AD-A252 273
RICKENBACKER AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASECOLUMBUS, OHIO
PRE-CLOSURE SAMPLING REPORTHAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA
VOLUME I
FINALS JL fL
MARCH 1992
NAZWRA? BUWOaR CONTRACrORt 07#=Oak Rift. TennaMe 37831
M A MAGID BY MARMi MARIETTA ENRY 3Y6iUMI. WNCror the U.& DtPARMEhIf Or ZNMRY under comtma lD9%W0S44OM1400
Report Docu-rint Page mN.0"Puic reprtng burden for his infOrrnetion is estimated to average 1 hour per response. including thue time to reiw instructions, searchiing eisting date sources, gaihelng andmaentaineng the data needed. and completing and revievoung the collection of irtormation Send comments regaring this burden estimate or any othe aspect ofties colecton ofiriormation, incuing suggestions for reducing this burden to Washington Service Headquarters Services Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson DwasHiha.Si 20,Ak~o.V 22202-4302 and to the Ofie Of Maniagement and Dudget. Pa oermr Reduction Prn"ct 10704-0188twashiron. DC 20531. Agency Use Only (Leave Blank) 2. Report Date 3. Report Type and Dates Covered
IMarch 1992 Final Sampling Report4. Tie and Sutitlde 5. Funding NumbersRickenbacker Air National Guard Base Columbus, OhioPre-closure Sampling ReportHazardous Waste Storage Area
6. Atihor(s)
N/A
7. Performing Organization Nat s(s) and Address(es) 8. Performing Organization Reportnumber
Engineering - Science19101 Villaview Road - Suite 301Clevland, Ohio 44119
. Sponsoing~onitoring Agency Nne~s) and Address(es) 10. Sponsorgm~oing AgencyHazardous Waste Remedial Action Program Report Number
Oak Ridge TN
Air National Guard Readiness CenterAndrews Air Force Base, Maryland 20331
11. Supplemental Notes
12. DistribauinlAvdilbliy Statemnwwt 12b. Distribution Code
Approved for public release; distributionis, unlimitedI
13. Abstract: (maxhmmnm 200 Words)
An investigation was conducted at the Rickenbacker Air National Guard Base Hazardous WasteStorage Area (HWSA) (Building 560). The base is located in Columbus, Ohio. Sampling wasconducted in accordance with the Ohio Environ -mental Protection Agency regulations onclosures of HWSAs. The field activities were completed March 1989. The results of thisinvestigation are presented in the subject document. As a result of this investigation additionalinvestigations were recommended for this site in order to determine the extent of soil and groundwater contamination .
14. aftet Terms Hazardous wae swoage are, Oho Environrmnal roteclon Agency. IL Nmbuer of PauseRlckeutcr Air Na~oWa Guar Base Vol I1a200 Vol 11- 225
16. Price Cede
17. Secuit Cl Me atl of IL fticurly C11101810catln Of *. N~ cli"Wk C dimflata of 2L UdI "A ed Ah hopReotUnclassimid tkppUnclassifi hd Unclassfie NoneI=141-2Mfdo mwm N w 2f F= WSrt2W3.
PRE-CLOSURE SAMPLING REPORT
RICKENBACKER AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASE 4 "Columbus, Ohio .
Acosesion For
FINAL '
Volume I -- --r---t-i /Availability Codes
MARCH 1992 Avail ard/orDielk Special
Submitted To:
AIR NATIONAL GUARD READINESS CENTERANGRC/CEVR
Andrews AFB, Maryland
Submitted by:
HAZARDOUS WASTE REMEDIAL ACTIONS PROGRAMMARTIN MARIETTA ENERGY SYSTEMS, INC.
Oak Ridge, Tennessee
92-15412Prepared br IU UUUI
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE19101 Viliaview Road - Suite 301
Cleveland, Ohio 44119
For the:
U.S. Department of EneryUnder Contract No. DE-ACO-840R21400
1190PC/D45-15#Rev. 03/10/92
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of FiguresList of TablesList of SheetsList of AppendicesAcronyms
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1-1
2.0. BACKGROUND 2-12.1 Base Background 2-12.2 Hazardous Waste Storage Area 2-3
2.2.1 History 2-52.2.2 Previous Investigations 2-52.2.3 Pre-Closure Sampling Plan 2-7
3.0. PURPOSE AND SCOPE 3-1
4.0. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 4-14.1 Climate 4-14.2 Soils 4-14.3 Surface Water Hydrology 4-14.4 Regional Geology 4-34.5 Local Hydrogeology and Groundwater Use 4-3
5.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION PROGRAM 5-15.1 Field Investigation Procedures 5-15.1.1 Decontamination 5-15.12 Surface Soil Sampling 5-15.13 Drilling Program 5-2
5.13.1 Drilling Procedures 5-25.13.2 Shallow Borings 5-25.133 Deep Borings 5-4
5.1.4 Soil Boring Sampling 5-45.1.5 Monitoring Well Construction, Completion 5-5
and Development5.1.6 Field Measurements 5-9
5.1.6.1 Temperature and pH Measurement 5-95.1.6.2 Conductivity Measurement 5-95.1.7 Groundwater Sampling 5-9
5.1.8 Sampling Pro 5-105.1.8.1 " Numbering System 5-105.1.82 S le, Lbels 5-135.1.8.3 Chain-of-Custody Records 5-135.1.8.4 Sample Handling, Packaging 5-13and Shipment5.1.8.5 Field Log Books 5-15
5.1.9 _Analytical Methods 5-165.1.9.1 Detection Limits 5-165.1.10 Quality Assurance Samples 5-16
5.1.11 Aquifer Testing 5-19
11901C/D45-LS%#Rev. 03/10/92
TABLE OF CONTENTS(continued)
Eage
5.1.12 Contaminated Materials Management 5-195.1.13 Site Surveys 5-21
6.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION FINDINGS 6-16.1 Geology 6-16.2 Hydrogeology 6-26.3 Analytical Results 6-9
6.3.1 Criteria for Determining Significance of Results 6-96.3.1.1 Metals 6-96.3.1.2 Volatile and Semi-Volatile Organic 6-11Compounds
6.3.2 Soil Results 6-146.3.2.1 Soil Results 0-2 Foot Interval 6-1463.2.2 Soil Results 3-5 Foot Interval 6-146.3.2.3 Soil Results 8-10 Foot Interval 6-156-3.2.4 Soil Results 13-15 Foot Interval 6-156.3.2.5 Soil Results > 15 Foot Interval 6-15
6.3.3 Groundwater Results 6-1663.3.1 Volatile and Semi-Volatile Organics in 6-16
the Groundwater Results6.3.3.2 Filtered Metals in Groundwater Results 6-17
7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7-17.1 Conclusions 7-17.2 Recommendations 7-1
8.0 REFERENCES 8-1IIIIIII
19OPC.D4S-l a#I Rev. 03/10/92
LIST OF FIGURES
Number Aitle
2.1 Location Map - Rickenbacker ANGB 2-22.2 Hazardous Waste Storage Area - Rickenbacker ANGB 2-42.3 Existing Boring, Surface Soil Sample and Monitoring Well
Locations - Hazardous Waste Storage Area - Rickenbacker ANGB 2-8
4.1 Soil Map - Rickenbacker ANGB 4-2
5.1 Pre-Closure Sampling Locations - Hazardous WasteStorage Area - Rickenbacker ANGB 5-3
5.2 Typical Monitoring Well Construction for ShallowAquifer Wells 5-7
53 Monitoring Well Construction Log 5-85.4 Chain-of-Custody Form 5-14
6.1 Hazardous Waste Storage Area - RANGB, Cross-Section ofSubsurface Lithologies from A to A' 6-4
6.2 Hazardous Waste Storage Area - RANGB, Cross-Section ofSubsurface Lithologies from B to B' 6-5
6.3 Water Surface Map - Hazardous Waste Storage Area6 February 1990 - RANGB, OH 6-7
6.4 Water Surface Map - Hazardous Waste Storage Area19 June 1990 - RANGB, OH 6-8
6.5 Background Soil Sampling Locations - RANGB, OH 6-13
LIST OF TABLES
Number Tile2.1 Utility Legend for Site Plans - Rickenbacker ANGB 2-6
5.1 Analytical Methods and Collection Specifications forSoil and Sediment Samples - Rickenbacker ANGB 5-6
5.2 Analytical Methods and Collection Specifications forWater Samples - Rickenbacker ANGB 5-11
5.3 Sample Numbering System - Rickenbacker ANGB 5-125.4 List of Compounds for GC/MS Methods - Rickenbacker ANGB 5-175.5 Minimum Reporting Limits 5-20
6.1 HWSA - Well Construction Details 6-66.2 Hydraulic Conductivity and Groundwater Velocity at the
HWSA - Rickenbacker ANGB, Ohio 6-106.3 Standards for Metal Concentrations in Soil and Drinking
Water - RANGB, OH 6-126.4 Detected Compounds in Soils (0-2') at HWSA - RANGB, OH 6-186.5 Detected Compounds in Soils (3-27) at HWSA - RANGB, OH 6-326.6 Detected Compounds in Groundwater at HWSA - RANGB, OH 6-49
119)PC/D45.J5.#Rev. 03/10/92
LIST OF APPENDICES
Volume I
Appendix A - Boring Logs
Appendix B - Monitoring Well Construction and Development Logs
Appendix C - Hydraulic Conductivity Test Field Logs
Appendix D - Quality Assurance Report
U9opC/D45-LS#R.v. 03/10/92
LIST OF APPENDICES(continued)
Volume II
Appendix E - Analytical Results
Appendix F - Chemical Analyses of Phase-Separated Hydrocarbon
Appendix G - Chain-of-Custody Records
LIST OF SHEETS
Sheet 1 Semi-Volatile Organics & Metals, Surface Soil Samples (0-2')
Sheet 2 Met"ls, Volatile Organics & Semi-Volatile Organics, Soil Samples (3-5')
Sheet 3 Metals, Volatile Organics & Semi-Volatile Organics, Soil Samples (8-10')
Sheet 4 Metals, Volatile Organics & Semi-Volatile Organics, Soil Samples (13-15')
Sheet 5 Metals, Volatile Organics & Semi-Volatile Organics, Soil Samples (> 15')
Sheet 6 Volatile Organics & Semi-Volatile Organics, Groundwater
Sheet 7 Filtered Metal Analysis, Groundwater Samples
Sheet 8 Sampling Locations at HWSA - RANGB, OH
119PC/D45-L%#Rev. 03/10/92
ACRONYMS
AAS Atomic Absorption SpectrophotometerAFRES Air Force ReserveANG Air National GuardANGB Air National Guard BaseARAR Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate RequirementsASTM American Society for Testing Materials
BAT Best Available TechnologyBCT Best Conventional TechnologyBTX Benzene, Toluene and Xylene
°C degrees CentigradeCCC Calibration Check CompoundsCERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
ActCLP Contract Laboratory ProgramCRDL Contract Required Detection LimitCRQL Contract Requirement Quantitation Limit
DD Decision DocumentDNR Department of Natural ResourcesDOD Department of DefenseDOE Department of EnergyDQO Data Quality Objectives
EC Electrical ConductivityES Engineering-Science, Inc.eV Electron Volt
0 F degrees FahrenheitFS Feasibility StudyFFS Focused Feasibility Study
GC Gas ChromatographGC/MS Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry
HAL Health Advisory LimitHSP Health and Safety PlanHARM Hazard Assessment Rating MethodologyHAS Hazard Assessment ScoresHAZWRAP Hazardous Waste Remedial Action ProgramHMTC Hazardous Materials Technical CenterHWSA Hazardous Waste Storage Area
ICP Inductively Coupled Plasma Emission SpectrometerID Inside DiameterIRP Installation Restoration Program
LQAC Laboratory Quality Assurance Coordinator
119OPC/D45-JSmPRev. 03/1o/92
SECTION 1.0EXECUTVE SUMMARY
This report documents the activities and findings of field investigations conducted atthe Hazardous Waste Storage Area (HWSA) at Rickenbacker Air National Guard Base(ANGB) between January and March 1990. The purpose of this investigation is to denyor determine the presence of chemical contamination in the surface sediment, soil andgroundwater at the HWSA, assess the potential risks to the environment and humanhealth, and determine actions that will allow a closure to the HWSA.
Rickenbacker ANGB is located twelve miles southeast of Columbus, Ohio. Thefacility has been in operation since the early 1940's in support of training and air-to-airrefueling missions. Reciprocating and jet engined aircraft have been operated out of thefacility.
The HWSA at Rickenbacker ANGB consists of Building 560 and the Drum StorageArea southeast of the building. It has been a under a Part A Permit for hazardous wastestorage since 1983. The facility was last used in September 1986. The Drum StorageArea adjacent to Building 560 had been used to store liquid wastes such as spent
solvents, cleaning fluids, acids and paint strippers. There are four 25,000 gallon steelunderground storage tanks (USTs) adjacent to the HWSA that have been in use foralmost 40 years. Two tanks currently store de-icing fluid. JP-4 jet fuel, and recyclableoil were historically stored in the other two tanks.
Activities conducted during the pre-clcure sampling included surface soil sampling,shallow and deep soil sampling by borg installation of groundwater monitoring wellsand groundwater sampling,
All work conducted at the HWSA was done in accordance to the Pre-CaureSampling Plan (December 1989) with site activities being complete by March 1969.
The surfial (<W( below grade) unosldtdmaterials are similar throughoutRickenbacker ANGB and the HWSA. The uppermost ten feet is typicaDy a brown siltyclay, with trace amounts of small pebbles. From ten to a r1-imately fifteen feet issily/sandy day. A saturated sand is enuntered at ap;roimately 15 feet Wter fromthis sand ris in we to eilhtt to ten feet below gae Tds is underlain by a thin (.I')
n. Wn/W 14
layer of hard, dense gray clay over brown to gray sand and gravel. The hydraulic
gradient is in a general southerly direction.
Surface and shallow soil within and adjacent to the HWSA are contaminated with
metals, semi-volatile organic compounds and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The
extent and concentration of contaminants generally decrease with depth. The exception
to that generalization is the contamination of the shallow aquifer with phase-separated
hydrocarbons, dissolved fuel components and halogenated VOCs with only trace
concentrations in the shallow soil.
Specific metals that were found in the soil and groundwater at the site are: arsenic,
beryllium, cadmium, lead, thallium and zinc with isolated occurrences of silver andmercury. Detectable semi-volatile organics were found at levels up to 164,300 gg/k,
concentrating mainly in the upper two feet of the soil and toward the western area of the
site. No semi-volatile organics were detected in the groundwater. Detectable volatile
organics in the soil and groundwater included: benzene, ethylbenzene, methylenechloride, and xylenes with more isolated occurrences of trichloroethene, toluene,acetone, vinyl chloride and tras-1,2-dichloroethene. Benzene and trichioroethene were
detected in groundwater at concentrations above the maximum contaminated level
(MCL) for drinking water.
The varied and extensive contamination detected preclude the affecting of a "clean"closure of the HWSA. The extent of the downgradient groundwater contamination and
some surface soil contamination is not well defined.
Additional investigation is warranted to determine the extent of contamination
Based on results of the additional investigation revisions to the Cosure Plan will need to
be made to complete a "landfill" closure. The revised closure should include someFmubination of iolation, removal or capping of the cntaminated soil and remediationof the grnmdwaer problem.
PAW. UM//W 1-2
SECTION 2.0
BACKGROUND
2.1 BASE BACKGROUND
The Rickenbacker ANGB is located 12 miles southeast of Columbus, Ohio and 0.5
miles east of the Village of Lockbourne (Figure 2.1). The Base currently covers
approximately 2,100 acres. Ownership of portions of the Base have been transferred
from the U.S. Air Force to the Rickenbacker Port Authority (RPA) since 1982. The
RPA property is used for private aircrafts. The Base occupies a plateau separating the
Big Walnut and Walnut Creek Drainage Basins. Approximate elevation of the Base is
740 feet (MSL).
Rickenbacker ANGB, known as Lockbourne Air Force Base until 1974, was
officially activated as the Northeastern Training Center, Army Air Corps, in 1942 and
was used as a training center for glider pilots. In 1943, glider training was discontinued
and a school for B-17 pilots was established at the Base.
In 1949, the Base was deactivated by the Air Force and used for 18 months as anOhio ANG training base until 1951, when the Base was tranderred to the Strategic Air
Command (SAC) and reactivated as an Air Force Base in response to the Korean
Conflict. In 1958, the 301st Bombardment Wing moved to the Base. In June 1964, the
301st Bombardment Wing was redesignated as the 301st Air Refueling Wing and began
flying KC135 Strae Tankers out of the Base. The SAC refueling mission of the 301st
Air Refueling Wing is continued today at Rickenbacker by the 160th Air Refueling
Group of the Ohio ANG, which moved to the Base in 1972. In July 1965, the 840th Air
Division of the Tactical Air Command moved to Rickenbacker with its C-130 Hercules
Carpo Airauft and took command of the Base. In 1971, command of the Base wasagam transferred to SAC under the 301st Air Refueling Wing Also in 1971, the Air
Force Reserve's (AFRES) 302nd Tactical Airlift Wing (TAW) moved to Rickenbackerfrom the Climon County Air Base. The 302nd TAW flew C-0A cargo planes in
mppo of their airlift mission In 1981, the 302nd TAW vacated Rickenacker ANGB,
and W. units wer converted to the 907th Tactical Airlift G"nup (TAG) (AFRES). The
airraft mrtly beia ed by the 907th TAG is the C-130. The 907th Aerial SprayBranch, under the 907th TAG, is responible for aerial pesticide sprayimg missions at
ran. np/s 241
OHIO RICKENBACKER
AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASE
II iSulphur 4 3 6 1
I \,CK WAV Lomoieii
FIGUR 231 FAIRELI0 10 1 5 RCENBCKEAMNIA AUOOSL ASOAWA IRNA 0NALGADBSIf , , ill
other bases around the country. Pesticides used by the 907th Aerial Spray Branch arenot stored or transported at Rickenbacker ANGB, but are supplied by the Base being
sprayed. On 1 April 1980, Rickenbacker Air Force Base closed and the installation was
turned over to the Ohio National Guard. At that time, an organization known as
Detachment 1, OHANG was created to be the single manager for the military units
stationed at Rickenbacker ANGB with the 121st Tactical Fighter Wing, 160th Refueling
Group, and 907th Tactical Airlift Group being major tenants. In the fall of 1988,Detachment 1 was deactivated and the 121st TFW assumed host and single manager
responsibilities under a sub unit known as the 121st COS (Consolidated Operating
Support). The 121st TFW has been at Rickenbacker ANGB since 1949, previously
flying F-100 Super Sabres and currently flying A7D Corsairs. As many as 5,000 people
have worked on the Base in its history. Currently, 1,100 people are on the Base daily.
Land use adjacent to the Base is residential and agricultural. The houses and
apartments in the northwest comer of the Base which were formerly occupied by Base
personnel have been purchased by a private developer and are being rented and sold.
The Base, former Base housing and the Village of Lockbourne use water supplied from
Base water wells.
North of the Base lies open agricultural land with some residential development
along Alum Creek Drive. East of the Base is agricultural land and residential
development along the major roads. South of the Base is the former Base golf course
which is now privately owned, trailer parks and widely spaced single-family homes. To
the West is the Norfolk and Western and Chesapeake and Ohio railroad traI, the
abandoned Ohio Canal and the Village of Iockboume with residential and lightindustrial development.
Future land use in adjacent areas will probably be residential and light industrial as
the urban development of Columbus extends to the southeast
2.2 HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA
The HWSA at Ricenbacke ANGB consists of Building 560 and the Drum Stmage
Area southeast of the building. Figure 2.2 shows the HWSA lotion. The histMy ofwate mae at the ste and the result of previous investiom of the site ae
- had below.
a". f/5/n 2-3
-. ~C~ - .
IISO
.. ... ..
RICKEBACKE ANG, O~iO
I~1 +SEmA AS2
I 7.
2.2.1 History
The HWSA has been under a permit for hazardous waste storage since 1983. Nowaste has been stored at the facility since September 1986. The Drum Storage Areaadjacent to Building 560 had been used to store drums containing liquid wastes such asspent solvents, cleaning fluids, acids and paint strippers. Small quantities of dry wastessuch as spent desiccants were stored in Building 560.
Four 25,000 gallon steel underground storage tanks (USTs) adjacent to the HWSAhave been in use for almost 40 years. Two of these tanks are still in use for the storageof non-hazardous de-icing fluid. The other two tanks were used to store oil andrecyclable JP-4 jet fuel but have not been used since they were taken out of service inthe latter part of 1988. The used oil storage tank was also used to store dielectric fluidwhich may or may not have contained PCBs. However, the tanks are not included in theHWSA permit The only recorded loss from any of the storage tanks occurred in 1982,when a standpipe broke. No record of the amount of waste released is available.
2.2.2 Previous Investigations
The HWSA was identified as a potential source of contamination in a PreliminaryAssessment (PA) of the Base conducted in 1987 (Hazardous Materials Technical Center[HMTC]. Based on the results of the PA, a site investigation was conducted.Engineering-Science (ES) completed the first phase of the field investigation of theHWSA in October 1988. The results of this investigation are discussed in detail in theES Report Field Imtigaton Reprt - Hazardous Waste Storage Area, RickenbakerAir National Guard Base Coluu Ohio (October 1990). A brief summay of thetesting program and results follows. The results of the previous study were utilized indrawing conclusions for this report. Investigations at the site included a soil-gas survey,shallow and deeper soil sampling and the dr&lg and sampling of monitoring wells toinvestigate groundwater quality. Figure 23 shows the locations of samples made on theHWSA site. Table 2.1 is a legand for Figure 2.3.
A ten point soil-gas survey was conducted on 25 July 1988 which identified two areaswith elevated oncentraio of benzene, toluene and rtho-yimene (BTX).Cenratiom of total WX in the sail-as samples ranged from undete-table to 29.8
3.,. 1,51324
TABLE 2.1
UTILITY LEGEND FOR SITE PLANS
RICKENBACKER AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASECOLUMBUS , OHIO
ABOVE GROUND UTILITIES AND FEATURES:
RAILROAD
0 MANHOLE
o VALVE
-x- FENCE
o RUNWAY / TAXIWAY LIGHT
A FIRE HYDRANT-H.- HEAT LINE
-- JF- JET FUEL LINE
ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER* ELECTRIC SERVICE POLE
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES:
HEAT LINE
JET FUEL LINE
----- ELECTRIC LINE-- T-- TELEPHONE LINE
- - WATER LINE
-8- SANITARY SEWER
-SS- STORM SEWER
0 JUNCTION BOX
24
Soil samples were collected from the 16 surface locations, 6 hand borings and 3auger borings shown on Figure 2.3. Analyses indicated elevated semi-volatile organicand metals concentrations. The characteristics of the semi-volatile organics found weretypical of coal-tar derivatives and phthalates. Metals identified included cadmium,chromium, copper, lead and zinc.
Three of the auger borings made during soil sampling were completed asmonitoring wells in the shallow aquifer. Water samples from two of these wellsexhibited volatile organic concentrations in excess of Federal Maximum ContaminantLevels (MCLs). Water from MW1 contained 94 g/l benzene, 20 A&g/1 xylenes and 135,g/l methylnapthalene. Water from MW3 contained 44 ug/l trichloroethene. Samplesfrom all wells had total unfiltered metals concentrations in excess of Federal DrinkingWater Standards for arsenic, cadmium, chromium and lead.
2.2.3 Pre-Closure Sampling Plan
On the 29th of September 1989, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency(OEPA) approved a closure plan for the HWSA in compliance with OhioAdministrative Code (OAC) Rules 3745-66-11 and 3745-66-12. The Plan assumed thatclean closure could be a pished by removal of a volume of contaminated soil ThePlan included a description of the pre-closure sampling which is the subject of thisreport and stated that the Plan would be revised to reflect the data collected.
VWnfW/D~emev. u//,m2-7
'PIK
4t,
//
40
4,b
030 15 0 30 60
FEET
14 • 0 0 LEGE ND:
0/ + BORING LOCATION
& SURFACE SOIL SAMPLE
/ /. -- MONITORING WELL
/ // //4,//// /
o\ / / / /
4, ,
>/• /
0&,,%V
ab ' EXISTING BORING SURFACE SOIL SAMPLE
44f.\ %
,t,,.., AND MgNITORING WELL LOCATIONSHAZARDOUS WASTE STORAG AREA
RICKENBACKER ANGB, OHIO
2-S ESNINEEfINB-CIENCE
SECTION 3.0
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of the additional investigation at the HWSA was to determine theextent of contamination to allow revision of the Closure Plan to affect a "dean" closureof the site. That is to remove contaminants to levels which would allow unrestricted useof the property without continued monitoring. This objective was accomplished throughthe following iestigation techniques:
Soil samples were collected from the surface and during drilling operations.Laboratory analyses of these soil samples determined the extent ofcontaminants in the soiL
- Monitoring wells were installed to test for the presence or absence of phase-
separated hydrocarbons, to determine the hydrologic gradient and to collectgroundwater samples for laboratory analysis.
- Aquifer tests (rising-head tests) were conducted on representative wells to
determine the aquifer hydraulic conductivity.
W.W94#*am S/3#
SECTION 4.0
ENVIRONMENTAL SEITING
The environmental setting of the Base is described in this section with an emphasis
the identification of natural features that may influence the movement of hazardous
aste contaminants.
4.1 CLIMATE
The climate of Columbus, Ohio is characterized as continental (Pierce, 1959). The
mean annual temperature is 520 F. The coldest month is January, while the warmest
month is July, with mean temperatures of 30 F and 74 "F, respectively. Mean annual
precipitation is 38 inches with October being the driest and June the wettest months.
Net precipitation is calculated to be 2.71 inches per year (HMTC, 1987).
4.2 SOILS
Soils mapped at the Base are of the Kokomo and Crosby Series (Figure 4.1) (Soil
Conservation Service [SCS, 1976). The soils are characterized as deep, very poorly
drained, slowly to moderately slowly permeable soils formed in glacial tills on uplandL
The Crosby series soils are formed on slopes up to 6 percent grade while the Kokomo
series soils form on gentler 0-2 percent slopes on the higher landscape positions. The
Crosby soils exhibit permeabilities of 0.06 to 0.6 in/hr in unleached horizons. The
Kokomo soils have peMabiities of 0.2 to 2.0 in/hr.
4.3 SURFACE WATER HYDROLOGY
icenbe ANGB occupes the drainag divide between Big Walnut Creek andWalnut Creek. Surface drainage from the Base is through an extensive storm drainnetwork wdch inluds, corrupted metal and concrete drainage pipes and opendrainage ditcheL Surface water is routed throh oil-water separstors before releameinto Pr udiag surface stream
%W. -F /s" 4.1
CsAA
SCALE
Ku F r -CsA
CsA
CsA Ku
CCiA
Ku
EXPLANATION:
CrA CROSBY SILT LOAM, 0-2% SLOPESCrID CROSBY SILT LOAM, 2.6% SLOPES
CsA CROSBY URBAN LAND COMPLEX, 0-2% SLOPES
COO CROSBY URBAN LAND COMPLEX, 2-6% SLOPES K
Ko KOKOMO SILTY CLAY LOAM
Ku KOKOMO URBAN LAND COMPLEX
Ce*B CELINA SILT LOAM, 2-6% SLOPES
CIO CELINA URBAN LAND COMPLEX, 2-6% SLOPES CsA
KeB KENDALLVILLE SILT LOAM, 2-6% SLOPESK*C2 KENDALLVILLE SILT LOAM, 6-12% SLOPES
SOURC ISOIL SURVEY OF FRANKLIN COUNTY,USDA/SCS (1977)
Cr8 Ko ,"KeC23ACBCr8
,-CrBKiKu Cr8
Kuu
Ku CKu
CiAA
FIGURE 4.22 SOIL MA
KRuCKENBAK ER OAICAIOAsUADBS
Cs2 Cr
4.4 REGIONAL GEOLOGY
The Base is located in the Glaciated Central Lowlands Province just west of the
Appalachian Plateau Province. The geology of the area is characterized by 200 feet( +)of Pleistocene glacial outwash sand and gravel and silty and clayey till filling a preglacial
bedrock valley (Smith and Goldthwaite, 1958). The bedrock types under the mixed drift
fill are Devonian limestones and shales of the Columbus and Delaware Formations.
4.5 LOCAL HYDROGEO LOGY AND GROUNDWATER USE
Groundwater is the primary source of drinking water for the Base and the Village ofLockbourne. The Base is underlain by two aquifers. The shallow aquifer has depths tostatic water levels of 3 to 20 feet and on base of the aquifer between 30 and 35 feet. Thedeep aquifer has static water levels between 50 and 60 feet and base of the aquifer
between 200 and 210 feet at bedrock (ES April 1989). There are six water wells locatedon the Base. Five of these wells are located in the northwest portion of the Base, andsupply drinking water for ANGB personnel and former Base housing residents and tothe Village of Lockbourne (sice June 1989). Of these five wells, well #2 is no longer inservice. According to driller's logs, the five Base water-supply wells are completed inthe coarse-sand and gravel of the deep aquifer directly on top of the bedrock at depthsof 180 to 200 feet. Water from these five wells is treated by sand filtration andchlorination before distribution. Recent testing of water from the wells for prioritypollutants indicated no contamination. The sixth water well is located at the BaseHeating Plant. The well is screened at a depth of 85-100 feet beneath the surace, but is
no longer in service.
The well upplying water to the golf course club house southeast of the Bae iscompleted in sand and gravel at 63 to 73 feet. The well was formerly owned by the Base,
but is now owned by t owner of the Country Club.
Homes in Lockbourne and along the rural roads -urudn the Base wareformerly served by dvidual d sWater Wells. Thee wes are copee in sndand gravel of the shalow and deep aquifers between 20 and 100 feet deep. Concern forwater quaft in b ne has following a study whkh indkted a hgher thanexpeeted cu rate and discovery of chlorkated methae compound n
9rQ. 1 ~jO 44
some wells (Ecology and Environment, 1986). Consequently, in June of 1989, theVillage tied into the Base water system.
The shallow geology beneath the Base is composed of 10-20 feet of silt and clay atthe surface, underlain by intermittent stringers and lenses of sand and gravel ranging inthickness from 1-10 feet. The direction of groundwater flow in the shallow aquifer isaffected by both the Big Walnut Creek to the west and the Walnut Creek to the east.The Base is within a recharge area of the shallow aquifer with groundwater flow to thewest, south or east depending on location.
The geologic material separating the shallow and deep aquifers beneath the Baseconsists of 30 to 40 feet of silty day. The deep aquifer consists of fine-to-medium sandand gravel underlain by shale at an approximate depth of 200-210 feet.
I
ISECION 5.0
FIELD INVESTIGATION PROGRAM
The pre-closure sampling activities included soil sampling at the surface and at
depth and the installation of six new monitoring wells in and around the HWSA. The
elements of the sampling plan are summarized below. Details of the field investigation
techniques, sampling and analytic procedures are given in this section. Section 6presents the findings for the described field investigation.
5.1 FIELD INVESTIGATION PROCEDURES
I 5.1.1 Decontamination
All split-spoon samples, sampling trowels, bailers and other sampling equipmentwere decontaminated between samples by washing with a Liquinox and tap water wash,
a tap water rinse, distilled water rinse and finally a methanol rinse. Augers and drill
pipes were cleaned between borings by steam cleaning with tap water. This cleaning
took place at the designated decontamination area on the Base.
An equipment decontamination area was designated. The decontamination pad
consisted of a concrete base with curbing covered with plastic. The base and curbing
were designed so that all washwater and soils were contained on the pad and drained
into a sump. Waste from the sump was pumped into drums for temporary storage until
final disposition. All drums were labeled as to date of collection and contents. Thedeconamination pad was of sufficient size to contain the largest drill rig which was used
at the site. Exact specifications of thw pad was determined after coorInatIng with Basepersonnel about the location of the pad and decontamination activities. Thedecontamination pad was located in a fenced area just south to southeast of Building
910, the Base Civil En eers Office.
&1.2 Swub Soi SampUig
The purpose of surface soil sampling was to determine the presence and extent ofcotaminatio in the upper soil horm s at the HWSA where surface spills from drumsmay have occurred.
Ii
mPc(D642#3 bh. 3m/U/ 5.1
Surface soil samples were collected from the upper six inches of soil using a stainless
steel trowel. Thirty-one surface soil samples were collected at the site in a grid pattern
with 35 feet between centers. Figure 5.1 shows the locations of the sample points.
Surface soil samples were analyzed for base-neutral, semi-volatile organics and for
priority pollutant metals. The 35 foot grid spacing was based on guidance in U.S. EPA
Document SW846 for collection of statistically valid samples.
5.1.3 Drilling Program
The objectives of the drilling program at the HWSA were to obtain samples for
lithologic descriptions and stratigraphic correlation, to obtain samples of soil for
chemical analysis, and to install groundwater monitoring wells. The monitoring wells
were used for hydrogeologic characterization of the shallow aquifer beneath the HWSA
and to obtain samples for evaluation of groundwater quality in the aquifer. Monitoring
well drilling and construction were performed by an experienced driller. All drilling
sites were screened with a metal detector to verify the location of underground pipelines
and tanks before commencing drilling. In addition, appropriate Base personnel and site
blueprints were used to further verify locations of underground pipelines and tanks.
5.L3.1 Drilling Procedures
Soil borings drilled for collection of soil samples and for installation of monitoringwells were advanced using 4.25 inch inside diameter (ID) continuous flight hollow-stem
augers (approx. 6 inch diameter boring). A steel split-spoon sampler was used to collect
samples, using American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) Method D-1586.Borings not intended for monitoring wells were also made with a 4.25 inch ID hollow-stem auger. Following drilling, these borings were filled to grade with acement/bentonite grout using a tremie pipe.
&L13.2 Shallow Borings
Ten of the surface soil sample sites were drilled to a depth of eight feet using a
hollow-stem auger. Laction for shallow boring; are shown on Fgure 5.1 and Sheet &
Soil samples were collected at depths of three and eight feet and analymed for base-nmtra. samdvade orpamis ud pir ant meal The pupse of the sba owboinowas to determine the vertical extent of soil comammaion. The 10 ocatiom are
r ~c~6u
+
4*
It& 4 '
4t,
44
40
° X 4
,4
"\ %$e " /" ?4
q,'
A \,
K t
030 15 0 30 60
FEET
1~000
% LEGEND:
//. . soIL.BoRIN (ABI -AB1o SHALLOW)
4 0 / (ABII-AB15 DEEP)/i , /
/ / + MONITORING WELL ( MW-I- MW-9)
\ ,/ £ SURFACE SOIL SAMPLE (SUI9-SU49)
o% >
PRE-CLOSURE SAMPLING LOCATIONSHAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREARICKENBACKER' ANG11, OHIO ..
6 FEBRUARY 1990
5-3ES EMOEERN-4C1
in areas of greater contamination determined from the 1988 sampling results (ES, SIReport, 1990). The eight to ten foot sampling depth is the approximate depth to static
water.
5.133 Deep Borins
Five borings in areas of greatest contamination were advanced to the base of theshallow aquifer in order to define the vertical extent of the soil contamination. Deepboring locations are shown on Figure 5.1. The locations were selected based on resultsof the 1988 sampling (ES, SI Report, 1990). Sampling in these borings was continuous.Borings were advanced until an apparently uncontaminated sample was obtained. The
deepest (apparently uncontaminated) and apparently most contaminated samples weresubmitted to the laboratory to be analyzed for base-neutral, semi-volatile and volatileorganics and priority pollutant metals.
S.1.4 So Boring Sampling
During drilling operations, soil samples were collected with a split-spoon samplerusing the Standard Penetration Test (ASTM D-1586). Soils were classified with respectto type, by the visual-manual procedure (ASTM D-2488) noting mineralogy, color,I odor, staining, etc. (see Appendix A). The samples were also checked for the presence
of organic vapors. The test for vapors involved placing a portion of the sample, notintended for volatile analysis at the laboratory, in a jar, sealing the jar with alminumfoil, allowing the sample to equilibrate for at least ten minutes, then measuring theconcenmion of organics in the headspace of the jar using a m rete with a
photoionization detector (PID). The PID was cahbrated with zero atmospheric air anda 100 ppm isobutylene standard. Both the PID and samples were allowed to stabilize atroom - a e (700F) before analys This step is uen because PIsD' are lessaccurate below 40"F and temperatures in the field during sampling were conistently
beow fteezin
Splt-spon saiplr used to collect samples to be anabd for v oranI ~compounds were asemibled with several 3 and 6-inch brass liners TMue ofliners used was determined by the lngth of the spit-spoon sample. After drig t
I smqer was dhsuembled and the secnd Dero fth bdno mam 1f aWeft) wasseled with Teflon-limed caq wrapped in alumnium foil and secuely teped SamplesI
I w. WJ .
thus sealed were transported to the laboratory. Liners remaining in the sampler wereextruded and the material was used for lithologic description and other analyses.
Emptied liners were decontaminated and reused in subsequent samples.
Selected soil samples from drilling, and all surface soil samples were packaged and
shipped to the ES Berkeley Laboratory for chemical analysis. Soil samples selected for
chemical analysis for non-volatile constituents were removed from the sampler and
placed in an appropriate sample bottle. The sample bottle types that were used for soil
samples are presented in Table 5.1.
5.1.5 Monitoring Well Construction, Completion and Development
Six additional soil borings were made into the shallow aquifer for installation of
monitoring wells. The locations of six monitoring wells are shown on Figure 5.1.
The wells consisted of 2-inch ID Schedule 40 polyvinyl chloride (PVC) casing and
screen. The casing and screen have threaded, flush joints and a threaded bottom cap. Aten-foot screen, machine slotted with 0.010 inch openings was set spanning the watertable to detect floating contaminants and to allow for seasonal water table fluctuations.
The screen and can were installed through the inside of the augers. A sand packconsisting of No. 20z40 bagged silica sand was poured around the screen while theaugers were slowly withdrawn to prevent bridging of the sand. The sand pack and
screen slot dimensions were selected based on the grain size of the aquifer and
surrounding materials. The sand pack extended two feet above the screen. A minimum
two-foot thick bentonite pellet seal was placed above the sand pack. A
cement/bentonite grout mixture (5% bentonite) was placed from the top of thebentonite seal to six inches below the ground surface. A typical monitoring wellconst ion diagram for wells to be iutalled in the shallow aquifer is presented inFigure 5.2. The momtrucam, of each monitoring well was recorded on a HAZWRAP
(Hardous Waste Remedial Actions Program) monitoring well conmtruction log fre5.3).
The wel were completed with two to three feet of casin extending above theground mrfce A protective se casing (six feet long) equipped with a loc p waset into the omcnt gout to a depth below the frost line and a mminm 6 inch thick bytwo fret sqae conete pad wa installed wound the rim pipe of the abe-I n
ft. VV" 5
TABLE 5.1
RICCEMBACKER A1168. COLUMBUS, OHIOANALYTICAL METHODS AND COLLECTION SPECIFICATIONS
FOR SOIL SAMPLES
Preser-Analytical vat ion Holding
Parameter Method (1) Smle Container Method Time
Volatile Ci.P/82402 Brass split-spoon ()Cool. 40C 10 days afterOrgan ics samler saled w/Tef In( receipt
or 6 oz.( yidwmuth glassw/Teflon liner
samles mustbe extracted
Samu-Volatile CLP/8240 2 8 oz. wldeoth glass Cool. 40C within 5 daysOrganics w/Teflon ()liner days of receipt
and extractsanalyzed within40 days
Metals: 3
Antimony 6010Arsenic 7060beryllium 6010Cadmim 6010Chromium 6010Copper 6010Lead so10 8 oz. vioemouth glass Cool. 4*C 6 months (exceptMercury 7470 w/Teflon(R liner Mercury;Nickel 6010 25 days)Selenium 7641Silver 6010Thallium 7640Zinc 6010
I. Seurga unless otherwise meted: SW 646. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Mostas. U.S. EPA. Novmbr IM6.
2. 6240 aud 8270 methods were used during 1I6 invest igatioens.
3. All swea for metals analysis were piepred by Method 3050.
NOV. IV"6
LOCKING COVERCONCRETE F I LLEDSTEEL GUARD POST
- - STEEL PROTECTIVECASING
CONCRETE PAD
BENTON ITE /CEMENT GROUT
-2r 1.D. PVC SCH.40 RISER
STATIC WATER LEVEL
BENTONITE PELLET SEAL
2' D. PVC SCH.40 WELLSCREEN FLUSH THREADED
SAND PACK
PLUS
PISU ginsV DIAMETER HOLE
MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION,FOR SHALLOW AQUIFER WELLS
ESsw~m-cv
REV. DATE: JAN I1$1
MONTORNG - EL COSRRTO OTECTIVue Case
Eley. otrctr Di otr atr
HegtDepth BsS Weep Note (YIN)
GS Elev. GUARD POSTS (YIN)GS High 0-0 AA A o. Type
Dept SGS111 oe ;zLSURFACE FAD
% o 00%%Composition a Size__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
N 0- 000SURFACE CSG0%%, Type00Diameter ______T-ol Length-000 GROUT: Setup/ Hydration Time
000 0#0Composion & Proportions
N00 00Interval 13SS_____________ ____
N '00Tremied (Y/N).00 RISER PIPE
%%000Type%001 00Diameter _______________________
%400Total Lenrth(TOC to TOS)
000, ~GROUT .aPo ;
00 0Interval SOS_______________0000Tremid (Y/ N)000 CENTRALIZERS (Y/ N).000 Depth(s)
SEALType
Selup/Hydrolion Tim........... Vi. FliMd Added -
Seed a (YI)
AmtUsed d-7
~.i ~J~- FiGsown.at site Obt-Sct.c
wells. The well number was imprinted on the well cover lid. Three steel guard postswere erected around each of the protective steel casings, each set two and one-half feetdeep in separate footings. Monitoring wells 4 through 8 were developed by pumpingwhile monitoring well 9 was hand-bailed until the pH and conductivity stabilized to +10percent. Water level recovery was monitored after final well development tocomplement slug test results.
5.1.6 Field Measurements
Field measurements of temperature, pH and specific conductance were performedon water samples at the time of sample collection.
S.1.6.1 Temperature and pH Meurement
The temperature and pH of each water sample was meaured using an electronicpH probe. The probe was calibrated using buffer solutions of the appropriate range forexpected values of pH to be found at the Base. The meter was also be re-cahibratedaccording to manufacturer's instructions.
S.L2 Coudity Mauemet
The specific conductance of each water sample was measured with a portableconductivity meter. A standard potassium chloride solution was used to calibrate thenprior to use. The meter was also re-cahlrated periodically accordtng tomanuacre's iMhCtioM
5.1.7 Groundwater Sampling
Prior to sampln each moniUn well, the static water level was m red, and pHtemperature and conductivity of the water were determined. Te well was purged bybsain8 umil two to three total well water volumes (rWWV) were removed md p§lconduci vity and tenertue stalized (.10%) or the well was dry. The TWWVincdes water in the scree riser ad sand pacL The TWWV was calculated for eadcwell aer meamring static water level and was recorded in the field log bodI. Plastic- d coering was used at each well site to pr event- devices from adam ws
The bailers used for purging were constructed of Teflon(a Samples were collectedusing a Teflon(') Bailer with dedicated polypropylene line. The first sample withdrawnwas put in a container for volatile analysis. Other sample bottles were filled with theremaining water. The 1990 investigation utilized pre-preserved sampled bottles suppliedby the laboratory. Appropriate preservatives were added to the sample bottles aftersample collection during the 1988 investigation. One sample from each well collectedfor metals analysis was filtered in the field prior to preservation with a 0.45 micron meshfilter to remove suspended particles from the water. Filtered samples were analyzed forthe concentrations of metal dissolved in the water. Both filtered and unfiltered samplesfrom each well were analyzed for metals concentration. Vials used for containingsamples to be analyzed for volatile organics were checked to assure that no air bubbleswere present before the samples were packaged for shipment. A summary of the typesof sample bottles and preservatives used for water samples is presented in Table 52.
The bailers and tip of the water level indicator and interface probe used at each wellwere decontaminated before use at the next sampling location. The probe of the pHwand and the conductivity meter were rinsed with deionized, organic free water aftereach use.
S.1.8 Sampling Program
5.1.8.1 Sample Nmmbering System
Each sample was assigned a unique sample identification number that describeswhere the sample was colected. Each number consisted of a group of letters andnumbers, separated by hyphen. The sample numbering system is presented in Table5.3.
mm ./9-3
TABLE 5.2
RICKENBACKER ANNS. COUMBUS. OHIO
ANALYTICAL METHOOS AND COLLECTION SPECIFICATIONS FOR WATER SAMPLES
Preser-Analytical vation Holding
Parameter Method (1) Samle Container Method Time
Volatile CLP/82402 40 ml. 1 ass. HCL 10 days afterOrgan ics Teflon( )-lined septa.. (4 drops). receipt
cap Cool. 40C
Samles must beextracted
Sami -Vo latlie) CLP/62402 1 Liter. arer glass. Cool. 4*C within S daysOrgan ics wlTeflon(R) liner of receipt and
extracts analyzedwithin 40 days
Total Metals:3
Antimony 6010Arseic 7060Berylliuma 6010Cadmium 6010Chrmium 6010
Copper s010Lead 6010 2 liter plastic or I6IO3 to 6 months (exceptMercury 7470 glass pM'Z Mercury: 28 days)Nickiel 6010Selenium 7740Silver 6010Thelli,. 7641
zinc 8100
I1. Seure ules otherwise ntd: SW 646. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Wastes. U.S. EPA. Nover 1366.
2. li40 and 627 methods am vsed daring 1Ml Imvestigattens.
3. All samles for metals anlysis usee pippred by Metho 3050.
UUPC/36l-1MSew. 113W11
TABLE 5.3
SANPLE NUNDERING SYSTEMRICKENBACKER ANGI, COLWBUS, OHIO
Project Identification: RB for Rickenbacker
Site Identification: HW for Hazardous Waste Storage Area
Samole Source Number (seguential):NW Monitor Well #HB Hand Boring #AS _Auger Boring 0SU Surface Sediment Sampling Location #
Sample Number:GW Ground WaterSS Soil Sample (Split-Spoon or HB)GS Surface Soil Grab Sample
Exa le:
RB-IHW-IM-SSI
First soil sample from onitor Well #6 drilled at the Hazardous WasteStorage Area at Rickenbacker ANGS.
91MC / -141dlan. 1/23/o 6-12
5.1.8.2 Sample Labels
All physical samples obtained at the site were placed in an appropriate sample
container for shipment to the laboratory. Each sample bottle was identified with aseparate identification label. The information on the label included the following
information:
Project identification;Sample identification;Preservatives added;Date of collection; andRequired analytical method numbers.
5.1S.3 Chain-of-Custody Records
All samples were accompanied by a Chain-of-Custody Record (Figure 5A). A
Chain-of-Custody Record accompanied the sample from sample collection and shipment
to the laboratory and through the laboratory.
The "Remarks" column was used to record specific considerations associated withsample acquisition such as: sample type, container type, sample preservation methods,
values for organic headspace concentrations for specific samples, and method number of
analyses to be performed.
One copy of this record followed the samples to the laboratory. The laboratory
maintains one file copy, and the completed original was returned to the project manager
as a part of the final analytical report to document sample custody transfers. Shipments
were sent by air express courier.
5.1.84 Sample Handling. Packgig and Shipument
Precleaned smpu e boules were supplied by the laboratory. These bottles werecleaned with a laboratory grade detergent wash and rinse, an acid rime, a multiple
deionind wor rim and final oven dryig capping and packing der qua tycontroed mditions. The bottles were stored in their original unopened packages untilused at the collection shte, with the exception of the bottles used for trip blankL Theseboules were Wled with organi-free water at the laboratory where the analyses were
in odandresealWe prto shiameato t fie
by. WWW S-IS
II
I
I 1
2 WI
EalES
-tZ -_ -CO cn 1
Oa-- -4
-'I
Individual sample bottles were wrapped in packing material to prevent breakage inshipment to the laboratory. The packages were be placed in insulated shipping coolers
with plastic bags of ice.
A Chain-of-Custody Record describing the contents of the cooler was placed in asealed plastic bag and taped to the upper inside lid of the cooler. The shippingcontainer was taped shut with security labels taped over opposite ends of the lid. Thecontainer was then shipped for overnight delivery to the laboratory.
5.1.8.5 Field Log Books
Bound field log books were maintained by the field team leader and team members.Information pertinent to the field survey and/or sampling was recorded in the log books.These are bound books, with consecutively numbered pages. Waterproof ink was usedin making all entries. Entries in the log book included at least the following:
Name and title of author, date and time of entry, and physical/ environmentalconditions during field activity;
SPurpose of sampling activity;* Name and address of field contact;* Name and title of field crew,* Name and title of any site visitors;* Type of sampled media (e.g., soil, sediment, groundwater, etc.);* Sample collection method;• Number and volmne of sample(s) taken;* Description of sampling point(s);* Date and time of collection;
* Sample' ification umber(s);SSample disbution (e.g., laboratory);* Refames for all maps and photogrphs of the sampliog site(s);SField Ibserton* Any field meaurem ntm made, such as pH, temperatue water level, etc.; and* Weather condtions.
When an error was made i a og book, the perso who node the enuy mde thcorrection simply by crossing a line through the error and enterin the correct
by,. 3p.,5./
information. The erroneous information was not be obliterated. AD entries were signedand dated and all corrections initialed and dated.
S.1.9 Analytical Methods
The samples of soil and groundwater were analyzed for the parameters listed inTables 5.1 and 5.2. The target compounds for methods using gas chromatography/massspectrometry (GC/MS) are listed in Table 5.4.
5.1.9.1 Detection Limits
The detection limits for organic compounds determined by CLP GC/MS methodsare published in the respective methods. These method detection limits (MDL) aredetermined using laboratory prepared standard solutions. The actual detection limitobtainable for an environmental sample may be higher due to the sample matrix. Thepractical quantitation limits published in the methods are used as a guideline forestablishment of the lower limit for quantitation.
The minimum detection limits for the requested metals analyses are published forthe respective methods. The minimum" reporting limits for these metals are shown inTable 5.5.
5.1.10 Quality Assurance Samples
Quality Assurance (QA) samples were submitted to the laboratory with thegroundwater and soil. Blind duplicate samples were given a false sample number similarto the true sample identity. The true sample mnbers were recorded in field records,but did not appear on the sample bottle labels or the Chain-of-Custody Records. Thepmpose of the duplicate samples is to provide a ceck of alytic:a retab . Thefrequency of the duplicate samples was one for each ten soil samples and one for eachten oudw samples submftted for each analysi Duplicate samples wer collectedfor analysis at wons Where -- was smpected based on odor, dscooorationthe pfesen of organic vapors or anomalous pH or conductivity - -s nts. A totalof eg duplicate samples were taken. Seven duplicates of soil samples, and meduplicate of a water sample
W. to j 946
I TABLE 5.4
LIST OF COMPOUNDS FOR BC/MS METHODS - RICCENBACKER ANGS, COLUMBUS, OH
Base/Neutral Extractable Semi -Volatile Organics
I Acenaphthene Fl uorantheneAcenaphthyl en. FluoreneAnthracene
Hexachi orobenzeneIez~~loatee eahoouainBenzo(b)fl ucranthene Hexachlorobtadne
Benzo(a)pyrene Hexachl orocycl opentadi eneBenzo (a) ant hraceneBenzo(ghi )peryl en. lndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyreneBenyl Alcohol * IsophoroneI Bi s(2-chloroethyl )etherBi s(2-chl oroethoxy)methane Naphthal eneBis(2-ethylhexyl )phthal ate NitrobenzeneBis(2-chlorolsopropyl )ether N-Nitrosodiphenyl amine4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether 2-NitroanilineButyl benzlphthal ate 3-Nitroaniline
4-MI troanilineI 2-Chl oronaphthal ene N-Nltroso-Diuethylamine*4-Chloroaniline N-Nitroso-di -n-dipropylamine4-Chiorophenyl phenyl etherI Chrysene 2-Methyl naphthal ene
Dl benzo (a, h) anthracene PhenanthreneDi benzofuran PyreneI Di -n-octylphthal ate1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene 1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene1,2-01 chi orobenzene1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene3,3' -Dlchi orobenzidineDiethyl phthalateDimthyl phthal ate2,4-Dinitrotoluenm2,6-DinltrotolueneDi -n-octyl phthal ate
*These compounds are not on the Target Compound List (TCL) but wereincluded in the analysis report.
I 3UU/K544IRev. 19/30/30 6-17
TABLE 5.4 (continued)
LIST OF COMPOUSS FOR BC/NS NMOS - RICKICEBACICER ANGI, COLUMBUS, OH
Volatile Organics
Acrolein *1,1 -Di chi oroethaneAcetone 1, 2-Di chl oroethaneAcryl onitrile *trans-i , 2-Dichloroethene
Benzene trans-i ,3-DichloropropeneBromomethaneBromodi chi orouiethane 2-HexanoneBromof orm Ethyl Benzene2-Butanone Styrene
Carbon disulfide 1,1 ,2,2-TetrachloroethaneCarbon tetrachlori de let rachi oroetheneChi orobenzene. Tol ueneChi oroethane 1,1, 1-Tnt chi oroethaneChloroform 1,1,2 -Trichi oroethane2-Chioroethyl vinyl ether *TrichioroetheneChl oromethane Tn chi orofl uoromethaneDi bromochi oromethane1,2-Dichloropropane Vinyl chloride1,3-Dichlorobenzene *Vinyl Acetate*Methylene Chloridecis-1,3-Dichloropropene Xylenes4-Methyl -2-pentanone1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene *1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene *1, 1-Dichioroethene
* These compounds are not on the Target Compound List (TCL) but wereincluded in the analysis report.
New. 10/30/30 5-18
Additional QA samples consisted of: one field blank (water in appropriatelypreserved sample bottles) from each sampling period and water source, one equipmentwash blank (deionized organic free water poured through the decontaminated samplingequipment into the appropriately preserved sample bottles) for every other day ofsampling, and one trip blank (VOA vials filled by the laboratory with deionized, organicfree water) in each cooler transporting samples for volatile organic analyses. Thepurpose of the trip blank is to monitor for sample contamination that might occur duringshipping and handling or from improperly cleaned sample bottles The purpose of thefield blank is to verify the quality of the water used for decntamination. The purposeof the equipment wash blanks is to test the effectiveness of decontamination procedures.The discussion of blank and duplicate analysis is included in the data validation report(Appendix D).
5.1.11 Aquifer Testing
Rising-head aquifer tests were performed on monitoring wells 4, 6, 7 and 8 in orderto estimate aquifer charcteisics (see Appendix C). The tests followed protocol forfield determination of hydraulic conductivity set out in EPA Method 9100.
For this test, a transducer is placed at the bottom of the well this sends a signal to aremote In-Situ Inc. Hermit Data Logger which records the amount of water above thetransducer. A known amount of water (slug) is withdrawn from the well, and the Hermitrecords the change in water level in the well versus time.
The data collected during the slug tests were used to calculate hydraulic conductivityvalues according to the technique developed by Hvortlev (1951). These values are usedto estimate trmmissivty and water flow velocity throgh the tested aquifer.
S.LIZ C ahmI Maulaeils Mmpmet
AD dwaelopmer a, purg water, pump test discap waer andm in wastewater was collected and stored on-site pending receipt of remls
ofcemical analysisof repireusativesamples Excesc iloutd fm the dringapra ti m wo placed on and covered with plastic sheeting until results of chemicalanalysis we: received. Te sourc and dte calecon of the waste m tmial in eachcontaminer was clearly m d an the onaudei t e co aminer. Soil and grmater
. MV"4 sa
TABLE 5.5
MINIMUM REPORTING LIMITS
ANALYSIS WATER SOILMETAL METHODS ug/L mg/Kg
Antimony 6010 100 10Arsenic 7060 10 1Beryllium 6010 5 0.5Cadmium 6010 10 1Chromium 6010 50 5Copper 6010 25 2.5Lead 6010 20 10Mercury 7470 0.2 20Nickel 6010 40 4Selenium 7740 10 1Silver 6010 50 5Thallium 7841 100 10Zinc 6010 20 2
,UWCjN54ftdsRev. 123/W3S
analyses for samples collected from the wells from which the contaminated materialcame were used to astablish chemical properties of the waste and determine disposalneeds.
5.1.13 Site Surveys
All surface soil, soil boring and monitoring well locations were identified on mapsprovided by Base personneL The horizontal locations of the soil borings and monitoringwells were surveyed by a licensed surveyor to an accuracy of one foot. The verticallocation of a dearly marked measuring point on the top of each monitoring well wasalso surveyed with reference to U.S. Geological Survey or U.S. Geodetic Surveybenchmarks with an accuracy of +0.01 foot Accurately locating the surface soilsampling sites was accomplished by tape and compass orientation with respect to a localstructure or roadway which appears on Base plans.
by. UmtsIW
SECTION 6.0
FIELD INVESTIGATION FINDINGS
6.1 GEOLOGY
A total of twenty-one borings were drilled at the HWSA (see Figure 5.1) between 22January and 9 February 1990. Ten borings were drilled to a depth of ten feet, fiveborings to a depth of 23 to 27 feet, and six borings were drilled to sixteen feet andcompleted as monitoring wells. As seen in the boring logs (Appendix A) and cross-sections (Figures 6.1 and 6.2, respectiveiy) lithologies are typical of the glacialdepositional environment as outlined in Section 4.
Soil from the ground surface down to eight feet is characterized by a medium brownsilty clay, with trace amounts of pebbles. This layer grades into a grayish silty clay fromeight to fourteen feet, with moisture encountered at ten feet. This layer is immediatelyunderlain by the shallow aquifer, wet, fine to medium grained brown sandy gravel fromfourteen to eighteen feet. The aquifer has some interbedded thin layers of fine, well-sorted brown sands and fine to medium-graied gray sandy graveL Upon equilibrationin the monitoring wells, the static water level was app:i ten feet below grade.The shallow aquifer is separated from a second aquifer by a confining layer of hard,dense gray clay from eighteen to nineteen feet below grade. Immiately below thisconfining layer exists a fine to medium grained gray sandy gravel interbedded with thinlayers of fine grained well sorted brown sands and dense gray clays. This layer (shown incross-section B-B, Figure 6.2) is underlain by a hard dense gray clay down to at least 27feet. Wheth these sand layers represent two distinct aquifers or become onecontinuous sand away from the HWSA is unknown at this time.
On-site field screening of the soil samples taken from these barinp was done usinga Photovac Mrotipon detector. Procedure for this field screening isoutlined in Section S. Th is iutrmn measures volatile orpnic cnents frm each soilsample in parts per million (ppm) conen n. The co motftiam ofvolatile organic fom the samples ranged from 10 to 3,180 ppma. Hie levels ofvolatile. coming from borinm RB-,W-AB (1,666 ppm), RD-HW-AB11 (3,180 ppm),RB-HW-AB14 (2,260 pm), RB-HW-MW5 (2,376 ppm), RB-HW-MW6 (1,304 ppm)
n6,,s,m 6
and RB-HW-MW7 (930 ppm). See boring logs, Appendix A for complete fieldscreening results.
Visually, few of the soil samples collected from the soil borings appeared to becontaminated. Hydrocarbon staining and odors were present in RB-HW-AB3, RB-HW-AB4, RB-HW-AB12 and RB-HW-MW7. For a more detailed description of these soilsamples, see the boring logs for both soil and monitoring well borings in Appendices Aand B, respectively.
6.2 HYDROGEOLOGY
In addition to the three previously installed monitoring wells on site, an additionalsix groundwater monitoring wells were installed at the HWSA (see Figure 5.1). All wellswere set at a depth of fifteen feet with total depth of the boring at sixteen feet.Monitoring well construction logs are shown in Appendix B.
Two factors influenced the depths at which the monitoring wells were completed.Based upon field observations from the split-spoon soil samples, well screens wereplaced at depths spanning the most porous/permeable area of the shallow aquifer. Thisbeing the sandy clays and gravels and fine to medium grained sand strata. Wellconstruction details are summarized in Table 6.1.
Secondly, the monitoring well borings were terminated above the underlying hard,dense, gray cay acting as the confining layer between the shallow and second aquifers.The basal clay was at a depth of eighteen feet, total depth for monitoring wells wassixteen feet, giving a two-foot buffer of undisturbed sediments above the ifining layer.In this way, any possible contamination above this layr would have no avenue tocontaminate the water and sediments below the confining clay layer.
Al poundater mitrin wellspresent at t HW&A, the three exingwe s bstall durn the sike invetgion had wae samples collected from tamWater lewe mesunt wer recorded from each well, thme Imls wer thm ecedon a sie map and gunral watr table surface maps were conscmed (se Fgure 63 and&4). As shon in t water tMble mup from February and Jne 190, the apparenthydrol gradient is in a southely to south-m direcu T two map differloca in the vidk of th tur UST; cand in the msuth portion of the sh, Onthe Fmmy water tl map, water l amud the for USM afe elevtd
compared to the nearest monitoring wells. This can be explained by the accumulation ofwater in the more permeable fill material surrounding these tanks. This however, is notapparent in the June 1990 water table map. Here, the four USTs are a low water levelarea compared to the surrounding area, with water levels being more similar from wellsin the nearest vicinity to the tanks. In both water level maps (February and June 1990)MW6 represent the furthest downgradient monitoring well for the HWSA.
Development and purging of each well was completed as described in Section 5.1.5,then 5.1.7. Static water levels were reached after development and before purging ofeach well. With the exception of MWS, all wells were visually clean and clear of anyphase-separated hydrocrbons (PSH). MWS, however, contained a four foot thick layerof yellowish-orange PSH on top of the water. Samples of the liquid hydrocarbons weresent to a laboratory for a fingerprint analysis to determine the type of hydrocarbon.Water samples were collected from the other eight wells and sent to the ES BerkeleyLaboratory for further analysis. All water sampling procedures were adhered to asdescribed in Section 5. For more details of dates of completion and water volumeextracted from each well, see Appendix B.
Rising head aquifer tests were carried out on MW4, 6, 7 and 8 according toprocedures defined in Section 5. Data from the tests was used to calculate the hydraulicconductivity (K) of the aquifer. Hydraulic conductivities ranged from 2.oki0O cm/sec(MW?) to 4.9x10 5 cm/sec (MWS) (Table 6.2). Appendix C contains aquifer testanalysis sheets for each well tested. Average velocities were calculated using a gradientof .047 (19 June 1990 and 6 February 1990) and assuming a porosity of 25 percent(Table 6.2)
hv,4 W
0:*0, 0, II'
0, . 0. ct_v** 0.:o o ~ o ~ < z
LL)...::::::*
. j 0 "*L
I
h.iPXA4 S
L-6,11-1 7u
i~
0 -~ 0
0'1 00-0, z:4I 4:*L V
5_1__. __ 1
Ooil H. M1~
Ote$ I IA2'.:: , : , .h16, O955
1;0S : mN -scw
CLi 5. 17
L&J LOJL)<
r: 0 LALA
ED = -~ 0 0(I CYI, 0 0 00 10 0 0
* 0 * 0 --la . 0 -.. .- LJ L)U
-~~ - -:::.~~~ :. -0. 10::: z, 0
*:~'#~~+~ 0 ~~0 0~cx*:::0 0 0
-a- i L. :
::::~~4:':'444.t.'~ *::**** Q. : L jxSIIb:x~~* -*.
ci ML.ES4 -111mbo-ccc
0 0 0 0 gv
an 0w 0 0 a" a
I4
-"-" "- - -
I 0 q 0l 0l iaq 0I q
.i ii liii i !I
I6
K .i, --il 'IA-
41.
C %
-41
JI
733 J
/"O
030 15 0 30 60
FE ET
0+ LEGEND:
00 1 RB-HW-AB12 RB-HW-AB2
3 RB-HW-AB3
/ RB-HW-AB4
5 RB-HW-AB5
/ 16 RB-HW-AB6'V 4.7 RB-H W-AB7
//8 RB-HW-ASB
4 (/ /9 RB-HW-A89
<10 RB-HW-AB1O/11 RB-HW-AB 11
V12 RO-HW-AS12
13 RB-HW-AB13
14 RB-HW-AB14
is RB-HW-ABSI
1" 4+ WATER SURFACE MAP') " / HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA
.% RICKENBACKER ANGB,9 OHIO "
6-7 ES ENCINEERIN-SCIENCE
- - m m mm4l m m m| mmmmllm mmm m m m . -
.44
44
NN
4.N(c
4;ck.
9 %~su
030 15 0 30 60
FEET
-13;1 04 LEGEND:
-r391 + MONITORING WELL"- a" /
/ /+ SOIL BORING
// // ///-3
/ /// /
(< // /-* \ /7/4 /
\ /,>
'Yo'>
#0 I
0°o
FIGURE 6.4
WATER SURFACE. MAPHAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA
RICKENBACKER ANGB, OHIO'19 JUNE 1990
ES £.bINr.SCI NC
6.3 ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Section 6.3.1 presents the criteria (see Table 6.3) for determining significance of the
results of the Pre-Closure Sampling. The analytical results discussed in Section 6.3.2 are
summarized in Tables 6.4 through 6.6 and on the Sheets in the back of this report. Onlythe results of the most recent sampling episode (January and February 1990) areincluded in these tables. Results from the previous investigation are shown on the
Sheets and presented in the ES Field Investigain ROn (October 1990).
6.3.1 Criteria for Determining Sluuficance of Results
The presence of contaminan in the environment due to pa.t materials handling
practices does not mean the contaminants pose a significant, unacceptable threat to
human health or the environment. The final determination for further investigative and
remedial actions should be established based on estimates of risk to human health andthe environment. The objective of this subsection is to define some of the criteria fordetermining what analytical results are significant. This is done by comparing results tobackground sampling done at Rickenbacker ANGB (Table 6.3 and Figure 6.5). See theInternal Draft SI Report (April 1990) for complete discussion of background sampling.For compounds not covered by the background sampling, cmparions were made toU.S. EPA, and Ohio regulatory limits. When no regulatory limits had been defined byOhio, limits established by other states were used for discussion purposes.
6.3.L1 Metals
Metals occur naturally in soils, sediments and water as free elements or more
typically associated with other compounds. Free metallic elements play a variety ofimportant physiological roles in all living organisms. Above certain e nratis
however, these metals may act as allerge , mutagens, teratogens and crciogen
Establishing what roncenations of metals are significant requires some standard ofnaturally occurring concentration. For the purposes of this report, three sources ofbackgrund metals concentrations in wil are being employed. The primary source ofcomparison is the results of the analysis of samples collected on the perimeter of theBase. These smples were collected expreuly for the purpos of establihing,bac~g rund nenotratio Samples were collectd from or borin advanced to 15feet below grade at selected locatios on R ac ANOB on the 8th of December
W,.C/o4 6mu,. um
INTERNAL DRAFT
TABLE 6.2
NYDRIAULIC CONDUCTIVITY AND GIOUNDATER VELOCITY
HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA
RICIENBACIR AM - OHIO
Hydraulic Conductivity Velocity
wet (clsec) (feet/day) feet/day feet/year
N1-4 5.55 x 10 . 5 0.157 .03 11
NW-6 6.75 x 10 . 5 0.192 .04 15
Ni-? 2.00 x 10 . 3 4.32 .81 296
NW-8 4.89 x 10 . 5 0.139 .03 11
See Appendix C for calculation sheets.
i ' Assumd 2S% porosity, gradient * .047.
I
iIIII
I mc4-2wesI
1989 (see Figure 6.5). These locations were chosen to give a representative analysis ofthe Base and of typically natural chemical compounds in the soil. Each boring wassampled from 0-2 and 13-15 feet below grade and analyzed for total petroleumhydrocarbons (TPH) and priority pollutant metals. Chemical analyses results arerecorded in Table 4.23 of Engineering-Science, Inc. Aril 1990 Site Inspection ReportVolume 1. Background calculations for metals and TPH are presented in Table 4.24 ofthe same document. Results of the total metals show detectable concentrations ofpriority pollutant metals in all samples. The metals cadmium, mercury, selenium andsilver were not detected in any sample.
Calculation of the Rickenbacker ANGB background values is based on Ohio EPAclosure guidance for naturally occurring compounds. Under this guidance, backgroundis considered equal to the arithmetic mean (;&) of a sample population plus two standarddeviations (A) [;s + 2 fl. Table 4.24 of the April 1990 SI Report presents the calculatedmeans, standard deviations and background values for the sample populations 0 to 2feet, and all depth intervals. The upper limits of concentrations defined as backgroundby this sampling are presented in Table 62 Published ranges of metals concentrationsare also presented in the Table for comparison. In the following discussions of thechemical analysis results, a metal concentration is considered above background if itexceeds the Rickenbacker ANGB background, background concentrations found in theChemical Equilibria in Soil Study and the typical Ohio farm soil concentrations.
Evaluation of metals concentrations in water in this report are based on the primaryand secondary maximum contaminant level (MCL) concentrations established by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). These standards are established fordrinking water and are only used to identify areas of potential contamination. Instancesof groundwater samples exceeding the MCL do not necessarily warrant remediation.
"L2 Vola and Sem-Vdat Organc Com
Volatie oqanic compounds (VOCs) and semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs)do not ocur naturally in the soil or groundwater. In the absence of any strict guidancefrom Ohio regulkary agends regarding amptable levls, of these compoundssignificance must be determined on a basis of risk from exposumre to each compound.The concenuations shown an the Sheets represelt the total semi-volatile oranicspresent at the locations indkated. Volatile oanics are ised individu .
b,. IS/U/U &
INTERNAL DRAFT
TABLE 6.3
STADAS FOR NETALS CNCENTRAT IONS IN MOIL AMS DRINKING WATER
MICKEMBAOCER AMU 0010I
Ohio Farm Soill Chemical Equtlbria2 RAINin3 Fedearal Drinking
*tat Concentration Concentration §&ackresAW Water Stanclard
ntlmany NA 2 -10 5.8 NA
reanic NA 1 - so 29.5 0.05a
wryllita MA 0.1 -40 0.8 NA
mcim0 - 2.9 0.01 -0.7 0.3 0.010
hrmfm - 23 1 - 10006. 0.050
oppr 11 - 37 2 - 100 37.0 IO
mad 9 -39 2 -200 22.5 .0
arcury MA 0.01 -0.3 0.07 002
Ickel 9 -38 5 -500 41.0 NA
mleniiu MA 0.1 -2.0 1.5 0.018
liver NA 0.01 - 5 0.20.5
%allium MA MA 1.0 NA
Inc 47 - 133 10 - 300 145.0 5 0Ob
- Netats in Ohio Faim Scit$ CLgen aid Niler, IMU)
- Chemical Equilibria in bie (W.L. Liudwy, 197)
- Inginering-Sclence, Inc., April 1990 site InvestimtlnR r.Eiknme Air Natl Bard UrnJIMClumbs, Ohio Volsas 1, fara 4.3.24.
i Not Aveie
- Primry Drinking Water NEL
- Seconcim V rinking Water Standard
- I
va...
INS.
'........
V~ V
2000 1000 0 00fOt FIGURE 6.5
LEGEND: saiBACKGROUND
A BACKGROUD SOIL SAMPLE SOIL SAMPLING LOCATIONSCOLLECTION LOCATION RICKENBACKER
- BASE BOUNIDARY AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASE
6-13
6.3.2 Sol Results
In this subsection, the results from the soil analysis will be summarized inaccordance with the significance of results findings. Detected compounds at each depthinterval analyzed have been placed on depth specific site maps (Sheets 1 through 5).Where no volatile or semi-volatile organics were detected, a not detected symbol (ND)was placed on the map. When metals were detected above background criteria, theirconcentrations were placed on the maps. Summaries of the results will be divided intothese depth intervals for metals, volatile organics and semi-volatile organics: 0-2', 3-5',8-10', 13-15' and greater than 15'. Summaries of chemical compounds and theirrespective values are also shown in Tables 6.4 and 6.5.
6.3.2.1 Soil Results 0-2 Foot Interval
At the 0-2 foot interval lithology consisted of a dry, dark brown, silty clay topsoil,numerous compounds were detected. Total metals were found over the site with higherlevels within the fenced area. Detected above background criteria (Table 6.4 & Sheet 1)were beryllium, cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, silver and zinc.
Volatile organic compounds were only analyzed for at six hand borings and twomonitoring well locations. The only VOCs detected were 440,000 ag/kg o-xylene atHB1.
Total detected semi-volatile organics ranged from 150 to 164,300 pg/kg, withvirtually all of the high concentrations toward the western outside perimeter of the site.Sample SU33, located in the central portion of the site, has a total semi-volatileconcentration of 13,420 ig/kg (Sheet 1).
6 3.2 Soil Results 3.5 Foot Interval
At the 3-5 foot interval lithology consisted of a dry, medium brown, silty clay with atrace amount of pebbles. Detected compounds became more isolated in the 35 footinterval than in the 0-2 foot interval. Metals detected above b r Were
beryllium cadmium, lead, silver. thallium and zinc (see Table 6.5 and Sheet 2).
Semi-olatle orpna were found at ten out of fourteen sampi locations rangingfrom 530 to 4,630 pgf. Volatile orpnic compound t n e an e were
"Sc/Ds.-3w. S/mW 5-1
found at concentrations of 120,000 and 1,900,000 g/kg, respectively, in HBI nearBuilding 560. Benzene was found in AB2 at an estimated concentration of 1J g/kg.
6.3.2.3 Soil Results 8-10 Foot Interval
At the 8-10 foot interval, lithology consisted of a moist brown, silty clay. Metalconcentrations were found below the background levels except for selenium at 1.7mg/kg (MW8).
Volatile organics were found at levels up to 27,000 Mg/kg of o-xylene at AB14.The highest concentrations were found at AB1, AB14 and MW7. Specific compoundsinclude: benzene, ethylbenzene, xylenes and 1,1,1-trichloroethane (see Table 6.5 andSheet 3). Total detected semi-volatile organics ranged from 130 to 1,800 g/kg.
6.3.2.4 Soil Results £3-15 Foot Interval
At the 13-15 foot interval, lithology consisted of a wet brown to gray sand andgravel. No metals concentrations were found above the background levels, except forcopper at 57.4 mg/kg at MW5. Semi-volatile organics were not detected except for atotal of 620 g/kg at MW5. Volatile organic compounds were found in the southerncomer and along the northeast side of the area. These include: benzene, ethylbenzene,toluene, xylenes, acetone, trichloroethene, trans-1,2-dichloroethene, 1,1-dichloroethene,
and vinyl chloride (see Table 6.5 and Sheet 4). The highest concentration was 1,000
g/kg trans-1,2-dichloroethene at MW6.
6.32.5 Soil Remits > 1S Foot Interval
At the greater than fifteen foot interval, sand and gravel is present to a depth ofapproximtely 25' with a thin layer of clay from 18'-19'. Detected volatile and semi-volatile organics were confined to the southeast side of the area. Semi-volatile organicswere found only at MW1 at a total concentration of 1,830 g/kg. The highest volatile
organic concentrations were also found at this location. They were benzene,ethylbemene, and o-xylene at concentrations of 1,900, 11,000, and 20,000 Mg/kg,respectively.
3.,. 6(513 6-15
Two other locations had detected concentrations of volatile organics. Benzene wasfound in AB14 at 6 Mig/kg. Trichloroethene was found in AB15 at 4J pg/kg. Arsenic,
copper and mercury were detected above background levels at three locations.
The trichloroethene detected in AB15 at a depth of 25-27 feet and the benzene
detected in AB14 (see Sheet 5) at a depth of 21-23 feet indicate that the aquifer belowthe 18-19' clay confining layer has contamination in its soil and groundwater. Thissuggests that there may be communication between the two aquifers. This implies thatthe clay confining layer may not be continuous and may pinch out in a lense pattern
beneath the site.
6.3.3 Groundwater Results
In this subsection, the results of the groundwater analysis are summarized on twosite maps. MW1 through MW3 were installed in 1988. MW4 through MW9 wereinstalled in 1990. The suffix GWI indicates the first sampling of that well. Ukewise, thesuffix GW2 indicates the second sampling of that well. Sheet 6 summarizes the results
of the volatile and semi-volatile organics analysis. Sheet 7 summarizes the results of the
filtered metal analysis. This information is also shown in Table 6.6.
6.3,3.1 Volatile and Semi-Volatile Organics in the Groundwater Results
On the analytical results map (Sheet 6), both the 1990 and 1988 sampling data areshown. The only semi-volatile organic compound found in the groundwater was
2-methylnaphthalene at 5J jig/L in MW8 (see Table 6.6).
Volatile organic compounds were detected in MW1, MW3, MW6 and MW7. MW1
was sampled in 1988 and in 1990. The first sample had 94 jig/L benzene, and 20 g/Lo-xylene. The second sample had 560 pg/L benzene, 110 pg/L b 35 pig/Lm/p-xylene, and 86 AL o-zylen. MW3 was also sampled in 1988 and in 1990. Thefirst sample had 44 pag/L - id loeten The second sample also had this compound at
7 ig/L MW6 had 8 ua/L trans-1,2-dichloroethene, and 78 g/L trichloroethene. MW7
had benzene, ethybeazen m/p-xylcne and o-xylene at 200,90, 21.1, and 70 g/L Inaddition, four feet of phm-seprated hydrocarbon were oating in MW5. Fingerprintanalysis of the liquid hy docarbos identified it as a 30 to 40 pecent weathered gasolinemixed with jet feel (Appendix F).
A.,. UAPIM64
6.3.3.2 Filtered Metals in Groundwater Results
On the analytical results map for metals (see Table 6.6 and Sheet 7) only the 1990water sampling data are shown since no previous filtered metal analyses had been done.
Four metals were detected all at concentrations below the Federal Drinking WaterStandards (Table 6.3). These four metals were arsenic found at 2.0 to 9.4 g/L, leadfound at 3.1 to 14.0 M&g/L, zinc found at 5.0 to 35 gIL and mercury at 0.11 ug/L
of. ./ 6.17
00
0oo
z
<.
z
C.D
I
I.-j0 cr.0
0-V
00
I~~~~ i& 8 888oN+ CO)
0 CYIIo
CID
z
(u) Cl) C
zS I
Cl)a:I II
M- 0L I z
_C N
Cll N11 11 1 I1 1 1 II
Cj)Y
z CO)
00.
L) 0o 0o zwi 0.
E
to
(0
.N r
*.L .7
6-19
CV) CY
0
co cc0z
C13 0z
CV) -,-,V,-O -,
I c
0 o
C/l) r-
z
0 D
0
o c00
IU C
r
C 6 C .a C 9
a- ".. I I A C
Z~ 2:
6-20
CI) V- CO q
o
z
00
z
W3 Co C#
0-
I
-o
D c
Co
0~0
0 0L
Wr z
CDC
0 Le 1 j Th;i*I-..
0 0 0I~ III !1lIiiiiii I6-21
-1) -1)-) -13-,
c o o
,,
00
CI
z<
z
U c
CYLLJ111 I) r. N
i-i
'- 00 C
0 c
100
0~0
CC
M 3j
-S U a. .2 .4
~AL0 A I.cp)U V U
0m0
0
z
w
co
z
z00
o OL
z 0L.
I-C C
C. 3.Ci'
ed 0 00W Jul11iTI IA I $1!
6-23
IC I
CDO
z
< M
< I
-)o
Zm CO I0 b
oi 0
zNoc
z II
Ejio.m 0 "
6-2
o No cm
00
1 m
zz M
: 0Y
z
CV /)m
Cl)
I-) 0
00/ 0E)
o z 0z
oo07.
U)IOIOi-y-Li
00c~Jmo -2
00 (0
0
z
z
cn M
(0CY N cmINI
C,,
0 C 0
z
0 E0
o ~ 0E
I-wj
C.C
II U.
6-26
00
I mco
z~ 49< 0
zClO
LUd
CO)
I- 0
I
-J2
D CV
o cto c0Dz
1Y-C. CO I~~
z
CO m
C coV IC'I w
Cl I
CM o-oV
-J-
zC0
az
wI-J
C.)
w
6-28
49
00
I o
C IY
z
o C*
oY co ' 0
z d0c'Vo
z4
V- V0-
1 2
~
Coo
0..
C,,R
z<f
cca~I-
I ccb
CO,
0 cc
I- 0
U-tow i,
o 03
00
CD -z 4
aou O I~C) 03
z D
CYl
0 C
z I
cl) 0
z
0. 0
07
w zzS
6-31
00
I m f
z
z
w -
CCOO
CoY
I ~
z ,-fy
o c
0
w CD
I C
0 Ei
a-32
I M 4- V- o
z
LU
M I -
:
U))
iz
C,,-J0QU)-J
0~0Cz
o~ cOcov
ui 0
CoL
00
CIL >01 m 5 .6-33
_ 0
0 C
z
Lom o
w
I
Izflco3%.c-COJ co-
z I L
0 <
0
00
o CD
z ct
r: I.-
6-34
0
0
z
< C)
Ic
w -
MCD L
zD co : -0 CC0.
0
wQ z
LU,
twojcm 30
IA I~I II~M iI~Iu6-35
00
CDo
z
z0
Cl,
co)
CY <
C,) ~ ~ ON NO11 1 1 1on Co C
0 M
0
LUJ
C.CLUz
> I I~ Ii - w21 oO
I _ AJ~iI IiIIIIi!Im6-3.
0m0
z
UU
I C/w:c
< 2:
z -
00
U
wE c
I) 0
oo Dco c'i
I rn f
00
5 zoc coI'
z co C1 C
o o c0
I-
zzCl) CD mhczf I3o!:II cC
X.503
c; c; j d d
I N
:c = I
0z
o "
U,,
w cI I
NI E%=
-J
Uf)
0 cc0
0
gill 1i11 1 ii:
t6-39
0 30u0
Co X
z
C.
Z 0i
Co M
< ,,
CoC
z g0
CCo
z0 CICz
2
o;C ; CIX
OEw z
t- 1
6-40
co cc III<ICD ~0
z
a:,
z I
w<
I- ~ IN~ 1 . 11 1
m 0o 0
CI)
z
o c(0
00 ~ ~ _ 00'1
E Ez
I- 'a.
CI%)
wd
6-41
0 0o 0 0cl -
Z0 0oS3cco CCCCD,
01
< I C,
0) CCO
ao 3
0 0C
E
0C
Jim
(-4
00
0
z
z
0 0.11
wM
C,)C,<-i
o c
0
zii
Ir 9
CC
It ii.jIIlol
fifi ZiIJ
zz m0 ccnca~ ~0co '4 Mz
<
0 C,
a: Ma:~i z
X II m
-OJV
oV M
z)
o c
zzCOd -J
cc
cr.1I-
0 E~
0~
CDz
z 1
LU
< IP
0-
C,,R
0
0 Ez '
E 0J
I ..afiiI i6-4I,5 , I
0 1111 I
0 oom a:
0z
'C13
CCO
w
Z: I n
I--
CC,
z III o
0
0iq Il W? q-7 J
z
I-..
IIIIII~DI 1 1 1 1 1
zmI' -I I LSJ0
CC0
IN DI f)C
uii
I !iiiiii
6-47
coIiI I II I I I
Iy I I I I I I .
EI
fi li
i I|I
I"I
V- CV)
cOI I 1 1~J
ISO
liii
I ii
cr
I 0Y
I II to CIIIY 29
UxiL IU1 0f!oil I. I dO
-2 0
ii
6-50
04 N
Im LL
zbEe-6U
6~soJs
iI~ ~jiir
CA t
6-71
I ~!~iro
m 0g=
z
MIN
I! I ,i
+ ino t
co aJ
78 cm I ! R I I I Ic i isCDIii l
a:i
Ig v)jIcm
SECTION 7.0
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 CONCLUSIONS
The analytical results indicate soil contamination in widely spaced areas of theHWSA down to depths of over fifteen feet, as well as contaminaton of the groundwaterwith organic solvents and fuel components. Consequently, removal of all of thecontamination, to effect a clean closure is not a practical alternative. Even if soil wereremoved to a depth of 15 feet, groundwater remediation is necessary and would requirean extended groundwater monitoring program. In addition, the extent of groundwatercontamination south of the site and in the second aquifer and the extent of surfacecontamination at the western corner are unknown.
The association of the phase-separated hydrocarbons (PSH) in MW5 with theexisting UST system adjacent to the HWSA required notification of the Ohio Bureau ofUnderground Storage Tank Regulations (BUSTR). At the request of BUSTR,additional investigation of the USTs was conducted. Those investigative results are thesubject of a separate report (ES, Phase-Separated Hydrocarbons, 1990). The existenceof the PSH places the removal of fuel components from the groundwater under BUSTRjurisdiction while all other contamination remains within RCRA jurisdiction.
7.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
In light of the preceding conclusions, additional sampling activities should beconducted to determine the extent of groundwater contamination downgradient fromthe site and to determine the extent of surface soil contamination near the westerncorner of the fenced area.
The Cloure Plan will need to be revised to account for the more extiveco-taination. A landfill mclosure requiring long-term monitoring of groundwater at thesite will probably be required. Such a closure could be implemented in three wayL
Optl. 1 would be to fence the a ctinin contminated mrface soils, inslldmwgradie monitoring wells and i a periodic smpling propa. This
WDrC/4WMlhi. 11/5st 741
option will require a determination of minimal risk to human health and the
environment from leaving the contaminated surface soils in place and uncovered.
Option 2 would be implemented if leaving the soils uncovered is determined to bean unacceptable risk. In that event, the site would be covered with a geotextile and daycap prior to fencing. The groundwater monitoring program would be identical toOption 1.
Option 3 would be implemented if leaving all of the contaminated soils is place isdetermined to be an unacceptable risk. In that event the upper few feet of the mostcontaminated soil would be removed prior to backfilling and capping as in Option 2.
Included in the scope of closure for all options would be implementing remedialaction with regard to the groundwater contamination. A likely remedial action would bepumping and treating the groundwater.
a". 1/S/f 742
SECnJON 8.0REFERENCES
Ecology and Environment, Inc., St ~~nRw okore cebce i
Engineering-Science, Rickenbacker Air National Guard Base. Columbus, Ohio: SiteInpctinr emedia I-etgainFeasibility Study/Remedial Design - Work Plan -
FiniaL June 1988.
Engineen -Science,Fil neiau Q -Haadu Wst Sorg Ae:
e-losmir QligPan Hazardous Waste Stoige Ara. Builigj560 Work Plan - FinalDecember 19.
Enginee -Science,,Rickenbacker Air National Guard Base. Columbus Ohio: AdditionaSite scton Sam~pling - Addendum #1 to SI/RI/FS/RD Work Pla October 1989.
Engineering-Science,ono hs-eaae vrcroExettteHzrdu
Hazardous Materials Technical Center, Installation Restoration Progrm: Phase L RecordsSearch (Preliminai Assessment). Ricikenbacker Air Natina Guard Base. ColumbU.~D June 1987.
Martin Marietta Eergy Systems, Inc, Statement of Work for Site Insp.-ton. Remedial
Guar 1RksegjU~L%_hj%31 August 1987.
Pierce, Li., The Climate of Oho n Climates of the States. 1959. in Volume 1 - Eastern StaelWater Inomton Center, Inc., 1974.
Schmidt, JJ., and Goldthwait R.P., TeGonWtrRw cso r~nC hoBulletin 30, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water, 1958.
US. DepartmenC-t of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Soil S&rv= of Frnkli CountQha1976.
Epneering-Scienm e,+icqhbd=e Air N&ana Guard Base. Clmu.Oo: SiteInspctio Reort Finl Aril 1990.
logan, TJ., and Miler, RAH, 1963, BcmnL i fH oFr o hOhio State University, Ohio Agricultural Research and Deeopment Center, Wooster,Ohio.
Linday, WJL, 1979, Chemical qilbimin Soils.
new o"i
APPENDIX A
BORING LOGS
U1WCDs.UWb.11/5/11
REV. DATE: JAN' '599
RING LOG[ BORING/ WELL NO.:f% Q HW) - Ad Page --. L- oIlation: Je1* bac ker A f3oP3site: Hi W -TA
ct No. CZLq5S.1. O-1 Iclient/Project: P-kQJ6 1AZt&0zWa-eZ ot A r-fHRAP Contractor: E-Z~ M., DrIg Controctor. 2- r11A-I sc Driller: "JE Ljrkt
Started. '1, l ( (to :(-X -. n ) IDrig Ended: 'J44.-90 * :3.a...n) Sofehole dia(s): C:Method/Rig Type: Vk.1c& ire &.,.ter it,.j1-f %.Ft0, 7r S'4 ;-,,I
C b. ~ .~ + - -o Aj From -_____ to _ ______ Protection Level: /
~OLithologic Description 0 ,4 t
%J' "w' 3Q5
*0 Spi s-'ntwe 0 te GCOe
se -utting$notes:
REV. OATt: JANi 19
BORING LOG IBORING/WELL NO.: ~-V ) 4Page~ tInstollotiOn: 6,ar4Er. AAJ!2:d site: ,'AS~
Project Io:.9%2c Client/Project: "aJd/, 2.-.~ 4 a T 7"
HAZWRAP Contractor: E-Z Tne Drig Contractor: T-.g% rAs4.r.CJ Driller: ~
OrIg Started: )/AIX /qL>( %S : 00 .~ )IDrig Ended: I/AJj/q ISJ :JO0pam) IBorehole dMOWs:
OrIg Method/Rig Type: 1 5saej" alo~rf- ~,4 '.~.'/ -' 57iLogged by: a .. ~ -Log CY From _____to ______ rtcinLvl ~
Alx .0\ ,I.. 1 70 6oSK\"\ 1, 9 t\ k k 016
a II
S s t peltubs) 0_a_____________r
C sCatting, Notes:_ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _
isl tonb: 0.e iter AA- ig / Frm______ t ______ PoetonLvl
HAZWRA Contactr: ogSnc D sri p tatio : Driller:.e
Drt~ 0 y Methd/Ri Tye I1., -,.
to 40 "Jo\ oc0'0 I
1% \.01 IS
04,94 00S ,00 IeLlooi esrpin\ss
*0
U t Thi well tube R m Rock coring Field 6/C 01011/mo.)
5' 509 sgpee(tvk) 0 a Other 6/C Oper.:
A-3
REV. DATE: JAN 19I9
IORING LOG IBORING/WELL NO.: -Page ostalo0o:r- Site: Alix A
rojec No.~~ Client/Project: rr'
AZWRAP Contractor: o -3 rig Contractor: ~ 7 ~ r4 Driller:
rig Startled: Ijj%%/qo (I 3 : -1 .c .4L ) Drig Ended: ~/~ ~( ) Borehole dia(s): C
'rig Method/Rig Type: I-IIZ 10.. -3 +e ,I tX3e *' gA' 4,06,0,7 ,4ogged by: p e. L
2t.I e.s~ - E -Log ( Y/g From _ ____to _______ Protection Level:
C 0 0 Lithologic Descriptio
in .
(z & W 7wty 9/ 01
~O./04-1
07,
U s~ IIRwl oe R2Re c~lFl /oemd32 spl *09jfobo 0' a~y £3Iac I/ v0
C ofi"pot*
Ado- -' 9o
REV. DATE: J*I1i4 3
ORING LOG IBORING/WELL NO.: 14 Page of of
1tal1otion: A AJ0 " Site: Al4) -
oject No.; v-O.v3 Client/Project: RA)G/ - .0 O-v , 44 s e-
QWRAP Contractor: E5 1 c. DrIg Contractir: -t #-ro I Driller: 1,..-''19 Started: I e~a)9o( 19:-30 am) Dl9 Ended: c(/ -0(-' m) Borehole dia(s):rig Method/Rig Type: ~ - '/-t' ~ ~ ' 6~
Dgged by: .).Crei Er -Log (Y/& From _____to ______ Protection Level:
JV~~~ ~~ Lithologic Description ,e. $O t
~~17
A/0 0 w
r-A -
' soot Ops (tue) 0'2 Olm 6/C Open.:
C' Cuttp Nt..A-5
REV. OATE: JA elg
BORING LOG I BORING/WELL NO.: K._-jWe.. Pae.-- of _____
installation: A &4 . Se: ,Page
Project No.: Client/Project: 0 , e-6 Al.. .e x.HAZWRAP Contractor . '- , DrIg Controctor: -, Tr%_I Oriller: . .
OrIg Started: -/ (,1 :O.J6 m) DrIg Ended: I/'av6r 1 i1 : O).&.m) I Borehole dia(s): C'Dr~g Method/Rig Type: r .+m 8Je ~ ~ ' 's TLogged by:C,.Q. _.. 4 E-Log ( Y)D "From t o Protection Level:
- -fl#I?\~ i0A0 '
tcLithologic Description Jb~ """0
Q304
II_E t X
I I
4,4 4
)--
REV. DATE: JAN 1969
IORING LOG IBORING/WELL NO.: 96- J.,q7Page 1otI
Islollotion: 1*;kLbQ.c4.e A. 1-iC-, J Sile:
roject No.:,CV5,.. I Cliant/Pro~ect: RLAk.,C.II mcowy -rpe --- 4-CC
AZWAPConrato. ~ , ~Drlq Contractor: 2f, * Driller:
rig Started: II- 9L ( 4~b m) Drig Ended: 14at 1#4 : 5 0- So Boole dio(s):
irig Method/Rig Type: Poll.1 5-V g~g,3 / x m ci.'7
ogged by: ... * eLer E-Loo (Y/(R) From _ ____to _ _____ Protection Level:
c~oo~fi~Lithologic Description G46' 4 ~0 ae~ 40 C
oo/t-5- A-.~C, .4-
Us Thin well tob* Its mock Coringl flow G/Ciewe~jSI $Put supeoe(tub.11) 0 a Oftf~ 6/C Oper.:C a Cofthw. Notes:
A-?
REV. OATE: JAN 1989
BORING LOG B1ORING/WELL NO.: Pag.- e/eJ- o4f Pge_L_ ___
Instollation: 4,%)Sete6 1'site:Project No.. C.Lq4,';...a Client/Project: Xilic3e-/ ./u,,-d'ui -HAZWRAP Contractor: -- : " Drig Contractor: * , * . Driller: /9 i -<
DrIg Storted: 'V0./O( I m) .DrIg Ended: '/o .. Co 1 3 :504am) Borehole dia(s): C
Drig Method/Rig Type: Noll .,ci.- a..xr- .HtSa-r ' % Sc,, -7- 4
Logged by:a?6. E- Log (Y/ ' From 0 to Protection Level:
- t \ . 6
II
Ii
- 7
a, s$ pli t mIvlk) 'Othe11r .. ... /C Oper.: ..
'Ctteg Notes:ecrpio 3 \*"O e
A-S
REV. DATE: JAN #ta9
ORING LOG IBORING/WELL NO.: 4 .- A 9Page IOL.
,tallotion: (Z . i b..-,, ,J Sit.: Z6 iS-4'oject No. eAT? _ Client/Project: QAC. &
AZWRAP Conroctor: - E-. - n! Dri Contrac or: ._7 -r',4 Driller: . .J,-, 01
rig Stored: '/.1(5_9:0A>.,m) DrIg Ended: 1/.L,/9o ( " is Am) Borehole dioos):
rig Method/Rig Type: -7.-Av~aue ~~I * *r
ogged by:c).~£jg E- Log Y/6Q Vrm I____ to ______ Protection Level:
oo,- ,O Lithologic Description " A" %o,\, 6 0 , , O
%I k,4-0,-%-
i0
I I
S sSpo sp"(Sbe) 0 aowmr /C eke/si.C~~/ O C MMrHoes
A-O
ItEV. OATC: JANga
ORING -LOG BORING/WELL NO.: Ria '1.- AN Page _L.. of f
stolotion: Site:
roject No.; Ce.l~#.a).03 jClient/Project: 02Q.G 4 .v"4)?Z TloAZWRAP Contractor; F_5 :~~. Drlq Controclor: EArxvucl Driller: 0 c.rig Started: '1./n ) I OrIg Ended: 11A3/J9 (_m) I Borehole diofa):
rig Method/Rig Type:
ogged by:G..C. -I! +- ELg(/9 Fo _____t _____ Protection Level:
jAiN I 10 . 1 60 6t
_ __ ~~Lithologic Description ~.t~~t (
ZLL~~ '-)c coar-S.
C I EotaA46
roged N. cd ol- E-Lrog Yerm ____ t ______ PoetinL:J
LithologicC1f:r=-" D es oncr : D'ri $ l
40 X
0\-i
- 4 7 %eA4
'7
.5.I 9. 3r~ 2~-e~ - Fwfl ,o~niL7
It ^4 o4 .r16 1.. ,) i 1.T4L0
- .VO4..V~ D
I~ ~ 4A/0L COD~',7 t
c-c L~ n' - --
fig leshso.I9 ______ ______
5S Spam ep.(twoe) 0 a Omher S opar.:
A-1 I
REV. DATE: JAN 1939
BORING LOG BORING/WELL NO.: 04. ae ... o
Installation: r- C, 49 Site:
Project No.: csqs'1..oZ Client/Project: Zf2,qi&3e
HAZWRAP Contractor: G7- =, DrIg Contract r: it &Z rllr
DrIg Started: _izLa 9o 4 :10 J& m) Drig Ended: --30Iqo(vc .&m)_ Borehole dia(s): -
Drig Method/Rig Type: HbI( T.- I-7 g7
Logged by: Coe, ... ~, +dr- E- Log (Y/d) 'JFrom _____to _______ Protection Level.:
vo CVl Lithologic Description O , t
Ia
j 0'
09C.I
'-' '16 f
A-"IF
REV. DAM~ JAd 099
ORING -LOG IBORING/WELL NO.: Page . of I....L..
soged by: RQ % . .Ae, 6L4 (Y/ Fro pr-__ _ it : _____ Poecin eel
Dsri p tion6 Z L 1~ ,$
Lithologi Driller:~
.% cT Ar9\%
";60,910l I 0Llooi ecito
1 0 T(4AtO*? ' eL- t. . 1i. ~ it 0.4/~
* 7C1 ~~en, sqno3LA L.. 7-4 /RS~ 4k-. ~/4
Cs Cetng etsA-i7
REV. DATE Iapt loss
30RlNG LOG IBORING/WELL NO.: -1(JAE/ Page --- of If__
,goltan Z C- ba~.- C r 4 Site:. q&J)ZRIroject No.: . Client/Project: <0jC,,e 1-1e r ~ 6s"4AZWRAP Contractor: E-Z~ Ii.. OrIg Contractor: 1- 4t'a~z r 4 4Z Driller: 0.J,)rig Started: 14~./q ( :00O A. m) DrIg Ended: lj-, /90~ p * ~)g)Brhole dia(s): C)rig Method/Rig Type: CLJ= Lad~- Z c 0008~o-i -7- 74
.ogged b y c t.- E-Log (Y/Oj ram -____ to _______ Protection Level: 49
Q@@o A Lithologic Description SCI e'04 C. -80- 40 0~
I YV ,)
~~~~~e A s/~'
0 3 C. ra- I ~ - 1
% 0 3 &r4j V% -1 0 q*'
711o -a. I+
3.A) 1/9~3 I,.
It 11 qA & aL /- 0j*1
- - - r gas- -
U a ?bI. well lhe N Ruk cee Field a/c pMoke/Me)8. a So 50"9w e0 : a/C Open.:I
A-14
REV. DATE: JAM96
MORING LOG BORING/WELL NO.: 442.s/ - IS / Page -L..of
~Istollotion: (Z eke.-ciAt) CQ.i, 83 Site: /70e4's A
IrojeCt' No.. CLL6& . Ci Client/Project: <.A ,'.
IAZWRAP Contractor. G£-S M'c Drig Contractor: /l, Driller:
)rig Started: IIA59L> ( 7'Lc -& M) DrIg Ended: 1/1S140 C I :350rm) Borehole dia(s): J
)rig Method/Rig Type. IV% CL!Jr Qk 0 1~ -Igc S, 001 ~-rq.ogged by.&C, ., - E- Log (Y/d) From 10____t ______ Protection Leve:
e, O Liiholormic Description \Y eC,- oai woO so
e-IL~~ ~ ~ I A- .C&p07A.6Zl/ y
-3Io4~ ~ J6 /cIL
yEI 0'
C/&y
\706OfI/ y4 ir i9t Ceov
\Y;O. A. I -J C -... V(. %3
#-qxt~ G I ̂ IN-q6 4tc,,L ) eiS
4./ .a9______
U a Thin well tube Rt a Mocek cring PieM a/c Wk/e.S'2 Split spaee(tvbe) 0'0 Other 6/C Oper.:C' ICuffimq, notes:
A-15
REV. DATE: JAN i9U5
BORING LOG BORING/WELL NO.: L,_ -. 4 -. e POe-.- ofinstallation: I2_.; C- "L IC A A) C 8Silt: h,f(.J
Project No..e4,yS. C . I Client/Project: ^4.-'e e 41/'L n/.4,. ,l A,.-o- ,HAZWRAP Contractor: " -'" Driq Contracor: /,..( r -Driller: ,- V
DrIg Started: '/ lc (% : %,S a m) Drig Ended: '4.qjQo 1( C - :0: ,m) Borehole dio(s): t'
Drig Method/Rig Type: %AJa Te~ .4 ~7
Logged by:COD r- C4t E- Log ( YtJ from _____to _______ Protection Level: 0]
a Lithologic Description \ s wo e . o ,
;* - o ,dd, --. *
o. N. 0
I Iy 6 - -- IIII II
'.I
4-1I 35/m 4 1 -
04-
u aD This wel it ube Its meck coring Flwa/ Gf4i.MJ
So $09 Op"Off~m) OS Olber ___________ /C Oper.:IC aCottimm Note$:
A-1S
REV. DATE *~ JAN
BORING LOGT BORING/WELL NO.: ,glW, 'Page L-o
Drig Method/Rig Type: H.~ 1/ r 7W.- ~ ________
Logged by: (21 C. =-~ELg(k rm_____ o______ rtcin Level L
I,% a\. 1b6,k
V11 GVV00 0Lithologic Description GAe W k
/V A/I! , j.
-. 1-
'R~ I a
Ur This well lte NRs Rock coting Flw a/Cyeke/me".
$2 Spit a...('ub.) 0os Otbv 6/C Ope'.:
A-17
BORING LOG IBORING/WELL NO.: REV DA 1t~s~ Po E! JA 19
OIg to/ig Type: NIefO . Site:,/. ~ /
Logged by:G.LJ.,, E- Log ( YAj romi to Protection Level: ~
10t9 6 OD tLithologic Description ~.t' ~(A
7V
-14 IA'
A/ .
A6- 1
U' Thm well tbO N a Reck ceting *, c~llom.,S3spoMt ,wpee(,be) 0' a , Oft?_ __ _ __ _ ____ ____ ____ __
-C aCummfa Noes,:
A-IS
REV. OTE: JAN 6e05
BORING LOG I BORING/WELL NO.: OZ&-L.)- , .4,J7 Poge .of
Instollotion: .ice.,bo.ckr- A,--, & 3 1 site: ,,, jl;AProject No.: , °--Client/Project: A//ru-O e.
HAZWRAP Contractor: -. "-,-. Drlq Contractor: %l-.x. e,4rE I Driller: /
Drig Storied: I13o/-0('" :oo A m) Orig Ended: '/o/, 9./90 " ' to "M) Borehole dils): C'Drig Method/Rig Type: I.L .
Logged by: .C. -,- E-Log (Y/O rm _ _ to a " _ Protection Level:
, t ",: Lihologic Description , \- ' (, \ \ "
'A/
U I'0 C . A/ 3
o -4,17/© " '01-A'CJY I- sztal W,
A-it
- I
A-1
qEV. DATE: JAN 1989
BORING LOG BORING/WELL NO.: - ,. Page-W at__ Installation: 1; . . Site:
Project No.. q&#S_.*jb Client/Project: J8~sAZWRAP Contractor: IE_ ,, e Drlq Contractor: 7..64,- 'A:,. Driller: A .. I
DrIg Started. 'I I o/o ( is :Do m ) Drig Ended: i . 90 (i. :.o~xm) Borehole dia(sJ: ,
DrIg Method/Rig Type: Z e ., O '. e I -, o. t 7;,CLogged by:, , * .& . .. E- Log (Y/#4) From to _ Protection Level: 0
Lithologic Description s\ o''-r
, -I- -- -
o .,"I 5
.4-/- -7Xo
,ae
-- 200, A c)00 4
'
I I" 7C- /a'
U S T i yill tb s R s Iqr~ k I sgin ... Field /C #i ,.hi
S, SlIiI ile ew fu e) 0 ' Oflier .... . /C pe.: ..
I C' Cutl sgs N oes: .... ...
A-2O
REV. DATE: JAN 1909
BORING LOG ORING/WELLNO.: -Z - ?, 9 Pooe.. of
installation: . ,, k % . 0,- . 00; site: '..A
Project No..,~ Client/Project: eqq. ,,e
HAZWRAP Controctor: - Driq Contractor!, Z . Driller: o ( /. ,
Drig Started:A -9 rZ (_Ct :&c .0 Mn) Dr1g E ndecd: I t> :ooc AL ~: .m) Borehole dia(s):
Drig Method/Rig Type: iLi 0 vo C-9 7 WLogged by: ,. -,- , E-Log (Y ) "From to Protection Level: j
O SO .. ' Lithologic Description \o ' "
.. .e ,
30
I
I I
I I I30" " -
U 8 hisell____*amck____" Field 6/c Oftbe/siS. Spit so"* (tube) O Other 6/C Ope,.:
c€ C eftln Netes:
A-21
APPENDIX B
MONITRING WELL CONSTUMFON AND DEVELOPMENT LOGS
REV. DATE* Jaw fees
MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION LOG -Standord
WELLmN.S~r: ^j Insalaton Site: Cm.n: Itq -(S:c,..~m
HAZRA Wellacor Cood. oic -f Contrctor
Elev. -- PROTECTIVE CSGHeight_ Moterial/Type
Elev.DiameterEHeigh Depth FIGS... -Weep Hole(Y6
~s ler.GUARD POSTS (GY N)ANo...L...Tp '~ '
DepthBGS 7 A ASURFACE PAD00 0,Composition & Size "' ZLM
0000 00eRISER PME01 00Type _ XT. 1/0 C001 -1 Diameter a
000 00, Total Length(TOCto TOS)
010Composition 6, Proportions 74~' 116 1~~ et
0#4 Tremied (YA&0.0 ntervalBG ass. 1.00 00CNTAIZR (Y/eO000 0000Depth(s)
0000 0.10SEAL
source Z7* f 04 V
Setup/Hydration time b-: VOL FlidA00 Tremied (Y/4)
FILTER PACKTypeAmt Used le 0 Z- Z Z.Tremied (Y J - - -.#.
or. Site Oit. __A
SCREEK
DiameterSlot Sze G, Type a
Interval BKS
mett.m cop (Y/N
solo/Hy.Useo timeTu (Y/NT
0110111111 db.
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOG IWELL NO.: ed-,4J-.4WWI Pae 2 of
Installation: XsIeA66 w* A4 Amdsite: Wf'J AProject No.: 41' P?.203 IClient/Project: 9,A J'JC. £..4jt9
HAZWRAP Contractor: g- ZV, I Dev. Contractor: A,., 'oc_0ev. Start: X/-a./9O (i : V-5 m.n) IDev. End: -9o(l:
0 .m) Csg DiuoDeveloped by: -*i1ks'Aec .o!Dev. Rig (N)
)ev. Method Fir1, ezz~.. /' OLC+ euna a A 2)A L- '
-5r*-Dtv. SWL J'ft-. Mauimum drawdown during pun f~ it at gi
Range and Average discharge rate :29~ ~(7 prctol quantity of material bailed-rotal quantity of water discharged by pumping £
)ispositin of discharge water 'Ie~ea 53*/ rptu.aL d-,m
Time Volume Wate r Turbidity Clarity/ Temp. p H Canduetmviy RemairlsRemoved Level Color OC
___ (gal) f_
___________I
11 :4s -- - - _ _ __W . . 9
IIso - 1a 1 -%0
lWI(- A -
1- - - - --0
REV. DATE: JAM 599
MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION LOG-Standard -Fie
-- Comp. Strt: - e q :3 ... ) Comp.End: 00-4 -o (do:u - AY..m25Built By: -s. fe-U.k A. sc Well Coard.: ~A ~J i
Elew. -. PROTECTIVE CHGmaterial/Type te
HeightDiaetlerEe.Depth 965 Weep Hole C Y/N)
HSegh GUARD POSTS & N ) e j rGS Heigtv . 0 No. 36...... Type 't e.Dept 13G 010SURFACE PAD
Co poi0o0 Size C ' of.r.
0000 000RISER PIPE1.0Type -4~ Q- P VK.00 Diamneter
oe 00Total Lenglh(TOCto TO) /
01*1 GROUTCampositian a Proportions15 ';e'~ - -
1000 000Tremied (YA~interval 365 S5-10
000 CENTRALIZERS (YAP3000, Depth($)
Type ep-,;' i'rSource ' 4* ,Setup/Hydrotia tame &V o"ior Vol. Fluid Added.JiL..Tremied ( Y/O5FILTER PACK
_ _ _TypeU I#C-a
Trentied (YAP - -
Source -r' eCor. site obtf.Aw6M422
SCRED NEU
slot sie a Type e3.interval BOS -
Botto cap (Y/N)
Teemftd If/NBorehl ft.
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOG IWELL NO.: A6- .4 oftJ5 IpaqeL. of -i
nstallation: le. 4 6.ek, - I~'I, Site: 14& 1 4Protect NO.: C.L44,3.03, IClient/Project: kAJ. I/
HAZWRAP Contractor: 6-.3Z- i. 0v otatr:-k lL ~~rDev. Start: CX.L9U Itl :'.m) I0ev. End: a2. 02.2 ( * ) Csg Oso.
Developed by: D ~! ~ ev. Rig (0/ N)
v. Method It.. Fir, a rsg13, W %reji- 1.j42i e, 1 0 14- Q k
uipment -4fIMA-oI$
* - Dtv. SWL . - ' Maimum drawdown during pumping nof at .- 70 gpminge and Average discharge rate xed - Opmtat qjantity of material boiled ________________________
tat quantity of water discharged by pumping IT,soosition of discharge water C ~ ; S~. -. _
Time Volume Water Turbidity Clarity/ Temp. pH Conductivity RemarksRemoved LovelI Color 0 C
(gal) fti.BTOC
7.6o WI G T - -
1_7f4~
'boO - ~J9A0.70-
' Ao I b
REV. DATE: JAM 1969
MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION LOG -Standard
* WELL NO.: , J . Instollation: 69 ~silt:. JProject NozX.:Z#31 Clieint/Project: e4.d'd Z:-l~ , /-. -EI4AZWRAP Contractior: - Z S c . IIDdq Contractor: Z94-07
Comp.Stort: V-3 0 ( q:'~ S...m) ICamp. End: / 0/q? ( 11 :'30- mn)
Bit1y Well Coord.: .- '&- ~ (
V. -- PROTECTIVE CSGHeight_ M erial/Type
Elev.Diameter 'HegtDepth 665 Weep Hole (Y/N)GS Elev.GUARD POSTS, (&YN)
GSHiht-,y 56WAN.~ Type -00.;e/#9eDept SGS000,SURFACE PAD
00 00,Composition a Size t4 ,
0010 RISER PIPE00Type - 500. '00 rc00Diameter ________________________
.000TotalI Lenqth(TOC to TS)-0000 00.0GROUT0010 000composition a proportions "<-Po e3 7i
0,Tremied (YAj J.0000 Interval BGS
00, 0#0Dtpth(s)
Source g: e47 'd r !Aai~Setup/Hydration tune ~ 'Vol Fluid Added..&1miL.
4. . Tremied ( Y4)
FILER PAC.3' ~Type 4
Lint UsedTremied (Y/J-Source - AP.~i.Or. Size Diet. ' V
Type I V oplMoleterSlot Size a TypeInterval 365 S ' '-
_______ ie ( TALlotewol "S
Botm CM (TN)
RUsrebele PLO.
FY[_ OAT[" JAN IGRI19
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOGI WELL NO.: 1Cg.W/j.. -oi L4 I Paqe---- of /
Installoon: c . .A- ,) Site: ,
Project No.: d ./,-2. C I Cimnt/Project: Z - / ... AA-
HAZWRAP Contractor: , - .. , 0ev. Contractor: ,, .r ,,,,.Dev. Start: -,9'0 G La.: 02..m) 0ev. End: -- I90 ( I'- : qI...m) Csg Dio..
Developed by: " - e r . , Dev. Rig ((I( N)
0, -" 7
luipmen i L. 4- V A.-h~A .
e-Dev. SWL 69 -L-S Maximum drowdown during pumn -.'0 f t at .pm
inge and Average discharge role 6.4-3 - *ON 1 - g pm
tOl quantity of material boiled -
tal quantity of water discharged by pumping " . - - '-
soosition of discharge water .1-IL '.L-L - , .6-/, r - r-, -
Time Volume Water Turbidity Clarity/ Temp. pH tonducivily Remarks
Removed Level Color oC
(gal) ft.BTOC
X- S - lG.O 7V
03:00-
I-, - - -- -..
REV. oSTE: JAW $egg
MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION LOG -Standard
WELL NO.: .. ~~ Installation: ke c A Aj G& site:
Project No:L 4 o Client/Project: 70 / 7~~~I4AZWRAP Contractor: £~~rcDrig Contractor: 0 VA-,Je
Comp. Start: - ) j 00.m)l ComP.End: 113 ( 1*4 1. iQ.....m)
Built By: - 1<4.-. ... Well Coord.: ~
Cekw. -PROTECTIVE CSG/Height __ Material/Type
Eo.DiameterHleigh Depth BGS O*).5 - Weep Hole (Y/N)
GS Ele. GUARD POSTS (CON)GS H~eight 0.007F ,6' No _,h..... Type V/'4 Kit /% I
Dept SURAC PA
4 oe 00, Composition00 Oo UFC BA Siz*e4 ' -"c c~f
000, RISER PIPE0010 000 Type Z~cI,.,AC,> v vtCL00 000Diameter .1
0.0 101Total Lenglh(TOC to TOS)
GROUTCornposition & Proportions 1Z Ae. I l 1 A
10*0Tromied MO490.40 ~Interval BSS-- o .c
.101CENTRALIZERS (Y/6~)000 Depth($)
000SEAL
source . fAzrjoeSetvp/Hydrotmn tlime .4.m~In w Vo. Fluid Add.....c.aTremied (Y/e)
M i FILTER PACKType m~e
Amt Used 6?O J, 4V k~Tremied (Y4/ . -
SourceOr. Site Dist. dw in 4'
Type tI ./
Slot Size S, Typo .CI
Iuafervoj 36e-s4
Fooo seift cap (T/ N)
Setup/NY eflh timeTreshil ( Y$
!WELL DEVELOPMENT LOGI WELL NO.: --4.~7 1Page .. L.of
AZWRAP Conrco:g- _Z.qe I0ev. Contractor: -t-.. e1 ~ As A oc.
D 0v. Start: a A('90 : 50 m) I e. End: . / /? ( I : 0 Qk m) ICsg Dio..
Developed by: /, D ev. Rig &Y N)
Dev. Method oat, PrO-c ie
Eouipment e 4 9,r
rre-Dev. SWL*lS Maximum drowdown during pumpi -' ... C...Q .... ft at pRange and Averapge discharge rate / ~.)gpmTot01 oantity of material bailed-Thtal quantity of water discharged by pumping
Disposition of discharge water e.1.IIEi-m . /-
Time Volume Water Turbidity Clarity/ Temp. p1 H Coducivity RemarkisRemoved Level Color
0C
(gal) f t.BTOC
L MISe /0 L5.o 1 6 re" G - 7-
- - 4-t
- ,..S -7Y0r;%
- -* -. -9. -r -T -uC
REV. OATI: JAN 0989
MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION LOG-StandardWELL NO.: ,7 IInstallation: site: , AP~roject No.:,C-Zd i Clisnt/Pfojecl:,,A,)G /.M ,e - '.,.,st - -Lo.-- -
)tAZWRAP Contractor:- jg:.: z7 ..", .O4 otoco: ..j., ' d 1, _7j.4.
-- Comp. Stott: *- IT 0 q-0' (/S: OC.)- m) Comp. En: / B0/90. (/:7 Pm)
Buit By: _I'. . . Well Coord.: 9 - 4J- MLi' I
lev. -. ..... PROTECTIVE CSG
Height Moteriol/Type . colElev.Diameter
Height Depth SGS 4. Weep Hole (Y/N)
GS Etv% GUARD POSTS (& N)GS Height 0.00N a.--3 Type .
Depth
3GSl SURFACE PAD0000 Composition a Size C '- A .
• 0 RISER PIPE• Type cA ,wO P"C
• Dioeler .. _ _ __._010 0Total Length(TOC to TOS) i"
GROUTComposition I Proportions '-' "" ""
'
•00 Tremied (YAMD
000 Intervo S000 CENTRALIZERS (Y/d
• Depthfs).
0000 SEALType ~#?/~'
Setup/Hydration time 0,... Vol. Fluid AddedTremied (Y/N)
FILTER PACKType r/C, OAmt Used /sin .Ar- C-- 4d"Tremied (YD -
Source o "o -" 4' ''
"r. Size Dist. w vn
Diameter ." . .
Slot Size S TypOIntervel BGS *-4- ,
la-er-el -6S 0ttl Cop (Y/ N)
MCIKLL E PLUS
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOG WELL NO.: pAI Pge __L of __
installation: (Z' A J 4r,~ 49site: W&.WsAProject No.: d 4MiSa.o ObIClient/Project: tZkl..sC /.j4AZWRAP Contractor: C.C .Z4~j 0ev. Conttractor: l oc
0ev. Start: a2-9 (O Cq: X 9- M) I0ev. End: !.4, 0 C ~:~.m) Csg OiC.-
Developed by: 37 M.- f Ar.* - 02( ev. Rig 10/N)
'ev. Method Z Pr 4LZje*A ao054P.
7,4I
re-Dev. SWL _________Maximum drawdown during pumping ........So3fn.4....ft 0
longe and Average discharge rate 0-3 - 'O & 4. gpmotal quantity of material boiled -otol quantity of water discharged by pumping 19 -1
lisoosition at discharge water CeIL3e~ Cc .. 0l 04 eVj"
Time Volumne Water Turbidity Clarity/ Temp. P H aonductivity RemarksRemoved Level Color 0 C
(gal) ft.BTOC
qJ:so S-LO "'J ~ .16 1 710
1I ~ FB .14,0 ta-
ia.* 7. C1 CP -
'30: - -
- -:-- 0-
141! Os - ,..
-1-:-0
REV. DATE: JAN 098
MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION LOG - StandardWELL NO.:,t.91 Instalation: 77 ,4.,. 4.~Site: //~aProject Nof1OO Client/Project: e'a &.ree
I4AZWRAP Contractor: F* Drlq Contractor: 71A /vx4~ (Aj4-xc.Comnp.Star I: /,~- q~ 9: 4'Q..m) Comp. End: -/Q / q.,. 0' OQ...M)
Built BY: T 47-. 4 .*'Aro.-Well Coord.: le8 040%j 91~U9
Eley. -~-PROTECTIVE CSGHeight _ Material/Type ~ ~
Ee.Diameter 4
H~eigh Depth BGS - Weep Hole (YIN)
GS Elev. GUARD POSTS & 'N) of ee.IPGS Hegh 0.00'NA... A No..-",It Type 12 tel j&
000 SURFACE PAD
1.0 .0composition a Silte xe?~Z
01, 10Type 94 0 PV'C
0-0 000Diameter00, Oe Total Lenglh(TOC to TOS) %
00, GROUT.. 0composition a proportions '"TI
0, 00Tremied (Y16100 .00Interval BBS __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
000 CENTRALIZERS ( Y/S0000 OeDepth($)
SEAL
source ,'aerxrWxcSetup/Hydration time ~'~ .Vol. Fluid Addd.La...
0.rremied ( Y/6i1
EP FILTER PACKType - %Y C O
0 Amt Used __j2 6 4&qTremied Me~Source -4. £ A srC
or. sise Dist. __ Aw it VC)
Typer ye 0
0 Infervel 1114111
___ *~(Y/gInlervel OSsoft@e* cap (V/N)
Teeae4 IT/Ni
t~44
REw v- JA N jfw nq
WELL DEVELOPMENT LOG IWELL NO.: , - - Paoe . af .Installation: .. ;c..k -., A.J C6 site: -// C-4PrOject NO.: CL'IS -2. 0 ZI Client/Project: / 4)-, 6
g
,AZWRAP Contractor: _4.3 v ctor:." A'./, - rC Ao& -el,Dev. Start: o l: OQ..m) I0ev. End: -211, I 90 ( Q~. Qm) Csg Oia.:Developed by: D ,'Ja ' x f , 4s-,roc. / _. ci 0ev. Rig (/N)
Dev. method N X . 5 I lv ba; I .-
E Q U io m e n t 16 & -*_' o , ' / a .; e L ." * k,-9
Pre-Dev. SWL I 05 Maximum drowdown during pumping . I.. ... ft at 0.10 gpmRange and Average discharge rote ,' / - 0, . . ,.V / 0./ gpmTotal auantity of material boiled 1, , ./
Total quantity of water discharged by pumping -
Disposition of discharge water e , / £,, ;-- ft M16 - I . ,
Time Volume Water Turbidity Clarity/ Temp. J pH Conductwity RemarksRemoved Level Color oC
(gal) ft.BTOC
t! ,o ; I. (3 '. - ,, ,,, "73 ,J'O
O- 121,11 -A 7A/
- 0- ---.- - a7-
,Q. o. IV01, "7.5 9/0
APPENDIX C
HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY TEST
FIELD LO0GS
9WPC/D4%.Oe
IN-SITU PERMEABILITY TESTFIELD LO G
OJECT LOCATION iC-q-4
LL NUMBER ELEVATION ______
TE 1,5 /990
WATUR H-h
STATIC HEAD (H) ol~
SCREEN RADIUS (R) 551 If- - 5t -_n
- - - SCREEN LENGTH (L) 7. Z) c2___.7.Zi-3 9q 7. 1,o~ 7.9,,2 o1003
- 1'0 INITIAL HEAD (Ho) -4-1 A 9- 96 7:9-1
:.i I HYDRAULIC CONDUC11VTY:__ IIj __ _ = -*. I
2LTO -_ _
. . . . .. . .
* 9 ..S.S ..... . .....
I5 I ." I I I .
t I 1 1 0 U_
SIt_, I I I F
* ~ ~~~ 10 I a'.
IN-SITU PERMEABILITY TESTFIELD LO G
OJECT LOCATION________
LLNUMBER ~-6ELEVATION_______
TE ~ ~ ?C
'7 flE eTt4
* STATIC HEAD (H)
C0t-71aUL7 e'SCREEN RADIUS (R) .a -/;y7~t.L.IO.,
t 'g-77F 179
- - SCREEN LENGTH (L) 9 -1 0. ,o 10.3
- t'.0 INITIAL HEAD (Ho) I
~J::E:l I HYDRAUUC CONDUCTVIiY: -__ 1<K=r in(L/R) J.
2LT; s.'o~) _____
. . ... . . . . .
*. . . . . . # -4-4
*~t .7 lot S SS
IN-SITU PERMEABILITY TESTFIELD LO G
IOJECT <fe v- LOCATION ''---
:LL. NUMBER -*4 7ELEVATION --------___
WATL H-h
STATIC HEAD (H) c' -O7Ig.9 ~ o I- 4~
SCREE RADIUS(R
SCREEN LENGTH (L) '___I
- I'-O INfIAL HEAD (Ho) .Z
*HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVTY:
K r In(L/R)1~ ~R 2LTOL W _ _
.. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i t I a IIs I
*~ ~~ A l l * S
I I 111 Bi lil
IN-SITU PERMEABILI TY TESTFIELD LO G
WOJECT Cf9J-?.6-3 LOCATION
ELL NUMBER -e'tELEVATION _______
WATER H-h
STATIC HEAD (H) -74C -~LQ " 1/,?,/ .
- -PIPE RADIUS (r)y .3 0.20 1,-1...l1
SCREEN RADIUS (R) £0-z5 I0- - SCREEN LENG-iH (L)
t-0.. INITIAL HEAD (Ho)
I HYDRAULIC CONDUCTlV~lY:Ii.K=r In(L/R)
R 2LT;VTUK= .. ~1) . I~CoS' ~~~~e
w~ 9.
. .... . . . . . . . . . . .
I t I a
:11k.1 tE I I i ll I ' IA 3 ~ 1I4E qii '
APPENDIXK D
QUALIT ASSURANCE REPORT
unc/mue
APPENDIX D
QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT
This appendix presents a summary and review of quality assurance and quality
control results for the laboratory analysis of water and soil samples collected as part of
the Pre-Closure Sampling of the Hazardous Waste Storage Area during 1990 at
Rickenbacker Air National Guard Base (ANGB) in Columbus, Ohio. The analyses
were performed by Engineering-Science Berkeley Laboratory (ESBL).
The results from ESBL are divided into several data packages. Each data package
is comprised of one or more work orders and includes all the required quality control
documentation. Each package was validated by reviewing holding times, GC/MS
tuning, initial and continuing calibration, blank/spike control samples, surrogate results,
method blanks, matrix spike/spike duplicates and field quality control sample results. If
the criteria were not met in any of these categories, action was taken as specified by the
HAZWRAP validation guidelines. Specific problems will be discussed in this section
along with the action that was taken. Validation notes are included with this Appendix.
Laboratory deliverables will be submitted under separate cover upon request.
The analytical results of the environmental and quality control (OC) samples were
evaluated to assess the representativeness, precision and accuracy, comparability and
completeness of the data.
Representativeness was evaluated from the analytical results of the trip blanks, field
blanks, rinseate blanks, method blanks and field duplicate samples. Analytical results of
the blanks are summarized in Tables D-3 and D-4. Comparison of the analytical results
from duplicate samples are summarized in Tables D-5 and D-6.
Precision and accuracy were evaluated by reviewing the laboratory matrix spike
sample (MS), matrix spike duplicate sample (MSD) and the surrogate spike sample.
This information along with the Case Narratives which discuss specific OC problems, is
included with the data deliverables.
Comparability qualitatively expresses the confidence with which one data set can be
compared with another. Analytical methods were used for this investigation which are
lmo Uc/45416by. 1 /W D4
documented standard methods. Any investigation in the future can use these samemethods to compare the results with this site investigation.
The completeness of the results was determined by the number of valid analysescompared to invalid analyses. This is determined from the results of the data validationprocedure.
D-1 HOLDING TIMES
Soil and water samples were analyzed for volatile organics and semi-volatileorganics by CLP procedures and priority pollutant metals by SW-846 Methods. Holdingtimes were reviewed for these analyses and summarized in Tables D-1 and D-2 for soil
and water samples, respectively.
The sample ID's, date of sampling, date of extraction (if applicable) and date ofanalyses are indicated. The number of days elapsed from sampling to analysis and ifappropriate to extraction, are shown for each analytical procedure. Analyses whichexceed the holding times are marked.
Guidelines for holding times are taken from the HAZWRAP document"Requirements for Quality Control of Analytical Data" DOE/HWP-65/R1. All volatilesorganic analyses and metals analyses were within holding time. For the semi-volatileorganic analyses, one water and one soil were extracted out of holding times. Due toexceeded holding times, the data is flagged as estimated.
D-2 REPRESENTATIVENESS
Representativeness expresses the degree to which sample data represents thecharacteristics of a population. This is determined by the field sampling program. Theanalytical results for the trip blanks, field blanks and rinseate blanks are summarized inTable D-3. The results of the method blanks are summarized in Table D-4.
Field Blanks
A field blank is a sample of the water source used for decontamination. It is placeddirectly from the source bottle into an appropriate sample container. Three types of
NW. 1/5/N D
field blanks were collected during this site work. Samples designated with a "Dr werecollected from the drillers tap water which was transported on site and used as an initialrinse. Samples designated with a "Sr were collected from the site tap water which wasalso used as an initial rinse. Samples designated with a "DI" were collected from bottleddeionized organic-free water. All three types of field blanks show several similarvolatile organics at low levels (5 to 20 ppb). There are also a few metals present atconcentrations much below the MCLs.
Trip Blanks
A trip blank consisted of deionized organic-free water in VOA vials filled by thelaboratory for purposes of traveling with a cooler of samples back to the lab. The tripblanks were only analyzed for volatile organics. With one exception, the only volatileorganics detected in the field blanks were methylene chloride and acetone which arecommon lab contaminants. Since the concentrations are all very close or less than theContract Required Quantitation Limit (CRQL) and, in many cases, were also found inthe associated method blank, it is not felt that their presence is a cause of concern. Thepresence of these compounds indicates a laboratory induced contamination rather thana contamination occurring during shipment. The one exception is 1 ppb of 1,1,1-trichloroethane found in the trip blank identified as RB-HW-TB4. However, no 1,1,1-trichloroethane was found in any associated environment samples.
Rinseate Blanks
Rinseate blanks consisted of deionized organic-free water poured through the
decontaminated bailer, split-spoon, or trowel into sample bottles. Decontaminationsteps were as follows: Liquinox site tap water wash, site tap water rinse, deionized waterrinse, methanol rinse, air dry. Most of these rinseate blanks have some, but not all ofthe volatile organics found in the field blanks. After reviewing the method blank data,all the compounds except chloroform can be eliminated. Metals were also found in therinseate blanks at levels much below the MCLs.
1KMiC/4-319#Rev. 10/2398 D-3
Method Blanks
Method blanks are aliquots of analyte-free water analyzed with a sample batch toidentify contaminants introduced by the preparation or analysis procedure. If acompound found in an environmental sample is also found in the corresponding methodblank, then the result is flagged or footnoted in the results table. For common labcontaminants, if the analyte is less than ten times the concentration in the blank, itshould be regarded as not detected. For compounds which are not common labcontaminants, the factor used is five.
The volatile and semi-volatile organics found in the method blanks are listed inTable D-4. This information was used to validate the results along with the results ofthe field blanks, trip blanks and rinseate blanks. Most of the volatile organic results hadlow levels of common laboratory contaminants. Virtually all these were eliminated afterreviewing their respective associated blank data. Actions taken are summarized in thevalidation notes.
Approximately fifteen soil samples had phthalate levels below the CRQL but abovethe instrument detection limit (IDL) so they were flagged as estimated (J). In general,the associated method blanks did not have any phthalates. However, since they areconsidered common lab contaminants, are found at low levels and there is no reason tosuspect they are actually present at the site, their presence in the samples should beconsidered unlikely.
Most of the preparation blanks for the metals analyses had low levels of one or twoelements. Any concentration of these metals found in the sample within five times theamolnt found in the blank was flagged as estimated (J). See the validation notes fordetails.
Discussion of Blank Results
As mentioned above, there were several volatile organics found in the field blanks.After review of the method blank data, methylene chloride, acetone and 1,1,1-trichloroethylene can be eliminated from the field blanks. However, the field blankscontained several volatile organics whose source is unclear. These are chloroform,
lWDIPC/4s.21 #3y. 1@ /23/ D4
bromoform, bromodichloromethane, and dibromochloromethane. None of thesecompounds were found in the method blanks which indicates that it was not alaboratory-introduced contamination. These were also not found in the trip blanks, sothey were not introduced during transportation. Therefore, these compounds mayactually be present in the source waters.
The other notable fact is that all three types of field blanks have some combinationof these four contaminants. The drillers tap water has all four compounds. This agreeswith the results of a field expedition in the fall of 1989 at other sites at RANGB, wherethe same drillers were used. The site tap water shows everything except bromoform.The deionized water has chloroform in all three samples. Bromodichloromethane isalso in one field blank and benzene is in another. This deionized water is from the samelot used during the field work in the fall of 1989. Chloroform was also found in a fieldblank from that period.
If there is chloroform actually present in the deionized water, it would also show upin the results of the rinseate blanks. Reviewing this data with the method blanks,everything except chloroform can be eliminated. This corresponds to the results of thedeionized water field blanks.
In conclusion, the site tap water and drillers tap water show low levels of three tofour volatile organics. The deionized water contains low levels of chloroform. Since thiswater is used after the tap water in the decontamination process, chloroform should bethe only volatile organic to possibly show up in the environmental samples. Ifchloroform does show up in low levels (within five times the detection limit), the datawill be considered suspect. However, no chloroform was found in the environmentalsamples.
There may be a few metals present in the source water but at such low levels thattheir presence would not affect results of the environmental samples. Cadmium and
mercury were the only metals found in the rinseate blanks that were not in the fieldblanks. This could be due to incomplete decontamination procedures, however, thelevels were very low (about 1 ppb) and it is unlikely this would impact any subsequent
sampling events.
1O9ODPC/46-219#Rev. 10/23/" D-5
Duplicate Samples
Tables D-5 and D-6 summarize the analytical results of the soil and water duplicatesamples, respectively. The relative percent difference (RPD) is calculated for eachcompound that was detected in a given duplicate set. The number of soil and watersamples collected does meet the required frequency of ten percent (10%).
Table D-5 shows that the duplicate semi-volatile and metal results of the soilsamples show good agreement. The volatile organic results do not show as goodagreement. However, this may be due to the volatility of the parameters and theheterogeneous nature of the soil.
One water duplicate set was analyzed for semi-volatile and volatile organics anddissolved metals. The same semi-volatile compound was found in each sample at thesame concentration. Volatile organics were not found in either sample. Four dissolvedmetals were found in each sample of comparable concentrations. The other duplicateset was analyzed for total metals. The results showed more variability than in thedissolved sample set results which is expected. Overall, the duplicate water results wereacceptable.
D-3 PRECISION AND ACCURACY
Precision and accuracy are assessed from the results obtained from the analysis ofmatrix spike and matrix spike duplicate samples and surrogate spiked samples.
Precision
Precision refers to the relative percent difference (RPD) in values obtained from
two duplicate samples, in this case matrix spike duplicate samples. RPD is calculated asfollows:
Relative Percentage Difference - 2 (C1 - C2) x 100
C1 +C2
Where:
C1, C2 = The two values obtained by analyzing duplicate samples
109ODPC/4S-219#l,. 1o/23/9o D4
Acceptable levels of precision vary according to the sample matrix, the specificanalytical method, and the analytical concentration relative to the method detectionlimit. The data is not qualified on the matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSD)results alone. This information is used in conjunction with other criteria to determinethe need for action.
RPDs for volatiles and semi-volatile organic analyses were all within range. SomeRPDs for metal analyses were out of range, but were not considered to be grossly out ofrange. No further action was taken.
Accuracy
Accuracy refers to the correctness of the value obtained from the preparation and
analysis of a sample. It is determined by comparing the analytical results of a givensample and its corresponding matrix spike sample. Surrogate compounds added to eachsample also make it possible to evaluate the analytical accuracy. Accuracy is expressedas percentage recovery and is calculated using the following formula:
Percentage Recovery (PR) = (Ss - SO) x 100
Value:So = Background value, the value obtained by analyzing the sample
before spiking;
S = Concentration corresponding to the spike addition to the sample;and
Ss = Value obtained by analyzing the matrix spike sample with the spikeadded.
The degree of accuracy, or PR, to be expected is dependent upon the sample matrix,specific analytical method, and the concentration of the analyte relative to its detectionlimit. The closer the measured value is to the detection limit, the lower the accuracy ofanalysis. Metals and other inorganic water quality parameters are normally determinedwithin the range of 75 to 125 percent or as specified by Laboratory Control Charts.
The procedures for spike samples to be analyzed by gas chromography methods aredescribed in each respective method. The expeced range for recoveries of eachcompound are also provided in the method descriptions.
1mDC/4.219An. 10/23/ D-7
If quality control results demonstrated an out of control situation for the spikedsample or spiked duplicate sample, a corrective action was taken. This may haveincluded checking the calculations, flagging data in accordance with the proceduresprescribed for the method, recalibration of the instrument, re-extraction, and/or re-analyses of the samples.
In Work Order 1636, two surrogates for the volatile organics for sample RB-HW-AB12-SS7 were out of range. As required, the laboratory reextracted and reanalyzed.The results of the reanalysis had the same problem. This sample also had one internalstandard area out of range. The data from the first analysis was used and flagged asestimated.
In the semi-volatile organic analysis, some PR's of the matrix spike analysis were outof range. In all cases, these PR's were barely out of range (1 to 2 percent outside of therange) and no further action was justified.
In the semi-volatile organic analysis of RB-HW-SU45 and SU46, three internalstandards were out of range for both samples Reanalysis was done and again the samethree standards were out. The data for both samples is considered approximate and wasflagged appropriately (J).
For the metals analysis, several of the data packages had spike recoveries outside ofthe acceptable range of 75 to 125 percent. Associated samples were flagged accordingto HAZWRAP validation guidelines. Spike recoveries for antimony of less than 30percent caused 31 results for that metal to be qualified as invalid (R). See validationnotes for details.
D-4 COMPARABILITY
Comparability qualitatively expresses the confidence with which one data set can becompared with another. The analytical methods used for this investigation aredocumented standard methods. Although CLP methods were not used for the metalsanalysis, CLP-type data packages were received for all analyses. Future investigationsusing the same standard methods can be compared to this investigation.
1ONDPC/4S.219#am. 1 S/23/ D4
D-5 COMPLETENESS
The completeness of the data is the percentage of analyses which are judged to bevalid and is determined by calculating the number of invalid analyses. Invalid analysescan include those analyses which were not performed by the lab or those analyses whichare disqualified due to quality control problems. Thirty-one antimony results wereflagged as invalid due to very low spike recoveries. Since the rest of the metals resultsand all of the volatile and semi-volatile organic results are considered valid, the goal of90 percent completeness was achieved.
1OWDFC/4.21-Re,. i*/23/W D-
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: 'L C C EN iA-C 1-tlELAB: -E U
DATE OF REPORT: l q o
WORK ORDER #: I ( 57
SAMPLE ID: M AV7-C- VJI 1I'-173)ANALYSIS: v -P
PROBLEM AND ACTION: ecmytynC)o U-AW'4'1XV C 5-0 235D1J-
E/ P-;;,I. L kA* 0- , O _ .
WvL b tL,'v s&a/m SOyLt- &5 oa.0 Ua. &£i6t c
L-qob A., A.,L 0--Q ,WORK ORDER #: 1 &5 o7SAMPLE ID: "Kk J-&W/ (E) iA5J)ANALYSIS: V - CIL PPROBLEM AND ACTION: (vmmW&.l'V7 &bO eOtAoV1441A1
l 4 - Lk 5 --
1 9ODPC/D76,-16#
min DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: 1~C4p 1BAOVJLAB: TSZLDATE OF REPORT: I qj)
WORK ORDER#: ((W
SAMPLE ID: Av8I-SSI (l(!30-o1)
ANALYSIS: V -CLp
PROBLEM AND ACTION: ( C O .
-3Y A C~S A 0 VC-,L
WORK ORDER #: la
SAMPLE ID: Pf9I I- .SSZ
ANALYSIS: V--CLF.P
PROBLEM AND ACTION: CVyVVU J , ,,.18oo 18 Ac, I= g oo z
.z4cXc A IS&,0 u'-DJ
m j-x 125
1 O9ODPC/D76n-1 6# REVIEWER:J
DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: 'Rt c. - ' A-C-R.-ELAB: EBDATE OF REPORT: q o
WORK ORDER#: Io30SAMPLE ID: A182"SS 51 30"-039ANALYSIS: V -Cli:
PROBLEM AND ACTION: C t~o7t- LJ, m. *
r7"-8 A 7 LL&-24-Y100 LLIFt2,3 ,I I Troo u."
WORK ORDER#: 1 toSAMPLE ID: A--' 2 - S 2 t I 3o - 4-)
ANALYSIS: V- C.L.o
PROBLEM AND ACTION: CtrvYlt4T tJ 0
4 to A4U=1OLJ-
I 090DPC/D76a-16#
DATE-
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: Ck E?]J3ACK V(
LAB:
DATE OF REPORT: IC?90
WORK ORDER #: l "3
SAMPLE ID: P .5 -SS- C1 ,3o
WORK ORDER #: I (O3 0
ANALYSIS: V -.PROBLEM AND ACTION: C£7fll La.4 CIt.
If A U ,o J
13- 1 g 4
I090DPC/D76a-16# REVIEWER: <f
DATE:
WORK~r~ ORDR# (3
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: tL,41C LETZ,
LAB: SL
DATE OF REPORT: /qlo
WORK ORDER#: 1 (030SAMPLE ID: ft I-s , 1(:, 0 -
ANALYSIS: \) -CU
PROBLEM AND ACTION. (GVWfW L&b (ZYI+.T7. A C, ==:!P 1_ t 2- J
q A 10 -oo
WORK ORDER#: 1 O?'3
SAMPLE ID: A-6:3 -SS I ( IL33# -0
ANALYSIS: V _Caep
PROBLEM AND ACTION: Leib L Cvit.1-7 3- tC- 0 o vcj
109ODPC/D76a-16# REVIEWER:
, .DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: cI(.-E mN c-t'
LAB: -N
DATE OF REPORT: jqcqo
WORK ORDER #: j (,3
WORK ORDER #: ] *3
SAMPLE ID: A-193 _G3 (I14933 -o2z)ANALYSIS: V -CLPPROBLEM AND ACTION: L-a b ( +.
12- D2, A4- D IAR . .C22o - A loo WrF
WORK OR.DER #: 1U&33
SAMPLE ID: A-134- SSI15 ( ~-0 3,)
ANALYSIS: V - CL-PPROBLEM AND ACTION: ech1/fle Yi1-bCt
&-2I A ")
lO9ODPC/D76a-16# REVIEWER..J%.
,DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: CC_.N'-3A C.
LAB: ES L
DATE OF REPORT: lqqD
WORK ORDER#: I (ps3
SAMPLE ID: P e4-SSZ ( I -- O 4-)
ANALYSIS: V &L2tw.
PROBLEM AND ACTION: C h- t "
wo'A
WORK ORDER #: 16*3
SAMPLE ID: P 'Vss I ( I c -(d)
ANALYSIS: V- L
PROBLEM AND ACTION: (MtVKli. kt
,.J- A 100.io L
1D9ODPC/D76a-16# REVIEWER:DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: .- V4 A-rk-EZLAB: 8LDATE OF REPORT: /95D
WORK ORDER #: IL-, 3SAMPLE ID: AS&-SS2 (1 (P33 -0ANALYSIS: -.
PROBLEM AND ACTION: ( n 1'% dL "
± V- f LC:tcoit
WORK ORDER#: 1(033
SAMPLE ID: FAi-7-SSf (h6S3307)ANALYSIS: V C--P--
PROBLEM AND ACION: C 1.dk9 l.&K J
373- A b L.3-S F,3- Ek2 - too Lcr
1090DPC/D76a-16# REVIEWER: j .- )
DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: &kE J L4 -Ck-Ete
LAB: 2-S8-DATE OF REPORT: lqqD
WORK ORDER #: l(o 3 3
SAMPLE ID: .RB7 - 2S 2- C I (oS3 -O08ANALYSIS: V -C? .PROBLEM AND ACTION: (~''VL4- ~4 0 Lt'
2 J A J-i Lu
7 I- /AvL2 eo Lj-
WORK ORDER#: ( 0 3?
SAMPLE ID:A'sl - ( (3n-~ANALYSIS: 'U - C, L?
PROBLEM AND ACTION:Cyiw p J (711
0LS ~- ~ loou-J,
109ODPC/D76a-16# REVIEWER: .5DATE:
r 40e
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: K-EY'1 iA-.. Z
LAB: -13L.
DATE OF REPORT: q 0
WORK ORDER#: I D3
SAMPLE ID: R "- Cuo0 -io)
ANALYSIS: J -CL.?
PROBLEM AN] ACTION:4 t Cn.
13 1 vt. -: -
WORK ORDER#: 16'3 3
SAMLEID A,3 0 SSl 1 1633-)ANALYSIS: V -CL?
PROBLEM AND ACTION: CWW,
2.2 13 AI V -4 -ZU j
q j-A
1090DPC/D76n-16# REVIEWER: JDATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: I"j(C J_€)'3-- IL.
LAB: E--
DATE OF REPORT: JqqC)
WORK ORDER#: I (C33SAMPLE ID: A 0-SS2 (1 U33- I)
ANALYSIS: V - Cj-?
PROBLEM AND ACTION: (j&A/V~~1Lt&J (74kL?14 ( ,v CWTo A 100 UG-T
r7 /n cL iDc)o u-J
WORK ORDER#: .3(G
SAMPLE ID: A'6- 12 SS3 I Ctc3 0 ii)lSANALYSIS: v - CL?
PROBLEM AND ACTION: C vLDATE
C-t3- A jo o u -Y
1 O9ODPC/D76.n-1 6# REVIEWER:DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: jLCN e(IC A- CL-
LAB: S"B -
DATE OF REPORT: l q -
WORK ORDER#: 163&
SAMPLE ID: A612 - Ss7 (1 - 3 ( - c2)
ANALYSIS: V - C1...LA
PROBLEM AND ACTION: (%cl'c~' -eJi -1LtI2.1 "8 /e. - 21 (JIL-4& J- A OO UJ
WORK ORDER#:
SAMPLE ID: E:-- C 3O )
ANALYSIS: V -C-.,
PROBLEM AND ACTION: VWO -J 44JVt,37 AL(-, ==P 37 Lk,j- A loo koo
1090DPC/D76-16# REVIEWER: 3FE
DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: AC .--NS -c..x.'
LAB: C-s BL
DATE OF REPORT: J q
WORK ORDER#: I (-0'
SAMPLE ID: -A- n3 -S ((-7 (to 36 - c4-)ANALYSIS: V -
PROBLEM AND ACTION: CbwtVt 4 jf~9(f--227 73 I_ 2-7 LLQT
7J J A - 100 U-3J
WORK ORDER #: Z-7
SAMPLE ID: VI[4---SS2 1037 -0 i)ANALYSIS: V -CL9
PROBLEM AND ACTION:1300 B " C _, 15- ia. 70
h. e . 114- - /300 t-m - 2oo vC. dJC 12dc I2!
1090DPC/D762-16#REVIEWER: Jet?DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: tCiLE( AC_-
LAB:
DATE OF REPORT: I qqD
WORK ORDER #: ) (c37SAMPLE ID: FYR, 14-SS7 (16c3r-oz)
ANALYSIS: V-CLP
PROBLEM AND ACTION: Cwv
to &JI- o ch--
WORK ORDER#: 16 ( 3 7
SAMPLE ID: D)5 ( I b3g7- 03)
ANALYSIS: V "u-"
PROBLEM AND ACTION: (Ov/1~4U -J If4
s- ,~Z1~ N o CaLCttG)
1090DPC/D76n-16# REVIEWER: J -"3DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE:") ( ClLNZA-c v- zLAB: -, L
DATE OF REPORT: jqq C
WORK ORDER#: (037SAMPLE ID: A-18is3 - SS (I 7-04)ANALYSIS: V -CL-? fPROBLEM AND ACTION: L
(~4o
4-3 l x 43 ur
WORK ORDER #:
SAMPLE ID: A Z15-SS C (N -S-7 - .)
ANALYSIS: V -CA, P
PROBLEM AND ACTION: 9owv yw &' h C ow',/vn.4-2- 9 AC = 42 Lc-s_
43 j -A oo --
4 -1zC - NoodcKY1
,o9ODPC/D7,.16# REVIEWER:
DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE:i? 1 .IJ AcCLAB: E75I3L
DATE OF REPORT: lqqcO
WORK ORDER #: IL37
SAMPLE ID: -)4- Cl )V37 - Ot)ANALYSIS: V -CL?
PROBLEM AND ACTION: ,YVA" k./o--- ( "15 8 t 5- u..2- ; '- A == ) -
WORK ORDER #:
SAMPLE ID: WV X4- -SS (o q-3-0 4A)'VK 4 - SS-
ANALYSIS: (7 LAl,
PROBLEM AND ACTION:
N'1Ei 1p"- IcrL/ I(CT"cr=0 /0 LU'
1090DPC/D76n-16# REVIEWER: UDATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: (c {C hca-LAB: ES3LDATE OF REPORT: [ Q
WORK ORDER#: (04-3SAMPLE ID: fns ii-§4(i(o4, )7) AG II-! S7(I&c43C O))ANALYSIS: V - CLP/
PROBLEM AND ACTION: Q4 L &/A LL
Jy t0 oo uT
WORK ORDER #: ( co 4-SSAMPLE ID: MVU0JSS2 - ( U4OJ ) MW G -SS" (7 C ,45- 02-)
ANALYSIS: V - CLP
PROBLEM AND ACTION: evVl U 4
C 73- 3 3 73 u,-J
/KJ= 100 J 70 J - I s -
109DDPC/D76n-1A6#REVIEWER: JLZDATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: ?/t caWA CiceZQ_LAB: E S13 LDATE OF REPORT: lqqo
WORK ORDER #: 1 (+SAMPLE ID:m 7s 2S I 24-O3) A ),A-Fg3(I( 4 -O-)
ANALYSIS: V -CU?
PROBLEM AND ACTION: (AVyok 4 ~~
- 0q0 -$o
WORK ORDER #:
SAMPLE ID:AVj9-& 2 (6~46 -06) ,1 Suu-q I(N -oQANALYSIS: V -
PROBLEM AND ACTION: 441 (&li.A4t e8 I DO I3 . (o 73 WT& .3
A- S C00 - / j- /Q c,.-
/V L &,c"= 100 uY --
IOODPC/D76a-16# REVIEWER: J1BDATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: eI IL- 5/ C LL tZ
LAB: 5--5L
DATE OF REPORT: /990
WORK ORDER #: & 4s
SAMPLE ID: D(s ( 1045-7) 'D ((4 5-0 )ANALYSIS: V -CL?
PROBLEM AND ACTION:M C, -13 --l 5--uj- q ~--
Ak 3 Z-" 1 2--- -
WORK ORDER#: I (o 42SAMPLEID: PA S 2 ((tC'47-o) - SS3(47oz)
ANALYSIS: V -.C '
PROBLEM AND ACTION: Ci14wt ~ L~A9qC I 1. ---- 12-I 5- (c® G --- D 0 Lk, -
A 7J--- lO ---
A't_.. r7 3---=/ j ,L"
1O9ODPC/D76a-I 6#RVIW:JEi1
DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: (ue-HaA-c"(_.
LAB: C53L
DATE OF REPORT: I qqD
WORK ORDER #:
SAMPLE ID: -S2Q- ,'" )3) - @L os- 04-)
ANALYSIS: v -Ct2
PROBLEM AND ACTION: 00cbV
3S~~' 1cO13l 3j- t tOD ul ----
WORK ORDER#: 1(o 43
SAMPLE ID: l t I - 4 -SS3-o7)ANALYSIS: V -CL?
PROBLEM AND ACTION: iMl ISSk ±Uol- C1
4k. 12(0dTYC& ufCL 1/3/iCD , /50 afla L v-
109ODPC/D76a-16# R
DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
S ITE L K rF-A HV -AN\) &-BLAB: FS ZL
DATE OF REPORT: jqqco
WORK ORDER#: I (o3 (oSAMPLE ID:3-9 -AbIZ-S S-7 C I (v 3&-0 2)
ANALYSIS: V -~APROBLEM AND ACTION: 2. IA o~sa& f
WORK ORDER #: (C&3(pSAMPLE ID: I -VJ~S1((3~-~2
ANALYSIS: ki-Cl?PROBLEM AND ACTION: I}14crn(ol S4adro Aoi-
dcctum es iolc j PLV Ww ice d/Y1 -
becuaj I sLu-AO~jdC2- ~+ cf U/& s.
qC-ri orl:. S i,wL ot bvf
I O9ODPC/ D76a- 16# REVIEWER: lzDATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: __k_-
lAB: L~DATE OF REPORT: qq
WORK ORDER #: I(o2"7
SAMPLE ID: 2UL4c -SS?) ( I Co 2--7 -03 -7)
ANALYSIS: S V -CL?
PROBLEM AND ACTION: /i.Ak-j% &'lLdL-uA/ SV "-pk o0[ - ( Z, 4 - T C.-3 4 r e36
Qxnu4 (3S -1o-7)
Pre-Pr< s
1'fof SD i~s box LL 041 o
WORK ORDER#: I(D 3 OI / -, 1 W43,i(4-%1c0 47
SAMPLE ID:
ANALYSIS: SV -CL?
PROBLEM AND ACTION: _p(L-'.
LD of 3 3k-J- e o C
OYUI,- E o is A 19 L(r--o )
bf &- L "'lA~ -xtCLLbEk" Cu . ua2t 3 ,,, .0
1O9ODPC/D76a-16# ' /9 (7 !1f8
DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: (Ci_?YN13A-'). .
LAB: J-S-1 LDATE OF REPORT: /99 /o
WORK ORDER #: I V57SAMPLE ID: 1(57.,c3 WLUJl &L,)2
ANALYSIS: V / - ,'
PROBLEM AND ACTION: ,,A4 L A CwkhqI .
WORK ORDER#:
SAMPLE ID: 1657. 13 /AVJ 7--)ANALYSIS: V - C L?
PROBLEM AND ACTION: ( Vt-f vt.1&) 4 LY
0 4o S¢o: _,IL
0o9DPC/D76a-16# REVIEWER: J £.9DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: (CI6/ AC C-.
LAB: E5 3 L-
DATE OF REPORT: j q C)
WORK ORDER#: 1 (o
SAMPLE ID:
ANALYSIS: Sv -CLP
PROBLEM AND ACTION: L / p,'L-L--
IVo C--, )o.\f.
WORK ORDER#: 'i'ajZ I (o 3SAMPLE ID: , ))
ANALYSIS: V -CLP
PROBLEM AND ACTION: cH~ J fto lC"/
;503
emfcee cu. akLoq .j L r;&v4A+
109ODPC/D76a-16# REVIEWER: J -
DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: (K AIO
LAB: EcSBL-.DATE OF REPORT: l6Iq C
WORK ORDER#: 57SAMPLE ID: &1U3-"J2. (1 2'27 -02)
ANALYSIS: S V - CL
PROBLEM AND ACTION: 4+ L-1D I W( :r 1-T1 M
S- , _Ut 2- Lp -9. 0 _,jc'JAtr-ackcL Z/)4 lqD I
H/ri t& iA PIJ4 vo/ztr o-k,/ oi
WORK ORDER #:
SAMPLE ID:
ANALYSIS:
PROBLEM AND ACTION:
I09ODPC/D76-16# REVIEWER: - l
DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: (C1 ,
LAB: -S L.
DATE OF REPORT: C? q 0
WORK ORDER#: I (o2"7SAMPLE ID: ZB - KW - S U-2-77
ANALYSIS: SV - C L?
PROBLEM AND ACTION: J{0d"JX,-
?PR o -1,4- -- 3 Lo.,, ur-j, Cs -1 -7)
WORK ORDER#: 1(aZ7SAMPLE ID: S 45 L t 2-7 -Z7 ) u 4 Cf zv-- )ANALYSIS: SV -cuPPROBLEM AND ACTION: CVIA, (LJ SiatCL o c&O Od
r o +k-. -aa~p Lua 7S 4- , 6S a-v 4 Co
i~ r, 0,,,,".' , -..u , CL
109ODPC/D76a-16# REVIEWER:
fl..c DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: ( -F -CL
LAB: e3F L
DATE OF REPORT: 1q 9C
WORK ORDER#: I (o1 (oL 3 (3) 7 I I(cA3
SAMPLE ID:
ANALYSIS: JVLh-(-- CL P
PROBLEM AND ACTION: p'o 1/l- b (ewe L-
~ o-o
WORK ORDER #: ((o2 7I ~ t-o5 1SAMPLE ID:
ANALYSIS: X ,; CLp
PROBLEM AND ACTION: t;p 'w rcL-C) UI OLdL&L 0ic
-75-1252
1O9ODC6-16 REVWER I cui~
DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: K )LL --. CtLE5
LAB:
DATE OF REPORT: tqcro
WORK ORDER#: D(,30J / 33
SAMPLE ID:
ANALYSIS: /Y~~~C-(LPPROBLEM AND ACTION: PAL iA o/ AL-
T- o. oq o.t5 = /.*
L~Pb - L 4- Sa,' "Af ( #o /CAJ~
WORKORDER#:
SAMPLE ID:
ANALYSIS: /YL-u2~-CPROBLEM AND ACTION: LQJc~ k-P, /dUXH
75 -/Z-5ZL/7.3-.7 , 3 7,w) 0o,,,.,,c.ci ---
,-r. ,2,.*9% C(-,-) - ,J,.-O(-) .,,ta_,c,:kCIr)
109ODPC/D76a.16#REVIEWER: L9DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: -ClL T 3A(-X- Q
LAB:
DATE OF REPORT: )qqO
WORK ORDER#. I / 47 S#r:7
SAMPLE ID:
ANALYSIS: KQt-~-(LPPROBLEM AND ACTION:
v .Lt L/LJ kv -
WORK ORDER#: /(D 4 ,/(, 4 o -sSAMPLE ID:
ANALYSIS: ,AJW- LP
PROBLEM AND ACTION: 2t -A5 - /Z
3b / g. a .(4& 7. aj- &) ,,>.,. Ced)k-s 3*-9> cykc 6F) uaSdcc-sL)
P, > < v7. d C,-s (J) ,,,,dj .k L. UJh)
f42. cLkS ACJ)AE
1 mD~C/D76n-1 6#REVIEWER: 5'3
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE:2
LAB: e i -
DATE OF REPORT: J C 9
WORK ORDER#: I'(-O'SSAMPLE ID:
ANALYSIS: , J -L -P
PROBLEM AND ACTION: ,,).kt. ALC' 7 -12 r,
Pb 49. O. ,-. kas m- ~ak u d-4
3D 2o - / 2-ZOsrV -pLP.L c 1 0-1~
WORK ORDER#: I&Z7 Lc-{6SAMPLE ID:
ANALYSIS: i £?'L-e PPROBLEM AND ACTION:
OL 10 J3 5 7SVz/cyrrL 0. I 5 - .7o5
109ODPC/D76a-16# REVIEWER: J C'-DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: 2 C (L-E-I AL VE2
LAB: t:s;L-DATE OF REPORT: q C)
WORK ORDER#: I(27 So UsSAMPLE ID:
ANALYSIS: /YlJ-v.JO
PROBLEM AND ACTION: U'k ,c W & CLL- 7-/2
:2-73. 3 cW LL
73. 2 CT)
WORK ORDER#: i(__.7.I - .33 SoIS
SAMPLE ID:
ANALYSIS: - _
PROBLEM AND ACTION: sp LPIlk 15 .L -2A
-7 . ( -J (- )5 y3. (o () (1 6 j
1O9ODPC/D76a-16#RVIW:DATE:
nfl n
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: C 1( '-,,
LAB: LS~3-DATE OF REPORT: D 9 C
WORK ORDER#: ] o3OC),0D t -. l 0 J5
SAMPLE ID:
ANALYSIS: L - L_
PROBLEM AND ACTION: P--.f
2 5
5ATL
if!akIL #S 1.
WORK ORDER#: /0'4.O /W4.C )C ). tD)I
SAMPLE ID:
ANALYSIS: ,'A t -i-wCPROBLEM AND ACTION: % jaAO&O, j e'J~
109ODPC/D76a-16# RVEE:JiI
DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: (< CC;FLCYL (..1C
LAB: 1 L
DATE OF REPORT: 11
WORK ORDER#: /(G4,/(c 7 /(aoO,/c o'5 4--l IJtoA_
SAMPLE ID:
ANALYSIS: /Y"" & /CP
PROBLEM AND ACTON: P~e~OLJ&V4.plo 2.-r . x = /
~~)..f L0 rI x, -7.0 1/ - 35-
WORK ORDER#: )C 5 (kti0
SAMPLE ID:
ANALYSIS: /LLU - & P
PROBLEM AND ACTION: h LcL.'vl _-T
2b 2.0 E /rY/ . )c, /O j/i~Y~-7.O ~ f~ 5 315
/ 35
109ODPC/D76a-16# REVIEWER: .DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: i (tcic" L AtLE3"
LAB: E FL
DATE OF REPORT: I
WORK ORDER #: 5-7 i i.A o'4-A-
SAMPLE ID:
ANALYSIS:-CLF
PROBLEM AND ACTION: ?rlL1 ) . $ -
A~n, /3. '13 ujp5
WORK ORDER #:
SAMPLE ID:
ANALYSIS:
PROBLEM AND ACTION:
109ODPC/D76a-16# REVIEWER:
DATE:
DATA VALIDATION NOTES
SITE: (&CIC r ALAB:
DATE OF REPORT: 6lZ)
WORK ORDER#: IL-Z.1 -3 &SLI.--
SAMPLE ID:
ANALYSIS: )/LQ - - ( /'
PROBLEM AND ACTION: ?ALjUiCAo- L
WORKORDER#: ((-o27. 3 czR.3 o q tj aSAMPLEID:I
ANALYSIS: -~k CL P
PROBLEM AND ACTION: PAD/ qsc;LcLtov. b LU'v&
Pb .2 -1- #5 L1 IL-
W-n /4, q. 4 L,
1090PC/76a16#REVIEWER: J -399 4.DATE:
0000000000000000
0
000
zJ
ww
0~ >k
w c -w
0 0
wcj~ > 4k
0o
z 1 11 1 1 1 11 1 11 1 11 1 1
Cj) CL C I,
c1 C.) >
CllCl
Fn__
00
w~
1I A 9- 911111A III9 I I IIIAAA A-AA
OD~ 1 1 m ODmm CDO OC D OO DC O DO D0 C OC DCOC DC O DC D
____C CYo ~ ~ o ro :Cfn-df)
-A252 2737 RICKENBACKER AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASE OLUPuS OHIO 3/3PRE-CLOSURE SAMPLING REPORT HAZARDOUS HASTE STORAGEAREA YOLUME 1(U) MARTIN MARIETTA ENERGY SYSTEMS INC OAK
UNCLASSIFIED RIDGE TN MAR 92 DE-ACO5-840R21400 NLIIIhhu-EhII'!
m .. . . m n- a---
IMAGE EVALUATIONh TEST TARGET (MT-3) 4t
4N
iL, 112.IIII 1 0 I II I3_2 112.2
I1111.25 1111 .4 1.6
4:'150mm ,4
" 6"
"// IPHOTOGRAPHIC SCIENCES CORPORATION770 BASKET ROAD
P.O. BOX 338WEBSTER, NEW YORK 14580
(716) 265-1600
0000 0000000000000
00000 000000 0000 00000000I : iaaa i II II II II IIII I 2I1I II III EU I I I I I I
0000 00000000WWW 0000 00000000
0 0000
(n 0000 0000000000000000000
we,) cr -wo om m mo mm o C)GC)D W WW
wl 0 lU) C a.0
O)CC 0000000 00000C0000000000000000000
mmmm mmmw m~o~mmm mmmmmm~mww
COII )wwwo
-00000000000000000000000 00000
0I 4k - I LL00
* ~~~cc
I w
00
IUZ*nc U i I I Q (9 IQ 1 19129 IQ QIQ IIQ R 11RIQM1V11 IQ R1 1 1 R 9I
~coo~ :4
Ii>
*c >
wI I3
z C C C C C ~ CC C C C C C C EIucc9-C)9 QIQRIQ99 QR9 CF 3f V)9S C
CL @U
111 11 1111N1111NN111m0C C4 ,, ctoI% IIy cyc )W )i
'0
00000000 000000000000 00
*0.5)
00
w w0 00000000 000000000000 00
p 0
in .0Q S0 o i
<-.U - .L W W w UWW4UUL4 4UU22* , CJN C) CJCC4NmW z) ~ ~ )111
02
N ,-t N - 0 *
w I1I1I1I 1 I l l I II I I I I I I I i mr wll
I~~~~~- ____ V____ ____ _____ _V__V____ ____ ___V___V_
IL V . Y2c.I < -
Iv0*6 00
U2~C 0 00 0 0 0 0 00000
00 LLo U-WWW WWWU WWWL
0000000 00000
HiL
ww
Cf) z C.)
I p
L~j >
~~~~~ !e~ID y W X(
lo 004 60 00 III 66_ - 0 0
~~0Q~~ U~) 0) 0)0)0 wO0
< >cc ~ 8zJ J' c~c~
I 0,
WHI
Im
000000000000 00000000
InI 0000
CD O~ 0 )0) 0 CDG) 0 (D m
I -J
0 0
Cf~w 00000000000 00000000
3 i 00)~CJ %
0~
Q -i
IIco CO V
LO~-~~= IV c III~~c co11I I
CII SoIIS
Io co o
0000 00 00000 000000
cow Ww w 0NW - M W W
008880880 Cc)IoWOWQI8OO8SQa 00)0000000 8ao 8800-iz LI II II II I II IIII I 1 lIlI I II II I IiIII
0.< I.LLLLLW W nn WL W -L .L U. wLw w w
-~~ . . -. . .- .~ u~i~ '00) C--Yc~ NC)C- C0
U y)co c< :5 g'U
*0
II iiE0~UBUzi808888
wiZLI- LLL..LA iFi IL L LI 1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
I ~ C I$~ rp IP UI I I I I III
0-1
9- q- Q
mmZm m m"mm-~mm m m mccI 4yw~
IM000000I 000000000
< 00000000 00 0 00000000 0000000000
*5 Coo I- 00 m
0 -100 00 0 00 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
oI I I I II IL 11 1 1 1I0l l~
crt -00000000 .00 .0 0.00.00.0.00 0.00.0.000.00.0
C0
Fn 0
ca L 0000000 00 0000000 0000000000OOOO)OMS S- 0i _j I I I.
V- V- VI
to CL 00000 0 0ma0 0 W 0 0 a0 aa0 0
w < -i-q
v 0 t-~ IDsosoosso-N Vwowoow woowuosoosW.
ZERMM0 ER ummucci cca, LU.U L I31111 0 -0000 : 9 : 3
-o 0f-N toIl o Mt ot oI og ococ cI ot og ac o
m x c m i wwmwc xww c wc IU i w Ix Imc
.. ....
IS
'C
U
*~ 00
* wC)i1111 lii li
4k Ilii lii li*w*U 7iIID*>
ccC
lex~x
w E
5- CO. ca
o l 0 cU
I I I I I I IccIv
Im
Ic< cc
0 cr
- Zo w
00C
0 00
a) crc CO
fl<U) 0
cr0
ICL C C3.
I 0 MC)VI~E
CI li I
I22 RRMo ~I EMIT
I ____
Table D-3RICKENBACKER ANGB HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA
RANGB BLANK ANALYSIS RESULTS
SEMI- PRIORITYVOLATILE VOLA71LE POLLUTANT
SAMPLE ID DATE ORGANICS ORGANICS METALSLOCATION SAMPLED CLP CLP CLP
RINSE BLANKS
RB-HW-RB1 18-Jan-90 -- ND Cadmium(2.0 ug/L)B
Copper(6.0 ug/148
Lead(2.3 ug/L)B
Mercury(.11 ug/L)B
Zinc(8.0 ug/L)B
RB-HW-RB2 22-Jan-90 Methytene Chloride ND Copper(8 ugIlL) B (13.0 ugIL) B
Chloroform Lead(2 ugIL)J (14.8 ugIL)
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane Zinc(4 ug/L)J (17.0 ug/L) B
RB-HW-RB4 24-Jan-90 Methylene Chloride ND Lead(10 ug/L) B (3.0 ugAL)Acetone Mercury(8 ugIL)J (.29 ugh..)
Chloroform Zinc(3 ug/L) (20.0 ug/)
1, 1,1 -Tnch loroethane(1 ugIL)J
RB-HW-RB5 25-Jan-90 Methylene-Chloride- -
(14 ugA.)BChloroform(3 ug/L)J
1,1,1 -Tnchloroethane(1ugL
RB-HW-RB7 29-Jan-90 Methytene-Chloride -- Lead(9 ugIL)B (2.8 ug/L)BAcetone Seleniumn
(13 ugAL)J- ZincChloroformn (7.0 ugAL)B(2 ug/L)
I Table D-3RICKENBACKER ANGB HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA
RANGB BLANK ANALYSIS RESULTS
SEMI- PRIORITYVOLAILE VOLAILE POLLUTANTISAMPLE ID DATE ORGANICS ORGANICS METALS
LOCATION SAMPLED CLP CLP CLPR-HW-RB6 26-Jaii-90 Methylene Chloride -- Lead
(11 ug/1.)B (2.6 ug/L.)BAcetone ZincI '6 ug/L)J (8.0 ugIL)B
Chloroform(2 ug/L)J
RB- HW-RB8 30-Jan-90 MethyleneChloride ND Lead(13 ug/L)B (3.2 ugIL)Acetone ZincI(14 ugIL)J (9.0 ugIL)B
Chloroform(2 ug/L)JI RB-HW-RB9 31 -Jan -90 Methylene Chloride ND Lead
(12 ugIL)B (5.5 ugIL)Chloroform Mercury(2 ug/L)J (.23 ug/L)
I (8.0 ug/L)BI RB-HW-RB1.2 09-Feb-90 Methylene ChlorideNDLa
RB-HW-RB1O 06-Feb-90NDCpe
(7.0 ug/L)BI RB-HW-RB11 06-Feb-90 ND -- Zinc(4 ugAL)B
Lead* (3.3 ug/L)
* RB-HW-RB13 16-Feb-90 Acetone ND Lead(10 ugjL)J (2.1 ug/L)B
Zinc(4 ug/L)B
RB-HW-RBl3 Filtered -Lied
I (2.3 ug/L)B
1 (7.0 ugULB
Table D-3RICKENBACKER ANGB HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA
RANGB BLANK ANALYSIS RESULTS
SEMI- PRIORITYVOLATILE VOLATILE POLLUTANT
SAMPLE ID DATE ORGANICS ORGANICS METALSLOCATION SAMPLED CLP CLP CLP
FIELD BLANKS
RB-HW-FB1 Dl 18-Jan-90 -- ND Copper(7.0 ugIL)B
Lead(2.5 ug/L)B
Thallium(.90 ugIL)B
Zinc(17.0 ug/L)B
RB-HW-FB2ST 18-Jan-90 -- ND Arsenic(2.4 ugAl.)B
Copper(9.0 ug/L)B
Zinc(13.0 ug/L) B
Lead(5.8 ug/L)Thallium
(1.5 ug/)BWRB-HW-FB3 DT 22-Jan-90 Chloroform ND Copper
(4 ugIL)J (10.0 ugIL)B1,1,1 -Trichloroethane Lead
(9 ug/L) (3.1 ug/L)Bromodichloromethane Zinc
(9 ug/L) (274. ug/h)Dibromochioromethane
(14 ugIL)Bromoform
(7 ugL)RB-HW-FB4 DI 22-Feb-90 Methylene Chloride ND Lead
(15 ug/L) B (2.8 ug/)BAcetone Zinc
(16 ug/L)J (20.0 ug/L)Chiortorm(4 ug/L)J
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane(7 ug/L)
Brornodichioromethane(9 ug&)
Table D-3RICKENBACKER ANGB HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA
RANG13 BLANK ANALYSIS RESULTS
SEMI- PRIORITYVOLAILE VOLATILE POLLUTANT
SAMPLE ID DATE ORGANICS ORGANICS METALSLOCATION SAMPLED CLP CLP CLP
RB-HW-FB5 Dl 29-Jan-90 Methylene Chloride -- Arsenic(11 ug/L)B (1.6 ug/L)BAcetone LeadI(15 ugIL)J (2.5 ugIL)B
Chiorform(2 ugIL)J
RB-HW-FB6 DT 29-Jan-90 Acetone -- Arsenic(5 ugIL)J (1.5 ugIL)B
Chloroform CopperU(3 ugIL)J (9.0 ug/L)BBromodichloromethane Lead
(8 ugIL) (15.4 ugIL)Dibromochloromethane Zinc
(11 ug/L) (391. ug/L)BBromoformI (5 ugIL)J
RB -HW- FB7 ST 06-Feb-90 Chloroform ND Arsenic(13 ug/L) (1.5 ug/L)BIBromodichloromethane Copper(7 ugiL) (23.0 ug/L)B
Dibromochioromethane LeadI(4 ugIL)J (4.3 ugA.)Zinc
* (19.0 ugIL)B* RB-HW-FBB Dl 06-Feb-90 Methylene Chloride ND Lead
(21 u~gI) (3.6 ug/L)Chloroform ZincI(6 ug/L) (8 ug/L)B
1,1,1 -Tnichloroethane(2 ug/L)JBenzene(2 ugLLJ
Ifr
Table D-3RICKENBACKER ANGB HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA
RANGB BLANK ANALYSIS RESULTS
SEMI- PRIORITYVOLATILE VOLAILE POLLUTANT
SAMPLE ID DATE ORGANICS ORGANICS METALSLOCATION SAMPLED CLP CLP CLP
RB-HW-FB10 ST 16-Feb-90 Methylene Chloride ND Arsenic(4 ug/L)J (1.6 ugIL)B
Chloroform Copper3(11 ug/L) (14 ug/L) B1 ,1,1 -Tdchloroethane Lead
(8 ug/h) (4.7 ug/L)Bromodichloromethane ZincI (5 ugiL) (17 ugAl.) BDibromochloromethane
(3 ug/L)JRB-HW-FB9 16-Feb-90 -- ND Lead
(2.4 ug/L)I Zinc(9.0 ua/L)B
Table D-3RICKENBACKER ANGB HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA
RANGB BLANK ANALYSIS RESULTS
SEMI- PRIORITYVOLAILE VOLATILE POLLUTANT
SAMPLE ID DATE ORGANICS ORGANICS METALSLOCATION SAMPLED CLP CLP CLP
TRIP BLANKS
I RB-HW-TB3 24-Jan-90 Methylene Chloride
I1_jlIRB- HW-TB4 24-Jan-90 Methytene Chloride
(22 ugIL) BAcetone
(15 ug/L)J* RB-HW-TB6 29-Jan-90 Methylene Chloride
3 (92 ug/L)B
*(268ug/LBJ* ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,, RBH-B 0-a-0 MTyneChlorde -- -
(13 ug/L)B* RB-HW-TB8 31-Jan-90 MethyleneChloride
*(16 ugIL)B
U (18 ug/L)J* RB-HW-TB13 0-Feb-90 Methytene Chloride --
(63 ugiL)B3 RB-HW-T8 09 -Feb - 90 Methylene Chloride- -
* (8 ug/L)JRB-HW-TB13 16-Feb-90 Methylene Chloride --
RB-HW-TB14 16-Feb-90 MehnD Chlorid
(1I~g.I jBFWT1 1-e-0N
U TABLE D-4RICKENBACKER AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASEI HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA
METHOD BLANK TESTING
METHOD BLANK DATE COMPOUNDS SAMPLESK ID NUMBER ANALYZED IMETHODI DETECTED ASSOCIATEDMWVM1 0900210A4 10-Feb-90 VOC METHYLENE HtB-FW-TB9
CHLORIDE RB-HW-MW3-GW2(5ug/L)J RB-HW-MW1 -GW2
RB-HW-MW4-GW1RB-HW- FB7
I MWVM190212A 12-Feb-90 VOC METHYLENE RB-HW-MW2-GW2CHLORIDE R13-HW-MW6-GW1(4ugIL)J RB- HW- MW7-GW1
RB-HW-MW8-GW1RB-HW-FB8RB-HW-RB10RB-HW-TBIO
I MWVM1900213A 13-Feb-90 VOC METHYLENE RB-HW-MW2-GW2MSCHLORIDE RB-KW-MW2-GW2MSD(6ug/L) RB- HW-TBl2I RB-HW-D9
RB- HW-TBI IRB-HW-RB1 1I RB-HW-MW1 -GW2RB-HW-D8
I MWVM1900222A 22-Feb-90 VOC METHYLENE RB-HW-MW9-GWICHLORIDE RB-HW-FB10(5ugIL)J RB- HW-TBI 4U RB-KW-RB13
RB- HW- FB93 RB-HW-TBI5
MWBNA900212 13-Feb-90 SVOC - RB-H-MW4-GW1RB-HIW- D8MS;RB- HW- D8MSDRB-HlW-MW1 -GW2RB- HW- FB7RB-HfW-FB8RB-HW-RB10I RB-HW-MW2-GW2R8-HW-MWB-GW1RB- HW- MW7-GWi3 RB-HW-RBI I
I TABLE D-4RICKENBACKER AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASEI HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA
METHOD BLANK TESING
METHOD BLANK DATE COMPOUNDS SAMPLES* MID NUMBER ANALYZED METHOD DETECTED ASCAE
MWBNA900213 14-Feb-90 SVOC -- RB-HW-MW3-GWF2RB-HW-D9
I MWBNA900221 21-Feb-90 SVOC -- RB-HW-FB9RB-HW-RB13RB-HW-MW9-GW1
RB-HW-FB1O
I MWBNA900124B 24-Jan-90 SVOC -- RB- HW- FB3RB- HW- FB4
RB-HW-FB2MSBNA900125A 25-Jan-90 SVOC -- RB- HW-SU27MS
RB- HW-AB2-SS2I RB-HW-AB1 -SS1RB-HW-AB1 -SS2RB-HW-AB2-SSII RB-HW-AB2-SS2RB-HW-AB5-SS2RB-HW-AB8-SS1I RB- HW-AB8-SS2SPIKE- BLANKRB- HW-AB3-SSII RB-HW-AB3-SS2RB- I{-AB4-SS1RB- HW-AB4-SS2IBH-I3-~RB- HW-AB6-SS1RB-HW-ABO-SSI
RB- KW-AB7-SS2
TABLE D-4RICKENBACKER AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASEI HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA
METHOD BLANK TESING
MEHDBAK DTIOPUD APEI ID NUMBER ANALYZED METHOD DETECTED ASSOCIATED
IRB-HWS2RB -HW-ASS
RB- HW-AB1 -SS1IBH-B-SRB- HW-AB1 0-SS2RB- HW-AB1 2-SS3I RB-HW-AB12-5S7RB-HW-ABI 5-SS3RB-HW-AB1 5-888I RB- HW-AB1 4-SS2RB-HW-AB1 4-SS7
RB-HW-D5I RB- HW-AB1 5-SS3
MSBNA900130 30-Jan-90 SVOC -- RB-HW-FB5IBH-BRB- HW- FB6RB-HW-FB6RB-HW-FB6
* MSBNA900131 31 -Jan-90 SVOC -- RB-HW-MW4-SS2I RB- HW- MW4-SS3
RB-HW-AB1 1 -887RB- HW-ABI 1 -SS4RB-HW-ABI11-SS4MSRB- HW-AB 1 -SS4MSDRB-HW-MW6-SS2RB- HW- MW6-S83RB-HW-MW7-SS2RB-HW-MW7-SS3
RB-HW-MW8-SS2RB- HW- MW8-S83I RB-HW-D6RB-HW-D7
i RB- HW-AB5-SS11 MWBNA900201 05-Jan-90 SVOC bis(2-ETHVLHEXYL) RB-HW-RB8
PHTHALATE RB- HW- RB9MI
I TABLE D-4RICKENBACKER AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASEI HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA
METHOD BLANK TESING
METHOD BLANK DATE COMPOUNDS SAMPLESK ID NUMBER ANALYZED METHOD DETECTED ASSOCIATEDMWBNA9002O9 12-Feb-90 SVOC -- RB- KB- SU49- SS3-
RB-HB-SB4-SS1RB- HB- MW5- SS2
RB-HB-MW5-SS3
I MWBNA900216 16-Feb-90 SVOC -- RB-HW-RB12
MSBNA900220 21-Feb-90 SVOC -- RB-HW-MW9-SS2RB-HW-MW9-SS3
MSBNA900119A 19-Jan-90 SVOC -- RB-HW-SV27RB-HW-SV28RB-FIW-SV23RB- HW- SV26RB-HW-SV19RB- HW-S5V30SPIKE BLANKU RB- HW-SV29RB-FIW-SV22RB- HW-SV24I RB- HW-SV31RB-FIW-SV32
I MSBNA900122A 22-Jan-90 SVOC -- RB-HW-SV37RB- HW-SV43RB- HW- SV42I RB-FHW- SV20RB- HW-SV34RB-FHW- SV35RB- HW-SV36RB-HW-SV38RB-FIW-SV39RB-FIW-SV40RB-IHW-SV44I RB- HW- V45RkB-IfW-8V45RB-HW-SV47
RB- HW-S8V48RB-KW-D1I RB-HW-D2RB-R*-D3
U TABLE D-4RICKENBACKER AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASEI HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA
METHOD BLANK TESTING
METHOD BLANK DATE COMPOUNDS SAMPLES* MID NUMBER ANALYZED METHOD DETECTED ASCAE
MSBNA90012-5A 25-Jan-90 SVOC -- RB-HW-SU27MSRB- HW-SU27MSDRB- HW-S5U21
MWBNA900123 23-Jan-90 SVOC DIETHYPHTHALATE SPIKE BLANK(15ug/L) SPIKE BLANKBIBH-B
RB- HW- FBIRB- HW- RBI
MSVM2900125A 25-Jan-90 VOC METHYLENE RB-HW-AB5-SS1CHLORIDE RB-HW-AB5- SS2(lOug/L) RB-HW-AB8-SS1ACETONE RB-HW-AB8-SS2(lOug/L)J RB- HW-AB1 - SS12- BUTANONE(6ug/L)JI 4- METHYL-2- PENTANONE(3ug/L)JTETRACHLOLOETHENE(lugIL)JTOLUENE(lugIL)JI ETHYLBENZENE(Iug/L)J
I MWVM1900126A 26-Jan-90 VOC METHYLENE RB-HW-FB,3CHLORIDE RB-HW-FB4(8uaJL) RB-K-W-RB2ACETONE RB-HW-TBI(24ug/L)J RB-MH-TB2
RB-HW-AB1 -8821,1,1 -TRICHLOROETHANE(4ug/L)J
- MSVM2900128A 26-Jan-90 VOC METHYLENE RB-lHW-AI32-SS1CHLORIDE RB3-IrW--A82-882(4uWWLJ RB-MH-AB6-S81ACETONE RB-HW-ABS- 882(3u9/LJ2- BUTANONE
(W
I-t
U TABLE D-4RICKENBACKER AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASEI HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREA
METHOD BLANK TESTING
METHOD BLANK DATE COMPOUNDS SAMPLES* MID NUMBER ANALYZED METHOD DETECTED ASCAE
MWVM1900127A 27-Jan-90 VOC METHYLENE= RU-HW--Rff4-CHLORIDE RB-HW-TB3(l0ug/L) RB-HW-RB5ACETONE RB-HW-TB4(8ugIL)J
I MSVM2900129A 08-Feb-90 VOC METHYLENE RB-HW-AB4-SS1CHLORIDE RB-HW-AB4-SS2
* (lOug/L)ACETONE(21 ugIL)J2- BUTANONE(5ug/L)JTOLUENE3 (1ug/L)J
* MSVM 1900130A 30-Jan-90 VOC METHYLENE RB-HW-AB13-SS7*CHLORIDE RB-HW-AB13-S5
(7ugIL) RB- HW-ABI 2-SS7ACETONE RB-HW-ABI2-SS3I (25ugIL)J RB-HW-AB1 4-SS7
RB-HW-D5
I MSVM2900130A 30-Jan-90 VOC, METHYLENE RB-HW-AB7-SSICHLORIDE RB- HW-AB7-S82(8ugIL) RB3-HW-AB9-S581I ACETONE RB- HW-AB9- 852(leug/L)J RB-HW-AB3-SSl3 2- BUTANONE(4ug/L)J
3 MSVM1900131A 31 -Jan-90 VOC METHYLENE RB-HW-ABI2-SS7CHLORIDE RB-HW-AB1 5-S88(Sug/L) RB-HW-1343 ACETONE RB- HW-A812-SS7B
(IIL
TABLE D-4RICKENBACKER AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASE
HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREAMETHOD BLANK TESTING
METHOD BLANK DATE COMPOUNDS SAMPLESID NUMBER ANALYZED METHOD DETECTED ASSOCIATED
VSVM900131A 31 -Jan -90 VC METHYLENE RB-HW-AB4-SSICHLORIDE RB- HW-ABI 0-SSI(8ug/L) RB- HW-AB1 0-SS2ACETONE RB-HW-AB3-SS2(l OugIL)J RB-HW-MW4-SS22- BUTANONE(4ugIL)J
MWV1900201A 01 -Feb -90 VOC METHYLENE RB-HW-FB5CHLORIDE RB-HW-FB6(11lugL) RB-HW-TB6ACETONE RB-HW-RB7(21 ug/L)J RB- HW-TB5
RB- HW- RB6RB-HW-RB8RB- HW-TB7RB- HW- RB9RB- HW-TB8
MSV2900201A 01 -Feb-90 VOC METHYLENE RB- HW- MW4-SS3CHLORIDE RB-HW-AB1 1(lOugIL) RB-HW-D7ACETONE RB-HW-MW8-SS3(11 lug/L)J RB-HW-MW8-SS22- BUTANONE RB-FHW- MW7-SS3(5ug/L)J
MSVM2900202A 02-Feb-90 VOC METHYLENE RB-HW-MW6-SS2CHLORIDE RB- HW-MW6-SS3(l9ug/L)ACETONE(7ug/L)J2- BLTANONE(4ug/L)J2- HEXANONE2uo/LJ
TABLE D-4RICKENBACKER AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASE
HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AREAMETHOD BLANK TESING
METHOD BLANK DATE COMPOUNDS SAMPLESID NUMBER ANALYZED METHOD DETECTED ASSOCIATED
MSVM1900205A 05-Feb-90 VOC METHYLENE RB-HW-A514-S52CHLORIDE RB-HW-MW5-SS3(1 200Ag/L) RB- HW- D61 30
RB- HW- D6MSRB-HW-D6MSDRB-HW-MW7-SS2
MSVM2900205A 05-Feb-90 VOC METHYLENE RB-HW-MW6-SS3CHLORIDE RB-HW- MW5-SS2(9ug/L) RB-HW-AB15-SS3ACETONE(6ugIL)J2-BUTANONE(6ug/L)J
MSVM2900208A 08-Feb-90 VOC METHYLENE RB-HW-AB1 1 -SS4CHLORIDE RB-HW-AB1 1-SS4MS(7ug/L) RB-HW-AB1 1-SS4MSDACETONE RB-HW-06(4ug/L)J
MWVM1900214A 14-Feb-90 VOC -- RB-HW-TB13RB-HW-RB12
MWVM2900215A 15-Feb-90 VOC METHYLENE RB-HW-MW9-SS2CHLORIDE RB- HW- MW9-SS3(5ug/L)J2- BUTANONE(6ug/L)JVINYL ACETATE(1 ug/L)J2- HEXANONE(lug/L)J4-METHYL- PENTANONE(2ug/L)JTOLUENEO&W.L)
Table D-5RICKENBACKER ANGB HAZARDOUS
WASTE STORAGE AREASOIL DUPLICATE COMPARISON
DUPLICATE SOIL SAMPLES-- RB-HW-D1 RB-HW-SU281 RPD]Volatile Organics:Vinyl Chloride --
Methylene -Chloride------Acetone------Thichlorofluoromethane-- -
1, 1 - Dich loroethane------trans-i ,2-Dichloroethene- ----
2- Butanone------Trichloroethene------Benzene----Toluene------Ethylbenzene------mlp-Xylene--- --
o-Xylene------
Semi -Volatile Organics:Fluoranthene 170 J < 42D 67Pyrene 190J1 < 420 67Benzo(b) Fluoranthene 160 J < 420 67Diethylphthalate < 410 < 42DChrysene < 410 < 420Benzo(a) Pyrene < 410 < 420
Metals:Antimony - -----
Arsenic------Berylium------Cadmium------Chromium------Copper------Lead GF------Lead ICP------Mercury------Nickel------Selenium------silver------Thallium------Zinc------
fl-46
Table D-5RICKENBACKER ANGB HAZARDOUS
WASTE STORAGE AREASOIL DUPLICATE COMPARISON
DUPLICATE SOIL SAMPLES RB-HW-D2 'RB-HW-SU41 RPDVolatile Organics:
Vinyl ChlorideMethylene ChlorideAcetoneTrichiorofluoromethane1, 1- Dich loroethanetrans- 1,2-Dichloroethene - --
2- ButanoneTrichloroetheneBenzeneTolueneEthylbenzenern/p -Xylene
o-Xylene
Semi-Volatile Organics:Fluoranthene < 410 330 J 47Pyrene 130 J < 300 14Benizo(b)Fluoranthene < 410<42Diethylphthalate < 410 240 J 16Chrysene < 410 200 J 2Benzo(a) Pyrene < 410 170 J 19
Metals:Antimony-- ---
Arsenic --
BeryliumCadmium--- --
Chromium------Copper------Lead GF - --
Lad ICP - --
Mercury------Nickel------
Thallim---Zinc-----
Table D-5RICKENBACKER ANGB HAZARDOUS
WASTE STORAGE AREASOIL DUPUCATE COMPARISON
DUPLICATE SOIL SAMPLES RB-HW-D3 RB-HW-SU42 RPDVolatile Organics:Vinyl ChlorideMethylene ChlorideAcetoneTrichlorofluoromethane1,1 -Dichloroethanetrans- 1,2-Dichloroethene .....2-ButanoneTrichloroethene ......BenzeneTolueneEthylbenzene ......m/p-Xylene ......o-Xylene ......
Semi-Volatile Organics:Fluoranthene < 410 160 J 25Pyrene 200 J 190 J 5Benzo(b)Fluoranthene 240 J < 440 46Diethylphthalate 200 J < 440 29Chrysene < 410 < 440 200Benzo(a)Pyrene < 410 < 440 200
Metals:Antimony ......Arsenic ......Berylium ......Cadmium ......Chromium ...Copper ......Lead GF ......Lead ICP ......Mercury ......Nickel ......Selenium ......Silver ......Thallium ......Zic-
rl -'4
Table D- 5RICKENBACKER ANGB HAZARDOUS
WASTE STORAGE AREASOIL DUPUICATE COMPARISON
DUPUICATE SOIL SAMPLES RB-HW-D4 RB-HW-AB15-SS8 RPD)Volatile Organics:
Vinyl Chloride <11i1Methylene Chloride 15 B 42 J 95Acetone 28 J 43 J 42Trichlorofluoromethane < 11 < 111,1 - Dichloroethane < 6 < 6trans-i ,2-Dichloroethene 9 < 62-Butanone < 115 <1II1Trichioroethene 250 D 4 J 194Benzene < 6 < 6Toluene < 6 < 6Ethylbenzene < 6 < 6rn/p -Xylene < 6 < 6o-Xylene < 6 < 6
Semi-Volatile Organics:Fluoranthene < 380 < 370Pyrene < 380 < 370Benzo(b) Fluoranthene < 380 < 370Diethylphthalate < 380 < 370Chrysene < 380 < 370Benzo(a) Pyrene < 380 < 370
Metals:Antimony 2.8 UN 2.6 UN 7Arsenic 13.4 14.5 8Berylium 0.49 0.72 38Cadmium 0.28 B 0.13 B 73Chromium 13.6 18.4 30Copper 22.4 N 19.9 N 12Lead GF----Lead lop 22.2 N* 13.2 N* 51Mercury 0.057 U 0.16 95Nickel 27.4 30.3 10
Seeim0.36 0.31 1s
Thallium 0.35 UNW 0.094 UNW 115Zinc 91.1IN 68.8 N 28
Table D-5RICKENBACKER ANGB HAZARDOUS
WASTE STORAGE AREASOIL DUPUICATE COMPARISON
DUPLICATE SOIL SAMPLES__ RB- HW-D5 RB-HW-AB14-ss7T RPDVolatile Organics:
Vinyl Chloride < 12 < 11Methylene Chloride 1013 8J 22Acetone 27 J 18.1 40Trichlorofluoromethane < 12 < 111, 1 - Dich loroethane < 6 < 6trans-i 1,2- Dichloroethene < 6 < 62-Butanone < 116 < 111Trichioroethene IJ < 6 100Benzene 5 J 6 18Toluene 8 < 6 91Ethylbenzene < 6 < 6rn/p -Xylene < 6 < 6o-Xylene < 6 < 6
Semi -Volatile Organics:Fluoranthene < 380 < 370Pyrene < 380 < 370Benzo(b) Fluoranthene < 380 < 370Diethylphthalate < 380 < 370Chrysene < 380 < 370Benzo(a)Pyrene < 380 < 370
Metals:Antimony 3.1 UN 3.2 UN 3Arsenic 10.6 B 61.2 141Berylium 0.46 0.32B 36Cadmium 0.15 0.16 B 6Chromium 11.7 9.4 22Copper 19.9 N 46 N 79Lead GF 14.6 N* 22.9 44Lead ICP----Mercury 0.09 0.055 48Nickel 22 15.3 36Selenium 0.28 0.6 73SilverThallium o.ii UINW 0.09 UNW 2DZinc 66.1 -N 73.6 N 11
Table D-5RICKENBACKER ANGB HAZARDOUS
WASTE STORAGE AREASOIL DUPLICATE COMPARISON
DUPLICATE SOIL SAMPLES RBH-D6 R HW-MW6-55S3 F RPDVolatile Organics:
Vinyl Chloride < 11 59MethyleneChloride 4 JB 31 B 154Acetone 3 J 7 J 80Trich lorofluoromethane <11 < 111,1 -Dichloroethane < 6 < 6trans- 1,2-Dichloroethene < 6 1000 D 1992-Butanone < 115 7 J 157Trichloroethene < 6 40 172Benzene < 6 < 6Toluene < 6 1J1 100Ethylbenzene < 6 < 6m/p-Xylene < 6 < 6o-Xylene < 6 < 6
Semi-Volatile Organics:Fluoranthene < 380 < 380Pyrene < 380 < 380Benzo(b) Fluoranthene < 380 < 380Diethylphthalate < 380 < 380Chrysene < 380 < 380Benzo(a) Pyrene < 380 < 380
Metals:Antimony 4 UN 3.9 UN 3Arsenic 11.1 ISS 11.3 N 2Berylium 0.6 4.9 156Cadmium 0.7 0.2 B i11Chromium 17.3 14.5 18Copper 19.5* 21.6* 10Lead GF 9.6 N 15.1 ISS 45Lead lOP----Mercury 0.058 0.057 U 2Nickcel 24.5 28.5 15Selenium 0.47 N+ 0.98 INS, 70Silver 0.66 U 0.65 U 2Thallium 0.075 U 0.078 UW 4Zinc 73.9 72.8 1
Table D-5RICKENBACKER ANGB HAZARDOUS
WASTE STORAGE AREASOIL DUPLICATE COMPARISON
DUPLICATE SOIL SAMPLES I RB-HW-D7 RB-HW-MW7-SS3 1 RPDVolatile Organ ics:Vinyl Chloride < 13 < 13Methylene Chloride 9 B 8 B 12Acetone 22J19J 15Trichlorofluoromethane 11 < 131, 1- Dich loroethane I1J < 6trans-i ,2-Dichloroethene 2 J < 6 402-Butanone 9J1 3 J 1ooTrichloroethene, 8 < 6 91Benzene 76 140 59Toluene < 6 4 J 29Ethylbenzene 6 J < 6 67rn/p -Xylene 8 < 6 91o-Xylene 10 < 6 108
Semi -Volatile Organics:Fluoranthene < 470 < 410Pyrene < 470 < 410Benzo(b) Fluoranthene < 470 < 410Diethylphthalate < 470 < 410Chrysene < 470 < 410Benzo(a) Pyrene < 470 < 410
Metals:AntimonyArsenic----Berylium --
Cadmium--Chromium--Copper----Lead GF--Lead ICP--Mercury----Nickel----Selenium----Silver----Thallium----Zinc----
o. a111O11 000I Z1 1 1 c'i C6 (d V-J
a -3 m
C, *
0 c
cn 0)
Or
DIm Mco ~ I Io00 Or- C
CLC 4M 1ico 0L
ccco co~
