988833
FIFTH FIVE-YEAR REVIEW REPORT FOR
VAN DALE JUNKYARD SUPERFUND SITE
WASHINGTON COUNTY, OHIO
sn%,
£
<
3>
O
\
&
PRO^^0
ro
z
LU
o
T
.0*
Prepared by
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 5
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
2/16/2024
X Douglas Ballotti
Douglas Ballotti, Director
Superfund & Emergency Management Division
Signed by: DOUGLAS BALLOTTI
-------
Table of Contents
LIST 01 ABBREVIATIONS & ACRONYMS 2
I. INTRODUCTION 3
FIVE-YEAR REVIEW SUMMARY FORM 4
II. RESPONSE ACTION SUMMARY 4
Basis for Taking Action 4
Response Actions 6
Status of Implementation 9
Institutional Controls 10
Systems Operations/Operation & Maintenance 12
III. PROGRESS SINCE THE LAST REVIEW 13
IV. FIVE-YEAR REVIEW PROCESS 17
Community Notification, Involvement & Site Interviews 17
Data Review 17
Site Inspection 19
V. TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT 20
QUESTION A: Is the remedy functioning as intended by the decision documents? 20
QUESTION B: Are the exposure assumptions, toxicity data, cleanup levels, and remedial action
objectives (RAOs) used at the time of the remedy selection still valid? 20
QUESTION C: Has any other information come to light that could call into question the
protectiveness of the remedy? 21
VI. ISSUES/RECOMMENDATIONS 21
\ II. PROTECTIVENESS STATEMENT 23
VIII. NEXT REVIEW 24
APPENDIX A - REFERENCE LIST 25
APPENDIX B - Site Maps and Figures of the Van Dale Junkyard Site, Washington County, Ohio
APPENDIX C - Environmental Covenants for Van Dale Junkyard Site
APPENDIX D - Five-Year Review Public Notice
APPENDIX E - Trend Analysis of Six Chemicals of Concern in the Groundwater - Van Dale Junkyard
Superfund Site
APPENDIX F - MNA Efficacy Evaluation
APPENDIX G - Five-Year Review Site Inspection Checklist and Pictures
TABLE LIST:
TABLE 1: Summary of Implemented Institutional Controls
TABLE 2: Protectiveness Determinations/Statements from the 2019 FYR
TABLE 3: Status of Recommendations from the 2019 FYR
TABLE 4: Range of Contaminant of Concern Concentrations in Select Wells
1
-------
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS & ACRONYMS
ARAR
Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirement
BLRA
Baseline Risk Assessment
CERCLA
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
CFR
Code of Federal Regulations
COC
Contaminants of Concern
CUG
Cleanup Goal
EPA
United States Environmental Protection Agency
ESD
Explanation of Significant Differences
FYR
Five-Year Review
ICs
Institutional Controls
IMMP
Inspection, Maintenance, and Monitoring Plan
LTS
Long Term Stewardship
MCL
Maximum Contaminant Level
NCP
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
NPL
National Priorities List
O&M
Operation and Maintenance
OEPA
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
ORC
Office of Regional Counsel
PAH
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon
PFAS
Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances
PRP
Potentially Responsible Party
RAO
Remedial Action Objectives
RA
Remedial Action
RD
Remedial Design
RD/RA
Remedial Design/Remedial Action
RI
Remedial Investigation
ROD
Record of Decision
RPM
Remedial Project Manager
Site
Van Dale Junkyard Superfund Site
svoc
Semi-Volatile Organic Compound
TBC
To be considered
UU/UE
Unlimited Use and Unrestricted Exposure
VOC
Volatile Organic Compound
2
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
The purpose of a Five-Year Review (FYR) is to evaluate the implementation and performance of a
remedy in order to determine if the remedy is and will continue to be protective of human health and the
environment. The methods, findings, and conclusions of reviews are documented in FYR reports such as
this one. In addition, FYR reports identify issues found during the review, if any, and document
recommendations to address them.
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is preparing this FYR pursuant to the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Section 121,
consistent with the National Contingency Plan (NCP)(40 CFR Section 300.430(f)(4)(ii)), and
considering EPA policy.
This is the fifth FYR for the Van Dale Junkyard Superfund Site (Site). The triggering action for this
statutory review is the completion date of the fourth FYR. The FYR has been prepared due to the fact
that hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain at the site above levels that allow for
unlimited use and unrestricted exposure (UU/UE).
The Site consists of one operable unit (OU) and a comprehensive site-wide review will be addressed in
this FYR.
The Van Dale Junkyard Superfund Site FYR was led by Bill Murray, EPA Remedial Project Manager.
Participants included David Wilson EPA Hydrogeologist; Adrian Palomeque, EPA Community
Involvement Coordinator; and Baxter Foskuhl, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) Site
Coordinator. OEPA and the Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) were notified in writing of the
initiation of the five-year review. The review began on 2/8/2023.
Site Background
The Site is located about 1.5 miles northeast of the City of Marietta in Washington County, Ohio, along
the rolling hills of the Appalachian Plateau (See Appendix B - Figures 1). Situated along the Ohio
River, Marietta has a population of approximately 13,000, based on 2020 Census data. The Site was a
former junkyard located on 31 acres in a rural residential area, occupying part of a natural ridge that runs
east to west. Primary land use in the area is agricultural and residential, with approximately 200
residences located within a one-mile radius of the Site. Farm animals graze on neighboring properties. A
closed landfill, the Marietta Sanitation Landfill, borders the Site to the south.
On-Site, a few unoccupied barns and two mobile home trailers are located at the top of the ridge
adjacent to the main access road. One of the trailers has been used as a residence since at least 2008,
while the other has been used for storage. At the time the Site was discovered, various scrap materials,
automobiles, and waste drums containing industrial solvents, tar, and sludges were located throughout
the Site. Historically, there was no known use of Site groundwater. Groundwater access in the area has
been inconsistent and unreliable. Currently, the on-site resident along with residents adjacent to and
surrounding the site use the City of Marietta's public water supply system as a drinking water source.
Surface water drainage from the Site flows through two intermittent streams to Duck Creek, a small
tributary to the Ohio River.
Investigations of hazardous substance disposal at the site began in 1980, when OEPA personnel first
visited the site. The site has a history of complaints to local authorities from nearby residents dating
3
-------
back to at least 1969. Most of the complaints appear to have been related to open-burning and accepting
wastes which created nuisances, such as odors and rodents. Based on observations of drummed waste at
the site in 1980, preliminary assessments of contamination at the site were conducted by EPA and
OEPA from 1980 to 1983. Based on the assessments of the release of hazardous substances at the site,
the site was proposed for inclusion on EPA's National Priorities List (NPL) for Superfund sites in
1982, and was finalized on the NPL in June 1986.
FIVE-YEAR REVIEW SUMMARY FORM
SITE IDENTIFICATION
Site Name: Van Dale Junkyard
EPA ID:
OHD980794606
Region: 5
State: OH
City/County: Marietta/Washington
NPL Status: Final
Multiple OUs?
No
Has the site achieved construction completion?
Yes
Lead agency: EPA
Author name (Federal or State Project Manager): William Murray
Author affiliation: EPA Remedial Project Manager
Review period: 2/8/2023 - 10/18/2023
Date of site inspection: 4/27/2023
Type of review: Statutory
Review number: 5
Triggering action date: 2/22/2019
Due date (fiveyears after triggering action date): 2/22/2024
II. RESPONSE ACTION SUMMARY
Basis for Taking Action
As part of the RI, a baseline risk assessment (BLRA) was prepared to characterize the current and
potential threats to human health and the environment that may be posed by the Site through various
4
-------
exposure pathways such as ingestion and dermal contact (EPA, 1992). The BLRA identified the
following contaminants of concern (COCs), with media impacted, and determined
to be major potential health risks at the Site:
COC SOIL GROUND-WATER SEDIMENT SURFACE WATER
Antimony
X
X
X
Arsenic
X
X
X
Barium
X
X
X
Benzo(a)anthracene
X
X
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
X
X
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
X
X
Benzo(a)pyrene
X
X
Beryllium
X
X
X
Bis(2 -ethy lhexy l)phthalate
X
X
X
X
Cadmium
X
X
Chrysene
X
1,1 -Dichloroethene
X
X
X
1,2-Dichloroethene
X
X
X
Indeno( 123 -cd)pyrene
X
Lead
X
X
X
Naphthalene
X
Nickel
X
X
X
Silver
X
Tetrachloroethene
X
Thallium
X
1,1,1 -T richloroethane
X
X
X
X
Vanadium
X
Vinyl chloride X
The BLRA stated that releases of Site-related contaminants, if not addressed, posed an imminent and
substantial endangerment to public health, welfare, and the environment. The contaminants which
contributed most to the elevated Site risks for human health included volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) such as tetrachloroethene, 1,1-dichloroethene, and vinyl chloride (VC), semivolatile organic
compounds (SVOCs) such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) like naphthalene and
benzo(a)pyrene, and metals like arsenic, cadmium, and lead. The BLRA also concluded that
approximately 95 percent of the excess risk to human health associated with the Site is due to the
potential use of groundwater, with the remaining 5 percent associated with dermal contact with Site
soils. Contaminants contributing excess risks and hazards in groundwater were antimony, arsenic,
barium, bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, cadmium, 1,1-dichloroethene (DCE), nickel, tetrachloroethene,
vanadium, and VC. For soil, contaminants contributing excess risks included antimony, arsenic, bis(2-
ethylhexyl)phthalate, lead, and PAHs such as naphthalene and benzo(a) pyrene.
Despite extensive habitat degradation at the Site due to disposal activities, diverse terrestrial and aquatic
habitats were observed over the north slope. Evaluation of Site contaminant levels against known
5
-------
toxicity thresholds indicated no toxic effects, with contaminant levels not exceeding chemical-specific
concentrations for either acute or chronic effects in wild or laboratory animals. Exceedances of surface
water quality criteria and standards suggested adverse effects on aquatic life may have been occurring,
particularly in the surface water and sediments in the seeps located on the north slope of the Site. No
endangered or threatened species were known to be present around the Site, based on available State
information.
Response Actions
OEPA visited the Site in 1980 and observed, among other things, drummed wastes at the Site. Later,
OEPA began to investigate the Site under the authority of CERCLA, conducting preliminary
assessments at the Site from 1980 to 1983.
Following investigations carried out under CERCLA, the State of Ohio filed a lawsuit against the
owner/operator of the Site in 1984. Eventually, the State of Ohio and the owner/operator reached a
settlement agreement. A key provision was that the agreement assured the State access to the Site for
further investigations.
Remedial Action Objectives
Following completion of the RI, EPA issued a FS for the Site in August 1992. This FS report presents
and discusses the process used to develop and screen remedial action alternatives for the Site. The FS
alternative evaluations are based on the results of the RI, including the Baseline Risk Assessment. EPA
signed a Record of Decision (ROD) for the Site on March 31, 1994 (EPA, 1994). The ROD identified
the following remedial action objectives (RAOs) for the Site:
• Achieve a total Site risk of 1E-06 or less for carcinogens;
• Achieve a total Site hazard index of 1 or less for noncarcinogens; and
• Meet all applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs).
Remedy Selected
The above RAOs were developed to aid in the development of the remedy for the Site. The selected
remedy in the ROD included the following components:
• Collect and consolidate an estimated 9,000 cubic yards of soil and drummed waste materials
located beyond the Site containment area that contain organic and inorganic contaminants;
• Segregate collected and consolidated solid waste and drummed waste from soil;
• Off-site disposal of drummed materials, sludge, and other collected and consolidated waste
which contains substances, especially hazardous wastes, not suitable for on-Site containment;
• Screen collected and consolidated solid waste materials for salvageable materials to be
decontaminated on-Site and taken off-Site for salvage;
• Consolidate soil and non-salvageable solid waste which exceeds soil cleanup levels in the on-
Site containment area and cover with a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Subtitle C hazardous waste cap;
• Bioremediate sediments in-place that exceed the cleanup levels for organic contaminants in the
seeps on the north slope of the Site, as necessary;
6
-------
• Fence the Site to restrict Site access and place institutional controls (ICs) on Site to ensure the
integrity of the remedial action, including deed restrictions to prevent the installation of drinking
water wells and the disturbance of the capped area until cleanup levels are achieved;
• Monitor groundwater and surface water/sediments to confirm that the removal, treatment, and
containment of source materials and the natural attenuation of residual contaminants allow for
the expeditious attainment of cleanup levels; and
• Conduct other operation and maintenance (O&M) requirements, including cap mowing,
inspection, and repair.
The selected remedy is intended to protect human health and the environment by removing, treating, or
containing all significant threats at the Site, thereby reducing human health and environmental risks to
acceptable levels.
Cleanup Goals
The 1994 ROD established the following cleanup goals (CUGs) for Site COCs.
Groundwater
coc
CUG (milligram/liter)
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Cadmium
DCE
0.005
0.088
0.302
0.005
0.001
0.00858
0.0015
0.100
0.100
0.060
0.0015
0.020
0.040
0.0005
cis 1,2-Dichloroethene
trans 1,2-Dichloroethene
Nickel
T etrachl oroethene
1,1,1 -Trichl oroethane
Vanadium
VC
Soil
COC
Cleanup Level (milligram/kilogram)
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
B enzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Beryllium
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Cadmium
Chrysene
12
10.9
12.1
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
1.43
0.33
9.72
0.33
0.005
DCE
7
-------
Indeno( 123 -cd)pyrene
0.33
Naphthalene
0.33
Nickel
36
T etrachl oroethene
0.005
Thallium
2.0
Vanadium
70.4
1,2-Dichl oroethene
0.06
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
0.03
VC
0.010
Lead
500
Sediment
COC Cleanup Level (milligram/kilogram)
Antimony 9,500
Arsenic 0.24
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 16,800,000
Di-n-butylphthalate 32,300
Butylbenzylphthalate 2,450
2-Butanone 0.128
Chlorobenzene 8.58
Chloroform 3.48
Chromium 1.035
Copper 58.9
Cyanide 0.026
Ethylbenzene 68.2
Lead 15.9
Mercury 0.006
4-Methylphenol 0.215
Styrene 44.5
Tetrachloroethene 26.6
Toluene 425
Zinc 53
Surface Water
COC Cleanup Level (milligram/liter)
Antimony 0.19
Arsenic 0.19
Beryllium 0.023
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 0.0084
Di-n-butylphthalate 0.19
Butylbenzylphthalate 0.049
2-Butanone 0.0071
Cadmium 0.0014
Chlorobenzene 0.026
Chloroform 0.079
Chromium 0.207
Copper 0.0118
8
-------
Cyanide
0.012
1,1 -Dichloroethene
0.078
1,2-Dichloroethene
0.31
Ethylbenzene
0.062
Iron
1.0
Lead
0.00692
Mercury
0.0002
4-Methylphenol
0.0062
Nickle
0.17
Naphthalene
0.044
Selenium
0.005
Silver
0.0013
T etrachl oroethene
0.073
Toluene
1.7
Thallium
0.016
1,1,1 -Trichloroehtane
0.088
Zinc
0.106
Status of Implementation
Construction of the selected remedy for the Site was completed in 2000. The PRPs performed the work
under Unilateral Administrative Order V-W-94-C-307 for remedial design and remedial action
(RD/RA), issued by EPA on August 16, 1994. During the RD, EPA approved a design modification to
stabilize the area to be capped to minimize shifting. Also, sediment and seep water sampling results
obtained during the RD indicated there was no need for bioremediation for seep sediments. Thus, EPA
eliminated the bioremediation for seep sediments from the design. Following these design changes,
construction of the remedy involved the following, as described in the EPA-approved Final Design
Report (GeoSyntec, 1999):
• Construction of a slope buttress near the toe of the northeast slope of the area to be
capped;
• Installation of a subsurface drainage system including geotextile filter, high-density
polyethylene (HDPE) piping, drainage gravel, and two concrete collection sumps;
• Excavation and consolidation of impacted material in designated areas up-slope of the
buttress;
• Construction of a final cap system over the consolidated, impacted material, consisting
of:
Placement, grading, and compaction of impacted material under the cap;
12 inches of bedding soil;
• 60-mil, HDPE geomembrane liner;
Geocomposite drainage layer;
18 inches of cover soil;
6 inches of topsoil; and
Establishment of a vegetative, grass cover.
9
-------
• Installation of surface water management structures to manage run-on and run-off on and
around the cap. This included the installation of perimeter drainage ditches, intermediate
cover benches, and a buttress wall diversion ditch;
• Implementation of erosion and sedimentation controls. In areas north, south, east, and
west of the cap, grading, seeding and mulching were conducted. Temporary silt fencing
was installed in these areas until the vegetation was established; and
• Regrading and revegetation of disturbed areas of the slope.
Following completion of the RA, EPA issued a Preliminary Close-Out Report on July 7, 2000, to
document that RA construction activities were substantially completed (EPA, 2000).
Institutional Controls
ICs are non-engineered instruments, such as administrative and/or legal controls, that help minimize the
potential for exposure to contamination and protect the integrity of the remedy. Compliance with ICs is
necessary to assure long-term protectiveness for any areas which do not allow for UU/UE. EPA
conducted a review of the ICs in place and has determined that they are currently adequate to protect
human health and the environment. A summary of the implemented ICs for the Site is listed in Table 1
and are further discussed below. An IC map showing restricted areas at the Site is shown in Appendix B
- Figure 2.
Table 1: Summary of Implemented ICs
Modiii. eniiineeivd
controls. ;iihI ;iiv;is lliiil do
noi support I I /I 1. l);isod
on cur roil I conditions
ICs
Needed
ICs C;illcd
lor in llie
Decision
Documents
Impiicled
P;ircel(s)
IC
OI).jec(i\e
Tillc of IC liislriimcnl
Implemented ;ind l);itc Un-
pin lined)
Capped RCRA Subtitle C
hazardous waste area on
Site
Yes
Yes
Capped
hazardous
waste area
called
"Restricted
Area B" in
Environmental
Covenant
(EC). See
Appendix C.
Pi'olnbil residential,
commercial, and
industrial land use
within the capped
area and any land
use that may
interfere with the
remedial
components of the
remedy. Prohibits
filling, grading,
excavating,
building, drilling,
or mining on land
where a hazardous
waste facility was
operated
EC instrument
201900000806, Volume
403, Page 259, dated
02/11/2019, Washington
County, Ohio; and Ohio
Administrative Code
(OAC) Rule 3745-27-13
Area of the Site beyond
Restricted Area B subject
to residential cleanup
standards, excluding the
area in the south-central
of the Site purchased by
Yes
Yes
Portion of Site
called "Area
A Property" in
signed EC.
See Appendix
C.
Prohibit installation
of groundwater
wells and use of
groundwater
EC instrument
201900000806, Volume
403, Page 259, dated
02/11/2019, Washington
County, Ohio
10
-------
relative of former
landowner.
South-central portion of Site
beyond Restricted Area B,
recently purchased by
relative of former
landowner. Referred to as
Jack Longfellow property.
Yes
Yes
0.41-acre
portion
of Site that
includes
residential
mobile home
and
other structures
(barn, other
trailer, etc.) See
Appendix C.
Prohibit installation
of groundwater
wells and use of
groundwater
EC instrument
202100000243, Volume
650, Pages 5057-5074,
dated January 12, 2021,
Washington County, Ohio
Capped RCRA Subtitle C
hazardous waste area and
surface water ditch, which
extends onto Spindler
property immediately east
of the Site (0.2 acres).
Referred to as Spindler
Property.
Yes
Yes
0.2-acre portion
of Site that
includes
Capped
RCRA Subtitle
C
hazardous
waste
area and surface
water ditch, that
extends onto
Spindler
property
immediately
east of the Site.
See
Appendix C.
Prohibit residential
use within the
capped area and any
interference with the
cap and remedial
components,
monitoring
locations, networks
and systems.
Prohibits
filling, grading,
excavating, building,
drilling,
or mining on land
where a hazardous
waste facility was
operated, including
areas within 300
feet if integrity of
waste placement
or ancillary
structures will be
impacted.
EC Instrument
200800002580,
Volume 464, Page
631, dated 04-09-
2008, Washington
County, Ohio; and
OAC Rule 3745-
27-13
Status of Access Restrictions and ICs:
Access restrictions, including a fence and warning signs are required per the 1994 ROD, and remain in
place. The following Site property real estate transactions were completed in 2021.
• Attorneys representing Jack W. Longfellow notified EPA that their client purchased 5.164 acres
of the Site property from the Estate of Mr. Thomas Vandale (area). It should be noted this does
not include any of the RESTRICTED area. The EC on the subject parcel is referenced in the
Fiduciary Deed recorded by the Recorder of Washington County, Ohio, on September 28, 2021
(Vol 656 Pgs. 5855).
• Attorneys representing Mr. Brian Carpenter and Mr. Richard E. Eddy notified EPA that their
clients purchased 25.55 acres of the Site property from the Estate of Mr. Thomas Vandale (area).
It should be noted that the RESTRICTED area was included in this transaction. The EC on the
11
-------
subject parcel is contained in the Corrective Deed filed for record by the Recorder of
Washington County, Ohio, on October 12, 2021 (Vol 657 Pgs. 2277).
Current Compliance:
Based on annual inspections by the City of Marietta and OEPA, along with discussions with the PRP
and OEPA, EPA is not aware of Site or media uses which are inconsistent with the stated objectives to
be achieved by the ICs. The remedy appears to be functioning as intended. No Site uses which are
inconsistent with the implemented ICs or remedy IC objectives were noted during the 4/27/2023 FYR
Site inspection.
IC Follow up Actions Needed:
No follow-up actions needed. In the 2019 FYR, EPA had considered relying on Ohio rules OAC Rules
3701-28-10(B) and (G) and OAC Rule 3745-27-13 to maintain protectiveness at the Site. Meanwhile,
EPA secured ECs with the new landowners to implement ICs for the Site. Since all ECs have been
recorded, reliance on the Ohio rules is no longer necessary to implement the ICs.
Long Term Stewardship:
Long-term protectiveness requires continued compliance with the ICs consisting of land use and
groundwater use restrictions to ensure that the remedy continues to function as intended. Long-term
stewardship (LTS) will ensure that the ICs are maintained, monitored and enforced. The 2019 Fourth
FYR recommended an update to the LTS Plan to address a process for dealing with any potential IC
issues that may arise during the reporting period. EPA continues to work with the PRP on finalizing
revisions to the LTS Plan.
Systems Operations/Operation & Maintenance
The PRPs are currently performing long-term O&M activities under EPA and State oversight. O&M
activities are being conducted in accordance with the 2001 Inspection, Maintenance, and Monitoring
Plan (IMMP), conditionally approved in 2001 and subsequently modified in 2012 (Addendum 1) and
2014 (Addendum 2) (Geosyntec, 2014). Final approval of the IMMP, as revised, was conditioned upon
receipt of a signed/recorded EC for the Site.
The 2001 IMMP requires the following activities to be performed:
• Conduct annual inspections of the hazardous waste cover/cap and the other remedy components
and make repairs as needed;
• Perform periodic (quarterly/semiannual/annual) groundwater, seep and surface water sampling,
and annual sediment sampling; and
• Perform other activities as requested by EPA such as installing additional monitoring wells or
collecting additional samples.
The IMMP was updated in 2012 (Addendum 1) to include the following:
• Reduced groundwater monitoring frequency from quarterly to annually at seven wells: MW01-
01, MW01-02, MW01-03, MW01-07, MW01-10, MW03-04 and MW03-12;
• Continued quarterly groundwater monitoring at 7 wells: MW03-05, MW03-06, MW01-08,
MW03-09, MW03-11, MW07-13, andMW07-14;
12
-------
• Reduced groundwater monitoring frequency from quarterly to annually for eight contaminants:
bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, nickel and
vanadium;
• Reduced groundwater monitoring frequency from quarterly to annually for monitored natural
attenuation (MNA) parameters (except groundwater stabilization parameters), dissolved
hydrocarbon gases and inorganic anions. Eliminate sulfate, sulfide, phosphate and ammonia
nitrogen from the monitoring program;
• Reduced frequency of sediment and surface water monitoring from quarterly to annually, and
then from annually to every three years. Continue to monitor seeps annually at SW-06;
• Specified annual sampling will be conducted during the second quarter sampling event;
• Use passive diffusion bag (PDB) sampling for quarterly groundwater monitoring samples.
Groundwater samples collected during the annual sampling event (second quarter) will be
collected using low-flow sampling procedures. All groundwater samples collected from MW07-
13 will be collected using PDBs because low-flow groundwater sampling is not possible at
MW07-13; and
• Reduced cap monument surveying from quarterly to annually and reinstituted quarterly surveys
if cap movement accelerates substantially.
In April 2014, the IMMP was further updated (Addendum 2) to include the following:
• A requirement for evaluating MNA progress in meeting cleanup goals every five years;
• Documentation and certification of existing ICs at the Site annually;
• A requirement for a focused inspection and reporting of changes to land and groundwater use at
the Site; and
• The reporting of any construction activities and vandalism that occurred between quarterly
monitoring events.
III. PROGRESS SINCE THE LAST REVIEW
This section includes the protectiveness determinations and statements from the last FYR in 2019 and
2021 FYR Addendum as well as the recommendations from them and the current status of those
recommendations.
Table 2: Protectiveness Determinations/Statements from the 2019 FYR and 2021 FYR Addendum
ou#
Protectiveness
Determination
Protectiveness Statement
2019 FYR:
1 (Sitewide)
Protectiveness Deferred
A protectiveness determination of the remedy at the Van Dale
Junkyard Superfund Site cannot be made at this time until further
information is obtained. Further information will be obtained by
taking the following actions: 1) Complete two rounds of air and soil
gas sampling at the Site in accordance with the approved sampling
plan. If a complete VOC-contaminant VI exposure pathway exists at
the Site, determine whether VI of VOC-contaminants poses an
unacceptable risk to current or future residential users on the
uncapped portion of the Site. Based on the results, determine any
13
-------
additional actions needed such as additional appropriate land use and
VI controls. 2) Finalize the draft supplemental risk assessment to
determine whether soils in the uncapped portion of the Site pose an
unacceptable risk to current or future residential users; based on the
results of the supplemental risk assessment, determine appropriate
additional soil response actions and/or restrictions, if any.
2021 FYR
Addendum:
1 (Sitewide)
Short-term Protective
The remedy at the Van Dale Junkyard Site currently protects human
health and the environment because there are no complete exposure
pathways. Based on the evaluation of indoor, ambient, and subsurface
soil gas sampling, a complete VI exposure pathway does not exist at
the Site and further analysis of surface and subsurface soil data
determined that soils on the uncapped portion of the Site do not pose
an unacceptable risk to current or future residential users. The single
onsite residence is connected to municipal water and ICs are
preventing the installation and use of groundwater onsite effectively.
Further, the cap at the Site is functioning as intended, is being well-
maintained, and there has been no evidence of trespassing or
vandalism. Annual Site reports provided by the PRPs certify that ICs
required by the 1994 ROD that are in place are maintained and
effective. However, in order for the remedy to be protective in the
long-term, the following actions need to be taken to ensure
protectiveness: Perform analysis and any necessary further sampling
investigations in accordance with the 1994 ROD and Inspection,
Maintenance and Monitoring Plan (IMMP) to determine the
effectiveness of the MNA remedy and if implementation of
contingency measures are needed; Update the HHRA to include the
following sentence regarding VI 'Should subsurface maintenance
work or construction activities be necessary in the future, an
evaluation of the potential risks along with a risk mitigation plan will
be implemented at that time'; and, Update the long-term stewardship
procedures in the IMMP to include how to address IC issues if
identified during an inspection.
Table 3: Status of Recommendations from the 2019 FYR
OU#
Issue
Recommendations
Current
Status
Current Implementation
Status Description
Completion
Date (if
applicable)
1
(Sitewide)
The site record
does not document
whether a
complete VI
exposure pathway
exists in the
uncapped portion
of the Site and, if
it does exist,
whether such
exposure pathway
poses an
unacceptable risk
for current and
Complete two
rounds of air and
soil gas sampling at
the Site and submit
results of the
survey to EPA, in
accordance with
the approved
sampling plan. If a
complete VOC-
contaminant VI
exposure pathway
exists at the Site,
determine whether
Completed
The PRPs submitted, and EPA
approved, the Ambient Air
and Subsurface Soil Gas
Investigation Field Sampling
Plan and Quality Assurance
Project Plan (FSP and QAPP;
Geosyntec, 2018). The PRPs
subsequently completed two
rounds of air and soil gas
sampling in summer and
winter 2018. The VI
investigation consisted of the
following components:
subsurface soil gas probe
8/30/2019
14
-------
future residential
use.
VI of VOC-
contaminants poses
an unacceptable
risk to current or
future residential
users on the
uncapped portion
of the Site. Based
on the results,
determine any
additional actions
needed such as
additional
appropriate land
use and VI
controls.
installation and sampling;
outdoor air sampling; and
crawlspace and indoor air
sampling of the on-site
residential trailer. The PRPs
submitted documentation of
the sampling results and
analyses in the Ambient Air
and Subsurface Soil Gas
Investigation Report, which is
an attachment to the
Supplemental HHRA
Revision 4, submitted in
August 2019 (Supplemental
HHRA Rev. 4; Geosyntec,
2019). Results of the VI
investigation indicated no
indoor or outdoor VOC
exposure risk at the uncapped
portion of the Site.
1
(Sitewide)
Effective ICs need
to be
implemented,
monitored,
maintained and
enforced to assure
long-term
protectiveness of
the remedy.
Finalize and record
remaining ECs for
parcels owned by
the Estate of Mr.
Thomas Vandale
and property
owned by Jack
Longfellow.
Completed
The remaining two ECs have
since been finalized, signed,
and recorded. The EC for the
30.533-acre Estate of Mr.
Thomas Vandale area, also
referred to Areas A and B in
the 2019 FYR, was recorded
on February 11, 2019. It
should be noted that this area
also includes the
RESTRICTED area. The EC
for the 0.416-acre area
referred to as Jack Longfellow
property was recorded on
January 12, 2021.
1/12/2021
1
(Sitewide)
Upward trends in
contaminant
concentrations
have been
detected at a few
monitoring wells
(e.g., MW01-08
and MW03-09),
resulting in
concerns about the
progress being
made in
attenuating
contaminants via
MNA.
Perform analysis
and any necessary
further sampling
investigations in
accordance with
the 1994 ROD and
IMMP.
Completed
The PRPs provided and EPA
reviewed the sitewide
quarterly groundwater
monitoring data from June
2018 through March 2023 and
evaluated the contaminant
concentrations in monitoring
wells MW01-08 and MW03-
09 including the efficacy of
MNA as provided in the
PRPs' 2022 MNA Efficacy
Evaluation Report (Geosyntec,
2022). Overall, contaminant
concentrations are decreasing
and COCs are not migrating
offsite. This is a process EPA
intends to complete every four
years. The Data Review
10/10/2023
15
-------
section of this report provides
further detail. See also Issue
and Recommendation # 1 for
this FYR.
1
(Sitewide)
There is
uncertainty
regarding whether
current risks from
surface and
subsurface soil in
the uncapped
portion of the Site
is protective for
residential use.
Finalize the draft
supplemental risk
assessment to
determine whether
soils in the
uncapped portion
of the Site pose an
unacceptable risk
to current or future
residential users;
based on the results
of the supplemental
risk assessment,
determine
appropriate
additional soil
response actions
and/or restrictions,
if any.
Completed
Approved by EPA in March
2020, the Supplemental
HHRA Revision 4 included a
complete surface and
subsurface soil evaluation,
including: (i) development of
a conceptual site model; (ii)
data evaluation and selection
of constituents of potential
concern; (iii) exposure
assessment; (iv) toxicity
assessment; and (v) risk
characterization. The
Supplemental HHRA also
included an evaluation of
potential exposures for current
and future residents via the
inhalation pathway on the
uncapped portion of the Site.
Based on the evaluation of
surface and subsurface soil in
the uncapped portion of the
Site, the Supplemental HHRA
concluded no unacceptable
risk to current or future
residential users. Based on the
evaluation of indoor, ambient,
and subsurface soil gas, the
Supplemental HHRA
concluded no complete VI
exposure pathway exists on
the uncapped portion of the
Site.
3/20/2020
1
(Sitewide)
LTS procedures
are in-place but
must be updated to
be comprehensive.
Update the LTS
procedures in the
IMMP to include
how to address IC
issues if identified
during an
inspection.
Ongoing
EPA continues to work with
the PRP on the language
describing the procedures on
how to address IC issues
identified during an
inspection.
n/a
1
(Sitewide)
Effective ICs need
to be
implemented,
monitored,
maintained and
enforced to assure
long-term
protectiveness of
the remedy.
Conduct additional
IC evaluation
activities such as
determining if
OAC Rules 3701-
28-10(8) and (G)
and 3745-27-13
meet the IC
objectives and
Completed
EPA pursued ECs with the
existing and new landowners
to implement ICs for the Site.
Since all ECs have been
recorded, reliance on the Ohio
rules is no longer necessary to
implement the ICs.
1/12/2021
16
-------
requirements in the
ROD for
contaminated
groundwater and
the capped area of
the Site, and
whether an EC or
other ICs are
necessary to
address these
areas/media.
IV. FIVE-YEAR REVIEW PROCESS
Community Notification, Involvement & Site Interviews
A public notice was made available on the EPA's website (https://www.epa.gov/oh/fifth-five-vear-
review-process-van-dale-iunkyard-site). on July 27, 2023, stating that there was a FYR and inviting the
public to submit any comments to EPA (See Appendix D). No comments were received. Because EPA is
in regular contact with OEPA and the PRP's consultant, interviews were not conducted. The results of
the review and the FYR report will be made available at the Site information repository located at the
Washington County Public Library, 615 Fifth Street, Marietta, Ohio, and on the Van Dale Junkyard
webpage at https://www.epa.gov/superfund/vandale-iunkyard
Data Review
Groundwater/Surface Water/Sediments
Groundwater: Groundwater monitoring is conducted in accordance with the Inspection, Maintenance
and Monitoring Plan (IMMP) (Geosyntec, 2001) and the 2012 addendum to the IMMP. Groundwater
monitoring is conducted quarterly. During the first, third and fourth quarters, groundwater samples are
collected from seven monitoring wells (MW03-05, MW03-06, MW01-08, MW03-09, MW03-11,
MW07-13, and MW07-14) using PDBs and analyzed for VOCs. During the second quarter, groundwater
samples are collected from monitoring well MW07-13 by PDB and analyzed for VOCs, and
groundwater samples are collected from the remaining 13 wells using low flow sampling and analyzed
for VOCs, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (BEHP), select metals, and MNA parameters.
An analysis of groundwater data from June 2018 through March 2023 was completed for this FYR.
Based on historic exceedances of CUGs, six COCs DCE, cis-l,2-Dichloroethylene (cis-DCE), trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene (trans-DCE), tetrachloroethylene (PCE), 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (TCA), and VC were
analyzed to determine statistical trend and time to meet CUGs. Of the 14 monitoring wells examined,
five had levels of one or more COC above their respective CUGs for the five-year period. These are the
same wells as the previous five-year review period (June 2013 - March 2018). These wells and COCs
are:
MW01- 08 (DCE, cis-DCE, PCE, and VC)
In monitoring well MW01-08 there were four COCs with values above their respective CUGs, three of
which had concentrations well above their respective CUGs (DCE, cis- DCE, and VC). DCE had a very
17
-------
strong downward trend and the possibility of meeting the CUG in 2033. cis-DCE had a weak to non-
existent downward trend with the possibly of meeting the CUG in 2062/2067. PCE is exhibiting a
downward trend, no seasonality, and, since June 2022, concentrations have been below the CUG. VC is
exhibiting a very strong downward trend, no seasonality, with the possibility of meeting the CUG at the
end of 2023 or in 2024.
MW01-10 (DCE, PCE, and VC)
Monitoring well MW01-10 had one COC, DCE, that appears to be exhibiting a weak, upward trend.
PCE appears to have met the CUG in 2019 and is currently stable, exhibiting no trend. VC is showing a
strong downward trend with concentrations at or below the CUG.
MW03-06 (DCE and VC)
In monitoring well MW-03-06, DCE concentrations are stable and were above the CUG only two
quarters during the period analyzed. VC concentrations are stable and were above the CUG only three
quarters during the period analyzed.
MW03-09 (DCE, cis-DCE, PCE, and VC)
Monitoring well MW03-09 had four COCs that were consistently or often higher than their respective
CUGs. DCE is stable with concentrations hovering just over the CUG. This contaminant currently
shows a slight downward trend with the possibility of meeting the CUG in 2064. cis-DCE was found to
not have a statistically significant trend or seasonality, but the concentrations observed fluctuate above
and below the CUG. PCE also shows no trend or seasonality, concentrations are stable but fluctuate just
over the CUG. VC, slightly elevated and stable, and has only exceeded the CUG three quarters over the
last five years.
MW03-11 (PCE and VC)
In well MW03-11 there are only two COCs, PCE and VC, with concentrations above the CUGs. PCE
concentrations, consistently greater than the CUG, are demonstrating a very strong downward trend
without seasonality, and may possibility meet the CUG by 2029 or 2030. VC slightly elevated and
stable, and has only exceeded the CUG three quarters over the last five years.
The complete EPA analysis can be found in Appendix E.
MNA Evaluation:
The IMMP, as revised, requires the groundwater data be used to evaluate the effectiveness of MNA
processes in attenuating remaining site contaminants to meet applicable CUGs under the ROD. This
MNA evaluation is required every five years, to coincide with EPA's FYRs. In its 2022 MNA
Efficacy Evaluation Report (See Appendix F), the PRPs provided the following conclusions and
recommendations:
• Natural attenuation is occurring at varying rates due to the natural physical properties of the
aquifer matrix and the distribution of COCs at the Site. The continued presence of COCs in
groundwater is attributed to a secondary source of dissolved mass in the low permeability rock
matrix.
• The attenuation over distance for all COCs, combined with the depletion of back-diffusion
contributions to the plume is resulting in the receding COC plume observed at the Site.
• VOC concentrations are decreasing, as evidenced by plume shrinkage and receding source decay
rates, at an expected and acceptable rate given the fractured rock geology of the Site.
18
-------
• Data show that the COCs are not migrating off-Site as evidenced by VOCs measured below the
ROD CUGs or non-detect in downgradient/side-gradient monitoring wells for at least the last
nine years.
• It is recommended that continued monitoring be conducted in accordance with the IMMP and
subsequent IMMP addenda to confirm that VOC concentrations in the former source area are
continuing to decline.
EPA generally agrees with the conclusions and recommendations of the PRPs 2022 MNA Efficacy
Evaluation Report. Estimated time to reach CUGs, based on trend analysis of the data completed by
EPA, is largely consistent with the evaluation completed by the PRP. The timeline to achieve CUGs,
through MNA following source removal, was not modeled for the FS as part of the alternatives analysis,
but is expected to take at least 30 years.
Table 4: Range of Contaminant of Concern Concentrations in Select Wells
June 2018-March 2023 Concentration Range (ppb)
Cleanup
Goal
Contaminant (ppb) MW01-08 MW01-10 MW03-06 MW03-09 MW03-11
DCE 1.5 31.1 -65.2 0.9 -3.2 0.5 -2.8 3.0 - 15.4 0.5 - 1.0
cis-DCE 100 557 - 869 9.8 -44.6 6.6-36.2 24.4 - 149 0.4- 1.9
trans-DCE 100 2.8 - 5.9 0.3 - 1.0 0.5 - 1.0 0.4- 1.0 .05 - 1.0
PCE 1.5 0.3 - 5.0 0.8 -2.0 0.3 - 1.0 8.3 -40.6 1.3 - 14.5
TCA 20 0.4 - 5.0 0.4 - 1.0 0.4 - 1.0 0.3 -2.1 0.3 - 1.0
VC 0.5 1.6-245 0.2 -0.5 0.3 - 1.0 0.3 - 1.0 .03 - 1.0
Surface Water and Sediments: The IMMP requires surface water and sediment monitoring on a triennial
basis (once every three years), and the surface water seep location annually. Surface water and sediment
samples were last collected in 2021. The surface water seep (SW-06) has not been sampled since 2017
due to insufficient water. Sediment and surface water sampling locations along Tributary A are co-
located at five locations (SW-01 thru SW-05 and SED-01 thru SED-05). Three additional locations
along Tributary A are monitored for sediments only (SED-06 thru SED-08).
The surface water samples were analyzed for five VOCs (1,1,1-TCA, 1,1-DCE, cis-l,2-DCE, PCE, and
trans-1,2-DCE). VOCs were not detected in any surface water samples. The surface water samples were
also analyzed for three metals: arsenic, cleanup level 48 ug/1; lead, cleanup level 3.2 ug/1; and silver;
cleanup level 0.12ug/l. These three metals were not detected above CUGs in any sample.
Eight sediment samples were analyzed for one VOC (PCE) and one SVOC (BEHP). PCE and BEHP
were not detected in any of the sediment samples. Sediment samples were also analyzed for three metals
(antimony, arsenic, and lead). Antimony was not detected in any of the sediment samples. Arsenic was
detected in all the sediment samples at concentrations exceeding the cleanup level (0.24 milligrams per
kilogram [mg/kg]). The concentrations of arsenic ranged from 7.97 mg/kg to 14.2 mg/kg. Lead was
detected in all sediment samples with concentrations ranging from 11.8 mg/kg to 68.3 mg/kg. Five of
the eight samples exceeded the cleanup level (15.9 mg/kg) for lead. These results are consistent with
historical sediment sampling results, except for the lead concentration at location SED-02. The
19
-------
concentration of lead at SED-02 (68.3 mg/kg) is higher than historic concentrations at this location,
which have ranged from 10.3 mg/kg to 28.6 mg/kg; however, given that lead concentrations in other
locations and in surface water samples are consistent with historic results, no action is required at this
time.
Site Inspection
The inspection of the Site was conducted on 4/27/2023. In attendance were Bill Murray, EPA RPM;
Baxter Foskuhl and Austin Tweedy, OEPA; and, Diane McCausland, Engineering Management, Inc.
The purpose of the inspection was to assess the protectiveness of the remedy. Based on observations, the
remedy appears to be functioning properly.
• The cap, monitoring wells, gates, and fencing appeared to be in good condition;
• All signs are in place and legible;
• Survey markers for the cap monuments were readily visible;
• No evidence of vandalism or trespassing was seen during the walking tour of the Site; and
• No changes to land use were observed. It is still considered rural residential.
The site inspection checklist can be found in Appendix G.
V. TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT
QUESTION A: Is the remedy functioning as intended by the decision documents?
Answer: Yes.
Question A Summary:
The ROD required excavation and disposal (off-site and on-site) of source material, placement of a
RCRA Subtitle C hazardous waste cap over a 4-acre section of the Site, MNA to meet groundwater
CUGs, and ICs to ensure the integrity of the remedy is maintained. Observations made during the FYR
Inspection, completed April 27, 2023, indicated the cap was functioning as intended, was being well
maintained, and that there was no evidence of trespassing or vandalism at the Site.
Ten of the fourteen monitoring wells in the network exhibited contaminant concentrations at or below
their respective CUGs. MNA was expected to take a minimum of 30 years to achieve CUGs. The rate of
progress in attenuating, or estimated time to reach the CUGs, at two wells, MW01-08 and MW03-09,
could be 40 years (2064), based on current data trend analysis.
All ICs, in the form of ECs, have been implemented. All ECs are recorded and functioning properly. In
addition, a revision to the IMMP is being developed to include LTS procedures for addressing how
issues discovered during IC inspections will be addressed.
QUESTION B: Are the exposure assumptions, toxicity data, cleanup levels, and remedial action
objectives (RAOs) used at the time of the remedy selection still valid?
Answer: No
Question B Summary:
20
-------
The Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for cis-l,2-dichloroethene was revised to 70 ppb and the
current CUG at the Site is 100 ppb. The CUG no longer meets ARARs and must be revised to meet the
ARARs. EPA will work with the Office of Regional Counsel to revise or amend the enforcement
documents, as appropriate, to document and formalize the change to the CUG. This does not affect
current protectiveness, although, CUGs for cis-l,2-dichloroethene have not yet been attained at two
monitoring wells, and there is no current human exposure to contaminated groundwater.
Other than the change in MCL discussed above, the RAOs, exposure assumptions, and groundwater/soil
cleanup levels are still valid. In addition, soils in the uncapped portion of the site were evaluated in a
supplemental Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) completed in August 2019 based on a residential
use scenario that included potential risks from the VI exposure pathway, which was not evaluated during
the RI, and the evaluation indicated that there is no complete exposure pathway (Geosyntec, 2019).
Changes in Exposure Pathways
As indicated in the previous FYR (EPA, 2019), the ROD required contaminated soil in the uncapped
portion of the Site to be cleaned up to residential use. However, the 1999 post-excavation risk
assessment performed by the PRPs evaluated risks from soil in the uncapped area based on a hunting
and trespassing exposure scenario (3 x 10 6risk). The PRPs used this scenario because hunting and
trespassing were the current and reasonably anticipated future land use of the property at the time.
Approved by EPA in March 2020, the Supplemental HHRA Revision 4 included a complete surface and
subsurface soil evaluation, including: (i) development of a conceptual site model; (ii) data evaluation
and selection of constituents of potential concern; (iii) exposure assessment; (iv) toxicity assessment;
and (v) risk characterization. The Supplemental HHRA also included an evaluation of potential
exposures for current and future residents via the inhalation pathway on the uncapped portion of the
Site. Based on the evaluation of surface and subsurface soil in the uncapped portion of the Site, the
Supplemental HHRA concluded no unacceptable risk to current or future residential users. Based on the
evaluation of indoor, ambient, and subsurface soil gas, the Supplemental HHRA concluded no complete
VI exposure pathway exists on the uncapped portion of the Site.
Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) have been identified as emerging COCs in groundwater and
have been associated with a variety of industrial and municipal wastes that may have been disposed of at
Van Dale Junkyard. PFAS were not considered at the time of remedy selection. The PRP Group will
need to analyze for PFAS as potential emerging COCs in the groundwater in a future annual
groundwater sampling event. EPA anticipates this will occur in 2024 or 2025. Potential PFAS
contamination does not affect the current protectiveness of the remedy because all known contamination
is contained, and not migrating and effective ICs are in place. Furthermore, there is no one drinking or
using the water downgradient of the landfill and there are no municipal water supply wells within the
immediate vicinity of the Site, so if PFAS is found to be present there is no complete exposure pathway.
1,4-Dioxane has also been identified as emerging COC in groundwater and has been associated with a
variety of industrial and municipal wastes that may have been disposed of at Van Dale Junkyard. 1,4-
Dioxane was not considered at the time of remedy selection. The PRP Group will need to analyze for
1,4-Dioxane as a potential emerging COC in the groundwater in a future annual groundwater sampling
event. EPA anticipates this will occur in 2024 or 2025. Potential 1,4-Dioxane contamination does not
affect the current protectiveness of the remedy because all known contamination is contained, and not
migrating and effective ICs are in place. Furthermore, there is no one drinking or using the water
downgradient of the landfill and there are no municipal water supply wells within the immediate vicinity
of the Site, so if 1,4-Dioxane is found to be present there is no complete exposure pathway.
21
-------
QUESTION C : Has any other information come to light that could call into question the protectiveness
of the remedy?
Answer: No
Question C Summary:
Based on information available (e.g., State/PRP reports, site inspections, etc.), there have been no
impacts from natural disasters, no newly identified ecological risks, or any other information that has
been identified that could affect the protectiveness of the remedy for the Site.
VI. ISSUES/RECOMMENDATIONS
Issues/Recommendations
()l (s) without Issues/Recommendations Identified in (ho l i\e-Ye:ir Rexiew:
none
Issues and Recommendations Identified in the l"i\e-Year Rexiew:
Issue #1
OU(s): 1
(sitewide)
Issue Category: Remedy Performance
Issue: While statistical analysis indicates a downward trend in contaminant
concentrations in two monitoring wells (MW01-08 and MW-03-09), concerns
remain about the progress being made in attenuating contaminants via MNA.
Recommendation: EPA should continue to complete multiple statistical analyses
of the groundwater data in addition to reviewing the data trend analysis completed
by the PRP.
Affect Current
Protectiveness
Affect Future
Protectiveness
Party
Responsible
Oversight Party
Milestone Date
No
Yes
EPA
EPA/State
10/31/2027
Issue #2
OU(s): 1
(sitewide)
Issue Category: Institutional Controls
Issue: LTS procedures are in-place but must be updated to be
comprehensive.
Recommendation: Update the LTS procedures in the IMMP to include how
to address issues if identified during an inspection.
Affect Current
Protectiveness
Affect Future
Protectiveness
Party
Responsible
Oversight Party
Milestone Date
No
Yes
PRP
EPA/State
10/1/2024
22
-------
Issue #3
OU(s): 1
(sitewide)
Issue Category: Monitoring
Issue: Groundwater has not been analyzed for PFAS. PFAS have been identified
as emerging contaminants of concern in groundwater and has been associated
with a variety of industrial and municipal wastes that may have been disposed of
at Van Dale Junkyard.
Recommendation: Conduct PFAS sampling and analysis in groundwater
monitoring wells.
Affect Current
Protectiveness
Affect Future
Protectiveness
Party
Responsible
Oversight Party
Milestone Date
No
Yes
PRP
EPA/State
9/30/2025
Issue #4
OU(s): 1
(sitewide)
Issue Category: Monitoring
Issue: Groundwater has not been analyzed for 1,4-Dioxane. 1,4-Dioxane has been
identified as an emerging contaminant of concern in groundwater and has been
associated with a variety of industrial and municipal wastes that may have been
disposed of at Van Dale Junkyard.
Recommendation: Conduct 1,4-dioxane sampling and analysis in groundwater
monitoring wells.
Affect Current
Protectiveness
Affect Future
Protectiveness
Party
Responsible
Oversight Party
Milestone Date
No
Yes
PRP
EPA/State
9/30/2025
OTHER FINDINGS
In addition, the following issues and recommendations were identified during the FYR, but do not affect
current protectiveness:
• The Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for cis-l,2-dichloroethene was revised to 70 ppb and
the current CUG at the Site is 100 ppb. The CUG no longer meets ARARs and must be revised
to meet the ARARs. EPA will work with the Office of Regional Counsel to revise or amend the
enforcement documents, as appropriate, to document and formalize the change to the CUG. This
does not affect current protectiveness, although CUGs for cis-l,2-dichloroethene have not yet
been attained at two monitoring wells, there is no current human exposure to contaminated
groundwater.
• The 1994 ROD prescribed in place bioremediation of sediments found in the seeps on the north
slope. Sediment and seep water sampling results obtained during the RD indicated there was no
need for bioremediation for seep sediments and EPA eliminated the bioremediation for seep
23
-------
sediments from the design. Formal documentation of this decision cannot be found. EPA will
include this decision in the documentation of the above CUG change for cis-l,2-dichloroethene
VII. PROTECTIVENESS STATEMENT
OU1 and Sitewide Protectiveness Statement
Protectiveness Determination:
Short-term Protective
Protectiveness Statement: The remedy at the Site currently protects human health and the environment
because there are no complete exposure pathways and is functioning as intended. Although, cleanup
goals have not yet been attained in groundwater, there is no current human exposure to contaminated
groundwater. The single onsite residence is connected to municipal water. Effective ICs are in place
and there is no one drinking or using the water downgradient of the landfill and there are no municipal
water supply wells within the immediate vicinity of the Site. Further, the cap at the Site is functioning
as intended, is being well-maintained, and there has been no evidence of trespassing or vandalism.
Annual Site reports provided by the PRPs certify that ICs required by the 1994 ROD that are in place
are maintained and effective.
However, in order for the remedy to be protective in the long-term, the following actions need to be
taken to ensure protectiveness: Groundwater must be sampled and analyzed for PFAS and 1,4-dioxane;
LTS procedures in the IMPP must be updated to include how to address issues if identified during an
inspection; and EPA must continue to complete multiple statistical analyses of the groundwater
monitoring data to ensure effectiveness of the MNA remedy.
VIII. NEXT REVIEW
The next FYR report for the Van Dale Junkyard Superfund Site is required five years from the
completion date of this review.
24
-------
APPENDIX A - REFERENCE LIST
Administrative Order on Consent for Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study, July 7, 1987
Antea Group, Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Reports - Van Dale Junkyard Site, 2019, 2020, 2021,
2022, 2023
City of Marietta, Ohio, On-Site Inspection of the Van Dale Junkyard Site, 2019, 2020,2021 2022, 2023
Geosyntec, Final Design Report, 1999
Geosyntec, Inspection, Maintenance, and Monitoring Plan - Addendum 2, April 2014
Geosyntec, Supplemental Human Health Risk Assessment - Revision 4, August 2019
Geosyntec, MNA Efficacy Evaluation, January 2022
Unilateral Administrative Order for Remedial Design and Remedial Action, August 16, 1994
U.S.EPA, 1992 Final RI Report, Van Dale Junkyard Superfund Site, Washington County, Ohio
U.S.EPA, 1994 Record of Decision Van Dale Junkyard Site, Washington County, Ohio
U.S.EPA, Fourth Five-Year Review Report for Van Dale Junkyard Superfund Site, February 22, 2019
U.S.EPA, Trend Analysis of Six Chemicals of Concern in the Groundwater at the Van Dale Junkyard
Superfund Site June 2018 through March 2023, October 2023
25
-------
APPENDIX B - Figure 1: Site Maps of the Vandale Junkyard Site, Washington County, Ohio
WMM4
Edge of Cap
RCRA Subtitle C Cap
Fence
Trailer /
Mobil Horn*?
Well identifier
Site boundary (appiox,)
OHIO
QBUHIHH
Marietta
vaixiale Junk
Van dale J unkyard
E PA ID: OI ID980794606
Super! unci
US Environmental Protection Agency
-------
APPENDIX B - Figure 2: Map of the Vandale Junkyard Site with the Institutional Control
Boundaries Identified
Legend
Sampling Locations
& Collection Sump
• Monitoring Well
~ Sediment
a. Surface Water
I I Vandale Estate Property
Full Extent of Landfill Cap
I I (Restricted Area)
Existing Fence
; __j Longfellow Property Boundary
—¦¦¦— Tributary A
Site Access Road Right-of-Way
Restricted Area Requiring ICs
Sources: Parcel Boundaries approximated from Washington County, OH parcel Maps
k GeoSytstec Consultants
VANDALE JUNKYARD SITE
INSTITUTIONAL CONTROL MAP
2018
-------
APPENDIX C - Environmental Covenants for Vandale Junkyard Site
-------
EPA Region 5 Records Ctr.
Hllllli
ENGINEERING
294849
April 16, 2008
Mr. Ronald Murawski
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region V
77 W. Jackson Blvd. (SR-6J)
Chicago, IL 60604
Re: Vandale Junkyard Site
Dear Mr. Murawski:
Enclosed are four copies of the recorded Environmental Covenant (Covenant) for the portion of
the Vandale Junkyard Site remedy that extends across the Site boundary on to property owned by
David and Nancy Spindlcr, Maria Kniffin Marsh, and Louis and Nancy Spindler. The Covenant
was recorded in Washington County. Ohio on April 9. 2008.
Should you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours.
James R. Campbell. Ph.D.. P.E.
enclosure
cc: M. Sherron (Ohio EPA)
Vandale Technical Committee
vandale\epa\correspondence 2008\Murawski Letter 04-16-08
1=1(11) Ardmori' lil\d. Suite 502. Pittsburgh. PA 15221-1168 T i12.2-h.091~ 1-' 112.2 13 ¦ 3 ^ <) i \\ ww.e-emi.eom
ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, INC.
-------
F i led Tor Record in
WASHINGTON COUNTY» OHIO
TRftCEY WRIGHT» RECORDER
H4-09-2008 At 12:57 pm.
DEED 156.00
OR Volume 464 Pose 631 - 648
Instrument VoIuop Pqsp
200800002580 OR 464 631
To be recorded with Deed
Records - ORC § 317.08
ENVIRONMENTAL COVENANT
This Environmental Covenant is made as of the HJiVi day of tfalRcH , 2008, by and
among David and Nancy Spindler, Louis and Nancy Spindler, and Maria KnifFin Marsh, Owners
and Holders, and U.S. EPA (as further identified below) pursuant to Ohio Revised Code
("ORC") §§ 5301.80 to 5301.92 for the purpose of subjecting the Restricted Area (described
below) to the activity and use limitations and to the rights of access described below.
I. BACKGROUND
1. Pursuant to Section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act ("CERCLA"), 42 U.S.C. § 9605, the United States Environmental Protection
Agency ("U.S. EPA") placed the Vandale Junkyard Site ("Site"), located at Marietta Township
Road No. T-83, in Washington County, Ohio, on the National Priorities List, set forth in 40
C.F.R. Part 300, Appendix B, by publication in the Federal Register. 51 Fed. Reg. 21,078 (June
10, 1986).
2. U.S. EPA issued a Record of Decision (ROD) on March 31, 1994, providing for, among
other things, consolidating wastes and placing a multi-layer cover over hazardous substances and
wastes remaining at the Site, minimizing the potential for direct contact with hazardous
substances and minimizing releases from the Site; continuing to operate and maintain the remedy
after the remedy is constructed; continuing to monitor the Site and surrounding area for any
potential releases including releases to the surface waters, sediments, and groundwater, the soils
and the air; imposing Site security requirements at and near the covered wastes and substances,
and; requiring institutional controls for the Site area through deed restrictions and/or zoning.
The institutional controls, which are addressed more specifically in this document, are to protect
the performance of the remedy and prevent the exposure of humans or the environment to
contaminants, by limiting the future use of the property at and near where remedial construction
has occurred, and by limiting future uses that may interfere with maintaining or monitoring the
performance of the remedy. Ohio EPA concurred with the ROD.
3. On August 16, 1994 and October 16, 1995, U.S. EPA issued Unilateral Administrative
Orders ("UAO"). In the Matter of: The Vandale Junkvard Site. Case Nos. V-W-94-C-307
(August 16, 1994) and V-W-96-C-318 (October 16, 1995) (collectively, "UAOs") to Goodrich
Corp., Cytec Industries Inc., Kardex Systems, Inc., Lockheed Martin Corp., Exxon Mobil Corp.,
and, Unisys Corporation, (collectively the "Performing Respondents") and Mr. Thomas Vandale
as a cooperating Respondent, ordering them to implement the remedial actions selected in the
March 31, 1994 ROD.
4. With the exception of the institutional controls, and operation and maintenance of the
remedy, the remedial action has been implemented at the Site, and a portion of the remedy
Vandale\HnvironmentaI Covenant
-------
Instrument Voluae Page
200800002580 OR 464- 632
(surface water drainage channel and subsurface gravel fill) extends onto property (Restricted
Area) owned by David and Nancy Spindler, Louis and Nancy Spindler, and Maria Kniffin
Marsh, as shown in Exhibit A.
II. STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY AND PURPOSE
5. Environmental Covenant. This instrument is an environmental covenant executed and
delivered pursuant to §§ 5301.80 to 5301.92 of the Ohio Revised Code. U.S. EPA by issuing the
ROD, and Ohio EPA by concurring in the ROD, have "determined or approved the
environmental response project," under Section 5301.80 of the Ohio UECA statute. The UAOs
constitute an environmental response project as defined by ORC §5301.80(E).
6. Access to. and Activity and Use I imitations at. the Site. In executing this Environmental
Covenant, the Owners/Holders agree: 1) to grant a permanent right of access to the Restricted
Area to the Access Grantees (as defined in this document) for purposes of repairing the surface
water drainage channel and subsurface gravel fill, and appurtenant structures, and 2) to impose
on the Restricted Area activity and use limitations as covenants that will run with the land for the
purpose of protecting human health and the environment.
III. DEFINITIONS
In addition to the definitions in Ohio Revised Code ("ORC") §§ 5301.80 to 5301.92,
incorporated here by reference, the following definitions shall apply to this Environmental
Covenant.
7. Access Grantees shall mean the U.S. EPA, Ohio EPA, and the Performing Respondents,
their successors and assigns, and their respective officers, employees, agents, contractors, and
other invitees (the Vandale Group).
8. Access Property shall mean the property currently owned by David and Nancy Spindler,
Louis and Nancy Spindler, and Maria Kniffin Marsh as shown in Exhibit A and described in
Exhibit B.
9. U.S. EPA shall mean the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and any
successor departments or agencies of the United States.
10. Restricted Area shall mean an approximately 0.171 acre tract of real property currently
owned by David and Nancy Spindler, Louis and Nancy Spindler, and Maria Kniffin Marsh in
Washington County, Ohio, more particularly described in Exhibit A, attached and incorporated
by reference into this Environmental Covenant. See Exhibit B for a legal description of the
Restricted Area.
11. Grantee. Owners David and Nancy Spindler, Louis and Nancy Spindler, and Maria
Kniffin Marsh whose property description and location are listed above in paragraph 10, are the
grantees of this Environmental Covenant.
Spindler Covenant
2
-------
Instrument Volume Page
200800002580 OR 464 633
12. Holder shall mean the Owners, David and Nancy Spindler, Louis and Nancy Spindler,
and Maria Kniffin Marsh, who own the property described above in paragraph 10, and who are
the holders of this Environmental Covenant.
13. Ohio EPA shall mean the State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, and any
successor departments or agencies of the State of Ohio.
14. Owners shall mean David and Nancy Spindler, Louis and Nancy Spindler, and Maria
Kniffin Marsh, who are the current owners of the Restricted Area described in paragraph 10,
above.
15. Performing Respondents, also known as the Vandale Junkyard PRP Group, shall mean
the following respondents to the August 16, 1994 and October 16, 1995, U.S. EPA issued IJAOs,
In the Matter of: The Vandale Junkyard Site. Case Nos. V-W-94-C-307 (August 16, 1994) and
V-W-96-C-318 (October 16, 1995), and any successor entities: the Goodrich Corp., Cytec
Industries Inc., Kardex Systems, Inc., Lockheed Martin Corp., Exxon Mobil Corp., and Unisys
Corporation.
16. Unilateral Administrative Order ("UAO" or "Order") shall mean the August 16, 1994 and
October 16, 1995, U.S. EPA issued UAOs, In the Matter of: The Vandale Junkyard Site. Case
Nos. V-W-94-C-307 (August 16, 1994) and V-W-96-C-318 (October 16, 1995) (collectively,
"UAOs") to Goodrich Corp., Cytec Industries Inc., Kardex Systems, Inc., Lockheed Martin
Corp., Exxon Mobil Corp., and, Unisys Corporation, (collectively the "Performing
Respondents") and Mr. Thomas Vandale as a cooperating Owner Respondent, ordering them to
implement the remedial actions selected in the March 31, 1994 ROD for the Site.
Now therefore, Owners and U.S. EPA agree to the following:
IV. ACCESS
17. Access to the Site. Owners agrees for self and successors in title that U.S. EPA, Ohio EPA,
the Performing Respondents, and their employees, agents, contractors and invitees, shall have
and hereby grant to each of them unrestricted right of access to the Restricted Area, to undertake
the Permitted Uses described in paragraph 18, below. The Restricted Area is shown on Exhibit
A. The right of access granted under this paragraph 17 shall be irrevocable while this Covenant
remains in full force and effect. Notwithstanding the above, the parties agree that they shall
access the Restricted Area from the adjacent property to the west owned by Mr. Thomas
Vandale.
18. Permitted Uses of Access. The right of access granted under Paragraph 17 of this
Environmental Covenant shall provide Access Grantees with access at all reasonable times to the
Site for the purpose of conducting any activity relating to the UAOs and the ROD, including, but
not limited to, the following activities:
a. Implementing or enforcing this Environmental Covenant, consistent with the
provisions of ORC §5301.82(A)(6);
Spindler Covenant
3
-------
Instrument VoIump Pas*
200800002580 OR 464 634
b. Conducting investigations relating to evaluating the integrity or protectiyeness of
the remedial action that has been implemented pursuant to the ROD and the UAOs;
c. Obtaining samples;
d. Implementing Work pursuant to the ROD and the UAOs, including but not
limited to conducting sampling, and repairing and maintaining the surface water drainage
channel and subsurface gravel fill and appurtenant structures:
e. Determining whether the Restricted Area is being used in a manner that is
prohibited or restricted; and
f. Assessing proposed changes to the Activity and Use Limitations, and assessing
proposed changes in any property interest in the Restricted Area.
V. ACTIVITY AND USE LIMITATIONS
19. Activity and Use Limitations The activity and use limitations set forth in this
Environmental Covenant are to protect human health and the environment. Specified activity
and use limitations are intended to protect the performance of the remedy for the Site and prevent
the exposure of humans or the environment to hazardous substances and contaminants, by
limiting future uses of property at and near where remedial construction has occurred, and by
limiting future uses that may interfere with access to, monitoring the performance of, assessing
or maintaining the remedy.
a. Activity and Use Limitations Do Not Restrict Remedial Work. This Section V
does not limit the Access Grantees from activities and uses on or near the Restricted Area when
performing their obligations to implement, monitor, assess or maintain the Site remedy as
provided by the ROD and UAOs, including but not limited to repairing and maintaining the
surface water drainage channel and subsurface gravel fill and appurtenant structures.
b. General Activity and Use Limitations. Unless U.S. EPA grants prior written
consent for such use, Owners agree for selves and successors in title not to permit the Restricted
Area to be used in any manner that may interfere with or adversely affect, as determined by U.S.
EPA: (i) access to the Restricted Area; (ii) monitoring, inspecting, or investigating Restricted
Area conditions; or (iii) the integrity or protectiveness of the surface water drainage channel and
subsurface gravel fill and appurtenant structures. Owners' agreement restricting use of the
Restricted Area shall include, but not be limited to, not, permitting any mining, excavation,
grading, building, or the installation or construction of, any buildings, wells, pipes, ditches, or
any other structures on the Restricted Area unless first obtaining U.S. EPA's written consent to
such use or activity. In paragraph 19.d., below, U.S. EPA is providing written consent
identifying allowable uses of the Site and corresponding conditions for such uses.
c. Future Activity and Use Limitations. Owner covenants for himself and his
successors and assigns that the Restricted Area future uses shall be only in accordance with a
Spinciler Covenant
4
-------
Instrument Volume Pqsp
- - 200800002580 OR 464 635
U.S. EPA-approved plan for re-use. The parties shall agree to amend this Environmental
Covenant pursuant to paragraph 24, as a prerequisite to U.S. EPA approval of a proposed plan
for re-use, to the extent necessary to incorporate the proposed re-use.
d. Activities and Uses Not Prohibited. This Environmental Covenant does not
prohibit any activity or land use of the Restricted Area which, as planned and as implemented,
would neither interfere with, nor adversely affect, human health or the environment, the surface
water drainage channel and subsurface gravel fill and appurtenant structures, and Restricted Area
access, as determined by U.S. EPA. U.S. EPA and Ohio EPA must be consulted regarding any
proposed activities and uses not specifically addressed in this Environmental Covenant, prior to
implementing the proposed activity or use. After the consultation, U.S. EPA, in consultation
with Ohio EPA, will provide a responsive evaluation of the proposed activity or use, and such
evaluation shall not be unreasonably withheld. Based on this consultation process, livestock
grazing, hunting, and traversing the Restricted Area, excluding the fenced portion of the Site
remedy, is not prohibited in the Restricted Area.
e. Fenced Portion - Activity and Use Limitations. The fenced portion of the Site
remedy is shown in Exhibit A and a legal description is provided in Exhibit C. Owners covenant
for selves and successors and assigns that the fenced portion of the Site remedy extending into
the Restricted Area shall be used only in accordance with a U.S. EPA-approved written plan for
re-use. In addition to any more restrictive Activity and Use Limitations provided in
subparagraphs 19.a. through 19.c., Owners agree for selves and successors in title not to use the
fenced portion of the Restricted Area, and not to permit others to use the fenced portion, without
a re-use plan approved in writing by U.S. EPA. In particular, Owner agrees that the fenced
portion of the Restricted Area shall not be used for:
i. generating, treating, storing, or disposing of any waste, hazardous
substance, or scrap material;
ii. conducting any activity or use which may disturb the surface of the
property, including but not limited to operating motorized vehicles or conducting
agricultural activities such as farming and/or allowing animals to traverse or graze;
iii. extracting any material from or discharging any material into or onto the
property, and constructing, repairing, maintaining, or using groundwater extraction,
discharge or injection equipment such as wells, seepage ponds and leach fields; and
iv. activities prohibited as provided by Ohio Administrative Code Chapter
3745-27, including but not limited to, landscaping, digging, grading, filling, drilling,
mining or constructing upon the property.
VI. GENERAL PROVISIONS
20. Running with the Land. This Environmental Covenant shall be binding upon the Owners
and all assigns and successors in interest, including any Transferee, and shall run with the land,
pursuant to ORC § 5301.85, subject to amendment or termination as set forth in this
Environmental Covenant. The term "Transferee," as used in this Environmental Covenant, shall
mean any future owner of any portion of an interest in the Site, including, but not limited to,
owners of an interest in fee simple, mortgagees, easement holders, and/or lessees.
Spindler Covenant
5
-------
Instrument Volume Posp
200800002580 OR 464 A36
21. Requirements for Notice to U.S. EPA Following Transfer of an Interest in, or Concerning
Proposed Changes in the Use of. Applications for Building Permits for, or Proposals for any Site
Work Affecting Contamination on. the Restricted Area. Neither Owners nor any Holder shall
transfer any interest in the Restricted Area or make proposed changes in the use of the Restricted
Area, or make applications for building permits for, or proposals for any work in the Restricted
Area without first providing notice to U.S. EPA and obtaining any approvals or consents to the
proposed change or use.
22. Notice upon Conveyance. Each instrument conveying any interest in the Property or any
portion of the Property shall contain a notice specifying the activity and use limitations, and
grants of access, set forth in this Environmental Covenant, and providing the recorded location of
this Environmental Covenant. The notice shall be substantially in the following form:
TIIE INTEREST CONVEYED HEREBY IS SUBJECT TO AN
ENVIRONMENTAL COVENANT, DATED , 200_, RECORDED
IN THE DEED OR OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE WASHINGTON
COUNTY RECORDER ON , 200_, IN [DOCUMENT , or
BOOK , PAGE J. THE ENVIRONMENTAL COVENANT
CONTAINS THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITY AND USE LIMITATIONS:
[Insert the language that describes the activity and use limitations exactly as it
appears in the Environmental Covenant.]
Owners shall notify Ohio EPA and U.S. EPA within ten days after each conveyance of an
interest in any portion of the Property. Owners' notice shall include the name, address, and
telephone number of the Transferee, a copy of the deed or other documentation evidencing the
conveyance, and a survey map that shows the boundaries of the property being transferred.
23. Administrative Record. Consistent with the provisions of ORC § 5301.82(A)(8), the U.S.
EPA established an administrative record for the Vandale Junkyard Superfund Site at the U.S.
EPA, Region 5, Superfund Division, 77 W. Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois. A copy of this
administrative record is available for public viewing at the Washington County Public Library,
615 5th Street, Marietta, Ohio, 45750. The library may also be contacted at (740) 373-1057.
24. Amendments; Early Termination. This Environmental Covenant may be modified or
amended or terminated while Owners own the property only by a writing signed by Owners and
U.S. EPA with the formalities required for the execution of a deed in Ohio which is recorded in
the Office of the Recorder of Washington County, Ohio. Upon transfer of all or any portion of
the Site, Owners waive any rights that they might otherwise have under Section 5301.90 of the
Ohio Revised Code to withhold their consent to any amendments, modifications, or termination
of this Environmental Covenant, to the extent that they have transferred their interest in that
portion of the Restricted Area affected by the modification, amendment or termination. The
rights of Owners' successors in interest to modify, amend or terminate this Environmental
Covenant are governed by the provisions of Section 5301.90 of the Ohio Revised Code.
Spindter Covenant
6
-------
Instrument Volume Rase
200800002580 OR 464 637
25. Other Matters.
a. Representations and Warranties of Owners. Owners represent and warrant: that
Owners are the sole owners of the Restricted Area; that Owners hold fee simple title to the
Restricted Area which is free, clear and unencumbered; that the Owners have identified ail other
persons that own an interest in or hold an encumbrance on the Property and notified such persons
of the Owner's intention to enter into this Environmental Covenant; that Owners have the power
and authority to make and enter into this Environmental Covenant as Owners and Holders, to
grant the rights and privileges provided here and to carry out all obligations of Owners and
Holders in this Environmental Covenant; that this Environmental Covenant has been executed
and delivered pursuant to the UAOs; and, that this Environmental Covenant will not materially
violate or contravene or constitute a material default under any other agreement, document or
instrument to which Owners are parties or by which Owners may be bound or affected.
b. Right to Enforce Environmental Covenant Against Owners; Equitable Remedies.
In the event that Owners or any other person should attempt to deny the rights of access granted
under Section IV or should violate the restrictions on activities and uses of the Restricted Area
set forth in Section V, then, in addition to any rights which U.S. EPA may have under the UAOs,
U.S. EPA, Ohio EPA or any Performing Respondent that is adversely affected by each denial
(for example, any Performing Respondent that is prevented from conducting its remedial
obligations under the UAO or the ROD) or by such violation shall have the right to immediately
seek an appropriate equitable remedy and any court having jurisdiction is hereby granted the
right to issue a temporary restraining order and/or preliminary injunction prohibiting such denial
of access, activity or use in violation of restrictions, upon application by U.S. EPA, Ohio EPA or
by such adversely affected Performing Respondent without notice or posting bond. Owners and
each subsequent owner of an interest in the Restricted Area by accepting a deed to the Restricted
Area or to any part of it waives all due process or other constitutional right to notice and hearing
before the grant of a temporary restraining order and/or preliminary injunction pursuant to this
Subsection 25.(b).
c. Future Cooperation; Execution of Supplemental Instruments. Owners agree to
cooperate fully with U.S. EPA, Ohio EPA and the Performing Respondents, to assist them in
implementing the rights granted them under this Environmental Covenant and, in furthering this
Environmental Covenant, agree to execute and deliver such further documents as may be
requested by U.S. EPA to supplement or confirm the rights granted hereunder.
d. Cumulative Remedies; No Waiver. All of the rights and remedies set forth in this
Environmental Covenant or otherwise available at law or in equity are cumulative and may be
exercised without regard to the adequacy of, or exclusion of, any other right, remedy or option
available here or under the UAOs or at law. The failure to exercise any right granted here, to
take action to remedy any violation by Owners of the terms here, or to exercise any remedy
provided here, shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any such right or remedy and no
forbearance on the part of U.S. EPA and no extension of the time for performance of any
obligations of Owners shall operate to release or in any manner affect U.S. EPA's rights.
e. Severability. If any provision of this Environmental Covenant is found to be
unenforceable in any respect, the validity, legality, and enforceability of the remaining
provisions shall not in any way be affected or impaired.
f. Recordation. Within thirty (30) days after the date of the final required signature
on this Environmental Covenant, Owners shall file this Environmental Covenant for recording,
in the same manner as a deed to the Site, with the Washington County Recorder's Office.
Spindler Covenant
7
-------
Instrument Volume Page
— 200800002580 OR 4-64 638
g. Effective Date. The effective date of this Environmental Covenant shall be the
date upon which the fully executed Environmental Covenant has been recorded as a deed record
for the Site with the Washington County Recorder.
h. Distribution of Environmental Covenant/Other Notices. Unless otherwise
notified in writing, the Owners shall distribute all documents and communications required by
this Environmental Covenant, including distributing a file-stamped and date-stamped copy of the
recorded Environmental Covenant, to:
Pr«M>
Michael D. Sherron
Site Coordinator
Vandale Junkyard Site
Ohio EPA SEDO, DERR
2195 Front Street
Logan, Ohio 43138
^ For the Performing Respondents:
Diane E. McCausland
Engineering Management, Inc.
1500 Ardmore Blvd., Suite 502
Pittsburgh, PA 15221
Ronald W. Murawski
Remedial Project Manager
Vandale Junkyard Site
U.S. EPA Region 5
77 West Jackson Blvd., SR-6J
Chicago, Illinois 60604
For Owners:
David and Nancy Spindler
1155 Pleasant Ridge Road
Marietta, OH 45750
Louis and Nancy Spindler
126 Ashley Hall Plantation Road
Charleston, SC 29407
Maria Rniffin Marsh
2325 West Harborlight Street
Wichita, KS 67204
i. Governing Law. This Environmental Covenant shall be construed according to
and governed by the laws of the State of Ohio and the United States of America.
j. Captions. All paragraph captions are for convenience of reference only and shall
not affect the construction of any provision of this Environmental Covenant.
k. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of each and every performance
obligation of Owners under this Environmental Covenant.
Spindler Covenant
8
-------
Instrument Volume Paae
- . - - 200800002580 OR 4-64 639
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Owners and U.S. EPA have executed and delivered
this Environmental Covenant as of the date first above written.
OWNER
OWNER
STATE OF OHIO )
) ss.
COUNTY OF UMiwknW )
rfP°~
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
2007, by David Spindler and Nancy Spindler, husband and wife.
Spindler Covenant
9
-------
- Instruct nBVol""?P?!S
200800002580 OR «•-<
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Owners and U.S. EPA have executed and delivered
this Environmental Covenant as of the date first above written.
Louis Spindler "
OWNER
nau
Nancy Spinqler IJ
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF Char |eSV*A )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this j t> —~ day of
liiu .iui.wgju.ujLg itxou.ujai.wii5. was auMiuwiwugvu uwuiv ixik
g\r\us%/^ , 200^, by Louis Spindler and Nancy Spindler, husband and wife,
Notary Public
lR\n(^S
• - -
^
; is' J • ..
\ ¦ \ 'J-
\*r\
-''j
Spindler Covenant
10
-------
Insfcruaent Voluste Page
200800002580 OR 464- 641
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Owners and U.S. EPA have executed and delivered
this Environmental Covenant as of the date first above written.
OWNER
Ma4a Kniffiniyfarsh
STATE OF KANSAS )
) SS
COUNTY OPStMil)M£A
Jj/Um-Usf ,
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
200/, by Maria Kniffin Marsh.
f
KEUDfSUfMWER
www wane
ran of i
Spindler Covenant
11
-------
Instrument Volune Pcisp
200800002580 OR 464 642
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Owners and U.S. EPA have executed and delivered
this Environmental Covenant as of the date first above written.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
On behalf of the Administrator of the
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Superfund Division, Region 5
STATE OF ILLINOIS )
)SS.
COUNTY OF COOK )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ZV^day of
2008, by Richard C. Karl, Director, Superfund Division, Region 5 of the United
States Environmental Protection Agency, on behalf of the United States of America.
official seal
JOHNVFAGKX.0
NOTARY PUSUC - STATE OF IUJ«
my commission emmsmvm
m''I'"I I' 11
Notary Public
NO TfiANSF£BNECEsSARY
*4
M NEC
iSL
,20 0*i
lA..ni Auditor
WASHINGTON COUNTY AUDITOR
w.
Spindler Covenant
12
RCMT KVW BA
Couato
grfm&r r.E.P.S:
-------
Instrument Volume Pose
200800002580 OR 464 643
EXHIBIT A
Drawing of the Restricted Area
-------
Instrument Volume Pass
mwmmhm ur -~wt sw
/ ThomasA/aridale¦'
David & Louis Spindier; -'
and Mark Kniffin. •
Permanent Easement-
Fenced Portion of the Remedy.
Permanent Easement
SW-01
SED-01
Legend
Sampling Lxations
& CoDection Sump
41 Monitoring Well
~ Sediment
A Surface water
i 1 vandale Junkyard Site
i—l Full Extent of Landfill Cap System
Permanent Easement-
Fenced Porflcri of the Remedy
Permanent Easement
Existing Fence
Properly Boundaries
Tributary A
j:
25 50
100 Feet
Sources: Parcel Boundaries approximated from Washington County. Oh parcel Maps
SpindlerfKniffin property defined in Official Record 397. page 132.
s^CSeoSvmtec Consultants
/tMQ.OMfSil
PROJECT NO: GR3597-400
FIGURE no Exhibit A
DOCLWENTMO: GAD6003Q
FILE K0:U£CAid
N:\VandalaVEnvifonmental Covenant Mop
-------
Instrument Volut»p pa3p
200800002580 OR 464 645
EXHIBIT B
Legal Description of the Restricted Area
-------
Instrument Volume Paae
200800002580 OR 464 646
VERNON SURVEYING CO. PROFESSIONAL SURVEYORS
September 12,2006
06-5423
0.171 Acre
Permanent Easement
for Drainage Structure
Situated in the State of Ohio, Washington County, Marietta Township, Section 12, Town 2,
Range 8, and being part of 160 Acre Lot No. 41, more particularly described as follows:
Beginning for reference at a comer stone monument found at the northwest comer of 160 Acre
Lot No. 41; thence with the westerly line of said lot S 07-17-02 W a distance of 791.15 feet to a
point, said point being the TRUE PLACE OF BEGINNING for the easement herein to be
described;
thence S 37-26-22 E a distance of 21.19 feet to a point;
thence S 14-39-24 E a distance of 67.19 feet to a point;
thence N 81 -42-51 E a distance of 104.09 feet to a point;
thence S 30-57-50 E a distance of 5.83 feet to a point;
thence S 02-51-45 W a distance of 20.02 feet to a point;
thence S 45-00-00 W a distance of 16.97 feet to a point;
thence S 70-49-16 W a distance of24.35 feet to a point;
thence S 76-25-46 W a distance of 29.83 feet to a point;
thence S 84-38-39 W a distance of 32.14 feet to a point;
thence N 76-28-18 W a distance of 54.33 feet to a point on the westerly line of
160 Acre Lot No. 41;
thence N 07-17-02 E a distance of 110.000 feet to the TRUE PLACE OF BEGINNING,
containing 0.171 acres, more or less, but subject to all legal highways, easements, and restrictions of
record.
Bearings are based on an assumed meridian. All bearings shown are used to denote horizontal angles
only.
This right-of-way description prepared by Robert G. Vernon, Professional Surveyor No. 6282, based
on field surveys in August, 2006.
/
/ ROBERT I
iGEQRGEVERNOH*
\oC~
Robert G. Vernon
PS 6282
Date
POST OFFICE BOX NUMBER 741, MARIETTA, OHIO 45750
259 MUSKINGUM DRIVE, MARIETTA
TELEPHONE 740/373-8397
FAX 740/373-8266
-------
Instrument Volume Paso
200800002580 OR 464 64?
EXHIBIT C
Legal Description of the Fenced Portion of Remedy Extending on to Restricted Area
-------
mi
VERNON SURVEYING CO. PROFESSIONAL SURVEYORS
October 16, 2000
00-4650
Instrument Volume Pasp
200800002580 OR 464 648
0.0646 Acre
Fence Description
David SpindSer Property
Situated in the State of Ohio, Washington County, Marietta Township, Section 18, Town 2,
Range 8, and being part of 160 Acre Lot No. 42, more particularly described as follows:
Commencing for reference at a stone monument found at the northeast corner of Section 18,
Town 2, Range 8; thence with the easterly line of Section 18 S 07-17-02 W a distance of 791.59
feet to the True Place of Beginning for the parcel herein to be described; thence leaving the
easterly line of Section 18 and following a perimeter fence the following five (5) courses:
S 24-36-41 E a distance of 59.67 feet to a point
thence S 15-10-24 W a distance of 49.41 feet to a point
thence S 15-09-15 W a distance of 20.30 feet to a point
thence S 13-57-25 W a distance of 4.39 feet to a point
thence S 79-52-31 W a distance of 22.48 feet to a point;
said point being in the westerly line of Section 12; thence with the westerly line of Section 12
N 07-17-02 E a distance of 130.79 feet to the True Place of Beginning, containing 0.0646 acres
more or less, but subject to all legal highways, easements, and restrictions of record.
North is based on an assumed meridian and all bearings shown are used to denote horizontal
angles only. All iron pins set are 5/8-inch diameter by 34-inch length rebar with a plastic cap
stamped "Vernon OH5282-WV550".
This legal description prepared by Robert G. Vernon, Professional Surveyor No. 6282, based
on field surveys in August 2000.
200800002580
SEE FILE: OIAHE E. MCCAUSLAND
ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT INC
1500 ARDHORE BLVD.> SUITE 50
PITTSBURGH PA 15221
POST OFFICE BOX NUMBER 741, MARIETTA, OHIO 45750
TELEPHONE 740/373-8397
-------
To be recorded with Deed
Records - ORG § 317.08
ENVIRONMENTAL C OVENANT
uk
This Environmental Covenant is made as of the 7 _ day of November, 2018, by and
among Margie Longfellow and Margie M. Pugh, acting in their capacity as Co-Executors on behalf
of the Estate of Thomas Vandale, deceased Owner and Holder, and U.S. EPA (as further identified
below) pursuant to Ohio Revised Code ("GRC") §§ 5301.80 to 5301.92 for the purpose of
subjeeting the Property and the Restricted Area (described below) to the activity and use
limitations and to the rights of access described below. This Environmental Covenant will also
provide rights of access to property ("Access Property" as further described below) containing
roads to the Site, the Property and the Restricted Area as specified in Paragraph 23.
I- BACKGROUND
1. Pursuant to Section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act ("CERCLA"), 42 U.S.C. § 9605, the United States Environmental Protection
Agency ("U.S. EPA") placed the Vandale Junkyard Site ("Site"), located at Marietta Township
Road No. T-83, in Washington County, Ohio, on the National Priorities List, set forth in 40 C.F.R.
Part 300, Appendix B, by publication in the Federal Register, 51 Fed. Reg. 21,078 (June 10,1986).
The Property that is subject to this Environmental Covenant is part of the Site.
2. A Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) of the Site history found that Mr.
Vandale operated the Site as a junkyard from the early 1960s until about 1980, and that junkyard
operations may have been occurring at the Site since the 1940s. During its operation, the junkyard
received a variety of materials for disposal and/or salvage, including general wastes such as scrap
metal, appliances, furniture, automobiles, tires and batteries. In addition, disposal records from
various industrial facilities indicate that the Site accepted at least 2200 drums of industrial wastes
in the late 1970s. These drums contained materials such as waste industrial solvents, tar and iron
-------
cakes, sludges, paints and inks. The investigation determined that unsalvageablc materials were
managed at the Site either by emptying them onto the ground, burning them on the ground, and/or
burying or bulldozing them over the Site.
3. The RI/FS found widespread organic and inorganic hazardous substances in soils,
groundwater, surface waters, and sediments at the Site. Analysis of Site soil samples demonstrated
high concentrations of hazardous substances, including chlorinated compounds tetrachloroethene
and trichloroethene; unchlorinated compounds typically associated with gasoline (benzene,
ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylenes); bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate; polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons; and a number of metals. Analysis of on-Site groundwater samples exhibited a
number of hazardous substances at levels in excess of established drinking water standards, the
U.S. EPA's Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). On-Site ground water samples indicated
MCI, exceedances for 1,1-dichloroethcne; 1,2-dichloroethene; 1.1,1-trichlorocthane;
tetrachloroethene; trichloroethene; vinyl chloride; arsenic; barium; beryllium; cadmium;
chromium; lead; nickel; and thallium. Analysis of surface waters and seeps which drain from the
Site were found to contain hazardous substances at levels in excess of Ohio Water Quality
Standards (WQS) and U.S. EPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria (AWQC) at a number of
sampling locations. WQS and AWQC were exceeded for the following substances: silver,
cadmium, copper, cyanide, iron, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, and zinc. Sediments in these
surface waters also reflected many of these same metals.
4. The RI/FS found that hazardous substances found at the surface and buried at the Site were
presenting a direct contact threat. Surface water drainage from the Site flows through two
intermittent streams to Duck Creek, a small tributary to the Ohio River located less than one quarter
mile to the west of the Site. Although saturated bedrock formations exist below the Site as
identified in the Site Conceptual Model, the nature of the mantle covering the bedrock formations
beneath the Site allows only marginally interconnected pockets of groundwater. At present, there
is no known use of groundwater at the Site.
5. U.S. EPA issued a Record of Decision (ROD) on March 31, 1994, providing for, among
other things, consolidating wastes and placing a multi-layer cover over hazardous substances and
wastes remaining at the Site, minimizing the potential for direct contact with hazardous substances
and minimizing releases from the Site; continuing to operate and maintain the remedy after the
remedy is constructed; continuing to monitor the Site and surrounding area for any potential
releases including releases to the surface waters, sediments, and groundwater, the soils and the air;
imposing Site security requirements at and near the covered wastes and substances, and; requiring
institutional controls for the Site area through deed restrictions and/or zoning. The institutional
controls, which are addressed more specifically in this document, are to protect the performance
of the remedy and prevent the exposure of humans or the environment to Site-related compounds
of concern by limiting the future use of the property at and near where remedial construction has
occurred, and by limiting future uses that may interfere with maintaining or monitoring the
2
-------
performance of the remedy. Ohio EPA concurred with the ROD.
6. On August 16, 1994 and October 16, 1995, U.S. EPA issued Unilateral Administrative
Orders ("UAO"), In the Matter of: The Vandale Junkyard Site, Case Nos. V-W-94-C-307 (August
16,1994) and V-W-96-C-318 (October 16,1995) (collectively, "UAOs")to Goodrich Corp., Cytec
Industries Inc., Kardex Systems, Inc., Lockheed Martin Corp., Exxon Mobil Corp., and, Unisys
Corporation, (collectively the "Performing Respondents") and Mr. Thomas Vandale as a
cooperating Respondent, ordering them to implement the remedial actions selected in the March
31, 1994 ROD. Any operation, maintenance and monitoring activities related to implementing the
remedial actions, such as those described in Paragraph 24, are enforceable under the UAOs and
ROD.
7. With the exception of the institutional controls, and operation, maintenance and monitoring
of the remedy, the remedial action has been implemented at the Site.
II. STATEMENT OP AUTHORITY AND PURPOSE
8. Environmental Covenant. This instrument is an environmental covenant executed and
delivered pursuant to §§ 5301.80 to 5301.92 of the Ohio Revised Code. U.S. EPA by issuing the
ROD, and Ohio EPA by concurring In the ROD, have "determined or approved the environmental
response project," under Section 5301.80 of the Ohio UECA statute. The UAOs constitute an
environmental response project as defined by ORC §5301.80(E) and authorize and require certain
remedial actions be performed by the Owner.
9. Access to, and Activity and Use Limitations at the Property. In executing this
Environmental Covenant, Margie Longfellow and Margie M. Pugh, acting in their capacity as Co-
Executors on behalf of the Estate of Thomas Vandale, deceased Owner and Holder, agree; 1) to
grant a permanent right of access over the Property to the Access Grantees (as defined in this
document) for purposes of implementing, facilitating, monitoring, and maintaining the remedial
action for the Vandale Junkyard Superfund Site, and 2) to impose on the Property activity and use
limitations as covenants that will ran with the land for the purpose of protecting human health and
the environment.
HI. DEFINITIONS
In addition to the definitions in Ohio Revised Code ("ORC") §§ 5301.80 to 5301.92, incorporated
here by reference, the following definitions shall apply to this Environmental
Covenant.
3
-------
10. Access Grantees shall mean the U.S. EPA, Ohio EPA, and the Performing Respondents,
their successors and assigns, and their respective officers, employees, agents, contractors, and
other invitees (the Vandale Group),
11. Access Property shall mean the property and/or right-of-way previously owned by Mr.
Thomas Vandale, deceased, which property is currently collectively administered and controlled
by Margie Longfellow and Margie M. Pugh, acting in their capacity as Co-Executors 011 behalf of
the Estate of Thomas Vandale, deceased Owner and Holder, and described in Exhibit A, attached
and incorporated by reference into this Environmental Covenant, See Exhibit B for a legal
description of access property.
12. U.S. EPA shall mean the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and any
successor departments or agencies of the United States.
13. "Property" shall mean an approximately 30.5 acre tract of real property previously owned
by Mr. Thomas Vandale, deceased, which Property is currently collectively administered and
controlled by Margie Longfellow and Margie M. Pugh, acting in their capacity as Co-Executors
on behalf of the Estate of Thomas Vandale, deceased Owner and Holder, at 515 Goose Run Road,
Marietta, in Washington County, Ohio, more particularly described in Exhibit A, attached and
incorporated by reference into this Environmental Covenant, See Exhibit C for a legal description
of the Property.
14. "Restricted Area" shall mean a portion of real property within the Property, encompassing
the location where hazardous substances remain under a hazardous waste cover, comprising
approximately 4.4-acre tract of real property described in Exhibit A, attached and incorporated by
reference into this Environmental Covenant. See Exhibit D for a legal description of the Restricted
Area.
15. Grantor. Margie Longfellow and Margie M. Pugh, acting in their capacity as Co-Executors
011 behalf of the Estate of Thomas Vandale, deceased Owner and Holder, who presently
collectively administer and control the property described above in Paragraphs 11 and 13, are
collectively the grantor of this Environmental Covenant.
16. Groundwater, for the purpose of this Environmental Covenant, shall mean any
accumulation of water within land, but not the accumulation located on the surface of the land,
including "private waters", and "waters of the State" as defined at Ohio Revised Code Chapter
6111.01 (H).
17. Holder shall mean Margie Longfellow and Margie M. Pugh, acting in their capacity as Co-
Executors 011 behalf of the Estate of Thomas Vandale, deceased Owner and Holder, who
4
-------
collectively administer and control the property described above in. Paragraphs 11 and 13, and who
are collectively the holder of this Environmental Covenant.
18. Ohio EPA shall mean the State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, and any
successor departments or agencies of the State of Ohio.
19. Owner shall mean Margie Longfellow and Margie M. Pugh, acting in their capacity as Co-
Executors on behalf of the Estate of Thomas Vandal e, deceased Owner and Holder, who
collectively administer and control the Property described in Paragraph 13, above. Mr. Thomas
Vandale, deceased, is the Property Owner Respondent named in the Unilateral Administrative
Order described in Paragraph 22, below, in an action filed by U.S. EPA under federal programs
governing environmental remediation of the Site in accordance with the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980,42 U.S.C. § 9601, et seg.
20. Performing Respondents, also known as the Vandale Junkyard PRP Group, shall mean the
following respondents to the August 16, 1994 and October 16, 1995, U.S. EPA issued UAOs, In
the Matter of: The Vandale Junkyard Site. Case Nos. V-W-94-C-307 (August 16,1994) and V-W-
96-C-318 (October 16, 1995), and any successor entities: the Goodrich Corp., Cytec Industries
Inc., Kardex Systems, Inc., Lockheed Martin Corp., Exxon Mobil Corp., and Unisys Corporation.
21. Site shall mean the Property as defined in Paragraph 13 and an adjacent parcel owned by
Jack Longfellow with the Washington County Tax Parcel Number 230083600001 and as identified
in the Unilateral Administrative Order.
22. Unilateral Administrative Order ("UAO" or "Order") shall mean the August 16, 1994 and
October 16,1995, U.S. EPA issued UAOs, In the Matter of: The Vandale Junkyard Site, Case Nos.
V-W-94-C-307 (August 16,1994) and V-W-96-C-318 (October 16,1995) (collectively, "UAOs")
to Goodrich Corp., Cytec Industries Inc., Kardex Systems, Inc., Lockheed Martin Corp., Exxon
Mobil Corp., and, Unisys Corporation, (collectively the "Performing Respondents") and Mr.
Thomas Vandale as a cooperating Owner Respondent, ordering them to implement the remedial
actions selected in the March 31,1994 ROD for the Site.
Now therefore, Owner and Holder and U.S. EPA agree to the following:
IV. ACCESS
23. Access to the Property. Owner and Holder agree for themselves and their successors in interest
and assigns, including all Transferees, that U.S. EPA, Ohio EPA, the Performing Respondents,
and their employees, agents, contractors and invitees, shall have and hereby grants to each of them
unrestricted right of access to the Property, to undertake the Permitted Uses described in Paragraph
24. below, and in connection with this access, to use all roads, drives and paths, paved or unpaved,
5
-------
located on the Property, or off the Property and used by Owner and Holder(s) and their successors
in interest and assigns, including all Transferees, and their invitees for ingress to or egress from
portions of the Property (collectively, "Access Roads"), The Property and existing Access Road
are shown on Exhibit A, The right of access granted under this Paragraph 23 shall be irrevocable
while this Covenant remains in Ml force and effect. Notwithstanding the above, the parties agree
that they shall access the Property from Goose Run Road over the Access Property. Access shall
be along the road located east oi the single-family dwelling identified as Vandale residence on
Exhibit A.
24. Permitted Uses of Access. The right of access granted under Paragraph 23 of this
Environmental Covenant shall provide Access Grantees with access at all reasonable times to the
Property for the purpose of conducting any activity relating to the UAOs and the ROD, including,
but not limited to, the following activities:
a. Implementing or enforcing this Environmental Covenant, consistent with the
provisions of ORC §5301.82(A)(6);
b. Monitoring the Work, and verifying any data or information submitted to the United
States or the State of Ohio;
c. Conducting investigations relating to contamination at or near the Site, or relating
to evaluating the integrity or protectiveness of the remedial action that has been or will be
implemented pursuant to the ROD and the UAOs;
d. Obtaining samples;
e. Assessing the need for, planning, or implementing response actions at or near the
Site;
f. Implementing the Work pursuant to the ROD and the UAOs, including but not
limited to installing, replacing, or repairing monitoring wells, conducting sampling, and
maintaining the landfill cover and appurtenant structures;
g. Inspecting and copying records, operating logs, contracts, or other documents
maintained or generated by the Owner and Holder(s) or his agents, consistent with Section XVI
(Access to Information and Document Availability) of the U AO, including but not limited to
records relating to the transfer of any property interest in the Property;
h. Assessing compliance with the UAOs and the ROD;
6
-------
i. Determining whether the Property or other property is being used in a manner that
is prohibited or restricted or that may need to be prohibited or restricted by or pursuant to the ROD
or UAOs; and
j. Assessing proposed changes to the Activity and Use Limitations, assessing
proposed changes in any property interest in the Property, and assessing proposed changes in
Access Roads.
V, ACTIVITY AMD USE LIMITATIONS
25. Activity and Use Limitations
a. Activity and Use Limitations. The activity and use limitations set forth in this
Environmental Covenant are to protect human health and the environment. Specified activity and
use limitations are intended to protect the performance of the remedy for the Site and prevent the
exposure of humans or the environment to hazardous substances and contaminants, by limiting
future uses of the property at and near where remedial construction has occurred, and by limiting
future uses that may interfere with access to, monitoring the performance of, assessing or
maintaining the remedy.
b. Activity and Use Limitations Do Not Restrict Remedial Work. This Section V does
not limit the Access Grantees from activities and uses on or near the Site when performing their
obligations to implement, monitor, assess or maintain the Site remedy as provided by the ROD
and UAOs, including but not limited to, constructing, replacing, repairing, maintaining, extracting
from, injecting into, or otherwise using wells, such as monitoring wells, related to the
environmental response action; constructing, replacing, repairing and maintaining the cover over
hazardous substances and wastes left on the Site; repairing and maintaining roads used to access
the Site; and constructing, replacing, repairing and maintaining surface drainage on the Site.
26. Activity and Use Limitations Applicable to the Property. Except to the extent restrictions
applicable to the Restricted Area are more restrictive, as provided in Paragraph 27 below, the
Activity and Use Limitations for the Property are as follows:
a. General Activity and Use Limitations. Unless U.S. EPA grants prior written
consent for such use, Owner and Ilolder(s) agree on behalf of the Estate of Thomas Vandale,
deceased, in their capacity as Co-Executors, and their successors in interest and assigns, including
all Transferees, not to permit the Property to be used in any manner that may interfere with or
adversely affect, as determined by U.S. EPA: (i) access to the Site; (ii) monitoring, inspecting, or
investigating Site conditions; or, (iii) the Integrity or protectiveness of the remedial action which
has been implemented or which will be implemented pursuant to the ROD and the UAOs. Owner's
and llolder(s)" and their successors in interest and assigns, including all Transferees, agreement
restricting use of the Property shall include, but not be limited to, not permitting any drilling,
7
-------
mining, building, or the installation or construction of any buildings, wells, pipes, ditches, or any
other structures on the Property unless first obtaining U.S. EPA's written consent to such use or
activity. The U.S. EPA, Ohio EPA and Performing Respondents, concurrently, shall have the right
to review any proposed use(s) of the Property prior to U.S. EPA providing an opinion on the
proposed use(s). Any proposed buildings or structures that could be used for human occupation
shall include vapor intrusion protection (i.e., volatile organic vapor barrier or sub-slab
depressurization system). In Paragraph 26.d., below, U.S. EPA is providing written consent
identifying allowable uses of the Property and corresponding conditions for such uses.
b. Specific Activity and Use Limitations. Owner and Holder(s) agree on behalf of the
Estate of Thomas Vandale, deceased, in their capacity as Co-Executors, and their successors in
interest and assigns, including all Transferees: (i) to not bring onto the Property, and to refuse to
grant permission to any other person to bring onto the Property, waste, hazardous substances, or
scrap material, except in accordance with any federal, state or local permit; (ii) to not treat, recycle
or reclaim on the Property any hazardous substances or scrap material generated on the Property;
(iii) to not store waste, hazardous substances or scrap material generated 011 the Property for more
than 30 days, and all such storage shall use methods and equipment that will prevent the waste,
hazardous substances and scrap from contaminating or threatening to contaminate the Property;
(iv) that any waste, hazardous substances and scrap material generated on Property shall be
removed from the Property for proper disposal within 30 days of the initial waste, substance or
material being generated; (v) that there shall be no groundwater use, extraction, discharge or
injection at the Property, including but not limited to installing, using or operating equipment such
as wells, seepage ponds and leach fields; and (vi) that residential use of the Property requires prior
written approval of U.S. EPA and any structures used for human habitation shall include vapor
intrusion protection (i.e., volatile organic vapor barrier or sub-slab depressurization system).
These specific activity and use limitations do not apply to the Access Grantees in the performance
of their obligations to implement the ROD and UAO provisions, including but not limited to,
constructing, replacing, repairing, maintaining, extracting from, injecting into, or otherwise using
wells, such as monitoring wells, related to the environmental response action.
c. Future Activity and Use Limitations. Owner and Holder(s) covenant on behalf of
the Estate of Thomas Vandale, deceased, in their capacity as Co-Executors, and their successors
in interest and assigns, including ail Transferees, that the Property future uses shall be only in
accordance with a U.S. EPA-approved plan for re-use. The parties shall agree to amend this
Environmental Covenant pursuant to Paragraph 33, as a prerequisite to U.S. EPA approval of a
proposed plan for re-use, to the extent necessary to incorporate the proposed re-use.
d. Activities and. Uses Not Prohibited. This Environmental Covenant does not
prohibit any activity or land use of the Property which, as planned and as implemented, would
neither interfere with, nor adversely affect, human health or the environment, the Site remedy,
remedy objectives, the remedy construction, operation and maintenance including the surface
8
-------
water and groundwater monitoring system as that system may be modified, and Site access, as
determined by U.S. EPA, This subparagraph does not address activity and use provisions
applicable to the Restricted Area. U.S. EPA and Ohio EPA must be consulted regarding any
proposed activities and uses not specifically addressed in this Environmental Covenant, prior to
implementing the proposed activity or use. The U.S. EPA, Ohio EPA and Performing
Respondents, concurrently, shall have the right to review any proposed use(s) of the Property prior
to U.S. EPA providing an opinion on the proposed use(s). After the consultation, U.S. EPA, in
consultation with Ohio EPA, will provide a responsive evaluation of the proposed activity or use,
and such evaluation shall not be unreasonably withheld. Based on this consultation process, the
following planned activities and uses are not prohibited, so long as they are implemented in a
manner consistent with the provisions of this Environmental Covenant and all other applicable
State, federal and local laws, regulations and requirements: (i) livestock management, but
excluding the Restricted Area; and (ii) landscaping, grading and filling consistent with livestock
management, but excluding the Restricted Area, except where such activities may interfere with,
or adversely affect, human health or the environment, the Site remedy, remedy objectives, the
remedy construction, operation and maintenance including the surface water and groundwater
monitoring system as that system may be modified, and Site access, as determined by U.S. EPA
in consultation with Ohio EPA.
27. Restricted Area - Activity and Use Limitations. Owner and Holder(s) covenant on behalf of
the Estate of Thomas Vandale, deceased, in their capacity as Co-Executors, and their successors
in interest and assigns, including all Transferees, that the Restricted Area shall be used only in
accordance with a U.S. EPA-approved written plan for re-use. The U.S. EPA, Ohio EPA and
Performing Respondents, concurrently, shall have the right to review any proposed use of the
Restricted Area prior to U.S. EPA providing an opinion on the proposed use(s). In addition to any
more restrictive Activity and Use Limitations provided in subparagraphs 26.a. through 26.c.,
Owner and Holder(s) agree on behalf of the Estate of Thomas Vandale, deceased, in their capacity
as Co-Executors, and their successors in interest and assigns, including all Transferees, not to use
the Restricted Area, and not to permit others to use the Restricted Area, without a re-use plan
approved in writing by U.S. EPA. In particular, Owner and Holder(s) agree on behalf of the Estate
of Thomas Vandale, deceased, in their capacity as Co-Executors, and their successors in interest
and assigns, including all Transferees, that the Restricted Area shall not be used for:
a. generating, treating, storing, or disposing of any waste, hazardous substance, or
scrap material;
b. conducting any activity or use which may disturb the surface of the property
identified as the Restricted Area, including but not limited to operating motorized vehicles or
conducting agricultural activities such as farming and/or allowing animals to traverse or graze;
c. extracting any material from or discharging any material into or onto the property
identified as the Restricted Area, and constructing, repairing, maintaining, or using groundwater
extraction, discharge or injection equipment such as wells, seepage ponds and leach fields;
9
-------
d. using surface water on or from the Restricted Area in any manner, including for
any human, animal, or agricultural purpose; and,
e, activities prohibited as provided by Ohio Administrative Code Chapter 3745-27,
including but not limited to, landscaping, digging, grading, filling, drilling, mining or constructing
upon the property.
VI, GENERAL PROVISIONS
28. Assist and Cooperate in Implementing the ROD Remedy. As provided in the UAOs Section
XVI, Respondent Owner agrees and covenants on behalf of the Estate of Thomas Vandale,
deceased, In their capacity as Co-Executors, and all assigns and successors in interest, including
any Transferee, to provide access to the Property, and to assist and cooperate in implementing the
ROD and UAQ remedy at the Site. Owner is agreeing on behalf of the Estate of Thomas Vandale,
deceased, in their capacity as Co-Executors, to enter into and abide by the requirements of this
Environmental Covenant for Owner and all assigns and successors in interest, Including all
Transferee.
29. Running with the Land, This Environmental Covenant shall be binding upon the Owner and
all assigns and successors in interest, including all Transferees, and shall run with the land,
pursuant to ORG §5301.85, subject to amendment or termination as set forth in this Environmental
Covenant. The term "Transferee," as used In this Environmental Covenant, shall mean any future
owner of any portion of an interest In the Property, including, but not limited to, owners of an
interest in fee simple, mortgagees, easement holders, and/or lessees.
30. Requirements for Notice to U.S. EPA Following Transfer of an Interest in, or Concerning
Proposed Changes in the Use of. Applications for Building Permits for, or Proposals for any Work
Affecting Contamination on. the Restricted Area. Neither Owner nor any Holder shall transfer
any Interest in the Restricted Area or make proposed changes in the use of the Restricted Area, or
make applications for building permits for, or proposals for any work in the Restricted Area
without first providing notice to U.S. EPA and obtaining any approvals or consents to the proposed
change or use.
31. Notice upon Conveyance. Each instrument conveying any interest in the Property or any
portion of the Property shall contain a notice specifying the activity and use limitations, and
grants of access, set forth in this Environmental Covenant, and providing the recorded location of
this Environmental Covenant. The notice shall be substantially in the following form:
THE INTEREST CONVEYED HEREBY IS SUBJECT TO AN
ENVIRONMENTAL COVENANT, BATED OCTOBER 2018,
RECORDED IN THE DEED OR OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE
WASHINGTON COUNTY RECORDER ON » 2018, IN
10
-------
[DOCUMENT , or BOOK , PAGE ,]. THE ENVIRONMENTAL
COVENANT CONTAINS THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITY AND USE
LIMITATIONS; /Insert the language that describes the activity and me
limitations exactly as it appears in the Environmental Covenant./
Owner, Holder(s), successors in interest and assigns, including all Transferees, shall notify Ohio
EPA and U.S. EPA within ten days after each conveyance of an interest in any portion of the
Property. Owner's notice shall include the name, address, and telephone number of the Transferee,
a copy of the deed or other documentation evidencing the conveyance, and a survey map that
shows the boundaries of the property being transferred.
32. Administrative Record. Consistent with the provisions of ORG § 5301.82(A)(8), the U.S.
EPA established an administrative record for the Vandale Junkyard Superfund Site at the U.S.
EPA, Region 5, Superfund Division, 77 W. Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois. A copy of this
administrative record is available for public viewing at the Washington County Public Library,
615 5th Street, Marietta, Ohio, 45750. The library may also be contacted at (740) 373-1057.
33. Amendments; Early Termination. This Environmental Covenant may be modified or amended
or terminated while Owner, Holder(s), successors in interest and assigns, including all Transferees,
owns the Property only by a writing signed by Owner and U.S. EPA with the formalities required
for the execution of a deed in Ohio which is recorded in the Office of the Recorder of Washington
County, Ohio. Upon transfer of all or any portion of the Property, Owner waives any rights that
they might otherwise have under Section 5301.90 of the Ohio Revised Code to withhold his
consent to any amendments, modifications, or termination of this Environmental Covenant, to the
extent that they have transferred his interest in that portion of the Property affected by the
modification, amendment or termination. The rights of Owner's successors in interest to modify,
amend or terminate this Environmental Covenant are governed by the provisions of Section
5301.90 of the Ohio Revised Code.
34. Other Matters.
a. Representations and Warranties of Owner. Owner represents and warrants: that
Owner is the sole owner of the Property; that Owner holds fee simple title to the Property which
is free, clear and unencumbered; that Owner has the power and authority to make and enter into
this Environmental Covenant as Owner and Holder, to grant the rights and privileges provided
here and to carry out all obligations of Owner and Holder in this Environmental Covenant; that
this Environmental Covenant has been executed and delivered pursuant to the UAOs; and, that this
Environmental Covenant will not materially violate or contravene or constitute a material default
under any other agreement, document or instrument to which Owner is a party or by which Owner
may be bound or affected.
b. Advice of Counsel. Owner has been advised to seek the advice of independent
counsel before entering into the Environmental Covenant and represents that Owner has done so.
11
-------
c. Right to Enforce Environmental Covenant Against Owner; Equitable Remedies. In
the event that Owner or any other person should attempt to deny the rights of access granted under
Section IV or should violate the restrictions on activities and uses of the Property set forth in
Section ¥, then, in addition to any rights which U.S. EPA may have under the UAOs, U.S. EPA,
Ohio EPA or any Performing Respondent that is adversely affected by each denial (for example,
any Performing Respondent that is prevented from conducting its remedial obligations under the
UAO or the ROD) or by such violation shall have the right to immediately seek an appropriate
equitable remedy and any court having jurisdiction is hereby granted the right to issue a temporary
restraining order and/or preliminary injunction prohibiting such denial of access, activity or use in
violation of restrictions, upon application by U.S. EPA, Ohio EPA or by such adversely affected
Performing Respondent without notice or posting bond. Owner and each subsequent owner of an
interest in the Property by accepting a deed to the Property or to any part of it waives all due
process or other constitutional right to notice and hearing before the grant of a temporary
restraining order and/or preliminary injunction pursuant to this Subsection 33.(c).
d. Future Cooperation: Execution of Supplemental Instruments. Owner, Holder(s),
successors in interest and assigns, including all Transferees, agree to cooperate fully with U.S.
EPA, Ohio EPA and the Performing Respondents in implementing the rights granted them under
this Environmental Covenant and, in furthering this Environmental Covenant, agree to execute
and deliver such further documents as may be requested by U.S. EPA to supplement or confirm
the rights granted hereunder.
e. Cumulative Remedies: No Waiver. All of the rights and remedies set forth in this
Environmental Covenant or otherwise available at law or in equity are cumulative and may be
exercised without regard to the adequacy of, or exclusion of, any other right, remedy or option
available here or under the UAOs or at law. The failure to exercise any right granted here, to take
action to remedy any violation by Owner of the terms here, or to exercise any remedy provided
here, shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any such right or remedy and no forbearance on the
part of U.S. EPA and no extension of the time for performance of any obligations of Owner shall
operate to release or in any manner affect U.S. EPA's rights.
f. Severability. If any provision of this Environmental Covenant is found to be
unenforceable in any respect, the validity, legality, and enforceability of the remaining provisions
shall not in any way be affected or impaired.
g. Recordation. Within thirty (30) days after the date of the final required signature
on this Environmental Covenant, Owner shall file this Environmental Covenant for recording, in
the same manner as a deed to the Property, with the Washington County Recorder's Office.
h. Effective Date. The effective date of this Environmental Covenant shall be the date
upon which the fully executed Environmental Covenant has been recorded as a deed record for the
Property with the Washington County Recorder.
i. Distribution of Environmental Covenant/Other Notices. Unless otherwise, notified
in writing, the Owner shall distribute all documents and communications required by this
Environmental Covenant, including distributing a file-stamped and date-stamped copy of the
recorded Environmental Covenant, to:
12
-------
For Ohio EPA:
Shannon Cook
Site Coordinator
Vandale Junkyard Site
Ohio EPA Southeast District Office
2195 Front Street
Logan, Ohio 43138
shannop.cook@epa.oMo.gov
For U.S. EPA:
Rosauro DelRosario
Remedial Project Manager
Vandale Junkyard Site
U.S. EPA Region 5
77 West Jackson Blvd., SR-6J
Chicago, Illinois 60604
deIrosario.rosaiiro@epa.gov
For Washington County:
Brenda Wolf
Washington County Clerk
205 Putnam Street
Marietta, Ohio 45750
bwolfe@wcgov.org
For the Performing Respondents:
Diane E. McCausland
Engineering Management, Inc.
1500 Ardmore Blvd., Suite 502
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15221-4468
dem@e-emi.com
For the Owner:
Margie Longfellow and Margie M. Pugh,
Co-Executors of the Estate of Thomas Vandale, deceased
c/o James R. Addison Co., L.P.A.
P.O. Box 845
Marietta, Ohio 45750
j. Governing La.w. This Environmental Covenant shall be construed according to and
governed by the laws of the State of Ohio and the United States of America.
k- Captions. All paragraph captions are for convenience of reference only and shall
not affect the construction of any provision of this Environmental Covenant.
1. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of each and every performance
obligation of Owner under this Environmental Covenant.
13
-------
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Owner and Holder and U.S. EPA have executed and
delivered this Environmental Covenant as of the date first above written.
OWNER AND HOLDER
£ Hi,
Margie Longfellow, Co-Executor, On Behalf
of the Estate of Thomas Vandale, deceased
Margie M. Pugh, Co-Executor, On Behalf of
the Estate of Thomas Vandale, deceased
STATE OF OHIO
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
)
) ss.
)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this J_ day of
Novembor, 2018, by Margie Longfellow and Margie M. Pugh, acting in their capacity as Co-
Executors on behalf of the Estate of Thomas Vandale, deceased.
1 Lzk/./rt
y
f\
'• J 4'
Notary Public
i"' t M 1 _*
"
JAMES R. ADDISON, JR.
Attorney At Law
rvNY-- ' Mo
v, r.F *
D'ipRcc 14" 03 R C
14
-------
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
On behalf of the Administrator of the
United States Environmental Protection Agency
By:
Supcrfund Division, Region 5
STATE OF ILLINOIS )
) ss.
COUNTY OF COOK. )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of _
2018, by , Director, Supcrfund Division, Region 5 of the United States
Env ironmental Protection Agency, on behalf of the United States of America.
Notary Public
This instrument prepared by:
Diane E. McCausland
Engineering Management, Inc.
1500 Ardmore Blvd., Suite 502
Pittsburgh, PA 15221-4468
15
-------
EXHIBIT A
Drawing of the Access Property, Property , and Restricted Area
-------
EXHIBIT A
ENVIRONMENTAL COVENANT
ACCESS PROPERTY, PROPERTY, RESTRICTED AREA
Legend
Sampling Locations
® Collection Sump
~ Monitoring Well
~ Sediment
a Surface Water
1 I Property
__ Full Extent of Landfill Cap System
I—J (Restricted Area)
Existing Fence
—- Property Boundaries
Tributary A
Srte Access Road Righl-of-Way
Sources Parew Boundaries iippro'imaiecl horn Washington County. OH parcel Maps
l GeoSyjuec Coiki'liams
L'RE HO Exhibit A
-------
-------
EXHIBIT B
Legal Description of the Access Property
-------
NERNON
VERNON SURVEYING CO. PROFESSIONAL SURVEYORS
September 12, 2006
06-5423
18 Foot Wide Right-of-Way Description
East Access to
Vandale Landfill
Situated in the State of Ohio, Washington County, Marietta Township, Section 18, Town 2,
Range 8, and being part of 160 Acre Lot No. 42, more particularly described as follows:
Beginning for reference at a comer pin found at the southeast comer of 160 Acre Lot No. 42;
thence with the southerly line of said lot N 83-28-10 W a distance of 103.30 feet to a point, said
point being the centerline of an existing 18.00 foot right-of-way as referenced in Deed Book 379
Page 342 of Washington County records, said point also being the TRUE PLACE OF
BEGINNING for the centerline of the right-of-way herein to be described, said right-of-way to be
18.00 feet in width and to be located 9.00 feet on each side of the described centerline;
thence N 26-41-13 W a distance of 117.71 feet to a point in the center of a new 50.00 foot
right-of-way, said point also being the end of this 18.00 foot wide right-of-way.
Bearings are based on an assumed meridian. All bearings shown are used to denote horizontal angles
only.
This right-of-way description prepared by Robert G. Vemon, Professional Surveyor No. 6282, based
on field surveys in August, 2006.
Robert G. Vemon
PS 6282
(l-Z- i L
O
Date
4,1.(11,,,
: ROBERT • 5
:GEORGEVERNON= ;
-o • S-62S2 : ;
¦P '¦ a tSz -
POST OFFICE BOX NUMBER 741, MARIETTA, OHIO 45750
259 MUSKINGUM DRIVE, MARIETTA
TELEPHONE 740/373-8397
FAX 740/373-8266
-------
EXHIBIT C
Legal Description of the Property
-------
Description of 30.053 Acres
The following described parcel is a new survey of the residue of the Thomas Vandaie
property as conveyed by Deed Volume 377, Page 776 (1/2 Interest) and as conveyed to
Thomas Vandaie by Tract li of Official Records Volume 403, Page 261 (1/2 Interest) of
the Washington County Recorder's Office.
Situated in the State of Ohio, County of Washington, Township of Marietta, being part of
the east half of 160 Acre Lot No, 42 in Section 18, Range 8 West, Township 2 North, of
"The Ohio Company Purchase", and being bounded and described as follows:
BEGINNING at a stone at the northeast comer of Section 18 as calculated from a
Robert Vernon survey in August 2000 (Note: Reference bearing on the north line of
Section 18 (being the north line of 180 Acre Lot No, 42 used as an assumed bearing of
South 89°36*31" East.)
thence, from said Point of Beginning, South 00°38'54" West a distance of 1,328:40 feet
an iron pin found (size and type unknown) inside the south base of a 14" maple at the
southeast corner of 160 Acre Lot No. 42;
thence, with the south line of 160 Acre Lot No, 42, South 89°58'57* West a distance of
107,27 feet to a point in an existing drive and being in the north line of a 7,846 acres
tract as conveyed to Jack Longfellow by Official Records Volume 579, Page 2704 of the
Washington County Recorder's Office;
thence, with the north line of said Longfellow properly and in said driveway, the
following 6 courses:
1. North 26°01'15" West a distance of 96.12 feet to a point; -
2. thence North 36°31'15" West a distance of 100.00 feet to a point;
3. thence North 44°31 '15" West a distance of 100.00 feet to a point;
4. thence North 50°01*15" West a distance of 51.00 feet to a point;
5. thence North 58"46'15" West a distance of 93.10 feet to a point;
8. thence North S4°36'15" West a distance of 85,98 feet to a point at the southeast
corner of a 0.416 acre tract as conveyed to Jack Longfellow by Official Records
Volume 826, Page 2345 of the,Washington County Recorder's Office;
thence, with said Longfellow 0.416 acre tract, the following 4 courses:
1. North 12°55'46" East a distance of 115.91 feet to a point in a chainlink fence,
passing through an iron pin found capped "Biedenbach 7881" at a distance of
plus 10.96 feet;
2. thence North 72°48'2i" West a distance of 131.29 feet to an iron pin found
capped "Biedenbach 7881", passing through an iron pin found capped
"Biedenbach 7881° at a distance of plus 0.50 feet;
3. thence North 78°28'22" West a distance of 29.88 feet to an iron pin found capped
"Biedenbach 7881";
Page 1 of 2
-------
Page 2 of 2
Description of 30.533 Acres
4. thence South 19°14'06* West a distance of 117.07 feet to a point in the north line
of the aforesaid Longfellow 7,846 acres tract;
thence, with the north line of said Longfellow 7,845 acres tract, the following 4 courses;
1. North 38*36'15" West a distance of 23.85 feet to a point; *
2. thence South 73"23'45" West a distance of 380.30 feet to an iron pin found
capped "Biedenbach 7881";
3. thence South G9W15" East a distance of 29.80 feet to a 1" pinch top iron pipe
4. thence South " West a distance of 265.52 feet to an iron pin found
capped "Biedenbach 7881" in the east line of a 10.93 acres tract as conveyed to
Timothy N. and Michelle R. Gilinwalters by Tract ill of Official Records
Volume 424, Page 1563 of the Washington Couhty Recorder's Office;
thence, with the east line of said Gillinwaltars property and an extension thereof,
North 0Q°46'46" East a distance of 1,121.48 feet to a marked stone found in the north
line of Section 18;
thence, with the north line of Section 18, South 89°36*31" East a distance of 1,266.32
feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING;
containing 30.533 acres, more or less.
Subject to all legal right-of-ways, easements, restrictions, reservations, and zoning
regulations of record.
Subject to the 100-year Flood Plain restrictions, if applicable.
All iron pins sat are 5/8" x 30" rebar capped and labeled "Biedenbach Surveying, LLC.
PS 7881".
The bearings in this description are for angle calculations only and are based on the
southeast portion of the south line of 160 Acre Lot No. 42 used as an assumed bearing
of South B9°58'57" West.
A plat of the above:described survey has been submitted for file at the County
Engineer's Office.
The above description prepared by Gregory A. Biedenbach, Ohio Registered Surveyor
No. 7881, based on information obtained from an actual field survey of June 1S, 2017
and information compiled from a Robert Vemon survey in August 2000. Said survey
being subject to any facts that may be disclosed in a full and accurate title search.
.OVP OF n 't'j.
Prior Deed: Official Records Volume 403, Page 261
found;
Date Gregory A. Biedenbach
Ohio Registered Surveyor
No. 7881. (Survey File: GB-2448F)
-------
EXHIBIT D
Legal Description of Restricted Area
-------
NERNON
VERNON SURVEYING CO, PROFESSIONAL SURVEYORS
October 16, 2000
00-4650
4.4032 Acre
Fence Description
Thomas Vandalc Property
Situated in the State of Ohio, Washington County, Marietta Township, Section 18, Town 2,
Range 8, and being part of 160 Acre Lot No. 42, more particularly described as follows:
Commencing for reference at a stone monument found at the northeast corner of Section 18,
Town 2, Range 8, thence with the easterly line of Section 18 S 07-17-02 W a distance of 791.59
feet to the True Place of Beginning for the parcel herein to be described; thence continuing with
the easterly line of Section 18 S 07-17-02 W a distance of 130.79 feet to a point; thence leaving
the easterly line of Section 18 and following a perimeter fence the following seventeen (17)
courses:
S 79-52-31 W a distance of 0.25 feet to a point;
thence N 29-39-43 W a distance of 12.68 feet to a point;
thence S 57-28-27 W a distance of 302.70 feet to a point;
thence N 47-31-30 W a distance of 20.86 feet to apoint;
thence N 47-28-42 W a distance of 198.86 feet to apoint;
thence N 68-54-30 W a distance of 19.99 feet to a point;
thence N 69-13-17 W a distance of 20.57 feet to a point;
thence N 69-28-01 W a distance of 17.68 feet to a point;
thence N 19-38-02 E a distance of 442.37 feet to apoint;
thence N 28-50-07 E a distance of 70.91 feet to a point;
thence N 58-58-05 E a distance of 20.70 feet to a point;
thence N 58-57-55 E a distance of 20.29 feet to a point;
thence S 48-36-01 E a distance of 20.42 feet to a point;
thence S 32-31-28 E a distance of 118.77 feet to apoint;
thence S 68-52-15 E a distance of 60.41 feet to a point;
thence S 30-00-17 E a distance of248,69 feet to a point;
thence S 24-36-41 E a distance of 40.45 feet to a point;
said point being the True Place of Beginning, containing 4.4032 acres more or less, but subject
to all legal highways, easements, and restrictions of record.
POST OFFICE BOX NUMBER 741, MARIETTA, OHIO 45750 TELEPHONt 740/373-8397
-------
VERNON SURVEYING CO. PROFESSIONAL SURVEYORS
North is based on an assumed meridian and all bearings shown are used to denote horizontal
angles only. All iron-pins set are 5/8-inch diameter by 34-inch length rebar with aplastic cap
stamped "Vernon OH6282-WV5 SO".
This legal description prepared by Robert G. Vernon, Professional Surveyor No. 6282, based
on field surveys in August 2000.
POST OFFICE BOX NUMBER 741, MARIETTA, OHIO 45750 TELEPHONE 740/373-8397
-------
i iiiiiiii ii iiii
202100000243 01/12/2021 01:32 PM
Filed for Record in WASHINGTON County, OH
Tracey Wright, Recorder Ree Fees: $166.00
DEED OR Vol 650 Pgs 5057 - 5074
To be recorded with Deed
Records-ORG 1317,08
OA IU fyzsv?
ENVIRONMENTAL COVENANT
This Environmental Covenant is made as of the day Qf June? 2020, by and among
Jack Longfellow, Owner and Holder, and U.S. EPA (as further identified below) pursuant to Ohio
Revised Code ("ORC") §§ 5301.80 to 5301.92 for the purpose of subjecting the Property to the
activity and use limitations and to the rights of access described below.
I. BACKGRQUND
1. Pursuant to Section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act ("CERCLA"), 42 U.S.C. § 9605, the United States Environmental Protection
Agency ("U.S. EPA") placed the Vandale Junkyard Site ("Site"), located at Marietta Township
Road No. T-83, in Washington County, Ohio, on the National Priorities List, set forth in 40 C.F.R.
Part 300, Appendix B, by publication in the Federal Register. 51 Fed. Reg. 21,078 (June 10,1986).
The Property that is subject to this Environmental Covenant is part of the Site.
2. A Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) of the Site history found that the Site
was operated as a junkyard from the early 1960s until about 1980, and that junkyard operations
may have been occurring at the Site since the 1940s. During its operation, the junkyard received
a variety of materials for disposal and/or salvage, including general wastes such as scrap metal,
appliances, furniture, automobiles, tires and batteries. In addition, disposal records from various
industrial facilities indicate that the Site accepted at least 2200 drums of industrial wastes in the
late 1970s. These drums contained materials such as waste industrial solvents, tar and iron cakes,
sludges, paints and inks. The investigation determined that unsalvageable materials were managed
at the Site either by emptying them onto the ground, burning them on the ground, and/or burying
or bulldozing them over the Site.
NO TRANSFER NECESSARY
, 20 Zl_
auditor
WASHINGTON COUNTY AUDITOR
-------
3. The RI/FS found widespread organic and inorganic hazardous substances in soils,
groundwater, surface waters, and sediments at the Site. Analysis of Site soil samples demonstrated
high concentrations of hazardous substances, including chlorinated compounds tetrachloroethene
and trichloroethene; unchlorinated compounds typically associated with gasoline (benzene,
ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylenes); bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate; polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons; and a number of metals. Analysis of on-Site groundwater samples exhibited a
number of hazardous substances at levels in excess of established drinking water standards, the
U.S. EPA's Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). On-Site ground water samples indicated
MCL exceed ances for 1,1-dichIoroethene; 1,2-dichloroethene; 1,1,1 -trichloroethane;
tetrachloroethene; trichloroethene; vinyl chloride; arsenic; barium; beryllium; cadmium;
chromium; lead; nickel; and thallium. Analysis of surface waters and seeps which drain from the
Site were found to contain hazardous substances at levels in excess of Ohio Water Quality
Standards (WQS) and U.S. EPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria (AWQC) at a number of
sampling locations. WQS and AWQC were exceeded for the following substances: silver,
cadmium, copper, cyanide, iron, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, and zinc. Sediments in these
surface waters also reflected many of these same metals.
4. The RI/FS found that hazardous substances found at the surface and buried at the Site were
presenting a direct contact threat. Surface water drainage from the Site flows through two
intermittent streams to Duck Creek, a small tributary to the Ohio River located less than one quarter
mile to the west of the Site. Although saturated bedrock formations exist below the Site as
identified in the Site Conceptual Model, the nature of the mantle covering the bedrock formations
beneath the Site allows only marginally interconnected pockets of groundwater. At present, there
is no known use of groundwater at the Site.
5. U.S. EPA issued a Record of Decision (ROD) on March 31,1994, providing for, among
other things, consolidating wastes and placing a multi-layer cover over hazardous substances and
wastes remaining at the Site, minimizing the potential for direct contact with hazardous substances
and minimizing releases from the Site; continuing to operate and maintain the remedy after the
remedy is constructed; continuing to monitor the Site and surrounding area for any potential
releases including releases to the surface waters, sediments, and groundwater, the soils and the air;
imposing Site security requirements at and near the covered wastes and substances; and requiring
institutional controls for the Site area through deed restrictions and/or zoning. The institutional
controls, which are addressed more specifically in this document, are to protect the performance
of the remedy and prevent the exposure of humans or the environment to Site-related compounds
of concern by limiting the future use of the Property at and near where remedial construction has
occurred, and by limiting future uses that may interfere with maintaining or monitoring the
performance of the remedy. Ohio EPA concurred with the ROD.
6. On August 16, 1994 and October 16, 1995, U.S. EPA issued Unilateral Administrative
Orders ("UAO"), In the Matter of: The Vandale Junkvard Site. CaseNos. V-W-94-C-307 (August
2
-------
16,1994) and V-W-96-C-318 (October 16,1995) (collectively, "UAOs") to Goodrich Corp., Cytec
Industries Inc., Kardex Systems, Inc., Lockheed Martin Corp., Exxon Mobil Corp., and, Unisys
Corporation, (collectively the "Performing Respondents") and Mr, Thomas Vandale as a
cooperating Respondent, ordering them to implement the remedial actions selected in the March
31, 1994 ROD. Any operation, maintenance and monitoring activities related to implementing the
remedial actions, such as those described in Paragraph 22, ire enforceable under the UAOs and
ROD.
7. With the exception of the Institutional controls, and operation, maintenance and monitoring
of the remedy, the remedial action has been implemented at the Site.
8. Environmental Covenant. This instrument is an environmental covenant executed and
delivered pursuant to §§ 5301.80 to 5301.92 of the Ohio Revised Code. U.S. EPA by issuing the
ROD, and Ohio EPA by concurring in the ROD, have "determined or approved the environmental
response project," under Section 5301.80 of the Ohio UECA statute. The UAOs constitute an
environmental response project as defined by ORC §5301.80(E) and authorize and require certain
remedial actions be performed.
9. Access to. and Activity and Use Limitations at. the Property. In executing this
Environmental Covenant, Jack Longfellow, the Owner, agrees: 1) to grant a permanent right of
access over the Property to the Access Grantees (as defined in this document) for purposes of
implementing, facilitating, monitoring, and maintaining the remedial action for the Vandale
Junkyard Superfund Site, and 2) to impose on the Property activity and use limitations as covenants
that will run with the land for the purpose of protecting human health and the environment.
In addition to the definitions in Ohio Revised Code ("ORC") §§ 5301.80 to 5301.92, incorporated
here by reference, the following definitions shall apply to this Environmental
Covenant.
10. Access Grantees shall mean the U.S. EPA, Ohio EPA, and the Performing Respondents,
their successors and assigns, and their respective officers, employees, agents, contractors, and
other invitees (the Vandale Group).
11. U.S. EPA shall mean the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and any
successor departments or agencies of the United States.
II. STATEMEN : 1SKQSE
III. DEFINITIONS
3
-------
12. Property shall mean an approximately 0.41-acre tract of real property owned by Mr. Jack
Longfellow, at 667 Goose Run Road, Marietta, in Washington County, Ohio, more particularly
described in Exhibit A, attached and incorporated by reference Into this Environmental Covenant.
See Exhibits A and B for a drawing and legal description of the Property, respectively.
13. Grantor shall mean Owner and Holder Jack Longfellow, whose property description and
location is listed above in Paragraph 12, is the grantee of this Environmental Covenant
14. Groundwater, for the purpose of this Environmental Covenant, shall mean any
accumulation of water within land, but not the accumulation located oe the surface of the land,
including "private waters", aid "waters of the State" as defined at Ohio Revised Code Chapter
6111.01 (H).
15. Holder shall mean Jack Longfellow, Owner of the property described above in Paragraph
12, who is the holder of this Environmental Covenant.
16. Ohio EPA shall mean the State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, and any
successor departments or agencies of the State of Ohio.
17. Owner shall mean Jack Longfellow, whose property description and location is listed above
in Paragraph 12, is the grantee of this Environmental Covenant.
18. Performing Respondents, also known as the Vandale Junkyard PRP Group, shall mean the
following respondents to the August 16, 1994 and October 16, 1995, U.S. EPA issued UAOs, to
the Matter of: The Vandale Junkvard Site. Case Nos. V-W-94-C-307 (August 16,1994) and V-W-
96-C-318 (October 16, 1995), and any successor entities: the Goodrich Corp., Cytec Industries
Inc., Rardex Systems, Inc., Lockheed Martin Corp., Exxon Mobil Corp., and Unisys Corporation.
19. Sitg shall mean the Property as defined in Paragraph 12 and an adjacent parcel previously
owned by Mr. Thomas Vandale, deceased, which property is currently collectively administered
and controlled by Margie Longfellow and Margie M. Pugh, acting in their capacity as Co-
Executors on behalf of the Estate of Thomas Vandale, deceased Owner and Holder, with the
Washington County Tax Parcel Number 230083600000 and as identified in the Unilateral
Administrative Order.
20. Unilateral Administrative Order ("UAO" or "Order") shall mean the August 16,1994 and
October 16,1995, U.S. EPA issued UAOs. In the Matter of: The Vandale Junkvard Site, Case Nos.
V-W-94-C-307 (August 16,1994) and V-W-96-C-318 (October 16,1995) (collectively, "UAOs")
to Goodrich Corp., Cytec Industries Inc., Kardex Systems, Inc., Lockheed Martin Corp., Exxon
Mobil Corp., and, Unisys Corporation, (collectively the "Performing Respondents") and Mr.
4
-------
Thomas Vandale as a cooperating Owner Respondent, ordering them to implement the remedial
actions selected In the March 31,1994 ROD for the Site.
Now therefore, Owner and Holder and U.S. EPA agree to the following:
IV. ACCESS
21. Access to the Property, Owner and Holder agrees for itself and its successors in interest and
assigns. Including all Transferees, that U.S. EPA, Ohio EPA, the Performing Respondents, and
their employees, agents, contractors and invitees, shall have and hereby grants to each of them
unrestricted right of access to the Property, to undertake the Permitted Uses described in Paragraph
22, below, and in connection with this access, to use all roads, drives and paths, paved or unpaved,
located on the Property The right of access granted under this Paragraph 21 shall be Irrevocable
while this Covenant remains in full force and effect
22. Permitted Uses of Access. The right of access granted under Paragraph 21 of this
Environmental Covenant shall provide Access Grantees with access at all reasonable times to the
Property, for the purpose of conducting any activity relating to the UAOs and the ROD, including,
but not limited to, the following activities:
a. Implementing or enforcing this Environmental Covenant, consistent with the
provisions ofORC §5301.82(A)(6);
b. Monitoring the Work, and verifying any data or information submitted to the United
States or the State of Ohio;
c. Conducting investigations relating to contamination at or near the Site, or relating
to evaluating the integrity or protectiveness of the remedial action that has been or will be
implemented pursuant to the ROD and the UAOs;
d. Obtaining samples;
e. Assessing the need for, planning, or implementing response actions at or near the
Site;
f. Implementing the Work pursuant to the ROD and the UAOs, including but not
limited to installing, replacing, or repairing monitoring wells, conducting sampling, and
maintaining the landfill cover and appurtenant structures;
h. Assessing compliance with the UAOs and the ROD;
5
-------
i Determining whether the Property is being used in a manner that Is prohibited or
restricted or that may need to be prohibited or restricted by or pursuant to the ROD or UAOs; and
j. Assessing proposed changes to the Activity and Use Limitations, assessing
proposed changes in any property interest In the Property.
V. ACTIVITY AMP USE LIMITATIONS
23. Activity and Use Limitations
a. Activity and Use Limitations. The activity and use limitations set forth In this
Environmental Covenant are to protect human health and the environment. Specified activity and
use limitations are intended to protect the performance of the remedy for the Site and prevent the
exposure of humans or the environment to hazardous substances and contaminants, by limiting
future uses of the property at and near where remedial construction has occurred, and by limiting
future uses that may interfere with access to, monitoring the performance of, assessing or
maintaining the remedy.
b. Activity and Use Limitations Do Not Restrict Remedial Work. This Section V does
not limit the Access Grantees from activities and uses on or near the Site when performing their
obligations to Implement, monitor, assess or maintain the Site remedy as provided by the ROD
and UAOs, including but not limited to, constructing, replacing, repairing, maintaining, extracting
from, injecting into, or otherwise using wells, such as monitoring wells, related to the
environmental response action; repairing and maintaining roads used to access the Site; and
constructing, replacing, repairing and maintaining surface drainage on the Site.
24. Activity Limitatipns Applicable tp the Property. The Activity and Use Limitations
for the Property are as follows:
a. General Activity and Use Limitations. Unless U.S. EPA grants prior written
consent for such use, Owner and Holder, his successors in interest and assigns, including all
Transferees, agree not to permit the Property to be used in any manner that may interfere with or
adversely affect, as determined by U.S. EPA: (i) access to the Site; (ii) monitoring, inspecting, or
investigating Site conditions; or, (iii) the integrity or protectiveness of the remedial action which
has been implemented or which will be implemented pursuant to the ROD and the UAOs. Owner
and Holder's, and his successors in interest and assigns, including all Transferees, agreement
restricting use of the Property shall include, but not be limited to, not permitting any drilling,
mining, or the installation or construction of any wells, pipes, ditches, or other similar structures
on the Property unless first obtaining U.S. EPA's written consent to such use or activity.
6
-------
b. Specific Activity and Use Limitations. Owner and Holder, his successors in interest
and assigns, including all Transferees, agree: (i) that there shall be no groundwater use, extraction,
discharge or injection at the Property, including but not limited to installing, using or operating
equipment such as wells or seepage ponds; and (ii) that any structures used for human habitation
shall include vapor intrusion protection (i.e., volatile organic vapor barrier or sub-slab
depressurlzation system). These specific activity and use limitations do not apply to the Access
Grantees in the performance of their obligations to implement the ROD and UAO provisions,
including but not limited to, constructing, replacing, repairing, maintaining, extracting from,
injecting into, or otherwise using wells, such as monitoring wells, related to the environmental
response action.
VI. GENERAL PROVKGMS
25. Assist End Cpopgnjtc jn Implementing the ROD Remedy. Owner and all assigns and
successors in interest, including any Transferee, agree to provide access to the Property, and to
cooperate in implementing the ROD and UAO remedy at the Site. Owner is agreeing to enter into
and abide by the requirements of this Environmental Covenant for Owner and alt assigns and
successors in interest, including any Transferee.
26. Running with the Land. This Environmental Covenant shall be binding upon the Owner and
all assigns and successors in interest, including any Transferee, and shall run with the land,
pursuant to ORG § 5301.85, subject to amendment or termination as set forth in this Environmental
Covenant. The term "Transferee," as used in this Environmental Covenant, shall mean any future
owner of any portion of an interest in the Property, including, but not limited to, owners of an
interest in fee simple, mortgagees, easement holders, and/or lessees.
27. Notice upon Conveyance. Each instrument conveying any interest in the Property or any
portion of the Property shall contain a notice specifying the activity and use limitations, and grants
of access, set forth in this Environmental Covenant, and providing the recorded location of this
Environmental Covenant. The notice shall be substantially in the following form:
THE INTEREST CONVEYED HEREBY IS SUBJECT TO AN
ENVIRONMENTAL COVENANT, DATED 2018, RECORDED IN
THE DEED OR OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE WASHINGTON COUNTY
RECORDER ON . 2018, IN (DOCUMENT . or BOOK ,
PAGE J. THE ENVIRONMENTAL COVENANT CONTAINS THE
FOLLOWING ACTIVITY AND USE LIMITATIONS: [Insert the language
that describes the activity and use limitations exactly as it appears in the
Environmental Covenant J
7
-------
Owner and Holder, his successors in Interest and assigns, including ail Transferees, shall notify
Ohio EPA and U.S. EPA within ten days after each conveyance of an interest In any portion of the
Property, Owner's notice shall include the name, address, and telephone number of the Transferee,
a copy of the deed or other documentation evidencing the conveyance, and a survey map that
shows the boundaries of the property being transferred.
28. Administrative Record. Consistent with the provisions of ORC § 5301.82(A)(8), the U.S.
EPA established an administrative record for the Vandale Junkyard Superftwid Site at the U.S.
EPA, Region 5, Superfund Division, 77 W. Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois. A copy of this
administrative record is available for public viewing at the Washington County Public Library,
615 5th Street, Marietta, Ohio, 45750. The library may also be contacted at (740) 373-1057.
29. Amendments: Early Termination. This Environmental Covenant may be modified or amended
or terminated while Owner and Holder his successors in interest and assigns, including all
Transferees, owns the Property only by a writing signed by Owner and U.S. EPA with the
formalities required for the execution of a deed in Ohio which is recorded in the Office of the
Recorder of Washington County, Ohio. Upon transfer of all or any portion of the Property, Owner
waives any rights that they might otherwise have under Section 5301.90 of the Ohio Revised Code
to withhold his consent to any amendments, modifications, or termination of this Environmental
Covenant, to the extent that they have transferred his interest in that portion of the Property affected
by the modification, amendment or termination. The rights of Owner's successors in interest to
modify, amend or terminate this Environmental Covenant are governed by the provisions of
Section 5301.90 of the Ohio Revised Code.
30. Other Matters.
a. Representations and Warranties of Owner. Owner represents and warrants: that
Owner is the sole owner of the Property; that Owner holds fee simple title to the Property which
is free, clear and unencumbered; that Owner and Holder has the power and authority to make and
enter into this Environmental Covenant, to grant the rights and privileges provided here and to
carry out all obligations of Owner and Holder in this Environmental Covenant; that this
Environmental Covenant has been executed and delivered pursuant to the UAOs; and, that this
Environmental Covenant will not materially violate or contravene or constitute a material default
under any other agreement, document or instrument to which Owner is a party or by which Owner
may be bound or affected.
b. Advice of Counsel. Owner has been advised to seek the advice of independent
counsel before entering into the Environmental Covenant and represents that Owner has done so.
c- RkhttoJMkceJMIroilB^^ Remedies. In
the event that Owner, Holder, his successors in interest and assigns, including all Transferees, or
any other person should attempt to deny the rights of access granted under Section IV or should
violate the restrictions on activities and uses of the Property set forth in Section V, then, in addition
to any rights which U.S. EPA may have under the UAOs, U.S. EPA, Ohio EPA or any Performing
8
-------
Respondent that is adversely affected by each denial (for example, any Performing Respondent
that Is prevented from conducting its remedial obligations under the UAO or the ROD) or by such
violation shall have the right to Immediately seek an appropriate equitable remedy and any court
having jurisdiction is hereby granted the right to issue a temporary restraining order and/or
preliminary injunction prohibiting such denial of access, activity or use in violation of restrictions,
upon application by U.S. EPA, Ohio EPA or by such adversely affected Performing Respondent
without notice or posting bond. Owner and each subsequent owner of an interest in the Property
by accepting a deed to the Property or to any part of it waives all due process or other constitutional
right to notice and hearing before the grant of a temporary restraining order and/or preliminary
injunction pursuant to this Subsection 30.(c).
d. Future Cooperation: Execution of Supplemental Instruments. Owner and Holder,
his successors in interest and assigns, including all Transferees, agree to cooperate fully with U.S.
EPA, Ohio EPA and the Performing Respondents in implementing the rights granted them under
this Environmental Covenant and, in furthering this Environmental Covenant, agrees to execute
and deliver such further documents as may be requested by U.S. EPA to supplement or confirm
the rights granted hereunder.
e. Cumulative Remedies: No Waiver. All of the rights and remedies set forth in this
Environmental Covenant or otherwise available at law or in equity are cumulative and may be
exercised without regard to the adequacy of, or exclusion of, any other right, remedy or option
available here or under the UAOs or at law. The failure to exercise any right granted here, to take
action to remedy any violation by Owner of the terms here, or to exercise any remedy provided
here, shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any such right or remedy and no forbearance on the
part of U.S. EPA and no extension of the time for performance of any obligations of Owner shall
operate to release or in any manner affect U.S. EPA's rights.
f. Severability. If any provision of this Environmental Covenant is found to be
unenforceable in any respect, the validity, legality, and enforceability of the remaining provisions
shall not in any way be affected or impaired.
g. Recordation. Within thirty (30) days after the date of the final required signature
on this Environmental Covenant, Owner shall file this Environmental Covenant for recording, in
the same manner as a deed to the Property, with the Washington County Recorder's Office.
h. Effective Date. The effective date of this Environmental Covenant shall be the date
upon which the fully executed Environmental Covenant has been recorded as a deed record for the
Property with the Washington County Recorder.
i. Distribution of Environmental Covenant/Other Notices. Unless otherwise notified
in writing, the Owner shall distribute all documents and communications required by this
Environmental Covenant, including distributing a file-stamped and date-stamped copy of the
recorded Environmental Covenant, to:
f
-------
For Ohio EPA:
Maggie Selbe
Site Coordinator
Vandale Junkyard Site
Ohio EPA Southeast District Office
2195 front Street
Logan, Ohio 43138
IMggi£^£l!2£@eQa£iij2^
For U.S. EPA:
William Murray
Remedial Project Manager
Vandale Junkyard Site
U.S. EPA Region 5
77 West Jackson Blvd., G-9J
Chicago, Illinois 60604
mm" i
For Washington Count?:
Brenda Wolfe
Washington County Clerk
205 Putnam Street
Marietta, Ohio 45750
Fpr the Performing Rggppnfonts:
Diane E, McCausland
Engineering Management, Inc.
1500 Ardmore Blvd., Suite 502
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15221-4468
c ixoni
For the Owner:
Jack Longfellow
643 Goose Run Road
Marietta, Ohio 45750
j. Governing Law. This Environmental Covenant shall be construed according to and
governed by the laws of the State of Ohio and the United States of America.
k. Captions. All paragraph captions are for convenience of reference only and shall
not affect the construction of any provision of this Environmental Covenant.
1. Time of the Essence, Time is of the essence of each and every performance
obligation of Owner under this Environmental Covenant.
10
-------
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Owner and Holder and U.S. EPA have executed and
delivered this Environmental Covenant as of the date first above written.
OWNER AND HOLDER
.. '/'> ... li u.l. s"
L ^ ^ '1^ ion ^" j NotSary Public ;
-T ^ MyCommtssior IT ¦ »
11
-------
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
On behalf of the Administrator of the
United Stales Environmental Protection Agency
»Digitally signed by
DOUGLAS BALLOTTI
Data: 2020,12.08
By. " / 15:41:53-06W
Supcrfund & Emergency Management Division, Region 5
STATE OF ILLINOIS )
)SS.
COUNTY OF COOK )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ^th Jay of ^ecem^S.
2020, by Douglas Ballotti Director, Supcrfund & Emergency Management Division,
Region 5 of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, on behalf of the United States
of America.
-ny/
Digitally slpwlb* JOHN
FAGIOLO
Dats: 2020,12,08
18:02:43-08W
Notary Public
xtmmma
ssmiwmtM
DfglaBjf signed by JOHN
PAGIOtO
Data: 20Z0 12 06
18:03:33 -06TW
This instrument prepared by:
Diane E. McCausland
Engineering Management, Inc.
1500 Ardmore Blvd., Suite 502
Pittsburgh, PA 15221-4468
12
5-L'
-------
EXHIBIT A
Drawing of Property
-------
C\
'r-
-------
«
\m'Y-
*«:> v'.4Ml il"F -j*
my r>:si-kirm-fl
!<»!
OMk'-i iMJ-lM»•!*¦>«
!t|H: *lM|.h4l!>>T»>d
w-w^i-immnni
Scale *1 ~~ 100
Survey Plot
for
JACK LONGFELLOW
soimbd m we sim or wto,
cowrr of wamngish hmnsmp of
kMOCTTA, BOMB FART OF Nt AC. IOT
14t m section m m*e * west,
ratNSHP 2 norm or * oho
coumhy mmcmsc.
pmmmn bommmis
(I) ML DEEB5 as worn
f» cou*rr t** baps,
M U.ICJL mm. MAP MAKTfA.
(«) 9URKT PUT BT MBtST WJWM.
(3) wtver fiat m james mmrm,
IKE BEAJWB OH THIS BAT ARE TO ANO£
CALCULATIONS ONLY AM *K BAKU OH AN
ASSUMED HQWK8 OH IK SOUTHEAST P0B1WI
OF «0 AOS LOT # 43 U5» AS
souvt st*sr* west,
O - S/T « 30" IP, S*t 1M«Mi
Sot***, UC. PS 7U* - PS BS34*
O • 1' Piwti T©p fcymI
* - wn*y «#• psirt
mot mUim* faun#
¦ owtosl %%mm fewrt
# as %iT Iran pfa in wents
• m 5/i" Nw phi fbwid HSKSJfSfWl
® • 5/B* ton ph M Mppsfl tinai BW
¦ gaWkf p«;*l¥ tln®«
•— rn mm M *>ta aurwy
IMtoJL • IDMa It
o**. a* % >s»J
ion —
wttwt
anon
x m, wa
KB' * l<
S««o«
mmc Lot #si
i moot court that thq sw« tw* wse? to tc
ipf g Mf BMOBjasC TWT ft »»»! AH
/j£&/7
OAtfc
on® wt Mww n im
now mnm at
114 MWiS W
mna cm «?»
ummittt cfncc
tmiwiK nm
Survey File No,: GB-2446F2 «wn ««
" SS0&&&
«SnS* j
1:208
-------
EXHIBIT B
^egal pescription of the Property
-------
Description of 0.418 Acre
The following described parcel Is a new split out of a 31.13 acres tract as conveyed to
Thomas Vandals by Timet II of Official Records Volume 403, Page 261 of the
Washington County Recorder's Office.
Situated In the State of Ohio, County of Washington, Township of Marietta, being part of
the east half of 160 Acre Lot No, 42 In Section 18, Range 8 West, Township 2 North, of
"The Ohio Company Purchase", and being bounded and described as follows:
Commencing for reference at an Iron pin found (size and type unknown) inside the
south base of a 14* maple at the southeast comer of 160 Acre Lot No. 42 {Note:
Reference bearing on the southeast portion of the south line of 180 Acre Lot No. 42
used as South B9°58'57* West.);
thence, with a reference he, North 43°4T22" West a distance of 643.53 feel to a point,
being THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING for this description;
thence, from said Point of Beginning with a chain link fence, South 12°55'48" West a
distance of 115.91 feet to a point in the north line of a 7.846 acres {new survey) as
conveyed to Jack William Longfellow by Official Records Volume 578, Page 2704 of the
Washington County Recorder's Office, passing through an iron pin sat at a distance of
plus 104.98 feet;
thence, with the north line of said 7.848 acres tract, the following two courses:
1. North 64*36'15* West a distance of 106.12 feet to a point;
2. thence North 88*36'15* Wast a distance of 71.25 feet to a point, an Iron
pin set bears for reference South 19*14 W West a distance of 11,23 feet;
thence North 1§°14'06" last a distance of 117.07 feet to an iron pin set;
thence South 78°28'22" East a distance of 29.88 feet to an Iron pin set;
thence South 72°4B*29" East a distance of 131.29 feet to tie Point of Beginning,
passing through an iron pin set at a distance of plus 130,79 feet;
containing 0.416 acre, more or lass.
Subject to all legal right-of-ways, easements, restrictions, reservations, and zoning
regulations of record.
Subject to the 100-year Flood Plain restrictions, if applicable.
All Iron pins set are 5/8" x 30" rebar capped and labeled 'Biedertbach Surveying, LLC.
PS 7881*.
Page 1 of2
-------
Page 2 of 2
Description of 0.416 Acre
The bearings In this description are for angle calculations only and are based on the
southeast portion of the south line of ISO Acre Lot No, 42 used as an assumed bearing
of South 89e58'5r West.
A plat of the above-described survey has been submitted for file ai the County
Engineer's Office.
The above description prepared by Gregory A. Biedenbach, Ohio Registered Surveyor
No. 7881, based on information obtained from an actual field survey of June 15,2017,
Said survey being subject to any facte that nay be disclosed In a full and accurate tie
search.
Prior Deed: Official Records Volume 403, Page 281.
Date
Cc; Survey Pile: GB-2446F
Gregory A. Biedenbach
Ohio Registered Surveyor
ENGINNEWNG MANAGEMENT INC
4715 SHERBROOKE CT
ALLISON PARK, PA 15101
Inst #202100000243
-------
Appendix D
Five-Year Review Public Notice
-------
7/31/23, 2:19 PM
Public Notice: Van Dale Junkyard Site - Five-Year Review in Process | US EPA
= An official website of the United States government
Here's how vou know
MAIN MENU
Search EPA.gov
EPA in Ohio CONTACT US
Public Notice: Van Dale
Junkyard Site - Five-Year
Review in Process
How to Comment
Comments Due: January 15,2024
Adrian Palomeque
(palomeque.adrian@epa.gov)
Community Involvement Coordinator
440-250-1715
William Murray
(murray.williamj@epa.gov)
Remedial Project Manager
312-353-6324
You may also call EPA toll-free at 800-621-8431,8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., weekdays.
https://www.epa.gov/oh/van-dale-junkyard-site-five-year-review-process
1/6
-------
7/31/23, 2:19 PM
Public Notice: Van Dale Junkyard Site - Five-Year Review in Process | US ERA
Publish Date: July 27,2023
Summary
Fifth Five-Year Review in Process
U.S. EPA is conducting a five-year review of the Van Dale Junkyard site located on Goose
Run Road, between Township Road 345 and State Route 26 in Marietta, Ohio. The
Superfund law requires regular checkups of sites that have been cleaned up - with
waste managed on-site - to make sure the cleanup continues to protect people and the
environment. This is the fifth five-year review of this site.
EPA's cleanup at the site consisted of installing a hazardous waste cover, or cap;
excavating approximately 9,000 cubic yards of contaminated material from the site for
either off-site disposal or for on-site containment under a hazardous waste cap; and
monitored natural attenuation.
More information is available at the Washington County Public Library, 615 Fifth St, and
at the Van Dale Junkyard webpage. The review is expected to be completed by February
2024.
The five-year review is an opportunity for you to tell EPA about site conditions and any
concerns you have.
Applicants or Respondents
United States
Contact Us to ask a question, provide
feedback, or report a problem.
https://www.epa.gov/oh/van-dale-jurikyard-site-five-year-review-process
2/6
-------
Appendix E
Trend Analysis of Six Chemicals of Concern in the Groundwater at the
Vandale Junkyard Superfund Site June 2018 through March 2023
-------
10 October 2023
Trend Analysis of Six Chemicals of Concern in the Groundwater
at the Vandale Junkyard Superfund Site
June 2018 through March 2023
USEPA FIELDS Group
John Canar, Environmental Scientist
Chuck Roth, Life Scientist
Tyler Vappi, Research Associate
Introduction
In preparation for the upcoming five-year review, selected groundwater chemical concentrations were
evaluated for the most recent five-year period at the Vandale Junkyard site. Groundwater sampling at
the Vandale Junkyard Superfund site is conducted quarterly or annually, depending on the well.
Groundwater data in the USEPA Region 5 EQuIS database exist from June 2001 to the present. The
five-year period selected for the below analyses was June 2018 through March 2023. This document
includes analyses performed on six chemicals of concern in the groundwater at the site for this time
period. These chemicals were: 1,1-Dichloroethene (DCE), cis-l,2-Dichloroethylene (cis-DCE), trans-
1,2-Dichloroethene (trans-DCE), tetrachloroethylene (PCE), 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (TCA), and vinyl
chloride (VC). Basic statistics and trend analysis were conducted on the six chemicals of interest in
each of the 14 wells for the selected five-year period and are presented in this document.
Summary of Significant Findings
Of the 14 monitoring wells examined, five had levels of one or more chemicals of interest significantly
above their respective cleanup goals (CUGs) for the five-year period (June 2018 - March 2023). The
same wells as in the previous five-year review (June 2013 - March 2018). These wells were: MW01-
08, MW01-10, MW03-06, MW03-09, and MW03-11.
MW01-08:
• the medians for cis-DCE, DCE, PCE, and VC were 7, 32, 1.3, and 172 times higher than their
respective CUGs. (Previously 9, 45, 3, and 276 times higher.)
• cis-DCE had a weak to non-existent downward trend, possibly meeting the CUG in 2062/2067.
2
-------
(Previously, also a weak to non-existent trend.)
• DCE had a very strong downward trend, possibly meeting the CUG in 2033, however DCE
concentrations began to plateau at the end of 2020, roughly at 40ppb. (Previously, an upward
trend.)
• PCE had a downward trend and, since, June 2022, the levels were below the CUG. (Previously,
no trend.)
• VC had a very strong downward trend, possibly meeting the CUG at the end of 2023 or in 2024,
however VC concentrations may be plateauing near 50ppb. (Previously, VC data were plateauing
around 127ppb.)
MW01-10:
• the median for DCE was 1.2 times higher than its CUG. (Previously, DCE, PCE, and VC were 3,
5, and 1.5 times higher.)
• DCE had a very weak upward trend, hence unlikely to meet the CUG in the future. (Previously,
no trend.)
• PCE met the CUG in 2019 and currently has no trend. (Previously, there was a strong downward
trend and expectation to meet the CUG between 2019 and 2022.)
• VC had a strong downward trend and all values were at or below the CUG. (Previously, no
trend.)
MW03-09:
• the medians for cis-DCE, DCE and PCE were 0.7, 4, and 8 times higher than their respective
CUGs. (Previously, 1.1, 9, and 14 times higher.)
• cis-DCE had no trend but linear regression and Sen's slope method predicts that the well will be
above the CUG in 2029/2030. (Previously, no trend.)
• DCE had no trend but linear regression predicts possibly meeting the CUG in 2064, whereas
Sen's slope method predicts an increasing trend. (Previously, no trend.)
• PCE had no trend but linear regression predicts possibly meeting the CUG in 2044, whereas Sen's
slope method predicts an increasing trend. (Previously, a weak upward trend.)
MW03-11:
• the median for PCE was 7 times higher than its CUG. (Previously, 11 times higher.)
• PCE had a very strong downward trend, possibly meeting the CUG in 2029/2030, however
concentrations have been plateauing around 9ppb over the past two years. (Previously, there was
a strong downward trend but the last 1-1.5 years of PCE data were plateauing at a median of
13ppb.)
3
-------
Methods
Data
The USEPA Region 5 EQuIS database was queried for six chemicals of interest: DCE, cis-DCE, trans-
DCE, PCE, TCA, and VC. These chemicals were queried from the fourteen wells (see Figure 1) with
chemistry data for the time period of interest, June 2018 through March 2023. The selected time period
ensured that five years of annual or quarterly data were analyzed and complemented the previous five-
year review of June 2013 through March 2018 groundwater data.
Specifically, in EQuIS, the "Analytical Results II" query ("report" in EQuIS jargon) was used for the
above query with the following modifications:
• all monitoring wells were queried
• field duplicates as well as the default "normal" samples were queried
• the date range was 6/1/2018 through 3/31/2023
• only the groundwater sample matrix was queried
• only the above six chemicals were queried
• additional well information was also queried, e.g., surface elevation, well start depth
Data Handling and Basic Statistics
The output from the above EQuIS query, a comma-separated file (*.csv), was imported into the SAS
statistical software for data "cleanup", formatting, new field creation, subsetting, basic statistics,
graphing, and exporting for use in other software (ArcGIS Pro, ProUCL, and VSP). Two of the wells
had field duplicates, wells MW01-08 and MW03-09. SAS was used to create a maximum value from
these field duplicates in order to be most conservative, from an ecological and human health standpoint.
Historically, the consultants for Vandale Junkyard (Engineering Management, Inc. EMI) selected the
"parent" sample ID in the case of any duplicate samples and used that value for statistical analysis. (The
"parent" sample ID is that sample not identified as the duplicate.)
Reporting limits and Cleanup Goals
One concern with the existing data is the use of reporting limits at or very close to the cleanup goal
(CUG). In the case of VC, the reporting limit is at the CUG of 0.5ppb. Hence it will not be possible to
demonstrate that the VC levels in these wells were below the CUG; only that they were at the CUG.
Upgradient compared to Downgradient wells
Graphic comparisons of the six chemicals of interest in selected up- and down-gradient wells were
generated in the SAS statistical software.
4
-------
Maps of Chemical concentrations by well
ArcGIS was used to create maps of the maximum concentration level for each of the 14 wells and each
of the six chemicals of interest for the period June 2018 through March 2023.
Trend Analysis and Time to Meet Cleanup Goals (CUGs)
A Python script was integrated with ArcGIS Pro to perform the Mann-Kendall nonparametric test for
trend. (The Python scripts' Mann-Kendall results matched those found from ProUCL version 5.1.) The
Theil-Sen trend test was performed in ProUCL version 5.1. And, Visual Sample Plan (VSP) version
7.19 was used to perform the Season-Kendall trend test. The Seasonal-Kendall is "an extension of the
Mann-Kendall" test when "the data collected over time were expected to change in the same direction
(up or down) for one or more seasons" (VSP, 2018). Both softwares were funded, in part, by the U.S.
EPA and other Federal agencies.
The time required to meet a cleanup goal (CUG) for selected wells and chemicals was calculated using
equations for trend estimated in the VSP software and confirmed in the ProUCL software. Both
softwares estimate trend equations using linear regression methods and nonparametric regression
methods (i.e., nonparametric methods Theil-Sen in ProUCL and Sen's slope estimation in VSP).
Results and Conclusions
Data characteristics and Basic Statistics
Most of the 14 wells had a very high proportion of non-detects for the six chemicals of interest. For
example, wells MW03-04, MW03-12, MW07-13, and MW07-14 had non-detects for all six chemicals
for every sampling event, hence 100% non-detects. Another six wells (MW01-01, MW01-02, MW01-
03, MW01-07, MW03-05, and MW03-06) had from 68 to 93% non-detects for all six chemicals. Due to
the larger proportion of non-detects or very narrow ranges of concentrations, trend analysis was not
conducted on many of the chemicals of interest for these wells, save for VC levels. Additionally, trend
analysis was performed for MW03-06 for DCE and VC, MW03-11 for PCE and VC, MW03-12 for PCE
and VC, and MW07-13 for DCE and VC. (See Table 1 for an overview of the trend results as well as
basic statistics for the 14 wells.)
Basic statistics were performed in the SAS statistical software. The results are presented in Table 1 and
Table 2.
Upgradient compared to Downgradient wells
Four upgradient versus downgradient well pairings were compared (see Figure 2). Well MW03-11 was
compared to the two downgradient wells, MW07-13 and MW07-14 (Figures 3-8), one of the six
chemicals, PCE, had almost always consistently higher levels than either of the downgradient wells (see
5
-------
Figure 5). Additionally, the downward trend can be seen in this figure. Vinyl chloride, although having
three concentrations higher than the CUG, had the same concentrations in each of the three wells over
time (see Figure 8). Four of the six chemicals (cis-DCE, DCE, TCA, and trans-DCE) in MW03-11 were
well below the respective cleanup goals (CUGs).
For MW03-09 compared to the two downgradient wells, MW01-07 and MW03-12 (Figures 9-14), four
of the six chemicals (cis-DCE, DCE, PCE, and VC) had higher or sometimes higher levels in the
upgradient (MW03-09) well than the downgradient wells MW01-07 and MW03-12. Three of these four
chemicals were often above their respective cleanup goals (cis-DCE, see Figure 9) or were well above
their CUGs (DCE and PCE, see Figures 10 and 11). Vinyl chloride, although having three
concentrations higher than the CUG, had the same concentrations in each of the three wells over time
(see Figure 14). The other, TCA, had levels well below its CUG of 20ppb.
Well MW01-08 contained concentration levels all six chemicals well above, or mostly so, than those
found in the downgradient well MW03-12 (Figures 15-20). Chemicals cis-DCE, DCE, PCE, and VC
were well above, or mostly so, then their respective CUGs (see Figures 15, 16, 17, and 20). Since June
2022, PCE levels have been below its CUG of 1.5ppb (see Figure 17). cis-DCE may meet its CUG in
2062/2067. DCE and VC may meet their CUGs in 2033 and 2024, respectively, but each appears to be
plateauing at about 40ppb and 50ppb, respectively (see Figures 16 and 20). TCA and trans-DCE were
well below their respective CUGs in both the up- and downgradient wells (see Figures 18 and 19).
Three of the chemicals in well MW01-10 were higher than those in well MW03-05 (see Figures 21-26).
These chemicals were cis-DCE, DCE, and PCE (see Figures 21, 22, and 23). The other three chemicals
in well MW01-10 were very close to their respective chemical concentrations in well MW03-05. DCE
and PCE levels in well MW01-10 were sometimes above their respective CUGs, but not by a lot (see
Figures 22 and 23). Vinyl chloride, although having three concentrations higher than the CUG, it had
the same concentrations or lower than the downgradient well, MW03-05 (see Figure 26).
Maps of Chemical concentrations by well
Maps of the maximum concentration level for each of the 14 wells and each of the six chemicals of
interest for the period June 2018 through March 2023 are shown in Figures 27-32. The lowest range of
concentration values in the legend of each figure represents each chemical's cleanup goal (CUG). As in
the previous five-year analysis, four of the six chemicals of interest had levels above their respective
cleanup goals: cis-DCE, DCE, PCE, and VC (see Figures 27-29 and 32). Only one well, MW01-08 had
a cis-DCE level above the CUG (see Figure 27). Four wells, MW01-08, MW01-10, MW03-06, and
MW03-09 had DCE levels above their CUGs (see Figure 28). Four wells, MW01-08, MW01-10,
MW03-09, and MW03-11 had PCE levels above their CUGs (see Figure 29). Seven of the 14 wells had
VC levels above their CUGs. These wells were: MW01-08, MW03-05, MW03-06, MW03-09, MW03-
11, MW07-13, and MW07-14. Each had VC levels above their CUGs (see Figure 32). Taken as a
whole (see Figure 33), there were eight wells with one or more chemicals of concern with a maximum
value above their respective CUGs. These wells were: MW01-08, MW01-10, MW03-05, MW03-06,
MW03-09, MW03-11, MW07-13, and MW07-14. The four downgradient wells, MW03-05, MW03-06,
6
-------
MW07-13 and MW07-14 only had VC levels above the CUG, however each had some VC
concentrations with non-detect values of lppb, very close to the CUG of 0.5ppb.
Another way to show the elevated levels of the six chemicals of interest in these four upgradient wells is
displayed in Table 2. This table provides descriptive statistics for the chemicals of interest in each well
(number of observations, median, and range) as well as the proportion of samples at or above the
cleanup goal (see column "2018-2023 Prop, ge CUG" in Table 2). This field, "Prop, ge CUG", is a
measure of the consistency of exceedances. As seen in the table, the majority of wells with exceedances
had them at very high proportions, e.g., 20/20, 17/19. (These are in red font.) Compared to the previous
five-year period (see column "2013-2018 Prop, ge CUG"), PCE levels in MW01-08 decreased from
17/20 exceedances to 10/20 exceedances. Well MW01-10 had fewer exceedances for cis-DCE, DCE,
and PCE in the current five-year period compared to the last. Although not shown in Table 2, well
MW03-06 improved during this 5-year period compared to the previous in that fewer exceedances of the
CUG of 1.5ppb (from 9/20 to 2/20) even though there was no real change in the maximum values, from
2.9ppb versus 2.8ppb. In contrast, wells MW03-09 and MW03-11 did not improve compared to the
previous five-year period.
Trend Analysis and Time to Meet Cleanup Goals (CUGs)
An overview of the trend analysis findings is presented in Table 1. Three different trend tests were used.
One, the nonparametric Mann-Kendall (M-K) trend test was performed on all six chemical of concern
for all 14 wells. The results are shown in Table 1. For selected wells and chemicals, the Theil-Sen trend
test was performed in ProUCL and the Seasonal Kendall trend test was performed in VSP. In cases
where the downward trend was statistically significant, estimates of dates when a well would meet the
cleanup goal (CUG) for a particular chemical were estimated using the linear regression equations
estimated by both ProUCL and VSP. Additionally, the Theil-Sen and Sen's slope estimator equations
were also used to estimate the time to meet a CUG. (The former was estimated in ProUCL, the latter in
VSP.) These estimates were also generated for several other chemicals in wells with no significant M-K
trend but which had instances of higher numbers of exceedances of the CUG.
Of the 14 wells examined for the six chemicals of interest, ten wells had levels of each of the six
chemicals of concern at or below their respective CUGs (see Table 1). These wells were: MW01-01,
MW01-02, MW01-03, MW01-07, MW03-04, MW03-05, MW03-06, MW03-12, MW07-13, and
MW07-14. Given that these wells had chemical levels at or below the CUGs, trend analysis was not
performed for most of the chemicals. The only concern in each of these wells is that the reporting limit
(i.e., detection limit) for vinyl chloride (VC) is at the cleanup goal of 0.5ppb. Hence, it will not be
possible to demonstrate that the VC levels in these wells were below the CUG; only that they were at the
CUG.
In the remaining four wells, the levels of one or more chemicals of interest were above their respective
CUGs (see Table 1). These wells were: MW01-08, MW01-10, MW03-09, and MW03-11. These wells
were addressed, in turn.
7
-------
MW01-08
In well MW01-08 there were four chemicals with values above their respective CUGs (see Table 1).
Three of which had concentrations well above their respective CUGs, i.e., cis-DCE, DCE, and VC. cis-
DCE had a weak to non-existent downward trend, no seasonality, with the possibly of meeting the CUG
in 2062/2067. A relative sense of the significance of these elevated values can been seen in the ratio of
the median to the CUG. That value was 7.0; essentially the median cis-DCE levels were nearly an order
of magnitude higher than the CUG. DCE had a very strong downward trend, no seasonality, with the
possibility of meeting the CUG in 2033. However, the DCE concentrations began to plateau at the end
of 2020, roughly at 40ppb (see Figure 34). The ratio of the median to the CUG was 32 indicating that
the median DCE level is 32 times higher than the CUG (see Table 1). PCE had a downward trend, no
seasonality, and, since, June 2022, the levels were below the CUG. The ratio of the median to the CUG
was 1.33 (see Table 1). Although VC had a median to CUG ratio of 172, two orders of magnitude
higher than the CUG, it had a very strong downward trend, no seasonality, with the possibility of
meeting the CUG at the end of 2023 or in 2024. However, VC concentrations may be plateauing near
50ppb (see Figure 35).
MW01-10
Well MW01-10 had one chemical, DCE, that appeared to have an increasing trend. The Mann-Kendall
trend test found a very weak upward trend and both linear regression and Sen's nonparametric slope
estimate also had upward trends. The ratio of the median to the CUG was 1.2, not an extremely high
ratio. PCE appears to have met the CUG in 2019 and currently had no trend either using the Mann-
Kendall test or the Theil-Sen test. VC had a strong downward trend and all values were at or below the
CUG.
MW03-09
Well MW03-09 had four chemicals that were consistently or often higher than their respective CUGs
(see Table 1). cis-DCE was found to not have a statistically significant trend or seasonality, but the
linear regression and Sen's nonparametric slope estimate generated upward trends. These potential
upward trends may lead this well to go above the CUG in 2029/2030. DCE had no trend, no seasonality,
but the linear regression estimated a downward trend with the possibility of meeting the CUG in 2064,
whereas Sen's nonparametric slope estimate predicted an upward trend. The ratio of the median to the
CUG was 4.27. As with DCE, PCE also had no trend or seasonality, and the linear regression estimated
a downward trend with the possibility of meeting the CUG in 2044, whereas Sen's nonparametric slope
estimate predicted an upward trend.
MW03-11
In well MW03-11 there was only one chemical, PCE, with concentration values of concern (see Table
1). Its median to CUG ratio was 7.33. However, there was a very strong downward trend (see Figure
36), no seasonality, and may possibility meet the CUG by 2029 or 2030. However, concentrations may
be plateauing around 9ppb over the past two years (see Figure 36).
Mann-Kendall graphs and trend results as shown in Figures, 34, 35, and 36 are available for the
remaining chemicals and wells upon request.
8
-------
References
ProUCL Version 5.0.00 User Guide, Statistical Software for Environmental Applications for Data Sets
with and without Nondetect Observations, EPA/600/R-07/041, Prepared by Anita Singh and Robert
Maichle, September 2013.
VSP Development Team. Seasonal Kendall Test for Monotonic Trend. Available:
https://vsp.pnnl.gov/help/Vsample/Design Trend Seasonal Kendall.htm. [Accessed: 02 October
2023.]
Contact
Please contact the USEPA FIELDS Group via John Canar (canar.iohn@epa.gov) about this document.
9
-------
Figures and Tables
for report
Trend Analysis of Six Chemicals of Concern in the Groundwater
at the Vandale Junkyard Superfund Site
June 2018 through March 2023
-------
Figure
Vandale Junkyard
Groundwater Well locations
MW03 05
iff
MW03-04
MW01 03
-------
Summary of tend analysis results for the 14 Vandale Junkyard groundwater wells (June 2013 through and including March 2018)
Well Chemical
Findings
No. Obs.1 Median (ppb) Range (ppb)2
CUG (ppb)3
Median/CUG4
Prop, ge CUG5
0/5
Mann-Kendall test
NA
Data Seasonal Kendall test Theil-Sentest
annual
MW01-01 cis-DCE
all concentrat
all concentrat
ons well below CUG
ons below CUG
5 0.5 0.3-1
100
0.01
MW01-01 DCE
5 1 0.4-1
1.5
0.67
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-01 PCE
all concentrat
ons below CUG
5 0.5 0.3-1
L5
0.67
0/5
NA
annual
"la hip 1
MW01-01TCA
all concentrat
ons well below CUG
5 0.5 0.4-1
20
0.05
0/5
NA
annual
I O U IC _L
MW01-01 trans-DCE
all concentrat
ons well below CUG
5 0.5 0.5-1
100
0.01
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-01VC
4 of 5 concentrations = CUG
5 0.5 0.3-0.5
0.5
1
4/5
notrend
annual |
Well Chemical
Findings
No. Obs.1 Median (ppb) Range (ppb)2
CUG (ppb)3
Median/CUG4
Prop, ge CUG5
Mann-Kendall test
Data
MW01-02 cis-DCE
all concentrat
ons well below CUG
5 0.4 0.3 - 0.5
100
0.00
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-02 DCE
all concentrat
ons below CUG
5 1 0.4-1
1.5
0.67
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-02 PCE
all concentrat
ons below CUG
5 1.1 0.9-1.4
1.5
0.73
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-02TCA
all concentrat
ons well below CUG
5 0.5 0.4-1
20
0.03
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-02 trans-DCE
all concentrat
ons well below CUG
5 0.5 0.5-1
100
0.01
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-02 VC
4 of 5 concentrations = CUG
5 0.5 0.3-0.5
0.5
1
4/5
notrend
annual |
Well Chemical
Findings
No. Obs.1 Median (ppb) Range (ppb)2
CUG (ppb)3
Median/CUG4
Prop, ge CUG5
Mann-Kendall test
Data
MW01-03 cis-DCE
all concentrat
ons well below CUG
5 0.5 0.4-1
100
0.01
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-03 DCE
all concentrat
ons below CUG
5 1 0.4-1
1.5
0.67
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-03 PCE
all concentrat
ons below CUG
5 0.5 0.3-1
1.5
0.33
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-03TCA
all concentrat
ons well below CUG
5 0.5 0.4-1
20
0.03
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-03 trans-DCE
all concentrat
ons well below CUG
5 0.5 0.5-1
100
0.01
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-03 VC
4 of 5 concentrations = CUG
5 0.5 0.3-0.5
0.5
1.00
4/5
notrend
annual
Well Chemical
Findings
No. Obs.1 Median (ppb) Range (ppb)2
CUG (ppb)3
Median/CUG4
Prop, ge CUG5
Mann-Kendall test
Data
MW01-07 cis-DCE
all concentrat
ons well below CUG
5 1.5 0.6-2.5
100
0.02
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-07 DCE
all concentrat
ons below CUG
5 1 0.4 -1.0
1.5
0.67
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-07 PCE
all concentrat
ons below CUG
5 0.5 0.2-1.0 ~
1.5
0.33
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-07TCA
all concentrat
ons well below CUG
5 0.5 0.4 -1.0
20
0.03
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-07 trans-DCE
all concentrat
ons well below CUG
5 0.5 0.5 -1.0
100
0.01
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-07 VC
4 of 5 concentrations = CUG
5 0.5 0.3 - 0.5
0.5
1.00
4/5
notrend
annual
Well Chemical
Findings
No. Obs.1 Median (ppb) Range (ppb)2
CUG (ppb)3
Median/CUG4
Prop, ge CUG5
Mann-Kendall test
Data
Seasonal Kendall test Theil-Sen test
"
MW01-08 cis-DCE
concentrations well above CUG, weak to non-existent downward trend
concentrations well above CUG, but a significant downward trend
20 700 557 - 869
100
7.00
32.07
20/20
MK = 27%
quarterly
quarterly
SK 10%, no seasonality |TS NOTsig. at 5% or 20%
MW01-08 DCE
20 48.1 31.1-65.2
L5
20/20
MK0-5%
SK 5%, no seasonality TS5%
MW01-08 PCE
10of 20values above the CUG
20 2.0 0.3 - 5.0
1.5
1.33
10/20
MK 6 -10%
quarterly
SK 10%, no seasonality TS NOT sig. at 5%; sig. at 20%
MW01-08TCA
all concentrations below CUG
20 2.3 0.4 - 5.0
20
0.12
0/20
NA
quarterly
MW01-08 trans-DCE
MW01-08 VC
all concentrations below CUG
concentrations well above CUG, but a significant downward trend
20 3.8 2.8-5.9
20 86.2 1.6 - 245
100
0.5
0.04
172.40
0/20
NA
quarterly
20/20
MK0-5% J quarterly
SK 5%, no seasonality TS5%
i
Well Chemical Findings No. Obs.1 Median (ppb) Range (ppb)2
CUG (ppb)3
Median/CUG4
Prop, ge CUG5
Mann-Kendall test
Data Theil-Sen test
MW01-10cis-DCE all concentrations well below CUG 5 28.1 9.8 - 44.6
100
0.28
0/5
MK 20-25%
MK 20-25%
annual
MW01-10 DCE 3 of 5 values above the CUG 5 1.8 0.9-3.2
1.5
1.20 3/5
annual TS NOTsig. at 5% or20%
MW01-10 PCE
2 of 5 values above the CUG
5 1.3 0.8-2.0
1.5
0.87
2/5
notrend
annual TS NOTsig. at 5% or20%
MW01-10TCA
all concentrations below CUG
5 0.5 0.4 -1.0
20
0.03
0/5
NA
annual
\
MW01-10 trans-DCE
all concentrations well below CUG
5 0.5 0.3-1.0
100
0.01
0/5
NA
annual
J \
MW01-10 VC
3 of 5 concentrations = CUG
5 0.5 0.2 - 0.5
0.5
1.00
3/5
MK 6 -10%
annual
*
Well Chemical
MW01-08 cis-DCE
MW01-08 DCE
Estimated time to meet CUG
Well Chemical
Findings
No. Obs.1 Median (ppb) Range (ppb)2
CUG (ppb)3
Median/CUG4
Prop, ge CUG5
Mann-Kendall test
Data
Estimated to meet CUG in 2033; however DCE data began to plateau at end of 2020, roughly at ~43ppb |
MW03-04 cis-DCE
all concentrat
all concentrat
ons well below CUG
ons below CUG
5 0.5 0.4 -1.0
100
0.01
0.67
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-08 PCE
MW03-04 DCE
5 1 0.4 -1.0
L5
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-08TCA
MW03-04 PCE
all concentrat
ons below CUG
5 0.5 0.3 -1.0
1.5
0.33
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-08 trans-DCE
MW03-04TCA
all concentrat
ons well below CUG
5 0.5 0.4 -1.0
20
0.03
0/5
NA
annual
MW01-08VC
Estimated to meet CUG end of 2023 or
nid 2024; however VC data may be plateauing near50ppb
MW03-04 trans-DCE
all concentrat
ons well below CUG
5 0.5 0.5-1.0
100
0.01
0/5
NA
annual
MW03-04 VC
4 of 5 concentrations = CUG
5 0.5 0.3 - 0.5
0.5
1.00
4/5
notrend
annual
Well Chemical
Estimated time to meet CUG
MW01-10 cis-DCE
Estimated increasing trend via linear re
Met CUG in 2019
gression and Sen's non para metric slope estimate
Well Chemical
Findings
No. Obs.1 Median (ppb) Range (ppb)2
CUG (ppb)3
Median/CUG4
Prop, ge CUG5
Mann-Kendall test
Data
MW01-10 DCE
MW01-10 PCE
MW03-05 cis-DCE
all concentrat
ons well below CUG
20 1.4 1.0 - 2.2
100
0.01
0/20
NA
quarterly
MW01-10TCA
MW03-05 DCE
all concentrat
ons below CUG
20 1 0.3 -1.0
L5
0.67
0/20
NA
quarterly
MW01-10 trans-DCE
MW03-05 PCE
all concentrat
all concentrat
ons below CUG
ons well below CUG
20 0.8 0.3 -1.0
1.5
0.53
0/20
NA
quarterly
MW01-10VC
MW03-05 TCA
20 0.8 0.4 -1.0
20
0.04
0/20
NA
quarterly
MW03-05 trans-DCE
all concentrat
ons well below CUG
20 0.8 0.5 -1.0
100
0.01
0/20
NA
quarterly
MW03-05VC 18of 20 concentrations >= CUG; only 3 of 20 concentrations >CUG 20 0.5 0.3-1.0 0.5 1.00 18/20 notrend quarterly
-------
Summary of tend analysis results for the 14 Vandale Junkvard groundwater wells (June 2013throueh and includins March 2018)
Table 1 (cont'd)
MW03-06 cis-DCE
all concentrations well below CUG
20|
18.5
6.6-
36.2
100
0.19
0/20
NA
q
arte rly
MW03-06 DCE
2 of 20concentrations >CUG
20
1.0
0.5
2.8
1.5
0.67
2/20
no trend
|q
arte rly
MW03-06PCE
all concentrations below CUG
20
0.8
0.3
1.0
1.5
0.53
0/20
NA
|q
arte rly
MW03-06TCA
all concentrations well below CUG
20
0.8
0.4
1.0
20
0.04
0/20
NA
q
arte rly
MW03-06trans-DCE
all concentrations well below CUG
20
0.8
0.5
1.0
100
0.01
0/20
NA
q
arte rly
MW03-06VC
18of 20 concentrations >= CUG; only 3of 20concentrations >CUG
2o|
0.5
0.3
1.0
0.5
1.00
18/20
no trend
|q_
arte rly | |
Well Chemical
Findings
No. Obs.1
Median (ppb) Range (ppb)2
CUG (ppb)3
Median/CUG4
Prop, ge CUG5
Mann-Kendall test
Data
Seasonal Kendall test
Theil-Sentest
MW03-09 cis-DCE
7of 19concentrations >CUG
19
67.4 24.4-149
100
0.67
7/19
no trend
quarterly no seasonality
TS NOT sig. at 5% or 20%
MW03-09 DCE
19 of 19concentrations well above CUG
19
6.4 3.0-15.4
1.5
4.27
19/19
no trend
quarterly no seasonality
TS NOT sig. at 5% or 20%
MW03-09PCE
19 of 19concentrations well above CUG
19
11.7 8.3 - 40.6
1.5
7.80
19/19
no trend
quarterly no seasonality
TS NOT sig. at 5% or 20%
MW03-09TCA
all concentrations well below CUG
19
0.7 0.3-2.1
20
0.04
0/19
NA
quarterly
MW03-09trans-DCE
all concentrations well below CUG
19
0.6 0.4-1.0
100
0.01
0/19
NA
quarterly
MW03-09VC
17 of 19 co nee ntrati o ns >= CUG; o n 1 y 3 of 19 co nee nt rati o n s > CUG
19
0.5 0.3-1.0
0.5
1.00
17/19
no trend
quarterly
Well Chemical
Findings
No. Obs.1
Median (ppb) Range (ppb)2
CUG (ppb)3
Median/CUG4
Prop, ge CUG5
Mann-Kendall test
Data
Seasonal Kendall test
Theil-Sentest
all concentrations well below CUG
all concentrations below CUG
19 of 20concentrations well above CUG
all concentrations well below CUG
all concentrations well below CUG
18 of 20 co nee ntrati o ns >= CUG; o n I y 3 of 20 co nee nt rati o n s > CUG
0.4-1.9
0.5-1.0
1.3 -14.5
0.3-1.0
0.5-1.0
0.3-1.0
} 0.01
5 0.60
5 7.33
) 0.03
J 0.01
Well Chemical
Findings
MW03-12 cis-DCE
all concentra
ions well below CUG
MW03-12 DCE
all concentra
ions below CUG
MW03-12 PCE
all concentra
ions below CUG
MW03-12TCA
all concentra
ions well below CUG
MW03-12 trans-DCE
all concentra
ions well below CUG
MW03-12VC
4 of 5 concen
rations = CUG
No. Obs.1
5
Median (ppb) Range (ppb)2
0.5 0.4-1.0
CUG (ppb)3
100
5
1 0.4-1.0
1.5
5
0.5 0.3-1.0
1.5
5
0.5 0.4-1.0
20
5
0.5 0.5-1.0
100
5
0.5 0.3-0.5
0.5
0.01
0.67
0.33
0.03
0.01
0/20
0/20
19/20
0/20
0/20
18/20
0/5
0/5
0/5
0/5
0/5
4/5
quarterly
Iquarte rly
|quarterlyseasonality TS5%
quarterly
quarterly
| quarterly
annual
annual
| annual
annual
annual
annual
Well Chemical
Findings
MW07-13 cis-DCE
all concentr
tions well below CUG
MW07-13 DCE
all concentr
tions below CUG
MW07-13 PCE
all concentr
tions below CUG
MW07-13TCA
all concentr
tions well below CUG
MW07-13 trans-DCE
all concentr
tions well below CUG
MW07-13VC
18 of 20 concentrations >= CUG; only 3 of 20con cent rations >CUG
No. Obs.1 Median (ppb) Range (ppb)2 CUG (ppb)3 Median/CUG4 Prop, ge CUG5 Mann-Kendall test Data
0.01
0.67
0.53
0.04
0.01
0/20
0/20
0/20
0/20
0/20
18/20
NA quarterly
NA quarterly
JMK 0 - 5%^| q uarte rly
NA quarterly
NA quarterly
no trend quarterly
Well Chemical
Findings
MW07-14 cis-DCE
all concentr
tions well below CUG
MW07-14 DCE
all concentr
tions below CUG
MW07-14PCE
all concentr
tions below CUG
MW07-14TCA
all concentr
tions well below CUG
MW07-14 trans-DCE
all concentr
tions well below CUG
MW07-14VC
18 of 20 concentrations >= CUG; only 3 of 20con cent rations >CUG
No. Obs. Median (ppb) Range (ppb) CUG (ppb) Median/CUG Prop, ge CUG Mann-Kendall test Data
NA quarterly
0.01
0.67
0.53
0.04
0.01
0/20
0/20
0/20
0/20
0/20
18/20
quarterly
quarterly
quarterly
quarterly
quarterly
Notes:
1No. Obs. = Number of observations
ppb = parts per billion (ug/L)
2 Range = miniumum value and maximum value
3 CUG = cleanup goal
4 Median/CUG = median value divided by the CUG; a relative measure of degree of problem or non-problerr
5 Prop, ge CUG= proportion of all values greaterthan or equal to the cleanup goal, CUG
NA = not applicable as test was not necessary
6 Estimated time to meet CUG based on Linear Regression and Sen's nonparametric slope estimate
Key for Findings and Median/CUG col u
No concern
ins:
Possible concern
Of concern
Key for Trend analysis:
20-30% very weak DOWN ward trend, alpha 20%-30%
6-10% DOWN ward trend, alpha 6-10%
0-5%
very srong DOWN ward trend, alpha 0-5%
Well Chemical
MW03
MW03
MW03
MW03
MW03
MW03
cis-DCE
09DCE
PCE
09TCA
09trans-DCE
09 VC
Well Chemical
MW03-11 cis-DCE
MW03-11 DCE
MW03-11 PCE
MW03-11TCA
MW03-11 trans-DCE
MW03-11 VC
Estimated time to meet CUG
Estimated increasing trend that vy
I be above CUG in 2029/2030 via linear regression and Sen's non parametric slope estimate
Estimated to meet CUG in 2064via Linear Regression, estimated to be an increasing trend via Sen's nonparametricslope estimate
Estimated to meet CUG in 2044 via Linear Regression, estimated to be an increasing trend via Sen's nonparametric slope estimate
EstimatedtomeetCUGin2029or2030
20-25%
6-20%
very weak upward trend, 20%-25%
upward trend, alpha 9%-20%
very strong upward trend, alpha 0-5%
-------
MW03 12
MVV07 14
MW03 05
Figure
Vandale Junkyard
Groundwater Well locations
MW03-04
MW01 03
MW01 01
Well identifier
H up- vs down-gradient groupings
-------
Well overlays:
MW03-11VS MW07-13 and MW07-14
-------
Notes: reporting limits are often 0.5ppm and Ippm
Figure 3
Wells MW03-11 (upgradient) vs MW07-13 (downgradient) and MW07-14 (downgradient)
cis-DCE (ppb); cleanup goal (CUG) = 100pph
Vandale Junkyard
2.0
1.5
sn.
Ol.
LU
O
~
I
CO
H 1.0
o
0.5
"i—
Jan
2018
Jan
2020
Jan
2021
Sample Date
Jan
2022
Jan
2023
Jul
Well A MW03 11 cisDCE • MW07 13 cisDCE ft MW07 14 cisDCE
-------
Notes: reporting limits are often 0.4ppm and Ippm
Figure 4
Wells MW03-11 (upgradient) vs MW07-13 (downgradient) and MW07-14 (downgradient)
DCE (ppb); cleanup goal (CUG) = 1.5ppb
Vandale Junkyard
1.0 -
0.9
0.8 -
Cl.
C-
O
~
0.6 -
0.5
0.4 -
Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Sample Date
Well ~ MW03 11 DCE • MW07 13 DCE £? MW07 14 DCE
-------
Figure 5
Wells MW03-11 (upgradient) vs MW07-13 (downgradient) and MW07-14 (downgradient)
PCE (ppb); cleanup goal (CLIG) = 1.5ppb
Vandale Junkyard
JZl
•Zl.
Q.
LU
O
G_
15.0
12.5
10.0
7.5
5.0
2.5
0.0
Jan
201S
Jul
Jan
201S
Jul
Jan
2020
Jul
Jan
2021
Jul
Jan
2022
—r-
Jul
Jan
2023
Sample Date
Well ~ MW03 11 PCE • MW07 13 PCE O MW07 14 PCE
Jul
-------
Notes: reporting limits are often 0.4ppm, 0.5ppm, and lppm
Figure 6
Wells MW03-11 (upgradient) vs MW07-13 (downgradient) and MW07-14 (downgradient)
TCA (ppb); cleanup goal (CUG) = 20ppb
Vandale Junkyard
1.0
0.8
_2Z!
Cl.
5 0.6
0.4
"i—
Jan
2018
Jan
2019
Jan
2021
Sample Date
Jan
2022
Jan
2023
Jul
Well A MW03 11 TCA # MW07 13 TCA W MW07 14 TCA
-------
Notes: reporting limits are often 0.5ppm and Ippm
Figure 7
Wells MW03-11 (upgradient) vs MW07-13 (downgradient) and MW07-14 (downgradient)
trans-DCE (ppb); cleanup goal (CUG) = 100pph
Vandale Junkyard
JZl
Q_
EL
LU
O
D
i
CO
cz
03
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
"i—
Jan
2018
—i i 1—
Jan Jul Jan
2019 2020
Jul
Jan
2021
Jan
2023
Jul
Well A MW03 11 transDCE
Sample Date
I MW07 13 transDCE C? MW07 14 transDCE
-------
Notes: reporting limits are often 0.32ppm, 0.5ppm, and Ippm
Figure 8
Wells MW03-11 (upgradient) vs MW07-13 (downgradient) and MW07-14 (downgradient)
VC (ppb); cleanup goal (CUG) = 0.5ppb
Vandale Junkyard
1.0
0.8
Ci.
O
>
0.6
0.4
Jan
2018
Jan
2019
Well
Jan
2020
Jan
2021
Jan
2023
Sample Date
~ MW03 11 VC • MW07 13 VC ~ MW07 14 VC
-------
Well overlays:
MW03-09 vs MW01-07 and MW03-12
-------
Figure 9
Wells MW03-09 (upgradierit) vs MW01-07 (downgradient) and MW03-12 (downgradient)
cis-DCE (p|ih); cleanup goal (CUG) = 100ppb
Vantlale Junkyard
150 -
*
1 25 -
\ K fv
100 -
3"
Cs_
Cl
CUG 10Oppb I \ j \ I ^ J \ I *
II 7\ \
LU 7^ _
o
Q
1
CO
\/\\\
50
\/ \1 V
25
IV
0 -
£ A A*- -
i i i i i i i i i i i i
Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Sample Date
Well A MW01_07_cisDCE • MW03_09_cisDCE ~ MW03_12_cisDCE
-------
Figure 10
Wells MW03-09 (upgradient) vs MW01-07 (downgradient) and MW03-12 (downgradient)
DCE (ppb); cleanup goal (CUG) = 1.5ppb
Vandale Junkyard
JZ:
Q_
.d-
LLI
O
~
Jan
2018
Jul
Jan
2019
Jul
Jan
2020
Jul
Jan
2021
Jul
Jan
2022
Jul
Jan
2023
Jul
Sample Date
Well A MW01 07 DCE • MW03 09 DCE ~ MW03 12 DCE
-------
Wells MW03-09 (upgradient) vs MW01-07 (downgradient) and MW03-12 (downgradient)
PCE (ppl)); cleanup goal (CUG) = 1.5ppb
Vandale Junkyard
40
30
JZl
•Zl.
Q.
LU
O
G_
20
10
0
CUG 1 .Sppb
"i—
Jan
2018
—i—
Jan
2019
—r~
Jul
—i—
Jan
2022
T"
Jul
i
Jan
2023
Jul
Jul
Jan
2020
Jul
Jan
2021
Jul
Sample Date
Well A MW01 07 PCE • MW03 09 PCE MW03 12 PCE
-------
Notes: reporting limits are often 0.4ppm, 0.5ppm, and lppm
Figure 12
Wells MW03-09 (upgradient) vs MW01-07 (downgradient) and MW03-12 (downgradient)
TCA (ppb); cleanup goal (CUG) = 20ppb
Vandale Junkyard
Q.
Q-
<
O
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
"i—
Jan
2018
Jan
2020
Jan
2021
Sample Date
Jan
2022
Jan
2023
Jul
Well A MW01 07 TCA • MW03 09 TCA ~ MW03 12 TCA
-------
Notes: reporting limits are often 0.5ppm and Ippm
Figure 13
Wells MW03-09 (upgradient) vs MW01-07 (downgradient) and MW03-12 (downgradient)
trans-DCE (ppb); cleanup goal (CUG) = 100ppli
Validate Junkyard
JZi
Q_
Cl.
LU
O
Q
i
to
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
—i—
Jan
2022
—i—
Jan
2023
Jan
2018
Jul
Jan
2019
Jul
Jan
2020
Jul Jan
2021
Sample Date
Jul
Jul
Jul
Well ~ MW01 07 transDCE • MW03 09 transDCE MW03 12 transDCE
-------
Notes: reporting limits are often 0.32ppm, 0.5ppm, and Ippm
Figure 14
Wells MW03-09 (upgradient) vs MW01-07 (downgradient) and MW03-12 (downgradient)
VC (ppl)); cleanup goal (CUG) = 0.5ppb
Vandale Junkyard
1.0
0.8
C!_
Q_
o
0.6
0.4
CUG O.Sppt
Jan
2018
Jul
Jan
2019
Jul
Jan
2020
Jul
Jan
2021
Sample Date
Jan
2023
Well ~ fillW01 07 VC • MW03 09 VC O MW03 12 VC
-------
Well overlays:
MW01-08 vs MW03-12
-------
_C!
Cj-
UJ
O
Q
i
CO
(J
800
600
400
200
0
Wells MW01-08 (upgradierit) vs MW03-12 (downgradient)
cis-DCE (ppb); cleanup goal (CUG) = 100ppb
Vandale Junkyard
CUG 10Oppb
i 1 1 r~
Jan Jul Jan Jul
2018 2019
Jan Jul Jan Jul
2020 2021
Jan Jul
2022
Sample Date
Jan
2023
Jul
Well ~ MW01 08 cisDCE ~ MW03 12 cisDCE
-------
Figure 16
Wells MW01-08 (upgradient) vs MW03-12 (downgradient)
DCE (ppb); cleanup goal (CUG) = 1.5pph
Vandale Junkyard
60
40
JZ:
Q_
.d-
LLI
O
~
20
0
CUG 1.5ppb
~vf
' —=— —
¦&-
i—
Jan
2018
Jul
—i—
Jan
2019
Jul
Jan
2020
Jul
Jan
2021
Jul
Jan
2022
Jul
—i—
Jan
2023
Jul
Sample Date
Well A MW01 08 DCE & MW03 12 DCE
-------
Notes: reporting limits are often lppm and 5ppm
Figure 17
Wells MW01-08 (upgradient) vs MW03-12 (downgradient)
PCE (ppb); cleanup goal (CUG) = 1.5ppb
Vandale Junkyard
JZ:
Q_
.d-
LLI
O
LL
5 -
4 -
3 -
9 _
1
0 -
1
Jan
2023
Jan
2018
Jul
Jan
2019
Jul
Jan
2020
Jul
Jan
2021
Jul
Jan
2022
Jul
Jul
Sample Date
Well A MW01 08 PCE ft MW03 12 PCE
-------
Notes: reporting limits are often 0.4ppm, 0.5ppm, and lppm
Figure 18
Wells MW01-08 (upgradient) vs MW03-12 (downgradient)
TCA (ppb); cleanup goal (CUG) = 20ppb
Vantlale Junkyard
5 -
4 -
— ? -
Q_ J
Cl,
<
o
I—
? -
1
Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Sample Date
Well ~ MW01 08 TCA U MW03 12 TCA
-------
Notes: reporting limits are often 0.5ppm and Ippm
Figure 19
Wells MW01-08 (upgradient) vs MW03-12 (downgradient)
trans-DCE (ppb); cleanup goal (CUG) = 100pph
Vantlale Junkyard
6 -
5
_~ 4 -
•Zl.
JZl.
LLI
O
9 3-
ra
? -
1
Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Sample Date
Well A MW01 08 transDCE MW03 12 transDCE
-------
Wells MW01-08 (upgradient) vs MW03-12 (downgradient)
VC (ppli); cleanup goal (CUG) = 0.5pph
Vandale Junkyard
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Sample Date
Well A MW01 08 VC ~ MW03 12 VC
-------
Well overlays:
MW01-10 vs MW03-05
-------
Figure 21
-a—fr
H 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r
Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Sample Date
Wells MW01-10 (upgradient) vs MW03-05 (downgradient)
cis-DCE (ppb); cleanup goal (CUG) = lOOpph
Vandale Junkyard
Well A MW01 10 cisDCE ~ MW03 05 cisDCE
-------
Notes: reporting limits are often 0,4 and Ippm
Figure 22
Wells MW01-10 (upgradient) vs MW03-05 (downgradient)
DCE (ppfo); cleanup goal (CUG) = 1.5ppb
Vantlale Junkyard
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Sample Date
Well A MW01 10 DCE MW03 05 DCE
-------
Notes: reporting limits are often 0.5ppm and Ippm
Figure 23
Wells MW01-10 (upgradierit) vs MW03-05 (dowrigradient)
PCE (ppli); cleanup goal (CUG) = 1.5pph
Vantlale Junkyard
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Sample Date
Well A MW01 10 PCE ~ MW03 05 PCE
-------
Notes: reporting limits are often 0.4ppm, 0.5ppm, and lppm
Figure 24
1.0 -
0.9
0.8
-!Zi
C!_
Cl.
O
I—
0.6 -
0.5
0.4
Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Sample Date
Well A MW01 10 TCA ~ MW03 05 TCA
Wells MW01-10 (upgradierit) vs MW03-05 (downgradient)
TCA (ppb); cleanup goal (ClIG) = 20ppb
Vantlale Junkyard
-------
Notes: reporting limits are often 0.5ppm and Ippm
Figure 25
Wells MW01-10 (upgradierit) vs MW03-05 (dowrigradient)
trans-DCE (ppb); cleanup goal (CUG) = 100ppb
Vandale Junkyard
*
H 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r
Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Sample Date
Well A MW01 10 transDCE ~ MW03 05 transDCE
-------
Notes: reporting limits are often 0.32ppm; 0.5ppm, and Ippm
Figure 26
Wells MW01-10 (upgradient) vs MW03-05 (downgradierit)
VC (ppb); cleanup goal (CUG) = O.Sppfo
Vanriale Junkyard
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Sample Date
Well ~ MW01 10 VC ~ MW03 05 VC
-------
Vandale Junkyard
Maximum cis-DCE (ppb)
(June 2018 - March 2023)
MW03-12
-K
MW07-14
MW03-06
cis-DCE (ppb)
O 0.3-100.0
O 100.1 - 500.0
# 500.1 - 869.0
Figure 27
MW01-01
-------
I
MW07-13
MW03-11
DCE (ppb)
O 0.25 - 1.50
o 1.51 - 5.00
6 5.01 - 65.20
DCE cleanup goal: 1.5ppb
Figure 28
-------
Figure 29
Vandale Junkyard
Maximum PCE (ppb)
(June 2018 - March 2023)
^Hmwo7-14
MW01-07
MW03-12
rn
MW07-13
MW03 09
MW03-06
MW01-08
MW03-05
MW03 11
MWOl 10
MW03 04
MW01-03
Tetrachloroethylene (ppb)
Tetrachloroethylene cleanup goal: 1.5ppb
MW01-01
MW01-02
> ^ X
-------
Figure 30
TCA (ppb)
0.29 - 5.00
5.01 - 20.00
TCA cleanup goal: 20ppb
-------
Vandale Junkyard
Maximum trans-DCE (ppb)
(June 2018 -- March 2023)
MW03-12
MW07-14
MW01-07
MW03-09
MW03-11
'i
trans-DCE (ppb)
0.29 - 5.87
5.88- 100.00
trans-DCE cleanup goal: lOOppb
Figure 31
MW03-04
MW01-01
-------
Vandale Junkyard
Maximum VC (ppb)
(June 2018 - March 2023)
^ ER} > s.v- _
Figure 32
-------
Figure 33
Vandale Junkyard
Maximums of cis-DCE, DCE, PCE, TCA, trans-DCE, and VC (ppb)
(June 2018 - March 2023) ¦¦»¦¦¦
-------
Well Chemical
MW01-08 cis-DCE
MW01-08 DCE
MW01-08 PCE
MW01-08 TCA
MW01-08 traiis-DCE
MW01-08 VC
2018-2023
No. Obs.1 Median (ppb) Range (ppb)2 CUG (pph)3 Prop, ge CUG4
20
20
20
20
20
20
700
48.1
2
2.3
3.8
86.2
557-
31.1 ¦
0.3 ¦
0.4-
2.8 ¦
869
65.2
5.0
5.0
5.9
1.6-245
100
1.5
1.5
20
100
0.5
20/20
20/20
10/20
0/20
0/20
20/20
2013-2018
Prop, ge CUG4
20/20
20/20
17/20
0/20
0/20
20/20
Table 2
MW01-10 cis-DCE 5 28.1
MW01-10 DCE 5 1.8
MW01-10 PCE 5 1.3
MW01-10 TCA 5 0.5
MW01-10 trans-DCE 5 0.5
MW01-10 VC 5 0.5
9.8 - 44.6 100 0/5 4/5
0.9 - 3.2 1.5 3/5 5/5
0.8 - 2.0 1.5 2/5 5/5
0.4 - 1.0 20 0/5 0/5
0.3 - 1.0 100 0/5 0/4
0.2 - 0.5 0.5 3/5 4/5
MW03-09 cis-DCE
19
67.4
MW03-09 DCE
19
6.4
MW03-09 PCE
19
11.7
MW03-09 TCA
19
0.7
MW03-09 trans-DCE
19
0.6
MW03-09 VC
19
0.5
24.4 - 149 100 7/19 13/20
3.0 - 15.4 1.5 19/19 20/20
8.3 - 40.6 1.5 19/19 20/20
0.3 - 2.1 20 0/19 0/20
0.4 - 1.0 100 0/19 0/20
0.3 - 1.0 0.5 17/19 19/20
MW03-11 cis-DCE
20
0.6
OS
I
©
100
0/20
0/20
MW03-11 DCE
20
0.9
0.5 - 1.0
1.5
0/20
2/20
MW03-11 PCE
20
11
1.3 - 14.5
1.5
19/20
20/20
MW03-11 TCA
20
0.5
O
I
CO
©
20
0/20
0/20
MW03-11 trans-DCE
20
0.8
0.5 - 1.0
100
0/20
0/20
MW03-11 VC
20
0.5
O
i
CO
©
0.5
18/20
20/20
Notes:
1 No. Obs. = Number of observations
" Range = miniumum value and maximum value
3 CUG = cleanup goal
4 Prop, ge CUG = proportion of all values greater than or equal to the cleanup goal, CUG
the last column include previous five-year period results, 2013-2018
ppb = parts per billion (ug/L)
red font indicates wells with exceedances
-------
Figure 34
lrl DICHLOROETHENE vs Date
MW01_08_DCE
Threshold 1.5 ug/l (20ppbv)
Ordinary Least Squares Line
Loess Smoothing Line
1.1-DICHLOROETHENE Non-Detects
1.1-DICHLOROETHENE Detects
2023
Threshold Value Inset Chart
Sample Location ID
Anatyte
Units
IV
Mean
Median
Min
Ma*
Threshold Value lug/IJ
% £ threshold valje
Obs threshold / total ot>s
MX Trend
MK p-value
Ma nn-Kendall Test Statistic
Addlttonal Notes
MW010BDCE
1.1-DICHLOROETBENE
ug/l
20
4B.2
4B.1
31.1
65.2
1.5
100
20 / 20
decreasing
0.016
-2.402
:* !• dJp rata*
-------
Figure 35
VINYL CHLORIDE vs Date
MW0108VC
Threshold 0.5 ug/l (20ppbv)
Ordinary Least Squares Line
Loess Smoothing Line
VINYL CHLORIDE Non-Detects
VINYL CHLORIDE Detects
§> 150-
2023
Threshold Value Inset Chart
Sample Location ID
Analyte
Units
K
Mean
Median
Mln
Ma*
Threshold Val je (ugl)
% is. threshold value
Obs 2: threshold / total obs
MK Trend
MK p-value
Mann-Kenda II Test Statistic
Additional Motes
MW0108VC
VIKYL CHLORIDE
20
97.65
B6.2
i.e.
245.0
05
100
20/20
dec reasing
0.007
-2.693
¦¦ ¦- jr- of djpicates
200-
-------
Figure 36
TETRACHLQROETHYLENE(PCE) vs Date
MW03_11_PCE
Threshold 1.5 ug/l (20ppbv)
Date/Time Threshold Via I Lie Inset Chart
IS i
Sample Location ID
Analyte
hi
Mean
Median
Mln
Wax
Threshold Value {ug/l|>
% a threshold value
Qbs a threshold / total obs
MK Trend
MK p-val je
Mann-Kendall Test Statistic
Additional Motes
1.5 ug/l Threshold Value
MW03_11_PCE
TETRACHLOROETHYLENEI PCE'f
ijg/l
20
10.4
10.95
1.32
14.5
15
95
19/20
decreasing
0.003
-2.966
max Irou m of du plica
5-
-------
Appendix F
MNA Efficacy Evaluation
-------
Preparedfor
Vandale Junkyard Site
PRP Group
MNA EFFICACY EVALUATION
Prepared by
Geosyntec
consultants
engineers I scientists I innovators
941 Chatham Lane, Suite 103
Columbus, Ohio 43221
Project Number CHC8034
January 2022
-------
Geosyritec^
consultants
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 MNA Efficacy Evaluation Requirements 1
1.2 Objectives 1
1.3 Report Organization 2
2. SITE BACKGROUND 3
2.1 Geology 3
2.2 Hydrogeology 4
2.3 Site Hi story 4
2.4 Recent MNA Evaluations 5
3. GROUNDWATER MONITORING DATA ANALYSIS 6
3.1 Groundwater Monitoring 6
3.2 Groundwater Monitoring Data 6
3.2.1 VOCs 6
3.2.2 Metals and BEHP 6
3.3 MNA Parameters 7
3.3.1 Total Organic Carbon 7
3.3.2 Nitrate and Nitrite 7
3.3.3 Iron and Manganese 7
3.3.4 Ethane and Ethene 8
3.3.5 Alkalinity 8
3.4 VOC Trends in Groundwater 9
3.5 Remaining Time to Cleanup VOCs 10
4. EVALUATION 01 VIN A EFFICACY 12
4.1 Monitored Natural Attenuation Evaluation Summary 12
4.1.1 Summary of COC Trends Over Time 12
4.1.2 Plume Attenuation 13
4.1.3 MNA Progress Summary 14
4.2 Alternative Remedy Evaluation 15
4.3 Institutional Controls 15
5. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 16
6. REFERENCES 18
MNA Efficacy Evaluation i January 2022
-------
Geosyritec^
consultants
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Constituents of Concern in Groundwater
Table 2 Summary of the Most Recent Groundwater Monitoring Results
Table 3 Summary of MNA Indicator Parameters from 2017 to 2021
Table 4 VOC Statistical Trend Results for 2017 -2021
Table 5 VOC Statistical Trend Results for 2012 -2021
Table 6 VOC Statistical Trend Results for 2001/2003 - 2021
Table 7 Source Decay Rates and Cleanup Summary Table
Table 8 Summary of 2021 Surface Water VOC Sampling Results
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Site Location Map
Figure 2 Conceptual Cross-Section
Figure 3 Groundwater Potentiometric Surface Map
Figure 4 Current Long-Term Groundwater and Surface Water Monitoring Network
Figure 5 Time-Series MNA Evaluation for MW01-08
Figure 6 MW03-09 Sampling Results for PCE
Figure 7 Extent of ROD Cleanup Goal Exceedances for 1,1-DCE
Figure 8 Extent of ROD Cleanup Goal Exceedances for PCE
Figure 9 Extent of ROD Cleanup Goal Exceedances for cis-l,2-DCE
Figure 10 Extent of ROD Cleanup Goal Exceedances for VC
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results
Appendix B Statistical Trend Test Plots
MNA Efficacy Evaluation
li
January 2022
-------
Geosyntecf>
consultants
1. INTRODUCTION
This Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) Efficacy Evaluation for the Vandale
Junkyard Site (Site) was prepared by Geosyntec Consultants, Inc. (Geosyntec) on behalf
of Engineering Management, Inc. (EMI) and the Vandale Junkyard Site PRP Group (The
Group) in accordance with Section 3.8.2 of the Inspection, Maintenance, and Monitoring,
Plan (IMMP). The IMMP indicates that for each five-year review period, a MNA Efficacy
Evaluation will be prepared to assess the effectiveness of MNA processes occurring at
the Site. This Report evaluates the effectiveness of MNA processes at the Site through
September 2021.
1.1 MNA Efficacy Evaluation Requirements
Section 3.8.2 of the IMMP outlines the items to be included in this MNA Efficacy
Evaluation, including:
• Assessment of progress toward attainment of the Record of Decision (ROD)
performance goals;
• Summary of data collected during the monitoring period, with a comparison to
ROD cleanup levels; and
• If the assessment concludes insufficient progress, a discussion of the reasons and
possible corrective measures.
1.2 Objectives
To address the provisions of the IMMP for evaluation of the selected MNA remedy at the
Site, historical groundwater monitoring data have been reviewed and analyzed. The
following analyses have been completed:
• The current concentrations of constituents of concern (COCs) defined by the ROD
have been compared to the ROD cleanup levels (Table 1) and U.S. EPA
Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) to evaluate the progress of groundwater
restoration via MNA processes;
• Key MNA indicator parameters that have been measured at the Site have been
evaluated to assess if MNA processes are ongoing;
MNA Efficacy Evaluation
1
January 2022
-------
Geosyntecf>
consultants
• Statistical trends of groundwater data for select volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) identified in the ROD have been calculated for multiple timeframes to
evaluate MNA progress in decreasing VOC concentrations; and
• Source decay rates and time to achieve the ROD cleanup goals have been
estimated for VOCs that exceed the ROD cleanup goal and that are characterized
by a decreasing trend.
1.3 Report Organization
The remainder of this MNA Efficacy Evaluation is organized as follows:
• Section 2 details the Site background including geology, hydrogeology, Site
history and recent MNA evaluations;
• Section 3 provides a summary of the groundwater monitoring data collected and
analyses completed to evaluate MNA progress;
• Section 4 details the evaluation of MNA progress and efficacy at the Site; and
• Section 5 provides a summary of key findings and recommendations.
MNA Efficacy Evaluation
2
January 2022
-------
Geosyntecf>
consultants
2. SITE BACKGROUND
The Site is located in Washington County, Ohio, approximately 1.5 miles northeast of
Marietta, Ohio, in Marietta Township Section 18 (Figure 1). Located in the Appalachian
Plateau Province in southeastern Ohio, the Site occupies a 31-acre tract of land,
approximately 10 acres of which are reported to have been utilized as a junkyard. The
Site is located in a rural area on top of a natural ridge. The Site is bordered on two sides
(north and east) by a steep, wooded ravine that approaches 200 feet (ft) deep in places.
An unnamed tributary (designated Tributary A in the Feasibility Study (FS; Metcalf and
Eddy, 1992)), which receives runoff from the Site, is an intermittent tributary in this
ravine and empties into Duck Creek approximately 1,500 ft west of the Site. The Marietta
Sanitation Corporation Landfill, which forms the southern boundary of the Site, was
closed in 1985. The wooded, sloped areas of the Site formerly contained discarded
junkyard materials, debris, and the remnants of drums from industrial waste previously
accepted for disposal at the Site.
2.1 Geology
The sandstone and siltstone strata beneath the Site are typically gray or brown and are
relatively resistant to weathering, occasionally forming ledges on the valley walls that are
identifiable across the Site. The mudstone strata beneath the Site are typically reddish-
brown with some gray intervals. The mudstone is readily weathered and does not form
ledges. Previous investigations confirmed that interbedding of the rock types is common
in the subsurface. Based on geologic logs in the FS Report (Metcalf and Eddy, 1992),
thin layers of resistant siltstone and sandstone were identified from rock cores within
intervals defined as mudstone on the cross section and in the stratigraphic section.
Likewise, layers of less-resistant mudstone occur within intervals identified as the ledge-
forming sandstone. One stratigraphic marker that extends across Washington County is
the Washington Coal. This coal has been identified in the higher elevations of the Site,
ranging in thickness from 2 to 3 feet. A veneer of soil material derived from the
underlying bedrock overlies the bedrock across the Site. Portions of the Site are covered
by colluvium ranging in grain size from clay to boulders deposited by downslope
movement. Some of the soil near the top of the Site may be residual, rather than colluvial,
in nature. The creek (Tributary A) at the foot of the northeast slope is very narrow with
steep side walls of exposed soil and bedrock.
One important deviation of the Site geologic setting is the local-scale slump of bedrock
outcrops along the northern flank of the hillside, where strata were measured at a dip of
3 to 5 degrees north-northeast consistent with the slope direction (opposite, and at a
greater angle of relief than the regional dip direction). The primary relevance of this
MNA Efficacy Evaluation
3
January 2022
-------
Geosyntecf>
consultants
slump feature is its influence on groundwater flow. The incline on the bedrock ledge
promotes the groundwater to flow along the dip of the slump feature, i.e., down the face
of the valley wall toward Tributary A. A conceptual cross-section is shown in Figure 2.
2.2 Hydrogeology
The primary conduit for shallow groundwater flow at the Site is a system of shallow
interconnected fractures. The hydraulic head in these fractures results in a potentiometric
surface that is a subdued replica of the ground surface. The flow characteristics are due,
in part, to the large permeability contrast with the underlying competent rock, where
lower permeabilities slow the vertical migration of infiltrating water creating a water table
in the upper more highly fractured zone. Groundwater flows from higher elevations along
hilltops and discharges in the lower elevations along the valley floor. Groundwater in
this fractured mantle systems is primarily derived from vertical infiltration.
The direction of groundwater flow within the fractured mantle mimics the ground surface
topography. The potentiometric surface map (Figure 3) depicts groundwater flowing in
a northward direction from the ridge along a relatively even hydraulic gradient toward
Tributary A, the discharge location.
2.3 Site History
The Vandale Junkyard Site was a permitted junkyard operation (by Washington County)
from the early 1960s. During its operation, the junkyard accepted a variety of materials
for disposal and/or salvage. These materials included typical household and commercial
wastes such as scrap metal, white goods (refrigerators, stoves, washing machines, etc.),
tires, batteries, automobiles, and non-putrescible municipal waste, as well as a number of
55-gallon drums that contained variable quantities of waste industrial
solvents/degreasers, waste tar and iron cakes, sludges from organic chemical
manufacturing, paint thinners, paints, and ink wastes.
The Site was placed on the National Priority List (NPL) in 1986 and became part of the
Superfund program. The ROD was issued in 1994. Remedial action was completed at the
Site in the late 1990s when soils containing COCs were excavated from the former source
zone, consolidated on-Site with impacted solid waste residue/soil, and covered with a
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle C cap. The ROD identified
MNA as the groundwater remedy.
MNA Efficacy Evaluation
4
January 2022
-------
Geosyntecf>
consultants
2.4 Recent MNA Evaluations
The progress and efficacy of the selected MNA groundwater remedy has been evaluated
numerous times since monitoring began in 2001 following remedial action. The most
recent MNA Efficacy Evaluation was completed by Antea in 2017 (Antea, 2017)
followed by an MNA Progress Evaluation by Porewater Solutions in 2018 (Porewater
Solutions, 2018) and a Groundwater Contingency Evaluation completed by Geosyntec in
2018 (Geosyntec, 2018). The results of these evaluations supported the use of MNA as
the groundwater remedy for the Site. Specifically, the MNA Progress Evaluation
(Porewater Solutions, 2018) concluded: "Back-diffusion from the fractured rock matrix
is known to require a long remediation timeframe, and is consistent with the ITRC (2017)
guidance manual for remediating fractured rock sites. There is no risk to downgradient
receptors, and the plume is continuing to recede inward over time. There is no technology
currently available which can expeditiously remediate the dissolved constituent mass
stored in the rock matrix. Thus, there is no benefit associated with additional remedial
action at this Site, nor is there a need given the lack of risk and demonstrated MNA
progress. The entirety of the data set demonstrates that natural processes are attenuating
VOCs in groundwater at a rate in excess of VOC back-diffusion from the former source
area."
MNA Efficacy Evaluation
5
January 2022
-------
Geosyntecf>
consultants
3. GROUNDWATER MONITORING DATA ANALYSIS
3.1 Groundwater Monitoring
The groundwater monitoring program currently consists of 14 wells, seven of which are
sampled quarterly (MW03-05, MW03-06, MW01-08, MW03-09, MW03-11, MW07-13,
and MW07-14) and seven of which are sampled on an annual basis (MW01-01, MW01-
02, MW01-03, MW03-04, MW01-07, MW01-10, and MW03-12). The locations of the
monitoring wells included in the groundwater monitoring program are provided in Figure
4. During the annual sampling event conducted during the second quarter, groundwater
samples are collected from all 14 wells and analyzed for the list of COCs shown in Table
2, which includes 1,1,1-trichloroethane (1,1,1-TCA), 1,1-dichloroethene (1,1-DCE), cis-
1,2-dichloroethene (cis-l,2-DCE), tetrachloroethene (PCE), trans-1,2-dichloroethene
(trans-1,2-DCE), vinyl chloride (VC), bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (BEHP), and several
metals. In addition, in 2018, trichloroethene (TCE) was added to the VOC analysis. For
the remaining quarterly events, groundwater samples are analyzed for the chlorinated
VOCs only.
3.2 Groundwater Monitoring Data
3.2.1 VOCs
Analytical results of groundwater monitoring conducted since 2001 are presented in
Appendix A. Table 2 provides a summary of the results from the most recent groundwater
monitoring event conducted at each location compared to the ROD cleanup goals. In the
most recent groundwater sampling event, VOC concentrations in samples from ten of the
fourteen groundwater monitoring wells did not exceed the ROD cleanup goals. This is
consistent with results since June 2018. Samples from MW01-10 and MW03-11 each had
an exceedance of a single VOC. Samples from MW01-08 and MW03-09 exceeded ROD
cleanup goals for three VOCs each.
3.2.2 Metals and BEHP
Analytical results of groundwater monitoring conducted since 2001 are presented in
Appendix A. Table 2 provides a summary of the most recent groundwater collection event
compared to the ROD cleanup goals. Metals and BEHP had limited exceedances of their
respective ROD cleanup levels over the entire 20-year monitoring period (Appendix A).
During the most recent sampling event in May 2021, there was only one detection of a
metal or BEHP that exceeded a ROD clean up level. Barium was detected at 491 |ig/L in
the sample from MW03-06, in exceedance of the ROD cleanup goal (302 (J,g/L). While
the barium concentration at MW03-06 also exceeded the ROD cleanup goal in 2020 (378
MNA Efficacy Evaluation
6
January 2022
-------
Geosyntecf>
consultants
Hg/L), it had previously not exceeded the ROD cleanup goal since 2006. It is important
to note that although the barium concentrations exceed the ROD cleanup goal, they are
below the U.S. EPA MCL for barium of 2,000 (^g/L.
It should also be noted that the detection limits for BEHP and antimony in 2020 and 2021
were higher than the ROD cleanup goals and in the case of antimony also higher than the
U.S. EPA MCL (Appendix A). The concentrations of BEHP and antimony from 2017 -
2019 were all below the ROD cleanup goals or non-detect with the exception of BEHP,
which exceeded the ROD cleanup goal but not the U.S. EPA MCL in MW01-08 in 2018
and in MW03-09 in 2020.
3.3 MNA Parameters
Several parameters were measured in Site groundwater to assess the contribution that
intrinsic biodegradation is making to the overall natural attenuation process for VOCs in
the Site groundwater. Unimpacted well MW01-1 was used for background comparison.
The groundwater monitoring results for the last five years are summarized in Table 3.
3.3.1 Total Organic Carbon
The process of anaerobic VOC biodegradation by reductive dechlorination consumes
TOC in groundwater. Low levels of TOC (less than 10 mg/L) were detected in all of the
monitoring wells sampled during the last five years (2017 - 2021), providing a line of
evidence that this natural attenuation process is ongoing at the Site.
3.3.2 Nitrate and Nitrite
Anaerobic VOC biodegradation can result in the reduction of nitrate to nitrite and then
nitrogen gas. Background monitoring well MW01-01 has contained measurable levels of
nitrate (0.8 - 1.25 mg/L) from May 2017 - May 2021. However, the monitoring wells in
and downgradient of the former source zone are characterized with low, often non-detect
concentrations of nitrate, indicative of depletion by biodegradation processes. Nitrite
concentrations are also low in Site groundwater, which serves as evidence of degradation
to nitrogen gas.
3.3.3 Iron and Manganese
Iron and manganese reduction are common types of microbial metabolism in
groundwater, suggesting a zone of biodegradation that can concurrently reduce
chlorinated VOCs. Where microbial-induced reduction is occurring, the reduced forms
of iron and manganese (soluble in water and therefore detectable during groundwater
monitoring) accumulate in the zone of biodegradation. Iron was not detected over the past
MNA Efficacy Evaluation
7
January 2022
-------
Geosyntecf>
consultants
five years in background monitoring well MW01-01. However, it was detected in
MW01-08 and MW03-09 up to 0.6 mg/L, which are located in the former source zone
where VOC concentrations exceed ROD cleanup goals. Similarly, the downgradient
monitoring wells that still have VOCs above the ROD cleanup goals (MW01-08, MW03-
09, MW01-10, and MW03-11) have elevated concentrations of manganese
(concentrations up to 1.2 mg/L) relative to the background monitoring well (MW01-01)
where concentrations ranged from 0.02 to 0.2 mg/L. This supports the presence of
ongoing anaerobic oxidation of VOCs at the Site under iron-reducing and manganese-
reducing conditions.
3.3.4 Ethane and Ethene
Ethene is the final degradation product of the PCE anaerobic dechlorination pathway,
which includes, in subsequent steps, cis-l,2-DCE, 1,1-DCE, and VC. Ethane is the final
degradation product of the 1,1,1-TCA anaerobic dechlorination pathway. Ethane would
not be expected at the Site, as 1,1,1-TCA concentrations have historically been below the
ROD for at least the last 20 years.
Ethene has been detected in MW01-08, a well in the former source zone with VOC
exceedances of the ROD cleanup goals. The time series graph provided in Figure 5
illustrates how decreasing cis-l,2-DCE concentrations correlate with increasing VC
concentrations starting around 2008. Ethene concentrations appear to track closely with
VC, suggesting that as VC is generated, it undergoes dechlorination to ethene. This
provides evidence that critical microorganisms such as Dehalococcoides ethenogenes,
organisms which facilitate complete dechlorination of PCE to non-toxic endpoints, are
present at the Site.
3.3.5 Alkalinity
Alkalinity is principally a measurement of dissolved carbon dioxide. Biodegradation of
organic compounds produces carbon dioxide; therefore, groundwater undergoing
biodegradation of dissolved organic carbon or VOCs may have elevated alkalinity.
Alkalinity concentrations from June 2017 to May 2021 averaged approximately 280 mg/L
in MW01-01, which serves as the background well. The average alkalinity concentration
in MW01-08 was over 500 mg/L for the five-year period of 2017 through 2021 and the
average concentrations in MW03-09 and MW01-10 for the same time period were
approximately 350 mg/L. The higher than background concentrations of alkalinity
observed in former source zone monitoring wells where VOCs exceed the ROD cleanup
goals suggest MNA processes are ongoing.
MNA Efficacy Evaluation
8
January 2022
-------
Geosyntecf>
consultants
3.4 VOC Trends in Groundwater
To evaluate the trends in VOC concentrations over time, Mann-Kendall statistical trend
tests were completed using Site groundwater data collected from three different time
intervals i) the most recent five years; ii) the most recent ten years; and iii) the full
monitoring period with U.S. EPA ProUCL software. The timeframes and associated
rationale are detailed below:
• September 2017 - September 2021: In recent groundwater evaluations
completed for the Site, U.S. EPA has requested short-term trend evaluations.
Therefore, statistical trends of VOCs with concentrations that have exceeded the
ROD cleanup goal in the most recent five years of groundwater data have been
completed.
• September 2012 - September 2021: The use of a period longer than 5 years for
near-term trend analysis is recommended in U.S. EPA's guidance "Best Practices
for Environmental Site Management: Recommended Contents of a Groundwater
Monitoring Report" (EPA-542-F-16-005, September 2016). The document states:
"For sites with a long history, it is recommended that trend analyses include only
recent data (e.g., the past 8 to 10 years) to support evaluation of remedy progress."
Therefore, statistical trends of VOCs with concentrations that have exceeded the
ROD cleanup goal in a given well in the last 10 years have been completed.
• Full monitoring period (at most June 2001 - September 2021): The near-term
trends (for data from the last 5 and 10 years) must be considered in conjunction
with longer-term VOC trends to provide a complete understanding of overall
VOC attenuation at the Site. Therefore, statistical trends of VOCs with
concentrations that have exceeded the ROD cleanup goal in a given monitoring
well at any time over the full monitoring period have been completed.
Trends were only generated for VOCs of concern defined by the ROD in monitoring wells
that had an exceedance of a ROD cleanup goal at least once during the evaluated
timeframe (i.e., last five years, late ten years, or the full monitoring period).
The results of the trend analysis are provided in Tables 4 through 6. Statistical results are
provided in Appendix B. Specific observations include:
• September 2017 - September 2021: All trends evaluated were stable (10 trends)
or decreasing (2 trends).
MNA Efficacy Evaluation
9
January 2022
-------
Geosyntecf>
consultants
• September 2012 - September 2021: All trends evaluated were stable (5 trends)
or decreasing (12 trends).
• Full monitoring period (at most June 2001 - September 2021): A single
increasing trend was observed - PCE in MW03-09. All other trends evaluated
were stable (2 trends) or decreasing (22 trends).
The trend analysis demonstrates that the plume is not expanding.
3.5 Remaining Time to Cleanup VOCs
For those VOCs that showed a statistically significant decreasing trend during the
evaluated time period but remained consistently above the ROD cleanup goal, a source
decay rate constant and the approximate time to achieve the ROD cleanup goal were
estimated for each compound using U.S. EPA SourceDK software (see Table 7). If a
VOC concentration fluctuated above and below the ROD cleanup goal during the most
recent five-year monitoring period (2017-2021), this evaluation was not completed for
the specific VOC at that location because it is anticipated that the parameter will
consistently achieve its cleanup level in the near term. As such, three VOCs in two wells
were excluded: 1,1-DCE and PCE in MW01-10 and cis-l,2-DCE in MW03-09.
Source decay rates were calculated for remaining VOCs exceeding cleanup goals in
monitoring wells MW01-08 (1,1-DCE; cis-l,2-DCE, and VC), MW03-09 (1,1-DCE and
PCE) and MW03-11 (PCE) using VOC data from each of the three different time periods
that were used to evaluate the concentration trends. Each of these wells is discussed
further below.
MW01-08: Based on the most recent sampling event, three VOCs remain above the ROD
cleanup goals in MW01-08, located in the former source zone: 1,1-DCE, cis-l,2-DCE,
and VC (Table 2). The concentration trends for the three VOCs were stable or decreasing
over all three time periods of data evaluated:
• 1,1-DCE - A decreasing trend was observed for 1,1-DCE, both with data from
2001 - 2021 and with the most recent 5 years of data (2017 - 2021). Based on
long-term data, the time to achieve cleanup for this VOC is approximately 90
years; however, recent data in the last five years suggests a more rapid cleanup of
approximately 25 years.
• cis-l,2-DCE - The longest time to cleanup, regardless of the dataset evaluated,
was observed for cis-l,2-DCE, which is approximately 70-100 years.
MNA Efficacy Evaluation
10
January 2022
-------
Geosyntecf>
consultants
• VC - VC was observed to have a stable trend when evaluating data for the five-
year dataset or the full monitoring period. A decreasing trend was observed when
evaluating data over the past ten years (2012 - 2021). For the ten-year dataset, the
time to achieve ROD cleanup goals is approximately 30 years.
MW03-09: Based on the most recent sampling event, two VOCs remain consistently
above the ROD cleanup goals in MW03-09, located in the former source zone: PCE and
1,1-DCE (Table 2). PCE concentrations show stable trends in recent monitoring data
(2017 - 2021 and 2012 - 2021) and increasing trends over the full monitoring period
(2003 - 2021); therefore, the time to achieve cleanup goals was not calculated for PCE.
1,1-DCE was observed to have a stable trend when evaluating data for the last five years
or the full monitoring period and a decreasing trend when evaluating data over the past
ten years (2012 - 2021). For this ten-year dataset, the time to achieve ROD cleanup goals
is approximately 10 years.
MW03-11: PCE is the only VOC above its ROD cleanup goal in monitoring well
MW03-11 (Table 2). MW03-11 is located sidegradient of the former soil excavation area
and PCE in this well is predicted to achieve concentrations below the ROD cleanup goals
in less than approximately 15 years regardless of the timeframe of data evaluated.
This evaluation indicates that MNA is attenuating the plume over time. As expected, the
former source zone will require the greatest amount of time to restore (the ROD notes
that "ground water contamination may be especially persistent in the immediate area of
the contaminant sources"). The majority of monitoring wells contain VOCs below or
fluctuating just above and below the ROD cleanup goals. Based on recent data for the
last 5 to 10 years, the few VOCs at MW01-08, MW03-09, and MW03-11 that are
consistently above ROD cleanup goals but exhibit decreasing trends are expected to
achieve cleanup goals in about 25 years or less, with the exception of cis-l,2-DCE (which
is predicted to take longer to reach cleanup goals at MW01-08).
MNA Efficacy Evaluation
11
January 2022
-------
Geosyntecf>
consultants
4. EVALUATION OF MNA EFFICACY
4.1 Monitored Natural Attenuation Evaluation Summary
There are two naturally occurring processes resulting in substantial attenuation of COCs
at the Site:
• VOC degradation as evidenced by decreasing and stable trends described in
Section 3.4, along with favorable geochemical conditions as demonstrated by
MNA indicator parameters as described in Section 3.3; and
• Matrix diffusion as discussed in detail in the MNA Progress Evaluation
(Porewater Solutions, 2018) and further supported by this evaluation, which
includes:
o Forward matrix diffusion in the downgradient plume, which is
substantially retarding the COC plume and preventing offsite migration,
thereby reducing risk; and
o Depletion of dissolved mass stored in the rock matrix along with a
corresponding decline in back-diffusion, which is causing the COC plume
to recede over time.
Each of these processes are described in more detail in subsequent sections.
4.1.1 Summary of COC Trends Over Time
At most wells, COC concentrations have been steadily declining over time and are now
below the respective cleanup goals. Based on the most recent sampling event (May or
September 2021), there are only four of 14 monitoring wells that currently have VOC
exceedances of the ROD cleanup goals (MW01-08, MW01-10, MW03-09, and MW03-
11) and one monitoring well with a barium exceedance of the ROD cleanup goal (MW03-
06) (Table 2). It is important to note that the exceedances of VOCs in MW01-10 and
barium in MW03-06 are below U.S. EPA MCLs. Therefore, only three wells, two of
which are in the former source area (MW01-08 and MW03-09), still maintain VOCs at
concentrations exceeding both the ROD cleanup goals and MCLs. The concentration
trends for VOCs in exceedance of the ROD cleanup goals were evaluated over time as
described in Section 3.4.
MNA Efficacy Evaluation
12
January 2022
-------
Geosyntecf>
consultants
The trend results suggest the following about the progress of MNA at the Site:
• Most trends observed, regardless of the time period evaluated, are decreasing or
stable, suggesting on-going MNA progress at the Site.
• A single increasing trend of PCE was observed in MW03-09, located in the soil
removal area, when the full monitoring period of data was evaluated. The trends
for more recent data (5-year and 10-year datasets) were stable. A visual review of
the PCE groundwater concentrations (Figure 6) in MW03-09 in the last five years
(since 2017) suggest that the concentration is now stable and beginning to decline.
• The numerous observed decreasing trends, regardless of the time period
evaluated, provide supporting evidence that MNA processes are attenuating
VOCs at the Site.
Downgradient and sidegradient monitoring wells MW01-02, MW01-03, MW03-04,
MW03-05, MW03-12, MW07-13 and MW07-14 have not had VOC exceedances of ROD
cleanup goals in the last 14 years. Downgradient/sidegradient monitoring well MW01-07
has not had VOC exceedances of the ROD cleanup goals in the last nine years.
Downgradient/sidegradient monitoring well MW03-06 has not had VOC exceedances of
the ROD cleanup goals in the last three years. Only one VOC (PCE) present in
downgradient/sidegradient well MW03-11 exceeds its cleanup goal, and it is exhibiting
a decreasing trend regardless of the timeframe data set evaluated.
These temporal trends indicate that dissolved constituent VOC mass stored in the rock
matrix in former source areas is depleting naturally over time and not migrating to
downgradient and sidegradient monitoring wells. In addition, the plume is not expanding
and migrating off-Site, as evidenced by no detections of Site-related VOCs in Tributary
A, the final groundwater discharge point (Table 8). The rate of decline has been observed
to be slower at MW01-08 and MW03-09 than at other wells, presumably due to the effects
of back-diffusion in the former source area (Porewater Solutions, 2018).
4.1.2 Plume Attenuation
COC concentrations attenuate by orders of magnitude downgradient from the former
source area, due to the combined processes of degradation and forward matrix diffusion
occurring in the plume (Geosyntec, 2018 and Porewater Solutions, 2018). The strength
of these attenuation processes has caused the COC plume to recede inwards towards the
former source area, which demonstrates that MNA is progressing sufficiently, and
additional remedial measures are not necessary.
MNA Efficacy Evaluation
13
January 2022
-------
Geosyntecf>
consultants
Figures 7 through 10 present a summary of the receding plume conditions for 1,1-DCE,
PCE, cis-l,2-DCE, and vinyl chloride, respectively. The historical extent of exceedances
of each VOC is provided on the figure. The current extent of VOCs is indicated using the
most recent set of data collected from each monitoring well. The VOC concentrations
remain the highest in the former source area characterized by MW03-09 and MW01-08.
In addition, a single VOC exceedance, each, is observed in MW01-10 and MW03-11. In
general, the VOC exceedances have receded as exceedances are no longer observed in
MW03-06 and exceedances observed in MW01-10 and MW03-11 are only slightly above
the ROD cleanup goals, providing evidence of the plume recession.
4.1.3 MNA Progress Summary
Natural attenuation is occurring at varying rates due to the natural physical properties of
the aquifer matrix and the distribution of COCs at the Site. The continued presence of
COCs in groundwater is attributed to a secondary source of dissolved mass in the low-
permeability rock matrix. Back-diffusion of dissolved COC mass, from the rock matrix
into open fractures in the former source area, is causing low COC concentrations to
remain in groundwater in the shrinking plume at the Site.
The attenuation over distance for all COCs, combined with the depletion of back-
diffusion contributions to the plume is resulting in the receding COC plume observed at
the Site. This indicates that risks are continuing to be reduced at the Site, and that MNA
is continuing to progress towards groundwater restoration.
There are currently four wells at the Site where one or more VOCs exceed cleanup goals:
MWO1-08, MW03-09, MWO1-10, and MW03-11. VOC trends at MWO1-10 indicate that
this well is progressing quickly to restoration and will be below the cleanup goals in the
near-term. All VOCs are currently below MCLs at MW01-10. VOCs in MW01-08 and
MW03-11 are exhibiting downward trends and decay rates associated with a receding
plume in the long-term, but will take longer to remediate due to the slow decline in back-
diffusion contributions in the vicinity of these two wells (Geosyntec, 2018). An
evaluation of VOC trends at MW03-09 should be conducted again in five years to
determine if the VOC concentration stability observed over the last five years at this well
will continue or if the concentrations begin to statistically decline.
The entirety of the data set presented in this MNA Efficacy Evaluation demonstrates that
natural processes are degrading COCs faster than the flux from back-diffusion in the
former source area, and thus reducing the overall contaminant mass.
MNA Efficacy Evaluation
14
January 2022
-------
Geosyntecf>
consultants
4.2 Alternative Remedy Evaluation
The information presented above indicates that MNA processes are ongoing at the Site
and are actively attenuating VOCs in Site groundwater.
A contingency evaluation prepared in 2018 to evaluate alternative groundwater
remediation technologies (Geosyntec, 2018) concluded that MNA is the best remedial
option for Site remediation. As detailed in the contingency evaluation, back-diffusion
from the fractured rock matrix is known to require a long remediation timeframe and is
consistent with the ITRC (2017) guidance manual for remediating fractured rock sites.
There is no risk to downgradient receptors, and the plume is continuing to recede inward
over time. There is no technology currently available which can more expeditiously
remediate the dissolved constituent mass stored in the rock matrix. Thus, there is no
benefit associated with additional or alternative remedial action at this Site, nor is there a
need given the lack of risk and demonstrated MNA progress.
4.3 Institutional Controls
An Environmental Covenant was recorded in February 2019 on 30.5 acres encompassing
most of the Site. The Environmental Covenant prohibits groundwater use until
groundwater cleanup goals are achieved and requires that any residential use of the parcel
requires U.S. EPA written approval. An Environmental Covenant was recorded on a 0.4-
acre portion of the Site in January 2021. This Environmental Covenant prohibits
groundwater use until groundwater cleanup goals are achieved.
MNA Efficacy Evaluation
15
January 2022
-------
Geosyntecf>
consultants
5. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In summary, the following conclusions can be made based upon this MNA Efficacy
Evaluation:
• Expeditious progress, defined by U.S. EPA as statistically significant, decreasing
VOC trends through time, is occurring via MNA at most monitoring wells on-
Site. Historical practices at the Site support the occurrence of spatially dispersed,
small areas of residual COC mass in the rock matrix below the water table that
are generally impracticable to identify and remediate but that can sustain low
levels of COCs in groundwater through back diffusion; a level that MNA is
controlling, as evidenced by Site data, a single increasing VOC trend, and an
overall receding plume footprint.
• VOC concentrations are decreasing, as evidenced by plume shrinkage and
receding source decay rates, at an expected and acceptable rate given the fractured
rock geology of the Site. Remedial actions accomplished to date have effectively
eliminated the majority of source mass, minimized the influx of dissolved VOCs
from existing residual mass locations, and stabilized the Site such that natural
attenuation processes are controlling dissolved concentrations and prohibiting
migration of COCs as the Site progresses toward long term restoration.
• Data show that the COCs are not migrating off-Site as evidenced by VOCs
measured below the ROD cleanup goals or non-detect in the following
downgradient/sidegradient monitoring wells for at least the last nine years:
MW01-02, MW01-03, MW03-04, MW03-05, MW01-07, MW03-12, MW07-13,
and MW07-14. In addition, surface water sampling locations in the ultimate
groundwater discharge point of Tributary A were non-detect for VOCs in 2021
(Table 8) and have been since monitoring began in 2001.
• Environmental indicators from the Site provide support that the selected remedy
achieves the goals of Superfund because human exposure is controlled (i.e., there
is no complete exposure pathway for direct contact with potable groundwater;
sufficient groundwater is not even available to support residential or agricultural
pumping), and groundwater containing COCs is not migrating off-Site. Off-Site
migration of groundwater containing COCs has not been observed during the
entire monitoring period beginning in 2001.
MNA Efficacy Evaluation
16
January 2022
-------
Geosyntecf>
consultants
• It is recommended that continued monitoring be conducted in accordance with the
IMMP and subsequent IMMP addenda to confirm that VOC concentrations in the
former source area are continuing to decline.
MNA Efficacy Evaluation
17
January 2022
-------
Geosyntecf>
consultants
6. REFERENCES
Antea Group, 2017. Monitored Natural Attenuation Efficacy Evaluation Report for the
Vandale Junkyard Site. March.
Geosyntec Consultants, Inc., 2001. Inspection, Maintenance, and Monitoring Plan for the
Vandale Junkyard Site. April.
Geosyntec Consultants, Inc., 2018, Groundwater Contingency Evaluation Report for the
Vandale Junkyard Site. October.
Interstate Technology Regulatory Council (ITRC), 2017, Characterization and
Remediation in Fractured Rocks, https ://fracturedrx-1 .itrcweb. org/.
Metcalf and Eddy, Inc. 1992, Final Feasibility Study Report, Vandale Junkyard, Marietta,
Ohio. Metcalf and Eddy, Inc. 2800 Corporate Exchange Drive, Suite 250
Columbus, Ohio.
Porewater Solutions, 2018. Monitored Natural Attenuation Progress Evaluation for the
Vandale Junkyard Site. October.
U.S. EPA, 2016, Best Practices for Environmental Site Management: Recommended
Contents of a Groundwater Monitoring Report. EPA-542-F-16-005, September
2016.
MNA Efficacy Evaluation
18
January 2022
-------
TABLES
-------
Table 1. Constituents of Concern in Groundwater
Vandale Junkyard
Geosyntec Consultants
Parameters
ROD Cleanup Levels (|ig/L)
U.S. EPA MCL (jig/L)
1,1,1 -T richloroethane
20
200
1,1 -Dichloroethene
1.5
7
\/Arc
Cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
100*
70
V UL5
T etrachloroethene
1.5
5
Trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
100*
100
Vinyl Chloride
0.5
2
Semi-VOCs
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate
1
6
Antimony
5
6
Arsenic
88
10
Barium
302
2000
Metals
Beryllium
5
4
Cadmium
8.58
5
Nickel
60
NS
Vanadium
40
NS
Notes:
NS = No standard
ROD = Record of Decision
VOC = volatile organic compound
U.S. EPA MCL = U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Maximum Contaminant Limit
|ig/L = micrograms per liter
The ROD does not provide separate cleanup levels for cis-l,2-DCE and trans-1,2-DCE. A single value of
100 |ig/L is used
-------
Table 2. Summary of Most Recent Groundwater Monitoring Results
Vandale Junkyard
Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
o
"O
41
"a
S
es
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
—
%
£
ROD Cleanup Goal
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
0.088
0.302
0.005
0.00858
0.06
0.04
o
MCL
200
7
70
5
100
5
2
6
0.006
0.01
2
0.004
0.005
NS
NS
MW01-01
5/20/21
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.49
<0.08
< 0.008
0.0848
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
<0.008
MW01-02
5/20/21
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
0.872
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.49
<0.08
< 0.008
0.0378
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
<0.008
MW01-03
5/20/21
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.43
<0.08
< 0.008
0.0236
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
<0.008
MW03-04
6/16/20
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.75
<0.08
< 0.008
0.0566
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
<0.008
MW03-05
9/8/21 (VOC); 5/19/21 (BEHP/Metals)
<0.5
< 1
1.41
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.49
<0.08
< 0.008
0.0485
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
MW03-06
9/8/21 (VOC); 5/19/21 (BEHP/Metals)
<0.5
< 1
9.29
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.1
<0.08
< 0.008
0.491
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
MW01-07
5/19/21
<0.5
< 1
1.27
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.32
<0.08
< 0.008
0.0455
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
MW01-08
9/8/21 (VOC); 5/20/21 (BEHP/Metals)
<2.5
51.4
869
2 5
4.22
3.21
92.1
<6.76
<0.08
< 0.008
0.0387
<0.0016
0.00163
<0.016
<0.008
MW03-09
9/8/21 (VOC); 5/20/21 (BEHP/Metals)
0.787
X.94
108
25.7
<0.5
11
<0.5
<5.26
<0.08
< 0.008
0.0649
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
MW01-10
5/19/21
<0.5
3.22
44 o
1.1
<0.5
4.4
<0.5
<5.56
<0.08
< 0.008
0.0215
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
MW03-11
9/8/21 (VOC); 5/19/21 (BEHP/Metals)
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
13.2
<0.5
1.17
<0.5
<5.26
<0.08
< 0.008
0.0179
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
<0.008
MW03-12
5/19/21
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.15
<0.08
< 0.008
0.0824
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
<0.008
MW07-13
9/8/21 (VOC)
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
MW07-14
9/8/21 (VOC); 5/19/21 (BEHP/Metals)
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.15
<0.08
< 0.008
0.0323
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
<0.008
Notes:
NS = no standard
BEHP = Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate
VOC = volatile organic compound
MCL = maximum contaminant level
ROD = record of decision
— indicates no sample collected
< indicates value below the reporting limit
* = The ROD does not provide separate cleanup levels for cis-1,2-dichloroethene and trans-1,2-dichloroethene. One cleanup level of 100 jxg/L was assigned to both.
The data included is the most recent sampling event for each constituent. Annually sampled monitoring wells were sampled for the full suite of COCs in May 2021 and VOCs were
sampled in September 2021 for monitoring wells sampled quarterly.
All VOC and Semi-VOC results are in micrograms per liter (jxg/L)
All Metals results are in milligrams per liter (mg/L)
Bold highlighed numbers indicate results that have exceeded ROD cleanup levels
-------
Table 3. Summary of MNA Indicator Parameters from 2017 to 2021 Geosyntec Consultants
Vandale Junkyard
Well ID
Date Sampled
Alkalinity
Ethane
Ethene
Iron
Manganese
Nitrate
Nitrite
TOC
6/21/2017
287
<5
<5
<0.1
0.0622
<0.6
<0.4
3.73
o
1
6/27/2018
300
<5
<5
<0.1
0.03
1.25
<0.8
5.35
o
6/19/2019
267
<5
<5
<0.1
0.182
< 1.8
< 1.2
5.09
1
6/16/2020
283
<2
<2
<0.08
0.0191
<4
<4
3.72
5/20/2021
272
<2
<2
<0.08
0.0314
0.8
<0.2
4.68
6/21/2017
250
<5
<5
0.457
<0.01
<3
<2
2.68
O
1
6/26/2018
292
<5
<5
<0.1
<0.01
< 1.2
<0.8
5.17
o
6/18/2019
275
<5
<5
<0.1
<0.01
< 1.8
< 1.2
5.79
1
6/17/2020
288
<2
<2
<0.08
< 0.008
< 1
< 1
4.24
5/20/2021
264
<2
<2
<0.08
< 0.008
0.4
<0.2
3.16
6/21/2017
257
<5
<5
<0.1
0.37
<3
<2
3.79
-t
o
1
6/26/2018
353
<5
<5
<0.1
2.67
< 1.2
<0.8
6.79
©
6/18/2019
288
<5
<5
<0.1
1.92
<3
<2
7.51
1
6/17/2020
306
<2
<2
<0.08
1.18
<0.2
<0.2
5.58
5/20/2021
289
<2
<2
<0.08
0.886
0.3
<0.2
4.76
6/22/2017
440
<5
<5
<0.1
0.041
<3
<2
4.4
in
©
i
6/26/2018
448
<5
<5
<0.1
0.0352
<0.6
<0.4
8.34
©
6/18/2019
445
<5
<5
<0.1
<0.01
<0.6
<0.4
8.72
1
6/16/2020
362
<2
<2
<0.08
0.0123
0.3
<0.2
3.66
5/19/2021
276
<2
<2
<0.08
0.0301
0.2
<0.2
3.2
6/22/2017
277
<5
<5
<0.1
0.0633
<0.6
<0.4
2.73
v.©
©
1
6/27/2018
258
<5
<5
<0.1
0.045
<0.6
<0.4
3.47
©
6/19/2019
263
<5
<5
<0.1
0.0214
<0.6
<0.4
3.67
|
6/16/2020
256
<2
<2
<0.08
0.0209
<0.2
<0.2
3.01
5/19/2021
264
<2
<2
<0.08
<0.008
<0.2
<0.2
3.1
6/21/2017
337
<5
<5
<0.1
0.0699
<0.6
<0.4
3.88
r-
o
i
6/26/2018
315
<5
<5
<0.1
0.0501
<0.6
<0.4
5.36
o
6/18/2019
322
<5
<5
<0.1
0.0603
<0.6
<0.4
6.29
1
6/16/2020
312
<2
<2
<0.08
0.0581
<0.2
<0.2
4.86
5/19/2021
302
<2
<2
<0.08
0.0177
<0.2
<0.2
5.91
6/22/2017
522
<5
<5
<0.1
0.379
<6
<4
9.03
90
o
1
6/27/2018
504
<5
<5
<0.1
0.382
<6
<4
9.57
o
6/19/2019
494
<5
6.89
0.125
0.413
<3
<2
13.1
1
6/17/2020
494
<2
2.22
0.214
0.351
< 1
< 1
5.14
5/20/2021
519
<2
<2
0.586
0.421
<0.2
<0.2
6.99
6/22/2017
384
<5
<5
0.438
0.0428
<6
<4
3.36
C\
6/27/2018
265
<5
<5
<0.1
<0.01
< 1.2
<0.8
4.61
i
6/19/2019
353
<5
<5
<0.1
0.0518
<3
<2
7.24
|
6/16/2020
358
<2
<2
<0.08
0.0198
< 1
< 1
4.62
6/17/2020
354
<2
<2
<0.08
0.0993
< 1
< 1
5.1
5/20/2021
366
<2
<2
<0.08
0.105
<0.2
<0.2
4.43
-------
Table 3. Summary of MNA Indicator Parameters from 2017 to 2021 Geosyntec Consultants
Vandale Junkyard
Well ID
Date Sampled
Alkalinity
Ethane
Ethene
Iron
Manganese
Nitrate
Nitrite
TOC
6/22/2017
424
<5
<5
<0.1
0.807
<6
<4
5.34
o
i
6/27/2018
334
<5
<5
<0.1
0.786
< 1.8
< 1.2
3.84
o
6/19/2019
363
<5
<5
<0.1
1.18
< 1.8
< 1.2
7.76
1
6/16/2020
309
<2
<2
<0.08
0.366
<0.2
<0.2
5.52
5/19/2021
338
<2
<2
<0.08
0.212
<0.2
<0.2
6.54
6/21/2017
337
<5
<5
<0.1
0.0179
<3
<2
2.54
1
6/27/2018
159
<5
<5
<0.1
0.0229
< 1.2
<0.8
1.58
©
6/18/2019
165
<5
<5
<0.1
0.0394
< 1.8
< 1.2
3.24
1
6/16/2020
175
<2
<2
<0.08
0.0202
< 1
< 1
2.41
5/19/2021
184
<2
<2
<0.08
0.057
<0.2
<0.2
2.22
1
6/21/2017
337
<5
<5
<0.1
<0.01
<0.6
<0.4
3.22
6/27/2018
241
<5
<5
<0.1
0.0164
<0.6
<0.4
6.1
©
6/18/2019
315
<5
<5
<0.1
<0.01
<0.6
<0.4
5.59
1
6/16/2020
304
<2
<2
<0.08
0.0125
0.2
<0.2
1.02
5/19/2021
286
<2
<2
<0.08
< 0.008
0.2
<0.2
3.72
1
r-
6/21/2017
<20
<5
<5
<0.1
0.0851
<0.6
<0.4
2.49
5/19/2021
299
<2
<2
<0.08
< 0.008
<0.2
<0.2
3.14
6/21/2017
331
<5
<5
<0.1
0.0851
<0.6
<0.4
2.49
-t
i
6/27/2018
277
<5
<5
<0.1
0.0329
< 1.2
<0.8
2.13
r-
o
6/19/2019
292
<5
<5
<0.1
0.0226
< 1.8
< 1.2
2.83
6/17/2020
295
<2
<2
<0.08
0.034
<0.2
<0.2
3.65
5/19/2021
299
<2
<2
<0.08
< 0.008
<0.2
<0.2
3.14
Notes:
< indicates value below the reporting limit
All results are in milligrams per liter (mg/L)
TOC = total organic carbon
-------
Table 4. VOC Statistical Trend Results for 2017 - 2021 Geosyntec Consultants
Vandale Junkyard
Well II)
( onMiliienl
l.l-IK 1.
cis-1,2-DC "I-:
PCE
\ in\ 1 Chloride
MW03-06
No Trend
—
--
--
MW01-08
l)eere;isin*i Trend
No Trend
No Trend
No Trend
MW03-09
No Trend
No Trend*
No Trend
--
MW01-10
No Trend*
--
No Trend*
No Trend
MW03-11
-
-
l)ecre;isin*i Trend
-
Notes:
DCE = Dichloroethene
PCE = Tetrachloroethylene
For annually sampled wells, data used to generate trends were from June 2017 to June 2021
For quarterly sampled wells, data used to generate trends were from September 2017 to September 2021
*Data in these wells fluctuates above and below the ROD cleanup goal during the subject monitoring period
Bold Trends indicate COCs with concentrations above the ROD cleanup goal in 2021
Trends highlighted in green indicate decreasing trends
-------
Table 5. VOC Statistical Trend Results for 2012 - 2021 Geosvntec Consultants
Vandale Junkyard
Well ID
Constituent
1,1-DCE
cis-l,2-DCE
PCE
Vinyl Chloride
MW03-06
No Trend
—
--
Decreasing Trend
MW01-07
Decreasing Trend
—
--
No Trend
MW01-08
No Trend
Decreasing Trend
No Trend
Decreasing Trend
MW03-09
Decreasing Trend
Decreasing Trend*
No Trend
--
MW01-10
Decreasing Trend*
Decreasing Trend
Decreasing Trend*
Decreasing Trend
MW03-11
Decreasing Trend
-
Decreasing Trend
-
Notes:
DCE = Dichloroethene
PCE = Tetrachloroethylene
For annually sampled wells, data used to generate trends were from June 2012 to June 2021
For quarterly sampled wells, data used to generate trends were from September 2012 to September 2021
*Data in these wells fluctuates above and below the ROD cleanup goal during the subject monitoring period
Bold Trends indicate COCs with concentrations above the ROD cleanup goal in 2021
Trends highlighted in green indicate decreasing trends
-------
Table 6. VOC Statistical Trend Results for 2001/2003 - 2021 Geosvntec Consultants
Vandale Junkyard
Well ID
Constituent
1,1,1-TCA
1,1-DCE
cis-l,2-DCE
PCE
Vinyl Chloride
MW01-02
--
--
--
Decreasing Trend
--
MW03-05
--
Decreasing Trend
--
--
--
MW03-06
--
Decreasing Trend
Decreasing Trend
Decreasing Trend
Decreasing Trend
MW01-07
Decreasing Trend
Decreasing Trend
Decreasing Trend
Decreasing Trend
Decreasing Trend
MW01-08
--
Decreasing Trend
Decreasing Trend
Decreasing Trend
No Trend
MW03-09
--
No Trend
Decreasing Trend*
Increasing Trend
Decreasing Trend
MW01-10
--
Decreasing Trend*
Decreasing Trend
Decreasing Trend*
Decreasing Trend
MW03-11
-
Decreasing Trend
-
Decreasing Trend
-
Notes:
TCA = trichloroethane
DCE = dichloroethene
PCE = tetrachloroethylene
*Data in these wells fluctuates above and below the ROD cleanup goal during the subject monitoring period
Bold Trends indicate COCs with concentrations above the ROD cleanup goal in 2021
Trends highlighted in green indicate decreasing trends
Trends highlighted in orange indicate increasing trends
Monitoring wells beginning with MW01 were monitored beginning in 2001
Monitoring wells beginning with MW03 were monitored beginning in 2003
-------
Table 7. Source Decay Rates and Cleanup Summary Table Geosyntec Consultants
Vandale Junkyard
Well ID
Constituent
Timeframe of Data
Evaluated
Year to Achieve
Cleanup
Source Decay Rate
(year1)
Scpk'nilvr I" - Seplemher 2<>2 1
MW01-08
1,1-DCE
2017-2021
2048
1.26E-01
cis-l,2-DCE
No Trend
VC
No Trend
MW03-09
1,1-DCE
No Trend
PCE
No Trend
MW03-11
PCE
2032
1.54E-01
Sepiemher 2<> 12 - Sepiemlvr 2<>2 1
MW01-08
1,1-DCE
2012-2021
No Trend
cis-l,2-DCE
2120
2.02E-02
VC
2049
1.77E-01
MW03-09
1,1-DCE
2032
1.17E-01
PCE
No Trend
MW03-11
PCE
2035
1.24E-01
:<)<)| or 2tiu' -Seplemlvr:o:i
MW01-08
1,1-DCE
2001/2003 -2021
2111
3.90E-02
cis-l,2-DCE
2094
2.78E-02
VC
No Trend
MW03-09
1,1-DCE
No Trend
PCE
Increasing Trend
MW03-11
PCE
2038
1.01E-01
Notes:
DCE = dichlorothene
PCE = tetrachloroethylene
VC = vinyl chloride
Most recent 5 years is September 2017 - September 2021
Most recent 10 years is September 2012 - September 2021
Source decay rates were only calculated for well-parameter pairs where decreasing trends were observed
and concentrations were consistently above the ROD cleanup goal.
-------
Table 8. Summary of 2021 Surface Water VOC Sampling Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Tributary A Location ID
Date Sampled
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
SW-01
5/20/21
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
-
SW-02
5/20/21
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
-
SW-03
5/20/21
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
-
SW-04
5/20/21
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
-
SW-05
5/20/21
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
-
Notes:
— indicates not measured
< indicates value below the reporting limit
All VOC results are in micrograms per liter (ng/L)
-------
FIGURES
-------
DATE:
01/04/2022
SCALE: 1"= 2,000 FEET
PROJECT NO: CHC8034
FIGURE NO:
Source: Marietta, OH; 1:24k Topographic Quadrange;
LEGEND
Property Line
0 1.000 2.000 4.000 Feet
1975
Geosyritec^
consultants
SITE LOCATION MAP
VANDALE JUNKYARD SUPERFUND SITE
N:\VandaIe\2017 Services\GIS\MXD\01_Site Location; 01-AUG-2017
-------
840
820"
800
780
760
0 740
1
720"
TOO
6®0 ~
660
6401
Oft
S-7
PRECIPITATION
~ov
.0W<
LEGEND
LIMIT OF FRACTURED MANTLE
POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE
~
GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION
>11—>
INTERFLOW AND SEEP
**
SURFACE RUNOFF
RECHARGE INFILTRATION
CB-5S/D _
(PROJECTED 150ft WEST)
VTH
K
ton
r
Competent Bedrock
jANUb T ONt
1
250 ft
1—
500 ft
750 ft
Reference: GeoSyntec (2018)
CONCEPTUAL CROSS-SECTION
MNA PROGRESS EVALUATION
VANDALE JUNKYARD SITE
MARIETTA, OHIO
FIGURE 2
September 10, 2018
-------
»'//«
BACKGROUND AND DOWNGRADIENTI
SIDEGRADIENT LOCATIONS IN MONITORING
NETWORK
VANDALE JUNKYARD
SUPERFUND SITE
LEGEND
— Property Line
¦¦¦I—mi Water Features
Topography Contour
— Potentiometric Contour (2004)
Approximate Groundwater Flow Direction
# Soil Excavation Area Monitoring Well
(J Downgradient / Sidegradient Monitoring Well
(J Background Monitoring Well
1999 Excavation Areas
25
50
100 Feet
Geosyntec^
consultants
PROJECT NO: CHC8034
FIGURE NO: 3
-------
MW03-11
MW03-12
JW%?3kS'I
«sw-(ul a.
.MW07-14
1MW07-13
MW03-06
Tributary A ,
r •v/'
MW03-05
H
@5$G©
MW03-04
MW01-08
MW03-09]
MW01-10
( t
k» i
;&
m
SW-02
MW01-02
E*wa&M"
"rvl
P9E
MW01-01
r £ .1. f "* • "
*,• - **- 1*7-i
< / u
•*" ,m»•...^ "** r^5- ii p IN ®F
CURRENT LONG-TERM GROUNDWATER AND
SURFACE WATER MONITORING NETWORK
VANDALEJUNKYARD
SUPERFUND SITE
LEGEND
Property Line
Water Features
Monitoring Wells (Sampled Annually)
Monitoring Wells (Sampled Quarterly)
Surface Water Sampling Locations
(Sampled Every Three Years)
Geosyntec^
consultants
PROJECT NO: CHC8034
FIGURE NO:
\\ARO-01\Data\Gis\Prj1\Vandale\2018 Services\05_Groundwater Contingency Evaluation\GIS\MXD\Figure 2-1_v2.mxd; HDuff; 1/7/2022
-------
=L
c
o
c
(D
O
c
o
u
(D
T3
_o
-C
u
>
c
>
¦a
c
CU
LU
U
Q
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
'<-> 200
T
ft
m
\ A
\ f \, A \
0
2001 2003 2005 2007 2008 2010 2012
Sampling Date
30
- 25
20 w>
c
o
15 £
u
c
o
u
-------
70
60
50
40
00
3
a? 30
20
10
0
11
k
11 il n A
M l4l
WW
rv/W
.•w-wY v
2001 2003 2005 2007 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022
Sampling Date
)jg/L
micrograms per liter
PCE
Tetrachloroethene
MW03-09 Sampling Results for PCE
Vandale Junkyard Superfund Site
Geosyntec^
consultants
Project No. CHC8034
January 2022
Figure
6
-------
wasm
MWOgOS
mm
• 4^
MW03l0;4'
MW03J09
._8.94ori
MW03I1,1
E1!W
immm
\\ARO-01\Data\Gis\Prj1Wandale\2021 Services\GIS\mxd\Fig4_11 DCE_Plume.mxd; HDuff; 1/17/2022
EXTENT OF ROD CLEANUP GOAL
EXCEEDANCES FOR 1,1-DCE
VANDALEJUNKYARD
SUPERFUND SITE
LEGEND
Property Line
Water Features
^ Monitoring Well With No ROD Exceedances
Monitoring Well With Historical ROD
Exceedances; No ROD Exceedance in
Most Recent Sampling Event
Monitoring Well Wth ROD Exceedance in
Most Recent Sampling Event
Notes
- 1,1-DCE: 1,1-Dichloroethene.
- MCL: Maximum Contaminant Level.
- ROD: Record of Decision.
- EPA: Environmental Protection Agency.
- Results are presented in micrograms per liter (pg/L).
- The ROD cleanup goal for 1,1-DCE is 1.5 pg/L.
- Monitoring well MW01-10 exceeded the ROD cleanup
levels (1.5 pg/L) but did not exceed the EPA's MCL
(7.0 pg/L).
- MW03-04 was not sampled in 2021. Data displayed
was collected in the June 2020 event.
Geosyntec
consultants
PROJECT NO: CHC8034 FIGURE NO:
-------
m
- *.
¦ v
HW®
MWK)
m
mmm
<3®£J
<3Q®
JBiP
w6t«49
EPPflfl
p(Ka
I '
B525P® EEF907
-3®B
JSL
... .jf
EBE0CNQD
HIM) <3^0
SB? •
£&
i?
EMKMID
m
I
•y+&.
u vw| S>
<$m
1M
'<:,
*
Y;" ¦
r' sL t
¦%
' v
,, : M
t$£&rL,
££L
GHDtHDO
a, .. -
¦¦
!
m-m
'< -I
*.
«£.
i
ZX 7~$r ^--:-
/ . . ; >y 7
nA>- #
> *
**>/ r>
in
*
U¥'.A-
! . j -
1 J
EXTENT OF ROD CLEANUP GOAL
EXCEEDANCES FOR PCE
VANDALE JUNKYARD
SUPERFUND SITE
N
j
ll
LEGEND
Property Line
Water Features
Monitoring Well With No
ROD Exceedances
Monitoring Well With Historical ROD
Exceedances; No ROD Exceedance in
Most Recent Sampling Event
Monitoring Well With ROD
Exceedance in Most Recent
Sampling Event
Notes
- PCE: Tetrachloroethylene
- ROD: Record of Decision.
- Results are presented in micrograms per liter (pg/L).
- The ROD cleanup goal for PCE is currently 1.5 pg/L.
- MW03-04 was not sampled in 2021. Data displayed
was collected in the June 2020 event.
0
100 200
400
l Feet
Geosyntec
consultants
PROJECT NO: CHC8034
FIGURE NO: 8
\\ARO-01\Data\Gis\Prj1\Vanda!e\2021 Services\GIS\mxd\Fig5_PCE_P!ume.mxd; HDuff; 1/17/2022
-------
MW03I12
|IP5B
MW03-05.
1.41 I
SVSW03I04
MW03T09
M\NOZ,V\
KHo.sF
immm
\\ARO-01\Data\Gis\Prj1\Varidale\2021 Services\GIS\mxd\Fig6_cis-12-DCE_Plume.mxd; HDuff; 1/17/2022
EXTENT OF ROD CLEANUP GOAL
EXCEEDANCES FOR CIS-1,2-DCE
VANDALE JUNKYARD
SUPERFUND SITE
LEGEND
Property Line
¦— Water Features
Monitoring Wei! Wth No ROD
Exceedances
Monitoring Well With Historical ROD
• Exceedances; No ROD Exceedance
in Most Recent Sampling Event
Monitoring Well With ROD
Exceedance in the Most Recent
Sampling Event
Notes
- cis-1,2-DCE: cis-1,2-Dichloroethene.
- Results are presented in micrograms per
liter (jjg/L),
- The ROD cleanup goal for cis-1,2-DCE is
100 jjg/L.
- MW03-04 was not sampled in 2021. Data
displayed was collected in the June 2020 event.
0 100 200 400
Feet
Geosyntec
consultants
PROJECT NO: CHC8034 FIGURE NO:
-------
MW03I12
|IP5B
SVIW03-05
1 4^
MW03T5?
Z^IO.5
MW03J09
SSo.5ȣ
M\NOZ,V\
KHo.sF
, ^ J*
immm
WARO-01 \Data\Gis\Prj1 \Vandale\2021 Services\GIS\mxd\Fig7_VC_Plume.mxd; HDuff; 1/17/2022
>UH
i
EXTENT OF ROD CLEANUP GOAL
EXCEEDANCES FOR VC
VANDALEJUNKYARD
SUPERFUND SITE
LEGEND
Property Line
Water Features
Monitoring Well With No ROD
Exceedances
Monitoring Well With Historical ROD
Exceedances; No ROD Exceedance in
Most Recent Sampling Event
Monitoring Well Wth ROD
Exceedance in Most Recent Sampling
Event
Notes
- VC: Vinyl Chloride.
- ROD: Record of Decision.
- Results are presented in micrograms
per liter (pg/L).
- The ROD cleanup goal for VC is 0.5 pg/L.
- MW03-04 was not sampled in 2021. Data
displayed was collected in the June 2020 event.
Geosyntec
consultants
PROJECT NO: CHC8034 FIGURE NO: 10
F. ft
-------
APPENDIX A
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results
Vandale Junkyard
Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
25-Jun-01
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
< 1
5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.15
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
28-Sep-01
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
< 1
<4.7
<0.001
< 0.004
0.14
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.019
28-Mar-02
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
< 1
<5.3
<0.001
< 0.004
0.098
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
10-Jun-02
< 1
< 1
< 1
0.31
< 1
--
< 1
32
0.0029
< 0.004
0.125
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
ll-Sep-02
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
< 1
<5
<0.001
0.0161
0.0904
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
17-Dec-02
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
< 1
<5
<0.001
0.0151
0.121
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
13-Mar-03
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
< 1
<5.21
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0933
< 0.004
0.000584
<0.04
<0.01
23-Jul-03
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
< 1
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0729
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
17-Sep-03
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
< 1
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0583
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
5-Dec-03
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
<5.13
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0521
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
MW01-01
10-Mar-04
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0828
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
10-Jun-04
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.02
<0.001
0.0163
0.05
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0133
9-Sep-04
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
I.3X
0.034')
< 0.004
0.0783
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0145
17-Dec-04
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
0.008
0.0554
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0152
15-Mar-05
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
4.(i?
<0.001
0.0655
0.13
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
15-Jun-05
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.069
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
15-Sep-05
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
0.008
0.0644
0.19
< 0.004
0.000527
<0.04
0.0263
12-Dec-05
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0593
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0104
8-Mar-06
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0689
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0109
16-Jun-06
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
0.0043
0.0597
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
15-Sep-06
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.06
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0587
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0109
7-Dec-06
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.03
<0.001
< 0.004
0.073
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
8-Mar-07
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.08
<0.001
< 0.004
0.114
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
7-Jun-07
< 1
< 1
< 1
0.95
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.12
<0.001
< 0.004
0.06
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.02
14-Sep-07
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
4.34
<0.001
<0.02
0.0464
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.2
5-Dec-07
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.2
<0.001
< 0.004
0.034
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
ll-Mar-08
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.09
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0641
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
6-Jun-08
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
1.22
<0.001
< 0.004
0.062
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
28-Aug-08
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.19
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0484
< 0.004
<0.005
<0.04
<0.1
12-Dec-08
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.18
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0494
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
19-Mar-09
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.14
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0639
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
9-Jun-10
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.09
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0962
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
MW01-01
6-Jun-ll
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
2.(>(>
<0.001
< 0.004
0.112
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
22-Jun-12
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.02
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0842
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
21-Jun-13
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.19
<0.001
0.0063
0.097
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
13-Jun-14
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
-
< 1.11
<0.001
< 0.004
0.111
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
10-Jun-15
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
15-Jun-16
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.11
<0.001
0.003
0.0865
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
21-Jun-17
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.18
<0.001
0.002
0.0824
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
27-Jun-18
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
< 1.09
0.001
0.0021
0.121
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
19-Jun-19
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
< 1.19
<0.001
0.0097
0.156
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
16-Jun-20
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5
<0.08
<0.008
0.114
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
20-May-21
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.49
<0.08
<0.008
0.0848
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
0.088
0.302
0.005
0.00858
0.06
0.04
26-Jun-01
2.1
1.2
2.3
1.5
< 1
--
< 1
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.19
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.01
28-Sep-01
2
1
1.9
2
< 1
--
< 1
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.11
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
28-Mar-02
1.7
< 1
1.4
\.n
< 1
--
< 1
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.25
< 0.004
0.000728
<0.04
0.01
6-Jun-02
1.1
< 1
1.9
I.S
< 1
--
< 1
<5.4
<0.001
< 0.004
0.08
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
10-Sep-02
1.57
1.04
1.73
2.75
< 1
--
< 1
<5.15
<0.001
< 0.004
0.08
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
17-Dec-02
2.56
< 1
1.62
i.r
< 1
--
< 1
<5.26
<0.001
0.01
0.14
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
ll-Mar-03
1.64
< 1
1 96
2.29
< 1
--
< 1
6.42
<0.001
< 0.004
0.1
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
21-Jul-03
1.95
< 1
2 U(,
2.16
< 1
--
< 1
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.11
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
15-Sep-03
2.14
1.25
2 42
2.8
< 1
--
< 1
<5.15
<0.001
< 0.004
0.11
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
4-Dec-03
1.31
< 1
1 SI
2.56
< 1
--
<0.5
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.131
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
MW01-02
8-Mar-04
1.45
1.04
2 5l>
2.49
< 1
--
<0.5
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0869
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
8-Jun-04
1.31
< 1
2 52
2.24
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
0.0346
0.0174
0.0917
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0147
8-Sep-04
1.43
1.14
2 "4
2.25
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0641
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0134
14-Dec-04
< 1
< 1
2 <.X
1.85
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0773
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
16-Mar-05
< 1
< 1
: 4
1.86
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.089
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
15-Jun-05
1.15
< 1
2 l(.
1.81
< 1
--
<0.5
1.04
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0807
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
15-Sep-05
< 1
< 1
2 14
1.54
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
0.0037
0.0245
0.111
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0142
12-Dec-05
< 1
< 1
2 5l>
1.95
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
0.00(>4
0.0634
0.118
< 0.004
0.000561
<0.04
0.0117
6-Mar-06
< 1
< 1
1.98
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
0.0041
0.0489
0.104
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0164
14-Jun-06
< 1
< 1
2.24
1.17
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0826
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
13-Sep-06
< 1
< 1
2.79
1.71
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.05
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0702
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.013
5-Dec-06
< 1
< 1
2.52
1.44
< 1
--
<0.5
19.5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0646
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
6-Mar-07
< 1
1.08
2 '(.
1.62
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.19
0.0011
0.0173
0.0626
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.02
6-Jun-07
< 1
< 1
2.42
1.97
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.11
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0562
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
ll-Sep-07
< 1
< 1
2.1
1.34
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.06
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0582
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
6-Dec-07
< 1
< 1
1.8
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.13
<0.001
< 0.004
0.06
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
13-Mar-08
< 1
< 1
1.66
1.09
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.12
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0497
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
5-Jun-08
< 1
< 1
1.32
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.046
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
27-Aug-08
< 1
< 1
2.1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.2
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0472
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
10-Dec-08
< 1
< 1
1.95
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.12
<0.001
< 0.004
<0.01
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
18-Mar-09
< 1
< 1
1.98
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.03
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0504
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
9-Jun-10
< 1
< 1
1.97
1.07
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.08
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0486
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
MW01-02
8-Jun-ll
< 1
< 1
2
1.13
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.02
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0558
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
22-Jun-12
< 1
< 1
2.03
1.28
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.08
<0.001
< 0.004
0.049
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
20-Jun-13
< 1
< 1
1.83
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.18
<0.001
0.0054
0.0446
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0145
ll-Jun-14
-
-
1.35
1.1
-
-
-
< 1
<0.001
0.0024
0.0509
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
4-Jun-15
-
-
1.15
0.902
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
15-Jun-16
< 1
< 1
1.12
1.09
< 1
-
<0.5
<5.32
<0.001
0.0025
0.15
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
21-Jun-17
< 1
< 1
< 1
1.03
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.14
<0.001
0.0018
0.0937
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
26-Jun-18
< 1
< 1
< 1
1.23
< 1
< 1
<0.5
< 1.11
<0.001
0.0051
O.-T
< 0.002
0.00278
<0.04
0.0156
18-Jun-19
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
< 1.03
<0.001
0.0019
0.0818
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
17-Jun-20
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
1.39
<0.5
0.64
<0.5
<5.88
<0.08
< 0.008
0.113
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
<0.008
20-May-21
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
0.872
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.49
<0.08
< 0.008
0.0378
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
<0.008
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
26-Jun-01
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
< 1
<5
<0.001
0.014
1.2
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.048
27-Sep-01
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
< 1
<4.8
<0.001
< 0.004
0.15
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
28-Mar-02
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
< 1
<5.2
<0.001
0.0053
0.23
< 0.004
0.000507
<0.04
<0.01
6-Jun-02
< 1
< 1
< 1
0.34
< 1
--
< 1
5.7
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0866
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
ll-Sep-02
< 1
< 1
0.28
0.43
< 1
--
< 1
<5.26
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0478
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
17-Dec-02
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
< 1
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0536
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
12-Mar-03
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
< 1
<5.1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0709
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
21-Jul-03
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
< 1
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0519
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
16-Sep-03
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
< 1
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0449
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
4-Dec-03
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
<5.15
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0549
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
MW01-03
8-Mar-04
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
<5.1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0522
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
8-Jun-04
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
0.0168
0.0637
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0158
8-Sep-04
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0415
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0127
14-Dec-04
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0417
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
16-Mar-05
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0412
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
15-Jun-05
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
l."">
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0355
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
15-Sep-05
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0403
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.01
12-Dec-05
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0476
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0118
6-Mar-06
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0336
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0136
14-Jun-06
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.02
0.0021
0.018
0.0968
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
13-Sep-06
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.09
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0358
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0135
5-Dec-06
< 1
< 1
< 1
0.456
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.05
<0.001
< 0.004
0.032
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
7-Mar-07
< 1
< 1
< 1
0.412
< 1
--
(i 5
<1.1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0311
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.02
6-Jun-07
< 1
< 1
< 1
1.29
< 1
--
(i 5
10.1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0341
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
ll-Sep-07
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
0.5
2.35
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0321
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
6-Dec-07
< 1
< 1
< 1
0.385
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.16
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0323
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
13-Mar-08
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.11
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0298
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
5-Jun-08
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.19
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0316
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
27-Aug-08
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.2
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0338
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.1
11-Dec-08
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.17
<0.001
< 0.004
<0.01
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
19-Mar-09
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
2.44
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0288
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
9-Jun-10
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.22
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0352
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
MW01-03
9-Jun-ll
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0456
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
22-Jun-12
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.02
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0371
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
20-Jun-13
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.19
<0.001
0.0061
0.033
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0162
ll-Jun-14
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
--
< 1.06
<0.001
0.0032
0.0289
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
4-Jun-15
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
--
--
"
--
--
--
--
--
--
15-Jun-16
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.05
<0.001
0.0018
0.0328
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
21-Jun-17
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.1
<0.001
0.0014
0.0336
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
26-Jun-18
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
1.4
<0.5
< 1.12
<0.001
0.0011
0.0223
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
18-Jun-19
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
< 1.02
<0.001
0.0018
0.0284
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
17-Jun-20
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.81
<0.08
<0.008
0.0306
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
20-May-21
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.43
<0.08
<0.008
0.0236
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
22-M-03
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
< 1
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.214
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
17-Sep-03
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
< 1
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.147
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
3-Dec-03
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0931
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
10-Mar-04
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
<5
<0.001
0.0093
0.0981
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
10-Jun-04
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
0.0198
0.0944
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
9-Sep-04
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
0.004
0.0794
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0103
15-Dec-04
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
0.0124
0.0077
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0135
15-Mar-05
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
0.0042
0.0707
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
15-Jun-05
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
I.0<)
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0747
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
15-Sep-05
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0968
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0136
MW03-04
14-Dec-05
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.02
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0656
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
7-Mar-06
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0659
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
12-Jun-06
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0626
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
14-Sep-06
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.08
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0609
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
6-Dec-06
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
1.32
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0636
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
6-Mar-07
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
• 1 15
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0533
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.02
6-Jun-07
< 1
< 1
< 1
0.966
< 1
-
<0.5
I.S7
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0502
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
13-Sep-07
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
5.7(,
<0.001
<0.02
0.0544
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
4-Dec-07
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.12
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0596
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
12-Mar-08
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.14
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0552
< 0.004
0.000322
<0.04
<0.01
4-Jun-08
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
I.3X
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0657
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
26-Aug-08
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.11
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0459
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.1
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
9-Dec-08
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.08
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0452
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
18-Mar-09
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
3.0')
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0553
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
9-Jun-10
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.08
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0489
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
9-Jun-ll
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.02
<0.001
0.0064
0.115
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
21-Jun-12
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.05
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0491
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
19-Jun-13
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.33
<0.001
0.0052
0.0482
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0167
MW03-04
ll-Jun-14
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.09
<0.001
0.0036
0.0412
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
4-Jun-15
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
15-Jun-16
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.14
<0.001
0.0012
0.0373
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
21-Jun-17
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.08
<0.001
0.0016
0.0385
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
26-Jun-18
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
< 1.14
<0.001
<0.001
0.0319
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
18-Jun-19
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
< 1.05
<0.001
0.0017
0.0344
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
16-Jun-20
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.75
<0.08
< 0.008
0.0566
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
22-M-03
< 1
< 1
8.83
< 1
< 1
-
< 1
<5.21
<0.001
< 0.004
0.501
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0133
16-Sep-03
< 1
< 1
11.8
< 1
< 1
-
< 1
<5
0.0103
0.0264
0.51')
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
4-Dec-03
< 1
1.49
24
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
<5.1
<0.001
< 0.004
u: i:
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
9-Mar-04
< 1
< 1
16.9
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
<5.13
0.0151
0.0046
0.451
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
MW03-05
9-Jun-04
< 1
< 1
12
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.02
<0.001
0.008
0.3X"7
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
9-Sep-04
< 1
< 1
15.5
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
0.0044
0.55')
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
17-Dec-04
< 1
< 1
18.9
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
0.0095
0.104
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0123
16-Mar-05
< 1
< 1
12.3
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
0.0025
0.148
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
15-Jun-05
< 1
< 1
9
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
UP
<0.001
< 0.004
0.224
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
15-Sep-05
< 1
< 1
13.6
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.18
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
14-Dec-05
< 1
< 1
15
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
0.0063
0.081
0.(»*)«)
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
8-Mar-06
< 1
< 1
15.8
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
0.0047
0.054
0 ISS
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
15-Jun-06
< 1
< 1
15.8
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.40')
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
14-Sep-06
< 1
< 1
20.3
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.08
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0893
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
6-Dec-06
< 1
< 1
17.6
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
i.y-i
0.0032
0.0379
0.183
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
7-Mar-07
< 1
1.14
16.7
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.04
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0971
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
6-Jun-07
< 1
< 1
19.4
0.587
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.24
<0.001
< 0.004
0.083
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
13-Sep-07
< 1
1.27
29.2
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.15
<0.001
<0.02
0.0832
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
5-Dec-07
< 1
1.63
41.5
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.15
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0651
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
MW03-05
13-Mar-08
< 1
< 1
16.5
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.07
0.003
0.0229
0.27
< 0.004
0.000283
<0.04
<0.01
4-Jun-08
< 1
< 1
13.1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
1.12
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0841
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
27-Aug-08
< 1
1.12
25.6
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.08
<0.001
< 0.004
0.06
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.1
11-Dec-08
< 1
< 1
26.6
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.06
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0768
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
17-Mar-09
< 1
< 1
22.1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
2.0<)
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0737
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
24-Jun-09
< 1
< 1
14.6
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
--
--
--
--
"
22-Sep-09
< 1
1.06
26.6
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
--
--
--
--
"
8-Dec-09
< 1
< 1
21.9
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
--
--
--
--
"
29-Mar-10
< 1
< 1
6.99
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
--
--
--
--
"
ll-Jun-10
< 1
< 1
9.38
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.06
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0746
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
13-Sep-10
< 1
< 1
13.1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
--
--
--
--
"
10-Dec-10
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
"
--
--
--
--
--
"
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
16-Mar-ll
< 1
< 1
11.1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
"
--
--
--
--
--
5-Jun-ll
< 1
< 1
6.87
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
1.55
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0521
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
8-Sep-ll
< 1
< 1
10.6
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
5-Dec-11
< 1
< 1
7.22
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
18-Mar-12
< 1
< 1
5.88
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
~
"
--
--
--
--
--
~
22-Jun-12
< 1
< 1
9.59
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
2(».3
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0749
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
27-Sep-12
< 1
< 1
5.94
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
"
30-Nov-12
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
15-Mar-13
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
~
--
~
--
--
~
~
18-Jun-13
< 1
< 1
9.74
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.02
<0.001
0.0033
0.126
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
MW03-05
12-Sep-13
< 1
< 1
6.1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
~
"
~
--
~
~
--
"
6-Dec-13
< 1
< 1
5.99
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
13-Mar-14
< 1
< 1
4.58
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
~
~
~
--
~
~
~
ll-Jun-14
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
< 1.19
<0.001
0.0044
0.4')')
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
ll-Sep-14
< 1
< 1
2.97
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
~
"
--
--
~
"
--
~
4-Dec-14
< 1
< 1
3.46
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
"
19-Mar-15
< 1
< 1
4.17
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
~
~
~
--
~
~
~
5-Jun-15
1.35
(>.37
63.9
1 (>.5
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.18
<0.001
0.0071
0.154
< 0.004
0.00119
<0.04
0.0396
9-Sep-15
< 1
< 1
3.44
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
~
~
--
~
~
--
~
~
10-Dec-15
< 1
< 1
3.79
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
~
"
~
--
~
~
--
~
15-Mar-16
< 1
< 1
3.14
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
~
~
~
--
~
~
--
15-Jun-16
< 1
< 1
2.98
< 1
< 1
~
<0.5
< 1.03
0.001
0.0034
0.0665
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
30-Sep-16
< 1
< 1
3
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
"
--
--
--
--
~
20-Dec-16
< 1
< 1
3.15
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
"
~
~
~
~
~
14-Mar-17
< 1
< 1
2.64
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
"
--
~
~
~
--
22-Jun-17
< 1
< 1
1.38
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.15
<0.001
0.003
0.202
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
20-Sep-17
< 1
< 1
2.32
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
~
--
"
~
~
12-Dec-17
< 1
< 1
2.26
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
~
~
~
--
~
13-Mar-18
< 1
< 1
1.93
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
~
~
~
~
~
26-Jun-18
< 1
< 1
1.7
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
< 1.12
<0.001
0.003
0.0849
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
25-Sep-18
< 1
< 1
2.15
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
--
"
--
--
--
"
~
"
27-Dec-18
< 1
< 1
1.96
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
--
"
--
~
~
~
~
~
MW03-05
26-Mar-19
< 1
< 1
2.16
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
--
"
--
~
~
~
--
~
18-Jun-19
< 1
< 1
1.32
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
< 1.04
<0.001
0.0029
0.173
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
4-Sep-19
< 1
< 1
1.58
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
--
"
--
--
--
~
~
"
3-Dec-19
< 1
< 1
1.75
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
--
"
--
~
~
"
~
~
24-Mar-20
< 1
< 1
1.65
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
"
--
~
~
~
~
~
16-Jun-20
<0.5
< 1
1.8
<0.5
<0.5
0.58
<0.5
<5.05
<0.08
<0.008
0.266
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
28-Sep-20
<0.5
< 1
1.32
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
--
"
--
~
--
~
--
--
9-Dec-20
<0.5
< 1
1.27
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
--
"
--
--
~
~
~
~
31-Mar-21
<0.5
< 1
1.14
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
--
"
--
~
~
"
~
~
19-May-21
<0.5
< 1
1.03
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.49
<0.08
<0.008
0.0485
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
8-Sep-21
<0.5
< 1
1.41
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
--
--
--
~
~
~
--
--
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
0.088
0.302
0.005
0.00858
0.06
0.04
22-M-03
i 4:
6.33
104
1.47
< 1
--
1.64
<5.26
<0.001
0.0139
1.42
< 0.004
< 0.0005
0.0471
16-Sep-03
3.53
9.34
133
2.94
< 1
--
1.31
< 5
0.0107
0.0298
0.3
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
0.0116
3-Dec-03
l.oS
7.35
94.3
1.51
< 1
--
0.85
<5.1
0.0105
0.0381
0.248
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
10-Mar-04
< 1
5.SS
89
< 1
< 1
--
1.41
< 5
<0.001
0.0065
0.0642
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
9-Jun-04
< 1
7.13
101
< 1
< 1
--
1.23
< 1.02
<0.001
0.0197
0.0518
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
0.0123
7-Sep-04
< 1
5.S5
83.2
< 1
< 1
--
2.13
< 1.03
0.0607
0.0466
0.444
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
0.0215
16-Dec-04
< 1
(..(.2
108
< 1
< 1
--
1.6
1.07
0.0094
0.0128
0.0783
0.000267
< 0.0005
< 0.04
0.0128
16-Mar-05
< 1
4.92
84.4
< 1
< 1
--
1.1
< 1
<0.001
0.0068
0.126
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
14-Jun-05
< 1
4.83
75.8
< 1
< 1
--
1.06
< 1
<0.001
0.0044
0.0816
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
15-Sep-05
< 1
5.1 IS
90.7
< 1
< 1
--
2.82
< 1
0.0068
0.0443
0.349
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
0.0175
MW03-06
13-Dec-05
< 1
4.5(>
77.9
< 1
< 1
--
0.51
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.152
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
0.0122
8-Mar-06
< 1
5.07
73.9
< 1
< 1
--
1.15
< 1
0.0055
0.0792
0.611
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
0.0297
15-Jun-06
< 1
5.05
82.7
< 1
< 1
--
0.93
< 1.02
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0525
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
14-Sep-06
< 1
6.46
93.6
< 1
< 1
--
2.22
< 1.06
<0.001
< 0.004
0.059
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
6-Dec-06
< 1
4.5')
74.9
0.376
< 1
--
0.89
2.13
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0658
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
7-Mar-07
< 1
3.'>5
56.4
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.05
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0851
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
6-Jun-07
< 1
4."72
69.4
< 1
< 1
--
0.55
<1.1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0413
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
13-Sep-07
< 1
3."")
57.9
< 1
< 1
--
0.92
11.3
<0.001
0.0046
0.0474
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
5-Dec-07
< 1
5.04
72.2
< 1
< 1
--
1.02
< 1.12
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0397
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
13-Mar-08
< 1
3.33
48.5
< 1
< 1
--
(i 5
<1.1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0907
< 0.004
0.000357
<0.04
<0.01
3-Jun-08
< 1
2.49
50.2
< 1
< 1
--
0.83
< 1.08
<0.001
< 0.004
0.113
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.02
27-Aug-08
< 1
3.51
49.6
< 1
< 1
--
1.64
3.32
0.0016
0.0354
0.0608
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.1
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
11-Dec-08
< 1
3.X
60.4
< 1
< 1
--
0."")
< 1.08
<0.001
0.0332
0.0801
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
17-Mar-09
< 1
J."7-!
51.7
< 1
< 1
--
(i 5
< 1.11
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0631
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
24-Jun-09
< 1
3.(iX
54.3
< 1
< 1
--
0."72
~
"
--
--
--
--
--
"
23-Sep-09
< 1
2.52
41.9
< 1
< 1
--
l.(»
~
"
--
~
~
~
~
~
8-Dec-09
< 1
2.1
42.5
< 1
< 1
--
0.5(»
~
~
~
~
--
--
~
~
29-Mar-10
< 1
2.S4
43.2
< 1
< 1
--
(i 5
--
~
~
--
~
~
~
~
10-Jun-10
< 1
3.42
51.6
< 1
< 1
--
0.«)(»
< 1.11
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0485
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
14-Sep-10
< 1
I.S4
26.8
< 1
< 1
--
1
~
"
--
~
~
~
--
"
10-Dec-10
< 1
3."72
55.6
< 1
< 1
--
~
~
~
~
~
--
--
~
~
17-Mar-ll
< 1
2."7I
36.8
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
MW03-06
5-Jun-ll
< 1
3.43
53.8
< 1
< 1
--
0.5(»
3.93
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0441
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
9-Sep-ll
< 1
I.X(.
26.1
< 1
< 1
--
1.51
~
~
--
--
~
~
--
~
5-Dec-11
< 1
3.1
50.8
< 1
< 1
--
0.(»3
~
"
~
~
--
--
~
"
19-Mar-12
< 1
2.5')
40.3
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
23-Jun-12
< 1
2.3"'
40.4
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.12
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0352
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0148
27-Sep-12
< 1
< 1
11.8
< 1
< 1
--
1.13
--
~
--
--
~
~
~
~
30-Nov-12
< 1
1.24
17.6
< 1
< 1
--
--
~
~
~
~
--
--
--
~
15-Mar-13
< 1
I.5S
26.9
< 1
< 1
--
~
~
"
~
~
~
~
~
--
19-Jun-13
< 1
2.(.y
40.5
< 1
< 1
--
0.(»2
< 1.1
<0.001
0.0021
0.0355
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0107
12-Sep-13
< 1
< 1
11.4
< 1
< 1
--
1.03
--
~
--
~
~
~
~
~
6-Dec-13
< 1
1.39
20.1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
~
~
~
--
--
--
~
~
13-Mar-14
< 1
1.36
21.8
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
~
~
~
~
~
~
--
~
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
12-Jun-14
< 1
2.52
36.2
< 1
< 1
-
-
< 1.08
<0.001
0.0014
0.135
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
ll-Sep-14
< 1
< 1
10
< 1
< 1
-
0.T
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4-Dec-14
< 1
< 1
11.3
< 1
< 1
-
0.81
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
19-Mar-15
< 1
1.28
19.7
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4-Jun-15
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
9-Sep-15
< 1
< 1
9.52
< 1
< 1
-
0."M
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
10-Dec-15
< 1
1.41
23.7
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
15-Mar-16
< 1
I.S5
27.8
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
15-Jun-16
< 1
2.50
39.7
< 1
< 1
--
0.05
< 1.2
<0.001
0.0011
0.0704
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
30-Sep-16
< 1
1
9.91
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
MW03-06
20-Dec-16
< 1
I.X"'
31.9
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
14-Mar-17
< 1
l."^
28.4
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
22-Jun-17
< 1
2.8(»
38.2
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.14
<0.001
0.0032
0.0766
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
20-Sep-17
< 1
1.3
15.2
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
12-Dec-17
< 1
1.51
24.9
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
13-Mar-18
< 1
1 44
23.4
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
27-Jun-18
< 1
2."7(i
36.2
< 1
< 1
2.02
<0.5
< 1.1
<0.001
0.001
0.0565
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
25-Sep-18
< 1
< 1
10.3
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
27-Dec-18
< 1
< 1
19.8
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
26-Mar-19
< 1
1.06
18.1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
19-Jun-19
< 1
1.15
23
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
< 1.18
<0.001
0.0056
0.112
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
4-Sep-19
< 1
< 1
7.78
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
0.088
0.302
0.005
0.00858
0.06
0.04
3-Dec-19
< 1
< 1
16.4
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
24-Mar-20
< 1
< 1
15.8
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
16-Jun-20
<0.5
< 1
22.8
<0.5
<0.5
0.87
<0.5
<5.32
<0.08
0.0089
0.378
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
0.0091
MW03-06
28-Sep-20
<0.5
< 1
6.55
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
9-Dec-20
<0.5
1.09
19.2
<0.5
<0.5
0.52
<0.5
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
31-Mar-21
<0.5
1.25
19.3
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
19-May-21
<0.5
1.32
20.9
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.1
<0.08
<0.008
0.491
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
8-Sep-21
<0.5
< 1
9.29
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
26-Jun-01
2X
30
240
7.9
2.9
--
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.11
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
27-Sep-01
32
230
9.6
1.2
--
25
<4.8
0.0028
< 0.004
0.08
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.08
27-Mar-02
15
24
220
5.9
1.1
--
13
<5.1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.062
< 0.004
0.00111
<0.04
<0.01
5-Jun-02
r
32
180
5.8
< 1
--
19
<5.3
<0.2
<0.1
0.05
<0.01
<0.01
<0.04
<0.01
9-Sep-02
15 5
27.9
192
4.5
< 1
--
12.8
<5.1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.05
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
16-Dec-02
1 ^
20.5
182
4.15
< 1
--
11.8
<5.1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.05
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
MW01-07
12-Mar-03
4
11.9
89.1
2.01
< 1
--
8.7y
<5.18
<0.001
< 0.004
0.05
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
22-Jul-03
14.9
25.4
186
2.96
1.02
--
14.1
<5.1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0574
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
15-Sep-03
12.1
20.3
143
2.85
< 1
--
12
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0513
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
5-Dec-03
7.62
15.3
119
4.52
< 1
--
9.36
<5.18
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0531
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
9-Mar-04
4.98
9.55
92.7
2.87
< 1
--
8.22
<5.15
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0536
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
9-Jun-04
5.85
13
')') 2
2.46
< 1
--
8.55
< 1
<0.001
0.016
0.0569
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.013
9-Sep-04
3.3
S.57
-u."
1.28
< 1
--
6.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0536
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
16-Dec-04
4.2
S.S4
83.7
2.44
< 1
--
7.43
< 1
<0.001
0.0091
0.0584
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.012
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
0.088
0.302
0.005
0.00858
0.06
0.04
17-Mar-05
3.17
6.98
66.3
2.21
< 1
-
4.32
< 1.02
< 0.001
< 0.004
0.0502
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
13-Jun-05
3.72
8.65
67.2
2.3
< 1
-
4.48
< 1
< 0.001
< 0.004
0.0519
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
15-Sep-05
3.97
7.72
79.3
2.12
< 1
-
5.86
< 1
< 0.001
< 0.004
0.0573
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
0.0104
14-Dec-05
5.05
9.44
89.2
2.84
< 1
-
4.95
< 1
< 0.001
< 0.004
0.0537
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
0.0101
8-Mar-06
6.1
12.9
110
3.69
< 1
-
6.81
< 1.02
< 0.001
< 0.004
0.0544
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
14-Jun-06
4.89
10
87.4
2.32
< 1
-
7.4
< 1
< 0.001
< 0.004
0.0487
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
12-Sep-06
2.76
6.49
56.4
1.68
< 1
-
4.93
< 1.08
< 0.001
< 0.004
0.0485
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
6-Dec-06
4.08
8.58
73.7
1.77
< 1
-
5.8
2.9
< 0.001
< 0.004
0.051
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
7-Mar-07
4.35
9.39
83.2
2.88
< 1
-
2.86
< 1.11
< 0.001
< 0.004
0.049
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.02
5-Jun-07
5.34
12.1
104
3.76
< 1
-
9.8
< 1.15
< 0.001
< 0.004
0.0451
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.02
MW01-07
ll-Sep-07
7.15
18.5
141
2.79
< 1
-
8.6
1.29
< 0.001
< 0.004
0.052
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.05
4-Dec-07
4.54
88.2
2.18
< 1
-
8.16
< 1.23
< 0.001
< 0.004
0.0518
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.05
ll-Mar-08
1.84
4.85
45.8
1.39
< 1
-
0.54
< 1.05
< 0.001
< 0.004
0.0453
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
3-Jun-08
2.04
4.43
46.4
1.48
< 1
-
5.09
< 1.1
< 0.001
< 0.004
0.0467
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.05
28-Aug-08
3.05
"\6
58.4
2.18
< 1
-
4.8
10.1
< 0.001
< 0.004
0.0419
< 0.004
< 0.005
< 0.04
<0.1
ll-Dec-08
2.13
6.02
52.7
< 1
< 1
-
4.3
< 1.16
< 0.001
< 0.004
<0.01
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
17-Mar-09
3.98
10.4
86.2
< 1
< 1
-
1.51
1.25
< 0.001
< 0.004
0.0493
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
10-Jun-10
1.38
3.95
33.5
1.23
< 1
-
2.2')
< 1.16
< 0.001
< 0.004
0.0395
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
6-Jun-ll
< 1
2.14
18.6
< 1
< 1
-
1.24
< 1.08
< 0.001
< 0.004
0.0419
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
21-Jun-12
< 1
1.66
14
< 1
< 1
-
0.7
< 1.05
< 0.001
< 0.004
0.0463
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
20-Jun-13
< 1
< 1
5.96
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.08
<0.001
0.0015
0.044
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
10-Jun-14
< 1
< 1
5.03
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.06
<0.001
<0.001
0.0406
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
S
JS
i
s
—
JS
"S
£
_o
s
u
a
trans-1,2-
ichloroethene
S
—
JS
"S
£
_o
2
o
inyl Chloride
(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
O
¦-
"S
H
Q
•c
H
>
ffl
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
0.088
0.302
0.005
0.00858
0.06
0.04
4-Jun-15
< 1
< 1
< l
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
14-Jun-16
< 1
< 1
7.12
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.16
<0.001
<0.001
0.0455
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
21-Jun-17
< 1
< 1
5.42
< 1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.06
<0.001
<0.001
0.0413
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
MW01-07
26-Jun-18
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
< 1.2
<0.001
<0.001
0.0396
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
18-Jun-19
< 1
< 1
2.49
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
< 1.02
<0.001
<0.001
0.04
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
16-Jun-20
<0.5
< 1
1.46
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.56
<0.08
<0.008
0.0401
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
19-May-21
<0.5
< 1
1.27
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.32
<0.08
<0.008
0.0455
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
26-Jun-01
5.5
54
680
1.1
2.5
-
150
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.069
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
27-Sep-01
4.6
69
680
< 1
2.5
-
200
<4.2
<0.001
< 0.004
0.027
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
28-Mar-02
7.8
-»)
1100
1.7
11
-
100
< 5.1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.031
< 0.004
0.000502
<0.04
<0.01
5-Jun-02
6.2
"*4
930
3
13
-
100
13
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0203
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
10-Sep-02
7.4
III')
1050
2.35
5.52
-
6"7.2
<5.21
<0.001
0.0196
0.212
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0143
16-Dec-02
< 10
92.1
1190
< 10
< 10
-
32.6
<5.1
0.0041
0.0281
0.51
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0366
12-Mar-03
6.47
HIS
1090
1.84
6.94
-
24.6
< 5.1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0199
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
MW01-08
23-Jul-03
7.13
137
1210
2.18
5.56
-
60.8
5.35
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0285
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
17-Sep-03
6.47
125
1160
2.31
8.38
-
45.1
<5.21
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0488
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
5-Dec-03
< 10
•>2.5
I0(.0
< 10
< 10
-
9.13
< 5
0.008(>
0.0256
0.137
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
9-Mar-04
< 10
99.6
1400
< 10
< 10
-
64.8
<5.15
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0153
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
10-Jun-04
< 10
120
1280
< 10
< 10
-
25.6
< 1
<0.001
0.0106
0.0159
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.013
8-Sep-04
4.73
122
1260
1.74
5.29
-
9.0"7
< 1.02
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0389
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0137
17-Dec-04
4.94
121
11«)0
2.28
5.11
-
88.(>
< 1.05
<0.001
0.006
0.0189
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0146
17-Mar-05
< 10
•>2.5
1390
< 10
< 10
-
29
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0152
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00X5X
0.06
0.04
14-Jun-05
< 10
X5.'J
1240
< 10
< 10
--
140
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0127
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
15-Sep-05
< 10
"M
1260
< 10
< 10
--
3"7.1
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0157
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
13-Dec-05
< 10
•>1.5
I2')0
< 10
< 10
--
50.1
< 1.02
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0172
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
8-Mar-06
< 10
«)l.3
1270
< 10
< 10
--
4(>.l
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0118
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
15-Jun-06
< 10
1440
< 10
< 10
--
IS.I
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0152
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
15-Sep-06
< 10
110
I4S0
< 10
< 10
--
I2S
3.16
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0193
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0118
7-Dec-06
< 10
105
1350
< 10
< 10
--
42.6
< 1.03
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0124
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
8-Mar-07
< 10
106
1340
< 10
< 10
--
154
< 1.09
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0217
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
5-Jun-07
< 10
Sl.l
1230
< 10
< 10
--
T5
<1.1
<0.001
< 0.004
<0.01
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
12-Sep-07
< 10
'>3.3
1390
< 10
< 10
--
136
75.4
<0.001
< 0.004
0.012
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.1
MW01-08
6-Dec-07
< 10
<)5.(>
1240
< 10
10.1
--
142
<1.1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0155
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.1
12-Mar-08
1.9
10*)
I0S0
0.923
11.6
--
132
1.21
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0193
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
5-Jun-08
< 10
5').5
1250
< 10
< 10
--
23')
1.23
<0.001
< 0.004
<0.01
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.1
28-Aug-08
1.67
I0S
1320
< 1
4.47
--
235
1 11
<0.001
< 0.004
<0.01
< 0.004
<0.005
<0.04
<0.1
10-Dec-08
< 10
104
1360
< 10
< 10
--
240
I <)')
<0.001
< 0.004
<0.01
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
19-Mar-09
< 10
«>-\3
1300
< 10
< 10
--
220
2.23
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0108
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
24-Jun-09
< 10
X').')
1350
< 10
< 10
--
KiS
--
"
--
--
--
--
--
"
22-Sep-09
< 10
(.4.3
I0(>0
< 10
< 10
--
191
~
"
--
--
--
--
--
"
8-Dec-09
< 10
X2.2
1210
< 10
< 10
--
153
~
"
--
--
--
--
--
"
30-Mar-10
< 10
')(». 1
1300
< 10
< 10
~
24S
~
"
--
--
--
--
--
"
ll-Jun-10
< 10
"">.5
1090
< 10
< 10
~
32')
<1.16
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0115
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
14-Sep-10
< 10
113
1210
< 10
< 10
~
269
~
"
--
--
--
--
--
"
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oxx
0.302
0.005
0.00X5X
0.06
0.04
ll-Dec-10
< 10
96
1240
< 10
< 10
--
--
~
--
"
~
--
--
--
--
17-Mar-ll
< 10
X"U
1170
< 10
< 10
--
4 f
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
3-Jun-ll
< 10
X4."7
1130
< 10
< 10
--
269
3.8
<0.01
< 0.004
0.0102
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
8-Sep-ll
1.04
104
1010
< 1
5.46
--
260
--
~
--
--
--
--
--
~
5-Dec-11
< 10
"").2
1120
< 10
< 10
--
344
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
"
18-Mar-12
< 10
65.3
982
< 10
< 10
--
32X
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
24-Jun-12
<5
31.3
528
<5
<5
--
1X6
< 1.05
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0146
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0359
27-Sep-12
<5
37.7
608
<5
<5
--
409
--
"
--
--
--
--
~
~
30-Nov-12
<5
3X."7
658
<5
<5
--
--
~
~
~
~
~
~
--
~
15-Mar-13
<5
4"7."7
748
<5
<5
--
--
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
--
MW01-08
21-Jun-13
<5
72 7
1010
<5
<5
--
2X9
< 1.05
<0.001
0.003
0.0138
< 0.004
0.00116
<0.04
<0.01
12-Sep-13
<5
5').')
908
<5
<5
--
263
--
~
--
~
--
~
~
~
6-Dec-13
<5
5(>. 1
893
<5
<5
--
313
~
"
~
--
~
--
~
~
13-Mar-14
<5
"M.4
982
<5
<5
--
330
~
~
~
~
~
~
--
~
12-Jun-14
<5
30.4
718
<5
<5
--
--
< 1.03
<0.001
0.0026
0.0178
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
0.0162
ll-Sep-14
<5
64.X
942
<5
<5
--
24X
--
~
~
~
--
~
~
--
4-Dec-14
< 1
(.(..5
907
< 1
4.3
--
30X
~
~
--
~
~
~
~
~
19-Mar-15
< 1
"»X.X
902
< 1
4.82
--
312
~
"
~
--
~
"
~
~
5-Jun-15
< 1
53.2
865
< 1
4.74
~
29(»
< 1.15
<0.001
0.0031
0.0495
< 0.004
0.00119
<0.04
<0.01
9-Sep-15
< 10
6X.3
785
< 10
< 10
~
35.2
~
~
~
~
--
~
--
"
10-Dec-15
<5
71.7
1010
<5
<5
--
I5X
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
15-Mar-16
<5
60.5
858
<5
<5
~
106
~
~
--
~
~
~
~
~
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
0.088
0.302
0.005
0.00858
0.06
0.04
15-Jun-16
< 5
W
912
< 5
5.25
--
138
< 1.14
<0.001
0.0016
0.0367
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
30-Sep-16
< 5
"'».(»
986
< 5
< 5
--
40.9
--
"
--
--
--
"
--
"
20-Dec-16
< 5
70.5
975
< 5
< 5
--
106
--
"
~
~
~
~
~
~
14-Mar-17
< 1
"'(o
686
< 1
4.84
--
127
--
"
~
~
~
"
~
~
22-Jun-17
< 5
(.I."7
788
< 5
5.34
--
137
< 1.27
<0.001
0.0018
0.0386
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
20-Sep-17
< 5
858
< 5
5.41
--
71.3
--
"
--
--
--
~
--
"
12-Dec-17
< 5
75.3
904
< 5
< 5
--
126
--
"
~
~
~
~
~
~
13-Mar-18
< 5
(.0.')
838
< 5
5.77
--
129
--
"
~
~
~
~
~
~
27-Jun-18
< 5
54.S
716
< 5
< 5
8.29
122
2.94
<0.001
0.0014
0.0262
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
25-Sep-18
< 5
(.1.3
805
< 5
< 5
< 5
187
--
"
~
~
--
"
--
~
MW01-08
27-Dec-18
< 1
(> 1.5
503
< 1
4.58
3.17
178
--
"
--
--
~
~
~
"
26-Mar-19
< 1
60.6
733
< 1
4.77
1.32
251
--
"
~
~
~
~
~
~
19-Jun-19
< 5
41.2
700
< 5
< 5
< 5
171
< 1.11
<0.001
0.0031
0.0641
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
4-Sep-19
< 5
50.6
718
< 5
< 5
9
29.3
--
"
~
~
--
"
~
~
3-Dec-19
< 1
(.5.2
830
< 1
4.09
7.08
90
--
"
~
~
~
~
--
~
24-Mar-20
< 5
5(>.(>
863
< 5
< 5
< 5
138
--
"
--
--
~
~
~
"
17-Jun-20
<0.5
31.1
646
<0.5
5.87
6.87
58.4
<5.49
<0.08
<0.008
0.0924
<0.0016
0.0018
0.129
< 0.008
28-Sep-20
<0.5
48.1
700
<0.5
3.39
6.5
33.7
--
~
~
~
--
~
~
~
9-Dec-20
<2.5
42.5
653
<2.5
2.81
4.55
74.1
--
~
~
~
~
"
~
~
31-Mar-21
<2.5
43.3
681
<2.5
3.19
4.31
93.2
--
"
~
~
~
~
--
"
20-May-21
<0.5
44.')
679
<0.5
3
8.67
81.7
<6.76
<0.08
< 0.008
0.0387
<0.0016
0.00163
<0.016
<0.008
8-Sep-21
<2.5
51.4
869
<2.5
4.22
3.21
92.1
--
~
--
--
~
~
~
~
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
0.088
0.302
0.005
0.00858
0.06
0.04
23-Jul-03
1.95
5.78
166
1.78
< 1
--
< 1
<5.1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.044
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
17-Sep-03
2.1"
(..II
191
1.79
< 1
--
< 1
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0513
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
5-Dec-03
2.75
8.52
179
2.99
< 1
--
<0.5
<5
0.0129
< 0.004
0.0493
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
9-Mar-04
2.45
5.32
148
2.08
< 1
--
<0.5
<5.1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0358
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
10-Jun-04
3.5"
12
236
2.83
1.5
--
<0.5
< 1.02
<0.001
0.015
0.0517
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0147
8-Sep-04
1.1
3.12
80.6
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
0.038"7
< 0.004
0.068
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0223
17-Dec-04
4.39
14.2
272
3.37
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.02
<0.001
0.0079
0.0442
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0196
17-Mar-05
3.56
10.«J
186
3.08
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0377
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
13-Jun-05
3.39
12.4
195
2.84
1.16
--
<0.5
< 1
0.0063
< 0.004
0.0545
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
15-Sep-05
< 1
I.V
54.7
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
0.0056
0.0413
0.0981
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0185
MW03-09
13-Dec-05
5.01
14.3
205
4.87
< 1
~
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0462
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
8-Mar-06
3.02
9.(»2
173
3.12
<2
~
< 1
< 1
0.004
0.0531
0.146
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0196
15-Jun-06
5.32
K..3
251
3.93
1.29
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0482
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
15-Sep-06
4.91
15.4
310
4.76
<2
~
< 1
2.32
<0.001
< 0.004
0.046
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0125
7-Dec-06
5.49
19.4
304
5.78
<2
~
< 1
< 1.04
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0473
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
8-Mar-07
4.28
13.6
172
5.71
< 1
~
<0.5
< 1.11
<0.001
< 0.004
0.037
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.02
5-Jun-07
5.22
l(».3
242
5.54
1.67
~
<0.5
< 1.12
0.0042
0.0454
0.098
< 0.004
0.00109
<0.04
<0.05
12-Sep-07
1.18
4.62
131
1.69
< 1
--
<0.5
3.83
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0296
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.1
6-Dec-07
< 1
2.15
36
< 1
< 1
~
<0.5
< 1.07
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0364
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.1
13-Mar-08
2.26
8.5
i:
3.25
< 1
~
<0.5
< 1.09
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0363
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
5-Jun-08
2.92
10.9
173
3.4
< 1
~
<0.5
< 1.1
0.0022
0.0697
0.0342
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.1
29-Aug-08
2.73
10.8
191
3.46
< 1
~
<0.5
< 1.25
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0348
< 0.004
< 0.005
<0.04
<0.1
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
0.088
0.302
0.005
0.00858
0.06
0.04
10-Dec-08
< 1
2.')')
38.4
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.1
<0.001
0.0536
<0.01
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
19-Mar-09
2.92
11.5
134
6.09
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.05
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0342
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
24-Jun-09
3.9
15.(>
202
6.05
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
--
--
--
--
"
22-Sep-09
3.29
14.4
263
5.4
<2
--
< 1
--
~
~
~
--
--
~
~
9-Dec-09
4.82
IS.I
238
?
<2
--
< 1
--
~
~
--
~
~
~
~
2 9-Mar-10
3.59
13.3
127
8.26
< 1
--
<0.5
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
10-Jun-10
3.92
16.2
176
10.9
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.05
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0401
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
14-Sep-10
1.63
5.4«>
157
3.83
< 1
--
<0.5
~
"
--
~
--
--
--
"
10-Dec-10
4.26
19.2
211
9.04
<2
--
--
--
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
17-Mar-ll
3.15
11.4
98.2
9.59
< 1
--
<0.5
~
~
~
--
~
~
~
~
MW03-09
3-Jun-ll
3.65
14.4
148
11.5
< 1
--
<0.5
12.5
<0.01
< 0.004
0.0438
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
9-Sep-ll
6.09
28.4
334
24.9
<2.5
--
< 1.25
~
"
--
~
--
--
--
~
6-Dec-ll
3.38
I2.S
126
10.4
< 1
--
<0.5
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
"
19-Mar-12
2.25
9.12
86.6
7.49
< 1
--
<0.5
--
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
23-Jun-12
3.9
K.."7
177
16.9
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.18
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0377
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0247
27-Sep-12
4.69
20."7
269
26.9
< 1
~
<0.5
~
~
--
--
--
--
~
~
30-Nov-12
3.06
Hi. 1
195
6.41
< 1
--
--
~
"
~
~
~
~
--
~
15-Mar-13
1.77
').')5
I0(>
4
< 1
~
--
--
~
~
~
~
~
~
--
21-Jun-13
2.7
11.6
102
15.9
< 1
~
<0.5
< 1.04
<0.001
0.0022
0.0384
< 0.004
0.00128
<0.04
<0.01
12-Sep-13
3.63
14.5
145
20.3
< 1
~
<0.5
~
~
--
--
--
~
~
~
6-Dec-13
3.15
13.')
133
20.6
< 1
~
<0.5
~
~
~
~
~
--
~
~
13-Mar-14
1.7
X.I 13
84.4
6.22
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
~
~
~
~
--
~
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
0.088
0.302
0.005
0.00858
0.06
0.04
12-Jun-14
i 4:
6.34
62
10.4
< 1
--
--
< 1
< 0.001
I) DO I |
ii ()414
< 0.004
< 0.001
< 0.04
I) U|')(.
ll-Sep-14
3.5
17.9
179
33
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
--
--
"
--
--
4-Dec-14
3 'Jl
21.2
IS4
30.1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
19-Mar-15
i <>:
10.7
99.9
9.81
< 1
--
<0.5
--
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
5-Jun-15
1.35
6.3"7
63.9
16.5
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.18
<0.001
0.0071
0.154
< 0.004
0.00119
<0.04
0.0396
9-Sep-15
3.64
21.5
188
51.7
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
~
--
~
~
~
10-Dec-15
3.1
16.4
164
32.7
< 1
--
<0.5
~
~
~
--
~
--
--
--
15-Mar-16
1.12
''.SS
74.2
5.9
< 1
~
<0.5
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
15-Jun-16
1.43
6.5"'
70.7
19.(»
< 1
~
<0.5
< 1.14
<0.001
0.0055
0.138
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
0.0134
30-Sep-16
3.11
22.5
217
49.9
< 1
--
<0.5
--
~
~
~
--
~
~
~
MW03-09
20-Dec-16
3.03
20.1
K.4
58.7
< 1
~
<0.5
~
"
--
~
~
~
~
~
14-Mar-17
1.69
13.2
115
14.9
< 1
~
<0.5
~
~
~
--
~
"
--
--
22-Jun-17
1.5
10.2
101
22 7
< 1
~
<0.5
< 1.12
0.001
0.0055
0.11
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
0.0162
20-Sep-17
1.9
14
III
30.5
< 1
~
<0.5
--
~
~
~
--
~
~
~
12-Dec-17
1.79
14.1
126
31.4
< 1
--
<0.5
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
13-Mar-18
< 1
4.8(i
4') 4
8.79
< 1
~
<0.5
~
"
--
~
~
~
~
~
27-Jun-18
< 1
2.04
13.8
8.13
< 1
2.28
<0.5
< 1.08
<0.001
<0.001
0.0365
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
25-Sep-18
2.11
15.4
149
40.6
< 1
17.7
<0.5
--
~
~
--
--
"
--
"
27-Dec-18
< 1
7.5
~(i (i
4.75
< 1
22.5
<0.5
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
26-Mar-19
< 1
3.r
4.22
< 1
5.29
<0.5
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
19-Jun-19
< 1
4.4
51.6
14.1
< 1
5.28
<0.5
< 1.15
<0.001
0.0093
0.0762
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
3-Dec-19
1.18
10.5
113
28.2
< 1
12.9
<0.5
--
"
--
--
--
"
--
"
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
0.088
0.302
0.005
0.00858
0.06
0.04
24-Mar-20
< 1
4.89
4S S
7.14
< 1
6.65
< 1
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
16-Jun-20
<0.5
3.14
32 ')
11.7
<0.5
4.09
<0.5
<5.49
<0.08
<0.008
0.0722
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
17-Jun-20
<0.5
2.48
31.3
9.21
<0.5
3.71
<0.5
5.43
<0.08
<0.008
0.0528
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
MW03-09
28-Sep-20
1.0(.
11
121
30.8
0.77
12.6
<0.5
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
9-Dec-20
0.74
9.62
102
22
<0.5
10.4
<0.5
--
~
--
--
--
--
--
--
31-Mar-21
0.53
7.4
61.4
9.47
<0.5
8.1
<0.5
--
~
--
--
--
--
--
--
20-May-21
<0.5
2.96
29.4
9.13
<0.5
3.36
<0.5
<5.26
<0.08
<0.008
0.0649
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
8-Sep-21
0.79
8.94
108
25.7
<0.5
11
<0.5
~
--
~
--
--
--
--
--
25-Jun-01
7.8
30
230
7.5
< 1
--
< 1
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.069
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
28-Sep-01
6.7
18
84
8.9
< 1
--
< 1
<4.5
<0.001
0.0048
0.045
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
28-Mar-02
11
41
380
13
1
--
5
< 5.2
<0.001
0.0067
0.048
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
10-Jun-02
8.3
34
270
11
< 1
--
3.8
< 5
<0.001
0.0048
0.0378
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
ll-Sep-02
6.56
23."7
92.1
10.9
< 1
--
1.21
< 5.26
<0.001
0.0153
0.0544
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
18-Dec-02
6.06
19.8
77
10.9
< 1
--
3.54
<5.18
<0.001
0.0055
0.04
< 0.004
0.000537
<0.04
<0.01
MW01-10
13-Mar-03
12.6
65."7
386
17.9
1.33
--
"'.49
<5.21
<0.001
0.0098
0.0402
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
23-Jul-03
6.64
29.3
206
11.3
< 1
--
3.65
< 5.32
<0.001
0.0311
0.0384
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
16-Sep-03
9.51
4"7.3
245
15
1.16
--
6."72
< 5
0.0123
0.01
0.0516
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
4-Dec-03
10.4
66.8
721
17.5
2.12
--
12.2
< 5
<0.001
0.0086
0.0468
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
8-Mar-04
< 10
44
688
15.4
< 10
--
9.55
<5.15
<0.001
0.015
0.0541
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
8-Jun-04
6.98
32.6
290
10.7
1.7
--
5.13
1.67
<0.001
0.0157
0.0467
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0175
8-Sep-04
4.43
2"7.6
184
10.2
< 1
--
3.83
< 1
<0.001
0.0069
0.0441
< 0.004
0.000411
<0.04
0.0132
15-Dec-04
5.3
27.5
305
13.6
< 1
--
3.86
1.45
<0.001
0.0063
0.136
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0201
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
0.088
0.302
0.005
0.00858
0.06
0.04
17-Mar-05
1.45
8.43
73.9
5.09
< 1
--
l.(»8
< 1
0.0242
0.0872
0.126
< 0.004
0.00135
< 0.04
0.0127
14-Jun-05
1.08
5.(>4
51.4
3.89
< 1
--
0.9
< 1
< 0.00 L
< 0.004
0.0397
< 0.004
0.000766
< 0.04
<0.01
15-Sep-05
< 1
3
20
2.08
< 1
--
0.82
< 1
0.0074
0.0597
0.233
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
0.0163
13-Dec-05
< 1
7.14
74.6
2.99
< 1
--
1.09
2.73
0.0056
0.0792
0.0552
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
0.0148
7-Mar-06
1.29
12.5
143
6.72
< 1
--
2.03
3.57
< 0.00 L
< 0.004
0.0405
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
0.0117
13-Jun-06
< 1
7.54
84.7
3.75
< 1
--
1.21
1.85
< 0.00 L
< 0.004
0.039
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
13-Sep-06
< 1
10.4
115
5.61
< 1
--
2.28
3.76
< 0.00 L
< 0.004
0.0294
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
0.0129
5-Dec-06
1.41
17.3
215
7.2
1.33
--
3.6"'
1.81
< 0.00 L
< 0.004
0.034
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
6-Mar-07
1.17
5.88
30.4
3.85
< 1
--
0.(>8
< 1.04
< 0.00 L
< 0.004
0.0291
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.02
7-Jun-07
< 1
4.93
44.7
5.09
< 1
--
0.95
1.27
< 0.00 L
< 0.004
0.029
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
MW01-10
13-Sep-07
< 1
7 22
83.9
2.36
< 1
--
0.56
< 1.14
< 0.001
<0.02
0.0335
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.2
4-Dec-07
< 1
(..23
61.3
3.39
< 1
--
1.58
< 1.07
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0358
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.1
13-Mar-08
< 1
3.93
26.9
2.73
< 1
--
0.51
< 1.06
<0.001
< 0.004
0.028
< 0.004
0.000327
< 0.04
<0.01
5-Jun-08
< 1
1.87
13
1.12
< 1
--
0.65
1.83
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0303
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.05
28-Aug-08
< 1
2.42
15.6
< 1
< 1
--
0.93
< 1.06
<0.001
0.0046
0.033
< 0.004
<0.005
< 0.04
<0.1
12-Dec-08
< 1
3.33
25
< 1
< 1
--
1.16
< 1.08
<0.001
0.0732
0.0333
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
19-Mar-09
< 1
4.81
50.4
< 1
< 1
--
1.53
< 1.11
0.0011
< 0.004
0.033
< 0.004
< 0.0005
< 0.04
<0.01
9-Jun-10
< 1
2.04
12.4
2.01
< 1
--
(i 5
< 1.1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0309
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
7-Jun-ll
< 1
8.61
94.4
7.44
< 1
--
l.^.
< 1.09
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0329
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
23-Jun-12
< 1
11.5
219
8.41
< 1
--
4.43
< 1.05
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0294
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.032
20-Jun-13
1.05
15.2
231
12.9
< 1
--
3.82
< 1.1
<0.001
0.0036
0.0269
< 0.004
0.00146
<0.04
<0.01
13-Jun-14
< 1
4.02
89.7
8.2
< 1
--
--
< 1.05
<0.001
0.002
0.0226
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
0.088
0.302
0.005
0.00858
0.06
0.04
5-Jun-15
1
5.19
74.3
8.04
< 1
-
(i 5
< 1.2
<0.001
0.0053
0.0311
< 0.004
0.00121
<0.04
<0.01
14-Jun-16
1
4.27
50.3
6.28
< 1
-
0.54
< 1.18
<0.001
0.0036
0.0293
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
22-Jun-17
1
4.38
53.5
4.41
< 1
-
0.73
1.U4
<0.001
0.0025
0.0309
< 0.002
0.00253
<0.04
<0.01
MW01-10
27-Jun-18
< 1
< 1
9.84
1.9
< 1
2.63
<0.5
< 1.22
<0.001
0.0047
0.0299
< 0.002
0.00148
<0.04
<0.01
19-Jun-19
< 1
I.S4
28.1
1.95
< 1
5.41
<0.5
< 1.06
<0.001
0.0028
0.0224
< 0.002
0.00123
<0.04
<0.01
16-Jun-20
<0.5
< 1
11.5
0.802
<0.5
2.1
<0.5
<6.02
<0.08
<0.008
0.018
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
19-May-21
<0.5
3.22
44.6
1.1
<0.5
4.4
<0.5
<5.56
<0.08
<0.008
0.0215
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
22-M-03
10.7
9.17
< 1
47
< 1
-
< 1
<5
<0.001
0.0072
0.153
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0362
15-Sep-03
13.8
•J."7
< 1
58.1
< 1
-
< 1
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0445
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
5-Dec-03
6.98
6.2"'
< 1
51 .(>
< 1
-
<0.5
<5.1
0.0093
0.0226
0.0789
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
9-Mar-04
8.64
(..X
< 1
48.1
< 1
-
<0.5
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.024
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
9-Jun-04
7.42
(>.14
< 1
48.8
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.02
<0.001
0.0169
0.0266
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0164
7-Sep-04
6.78
5.49
< 1
44
< 1
-
<0.5
1.64
0.0429
0.0409
0.142
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0166
16-Dec-04
5.86
5. IS
< 1
39.9
< 1
-
<0.5
1.89
< 0.001
0.0103
0.034
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0139
MW03-11
17-Mar-05
4.84
4.89
< 1
3(».8
< 1
-
<0.5
1
0.0312
0.0661
0.232
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0408
14-Jun-05
5.19
4.43
< 1
41.8
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.022
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
15-Sep-05
4.17
4.32
< 1
32.6
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.029
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0127
14-Dec-05
5.13
4. IS
< 1
42.9
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1
0.0045
0.0575
0.0355
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0141
7-Mar-06
5.02
4."75
< 1
42.4
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1
0.0025
0.0315
0.0537
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0188
14-Jun-06
4.62
3.X(i
< 1
38.1
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0215
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
15-Sep-06
4.9
4.15
< 1
3"7.4
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.08
0.001
0.0154
0.0273
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0106
6-Dec-06
4.74
4.24
< 1
40
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.09
0.0033
0.0302
0.0301
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
8-Mar-07
4 (.-
4.43
< 1
3S.4
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.04
<0.001
0.0191
0.0262
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
5-Jun-07
4 us
4.17
< 1
35
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.06
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0166
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.02
12-Sep-07
4 (.-
3.54
< 1
35.')
< 1
--
<0.5
3.XS
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0191
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
4-Dec-07
' 2(.
3.53
< 1
23.4
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.09
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0221
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
ll-Mar-08
3.07
3.5')
1.25
24.2
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.11
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0207
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
5-Jun-08
2.97
2.64
< 1
2(».4
< 1
--
<0.5
1.14
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0147
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
26-Aug-08
2.64
3.4
1.64
25.1
< 1
--
<0.5
x.yj
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0197
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.1
9-Dec-08
2.66
3.64
1.91
22.5
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.27
0.0012
0.0672
0.0144
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
17-Mar-09
2.46
3.117
2.41
24.4
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.23
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0188
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
23-Jun-09
2.47
3.32
2.93
24.3
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
--
--
--
--
--
MW03-11
22-Sep-09
2.35
2.'M
2.4
20.4
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
--
--
--
--
--
8-Dec-09
2.06
2.'«,
4.59
20.(»
< 1
~
<0.5
--
"
--
--
--
--
--
--
22-Mar-10
2.52
2.yx
2.65
22.5
< 1
~
<0.5
--
~
--
--
--
--
~
~
ll-Jun-10
< 1
2.(>l
1.69
12.5
< 1
~
<0.5
< 1.02
<0.001
< 0.004
0.018
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
13-Sep-10
2.27
3.34
2.75
34.7
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
~
--
--
~
~
9-Dec-10
2.22
3.34
2.69
2(..5
< 1
~
--
--
~
~
~
--
--
--
~
16-Mar-ll
1.7
2.X2
2.8
20.4
< 1
~
<0.5
--
~
~
--
~
--
~
"
4-Jun-ll
1.56
2.22
2.57
I'U
< 1
~
<0.5
1. IS
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0238
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
8-Sep-ll
1.59
2.0')
2.14
3I.S
< 1
~
<0.5
~
~
--
~
--
~
~
~
5-Dec-11
1.6
2.0')
2.53
27.5
< 1
--
<0.5
~
"
~
~
~
~
~
~
18-Mar-12
1.32
I.')"7
2.31
25.3
< 1
~
<0.5
--
~
~
~
~
--
--
~
22-Jun-12
1.09
1.5
1.67
1 I.I
< 1
~
<0.5
< 1.19
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0248
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
27-Sep-12
1:
1.79
1.47
23.(i
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
30-Nov-12
i 11
1.82
1.49
20.2
< 1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
15-Mar-13
1
1.59
1.67
25.7
< 1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
18-Jun-13
1 (15
1.53
1.62
13.9
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.03
<0.001
0.0021
0.0241
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
12-Sep-13
i 11
1.72
1.67
27.1
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
6-Dec-13
< 1
1.34
1.51
2 l.(i
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
13-Mar-14
< 1
1.34
1.27
2 3.6
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
10-Jun-14
< 1
1.16
< 1
14.1
< 1
-
-
< 1
<0.001
0.001
0.0235
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
0.0129
ll-Sep-14
< 1
1.2
1.28
IS.I
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4-Dec-14
< 1
1.29
< 1
IS.2
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
MW03-11
19-Mar-15
< 1
1.32
1.26
21.S
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4-Jun-15
< 1
< 1
< 1
r.i
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
9-Sep-15
< 1
1.27
< 1
23
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
10-Dec-15
< 1
1.13
< 1
K..X
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
15-Mar-16
< 1
1.17
< 1
1 (>.5
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
14-Jun-16
< 1
< 1
< 1
r.i
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.11
<0.001
<0.001
0.0258
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
30-Sep-16
< 1
1.31
< 1
!(>.(>
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
20-Dec-16
< 1
< 1
1.39
X.39
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
14-Mar-17
< 1
1.01
< 1
r.9
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
21-Jun-17
< 1
< 1
< 1
I2.S
< 1
-
<0.5
< 1.15
<0.001
<0.001
0.0272
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
20-Sep-17
< 1
1.04
1.28
X.S2
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
12-Dec-17
< 1
< 1
< 1
13.4
< 1
-
<0.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
13-Mar-18
< 1
< 1
< 1
I4.(>
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
"
--
--
--
--
--
27-Jun-18
< 1
< 1
< 1
11.«>
< 1
1.31
<0.5
< 1.05
<0.001
<0.001
0.0232
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
25-Sep-18
< 1
< 1
< 1
12.(>
< 1
1.97
<0.5
--
"
"
--
--
"
--
"
27-Dec-18
< 1
< 1
< 1
13.2
< 1
1.02
<0.5
--
"
"
--
--
"
--
~
26-Mar-19
< 1
< 1
< 1
14.5
< 1
1.07
<0.5
--
"
"
--
~
"
--
~
18-Jun-19
< 1
< 1
< 1
12.2
< 1
1.24
<0.5
< 1.01
<0.001
0.0016
0.0249
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
4-Sep-19
< 1
< 1
< 1
13.1
< 1
1.39
<0.5
--
"
"
--
--
"
--
"
MW03-11
3-Dec-19
< 1
< 1
< 1
11.3
< 1
1.18
<0.5
--
"
"
--
~
~
~
~
24-Mar-20
< 1
< 1
< 1
II.1
< 1
1.1
< 1
--
"
"
--
~
~
~
~
16-Jun-20
<0.5
< 1
0.929
X.')4
<0.5
1.25
<0.5
<5.75
<0.08
<0.008
0.02
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
28-Sep-20
<0.5
< 1
0.648
11.2
<0.5
3.87
<0.5
--
--
--
--
~
--
--
--
9-Dec-20
<0.5
< 1
1.93
i
<0.5
4.63
<0.5
--
--
--
--
--
~
~
~
31-Mar-21
<0.5
< 1
0.583
y.x4
<0.5
1.01
<0.5
--
--
--
--
~
~
~
~
19-May-21
<0.5
< 1
0.771
S.3
<0.5
1.16
<0.5
<5.26
<0.08
<0.008
0.0179
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
8-Sep-21
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
13.2
<0.5
1.17
<0.5
--
--
--
--
~
~
--
--
23-Jul-03
< 1
< 1
6.05
< 1
< 1
--
< 1
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.114
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
17-Sep-03
< 1
< 1
10.5
< 1
< 1
--
< 1
<5
<0.001
< 0.004
0.13
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
3-Dec-03
< 1
< 1
6.12
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
<5.1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.141
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
MW03-12
8-Mar-04
< 1
< 1
2.87
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
<5.1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.144
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
9-Jun-04
< 1
< 1
8.15
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.02
<0.001
0.0178
0.147
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0126
9-Sep-04
< 1
< 1
2.25
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.119
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
14-Dec-04
< 1
< 1
2.34
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
1.41
0.0005
< 0.004
0.12
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
15-Mar-05
< 1
< 1
2.59
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.139
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
14-Jun-05
< 1
< 1
3.33
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.158
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
15-Sep-05
< 1
< 1
4.09
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
0.0055
0.0413
0.231
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0137
13-Dec-05
< 1
< 1
3.95
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.231
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0134
7-Mar-06
< 1
< 1
4.12
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.137
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
12-Jun-06
< 1
< 1
4.46
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.137
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
14-Sep-06
< 1
< 1
3.8
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.15
<0.001
< 0.004
0.115
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
7-Dec-06
< 1
< 1
2.45
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.11
<0.001
< 0.004
0.108
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
6-Mar-07
< 1
< 1
1.29
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.07
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0967
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
4-Jun-07
< 1
< 1
4.11
0.461
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
0.0016
0.0203
0.0998
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
MW03-12
ll-Sep-07
< 1
< 1
7.87
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.11
<0.001
< 0.004
0.106
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
4-Dec-07
< 1
< 1
3.9
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.17
<0.001
< 0.004
0.113
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
12-Mar-08
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.16
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0875
< 0.004
0.000349
<0.04
<0.01
6-Jun-08
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
l.4(>
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0847
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.05
26-Aug-08
< 1
< 1
3.27
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.14
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0973
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.1
9-Dec-08
< 1
< 1
4.28
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.05
<0.001
< 0.004
0.099
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
18-Mar-09
< 1
< 1
2.02
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.15
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0918
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
10-Jun-10
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.06
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0884
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
8-Jun-ll
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.11
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0945
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
23-Jun-12
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.18
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0925
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
0.0196
19-Jun-13
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
10.1
<0.001
<0.001
0.084
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
12-Jun-14
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.11
<0.001
<0.001
0.0968
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
4-Jun-15
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
"
--
--
~
--
--
14-Jun-16
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.22
<0.001
<0.001
0.0917
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
21-Jun-17
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.11
<0.001
<0.001
0.096
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
MW03-12
27-Jun-18
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
< 1.19
<0.001
0.0013
0.125
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
18-Jun-19
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
< 1.01
<0.001
<0.001
0.0879
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
16-Jun-20
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.43
<0.08
<0.008
0.133
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
19-May-21
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.15
<0.08
<0.008
0.0824
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
MW07-13
8-Sep-ll
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
5-Dec-11
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
--
~
--
--
--
--
18-Mar-12
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
--
--
~
~
~
~
21-Jun-12
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
--
~
~
~
~
~
27-Sep-12
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
--
~
--
~
~
~
30-Nov-12
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
--
--
--
--
~
~
--
~
--
15-Mar-13
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
--
--
--
--
~
~
~
--
~
21-Jun-13
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
--
--
~
~
~
~
MW07-13
12-Sep-13
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
~
~
~
~
~
~
6-Dec-13
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
~
~
--
~
~
~
13-Mar-14
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
~
~
~
--
~
--
12-Jun-14
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
--
--
--
--
~
~
~
--
~
ll-Sep-14
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
~
--
~
~
~
~
4-Dec-14
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
~
~
~
~
~
~
19-Mar-15
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
~
~
--
~
~
~
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
4-Jun-15
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
"
--
--
--
~
~
9-Sep-15
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
"
~
~
~
--
~
10-Dec-15
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
"
~
~
~
~
--
15-Mar-16
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
"
--
~
~
~
~
16-Jun-16
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
~
~
--
~
~
~
30-Sep-16
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
~
~
~
--
~
~
20-Dec-16
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
~
~
~
~
--
~
14-Mar-17
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
"
~
~
~
~
--
21-Jun-17
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
~
--
~
~
~
~
20-Sep-17
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
~
~
--
~
~
~
MW07-13
12-Dec-17
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
~
~
~
--
~
~
13-Mar-18
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
~
~
~
~
--
~
26-M-18
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
--
--
"
~
~
~
~
--
25-Sep-18
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
--
--
~
--
~
~
~
~
27-Dec-18
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
--
--
~
~
--
~
~
~
26-Mar-19
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
--
--
~
~
~
--
~
~
18-Jun-19
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
--
--
~
~
~
~
--
~
4-Sep-19
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
--
--
"
~
~
~
~
--
3-Dec-19
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
--
--
~
--
~
~
~
~
24-Mar-20
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
--
~
~
--
~
~
~
16-Jun-20
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
--
--
~
~
~
--
~
~
28-Sep-20
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
--
--
~
~
~
~
--
~
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
9-Dec-20
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
--
--
"
--
~
--
--
--
MW07-13
31-Mar-21
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
--
--
"
--
--
~
~
~
19-May-21
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
--
--
"
--
~
~
~
~
8-Sep-21
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
--
--
"
~
~
~
--
~
5-Dec-07
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.16
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0311
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.02
12-Mar-08
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.06
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0316
< 0.004
0.000409
<0.04
<0.01
4-Jun-08
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
1.12
<0.001
< 0.004
0.028
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
26-Aug-08
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.11
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0557
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
9-Dec-08
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.22
<0.001
0.052
0.0331
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
18-Mar-09
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.11
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0323
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
23-Jun-09
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
--
--
--
--
--
21-Sep-09
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
--
--
--
~
--
MW07-14
7-Dec-09
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
~
--
--
~
~
21-Mar-10
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
~
~
~
--
~
10-Jun-10
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.02
<0.001
< 0.004
0.028
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
13-Sep-10
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
--
--
--
~
"
9-Dec-10
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
--
--
"
--
~
~
~
~
~
16-Mar-ll
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
~
~
~
~
~
14-Jul-ll
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0468
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
8-Sep-ll
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
~
--
--
--
"
5-Dec-11
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
--
~
~
~
~
18-Mar-12
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
~
~
~
~
~
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
21-Jun-12
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.09
<0.001
< 0.004
0.0373
< 0.004
< 0.0005
<0.04
<0.01
27-Sep-12
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
--
--
--
--
"
30-Nov-12
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
--
--
"
--
~
~
~
~
~
15-Mar-13
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
--
--
"
--
--
--
--
~
~
20-Jun-13
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.03
<0.001
0.0022
0.0299
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
12-Sep-13
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
~
~
~
--
"
5-Dec-13
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
~
~
~
~
~
~
13-Mar-14
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
~
--
~
~
~
12-Jun-14
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
--
< 1.08
<0.001
0.0029
0.0337
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
ll-Sep-14
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
~
--
~
"
--
~
MW07-14
4-Dec-14
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
~
~
~
~
~
"
19-Mar-15
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
~
~
--
~
~
~
5-Jun-15
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
S.X2
<0.001
0.0024
0.037
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
9-Sep-15
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
--
~
"
~
~
10-Dec-15
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
~
~
~
~
--
~
15-Mar-16
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
~
~
--
~
~
"
14-Jun-16
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.18
<0.001
0.002
0.0516
< 0.004
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
30-Sep-16
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
--
~
~
~
~
~
20-Dec-16
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
~
--
~
"
~
~
14-Mar-17
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
~
~
--
~
--
~
21-Jun-17
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
< 1.16
<0.001
0.0022
0.047
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
20-Sep-17
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
"
~
~
~
~
~
"
-------
Appendix A. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results Geosyntec Consultants, Inc.
Vandale Junkyard
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Semi-
VOC
Metals
Well ID
Date Sampled
1,1,1-
T richloroethane
1,1-
Dichloroethene
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethene
T richloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Nickel
Vanadium
20
1.5
100*
1.5
100*
NS
0.5
1
0.005
o.oss
0.302
0.005
0.00S5S
0.06
0.04
12-Dec-17
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
"
--
--
--
~
--
13-Mar-18
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
<0.5
--
--
"
--
~
~
~
~
27-Jun-18
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
< 1.11
<0.001
0.0036
0.0419
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
25-Sep-18
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
--
"
--
--
~
~
--
~
27-Dec-18
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
--
"
--
--
--
~
~
--
26-Mar-19
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
--
"
--
--
~
"
~
~
19-Jun-19
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
< 1.05
<0.001
0.0034
0.0367
< 0.002
<0.001
<0.04
<0.01
MW07-14
4-Sep-19
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
--
"
--
--
~
~
--
~
3-Dec-19
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
<0.5
--
"
--
--
--
~
~
~
24-Mar-20
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
--
"
--
--
~
~
~
"
17-Jun-20
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.38
<0.08
<0.008
0.0351
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
28-Sep-20
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
--
--
--
--
~
--
~
~
9-Dec-20
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
--
--
--
--
~
~
--
~
31-Mar-21
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
--
--
--
--
--
~
~
--
19-May-21
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<5.15
<0.08
<0.008
0.0323
<0.0016
<0.0016
<0.016
< 0.008
8-Sep-21
<0.5
< 1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
--
--
--
~
~
--
~
~
Notes:
NS = no Record of Decision (ROD) cleanup standard
-- indicates no sample collected
< indicates value below the reporting limit
* = The ROD does not provide separate cleanup levels for cis-l,2-dichloroethene and trans-l,2-dichloroethene.
One cleanup level of 100 |ig/L was assigned to both.
All VOC, Semi-VOC, and Gas results are in micrograms per liter (|ig/L)
All Metals results are in milligrams per liter (mg/L)
Bold highlighted numbers indicate results that have exceeded ROD cleanup levels
-------
APPENDIX B
-------
o>
E
in
o
Cl
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
MW01-02 PCE
Data: Full Monitoring Period
Mann-Kendall Trend Analysis
n 43
Confidence Coefficient G.95I30
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 95.5423
Standardized Value of S -5.379S
M-KTest Value (S) -515
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
OLS Regression Slope -0.00D2
OLS Regression Intercept 2.039G
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
M W01-07 1,1-DCE
Data: 2012-2021
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
1.5
1.2
O)
E.
LU
O
G
0.9
0.6
0.3
0.0
-67
433
933
1433
1933
Time (days)
Mann-Kendall Trend Analysis
n 10
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 10.40EL3
Standardized Value of S -2.305S
M-KTest Value (S) -25
TabuJated p-value 0.0140
Approximate p-vaIue 0.0106
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
OLS Regression Slope -0.0004
OLS Regression Intercept 1.153B
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW01-07 VC
Data: 2012-2021
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
0.63
0.58
0.48
O)
E
o
>
0.38
0.28
0.18
0.08
-0.02
-67
1433 1933
Time (days)
2933
Mann- Ken d all Trend Analysis
n 10
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 5.7446
Standardized Value of S -1.3926
M-K Test Value (S) -9
Tabulated p-value 0.2420
.Approximate p-value 0.0819
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
OLS Regression Slope -0.0001
OLS Regression Intercept 0.2411
Insufficient statistical evidence
of a significant trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
34
29
24
O)
E
LU
O
G
13
14
-152
M W01-07 1,1-DCE
Data: Full monitoring period
Mann-Kendal! Trend Test
343
1343
2343 3343
Time (days)
4343
5343
6343
Mann-Kendall Trend Analysis
n 43
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 95.4493
Standardized Value of S -6.7994
M-KTest Value (S) -€50
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
OLS Regression Slope -0.0036
OLS Regression Intercept 19.2460
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
27
23
19
O)
¦E 15
<
O
h-
11
-1
-152
M W01-07 1,1,1-TCA
Data: Full monitoring period
Mann-Kendal! Trend Test
S4S
1848
2843 3848
Time (days)
4343
5m
6843
Mann-Kendall Trend Analysis
n 43
Confidence Coefficient G.95I30
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 95.3205
Standardized Value of S -6.8086
M-KTest Value (S) -€50
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
OLS Regression Slope -0.0022
OLS Regression Intercept 11.1419
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
245
195
O)
E
hi
0
Q
1
(N
T—
.52
o
145
95
45
-5
MW01-07 cis-1,2-DCE
Data: full monitoring period
Mann-Kendal! Trend Test
-152
543
1843
2343 3343
Time (days)
4343
5343
6343
Mann-Kendall Trend Analysis
n 43
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Sta ndard Devi ation of S 95.5475
Standardized Value of S -6.9303
M-KTest Value [S) -668
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
QLS Regression Slope -0.0281
OLS Regression Intercept 154.3942
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
o>
E
in
o
Cl
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
MW01-07 PCE
Data: full monitoring period
2848 3848
Time (days)
Mann-Kendall Trend Analysis
n 43
Confidence Coefficient G.95I30
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 95.3100
Standardized Value of S -6.4526
M-KTest Value (S) -616
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
OLS Regression Slope -0.0007
OLS Regression Intercept 4.0935
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
••
-------
MW01-07 VC
23 Data: full monitoring period
Mann-Kendal! Trend Test
Mann-Kendall Trend Analysis
n 43
Confidence Coefficient G.95I30
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 95.0701
Standardized Value of S -6.8791
M-KTest Value (S) -€55
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
OLS Regression Slope -0.0022
OLS Regression Intercept 11.8769
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW01-08 1,1-DCE
Data: 2017-2021
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
78
70
62
O)
E,
LLI
8 »
46
38
30
-29
171
371
571 771
Time (Days)
971
1171
1371
Mann-Kendall Trend Analysis
n 17
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of 8ignificance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of 6 24.2762
S tandardized Value of S -2.7599
M-K T est Value (S) -68
T abulated p-value 0.0020
Approximate p-value 0.0029
OLS Regression Line [Blue]
0 LS R egression S lope -0.0192
OLS Regression Intercept 67.9261
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW01-08 cis-1,2-DCE
Data: 2017-2021
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
882
832
_J 782
E
LU
O
Q
732
r—
W
(J
682
632
582
-29
171
371
571 771
Time (Days)
971
1171
1371
Mann-Kendall T rend Ana|i*sts
n 17
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of 5ignificance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 24.2556
Standardized Value of S -1.4842
M-K Test Value (S) -37
Tabulated p-value 0.07G0
Approximate p-value 0.0689
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
OLS Regression Slope -0.0724
OLS Regression Intercept 805.5714
Insufficient statistical evidence
of a significant trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
r
5
4
1
0
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 17
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 13.453G
Standardized Value of S -0.5S46
M-K Test Value (S) -9
T abulated p-value 0.3880
Approximate p-value 0.2760
OLS Regression Line [Blue]
OLS Regression Slope -0.0009
OLS Regression Intercept 0.9810
Insufficient statistical evidence
of a significant trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW01-08 VC
Data: 2017-2021
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
234
204
174
144
a
>
114
84
54
24
-29
171
371
571 771
Time (Days)
971
1171
1371
Mann-Kendall T rend Ana|i*sts
n 17
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 24.2762
Standardized Value of S -1.1122
M-K Test Value (S) -28
T abulated p-value 0.1350
Approximate p-value 0.1330
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
OLS Regression Slope -0.0500
OLSRegressionlntercept 149.5132
Insufficient statistical evidence
of a significant trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW01-08 1,1-DCE
Data: 2012-2021
Marin-Kendall Trend Test
77
69
61
O)
E,
LLI
O
Q 53
45
37
29
-68
432
932
1432 1932
Time (Days)
2432
2932
M ann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 37
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 7S.4591
Standardized Value of S -1.5041
M-K Test Value (S) -116
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0663
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
DLS Regression Slope -0.0028
DLS Regression Intercept 62.4932
Insufficient statistical evidence
of a significant trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
999
939
MW01-08 cis-1,2-DCE
Data: 2012-2021
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
-68
432
932
1432
1932
2432
2932
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 37
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of 9ignificance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 76.4221
Standardized Value of S -2.6170
M-K T est Value (S) -201
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0044
OLS Regression Line (Blue]
OLS Regression Slope -0.0462
~ LS Regression Intercept 895.3185
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
Time (Days)
-------
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
u>
E,
LU
O
CL
Data: 2012-2021
1
i
-J
At
-68
432
932
1432 1932
Time (Days)
2432
2932
IK''
M ann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 37
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 29.7937
Standardized Value of S 1.0069
M-K Test Value (S) 31
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) 1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.1570
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
DLS Regression Slope 0.0000
~LS Regression Intercept 0.0619
Insufficient statistical evidence
of a significant trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW01-08 VC
Data: 2012-2021
Marin-Kendall Trend Test
438
378
318
CJ)
£ 258
U
>
198
138
78
18
-68
432
932
1432 1932
Time (Days)
2432
2932
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 37
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of 9ignificance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 7G.4395
Standardized Value of S -4.2125
M-K Test Value (S) -323
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue]
OLS Regression Slope -0.0876
~ LS Regression Intercept 320.8644
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
O)
E,
LLI
O
a
28
-154 846 1846 2846 3846
Time (Days)
MW01-08 1,1-DCE
Data: full monitoring period
Marin-Kendall Trend Test
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 81
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of 5ignificance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 245.1877
Standardized Value of S -6.7622
M-K T est Value (S) -1,659
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue]
OLS Regression Slope -0.0079
~ LS Regression Intercept 105.8276
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW01-08 cis-1,2-DCE
Data: 2012-2021
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
1304
1104
O)
E
LU
O
D
C\l
r, 904
704
504
-154
846
1846
2846 3846
Time (Days)
4846
5846
6846
M ann-Kendall T rend Analysts
n 81
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 245.1469
Standardized Value of S -6.4696
M-K Test Value (S) -1,587
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
~ LS Regression Slope -0.0754
OLS Regression Intercept 1,297.9945
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW01-08 pce Mann-Kendall Trend Test
Data: full monitoring period
-154 846 1846 2846 3846 4846 5846 6846
Time (Days)
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 81
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of 5ignificance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 161.1593
Standardized Value of S -3.8968
M-K T est Value (S) -629
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue]
OLS Regression Slope -0.0001
~ LS Regression Intercept 0.8245
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
536
476
416
356
O)
E
a
>
296
236
176
116
56
-4
-154
MW01-08 VC
Data: full monitoring period
Marin-Kendall Trend Test
046
1846
2846
3846
Time (Days)
4846
5846
6846
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 81
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 245.1802
Standardized Value of S 1.4887
M-K Test Value (S) 366
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) 1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0683
OLS Regression Line (Blue]
OLS Regression Slope 0.0081
~ LS Regression Intercept 136.3838
Insufficient statistical evidence
of a significant trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
4.3
3.8
3.3
O)
E 2.8
ID
a
a
2.3
1.8
1.3
0.8
Data: 2017-2021
V
\ i
\
y
-28
171
371
571 771
Time (days)
871
1171
1371
Mann-Kendall T rend Ana|i*sts
n
Confidence Coefficient
Level of Significance
Standard Deviation of S
Standardized Value of S
M-K Test Value (S)
T abulated p-value
Approximate p-value
5
0.8500
0.0500
4.0825
0
0.5820
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
OLS Regression Slope -0.0007
OLS Regression Intercept 2.7253
Insufficient statistical evidence
of a significant trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW01-10 PCE
Data: 2017-2021
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
4.2
3.7
3.2
O)
LU
0
01
2.7
2.2
1.7
1.2
0.7
-29
171
371
571 771
Time (days)
971
1171
1371
Mann-Kendall T rend Ana|i*sts
n 5
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 4.0825
Standardized Value of S -1.2247
M-K Test Value {SJ -6
T abulated p-value 0.1170
Approximate p-value 0.1103
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
OLS Regression Slope -0.0022
OLS Regression Intercept 3.6063
Insufficient statistical evidence
of a significant trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
O)
E
a
>
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
Mann-Kendall T rend Analj*sis
n 5
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 3.6056
Standardized Value of S 0.0000
M-K Test Value (S) -1
Tabulated p-value 0.5920
Approximate p-value 0.5000
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
OLS Regression Slope -0.0002
OLS Regression Intercept 0.3841
Insufficient statistical evidence
of a significant trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
O)
E,
LLI
O
a
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 10
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard D eviation of S 11.1803
S tandardized Value of S -2.1466
M-K T est Value (S) -25
T abulated p-value 0.0140
Approximate p-value 0.0159
OLS Regression Line [Blue]
OLS Regression Slope -0.0033
~ LS Regression Intercept 10.5544
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
214
184
154
124
O)
E
LU
a
a
¦
CM
«
y 94
64
34
MW01 -10 cis-1,2-DCE
Data: 2012-2021
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
-67
433
933
1433
1933
2433
2933
Mann-Kendall T rend Ana|i*sts
n 10
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of 5ignificance 0.0500
S tandard D e viation of S 11.1803
Standardized Value of S -2.6833
M-K Test Value (S) -31
Tabulated p-value 0.0020
Approximate p-value 0.0036
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
OLS Regression Slope -0.0601
OLSRegressionlntercept 179.5109
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
Time (days)
-------
U)
E,
LU
O
Cl
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 10
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard D eviation of S 11.1803
Standardized Value of S -3.3988
M-K T est Value (S) -39
T abulated p-value 0.0000
Approximate p-value 0.0003
OLS Regression Line [Blue]
OLS Regression Slope -0.0034
~ LS Regression Intercept 10.9132
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
O)
E
a
>
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 10
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard D eviation of S 11.0151
Standardized Value of S -2.6327
M-K T est Value (S) -30
T abulated p-value 0.0020
Approximate p-value 0.0042
OLS Regression Line [Blue]
0 LS R egression S lope -0.0012
OLS Regression Intercept 2.9904
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
Marin-Kendall Trend Test
MW01-10 1,1-DCE 1 1
Time (days)
M ann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 43
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 95.5528
Standardized Value of S -5.6095
M-K Test Value (S) -537
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
DLS Regression Slope -0.0051
~ LS Regression Intercept 28.5728
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
692
592
492
O)
E
^ 392
HI
O
Q
OJ
~ 292
192
MW01 -10 cis-1,2-DCE
Data: full monitoring period
Marin-Kendall Trend Test
92
•S
-152
3848
Time (days)
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 43
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 95.5528
Standardized Value of S -4.1652
M-K Test Value (S) -399
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue]
OLS Regression Slope -0.0355
~ LS Regression Intercept 233.6340
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
M\/voi-io pce Marin-Kendall Trend Test
U)
E,
LU
O
Cl
Data: full monitoring period
M ann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 43
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 95.5371
Standardized Value of S -4.3229
M-K Test Value (S) -414
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
D LS R egression S lope -0.0012
~ LS Regression Intercept 9.9405
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW01-10 VC
Data: full monitoring period
12
10
CJ)
E
u
>
Marin-Kendall Trend Test
0
-152
840
1848
2848 3848
Time (days)
M ann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 43
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 95.3992
Standardized Value of S -3.6688
M-K Test Value (S) -351
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0001
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
DLS Regression Slope -0.0006
~ LS Regression Intercept 3.8397
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW03-05 1,1-DCE
Data: full monitoring period
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 74
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
S tandard D eviation of S 175.3815
Standardized Value of S -4.8637
M-K Test Value (S) -854
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.8449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue]
OLS Regression Slope -0.0001
~ LS Regression Intercept 0.8509
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
2882 3882
Time (Days)
5882
-------
2.4
1.9
O)
E,
LLI
U
a
1.4
0.9
0.4
-0.1
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
MW03-06 1,1-DCE
Data: 2017-2021
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 17
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 24.27S2
S tandardized Value of S -1.5241
M-K T est Value (S) -38
T abulated p-value 0.0640
Approximate p-value 0.0637
OLS Regression Line [Blue]
OLS Regression Slope -0.0005
OLS Regression Intercept 1.4850
Insufficient statistical evidence
of a significant trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
O)
E,
LLI
O
a
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
MW03-06 1,1-DCE
Data: 2012-2021
KTO3 -e- v >¦ rag'
M ann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 37
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 7S.44G1
Standardized Value of S -1.4520
M-K Test Value (S) -112
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0733
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
DLS Regression Slope -0.0002
~LS Regression Intercept 1.6113
Insufficient statistical evidence
of a significant trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW03-06 VC
Data: 2012-2021
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
1.0
0.8
B)0 6
E
o
>
0.4
0.2
0.0
-68
M ann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 37
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S SI .5440
Standardized Value of S -3.6722
M-K Test Value (S) -227
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0001
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
DLS Regression Slope -0.0002
DLS Regression Intercept 0.5201
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
Time (days)
-------
O)
E,
LLI
O
a
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
MW03-06 1,1-DCE
Data: full monitoring period
Time (days)
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 74
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 214.271 G
Standardized Value of S -8.8206
M-K T est Value (S) -1,891
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue]
OLS Regression Slope -0.0009
~ LS Regression Intercept 5.7588
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW03-06 gjs-1,2-DCE
Data: full monitoring period
Marin-Kendall Trend Test
123
103
83
O)
E
LU
O
D
OJ
i 63
(fl
(J
43
23
-138
862
1862
2862 3862
Time (days)
4862
5862
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 74
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 214.2779
Standardized Value of S -9.0630
M-K Test Value (S) -1,943
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue]
0 LS R egression S lope -0.0131
~ LS Regression Intercept 87.3994
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW03-06 PCE
Marin-Kendall Trend Test
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 74
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 1 SO.9254
Standardized Value of S -5.7169
M-K T est Value (S) -921
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue]
OLS Regression Slope -0.0001
~ LS R egression I ntercept 0.5618
U)
E,
LU
U
Cl
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
Data: full monitoring period
-------
O)
E
a
>
MW03-06 VC
Data: full
Marin-Kendall Trend Test
Time (days)
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 74
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 206.8171
Standardized Value of S -7.1512
M-K T est Value (S) -1,430
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue]
OLS Regression Slope -0.0002
~ LS Regression Intercept 1.3887
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW03-09 1,1-DCE
Data: 2017-2021
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
13
11
O)
E,
LU 9
U
a
-29
171
371
571 771
Time (days)
971
1171
1371
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 17
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of 3ignificance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 24.27G2
Standardized Value of S -0.5355
M-K Test Value (S) -14
Tabulated p-value 0.2990
Approximate p-value 0.2962
OLS Regression Line [Blue]
OLS Regression Slope -0.0023
OLS Regression Intercept 9.1115
Insufficient statistical evidence
of a significant trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW03-09 cis-1,2-DCE
Data: 2017-2021
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
122
102
O)
E
LU
O
a
¦
OJ_
r—
M
82
62
42
22
¦29
171
371
571
771
Time (days)
971
1171
1371
Mann-Kendall Trend Analysis
n 17
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of 3ignificance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 24.255G
S tandardized Value of S -0.3298
M-K Test Value (S) -9
T abulated p-value 0.3880
Approximate p-value 0.3708
OLS Regression Line [Blue]
OLS Regression Slope -0.0089
~ LS Regression Intercept 80.0500
Insufficient statistical evidence
of a significant trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW03-09 PCE
Data: 2017-2021
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
30
26
22
u>
E,
LU
0
01
18
14
10
-29
171
371
571
771
Time (days)
971
1171
1371
Mann-Kendall Trend Analysis
n 17
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of 9ignificance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 24.255G
Standardized Value of S -0.2474
M-K T est Value (S) -7
T abulated p-value 0.4200
Approximate p-value 0.4023
OLS Regression Line [Blue]
OLS Regression Slope -0.0034
~ LS Regression Intercept 20.2614
Insufficient statistical evidence
of a significant trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW03-09 1,1-DCE
Data: 2012-2021
Marin-Kendall Trend Test
20
17
14
O)
E,
LLI
O
a
11
-68
432
932
1432 1932
Time (days)
2432
2932
M ann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 37
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 7S.4591
Standardized Value of S -3.0735
M-K Test Value (S) -236
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0011
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
DLS Regression Slope -0.0030
DLS Regression Intercept 15.7961
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW03-09 cis-1,2-DCE
Data: 2012-2021
Marin-Kendall Trend Test
2G8
218
U) 168
E
LU
O
Q
OJ
tfl
(J
118
68
18
-68
432
932
1432
1932
2432
2932
Time (days)
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 37
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of 6ignificance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 76.4481
Standardized Value of S -3.2310
M-K Test Value (S) -248
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0006
OLS Regression Line (Blue]
0 LS R egression S lope -0.0317
~ LS Regression Intercept 159.1040
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
59
51
43
35
U>
E,
LU
O
CL
27
19
11
MW03-09 PCE
Data: 2012-2021
Marin-Kendall Trend Test
-68
432
932
1432
1932
2432
2932
Time (days)
M ann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 37
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 7S.452S
Standardized Value of S -0.0262
M-K Test Value (S) -3
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.4896
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
DLS Regression Slope -0.0006
DLS Regression Intercept 21.4775
Insufficient statistical evidence
of a significant trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW03-09 1,1-DCE
Data: full monitoring period
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
25
21
CO
E,
ID
U
a
17
13
-138
862
1882
2862
3862
4862
5862
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 74
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of 5ignificance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 214.2709
Standardized Value of S -1.0314
M-K Test Value (S) -222
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.1512
OLS Regression Line (Blue]
OLS Regression Slope -0.0003
~ LS Regression Intercept 12.6688
Insufficient statistical evidence
of a significant trend at the
specified level of significance.
Time (days)
-------
MW03-09 cis-1,2-DCE
Data: full monitoring period
Marin-Kendall Trend Test
317
267
3 217
Ui
E
LU
O
a
-------
MW03-09 PCE
Data: full monitoring period
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
59
49
39
u>
E,
hi 29
u
£L
19
-138
862
1882
2862
3862
4862
5862
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n
Confidence Coefficient
Level of 5ignificance
Standard Deviation of S
Standardized Value of S
M-K Test Value (S)
Appx. Critical Value (0.05)
Approximate p-value
OLS Regression Line (Blue]
OLS Regression Slope
~ LS Regression Intercept
Statistically significant evidence
of an increasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
74
0.9500
0.0500
214.2755
6.7530
1,448
1.6449
0.0000
0.0036
1.1971
Time (days)
-------
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
1.E
1.5
1.2
CJ)
E
a
>
0.9
0.6
0.3
0.0
Data: full monitoring period
]
,
¦138
862
1862
2862
3862
4862
5862
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n
Confidence Coefficient
Level of Significance
Standard Deviation of S
Standardized Value of S
M-K Test Value (S)
Appx. Critical Value (0.05)
Approximate p-value
OLS Regression Line (Blue]
OLS Regression Slope
~ LS Regression Intercept
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
74
0.9500
0.0500
121.3136
-2.8686
-349
-1.6449
0.0021
0.0000
0.1420
Time (days)
-------
13
11
U>
E,
LU
U
CL
MW03-11 PCE
Data: 2017-2021
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
-29
171
371
571 771
Time (days)
971
1171
1371
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 17
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of 3ignificance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 24.255G
Standardized Value of S -2.0614
M-K Test Value (S) -51
T abulated p-value 0.0210
Approximate p-value 0.0196
OLS Regression Line [Blue]
OLS Regression Slope -0.0029
~ LS Regression Intercept 13.2623
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW03-11 1,1-DCE
Data: 2012-2021
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
1.8
1.5
1.2
O)
E,
ID
U
0.9
0.6
0.3
0.0
-68
432
932
1432 1932
Time (days)
2432
2932
M ann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 37
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 76.2671
Standardized Value of S -6.7264
M-K Test Value (S) -514
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
DLS Regression Slope -0.0005
DLS Regression Intercept 1.6965
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
MW03-11 PCE
Data: 2012-2021
Marin-Kendall Trend Test
25
21
17
O)
E,
LU
O
Q_ 13
-68
432
932
1432 1932
Time (days)
2432
2932
M ann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 37
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of Significance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 7S.4395
Standardized Value of S -5.5207
M-K Test Value (S) -423
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.G449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue)
DLS Regression Slope -0.0044
DLS Regression Intercept 22.4500
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
-------
10
MW03-11 1,1-DCE
Data: full monitoring period
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
O)
E,
ID
U
a
-138
862
18G2
2862
3862
4862
5862
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 74
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of 6ignificance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 214.2071
S tandardized Value of S -11.3768
M-K Test Value (S) -2,438
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue]
OLS Regression Slope -0.0010
~ LS Regression Intercept 5.6259
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
Time (days)
-------
MW03-11 PCE
Data: full monitoring period
Mann-Kendall Trend Test
5G
48
40
CO 32
E,
LU
U
£L
24
16
-138
862
1862
2862
3862
4862
5862
Mann-Kendall T rend Analysis
n 74
Confidence Coefficient 0.9500
Level of 6ignificance 0.0500
Standard Deviation of S 214.2685
Standardized Value of S -9.3901
M-K Test Value (S) -2,013
Appx. Critical Value (0.05) -1.6449
Approximate p-value 0.0000
OLS Regression Line (Blue]
OLS Regression Slope -0.0056
~ LS Regression Intercept 42.2836
Statistically significant evidence
of a decreasing trend at the
specified level of significance.
Time (days)
-------
Appendix G
Inspection Checklist
-------
Oil-Site Inspection of the
Vandale Junkyard Site
Washington County, Ohio
Date of Inspection:
April 27, 2023
Time of Inspection:
10:30
Inspection Personnel:
Bill Murray - U.S.EPA
Diane McCausland -
Engineering Management,
Inc.
Baxter Foskuhl + Austin
Tweedy - Ohio EPA
Observed Weather Conditions:
60's sunny
REINFORCED SOIL SLOPE
Evidence of subsidence or settling: none observed
Seepage of leachate: none observed
Evidence of burrowing animals: none observed
Presence and location of erosion rills: none observed
Damage to vegetation/vegetation height:
no damage to vegetation observed - height of vegetation appeared optimal
Presence of woody plants: , ,
none observed
Observable irregularities such as bulges, bumps, slumps, or cracks:
none observed
Additional Comments:
-------
On-Site Inspection of the Vandale Junkyard Site
Washington County, Ohio
GeoSyntec Consultants
CAP AND CAP AREA INSPECTION
Evidence of subsidence or settling:
none observed
Seepage of Icachatc: none observed
Evidence of borrowing animals: , ,
none observed
Presence and location of erosion rills: none observed
Damage to vegetation/vegetation height:
no damage to vegetation observed - height of vegetation appeared optimal
Presence of woody plants: none observed on cap
Observable irregularities such as bulges, bumps, slumps, or cracks:
none observed
Additional Comments:
woody growth - trees/shrubs on retaining wall bench/steps
2
-------
On-Site Inspection of the Vandale Junkyard Site
Washington County, Ohio
GeoSyntec Consultants
SUBSURFACE DRAIN SUMPS INSPECTION N/A " not inspected
System flow problems:
System functioning:
Evidence of overflow, rerouting, or obstruction of drainage:
Evidence of sediment buildup in the sumps:
Condition of sumps:
Condition of locks and fence around buttress toe sump:
Other observable irregularities:
Additional Comments:
3
-------
On-Site Inspection of the Vandale Junkyard Site GeoSyntec Consultants
Washington County, Ohio
DRAINAGE SYSTEM INSPECTION
Drainage system flow problems:
none observed
Drainage system functioning:
appears to be functioning properly
Condition of channel lining:
good
Evidence of overflow, rerouting, or obstruction of drainage: none observed
Other observable irregularities:
none observed
Additional Comments:
inside sidewall of east ditch (or channel) along cap, basket missing +
erosion control stone missing, topsoil exposed, no vegetation, see
attached photo (approx. 2ft x 2ft)
SECURITY FENCE AND ACCESS ROAD INSPECTION
Condition of Fences / Gates / Locks / Chains: good
Condition of warning signs: good
Evidence of unauthorized access / foreign object on-site: none observed
Ev idence of burrowing animals: none observed
Condition of access road:
good
Additional Comments: , , ,
excessive woody vegetation growing through east,
west and north fence-line in multiple locations
4
-------
On-Site Inspection of the Vandale Junkyard Site
Washington County, Ohio
GeoSyntec Consultants
GROUNDWATER, SURFACE WATER, AND SEDIMENT
MONITORING NETWORK INSPECTION
Damage to monitoring wells: none observed
Damage to well identification tags: none observed
Condition of surface water, seep and sediment sampling locations: n/a - not observed
Damage to site permanent benchmark: none observed
Additional Comments: . r , , , ,
monitoring well locks round open/inoperable
multiple well caps missing or inoperable
RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS/DEED RESTRICTIONS
Changes to land or groundwater use
Capped portion of Site: none observed
Uncapped portion of Site:
Unauthorized groundwater wells installed: none 0bservecj
Unauthorized construction activities or evidence of vandalism: , ,
none observed
Reports of contaminant exposure or contaminant release: none observed
Additional Comments:
5
-------
On-Site Inspection of the Vandale Junkyard Site GeoSyntec Consultants
Washington County, Ohio
OTHER
Additional Comments:
. .. .'
mm.
6
------- |