.6 U
Cell 05
02G E -TEC6 -N-11J 22
10/22/02
2 B
0.75 B
38
30
54
42 B
20 B
32
18 U
20 B
1.5 U
1 5 U
Cefl 11
01GE-TE11-N-0310
03/10/01
29 B
20 U
699
755
41,4 B
111 B
316
405 B U
2® J
540 B U
2 U
40 U
Cell 11
C1GE-TE11-N-0425
04/25/01
NS
20U
No
325
NS
40 U
ns-v.v,' :
164 B U
NS
320 U
NS
40 U
Cell 11
01GE TE11-N-0S02
05/02/01
467
382
474
413.
27,6 B
20.8 B
268
233
118 U
179
4 U
3.2 U
Cell 11
01GE T El 1-N-C517
05/17/01
297 R
245
273
262
8.6 B
12.7 B
125
119
39,4 B U
65.9 8
4.4 U UJ
4.4 U
Cell 1i
01GE-T=1 I tl-f>514
06/14/01
0.4 U UJ
0.4 U
260
339
5.7 B J
9.5 B
966
138
19 4 U
19.4 U
1 3 U
1.3 U UJ
Celt 11
0-GE-TE1 l-N-0828
08/28/01
0.4 U J
0.4 U JU
127 J
127 J
07U UJ
0 7 U J
65.5
63 7
61.6 B
19 4 U UJ
1 3 U UJ
1,3 U
Cell 11
0'GE-TE1-.f,-1t)01
10/01/01
1 U J
1 U J
70.6 J
67.5 J
32B J
4,6 B J
51.8
54 7 JU
8.4 B UJ
58.1 B UJ
2 U
2 U
Ceil 11
O'GMEl -tvI024
10/24/01
0.4 U
0.71 B U
79.9
78.2
7 B
10.8 8
29.3
38,4
22.6 U
57.7 6 J
2.2 U
2 2 U
Cell 11
OI'G i-TEl 1-N-0504
06/04/02
49.4 B
6 U
44 B
22 B
I3 U
13 U
10 U
33.6 BJ
145 U
2390
17 U
17 U
Cell 11
02G' ;-TE 11 -N -1022
10/22/02
12 e
0.5 U
19
20
9.3 B
9,5 B
11 B
29
18 U
18 U
1.5 U
1.5 U
NcpocrOC
^Sarp0tefKi4 ^^watifjdiotsbcratDry J ««3SsT@fe&drBS4it E = serial eMu'SO?"* wars Dute&ie gisdesnes
NA 8 = efHrtoted ne&i? CC =* rafecaSors outesdia prefect arsd laboratory cerrtrci tonrets
I =ttterfereni present U = below &>e detection bmrt, re^Otrfig brrrt sttmn
-------
MT* Cells Leachate Results
Cell
Sample ID
Date
Sampled
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silicon
Diss
Tata;
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss,
Tots!
Total
CLP
CLP
CtP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
ULSA
(ug/l)
{ugil)
(ugfL)
iog/l)
(og/L)
(ug/t }
(ug/L )
(ug/t)
{mg/L as
SI02)
Ce# 05
016E-TE0S-N-0309
03/09W
2380
561
0.18 8 J
02
66 1
40 U
469
108 J
167 H
CeliOS
01GE-TEQ5-0-0309
03/09/01
NS < .
NS
NS
NS
MS
NS
No
NS'
NS
Call 05
01GE-TE0WW425
04QSG1
MS USUI
3080
MS . 1 015B
fNS W.a-
407 J
94,2 J
CMOS
C1GE-TE05-N-0502
0S/02/01
4090
3890
0,18 6
0.11 B
109
107
«5 J
400
Si OS
MGE-TB0WMB17
05/17/01
2030
1880
0 1 u
0,14 8
499
83.8
273
266
103
Cell 05
01GE-TE0WM1614
06/14/01
1800 J
2440'
0.15 B..J
0.22 J
46,7
.<*8
248
443 J
t'22.2
CeliOS
01Gg-TE05-NW1$
07/iaoi
956
969
0,1 u
0.1 u
26,6 B J
26.5 B_ J
235 J
239 J
NR
Call 05
01SE-TE05-N-D828
mmm
964
918
0!,28U
0 ? B U
28,2 B J
26 t B J
361
330 J
Mt
Cellos
0'GE*T£05*N*1001
10/01/01
m
955_J
0.12 B
0,22 J
28,5 B, J
27.9 6 J
289 J
289 4
NK
Ce#os
0*6€-TE05-K-1024
10/24/01
1870
1750
0 1 U UJ
0.1 U...UJ
55.6
-<0.4
31.8
308
NR
Cell®
02GS-TEO&-N-O6O4
08/04/02
2350
2090
0.2 U
02 U
52.1 B
56.5 8
97 9
218
NR
CeliOS
Q2ee-TE05-IW!5
08/15A52
NS . I930
« .....
0,1 u
NS
72,8
NP
28.4
NR
Ce#®
02C6-TEI&S-1022
10/22/02
2860| 2430
0.2 U
0 2 U
98
78
631 59
Nft
j>o
G
OH 11
Q1GE-TE1 l-N-0310
03/10/01
2110) 4710!
0 24 j| 0.25 j
67.1
130 B
m
511 , J
153 H
ceil 11
016E-TH1-N-0425
04/25/01
j 2.o7v
NT. ! 0 2S
NJi
79,4 8
w~'
364..., J
97,9 J
Gel! 11
016E-TE11-N-0S02
05/02/01
I 1070
951
0,24
0.22
51.5
.. *5.8
220 J
209
NR
OH 11
OtOE-TEl14KJ6-1?
06/17/01
tow
m
0,14 8
0,82.
27 B
36.3 B
<55
164
91
Cell 11
01GE-TE11-N-0614
0S/14A1
019 _J
802
0.14 B J
0.1 U UJ
16,6 B
24 7 B
144
204 J
80,2
Call 11
01GE-TH 1-N-QS28
08/28/01
54 3
89
0,18 8 U
0 19 B U
9.3 B J
8,3 B J
173
TO..J
Cell 11
01GE-TE11N>001
10/01/01
251
308
0.12 B
0 14 B
17 6 B.J
16.3 B J
158 J
144 _J
:nr
Ceil 11
01 GE-T6 11-N- *024
10/24/01
368
546
0.1 U UJ
0.1 U UJ
17,6 8
18.1 B
144
(42
NR
Cell 11
02Gl:-TE11-K-0604
06/04/02
321
465
0.2 U
0,2 U
: 14 U
14 U
40 U
: 40 u
NR
Celt 11
02GE-TC 11-M-10Z
10/22/02
471
511
0.2 U
0.2 U
I 14 8
14 B
65
I 64
; I
Mobs RbsuM tarn 2002 hava not coKeMedthtvaMMon process
NR. ArvXyui no'
MS- Sample rw wtmtao to tatwawy
MA- Men araly®! ty lab .iHtieujh reewesM
I mariraN fxaierif
4 raWafwi QuaWtes
> txttns two expired before waiyss
asiimassd result
i teto« he tMacHn kna, reporting limit shwm
R «tesuB iqecied due O boot QC
E » sami *1*00 mas outsac outteknes
CO « awnunj afttatmn twtsnle prtpct IM laboratory cm
-------
MI2 Cells Leachatc Results
Cell
Sarnp« ID
Date
Sampled
Silver
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
Diss.
Total
Diss
Total
Diss
Total
Diss.
Total
CiP
CLP
CLP
CIP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
{ugfi, )
wu
(ug/L)
{ug/L}
(ug/L)
(ug/L )
{ug/L )
(UQ/L)
CellOS
O'GE-TEQS-fJ'-GTO
03/09/01
6,3 B
60 U UJ
5 U R
100 U_R
144
BO U
217 J
195 B U
CellOS
0'iGE-TEQf-CMJ309
03/09/01
n:
ns ./¦
NS
pis
NS
NS
NS
NS
CellOS
0'G i-TEO: -N-0425
04/25/01
NS
15 U UJ
W5
25 U R
NS
110 B
NS
40.7 B U
Cell 05
O^GS-TEOS-N-OSOS
05/02/01
2.1 U
3.3 B J
45 3
65.2
90.9
91.2
64.5
11.5 B U
CellOS
01GE-TE05-N-0517
05/17/01
2 1 U R
8.4 B
28.6
25.7
59.7
68
4,4 B U
1.8 B
Cell 05
01C E-TE05-H-0614
06/14/01
0.7 U
0 7 U
5.6 U
6.8 B, U
588
75,5
16,1 B
37.9
CellOS
01G 05-N-0716
07/16/01
1.2 U
1.2 U
6.3 B J
11.6 1
29 2 B
27.1 8 J
14 1 B J
21.1 J
Ml 05
01G E S05-N-C-828
08/28/01
0 7 U
0 78 B
5.6 U
8,9 B J
28 B
29.5 B
34 7 J
27
Call 05
01GE-TE05-N-1001
10/01/01
3.1 B J
3 9 B J
6 4 B J
6.8 B J
14.7 B J
14.5 B J
907 B J
173 J
Cell 05
01GE-TE05-N-1Q24
10/24/01
1 U
1 U
10.1
7.1 8
11 B
10,4 0
32.4
20 B J
CellOS
02GE-TE05-N-0604
06/04/02
11 u
11 U
55 U
55 U
17 U
17 U
42 2 B
58.5 B
Ce'l 05
02GE-TE05-N-5815
08/15/Q2
NS
1.2 U
MS
4,9 U
NS
1 U
NS
12.5 B
Ce" 05
02GE-TE05-M 1022
10/22/02
1.3 B
0.8 U
7 U
8.8 B
5.1 B
1.5 U
171
77
Ce!' 11
01G!'-TE11-M-C310
03/10/01
9.5 B
60 U UJ
5.9 B J
100 U R
336
741 B
460 J
508 U
Cell 11
01GE .-7E11-N-042E
04/25/0'
NS
60II UJ
NS
100 U R
NS
214 B
MS
20 U
Ceil 11
01GL-TE 11-N-050I
05/02/01
4.2 8 U
2.1 U UJ
52.3
586
103
91
88.6
15.3 B
Ce'l 11
01GE-TE11-N-0517
05/17/01
2.3 U R
2,3 U
25
21.9 B
62.3
58.5
1 2 U
1.2 U
Cell 11
01GE-TE11-N-G'i14
06/14/01
0.7 U
0.7 U
5.6 U
5.6 U
49 B
63.1
17.8 8
37.3
Cell 11
01i;E-TE11-N-0'S28
08/28/01
0.7 U
0,7 U
10 6 U
5 6 U R
30.2 B
29.4 B
74 J
14.7 B UJ
Cell 11
01GE-TE 1-N-1 X>1
10/01/01
1.5 B J
1.9 B J
6 7 B J
SB J
19.1 B J
19 3 B
37
16,9 B
Cell 11
01GE-TE 1-N-1324
10/24/01
1 U
1 U
5.8 B
5.2 U
9.5 B
11.8 B
128B UJ
26.7 J
Cell 11
02GE TE11-N-0604
06/04/02
11 U
11 u
55 U
55 U
17 U
17 U
47.4 B
195 B
Cell 11
02GE-TE11-N-1022
10/22/02
0.8 U
0 8 U
7 U
7 U
2.8 B
1.5 U
142
27
Nofei- beftj/e unstefscofe laissraiofy quafcfiefs arid ate am CDM vafkia&Qffi qu@fefe&
Note; R&$a&$ from ;.'0D? hav<& not cornpteled JTte validation process
NR• Areif/M XX te* ut sled H = r^iSClfHl befi^arefySiS R » result rejected i&e to petjr GC
NS- Sarnple nc* sutmpttsd f£« L#*}f3!oty J =j gs&rsled r^soS E « sariad d&jtsori vrtss outeede guktefetes
NA* ^mlyzadtiytBbalfojgn»quesiiMi B = esEmated resuft CC = cafibratiafi oufcsxle ppofecJ and la&o^i-ory control kimte
I #«nftMfeFartt- pt-wmt U - be!®# tft© OefgetKXi hmrt, reporting ferret shoftn
-------
KEECO Cells l.e achate Results
ZE,
W
p
QRTHQPH
OSPHAIE
NITRATE
NITRITE
Conductivity
Turbidity
Ammonia
Total Sofcte
Cyanide
WAD
ULSA
ULSA
fffi9/l#
180 C)
{mg/L jjt
105 C)
(umhos/em©
25 C)
(mgrt- as
CaC03'
(mg/Las
Samme ID
(moil as N)
MS MS
QlGE-TEDt-N-0310
O1GE-TE0HJ-O310
NS NS
03/10®
ii
016t-TE01 -H-0425
Q1SE-7E01-O-O42S
04/25/01
2.800 I J
3.000 a
240
NS
1.950 J
0.8 J
0.08 UB.H UJ
05/02/01
03 1 B.fsjjj
-0M7
05(17/01
7 S7 j
2,WW J
0.05 UB.H
CttBQI
Cefl 01
0.05 UB,H
t- -061
06/14/01
10 U UJ
2.4 TO I
smj.
100 J
06/14/01
01GE-T601-N-0716
4.5 U UJ
4.5 U UJ
07/18/01
08/28/01
2.7® I
•TE01-IN-082S
010&TEtll«fl-l001
10 U UJR
2.910 I
0 52 H NR
48 H JJ
10 U UJ
OtGE-TEQI-M-1024
3.490
2.4 B J
10/24/01
10/22/02
Cell 01
02( it -Tt£01 - 1022
tell OS
Sli£>fe09-N-0310
03/1001
ms Ins |ns ns Jr
NS
NS
NS
NS ]
8 4 B..J|
NR
Cell 09
0 iGE-TEOO^N-0425
om&m
6.25] 6,760 i 3 110,000 j 4101
6.920 _J
7 2J
0.5 J'
0.05 UB,H_UJ
0,42 H Rj j
7.5 8 J]
MR ¦..??
C©B«
01GE-TBSWMS02
05/02/01
ns jus ]ns |n's |f
-6so4
OMWB
2.87 5190 5700 25000
3300
37900
r" ~T?
1 H
NFi
3.5 U|
10 u
Cefl 09
02I3E4BXS-IW815
mm
3-01 f 5200 J| 5800 920
3300
657
1.7
0.06 U
NR
3 U|
10 u
1 TWHV ¦WSMBWW'**" 'J tft «w^.» a) tfx BWSIW j tfipxmn « »•!« ®*«v
20S2 twt ft®! comt*ei»d ciracw
K».*l0lyM(«* 'KJU6 t«S
NS- not x) n> WWfiMory
NA- Mot araiyaal by ton aKhowjh rwfaesied
i =*ite«srent srreaot
H « hok»r>8 wte BtpfeiJ fcufcxa anatee
J sesamrtMnsuk
B = esWOWJ result
U * Wow th» deletion Inn reporting limt shown
R = result H8feo«t due to poor QC
£ s serial
-------
KEECO Cells Lea^hate Results
Cell
Sample ID
Date
Sampled
Ackjity
Alkalinity
BiCartonale
Carbonate
Bromide
Chloride
Fluoride
Sulfate
SuJf[dy
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
(mg/L as
CaCOS)
(mgA. as
CaC03)
(mg/L as
HC03)
(mg/L as
C03)
(mg/L)
{rrig/L}
(mg/L.)
{mg.t}
(mg/L)
Ceil 01
01G!
•TU01-N-0310
OS'10/01
NS
MS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS rO " ,,
NS ,
NS
Cell 01
0IGI.
-TE01-D-0310
03/10/01
MS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
Cell 01
01GC
-TE01 -N-0425
04/25/01
6_J
106 J
129 J
SU UJ
1 UB
18 B
20.1 B
1,990 J
1 U UJ
Cell 01 O1GE-TEQ1--D-0425
04/25/01
NS ' „w,
NS
NS
NS "
NS
NS
NT,
NS '
NS
Cell 01 01GETE01-N-0502
05/02/01
No
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
N!
NS
NS
Cell 01 jQ1GE-TE31 -K-0517
05/17/01
5 U
156
190
5 U
1 UB
17B
8.9 B,CC_J
2,050
1 U
Cell 01
O1GE-TE31-D-0517
05/17/01
5 U
152
185
5 U
1 UB
16.0 B
10.9 B,CC
1,960
1 u
Ce9 01
H1GE-TE01-N-0614
06/14/01
5 U
160
190
5 U
1 U
16
12
2,110
0.01 u
Cc-;[0i
uHie.TE.n-D-0614
06/14/01
5 U
160
190
5 U
1 u
16
10
2,150
001 u
Cell 01
01GE-TE01-N-0716
07/16/01
5 U
140
180
SU
1 u
10.9
12 3
2,059
1 U UJ
Cell 01
01GE-TE01-N-0828
08/23/01
su
170
210 JR
5 U
1 U UJ 16 J 11 J
2,000
1 u
Cell 01
01GE-TE01-N-1001
10/01/01
5 U
172
5 U
5 U
1 U UJ
20
10 7 J
1,810
1 U UJ
Ceil 01
01GE-TE01-N-1C24
10/24/01
SU
270
330 R
5 U R
1 U
22
23 J
2,500
1 u
Cell 01
02GE-TE01-N-0604
06/04/02
6300
5 U
SU
5 U
1 UH
21 H
0.31 H
9100 H
0 27
Cell 01
02GE-TE01-N-0815
08/15/02
1300
5 U
5 U
5 U
1 u
14
78
4900
0.09 U
Ceil 01
02GE-TE01- ^-1022
10'22/02
28000
5 U
5 U
5 U
1 u
11
140
32000
0 18 U
CeiiOS
01GE-TE09-N-0310
03'10/01
No
NS - '
NS _
NS
NS
NS
NS ¦ V<- ¦
NS ¦
NS
Ceil 09
01GE-TEO*i-N^j425
04/25/01
34 J
184 J
224 _J
5U UJ
1 UB
40.9 8
78.7 B
7,230 J
1 U UJ
Cell 09
QIGE-TEO.M', €502
05/02/01
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS ¦- VI ..
No
NS
NS
NS
Ce'i J9
01ClE-TE0!l-NO517
05/17/01
5 U
210
256
5 U
2U5
18,2 B
17.8 B,CC
1.970
1 u
Cell 09
01GE-TE09-N-0614
06/14/01
5 U
98
120
5 U
1 U
17
22.®
1,980
0.01 u
Cell 39
01GE-T E09-N-07 -6
07/16/01
5 U
130
160
5 U
1 U
11
9.4
1,609
1 U UJ
Cell 09
01GE-7 E09-D-07' 6
07/16/01
5 U
130
160
SU
1 U
12
9.8
1,842
1 U UJ
Cell 09
0' GE-TE09-NO828
08/28/01
5 U
130
160 R
5 U
1 U UJ 14 _J 16 . J
1,800
1 u
Cell 09
0 GE-TE.09-N-1001
10/01/01
5 U
178
SU
5 U
1 UJJJ
17
12
1,910
1 U UJ
Cell 09
0 :GE-Tri09-V-1024
10/24/01
5 U
170
200 R
5 U Ft
Tu
16
13 J
2,000
1 u
Cell 09
0:5G'i-TE09-N-0604
06/04/02
2200
5 U
5 U
5 U
1 un
S H
50 H
5100 H
0.18 U
Cell 09
02G iE-T E09-D-0604
06/04/02
1200
5 U
5 U
SU
1 UH
7.4 H
80 H
5200 H
0.45 U
Ceil 09
02 G E-TE09- SM)815
09/15/02
910
SU
5 U
5 U
1 u
12
160
4400
0 17
Guafcfer > beft-fg underscore afs Istxjra'ory qua^ws and a'ts-f arc COM vakJatMX* quattftens
Not®. R*2Su*t$ mom 2'JQ2 Have net qompteJtd tfie v#da?KX> process
MR- rot r@c:je:-sti$£i H - hokSng time expired before analysis
NS- Sample nor. .sutrfgH&g fo tobf rater/ J = esSrraisd result
uh- Nol analyst Eav &,} am>jgn requested B ~ es&naEod.ro&uR
J ^ftterfsreft pftsen* U - beks# She iJetectiort KirrvU, reporting lunrt shown
R = result recocted dus to pa& QC
E = seres d*ksbon ouisjcte Bu&SeiiFMis
GC = contBiisng cs^batEon outside prases sra! Eaboraiofy co
-------
KEECO Cells l.€achate Results
I
Date
Sampled
j
Cataum
Magnesium
Soditim
Potassium
Sodium
Adsorption
Ratio
Celt
Sample ID
Diss,
Total
Total
Diss.
Total
Total
Diss.
Total
DBS.
Total
Calculated
CLP
ULSA
CLP
CLP
ULSA
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
(mgft- )
{mfl'l )
(mgfl.)
(mg/L )
(mg/L )
{mg/L)
(mg/L J
(mg/L )
)
ffrXJ/L >
(umttess)
Celt 01
01GE-TE01-N-031Q
0i'10/01
486 J
NS. ,
616
174
NS
191
19.3 J
19 B
3 58 B J
16 6 3
02
Oil 01
01G£-.-1E01-D-G310
03/10/01
495 J
NS
5SS
179
NS
182
17,8 J
18 78
8-83 J
21.9 B
0 2
Celt 01
01GE-TE01 N-0425
04/25/01
NS
559 J
630
NS
135 J
154
NS '
12,8 8
NS
10 7 B
0.1
Celt 01
01GE-TB 1-0-0425
04/25/01
[vfe
NS
650
NS
Nft
161
NS
13 1 B
NT.
20 B
0.1
Cell 01
01GE-TEt«1-fW3»2
05/02/01
575
NS
560
129
125
14
12
13
13
0,1
Cei 01
01GE-TE(H-!I-0517
05/17/01
592
598
566
134
133
125
14
13
11.8 , R
11
0 1
Cell 01
013E-TE01-O-CS17
05/17/01
603
629
567
136
139
126
14
13
12
9
0,1
Cei 01
oiGE-reoi-N-«i4
06/14/01
476
537
589
137
143
185
16,1 J
22
5.5 J
8
0 2
Cell 01
01GE-fE01-0-0614
06/14«l
483
607
59
140
161
16
16-6 J
1,48 B
5.7 J
0.424 B
0,04
Cell 01
f 1GE-rE01-N-C716
07/16/01
442 J
605
489. J
96.7 J
120
105 „ J
18
19
18,3 J
20.2 J
0.2
Ceil 01
l '1GE-T E01-N-082
08/28/01
S16 J
550
515 J
100
111 J
24 J
24
34
0.3
Celt 01
01GE-TE01-K-1001
10/01/01
561 J
607
582 J
130 J
122
136 J
19
19
•
2d
0,2
Ceil 01
01CE-TE01-N-1024
10/24/01
707
650
596 RJ
255
240
224 J
32
27
42 S, J
39.5 J
0 2
Cell 01
02CE-TE01-N-0604
06/04/02
463
490
500
530
520
S37
15,4 B
5 73 B
7 05 B
8.09 B
0 1
Cell 01
02GF.-TE01-N-0815
08/15/02
320
550
322
323
480
324
8.72
8,7
15,4
15 4
0,1
Cell 01
02\3E-T€01-N-1022
10/22/02
300
520
303
410
680
375
0 884 B
9 45 U
221 8
2,87 8
0.0
Ceil 09
OKJE TE3J-U-0310
03/10/01
504 J
NS
533
105
NS
103
18.5 J
10 4 8
11.3 Jl S 49 B
02
Cell 09
01GE-TG34-N-0425
04/25/01
MS
807 j
541
NS
1.190 J
1.360
m
180
NS „-r, 31
0,9
Cell 09 i01GE-TEO»>-N-OS£J2
05/02/01
585
NS
584
166
NS
167
12
11
6 6
0.1
Cell 09 ' C GE-TK09-N-0517
05/17/01
569
581
530
173
163
160
13
12
8 7
0.1
Celt CO
0"GE-TE0^N-0614
06/14/01
4S9
536
521
128
137
152
17.4 J
22
9,42 J 12
0,2
Cei! 09
0:GE-TE06-N-0716
07/16/01
422 J
565
479 J
72,1 J
87
81 J
21
23
20,7 j 23,5 , J
0.3
Cell 09
0"GS-TE 09-0-0716
07/16/01
397 J
565
49? J
67,3 J
89
86 3 J
21
25
19.2 J 24,7 J
0 3
CeB 09
C1G ; -T E09-N-0828
oatts/Qt
517 J
560
493 J
128 J
120
120 J
24,6 J
23
251 23
0,2
Cell 09
0!Ge-TE09-N-1001
10*01/01
568 J
597
530 J
122 J
116
118 J
18.7 J
18
18.3 _J 19
0,2
Call 09
O1G=-TE09-N-1O24
10/24/01
633
580
636, RJ
130
130
142 J
23
23
27...J 28.6 J
02
OH09
02GE-TEQ9-N-0604
06/04/02
554
660
591
354
360
337
10.1 8
5,53 U
11 9 8 9.86 B
0,1
Cell 09
02G E -Tt 09-D-06 >1
06/04/02
563
700
569
373
370
313
10.7 B
5 53 U
114 B 8-83 B
0.1
Ce'! 09
02GE -T EG9- N-0315
06/15/02
300
510
312
349
500
m
32.3
33.9
14.61 13.9
0.3
Note Resute from 2002 t» e -« corefitetel the wrttiatm process
Nft- Araks® not requested
i<&- Sampte not stxnBed iu bosatory
ma- No* anatyajd tt *t> airnugn recjuesled
I onerterertptwiwi
H »txMm «« exjWM »®(w®arat»SB
J *
8 S
U • Mow the 4Mclian ML refwrimj tan*
R ¦ msu# pshaws dye to poof QC
E = mat **on w* outsHs Bt*sef»«s
CC = ogranuno raJWMWt m«s*Jb ptoieaami (a(»wiiairy control frms
-------
KEECO Cull;; Leachate Results
Oe«
.Sample ID
Date
Sampled
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Diss
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss.
ioSal
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
(ug/L)
.
64.6 8 J
MS
46 3 B U
NS -
10 u
Cell 01
0iGl:-TEX'1-N-0502
05/02/01
4,350
16,000
20.9 U UJ
20.9 U UJ
4.6 8 J
12.2
125 B
>7 B
1.4 B UJ
22 B UJ
Cell 01
01Gi;-TE01-N-05l7
05/17/01
166 B
6.650
23,2 U R
23,2 U UJ
7.6 B UJ
5.4 8 J
23.6 B
23,8 B
1 ? B UJ
0./5B U
Cell 01 01Gt;-TE01-D-0517
05/17/01
176 B
6,590
20,3 U_R
23.2 U
7.5 B UJ
7,7 8
24 1 B
23,5 B
1 B UJ
0.44 U
Cell 01 J01GSTE01-N-0614
06/14/01
4,130
9.710
4.9 U_UJ
4.9 U
7 1 B UJ
9.8 B UJ
196 B
26 9 B
1.9 8 UJ
2.5 B UJ
Cell 01 foiGH-TE01 'D-0614
06/14/01
4,230
952
4,9 U UJ
4.9 U
6,3 B UJ
35 U UJ
20 2 B
4.3 U
2.2 B UJ
0.58 B U
Ceil 01
01GE-TED1 -N-0716
07/16/01
1 03C
8.560
3,8 U UJ
3.8 U UJ
7.5 B UJ
12 UJ
22 8 B J
28 B J
1.6 B UJ
2.3 B UJ
Cell 01
I 1GE-TE11 N-0626
08/28/01
666.
1,870
4.9 U UJ
4,9 U
11.2 U
11.9 U
123 B
34 B J
0.93 B UJ
1,4 B J
Cell 01
O1GE-TE(l1-N-t0Oi
10/01/01
61.5 B JU
915 J
3 U UJ
3 U UJ
7 5 B J
8.8 B J
237 J
35.2 B J
1 U J
1 U UJ
CeilOt
01GE-TE01-M-1024
10/24/01
12,000
15,300 _J
3.7 U
3.7 U
22 2 J
20.4
170 B
49.1 B J
2.6 B U
2.8 B U
Cell 01
02GE-TE01-N-0604
06/04/02
598000
622000
53 U
53 U
1340
4050
111 B
42 3 B
78
79.2
Cell 01
02GE-TE01-N-0615
00/15/02
50400
50900
33 U
3 3 U
16.6
258
33,4 B
6.7 B
5,5
5.5
Cell 01
0;GE-TE01-N-1022
10/22/02
1620000
1710000
2 U
2 U
17300
18000
108 B
37 B
118
117
Cell 09
Q1GE-TE09-N-O3t0
03/10/01
216 LI
2,640
6 U
60 y
23 3
30 U
159 B
435 8 U
1 U
10 U
Cell 09
01GE-TE09-N-0425
04/25/01
NS
63,000
NS
30 U
26.y B J
NS • ¦¦
46,8 B U
NS
7 B
Cell 09
01GE-TE09-M-0502
05/02/01
23,400
74,900
20.9 U UJ
20.9 U UJ
9.4 B J
21 ...7
104 B
27.1 B
3.7 B UJ
7,5 U
Celi 09
01GE-TE09-N-0517
05/17/01
7,260
20,700
23 2 U R
23.2 U
6.3 B UJ
10.1 B
23.4 B
23,4 B
2.4 B UJ
2.2 B
Cell 09
~1GE-TEC1-11-0614
06/14/01
9,700
19.400
4.9 U UJ
4.9 U
3.5 U UJ
11.7 UJ
21.3 B
28 7 B
4.2 B UJ
3 1 B UJ
Cell 39
OIGE-TEftt-N-0716
07/16/01
1,700
5,600
38 U UJ
3.8 U UJ
7 8 UJ
7.8 B UJ
36.9 B J
29.4 B J
1.3 B UJ
1.2 B UJ
Cell 09
01GE-TEO1-DO716
07/16/01
1,660
5,770
4.7 B UJ
3.8 U UJ
9,1 B U
7,5 B UJ
35.1 B J
29.9 B J
1.3 B U
1,2 8 UJ
Cell 09
01G E-T EOM-N-0828
08/28/01
135 B
6,950
4.9 U UJ
4 9 U
10 6 U
14 U
16S B
30.8 B J
0.31 B J
1,3 B J
Cell 09
01tiE-l =09-N-1001
10/01*01
1,380
3,170 J
3U UJ
3 U UJ
12.1 J
15,8 J
188 B j
30.3 B J
1 U J
1.3 S JU
Cell 99
01GE-1 E09-N-10?,4
10/24/01
2.590
4,180 J
3.7 U
3.7 U
82B J
16.3
120 B
33.2 B J
0.8 8 U
0.98 B U
Celi 09
02G E -T E09- N-0S( >4
06/04/02
198000
407000
53 U
266 B
8 i B
24500
101 B
59,5 B
31.4 B
42 4 B
Celi 09
0 'iGE-T E.09-D- )604
06/04/02
214000
406000
53 U
237 B
72 6 B
25200
91.8 B
59.5 B
32.9 B
44.4 B
Cyll 00
0 iGE-TE:09-N- JS15
08/15*02
77700
76800
3.9 U
3.9 U
16.8
481
109 B
34.9 B
12.2
12.1
Hole Gua&focss bviors ucttet-Zitt src &bcjnafgry pualffes 3rxj after an? COM vafcda&on quaSfa?rs
Note' RwJts from 2u02 Have rK3t oonpfeglet} tie vasosection proc&ss
Nft- Analysis not requests# H = fto&Jng Ssma a^pered before amfy&s
NS- Sampfes not su&ritted to laboratory J = ©sferr^Sed resufi
NA- f4c* anaty ec &¦ tift c*a>oogh mourned 8 = «$Swr&tecr result
l =jnii3ffecifi! f fe&en.: U - betow th© detection Srrai reporting fens shewn
R = resuft reeded due to poor DC
E = s^sngf sSsJuteon wets ajfefde guNfeines
CC s contiriugng eaK^ton ouside prosed and teboratory contfel Isrrts
-------
KEECO Celts ieachate Resufts
Cell
¦
Sample 10
Date
Sa muted
Cadmium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
ton
Lead
Diss.
Total
Osss,
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss,
Total
Diss,
Total
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
(ug/L)
(U9"-)
tug/i-)
(ug/l)
(ug/t)
(ug/L)
(ug/L |
{ug/U
(ug/L)
(ug/L )
{ug?L i
(ug/L )
Ceil 01
OGE-TE01-N-0310
03/10/01
47.2
54.2
2 U
20 U
830
928
14!
772
18 U UJ
38,100
4 1
20 U
Cell 01
01GE-TE01-D-0310
03/10/01
49
5!,2
2 Li
20 U
879
890
155
767
16 U UJ
40,500
4.5 J
20 U
Ceil 01
01GE-TE01-N-0425
04/25/01
he
33.4
MS
20 U
N5
377
NS
6,380
59.300
NS -
20 U
Cell 01
01SK-TE01-&0425
04/25/01
ISC.
93
NT.
20U
MS
918
nr-i
5,100
NS
101,(B0
m
20 U
Cell 01
0IGE-TEQ1-N-0502
05/02/01
46.9
4/ 2
2.2 U
2.2 U UJ
541
512
269
1,080
2,520
25,400
0.8 U
1.5 8, U
Celt 01
01GE-TE01-N-OS17
~5/1 ?f'01
37.3 _R
40.9
2.4 U
2.4 U
511
500
39
412
18.6 U
9,900
0 89 U UJ
0.89 U
Cell 01
O'GE-TEOI -0-0517
05/17/01
38.9 R
406
2.2 U
2.4 U
521
500
35.8
413
34,2 8 U
10.000
0.8 U UJ
3.2 B
Cell 01
01GE-TEO1-N-O6I4
06/14/01
54 8
70.7
0.54 B...J
8 3 8
545
706
314
722
11,700
24,300
1 3U UJ
1.3 U UJ
CeW 01
O1GE-TEO1-D-0G14
06/14/01
57 5
6.2
2.2 B... J
0.98 8 U
562
82,7
322
62.9
12,100
1 '
5.8 UJ
1.3 U UJ
Cell 01
01GE-TEC' 1 • M-0718
07/16/01
36.7 J
43.1 J
9.5 8 J
6.6 B, J
311 J
350 J
71.7
800
22.2 U
19,000 J
2 7 U R
2 7 U UJ
Cell 01
01GE-TEC1-M-0628
08/28/01
23.6 „ J
25.1 _J
2.5 8. UJ
4.1 B J
192 J
196 J
24,6 8
62,5
1,710
4.010
1,3 U, UJ
1,3 U
CePOl
013E-TEC1-M-1001
10/01/01
11.1 J
11.6 J
1 U J
1 U UJ
95.5 _ J
99.3 , j
10.3 8
50 UJ
14 6 B Jli"
5.320 J
2U UJ
2U UJ
Cef. 01
013E-TE01-M-1024
10/24/01
955
87.7
1,6 B U
0.9 U
1.130
093
342
801
10.200
27,800 „ J
4.6
4.5 R
Cell 01
02GE-'"E01-N-0€04
06/04/02
490
494
151
157
4660
4740
22300
2410C
929000
1380000
17 U
17 U
Cell 01
02GE- "E01-N-C815
08/15/02
127
127
4.8 B
4 8 6
1350
1350
2510
2540
9720
15700
1 6 U
2,6 B
Cell 01
02GE-TEQ1 -N • 1022
10/22/02
903
1020
587
592| 4350
4270
56700
60200
7830000
8620000
415
5?'
Ceil 09
01GE-TE09-N -0310
03/10/01
11.9 J
H a
2 U
20 0
60
64.5 B
52 7
177 B U
818 J
1.800
2U UJ
20 U
CeiiOS
01G E-7 E 09-N-0425
04/25/01
NS
388
JJS
1CU
MS
4,500
NS
8,960
N IT-
283 B
NS
17.8 J
CettQS
£HGe-ie09-N-0502
05/02/01
120
124
2,2 U
10.1 B J
748
755
2,090
3,500
S',6 30
33,700
0.8 U
37 U
Cell 09
01GE-TE09-N-0517
05/17/01
69.9 R
64.1
2,4 U
2 4 U
470
431
276
743
144 U
7.040
0.89 U UJ
1.1 B
Ce'l 00
01GE-TE09-N-0614
06/14/01
65 4
74.8
O.S U UJ
8.1 B
333
453
836
1,350
12,400
19,700
2.9 B, UJ1
8.5 J
Cell 09
01OE -TE09-N-0718
07/16/01
27.7 _j
32.1 J
6 5 U UJ
7.6 8 J
154 J
175 J
127
383
333
5,400 ...J
2,7 U R
2 7 U UJ
CellOS
oi:;e-tkhm)7i$
07/16/01
26.1 J
34 J
6.5 U UJ
6. a B
144 J
183 J
127
434
452
8,390 J
$.3 J
27 U UJ
Cell 09
01GE-TE>»-N-0828
08/28/01
15.2 J
33.9 J
2.1 8 UJ
2.6 B J
213 J
22S J
23.8 8
332
156
7,320
1.8 8 J
'.3 U
Celt 09 01GE -T L O'.'-N-1001
10/01/01
27.4 J
26.4 J
1 U J
1 U M
125 J
123 J
52.2
170 J
396
6,250
2U UJ
2 U JJJ
Cell 09 :01GE-Tt,0&-N-1Q24
10/24/01
28 7
31
0.9 U
0.9 U
199
212
106
236
2,830
7,100..J
2.2 U
2 2U UJ
Ce# 09 jo; GE-TEOv-N-0604
06/04/02
442
506
27,9 8
998
2480
2370
12800
18600
127000
8670000
17 U
17 U
Cell 09 , 01 GE-T£~OS-D-0604
06/04/02
421
472
26.3 B
M1
2560
2200
13200
1&40Q
129000
8250000
17 U
17 U
CellOS iQIGE-TEOS-N-0815
08/15/02
289
235
7,8 8
26.3
2100
2100
5820
5780
12000
168000
6,4
6 1
Ncte. Qusarknfi a$©r %m CDM validation t&safilfcfs
We Rssute litra 2ftB haw not cou***®d the wiixlaiiom pKcsss
NR-AnMyAfloimquwM H • hafcing tans etprefl Wore analysis R = result rejected due to poor QC
h&San^noiisutiniiiMtoMiaalory J = «swal«<»* E«$enMdMoniiaseuM«suiMncti
NfrfWarntpettiwlab*^^ B = eswrated nswlt CC » othwso# eaHjratort twtskte projeet ami teKxawry contfot (trite
t
-------
KEECO C'HIs Leachate Results
Ceil
Saxf e ID
Date
Sampled
Manganese
Mercury
Nsckel
Selenium
Silicon
Diss.
Total
Diss
Tow I
Diss.
Total
Diss,
Total
Total
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
ULSA
(ug/L)
fug/L )
(ug'L)
(US/L)
(ug/l)
•
CeiiOS
01GE-T E09-N-0517
05/17/01
29,000
26,400
01 u
0 1 U
301 J
270
2.3 U UJ
2,3 U
33
Cell 09
01G E-T E09-N-0614
06/14/01
25.200 J
32.300
0.1 U UJ
0 1 U UJ
23/
286
4,4 U
4.4 U UJ
36 12
CellOS
01GE-TE09-N-0716
07/16/01
11,200
12.800
0.1 u
0.1 u
150 J
102 J
3 3 U R
3.3 5 R
NR
Cell 09
01GE-TE09-D-07I6
07/16/01
10,500
13,700
0 1 u
0.1 U
143 J
108 J
3.3 U R
3 3 U R
NR
CellOS
01G E-T EOS- N -0828
08/28/01
16,800
16,700
0.17 B U
0.13 B U
119 J
130 J
4.4 U
4.4 U
NR
CellOS
01GE-TE( 9 *>1-1001
10/01/01
15,500
15.600
0.1 u
0,1 U
82 J
75.3 J
3 U JR
3.6 B J
NR
CellOS
01 GE-TE( 9-^.1024
10/24/01
? 1,000
21,400
0 1 U UJ
0.1 0 UJ
111
114
79
7.2,
NF<
Cei OS
02 3E-TE19-N-0604
06/04/02
91900
87900
0.2 U
0,2 U
1520
1440
40 U
168
NR
Cel. OS
02 3E-TEG9-D-0C04
06/04/02
96900
81800
0.2 U
0.2 U
1580
1350
40 U
142
Nil
CellOS
02-3E- 'E09-N-OE 15
08/15/02
130000
128000
0.1 U
0,1 u
1220
1230
13.5
16.6
NR
Note Qusfefiers before i.fKSgusccwe 3f? iabofstefy qualifiers and are CW vgldaOEn qua-ffiers
Nte"«? Results frc«n 2tXKT faavo mo* cofnpSe«ed the vaNSatton process
NR- Anafy$& nc* re-qu^tud H = holding ferno expr©^ b#ori§ snalyiis
M$- Saffipfe nm suSjrsMfegai to tebprstofy J E ssurrsat&d
MA- Noi DrEifyit 3 by iaD ft^u&iJod B ~ esl&T&fgd ns&uit
I vw&m&smi prt&e^ U = frakw the d$e$c&an ismt,, reporting fmt shown
R s result fasted due to poor QC
E - saml dMson was outside guidelines
CC ee sisbrafcri prqed and .Mwatayo
-------
KEECO Cells Leach^te Results
Cell
&na*le ID
Dale
Sampled
Silver
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
Diss.
Total
Diss,
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CIP
CLP
CLP
CLP
(ug/L )
(ug/L )
iu§t)
(ug/L)
WL )
iug/i)
(ug/L)
(U0/L j
Cell 01
Q16E-Tf:0 "M-ffiHQ
03/10/01
3 U
30 U UJ
5 U R
50 U R
3 U
30 U
2.800 J
3,370
Call 01
01GE-TEO1-0-0310
03/10/01
3 U
30 U UJ
5 U R
SOU R
3 U
30 U
2.770 J
3,130
Cell 01
0 1 GE-TE01 -N-0425
04C5/01
m
30 U UJ
NR
50 U R
tc
30 U
NS
4.605
Cell 01
0" GE-TE01-D-042S
04/25/01
N'--
30 U UJ
SOU R
K,
30 0
Nt
4.700
Cell 01
01GE-TE01-N-QSG2
05/02/01
7.9 B UJ
256 J
1.7 U UJ
1.7 U
2,4 U
2.4 U
2,310
2,290
Cell 01
OIGi£-TE01-N-O517
05/17/01
6,9 6
S.1 B J
3JU
36 U UJ
2,7 U
2 7 U.UJ
1,430
1,820
Cell 01
OIGE-TE01-D-051?
05/17/01
4.2 B R
366
3,4 U
3.8 U
2,4 U
2-7 U
1.460
1.830
Celt 01
0IGU-TE01-N-06K
06/14/01
3.2 B.UJ
3.8 B .UJ
5.6 U UJ
5 G U_UJ
0.9 U UJ
0,9 U
1.900
2,560
Cell 01
01GIME01-D-0614
06/1401
3 4B, UJ
0,7 U
5.6 U UJ
5.6 U
0.9 U UJ
0,9 U
1,950
231
Cell 01
01GE-TE01-N-0716
07/16/01
1.2 U
1.2 U
4.9 U R
4,9 U R
1 U UJ
1 U UJ
1,230 _J
1,680 J
Cell 01
01 GE-TEO 1-N-0828
08/28/01
2 8 UJ
1.1 B J
5 6 U UJ
123
0,9 U
0 9 U
600 J
615
Cell 01
01GE-TE01-N-1001
10/01/01
1 U UJ
1 U ft
4 U RUJ
4 U RUJ
1 U J
1 u
333 J
274
Cell 01
01GE-TE01-M-1084
10/24/01
4.8 B
1,6 B
58.1
46,7
0.9 U UJ
0.9 U UJ
4,920
4.460 _J
Cell 01
02GE-TEC 1 VMD604
06/04/02
11 U
1! U
5SU
55 U
17 U
38 7 B
23400
23900
Cet> 01
02SE-TEC1-M-OB15
08/15/02
659
'3 8 0
4.1 U
4.1 0
1.1 u
1 1 U
4410
4420
Cell 01
02'3E-TED1-N-1022
10/22/02
40 U
40 U
232
220
101
88
13400
12900
©o
Cell 09
01GE- "E09-N-0310
03/10/01
3 U
30 U UJ
5 U R
50 U R
3 U
30 U
520 J
503 U
Cell 09
01G£-fEQ94MM25
04/25/01
NS
15 U UJ
NS
25 U R
MS
15 U
!*£>
28.600
CellOS
1 1GE-TE09-N-0502
05/02/01
6 2 B U
4.2 B J
1 7U UJ
1.7 U
2.4 U
3.3 B U
6,880
6,920
Cell 09
(.'1GE-TE09-IV-0517
05/17/01
6 6 B, R
2,3 U
1.9 U
3.BU
2.7 U
2.7 U
3,490
3,380
Ceii 09
(i 1GE-T E09-M-0614
06/14(1)1
2,4 8 UJ
1.9 B.UJ
5,6 UUJ
56U UJ
0,9 0 UJ
0.9 U
2,970
3,400
CellOS
01 GE-T E09-N-0716
07/16*01
1*2 U
12 U
4.9 U R
4.9 U R
1.2 B.UJ
1 U UJ
877 J
1.110 J
Cell 09
01GE-TE09-D-0716
07/16/01
1.2 U
1.2 U
4.9 U R
4.9 U R
1,4 B U
1 U UJ
830 _J
1.150 J
CellOS
01GF-TE09-NWJ828
08/28/01
1.4 8 UJ
1.1 B
5.6 U UJ
8,6 8 J
0.9 U
oiu
111 J
1,120
Ceil 09
G1UE-TE09-N-1001
10/01/01
1 U JU
! U R
4 U JUR
4 U JUR
1 U j
1 u
609
B88
CellOS
01iȣ-TE')9-H-1024
10/24/01
1 U UJ
1.4 8
22,1
19
0,9 U UJ
188
1.030
1,080,,J
Ceil OS
02GE-TE3 9-f Results taiJOOglnreiKtconipMMttievsMalioninmts
lift- Analysts not taear'. H-
NS-Santsemx iJttMWIwWwfalory J«
NA-Nos»»»iyit>l%a»8WwushnsQuesie
-------
UNR Cells Leac.hate Results
Cell
Sample ID
Date
Sampled
pH Lab
Conductivity
Total Solids
Hardness
Turbidity
Ammonia
NITRATE
NITRITE
p
ORTHOPHOSP
HATE
Cyanide
tab
Lab
Diss,
Susp.
Total
Lab
Tola!
Total
Total
Total
WAD
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
ULSA
CLP
ULSA
(su)
(umhos/cm @
25 C>
(mg/L @ 180
C)
(mg/L ffl
105 C)
Img/L as
CaC03)
(NTU)
(mg/L as
NJ
{mg/L as N)
(mg/L as P]
lug ft)
lug/1 )
Cell 03
01GE-TE03-N-0309
03/09/01
6.56 H
2,480 1 H
2,300 H
"X
—>
o
o
1,480 H
19.4 H
0.4 H
3,1 B.H HJ
0.05 HJ
37,3 J
NR ¦, "v
Cell 03
Q1GE-TE0IHW3309
03©9/01
6.68 _H
2,7501 H
2,300 _H
47 H
19.4 H
2,99 B.H HJ
0.1 HJ
NS
NR .
Cell 03
O1GE-TE03-fl-Q425
04/2 V01
7.89
2,190 i J
2,400 _J
4 U
1.570 J
0.2 J
1 7 j
0 13 B.H J
0 04H RJ
3.2 8
NR
Cell 03
01GE-TE03-N-0502
05/02/01
NS
NS ' \
NS
NS
NS . ,• ¦,
NS
NS .
NS
NS .
0.7 U UJ
NS
CellOS
01GE-TE03-D-0502
05/02/01
m i;~yk.
NS
NS
NS
No
NS
NS
NS
NS
0 7 U UJ
NS
Cell 03
01GE-TE03-N-0517
05/17/01
7.68 J
2,300 I
2,300 __J
10
1,550
2 J
2
0.05 U8.H
0.02 J
2.2 B UJ
SU
Cell 03
01GE-1 E03-N-06 4
06/14/01
7.92
2,250 I
2,400 _J
10 J
1,461
1,2
1.51
0,05 UH
0.02
4.9 B U
10 U UJ
Cell 03
01GE-7E03-N0716
07/16/01
7.29
2,620 i
2,237
1' J
1,600
1 JU
0.88
0.78 H J
4,5 U UJ
10 u
Cell 03
0IGE-7 [£03-M 3828
08/28/01
6.53
3,430 f
2.800 J 33 J
1,700
4,2 J
0.61
0,39 H i
NH
4 5U UJ
10 U UJR
Cell 03
0IGE-TE03-N-1001
10/01/01
7.48
2,8901
2,872 HJ
38 M JJ
1,900
15.2 J
1.18
0 05 UH
NH
1 U UJ
10 U UJ
Cell 03
0 IGE-Tlz03-D-1001
10/01/01
7.53
3,2201
2,802 H J
64 H JJ
1,800
26.1 J
1 36
0 05 UH
NR
5.2 B UJ
10 U UJ
Cell 03
01G£-Tl;03-N-1024
10/24/01
6,8
3,060
2,860
T2 j
1,800
1.1
0,8a
1.7 H
m
5.6 B
2
Cell 03
01G;-TE03-D-1024
10/24/01
7.32
3,260
2.930
11 . J
1.900
1,2
0.95
1.9 H
NR
6,3 B
3
Ceil 03 02CE-TE03-N-0604
06/04/02
6.8
2730
2600
71
1800
56
0.05 U
3 H
NH
3,5 U
10 U
Cell 03 02GE TE03-00604
06/04/02
7.99
2840
2700
51
1700
5.65
0,057
0 57 H
NR
3.SU
10 u
Cell 03
02GE-TE03-N-0815
08/15/02
8,48
2900
2600
6
1700
1.14
0 071
0.05 U
NR
3 U
10 u
Cell 03
02GE TECi;-r- -1022
10/22/02
7.16
3500
3100
110
2200
14.2
0.11
0.9
NR
6.5 8
NS
CellOS
31GE-TE ]£ N-0425
04/25/01
7.49
2,480 1 J
2 400 J
6
1,410 _J
0.5 J
1,4 j
0.05 UB.H UJ
0.05 H RJ
3 2 B J
NR
Cell 08
J13E-TEBN-05C2
05/02/01
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS .
0.7 U UJ
NS
Cell OS
}1 3E-TE08-N-1001
10/01/01
7,76
2,930 1
3,074 H J
12 H JJ
2,000
0.9 J
0,4
2.2 H
NR
5,9 B UJ
10 u UJ
Cell 08'
Or 3E-TE08-N-0604
06/04/02
8.61
2270
2500
59
1600
1,83
0,05 U
1.4 H
NR
3,5 U
10 u
ceuoe
0:GE-TE08-N-0815
08/1 5'02
No
N5
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
Celt 08
01GE -TE08-N-1022
10/22/02
8.37
3160
3000
21W
1.58
0,16
: i
NR
6.8 B
NS
Mot®. G*jgM©r$ yrfcdterscor® ar$ emafcfters and 3fi©r are COM vstatetCKi fjuaSfi^$
MfX© Resutes from a>32 have no( compter 9*e vsfeds&om proofs
NR- m ra$ue§ued HR = rasuH: feg®cM du$ to poor QC
NS-S^r^nocsubatuedtoiMOQiafv J * es&mafed resuft E -swiailvtKnw&ou°iJiilelines
NA- No* ,-inaty7«5 Qylafc afttouqft requested B » e?Eifn?fed naswit CC = conliAuing caSfrafcen ou&ide preyed arcd tebcsfa&Ctfy control fori©
I present U * b@tow the d€*eeS*ori lint repestrtg imrt shorn
-------
UNR Cells Leacru
Gen 03
016E-TECB*N-03O9
oamm
5 U H
14 H
17 JH
5 U H
1 UB H
35 1 B H
0.6 B H
1,710 H
1 U H
til 03
01GE-TEOJHWJ309
mmiiioi
5 U H
30 H
37 H
SU H
1 UB H
3S.3 B H
0.7 B_H
1,760 H
NS
Cell oa '
01GE-TE03-N-042S
04/2801
SU J
38 _J
46 J
SU UJ
1 UB
2 j B
o.2 ue
1.330 J
1 U UJ
OS 03
01GE-7E03-N-0502
mnmi
NS
NS »:
ns
MS: c-"5%2
NS
NS
NS
NS V#
m :
Cell 03
01GE-TE034WJS02
0S02/01
MS
UL,
NS
MS
NS
Nf.
n:,
NS
N6
Cell 03
01Ce-TE0:-"K>51
05/17/01
5 U
74
5
5 U
1 UB
39 Bl 0.4 B.CC
1.680
1 u
Cell 03
O1GE-TEOS-H-0614
06/14/01
5 U
48
a
5 U
1 U
301 0.5 UJ
1.790
0.01 u
Cell 03
016£-T£ 00-N-07 16
07/16rt)1
SO
62
76
5 U
1 U
34| 0.3
1,826
1 U UJ
Ce« 03
D1GE-TE 03-N-0828
08/28/01
5 U
36
44 JR
SU
1 U UJ 25 J 0 5 J
2,000
1 u
Cell 03
oi3e-teo3-n-iooi
10/01/01
5 U
92
5 U
50
1 U UJ
40
0.6 J
1.820
to UJ
Ceil 03
01GE-TE03-0-1001
io/oi/oi
5 U
92
5 U
5 U
1 U UJ
40
0,4 j
1.910
1 U UJ
Cell 03
01GE-TE03-N-1024
10/24/01
34
66
81 _R
6 U R
i u
25
0.81 J
2.100
1 u
Cell 03
0 'GE-TEO3-0-1O24
10S4«1
5 U
08
83 R
5 U R
1 U
28
0,47 J
2.000
1 u
Cell 03
02 GE-T E03-W-0604
06/044)2
5 U
48
58.5
5 U
1 UH
19 H
0 2 UH
15000 H
0.03
GstfOS
Q2GE-TE03-D-0604
06/04/02
5 U
60
73 1
5 U
1 UH
18 H
0.2 UH
18000 H
0.03
Ceil 03
0;>GE-TE03-N-08^
08/1&02
s u
28
34,1
5U
1 U
29
2
1900
Q.011
Call 03
Q26E-TE034M022
10122102
SU
94
115
1 u
20
1.3
2100'
0.01 U
O
1U UJ
CeBQa 016E-
Ceil 08 010E-
su i y uj
5 U
1 0 UJ
1700 H
0,2 OH
06AM/0
got u
NS
02SE-TE08.N-0S1S
c««oe
Cell 08
10/22/02
02GB-TEW-fi-1022
0.01 u
3 U
nam: QuaMais More untmcont see tatxraWy qiaHWn tna afigr are COM vtftWon
Mo« R«tuR(tam2MaMMi wont|iMadti««aid8itan)]ioceH
i 1. « ... .
w* Anai^sis no- fQQii6$ioQ
US- Sampli nol UCrnMd to tKxratay
NA- Wwatpsrf «y MuMmtgh tcquMtotf
1 *»Wsrfar»fi pnfln
H =h©idf^
j • etarranw) amui
B~#§sfrrat©tff^$yh
If = ixkm the tWecaofi Bint, reporting Inri Stowo
R «res* regeaetl due » poor QC
e • serai (jMan was omsitte smJstsm
CC - sotmmm aMnHan autsm iwjed and toSaaiory conn
-------
UNR C&lls ^cachcte Results
Ceil
Ssmpte ID
Date
Sampled
Caiou™
Magnesium
Sodium
Potassium
Sodium
Adso/ptiori
R^tHJ
Diss.
Total
Total
Diss.
Total
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
Calculated
CLP
ULSA
CLP
CLP
ULSA
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
(mg/L )
(mg/L )
{mg/L )
(mg/L )
(mg/L )
(mg/L )
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
(mg/L }
(mg/L )
(unit less)
Cel1 03
0'Gfc-T£03-N-0309
03/09'01
492 J
505 H
519
55
54 H
55
152 J
150
116 J
i43
1.7
Cell 03
0 "GE-TE03-D-0309
03/09/01
re;
NS
MS:!?;-..-
NS
NT.
NS
NS
MS . "v
n:
ns
NS
Cel! 03
OiGE-TE03-N-O4:'5
04/25/01
ns
542 J
512 J
NS
53 J
38
NS
114 J
NS
81
1.3
Cell 03
01GE-TE03-N-0502
05/02/01
554
Kis
576
17
NS
18
103
104
54
58
1.2
Cell 03
01GE-TE03-WJ502
05/02/01
552
NS
562
I
NS
17
101
I :.-
54
55
1 2
Cell 03
01GE-TE0 J-N-0517
05.'17*01
570
588
538
18
19
17
106 _J
100
62
58
1.2
Cell 03
01GE-TED J-N-0614
06/14/01
482
528
531
29
35
34
106,. J
129
83 J
207
1.5
Cell 03
01GE-TE03-N-0716
07/16/01
464 J
610
542 J
17.3 J
22
20.1 J
78
111
58.9 J
70.5 J
1.3
Cel! 03
01GE-TE03- N-0628
08/20/01
550 J
640
540 J
21.8 J
24)
21.7 J
119 J
112
107
90
1.3
Cell 03
01GE-"E03-N-1I»1
10/01/01
599 J
704
717 J
23 7 J
25
25.7 J
97
88
71
67
0,9
Cell 03
01GE-1E03-D-10O1
10/01/01
709 J
699
689. J
24 J
24
24.8 J
99
84 J
76
64 J
0.9
Cell 03
OIGE-TF.03-N-1024
10/24/01
689
650
665 RJ
50
46
49.9 J
120
115
108 J
107 J
1.2
Cell 03
OIGE-TE03-D 1024
10/24/01
673
570
672 RJ
50
45
45.2 J
118
107
107 J
100 _J
1.1
Cell 03
G2GE-TE03-N O504
06 .'04/0 2
533
580
542
75 8
78
75 1
60.5
57.2
43 8 B
44.3 B
1.6
Cell 03
Q2GE-T E03-D0604
06/04/02
546
550
555
77.4
79
78.6
60
55
43.6 B
43,4 8
0,6
Cell 03
0 2G E-TEO 3-N-0615
08/15/02
572
600
555
47 8
45
46.2
79.1
75.4
63.3
59,4
0.9
Cell 03
02GE-TE03-N-1022
10/22/02
488
660
527
123
130
132
84.3
93 6
85.5
113
0.9
Cel! 08
OK E TEOC-N-0425
04/25/01
NS
483 J
493
NS
50 J
40
NS «>-:
107
MS
98
1,2
CellOS
01CE-TE«-*I-0502
05/02/01
556
NS
522
49
NG
46
82.
77
86
82
0,9
on 08
01G E -TEttt-N-1001
10/01/01
539 J
667
567 J
60.6 J
70
67.7 J
98
103
88
77
1.1
Cell 08
)2GE-TE06-N-0604
06/04/02
5?2
520
527
60.5
62
63
44.3 B
42 7 B
44 2 R
40 8
05
Celt 08
]2 3E-TE 38-N-0815
0S/15/Q2
100
NS
NS
89.3
NS
NS
53.1
NS
8050
MS
0.9
CellOS
02 3E-TE J8-N-1022
10/22/02
1040
.-
788
111
86
100
89,4
86.4
105
103
0,7
CkiaJrfifxs tx lorn unt> f5«x
Nd@ Rebuffs freer 2002 ha-/© nof comp*#?^ the
Nft- Aftslysis not i^asted
NS» Ssmpte do? sybnittad- to laborestxy
NA- Mot analyzpd Gy tab c'ifrjough requested
! ssiterfefi^ preserrt
$re latjofatery qualifiers ami sSffiar arc C
•action procgso
h * hoidtft@ tsn© gspared before analysis
j=esferngfiedpesgst
B = es^-^tesE? resiic
U - below the tte\z£&Qn bmrt, reporting fsnt shown
R * wuft rejected due to pcor QC
E - seme eMuton ws$ eu®i
-------
UNR Ceils Leachate Results
Gel!
Sample ID
Date
Sampled
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Banum
Beryllium
Diss
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
Dtss
Total
Diss;
Total
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CIP
CLP
CLP
CIP
{ug/L
{ug/L >
{ug/L
iug-'L)
{ug/l
(ug/L ]
(ug/l
(ug/L
(ug/L!
(ugiL )
Call 03
MGE-FE03-N-0309
03/09/01
144 B U
120 U
6 U
60 U
22.8
36.4 B J
163 B
3a 1 B U
1 U
10 U
Cell 03
t < 1GE-TE03-D-0309
03/09/01
MS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
Nli
NS
NS
NS
Celt 03
CI1GE-TE03-N-O425
04/25/01
MS
12 U
NS
6 U
NS
9,8 B
NS
28 9 B
NS
' U
Cell 03
010E-TE03-IV-0502
05/02/01
53.4 U
S3.4 U
20.9 U UJ
20 9 U UJ
11.6
10 3 B J
121 B
26 8
0.4 U
0 4 u
Cell 03
01GE-TE03-D-0502
OS'02/01
53 4 U
53.4 U
20 9 U
20 9 U UJ
12
8 1 B J
94.4 B
25 B
0.4 U
C.4 U U
Celt 03
01GE-TE03-N-OS17
05/17/01
S3.4 U
59 3 U UJ
20,9 U R
23 2 U UJ
12.7
129
31,3 B
25 5 B
0.4 U
0,44 U
Coll 03
01 jf;'-TE0.3-N-0614
06/14/01
428 B U
52.1 B_J
4,9 U UJ
4.9 U
10.9 UJ
23>~ J
33.1 8
37.3 B
1 2 8_UJ
0.46 B UJ
Cell 03
01Gt"-TE0:J-N-O?16
07/16/01
179 B
163 B
38 U UJ
3 8 U UJ
11.3 UJ
7,5 B UJ
31.6 B_J
36.6 B J
0 59 B UJ
0,47 B UJ
Cell 03
01GE -TE33-N-0828
08 '28/01
538 B U
93 1 B
4.0 U UJ
4,9 U
9 B U
14.6 U
135 B
44.6 6 J
0 34B UJ
0.43 B JU
C«n 03
01GE -TE3VN-1001
10/01/01
11 U UJ
29 B UJ
3U UJ
311 UJ
9.8 B J
11.8 J
213 J
39 4 B.. J
1 U J
1 UJJJ
Ceti03 01G£-T["0.t-D-100T
10/01/01
1IUUU
53.4 B UJ
311 UJ
3 U UJ
17.2. J
13.6 J
89 1 8_J
65 7 8 J
1 U J
1 U UJ
Celt 03 0 GE-Tf ON-1024
10/24/01
55 U
293 J
3.7 U
3 7 U
8,5 B. J
217
155 B
54 4 B J
0.4 U
0,4 U
Celt 03
0 GE-TE03-D-1024
10/24/01
55 U
88,4 B UJ
3,7 U
3.7 U
8,1 B J
15,5
95.5 B
51 2 B J
0.4 U
0.4 U
Cell 03
0;'GE-TE03-N-0604
06/04/02
139 U
139 U
53 U
53 U
21 U
21 U
148 B
14 U
2 B
1.7 B
Cell 03
C:'GE-TE03-D-0604
06/04/02
139 U
139 U
53 0
53 U
21 U
21 U
90.6 6
30,9 B
1 U
1.6 B
Cell 03
C2GME03-N-03I5
08/15/02
268
224
3.9 U
3.9 U
9.5 8
11.3
266
25,6 B
0 2 U
0.2 U
Celt 03
02GME03-N-1022
10/22/02
48 B
679
2 U
2 U
26 U
15
116 B
55 B
0,51 B
1 4 B
Cetioe
01GE-TE08-M-0425
04/25/01
NS
124 B U
NS
30 U
NS
23 B J
NS
41,4 B U
51)
Cell 08
0IGE-TE08-N-O532
05/02/01
53.4 U
53.4 U
20.9 U
20 9 U
7.6 B J
10,5 B
104 8
34,6 B
0 4 U
0,4 U
Celt OS
01GE-TE08 N-1001
10/01/01
11 11 UJ
116 B JU
3U UJ
3U UJ
6 2 B J
5.9 B J
141 B J
44.5 B J
1 U J
* U JU
Celt OS
02GE-T& «-N-0604
06/04/02
512 B
242 B
53 U
53 U
21 B
22.4 B
275 0
14 U
4,8 B
1.8 B
Cel. 03
02GE-TEO$-'K)315
08/15/02
170 8
NS
3.9 U
NS
5220
NS
72,2 B
NS
0.22 B
NS
Cd 08
02GE-TEOE-IH022
10/22/02
28 U
28 U
2 U
2 U
9.1 B
2.6 U
167 B
468
0.41 B
1 6 B
Not? GuaSfjecs btfore irtderscore are laeorsiory qwa&fieirs and aft©- sr® COM vaWabon quaWk*rs
Note Results togcn 2GCS.? have rajt co-'ipfieted twt validation process
NR* Analyse not reque
-------
UNR Ceils Leachat e Results
Get
Sample ID
Date
Sanftpled
Cadmium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss,.
Total
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
fug/t)
-------
UNR Cell; Leachate Results
1
Cell
Sa-n«'.le ID
Date
Samnied
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Nckel
Selenium
Diss,
Total
Diss
Total
Diss,
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss.
TOtS!
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
Uig'L
(ugt
aur x'n requested
I =»fert«wa p«w«samMiwvk
B-®stroi«j muK
U • wto* tie ttetscton Sn*. reptttino toft sh»m
R » «si* repass) due lo po« QC
£ = sanai (Uutxxi «3» outass Bwdeims
CC « contmu«8 rates**) rjgiK protect
and tataatwy conned turns
-------
UNR Celis Le achate Results
Cell
Sample ID
Dale
Sampled
Silicon
Silver
Thallium'
Vanadium
Zinc
Total
Diss.
Total
Diss
Total
Dibs.
Total
Diss.
Total
ULSA
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
CLP
(mg/L 3S
SiG2)
(ug/L)
(ug/L 1
(ugfl. )
(ug/L)
(uft'f- >
(ug/L )
(ug/L )
(ufl'L )
Cell 03
01C-E TE03-N-0309
03/09/01
14.3 H
3 U
30 U UJ
5 U R
50 U R
3 U
30 U
160 J
29.9 B U
Cell 03
01GE TEOr-D-0309
03/09/01
NS
NS
NS
NS „
NS
NS '
NS
NS , ;""
NS
Ceil 03
01GE TEO:-A-0425
04/25/01
13.1 „J
NS
3 U
5 U
NS w.
3 U
N£
3.1 B U
Cell 03
)1GE TE0S-N-O502
05/02/01
NS
2.1 U
2,1 U UJ
1.7 U UJ
3.2 B U
'4U
2.4 U
142 J
35.6 J
Celt 03
)1GE-TE J3-0-0502
05/02/01
NS
2.1 U
2.1 U UJ
1 7 U UJ
3 B U
2.4 U
2 4 U
30,7
2.3 B UJ
Cell 03
J)3E-TE1J-H-0517
05/17/01
17
2.1 U
2.3 U UJ
2 3 B
2,5 B J
2.4 U U
2 7 U UJ
7 2 B
88 B U
Cell 03
11 3E-TEQ3-N-0614
06/14/01
17.42
0.86 B UJ
0.94 B UJ
5 6 U UJ
5 6 U
09 U UJ
1 B UJ
6.9 B U
28.7
Cel. 03
0113E-TE03-N-0716
07/16/01
NR
1.2 U
1.2 U
4.9 U R
49 U R
29 B UJ
1 U UJ
48 4 J
25.1 J
Cell 03
0' GE -TE03-N-0828
08/26/01
NR
0.7 U
1 B J
56U UJ
5.6 U R
0.9 U
0.9 U
35 9 J
21.8
Cell 03
01GE -TE03-N-1001
10/01/01
NR
1 U JU
1 U R
4 U JUR
4 U RUJ
1 U J
1 U
122 J
8.6 B J
Cell 03
O1GE-TE03-0-1001
10/01/01
*#¦ 1
1 U JU
1 U UJR
4 U JUR
4 U UJR
1 U J
1.4 B J
43,3 J
14.5 B J
Cell 03
01GE-TE03-N-1024
10/24/01
Nf
1 U UJ
1 U
6 5 B
6.9 B
0.9 U UJ
0.9 U UJ
28 1 U
15 1 B J
Cell 03
01GE-TE03-D-1024
10/24/01
NR
1 U UJ
1 U
7.5 B
5.6 8
09 U UJ
1 B
22.2 UJ
8.9 B J
Cell 03
02GE-TE03-N-0604
06104/02
NR
11 u
11 U
55 U
55 U
17 U
17 U
75.4 B
e u
Cell 03
02GE-TE03-[>0604
06/04/02
M-
11 u
11 U
55 U
55 U
17 U
17 U
132 B
30.8 8
Cell 03
02GE-TE0J-N-0815
08/15/02
Nfi
1.5 B
1.2 U
4.9 U
4.9 U
1 U
1 U
1148
1.9 B
Cell 03
02GE-TE03-M-1022
10/22/02
NR
0.8 U
0.8 U
7 U
7 U
1,5 U
1.5 U
105
tn-
Cell 08
Q1GE-TE08-N-0425
04/25/01
10.5 J
NS
15 U UJ
NS
25 U R
NS
15 U
NS
30.3 B U
Cell 08
01GE-1 E08-N-05I2
05/02/01
NS
2 1 U
2.1 U UJ
2 2 B J
3 5 B U
2.4 U
2.4 U
130
3.1 8 U
Cell 08
01GE-1 E08-M-100!
10/01/01
Nii
1 U JU
1 U R
4 U JUR
4 U_RUJ
1 U J
1 U
46,3 J
25.6
Cell 08
0! ?G E -T H08-N- 36 04
06/04/02
Ni-
11 u
11 U
55 U
55 U
17 U
17 U
6 U
44.2 B
Cell 08
0 5GE-TE08-N 3815
08/15/02
NR
1 2 U
NS
4.9 U
NS
1 U
NS
30,8
NS
Cell 08
0 2GE-T EOS- N-10 22
10/22/02
nr 't :
0.8 U
0.8 U
7 LI
7 U
1.5 U
1.5 U
224
82
Note. Qua&fers underscore a?e laboratory cjuai
-------
Appendix B
pH, Conductivity, Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, Turbidity,
and Oxidation-Reduction Potential of Test Cells
-------
Ceif
Dale
P«
Cond (mS/cm)
Temperature (C)
DO (mg/L)
Turb (NTU)
ORP (mV)
Co 1
2
5/2/01
3.73
9.0
126
3.46
79
585
5/17/01
2.52
9.9
166
3.49
0
610
6/14/01
2.48
9.4
12.5
7.97
4
592
7/16/01
2 41
120
21.7
0.94
-8
514
8/28/01
2.34
11.5
21.6
7.98
189
584
10/2/01
2.14
12.8
1@.8
0.56
8
10/24/01
2.38
1.9
1.6
0.70
159
555
$ -i-.
6/4/02
' V.. i
8/15/02
: !
, ¦
¦ rr—
10/22/02
' .v.- ;
6
5/2/01
^ r-
5/17/01
f r
e/14/oi
1" : 1
7/16/01
8/28/01
' . :i 1 :
¦ >/ "
10
10/2/01
Z.'.'i
17.2
431
• •
10/24/01
- _ . . :: 7_
-~f..
6/4/02
•
•¦r. *i
1 "? ;
8/15/02
10/22/02
1.81
21.2
0.32
579.9
10
5/2/01
4.09
7.6
11.9
3,44
10
576
5/17/01
4.48
5.5
15,9
5.07
24
325.9
6/14/01
0.24
4.4
12.7
7.19
25
118
7/18/01
662
4,1
23.0
5.07
27
202
a/28/01
6.65
4,2
21.4
8.02
143
445
10/2/01
5.26
5.6
17.5
2.72
485
10/24/01
4.51
7.5
7.1
3.25
654
650
6/4/02
3.5
12.0
14.38
5.27
495.2
8/15/02
3.51
10.9
22.8
5.82
27
515
10/22/02
3.89
13.4
2.48
~ . ~r
376.8
PR
4
5/2/01
11.55
1.7
12.3
2.45
7
127
5/17/01
9.56
1.3
15.8
5.68
0
100 7
6/14/01
11.21
2.4
11.1
3.48
2
31
6/14/01
11.18
2.0
10.4
2.39
53
-72
7/16/01
11.05
J.7
24.6
4.48
7
38
8/28/01
9.55
1.3
21.4
8 32
6
440
10/2/01
11.49
1.5
19.5
9.27
158
0
10/24/01
12.55
2.6
1.2
1.66
5
90
6/4/02
11 76
3,5
12.98
5.49
::
142.2
8/15/02
8.63
0,7
23.9
7.4
2
175
10/22/02
11.42
1.2
2.45
187.5
7
5/2/01
12,74
5.2
8
2.94
10
57
5/17/01
11.75
3,7
15
4.38
0
-65.1
6/14/01
10.77
2.0
12.1
6.63
i
-32
6/14/01
¦¦ • ,v
7/16/01
11.14
3.4
20.4
1.68
145
-i
8/28/01
3.4
1.2
20.7
8.25
34
560
10/2/01
12.02
2.6
18.3
1.69
-1
0
10/24/01
12,10
3.4
46
t.10
4
-30
6/4/02
11.9
4.1
13.05
7.87
259.5
8/15/02
8.78
0.8
21
6.95
5
190
i o/ii/02
12 IS
3.2
1 56
224.6
12
5/2/01
11.97
2.5
6.3
3.57
10
83
5/17/01
11.73
2.5
11.9
3.73
3
-42.9
6/14/01
7.58
0.8
11.7
6.31
1
'
64
6/1 l"i1
.
U . .. J
7/16" i
8/28/01
! 7.61
1,3
20./
5.27
2
334
10/2/01
8.16
1.3
20
3.2S
25
0
10/24/01
1122
1.0
4.1
0.31
11
100
| BMfQ2
11.13
1.4
14.41
3.23
195.2
8/15/02
7.88
1,0
74 7
8.18
0
330
10/22/02
10 HB
1.7
0.17
i '£'• '• *
??.? ?,
-------
Cell
Event
pH
Cond (mS/cm)
Temperature (C)
DO (mg/L)
Torb (NTU)
ORP (mV)
5/2/01
7.71
6.5
11.0
17
10
169
5/17/01
7.38
50.0
14.9
1.71
0
149.1
6/14/01
7,07
7,6
12 8
4,93
4
122
6/14/01
6.71
90,0
11.6
3 46
5
100
7/16/01
6.97
47.3
22.7
0.7
1
316
5
6/28/01
7.31
55.3
20
7,06
141
306
10/2/0 f
7 47
47,1
20
8.99
269
10/24/01
7.06
50.0
d.3
1.44
67
245
6/4/02
6.98
22.3
12.5
10.38
259,9
8/15/02
7.41
16.2
20.8
6.81
0
245
10/22/02
6.52
22.6
1 61
*?¦
278 2
5/2/01
7,03
6.9
9.2
4.12
10
314
5/17/01
6.01
44 9
15.6
2.21
0
56.7
6/14/01
7.37
63.0
12.5
5.9
2
24
6/14/01
¦ , 'J -
'
7/16/01
m
• %' <;
¦ .
¦¦
11
8/28/01
8.49
33.8
21,2
7.12
999
309
10/2/01
6.06
38.0
18.9
3.15
27
10/24/01
7.52
35.1
2.8
3.67
21
195
6/4/02
8.05
15,7
14.24
8.88
'
407.9
8/15/02
'
10/22/02
15.0
1.59
232.9
5/2/01
792
2.7
11.3
1.72
5.16
138
5/17/01
6.2
30
8.7
2.77
0
110.1
6/11/01
6.37
2.9
11.4
6.36
121
135
6/14/01
6.09
3.0
11.8
2.45
16
65
7/16/01
8.57
2 J
20.8
4.59
495
116
1
8/28/01
5.91
3.0
18.8
9.55
228
191
10/2/01
7.08
2,9
1S.8
5.8
63
193
10/24/01
6.20
3.5
13.3
0.79
17
165
6/4/02
2.61
8.0
12.31
0.62
518,8
8/15/02
294
5.0
21.9
6.96
§
575
KEECO
10/22/02
1.99
15.5
1.31
¦ -¦ , -
524.8
5/2/01
7.19
2.6
7.9
0
355
144
5/17/01
6.41
2.9
10.8
1.44
13
153.9
6/14/01
5.87
2.9
10.6
3
222
85
6/14/01
5.42
3.0
8.9
3.42
21
94
7/16/01
6.02
2.5
21 3
2.66
238
126
9
8/28/01
6.54
3.0
21 4
8.04
5
491
10/2/01
6.64
2,9
17 2
1.54
37
0
10/24/01
6.54
3.1
4.5
0,56
76
175
a/4/02
2.8
5.7
14.06
5.89
599.7
8/15/02
2.95
3,2
21.3
7.31
25
560
10/22/02
• r »
*'
'
5/2/01
6.6
2,4
11.5
1.62
10
470
5/17/01
7.52
2,8
14,9
3.12
0
137.2
6/14/01
6.68
2.9
10.3
7 88
4
400
6'14/01
* -
.. .
7/16/01
8
2.6
25,8
907
0
300
3
8/28/01
3.81
3.4
20.8
8.54
14
536
10/2/01
6,92
3.1
19.7
3.68
24
0
10/24/01
7.17
3.4
1.0
3.70
7
405
6/4/02
5.25
2.9
13.12
10.5
489.4
S/15'02
7.45
2.9
24.6
7.58
265
VJNR
10/22/02
5.85
3.5
0.31
'.fiH
280.9
5/2/01
10.05
2.4
11
4.73
10
113
5/1T/01
wHHSWPII! mlllSMHVC
in-1
6/14/0 i
1 „ „ *1
6/14/0'
TllPWi
?
,1^,1
I 7/16/1:1
i . - ¦
; -"i-r-vpfr
8
8/28/1:;:
: ^ .rszm.
1 - v.
tesilliSj
10/2/i"; i
!
T. k
i
1G/24H1
I'"'-"
£ 1
1
j.
| .£> * "j
.' J
1 .".7
T "¦ -0 83
I i 324.4 I
8/15/ ;
JIT"
f
. ..
; S ..I
VM'ZZi'.},
T n
i -."1 .i
f "2
Y 1 ys
¦"
i ¦
;L J37 J
-------
Appendix C
Applicable South Dakota Water Quality Criteria
-------
South Dakota Water Quality Criteria for a caldwatcr marginal fish life propagation water. (Section 74:51:0i :46)
Unionized ammonia nitrogen
<0,02
mg/l.
30-day average
as N
applicable
criterion in
mg/L
Daily maximum
Dissolved oxygen
>5.0
mg/L
Undisassociated hydrogen
sulfide
<0,002
mg/L
Pn
:>6.5-<8.8
units
Sec section 74:51 :OI :07—no change in receiving water greater than
0.5 units
'l'otal suspended solids
<90
mg/L
30-day average
<158
mg/L
Daily maximum
Temperature
<75
°F
Sec section 74:51:01:3 l-no lemp change over spawning beds, <
4 T change
Effluent limitations for discharges to trout fishery waters. (Section 74:51:0I:32)
Suspended solids
<10
mg/L
24-hr composited sample
<17,5
mg/L
Grab sample maximum
BODS
<10
mg/L
24-hr composited sample
<17.5
mg/L
Grab sample maximum
Criteria for limited contact recreation waters. (Section 74:51:01:51)
Dissolved oxygon
>5.00
mg/L
Fecal coliform
<1,000
/IQOmL
Geometric menu based on a minimum of Five samples obtained
during separate 24
hour periods for any 30-day period, and they may not exceed this
value in more than
20 percent of the samples examined in this same 30-day period
(May l-Scpt 30}
<2,000
/100ml,
in any one sample
Criteria for irrigation waters (Section 75:51:01:53)
Conductivity ut 25°C
<2,500
umbos/cm
30-day average
<4,375
u mhos/cm
Daily maximum
Sodium adsorption ratio
6.0 - <9.5
units
Sec section 74:51:0 l:07--no change in receiving water greater
than 0.5 units
TPH
<10
mg/L
See section 74:51:01:l0--Cannot impart a visible film or sheen on
the surface of the water or adjacent shoreline
Oil and Grease
<10
mg/L
See section 74:51:01:10-Cannot impart a visible film or sheen on
the airfacc of the water or adjacent shoreline
C-l
-------
Combined South Dakota Water Quality Criteria Applicable to the Gilt Edge Mine
PH
>6.5-<8.8
units
See section 74:51:01 :C>7—no change in
Conductivity ut 25C
receiving water greater than 0,5 units
<2,500
umhox/em
30-day average
<4,375
umhos/cm
daily maximum
Temperature
<75
nF
See section 74'.5 \ :(S 1:31 --no temp change over
dissolved oxygen
spawning beds, <4 T change
>5.0
mg/L
Total alkalinity as C»C€>3
<750
mg/L
M-day average
<1313
mg/L.
daily maximum
Total Dissolved Solids
<2500
mg/L
30-day average
<4,375
mg/L
daily maximum
Suspended Solids
<10
mg/L
24-hr composited sample
<17.5
tng/L
Grab sample maximum
Sodium adsorption ratio
<10
[Na< Vscrt(([Cu < 2] + [Mgi 2])/2) all in mcq/L
un-iortized ammonia nitrogen as N
<0,02
mg/L
30-day average
<1.75 times she applicable
mg/L
daily maximum
criterion in Appendix A
Nitrates as N
<50
mg/L
30-day average
<88
mg/L
daily maximum
Undisassociatcd hydrogen sulfide
<0.002
mg/L
BODS
<10
mg/L
24-hr composited sample
<17.5
mg/L
Grab sample maximum
<1,000
/IQOniL
geometric mean based on a minimum of 5
samples obtained during separate 24-hour
periods for any 30-day period, and they may
not exceed this value in more than 20% of the
samples examined in this same 30-day period
Fecal Col i form (May i-Sept 30}
<2,000
/lOOmL
in any one sample
TP II
<10
mg/L
Sec section 74:51:01:10—Cannot imparl a
visible film or sheen on the surface of the
water or adjacent shoreline
Oil and Grease
<1(1
mg/L
Sec section 74:5];0l:10--Cannot impart a
visible film or sheen on the surface of the
water or adjacent shoreline
C-2
-------
Arsenic (ug/L)
360
190
Cadmium (ug/L)
17 '
3
N
Chromium (III)
17(IN :
554
0
Chromium (VI)
15
10
Copper
63 ¦'
37
10
Cyanide (weak acid dissociable) (ug/L)
22
5.2
Lead
281 4
tO.'J
1 1
Mercury
2.1
0.012
based on dissolved cone (for acute)
and toi-rcc for chronic
Nickel
456(J s
SON
12
Selenium
20
5
Silver
37.4 6
Zinc
370 7
33X
1.1
Hardness (in mg/L CaC03)
use 25 mg/L as a minimum
use 401) mg/L as a maximum
Concentration is a function of hardness, according to the equations:
Acute:
'(1. 136672-(LN(Hardness)*().041838))*EXP(1.128*( LN
(Hardness))-3.828)
:0.316 "EX P(0,819 *< LN{Hardness»+3.688)
,G.9C*KXP(0.9422*( LN(Hardncss))-t .464)
'1(! .46203-(LN(Hardncss)*0 145712))*EXP< 1.273'(LN
{Hardness))-1,46)
i0.997*EXP(0.846*(LN(Hardncss))+-3.36l2)
fl0.S5*EXP( 1.72*LN(Hardncss)-6.52)
70.978 *EXP{0,8473 *( LN(Hardness))+018604)
Chronic:
(I. l()l 672-LN(Hardness)»0.t>4l 838})"(;XP(0.7S52*
(Hardncss))-3.49)
0.86*EXP(0.819*{l lardness))+1.561)
0.96*EXP(0.8545*(LN{Hardncss})-L465)
(1.46203-{LN(Hardncss)*0.145712))*EXP( 1.273 *(LN
(Hardness))-4.705)
0.997*EXP(0.846*(LN(I Iardness))+l. 1645)
0.986*EXP(0.8473*(LN(1 lardness))+0.7614)
C-3
-------
Appendix D
Acid-Base Accounting Results for Multicell Treatability Study
-------
Tabic 3-2 Acid-Base Accounting Results for Multicell Treatability Study
Vendor
Cell
Sample ID
Sample
Paste
Acid Potential
Neutralization
Add/Base
NP:AP
Sulfur. Hoi
Sulfur.
Sulfur. H.N03
Sulfur.
Sulfur.
Name
Dace
PH
(T CaC03/
Potential
Potential
Water
HCI
Extractable
Residual
Total
(su)
1000T)
OOtiE -TW0202-N-1026
10/26/00
2.4
47
1U
-47
0.02
0.68
0 22
1.11
0.16
2.17
OOGE-TW0204-N-1028
10/28/00
2.5
70
1 u
-70
0.01
0.61
0.20
1.89
0.15
2.85
OOGE -TW0206-N -1029
10/29/00
2.6
55
1 u
-55
0.02
0.58
0.19
1.38
0.20
2.35
JOGE-TW 0208-N-1031
10/31/00
2.4
41
1 u
-41
0.02
0.68
0.14
1.00
0.17
1.99
')OGE-TW0208-D-1031
10/31/00
2.3
59
1 u
-59
002
0 72
0 12
1.59
0.17
2.60
OOGE-TWO6O2-N-1025
10/25/00
4.3
24
3
-22
0.13
0.27
0.07
0.53
0.18
1.05
Control
6
O0GE-TW0604-N -1026
10/26/00
2.5
34
1 U
-34
0.03
0.64
0.10
0.87
0.12
1.73
00GE--nvO6O6-N-1028
10/28/00
3.7
38
1 u
-38
0.03
0.54
0.05 U
1.09
0.14
1.77
0 0GE-TWO6O8-N -1030
10/30/00
2.4
49
1 u
-49
0.02
0.64
0.15
1.19
0.24
2.22
00GE-TW1002-N -102 6
10/26/00
2.3
71
1 u
-71
0.01
0.64
0.21
1 74
0.31
2.90
00GE-TW1002-D-1026
10/26/00
2.4
87
1 u
-87
0.01
0.56
0.39
2.09
0.30
3.34
HI
OOG E-TW1004-N -1027
10/27/00
3.7
32
I u
-32
0.03
0.42
0.08
0.81
0.12
1.43
00G E- TW1006-N -1029
10/29/00
2.6
52
1 u
-52
0.02
0.60
0.18
1.28
0.21
2.27
00GE-TW1008-N-l 031
10/31/00
2.4
62
1 u
-62
0.02
0.49
0.29
1,48
0.20
246
.%
OOG E-TW0402-N -102 6
10/26/00
2.1
67
1 u
-67
0.01
0.41
0.33
1.60
0.24
2.56
0OGE-TWG4O4-N -! 02 6
10/26/00
2.1
70
1 u
-70
001
0.61
0.15
1.80
0 29
2.85
OOGE-TW07Q2-N -1026
10/26/00
2.2
59
1 u
-59
0.02
0.76
Oil
1.45
0.34
2.66
OOG E-TW0704-N -102 8
10/28/00
2.6
130
1 u
-130
0.01
0.83
0 15
3.57
0.52
5.07
7
OOG E-TWO704-D-102 8
10/28/00
2.8
42
1 u
-42
0.02
0.57
0.14
0.93
0.27
1.91
PR
OOGE-TWO706-N -102 9
10/29/00
2.4
56
1 u
-56
0.02
0.75
0.15
1.44
020
2.54
0OGE-TW07O8-N-1104
11/4/00
3.2
25
1 u
-25
0.04
0.54
0.06
0.58
0.15
1.33
OOGE-TW' 202-N-1026
10/26/00
25
85
1 u
-85
0.01
0.43
0.19
2.24
0.28
3.14
00GE-TW12O2-D-1026
10/26/00
2.4
69
1 u
-69
0.01
060
0.18
1.75
0.29
2.82
12
OOOE-TW1204-N-l 027
10/27/00
3 1
30
1 u
-30
0.03
0 49
0.06
0.66
0.24
1.45
00C iE-FWl 206-N-l 029
10/29/00
3.4
33
1 u
-33
0.03
0.43
0.12
0.75
0.17
1.47
OOGE- FW1208- N-1031
10/31/00
2.6
41
1 u
-41
0.02
0.66
0.12
1.02
0.18
1 98
f = ton? U = resj t belt * reporting I mil shown
-------
T able 3- 2 A :i i-Ba it; Accounting Results for Mult ice 11 Trcata l>ilit> Stu3
Fxtractablc
<%)
Sulfur,
Rfsiduiil
(%)
.Sulfur.
Total
(%)
OOGIf ¦ TWO 102 -N -102 6
10/26/00
2 ^
34
t V
-34
0.03
OoS
0 10
OS!
II 17
1 ~i)
1
IKiCiE-TWOI 04-N-102S
IO'28/OO
2 ft
62
11:
-62
O02
H62
0,24
1 54
0 20
2 60
OOGE-TW0106-N-102«}
10/29/00
3 2
24
I u
-2J
0 04
0.40
11.06
0,57
o 13
'
KfcEOJ
OOGt>TVV0108-N-l031
1001 *00
2 4
3(i
i u
-36
0 03
0,"2
0 14
0 .S3
0 19
l-SK
OOOE- rW'0902-N-l 02(>
1O-'2t>'O0
2 7
39
1 V
-39
0 03
0 50
n
00GE-TWI1906-N -1029
10.29 00
3 !
it>
1 ti
w
0 0?
0.55
0 10
0 70
0 13
1.4v
OOGt -TWO008-N -1031
10'31/00
2 b
36
I u
-30
0 03
0.h2
0 US
0.Q3
0 14
1.77
nOCrF -TW0302-N-1025
10/25 00
2.5
33
-33
(i i , 3'
0 43
0 i 3
C 7
(113
1 .(-0
WGEOwogob-N-WM
1029'00
3.4
>1
1 u
-31
0 03
0.58
o,o&
0 73
0,20
1 5"
0JGF-';"W0808-N-lO30
10.30- 00
49
111
-49
0 02
0.53
0,! 1
1,24
0 15
2 ! I
OOGE- '"W0502-N-1025
10/25/00
5.3
30
Q
-21
0 30
0 30
0,0f.
0 76
0,14
| 1""*
COGE-' \V0504-N-102~
10-27.00
2.4
51
11;
-51
0 02
11.71
0 14
1 25
0 10
2 34
5
G0GE-TW0504 -D-l 02 7
10'27,00
2 3
o4
1i<
-64
0.02
d.ftO
0,13
1 65
0,20
2 M
OOGE-TWO506-N-1029
10 29'00
2 4
41
1 V
-49
0/(2
0 !>4
0.13
1 32
0.13
2 22
Mr
O0GE-TWO5O8-N-1Q31
10/31/00
2 5
41
t l:
-51
0 02
0 "2
007
1,0o
0 17
2.02
OOGE-TWl 102-N-102O
10/26/00
3.8
3?
12
-25
0 32
0,4]
0 14
03>o
0.15
I Ml
11
OOGE-TWl 104-N-102?
10-27,00
5
-.0
i L
-30
0 03
0,44
0.12
0,00
0 14
1.3{)
00C/2-TWI106-N-1029
IO-29-0O
3.2
2
-28
t1 0"
0 42
0 10
0<.7
0,2 0
1 >>
01 <3=-TWI108-N-1030
10/30/00
3,1
2o
1 U
-2o
0 04
0 5S
o.!2
0,57
1.41
------- |