revised sve performance test report state …conjunction with the revised sve performance test...

Colder Associates Inc.305 Fellowship Road, Suite 200Mt. (aural, NJ USA 08064

REVISEDSVE PERFORMANCE TEST REPORTSTATE COLLEGE, PENNSYLVANIA

Prepared For

Ruetgcrs-Ncasc Corporation201 Struble Road

State College, PA 16801

Prepared by:

Colder Associates305 Fellowship Road, Suite 200

Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054

CDCO

DISTRIBUTION: «=>CO4 Copies - US Environmental Protection Agency . ^2 Copies - Pennsylvania Department Environmental Protection2 Copies • Ruetgers-Nease Corporation2 Copies - Colder Associates Inc.

November 1997 Project No.: 963-6333

OFFICES IN AUSTRAUA, CANADA, GERMANY, HUNGARY, ITALY. SWEDEN, UNITED KINGDOM, UNITED STATES

Ruetgers-NeaseCorporation" A subsidiary of RutgersAG

I ;201 Strubie Road. State College. PA 16801 Phone: 814-238-2424 • Fax: 814-238-1567

November 6, 1997

VIA FEDEX

Frank Klanchar (3HW22) Douglas OverdorffEPA Remedial Project Manager Department Project CoordinatorUnited States Environmental PA Department of EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Region III Protection, North Central Region841 Chestnut Building 208 W. Third StreetPhiladelphia, PA 19107 Williamsport, PA 17701

RE: Centre County Kepone Site, State College,Focused Feasibility Study and Revised Soil Vapor ExtractionTest Report

Dear Frank and Doug:

Section VI, Paragraph 13 of the Consent Decree and the Record ofDecision (ROD) for Operable Unit No. 1 (OU-1) provide Ruetgers-Nease Corporation (RNC) the opportunity to prepare and submit aFocused Feasibility Study (FFS) regarding the OU-1 remedy for soil(excavation) . Colder Associates Inc. (Colder) has prepared the FFSand the Revised Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) Performance Test Reporton behalf of RNC for the Centre County Kepone Site in StateCollege, Pennsylvania. This FFS provides a detailed, analysis of anAlternative Soil Remedy (enhanced SVE with limited excavation) anda comparative analysis of the two remedies with regard to the NCPcriteria.

The Revised SVE Performance Report has been updated to provideadditional data collected during the long-term performance test andresponse to Agency comments as detailed in the July 8, 1996 commentletter. Also, additional soil data collected during the 1997 Pre-Design Investigation are included. The FFS should be reviewed inconjunction with the Revised SVE Performance Test Report..

This, letter is to request EPA to review and approve the combinedsoil remedy (SVE with limited excavation) as an alternative to theROD soil remedy (excavation) . RNC also proposes a meeting withinthe next few weeks to go over the FFS with you and your technical

AR309308

RNC

staff. Please do not hesitate to contact me at (814) 231-9200 toarrange a meeting or if you have any questions regarding thesedocuments.

Very truly yours,

Rainer F. DomalskiProject Coordinator

Attachmentscc: H. Greenberg

F. Gheorghiu (Colder)

AR309309

November 1997 -i- 963-6333

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Cover Letter

Table of Contents i

Executive Summary E-l

SECTION PAGE

1.0 INTRODUCTION....,...................

2.0 SITE SETTING,.................,..........»..........................,...,.,........................................,.......22.1 Site Name and Location..........................................,.................;........................... 22.2 Site Description.................................................................................................... 22.3 Site Geology and Hydrogeology ..,.,.,„.,.,.....,..».....„,.,...,..,..,.....,............. 32.4 Subsurface Soil Characterization ......,.,,...,,.,,..,.,.,.....,.,......,„........,.......... 42.5 Remedial Technology Description,......„,.,,..,.....,..,.,.„......,..,...„*...........,.. 52.6 Treatment Process and Scale..,.,..,,.....,.....,,,.,......,.,.....,..,.......,..............,.. 5

3.0 SVE PERFORMANCE TEST APPROACH,,..,....,,,.,,,,,.,,,,...,,....,..,....,..,...., 63.1 Initial SVE Performance Test.,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,..,,,...,.,,,,....,,... 63.2 Short-Term SVE Performance Test .„,,,.,.„.,,,.„„,,„,„..„.,,„„,,,„.„.,,„„ 6

L / 3.2.1 Field Activities,..,,,,,.,.,.,,,.,,,.,,,,,..,.,»,..,,,,,..,,,.,,,,,,.,,.63.2.2 Sample Collection and Analysis .,.,,,,,.,.,,.,,...,,..,,.,,,,...,,,.,...,,.8

3.3 I ng-TeimSVETest.,..,,.,,.,....,,,.,,,.,.,;,,,.,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,..,,,..,,.3.3.1 Field Activities.,,,,.,,,,,,..,,,,,,,»,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,.,.,,,.,...,,,83.3.2 Sample Collection and Analysis ..,,....,,,,,,,.,,,..,,,,,,,,,,,,.,.,,.,9

3.4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control ,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,»,,,..,,,,,,.,.,,,,,,,,,,9

4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION,,,,.....,.,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,.,, 114.1 Data Analysis and Interpretation,,,,.,.,.,,,,,,,,....,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,...,, 11

4.1.1 Short-Term SVE Performance Test ,,„„.,..,.,.,,..,,„„,,„.,..„,... 114.1.2 Long-Term SVE Performance Test.,..,,,.....,..,,....,,,,,-....,,,.:.....,.. 124.1.3 Conceptual SVE Design.,,.....,,,,.,,,..,,,,,.....,,,,.,,,,,..,,,..... 13

4.1.3.1 Introduction.,..,,.,,..,.,,,,,.....,,.....,...,...,,,..,.,,...,... . 134.1.3.2 Model Description.,...,,.,....,.,,....,,,,,,,..,,,,...,.,.,,.... 134.1-.3.3 Model Calibration,..,..,....,,,,,,,....,.,.,...,,,,......,,,....., 154.1.3.4 Conceptual SVE System ....„,,„......,..,„„,...,„„,...,„.,......., 174.1.3.5 Conclusions ....,.,.„....„,,,,,..,„,.;......,„.,».,„,,..,,,.....,. 194.1.3.6 Estimation of Cleanup Time .„.,...„.»;..„„.....,,,...„...,...„,. 20

4.2 Recommendations .,....,...„,..„.....„,...,.....„..,„,„..,„.....,„„,.„..,.....„.„, 22

5.0 REFERENCES .,,,,..,.,,,,,.,,,,,..,»,,,,..,»,,,»,,...,,.,.....,,,,»,..,...,...,.,,.24

Colder Associates AR 30 93 10

November 1997 - ii - 963-6333

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2*1 Soil Concentrations from Tank Farm AreaTable 3-1 TO-14 Data from Short-Term Performance TestTable 3-2 Mass Removal Rates at Extraction Well E-2 (Fractured Well) (Using Laboratory

VOC Data - Long-Term Test)Table 3-3 Mass Removal Rates at Extraction Well E-3 (Unfractured Well) (Using

Laboratory VOC Data - Long-Term Test)Table 3*4 Mass Removal Rates at Extraction Well BR-2 (Using Laboratory VOC Data

Long-Term Test)Table 3-5 Mass Removal Rates at Extraction Well E-2 (Short-Term Test Only)Table 3-6 Mass Removal Rates at Extraction Well E-3 (Short-Term Test Only)Table 3-7 Mass Removal Rates at Extraction Well BR-1 (Short-Term Test Only)Table 3-8 Mass Removal Rates at Extraction Well BR-2 (Short-Term Test Only)Table 3-9 TO- 14 Data from Long-Term Performance TestTable 4-1 Calibrated Model ParametersTable 4-2 Calibrated Model Extraction Air FlowsTable 4-3 Extraction Air Flows: Scenarios 1 to 4

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2-1 Site Location PlanFigure 2-2 Study AreaFigure 2-3 Interpreted Thickness of Overburden

Figure 3-1 SVE Performance Test Layout

Figure 4- 1 . Model Domain: State College Tank Farm AreaFigure 4-2 Model GridFigure 4-3 Schematic Cross Section of AIR3D Model LayersFigure 4-4 Tank Farm SVE Performance Test Calibrated ModelFigure 4-5 Tank Farm SVE System: Scenario 1Figure 4-6 Tank Farm SVE System: Scenario 2Figure 4-7 Tank Farm SVE System: Scenario 3Figure 4-8 Tank Farm SVE System: Scenario 4Figure 4-9 Tank Farm SVE System: Intermediate Design

Colder Associates A R 3 0 9 3 I t

November 1997 - iii - 963-6333

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Borehole and Well Installation LogsAppendix B Standard Operating ProceduresAppendix C PDI Analytical DataAppendix D SVE Model Hydrogeologic Properties MapsAppendix E Calibrated Model Pressure Contour Maps for Layers 3,4, 5,6, and 7Appendix F Soil Contaminant Mass CalculationsAppendix G Response to Agency Comments Letter dated July 8,1996

Colder Associates A R 3 0 9 3 I 2

November 1997 E-l 963-6333

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

' ' . " ' ' ' ' ' ' . . .The Center County Kepone Site (Site) located in State College, Pennsylvania includes anoperating chemical manufacturing facility currently owned by Ructgers-Ncase Corporation(RNC). The RI/FS for the Site was completed in 1994. On April 24, 1997, the United StatesEnvironmental Protection Agency (USEPA) issued a Record of Decision (ROD) for the Sitedated April 21, 1995. The RI/FS determined that the Site posed no unacceptable risk based oncurrent use and the only unacceptable future risk was to potential future on-site residents,principally from groundwater exposure to volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The RODtherefore selected a remedy that includes the following elements on the RNC property to addressgroundwater and potential sources of contamination that could impact groundwater:

• Groundwater extraction and treatment, including both a source control component andmeans to prevent migration of contaminated groundwater off the RNC property; and,

• • Soil and sediment excavation, where possible, to remove VOCs which could impactgroundwater quality.

The ROD also clearly indicates that disruptions to plant operations shall be limited and that the^-^ facility remained operational.

Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) was considered by the USEPA as an alternative to excavation andwas considered likely to be effective but potentially infeasible due to the low permeability of thesoils, perched water conditions and physical constraints of an operating manufacturing plant.USEPA therefore selected the excavation alternative, acknowledging that this alternative will notbe feasible at some locations and stating that "a pilot study should be performed to provide datato support the design of an SVE well system".

In response to the ROD, RNC undertook a program of .fall-scale field testing in late 1995,including an initial performance test followed by a 5 week (short-term) performance test. Along-term performance test was then initiated in January 1996 and completed on August 1,1996.While the long-term test was still ongoing, an original submission of this report (ColderAssociates, 1996) was submitted to the USEPA and the Pennsylvania Department ofEnvironmental Protection (PADEP, with USEPA. jointly referred to as the Agencies) on April 5,1996. .The Agencies formally commented on that report in a letter dated July 8, 1996. TOsRevised SVE Performance Test Report has been prepared to address the July 8, 1996 Agency


November 1997 E-2 963-6333

comments and updates the report with the results from the long-term test. A Response toAgency Comments Document has been prepared and is provided in Appendix G of this Report. v jIn addition, results from the Pre-Design Investigation (PDI) soil sampling and analyses from theTank Farm Area have also been considered and are included in Appendix C.

In summary, the pilot test results demonstrated that SVE enhanced via hydraulic fracturing is aneffective means to withdraw large quantities of VOCs from the subsurface soil and will haveminimal impacts to plant operations. Technical concerns resulting from the low permeability ofthe subsurface soil and perched water conditions were resolved. Overall, the SVE technologyhas been proven to be a feasible and implementable technology for the site capable ofimplementing the overall remedial objectives, i.e., protection of groundwater within a relativelyshort period of time.

The following sections of this Executive Summary include a brief synopsis of the site conditions,the test program and the principal results achieved. The performance data has also been used tocalibrate a three-dimensional numerical airflow model for the site. Using the calibrated model, apreliminary conceptual design for an SVE system in the areas of concern on the RNC propertywas developed to illustrate the implementability of an SVE system in low permeability soils at , jthe Site. Finally, using the mass removal results from the long-term test, new subsurface soilquality data from the PDI, and a revised SVE design, an estimate of cleanup times for the TankFarm area was performed.

ConditionsThe Site is directly underlain by rock formations of the Loysburg Group and Bellefonte Group,both of which have been repeated as the result of a thrust fault which bisects the Site. Overlyingthe bedrock is a layer of residual soils and man-made fill. The residual soils are typically gray toreddish-brown silty clays Oikely from the Hagerstown-Opequam-Hublesburg Association) thatare the result of in-place weathering of the bedrock. Sand lenses have been observed in theclays. Fill materials generally are variable soils (from clays to gravels) that have been placed atthe Site for grading/construction and may include reworked residual soil. The interpretedthickness of overburden in the Tank Farm Area generally ranges between 10 and 20 feet Insome areas, soil/rock permeability is too low for the soil to completely drain and infiltrationrecharge is sufficient to create local perched (partially saturated) groundwater zones in the soiloverburden. Based upon soil descriptions, the depth of partial saturation associated with perchedconditions is inferred to range from approximately 5 feet to 15 feet below ground surface.

Colder Associates ' A R 3 0 9 3 I

November 1997 E-3 963-6333

Proceduret j An initial (24 hour) performance test was conducted in August 1995 using a single well in the

Tank Farm area and six monitoring points to assess potential airflows, vacuum heads, and radiiof influence. Based upon the results of this test a full-scale performance test was designed, alsoin the Tank Farm area, including the following features:

• 2 SVE Wells screened in overburden soils;

• 2 SVE Wells screened in shallow (unsaturated) bedrock; and,

• 16 monitoring points screened at various levels within the overburden and shallowbedrock.

Sand filled horizontal fractures were also installed from one of the overburden SVE wells using ahydraulic fracturing technique. The fracturing was monitored and controlled using state-of-the-art real-time resistivity and surface tilt-meter tracking of fracture propagation in the subsurface.Two fractures were installed at depths of approximately 12.5 feet and 14 feet bgs and propagatedapproximately 10 feet to 12 feet laterally from the well. Surface movements associated with thefracture installation were negligible and no disruption to plant operations occurred.

O • .A full-scale performance test of the system was undertaken for a 5 week period betweenNovember 20 and December 27, 1995. The following performance parameters were monitoredduring the test:

• Airflow rates;

• Vacuum heads in wells and monitoring points; and, •

• VOC .concentrations in extracted soil gas, by both field instruments and laboratory TO*14 analyses.

During the short-term performance test it was noted that water was present in the fracturedextraction well such that the fractures were submerged and unable to properly contribute toremoval of VOCs. Following completion of the test, the system was shutdown andmodifications were made to winterize the system and to provide a means to remove the perchedwater in the zone being treated by the pilot SVE well. The system was then placed back inoperation in January 1996 and was run continuously thereafter as a long-term performance test

v^y through July 1996. The following general conclusions from the performance test may be drawn:


November 1997 E-4 963-6333

During the short-term test, the unfractured well (E-3) removed approximately 37 lb.(1.23 lb./day) of VOCs and the fractured well (E-2) removed approximately 46 lb. (1.53IbVday) of VOCs at well head vacuums of around 10 inches of mercury;

In the subsequent long-term test, following control of perched water in the fracturesystem, the rate of removal from the fractured well increased to 4.2 IbVday at the samewell wellhead vacuum, compared to the increase to 1.85 IbVday for the unfractured well;and

The radii of influence for the unfractured and fractured wells, based on monitoring pointmeasurements of induced vacuum, were approximately 15 feet and 40 feet, respectively.

A three-dimensional numerical model of subsurface airflow was constructed using the computercode AIR3D numerical model (Version 1.3, Joss & Baehr, 1995). The numerical model wascalibrated to the results of the short-term performance test and matched the field observations ofair flow to within 1 percent. The calibrated value of air permeability (4xlO"'° cm1) for theresidual soil was somewhat lower than published values for similar materials (Edwards & Jones,1994) and the radii of influence were also underestimated in relation to the field measurements.As a result conservative predictions are expected from the calibrated model, i.e., the model willtend to underestimate the performance of SVE.

Based on an extensive program of SVE performance testing and associated numerical modeling,the following conclusions may be drawn:

• SVE is a feasible and implementable remedy at the Site;

• Where necessary, hydraulic fracturing is effective in reducing the number of wellsrequired in low permeability soils. Fracturing can be monitored and controlled usingstate-of-the-art real-time resistivity and tilt-meter measurements such that 'adverseeffects on the plant operations can be avoided;

• Use of the natural "underdrain" provided by the unsaturated bedrock and the inducedundcrdrain provided by horizontal soil fractures further assists in overcoming potentialproblems associated with low permeability soils;

• The effects of perched water conditions, while present, can be mitigated by vacuumremoval, especially in the case of fractured wells; and

• Reasonable and implementable SVE wellfields could achieve cleanup in a relativelyshort period of time with minimal disruption to plant operations.

D:\PROJECTS\M3-«33\SVE\97FINAL\EXECSUM.DOC

Goldar Associates A R 3 0 9 3 I 6

November 1997 -1- 933-6333

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Colder Associates Inc. (Colder Associates) was retained by Ruetgers-Nease Corporation (RNC)to implement a pilot-scale fracture enhanced soil vapor extraction (SVE) performance test at theCentre County Kepone Site (Site), located in State College, Pennsylvania. The Tank Farm Areaat the facility was the focus of this testing effort RNC retained RE. Wright of Middletown,Pennsylvania to install, initially operate, and maintain the SVE system for the duration of the testSVE testing was conducted in three phases including an initial performance test, a short-termperformance test, and a long-term performance test.

The following sections provide the Site Setting (Section 2) and the SVE Performance TestApproach (Section 3). Section 4 provides Results and Discussion on the performance testing andassociated numerical modeling followed by References.


November 1997 -2- 933-6333

2.0 SITE SETTING

2.1 Site Name and Location X-X

RNC owns and operates a chemical manufacturing plant in State College, Pennsylvania (Site).The plant on this Site has operated since 1958 when it was built and opened by Nease ChemicalCompany, Inc. (Nease), then the owner of the property on which the plant is located. As a resultof an acquisition in December 1977, RNC has operated the plant since then.

On September 8, 1983, the facility was placed on the Comprehensive Environmental Response,Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) National Priorities List (NPL). Pursuant toCERCLA, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA),Ruetgers-Nease and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) entered intoan Administrative Order by Consent (AOC, EPA Docket No. IU-88-22-DC) on November 7,1988. The AOC stipulated that a Remedial Investigation (RI) and Feasibility Study (FS) beperformed at the Ruetgers-Nease facility (the Site) and specific off-Site areas (the Study Area).The Site and the Study Area together constitute the CERCLA Site evaluated in the RI/FS. TheRI Report (SMC, 1992, Golder Associates, 1993) and FS Report (Golder Associates, 1994)present more details on the regulatory setting for the Site, The RI was conditionally approved by ^**~SUSEPA on April 17, 1993 and the FS was conditionally approved on September 27, 1994. OnApril 24,1995, USEPA issued a Record of Decision (ROD) for the Site dated April 21,1995.

2.2 Site Description

The Site is located in College Township, Centre County, Pennsylvania, approximately two andone-quarter miles northeast of the Borough of State College. The Site occupies an area ofapproximately 32.2 acres and includes RNC's active manufacturing facility. The RNCmanufacturing facility is located on Route 26 and Struble Road about 3,000 feet north of theintersection of State Routes 322 and 26 (Figure 2-1). The SVE performance test study area islocated in the Tank Farm Area, which is southwest of Struble Road and Building #1 and adjacentto the Conrail tracks, as shown on Figure 2-2.

The topography of the Site (shown on Figure 2-1) is relatively gently sloping terrain located onthe northwest flank of Nittany Mountain. Ground surface elevations in the area range fromapproximately 1,090 feet above mean sea level (ft.MSL) near the railroad tracks to 1,120 ft.MSLin the southeastern portion of the Site. Surface water at the Site flows as runoff to a retention

Golder Associates A R 3 0 9 3 I 8

November 1997 -3- 933-6333

basin before being discharged to the on-site Fresh Water Drainage Ditch (FWDD), whichultimately discharges to Spring Creek.

The regional climate is temperate and wet, with precipitation occurring throughout the year.Average monthly temperatures range from a minimum of 24.7 degrees Fahrenheit (e F) inJanuary to a maximum of 71.6° F in July, with a mean annual temperature of 48.8° F. In 1996,monthly precipitation for the area ranged from 2.0 inches in February to 1 1 inches in September,with a yearly total of 59.3 inches.

In the immediate vicinity of the Site, the land use is predominantly industrial, commercial, andresidential. Residential dwellings are located along the southeast border of the Site.Commercial establishments are located along State Route 26 which is heavily traveled and runsadjacent to the Site. According to the Centre County Regional Planning Commission, the 1990population in College Township was 7,620, with a projected population of 8,400 by 1995. Localpublic water supply is provided throughout the surrounding area by the Lemont Water Company(SMC, 2992).

Soil associations in the vicinity of the Site are the Hagerstown-Opequon-Hublesburg Associationand the Murril-Clarksburg Association. In the immediate Site area, Murrill gravelly loams, andurban land soils are present. Subsurface soils in the vicinity of the production area consistmostly of fill material, clays, and silts (SMC, 1 992).

23 Site Geology and Hydrogeology

Characterization and subsequent subsurface remediation of a Site requires development of anunderstanding of the geologic and hydrogeologic systems controlling contaminant fete andtransport. The scope of the Site characterization described herein is primarily limited to theSite's uppermost zone .the associated local geologic and hydrogeologic controls. Additionalregional and local geologic and hydrogeologic settings are described in the RI Report (SMC,1992 and Colder Associates, 1993). .

The Site (Figure 2-1) is located in the Nittany Valley between Spring Creek and NittanyMountain. This area is directly underlain by rock formations of the Loysburg Group and

i Bellefonte Group, both of which have been repeated as the result of a thrust fault which bisectsthe Site (Colder Associates, 1994), Overlying the bedrock is a layer of residual soils and man-


v_ </

November 1997 -4- 933-6333

made fill. The residual soils are typically gray to reddish brown silty clays (likely from theHagerstown-Opequam-Hublesburg Association) that are the result of in-place weathering of thebedrock. Sand lenses have been observed in the clay. Fill materials generally are variable soils(from clays to gravels) that have been placed at the Site for grading/construction and mayinclude reworked residual soil. The interpreted thickness of overburden in the Tank Farm Areagenerally ranges between 10 and 20 feet as shown on Figure 2-3.

The man-made fills and in-situ residual soils are generally dry to an approximate depth of 5 feetbelow ground surface (bgs) where perched water zones can be encountered. The truegroundwater table of phreatic surface in this area of the Site is about 25 feet bgs. Below theresidual soil* the bedrock is unsaturated and acts as a drain for precipitation, which percolatesdown from the ground surface to the bedrock. Where the bedrock is fractured or modified bydissolution, drainage is relatively rapid; however, where intact and unweathered bedrock isencountered, some lateral movement of the groundwater may occur along the soil/rock interface.This lateral movement occurs until a discontinuity (fracture, bedding plane parting, or solutioncavity) in the bedrock is intercepted, and the interface zone is then drained. However, in someareas, the soil/rock permeability is too low for the soil to completely drain and infiltrationrecharge is sufficient to create local saturated (perched) groundwater zones in the soiloverburden. Based upon soil boring logs (Appendix A) and soil descriptions, the depth of partialsaturation associated with perched conditions is inferred to range from approximately 5 feet bgsto 15 feet bgs.

2.4 Subsurface Soil Characterization

Based upon the data obtained during the RI and FS, the USEPA has determined that remediationof subsurface soils is needed at the Site in three areas: the Tank Farm Area, the Former DrumStaging Area and the Designated Outdoor Storage Area all of which are part of the operatingmanufacturing plant; Data collected during the RI indicates that these areas have significantcontamination from Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). The predominant VOCs detected inthese areas are aromatic hydrocarbons and chlorinated aliphatic compounds. The USEPA hasdetermined that removal of VOCs from the overburden soils in these three areas is necessary tobe protective of groundwater. Direct contact exposure to these soils does not represent anunacceptable risk based on current or reasonably anticipated future Site use scenarios. Table 2-1summarizes VOC data collected during the RI from boreholes located in the vicinity of the TankFarm Area. Additional soil data collected during the SVE performance tests are also

Colder Associates A R 3 0 9 3 2 0

November 1997 -5- 933-6333

summarized on Table 2-1. Appendix C presents data collected from the Tank Farm Area as part\^J of the Pre-Design Investigation (PDI) in April 1997.

2.5 Remedial Technology Description

The ROD for the Site specifies that the VOC contaminants in the soil should be removed throughexcavation so as to be protective of groundwater. The purpose of the present study is todetermine if SVE is a viable alternative to excavation, particularly when hydraulic fracturing isused to enhance the permeability of the overburden soils and when it could be implemented withonly limited disruption to plant operations. RNC has therefore undertaken a series ofperformance tests to gather actual field data to examine the effectiveness of this technique. TheTank Farm Area, which is the most highly contaminated, was selected as the focus of thesestudies; however, it is anticipated that this technique would also be applicable to the other lesscontaminated areas of the Site designated in the ROD.

2:6 Treatment Process and Scale

RNC has undertaken a phased approach for performance testing to assess the effectiveness ofI / SVE at this Site. In August 1995, an initial 24-hour single well performance test was performed

to assess whether this remediation technology was potentially applicable for the site-specificconditions and to determine key design parameters. The initial performance test is discussedfurther in Section 3.1. In November 1995, a short-term (5-week) performance test was initiatedusing multiple wells. Comparative data were gathered in this test for both fractured andunfractured soil conditions. The short-term performance test is discussed further in Section 3.2.At the end of January 1996, following enhancement to the system, RNC initiated a long-termperformance test, which concluded on August 1,1996 after 188 days of operation. The purposeof this test was to gather additional data on a continuing basis to demonstrate the long-termperformance of SVE. The long-term performance test is further discussed in Section 3.3.

Colder Associates A R 3 0 9 3 2 1

November 1997 -6- 933-6333

3.0 SVE PERFORMANCE TEST APPROACH

As noted in Section 1.3.1, a phased approach was used to conduct SVE performance testing atthe Site. The initial performance test was conducted over a two-day period in August 1995. Theshort-term performance test was conducted over a five-week period in November and December1995 and the long-term performance test was initiated in January 1996 was ongoing when theSVE Performance Test report was originally submitted to the Agencies on April 5, 1996.Subsequent to the April 5, 1996 submission, the long-term test was completed on August 1, 1996.The data provided in Tables 3-2 through 3-4 of revised report includes all long-term test data.

3.1 Initial SVE Performance Test

Colder Associates performed an initial SVE performance test in August 1995. Six piezometers(P-l through P-6) and one extraction well (E-l) were installed in the Tank Farm Area (Figure 3-1). Soil samples were collected from each of these boreholes and submitted to Centre AnalyticalLaboratories, Inc. (CAL) to determine VOC constituents and concentrations. These data aresummarized on Table 2-1. Pneumatic air flow testing was conducted and the results were usedto perform preliminary air flow modeling to assess the viability of SVE as a remedial alternativefor the Site. The results of this initial performance test were used to develop the approach for theshort-term performance test that was conducted in November and December 1995.

3.2 Short-Term SVE Performance Test

3.2.1 Held Activities

In preparation for the short-term SVE test, RNC contracted Colder Associates and their specialistsubsidiary Colder Applied Technologies, Inc. (GAT) to install extraction wells, monitoring probes,and sand filled horizontal hydraulic fractures in one extraction well. The locations of the SVEperformance test and these additional borings are shown in Figure 3*1. The ficldwork began onNovember 9, 1995. GAT conducted hydraulic fracturing at one extraction well located in theoverburden (well E-2). Two horizontal fractures, approximately 1 inch to 2 inches thick and 10 feetto 18 feet in diameter, were induced at approximately 12.5 feet bgs and 14feetbgs. Fractures wereinitiated using the patented "Fractool" system and filled with sand carried in a temporary viscous,propping fluid made of naturally occurring and biodegradable guar gum. The propping fluid isbased upon standard oil industry technology and contains a cross-linker which temporarilyproduces a highly viscous fracturing fluid which subsequently reverts to the viscosity of waterallowing the fluid to be removed leaving a sand filled fracture. In addition, ten (10) monitoring

Colder Associate* A R 3 Q 9 3 2 2

November 1997 -7- 933-6333

probes (M-l through M-10) were located around the fractured well (see Figure 3-1). FracturingV ; was carefully controlled through the use of two methods (tilt meters and active resistivity) to ensure

that the fractures were properly placed and did not disrupt utilities or encounter any obstructionsbelow the ground surface. Tilt meters are used to precisely measure the small amounts of groundheave, which occur during fracturing. The tilt of the ground, as well as flow and volume of theinjection fluid, are carefully monitored and real time calculations are performed to determine thegeometry and placement of the fracture. The active resistivity technique involves inducing anelectric current in the fracture fluid (100 Hz AC) and monitoring the induced voltage at the groundsurface. Through constant monitoring and real time calculations, the placement of the fracture canbe monitored and controlled. Both of these techniques were used in placing the fractures in well E-2 and the active resistivity technique was found to be the most effective in monitoring the fracturessince very little ground heave was detected. This is believed to be due to some compression of thefill material present above the overburden soils. The fracturing technique and associatedmonitoring technology arc described by Baker and Frere (1995), and Baker and Hocking (1995).

An additional (unfracturcd) overburden extraction well (£-3) and two additional bedrock extractionwells (BR-1 and BR-2) were also installed using hollow stem auger and/or air rotary drilling

\^ techniques. Wells BR-1 and BR-2 were screened approximately 10 feet into the bedrock as shownon the monitoring well installation field logs (Appendix A). Soil samples were collected fromboreholes BR-1 and BR-2 during drilling and submitted to CAL for analysis of VOCs. These dataare summarized on Table 2-1. Figure 3-1 shows the location of the extraction wells and monitoringpoints. Well drilling services were provided by Eichelbergers, Inc. of Mechanicsburg,Pennsylvania .under contract to Colder Associates.

RNC contracted R.E. Wright of Middletown, Pennsylvania to, install the SVE system. The systemwas installed during the week of November 13,1995 and began operation on November 20,1995.The system ran continuously with the exception of a 24-hour period on December 15, 1995. R.E.Wright performed initial startup operation and.maintenance and instructed RNC personnel in theoperation of the system. R.E. Wright operated the system for the first 3 days and visited the Siteonce every 5 to 7 days, thereafter. RNC made daily measurements from the system with theexception of those days R.E. Wright personnel visited the Site.

Colder Associates AR3 09323

November 1997 -8- 933-6333

3.2.2 Sample Collection and Analysis

Field performance measurements (flow, vacuum and VOC readings) were provided in tabular formto Colder Associates by R.E. Wright. The procedures used for collecting field measurements areprovided in Appendix B. Colder Associates used the data on these tables to calculate estimatedmass removal for each of the extraction wells over the course of the performance test. Air samplesfor TO-14 analysis were collected from E-2 and E-3 on November 15,1995 prior to start-up of thesystem and subsequently at specific time intervals from November 20, 1995 through December 4,1995. The procedures for collecting these samples are provided in Appendix B. These sampleswere submitted to CAL and the results of the analysis were provided in a report to RNC. Table 3-1provides a summary of the TO-14 results for SVE wells E-2 and E-3. These data clearly show anorder of magnitude increase in the concentration of VOC in the extracted vapors from the fracturedwell E-2 as the test progressed, indicating increasing performance with time. Golder Associatesalso used the laboratory VOC data to calculate estimated mass removal for each of the extractionwells over the course of the performance test. Tables 3-2, 3-3 and 3-4 show the flow, vacuum andlaboratory VOC data collected at various times during the short-term five week (37 day) test (aswell as for the long-term, 147 day test) for wells E-2, E-3 and BR-2, respectively. Tables 3-5, 3-6,3-7 and 3-8 show the flow, vacuum and field VOC readings collected at various times during the

short-term five-week test for E-2, E-3, BR-1 and BR-2, respectively.

33 Long-Term SVE Test

33.1 Field Activities

Based upon the data collected during the short-term SVE performance test, it was determined thatinstalling and operating a long-term SVE system in the Tank Farm Area would be beneficial inproviding additional data to demonstrate the effectiveness of SVE. Therefore, RNC commissionedR.E. Wright to build an improved header and treatment system to be contained in an insulatedbuilding. The system was installed in late January 1996 and began operation on January 26,1996.During the long-term, test, RNC personnel undertook daily field measurements. R.E. Wrightpersonnel visited the Site once a month to monitor operation and make any necessary adjustmentsto the system.

The new treatment system was housed in an insulated building adjacent to the Tank Farm area. Thesystem had a centrifugal condensate pump capable of removing solids. The system was alsoequipped with larger manifolds and two 1500 pounds (lb.). GAC units that result in lower back

Golder Associates AR30932U

November 1997 -9- 933-6333

pressure on the system. The system was completely heat-traced and had a fluid discharge line withdirect plumbing from the fluid knockout box to the existing on-Site treatment plant.

3.3.2 Sample Collection and Analysis

Initial start-up measurements, together with field measurements collected during operation of thelong-term SVE system for the month of February were available at the time of writing the SVEreport originally submitted to the Agencies on April 5, 1996. Data from air samples Submitted toCAL for VOC analysis using Method TO-14 are summarized in Table 3-9. These data togetherwith the field measurements have been used to determine mass removal rates. Data from the long-term test are presented in Tables 3-2 through 3-4 for wells E-2, E-3, and BR-2 respectively.Subsequent to the April 5, 1996 submission, the long-term test was completed and the dataprovided in Tables 3-2 through 3-4 of this revised report includes all long-term test data.

3.4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control

CAL used SW846 method 8260 for the analysis of VOCs in soil and method TO-14 for theanalysis of VOCs in air. All appropriate QA/QC procedures were used in the analysis of thesesamples.

Soil samples were collected during the initial performance test and the short-term performancetest. A field duplicate sample was collected from borehole P-5. The data indicates that the soilsin this area are somewhat heterogeneous. The same constituents were detected in both theprimary and field duplicate samples, however, the concentrations in the primary samples wereapproximately 30% to 40% higher than the concentrations in the field duplicate sample. Thistype of inhomogeneity is not uncommon in soil samples such as those collected from the TankFarm Area. The laboratory (CAL) performed matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSD)analysis on the soil samples collected from both the initial performance test and the short-termperformance test. Review of the results show that all QC criteria were achieved indicatingacceptable, analytical precision and accuracy and that VOCs were not detected in the methodblanks.

For the air samples analyzed by TO-14, Laboratory Control Samples were analyzed in duplicate.Additionally, a surrogate was used in the analysis of the samples. Review of the QC data shows

V y that all criteria were met indicating acceptable precision and accuracy for these analyses.

Colder Associates A R 3 0 9 3 Z 5

November 1997 -10- 933-6333

Additionally, the laboratory analyzed method blank samples for each batch of samples received.VOCs were not detected in any of the method blanks.

Overall, the QC samples collected during this study have shown that acceptable precision andaccuracy have been achieved in order to meet the objectives of the performance testing.

During the PDI, Golder Associates collected depth discrete samples in the Tank Farm Area tofurther characterize the subsurface soils in this area. The work was performed in accordancewith the Revised Remedial Design Work Plan (Golder Associates, 1997). These samples wereanalyzed for VOCs by CAL using method SW846 8260. Data summary tables for theseanalytical results are presented in Appendix C.

Colder Associate* AR 3 09326

November 1997 -11- 933-6333

4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Data Analysis and Interpretation

The data collected during the SVE performance testing has been interpreted and utilized in twoways.

• Firstly, flow, vacuum and VOC concentrations were tabulated and graphed and massremoval rates were calculated (Tables 3-2 through 3-8). Sections 4.1.1 and 4.1.2describe this data analysis and interpretation .for the short-term and long-termperformance tests.

• Secondly, a numerical airflow model was developed and calibrated using theperformance test data. The model was then used to prepare a conceptual SVE system

1 design (see Section 4.1.3). This report does not present a final design of the system,however the conceptual design indicates the potential effectiveness and practicality of alull scale SVE remediation system at the Site.

4.1.1 Short-Term SVE Performance Test

Review of the data from the short-term SVE test showed that the mass of VOCs removed by, , extraction well E-2 was less than optimal given that the soils in this area of the site show higher

contamination (Table 2-1) and that this well was fractured to increase soil permeability. Inreviewing the field notes and the conditions encountered it was determined that E-2 contained waterat the bottom of the well for the duration of the test so that the fractures were submerged due to thepartially saturated condition of the overburden soils and the fact that the fractures acted as a conduitfor the perched water. The partially saturated condition of the overburden soils is attributable to theadverse weather conditions encountered during the test (snow and rain) and the build up of water inOverburden Sump No. 2. R.E. Wright personnel subsequently installed a sucker tube to remove thewater from the extraction well under vacuum but for the duration of the test, it would appear thatthe fractures were saturated. Therefore, E-2 never truly functioned as a fractured SVE extractionwell and as a result, the short-term test could not evaluate its true potential in this area of the Site.However, this indicates that induced horizontal permeable fractures will act as underdrains for lowpermeability overburden soils. This will allow recovery of contaminants in perched water leachedfrom the soil prior to any potential impact on groundwater quality. In addition, the bedrock wellswill play a similar role in removing contaminants leaching from overburden soils. Consequently,the SVE system will remove both perched water within the overburden and its associated VOCs aswell as VOCs from the subsurface soil matrix.

Colder Associates A R 3 Q 9 3 2 7

November 1997 -12- 933-6333

Review of Tables 3-2 through 3-8 shows that the removal mass for the system ranges between 51tt>ymo. (1.7 lb./day) in E-2 to 102 lb./mo. (3.42 lb./day) in E-3 based upon calculations performedusing the field VOC readings. Based upon the calculations performed using the total VOClaboratory concentrations reported by CAL, well E-2 removes approximately 37 lb./mo. (1.23lb./day) while E-3 removes approximately 27 lb./mo. (0.9 Ib./day). It is expected that E-2 wouldremove a greater mass of VOCs once the fractures have been dewatered due to the greater porosityof the fractured material. For the bedrock wells, BR-1 and BR-2, removal mass rates ranged from47 lb./mo. to 38 lb./mo., respectively.

Based upon the data from the five week test, it has been demonstrated that although the SVEsystem operated under the "worst case" scenario (adverse weather conditions, freezing pumps andvalves, low vacuums and flows) it was capable of removing significant quantities of VOCs fromoverburden soils. Therefore, RNC and Golder Associates considered that operation of the SVEsystem under better conditions together with certain enhancements/augmentation would improve

the system and offer an effective way of dealing with VOC contaminated soils. In particular it wasrecommended that any further SVE operation should allow for removal of perched water.

4.1.2 Long-Term SVE Performance Test

Tables 3-2 through 3-4 present the data from the long-term test (as well as the data from theshort-term test) using laboratory VOC data. Review of Table 3-2 for the fractured well E-2shows that mass removal has increased significantly since the short-term test was conducted.This increase in mass removal can be attributed to improvements made to the SVE system aswell as implementation of the perched water removal that dewatered the fractures. This tableindicates that over the course of the long-term test, the mass removed by the single fractured\SVE well (E-2) was approximately 617 Ib. Review of Table 3-3 for the unfractured well E-3shows that mass removal has also increased since the short-term test was conducted. Over thecourse of the long-term test, the mass removed by the unfractured SVE well (E-3) isapproximately 272 Ib.

Data presented in Tables 3-2 through 3-4, indicate the following:

• The SVE system is successfully removing VOCs from the soils in the Tank Farm area asshown by the elevated concentrations of VOCs detected in the laboratory analyzed airsamples;

Golder Associates A R 3 0 9 3 2 8

November 1997 -13- 933-6333

• Dewatering of the fractures in extraction well E-2 has improved the removal of VOCsfrom the fractured soil, which substantially exceeds the removal rate for the unfracturedweIlE-3;

• Well E-2 operates as originally expected; and,

• As shown in Table 3-4, substantial quantities of VOCs are also being removed from thebedrock well BR-2 (approximately 27 lb./mo.).

4.1.3 Conceptual SVE Design

4.13.1 Introduction

An SVE numerical model was developed for the Site using the performance test data forcalibration purposes. The calibrated model was then used to evaluate SVE as a remedialmeasure for the removal of VOCs at the Site. This modeling exercise was performed to illustratethe implementability and flexibility of an SVE system for the Site. This exercise was notconducted to offer a proposed or preferred system final design.

Section 4.1.3.2 presents a description of the computer code AIR3D, numerical model set-up,modeling assumptions, model parameters and boundary conditions. Section 4,1.3.3 describes themodel calibration process (using the short-term SVE field testing data) and calibrated modelresults. Section 4.1.3.4 presents a conceptual SVE System for the Tank Farm Area and thenumerical results from AIR3D simulations and Section 4.1.3.5 provides data interpretation andconclusions.

4.13.2 Model Description

AIRS D DescriptionThe Three-Dimensional Model of Air Flow in the Unsaturated Zone numerical program, AJR3D,was used to calculate the air flow rates, radii of influence and well head pressure values for acalibration and 4 different SVE scenarios. AHUD (Version 1.3, Joss & Baehr, April 1995)simulates movement of air in the vadose zone using the MODFLOW (McDonald and Harbaugh,1988) algorithms. While MODFLOW was designed to simulate groundwatcr flow systems, it ispossible to transform the variables in the groundwatcr flow equation to represent air flow.AIR3D was designed to incorporate pre- and post-processing modules with the MODFLOWmodel, providing an efficient and reliable system for designing vapor extraction systems.

Colder Associates AR309329

November 1997 -14- 933-6333

AIR3D was developed by Joss and Baehr (1995) under joint funding by United States GeologicalSurvey and the American Petroleum Institute. The development, function, and operation ofAIR3D and its component pre- and post-processors, as well as AIR3D model testing andcomparisons to analytical solutions are documented by Joss and Baehr (1995).

Air Flow Model Set-UpAs shown on Figure 4-1, a rectangular area of approximately 283 feet by 187 feet (l.l acres),centered about the former tank saddles and the area of existing SVE field testing was chosen forthe AIR3D vapor phase extraction modeling. The model grid consisted of 188 columns, 98 rowsand 7 layers, as shown on Figure 4-2. The central portion of the grid was equally spaced 1 footby 1 foot cells, with increasing spacing towards the edges of the model domain. All theextraction wells in the model are within the portion of the grid comprised of 1 foot spacings.Appendix D includes the air flow model set-up figures that show the distribution of the inputparameters in the modeling grid area. A brief outline of the air flow model set-up is presented inthe following paragraphs.

Figure 4-3 shows the model layer set-up in schematic cross section, for cover, soils and bedrockin the area of existing SVE wells BR-1, BR-2, E-2 and E-3. Layer 1 of the model was either a 4inch cover of open ground, asphalt or concrete. The spatial distribution of Layer 1 layer covertypes, with respective permeability values, is provided on Figure D-l. Layer 2 was a uniform,2.9 foot thick layer of fill material of approximate sandy-silt composition. Layer 3 was auniform, 8.1 foot thick layer of native, overburden material of silty-clay composition. Wherepresent, (see Figure D-2) layer 4 included a 2-inch thick sand-filled hydrofracture. Layer 5consists of the lowest overburden layer which is 1.5 foot thick native soil/overburden materialconsisting mostly of silt and clay. Where present, Layer 6 included another 2-inch thick sand-filled hydrofracture. The bottom layer of the model (Layer 7, Figure 4-3) was the unsaturatedzone of the bedrock present underneath the Site. A thickness of 4 feet for layer 7 was establishedusing the depths to groundwater data available for the Site.

The most important parameters necessary for AIR3D modeling are the layer thicknesses, theassociated permeability and porosity. The thickness established for each layer was calculated asan average from the borehole logs for wells PI to P6, El to £3, and BR-1 and BR-2. Porositiesof 0.30 and 0.35 were assigned to the fill-overburden materials and the bedrock, respectively.Permeabilities for the various media were initialized in the range from IxlO'7 cm2 to IxlO"12 cm2.

Colder Associates f lR309330

November 1997 -15- 933-6333

The final calibrated permeability maps for each layer are provided and discussed on Figures D-lI i to D-3 in Appendix D. .

The existing SVE wells BR-1, BR-2, E-2 and E-3 were set as constant pressure boundaries intothe model and used to calibrate the model to the field conditions occurring during theperformance test. Wells BR-1 and BR-2 are bedrock wells screened only in layer 7. Well E-3 isa fully penetrating overburden well screened in layers 3, 4, 5, and 6. Well E-2 is a partiallypenetrating overburden well screened in layers 3, 4 and 5. It is believed that at the time ofperformance testing, at least the lower hydrofracture of well E-2 (model layer 6) was saturated.Therefore, well E-2 was considered not to be screened in this layer, as the layer was fullysaturated. Since all wells were connected to a common header system, all wells were assigned aconstant well head vacuum of 0.35 atmospheres (atm) (about 11.9 feet of equivalent negativewater head, or 10.4 inches Hg). This was the average well vacuum for the four SVE wells, aspresented on Tables 3-2 and 3-3.

4.1.33 Model Calibration

, The model was calibrated by comparing model simulations to the results from the short-term (5^—^ week) SVE performance test conducted during November-December, 1995. This was

accomplished by holding the well head vacuums constant while adjusting the permeabilities forthe various site media from their initial values until an acceptable match between field andmodel extraction air flows were achieved. A criterion of +/- 10% between model and field airflow values (at standard temperature and pressure [STP]) was used for verification of model airflows. In addition, the approximate radius of influence, as defined by the 0.95 atm pressurecontour (approximately 1.7 feet of equivalent water drawdown), was used to fine-tune thepermeabilities once the appropriate air flows had been established.

Model radii of influence (as seen on Figure 4-4) for the calibrated model where about 11 feet forthe unfractured well and 19 feet for the hydrbfractured well, as compared to field values of 15feet to 40 feet. Due to the fairly coarse air monitoring layout and the uncertainty of air flowpathways, a finer calibration is not possible at this time. Table 4*1 provides the modelparameters for permeability, porosity and well head pressures used in developing the final"calibrated model".

Colder Associates A R 3 0 9 33 I

November 1997 -16- 933-6333

The model and performance test extraction air flows are compared in Table 4-2. For individualwells, model extraction rates are within 10% of the average performance test value. For the totalsystem of four SVE wells, the total model flow rate of 6.77 cubic feet per minute (scfin) iswithin 1.1% of the average performance test value. As shown by layers in Table 4-2, thedifferent air flow rates for the hydro fractured well (E-2) and the non-fractured well (E-3),calibrated by adjusting both the magnitude and ratio of permeability between the sand-filledhydrofracture and the native soil in overburden, was a key in establishing calibratedpermeabilities. In terms of magnitude, the final calibrated permeability value for the sand-filledhydrofracture was 1.2x10"°* cm2. In comparison, for example, during field venting testsconducted in alluvial sands, Edwards (1996) found a 6-test average permeability value of 8.2x10"'cm2. For the silty-clay, native soils in overburden, the calibrated permeability was 3.9x10"'° cm2.From experimental field testing in Iowa "soil-over-till" type horizons, Edwards and Jones (1994)determined permeabilities ranging from IxlO"05 cm2 for the uppermost soil (brown-black loam)to 3xlO"08 cm2 for the lower till material. The calibrated vertical permeabilities were typicallytwo times the horizontal permeabilities. This applied to all layers of the model. This greatervertical permeability has been reported by others (Edwards and Jones, 1994). Based on thesedata, it appears that the calibrated model permeability for sands is in good agreement withpublished data, whereas for the silty-clay native soil (Layer 3), the model permeability may below. It should be expected therefore, that model predictions for air flows from an SVE systembased on this calibrated model, would be conservative in terms of extraction of soil vapor fromthe native soil, possibly underestimating the air flows that might be sustained in the field.

Figures E-l through E-5 (Appendix E) provides the steady-state pressure contours and air flow

rates for the various model layers of the calibrated model. The closed pressure contours areshown around the extraction well pairs BR-l/E-2 and BR-2/E-3. As seen on these figures,depressurization has developed about paired wells BR-l/E-2 and BR-2/E-3* whose air flow rateshave been calibrated to field conditions. The maximum pressure drawdown is 0.35 atm. at thewell head (fixed boundary condition), with pressure drawdown radically decreasing withdistance from the extraction wells. Typically, the 0.20 atm vacuum (i.e., 0.80 atm well headpressure) lies at no greater distance from the extraction well than 1 foot. This general distance-pressure relationship was also shown by Edwards & Jones (1994) under similar groundconditions.

Golder Associates AR 309332

November 1997 -17- 933-63331 -—- - . . . .

In summary, based on the results of the calibrated SVE model for four wells located at the TankFarm area, extraction air flow rates measured during the performance testing (ranging from 1.4scftn to 1.8 scfm) can be sustained on a long-term basis. The model used overburden wellsscreened in predominantly 10"to cm3 permeability native soil and bedrock wells in 10"°* cm2

limestone. As shown in Table 4-2, the introduction of a single 2-inch thick hydrofracture of 10"01

cm3 sand can increase well extraction air flow rates by about 28%.

4.13.4 Conceptual SVE System

Having calibrated the model, the following categories of conceptual SVE designs (increasing incomplexity) were evaluated using computer simulations:

• Scenario 1: An additional 23 overburden wells added to the calibrated model (see FigureD-4 for model layout of these wells);

• Scenario 2: An additional 9 bedrock wells added to Scenario 1;

• Scenario 3: Asphalt capping added to of Scenario 2 in the areas of the site currentlyhaving open ground cover; and,

I J • Scenario 4: Addition of 3100 ft1 of 2-inch thick, sand-filled hydrofractures to layer 4 of^"^ the Scenario 3 model option.

The following scenario descriptions provide an assessment of the potential implementability andflexibility of an SVE system for the Site and are not intended as a proposed or preferred finaldesign. For the purpose of these simulations, all wells (bedrock and overburden) were operatedat a constant vacuum of 10.4 in-Hg (i.e. well head pressure ~ 0.65 atm), using the sameparameters as developed in the calibration run.

Scenario 1Figure 4-5 presents the results of a computer run that simulates a SVE system comprised of atotal of 25 overburden wells screened in layers 3, 4, 5 and 6, and 2 wells screened in bedrock.Only well E-2 was set with a sand-filled hydrofracture (layer 4) in its screened section (as for thecalibrated run). The additional overburden wells were placed in three rows of 8 wells each.Figure D-4 shows the location of the 25 overburden wells used in Scenarios 1 through 4. Asshown in Figure 4-5, the zone of depressurization has grown considerably from the performance

, test case, as the radii of influence begin to overlap one another. The zone of depressurization at^—^ or below 0.95 atm. (1.69 feet of equivalent water drawdown) is approximately 13,000 ft2 in area.


November 1997 -18- 933-6333

Results from the simulation are provided in Table 4-3. As seen in Table 4-3, the total air flowrate for this SVE system can be conservatively estimated to be about 38 standard cubic feet perminute (scfm).

Scenario 2Figure 4-6 presents the results of a computer run that simulates a SVE system comprised of atotal of 25 overburden wells and 11 bedrock wells. As with Scenario 1, only well E-2 was setwith a sand-filled hydrofracture (layer 4) in its screened section. Therefore, the significant newelement to this scenario is the incorporation of a "wider-drain" system of bedrock wells. Figure

D-4 shows the location of the 11 model bedrock wells used in Scenarios 2 through 4.

As shown in Figure 4-6, the zone of depressurization at or below 0.95 atm. is approximately15,000 ft2 in area, a slight increase from Scenario 1. However, the important feature of thissystem is how the presence of bedrock wells (each operating at about 1.6 scfm in model layer 7)can substantially increase the area of depressurization at or below the 0.90 atm. and 0.85 atm.pressure contour elevations in layer 4 of the model.

As seen in Table 4-3, the total air flow rate for this 36 well system can be conservativelyexpected to be about 51 scfm. Overall the Scenario 2 SVE system is more likely to producestronger inward gradients under the Tank Farm area (i.e. capture zone) than a system consistingonly of overburden wells operating at comparable extraction air flow rates.

ScenariosFigure 4-7 presents the results of a computer run that simulates a SVE system comprised of atotal of 25 overburden wells and 11 bedrock wells (similar to Scenario 2), together with cappingof the open ground in the Tank Farm area. The "asphalt" capping (model layer 1) covered theexisting open area located between the former tank saddles to the west of Building 2, and therailroad spur further to the'west, an area of approximately 2000 ft2. .

As shown in Figure 4-7, the zone of depressurization continues to deepen as the radii of

influence increases for wells under the area of new capping. This increase in radius of influencedue to the presence of an impermeable cap is well documented in pneumatic testing theory andapplication (e.g. Joss and Baehr, 1995). Though the zones of depressurization at or below 0.95

Colder Associates A R 3 0 9 3 3 U

November 1997 -19- 933-6333

atm. and 0.90 atm. pressure contour elevations is approximately the same as for Scenario 2, the{j zone of depressurization at or below 0.85 atm. pressure has shown a moderate increase.

As seen in Table 4-3, the total air flow rate for this 36 well system can be conservativelyexpected to be about 48 scfm. This slight decrease in air flow rate is due to the impermeable capdecreasing the vertical flux of air into the model domain in the area of new capping.

Scenario 4 .Figure 4-8 presents the results of a computer run that simulates a SVE system comprised of atotal of 25 overburden wells and 11 bedrock wells (Scenario 2) with additional capping (Scenario3) along with the emplacement of about 3,100 ft1 of 2-inch thick sand-filled hydrofractures, arelatively small surface- area compared to the approximately 30,000 ft1 of area of Tank Farmlying within the capture zone of the SVE system. These lenses (approximately 200 ft2 in area)could be introduced in the field as 16 hydrofractures constructed during SVE well drilling.Figure D-5 of Appendix D shows the spatial distribution of these sand-filled hydrofractures atthe existing hydrofractured well.

V_X As was shown on Figures 4-4 to 4-7, the zone of depressurization has grown and deepenedthrough the addition of the various elements incorporated into the system. As seen on Figure4-8, with the addition of 16 hydrofractures, the zone of depressurization at or below 0.85 atm hascoalesced considerably in comparison to Figure 4-7. The total air flow rate for this 36 wellsystem can be conservatively expected to be about 52 scfm, or about 1.46 scfhi/well. This 8%increase in total system flow (a 14% increase in overburden air flows) from that of Scenario 3 ismoderate in terms of flow volume, but the strong effect on the development of the 0.85 atmpressure zone is significant.

4.133 Conclusions

Using a four-well model of the short-term performance test, a calibrated model was constructedand verified prior to its use in developing conceptual SVE designs. The critical issues that havebeen identified during this process are as follows:

• Non-hydrofractured, fully penetrating overburden wells (like SVE well E-3) shouldsustain a minimum steady-state extraction air flow rate of 1.4 scfm, as shown during the

. performance test and during model calibration. However, a native soil permeability ofV_^x 3.9xlO'10 cm3 was assessed for simulation of wells E-2 and E-3. This permeability is less


November 1997 -20- 933-6333

than indicated by field observations and in other published studies, and thereforepossibly offers conservative estimates of extraction air flow rates;

Fracturing of single overburden wells to provide a lens of sand-filled hydrofracture witha permeability of 1x10'°" cnr can increase extraction air flow rates by 28% (field) to48% (model);

Bedrock wells act as effective "underdrains" for the overall SVE system, broadening thezone of depressurization at the 0.85 atm. pressure contour elevation while increasingtotal system extraction air flow rates by 33%;

Additional capping of currently open ground can increase the radii of influence for wellsunder the cap with only a slight (4.5%) decrease in extraction air flow rate (and henceslight decrease in contaminant mass extraction). Such a measure further deepens theoverall zone of depressurization and ensures greater certainty of contaminant capture.Additionally, this measure will reduce water infiltration through overburden soilsminimizing leaching of contaminants into groundwater; and,

At the scale of 1 acre (Tank Farm area), the incorporation of 16, 2-inch thick, 200 ft2

sand-filled hydrofracture s (0.1% by volume) in a 10 foot thick native soil overburden,significantly deepens the overall zone of depressurization at the 0.85 atm. pressureelevation, while extracting an additional 14% of total system air flow from wellsscreened in the overburden material. In addition, the sand-filled hydrofractures will actas "underdrains" for any contaminants leaching from overburden soils.

4.13.6 Estimation of Cleanup Time

Based on results from SVE modeling and field measurements of VOC concentrations in soil andvapor, soil clean up times can be estimated for a specified volume of soil at the Tank Farm Area.The methodology to determine cleanup times included:

• Estimate the area contained within a preliminary design soil vapor extraction systemcapture zone for the Tank Farm area;

• Calculate the mass of Total VOCs contained within the area of envisioned Tank FarmSVE extraction; and,

• Using field measured mass extraction rates, estimate a cleanup time for the area.

Based on the results of the preliminary modeling (Sections 4.1.3.4 and 4.1.3.5), a first-cut

refinement for a potential SVE system for the Tank Farm area was developed. This preliminarydesign is not intended to represent a proposed or preferred design, but serves to again illustratethat SVE can be effectively implemented at the Tank Farm area. Figure 4-9 shows the area ofinfluence for a 17 well system (12 overburden wells and 5 bedrock wells). The air flow

Golder Associates A R 3 Q 9 3 3 6

November 1997 -21- 933-6333

extraction rate for the system is approximately 45 scfm, or about 2.6 scfm/well, comparable toj the single well field test air flow rates indicated in Tables 3-2 and 3-3. The zone of capture is

defined by the 0.99 atm contour, a dcpressurization equivalent to 2 inches of water drawdown.The area is approximately 23,000 fr, and extends well Underneath the tank saddle area, under therailroad spur tracks and beneath Building #2, areas that generally cannot be remediated byexcavation. .

To estimate the mass of contaminants contained within the 23,000 ft2 capture zone of thepreliminary SVE design, the results of 1990, 1991 and 1995 soil sampling analyses (as presentedin "fable 2-1) and more recent sampling results (PDI sampling results, Appendix G) werecompiled for the Tank Farm area. These data are provided in Appendix F, Table F-l. AppendixF further provides the basis and calculations for the determination of contaminant masscontained within the capture zone of the system shown of Figure 4*9,

As provided in Appendix F, Table F-2, the mass of Total VOCs was calculated using a slicemethod. The mean concentration in a sub-area within each of four (4) slices of overburden, eachabout 4 feet to 6 feet thick* was multiplied by the soil volume of that subrarea in the slice, to

\ _ J obtain a mass of Total VOCs. This method estimated the mass to be in the order of 13,600 Ibs(6,174 kg) of Total VOCs. This estimate is however biased towards a high Total VOC mass assoil sampling was targeted at the most contaminated areas within a sampling interval.

Next, based on the field measured vapor-phase VOC concentrations (Tables 3-2 and 3-3), anestimate of the rate of VOCs removed can be obtained. For a mass extraction rate for fracturedwells (Table 3-2) of 4.2 Ib/day and a preliminary design system of 12 overburden hydrofracturedwells, a mass removal rate for the system of 50 Ib/day would allow for an approximate cleanup

Jime of 0.4 to 0.6 years. A low end estimate, using unfractured well mass extraction rates (i.e.well E-3) of 0.9 Ib/day (11 Ib/day for the system) would allow for an estimated cleanup time of

^1.7 to 2.5 years. TTiese estimates book-end the range of potential cleanup times for the TankFarm area. ' .

At this time there is uncertainty in the cleanup time estimates. For example, the long-term massextraction rates are not well defined as information about tail of the mass extraction curve (seeFigure 3-2) is unknown. However. Table 3-2 shows that high mass removal rates were

\^_y maintained 147 days or 5 months into the test. As a result, a full-scale system would likely


November 1997 -22- 933-6333

exhibit a similar extraction rate for a similar amount of time, or longer. Importantly, thedemonstrated flexibility of an SVE system (wells can be placed in areas of higher soilconcentration, vacuum pressures can be increased, or decreased, more hydrofractures at differentdepths can be placed in each borehole) can address uncertainties associated with predictingcleanup times. In all, SVE at the Tank Farm area can be implemented with only limiteddisruption to plant operations, can effectively remediate VOCs, can treat a much greater area andmass of VOC than excavation, and can accomplish the remediation in a relatively short timeframe (conservatively less than three years).

4.2 Recommendations

It is recommended that SVE be utilized in place of excavation for the following principlereasons:

• A larger area/volume of soil may be treated by SVE since it is possible to install wellsclose to existing buildings and at other locations inaccessible for excavation on theactive manufacturing facil i ty. The overall protection of human health and theenvironment, i.e., protection of groundwater, is therefore enhanced;

• Unsaturated bedrock may be effectively treated by SVE. Based on the results obtainedin this study, the "soil" vapor extracted from an unsaturated bedrock well containedsignificant VOC contamination which would not be addressed by excavation and couldimpact groundwater. Bedrock SVE in conjunction with the planned bedrockgroundwater extraction is expected to be the most effective means of addressinggroundwater contamination issues at the Site;

• SVE minimizes the volume of waste and substantially reduces the short-termimplementation risks to workers and off-Site receptors associated with excavation andoff-Site transportation of VOC contaminated soil;

• SVE and treatment of the off-gas provides a higher degree of treatment than excavatedsoil dispersed of at a landfill and therefore better satisfies the USEPA's strategypreference for treatment.

• SVE is considerably more cost-effective than excavation and off-Site disposal and willprovide enhanced protection of human health and the environment, consequently, SVE isthe preferred cost-effective remedy;

• Based upon the new information generated in this study and as summarized in the tablebelow, SVE is preferred to excavation when evaluated in accordance with the remedyselection criteria established in the National Contingency Plan (NCP):

Colder Associates A R 3 Q 9 3 3 8

November 1997 •23- 933-6333

CriterionOverall protection

ARARs complianceLong-term effectiveness

Reduction of Toxicity,Mobility & Volume

Short-term effectiveness

ImplementabilityCost

ExcavationAdequate

None availableNot effective in some areas

Not effective in some areas

Much greater short-term risks,possibly shorter implementationtime may cause shutdown of plantoperationsNot implementable in some areasHiyher cost

SVEImproved (greater volumeremoved)None availableEffective over larger area, wouldremove greater quantities ofVOCsEffective over larger area,greater reduction of toxicity andvolumeReduced short-term risk, modestimplementation time, limitedimpacts to site operations

Implementable over larger areaLower cost

Assuming that SVE is adopted in place of excavation, it is recommended that a performancestandard be developed which is consistent with the remedial action objectives of "mitigatingleaching of VOCs from subsurface soil so as to be protective of ground-water, " A mass removalrate standard based on asymptotic performance is therefore recommended to ensure maximummass removal from soil and unsaturatcd bedrock to protect groundwater. Such a standard willallow for straightforward monitoring, particularly in the less accessible portions of the Site. Theperformance standards should also require some cycled operation in the latter stages of treatmentso as to maximize the mass removal consistent with the remedial action objectives.

COLDER ASSOCIATES

oddH.Refe,Ph.D.,P.E.Senior Environmental Engineer

Florin Ghetirghiu, P.O. ,Project Director and Principal

0:\PROJECTS\9«-6333\SVE\97FINAL\TXTREV;DOC

Golder Associates AR309339

November 1997 -24- 933-6333

5.0 REFERENCES

Baker, J.E. & Frere J.M. Use of Soil Fracturing to Enhance Soil Vapor Extraction: A CaseStudy, presented at Emerging Technologies in Hazardous Waste Management VII, AmericanChemical Society, Atlanta GA, September 17-20, 1995.

Baker, J.E., P.E., Hocking, G. Ph.D. Soil Fracturing for In-Situ Remediation and FractureEnhanced Bioventing, presented at the Eight International Institute on Gas TechnologySymposium on Gas, Oil and Environmental Biotechnology, Colorado Springs Co., December 11-13, 1995.

Edwards, K.B. Venting Test Analysis Using Jacob's Method, Jl. Environmental Engineering,vol. 122, no. 3, 1996.

Edwards, K.B. and L.V. Jones. Air Permeability from Pneumatic Tests in Oxidized Till, Jl.Environmental Engineering, vol. 120, no. 2, 1994.

Golder Associates Inc., 1995. Initial Performance SVE Test, October 1995.

Golder Associates Inc., 1993. Rucigers-Nease Chemical Company, Inc., Final RemediationInvestigation Report Revisions. October 1993.

Golder Associates Inc., 1994. Ruetgers-Nease Chemical Corporation, Feasibility Study Report,October 1993, revised July 1994.

Golder Associates, Inc., 1995. SVE Performance Test Report, April 1995.

Golder Associates Inc., 1997. Revised Remedial Design Work Plan, April 1997.

Joss, C.J. and Baehr, A.L., 1995. Documentation of AIR3D, an Adaptation of the Ground-Water-Flow Code MODFLOW to Simulate Three-Dimensional Air Flow in the UnsaturatedZone, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 94-533.

McDonald, M.G. and Harbaugh. AAV., 1988. A Modular Three-Dimensional Ground-WaterFlow Model, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 83-875. -

SMC Environmental Services Group, 1992. Ruetgers-Nease Chemical Company Inc., FinalRemedial Investigation Report, December 1992.

USEPA, 1989. Guide for Conducting Treatability Studies Under CERCLA, Interim FinalGuidance, EPA/540/2-89/058, December 1989.

USEPA, 1991. Guide for Conducting Treatability Studies Under CERCLA: Soil VaporExtraction, Interim Guidance, EPA/540/2-91/019A, September 1991.

Golder Associates A R 3 Q 9 3 ^ 0

TABLE 2-1SOIL CONCENTRATIONS PROM TANK FARM AREA

RNC FACILITY, STATE COLLEGE. PA

963O33

SmptolO SS-6(R1) tM*Cotoct*d Jw-01

Parametertan l OictanrMltMM

1.1.2-TifcWwMttwMTliCMMMttWM 3

TrtracMorattMMVinyl cMorid*tam-1.3-Dfehlorof>rop«MBMZMWTotoM

CMOnbMIZMM

ClnyBOTZ0IW

fl P^AyMfMft

»OCytaM

Chtonferm- 5AMBMM2-Butanon***ftMtytaMcNMidt" 8Cartxm DiwMktaTaHatiyJiolunnn-PropyttMnzMM2-cMonrtotoww1.3,5-TrinMthytMnzMM1.3,4-TrinMttiytMnzM*4-cMaratohJHwtaaprapyl IMTIZMM1.1 2-T«mchloaMlhafM 6

ToMVOCB 22

>BaA(RI) 8B3«(RI) SB3-C(RI)0*MK> 0^0 D^O

280 580 1900

280340 1000 22000

6100

02012000 28000 760000

8901500 5200 2700007500 23000 1300000

930 2300280 1600 2900

2600 5800 13000

510 12000

25040 65290 2302290

SB4-A(RI) SB4-B(RI) S84-C(RI) SB5-A(RI) S85-B(RI) BR-1 BR-2Dtc-90 DM-M OK-90 Dec-90 D*c-90 16-Nov-«5 14-Now4»5

37

• 68 78914 7117

24015 21

680 220 6 104

62 69 241300 310 9 41

30 230003

4900 610 340 30 5470 34 24 7

63 6 11 26 32 7

810142447357130

63

7191 1288 374 928 322 158 24936

P-2 P-3 P-1 E-1 P-« P-4 P-5 P-5 *4iOI-Aug-05 OI-AuQ-05 31-JuM>5 31-Jul45 02-Aug-9$ OI-Aug-BS OI-Aug-95 OI-Aug-BS

•

1170 2070 690 2870 3410 267000 1630001810 1190 26200 77600 40400

23000 158000 13900 45000 384 S6900 223000 123000

23100 34400 71400 56800 300 3670 29300 2130045400 73900 191000 101000 273 14200 51200 3280017900 39600 97700 24600 149 6730 13000 7740

539784 134

S910 1260 49400 6730 2180000 1350000

116480 310940 345674 280860 1770 117840 2841100 1738240

Al unto mn ugftg™ mfeta pracMt In Msocttted Hank*Btank tfwoM indnte ttwl HMlyte VMS (•xdudM S64-B, SB4 . SB5-A. SB5-B, BR-1, BR-2, P-fi Md MM Md dupicM* for P-5 •> UMM pointe

do ml s0om to tw.rvpraMnUlivt ol sol concanMkm* in ttw anm}

9-1863 6333 AR3093k l

1997 c c9634333

TABLE 3-1TO-14 DATA FROM SHORT-TERM PERFORMANCE TEST

MONITORING POINT E-2RNC FACILITY, STATE COLLEGE, PA

Sample IDDate Collected

Parametertrans-1,2-Dtehloroethenecte-1 ,2-iDicMoroelheneTrichtoroetneneTetrachtoroelheneBenzeneTolueneEttiyfcenzenem^>-Xyteneso-XyfeneMetfiytene cnkxfcto

Total VOCs

E-215-NOV-95

62.00033,00027.50031.00099.500176.200

0117,000

00

546,200

E-2 (2HR)20-Nov-OS

53.50024.600107.50036.100

0142.200198.00062.25033.00046,300

701,450

E-2 (4HR)20-NOV-95

16.30017.52528.50033.750

0208.000103.750135.00054,750

0

597.575

E-2 (8 HR)2Q-NOV-95

00

33.50056.25071,500192.250295.00028.50086.500

0

763.500

E-2 (24 HR)21-NOV-95

14.70043.30044,50054.00077,250202,000285,00080.50016,800

0

818,050

E-2(2OY)22-Mov-95

027.50014.82550.600

0287,500146.80048,20065.000

0

640.425

E-2 (7DY)27-NOV-95

0110.50086.250192.750120.000.53.000327.500183.000172.000

0

1.245.000

E-2 (14DY)04-Dec-95

2,4400

6.30024.900

070.70077,25045.25029.250

0

256,090

E-2 (21DY)11 -Dec-95

084.80089,200132.7508,270

580.000229.000121.750117.0006.030

1.368.800

E-2(28DY)18-Dec-95

041.000290.000332,500161,000

1.072,0001,602,000607,500285.000

0

4.391,000

E-2(37DY)27-Dec-95

042.050115.125149.30059.450945.15074.880259,300114.800

0

1.760.055

Note:al units are ppbv

COO

CO

ro

G:\F^OJECTS\963-6333\SVB97FINAL\To14data.xte -2 GoktorAtsodite* 1of3

November 1W7 963-8333

TABLE 3-1 .TO-14 DATA FROM SHORT-TERM PERFORMANCE TEST


SamptoK)Dal*CoUftcted

Parametertrans-1 .2-Dfchloroetneneti»-1.2-OichloroeiheneTricWoroetheneTetrachtoroetheneBenzeneTolueneEftyfcenzenerajt-Xyteneso-XyteneMethytene chloride

Total VOCa

E-3IftJJnuJKIII'MUV 99

0a

133,20000

1.530.000392.000462.0001.146.000

0

3.665,200

E-3(2HR)SlkUtfMtJll*V IVUV 99

00

188.50000

422.500582.600

1.660.000796,000

0

3.851,600

E-3(4HR)20-Nov-ftS

00

140.50000

1.357.000277,000817.500365.000

0

2.957,000

E-3(6HR)3AJimt_ACmWnW^I9

5871.730

160.2502,1603.090

2.307.000422.500780,000356,000

0

4.035.317

E-3(24HR)21-Nov-ftS

00

109,50000

485.000422,500760.000356,000

0

2.155,000

E-3 (20 Y)22-Nov-ftS

00

80^500

87,500262.500221.000105,25033.500

0

790.000

E-3(7DY)27-Nov-ft5

00

122.00000

612.000500.000139.000720,000

0

2.093.000

E-3 (14DY)fU-O*eJk4V^^£QW^V9

00

271.00000

520,000257.00029,00027,500

0

1.104.500

E-3 (21 OY)4iJl*r*Jk4• l'WI#MV9

000

137.00024,700

0535.000277,500104.750900.000

0

1.978.950

E-3 (28 DY)1ftJVM>JMiv^/ov-n

00

59.25000

159.500125.75031,75021.700

0

397.950

E-3 (37 DY)2T.n*o-a«At -VVC-V3

00

77.60000

738,000615.000247.00091,000

0

1.768.600

Note:aluntearappbv

CO

CO•(=-CJ

t c 2of3

November 1997c. c

963-6333

TABLE 3-1TO-14 DATA FROM SHORT-TERM PERFORMANCE TEST

MONITORING POINT P-3RNC FACILITY. STATE COLLEGE, PA

Sample. IDDate Collected

Parametertrans-U-DCEcte-U-OCETCEPCEBenzeneTolueneEttiyfbenzenemj>-Xyteneso-XytenaMeCC

Total VOCs

P-315-Nov-W

14.45025.500325.000395.00032,000

633.800120.000367,000755.000

0

2.667.750

P-3(2HR)20-Nov-M

00

166,000356.00014.550

775.000292.000725.000610.000

0

2.960,550

P-3 (4HR)20-NOV-95

00

95.000335.000

0645.000163,000392.000500.000

0

2.130,000

P-3 (8HR)20-Hov-»5

00

139.00071,500

0645,000342,000293.000463.000

0

1.953.500

P-3(24HR)21-NOV-95

00

147.000375.000

0935.000365.000465.000492.000

0

2.779,000

P-3 (2DY)22-NOV-95

00

17.50000

222^5042,00017,475103.000

0

402,225

P-3 (TOY)27-NOV-95

00

158.000327.00053.000

827.000530.000

1.008.0001,062,000

0

3.965.000

P-3 (14DY)04-Oec-95

00

130,000475.000

0627,000457.000

1.220.000475.000

0

3.384.000

P-3 (21 DY)11-Dec-95

00

79.300446.000

0567.000412.5001.488,000972.000

0

3.964.800

P-3 (28 DY)18-O«c-95

0000

17.6250

1.725.000455.000

000

2,197.625

P-3 (840 HR)27-Oec-*5

00

128.000233.000

0755.000197,000720.000410.000

0

2.443.000

Notes:aflunttsppbv

30COOtoCO•IT4T-

G:\PROJECTSW63-8333\SVB97FINALVTo14datajds\P-3 GoUer AseocMM 3of3

Nov»mb«M997 9634333

TABLE 3-2MASS REMOVAL RATES AT EXTRACTION WELL E-2 (FRACTURED WELL)

(USING LABORATORY VOC DATA • LONG TERM TEST)RNC FACILITY. STATE COLLEGE, PA

Well E-2 (Fracturad Wall)

:CwtMniratlQn*(lnppfnv)ilttmMl.8,6.*id504 towtwHnuttdConcentration (H ppmv)«lu houn H torn Mmpto Mbcttd « Wo toon.VKuum dm Ihxn 1/31JM to not Mm mpwttd. TIM dm torn M«tup(l/WM)hMbMnuMd in tiptoe*.

260

100 160ftwiMnl ThM (Otyi)

Time

(Hr)

Tim*

(Day*)

Vacuum(Wall)(in Ho)

Flow(Vacuum)

(cfm)

Flow(STP)(cfm)

Cone.(VOC)(ppmv)

Cone.(VOC)(mart.)

Mass Removal(Instant)(mg/mln)

Mass Removal(Cumulatlva)

(g)

Mass Removal(Cumulatlva)

(Ib)

SHORT TERM TEST1.02.03.75.08.012.024.048.0168.0336.0504.0672.0868.0

0.0420.0830.1530.2080.333

O.S1.02.0

- 7.014.021.028.037.0

13.713.013.013.012.311.29.312.214.513.513.04.58.0

3.32.62.62.23.32.64.42.21.12.25.72.12.9

1.81.51.51.21.91.73.01.30.61.23.21.82.2

0.0701.5597.60.0

763.50.0

818.1640.41245.0258.11368.84391.01760.1

0.02.82.40.03.10.03.32.65.01.05.517.67.0

0.0118.6101.10.0

168.50.0

281.794.579.935.0496.3878.9429.4

0.07.117.217.247.647.6250.4386.5962.11315.16317.315176.820741.6

0.000.020.040.040.100.100.550.852.122.6913.9033.3945.63

LONG-TERM TEST0.0

312.0480.0672.01512.02160.03000.03528.0

0.013.020.028.063.090.0125.0147.0

10.510.810.811.310.310.510.310.5

2.12.90.03.24.75.16.45.3

1.41.90.02.03.03.34.23.5

805.4940.7857.5844.12665.23797.74862.14473.5

3.23.83.43.410.715.219.417.9

123.2200.20.0

191.6920.51421.12325.71756.2

0.03747.53747.55954.652347.7107601.2224616.3280453.5

0.08.28.213.1115.2236.7494.6617.0

160 200 ISO

AR3093I+5

Novtmbcr 1997 9634333

TABLE 3-3MASS REMOVAL RATES AT EXTRACTION WELL E-3 {UNFRACTURED WELL)

(USING LABORATORY VOC DATA - LONG TERM TEST)RNC FACILITY, STATE COLLEGE, PA

Wall E-3 (Unfractuntd Wall)

Tlma

(Hr)

Time

(Days)

Vacuum(Wall)(InHg)

Flow(Vacuum)

(cfm)

Flow(STP)(cfm)

Cone.(VOC)(ppmv)

Cone.(VOC)(mo/L)


Mass Removal(Cumulative)

(0)


(Ib)

SHORT-TERM TEST1.02.03.75.08.012.024.048.0168.0336.0504.0672.0888.0

0.0420,0830.1530.2080.3330.51.02.07.014.021.028.037.0

10.29.89.59.59.09.56.29.010.512.811.04.57.5

2.22.61.81.71.72.22.21.11.71.15.70.91.9

1.51.81.21.11.21.51.70.8 •1.10.63.60.81.4

0.03665.22957.0

0.04035.3

0.02155.0790.02093.01104.51979.0398.01768.6

0.014.711.80.016.10.08.63.26.44.47.91.67.1

0.0737.0402.30.0

527.30.0

425.768.8253.978.7602.335.6279.2

0.044.284.584.5179.4179.4486.0565.12413.13206.811293.711652.615271.2

0.00.10.20.20.40.41.11.3

/ 5.37.124.825.633.6

LONG-TERM TEST0.0

312.0480.0672.01512.02160.03000.03528.0

0.013.020.028.063.090.0125.0147.0

10.210.210.610.99.710.09.79.7

2.91.30.01.61.92.11.31.6

1.90.90.01.01.31.40.91.1

3345.37307.05779.57751.52495.69385.03927.61290.2

13.429.223.131.010.037,515.75.2

734.2714.60.0

698.6355.31472.1393.8159.0

0.013377.313377.323729.241638.498373.0118722.6123759.8

0.029.429.452.291.6

217.5261.2272.3

NoU:Conc«ntrMon«{lnppniv)«llmMl,S.I.MdKMConcwWMon (In ppmv)«tw houn k torn umpM coMctad « MO houn.

700.0

100 1MlUnival TkM (Oayi)

200

M.O ———————————————————————————————14.0

f 12.01.10.0

l »I «I"

UB

A ~^^/y~~ ——0 W 100 ISO 200 290

MMMnl TkM (Myi)

ztt634333\>vt\97flnal\Sv«hardjd«\tibl«3-3 QoMtr AuaetetM

A R 3 0 9 3 U 6

November 1987 963-6333

TABLIMMASS REMOVAL RATES AT EXTRACTION WELL BJtt(USING LABORATORY VOC DATA-LONG TERM TEST)

RNC FACILITY, STATE COLLCOE. PA

Time

«Hr)

Time

tDave)

Vacuum<W»H)(InHg)

Well BR-2 (Bedrock WeH)

Flow(Vacuum)

(efmt

Flow(STP)(cfm»

Cone.(VOC)(ppmvl

Cone.(VOC)(mnl)

SHORT-TERM TEST1.02.03.75.06.012.024.048.0166.0336.0604.0672.0668.0

0.0312.0460.0672.01512.02160.03000.03526.0

00000112714212637

0.013.020.028.063.090.0125.0147.0

12.011.011.311.011.011.08.011.012.013.011.04,67.6

10.410.S10.811.010.08.99.49.8

3.3222.2222.23.3t.1224A3.34.60.94.2

8.13.60.0424.7423.63.6

2.01.41.41.4M2.10.81.42.61.92.90.63.1

LO3.32,30.02.63.1282.52.4

190.0120.010.06.0

120.0400.0200.0700.04500.0650.0317.01209.01800.0

MO-TERM TE,2806.0•54.41525.82348.31919.732240.0

1058.7

0.760.480.040.020.481.600.802.8018.002201.274.84750

IT11.223.626.109.397.661.290.004.23

Masa Removal(Inatant)(mil/mint


(a)

Masa Removal(Cumulative}

(ft)

42.518.91.60.918.994.516.3110.31343.2116.3103.5108.2627.0

1055.4252.60.0

699.76737101.60.0

290.3

2.63.73.63.97430.0432

202.09673.211045.112086.713179.421305.9

0.04726.64728.812789.046717.350668.650668.859665.8

0.00.00.00.00.00.10.10.421.7 .24.326.629.046.9

0.010.410.428.1102.8111.5111.5131.7

Nctt: Concentrations (In ppmv) at timea 1,5,8. and 504 houra eatimeted- Concentration (In ppmv) at 868 hours Is from sample collected at 840 hours.

Vacuum oat* from 1/31/96 has not been reported. Thadala from startup (1/26/96) has been used in tt* place.Concentration! for days 0 through 37 and 197 are from fleU measurements. Samples (or laboratory analysts not collected.

.g. 300.0

SO 100 150 200 250Removal Time (Daya)

100 200 300Removal Time (Days)

3£11-01

1,0

* .1*.

*\ ——— ——— t t \ 8

1 1 1 ———— \ —— ——SO 100 150 200 2 0

Removal Time (Days)

r\963-6333\ava\971toaJ\Svehardjd*«ala3'4 Oolder Associates

UR3093U71 or i

November 1997 063-6333

TABLE 3-5RNC FACILITY, STATE COLLEGE, PA

Masa Removal Rataa at Extraction Well E-2 SHORT-TgRM TEST ONLY(USING FIELD DATA)

Wall E-2

Time

(Hr)

1.02.03.75.06.012.024.048.0168.0336.0504.0672.0888.0

Tlmo

(Dayi)

00000112714212837

Vacuum(Well)(In HQ)

13.713.013.013.012.311.29.312.214.513.513.04.56.0

Flow(Vacuum)

(cfm)

3.32.62.62.23.32.64.42.21.12.25.72.12.9

Flow(STP)(cfm)

1.81.51.51.21.91.73.01.30.61.23.21.82.2

Cone.(VOC)(ppmv)

1000.01000.01000.0500.01000.01000.01000.04390.02500.0850.0103.0

5500.04210.0

Cone.(VOC)(mo/L)

4.04.04.02.04.04.04.017.610.03.40.422.016.8


202.6169.1169.170.5220.7187.1344.3647.9160.5116.237.3

1100.91027.1


(g)12.222.339.244.984.6129.5377.41310.42466.23637.94014.315111.428422.7


(Ib)

0.00.00.10.10.20.30.82.95.48.08.833.262.5

Not*: Concentrations (In ppmv) ar* from RE WrtgM fltld nMdlngs.

10 13 20 29Ramowl Tkns (Days)

30 35 40

18 20 25Removal Tkm (Days)

10 16 20 25Removal Time (Day*)

30 35 40

11/5/9715:43

0 elder Associate*AR3093U8

PageloM

November 1897 963-6333

TABLE 3-6 .RNC FACILITY, STATE COLLEGE, PA

Mass Removal Rates at Extraction Well E.a SHORT-TERM TEST QMI V(USING FIELD DATA)

Wall E-3

Timo

(Hr)

1.02.03.75.08.012.024.0

.48.0168.0336.0504.0672.0888.0

Time

(Dayt)

00000112714212837

Vacuum(Well)(in Hg)

10.29.89.59.59.09.56.29.010.512.811.04.57.5

Flow(Vacuum)

(cfm)

2.22.61.81.71.72.22.21.11.71.15.70.91.9

Flow(STP)(cfm)

1.51.81.21.11.21.51.70.81.10.63.60.81.4

Cone.(VOC)(ppmv)

1000.01000.01000.0500.01000.01000.01000.0

22000.010000.06500.01962.016000.09100.0

Cone.(VOC)(mfl/L)

4.04.04.02.04.04.04.088.040.026.07.8

64.036.4

Mass Removal(Instant)(mg/min)

164.2201.1136.163.6130.7170.1197.61916.61213.1463.4795.41431.91436.6


(0)

9.921.935.640.664.2105.0247.23007.111741.016412.124429.738863.657481.9


(Ib)

0.00.00.10.10.10.20.56.625.836.153.785.5126.5

Nott: Concentrlllons (In ppmv) iff from RE WrigW field readings.

25000

140.0

0.010 18 20 35

Rwnovil Tana (Dayt)

10 15 20 25 30Kamoval Tim (Days)

35 40 15 20 26 30Kamoval Tim* (Days)

11/5/8715:42

Oolder Associate*

A R 3 0 9 3 U 9Page 1 of 1

November 1907 BQ34333


Mass Rftmpyal flates at Extraetfpp Well BR-1 SHORT-TERM TESJ QN|,Y_(USING FIELD DATA)

W«ll BR-1

Time

(Hr)

1.02.03.75.08.012.024.048.0168.0336.0504.0672.0888.0

Time

(Days)

00000112714212837

Vacuum(Well)(In Hg)

12.512.012.011.511.510.59.011.514.512.711.05.07.2

Flow(Vacuum)

(cfm)

0.61.82.21.82.20.61.10.21.73.25.61.99.8

Flow(STP)(cfm)

0.31.11.31.11.40.40.80.10.91.83.51.57.4

Cone.(VOC)(ppmv)

10.00.00.00.00.00.00.014.4

700.0110.059.0

1600.02070.0

Cone.(VOC)(mart.)

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.12.80.40.26.48.3

Mass Removal(Instant)(mo'min)

0.40.00.00.00.00.00.00.2

67.422.923.6280.81735.9


(g)

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.3

485.8717.1954.83784.626282.3


(Ib)

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.01.11.62.18.3

57.8

15 20 25 30ftomoval Tknt (Days)

10 15 20 25 30Removal ThM (Days)

10 15 20 25 30Itomoval Tin* (D*ya)

11/5/97 15:42

QoMer AwoclatM

A R 3 0 9 3 5 0Page 1 of 1

November 1987 963-6333


Mass Removal Rataa at Extraction Well BR-2 SHORT-TERM TEST ONLY(USING FIELD DATA)

W0II BR-2

Tim*

(Hr)

1.02.03.75.0e.o12.024.048.0168.0336.0504.0672.0888.0

Tim*

(Day»)

00000112714212837

Vacuum(Well)(in Hg)

12.011.011.311.011.011.06.011.012.013.011.04.57.8

Flow(Vacuum)

(cfm)

3.32.22.22.22.23.31.12.24.43.34.60.94.2

Flow(STP)(cfm)

2.01.41.41.41.42.10.81,42.61.92.90.83.1

Cone.(VOC)(ppmv)

190.0120.010.06.0 ^

120.0400.0200.0700.04500.0550.0317.01209.01800.0

Cone.(VOC)(ma/L)

0.80.50.00.00.51.80.82.818.02.21.34.87.2

Mast Removal(Instant)(mgmiln)

42.518.91.60.918.994.518.3

110.31343.2116.3103.5108.2627.0


(0)

2.63.73.83.97.3

30.043.2202.09873.211045.112088.713179.421305.9


(Ib)

0.00.00.00.00.00.10.10.4

21.724.326.6 .29.046.9

8000

BO.O

11 20 «R«M«val ThM (Dayt)

» W

Naaiaval TMia (Day*)

11/5/9715:41

OoUtrAuoditM

f lR30935lPageloM

No/^ 1997 c 963-6333

TABLE 3-9TO-14 DATA FROM LONG-TERM PERFORMANCE TEST


Date Collected

ParameterTrichtoroetheneTetracNoroethenetrans-l -DteWoroetheiwcis-1 .2-DfcrUoroetneneBenzeneTolueneEthytoenzeneChlorobenzenem&p-Xyteneso-Xytene4-Chlorotoluene2-CtitorotolueneChloroform1,2-DJchtorobenzeneTrichkxometnaneTotal VOCs

31 -Jan-96Q 5 days

5400089500

000

320000128000

0150000562507600

0000

805350

08-Feb-96Q 13 days

8520083000

03180044750285000149000

0186500655009950

0000

940700

15-Feb-96ff 20 days

104000105000

0. 26000

48000170000170000

017200062500

00000

857500

23-Feb-96ff 28 days

68000335001035012000 .

0317500104000

024400054750

00000

844100

29-Mar-96<g> 63 days

15000097500

000

962500322500

0562500460000110175

0000

2665175

2S4pr-96® 90 days

681250165000

0180001350002050000245000

0387500108750

00

720000

3797700

30-May-96 .@ 125 days

2460002490000

0810061000

1460000234500

026000091800

00

53600

53244862084

21-Jun-96Q 147 days

99900323500

0427507540

223000257000

03275000240250

00.0

45250

4473465

COCD1OCJcn

Notes:Al units are ppbv

g:\pfd(ects\963-633\sve\97finaI\To14rev.x)s\E-2 GoMerAstodatm 1of5

November 1997 963-6333



Date Collected

ParameterTrichtoroetheneTetracMoroethenetrans-1 ,2-Dichtoroethenecis-1 ,2-DichloroetheneBenzeneTolueneEthytoenzeneChtorobenzenem&p-Xyteneso-Xytene4-Chtorotoluene2-CMorotoluene

Total VOCs

31-Jan-96@ 5 days

14150044000

000

1327500602500

072250045500052250

0

3345250

08-Feb-96fy 13 days

920000212750

077500

026590001550000

01782500

0105250

0

7307000

15-Feb-96tgf 20 days

214250166750

000

18250001040000

01720000690000123500

0

5779500

23-Feb-96@ 28 days

8400097250

000

28500001390000

02625000600000105250

0

7751500

29-Mar-96@ 63 days

8225000

1757524200

1040000425000

0625000144250137500

0

2495775

25-Apr-96Q 90 days

968750675000

000

27430001981000

01712500128100023750

0

9385000

30-May-96Q 125 days

290000000

322502112500505000

058750037250027800

0

3927550

21-Jun-96<Q 147 rifws

9800024400

02580011300511300203000

014700022200047400

0

1290200

coCDV0CJcnca

Notes:AH units are ppbv

J63-633\sve\97final\To14rev.xls\E-3 iociates C 2 0(5

No/ 1997 C C 963-6333

20CO

COCJ1


MONITORING POINT BR-1RNC FACILITY, STATE COLLEGE, PA .

Notes:Al units are ppbv

Date Collected

ParameterTrichtoroetheneTetrachkxoethenetrans-1 ,2-Dtehtoroetheneos-l -OtehtoroetheneBenzeneTolueneEthyfbenzeneChkxobenzenemAp-Xyteneso-Xytene4-Chlorotolueoe

TotalVOCs

31 -Jan-96@ 5 days

160500427500

000

29500097000

014700039250

0

1166250

08-Feb-96@ 13 days

58200272000

0117750

016475039500

010200025700

0

779900

15-Feb-96@ 20 days

0174500

00

3770018000041500

01092502880094000

665750

23-Feb-96@ 28 days

NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNS

NS

29-Mar-96@ 63 days


NS

25-Apf-96@ 90 days


NS

g:\projects\963-633Vive\97ftnaI\To14rev.x(s\BR-1 Gokter Associates 3of5

November 1997 963-6333


MONITORING POINT BR-2RNC FACILITY, STATE COLLEGE, PA

Date Collected 31 -Jan-96 OB-Feb-96 15-Feb-96 23-Feb-96 29-Mar-96 25-Apr46 30-May-96 21-Jun-96© 5 days @ 13 days @ 20 days @ 28 days @ 63 days @ 90 days @ 125 days @ 147 days

ParameterTrichkwoetheneTetrachlofoethenetrans-1 ,2-Dtchtoroethenecis-1 ,2-DfcNoroetheneBenzeneTolueneEthylbenzeneChlorobenzenem&p-Xyleneso-Xytene4-CWorotoJuene

17400097500

000

1267000745000

0277500245000

0

0236700

000

140700332500

058500186000

0

7100043750

000

550000169500

0557500134000

0

150000134250

000

1345000350000

086000165750117250

6250042250

01937542120802500337500

043250010300078000

3200023800

000

10600054500

058000392508800


11500049500

08430013200

44400079700

014300010300027000

Total VOCs 2806000 954400 1525750 2348250 1919745 322350 NA 1058700

CJCDtOCJcnen

Notes:AN units are pptov

63-6333\sve\976naI\Tol4revjds\BR-2 .oclates C 4 of 5

,997 c c 963-6333

enen


MONITORING POINT P-3RNC FACILITY, STATE COLLEGE, PA

Data Collected

ParameterTrichtoroetheneTetrachkHoethenetrans-1.2-Dichloroethenecis-1 -DtchtoroetheneBenzeneTolueneEthytbenzeneChtorobenzenem&p-Xyteneso-Xytene2-Cnlorototuene4-Chtorotoluene1,4-Dfchkxobenzene

Total VOCs

6 5 days

NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNSNS

NS

08-Feb-9€6 13 days


NS

15-Feb-96@ 20 days


NS

23-Feb-96@ 28 days

150000145000

000

42750001115000

01977000485000

041250

0

8188250

29-Mar-96@ 63 days

47000177000

000

1022500392000

0617500327500

015725052000

2792750

25-Apr-96@ 90 days

968750675000

000

27430001981000

01712500128100023750

00

9385000

3Q-May-96@ 125 days

25250087250

00

39500592000100250

010600021500

000

1199000

21-Jun-96@ 147 days

13400063900

03390

18100484000204000

0110000170000

000

1187390

roCOCD

Notes:AB units are ppbv

g:\proJect5\963^333\sve\97ftiaI\To14rev.xls\P-3 Colder Associates 5of5

November 1997 963-6333

TABLE 4-1CALIBRATED MODEL PARAMETERSRNC FACILITY, STATE COLLEGE, PA

Permeability (Horizontal)

Open ground k - 3.0 x 10"1 cm2 Layer IAsphalt k« I.Ox 10'" cm2 Layer 1Concrete k - 1.0 x 10'12 cm2 Layer 1Fill (sandy - silt) k'- 3.0 x 104 cm2 Layer 2Overburden (silty - clay) k - 3.9 x 10'10 cm2 Layer 3 & 5Sand filled fracture k - 1.2 x 10'' cm2 Layer 4 & 6Unsaturated bedrock k * 1.8 x 10** cm2 Layer 7

* Vertical permeabilities for all layers approximately two times respective horizontalpermeabilities (see text for discussion).

Porosity

Fill, overburden, sand fracs » 0.30Limestone bedrock • 0.35

Well Head PressureBR-1 ££ ££ BR-2

Model 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65Field 0.64 0.61 0.69 0.65

All pressures in atmosphere (atm)Field » mean value for well pressure as obtained from Tables 3-4 - 3-7 (eqt: Well Head

Pressure «* 1 atm (SIP) - well vacuum, 1 atm « 29.92 in Hg).

i:\projects\963-6333\sve\97fmal\tab4-t.doc

Golder Associates AR309357

November 1997 963-6333

TABLE 4-2CALIBRATED MODEL EXTRACTION AIR FLOWS

RNC FACILITY, STATE COLLEGE, PA

ModelLaver

34567

Model Total

Field Total 1.7

Extraction Air Flow Rate (cftn)Ed

1.8 1.4

0000

1.801.80

0.920.720.3100

1.95

0.920.02

. 0.180.19JL.1.31

0000

LZl1.71

1.8

Notes: All flow rates in cubic feet per minute (cfin)Field = Mean value for air flow (DSTP) as obtained from Tables 3-4 - 3-7

G:\PROJECTS\963-6333\SVE\97FINAL\TAB4-2.DOC

Colder AssociatesAR309358

November 1997 963-6333

TABLE 4-3EXTRACTION AIR FLOWS: SCENARIOS 1 TO 4

RNC FACILITY, STATE COLLEGE, PA

Model

Calibrated

Scenario 1

Scenario 2

Scenario 3

Scenario 4

No. ofOverburden

Wells2

25

25

25

25

No. ofBedrockWells

2

2

11

11

11

Capping

No

No

No

. Yes

Yes

Hydro-fractures*

200ft2

200ft2

200ft2

200ft2

3,100 ft2

Total

V M6.8 2.6

38.3 14.5

51.0 19.3

48.8 18.5

52.6 19.9

OverburdenWells

V M3.2 1.2

35.3 13.3

33.4 12.6

31.9 12.1

36.3 13.7

BedrockWells

V M3.6 1.4

3.0 1.2

17.6 6.7

16.9 6.4

16.3 6.2

Notes:

* Sand-filled hydrofractures all 2 inches thickness.V • Extraction air flow rate in cubic feet per minute (cfm)M = Extraction mass flow rate in grams per second (g/s)

G:\PROJECTS\963-6333\SVE\97FINAL\TAB4-3.DOC

Golder AssociatesHR309359

AR30936Q

IMK 823-6112 AS 9KMMW/15/96PA17-310

07

SITE LOCATION PLAN

Golder A«srtriatp« [RUETGERS-NCASE 2-1

LAB SUPPLYSTORAGE **SHEDS

feet

AR30936

"»-• 923-6112wue

AS SHOWN04/05/96PA17-282

07

Colder Associates

STUDY AREA

InouAt_________________2-2

TANK FARM / BLNUMNQ *1 AREA

•J095

DESIGNATED OUTDOORSTORAGE AR

FORMERSTAGING

DRUM

LEGEND

•"*^,*<f>\\*r£^

*"£#&>*\\

f \%q

.- > CQ,

MW-11DenSTMC MONITORWC «EU

Rl PHASE I AND II

• SOL SORING ("SB") LOCATION(LOCATIONS APPROIOUATE)

PRE-DESIGN INVESTIGATIONA SOL BORING LOCATION

SVE PILOT TESTP-6 PIEZOMETER/MONITORING WELL

BEDROCK EXTRACTION WELL

OVERBURDEN EXTRACTION WELL

MTCRPRCTCD OVERBURDEN TMOCNCSSCONTOUR

APPROXMA1E AREA OF BEDROCKOUTCROP

NOTES1.) OVCRBURDEN THICKNESS CALCULATED FROM GEOLOOC

LOSS OF EXISTING SITE yOMTORING WELLS. PDIBORINGS. OUTCROPS AT THE SITE AND THE PDJGCOLOOCAL MVESHGATKM.

2.) THKXNESS CONTOURS HAVE BEEN MTERPOLATEDBETWEEN BOREHOLES. ACTUAL SITE CONDITIONS HAYVARY. CONTOUR MTERVAL IS 5 FEET.

1} OVERBURDEN AS OEFMED HCLUOES MAN-UAOE FLLAND E»STMG RESUUAL SOILS

AR309362

925-6112

100escole

100

NOV o a mifeet

AS SHOWN

11/05/97PA17-366

OS

Golder Associates

INTERPRETED OVERBURDENTHICKNt

RUETG£RS-»4EASE Ct> 2-3

oM-7

M-3O

MW-22S

p_j p_. FORMER TANK FARM

M-2O»*-»

SB-4

A88"8

LEQEND_J4W-2)S

-k P-€Y"

AS8-5

UOMTORMG HELL

SOL VAPOR MOMTOttHG WEU/KZOUCIERAPPRONHA1E)

U— 1"

SOLBORMO(LOCATION APPROMUATC)SOL VAPOR EXTRACTION VCLLOJOCATKM APPROXMAIE)

VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL

PROBE

feat

AR309363

ifc 923-6112 AS SHOWNos/25/*6

~ PA17-30905

o l £

SVE PERFORMANCE

RUETGERS-NEASE co» 3-1

AR30936U

023-6112

LEGEND

-M——K——*— FEMCE

, - UOMTORMG HELL

• - SW VELLW OVERBURDEN

- - S« WUM BEDROCK

NOTESL) RESULTS OBTAMED FROM MR3D® SMAAHON&

KR90N U4 APRL IMS.

NOV 0 o I3S724 0 24

approximate scat* fe*t

AS SHOWN03/2S/M

• PA17-25407

MODEL DOMAINSTATE COLLEGE

TANK FA'RNC/STATE COLU. 4-1

LEGEND

-*——K——K— FENCE

•$• UQMTCRNGMCU.

^ SVE WELL IN OVERBURDEN

-- SVE KU M BEDROCK

NOTES1.) RESULTS OBTMCD FROM ARJD* SMULATK3NS:

VER30N 1.13. APRIL 1999.

approximate seal* feat

AR309365

*»»»: 823-6112~» WUE

««« -pt/L*"* fc.

*«* AS SHOWN•** 03/12/K« H» PA17-3O5MMn>£ 07

Golder Associates

MODEL GRID

RNC/STME COLLEGE/PA j"** 4-2

1u.

\A* CI

UJ

ft.32

•01

'i.

W 8o z13 3

— 9,»»- = « =e*l otl M *^ CM

MOV 0 6 1997

011 **

923-6112

DWDTKTV

NOT TO SCAl£OATEt 11-05-07«"" PA17-367

SCHEMATIC CROSS SECTIONOF AIR3D MODEL LAYERS

Gidder Associates RUETGERS-NEASE CORPORATION 4-3

CINPUT PARAMETERS

AJR30GRID

mcs

CRND(cm')

-Oflj»i<r

ASPLT(cm*)

10 -'

CONC(cm1)

n~n

nu(cmZ)

3,10——

SOIL(cm1)

I*-1"

FRAC(emZ)

.**

BORK(cm')

IO-"1

PBH-2(atm)

OL«S

PEW-J(aim)

0-6S

PEW-2(atm)

0.6$

PBR-1(aim)

O.65

RESULTSTOTAL

ALL LAYERS

V 1 M(ctm) l(o /see)

*f

LEGEND

-K——X——X— FENCE

-ty- MONITORING WELL

-$- SVE WELL IN OVERBURDEN

-Kj- SVE WELL IN BEDROCK

CONTOURS OF ABSOLUTE PRESSURE

065 - 070 Mm

^H D.ra - a 73 aim

I I 0.7S - 08

0.00 - O.BS aim

O.BS - 0.90 aim

ft«0 - O.M atm

NOTESI } RESJLIS OBIMNED n«]H AJUJD* 5MULA1KMS: VCftSXM Hi.

Z } MKSSUK CMIOUHS IMCD4 HMM lAIOt 4

RESULTSI.J MOMOUM. CXIRACtMH <UIES

BR-I - 1-M elmBR-2 - I 71 dnEW-! =• 1-tS ctm

0 u24 _ 0 _ 24

approximate scale feet

flR309367

923-6112WME

AS SHOWN

03/25/96PA17-3O6

Colder Associates

TANK FARM SVEPERFORMANCE TESTCALIBRATE

RNC/STATE COLL\ 4-4

INPUT PARAMETERS

AKJOCRO

M4SVI

hCRND(cm^J

wi-J

ASPLT(cm*)

^——— J

COMC(«"2>

»-*

nu(cmZ)

J.10°*

SOL(cm^)

3.9.-11

FRAC(crn )

lW«

BORK(en.2)

»-"

PBR-2(otm)

O.6S

PE*-3(atm)

O.S5

Pew-2(aim)

a«s

PBR-I(atm)

0.69

RESULTS

ALL

V(elm)

Ml

J^YtRS

(g/tc)

14.5

OVERJ

V(elm)

J5.J

WROtN

H(g/Hic)

13.J

BEOi

V(e«m>

10

ROCK

(9/tcJ

LEGEND

-*——X——K— FENCE

-($»- MONITORING WELL

- - SVE WELL IN OVERBURDEN

- - SVE WELL IN BEDROCK

COMTOUR8 OF ABSOLUTE PRESSURE

0*9 - an otin

a aou>eo<r»o

090 - O.SS Mm

NOTESi.) HEUTS OBMKD mat «UD* SHUAINMS: vuoo. i.

a.) 29 OKDBUBDEH MOS. 2 BEDROCK KU&

i) ncssuHE cmiowH MKEM HKW UIER *

NOV 0 ti 193724 _0 24


923-6112WME

AS SHOWN03/25/96PA17-297

07

Colder Associates

TANK FARM SVE SYSTEMSCENARIO

RNC/STATE COLLEGE/. h5

•*VT PARAMETERS

AIR30GRID

IMSV2

CRNO(cm2)

-as1«IO

ASPLT(cm'}

W-1

CONC<cm*>

•o-11

FILL(em2)

imtO**

SOI.(cm1)

i..-1"

FSAC(cm»)

..z.-08

BOfiK(cm*)

,0-°"

PBK-^(otm)

O6i

Pt*-3(aim)

oes

pt*-^(otm)

061

PHK-t(aim)

0.69

RESULTS

ALL L

V(efm)

510

AYERS

(<jA«>193

OVtRE

V(Cfal)

334

JUfiOEN

tg/>«)n «

seraV

(efm)

17 •

?OCK

(g/lc)

67

AS SHOWN

03/25/96PAI7-29B

Golder Associates

LEGEND

X——*— FENCE

-& MONITORING WELL

- SVE WELL IN OVERBURDEN

SVE WELL IN BEDROCK


0.65 - 0 70 atm

n O.TS - o.ao MR

0 SO - O.BS nln

O.BS - 0.90 Mm

Q.SQ - O.9S obn

COO»CDCOcc

NOTES1.) RESULTS OBTAMD FROM HKx SWULAHOWS; MCHSMM I IJ.

M>ML IM6.

Z.) SCEHAMO 2:

a) K OlCRBUMKH 1CUS, Z BCMOOl HELLS (SC£NAWO 1)

b.) « MOUKMAL BCOMOCX ICU.S

3.) PBCSa*E CONIOUftS IAKEN fftOM LM1ER 4

24

opproitimate scole feet

TANK FARM SVE SYSTEMSCENARIO 2

RNC/STATE COLLEGE/PA 4«6

HPUT PARAMETERS

AIR30GRD

RHSV3

kGRND(cm*>

fcld"

kASPLT(cm'}

10*"

kCONC(cm*>

,o-"

kFILL

(on2)

*HO°"

hSOL

(cm*)

wo"

kFRAC(cm*)

-00falO

hBOfiK(cm1)

Hf™

PBR-2(otm)

0.iS

PEW-3(gtm)

O.SS

PEW-2(aim)

0.65

PBR-I(atm)

O.6S

RESULTS

AU L

V(c(m)

BI.9

AVERS

M(9/««)

»9

OWRt

V(cfm)

«ft*

JURDEN

C9/^)

26. 1

8EOI

V(elm)

12.7

ROCK

toA<)4.eJ

LEGEND

-*——K——X— FENCE

-fy MONITORING WELL


-K SVE WELL IN BEDROCK


^H 005 - 0.70 otm

Or»COo\oCOcc.

0.90 - 094 abn

NOTES).) MESULIS OSIWtfD FROM

M>m. i*9i5MUlAnOM& WRSOH I ij.

o.) K OtCRBUMieH ICliS, 2 BEDROCK HCUS (SOMMMO 1)

i . •.) * jtoanoNM. KOKXX «tu.sc ) naaoHM. KSfttM.1 ctrmti

J.) MtESSUflE CONIOUftS WHEN ntCK lAlfR *.

NOV 0 6 1997

24 0 24


923-6H2-WME

AS SHOWN03/25/96PAI7-299

Galder Associates


RNC/STATE COLLEGE/

MPUT PARAMETERS

AIR 30GRID

IM5V4

CftNO(cm^)

«o"

ASPLT(cm7)

.0-"

CONC(cm7)

,o-1?

FILL(cm7)

-OB•lulu

SOIL(cm7)

X9.-W

FR*C(cm7)

I.*"

BOflK(cm7)

,0-M

PBR-2(atm)

a 65

PFW-3(atm)

o.*s

pFW-?(aim)

0.65

PHR-1(atm)

O.65

RESULTS

ALL L

V(cfm)

52.6

AYERS

(9/lc)

19.9

OVERt

V(elm)

Jil

iURDEN

(a/lc)

137

BEDI

V(elm)

16]

ROCK

(9/tc)

4 2

LEGEND

-*——M——X— FENCE

- MONITORING WELL

- - SVE MCa IN OVERBURDEN

- J- SVE WELL IN BEDROCK


^9 O6S - OTO otm

DO70 - O7S abn

0 75 - O 80 atm

0-80 - 08S uln

on - 0.90 aim

0 90 - O 95 mm

r-coer»

NOTESi ) RESU.IS oe»MCD FMM *Rjd SMJLAIKM& WMSMM in

•PHI 1995.

1) SOKMHO 4

a.) 23 O*JWURMH 4EU.S. 2 BEDROCK MELLS (SCCNAMO 1)

b ) 9 MOmOMI. KDMXX BtlLS (SCCNMMO 2).

c.) ADCktlOHM ASPHALt CAFVMC (SCEHAMO J)

4) MXXTKXMl WOO FT1 SANO-nu£0 fRACTLHCS

j) P«SSU« COHIOUftt IAKEN FHOU 1»£R 4.

HOV 0 6 199724 0 24


923-6112 AS SHOWN

03/1 ?/96PAI7-J03

GoMer Associates


RNC/S1ATE COLLEGE/PA 4-8

CONTOURS OP ABSOLUTE PRESSURE

D *• (4- EQUMMSIT MIDI MUMKM)

*• (ar OUNMBIT m

NOTESL) KSULK OmMO fMM

D nrat coaon OF u (HBWMo nu& SMMOCX KUI.

M noMK cmmwts MON FMM LAHOI 4.

CMr-co

SU;/ (i G 1337

0 241

MPUT PARAMETERS

*uk k k

COHCh

»5$iV"

— «

BR-2(obn) SB EW-2

(«*»)BR-1

RESULTS

MLl

(dn.)

AIERS

^«•* «U£

^ ———— W^ ———

•«* 10/16/97«"^= PA17-J53MMMfi 04

Qoldcf Associates

I =^*m~——aapproximate scale feet

TANK FARM SVE SYSTEMINTERMED1ATF DESIGN

RNC/STATE COLLEG. _) """4-9

%;? !'iW '-';iSi~tnira!!i!j' Btst;tJ's;;,---',;:;..^

AR3Q9373

MONITORING .WELL INSTALLATION LOJGL/PA

lUhMB. tj.lQgMrJ Drilling Method_Weather -.&>>/ovP__ Drilling CompanyT«mp .3<? * F Drfll ftlfl 5C'^-

TVJC.

C.

Wen No.__£JGround Bev. __Cottar Bw. ___fitartud V/ -'OO

Water

rL/M

MATERIALS INVENTORYA India JO i« yv

Casing Typi SCil Mfr PUf. Screen TypeJoint Type FLUSH- Tri^FAn Slot Size_

.in.dla. .(.I. BantentoSMl OJtPS

fUr si. AT^ ktstafiation Method _.^.0/0 /MOd ______ Bto Park Qty. IJ5 f.6S

Grout QuantityGrout Type SI

Ctntralizers.Mud Type

PiATypa tMOC'f XO-

Installation Method

Elm./ Depth .Soil/Rock Description

CWKXINO 9UMACEon*

s rrt

fOOT51 A

Installation Notes

COEU.F#AC.

- 1

- a

. u

- u

I/Q

•17

- f l

TOAT I^.S FT

ALT.OF 5 PPi*\ /A'

Si .-5 FT Ftltf-TT. ?'&

7, AT

Fft>.eToot.rtf>i « t(n /.Ot,

kfsffino-i!««?

W*ll Development NotesfX*. 5AHD @ U^

F(?AC SAKS ^ Ha 'w

_ S

rtrp

FIELD LOG Colder Associates Inc.

Goldor AssociatesField Boring Log

OfPTH

OtFTK

OfPTH

NO.OI*T

OIPTN

TIMI W

HOLt Jfi,. _ JOB MO

•OIL DMH.L lfl-3_ OA M«f). -

3*>-k)ta. MOJCCT «NC / *TATP COttftfi. \JfrtrJ

— Off ^ 1 *•"" *6 *PWl .n.,,,/*'?^ **"» ""**LJSc

Oft*UN<

OMH.klN<

aHILL •

i u^Ytin? Alfl Cf-TAtJV

1 OOurANV« KrMii

WT. SAMPLIM MAHtJ

WT. CAtlNO HAMUI

SAUPLC TV«« AMMI

•«. ««V«O»«N e eo**w HOTBf. M»MO« t«M*U U CAM IB HPft. »»te»f« UHPU O. Cur oaHC. MK*CO«C or cunt «*•t_T. tterrifl TUM r rwf PM1,O. THW*MUlO.O*tH M*4 HUMWNff PMU. TmmmulB. m>QM «. , BMwtt H

u unu M

It. IV.OCPTH

. 1

j- 3

L I

: lo;

1

'

!.

_

™

_

-•

'-

™

OCICPll^TION

F"IL(-

Sn-TV CLXY

W.OWJ

-

-

-j

IT iÛPl CL P »>*/" e O *fr, ' V* rl t **^ I_J t K P^ t lt_iJ

UrtMl .......«.,u'" .n.r1" mmetm

VIATION*MMM

MOTtUD

MB

•AMPLtt

NO.

1 *

nssin

*"5%TT

^

• o

U ****•t M.T•IT utrt

m nue«Wl MMVfl ilVf CWM IMttHf «*K4MMI** nuaw

£

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

_

-

-

SAUPLC

FS / PA .a«— -« f - 3•M*>T 1 _ or —— / ——

IN£_! — . tuHPACC ttiv. _^ — __._' BHErrn&"*r* ÂVÂJ

N K «Ti«»»o , ]jf ;^fl / HM5TO

L OIICHIPTION -HANOI OP PftOPOKTION"!••«•• • !••» -MiB' II lv«•vmr t- •*% -••*• MM«

MHIMM <M« B4 «M1M*f W UtMMtMOM U 4 If tart 4 MBkMtMlTCOHMCt W W)M MH Hi HOlOtMOM *" WM *r** tr t w««Mm

MWf • MMI1 T«J»lr»

OCICHIPTtON ANO tOHlNO NOTtS

ij\ ^rt.f? r«*- crn^te breu>n^ I'L*rvial

">/ (^LA^/ M -s .4V\ - V»(ccU•l.n, •4-htcvr.btiA ( tJ ft ).^

i vl

Pur<-V4r/

tsesf fJf ô^v-nW -(n.:i i M-IP & Ptj4K ' rvV" If, |l

F.'f t> /CST ^^-Vân £ fi -T-Kn*c lc<<Ji"7

L. "Sseen (^*i^H i^»,-*i / !/• *(J i -%,4K rrflL-î r,4

W/OUJPI' ^<-j>-rtiff.i

.

•

.

t •

!I

i

ii

FIELD LOG Golder Associates A R 3 0 9 3 7 5

MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION LOGfuin«p 13. tSCHf/ DrillingWeatfter &M&*-3 Drilllno Company

-A 1 j3 tf7^ (?V

Well No..Ground 6Collar BeSfcrtedJ:

£"-3 ShMt /

Water Depth.

MATERIALS INVENTORYWell CasingCuing TyptJoint Type -

tn.dia.M6

if in.dla. 5 ' If Bantenita Sail CH 'PSScreen Typt _SlotStoi O.OIO

Installation Malttod

Grout Quantity _ S SAL^_______Gram TyM 57a tEffTortrTE /95^ rEE^fT Drininj Mud Type

TypeInstallation Method

•3

E- f

7

$

LOGToft £-3 Toe.

3>EPTH OF FILC ^

AND TWC 2l

L06 OF ER-AFot LITMCX.C&Y.

S FT TLv*

5 —

;o,

M >£'£

DIA

s/0 t

•12

Wall Development Notes

FIELD UOQ 1 Colder Associates Inc.

Goldor AssociatesField Boring Log

-J.

jo« MO Qa^ta* IN** X-i

Hilt. OCLAVtO

.OfFTMOfPTH •Oil OfULt

DIMM MOCK CO«I_£L WIATMCM

MO.OI*T.*A.O.UO.IA..C_ TEMP. __————————— .

Ot^TN Wt. ——————————— Htt«. MOO. *"*• WT.

TIM< WU

HITHOO .COUPANT II.IV.

HAUHCN

WT. OAllNtt

•AMFLI TYMi14. MMHWMnJC* C*WMI«M*U• «. •MTtOMH04. M»«0» fcuMU

AMHCVUTION8 • OH 0«iC«IPTIOM -HANOI OP PHO»ONTlON

KonunM•c•.1.to.T*. T —— -it- ~T~-M*. «M*HW«m

«C*«. euve» euvnr FMf

HOT MOtTlJOHI« MM• M.T

MmiMM KU •• MMMt «t MHumlWON U 4M W>1 4 WUMU«OMM«T «* MM MM M HOtOf

UttMtounu

jLgy.OC^TH

•^s•15

•17

•|«

'/1

'.10

OCtCNI^TION

SlLTY CtAV

•LOWS.

*

•AUf LI*

&£A.

0-°

70

teo

V/Ao

o*

.'£

OCCCMIPTIOH AND COMINQ NOTIS

G roue(

T7fen^i

S a m e "fa Lab

" "i

/NJH>1" * 4e<d«.pftef «£_ Sample

*-J »-.HV L

FIELD LOG Colder Associates A R 3 0 9 3 7 7

MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION LOGJnh Nft to*!, - Utt. Profit fl */C / ^>Tr ^rti/ JF&ff f* /f>A

6A Imp k. lOFM ' nrllllng Method Alft QcfTAQ^

Wiather ? l«u£>/ Drilling Comnanv EiCM Ei. P£l?eeC«: Xtf r .T«mp £P»P nrtlRin &*llfAft4*1 DrillM- C. ttftftMMAkl

WeBNoGroundCollar EStarted

B/VlFkw.

11*30 IIn« /

ShMt \ i\i I

Wat« Death

naf«/Tinw

11,195 Cnmptetad /fc '00 /f'l?&50*I« TIMI / OATt

| . MATERIALS INVENTORY

Well CasingCasing TypeJoint Type _Grout QuantftGrout Tyw£

3. to.db. n.S- if w.iS*H MO ^\JC Sera

ri O<H - TrtfteAti sot

Screen«nTypeSbe

J3L

jMACMiV^ki.«a. 5

SLirrSLf. Ben

InsS

y Ô flALLoW^ CmtralbMv MO^C Rlt.

^•RFfJieNiTF /*r5l CfWPMr Drill ngMudTyp» "NlA m^

onita!illationrPackrPidcifladon

Unthnri Pi ? A V (<r ^

ON. 7^ »«rTypii Motif JJO t "iAWD

bUthnrf &(6AUn"V

Eitv./Oeptft

-

•lo

- ii

-Ik H>

Sc1 Mi 4 ^^

* 4 6*

. 30

Soil /Rock Dwcription ^ ^ •Hlllll>lil=lln7 ^ ^ ^ l

•

WOUND SURFACI

Oi'f^(iiJÔFf*(( £C£ Eo^'i*/6 Lot

Fbfc Bff-i poiL iT«< ei o 6 v )

BEOiLotK,

/A'' ->t*X ' '

i A^CO. /^^

V /^ >''*'/*/ VEHD or Grf^//^

'

(U

tii»oiO

. -

n?

|/

/

'y

^

'$,^«^

•t''//

'4.V,fy'%

is -«v

,"*—

^/

<?X-/.,/

^^x2

*

• "*•

;

^v

^^

. .

••

t flp» /

T

%%42*A

fy

//

'/

.';'

•

»T^

1\THfi

^

x*sy''/,^'/

^

^

i-cx;

^^^/k^^

X

"1C"»",1p— • Wi

x .:ACSC

ilMfr

e^ '

~~iC'

i*— Cf.

6L

nfrtM.AL

•frvC

.1 f.

a.- IN) EA

¥#

IA t

?f£.S/Vfr

-»/ tCAS*

*-,/or

re c

• <r

otic.1? *>t

sortA C

1 4l/f(W

**

£

iip

r

*Aî^K

&«>—\P

Installation Notes?ifl£FHotE AUî?£fC> "TT?15. S FT &65 WITHtj '/^ _ IN/CM Tf^ USA

Jko6y^5 u>rrHbe.A,t*>>J Awî1*- /xfcu TÂ srp^-/CA^.«/£. ^PouTEh ;N"PJ At E T?>Ft300e*Lp OPfD TO jr.l FTP,f,<^ LJ.TM ^- Itif «T>'\ D6"->K MotE.MAiviitlFi?. MX1* v>t& f

UiH'Lt "hQlLLtrtZ.

Aî2o< Afi PPMIW bCtLLFlZ' 'S.i"RttiÔCk. Tfiri S&FT7ft Act titMf M AuMrtFJioM iSfi T(i A3.<A WO ^Lf.ft Tf, Al.l FfW*£ . Cflh/T/rJuo"SSPt iT" • SPeOA/ 5/***iWwttfJ OuC£Po«iBCA/

Well Development Notes

.

•

•

•'

* '

.

.'

Tl 5

AR30

9378

*

FIELD LOG Gotder Associates Inc.

Golder AssociatesField Boring Log

•HMT ,——I——.

•UflPACC ILIV.

DATUM ____

•TAHTIO

COMfLfTIO H'-^O >nTlste<

SAMFLI TV Mi**. MMfMMUMJC*. CHMXtAfU•A *MV«OMN

»».•e.1.0. tH««HIXU.O*«*M. TmrrTri.ilfinT"W4.

AMMfVUTION* • OIL OftCMIPTION -HANOI Of PNOPOftTfON• »% -MM- it m

MTOMMUMl

MOf MQTTkMt*M

•*!•0 CMO* *fct•IT M.T*

"** 'KMMCNTI«. . «M«tiU* UVtMIBu Mm>

«tfv.OIFTH

y

t

7

«

-9

-;o

-n

II

rt

Jt

17

-ro

OIICMIPTtON

SILTV CLAV

ItOW

*

i CPr~ -

•AVPLI occcmrnoN AND •OKINQ NOTIS

Q? r*vf (

.L/ AV

/>/•,.„, , .. ^ - -1.- •-- ,-

ofa«c.^ -.sroujrt•hken

ffifa ^Ln -u -f-fN < _.

*!.

e s

FIELD LOG Golder Associates A R 3 0 9 3 7 9

MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION LOG.w.ini.9g3-&ll0- Project

Weather

STATf -f A/* rs / WeH No..GnxmdE

Drilling Company ^NC, Collar Bev.Sttrtod_4i

MATERIALS INVENTORYWefl Casing a *Casing Type _jSCJL—^Joint Type FLUSH

If

Grout Quantity ISOGrout Type 52i

•3 hufa

Screen Type MAftHtNE C.uTsiotSlM Q.ftio ivcriCmtralizers_

,l.f. Bentonfte Seal.Installation Method

N fl N t

Drilling Mud Type N/A

ratirPackQM ^75 ififf.

PiATyM Nft f .ucflif

£Iev./0«pth Soll/floek Description WELL SKETCH

0-16-M

o. <

Installation NotesIO-INCH t»uw

.V FTSET CAS.IN& AT

1*

Ib

It

It

I?

W

iu

.fbi

"ic&Oock:

Foe ^ -tNClTo Jt.o fT

i?F>b/wc.IN

^p£?fi*AA

OK.DM

X

NO.ft 1

Watt D«v«topment NotesINC'-30

E f f t

FIELD LOG Colder Associates Inc. AR309380

I8E60EHU

s>.K-^^^^ tJx^mMM jML^rji,<K WML M,fMI"! •»;*• **f~""v*" *™» <Jj, *ip- * ii j*£y •' ;--p •--*; •'-'J iK I I ^^ *! '* ' Wr? 'i ' *^*i" if?^?*'*!'

^ ;jf, ii Pi|ls^ ife^ ^f l{-!i%ii g5?il J|»^5 fl ^

':• r rlKt Ltlegij| jF'!Spjgig^%i!aj t ^'•^j; ;*;.« |jfyi?f. ii.; ^J i ( *Af ^_jh^T*^-^^<jjt^^si "^f|Jp£^ .&$:'BK^Jr i"^••* ^w; ;g*g yaaSfeM ^R^?CT;IHyS .pt S j>fe?! ;|p:jS^gP fi" i :J?"'

GENERAL PROCEDURE FOR CONDUCTING AIR SAMPLING

General Procedure

Air samples are collected using laboratory-prepared and evacuated Summa air sampling canisters.Summa canister is connected to a sealed well bore and air from the well bore is collected into thecanister for laboratory analyses.

Preparation

1. Pre-label Summa gas sampling canisters.

2. Calibrate vacuum gauge.

3. Complete pre-sample collection information on chain-of-custody forms.

Field

1. Connect vacuum gauge to vacuum monitoring port on wellhead cap, turn off vacuum to well atwellhead valve located on the vacuum line, and allow vacuum in well to go to zero.

2. Attach new tygon tubing to canister connector via a compression fining, remove galvanizedsteel plug, and immediately insert other end of tygon tubing into well bore through acompression fitting on wellhead cap.

"" 3. Pull tubing at canister and wellhead seals to check tightness.

4. Remove cap, pull sampling pin on Summa canister, and turn canister to fully open.

5. Fill Summa until vacuum noise of air entry stops, wait 30 seconds more to ensure completefilling of canister, then turn Summa valve back to closed and reinsert locking pin.

' 6. Remove sampling hose connector from compression fittings on canister and wellhead, replacecap on Sununa canister, and plug in wellhead.

7. Turn on vacuum to wellhead and ensure vacuum increases again to presampling vacuum.

8. Disconnect vacuum gauge from wellhead and close vacuum monitoring port.

9. Note sampling time on sampling table, and complete chain-of-custody form and sample label.

10. Submit samples directly to laboratory for processing and analyses.

&R309382

GENERAL PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINING VACUUMEXTRACTION SYSTEM (VES) AIR FLOW RATES

General Procedure

Air velocity in VES piping is determined with a Dwyer pitot tube-type flow sensor and magnehelicgauge. Differential pressures within the pipe due to air flow are measured and converted tostandard cubic feet per minute (scfhi) of air flow based on pipe diameter, temperature, andpressure.

Preparation

1 . Zero magnehelic gauge. Gauges are factory calibrated. Magnehelic gauge with sensitivity of0.0 to 0.5 inches of water column (WC) is used to measure air flows in the range of 0.0 scfhito 35.5 scfin. Gauges with sensitivity of 0.0 to 1.0 inches WC are used to measure air flows inthe range of 0.0 scfhi to 50.0 scfin,

2. Properly install monitoring port per manufacturer's direction. Monitoring ports consist ofcompression fitting having inside diameter just large enough to insert pitot tube into VES pipe.

Field

1. Check system vacuum to ensure design vacuum level is being induced. Record.

2. With vacuum on, remove cap from compression fitting monitoring port and insert pitot tubeinto pipe.

3. Check for proper alignment and full insertion of pitot tube in pipe and tighten compressionfitting. Check for leaks.

4. Read magnehelic gauge and record onto field data sheet. Measure and record temperature.

5. Compare WC reading to conversion chart for proper size pipe and temperature.

AR309383

Centre Analytical Laboratories, Inc.3048 Research Drive State College, PA 16801

Facsimile: (814)231-1253

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES

CHAPTER 11: LABORATORY INSTRUMENTSEFFECTIVE DATE: 25 September 1995SECTION 12: Air Analysis using a Tekmar AutoCan Autosampler/Concentratior

APPROVAL: /I——/ // "—— DATE:

1.0 URPOSE

1.1 This Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) describes the procedurefor air analysis using a Tekmar AutoCan Autosampler/Concentrator.

2.0 SCOPE

2.1 Sample collection is performed in a 6L Summa canister. Analysis isperformed using a Tekmar Autocan for concentration/desorption ofthe air sample and detection is performed on an HP 5890/5970 GasChormatograph / Mass Selective Detector (GC/MSD).

2.2 This SOP closely follows EPA Method TO-14

3.0 APPARATUS

3.1 Tekmar AutoCan Autosampler/Concentrator equipped with a 16position autosampler and Internal LN2 concentrator.

3.3 HP 5890 Gas Chromatograph.

3.4 HP 5970 Mass Selective Detector.

4.0 REAGENTS AND SOLUTIONS

4.1 TO-14 Calibration Mix 1 (Supelco) - 100 ppb.

4.2 Toluene-d8 (Supelco) - neat.

A R 3 0 9 3 8 U

4.3 4-Bromofluorobenzene (Supelco) 50 ng/ug in Methanol.

5.0 PROCEDURE

5.1 Prior to shipment to client, 6 L Summa canisters are prepared byhooking the canister to a vacuum pump and applying a vacuum of 0.05mm Hg.

5.2 The client will then take the canister which is under vacuum and openthe sampling value whereby the sample will rush into the canister. This isconsidered a "grab" sample. The canister is then sent back to thelaboratory for analysis.

5.3 Once at the laboratory, the canister is assigned a lab id and the clientname, sampling date, and canister number is recorded.

5.4 The canister is then pressurized to 20 psig. A dilution factor iscalculated and applied to the sample according to the following equation:

DF = Ya where Ya = absolute pressure (psia) after repressurizationX a X a = absolute pressure (psia) before repressurization v >

5.5 A 1 L aliquot of the sample is withdrawn from the repressurizedcanister via a mass flow controller on the Tekmar Autocan. The sampleis then cyrofocused on a glass bead trap cooled with LN2 (liquidnitrogen) to-160 deg C.

5.6 The trap is quickly heated to 200 deg C and desorbed onto a GC/MSfor analysis

5.7 Tuning - A BFB tune is performed every 24 hr by injecting 1 ul of 50ng/ul BFB solution. The following tuning criteria must be met.

AR309385

Mass•

50759596173174175176177

Criteria

15 - 40j>ercent of the base peak30 - 60 percent of the base peakbase peak, 100 percent relative abundance5-9 percent of the base peakless than 2 percent of the base peakgreater than 50 percent of the base peak5-9 percent of mass 174greater than 95 percent but less than 101 percent of 1745 - 9 percent of mass 176

5.7 Calibration

Initial - 3 points, alt must be < 30 % RSD.

Continuing - 1 point every 24 hours, must be < 25% D, elserecalibrate

6.0 QUALITY CONTROL

6.1 A method blank is performed with every workgroup ( 20 or lesssamples).

6.2 A Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) and a Laboratory ControlSampleDuplicate is also done with each workgroup.

6.3 A surrogate is added to each sample (toluene-d8). Recoveries forthis and for all LCS and LCSD samples are monitored and control chartsare established to determine control limits. These are updated quarterlyand are available for inspection.

A R 3 0 9 3 8 6

UDC4CO

iif

^ft

cSeptember 1997

Matrix: Soil

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY RESULTSVolatile Organic Compounds

Centre Cowtty Kepone Site - Pre-Design InvestigationState College, Pennsylvania

933-6333

.^*3JCOCDtoCOGOGO

ParameterDfcMcroolfluororneOianeCMorameOuneVinyl ChlorideBromomethaneChtoroetharwTricMorcAuoromeOumAcetoneCarbon Disuffide1.1-DkttoreettMneMethytona CMondaTraM-1£4)icnloroefhene1,1-OkMofDafiane_ _ — . - - •• __Z,Z*L*bi •*• v|fl u|MI NJ

ds-1 -DicMoroettieraBrornochloromrthaneCMoraforrn2-Butamnel.l.l-TrtcMoroeeianaCarbon TrtrachlorideI.l-DichloroprepaneBanzena1.2-OtchtotoelhaneTrichtoroethenf1 -ttchtoropropaneDtoromomethanaBromodteMoromelhane< Mrthyt-2-Peotanoned«-1,3-DicNoH)prt)pen0Toluenefrare-1 >DUiMupropene1,1,2-TricMortwfliane , .1 -Dibfomorthan»2-HexanoneTatracMoraetherM1,3-0*chtoropropane

Sample PointTF010304

Lab 10: L14599-8Date Sampled: 4/3007Percent Solids 80.42 %SQL

~ 12. 12

1212121212

2

6666666126666612«6

Result121212121212494

66«6666661261966612«6

Qua!UUUUUU

JUBUUUUUUJUUUUuuuuuuu

uuuuuu

OF

1111 ;

1111111111

11


Lab ID: L14599-11Date Sampled: 4/30/97Percent Solids 79.26 %SQL131313131313136666666661366866666613666661366

Result131313131313886B6666661368666666613696661366

Qua)UUUUUuJuuBUuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

uuuuuu

DF11111111111111

11

11



Result6161

. 618161

23030303030303030303061303030303015303030

. 6130110303030613030

Qua!UUuuuu

uuu

• uuuuuuuuuuuuJDuuuuuDuuuuuu

DF5555555555S555555555555555SS5555555


Lab ID: L 14545- 11Date Sampled: 4/24/97Percent Solids 83.48 %SQL150015001500150015001VMI W

1500750750750750750750750750750150075075075075075075075075075015007507507507507501500750750

Result1500150015001500150015001500750750120075075075075075031015007507507507507503207507507501500750

2100075075075015002900750

Qua!uuuuuuuuuBUuuUUJUuuuuuJuuuuu

uuuu

41

OF125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125

Al unto ar» pg*aDF indicates to Dilution Factor.SQL Mfcates tfw Sample Quantitafion UnitThe Qua! column Indicates ttw qualifier applied to the result by Ihe laboratory or the data vaBdator.Reler to Qualifier

ACCESStocmbflrapafflCal VOC TF Report

September 1997

Matrix: Soil


Centre County Kepone Site - Pre-Destgn InvestigationState College. Pennsylvania

933-6333

^^'— o

COCDto

ParameterDibromocNoromelhaneCNorobenzana1 . 1.U-TetrachlonwVtane

. EBiyKwnzenalOp-Xytaneo-XyteneStyraneBromoformbopropyfeenzeneBrofnobenzene1 .1 .2.2-Tetrachtoroethane1 3-TricNoropropanen-Propytbenzane2-CWorototuene4-Chtoratoluena1 ,3.5-Trimettiybenzenetert-Butytwnzene1.2.4-TrimettiytMnzenesec-SutybenzeneIsopTopvtokiene1.3-Dfchtorobenzene1,4-Oichlofobenzene1.2-Oicntorobanzanan-ButytMiueneI Oibremo-3-chlofopropanet .2.4-TricNofobenzeneHexachtorabutadNmeNaphthalene1,2,3-TricNorabanzene


Lab ID: L145994Date Sampled: 4/30/97Percent Solids 80.42 %SQL

aaeeaaeaeaae6a6eeeaaaaeea -12121212

Resulteaa94134aae646aeeee3a

1212

MS12 '

Qualuuu

juuuuJuuuuuuJuuuuuuuuuBu

DF*1111111111111111111111111111


Lab ID: L14599-11Date Sampled: 4730/97Percent Solids 79.26 %SQL

86aaa6ae6e6e6e66ee6e6aa6a13131313

Resultea86926ae621eeaee6e66aee6a13131313

QualUUuu

juuuu

uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

DF1111111111111111111


Lab ID: L 1454 5- 13Date Sampled: 4/24/97Percent Solids 82.57 %SQL3030303030303030303030303030303030303030303030303081616181

Result Qual30173014079018030303030303030303030303030303015

670303061816161

UJDUO00UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUJDDUUUUUU

DF55555555555555555555555555555


Lab ID: L1 4545-11Date Sampled: 4/24/97Percent Solids 83.48 %SQL7507507507507507507507507507507507507507507507507507507507507507507507507501500150015001500

Result7501400750

4400015000032000750750290750520750750750750280750750750750750750

10000-7507501500150011001500

Qualu

u

UUJuJuuuuJuuuuuu

uuuuJBu

DF125T25125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125

COGOto

ACCk^

NoU»:Al units are pgftg.DF mdfcafcn tie Caution Factor.SQL hidtcrteitie Sample Quanttaton Unit

Qual column indicates the qualifier applied to the result by the laborafc>v or the data vahtah

..mlritrapMtCri VOC TF Rtport10/UB7 8:49:47 AM

^ to qua»ercWn*on sheet

vtder Associates C

c cSeptember 1997

Matrix: 808


Centre County Kepone Site - Pre-Oesign InvestigationState Coflege. Pennsylvania

933-6333

- - ,

.

(•BumZDCOO

COtoO

ParameterDJcMowHuofomethaneCntorometttaneVinyl ChlorideBromomettianaCNoroefiantTrichtorofluoronwthaneAoBtoneCaibon Dnuffidt1.1-OichtoioelnemMetiytone CNorid*Tran*-1,2-Oichtoroe*iemf.l-OtoMonetwneZ^UJlUH^WfJ.

BremochtorometnanaCNofOtonn2-8utanona1,1.1-TricntofoaOMneCarbon TetrachtorideM-OttitofopropeneBenzeneU-OicNoroethaneTrkMoraeflwna

DftromomdhaneBronndiditoremeVtan*

cte-1 ,3-OichloroprapenaTokwneIrans-l ,3-OichtoraDnipane1.1.2-Trichtoroethane .1.2-Oibromoetiana2-HexanoneTetracntofoeVwne4 * •^•-•-•.*— * — — — -^^


Lab ID: L 14545-1 4Date Sampled: 4/24/97Percent Solids 76.84 %SQL6565656595

653333333333333333336533333333

.33333333336533333333336533•**

ResuR" 65

65656565

190033333333333333333365333333333320

33336533223333336533**

Qualuuuuuu0uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuJOuuuuuJDuuuuuII

DFS5SSs5Sss55555555555S5555SS555

, 5555c


Lab ID: L 14566-7Date Sampled: 4/28/97Percent Solids 82.48 %SQL

121212121212126666

12

6661266666126

' A

Result1212121212125676613666666106666666661266666126K

QualUUUUJUuLJUBUUUuuuJuuuuuuuuu

• uuuuuuuuII

DF111

11

11


Lab ID: U 4566-8Date Sampled: 4/28/97Percent Solids 82.26 %SQL6161616161616130303030303030303061303030303030

30306130303030306130<vt

Result61616161616127013303930303030303030303030303037

30306130

120003030306150VI

QualUUuUJuuLJUBJUUUUU .UJUUUuuJuuuuuJuuuuII

DF5S5S5555555555.55555555555555555555c

Sample PointTF030708D


' 3030

3060303030303030

3030

30303030306030tn

Result60606060606012030301930303030303060303030303030"VIOV

30» .

302400

3030306042VI

QualUUU"uuuL

UJuJBUuuuuuuuuuuuUJuuuuuJuuuuII

DFs5Ss5555555555555555555555SSS555S5X

M units are uBfeg.OF MfcatesVia Mutton Factor. .SQL indicate* fw Sample OuenWalion UnitThe Qual ooMim Mfcatn 9* quaNffer appied to tfw rasuK 6y •» laboratory wttedaUvaklate. Re*w to quatfwdeftn*oo sheet

Colder Associate*

September 1997

Matrix: Soil


Centre County Kepone Site - Pre-Design InvestigationState College, Pennsylvania

933-6333

x»3OCOO

CJ• r*

ParameterDibromocMoromathanaChtofotoeraene1 .1 .1 ,2-TefcachtoroethaneEthyfeenzanen\p-Xyten*o-XytoneStyianaBromofonnbopnpyttMnzanaBromobanzene1,1 .U-TetracNoroethafM1,2>TricMoroprapanen-PrapytMnzene2-CMoretokjene4-Chtorotohjane1 ,3,6-TnmelhyMMnzeneeNt-Butytienzane1 ,4-TrimaBiylbanzanese&Butyfjenzaneleoprapyaoluene1.3-OicMorabenzena1.4*DichlQrabenzene1 -OicMombanzanen-Buh banzana1J-O*romo-3-chtoropropan«1.2.4-TricNorebenzeneHaxachtorobutadienaNaphthalene1.2>TricNarobenzaM


Lab ID: L 14545- 14Date Sampled: 4/24/97Percent SoW* 76.84 %SQL3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333365656565

Result33333332200633333333319333333333333333333333314333350656565

QualuuuJOD0UUuuJOuuuuuuuuuuuJOuuJOuuu

DFs5555555555S5555S555555555555


Lab ID: L14566-7Date Sampled: 4/28/97Percent Solids 82.48 %SQL

666666666666666

. 666666666612121212

Result666482666666666666666666612121212

Qua!UUUJ

Juuuu

uuuuuuuuuuuuuUJuuUJUJ

OF1111111111



Result303030

130006500014000

303065301303022303026303330303030»303061616161

Qua!UUUJJJUU

UJUJuuJu

uuuuuuuuuUJUJ

DF55555555555555555655565SSS

' sss



Result303030

25001500029003030483066301630301530233030303030303060606060

Qua)UUu

, JJJUU

uJuJuuJuJuuuuuuuuuuu

DF555555555555555555555S5S55559

«cV^

Notes:Al units are pg/k0.DF MfcatM the Daubon Factor.SQL Mfcatfts tta Sample Quanttation Limit

QualcduOTiWicalBii* gnawer api*ed to Iheiw^

.MbHnportCd VOC TF ftaport V.-jlder Associates C Pa0*4oft»

cSeptember 1997

Matrix; SoH


Centre County Kepone Site • Pre-Design InvestigationState Cotege, Pennsylvania

933-6333

^*zaCOCD1OCOu>ro

ParameteracNofodataofomrthaneChtoremethaneVfnyl ChlorideBromomethaneChkNoethaneThcntorofluororneVianaAcetoneCarton DisuMde1.1-OfcNofDatieneMethytene CNorideTrans-l £-Oichtoreethene1.1-OfchhiioeBiane2 -Dfchtoreprepaneds-t -OichbFMBwneBromochtoromethaneCMorofenn2-Butanone1.1.1-TricMoroHhaneCarton Tekachtoride1.1-OfchtorepnpeneBenzene1.2-OtaNofoetianeTrfchtoroethene1£-DfcMoropropmObromometianeBrontodicnloromettane4 Methyt-2-Penlanoned$-1,3-OicMoiopropeneToluenefevi*-1,3-f>cnloropfDpenel.U-Trkttoroetfiane1.2-D*romoeth«ne2-HexanoneTetrachtoroeftene1.3-Otehtoropropane


Lab ID: L 14566-9Date Sampled: 4126/97Percent Solids 82.01 %SQL6181616161616130303030303030303061303030303030303030613030303030613030

Result616161616161ISO1330373030303030306130303030301603030306130

30003030306112030

Qua!uuuUJuuLJUBUUuuuuuuuuuu

uuuuujuuuuu

DFS5555555555555555S555555555555S5555



6464646464646432323232323232323264323232323232323232643232323232643232

Result64646464646412032322132323232323264323232323206032323264 '32

86003232326445032

Qua!UUUUuuLUJuJBUUUUuuuuuuuu

uuuuuJuuuuu

DF555555555555555555555555555555555S5


Lab ID: L 14599-2Date Sampled: 4/30/97Percent Solids 63.34 %SQL1500150015001500150015001500750750750750750750750750750150075075075075075075075075075015007507507507507501500750750

Result Qua!15001500150015001500150018007507507507507507507507507501500750750750750750

170007507507501500750

85000007507507501500

590000750

UUUuuu

uuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

u .uuuu

uuuu

u

DF125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125


Lab ID: L1 4599-5Date Sampled: 4/30/97Percent Sofids 84.04 %SQL1500150015001500150015001500740740740740740740740740740150074074074074074074074074074015007407407407407401500740740

Result150015001500150015001500150074074074074074074074074074015007407407407407409907407407401500740

4700007407407401500

41000740

Qua) DFuUUUUUUUUuuuuuuuuuuuuu

uuuuu

uuuuu

12512512512512512512512512512512$125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125

Notes:Al unit* era ug&g. .OF VKfcatestw Mutton FactorSQL MteatBS tw Sampto Quwimation LimiLThe Owl cdumn Indfcatei the quaffier applied to the msuM by the lattx^oryalhedatavaMator.

ACCESStoC-mbHraportlCriVOC TF Report10/1/97 8 4949AM Odder Associates

September 1997

Matrix: Soil


Centre County Kepone Site * Pre-Oesign InvestigationState College, Pennsylvania

933-6333

t»=0CO

u>CO• r*

Parameter(MNDmocNoromelhaneCMorobenzene1 .1,1 ,2-TetrachtoroethaneEthyfcenzsnemj>-Xyleneo-XyteneStynmeBtomofennbopropytoenzenaBromobenzenal.1^2*Tatachtoreethana1 ,2.3-TricMoraprepanen-Propyfeenzena2-Chton**Miw4-Chtoratoluene1 ,3,5-TrimethytMnzenetert-autyfcenzene1.2.4-Trinettiyfcemene•ec-ButytbenzenetoopfopyNoluena1.3-DtcMorobanzena1.4-OkMorabanzana1,2-DfchtorobanzeMn-Butyfeanzene1 4Nxonio-3-chloraprQpane1,2.4-TrichkMobanzenehexachtorobutadianeNaphttiatona1 .2.3-TrictHoiubenzana


Lab ID: L1 4566-9Date Sampled: 4/28/97Percent Solids 82.01 %SQL3030303030303030303030

3030303030303030303030303O

61616161

Result303030

20004400260030305130

2700303030302630203030303030303061616161

Qua!uuuJJJuuuJuuuuJuJuuuuuuUJuuUJUJ

DF55555S5555555555S555555555S55



64646464

Result323232

1600120002400

32326032

16003232323231322332323232323232

64646464

Qua!UUU

Uu

u

uuuuJuJuuuuuuuuuuu

DF5S5S55555555555S5S55S55555555



7507507507507507507507507507507507507SD

1500150015001500

Result750.750750

5100002800000350000

75075070007503700

1500750750 .260075012007507507507507507507501500150015001500

Qua!UUU

UU

u

u

uu

u

uuuuuuuuuuu

DF125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125



7407407407407407407407407407407407407401500150015001500

Result740740740

160000640000170000

7407405000740

39000740110074074012007407407407407407407407407401500150015001500

Qua!UU

.U

UU

U

U

uu

uuuuuuuuuuuuu

DF12512512512512512512512512512512544£125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125125

CO

ACCk^

Notes:Al units are pg/kg.DF indicates (he Mutton Factor..SQL tadfcatM ttw Sample Quanfctafcon Limit

Qual column mdteatos the quaMer applied to the result by the laboratory or the daUvalklalor r to qualifier (Mntton sheet

.f*11rapartlC4 VOC IF R*partV_ider Associates c

c c cSeptember 1997

Matrix: Sort


Centre County Kepone Site - Pie-Design InvestigationState College. Pennsylvania

933-6333

x»roCOotoCOU3«e-

ParameterDfchtoroMuoiomelhaneChtofomethwwViiyfCNori*8remomelh«neCMoroetaneTnchtoraOuoranw«HneAcetoneCarbon ObuMe1.1-DfcMoroetheneMelhyteneCNonaeTrans-1.24f(MotaettieneU4Nct*me0Mn»

' 2 -Ochtoroprepanetit-t£-OfcMoroe«teMBfornocMoremetieneCMofofemi "~" •2 Putonooe1.1.1-TikifcroetuneCarbon Tetrachtorio*1.1-OichtoraprepeneBenzeneI DfchtomeihaneTricMoraetttene1.2-OfcftompropaneMmmomttMneBfomocMcMarameViene< MeftyM-Pemenone •d*-1>OkttaropropeneTolueneb«n»-1,3-0icriloroprepene1.1.2-TikJftjroeBiane1.2-OfrDmoettiene2-HexanoneTeVacnloroetienel.S-Otahtoropropant


Lab ID: L 14599-1 3Date Sampled: 4/30V97Percent Solids 78.07 %SQL13131313131313

13

13

1

ResuR13131313131360a100

8aaa -013a000

a5O0a130540aa133a

QualUUUUuuJDUBUUUouuuuuuuujuUuuu

uu

; u

uJu

DF

1



12121212121212 .

12

1280

a' o

0

12a0

ResuR | Qual1212121212124

0

fl1200

a600

ae0

1204O0

a12ae

uuuuuujuuBUUuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu ,uJuuuuuu

DF11111111111111111111


Lab ID: L14566-11Date Sampled: 4/28/97Percent Solids 78.51 %SQL160016001600100016001600160080080080080080080080080080010008m80080080080080060080080010008008008008008001000800800

ResuR16001600160010001600160021008008008008008008008008008001000800800BOO8808001000BOO8008001600800

1700000600800

.8001600800800

QualUUUUuuJuu11

• uuuuuuuuUJUJJ

UJJUJUJUJUJUJ

UJUJUJuuu

1 <*125125125125125**MCTZD

T25125**1C7291251251251251254*kC72972572572572512512512512512512512512512512S125125125125125725



Result036363036303

17003131203f3131313131523131313131

13003131310331

03003131316341031

| QualUUuuuuLUJuJBUUuuuuJuuuuu

uuuuuJuuuu

u

DF55555555555t555555S55555555555S5555

Al units are ugftg.DF indfcates tie Dilution Factor.SQL Mteato* I* Sample Quantftaftan Un*.The Oual column Mfcate* Bw qualifier appled to the rest* by ttw t^wr^torycirtiea^tavaid^or.

10n/97 ft 49:51 AM GoMer Associate* Paga 7 rt 18

September 1997

Matrix: Soil


Centre County Kepone Site • Pre-Oesign InvestigationState College, Pennsylvania

933-6333

• ^^^

zoCOOU3

ParameterDibramocMofomMhanaCMorebanzane •>1.1 .1 TeBacNoroatianeEtiyfeenzenemj>-Xytanao-XytanaStymn*BrofflotonnIsoprepyfeenzaneBremobenzeneU.ZJ-Tetrachlororthan*1.2.3-TricMoropropaoan-PrapylMnzane2-ChtoroMuerw4-Chtoiotoluene1.3.5-Titmethytwnzenfttert-Butytjenzene1 .4-TmnathyttwnzeneMc-BulyttMnzanebopropyftoluene1.3-OfcMoiobanzene1.4-OfeMombenzenetZ-OJcMorabenzanen-autyJbenzene1 -OibnMno-9<hloropFOpane1 .7 4-TrtrW?™*1^ **T*"

NapNhatom1£3-TrtcMorobenzene

Sample PointTFQ41112

Lab ID: L 14599- 13Oat* Sampled: 4/30/97Percent Solids 78.07 %SQL

6

e6

13131313

Result

6130

66•66e13131313

Qua!UuUJu

uuuu

uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

OF111111

11



6

66

12121212

Result66e66666668266

12121212

Qua)UUUUUUuuuu

uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

OF11

11


Lab ID: L14566-11Date Sampled: 4/28/97Percent SoUds 78.51 %SQL800600aoo800aoo800800800800800800800800800aoo800aooaooaooaoo800800aooaooaoo1600160016001600

Result600aooBOO

3000000120000003700000

800800

76000aoo800800

23000060800

75000800

15000aooaooaooaooaooaooaoo1600160016001600

Qua!UUU

UU

Uuu

uJu

uuuuuuuuuuu

DF125125125125125125125125125125125f9<1*9

12512512512512512512512512512512512512549*1JafO

125125125


Lab ID: L14566-12Date Sampled: 4/28/97Percent Solids 79.43 %SQL | Result3131313131313131313131313131313131313131313131313163636363

313131

17000770

17000313134031

230031110313114031923131313131313163636363

QualuUUJJJUu

u

u

uu

u

uuuuuuuuuuu

DF55555555555555555555555555555

CO10cn

ACC\

Notes:AB units ar* pg/kQ.OF Indicates the Wuton Factor.SQL tofcate to Sample Ouanttatkm Lin*

Qual cotumn frftcatn to quanta applied to «w rasuK by Bn tabwato^ or the date vaWator -*»r to qualifier definition sheet

ibltapaWri VOC TF Report c

c c cSeptember 1997

Matrix: Sol


Centre County Kepone Site - Pro-Design InvestigationState College. Pennsylvania

933-6333

^^31CJCDCDCOVOO*

ParameterDfcttoroMuoranwtttaneCNorormttiBMVinyl CWorideBrafnonwthaneCMoraetianeTrichlOfoBuoronieaiamAcetoneCarbon DtouffideM-Dichkwoetiem•• i ij j ~ ^*~*~ — *-*-Mmyiane uxnoeTran*-1.2-QfeMQfoe1heM1.1-Ofchtoroefran*2>0ichtorapiopane

BremochiOfoinMnMeCMontonn2-ButanoM1.1.1-TricNoraethaneCarbon TetracNorideU-DfcntofopropeneBenzene1.2-Oichtoroethan«Tricntoroetwne1,2-OfchtoropropaneDtoomomelhanaBromodkrtoromrtharit< Mettiyi-Z-PertanoiMtis-1 .34NcntoroprepaneToluenetrans-I.S-Ofchloropropene1,1 -TrichtoroeBiane1£-Otoromoefiane2-HexanoneTetracMoroMhene1,3-Oichtoropropane



38

387738383838

.36363838367738363638

773638

Result7777777777771003938213838

38

367738363838389636383677

"381303638

.772038

Qua!UUUUUUI4UJBUUUUUUUUUUUU

UUUUU

UUUUJU

DFS5S555555555555S55555S555555555S555


Lab ID: L 14566-1 4Date Sampled: 4/28/97Percent Solids 54.53 %SQL

181010

1810

1818

18

16999991899

Result1610181810

183440914699139989999914999169219491059

Qua)UU

DF11

U 1UJUULJUBJUU

UUJUUUUU

UUUUU

UJUUJU

11111111111111111111111111111111


Lab ID: L 14599- 12Date Sampled: 4/30/97Percent Solids 76.81 %SQL13131313131313

1

1

Result131313131313

22

13

6120e861361186613736

Qua!UUUUUUJUUBUUU

UUUUUUUU

UUUUU

UUUU

U

DF

1111



1

Result131313S1313766126663661366668168861362066613206

QualUUUJBUUJUUBUUUJUUUUUUUU '

UUUUU

UUUU

U

DF111

11

Al unit* are pgfcg.DF Mfcatn tht Mutton FactorSQL Mfcatn Vw Sample QuanBation UmitThe Qua! column Mfcate* fie ouaMer apptod to the muR by tw labora^ or the date vafctotor. Refer to quaWw

100 Itfl 0:49:52 AM Golder Anoclates Pa0e9oH8

September 1997

Matrix: Soil


Centre County Kepone Site - Pie-Design InvestigationState College. Pennsylvania

933-6333

^^^*soCOCDvoGO

ParameterDibromochtonNnethaneChtorobenzene1.1.U-TetrachtofoelhanaEtiytbenzenem^Xyleneo-XyleneSlyreneBfotnofonnUopiopyRMnzeneBfomooenzene1 .1 Aa-TeHacntoroethane1A3-TricMonprapanen-Propytjenzene2-CWoroWuene4-CWoroto»uene1 .3.5-TrimettiyiJenzenetert-Butyfeenzene1A4-Trimefcytoenzene•ec-fiulylbanzenetaopropyHokiane1,3-Oichtorooenzenel.4-0icrtorebenzene1.2-DichlQrobenzanen-autyttwnzene1£4*bfomo-3-cNoroprepine1 ,2,4-TfKMorobenzeneHexacNorobuladianeNaphthalenelAS-TrkMorooenzene


Lab ID: L14566-13Dale Sampled: 4/28/97Percent Solids 65.12 %SQL

38383838 '38383836383838383836383838383838383838383877777777

Result363638820260006038366038

1300383838368438413838363838383877777777

Qua!UUU

UU

U

UUUU

U

UUUUUUUUUUU

OFs5555555555595555555555555555


Lab ID: L1 4566- 14Date Sampled: 4/28/97Percent Solids 54.53 %SQL

9

18181818

Result93934140379999

190

18181818

QualUJU

UUUU

UUJUUUUUUUUUUUJUUUJUJ

OFf11111

11111111


Lab ID: L 14599- 12Date Sampled: 4/30/97Percent Solids 76.81 %SQL

666666666666669666.666866613131313

Result6666566666

2906666666666666613131313

QualUUUUJUUUUU

UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

OFf1111111111111111111111111111



666666666666666666666666613131313

Result66661226666

1606666666666666613131313

QualUUUU

JUUUU

UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

OF1111111111

1111111111111

U>

ACCV,.

Notes:Al unite art po/kg.DF Indicates the Mutton Factor.SQL indicates the Sample Qtianttation limit

Qual colunm Micate* tie qualifier applied to the result by (he laboratory «the data vabdakx -' to qualto

.*1taf>anCd VOC TF ftaportIflMMT •-M-S3 Alt X^ ssociates c P*gt 10«M6

c c cSeptember 1997

Matrix: Sol


Centre County Kepone Sfte - Pro-Design InvestigationState College! Pennsylvania

933-6333

^Bl

=0COCD

COU>GO

ParameterDfcNorodrfluoremettMneChtorometfaneVkiyt ChlorideBromometfianeChkmethaneTricrtorofluoromethaneAcetoneCarbon Disuffide1.l4fcNoioeflwneMMiytane CMoridej ^ f j **"»*•*"•

2 t-OtcNoroprapane4M£4***metheneBromocNoromefHneCMorofom2-Bulanone1.1.1-TrichtorwtfianeCarbon TetracNorkto1.1-OtoMoropropeneBenzene1,2-DfcMoroethaneTrichtomethene1 -DkMoroprapaneDfcromometianeBfomoolchlofomelnana4 -MclhyM-Pentaoonedt-1.3-DichloropropeneToluenelrans'1 ,3-Ochloropropene1.1.2-Trichtoroethane1.2-Ofcromoethane2-HexanonaTetrachloroethene1,M)tehlofopropane


Lab ID: L14599-9Date Sampled: 4/30/97Percent SoWs 76.58 %SQL

131313

13131313

-

3

1

1

ResuR13131313131310 .aa14

aa3aa13aaaaa9eee13a20aaa137a

QualuuuuuuJuuBUuuJuuuuuuuu

uuuuu

uuuu

u

DF111111111111111111111111111111,11111



131313131313137777777771377777777713777771377

Result131313131313137721777777137777777771374777137 .7

QualuuuuuuuuuBUu

uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuJuuuuuu

DF

1


Lab ID: L 14 599-6Date Sampled: 4/30/97Percent Solids 80.36 %SQL12121212121212

a12

12aeaae12ae

Result12121212121241aa8

"• aeeaea7aeeaaeeea12aaeee12ae

QualUUuuuu

uuBuuuuuuJuuuuuuuuuuu

uuuuuu

DF11111111111111111111111111111111111


Lab ID: L 14599-1 4Date Sampled: 4/30/97Percent Solids 72.96 %SQL141414141414147777777771477777777714777771477

Result Qual DF14141414141429a71577777714777777777147157771477

UUUUuu

uBUuuuuuuuuuuuuuu.uuu

uuuuuu

1111t1111

Notts:Al units are ugfta.DF indicates tie Dilution Factor.SQL indicates tie Sample QuanSaSon Umt,The Qual cokimn MfcatM (he qualifier appted to trie resuH by th« latorrtoiv or the data vaMaW Rete to quaWtodrtnrttoo sheet

10/1/978:49:54 AM Gokter Associate*

September 1997

Matrix: Soft



933-6333

'

t^ •5*^DCOCD

CO

lO

ParameterDibromocMorametianeChlorobenzenel.l.l -TetracHoraettianeElhytbenzenemj)-Xy*anao-XyHneStyranaBvomotonnIsopropylbenzaneBromobBnans1,1.2,2-TatracttQroethane1.2,3-TfKMoropropaMn-Propytoenzana2-CMofDtoiuene4-CNoratoluena1 .3,5-Trime*hyfcenzen*lert-Butytoeraane1 .4-TrtmelnyftianzanattO-ButytMnzanebopropyttokMTw1.3-OfcNorabenzene1,4-DfcNorobenzanal -OicMorabenzeneitButybanzana1 3_nitii • iui_3_iiiliunair— — ™

1,2,4-TrtchtorotoanMn*HexacMorabutadtaneNapMhalanelAJ-Trichtoroljanzene



aft6ft6000e6686ft666

13131313

Result68ft8102ft666

3006ft66ft6ft6ft8ft6661313'1313

QualuUUU

JuuuU

UUuUUUUuuuuuuuuuuu

OF11111111111111 .111111111111111


Lab ID: L 14524-4Date Sampled: 4/23/97Percent Solids 75.96 %SQL Result

777777777777777777777777713131313

777747777757777777777777713131313

QualuUUUJUUUUuJuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

OF11111111111111111111111111111


Lab ID: L 14599-6 'Date Sampled: 4/30/97Percent Solids 80.36 %SQL

ftft6ft6ft6866ft6ft6066ft66ft668812121212

Result66864666664666666066ft6ft6812121212

QualUUUUJUUuuuJuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

OF.1111111111111111111111


Lab ID: L1 4599-14Date Sampled: 4/30/97Percent Solids 72.96 %SQL | Result

777777777777777777777777714141414

777767777757777777777777714141414

Qual | OFUUUUJuuuuuJuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

111111111111111111

111111

ACCEs^

Ai units are ug/kg.Of ndfcatet he Daution Factor.SQL Mfcattt the Sample Quanttaaon Limit

Tual column toftcates Via (natter applied to the resuN by (he laboratory or the <WavaWator^^ to

.ftltaportCM VOC TF ftaport c P«()« 12 Of 18

c cSeptember 1997

Matrix: Soil


Centre County Kepone Site - Pre-Design InvestigationState Coftege, Pennsylvania

933-6333

jarZDCOO

-P- 'OO

ParameterDiCfitorooinuoronieUianeCMoroniQtnaneVinyl ChlorideBromomeVianeChtoroeVianeTricntorafluomrnethaneAcetoneCarbon ENsuffideM-DichloroetieneMHhytone CMorideTrant-U-Okttoroethene1.1-OicMoroeBMne2 -CMcntoropropane

BromocNorornrthaneChterofann2-Butanonel.l.lTricntoroeffoneCarbon Tetrxrtoride1.1-DkttoropropeneBenzene1 -OichtofotfhaneTrichtoroetttene1,2-DicHoropropaneOfcromomeftane_ V tl ' — -BVulWRIJlKkmillULMW

ci»-1,3-0tehloropropeneToluenetanM,3-Ofchtoropropenei TrtcNoroeftane1£4Mbmrnoethane2-H0xanoneTetrachtoroetone1,3-OWitoropropane


Lab ID: L 14524-5Date Sampled: 4/23/97Percent Solids 83.5 %SQL12121212.121212

e12

12

12

ResuR12121212121254

4

23

12*266612B6

QualUuuuuu

JuBUuuuuu

uuuuuuuuuuuJuuuuuu

DF

111111111111111111111111111111

Sampte PointTF090708


13131313131313777777777137777777771377777137 -7

Result13131313131340672077777713777r777 •7713737771377

Qualuuuuuu

JuBuuUUuu.» 'uuuuuuuuuuuJuuuuuu

DF

1


Lab ID: L 14524- 11Date Sampled: 4/23/97Percent Solids 73.39 %SQL1414'1414141414777777777147777777771477777 "1477

Result14141414141442777777777109777777771477777147 .7

QualUUuuuuB0UJB

: uUUUUuJBUuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

DF

111111111111111111


Lab ID: L 14524- 18Date Sampled: 4/23/97Percent Solids 75.07 %SQL131313131313137777777771377777777713777771377

Result131313131313477767777771077777777713777771377

QualUU

•UUUUBUUJBUUUuuuJuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

DF

111111111111

Notes:Al unto are ugftg.

, OF indicatostfM Notion Factor.' .SQL indicates 0ie Sampte Ouantitafion UnitThe Qua! column Mfcatos tie qualifier appfied to the result by the Moratoiy or twditivalidator. Refer to qualifier alefMtkmineet

10*1/978:40:56 Ml

September 1997

Matrix: Soil

AKALYTICAL CHEMISTRY RESULTSVolatile Organic Compounds

Centre County Kepone Site - Pre-Design InvestigationState College. Pennsylvania

933-6333

•gp •zoCOCD03•*-"

ParameterOibromocMoramelhaneChtorobenzene1.1 ,1 -TetracMonathane

' Ethytbenzenam.p-Xyteneo-XyteneStyiBnaBromofonnIsopropytMnzeneBrornobenzene1,1 2-TetracWoroeBwne1.2.3-TrfcWoropropanen-Pfupyfcenzena2-Chtoratoluena4-ChlorolohMne1 .3.5-Trimelhybenzenetoft-Butytoanzene1 .2.4-Trimefryfcanzane•ac-Butytoanzane(Mprepyttoluene1.3-Oicnlorobanzana1.4-Ofehtorobenzene1.2-DcMorobenzanen-Butyttianzana1,2-D*romo-3<htoropropane1 .2.4-TrtcNorobaiueneHexacMorobutadlenaNaphthalene1 ,2,3-Trtchlorobenzene

Sample PomtTF090304


6e6

666666t6•ft

, ae6ftft12121212

Result6ee4123ft0

a0

30aBeeeae0

0a60a12121212

QualUuuj

juuuuJuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

DF11111111111111111111111111111



777777777777777777777777713131313

Result777123777771177777

,77777777713131313

QualUUU

JUuuuu

uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

DF1

11111111

11



777777777777777777777777714141414

Result777747777777777777777777714141414

QualUUUujuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

DF111

1111


Lab ID: LI 4524- 18Date Sampled: 4/23/97Percent Solids 75.07 %SQL

777777777777777777777777713131313

Result7773213777777777777777777713131313

QualUUUJ

JUUUUUUUUUUUUuuuuuuuuuuu

DF

1111111111111111111111

AC&v^

Note*:Afl units are pg/kQ.DF indicates the Mutton Factor.SQL indicates tw Sample Quanttation Urn*.

Qual cc^ntn Micates the quaMer appied to ttw result by the laborat

-mbltaportCal VOC IF Rapwt c Page 14 of 16

c c cSeptember 1997

Matrix: Soil



933-6333

-

^B -

3D^^*r

COCD

4^O^^v

ParameterDiehtonxHloorometfianeChtorometfianfVinyl ChlorideBromomettianeChtoroethaneTikJ*ofofluoroinethaneAcetoneCarton DisuMe1.1-DtoNaroeBMneMoBiyfane QitorktoTran*-1J-Oichtoroe1henel.l-Otchtoreetfiane2 -CMchtorepropane

BromocMommrthaneCMoroform2-Butanone1.1.1-TricNofoettianeCartMnTetracntoridei ,1-OichtoioprapeneBenzene1,2-OichtoreethaneTrichtoroethene1.2-DfchbrapropaneDftrontomeftane

44jtelhy^2 Pertanoneds-LS-OichtonprapeneToluene(rans-1,3-Dichtoropn)peM1.1,2-Trichtoroethane1,2-Pbromoelhane2-HexanoneTetrachtoroethene1,3-OicWoiopcopane


Lab ID: L 14524-1 6Date Sampled: 4/23/97Percent Solids 71.14 %SQL

1414141414141477777 .777714777777777147.77771477

ResuR141414141414167767777771477777777714777771477

Qua)uuuuuuBUUJBUuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuiruuuu

DFt111i11111ff

1111111111111111111111



32643232323232643232

Result64

6464646449015322232323212323264323232323215032

3265325303232326517032

QualUUUUJuuD

JNUBJUUUJJUuuuuuuu

uUJuuu

uuuu

u

DF555S55S55555555555555S55S5555555555



ResuR330033003300330033003300900017001700170017001700170017001700170033001700170017001700170069001700170017003300

- 1700790001700170017003300140001700

QualUuuuuuJuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

uuuuu

uu

:uuu

DF250250250250250250250250250250250250250<ucnZOO

250250250250250250250250250250•*£/!2SO250250250250250250250250250



ResuR33003300330033003300330012000170017001700170017001700170017001700330017001700170017001700500017001700170093001700

2400001700170017003300210001700

QualUuuuuuJuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

uuuuu

uuuu

u

DF250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250

250250250250250250250250250250

"-*---noni; ,

At unto am pgftg. . , •DF Indicates the Mutton Factor.SQL htiales the SamptoOu»n«Mbn Unit. ;The Qual column fndfcates tfte qualifier apptod to tha mm by the laboratory or lh« data vaWakx. Re*er to quafcftsrdefin*oo sheet

ACCESStK.H*1tapcirnCatvOC TF Report1ff1>97a«57AM Colder Associates

September 1997

Matrix: Soil


Centre County Kepone Site - Pre-Destgn InvestigationState College, Pennsylvania

933-6333

•r

SOCOou>•p-o

ParameterDJbromochloiDfnethaneChtorobenzene1.1 .1 -TetracMofoethaneEthyfeenzan*nxp-XylanefrXytaneStyraneBfomofonnbopropyfeenzeneBramobenzeneI.l -Tetrachtofoethane1 ,3-TricMorapropanen-PropyttMnzena2-CNorotoluene4-clriorotoJuBne1 .3.5-Trimethylbenzenetart-Bulyi»nzene1 ,2.4-TmnelhytMnzenastc-ButyKMnzenetaopropyttoluena1.3-Oichtofobenzene1,4-DfcMorobanzene1,2-Dfchbrobenzeneo-ButytMnz«nal -Obronto-S-cttoropropane1 .2.4-TrichtorobenzeneHexachtorabuladianaNaphthalem1.2.3-Trichtorobanzene


Lab ID: L 14524- 16Date Sampled: 4/23/97Percent Solids 71.14 %SQL

777777777777777777777777714141414

Result777777777797777777777777714a1414

Qua!uuuuuuuuuuB .uuuuuuuuuuuuu

. uuJBuu

DF11111111111111111111111111111

Sampte PointTF100304


Result Qua!323232

270150033032321732

170003232150323232323232323232323264366464

UUU

uuJu

uu

uuuuuuuuuuUJUJJ

UJUJ

DF55555555555555555555555555555

Sample PointTE1 00706

Lab ID: L 146 11 -6Date Sampled: 5/1/97Percent Solids 75.24 %SQL17001700170017001700170017001700170017001700170017001700170017001700170017001700170017001700170017003300330033003300

Result170017001700

40000140000240001700170017001700

730000170017006600170017001700170017001700170017001700170017003300330033003300

Qua!UUU

uuuu

uu

uuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

DF250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250


Lab ID: LI 461 1-9Date Sampled: 5/1/97Percent Solids 74.75 %SQL17001700170017001700170017001700170017001700170017001700170017001700170017001700170017001700170017003300330033003300

Result170017001700

57000190000330001700170017001700

560000170017008300170017001700170017001700170017001700170017003300330033003300

Qua) OFuu

.u

uuJu

uu

uuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250250

CJ

ACCfc^ *

Not**:Al units are pg/kg.DF indicates the CMubon Factor..SQL indicate* the Sampto QuanMation Urn*

Qual column indicates the quaMer applied to the feu* by *w laboratory or the data

MbltnfMfttC* VOC TF Report

to quarter definition sheet

Associates c

c cSeptember 1997

Matrix: SoH


Centre County Kepone Site - Pre-Oesign InvestigationState College, Pennsylvania

933-6333

&zoCO

VD4TOjr-

ParameterDkttorodMuoromethaneCMotomethaneWiylCMorktoBromomethaneCNoroethaneTricMorofluoromethaneAcetoneCarbon DtsurRdeIj-DJcMoroeVMfwMolhylens CMwideTrans-l -Otcntoroelhenef.l-Ochtoroelhane2>OichtoroprepBneds-l -OfcMoroetheneBiomocMoromelhaneChtoroform2-Butanone1 ,1,1-TrJcNoroetianeCarton Tettachtoride1,1-OJchtoropiopeneBenzene -1.2-OichtoroetfMneTrichtoroeVwne1,2-DicNorepreoaneDfcremometianeBfornodkMoromethane4 Mdhyt-2-Portanui*cifl ,3-OichtofOprapeneToluenetrans-1 ,3-Ofchtoropropene1.1 -TricNoroetaoel -Oibromoethane2-HexanoneTetnKtrioroethene1,3-Otahloropropane

Sample PointTF101Q11

Lab ID: L 146 11 -7Date Sampled: 5/1/97Percent Solids 72.64 %SQL6969696969696*34343434343434343469343434343434343434693434343434693434

ResuR696969696969

630034343434343428343411034343434

190343434693419034934693434

Qua!UUUUUUJ

UJUUUUUJUUJUUUUU

UUUUUBUJUUUU

DFS5SS5SSSSSS555SS5555S5S5SS555555555

Sample PointTF1 10203

Lab ID: L 1454 5- 10Date Sampled: 4/24/97Percent Solids 85.98 %SQL Result12121212121212 .66666

2

12666661266

12121212121212

12

6612 '666661266

Qual DFU < 1UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

11

11



13131313131313666

1366

136666613Q6

Result13170131313133366206666661366666

19006661361064613656

QualU

UuUu

uu

uuuuuuuuuuuuJuuuuu

uJuu

u

DF1111111T11111111

1111

1

Sample Point

Lab ID:Date Sampled:Percent Solids %SQL Result Qual j DF

Al units are pg/kg.DF indicates Vw Dilution Factor.SQL MfcatetBw Sample QuanWation Un*The Qual column Mfcate* t»e quaffier applied to the rest* by tie laborafc^ or the data vaWator. Refer to qoaWw definition sheet

ACCESSta.mb11rapaflCtf VOC TF RapM

September 1997

Matrix: Soil

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY RESULTSVolatile Organic Compound*

Centre County Kepone Site - Pre-Design InvestigationState Cotege, Pennsylvania

933-6333

*""

J^3DCOOl*O•4^

ParameterttbromocntoromethaneChtorabenzene1 .1 .1 l-TetrachtooettieneEthyftenzenemj>-Xyleneo-XytoneStyreneBfomofonnboprepytoenzeneBromobenzene1 ,1 £2-Tetmchlaree0iaM1 >Trichlorapropanen-Propytoenzene2-CMorotoluene4-CNorotolueM1,3.5-TrimethylMnzenetert-Butyfeenzene1,2,4-Trimethytjenzenesec-Butyfeenzenetsopropytotuene1,3-Oichlorabenzene1,4-OKhtorobenzene1 -Oichtorabenzanen-Butylbenzene1 "1 rhBlllllllll T 1 IJ-U JUJ JLUJLJL

1 .2.4-TfichtorobenzeneHexacMorobubKlienaNaphthalene1 ,2,3-Trichlorobenzene


Lab ID: L 1461 1-7Date Sampled: 5/1/97Percent Solids 72.64 %SQL343434343434343434343434343434343434343434

3434

69696969

Result343434656902203434IS34

12000343416034343434343434

18343426696969

QualUUU

UUJNU

UU

UUUUUUUUJNUUJUUU

OFS5555555555555555555555555555


Lab ID: L 1454 5- 10Date Sampled: 4/24/97Percent Solids 85.98 %SQL

666666666666666666666666612121212

Result666666666646666666

12121212

Qua)UUUUUUUUUUJBUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

OF

11111


Lab ID: LI 4545-8Date Sampled: 4/24/97Percent Solids 78.2 %SQL

666666666666666666

13131313

Result66631246666

250066

1106666

613131313

QualUUUJ

JUUUUJUU

UUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

OF

111111111111111111

Sample Point

Lab ID:Date Sampled:Percent Solids %SQL Result Qual DF

Ocn

ACCV

Notes:Al units are MOAV-DF «*cate» the Deutton Facto.SQLhx»c«»MtheSamp*«QuantrtatonLim<t

Qual column indicates Ihe qualifier applied to the cesutt by the laboratory or the data

.MbltafMNftCal VOC TF RtportIOW97 »4*S» AM Associate* c

September 1997

Matrix: Sol

cANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY RESULTS

Mirex and KeponeCentre County Kepone Site - Pre-Design Investigation

State College. Pennsylvania

C963-6333

'

ParameterMirexKepone


Lab ID: L14599-8Date Sampled: 4/30/97Percent SoWs 80 %SQL242864

Resuft242

, 664

dualUDUD

DF2020

Lab ID:Date SiPercentSQL23.684.2


L14599-11ipted: 4/30/97tofidsRemit

79Qua!

7.359.59

JOJD

OF22


LablO: L14545-13Date Sampled: 4/24/97Percent Solids 83SQL E Result I Qual I11.641.4

11.41.47

DF11


Lab ID: L14545-11Date Sampled: 4/24/97Percent Solids 83SQL I Result I Qual I11.440.7

7.3240.7

DF11

AR units am M9*9-DF Mkatw the Diutton Factor.SQL indicate* the Sample QumMtfon LimitThe Qual tioMm Meat** the quvMtar •pftiad to •» md by Ihe lateratory or m« data vaidator.Raler to quaffierdefinibon sheet.

COCD10

ACCESStac.mb1%iparflM KTFItaport GoMer Associate*

September 1997

Matrix: Soil

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY RESULTSMirex and Kepone

Centre County Kepone Site - Pre-Oesign InvestigationState College, Pennsylvania

963-6333


Lab 10: L14545-14Date Sampled: 4/24/97Percent Solids 77 %SQL13

46.3

Result13

6.53

QualUJ

DF11


Lab ID: L14566-7Date Sampled: 4/28/91n.————* f-r.j- atPercent SolidsSQL | Result

82


Lab 10: L14566-8Date Sampled: 4/28/97

| Parameter| Mirexj Kepone

Notes:Al mitt* are ug/kg.DF indicates the Mutton Factor.SQL indicates the Sample QoanWaton UnitThe Qua! column fndicalM tie quaHfter applied to (he result by the laboratory w the data vaUator. Refer to «ial«erdefinitk)n sheet

Lab ID: L14566-16waw OT..VOT. •*.*.«.». Date Sampled: 4/28/97

rwuvniouM <K % Percent Solids 82 % Percent Solids 83 3SQL | Result [ Qual DF SQL | Result j Qual DF SQL Result Qual DF44.8 j 4.25 JD 4 11.7 5.83 J 1 11.4 3.72 . J | 1160 633 D 4 41.6 136 1 40.7 228 1


Lab ID: L145G

ZXJCOo

ACCESSV^ KTFItaRart*n» HXI *-** "JO AU Associates C Pago 2 (X 9

c c cSeptember 1997

Matrix: Soil



963-6333



Lab ID: L14566-9Date Sampled: 4/28/97Percent SolidsSQL11.2160

ResuR

420

82dual

JD

%DF14


Lab ID: L14566-10Date Sampled: 4/28/97Percent Solids 78SQL j Result Qua!12.2 j 1.93 J433 1669 D

DF1

10


Lab ID: L14599-2Date Sampled: 4/30/97Percent SolidsSQL115410

Resuft7.452290

83QualJDD

OF1010


Lab ID: L14599-5Date Sampled: 4/30/97Percent SolidsSQL [ Result240854

2405970

84Qua!UDD

DF2020

Al unite are ugftg.DF todfcafes tfw Dilution Factor.SQL incftcates tie Sampte Quanttation LIT*ThaQual column todkatesthaojialifttapc*Bd to Vwresut byte

3DCOCDID-P-OCO

ACCESStoc.mb1V«porflM KTF Rapcrt Gokter Associates P«gt3of9

September 1997

Matrix: Soil

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY RESULTSMirax and Kepone


963-6333


Lab ID: L14599-13Data Sampled: 4/30/97Percent SoWs 76 %SQL11.7418

Result11.71356

Qua!UD

DF1

10


Lab ID: L 14599-7Date Sampled: 4/30/97Percent Solids 83 %SQL12

42.7

Result3.3579.5

Qua!J

DF11


Lab ID: L 14666- 11Date Sampled: 4/28/97Percent Solids 79 %SQL121430

Result24.5122

QualJDJD

DF1010

Lab ID:DateS.PercentSQL49.2175


L14566-12pled: 4/28/97

ParameterMirex

[ Kepone

Notes:Al units are tigAta.DF Indicates the Mutton Factor.SQL indicate* the Sample Quanttatton UnitTfce Qual column indicates the quHKer applied to the result by the toboratocy or trw data vaUtotor Refer to qualifier definition sheet

Result49.2450

79QualUDD

DF44

COCDUD-r-o

ACCESS*. lorflM KTFItaport1«11ST N-U 3D All

L C

c c cSeptember 1997

Matrix: Soil




57.1

Result16

43.5

65Qual

UJ

DF11



Lab ID:Date Sampled:Percent SoKds

963-6333

SQL17.662.9

Result17.662.9

Point32114566-14

4/28/9755 %

QualUU

DF11


Lab ID: L14599-12Date Sampled:Percent SolidsSQL25

44.6

Result2284.88

4/30/9777 %

Qual0J

DF

2.1

Lab ID:DateSPercenSQL12845.6

Sample PointTF06070B

L14599-4pled: 4/30/97

Result91445.6

79Qual

DU

DF101

Notes:Al units are pg/kg.DF indicate* the Mutton Factor.SQL Jrxiuitu the Sample Qtuntitation LimitThe Qual column todteates to qualifier applied to the rest* by the laboratory or 6w data vaidator. Refer to qualify o finWon sheet

roCOo

CD

ACCCSSWc mt>1V«port*l Colder Associates

September 1997

Matrix: Soil



Lab ID. L14599-9Date Sampled: 4/30/97Percent SolidsSQL12243.4

Result128143.4

77Qual

DU

DF101


Centre County Kepone Site - Pre-Design InvestigationState Cottege, Pennsylvania

Lab ID:Date Sampled:Percent Solids

963-6333

SQL252696

Result252896

Point304.14524-4

4/23/9776 %

QualUDUD

DF2020


Lab ID: L 14599-6Date Sampled: 4/30/97Percent Solids 80 %SQL11.942.5

Result11.94.87

QualUJ

DF11


Lab ID: L 14599-1 4Date Sampled: 4/30/97Percent Solids 73 %SQL12.644.8

Result11.244.8

QualJU

DF11

Al units are upykg.DF indicates the Nutton Factor.SQL indicates the Sample Quanttaoon UnitThe Qua! column indicates the quaWar applied to the result by the labocatotyor the data vafetotor.Reto to qualifief definition sheet

COo

ACCESS\i jfMrtlM KTFItafMMIonian 8-4*31 MI GoV.. Associate* c

Septermwrc c

1997

Matrix: Soil



Lab ID: L14524-5Date Sampled: 4/23/97Percent SofidsSQL I Result11.541.1

7.0241.1

64Qua)

JU

DF11

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY RESULTSMfrex and Kepone


Lab ID:Date Sampled:Percent SolidsSQL j Result

963-6333

13.247

13.247

Pointros.14524-3

4/23/9775 %

Qua)UU

DF11

Sample PontTF091112

Lab ID: L 14524- 11Date Sampled: 4/23/97Percent Solids 73 %SQL14.250.6

Result6.1150.6

Qua!JU

DF11

Lab ID:DateSPercentSQL12.544.7


L14524-18ipted: 4/23/97JolkJsResuM7.7144.7

75Qual

JU

DF11

Al units are ugflcg.DF indicates the Diufen Factor.SQL jhdcates the Sample QuanttaOon Urn*Tne Qua! column indfcates to qualifier appfed to the result by the laboratory or Ihe data vafafator Refer to quafcfierdefinrtton sheet

30COCD

ro

ACCESS\*cmb1V*porflM KTF Report1W1J97 B:4fr31 AM

Colder Associates

September 1997

Matrix: Soil




49.8

Resut11.34.39

71Qua!

JJ

DF11


Centra County Kepone Site - Pre-Design InvestigationState College, Pennsylvania

963-6333



Result1140910

78Qua!

DUD

DF2020

Lab ID:Date Sampled:Percent SolidsSQL266948

Result680948

Pointros.14611-6

5/1/9775 %

QualD

UD

DF2020


Lab ID: L 146 11 -9Date Sampled: 5/1/97Percent Solids 75 %SQL266952

Result745952

QualD

UD

DF2020

Al unite araDF Indicate* toe Dilution Factor.SQL indicate* tie Sample QuanWatton Untt.The Qua! column inchoates fte quaWwr applied to lie result by the laboiatonr or ite data vaMator. Refer to «ialite definition sheet

COCD

ACCESS^ .mpotflM KTFftaport C Pago 04 •

c c1997

Matrix: Soil


Centre County Kepone Site - Pn*Oesign InvestigationState College. Pennsylvania

963-6333


ar


LabtD: L 146 11 -7bate Sampled: 5/1/97Percent SoWs 73 %SQL13.849.1

ResuK31.549.1

Qua)

U

DF11

Lab ID:DaleS.PercentSQL11.842.2


U4545-10ipfed: 4/24/97iolkJsResult11.842.2

86QualUU

DF

11

Sample PointTF1.10506

Lab ID: L14545-8Date Sampled: 4/24/97Percent SolidsSQL12.745.3

Result5.3445.3

78Qual

JU

DF11

Sample Point

Lab ID:Date Sampled:Percent SolidsSQL I Result I Qual DF

NotnzAl unto are pgftg.DF imfcates the Dilution Factor.SQL indicates fwSamp4eQu«rtitatonLJrr*The Owl column Indicates »* quaHBw appRad to tw rest* by the latoraWyof trw data vafcdato-Refer to quaWw<Jrfnrtionsh«t

GOCDto

ACCESStoC-mbltaporMI K TF Report1(W«7 8:40:32 Ml GokJer Associate PagtSol*

LEGEND

AR309U

*» •»-• 923-4112 AS SHOW04/05/06PA17-285

07

Golfer Associates

K - AclO~°*cni2 (opm

K - 1x10 on (ooncraU)

K - Ixttf " on2 (<MpMt)

BEMOCK SVC MIL

SVC «U. M OVERBURDEM

EXIS1MG

V337

approximate seal* feat

LAYER t PERMEABHJTYFOR CALIBRATED MODEL

RNC/STATE COU£G ) \ D-1

DLEGEND

AR309M7

923-8112 AS SHOWN04/05/WPA17-288

07

Golder Associates

K - i9»l610an2 (Ml)

K - t.2xtO°*cm2 (md-flM hyfrofroc)

BEDROCK SVE VEIL

SVC WELL W OVERBURDEN

POSIMtG KLL

NOV 0 6 199724=^^=^^"»

approximate seal*

243

feet

LAYER 4 PERMEABILITYFOR CALIBRATED MODEL

RNC/STATC COLLEGE/PA ["" D-g

fc-

LEGEND

K - 3.9xl<fcm2 (M!)

K - 1MO on2 (Mnd-flM

•1J- BEDROCK S« «a

•^- S« Wit M OWRBURDEH

•<$)- EMS1MG WEU

• HOV 0 6 1997

z * _ ^ o _ ^ ^ 2 ^approximate scale feet

AR309MJ ^

»•*= 923-6112<*•* we««« Tlh^»« =K,

««= AS SHOWN•«* 04/OS/W« "« PA17-290M«*>1& 07

GfilckT AfiMM*iatw

LAYER 6 PERMEABILITYFOR CAUBRAT^H. MODEL

RNC/STATE CCUfifc.^/ ~D-3

LEQEND

AR309U9

923-6112 AS SHOWN04/OS/WPAI7-3O7

07

G<dder Associates

9UULATED OVERBURDEN HELL

EMULATED BEDROCK HELL

24

MOV 0 ti

0 24

approximate seals feet

SCENARIOS 3 AND 4SVE WELL LOCATION PLAN

RNC/STATC COUE(^/PA D-4

LEGEND

' —10 2K - 3.9x10 cm (gol)

K - 1 JMOa"an2 (wnd-fltod hydrofroe)

BEDROCK SVEVEU

SVE VCLL M OVERBURDEN

DOS1WG VEIL

NOV 0 6 e^'

24 0 24


)*• •« 823-6112»wr. ^yg

°*** Tlfrt—

"*"* +^

«**= AS SHOWN•** 04/05/96«"« PA17-308BIIMIU 07

Golder Associates

LAYER 4 PERMEABUTFOR SCENARIO 4

RNC/STATE COLU J*

r MAP

""""D-5

MPUT PARAMETERS

AIRS)GRC

RNCS

GRND(cm*)

fcM)0"

ASPLT(cm*)

«.-"

CONC(cm')

,o-"

fi.L(em*)

wo—

Ti-L(cm')

J*-"

FRAC(em2)

..«-"

BDRK(cm*)

10-*

E«-2(otm)

069

EW-3(aim)

O6S

PEW-2(gtm)

OW

E«-l(aim)

aes

RESULTSTOIAL

ALL LAYERS

V 1 M(elm) |(- '-

6.B

LEGEND

-K——K——*— FENCE

-<Jj- MONITORING WELL

- - SVE WU IN OVERBURDEN

-& SVE VCLL IN BEDROCK


•• 065 - 0 W oun

a0.70 - 0.75 aim

075 - Ottaun

OBO - O8S gtm

0.90 - 0-83 oun

CM

Orr>or

NOTES

RESULTSi.) WOIUOUM. EimACiKM RAIES

W-l - 1 80 dmBR-] - 1 7t dmEW-1 » 1 » elmEH- 3 . Ml dm

24KOV 0 G V337

0 24


923-6112

Hi'-'t /

AS SHOW*04/05/96PA17-292

"• SUBimt

Associates

CALIBRATEDLAYER 3

PRESSURE Cr ^3URS

RNC/STATE

O

LEGEND

-X——X——X— FENCE

- MONITORING WELL


4} SVE WELL IN BEDROCK

COHTOUB3 OF ABSOLUTE PRESSURE

^B O 65 - 0 TO otm

D » CM

COoc

0.85 - 0.90 aim

090 - 0« otm

NOTESI.) MSULR OeiMHED FROM

MXH. IMSSMULA1NN& «CRSON 1 II

RESULTSi.) MOMUM. E< mACno* MAIES

BR-t - IX> chiBH-2 - 1 II ftnfW-2 - I-SS elmEW-1 • 1J1 «*"

MPUT PARAMETERS

AIR JOGRID

mn

kGfiNP(tm1)

3.10°"

k»SWT(cm?)

10""

kconr(em'}

,o-"

KFNI

(cm'}

-00JnlO

k«_i

(cm')

J*-1"

kFRAC(cm^J

..H-"

k8DRK(cm'}

.o-"1

PBR-2(otm)

0*J

PEW-3(aim}

06i

PEW-2(aim)

oes

P8R-1(aim)

oes

RESULTSTO

ALL L

(ctai)

6 a

!ALAttRS

(9/tc)

ze

«MEAS SHOVWJ

04/05/96P*l 7-293

Colder Associates


CALIBRATED MODELLAYER 4

PRESSURE CONTOURSRNC/STATE COLLEGE/PA E-2

X —— X — - *— FENCE

MONITORING ¥CLL

SVE WELL IN OVERBURDEN

SVE HELL IN BEDROCK


) RESULTS oarMWD rnoi MRJO* SMULADQNS: tcftsKM 1.11.KPML IMS.

1) MnUiML EXOUCMN IU1ES_ BR-1 - 1.80 elm

W-I - ICW-2 - I.*S (*•

l.]l din

NOV **"0 24

WPUT PARAMETERS

Wfi30CRC

mcs

CRND(cm*)

-OB*.iiT^

ASPLT(cm )

w""

CONC(ctn )

10-"

FILL(an2)

J*10°*

ILL(cm2)

i9E-'°

fRAC(cmZ)

,.a-M

BOAK(cm')

.0-"

PBR-2(otm)

o.es

PEW-3(aim)

0«

PEW-2(otm)

asi

PBR-1(otm)

a 65

RESULTSTOTAL

ALL LAYERS

V 1 M(ctm)k"'-^)

66


923-6112WUC

AS SHOWN

04/05/96PA17-294

Colder Associates


PRESSURE Cr

RNC/STATE COLLEC E-3

INPUT PARAMETERS

A1R3OGRID

mcs

CRND(tm*)

JntO°"

ASPII(cm')

,0'"

CONCtern')

.0-"

FILL

tern1)

3rtO*

TILL(cm*)

3*-'U

FRAC(cm")

..a-0"

kBDRK(cm')

to""

PBR-Z(atm)

0.63

PEW-3(otm)

0.65

P£*-3(atm)

OGS

PBR-1(aim)

0*5

RESULTSTO

AU LV

(cfm)

6.0

IALA>tRS

M(fl/^c)

ZG

LEGEND

-*——*——»— FENCE

-<&- MONITORING WELL

-&• SVE WELL IN OVERBURDEN

-fe SVE NELL IN BEDROCK


^H 0.65 - O.TO aim

^^H O.TO - OL7S dim

1 I 0.75 - O.00 aim

^9 080 - O85 aim

^H 0 85 - 0 90 aim

^H osw - 0-»s mm

NOTES_________________1.) RESLL1S OBIiUNEO FMOU MtlfP SUULATKMS: VOKKm I 1

RESULTS________________i.) MMOUM. cinucnoN RAIES

BH-1 - I .*) <HmBR-2 - 1 71 dmlm-2 - I *S **•E»-3 - 1.11 dm

inCM-*atoCOcc

24 0 24


923-6)12

WUEAS SHOWN

04/05/96CALIBRATED MODEL

LAYER 6PRESSURE CONTOURS

Colder Associates RNC/STATE COLLEGE/PA E-4

INPUT PARAMETERS

AK3OGRID

RHCS

kGRND(em^)

«o"

kASPLI(emS)

,o-lt

kCONC(en,')

,0-'

k(TLL

(cm2)

wo*

kHU

(cm')

3.*-10

kFRAC(an*)

1**

kBORK(cn.2)

,0-™

PBfi-Z(atm)

O6S

PEW-3(atm)

oes

PF.W-2(aim)

0-65

PBH-1(aim)

O.S5

RESULTSro

ALL L

V(etm>

6.B

IALAVERS

(«Ae)

LEGEND

-X——X——X— FENCE

•ty MONITORING WELL

^ SVE WELL IN OVERBURDEN

Xj SVE WELL IN BEDROCK


a an - aw mm

040 - OK mm

o.ts - aso «m

090 - 0*5 abn

CM_*cnCDCO0=

NOTES1.) ffSULK OBTMNCD FMMtea*. i»»j

9HUAnOH& tCMSlOM 1.1].

RESULTSI.) MNVDUM. EIIIUCnON RAIES

W-l - 1 JO dmBR-2 • 1.71 dmEW-I - 1.95 dm«-, . in dm NQV 0 jj

24 0 24


923-6112WHE

if*.

AS SHOWN04/05/96PA17-296

Gaidar Associates


RNC/STATE COLLEGE. E-5

..y.

<

.. .J

- j

"ft"--"-1—^-—-*..

November 1997Table F-1

Data Set used for VOC Mass Calculation

963-6333

Sample ID

TF010304TF010607TF020708TF021112TF021415TF030304 •TF030708TF031011TF031920TF040304TF040708TF041112TF041516TF050203TF050708TF051112TF052021SB-3ASB-3bSB-3CSB-4aSB-4bSB-4cSB-5aSB-5bP-1P-2P-3P-4P-5P-6E-1BR-1BR-2

EASTING

1952111195211119520961952096195209619520711952071195207119520711952094195209419520941952094195211619521161952116195211619522021952202195220219521621952162195216219520881952088195212119521191952103195209719520841952141195210919520861952136

NORTHING

239791.7239791.7239813.6239813.6239813.6239829.2239829.2239829.2239829.2239857.7239857.7239857.7239857.7239890.7239890.7239890.7239890.7239983.5239983.5239983.5239888.5239888.5239888.5239813.8239813.8239881.5239854.6239852.3239843.1239821.4239845.1239860.9239801.5239883.2

Depth of Sample[ft. bgs]3.56.57,511.514.53.57.510.519.53.57.511.515.52.57.511.520.512.35161912.168

2.2516.65.484.54.99.55.27.257.157.35

Total VOCConcentration

[us/kg]2215823672665902320175

1040001527728085128460001727000220110

2066103711210062935742594065290239229071911288374928322

34567411648031094011784028411001779

•280860158

• 24936

z:\projects\963-6333\sve\97flnal\Tbl-f1.xls\ Colder AssociatesAR309i»28

Page 1 of 1

November 1997 Table F-2Total VOC Mass Within SVE Capture Zone

963-6333

Total VOC Mass Calculation • Depth Interval: 0 ft to 6 ft Below Ground Surface (bgs)Isoconcentration

AreaIA6IA5IA4IA3IA2IA1

Sub-Total

AiIff]

4,7656,9183,0275.043

655468

h[ft]

666666

VI[ft']

28.59041.50818.16230.2583.9302,928

[mj]810

1.17551485711163

Pfkg/m*]

1.9001,9001.9001,9001,9001,900

Msoll[kg]1,538,2082.233.226

977.1571.627.950

211.443157.533

CI[kg/kg]5.0E-075.0E-065.0E-055.0E-045.0E-031.6E-02

20.896 125,376 3.550 6.745.517

MeP<g]

7.69E-011.12E+014.89E+018.14E+021.06E+032.84E+03

4,768

Total VOC Mass Calculation • Depth Interval: 6 ft to 10 ft bgs

Total VOC Mass Calculation - Depth Interval: 10 ft to 14 ft bgs

Total VOC Mass Calculation - Depth Interval: Lower than 14 ft bgs.

IsoconcentrationArea

IA6IA5IA4IA3IA2IA1

Sub-Total

Ai[ft*]

7,8342,7292,2977,068

468500

h[ft]

444444

VI[ft*]

31.33610,9169.186

28,2721.8722,000

(ml6873092608015357

PIkg/m8]

1.9001.9001.9001,9001,9001,900

Msollfkg]1.685.949

587.306494.336

1.521.099100,718107,605

a[kg/kg]5.0E-075.0E-065.0E-055.0E-041.7E-032.8E-03

Me[kg]

8.43E-012.94E+002.47E+017.61 E+021.74E+023.06E+02

20,896 83.584 2.367 4,497,011 1,269


IA6IA5IA5IA4IA3Bedrock 1Bedrock 2

Sub-Total

AI[ft*]

1,2376.9151.8562.755

6161,5805,737

20,896

h[ft]

4444400

VI[ft*]

4.94827.6607.424

11.0203.264

00

54,316

[ml1407832103129200

1.538

P[kg/m']

.900

.900

.900

.900

.900,900,900

Msoil[kg]

266,2141.486.172

399.428592.901175,611

•• •

2.922.326

a[kg/kg]5.0E-075.0E-065.0E-065.0E-052.7E-04O.OE+00O.OE+00

MC[kg]1.33E-017.44E+002.006*002.96E+014.68E+01O.OOE+00O.OOE+00

86


IA6IA5IA4Bedrock 1Bedrock 2

Sub-Total

AII*1]

6.4401.7782.3182,6197,741

h[ft]

42800

VIIff]

25.7603.556

18,54400

[ml729101525

00

PIkg/m']

1.9001,9001.9001,9001,900

Msoil[kg]1,385,947

191,321997.710

••

Ci[kg/kg]5.0E-075.0E-065.0E-05O.OE+00O.OE+00

Me[kg]6.93E-019.57E-014.99E+01O.OOE+00O.OOE+00

20,896 47.860 1.355 2.574,978 52

Total 311,136 8,810 16,739,832 6,174

g:\projects\963-6333\SVEYTbl-f2.xls Colder Associates A R 3 0 9 t » 2 9

November 1997 963-6333Table F-3

Total VOC Mass Within Excavation ZoneTotal VOC Mass Calculation • Depth Interval: 0 ft to 6 ft Below Ground Surface (bg»)

Sub-Total

Isoconcentratlon Area

IA6IA5IA4IA3IA2IA1

VI[ft"J

1534066649883

1715439302928

[ml434.38168.70279.86485.75111.2982.91

P[kg/m3]

190019001900190019001900

MSOIIIkg]

825,327358,539531,728922,925211,443157.533

Cf[kg/kg]5.0E-075.0E-065.0E-055.0E-045.0E-031.8E-02

55,899 1,583 3,007.495

Me

Peg]4.13E-011.79E+002.66 E +014.61 E+021.06E+032.64E+03

4.363

Total VOC Mass Calculation • Depth Interval: 6 ft to 10 n bgs

Sub-Total

Total VOC Mass Calculation • Depth Interval: 10 ft to 14 ft bfls

Sub-Total

Total VOC Mass Calculation - Depth Interval: 14 ft to 20 ft bgs.

Sub-Total

Isoconcentratlon Area

IA6IA5IA4IA3IA2IA1

VImi

016443553

1674218722000

[ml0.00

46.55100.81474.08

53.0156.63

P[kg/m3]

190019001900190019001900

Msoil[kg]

1

88.451191,160900,758100,71.8107,605

Cl[kg/Kg]5.0E-075.0E-065.0E-055.0E-041.7E-032.8E-03

MePeg]

O.OOE+004.42E-019.56E+004.50E+021.74E+023.06E+02

25,811 731 1,388,691 940

I soconcen (ration Area

IA6IA5IA4IA3IA2IA1 |

VI(ft0)

222067396208

000

[ml62.66

190.83175.79

0.000.000.00

PIkg/m3]

1900.19001900190019001900

Msoll[kg]

119,441362,574334,005

-V

-

Cl[kg/kg]5.0E-075.0E-065.0E-052.7E-04

O.OE+00O.OE+00

Me[kg]

5.97E-021.81E+001.67E+01O.OOE+00O.OOE+00O.OOE+00

15,167 429 816,019 19

I socon centra lion Area

IA6IA5IA4IA31A2IA1 J ______

VI[ftl

494315251123

000

[ml139.9743.1631.800.000.000.00

P[kg/m3!

190019001900190019001900

Msoil[kg]

265,94582,04960,420

---

Cl .[kg/kg]5.0E-075.0E-065.0E-055.0E-045.0E-031.8E-02

Me[kg]1.33E-014.10E-013.02E+00O.OOE+00O.OOE+00O.OOE+00

0 7591 214.95 408,413 4

Total 104.468 2,956 8,620,619 5,345

O:\prefectB\9e3-6333\sve\S7flnanTbM3.xls Golder AssociatesAR309 t *30

Page 1 of 1

ILEGEND

SB-3

E-8R-2.

Rl PHASE I MO H SQL BORINC LOCATION(LOCATIONS APPROXIMATE)

PO SOL BOONG LOCATION

SUE PIEZOMETER MONITORMC NEU.

SVE OVERBUMXM EXTRACTION HELL

S« BEOROCK EXTRACTION MELL

AREA OF SUE REMEDIATION

NOTES1.) THE SAMPLE LOCATIONS NEAR BUILOMC ft WTH

EXCEEDENCES MLL NOT UNDERGO EXCAVATION DUE TOTHE PROXMTY OF THE BUUMNCS. TANKS. OVCRHEAOeOUPUENT AND OMCOMC OPERATIONS ACTHITIES. THESEAREAS CAN BE TREATED BY SUE..

2.) BOUNDARIES AND AREAS ARE APPROXMATE AND Wi.BE FURTHER DEFMED DURING THE REMEDIAL DCSWN AMDREMEDIAL ACTKM.

REFERENCES1.) TOPOCRAPMC FEATURES TAKEN FROM OK3TAL FUS

TITLED "BASE" DATED O6/OV*7 AND *15t012Or DATED06/09A7 SUPPLIED BY MTTANY CeoSOENCES. MC.

2.) LOCATION OF PROPERTY LINE. MONITORMG HELLS ANDPOI SOL BORMGS TAKEN FROM CMQTAL FILE TITLED•SPC* DATED 06/02/97 SUPPLED BY SKETLANOEHONEERINC * ASSOCIATES. MC.

1) LOCATION OF • PHASE I AND • SOL BORWCS TAKENFROM OCTAL FIE -PA17-169" DATED 10/14/WPREPARED BY COLDER ASSOCIATES INC.

NOV0689?20escale

203

feet

AR309U3

DWAS SHOWN1I/D7/B7PA17-372

07

•kdder Associates

ISOCONCENTRATION MASS AREASEXCAVATION LAYER 0 TO 6 FTTANK FAHM/BULD > AREAS

RUETGERS-HEASC F-1

o o

LEGENDSB-3-

tr-iu

E-3

BR-*

ft PHASE I AND II SQL BORMC LOCA1KW(LOCATIONS APPROXIMATE)

POI SOL BORING LOCATION

SVE'PGOMETER MOMTORMC HELL

SVE OVERBURDEN EXTRACTION WELL

SVE BEDROCK EXTRACTION NELL

AREA OF SVE REMEDIATION

NOTES1.) THE SAMPLE LOCATIONS NEAR BUUMNG f\ WTH

EXCEEOENCES HULL NOT UNDERGO EXCAVATION DUE TOTHE PROXIMITY OF THE BUILDINGS. TANKS. OVERHEADEQUPMENT AND ONGOMG OPERATIONS ACTIVITIES. THESEAREAS CAN BE TREATED BY SVE.

2.) BDUNDARCS AND AREAS ARE APPROXIMATE AND MLLBE FURTHER OEFHED DURING THE REMEDIAL DESIGN ANDREMEDIAL ACTION.

REFERENCES1.) TDPOGRAPHC FEATURES TAKEN FROM (MQTAL FILES

TITLED •BASE" DATED 06/D5/B7 AND 'l51012Or DATED06/09/97 SUPPLIED BY MTTANY CEOSOENCES. MC.

2.) LOCATION Of PROPERTY LINE, MOMtORMC NELLS ANDPDI SOIL BOftMCS TAKEN FROM DKITAL FILE TITLED•SPC" DATED 08/02/B7 SUPPUED BY SNEETLANOENGMEERMC * ASSOCIATES. MC.

3.) LOCATMN OF Rl PHASE f A*W • SCC BORMGS TAKENFROM ttOTAL RLE "PA17-169* DATED 10/14/93PREPARED BY COLDER ASSOCIATES INC.

AR309U32

"« 963-6U3 AS SHOWN

11/07/97

PA17-37307

Goider Associates

ISOCONCENTRATION MASS AREASEXCAVATION LAYER 0 TO 10 FTTANK FARM/BUUNNQ «1 AREAS

RUETGERS^EASE CORPORATION F"2

I

LEGENDSB-3

**

BR-2,

RJ PHASE I AND n 500. BORING LOCATION(LOCATIONS APPROXIMATE)

PCX SOIL BORING LOCATION

S\€ PIEZOMETER UQNJTORMG «ELL

SVE OieRBUROEN EXTRACTION WELL

AC BEDROCK EXTRACTION KLL

AREA OT SVt REMEDIATION

NOTES1.) THE SAMPLE LOCATIONS NEAR BtMDMG fl MtH

EXCCEOENCES «U. HOT UNDERGO EXCAVATION DUE TOTHE PROXHITY OF THE BULDWCS. TANKS. OVERHEADEQUIPMENT AND ONGOING OPERATIONS ACTMDES THESEAREAS CAN BE TREATED BY SVE.

2.) BOUNDARIES AND AREAS ARE APPROXMATE AND WU.BE FURTHER DEFINED DURING THE REMEDIAL DESIGN ANDREMEDIAL ACTION.

REFERENCES1.) TOPOGRAPHK: FEATURES TAKEN FROM DIGITAL HLES

TITLED "BASE" DATED 06/DS/B7 AND 151O12O7" DATED06/DB/47 SUPPUEO BY MTTANY GEOSQENCES. MC.

2.) LOCATION OF PROPERTY UNE. MOWTORMG WELLS ANDPOI SOL BORWGS TAKEN FROM DIGITAL RLE TITLED*SPC" DATED 06/02/97 SUPPUEO BY SMEETLANDENGMEERWC * ASSOCIATES, MC

3.) LOCATKM OF W PHASE I AND II SOL BORINGS TAKENFROM OtfTAL FU VA17-169' DATED TO/I4/M

, PREPARED BY COLDER ASSOCIATES INC.

flR309U3

>•" 963-UJ3DVD

AS SHOW11/07/97

•M •« PA17-37407

ISOCONCENTRATION MASS AREASEXCAVATION LAYRMP TO 14 FT

TANK FARM/BIT Vl AREA

RUETGERS-NEASE F-3

o

LEGEND

W-2.

Rl PHASE I AND H SOU. BORMG LOCATION(LOCATIONS APPROXIMATE)

PDI SON. BORMG LOCATION

SVE PIEZOMETER HOMTORWG WELL

SVE OVERBURDEN EXTRACTION WELL

SVE BEDROCK EXTRACTION WELL

AREA OF SVE REMEDIATION

NOTES1.) THE SAMPLE LOCATIONS NEAR BUUNNG fl WTH

EXCEEOENCES WLL NOT UNDERGO EXCAVATION DUE TOTHE PROXIUTY OF THE BUILDINGS, TANKS. OVERHEADCOmPUENT AND ONGOING OPERATIONS ACTIVITIES. THESEAREAS CAN BE TREATED BY SVE.

2.) BOUNDARIES AND AREAS ARE APPROXMA1E AND MLLBE FURTHER DEFINED DURING THE REMEDIAL DESIGN AMDREMEDIAL ACTION.

REFERENCES1.) TOPOCRAPMC FEATURES TAKEN FROM OCTAL FILES

TITLED "BASE* DATED 06/05/97 AND '15101207* DATED06/00/97 SUPPLIED BY WTTANY GEOSOENCES. MC.

2.) LOCATION OF PROPERTY UNE. MOMTORMC NELLS ANDPDI SOIL BORMGS TAKEN FROM DIGITAL FILE TITLED•SPC* DATED 06/D2/97 SUPPLIED BY SWEETLANOENCMEERINC It ASSOaATES. fftC

1) LOCATION OF R PHASE I AM) H SOU. BORMGS TAKENFROM 00TAL FILE *PA17-W DATED 10/14/93PREPARED BY COLDER ASSOCIATES INC

feet

AR309l*3li

363-6333 AS SHOW11/07/97PA17-373

07

Gaider Associates

ISOCONCENTRATION MASS AREASEXCAVATION AT LAYER 14 TO 20 FT

TANK FARM/BUUMNQ -1 AREA

RUETGERS-NEASE CORPORATION I F~4

LEGENDSB-3

•

1F-11-&

•

BR-2.

NOTES

JU PHASE I AND • SQL BORING LOCATION(LOCATIONS APPROXIMATE)

TO SOL BORING LOCATKM

SVE PCZOVeTER MONITORING NELL

SVE OVERBURDEN EXTRACTION NELL

SVE BEDROCK EXTRACTION 1KU

APPROXMATE AREA OF SVE REMEDIATION

1.) THE SAMPLE LOCATIONS NEAR BUILDING fl NTHEXCEEOEMCES WLL NOT UNDERGO EXCAVATION DUE TOTHE PROXMTV OF THE BULOMCS. TANKS. OVERHEADEQUPUENT AND ONGOMC OPERATIONS ACDVJTCS. THESEAREAS CAN BE TREATED BY 5VC

2.) BOUNDARIES AND AREAS ARC APPROXMATE AND WLLBE FURTHER OEFHEO OURMC THE REUEDML OESKN ANDREMEDIAL ACTION.

REFERENCES1.) TOPOGRAPHC FEATURES TAKEN FROM OK3TAL FILES

TITLED •BASE' DATED OS/DS/K AND isioixir DATEDOB/D9/B7 SUPPLIED BY MTTANY GEOSQENCES. MC.

2.) LOCATKM OF PROPERTY LME. MOMTORWG NELLS ANDPOI SOL BORINGS TAKEN FROM DKlTAL FILE TITLED•SPC" DATED 06/02/97 SUPPLED 8V SHCETLAWENOMEERWC Jt ASSOCIATES. MC.

3.) LOCATION OF n PHASE I AND • SOL BORINGS TAKENFROM DKaTAL RLE fAI 7-169* DATED 10/14/83PREPARED BY COLDER ASSOCIATES MC

NOVOfi

20escale

20afeet

«»: 963-6333DUD

AS SHOW*11/07/97PA17-376

07

Bolder Associates

AREA OF SVE INFLUENCEISOCONCENTRATION MASS

AREAS IN 0 TO "FT LAYERTANK FARM/BUT A«1 AREAS

RUETCERS-NEASE COK

LEGEND

Rt PHASE I AND fl SON. BORING LOCATION(LOCATIONS APPROXIMATE)

POI SOL BORMG LOCATION

SVCfCZOUETER MGMTORMC VCLL

£-3

8R-2

sve OVERBURDEN EXTRACTIOH WLL

SVE BEDROCK EXTRACTION vat

APPROXMATE AREA OF SVE REMEDIATION

NOTES1.) THE SAMPLE LOCATIOHS NEAR BULDMG fl MTH

EXCEEDENCES Mil MOT UNOERCO EXCAVATION DUE TOTHE PROXMTY Of THE BUUJNNCS. TANKS. OVERHEADEQUPUENT AND ONCONC OPERATIONS ACTIVITIES. THESEAREAS CAN BE TREATED BY SVE.

2.) BOUNOARCS AND AREAS ARE APPROXIMATE AND WLLBE FURTHER DEFINED DURING THE REMEDIAL OCSKM ANDREMEDIAL ACTION.

REFERENCES___________________1.) TOPOCRAPHC FEATUKS TAKEN FROM OtGtTAL FLES

TITLED •BASE* DATED osAe/97 AND •»ioi2or DATED06/09/97 SUPPUEO BY MTTANY GEOSOENCES. MC.

3.) LOCATION OF M PHASE I AND II SOL BORINGS TAKENFROM DK3TAL RLE -pAtT-ISfl- DATED 10/14/93PREPARED BY COLDER ASSOCIATES INC.

flR309l*36

-• "« 963-6333MK DUO

OMMt 1 ]V« '

•vn (^TtJLi

«** AS SHOWN

•»* 11/07/97«•" PA1 7-377• ••MO 07

Golder Associates

AREA OF SVE INFLUENCE(SOCONCENTRA1TON MASS

AREAS IN 0 TO 10 FT LAYERTANK FARM/BUUNNQ "1 AREAS

RUETGERS-NEASE CORPORATION | F'6

LEGEND

"-vTF-U.

Rl PHASE I AW H SON. BORMC LOCAHON(LOCATIONS APPROXUA1E)

POt SOL BORMC LOCATION "

SW PCZOUCTER UQNITQRMG WEL1 ,

SVE OKRaUROEN EXTRACTION «QX

SVE BEDROCK EXTRACTION WELL

APPROXHATE AREA OF SVE REWEDUT10N

NOTES1.) THE SAMPLE LOCATIONS NEAR SWLOWG fl WTH

EXCEEDENCES MLL NOT UNDERGO EXCAVATION DUE TOTHE PROXMTY OF THE BUILOMCS. TANKS. OVERHEADEQUPUENT AND ONGOMC OPERATIONS ACRMTIES. THESEAREAS CAM BE TREATED BY SK.

Z) BOUNOARCS AW AREAS ARE APPROXIMATE AW MILBE FURTHER OEFMEQ DUfONG THE REMEDIAL DESIGN ANDREMEDIAL ACTION.

REFERENCES1.) TOPOGRAPHC FEATURES TAKEN FROM DISTAL FILES

TITLED 'BASE' DATED 06/05/97 AND *1S101207* DATEDOB/M/97 SUPPLIED BY MTTAMY GEOSQENCES. MC.

2.) LOCATION OF PROPERTY UNE. MOMTORMG 1CLLS AWPOt SOL BORMGS TAKEN FROM DIGITAL FILE TITLED•SPCrOATED 06/02/9? SUPPUEO BY SHEETLANOENGMEERWC * ASSOCIATES. MC.

3.) LOCATION OF M PHASE I AND fl SOL BORINCS TAKEN -FROM DIGITAL FIE "PAI7-169- DATED 10/14/UPREPARED BY COLDER ASSOCIATES MC.

20e•cole

20afeet

AR309437

983-6331DVD

AS SHOWN11/07/97PAI7-378

07

Colder Associates

AREA OF SVE INFLUENCEISOCONCENTRATION MASS

AREAS IN 10 TO ^T LAYERTANK FARM/BUl 11 AREAS

RUETGERS-NEASE

LEGEND

E-3,

8R-2.

n PHASE I AW II SOIL BORING LOCATION(LOCATIONS APPROXIMATE)

POt SOR. BORING LOCATION

SVC PIEZOMETER UOMTORMG WELL

SW OVERBURDEN EXTRACTKM WELL

S* BEDROCK EXTRACTION WELL

APPROXMATE AREA OF 5VE REMEDIATION

NOTES1.) THE SAMPLE LOCATIONS NEAR BULDMG ffl WITH

EXCEEDENCES WILL NOT UNDERGO EXCAVATION DUE TOTHE PROXIMITY OF THE BULDWCS. TANKS. OVERHEADEQUPMENT AND ONCOMG OPERATIONS ACTIVITIES. THESEAREAS CAN BE TREATED BY SVE,

2.) BOUNDARIES AND AREAS ARE APPROXMATE AND WLLBE FURTHER OEF1NEO DURING THE REMEDIAL DESIGN ANDREMEDIAL ACTON.

REFERENCES1.) TOPOGRAPHC FEATURES TAKEN FROM OCTAL FUS

TITLED 'BASE* DATED 06/D5A7 AND 1510120r DATED06/09/97 SUPPLIED BY MTTANY GEOSOENCES, MC.

2.) LOCATON OF PROPERTY LME. MOMTORMG WELLS ANDPO) SOL BORINGS TAKEN FROM DIGITAL FILE TITLED'SPf DATED 06/02/97 SUPPUEO BY SWEETLANDENQNEDBNG * ASSOCIATES, WC.

1) LOCATION OF • PHASE 1 AND N SON. KMNCS TAKENFROM DIGITAL Fl£ 'PA17-I69' DATED 10/14/UPREPARED BY COLDER ASSOCIATES MC

20escole

0 6 J997o 20

_3feei

AR309U38

963-6U3 AS SHOWN11/07/97PA17-37»

Goider Assodates

AREA OF SVE INFLUENCEISCCONCENTRATION MASS

AREAS M 14 TO 20 FT LAYERTANK FARM/BUILOfNQ «1 AREAS

RUETGERS-NEASE CORPORATION F~8

AR309li39

November 1997 G-l 963-6333

Comment No. I

The effectiveness of an SVE system should be based on reaching achievement of RemedialAction Objectives (RAOs) contained in the ROD. Currently, there appears to be inadequateinformation to determine the total amount of VOC contamination present in the Tank FarmArea. Therefore, establishing a total VOC removal volume is inappropriate. Similarly, it•will also be necessary to determine the remaining levels of VOCs present in the soil profileafter SVE has been conducted. A detailed soil boring program should be conducted tovalidate the effectiveness of the SVE system. * A mass removal rate performance standardbased on asymptotic performance only measures the technological performance of the SVEequipment and may not necessarily meet the RAOs for the Site.

Response to Comment No. 1

The RAOs for on-site soil presented in the ROD are:

1 . Mitigate leaching of contaminants of concern from subsurface soil so as to beprotective of groundwater; and,

2. Protect environmental receptors.

As per Section 10.3 of the ROD, excavation of soil is to occur and continue until the soilremaining in place meets soil clean-up levels that are protective of groundwater (Table 9).As demonstrated in the FS discussed in RNC's comments on the Proposed Remedial ActionPlan (PRAP) dated November 30, 1994 and February 24, 1995, and as stated in the RODthere are limitations in the usefulness of excavation at this Site. It has been recognized bythe USEPA that excavation is not feasible in areas where there is restricted access (i.e., areasbetween buildings where there is insufficient room to maneuver or too close to structuralfoundations. Furthermore, excavation is unable to remediate contamination in unsaturatedbedrock which represents a source of VOC contamination to groundwater.

Based on the present data, it is estimated that there are approximately 18,600 cu. yds of TankFarm area soil which contain levels of contamination which could leach to groundwater.Excavation of 6,000 cu. yds of soil (per the ROD) represents only 32% of this total. Incontrast, SVE could treat close to 100% of the soil in the areas designated by the USEPA,including those with restricted access plus treat contamination in the unsaturated bedrock. Itshould be noted that the most highly contaminated areas (around soil borings SB-2 and SB-3) are areas which are not accessible for excavation. SVE with fracturing will thereforebetter satisfy the RAO of mitigating impacts to groundwater from subsurface soilcontamination than excavation would. In addition, since a comprehensive groundwaterremedy will be implemented, the soil remedy should be viewed as a means of sourceremoval to enhance the efficiency of the groundwater source control system. In addition,and as discussed in the Focused Feasibility Study Report, the SVE system will include theconstruction and operation and maintenance of a low permeability cover system pavement aswell as surface water routing which will significantly reduce the potential for purification toinfiltrate through subsurface soils in the areas of concern.

The number of samples collected in the Tank Farm/Building #1 area was deemed adequatefor the purpose of the Remedial Investigation (RI). Subsequent to performing the RI, RNCremoved some of the tanks in the Tank Farm area. During the Initial Performance Test andthe Short-Term Performance Test, additional soil samples were collected to further

Colder Associates

November 1997 G-2 963-6333

characterize the subsurface soil samples for the purpose of the pre-design investigation asdescribed below. ^ J

Comment No. 2

One concern with the report is the overall lack of depth discrete VOC data for subsurfacesoils in the Tank Farm Area. The SVE modeling appears to use accurate values for soilcharacteristics such as permeability but assumes that the contamination is uniformlydistributed throughout the vertical axis. • If SVE is to be pursued as a remedial technology inthe Tank Farm Area, additional borings should be advanced to delineate the vertical extentof VOC contamination before and after SVE operation. It would be beneficial for thisinformation to be presented in cross sections.


As noted above, additional soil data has been collected during the PDI. During the RI, depthdiscrete sampling was performed in the Tank Farm/Building #1 area. Subsequent to the RI,RNC removed some of the tanks in the Tank Farm, This allowed access to the Tank Farmfor performance testing of SVE technology. During the Initial Performance Test and theShort-Term Performance Test, samples were collected from the boreholes during drilling andinstallation. Each 2-foot interval of borehole was screened for VOCs using aphotoionization detector (PID). The interval having the highest PID reading from eachborehole was chosen for .laboratory analysis. These data, along with the RI data, and therecent April 199? soil sampling conducted (and reported on in the PDI report) were used to ,calculate an average concentration of VOC contamination. In April 1997, depth discrete soil V_/samples were collected from 66 borings in accordance with the Remedial Design Work Plan,dated April 1997. Depth discrete samples were collected at levels 0-4 ft. bgs, 4-8 ft. bgs, 8-12 ft. bgs and 12 ft. bgs to refusal. Samples were analyzed for VOCs, mirex and kepone.The average VOC concentration of sub-areas of the SVE capture zone was used to calculatethe mass of contaminants present throughout the Tank Farm area. This approach presents aconservative overestimation of contamination present in the Tank Farm area.

Comment No. 3 . '

The report should also describe the criteria used to determine the locations of the fourextraction wells used in this study and indicate whether comparable depth discrete VOCcontamination was present at each well location. Although the VOC concentrations in soilpresented for BR-2 are greater than BR-1, the vertical extent of contamination in these areasthroughout the soil profile is unclear. .


Depth discrete VOC sampling was not performed to determine location of the extractionwells used in this study. The entire Tank Farm area was considered contaminated asdescribed above. The locations of the four extraction wells were based upon achieving asensible relative geometry to assess system performance.

Qolder Associate* A R 3 0 9 k k

November 1997 G-3 963-6333

Comment No. 4

No model validation information is available. The model was calibrated using data from theshort-term test, and-the calibrated model was used to establish conditions for and predict theresults of the long-term test. The predicted conditions should be analyzed as a function ofthe actual conditions for the long-term test.


As opposed to groundwater modeling, SVE modeling does not usually have a validationstep. Typically, in groundwater modeling, the model is first calibrated to the existinggroundwater conditions (generally accomplished by matching groundwater contourelevations across a spatial domain) in an effort to reproduce the ambient groundwater flowfield. Then, the model is validated by, for example, simulating a pumping test andcomparing the results of the model simulation against the field data from the pumping test.However, in SVE modeling, it is impractical to first calibrate the model to the existingambient air flow field or field pressures because the pressures are all atmospheric and thesubsurface air is generally at rest. Instead, the SVE model is calibrated to a dynamic testsuch that SVE simulation results (well head vacuums, pressure contours, extraction rates)can be matched against the field test results.

The computation accuracy of AIR3D has been well validated against analytical solutions inthe literature (Airiest - A Computer Program to Simulate Two Dimensional AxisymmetricAir Flow in the Unsaturated Zone, Joss and Baehr, November 1992).

Comment No. 5

The calibrated model parameters should be explained and discussed further in the text. Thereference, assumptions, or rationale for selecting 2x as the factor between horizontal andvertical permeability should be provided. In addition, the note should explain whether thisstarred value applies to all permeabilities or just one particular layer. Also the reportshould clarify whether the term "overburden" is the same as "residual soil" or "in-situsoil". Consistent terminology should be used throughout the report.


Additional text has been added to further explain the calibrated parameter values. Inparticular, as noted-in Table 4-1, the vertical permeability for each layer is approximatelytwice that for the horizontal permeability for that layer. This applies to all layers of themodel. Justification for this 2:1 ratio of vertical to horizontal is found both in 1) literature(e.g. Edwards and Jones, 1994, and Beckett and Huntley, 1994) where the former found testsoils to be anisotropic with best fit model parameters of kH « 3.9 x 10"07 cm2 and kv * 1.4 x10"06 cm2, and 2) the later finding that significant vertical leakage occurs ("the rule, ratherthan the exception") even at sites with new concrete and asphalt covers. For State College,geologic logging indicates the presence of vertical fracturing in the overburden sediments,features leading to vertical leakage.

Finally, the report has been modified to identify that all non-consolidated materials'that lieabove bedrock are classified as being overburden, native soils (making up the lower portions

Colder Associates A R 3 0 9 ^ l f 2

November 1997 G-4 963-6333

of overburden) are classified as "native" or "residual" soils and those non-native soils(making up the upper portion of overburden materials) are classified as "fill" or "fill soils".

Comment No. 6

The short-term performance test concluded that fracturing of overburden wells can increaseextraction airflow rates by 28% field to 48% (model). The field measurements of air flowrates (28%) are most likely more representative to actual site conditions that the model'spredicted flow rates (48%). Therefore, unless additional justification is provided from thelong-term test, the report should consider 28% to be expected increase in air flow ratesbecause ofhydrofracturing at the Site.


Based on the recent data from the continuing SVE field test at St. College, an increase in airflow rate for the hydrofractured SVE well E-2 has since 02/23/96 (last data provided inreport, Revision #0) increased from 3.22 cfin at 11.3 Inches of mercury vacuum to 4.65 cfm,5.09 cfm, 6.44 cfm and 5.34 cfrn at vacuums of 10.3 inches of Hg to 10.5 inches of Hg.These numbers (not previously available to USEPA) support the estimation of higherextraction flow volumes as predicted with the SVE model.

Comment No. 7

No performance test data is presented for any of the SVE tests discussed in the report. Thesedata are critical and should include conditions in the extraction wells as well as responses inthe monitoring points/piezometers. These data are important to facilitate an evaluation ofsystem performance.


Perfonnance test data from the Initial Performance Test can be found in the report of thesame name prepared by Colder Associates dated October 1995. Since completion of thelong-term test in June, 1997, additional performance test data has been incorporated .into theRevision #1 SVE Performance Test Report.

Comment No. 8

The report does not explain why the extraction wells are only screened in the bottom 5 feet ofthe overburden when the overburden thickness ranges from 10 to 20 feet. The report shouldhave explained the selection and advantages of this construction rather than screening thewells throughout a larger interval in the overburden.


As reported on page 15, all SVE "model" wells screened in the overburden materials werescreened from 3 feet below ground surface to the top of bedrock (i.e. screened in Layers3,4,5 and 6). The thickness for each layer was established as an average from the boreholelogs for wells PI to P6f El to E3 and BR-1 and BR-2. The total screened length for SVE

Qolder Associates

November 1997 G-5 963-6333

model wells was approximately 9.9 feet. Mis-interpretation of these screen lengths mayhave arisen from the Schematic Cross Section of AIR3D Mode! Layers (Figure 4.3) whichsuggests shorter screen lengths.

Comment No. 9

The report provides no cost or data assumptions that SVE is considerably more cost-effectivethan excavation and off-site disposal. The cost evaluation should include all AOCsincluding the former drum staging area and designated outdoor storage area.


•The SVE Performance Test Report was prepared using the guidance documents Guide forConducting Treatabilitv Studies Under CERCLA. Interim Final Guidance, EPA/540/2-89/058, dated December 1989, and Guide for Conducting Treatabilitv Studies UnderCERCLA: Soil Vapor Extraction. Interim Guidance, EPA/540/2-91/019A, dated September1991.

RNC is providing the USEPA with a comparison of costs for SVE versus soil excavation inthe Focused Feasibility Study Report. The costs for excavation will be revised to include theprovisions of the ROD as well as the need for thermal treatment of a portion of the soilexcavated based on the new subsurface soil data.

Comment No, 10

There are some discrepancies and inconsistencies in the report. For example, the reportstates on page 16 that "wells BR-1 and BR-2 are bedrock wells screened only in layer 7."Previously, the report indicated that a thickness of 4 feet was assumed for layer 7; however,the logs in Appendix A indicate that the wells were advanced about S to 11 feet into bedrock.These discrepancies and inconsistencies should be corrected in the report and, ofappropriate, in the modeling.


All SVE model bedrock wells were fully screened through Layer 7, which was set at 4 feet,as described in the text and on Figure 4.3. Additional text has been added to the reportclarifying that the 4-foot of Layer 7 representing bedrock is just that thickness ofunsaturatedbedrock available for active SVE. Saturated bedrock is not available for SVE, and as suchwas not included in the thickness of Layer 7.

0:\PROJECTS\»634336\SVEV97FINALVCOMMENTS.DOC

Golder Associates

revised sve performance test report state …conjunction with the revised sve performance test...

Documents