24 January 2019

Mr. Ashish Joshi New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Division of Remediation Management & Response Northern Bureau of Field Operations 7 Ridgedale Avenue (2nd Floor) Cedar Knolls, NJ 07927-1112 SUBJECT: UST 1122A Site Investigation Report

Request for Unrestricted Use, No Further Action Approval Fort Monmouth, Oceanport, Monmouth County, New Jersey

PI G000000032 Dear Mr. Joshi:

The U.S. Army Fort Monmouth (FTMM) Team has prepared this Site Investigation (SI) Report to summarize previous investigations conducted at the site of former Underground Storage Tank (UST) 1122A (Registration No. 81533-171) within Parcel 43. This former UST was located within Installation Restoration Program (IRP) Site FTMM-59, which will be addressed under separate cover.

UST 1122A, located near Building 1122 (Figure 1), was a 1,500-gallon steel No. 2 fuel oil UST with fiberglass coating that was removed on 21 June 1994. Building 1122, demolished in 2014, housed an auto repair shop for Fort Monmouth personnel. UST 1122A was located west of Building 1122, and fuel oil was conveyed to the building from the tank via copper piping, which was removed on 24 June 1994. No holes or pitting were observed during the tank and piping removal. Soil surrounding the UST showed no evidence of staining and no hydrocarbon odors were detected (Smith Environmental Technologies Corporation [Smith], 1996; provided in Attachment A). Following removal of the UST, six post-excavation soil samples (A, B, C, D, E, and F; see Figure 2) and two field duplicates were collected and analyzed for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) from four locations along the sidewalls at a depth of 8.5 feet below ground surface (bgs), and two locations (A and D) on the bottom of the excavation at 9 feet bgs. Five additional samples (AA, BB, CC, DD, and EE) were collected along the former copper fuel lines at 1.5 feet bgs and analyzed for TPH. Post-excavation TPH concentrations ranged from non-detect (at 5 of the 13 locations) to 117 mg/kg (Table 1). These concentrations did not exceed the 2017 RDCSRS for fuel oil of 5,100 mg/kg for EPH (which is also applicable to TPH). Following receipt of post-excavation soil sampling results, the UST excavation was backfilled to grade with a combination of uncontaminated excavated soil and certified clean fill (Smith, 1996).

Based on the results of this investigation, the Army has determined that further remedial efforts are not warranted, and an Unrestricted Use, No Further Action (NFA) determination is requested for UST 1122A.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

OFFICE OF ASSISTANT CHIEF OF STAFF FOR INSTALLATION MANAGEMENT U.S. ARMY FORT MONMOUTH

P.O. 148 OCEANPORT, NEW JERSEY 07757

200.1e FTMM_02.08_0691_a

Ashish Joshi, NJDEP UST 1122A Site Investigation Report 24 Janumy 2019 Page 2 of2

Thank you for reviewing this request; we look forward to your approval and/or comments. Our technical Point of Contact is Kent Friesen at (732) 383-7201; kent.friesen@parsons.com. I can be reached at (732) 383-5104; william.r.colvin l 8.civ@mail.mil.

Sincerely,

iJ~~~ William R. Colvin BRAC Environmental Coordinator

cc: Ashish Joshi (e-mail and 2 hard copies) William Colvin, BEC (e-mail and 1 hard copy) Joseph Pearson, Calibre ( e-mail) James Moore, USACE (e-mail) Jim Kelly, USACE (e-mail) Joseph Fallon, FMERA ( e-mail) Cris Grill, Parsons (e-mail

Attachments: Figure 1 - UST 1122A Site Layout Figure 2-Post-excavation Soil Sample Locations at UST 1122A at FTMM-59

Table 1 - Soil Sampling Results - Comparison to NJDEP Soil Remediation Standards

Attachment A - Smith Environmental Technologies Corporation (Smith). 1996. Underground Storage Tank Closure and Site Investigation Repo1i, Building 1122, NJDEPE UST Registration No. 081533-171. February.

- -- New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Site Remediation Program

t Report Certifications for RCRA GPRA 2020, CERCLA, and Federal Facility Sites \~

These certifications are to be used for reports submitted for RCRA GPRA 2020, CERCLA, and Federal Facility Sites. The Department has developed guidance for report certifications for RCRA GPRA 2020, CERCLA, and Federal Facility Sites under traditional oversight. The "Person Responsible for Conducting the Remediation Information and Certification" is required to be submitted with each report. For those sites that are required or opt to use a Licensed Site Remediation Professional (LSRP) the report must also be certified by the LSRP using the "Licensed Site Remediation Professional Information and Statement". For additional guidance regarding the requirement for LSRPs at RCRA GPRA 2020, CERCLA and Federal Facility Sites see http://www.nj.gov/dep/srp/srra/training/matrix/quick ref/rcra cercla fed facility sites.pdf.

Document: UST 1122A Site Investigation Report, Request for Unrestricted Use, No Further Action Approval, Fort Monmouth, Oceanport, Monmouth County, New Jersey (24 January 2019)

PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDUCTING THE REMEDIATION INFORMATION AND CERTIFICATION

Full Legal Name of the Person Responsible for Conducting the Remediation: William R. Colvin Representative First Name: William Representative Last Name: Colvin Title: Fort Monmouth BRAC Environmental Coordinator (BEC) Phone Number: {732} 383-5104 Ext: Fax: Mailing Address: P.O. Box 148 City/Town: Ocean12ort State: NJ Zip Code: 07757 Email Address: william.r.colvin1 8.civ@mail.mil This certification shall be signed by the person responsible for conducting the remediation who is submitting this notification in accordance with Administrative Requirements for the Remediation of Contaminated Sites rule at N.J.A.C. 7:26C-1 .5(a).

I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted herein, including all attached documents, and that based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, to the best of my knowledge, I believe that the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant civil penalties for knowingly submitting false, inaccurate or incomplete information and that I am committing a crime of the fourth degree if I make a written false statement which I do not believe to be true. I am also aware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.

Signature: ~_)~~ Date: 24 January 2019

Name/Title: William R. Colvin BRAC Environmental Coordinator

Completed form should be sent to: Mr. Ashish Joshi New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Division of Remediation Management & Response Bureau of Northern Field Operations 7 Ridgedale Avenue (2nd Floor) Cedar Knolls, New Jersey 07927-1112

U

UU

U

U

U

U

U

U

Former Chemical StorageShed (Shed 2) (Razed)

Former Paint Booth/Shed(Shed 1) (Razed)

Former 1,500 gallon#2 Fuel Oil UST 1122A

and Excavation Area

Former Service Bay #10Hydraulic Lift

Former Service Bay #12Hydraulic Lift

and Excavation Area

Former 550 gallon Waste OilUST 1122B and Excavation Area

Former 995 gallonWaste Oil AST

Semaphore Avenue

Echo

Avenue

1122(Razed)

1124

Mill

Cre

ek

1122MW01

1122MW02

1122MW03

1122MW04

1122MW05

1122MW06

FTMM-59-MW-1

FTMM-59-MW-2

1122MW07

0 30 6015Feet

1 inch = 30 feet

¯

LEGEND:

U Monitoring Well

January 2005 Excavation

April-May 1995 Excavation

Underground Storage Tank

WW Water Line

SS Sanitary Sewer Line

WWSS Storm Sewer Line

GG Gas Line

Surface Water Feature

P:\

PIT

\Pro

jec

ts\H

un

tsvil

le C

on

t W

91

2D

Y-0

9-D

-00

62

\FT

MM

\CA

D F

iles

\GIS

\20

19

Rep

ort

s\F

TM

M-5

9\U

ST

11

22

A\F

IGU

RE

1.m

xd

Fort MonmouthNew Jersey

CREATED BY:

DATE:

PROJECT NUMBER:

REVIEWED BY:

FIGURE NUMBER:

FILE:

748810-02150

JAN. 2019

RR RF

FIGURE 1

FIGURE 1.mxd

PARSONSPARSONSPARSONSPARSONS401 Diamond Drive NW,

Huntsville AL

Source: FTMM Supplied CAD

FTMM-59 SITE LAYOUT

} c ~ ✓ ~

(?\ L ' \6' "' l _--_ __:::__~ _ /4 t-

::r

1

~

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

Service Bay #10 Hydraulic Lift

Former 550 gallon Waste OilUST and Excavation Area

Former Service Bay #12Hydraulic Lift andExcavation Area

Former 1,500 gallon#2 Fuel Oil UST and

Excavation Area

Former ChemicalStorage Shed

(Shed 2)

Former PaintBooth/Shed

(Shed 1)

Former 995 gallon Waste Oil AST

SemaphoreAvenue

Echo Avenue

1124

1122

Mill C

reek

FMTT59-SITEDD

FMTT59-SITECC

FMTT59-SITEBB

FMTT59-SITEAA

FMTT59-SITEEE

FMTT59-SITEEFMTT59-SITEC

FMTT59-SITEF

FMTT59-SITEB

FMTT59-SITED

FMTT59-SITEA

0 30 6015Feet

1 inch = 30 feet

¯

LEGEND:

!( 1994 Soil Sample (Smith, 1995)

WW Water Line

SS Sanitary Sewer Line

WWSS Storm Sewer Line

GG Gas Line

Surface Water Feature

January 2005 Excavation

April-May 1995 Excavation

Underground Storage Tank

P:\

PIT

\Pro

jec

ts\H

un

tsvil

le C

on

t W

91

2D

Y-0

9-D

-00

62

\FT

MM

\CA

D F

iles

\GIS

\20

19

Rep

ort

s\F

TM

M-5

9\U

ST

11

22

A\F

IGU

RE

2.m

xd

Fort MonmouthNew Jersey

CREATED BY:

DATE:

PROJECT NUMBER:

REVIEWED BY:

FIGURE NUMBER:

FILE:

748810-02150

JAN. 2019

RR RF

FIGURE 2

FIGURE 2.mxd

PARSONSPARSONSPARSONSPARSONS401 Diamond Drive NW,

Huntsville AL

Source: FTMM Supplied CAD

POST-EXCAVATION SAMPLE LOCATIONSAT UST 1122A AT FTMM-59

1122

1122

SERVICE BAY #10 HYDRAULIC LIFT1 " = 10 '

FORMER 550 gallon WASTE OIL UST1 " = 10 '

Additional historical soil sampling locationsare shown on maps provided in Appendix A.

NOTE:

1122

FORMER SERVICE BAY#12 HYDRAULIC LIFT AND EXCAVATION AREA

1 " = 10 '

,\ .. \ ,.. \

\ \ \ \

\ \ \ \

\ \ \ \

\ \ \ \

\ ' \ .. \ .. .. , .. ~

r2Zl . - -. '- --

Source Area

Loc ID

Sample IDSample DateTotal Petroleum Hydrocarbons (mg/kg)Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons NLE NLE NLE 26.8 ND ND ND ND ND ND1) Summary Statistics were obtained from Result Sheet(s) and reflect values for the whole dataset.

TABLE 1 SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS - COMPARISON TO NJDEPSOIL REMEDIATION STANDARDSUST1122A FORT MONMOUTH, NEW JERSEY

FTMM‐59‐SITE E FTMM‐59‐SITE E DUP

6/21/1994 6/21/1994 6/21/1994

FTMM‐59‐SITE DFTMM‐59‐SITE B DUP

6/21/1994

FTMM‐59‐SITE C

6/21/1994FTMM‐59‐SS‐SITE D‐9.0‐9.5' FTMM‐59‐SS‐SITE E‐8.5‐9.0' FTMM‐59‐SS‐SITE E DUP‐8.5‐9.0'FTMM‐59‐SS‐SITE B DUP‐8.5‐9.0' FTMM‐59‐SS‐SITE C‐8.5‐9.0'

FTMM‐59‐SITE A

FTMM‐59‐SS‐SITE A ‐9.0‐9.5'6/21/1994

FTMM‐59‐SITE BNJ Residential Direct Contact

SRS

NJ Non-Residential

Direct Contact SRS

NJ Impact to GW Soil

Screening Level

6/21/1994FTMM‐59‐SS‐SITE B‐8.5‐9.0'

1,500- gallon Steel Fuel Oil UST 1122A

! I I I I ! I ! I ! I ! I ! I ! I !

Source Area

Loc ID

Sample IDSample DateTotal Petroleum Hydrocarbons (mg/kg)Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons NLE NLE NLE1) Summary Statistics were obtained from Result Sheet(s) and reflect values for the whol

TABLE 1 SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS - COMPARISON TO NJDEPSOIL REMEDIATION STANDARDSUST1122A FORT MONMOUTH, NEW JERSEY

NJ Residential Direct Contact

SRS

NJ Non-Residential

Direct Contact SRS

NJ Impact to GW Soil

Screening Level

7.97 ND 117 88 8.83 17

6/24/1994 6/24/1994 6/24/1994FTMM‐59‐SS‐SITE DD‐1.5‐2.0' FTMM‐59‐SS‐SITE EE‐1.5‐2.0'

6/24/1994 6/24/1994

Copper Piping Associated with 1,500-gallon Fuel Oil UST 1122A

FTMM‐59‐SITE AA FTMM‐59‐SITE BB FTMM‐59‐SITE CC FTMM‐59‐SITE DD FTMM‐59‐SITE EE

FTMM‐59‐SS‐SITE AA‐1.5‐2.0' FTMM‐59‐SS‐SITE BB‐1.5‐2.0' FTMM‐59‐SS‐SITE CC‐1.5‐2.0'

FTMM‐59‐SITE F

FTMM‐59‐SS‐SITE F‐8.5‐9.0'6/21/1994>--------------! I I I I I I ! I ! I ! I ! I I

Footnote:

####

###

###

###

###

- The NJ Non-Residential Direct Contact Soil Remediation Standard refers to the NJDEP's Sept 18, 2017 Remediation Standards

http://www.nj.gov/dep/rules/rules/njac7_26d.pdf

- The NJ Impact to GW Soil Screening Level criteria refers to the Development of Site Specific Impact to Ground Water Soil Remediation Standards - Nov 2013 revised

http://www.nj.gov/dep/srp/guidance/rs/partition_equation.pdf

- Cell Shade values represent a result that is above the NJ Impact to GW Soil Screening Level

- Cell Shade values represent a result that is above both the NJ Residential, Non-Residential, AND NJ Impact to GW Soil Screening Level Direct Contact Soil Remediation Standard.

- Cell Shade values represent a result that is above both the NJ Residential and Non-Residential Direct Contact Soil Remediation Standard.

10) Criteria action level source document and web address.

- The NJ Residential Direct Contact Soil Remediation Standard refers to the NJDEP's Sept 18, 2017 Remediation Standards

http://www.nj.gov/dep/rules/rules/njac7_26d.pdf

8) Specific Chemical Classes (or Parameters) comments or notes regarding how data is displayed, compared to Action Levels, or represented in this table.

a) DELETE THIS NOTE BEFORE GOING FINAL: Refer to the NJDEP Protocol for Addressing Extractable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (Version 5.0, August 9, 2010) and the NJDEP Health Based end Ecological Screening Criteria for Petroleum Hydrocarbons (Version 4.0, August 9, 2010) to determine the category of tank being investigated and the appropriate cleanup standards or screening levels for that category of tank.

9) Chemical results greater than or equal to the action level (depending on criteria) are highlighted based on the Criteria that are present.

- Cell Shade values represent a result that is above the NJ Residential Direct Contact Soil Remediation Standard.

There are no NJDEP soil standards for individual PCB Aroclors, therefore the total PCB NJDEP standards were used for individual Aroclors.

- Cell Shade values represent a result that is above the NJ Non-Residential Direct Contact Soil Remediation Standard.

U-ND = Analyte not detected in sample, but no detection or reporting limit provided.

J = estimated detected value due to a concetration below the reporting limit or due to discrepancies in meeting certain analyte-specific quality control.

E (or ER) = Estimated result.

D = Results from dilution of sample.

J-DL = Elevated sample detection limit due to difficult sample matrix.

JN = Tentatively identified compound, estimated concentration.

UJ=The compound was not detected: however, the results is estimated because of discrepancies in meeting certain analyte-specific QC criteria.

J+ = The result is an estimated quantity, but the result may be biased high.

J- = The result is an estimated quantity, but the result may be biased low.

7) Chemical result qualifiers are assigned by the laboratory and are evaluated and modified (if necessary) during the data validation.

[blank] = detect, i.e. detected chemical result value.

B =Compound detected in the sample at a concentration less than or equal to 5 times (10 times for common lab contaminants) the blank concentration.

R = Rejected, data validation rejected the results.

U = non-detect, i.e. not detected at or above this value.

U-DL = Elevated sample detection limit due to difficult sample matrix.

1) All historical data collected prior to 2013 are reported as provided by others.

2) Number of Analyses is the number of detected and non-detected results excluding rejected results. Sample duplicate pairs have not been averaged.

3) NLE = no limit established.

4) ND = not detected in any background sample, no background concentration available.

5) Bold chemical dectection

6) SS = Site Specific action level, see "Specific Chemical Class (or Parameter)" footnote for details.

-

f '

F l

' ' ......

F7

Fl

......

......

.......

..__.

,C l

.....

r l

I L..

I....

f ·7

' ..... F ,,

......

r I

I .....

F 7

I-.,

f '

United States Army Fort Monmouth, New Jersey

Underground Storage Tank Closure and Site Investigation

Report

Building 1122 Main Post

NJDEP UST Registration No. 081533-171 NJDEP Closure Approval Letter Dated

June 7, 1994

February 1996

ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION

r ,

1122.DOC

UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK CLOSURE AND SITE INVESTIGATION -REPORT

BUILDING 1122

MAIN POST NJDEP UST REGISTRATION NO. 081533-171

NJDEP CLOSURE APPROVAL LETTER DATED JUNE 7, 1994

FEBRUARY 1996

PROJECT NO.: 09-5004-07 CONTRACT NO.: DACA51-94-D-0014

PREPARED FOR:

UNITED STATES ARMY, FORT MONMOUTH, NEW JERSEY DIRECTORATE OF PUBLIC WORKS

BUILDING 167 FORT MONMOUTH, NJ 07703

PREPARED BY:

SMITH ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION BROMLEY CORPORA TE CENTER

THREE TERRI LANE BURLINGTON, NEW JERSEY 08061

• SMTH ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION

Engineering • Consulting • Remediation • Construction

- . ...

' '

' '

' '

' '

r '

• SMTH

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY iv

1.0 UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK DECOMMISSIONING ACTIVITIES 1

1.1 OVERVIEW 1 1.2 SITE DESCRIPTION 2

1.2.1 Geological/Hydrogeological Setting 2

1.3 HEALTH AND SAFETY 3 1.4 REMOVAL OF UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK 4

i .4.1 General Procedures 4 1.4.2 Underground' Storage Tank Excavation and Cleaning 4

1.5 UNDERGRO~•ND STORAGE TANK TRANSPORTATION AND DISPOSAL

1.6 MANAGEMENT OF EXCAVATED SOILS

2.0 SITE INVESTIGATION ACTIVITIES

2.1 OVERVIEW 2.2 FIELD SCREENING/MONITORING 2.3 SOIL SAMPLING

3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

3.1 SOIL SAMPLING RES UL TS 3.2 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5 5

6

6 6 7

8

a· 8

Following Page No.

TABLES

Table 1 Summary of Post-Excavation Sampling Activities Table 2 Post-Excavation Soil Sampling Results

ii

7 8

r '

• SMTH

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)

FIGURES

Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3

Site Location Map Site Map Soil Sampling Results

APPENDICES

Appendix A Appendix 8 Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E

NJDEP-BUST Closure Approval Certifications Waste Manifest UST Disposal Certificate Soil Analytical Data Package

Ill

Following Page No.

1 2 8

I I

I I

• SMTH

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

UST Closure

On June 21, 1994, a steel underground storage tank (UST) with fiberglass coating was closed by removal in accordance with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) Closure Approval Letter dated June 7, 1994 at U.S. Army Fort Monmouth, Fort Monmouth, New Jersey. The UST, NJDEP Registration No. 081533-171 (Fort Monmouth ID No. 1122), was located immediately adjacent to Building 1122 in the Main Post area of U.S. Army, Fort Monmouth. UST No. 081533-171 was a 1,500-gallon No. 2 diesel oil UST. The UST fill port was located directly above the tank. The tank closure was performed by Cleaning Up The Environment Inc. (CUTE).

Site~sment

The site assessment was performed by U.S. Army personnel in accordance with the NJDEP Technical Requirements for Site Remediation (N.J.A.C. 7:26E) and the NJDEP Field Sampling Procedures Manual. Soils surrounding the tank were screened visually and with air monitoring equipment for evidence of contamination. Following removal, the UST was inspected for corrosion holes. No holes were noted in the UST and no evidence of potentially contaminated soils was observed surrounding the tank.

On June 21, 1994, following the removal of the UST, post-excavation ·soil samples B, C, E, F, DUP B, and DUP E were collected from a total of four ( 4) locations along the sidewalls of the excavation, at a depth of 8.5 feet below ground surface (bgs). Samples A, and D were collected from two (2) locations along the base of the excavation, at a depth of 9.0 feet bgs.

On June 24, 1994, following removal of the UST copper fuel lines, samples AA, BB, CC, DD, and EE were collected along the former piping length of the excavation, which was approximately 63 feet in length. The piping samples were collected at a depth of 1.5 feet bgs. All samples were analyzed for total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPHC).

Findings

All post-excavation soil samples collected from the UST excavation and from below piping associated with the former UST at Building 1122 contained TPHC concentrations below the NJDEP residential direct contact total organic contaminants soil cleanup criteria of 10,000 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) (N.J.A.C. 7:26D and revisions dated February 3, 1994). Samples A, and F, collected on June 21, 1994, contained TPHC concentrations of26.8 mg/kg, and 7.97 mg/kg, respectively. Samples BB, CC, DD, and EE, collected on June 24, 1994, contained levels of TPHC ranging in concentration from 8.83 mg/kg to 117.0 mg/kg. Sample AA contained a non-detectable concentration of TPHC.

iv

SMTH

Site Restoration

Following receipt of all post-excavation soil sampling results, the excavation was backfilled to grade with a combination of uncontaminated excavated soil and certified clean fill. Toe excavation site was then restored to its original condition.

Site Assessment Quality Assurance

The sampling and laboratory analysis conducted during the site assessment were performed in accordance with Section 7:26E-2.l of the Technical Requirements.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Based on the post-excavation soil sampling results, soils with TPHC concentrations exceeding the NJDEP soil cleanup criteria for total organic contaminants of 10,000 mg/kg, do not exist in the former location of the UST or associate<;l piping.

No further action is proposed in regard to the closure and site assessment of UST No. 081533-171 at Building 1122.

V

I I

I r

SMTH

1.0 UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK DECOMMISSIONING ACTIVITIES

1.1 OVERVIEW

One underground storage tank (UST), New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) Registration No. 081533-171, was closed at Building • 1122 at U.S. Army Fort Monmouth, Fort Monmouth, New Jersey on June 21, 1994. Refer to site location map on Figure 1. This report presents the results of the DPW's implementation of the UST Decommissioning/Closure Plan submitted to the NJDEP on May 25, 1994. The plan was approved on June 7, 1994. The UST was a steel 1,500-gallon tank with fiberglass coating containing No. 2 diesel oil.

Decommissioning activities for UST No. 081533-171 complied with all applicable Federal, State and Local laws and ordinances in effect at the date of decommissioning. These laws included but were not limited to: N.J.A.C. 7:14B-1 et seq., N.J.A.C. 5:23-1 et seq., and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) 1910.146 & 1910.120. All permits including but not lu:nited to the NJDEP-approved Decommissioning/Closure Plan were posted onsite for inspection. CUTE Inc., the contractor that conducted the decommissioning activities, is registered and certified by the NJDEP for performing UST closure activities. Closure of UST No. 081533-171 proceeded under the approval of the NJDEP Bureau of Underground Storage · Tanks (NJDEP-BUST). The NJDEP-BUST closure approval and signed certifications for UST No. 081533-171 are included in Appendices A and B, respectively.

Based on an inspection of the UST, field screening of subsurface soils and analytical results of collected soil samples, the DPW has concluded that no significant historical discharges are associated with the UST or associated piping.

This UST Closure and Site Investigation Report has been prepared by Smith Environmental Technologies Corporation, to assist the United States Army Directorate of Public Works (DPW) in complying with the NJDEP Bureau of Underground Storage Tanks (NJD,EP-BUST) regulations. The applicable NJDEP-BUST regulations at the date of closure were the Interim Closure Requirements for Underground Storage Tank Systems (N.J.A.C. 7:14B-1 et seq. September 1990 and revisions dated November 1, 1991).

This report was prepared using information required at the time of closure. Section 1 of this UST Closure and Site Investigation Report provides a summary of the UST decommissioning activities. Section 2 of this report describes the site investigation activities. Conclusions and recommendations, including the results of the soil sampling investigation, are presented in the final section of this report.

1

I fllJTnl Ill,. I ,lllU 111

r '

r '

r ,

f l

[ l

r '

r '

I ;

C l

I l

r ,

r '

k_,.,_,1

r ,

~ s C

:8 t! ~ 0 0 0)

.g

I i 0 .I= >

srinl U.S. Army Department of Pubic Works

Fort Monmouth, New Jersey

-p.:.:.-::.---=~

I:• , r ,I , , I \.

\-.-::-_c.e-:-

. . . ... ·•· •. I

• • : ;■ ";_J . ·---- I : . .-

~--"t--~~·.~•·· "'···

. \\ . 30 :--:·: ••

• ,/7.0

·~ ~

~­;,' i\"\ ~, v.., ~ ·. ~\,\ V c/•:.\,

~// _.--::; ✓• .• :-:_"

✓ -\\~~- ,· • :\.

~ , ~ ;:- //G"V,7#-7/ ~~---: __

~ C. 0

' ~~~"!""~~.,::; '.,,. -'.:;,

ID

I • ~:vD ..:. SCALE

fil I I iii N 0 2000 FT. QUADRANGLE LOCATION )._ __________________________________________ .....

Project No. 09-5004-07 Agure 1 Site Location Map

r '

r ,

r '

r '

r ,

f '

• SMTH

1.2 SITE DESCRIPTION

Building 1122 is located in the western portion of the Main Post area of Fort Monmouth, as shown on Figure 1. UST No. 081533-171 was located west of Building 1122 and appurtenant piping ran approximately 63 feet northeast from the excavation to Building 1122. The fill port area was located directly above the tank. A site map is provided on Figure 2.

1.2.1 Geological/Hydrogeological Setting

The following is a description of the geological/hydrogeological setting of the area surrounding Building 1122. Included is a description of the regional geology of the area surrounding Fort Monmouth as well as descriptions of the local geology and hydrogeology of the Main Post area.

Regional Geology

Monmouth County lies within the New Jersey Section of the Atlantic Coastal Plain physiographic province. The Main Post, Charles Wood, and the Evans areas are located in what may be referred to as the Outer Coastal Plain subprovince, or the Outer Lowlands.

In general, New Jersey Coastal Plain formations consist of a seaward-dipping wedge of unconsolidated deposits of clay, silt, and gravel. These formations typically strike northeast­southwest with a dip ranging from 10 to 60 feet per mile and were deposited on Precambrian and lower Paleozoic rocks (Zapecza, 1989). These sediments, predominantly derived from deltaic, shallow marine, and continental shelf environments, date from Cretaceous through the Quaternary Periods. The mineralogy ranges from quartz to glauconite.

The formations record several major transgressive/regressive cycles and contain units which are generally thicker to the southeast and reflect a deeper water environment. Over 20 regional geologic units are present within the sediments of the Coastal Plain. Regressive, upward coarsening deposits are usually aquifers (e.g., Englishtown and Kirkwood Formations, and the Cohansey Sand) while the transgressive deposits act as confining units ( e.g., the Merchantville, Marshalltown, and Navesink Formations). The individual thicknesses for these units vary greatly (i.e., from several feet to several hundred feet). The Coastal Plain deposits thicken to the southeast from the Fall Line to greater than 6,500 feet in Cape May County (Brown and Zapecza, 1990).

Local Geology

Based on the regional geologic map (Jablonski, 1968), the Cretaceous age Red Bank and Tinton Sands outcrop at the Main Post area. The Red Bank sand conformably overlies the Navesink Formation and dips to the southeast at 35 feet per mile. The upper member (Shrewsbury) of the Red Bank sand is a yellowish-gray to reddish brown clayey, medium-to-

2

r ,

r '

r '

r '

-co 10 0 -C 0

:;::::; as ... 0 a. ... 0 0 UJ (I) ·a, 0 0 C .c 0 (I) I--a -m E C 0 ·!; C w .c -·e rn .......

~ m Cl) 0 ... s

• SrlTH

OST

U.S. Army Department of Publlc Works

Fort Monmouth, New Jersey

SCALE

0 100' u,.,_ _________________________________ ...

Project No. 09-5004-07

,I [lllU,11 Ill,. 1- .run Ill

Figure 2 Bulldlng 1122

Site Map

I '

I '

r '

• SMTH

coarse-grained sand that contains abundant rock fragments, minor mica and glauconite (Jablonski). The lower member (Sandy Hook) is a dark gray to black, medium-to-fine grained sand with abundant clay, mica, and glauconite.

The Tinton sand conformably overlies the Red Bank Sand and ranges from a clayey medium to very coarse grained feldspathic quartz and glauconite sand to a glauconitic coarse sand. The color varies from dark yellowish orange or light brown to moderate brown and from light olive to

· grayish olive. Glauconite may constitute 60 to 80 percent of the sand :fraction in the upper part of the unit (Minard, 1969). The upper part of the Tinton is often highly oxidized and iron oxide encrusted (Minard).

Hydro geology

The water table aquifer in the Main Post area is identified as part of the "composite confining units," or minor aquifers. The minor aquifers include the Navesink formation, Red Bank Sand, Tinton Sand, Homerstown Sand, Vincentown Formation, Manasquan Formation, Shark River Formation, Piney Point Formation, and the basal clay of the Kirkwood Fo1mation.

Based on records of wells drilled in the Main Post area, water is typically encom1tered ;it depths of 2 to 9 feet below ground surface (bgs). According to Jablonski, wells drilled in the Red Bank and Tinton Sands may produce 2 to 25 gallons per minute (gpm). Some well owners have reported acidic water that requires treatment to remove iron.

Due to the proximity of the Atlantic Ocean to Fort Monmouth, shallow groundwater may be tidally influenced and may flow toward creeks and brooks as the tide goes out, and away from creeks and brooks as the tide comes in. However, an abundance of clay lenses and sand deposits were noted in borings installed throughout Fort Monmouth. Therefore the direction of shallow groundwater should be determined on a case by case basis.

1.3 HEAL TH AND SAFETY

Before, during, and after all decommissioning activities, hazards at the work site which may have posed a threat to the Health and Safety of all personnel who were involve with, or were affected by, the decommissioning of the UST system were minimized. All areas which posed, or may have been suspected to pose a vapor hazard were monitored by a qualified individual utilizing an organic vapor analyzer (OVA). The individual ascertained if the area was properly vented to render the area safe, as defined by OSHA ..

3

r '

I '

L-- _.

I '

• SIVRH

1.4 REMOVAL OF UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK

1.4.1 General Procedures

• All underground obstructions (utilities, etc.) were marked out by the contractor performing the closure prior to excavation activities.

• All activities were carried out with the greatest regard to safety and health and the safeguarding of the environment.

• All excavated soils were visually examined and screened with an OVA for evidence of contamination. Potentially contaminated soils were identified and logged dUFing closure activities.

• Surface materials (i.e., asphalt, concrete, etc.) were excavated and staged separately from all soil and recycled in accordance with all applicable reguL:1.tions and laws.

• A Suh-Surface Evaluator from the DPW was present during all closure activities.

1.4.2 Underground Storage Tank Excavation and Cleaning

Prior to UST decommissioning activities, surficial soil was removed to expose the UST and associated piping. All free product present in the piping was drained into the UST, and the UST was purged to remove vapors prior to cutting and removal of the piping. After removal of the associated piping, a manway was made in the UST to allow for proper cleaning. The UST was completely emptied of all liquids prior to removal from the ground. Approximately 259 gallons of liquid were transported by Freehold Cartage Inc. to Lionetti Oil Recovery Co. Inc., a NJDEP­approved petroleum recycling and disposal company located in Old Bridge, New Jersey. Refer to Appendix C for the waste manifest (NJA-1603184).

The UST was cleaned prior to removal from the excavation in accordance with the NJDEP­BUST regulations. After the UST was removed from the excavation, it was staged on polyethylene sheeting and examined for holes. No holes or punctures were observed during the inspection by the Sub-Surface Evaluator. Soils surrounding the UST were screened visually and with an OVA for evidence of contamination. No evidence of contamination was observed.

Soil screening was also performed along the piping associated with the UST. No contamination was noted anywhere along the piping length.

4

I '

I '

I '

I '

f I

' '

I '

----- --------- ---•----------------

• SMTH

1.5 UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK TRANSPORTATION AND DISPOSAL

The tank was transported by CUTE Inc. to Mazza and Sons Inc. for disposal in compliance with all applicable regulations and laws. See Appendix D for UST Disposal Certificate.

The Subsurface Evaluator labeled the UST prior to transport with the following information:

• site of origin • contact person • NJDEP UST Facility ID number • name of transporter/contact person • destination site/contact person

1.6 MANAGEMENT OF EXCAVATED SOILS

Based on OVA air monitoring and TPHC analysis results from the post-excavation soil samples, no soils exhibited signs of contamination. Therefore, the excavated soils were used as backfill following removal of the UST.

5

r '

SMTH

2.0 SITE INVESTIGATION ACTIVITIES

2.1 OVERVIEW

The Site Investigation was managed and carried out by U.S. Army DPW personnel. All analyses were performed and reported by U.S. Army Fort Monmouth Environmental Laboratory, a NJDEP-certified testing laboratory. All sampling was performed under the direct supervision of a NJDEP Certified Sub-Surface Evaluator according to the methods described in the NJDEP Field Sampling Procedures Manual (1992). Sampling frequency and parameters analyzed complied with he NJDEP-BUST document Interim Closure Requirements for Underground Storage Tank Systems (September 1990 and revisions dated November 1, 1991) which was the· applicable regulation at the date of the closure. All records of the Site Investigation activities are · maintained by the Fort Monmouth DPW Environmental Office.

The following Parties participated in Closure and Site Investigation Activities.

2.2

• Closure Contractor: Cleaning Up The Environment Inc. (CUTE) Contact Person: Nancy Williams Phone Number: (201)427-2881 NJDEP Company Certification No.: 0200128

• Subsurface Evaluator: Dinkerrai M. Desai Employer: U.S. Anny, Fort Monmouth Phone Number: (908)532-1475 NJDEP Certification No.: E0002266

• Analytical Laboratory: U.S. Anny Fort Monmouth Environmental Laboratory Contact Person: Brian.K. McKee Phone Number: (908)532-4359 NJDEP Company Certification No.: 13461

• Hazardous Waste Hauler: Freehold Cartage Inc. Contact Person: Barry Olsen Phone Number: (908)721-0900 NJDEP Hazardous Waste Hauler No.: 2265

FIELD SCREENING/MONITORING

Field screening was performed by a NJDEP Certified Sub-Surface Evaluator using an OVA and visual observations to identify potentially contaminated material. Soil excavated from around the tank and appurtenant piping, as well as the UST excavation sidewalls and bottom, did not exhibit any evidence of potential contamination.

6

( '

' '

SMTH

2.3 SOIL SAMPLING

On June 21, 1994, post-excavation soil samples B, C, E, F, DUP B, and DUPE were collected from a total of four ( 4) locations along the sidewalls of the excavation, at a depth of 8.5 feet below ground surface (bgs). Samples A, and D were collected from two (2) locations along the base of the UST excavation at a depth of9.0 feet bgs.

On June 24, 1994, following removal of the UST copper fuel lines, samples AA, BB, CC, DD, and EE were collected along the former piping length of the excavation, which was approximately 63 feet in length. The piping samples were collected at a depth of 1.5 feet bgs. All samples were analyzed for TPHC.

The site assessment was performed by U.S. Anny personnel in accordance with the NJDEP Technical Requirements and the NJDEP Field Sampling Procedures Manual. A summary of sampling activities including parameters analyzed is provided in Table 1. The post-excavation soil samples were collected using polystyrene scoops. Actual soil TPHC values may be higher than reported, due to sample utensil absorbency. If absorbency resulted in reducing the actual soil TPHC concentration by 50 %, the highest soil contaminant would have been 234.0 mg/kg, still below the applicable NJDEP soil cleanup standard for total organic contaminants of 10,000 mg/kg. Following soil sampling activities, the samples \Vere chilled and delivered to U.S. Army Fort Monmouth Environmental Laboratory located in Fort Monmouth, New Jersey, for analysis.

7

Sample ID

A B C D E F

DUPB DUPE

AA BB cc DD EE

*Note: --TPHC

Date of Collection

06-21-94 06-21-94 06-21-94 06-21-94 06-21-94 06-21-94 06-21-94 06-21-94 06-24-94 06-24-94 06-24-94 06-24-94 06~24-94

Not applicable

'-

TABLE 1

SUMMARY OF SAMPLINC. ACTIVITIES BUILDING 1122, MAIN POST .

FORT MONMOUTH, NSW JERSEY

Matrix Sample Type Analytical Parameters ( and USEPA Methods) *

Soil Post-Excavation TPHC Soil Post-Excavation TPHC Soil Post-Excavation TPHC Soil Post-Excavation TPHC Soil Post-Excavation TPHC Soil Post-Excavation TPHC Soil Post-Excavation TPHC Soil Post-Excavation TPHC Soil Post-Excavation TPHC Soil Post-Excavation TPHC Soil Post-Excavation TPHC Soil Post-Excavation TPHC Soil Post-Excavation TPHC

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (Method 418.1 / soil and aqueous)

Sampling Method

Polystyrene Scoop Polystyrene Scoop Polystyrene Scoop Polystyrene Scoop Polystyrene Scoop Polystyrene Scoop Polystyrene Scoop Polystyrene Scoop Polystyrene Scoop Polystyrene Scoop Polystyrene Scoop Polystyrene Scoop Polystyrene Scoop

r '

f I

I ;

I I

• SMTH

3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

3.1 SOIL SAMPLING RES UL TS

To evaluate soil conditions following removal of the UST and associated piping, post-excavation soil samples were collected from a total of six (6) locations on June 21, 1994, and from five (5) locations on June 24, 1994. All samples were analyzed for TPHC. The post-excavation sampling results were compared to the NJDEP residential direct contact total organic contaminants soil cleanup criteria of 10,000 mg/kg (N.J.A.C. 7:26D and revisions dated February 3, 1994). A summary of the analytical results and comparison to the NJDEP soil cleanup criteria is provided in Table 2 an:d the soil sampling results are shown on Figure 3. Toe analytical data package is provided in Appendix E.

All post-excavation soil samples collected on June 21, 1994, and on June 24, 1994, from the UST excavation and from below piping associated with the UST contained concentrations of TPHC below the NJDEP soil cleanup criteria. Post-excavation soil samples A, and F, collected on June 21, 1994 contained TPHC concentrations of 26.8 mg/kg, and 7.97 mg/kg, respectively. Post-excavation soil samples BB, CC, DD, and EE, collected on June 24, 1994, contained TPHC concentrations ranging from 8.83 mg/kg to 117.0 mg/kg. Sample AA contained a non-detectable concentration of TPHC.

3.2 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The analytical results for all post-excavation soil samples collected from the UST closure excavation at Building 1122 were below the NJDEP soil cleanup criteria for total organic contaminants.

Based on the post-excavation sampling results, soils with TPHC concentrations exceeding the NJDEP soil cleanup criteria for total organic contaminants of 10,000 mg/kg, do not exist in the former location of the UST or associated piping.

No further action is proposed in regard to the closure and site assessment of UST No. 081533-171 at Building 1122.

8

\

I I

j I

-~ 0 -C: 0

~ 8. 8 (/) Q)

~ 0 C:

15 Q) I-ii;

~ ~ e ·s;: C: w :5

~ ~ ~

Sll1H

SITE CC/1.5-2.0' BGS TPHC 88.0

SITE BB/1.5-2.0' BGS TPHC 117.0

SITE E/8.5-9.0' BGS TPHC NO

SITE E DUP/8.5- 9.0' BGS TPHC ND

SITE C/8.5- 9.0' BGS TPHC NO

SITE D/9.0-9.5' BGS TPHC ND

SITE B/8.5- 9.0' BGS TPHC ND

SITE B DUP/8.5- 9.0' BGS TPHC ND

FORMER FUEL LINES

SITE 00/1.5-2.0' BGS TPHC 8.83

SITE AA/1.5-2.0' BGS TPHC N)

SITE F /8.5-9.0' BGS

SITE A/9.0-9.5' BGS

LEGEND

e SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION (.ME 21, 1994)

r777] LIMT OF EXCAVATION LLLLl (.AN: 21, 1994)

e SOIL SA~ LOCATION (JUNE 24, 1994)

r777] LMT OF EXCAVATION LLLLl (JUN: 24, 1994)

NOTES: t ALL RESULTS IN MILLIGRAMS PER KILOGRAM (DRY WEIGHT)

2. SEE TABLE 2 FOR NJDEP SOIL CLEANUP CRITERIA

3. BGS = BELOW GROUND SURFACE

BUILDING 1122

SITE EE/1.5- 2.0' BGS

U.S. Army Department of Public Works

Fort Monmouth, New Jersey

SCALE

0 10' 5 (/) .__ ____________________________________________________________________ ......

Project No. 00-5004-07 Figure 3 Building 1122

Soil Sampling Results

TABLE2

POST-EXCAVATION SOIL SAMPLING RESULTS BUILDING 1122

FT. MONMOUTH, NEW JERSEY

PAGE 1 OF2

Sample Sample Sample Analysis Compound Sample Compound Result NJDEP Exceeds ID/Depth Laboratory ID Date Date Name Quantitation of {mg/kg) Soil Cleanup Cleanup

Limit Concern Criteria* Criteria (mg/kg) (mg/kg)

A/9.0-9.5' 1535.1 06-21-94 06-22-94 Total Solid -- -- 86% TPHC 6.6 yes 26.8 10,000

B/8.5-9.0' 1535.2 06-21-94 06-22-94 Total Solid -- -- 85 % TPHC 6.6 yes ND 10,000

C/8.5-9.0' 1535.3 06-21-94 06-22-94 Total Solid -- -- 86% TPHC 6.6 yes ND 10,000

D/9.0-9.5' 1535.4 06-21-94 06-22-94 Total Solid -- -- 86% TPHC 6.6 yes ND 10,000

E/8.5-9.0' 1535.5 06-21-94 06-22-94 Total Solid -- -- 84% TPHC 6.6 yes ND 10,000

F/8.5-9.0' 1535.6 06-21-94 06-22-94 Total Solid -- -- 86% TPHC 6.6 yes 7.97 10,000

DUP B/8.5-9.0' 1535.7 06-21-94 06-22-94 Total Solid -- --- 85% TPHC 6.6 yes ND 10,000

DUP E/8.5-9.0' 1535.8 06-21-94 06-22-94 Total Solid -- -- 83 % TPHC 6.6 yes ND 10,000

PAGE2OF2

Sample Sample Sample ID/Depth Laboratory ID Date

ANI.5-2.0' 1540.1 06-24-94

BB/1.5-2.0' 1540.2 06-24-94

CC/1.5-2.0" 1540.3 06-24-94

DD/1.5-2.0' 1540.4 06-24-94

EE/1.5-2.0' 1540.5 06-24-94

Notes: * Cleanup criteria for total organics

Not applicable / does not exceed criteria TPHC Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons

'

TABLE2

POST-EXCAVATION son., SAMPLING RESULTS BUILDING 1122

FT. MONMOUTH, NEW JERSEY

Analysis Compound Sample Compound Date Name Quantitation of

Limit Concern (mg/kg)

06-24-94 Total Solid -- --TPHC 6.6 yes

06-24-94 Total Solid -- --TPHC 6.6 yes

06-24-94 Total Solid -- --TPHC 6.6 yes

06-24-94 Total Solid -- --TPHC 6.6 yes

06-24-94 Total Solid -- --TPHC 6.6 yes

Smith Environmental Tehnologies Corporation (Project No. 09-5004-07)

soill 122.doc

Result NJDEP Exceeds (mg/kg) Soil Cleanup Cleanup

Criteria* Criteria (mg/kg)

98% ND 10,000

97% 117.0 10,000 96% 88.0 10,000 94% 8.83 10,000 95% 17.0 10,000

• SMTH

APPENDIX A

NJDEP BUST CLOSURE APPROVAL

' '

r '

r '

r '

CHRISTINE TODD WHITMAN

Governor

Mr. Joseph Fallon SELFM-EH-EV

~fa:f:e nf ~:efu ~:ers:eu DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AND ENERGY

Department of the Army Headquarters CECOM Fort Monmouth Fort Monmouth .. NJ 077703-5000

Dear Mr. Fallon:

Re: UST Closures - Fort Monmouth Fort Monmouth Army Base Tinton Falls, Monmouth County

ROBERT C. SHINN, JR. Commissioner

The NJDEPE has reviewed the four underground storage tank closure plans for UST number 0081 533 tanks 1 and 171 and for UST number 0090010 tanks 17 and 18 submitted on May 31, 1994 for NJDEPE review and approval. The: NJDEPE has determined that the closure plans for these tanks are consistent with the Technical Requirements for Site Remediation.

The remedial efforts associated with the closures of these tanks may commence as scheduled in each of the associated closure plans. This letter must be made available to any authorized personnel responsible for review and oversight of UST removals. This approval does not relinquish Fort Monmouth from fulfilling any Federal, County or Municipal requirement associated with the removal of underground storage tanks.

If you shouid nave any questions or .-~quire addir;c,nai ir~fc·;rr;ation, please du r,ot r.ssitate to contact me at (609) 633-1455. ·

Sincerely,

~~ l~n R. Curtis, Case Manager Bureau of Federal Case Management·

RPCE\BFCM\FTMMTH12.IRC

New Jersey Is An Equal Opportunity Employer • Printed on Recycled and Recyclable Paper

• SMTH

I •

APPENDIX B

CERTIFICATIONS

UST.OU 281

Scott A. Welner • " , Commissioner

State of New- Jersey Depmment of Environmenul.Protecdon·and Energy,

Division of Responsible Party Site Remediation CN029

Trenton. NJ 08625-0029 Tel. f 609-984-3 t 56 Fax. f 609-292-5604

UNDERGROUND STORAGE.TANK SITE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

Under the provisions of the Underground Storage of Hazardous Substances Act

in accordance with N.J.A.C. 7:14B

fQR UBit US£ QNL!_

USTI OILl&.llec'd _____ _

TMSI

Staff.:_-=====-~

Karl J. Delancy Dlreaor

This Summary form shall be used by all :,wners and operliltors of Undergrn1.1r.: Storage Tank Systems (USTS) who have either reponed a release and ari subje~ to the sit• assessment req:,11ro,nents cf N.J.A.C. 7:149-8.2 or who have closed LISTS pursuant to N.J.A.C. 7:148~9.1 et seq. ~-are subject to the site assessment requirements cf N.J.A.C. 7:14B-9.2 and 9.3.

INSTRUCTIONS:

• Please print legibly or typ8"

• F,1/ in all applie&bl• blanks. This form will require various auacbmeors in order to complete the Summary. The technical guidanc• document. lcJ.Ui..m Cfosure Requirements ,~m explains th• regulatory (and technical) requirements for closur• and th• filia m. ~ Investigation 4n1. Corrective &!i£a Requirements fRL· Discharges from Unc:grqrpund Sroraqe ~~~Systems o1xplains the regulatory (and technical} requiremen:s for Ct:Jrr«:rive action.

• Retum on,. original of th• form and all r.quir.d attachments to th• &bov• addr•ss. • Attach a sr:aled sit• diagram of th• subject facility which shows the information s{»Cified in hem N B of this form.

• E~p/ain any ·No· or W/A• response on a separ.te sheet.

Date cf Submission:,,._ ________ _

g.(tt'f 1122 QBJ 5~3-J7J FACILITY REGISTRATION #

. I. FACILITY NAME AND ADDRESS

U.S. Ann, Fort Monmouth, New Jersey Directorate o Eng1neer1ng

OWNER'S NAME AND ADDRESS, if different from ab:ive

Telephone No. __________ _

UST-014 2.-91

11. DISCHARGE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

A. Was ex>ntamination found? _ Yes .J_ No If Yn, Case No. ________ _ (Note: All discharges must be reponed ta the _Environmental Action Hotline (609) 292-7172)

B. The substance(s) discharged was(were) _N_/_A _________________ _

·c. Have any vapor hazards been mitigated? _ Yes No X MIA - --··

111. DECOMMISSIONING OF TANK SYSTEMS Closure Approval No. Letter dated June 7, 1994

The site assessment requirements associated with an,k decommissioning are explained in the Technical Guidance Document, Interim Closure Requirements for UST's, Section V. A-D. AU,m complete documentation of the methods used and the results obtained for each of the steps of ~ decommissjonjng used. Please include a w map which shows the locations of all samples and borings. the location of all tanks and piping runs at the facility at the beginning~ the·tank closure operation and annotated to differentiate the status P1 all ao,u A.o.d. ~ (e.g., removed, abandoned, temporarily closed, etc.). The same site map can be used to dcc:ument other pans of the site assessment requirements, if it is properly and legibly annotated. ·

IV. SITE ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS

A. Excavated Soil

Any evidence of contamination in excavated soil will require that th• soil be classified as either Hazardous Waste or Non-Hazardous Waste. Please include all required documentation of compliance with the requirements for handling contaminated excavated soil (if any was present) as explained in the technical guiciance c:iocuments for closure And COHi:tive :1e1ion. Describe amount of soil removed, its classification. and disposal location.

8. Scaled Site Diagrams ... ..

1. Scaled site diagrams must be attached which include the k>llow~ .nformation:

a. North arrow and scale b. The locations of the ground water monitoring wells c. Location and depth of each soil sample and boring d. All major surface and sub-surface strudures and utilities e. Approximate property boundaries f. · All existing or closed underground storage tank systems. including appur.1n·ant piping g. A cross•stdional view indic&ting depth of tank, stratigraphy and location of water table h. Locations of surface water bodies

C. Soil samples and borings (check appropria1e answer)

1. Were soil samples t&k•n from the excavation as prescribed? L. Yes No _NIA

2. W•r• soil borings taken at the tank system closure site as prescribed? _ Yes _ No L. N A

3. Attach the analytical results in tabular form and include the following information about each sample: a. Customer sample number (keyed to the site map) b. Th• depth of the soil sample c. Soil boring logs d. Method detection limit of th• method used •· OA/OC Information as required

2

,;1;JiflHl ,.J,1,1 1111,11 111

UST-014 21)1

O. Ground Wmer Monitoring

1. Number cf ground wa1er monlloring wells installed __ o ___ _

2. Attach the analytical results of th• ground water samplH in tabular form. Include the following information for each sample from each well:

a. Site diagram number for each well installed b. Depth of ground water surface c. Depth of ICl'Hnld interval d. Method detection limit of the method used e. Well logs f. Wall permit numbers g. QA/CC Information as required

V. SOIL CONTAMINATION

A. Was soil contamination found? Yes L No H -Yes·, please answer Question B·E H ·No•, please answer Question B

B. The highest soil contamination still remaining in the ground has been determined to be: 1. __.N.,./.._A..._ ___ _..ppb total BTEX, ....... N./..,.A ____ __.Jppb total non-targeted voe 2. N {4 ppb total BIN, N/A ppb total non-targeted BIN 3. lJZ Q ppm TPHC 4. N/A ppb _____________ (for non-petroleum substanc:a)

C. R@madiation of frH product contaminated soils

1. All free product contaminated soil on the propany boundaries and above the water table are believed to have been removed from the subsurface _Yes L No

2. Free product contaminated soils are suspected to exist below the. watertsbl& Yas X Ne 3. Free produd contaminated soils are suspected to exist off the property boundaries. Yes X No

D. Was the vertic:al and horizontal extent of contamination determined? Yes No l,_N/A

E. Does soil contamination interwd ground water? _ Yes No x,._NIA

VI. GROUND WATER CONTAMINATION N/A

A. Was ground water contamination found? _ Yes No H -Yes•, please answer Questions B-G. H ·No", please answer only Question B.

B. The highest ground water contamination at any 1 sampling location and at any 1 sampling event to date has been determined to be: · ·

1. ________ ppb total BTEX. ________ ..rpb total non-targeted voe 2. ________ ppb total BIN. pb total non-targeted BIN 3. ________ ppbtotal MTBE, ppbtotalTBA 4. _________ ppb (for non-petroleum substance) 5. greatest thickness of separate phase product found __________ _ 6. separate phase product has been delinaa:tld Yes No _NIA

C. Result(s) of wall search

1. A wall search (including a review of manual well records) indic-..atas that private, municipal or commercial walls do exist within the distances specified in the Scopa of Wor'K. Yes _ No _NIA

2. To. number of 1h.au wells identifi.ed is ___ _

3

, II la ;i1,.1 ;r, 1.·,1,

UST-014 2'91

O. Proximity of wells and ccntaminant plume

1. The shallowest depth of any well noted in th• weU sHrch which may be in the horizomal or vertical potential pa1h(s) of the ccntaminant plume(s) is ___ feet below grad• (amsideration has been given for the effects of pumping, subsurface structures, etc. on the direction(s) of ccntaminant migration). This well is ___ fNt from th• sourca and its screening begins at a depth of ___ feet.

2. Th• shallowest depth to the top of the well screen for any weU in th• potential path of the plume(s) (as dascribad in 01 abova) is ___ feat below grade. This wall is located ___ featfrcm the sourca.

3. Th• closest horizontal distance of a private, ccmmercial or municipal well in the potential path of the plume (as determined in 01) is ____ feat from th• source. This wall is ___ feet deep and screaning begins at a depth of ___ feet.

E. A plan for Hparate phase produd reca111ry has been included. _y as No _NIA

F. A ground water contour map has been submitted which includes the ground water elevations for each wall Yes No _NIA .

G. Delineation of ccntamination

1. The ground water contaminants have bean delineated to MCLs or lower values at tha property boundaries. _Yes _No

2. The plume is suspected to continue off the property a1 concantrations greater th2n MCLs. Yes- No

3. Off property access (circle one): is being sought h;s bean app:ov~ has b99n dar.igd

VII. SITE ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION [preparer of site assessment plan - N.J.A.C. 7:14S-S.3(b) !9.51ai3]

The parson signing this certification as the •Qualified Ground Water Consultant· (as defined in N.J.A.C.7:148-1.6) responsible for the design and implementation of the site assessment plan as specified in N.J.A.C. 7:148-B.3(a) & 9.2(b}2, must supply the name of the certifying organization and certification number. ·

"I cem"fl under penalty of law that the information provided in this document is rrue, accurate, and complete and was obtained by procedures in compliance with NJ.A.C. 7:14B-8 and 9: I am aware that there are significant penalties for submirring false, inaccurate, or incomplere inforinarion, inclUfiing fines and/or impriso~nt."

0 nk . D • ,;{ ' ~ L NAME (PrintorType) Di errai esai SIGNATURE "ZJ

COMPANYNAME U.S. Anny Fort Monmouth DATE ___ l..,,.l/ ___ .'2,,-'-· ..... /-5...:;/_/ __ _ (Preparer of Site Assessment Plan) 7

CERTIFYING CERTIFICA T10N ORGANIZATION NJDEP NUMBER E0002266 -----------------

4

I ;

r '

I '

I '

I '

I l

r '

I '

I '

f I

VIII. TANK PECQMM!SSJQN!NG eEBDflCATIQH {puson ~norming tank decommissioning ponion- of closure plan • N.J.A.C. 7:14B--i.S{a~)

"I ce.rrify un.de.r pe.nafry of law that tank de.commissioning acrivirie.s we.re. pe.rf orme.ti in compliance. with NJ.A..C. 7:14B-9.2(b)3. I am aware that th!re are. significant penalties for submitting false., inaccurate., or iTI.C()mpkte. inf ormari.on, ir.cludil'tf"fine.s ar.dlor impriso~nt."

NAME (Print orType) ___________ -SIGW.TURE __________ _

COMPANYNAME ______________ ~ __ DATE" ___________ _ (Penormer oi Tank U«:cmmfs7'10ning)

lX. CEBIJEJCATJQNS BY THE BESPQNSIBLE PABD'QES) Qf THE fActlIJY

A. The following certification shall be 1lgn1d by the hlghut ranking Individual with overall ruponslblllty for that facility · [N.J.j..C. 7:UB•2.3(c)1 I).

"I ce.rrify under penalry of law that rhe. informaric:- ;-:,·:-.-=-:f~d in this document is rrue, accurate, and comp/ere . I am aware that there. are. sigfl.lj'icu,'1 pe.nalrie.s for submirring false, inaccurare., or incomplere iriformanon, including fin.es an.di or · ·so~nt."

NAME {Print or Type) _J_a_m_e_s_Ot_t _______ SIGNATU

COMPANYNAME U.S. Anny, Fort Monmo~_t_h ____ ....___::,,

B. Th• following certification shall be signed aa follows [acccrdlng to th, requirements of N.J.A.C. 7:14B•:2.3(C)21):

1. For a corporation. by a principal executive officer of at Inst the level of vice president. 2. For a partnership or sole propri.torship, by a general partMr or the proprietor, r1spediv1ly; or 3. For a municipality, State, Federal or ether public agency by tither th, princi~I executive officer or ranking

elected official. 4. In cues wh1r1 the highest ranking corporate partnership, governmental officu or official at the facility as

required in A above is the um, person as the official required to certify in B. only the 01r1ttation in A nud to be made. In all other cues, the cartifications of A and B shall be made.

"! unify und" penalry of law that I have. person.ally e.:ramined and am familiar wirh- th~ informarion su.bmirre.d in rhis applicarion and all arrackd docume.nrs, and thar based on my inquiry of zhose individuals imme.diare.ly responsible for obtaining the inf ormarion, J btffr..,-~ rhar th! su.bmirred informa.rion is rrue, accurare, and conJ.Dleu. I am aware rhar rher~ are significant pen.alries for submirring false., inaccurar:;·.-::· ;.::=/:.r::p/ert informarion., inclu.din~ fints and/or imprisonment."

NAME (Print orType) ___________ SIGNATURE __________ _

COMPANY NAME _____________ _ OATE ____________ _

5

r '

l '

r r

r '

r '

JlNQIBQROlJND SJOUGI TANK (IJS'.t) Cl.oamJ&!81'1FICADON

BUILD.ING NO. _, .....::112=-2 __ _

NJDBP UST tmGISTRATION NO. • 81,.533-171

DATS TANK RBMOVPD _.;6""'/2=1~/9~4 ____ _

IJO I CONTRACTNUMBBR, __ -=..:91:;e..--0148~;:;._-_,___

I CBB.Tlff UNI>BR.PENALTY OP LAWTHATTANXl>BCOMMISSIONINO AC'I'lVlTI!S wmt.BPBllPO:RMBD JN COMPUANCB Wtl'BN1AC 7:148--9.2(b)3. I AM.AWARB mAT THBRBAB.B SIGNIFICANTlBNAL'DBS POllSUBMl'lTINO FALSB, INACCURA.TB, OR. INCOMPLBTBlNPO:tWA110N.INCUJDINGPnmSANfJ/OR. IMPRISONMBNT,

NAMB Q?!tnt0tType)

SIGNATUBB

NJD:BP UST ctOSUlm bCJ~lT.~.te.n.,l,IQ 4 p

COMPANY PmrFORMll:NO CJll1Inc .. NJDBP UST CLOSURBCOBPORATB CBR.TlPlCAT.BNO. -~02=0~9128~----

DATB OP SOBMlttAL _, _,-',71,.J.D~9/~94-..--. , ___ , ..

c;?/GT 'rl QIHJ .9.£R 80RL. 'ON Xl:H 'ONI 3lnG.

r '

r ,

r ,

• SMTH

APPENDIX C

WASTE MANIFEST

State of New Jersev Ocpanment oi Environmental Protection ~nd E:1croy

H::iz.iraous Waste Regulation Progr.im -Manifest Secuon

CN 028, Trenton, NJ 08625-0028 · • :'.le <l' nrint ,,, •:lock lcllcr!I. IForm rlr.~.1ont!d lor u~o nn <!!Ito 112-oitchl tvoewrllor.l

' · UtJIFGrii,1 HAZARDOUS "✓ASTE MANIFEST

1. ,.,un,,raror s u::; E.?A 10 ~o.

· · ,,,.: .. i ..... r:q ,\,i,u,,·.~ US Army Communications Electronic

:.:tcr~a1:on •~ :~e sr.aaea areas 1s n•~t r.:--ou1rca cy Federal 1:J..•1.

:1· in Post, c/o James Shirghio, Bldg 2504 A TN: SELFM-DL-EM-MS, Fort Monmouth, NJ iixxi 07703 : ~:•:.1.~"ra:r:-

0'1*

· ·· · ···· · 908 532-6224 ••-•r,r r -----.--.-.• --'-................ ,,-.,--...... """'-""""""-"=---------u-::i_c,...;;-,.\-ll)-j·i-oJ1_n_oe_r ____ ~_!_ U. _L k

. . __ ,., . . ... c_-c:...~ ~ ""'~ '- .-----_i' 'eehold Cartage Inc. 'N, J: DI 01 5' 4; 1: 2'. 6· 1: 6• 4• ~- ::.;:e ~, ,~~- :N.::fD._Efi:£..~k.b ~

•· .::•, ;.,llhl ' ~!:.:.:,,I.., ,,un•: ,:r • ••,r;•·~·::::r : · · ··•,, 1 908 462-1001 •

I l onetti Oil Recovery ,Co.·r;..u:, ---------

·I~ .••• ; .• • ·f ..

Itunyon & Cheesequake Rds. _ .. _:_• .... :•. 1 _ q l,d Bridge, NJ_0_8_8_5_7 _______ -=N-=Ja-...a:D~0 ____ 8_4........,;0'---4---4 __ 0.;...._6'---4 __ -_· ·_· ._ ... _ ... _ .. ·_-··_-_·-··_. 9.c..0_8;..__;.7_'.i°..;,,;,f_.:.o.,;,.;9:...:0:....:0_· __ !

•·•. ::1

·' ·.- ·, ...... ··,:-;,:•: -;,:i~rator, I cerufv that I have a oro,;;r:im in olace to rcouce tho volume and toxicity of \'i::rste !JP.nrrntod lo lt:l' c:r.c:ree I h.1ve c!eterm,n;d to be r 1 • : :,1•-1 rn:11 I l>:1v1, :.<:locrco th,: pr.:c:1:::ibl<1 method ot tmatmunt, stor:i'}o, or u,spo~.11 c1.:1r<•nt1v avarl.lbloJ l<l ,r.,• \':nicn n11:11m,:.:05 the present ::rnd

: ...... • . '.. · . .., 1:r • :llh ana the t,nv,ro ent: OR. ,1 I :im a small nuanutv •J~nerator, I havo maao a good laith 1:llort to r:,,r.nr.,:!? ,r~ ,•,.1s1o! <;tlnerauori and serect

.· . .-.. ., : , ... ·.: ,, "'•"' method tn.11 it v,trlable to me an_11d,...,thr:1::.t,-l _car:n:,-::r_rt_or_o_. -"""""~--'-----,.c..-7'--'----------,-------~ jt ·,7 --~~?:/~.::;:~11Kl~'-. • M · ~ ~ ~ Mon111 Ody

r{,.'df

· '. ; ".-r,cnt 01 Ht!CC!lll Of M,1leri.11~

Mon:11 iJ.;y Year I c__n_~~ ·.-.J·l s-- S,n~U, r

1 • • -~ • • •• - ! .-r·•J:it l'JI RP.ce•Pt ar ~.1.1:l~~n!s ,z

ISignmuro Monell Day Ye.Jr

I

~ (j)

!C) (.v

: ·.·.~:., :::.:1 -~ .·!," ;ex:>

-~ ·- ._ ::- :.:~

N

a:

r

Tan-.. \t. .J C.1 .. "o'-100 I 0- ·I~ / O frm:5 - . . . . . .

,~~ n~ .. oe:,st ~33·rnMAZZA & SON~, 1·Nc. ~ · .,. S, qq T{Jt/5 . RecyclJng Division

3230 Shafto Road • Tinton Fans. NJ 07753 (908) 922.g292

Re,cyclf ng Material Receipt form

eustomer: ( < ;,,d·c \ :-\ c , Address: ;r. ;ldlc-;-d Q ,· K

Job Location: L - . "1 \,," 4- . ') •cl " & C + · ra, A~ ~ Data: ;?{ a ""Jvn(· r"f '::/

58.3b0 Lr G

I

Truck/ContainerNo---_..;::-----.. · c:t\ . -- ' }· Concrete

78950

.. Ucense Plale/0.E.P.• )'T ~:~'-i ~:j '~iphafti. -.,L "f~;"\ LB ;:, ~~

.:.QW'"Q ,. 'J ,.;;,~

1Uumpa -□ 10yd

.P,-20 yd

trs·o yd

□ 40yd

0 50yd

...------· j' 1 Cf 8i)

\ 5 .. 99 -\tsY,s-,

. l I> I" '\, ~

Brush Wood Paaeta Glass Tirt~ Pa!nl9dWood Shlnales

I I TOTAL: coo I~ i.: ! . . ,,, ij ' ,

r• •; !, : I : ; : ,:,.- - - ~ I ,.

Welghmaster:. ~- Customer:=1\ti ;.; I.;',.·, _: U,_,,) i ., I ·'

l.:. ...... -····---·.lr-..-------·~---:----~----- ~·--·- -·--· -- ...... ··-·· .... ---·-··- -_......_,_ ___ ......._ ______ . ··- -- .... :_ ______ -

--

~

ltem(s)

r '

I; I

1453 W. Park Ave., Wayside Asbury Park, N.J. 07712

908-493-3333

Quantity / Measure (tons, lbs., yds., ea.)

~~u,dt,~/ 4bta 1925

l~I 11,fJH I,: II I 1· I :111:11 111

Order Date

Deliver Date

Delivered D F.0.8./P.U. 0

Unit Price

Sub Total

Delivery

N.J. Tax

Total

18773 ___ / ___ ; __ _

(p 1 .:;J \ 1 7 1• I C.O.D. D Charge~-

Total

CALCULATION SHEET

112 z.__ Building No.

Tank Size /St;O gal

N JDEPE Reg . No . oo o /.SJ ] - i 7 (

Tank Void II, z. .. f ... tons

ITEM NO.

CJ 21..7..'2-/. (

ITEM NO.

CLEAN FILL

DESCRIPTION

C(e."-" /; //

DESCRIPTION

......

l,,lil.!HL: Ill I 111111 111

QUANTITY

.2./.d'J

/

TOTAL <. f. J'.J

STONE

QUANTITY

TOTAL

TICKET#

/8'??]

TICKET#

• SMTH

APPENDIX D

UST DISPOSAL CERTIFICATE

·-··

I I I

·i

)

I I

·1

f :I

' . -

~'<· \.;.·::fr•' :~:_;=_;_ ·::-

{f;/J: ·.' ,.

f.,. ··~~- . :~. _-., ... -~

a LDC, l'I ~')... _.,- U s--r'·

fl',:

. .'. Cu1lomer'1 Name

.. ··"'..• i:- ,:_,

. .. t .,, ii";'

·. :~~~­.: iY.f .. , 4 '~

,i.•; ·,n:; [-:,;'f:i

:i•-1 1 ;_~

MAZZA & SONS, INC. Metal Recyclers Auto and Truck 3230 Shafto Rd. Tinton· Falls, NJ (908) 922-9292

C~fcc LV~

l··•, ~:. 1 i ·:;• .

I~;h;.· ;Jr:: •.;1:1,.

S}lri · , .,. NO. _____ _

DATEt:2£Z'-!~r. f'(

. :·~, ~ ::t~(: .·tAddresa ______________________________________ _

Make or Autos • . I

;:.:,/~!'.1{. :t,;,

!(~~-

. I .... :, . ;.;,1 •,'..;~*~fJ!f;j;:\•; --~

Tires

Tank ~ ,.:.:.,..; ,;· .:

Pnce:

:? •, -.,:.: ·. ~

·jtt:i.t' ,.- .·

•1,,....._r,,• .

. •:.: •• ~ .. _\~ _"'i·: --~-

1.~ .. _\, /;rt:n:)\,.

i

. '3 9 5 y.:, 37840 LB G

/7(;./o

. ----··------·· . -.:·-:-··:-., ! 1;:~\ 1·1 ,-1:::::.-----[ . .::.. \. _____ c.-:._~ - . . . . I. -., ]

_I · - 2 8 ,,. · ' ,.

')

Casi Iron

,(~> --LI. Iron

Copper #1

Copper #2

LI. Copper

Brass

Alum Clean

Lead

Stainless

Radiators

Battery

TOTAL AMOUNT:

1ij);,;;+jf At ;' ,YY c,u · " e-cl-w,ugher .·,:, .•,. Cuslomer -~~

Weight Price

. '.·i-.i~ ~~

'3Y,1tO --

11·

: ~.

• SMTH

APPENDIX E

SOIL ANALYTICAL DATA PACKAGE

Report of Analysis U.S. Army, Fort Monmouth Environmental Laboratory

NJDEPE Certification# 13461

Client: U.S. Army DPW, SELFM-PW-EV Bldg. 167 Ft. Monmouth, NJ 07703

Lab. ID#: 1535.1-.8 Sample Rec'd: 06/21/94

Analysis S~art: 06/22/94 Analysis Comp: 06/22/94

Analysis: 418.1 (TPH) Matrix: Soil Analyst: S. Hubbard Ext. Meth: Sonc.

NJDEPE UST Reg.#: 0081533-171 Closure#: 07-June-94 Letter

DICAR #: Location#: Bldg. 1122 WEST

Lab ID. Description %Solid Result I MDL

1535.1 Site A, North/S OVA= ND 86

1535.2 Site B, West/S, : OVA= ND 85 '

1535.3 Site C, West/N OVA= ND 86 .,

1535.4 Site D, North/N OVA= ND 86 --

1535.5 Site E, East/N OVA= ND .,,~-

84.

1535.6 Site F, East/S OVA= ND 86

1535.7 Site G, Dupe of B OVA= ND 85

1535.8 Site H, Dupe of E OVA= ND 83

M. Bl. Method Blank 100

Notes: ND= Not Detected, MDL= Method Detection Limit *=Silica. Gel Added, NA= Not Applicable

(mg/Kg)

26.8 6.6

ND 6.6

ND 6.6 ~-

ND 6.6 ,

ND 6.6

7.97 6.6

ND 6.6

ND 6.6

ND 3 .·3

1535.8 dup= 100% 1535.8 s= 112% 1535.8 sd= 103% RPD= 9.1%

1.,1 !IHI ii ,,1,1 i :111,11 111

Brian K. McKee Laboratory Director

LJ_s_ .A..R.1\11-V- FC>RT IVIC>NI\IIC>U1H f P.O. II: Pws wt-!f'tf'Z I Chain of Cusl:.ody

Dal:.e / Time 51:.arl:.: t:I\\ Project II: Sampler:

~ C t . i) ]) ll.. .,- CJ1.) - - !Or' - I 11 I ~ ; , ; / / ~ A . I ~ us omer. r,. t:~n .J-. - •

Analysis Paramel:.ers

~ 5€1-,fM- 'P\AJ-6✓ usr 00~1~33 :-171---~ 7 ,. '-~-•L\-~ --~ Phone: 2- / 4 - _. ..c:_ .....,._._......._~ c--~1~ .ll of'

Bol:.l:.les

Preserval:.ion Mel:.hod

r--------i---1----+------"------1----1-----1-1-I I I I I I I ~-u - ► •r H "1

Relinquished By (signature) Dal:.e / T[me !Received By ~s\gnal:.ure) Shipped By: -~

Relinquished By (signature) Dal:.e / Time !Received for Lab by (signature): Date/ Time

/~ No~e: A drawing depicting sample local:.ion should be al:.l:.ached'fr drawn on l:.he reverse side of' this chain

of cusl:.ody.

SAI-ENV CDC form 01 Page 7

_..J____ of- -/-----. Pages Rev. A Date: 02 Rpr_.?3

Enviornmental Laboratory

Certification Number .. -. 3461

Report of Analysis U.S. Army, Fort Monmouth Environmental Laboratory

NJDEPE Certification # 13461

Client: U.S. Army DPW, SELFM-PW-EV Bldg. 167 Ft. Monmouth, NJ 07703

Analysis: Munsel

Lab ID#

1535.1 ": ~

1535.2 1535.3 1535.4

'

1535.5 1535.6 1535.7 1535.8

Lab. ID#: 1535.1-.8 Sample Rec'd: 06/21/94 Analysis Start: 06/22/94

Analysis Comp: 06/22/94

Soil Color

5Y 3/2 Dark Olive Gray. · 5Y 3/2 Dark Olive Gray 5Y 4/2 Olive Gray 5Y 4/2 Olive Gray 5Y4/3 Olive 5Y 3/2 Dark Olive Gray 5Y 3/2 Dark Olive Grav 5Y 4/3 Olive

Brian K. McKee Laboratory Director

.,

/'

f '

l ,

fo. 15 iog Ar/. __ :_ · · --·- · ·· ·. ---.a~...;._--=--•-.. . . . ---·· .... --------:.--· -- .. ..::-----.:=:_------~s

·- ___ i_,. _5_: __;;;_2._03_~-'-'-y .. ; .

,. --- - . ·- ·----· --

-"-!5 .:50:,/ ... 12 /fr/...

---·· ____ _15 ~ 5 ·.F. __ Y ~IL- ... __ _ _______ ...... ---·--- . .· .r/':

7535,3 I ~t/_ · - · .:_. . . - . '

::- ----~-> . .! 5-36._~,:/. __ , : .. .:? ;;l{Y.2>-- ~~ ----:: ----:~---j

35.5 ,.J .dl.D . - . ; ·-•··-··-- .--· -· /5' ... --- ___ }".) __ ... __________ ---------·- ' ·, ,'

. J 535.?, (p /{,/ • : - . .;..·•• . . - .

I I ___ •·-~-/_~ 3 6_._1_ __ p Lf_._u:;:_" - . . ..

:--~--_/5 3-5$'_ 2 ~I/_' _ • • _ . 1 ... - 0. • '

., t : -,

-I . ....

Jl

----- ,_ __ /53£8 ___ z,4/ ------ 72!,<f> '"-· ____ : . · I- -s.- ~- tr r; -.5? ~r-~ ~--- --'S~ ~., -,~ ._:_. __ .,. -.,,V J:4J!..O_:.. -:'-/__!_ -· ..... ~, ~J o c:--~-_"')-· -~.:- - .. :: ---- -;,_---·,::------,:1- -.-_o·--~.::;:i---:-o

i __ ~:_13:3f:L U4:'Y: --~;~~ -I • • • •• l

I i

:-· -·- -.--·-··-···--·· -------------- --------------- ------~-~ •• I

. i --' I :

: ---·----··· .,,_. ------ - i I ;: -

--· ---------------·--------- --------1

-=

·' . .:.·.i

,,

PHC Conformance/Non-conformance Summary Report No Yes

1. Blank Contamination - If yes, list the sample and the / corresponding concentrations in each blank

2. Matrix Spike/Matrix Sp Dup. Recoveries Meet .Criteria (If not met, list the sample and corresponding recovery which falls outside the acceptable range) ·

3. IR Spectra submitted for standards, blanks, & samples

4. Chromatograms submitted for standards, blanks, and samples if GC fingerprinting was conducted.

' .

5. Extraction holding ti.me met. (If not met, list number of days exceeded for each1 sample)

6. Analysis holding time met. (If not met,list number of days exceeded for each sample)

Comments: _________________________ _

Laboratory Authentication Statement

I certify under penalty of law, where applicable, that this ---._. laboratory meets the Laboratory Performance Standards and Quality

Control requirements specified in N.J.A.C. 7:18 and 40 CFR Part 136 for Water and Wastewater Analyses and SW 846 for Solid Waste Analysis. I have personally examined the information contained in this report, and to the best of my knowledge, I believe that the submitted information is true, accurate, complete, and meets the above referenced standards where applicable. I am aware that there are stgnificant penalties for purposefully submitting falsified information, including the possibility of a fine and imprisonment.

Project #1535 -z~~ef Brian K. Mcee Laboratory Manager

Report of Analysis U.S. Army, Fort Monmouth Environmental Laboratory

NJDEPE Certification# 13461

~tent: U.S. Army Lab. ID#: 1540.1-.5 Sample Rec'd: 06/24/94

Analysis Start: 06/24/94 Analysis Comp: 06/24/94

DPW, SELFM-PW-EV Bldg. 167 Ft. Monmouth, NJ 07703

~ lysis: 418.1 (TPH) Ia. -rix: Soil malyst: s. Hubbard .1!Y'""'. Meth: Sonc.

NJDEPE UST Reg.#: ·oos1s33-l 7l Closure#: 07-June-94 Letter

DICAR #: Location#: Bldg. 1122 pipes

T,~b ID. Description %Solid Result I MDL (mg/Kg)

....,_~ ·~

1540.1 Site AA - Tank OVA= 60. 98 ND 6.6 ( ,

._,540.2 Site BB - E. Tank OVA= 90. 97 117. 6.6

,1_540.3 Site cc - Center OVA= ND 96 88.0 6.6

'11540.4 Site DD - w. Bldg .. OVA= ND 94 8.83 6.6 ; ' 1540.5 Site EE - Bldg. OVA= ND 95. 17.0 6.6

r

.

M. Bl. Method Blank J.00 ND 3.3

', Notes: ND= Not Detected, MDL= Method Detection Limit *=Silica Gel Added, NA= Not Applicable

I ' J.540.3 dup= 106% J.540.3 S= 107% 1540.3 sd= 93% RPD=13.7%

I ~I f/l (' 1 ,' I I I 11 // /1/

Brian K. McKee Laboratory Director

111, ;r,

u..:s_ ARMY, FORT. MC>NMdLJ~=t4 !,P.O. II: pws; (9 07 I Chain of Cusl:.ody

Project:. II: Sampler:l,e5/ (U~/L( Dale/ Time Analysis 51:.arl:.:

I Paramel:.ers Customer: D(.lD .

DI f:)tlG(l,,- D~s,4---:C· Sit73L'54 I 12''2-v''\;/;

Finish:

x.. ~, L-( 7 -( US1 00&1 S-3 3- 17 / Phone: '_,)

FJ~I- L--tl\J€S ~ Preserval:.ion

Mel:.hod Lab Sample· · 1111111111 Cusl:.omer Sample Sample . II of v J I

ID Number Dale/Time Local:.ion/ID Number 11al:.rix Bol:.1:.les Remarks

l5fO.J J r2)-{-'H s,~r; A-I+-, hNll So1L- \ t Li -/, 60 / J I z... I

l3 i3"'1='1'~ A> ... lL

I I{~ c,_ - c&:-a_f! ~ ~ -~ j4 b f")-W 8LD :-, j ·1'1)

\. 1/, r::;-- \j / \ / ~~---'01..t6 ' J ,/.' ''.) \1 'I IV( I . ....,,

'- -...

. \ I

()I/~ I J Ss ' OC--.. •. C!A1.,1 B~A715[) G-2..:t

-0 o/J A-tfc_

~'f' //

-9.r?o·)/6~ WYb -· --I.',

~J'rluishe/J B) /tgn•z Dal:.e / T i'me Received By Ssignal:.ure) Shipped By: '-e: 9 3 f'/7111 ~•~'1( ~~M ~zf ..q~ I 'lt/o 'Jy 0,~~ltV - II - - " I

t:.. I ReliiJuished 'g'y (signature) Dale/ Time Received for Lab by (signal:.ure): Dale/ Time

I Li~~ t-,;z7' I/ f"/4 Nol:.e: A drawing depicting sample location should be al:.l:.ached or drawn on l:.he reverse side ~f this chain

of cusl:.ody.

SRI-ENV C0C form 01 Page of Pages Rev. A Dale: 02 Apr.93 .. . ' . Enviornmental Laboratory

ertific:::a.tion Number "1 346"1

r '

Report of Analysis U.S. Army, Fort Monmouth Environmental Laboratory

NJDEPE Certification # 13461

Client: U.S. Army DPW, SELFM-PW-EV Bldg. 167 Ft. Monmouth, NJ 07703

Analysis: Munsel

Lab ID#

1540.1 1540.2 1540.3 1540.4 1540.5

Soil Color

Lab. ID#: 1540.1-.5 Sample Rec'd: 06/24/94

Analysis Start: 06/24/94 Analysis Comp: 06/24/94

2.5Y 5/4 Light Olive Brown 2.5Y 4/2 Dark Grayish Brown 2.5Y.5/4 Light Olive Brown 2.5Y 6/4 Light Yellowish Brown 2.5Y 5/4 Light Olive Brown

Brian K. McKee Laboratory Director

--··-

--··-- - ... -·--·- ·- ---- ......... -- ···--··-···-· -·-·- ·--· -----------·-----. .

-------·------/5'/0.I __ O_ . ..4£/ __ _____ --·----------·---f ___ _

-- _1.~.r..o ~2. __ ~ ~_!f_'[___ -----·----

- --· -> .. - _/ :}· __ f.()_ ! 3__ -...5/_,A,/_i,✓-_ __ :-: -----'·- ___ ::J_ --- ·.-; ________ -:::

·· __ [roio~ --~3 ;.,_ .: -P-v! .. " __ ? _1._a /o-3 __ __ }'ot!f// ____ -6.eJ--> . ____ -_1....--:'5 fo.~ -?S-/f(/ • _ ftu/J: ~ - -

-·-----~ ___ __15 fr?.'/ .... 2 _/{V __ ___________ _ ______ .

___________ j-5'fi?:5 ___ 5'.,,t/1/ -------

. ,~;--~------~--Js?-~--- ~j--~-g:~--g-: ~ ~ ---·- -----------------·- -·----·--••·--

'

. ·.; I.. , j' ! . : ; ij . '

I I I• : !

PHC Conformance/Non-conformance Summary Report

1. Blank Contamination - If yes, list the sample and the corresponding concentrations in each blank

2. Matrix Spike/Matrix Sp Dup. Recoveries Meet Criteria (If not met, list the sample and corresponding recovery which falls outside the acceptable range) .

3. IR Spectra submitted for standards, blanks, & samples

4. Chromatograms submitted for standards, blanks, and samples if GC fingerprinting was conducted.

5. Extraction holding time met. (If not met, list number of days exceeded for each.sample)

6. Analysis holding time met. (If not met,list number of days exceeded for each sample)

Comments: _________________________ _

Laboratory Authentication Statement

./

I certify under penalty of law, where applicable, that this laboratory meets the Laboratory Performance Standards and Quality

-- Control requirements specified in N.J.A.C. 7:18 and 40 CFR Part 136 for Water and Wastewater Analyses and SW 846 for Solid Waste Analysis. I have personally examined the information contained in this report, and to the best of my knowledge, I believe that the submitted information is true, accurate, complete, and meets the above referenced standards where applicable. I am aware that there are significant penalties for purposefully submitting falsified information, including the possibility of a fine and imprisonment.

Project #1540 ~: ;<~---Brian K. McKee Laboratory Manager