1i
SDMSDocID 2003216
Technical Memorandum-Treatabiiity Study Report
Lava Cap Mine Superfund SiteNevada County, California
Prepared for:
Contract No. 68-W-98-225/WA No. 21-RICO-093YU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
75 Hawthorne StreetSan Francisco, California 94105
Prepared by:
CH2M HILL, Inc.2525 Airpark Drive
Redding, California 96001
April 2002
T E C H N I C A L M E M O R A N D U M CH2MHILL
Treatability Study ReportLava Cap Mine Superfund SitePREPARED FOR: David Seter/U.S. EPA
PREPARED BY: Rebecca Maco/CH2M HILLKevin Porter/CH2M HILL
COPIES: David Bunte /CH2M HILLDavid Towell/CH2M HILL
DATE: April 5,2002
1.0 IntroductionThis technical memorandum presents the results of Lava Cap Mine Treatability Study. Thetreatability study was conducted in accordance with the Work Plan for Treatability Study, LavaCap Mine Superfund Site (CH2M HILL, 2001a).
The Lava Cap Mine Treatability Study included bench-scale studies for iron coprecipitationof the mine seepage and tailings dewatering and solidification for the mine tailings on thesite.
These tests were conducted by CH2M HILL's Applied Sciences Laboratory (ASL) inCorvallis, Oregon, on samples collected from the Lava Cap Mine site. The tests wereconducted between August 2001 and October 2001.
The purpose of the tests was to collect data to support the Feasibility Study (FS) for the LavaCap Mine. The FS is being prepared as part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's(EPA's) ongoing Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) for the Lava Cap MineSuperfund Site. This memorandum describes the objectives, methods, results, and conclu-sions of the treatability study.
2.0 Objectives
2.1 Mine Seepage TreatmentThe objective of the bench-scale tests on mine seepage was to identify ferric chloride copre-cipitation parameters for treatment of the mine adit seepage that would result in an effluentquality below the maximum contaminant level (MCL) for arsenic. Parameters to be identi-fied included:
• Oxidation requirements to convert arsenic to As*5 oxidation state• Required ferric chloride dose without additional pH adjustment• Required ferric dose with pH adjustment by addition of sulfuric acid
ROO\LAVA CAP TREAT DOC
TREATABIUTY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITE ^^^^
• Optimum treatment pH• Resultant water quality after treatment• Estimated sludge production rate and residual sludge characteristics
2.2 Tailings Dewatering and SolidificationThe objectives of the bench-scale tests on tailings were to:
• Obtain information on how the tailings could be dewatered and solidified .• Evaluate the strength characteristics of the solidified materials• Evaluate the effectiveness of the solidification process in reducing contaminant mobility• Evaluate the revegetation potential of the raw tailings
3.0 MethodsThe test plan and methods for the treatability study are described in the Work Plan forTreatability Study, Lava Cap Mine Superfund Site (CH2M HILL, 2001a). Several changes weremade to the Work Plan in response to EPA comments. These changes are documented in theLava Cap Treatability Study Workplan Response to EPA Comments dated August 21, 2001(CH2M HILL, 2001b). Treatability study methods and procedures for both the iron copre-cipitation study and the tailings dewatering and solidification study are summarized in thissection.
3.1 iron Coprecipitation Study on Mine Adit SeepageThe iron coprecipitation study included the following steps, which are described below:
• Sample collection• Raw water characterization• Raw water oxidation• Iron coprecipitation jar tests• Residual sludge characterization
A water sample (approximately 20 gallons) was collected from the collapsed adit seepage atLava Cap Mine on August 21,2001, and shipped to ASL for use in this study. Several testsand analyses were conducted on the raw water, including:
• Alkalinity-pH titration curve• Dissolved arsenic - As+3 & As+5
• Total metals (TCLP and STLC list metals)• Chloride• Hardness• Iron (total and dissolved)• Nitrate• Silica• Sulfate• Turbidity• Total organic carbon (TOC)• UV254
RDD/LAVA CAP TREAT.DOC
TREATABIUTY STUDY JREPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITE
Arsenic speciation performed during raw water characterization revealed that all arsenicwas already present in the oxidized form (As+5); therefore, oxidation was not required. Priorspeciation tests conducted on the adit seepage water have shown that 23 percent of thearsenic present in the adit seepage water is As+3 (CH2M HILL, 2002a); therefore, it is sus-pected that the sample for the current test was oxidized during collection and transportprior to speciation analysis, and that the speciation test results for the treatability studysample are not representative of the seepage waters. As a result, pre-oxidation requirementswere not evaluated as part of this study and will require further study prior to systemdesign.
Following raw water characterization, three sets of jar tests were performed to evaluatearsenic treatment with iron coprecipitation. General procedures for each jar test included:
• Ferric chloride addition• Flocculation• Gravity settling• Filtration (0.45 micron filter)• Resultant water quality analyses: pH, chloride, sulfate, arsenic• Resultant sludge analyses: volume, weight, total suspended solids (TSS)
Each jar test consisted of a series of six jars, each with different treatment conditions. The jartests are summarized as follows:
• Test 1: Evaluate an optimum ferric chloride dose (as FeCla) for arsenic treatment at lowpH, by adding varying ferric chloride concentrations at a constant test pH of 6.0.
• Test 2: Evaluate an optimum treatment pH, using the optimum ferric chloride dose fromTest 1, over pH range of 5.5 to 7.5.
• Test 3: Evaluate treatment effectiveness by the addition of ferric chloride without pHadjustment.
At the conclusion of the jar tests, the optimum treatment conditions were selected (44 mg/Lferric chloride and pH 6.5), and a larger batch of water (12 liters) was treated, using theseoptimum conditions, to create a large enough volume of sludge with which to perform totalmetals analyses.
3.2 Tailings Dewatering and Solidification StudyThe tailings dewatering and solidification study included the following steps, which aredescribed below:
• Sample collection• Raw tailings characterization• Tailings dewatering« Tailings solidification• Analyses of solidified tailings
Tailings samples were collected in late August 2001 from four tests pits on the Lava Cap Site(Samples TP6, TP7, TP8, and TP9 as described in the Lava Cap Mine RI/FS Data Gaps
RDOU-AVA CAP TREAT DOC
TREATABILITY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITE
Investigation - Geotechnical Exploration (CH2M HILL, 2002b)). Samples were placed in5-gallon buckets and shipped to ASL for use in the treatability study. Tailings from TP7were selected for use in the treatability study as they were determined to be the most repre-sentative of tailings at the site. The sample comprised moist gray clays and sands.
Several tests and analyses were conducted on the raw tailings, including:
• Soil-water characteristic curve• Grain size• Specific gravity of solids• In situ moisture• Total arsenic and metals• Nitrogen (NO3-N)• Ortho-phosphate• pH• Organic matter content• Cation exchange capacity
Following characterization of the raw tailings, the tailings were dewatered by gravity, andthe following analyses were performed on the dewatered tailings:
• In situ moisture• Unit weight• Shear strength
Shear strength of the raw tailings and compaction of the dewatered tailings were not evalu-ated as part of this work (as stated in the Work Plan), but were included in the geotechnicalexploration portion of the data gaps investigation conducted in 2001 (CH2M HILL, 2002b).
Dewatered tailings were solidified at three different amendment ratios (5,10, and 20 per-cent, by weight) of Portland cement. At each amendment ratio, three batches of tailings andcement were prepared. Samples from each of the three batches were then composited tocreate one batch of solidified material at each amendment ratio. The following parameters ofthe solidified materials were measured:
• Unit weight• Compressive strength• Permeability• Arsenic and metals leachability
4.0 Summary of DataThis section summarizes the data collected during the iron coprecipitation and tailingsdewatering and solidification treatability studies. Data packages are provided in Attach-ments 1 and 2, respectively.
4.1 Iron Coprecipitation StudyThis section presents the results of the iron coprecipitation bench-scale studies, includingthe results of raw water characterization, jar test results, and residual sludge characteristics.
RDD/LAVA CAP TREAT.DOC
TREATABILITY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITE
4.1.1 Raw Water Characterization
Results of the raw water characterization are presented in Table 4-1. The pH-alkalinity titra-tion curve is provided in Attachment 1. In general, the sample water is characterized as veryhard, containing a high concentration of minerals. The high mineral content of the wateralso contributes to high alkalinity, or buffering capacity. The water is also relatively high iniron, although the vast majority (more than 93 percent) is not dissolved, but rather presentas suspended solids and colloidal matter.
TABLE 4-1Summary of Results - Raw Water Analyses (detected constituents only)Lava Cap Mine Treatability Study Report
Parameter
Arsenic, dissolved (all As*5)
Barium, total
Iron, total a
Magnesium, total
Silica, total
Zinc, total
Turbidity
Alkalinity
Hardness
Chloride
Sulfate
PHTOG
Units
ng/Lng/Lng/L
Hg/L
ng/LH9/Lntu
mg/L as CaCO3
mg/L as CaCOa
mg/L
mg/L
units
mg/L
Value
320
62.8
1,430
10,700
22,000
20.9
5.4
171
220
1.0
68.3
7.85
0.78a Dissolved iron was not detected (detection limit 100 ng/L).
4.1.2 Ferric Chloride Coprecipitation Jar Tests
A summary of results for each of the three sets of jar tests is presented in this section. Com-plete jar test results are provided in Attachment 1. Results are slightly variable from one jartest to another; for example, at a pH of 6.0 and a ferric chloride dose of 44 mg/L, the finalarsenic concentration was 4.42 pig/L for Test No. 1, and 1.32 fig/L for Test No. 2. Thisvariation could be attributed to a number of factors, including incomplete mixing andchemical or biological changes within the solution over time (the jar tests were performedup to 2 weeks apart). General trends, however, are consistent among the three jar tests.
Jar Test No. 1The first jar test utilized sulfuric acid to maintain the solution pH at 6.0 while ferric chloridedose was varied between 30 and 100 mg/L. The results of this test are presented in Fig-ure 4-1 (all figures are provided at the back of this document). All ferric chloride dosesevaluated, with the exception of the 30 mg/L dose, resulted in final effluent arsenic concen-trations below the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 10 ug/L. At a ferric chloride doseof 30 mg/L, the final effluent arsenic concentration was 13 ug/L. The lowest ferric chloridedose that resulted in an effluent arsenic concentration less than the MCL was 44 mg/L.
RDO\LAVA CAP TREAT DOC
TREATABILITY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITE
Minimal benefit was achieved with ferric chloride doses greater than 44 mg/L; therefore44 mg/L was selected as the optimum dose.
Jar Test No. 2The objective of the second jar test was to determine an optimum treatment pH within therange of 5.5 to 7.5, using the optimum ferric chloride dose determined during Jar Test No. 1(44 mg/L). Results of Jar Test No. 2 are presented in Figure 4-2. As shown in the figure, thehighest degree of arsenic removal was achieved at a pH of 6.2. However, it should be notedthat effluent concentrations below the MCL were achieved for the entire range of pH tested.The maximum effluent arsenic concentration for the series of jar tests was 3.3 ug/L at a pHof 7.4.
Jar Test No. 3The objective of the third jar test was to determine the effectiveness of ferric chloride copre-cipitation without pH adjustment. Results of this test could be used to determine whether itis more cost-effective to control pH with acid addition or excess ferric chloride addition. Theresults of Jar Test No. 3 are presented in Figure 4-3. Effluent arsenic concentrations werebelow the MCL for all ferric chloride doses evaluated (15 to 140 mg/L). The pH of thesolution ranged from a high of 7.3 at a ferric chloride dose of 15 mg/L to a low of 6.0 at aferric chloride dose of 140 mg/L. Residual sludge production ranged from 15 to 88 dry mil-ligrams (mg) per liter of treated water.
4.1.3 Residual Sludge Characteristics
As demonstrated in Figure 4-3, the rate of sludge production is highly dependent on ferricchloride dose. Based on the results of the three jar tests, a set of optimum treatment condi-tions was selected for use in preparing a larger volume of treated water for analysis ofresidual sludge characteristics. The greatest arsenic removal was achieved in jar test No. 2with pH 6.2 and a ferric chloride dose of 44 mg/L. However, at the same ferric chloridedose, the final arsenic concentration was also well below the MCL at pH higher than 6.2 (seeFigure 4-2). Full-scale iron chloride plants typically operate around pH 6.5; therefore, for thelarger batch study, the selected test conditions were pH 6.5 (controlled by sulfuric acid addi-tion) and a ferric chloride dose of 44 mg/L.
Twelve liters of raw water were treated, and 1,800 mg (dry) of sludge were produced. Thistranslates into a sludge production rate of 150 mg per liter of water treated, or 1.25 poundsof sludge per 1,000 gallons of water treated.
As part of this test, and to support a metals mass balance for the treatment process, thefollowing samples were analyzed for total metals (sample IDs listed in parentheses areincluded in the Attachment 1 data package):
• Raw water (LC-Raw)• Raw, filtered water (LC-Raw-Filt)• Treated water (LC-JT-4-Settled)• Treated, filtered water (LC-JT-4-Filt)• Residual sludge (LC-JT-4-Sludge)
None of the metals analyzed for, including arsenic, were detected in the treated, filteredwater, with the exception of barium, which was detected at 50.3 jig/L. The detection limit
RDD/LAVA CAP TREAT.DOC
TREATABILITY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUNO SITE
for arsenic was 2 Mg/L- Metals concentrations detected in the sludge are presented inTable 4-2 in mg/kg dry weight. Based on these results, corresponding metals concentrationsfor a variety of dewatered sludge solids concentrations were calculated and presented inTable 4-2. As discussed in the Preliminary Draft Feasibility Study Report for the Lava Cap MineSuperfund Site (CH2M HILL, 2002a), the expected sludge solids content at disposal is 22 per-cent. It should be noted that iron was not analyzed for in the sludge, and is therefore notpresented in Table 4-2, although a significant quantity is likely present in the sludge.
TABLE 4-2Residual Sludge Metals Content (Detects Only)Lava Cap Mine Treatability Study Report
Calculated Sludge MetalsSludge Total Concentration (mg/kg wet weight) for
Metals Various Sludge SolidsConcentration Concentrations
AluminumArsenic
Barium
Cobalt
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Zinc
\lli^/i\y ui y
weight)
841
5,330
106
10.6
28.3
13.9
76.7
52.5
1%
8.4
53
1.1
0.1
0.3
0.1
0.8
0.5
5%
42.1
267
5.3
0.5
1.4
0.7
3.8
2.6
10%
84.1
533
10.6
1.1
2.8
1.4
7.7
5.3
22%
185
1,173
23.3
2.3
6.2
3.1
16.9
11.6
1 1 *wr
(mg/kg)
NS
500
100
NS
NS
1,000
20
5,000
1 W f\. W 1 b-W
(mg/kg)
NS
50
1,000
NS
NS
50
2
2,500
f.V SV I \^l_l~
(mg/kg)
NS
100
2,000
NS
NS
100
4
NS
TTLC = Total Threshold Limit Concentration
STLC = Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration
TCLP = Toxicity Charactenstics Leaching Procedure
NS = Not Specified
Also presented in Table 4-2 are the Total Threshold Limit Concentration (TTLC), ten timesthe Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration (STLC), and 20 times the Toxicity CharacteristicsLeaching Procedure (TCLP) limit for each compound detected. The TTLC and STLC areused when determining the hazardous waste characterization under California state regula-tions. The TCLP is used when determining a hazardous waste characterization under fed-eral regulations.
Neither the STLC nor TCLP tests were conducted as part of this treatability study becausethe tests each require 50 to 100 grams of sludge to perform the analysis. At the observed rateof sludge production (150 mg per liter treated), 667 liters (approximately 175 gallons) ofwater would need to be treated to generate 100 grams of sludge, which was not feasible forthis bench-scale study. However, the total metals results obtained can be compared withTTLC, STLC, and TCLP limits to assess the hazardous characteristics of the sludge. A briefexplanation of TTLC, STLC, and TCLP, and how the results of this study may be comparedto each, is provided in the following paragraphs.
RDCALAVA CAP TREAT DOC
TREATABILITY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITE
TTLCThe total metals test performed on the sludge measured the total concentration of the targetanalyte in the sample and is identical to the TTLC test; the only difference being that thetotal metals test is reported in mg/kg dry weight and the TTLC test is reported in mg/kgwet weight. Therefore, if the concentration obtained from the total metals test is scaled toaccount for the anticipated percent moisture in the sludge, the results of the two tests aredirectly comparable.
STLCThe intent of the STLC test is to simulate the conditions that may be present in a landfillwhere water may infiltrate into the landfill waste and migrate to the groundwater, carryingthe soluble materials with it. The STLC (California) test is similar to the TCLP (federal) test,although the methods and limit concentrations are slightly different. The extraction fluidused in the STLC test is a sodium citrate buffer solution. During the STLC test, the sample isdiluted 1:10; therefore, when comparing total metals results, the comparison should bemade to 10 times the STLC criteria. It could be anticipated that less than 100 percent of themetals present in the sludge would leach during an STLC test. Therefore, if the total metalsconcentration is greater than 10 times the STLC, the sludge could potentially be hazardousbut it is not necessarily so. An STLC analysis will be required to make the determination.Conversely, if the total metals concentration is less than 10 times the STLC, it can be rea-sonably assumed that the sludge would pass an STLC analysis.
TCLPThe TCLP test is similar to the STLC test in theory as discussed above. One of two extractionfluids is used in the TCLP test, depending on the initial alkalinity of the sample. For lowalkalinity samples, a sodium acetate solution at pH 4.93 is used; for high alkalinity samples,an acetic acid solution at pH 2.8 is used. The dilution factor for the TCLP test is 1:20; there-fore, total metals results should be compared to 20 times the TCLP criteria. As with theSTLC, if the total metals concentration is greater than 20 times the TCLP criteria, the sludgecould be hazardous and would require a TCLP analysis. If the total metals concentration isless than 20 times the TCLP criteria, it can be reasonably assumed that the sludge wouldpass a TCLP analysis.
In summary, if the total metals results (on a wet basis) do not exceed the TTLC, 10 times theSTLC limit, or 20 times the TCLP limit, then normally no further analysis is required, andthe material is classified as non-hazardous. Based on the results presented in Table 4-2,arsenic and mercury concentrations could cause the sludge to be classified as hazardous.Leaching analyses, such as TCLP or STLC, should be performed to determine the actualhazardous waste classification of the residual sludge.
4.2 Tailings Dewatering and SolidificationThis section presents the results of the tailings dewatering and solidification bench-scalestudies, including the results of raw tailings characterization, and analyses performed ondewatered and solidified tailings.
4.2.1 Raw Tailings Characterization
Laboratory data packages for the raw tailings characterization are provided in Attachment 2and summarized in this section. The soil water characteristic curve is presented in
RDD/LAVA CAP TREAT DOC
TREATABILITY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITE
Figure 4-4. According to the characteristic curve performed on the raw tailings, dewateringbased on gravity drainage may be accomplished, but moisture contents would not beexpected to decrease below about 12 percent.
Shear strength of the raw tailings (with as-received moisture content) was not investigatedas part of this work, but was analyzed as part of the geotechnical component of the datagaps investigation (CH2M HILL, 2002b). All other raw tailings characterization parametersare summarized in Table 4-3.
TABLE 4-3Summary of Results - Raw Tailings CharacterizationLava Cap Mine Treatability Study Report
Parameter
Grain size a
In Situ Moisture
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
Nitrate-N
pH
Ortho-phosphate
Organic Matter Content
Cation Exchange Capacity
Units
-
% dry weight
mg/kg dry weight
mg/kg dry weight
mg/kg dry weight
mg/kg dry weight
mg/kg dry weight
mg/kg dry weight
mg/kg dry weight
mg/kg dry weight
mg/kg dry weight
mg/kg dry weight
mg/kg dry weight
mg/kg dry weight
mg/kg dry weight
mg/kg dry weight
mg/kg dry weight
mg/kg dry weight
mg/kg dry weight
mg/kg
units
mg/kg
%
meq/100g
Value
36% Sand, 51% Silt, 13% Clay
22.2
1.5
549
20.3
<0.98
2.6
40..3
4.6
34.9
44.3
0.11
<6.2
13.7
<10
6.3
<2.5
9.2
235
1.47
7.89
< 0.01
0.29
1.4a Particle size distribution curve provided in Attachment 2.
The results presented in Table 4-3 can also provide a basis for a preliminary review ofrevegetation strategies for the Lava Cap Mine Site. Tailings revegetation/restoration is analternative that will be explored in the FS for Lava Cap Mine. Revegetation can help tophysically stabilize cohesiveless tailings, accelerate soil formation processes, and create con-ditions that can stimulate soil biological activity; all of which can contribute to a sustainablesoil ecosystem.
RDDUAVA CAP TREAT.DOC
TREATABILITY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITE
In general, no major concerns appear to exist regarding revegetation that cannot be over-come with the proper tailings restoration design. The texture of the tailings is a silty-sandwith medium to large pore space that may limit water-holding capacity. In those areas ofthe site where groundwater is too deep to be accessed by restoration vegetation and water-holding capacity of the tailings is low, irrigation may be required during establishment ofvegetation or as a permanent system to supplement seasonal rainfall.
Based on the results presented in Table 4-3, nutrient concentrations are very limited. Thiscan be overcome with a regular fertigation (a practice which can be used to supply muchneeded essential nutrients to the restoration vegetation) system. The cation exchangecapacity of the tailings (1.4 meq/lOOg) is low for soils but typical for unweathered tailings.
To further assess the potential for revegetation/restoration of tailings at the Lava Cap Site,the following tests are recommended for the raw tailings: salinity, electrical conductivity,sodium adsorption ratio (SAR), and growth tests (both germination tests and longer-termgrowth tests).
4.2.2 Dewatered Tailings Characterization
The shear strength of the dewatered tailings (initial water content of 11.7 percent) wasevaluated, and results are presented in Attachment 2. Dry unit weight of the dewateredtailings was 95 pounds per cubic foot (lb/ft3). Compaction of the dewatered tailings was notinvestigated as part of this work, but was included in the geotechnical component of thedata gaps investigation (CH2M HILL, 2002b) conducted in February 2002.
4.2.3 Solidified Tailings Characterization
Results of unit weight and compressive strength analyses performed on solidified tailingsare summarized in Table 4-4. Complete results are provided in Attachment 2.
TABLE 44Unit Weight, Compressive Strength, and Permeability Test Results - Solidified TailingsLava Cap Mine Treatability Study Report
Results at Each Amendment RatioParameter
Wet Density
Dry Density
Unconfined Compressive Strength
Average Permeability
Unit
lb/ft 3
lb/ft 3
psi
cm/sec
5%
117.1
97.9
124.3
3x1 0'6
10%
121.9
102.3
427
1X10"6
20%
114
97.7
729
4x1 0"6
The wet density was measured on the solidified material at the water content at which itwas received. To measure the dry density, the solidified material was dried in a 110°C ovento a constant weight prior to density measurement.
As described in the Work Plan for Treatability Study. Lava Cap Mine Superfund Site (CH2MHILL, lOOla), Type 2 Portland cement was selected as a stabilizing agent. Three amendmentratios, 5,10, and 20 percent by weight, were tested. The amendment ratios were based onthe "as received" weight of the materials. As shown in Table 4-4, unconfined strengthresults increased with cement content, as expected. However, based on the data obtained,
10 RDD/LAVA CAP TREAT.DOC
TREATABILITY STUDY REPORT• LAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITE
there was no obvious decrease in permeability with increasing cement content. Permeabil-ities were consistently in the 10"6 cm/sec range. Permeabilities were expected to decreasewith increasing cement content. However, laboratory personnel indicated nothing unusualwas observed during testing, and that there was no leakage along the sample /membraneinterface.
A study of the characteristics of the solidified tailings was performed to evaluate the feasi-bility of leaving the solidified tailings in place at the Lava Cap Site. One primary concernwith this alternative is leaching of metals from the solidified tailings into surface water andgroundwater. Metals' teachability of the solidified tailings was evaluated using the SyntheticPrecipitation Leaching Procedure (SPLP).
The SPLP procedure is particularly useful in those situations where a determination must bemade if a potentially contaminated material, left in situ, will leach toxic substances whenexposed to normal weathering. Instead of the landfill leachate simulating acetic acid mixtureused in the TCLP method, nitric and sulfuric acids are used in an effort to simulate the acidrains resulting from airborne nitric and sulfuric oxides. Results of the SPLP analysis may becompared to TCLP (federal) and STLC (California) limits to evaluate the feasibility of leav-ing the solidified materials in situ. Results of the solidified tailings SPLP analyses (detectedconstituents only), and the corresponding TCLP and STLC limits are presented in Table 4-5.As shown in the table, all amendment ratios tested resulted in solidified materials withmetals leachability well below regulatory limits. Leaching analyses were not performed onthe raw tailings, although such analyses are recommended for future studies as it is possiblethat the raw tailings would pass STLC and TCLP limits without amendment.
TABLE 4-5Solidified Tailings Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure Results (Detected Constituents Only)Lava Cap Mine Treatability Study Report
SPLP Result (mg/L) for Various Cement Amendment Ratios
Arsenic
Barium
Chromium
Copper
5%
0.0166
ND
0.0417
ND
10%
0.0152
0.138
0.0367
0.0289
20%
0.0133
0.266
0.0227
0.0226
STLC (mg/L)
5
100
5
25
TCLP (mg/L)
5
100
5
NS
STLC = Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration; TCLP = Toxicity Characteristics Leaching Procedure; ND = Not Detected;NS = Not Specified
5.0 ConclusionsThe following conclusions resulted from an analysis of the treatability study data. Theseconclusions have been used to support the development of the Preliminary Draft FeasibilityStudy Report for the Lava Cap Mine Superfund Site (CH2M HILL, 2002a).
RODUAVA CAP TREAT DOC II
TREATABIUTY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITE
5.1 Iron Coprecipitation Treatability Study• Pre-oxidation requirements require further study. The water sample collected for this
study was oxidized during sample collection and transport and therefore could not beused to determine oxidation requirements. Additional bench-scale or pilot-scale tests arerecommended to estimate oxidant dosage requirements.
• Optimum treatment conditions are 44 mg/L ferric chloride dose (as FeCla) and pH 6.2.Adequate treatment was also realized during Jar Test No. 3 with 15 mg/L ferric chloridedose, which could theoretically be a more cost-effective process than the 44 mg/L dose;however, Jar Test No. 1 demonstrated inadequate treatment at a dose of 30 mg/L.Therefore, optimum treatment conditions were conservatively selected to be 44 mg/Lferric chloride and pH 6.2.
• Under optimum treatment conditions, sludge is produced at a rate of 1.25 dry poundsper 1,000 gallons of water treated.
• Total metals tests performed on the residual sludge as part of this study indicate that theresidual sludge could be hazardous, although STLC and TCLP testing is required to fur-ther evaluate the leaching potential and waste classification of the sludge.
• Effluent arsenic concentrations below the MCL are achievable with iron coprecipitationat Lava Cap Mine.
5.2 Tailings Dewatering and Solidification Treatability Study• The tailings may be dewatered by gravity drainage methods to a moisture content of
about 12 percent. Dewatering the tailings provides an increase to the material shearstrength.
• With increased cement content, material shear strength increases and permeabilityremains consistently low.
• The metals leaching rate from the solidified tailings (solidification with Portland cementin amendment ratios of 5,10, and 20 percent) is well below STLC and TCLP limits.Therefore, leaving the solidified materials in situ is a feasible alternative and will beevaluated further in the FS.
• In general, there do not appear to be any major concerns regarding revegetation thatcannot be overcome with the proper tailings restoration design. Additional testing,including salinity, electrical conductivity, SAR, and growth tests (both germination testsand longer-term growth tests) is recommended.
6.0 ReferencesCH2M HILL, 2002a. Preliminary Draft Feasibility Study Report for the Lava Cap Mine SuperfundSite. January.
CH2M HILL, 2002b. Lava Cap Mine RI/FS Data Gaps Investigation - Geotechnical Exploration.February.
12 RDD/LAVA CAP TREAT.DOC
TREATABILITY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITE
CH2M HILL, 2001b. Lava Cap Treatability Study Workplan Response to EPA Comments. August.
CH2M HILL, 2001a. Work Plan for Treatability Study, Lava Cap Mine Superfund Site. July 2001.
RODVUW A CAP TREAT DOC 13
30 40 50 60 70
FERRIC CHLORIDE DOSE, AS FeCI3 (mg/L)
80 90 100
LC_treat-figs.xls\Figure 4-1
FIGURE 4-1JAR TEST NO. 1 RESULTSTREATABILITY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITENEVADA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
3.5
Ferric Chloride Dose, as FeCI3 = 44 mg/L
5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5
pH (units)
7.0 7.5
FIGURE 4-2JAR TEST NO. 2 RESULTSTREATABILITY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITENEVADA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
LC_treat-figs.xls\Figure 4-2
100
80 100 120 140 160
FERRIC CHLORIDE DOSE, AS FeCI3 (mg/L)
O
ui zoc
Q Oui zf- O< OUIQC
RESIDUAL ARSENIC CONCENTRATION
- - pH
60 80 100 120 140 160
FERRIC CHLORIDE DOSE, AS FeCI3 (mg/L)
FIGURE 4-3JAR TEST NO. 3 RESULTSTREATABILITY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITENEVADA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
LC_treat-figs xlsVFigure 4-3
UJ
OULUCC
C/3O
V)(3
20
18
16
14
12
10
4 --
8 10
PRESSURE (bars)
12 14 16
LC_treat-figs.xls\Figure 4-4
FIGURE 4-4SOIL-WATER CHARACTERISTIC CURVE, RAWTAILINGSTREATABILITY STUDY REPORTLAVA CAP MINE SUPERFUND SITENEVADA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
CH2MHILL Titration Curve
Sample InformationClientSourceSample Date/TimeProject NumberClient Sample IDLab Sample ID
Lava Cap
LC-Raw602001
Test InformationAnalystTest Date/TimeSample Volume
ET8/29/2001 1:00
50 mL
Titration Curve
Reagent Characteristics
TypeChemical
Reagent Strength
Acid
H2SO4
0.02 N
Base
NaOH
Total Alkalinity
171 mg/L as CaCO3
Measurements |
pH7.857.807.737.677.607.567.487.407.347.277.217.147.097.036.986.956.906.856.816.76
H2SO4(mL)0.000.100.250.500.751 001.251 501.752002.252.502.753003.253503.754004.25450
NaOH(mL)
Alkalinitymg/L as CaCO3
171.0169.0166.0161.0156.0151.0146.0141.0136.0131.0126.0121.0116.0111.0106.0101.096091.086081 0
PH6.736.666.626.616.546.466.426.386.306.206.126.025.905.655.224.554.50
H2SO4(mL)4.755.005.255.505.756.006256.506.757.007.257.507.758.008.258.508.55
NaOH(mL)
Alkalinity |mg/L as CaCO3;
76.071.066.061.056.051.046.041.036.031.026.021.016.011.0601.000
Alkalinity 30: end point = pH 4.9Alkalinity ISO: end point = pH 4.6Alkalinity 500: end point = pH 4 3
LC trtration curve xls. Raw Page I of 1 01/17/2002 2 24 PM
CH2MHILL Characterization
ClientSourceDate/Time CollectedProject Number (login)Laboratory ID (login)Project Number (analysis)Laboratory ID (analysis)
Sample InfLava Cap Mine
Raw
1561 97 00 LC602001
ormation
ParametersAntimony, total ug/LBarium, total ug/LBeryllium, total ug/LCadmium, total ug/LChromium, total ug/LCobalt, total ug/LCopper, total ug/LIron, total ug/LIron, dissolved ug/LLead, total ug/LMagnesium, total ug/LMolybdenum, total ug/LNickel, total ug/LSelenium, total ug/LSilica, total ug/LSilver, total ug/LThallium, total ug/LVanadium, total ug/LZinc, total ug/LTurbidity ntuAlkalinity mg/L as CaC03
Hardness mg/L as CaC03
Chloride mg/LNitrate-N mg/LSulfate mg/LrOC mg/LUV-254 cm 1
<5628<4<5<10<10<101430<100<3
10700<25<20<7
22000<10<10<2520954
171
220
1 0< 0 1683078
<0009
—
LC Characterization water xls Page 1 of PrntDate 01/30/2002
CH2MHILL LAVA CAP JAR TEST
Test Infor
Client
Source
Sample Location
Sample Date/Time
Project Number
Series Number
Analyst
Test Date/Time
nation
Lava Cap
ADIT
ADIT
8/21/2001 1808
151319 IT 01
1
DAH
9/6/2001 1500
Test Waler Ch,
Temperature 9/6/01 1500
pH 9/6/011500
Turbidity 9/6/011500
Alkalinity mg/LasCaC03
UV254 cm-1
TOC mg/L
SUVA Umg-m
Arsenic, soluble ug/L
iracteristics
23 °C
7 60 units
54ntu
171
0006
078
076
320
Test Objectives
Evaluate various ferric chloride doses (ranging from 30-100 mg/L) at a constant pH of 6 0
Reagent Characteristics
Type
Chemical
Stock Strength
Stock Reagent Basis
Jar#
Target pH units
Alkalinity mg/L as CaC03
Volume
Sulfuric Acid Stock Added
Dose
Lime Stock Added
Dose
Ferric Chloride Stock Added
Dose
Stock Added
Dose
pH after coag addition
pH after adjustment
Rapid Mix RPM
Duration
Flocculation RPM
Duration
Floe Observations
Settling Period
Settling Observations
Settled Water Pretreatment
pH units
ORP mV
Chloride mg/L
Sulfate mg/L
ron, soluble ug/L
Arsenic, soluble ug/L
Sludge @ 30 min mL
Sludge @ 30 min cm
TSS (sludge) mg
TSS (sludge) mg/L
Acid
Sulfuric Acid
lOOOmeq/L
H2SO,
1
60
21
20L
600 mL
30 mg/L
696
602
Base
Lime
lOOOmeq/LCa(OH)2
2
60
21
2 0 L
880mL
44 mg/L
676
607
Coagulant
Ferric Chloride
10000 mg/L
FeCI33
60
21
20L
1160mL
58 mg/L
668
603
Polymer
4
60
21
20L
1440mL
72 mg/L
Oxriant
5
60
21
2 0 L
1720mL
86 mg/L
656 644
606 | 603
6
60
21
20L
2000mL
100 mg/L
632
605
200
1 mm
60/40/20
5 mm each
- @ 60 RPM pin floe formed in all jars- Q 40 RPM floe grew to small size in all )ars, fluffy fioc density- @ 20 RPM floe grew to medium size in all jars, remained fluffy
15 mm
- Fluffy sludge density- Ma|onty of floe settled in the 15 mm settling period
0 45 um filtered
683
334
220
168
<100
1297
19
35
37
19
693
320
320
147
<100
442
37
66
60
30
689
310
417
138
<100
331
31
5 7
77
39 _,
695
310
51 7
122
<100
342
58
107
93
47
690
290
609
111
<100
204
58
107
109
55
702
290
704
985
<100
1 10
J50
99
129
65
Lava Cap Jartrel 9 2001 xls LC JT 1 (dose) Pago 1 of 3 PrmlOate OK24200?
CH2MHILL LAVA CAP JAR TEST
Client
Test Information
Source
Sample Location
Sample Date/Time
Project Number
Series Number
Analyst
Test Dateffime
Lava Cap
ADIT
ADIT
8/21/2001 1808
151319TT01
2
TBMY
9/27/2001 PM
Temperature
Test Water Characteristics
9/27/2001 PM
pH 9/27/2001 PM
Turbidity 9/27/2001 PM
Alkalinity mg/L as CaCOS
UV254 cm-1
rOC mg/L
SUVA Umg-m
Arsenic, soluble ug/L
235°C
7 70 umts
54ntu
171
0006
078
076
320
Test Objectives
Evaluate various pH conditions with a constant ferric chloride dose at 44 mg/L
Reagent Characteristics
Type
Chemical
Stock Strength
Stock Reagent Basis
Jarf
Target pH
Volume
Sulfuric Acid
Lime
Ferric Chloride
)H after adjustment
Rapid Mix
Flocculation
Floe Observations
units
Stock Added
Dose
Stock Added
Dose
Stock Added
Dose
Stock Added
Dose
RPM
Duration
RPM
Duration
Settling Period
Settling Observations
pH after flocculation units
Settled Water Pretreatment
pH units
ORP mV
Chloride
Sulfate
Iron, soluble
Arsenic, soluble
Sludge @ 30 mm
Sludge @ 30 mm
rSS (sludge)
rSS (sludge)
mg/L
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
mL
cm
mg
mg/L
Acid
Sulfuric Acid
1000meq/L
H2S04
1
550
20L
Base
Lime
10000 mg/L
Ca(OH)2
2
600
20L
520mL I 315mL
2 6 meq/L ' 1 6 meq/L
880 mL
44 mg/L
55
880mL
44 mg/L
60
Coagulant
Feme Chloride
10000 mg/L
FeCI3
3
625
20L
255 mL
13 meq/L
880mL
44 mg/L
63
4
650
20L
132mL
07meo/L
880mL
44 mg/L
65
5
700
20L
063 mL
3 2 mg/L
880mL
44 mg/L
6
750
20L
457mL
229mg/L
880 mL
44 mg/L
70 1 75
200
1 mm
60/40/20
5 mm each
Fine sized Floe Fine Medium sized Floe Fine Sized Floe
15 mm
Most of the floe settled in 15 minutes leaving a slightly turbid supernatant The settled sludge had a fluffy density
54 ]~ 60 ] 62 ~~]~ 65 | 69 | 74
58
185
266
63
192
265
163 128
<100
1 86
21
40
61
30
<100
132
19
37
55
27
0 45 um f
65
185
269
113
<100
094
21
42
64
32
tered
68
180
271
888
<100
230
30
57
61
30
71
185
269
604
<100
209
34
66
63 '
77
180
273
596
<100
332
24
4 6
79
31 ~~f 40
Lava Cap Jartest 9 ZQOUIs LC JT 2 (pH) Page 2 ol 3 PnnlOate 01/24/2002
CH2MHILL LAVA CAP JAR TEST
Test Infor
Client
Source
Sample Location
Sample Date/Time
Project Number
Series Number
Analyst
Test Date/Time
nation
Lava Cap
ADIT
ADIT
8/21/2001 1808
151319 TT 01
3
TBMY
10/02/2001 PM
Temperature
PH
Test Water Ch
10/02/2001 PM
10/02/2001 PM
Turbidity 10/02/2001 PM
Alkalinity mg/L as CaCOS
UV254 cm 1
TOC
SUVA
Arsenic, soluble
mg/L
L/mg m
ug/L
aractenstics
22 0 °C ~~
7 50 units
54ntu
171
0006
078
076
320
Test Objectives
Evaluate various pH conditions using feme chloride only (no acid addition)
Reagent Characteristics
Type
Chemical
Stock Strength
Stock Reagent Basis
Jar*
Target pH units
Volume
Sulfuric Acid Stock Added
Dose
Lime Stock Added
Dose
Ferric Chloride Stock Added
Dose
Stock Added
Dose
pH after ferric chloride addition
Rapid Mix RPM
Duration
Flocculation RPM
Duration
Floe Observations
Settling Period
Settling Observations
)H after flocculation units
Settled Water Pretreatment
pH units
ORP mV
Chloride mg/L
Sulfate mg/L
Iron, soluble ug/L
Arsenic, soluble ug/L
Sludge @ 30 mm mL
Sludge @ 30 mm cm
TSS (sludge) mg
TSS (sludge) mg/L
Acid
Sulfuric Acid
1000 meq/L
H2S04
1
724
Base
Lime
10000 mg/L
Ca(OH)2
2
698
20L 20L
300mL
15 mg/L
73
75
193
992
593
<100
612
10
22
31
L 15
600mL
30 mg/L
Coagulant
Ferric Chloride
10000 mg/L
FeCI33
672
2 0 L
1100mL
55 mg/L
4
646
20L
1600mL
80mg/L
5
620
20L
2200mL
110 mg/L
6
590
2 0 L
2800mL
140 mg/L
200
1 mm
7 1
73
180
336
591
<100
195
19
36
51
25
60/40/20
5 mm each
15m
69
0 45 um f
7 1
186
189
592
<100
150
50
96
78
39
n
67
Itered
68
198
496
586
<100
1 04
68
126
111
56
64
66
194
681
588
<100
1 17
76
143
120
60
60
63
204
862
577
<100
125
61
11 7
175
88
LavaTap J.)rtesl9 2001 xls LC JT3( I rrrpH) Page 3 on Print Dale 01 2*2002
CH2M Hill
Applied Sciences Group
2300 NW Walnut Blvd
Corvalhs. OR
97330-3538
P O. Box 428
Cc«vallls.OR
97339-0428
Tel S41.752.4271
Fax Ml 7520276
CH2MHILLApplied Sciences Group
October 22, 2001
Lava Cap
156197.00.LC
RE: Laboratory Report for Lava CapApplied Sciences Group Reference No. 6267
Rebecca Maco/SAC:
On October 10, 2001, CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Group received five samples with arequest for analysis of selected parameters. All analyses were performed by CH2M HILLunless otherwise indicated below.
The analytical results and associated quality control data are enclosed. Any unusualdifficulties encountered during the analysis of your samples are discussed in the casenarrative.
CH2M HELL Applied Sciences Group appreciates your business and looks forward toserving your analytical needs again. If you should have any questions concerning the data, orif you need additional information, please call Ms. Kathy McKinley at (541) 758-0235,extension 3120.
Sincerely,
Q
Judy GreydanusLaboratory Representative
Enclosures
cc:Tim Maloney/CVO
OR100022
PAGE 1 of
CLIENT SAMPLE CROSS-REFERENCE
CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Group Reference No. 6267
Sample ID626701626702626703626704626705
Client Sample ID/LC-JT-4-Filt -^
LC-JT-4-Sludee/LC-JT-4-Settled/ LC-Raw ~-TW£w
/ LC-Raw-Filt -^
DateCollected10/10/200110/10/2001
, /^ 10/10/2001VCW> 10/10/2001
10/10/2001
TimeCollected
AMAMAMAMAM
\jj^"', ntt^ ^%f*l ^t
& 3
CASE NARRATIVEMETALS
Lab Reference No.: 6267
Client/Project: Lava Cap
I. Holding Time:All acceptance criteria were met.
II. Digestion Exceptions:None.
HI. Analysis:
A. Calibration:All acceptance criteria were met.
B. ICP Interference Check Sample:All acceptance criteria were met.
C. Spike Sample(s):All acceptance criteria were met.
D. Duplicate SampleCsV.All acceptance criteria were met.
E. Laboratory Control Sample(s):All acceptance criteria were met.
F. ICP Serial Dilution:Not Required.
G. Other.None
IV. Documentation Exceptions:None
V. I certify that this data package is in compliance with the terms and conditions agreed to by theclient and CH2M HELL, both technically and for completeness, except for the conditions detailedabove. Release of the data contained in this hardcopy data package has been authorized by theLaboratory Manager or his designee, as verified by the following signature.
Prepared by:
Reviewed by:
CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Laboratory
Client Information
Client Sample ID:
Project Name:Project Manager:
Sampled By:Sampling Date:Sampling Time:
Type:Matrix:Basis:
Analyte
Aluminum, AlAntimony, SbArsenic, AsBarium, BaBeryllium, BeCadmium, CdChromium, CrCobalt, CoCopper, CuLead, PbMercury, HgMolybdenum, MoNickel, NiSelenium, SeThallium, TlVanadium, VZinc, Zn
Lab Information
LC-JT-4-Fitt
Lava Cap
Lab Sample ID:
Date Received:Rebecca Maco/SACTim Maloney10/10/01AMGrabWaterAs Received
MRL
1005.02.0
25.04.05.010.010.010.03.00.1025.020.07.010.025.020.0
SampleResult
1005.02.0
50.34.05.010.010.010.03.0
0.1025.020.07.010.025.020.0
Qualifier
UUU
UUUUUUUUUUUUU
Report
Units
A/g/LA/g/L
pgfl-//g/LA/g/L
A/g/LA/g/L
jug/L//g/LA/g/LA/g/LA<g/LA/g/LA>g/L//g/LA/g/LA/g/L
Revision No.:Reported By:Reviewed By:
AnalysisMethod
EPA 200.7EPA 200.7SM3113BEPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 245.1EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7
626701
10/10/20010JG/YL/SH.^d&-
DateAnalyzed
10/15/0110/15/0110/16/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/12/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/01
U=Not detected at specified reporting limits
CH2M HILLApplied Sciences Group
230ONW Walnut Blvd., Conallls. OR 97330-3538P O Box 428. Corra/fe OR 97339-O42B
Tel 541 7524271 fax 54! 7520276
CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Laboratory
Client Information
Client Sample ID:
Project Name:Project Manager:
Sampled By:Sampling Date:Sampling Time:
Type:Matrix:Basis:
Analyte
Aluminum, AlAntimony, SbArsenic, AsBarium, BaBeryllium, BeCadmium, CdChromium, CrCobalt, CoCopper, CuLead, PbMercury, HgMolybdenum, MoNickel, NiSelenium, SeThallium, TlVanadium, VZinc, Zn
LC-JT-4-Sludge
Lava Cap
Lab Information
Lab Sample ID:
Date Received:Rebecca Maco/SACTim Maloney10/10/01AMGrabSoilDry Weight (99%
MRL
1005.010.025.04.05.010.010.010.03.00.1025.020.07.010.025.020.0
s/fsfv&/^/£f^ *\f^ / J
moisture) r U
SampleResult Qualifier
8415.0 U
53301064.0 U5.0 U10.0 U10.628.313.976.725.0 U20.0 U7.0 U10.0 U25.0 U52.5
Report
<O" 1^ ezsXfiz^T*'^^°cJ
Units
mg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kgmg/Kg
Revision No.:Reported By:Reviewed By:
AnalysisMethod
EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 245.1EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7
626702
10/10/20010JG/YL/SH2>t&^~
DateAnalyzed
10/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/12/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/01
U=Not detected at specified reporting limits
CH2M HILLApplied Sciences Group
- 5
230ONW Walnut Blvd. Corvollls. OR 97330-3538PO Box 428 Corvallis. OH 97339-0428
1 752427! fox 541 7520276
CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Laboratory
Client Information
Client Sample ID:
Project Name:Project Manager:
Sampled By:Sampling Date:Sampling Time:
Type:Matrix:Basis:
Analyte
Aluminum, AlAntimony, SbArsenic, AsBarium, BaBeryllium, BeCadmium, CdChromium, CrCobalt, CoCopper, CuLead, PbMercury, HgMolybdenum, MoNickel, NiSelenium, SeThallium, TlVanadium, VZinc, Zn
Lab Information
LC-JT-4-SettIed
Lava Cap
Lab Sample ID:
Date Received:Rebecca Maco/SACTim Maloney10/10/01AMGrabWaterAs Received
MRL
1005.02.0
25.04.05.0
•10.010.010.03.00.1025.020.07.010.025.020.0
SampleResult
1005.036.352.14.05.010.010.010.03.00.1025.020.07.010.025.020.0
Qualifier
UU
UUUUUUUUUUUUU
Report
Units
A/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/L//g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/L
Revision No.:Reported By:Reviewed By:
AnalysisMethod
EPA 200.7EPA 200.7SM3113BEPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 245.1EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7
626703
10/10/20010JG/YL/SH-5>^4-
DateAnalyzed
10/15/0110/15/0110/16/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/12/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/01
U=Not detected at specified reporting limits
CH2M HILLApplied Sciences Group
2300 NW Walnut Blvd. CorraWs. OR 97330-3538PO Box 428. Corvo/te OR 97339-W28
Tel 541 752 4271 Fox 541 752 0276
CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Laboratory
Client Information
Client Sample ID:
Project Name:Project Manager:
Sampled By:Sampling Date:Sampling Time:
Type:Matrix:Basis:
Analyte
Aluminum, AlAntimony, SbArsenic, AsBarium, BaBeryllium, BeCadmium, CdChromium, CrCobalt, CoCopper, CuLead, PbMercury, HgMolybdenum, MoNickel, NiSelenium, SeThallium, TlVanadium, VZinc, Zn
Lab Information
LC-Raw
Lava Cap
Lab Sample ID:
Date Received:Rebecca Maco/SACTim Maloney10/10/01AMGrabWaterAs Received
MRL
1005.010.025.04.05.0
-10.010.010.03.0
0.1025.020.07.010.025.020.0
SampleResult
1235.070764.64.05.010.010.010.03.00.1025.020.07.010.025.024.1
Qualifier
U
*
UUUUUUUUUUUU
Report
Units
A/g/LA/g/LA/g/L//g/L//g/L//g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/L
Revision No.:Reported By:Reviewed By:
AnalysisMethod
EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 245.1EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7
626704
10/10/20010JG/YL/SH
-S*o4-
DateAnalyzed
10/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/12/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/01
U=Not detected at specified reporting limits
CH2M HILLApplied Sciences Group
- 7
2300 NW Walnut Blvd Corvallls. OR 97330-3538PO Box 428 CorvatHs. OR 97339-0428
Tel 541 752 4271 Fox 54 ? 752 0276
CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Laboratory
Client Information
Client Sample ID:
Project Name:Project Manager:
Sampled By:Sampling Date:Sampling Time:
Type:Matrix:Basis:
Analyte
Aluminum, AlAntimony, SbArsenic, AsBarium, BaBeryllium, BeCadmium, CdChromium, CrCobalt, CoCopper, CuLead. PbMercury, HgMolybdenum, MoNickel, NiSelenium, SeThallium, TlVanadium, VZinc, Zn
Lab Information
LC-Raw-Filt
Lava Cap
Lab Sample ID:
Date Received:Rebecca Maco/SACTim Maloney10/10/01AMGrabWaterAs Received
MRL
1005.010.025.04.05.0
10.010.010.03.0
0.1025.020.07.010.025.020.0
SampleResult
1005.030854.64.05.010.010.010.03.0
0.1025.020.07.010.025.020.0
Qualifier
UU
UUUUUUUUUUUUU
Report
Units
A/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/L
Revision No.:Reported By:Reviewed By:
AnalysisMethod
EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 245.1EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7
626705
10/10/20010JG/YL/SH^4-
DateAnalyzed
10/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/12/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/01
U=Not detected at specified reporting limits
CH2M HILLApplied Sciences Group
2300 NW Walnut Blvd. Corvollis. OR 97330-3538P O Box 428. Corvallis. OR 97339-0428
Tsl 54) 752 4271 Fax 541 752 0276
CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Laboratory
Client Information
Client Sample ID:
Project Name:Project Manager:
Sampled By:Sampling Date:Sampling Time:
Type:Matrix:Basis:
Analyte
Aluminum, AlAntimony, SbArsenic, AsArsenic, AsBarium, BaBeryllium, BeCadmium, CdChromium, CrCobalt, CoCopper, CuLead, PbMercury, HgMolybdenum, MoNickel, NiSelenium, SeThallium, TlVanadium, VZinc, Zn
Lab Information
METHOD BLANK
Lava CapRebeccaNANANAQCWater
Maco/SAC
Lab Sample ID:
Date Received:Report Revision No.:
Reported By:Reviewed By:
6267
NA0JG/YL/SH* Njl'* \ —j *"J M
As Received
MRL
1005.010.02.025.04.0•5.010.010.010.03.00.1025.020.07.010.025.020.0
SampleResult
1005.010.02.025.04.05.010.010.010.03.00.1025.020.07.010.025.020.0
Qualifier
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
Units
A/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/LA/g/L
AnalysisMethod
EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7SM3113BEPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 245.1EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7
DateAnalyzed
10/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/16/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/12/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/0110/15/01
U=Not detected at specified reporting limits
CH2M HILLAppned Sciences Group
23OONW Wo/nut Blvd. CcwaWs. OR 97330-3538PO Box 428 Corvatlls. OR 97339-0428
Tel 541 7524271 fox 541 7520276
CH2MHILL Applied Sciences LabCHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORDAND AGREEMENT TO PERFORM SERVICES
CVO 2300 NW Walnut BoulevardCorvallls, OR 97330-3538(541)752-4271 FAX (541) 752-0276
coc#Project #
l5UT7.Ofl.t-C.Purchase Order*
Project Name
G\/pme ICompany Name
CHZMJrteLL /SACReport to:
irnRequested Completion Date:
Sampling
Date Time
Type Matrix
Sample Disposal:
Dlapoa« Rfltuma n
CLIENT SAMPLE ID(8 CHARACTERS)
LABQC
Requested Analytical Method #
V-1
Preservative
THIS AREA FOR LAB USE ONLY
Page of
EPA Tier QC Level
1 (Screening) 2 3
Alternate Description Lab ID
to XX>3
L± /- — X Xr/
££.-:^
•-T, X XLC- ftxto y
J* XX /-C- ^XK x
Relinquished By Date/Time Received By Date/Time
.Sampled By and Title
/yrn /VU 1Relinquished By ™n») Date/Time /
inlm/ntReceived By (Pl««s« sign and prim name) Date/Time Relfnqulsheti By ' (Pl»ase »lgn and print nam«)) 7 Date/Time'
Shipping #
Special Instructions:
Instructions and Agreement Provisions on Reverse Side DISTRIBUTION: Original • LAB, Yellow • LAB, Pink • ClientPo./ ?/ni I ah firm I/in
CH2IV1HILLApplied Sciences Group Sample Receipt Record
Batch Number | (0 2JJ. Date/Time Received: J
Client/Project I fijjG( Temperature: | f_ "
VERIFICATION OF SAMPLE CONDITIONS (verify all items) * HD = Client Hand delivered Samples
ObservationWere custody seals intact and on the outside of the cooler?Was the Chain of Custody inside the cooler?Was the Chain of Custody property filled out?Were, the sample containers In good condition?Was there Ice in the cooler? f(jUUfH&/ i V/Z/
YES NO
If the answer to any of the questions above is NO, a Sample ReceipyExceptions Report Must be written.
VERIFICATION OF SAMPLE PRESERVATION (verify all preserved samples except HAAs, HANs and CH)
SampleNo1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829$0^
NutrientspH<2
X
Metals pH<2
£2-(
M /W
"
/
Volatiles
pH<2CyanidespH>12
-
TOCpH<2
-
Other(specify)
Other(specify)
N/A(soils/unpraa)
-
'// LOGIN AND pH VERIFICATIONS PERFORMED BYittMM to/io/A,Dale/Tune I 7 /
CH2MHILLApplied Sciences Group
Dat&Tum
2300 NW Walnut Blvd. Corvo/fe. OR 973303538P.O. Box423. CotvaOls. OR 97339^)428
Tel 541.752.4271 Fax541.7S2.0276
U/21/01 13:« ®541 752 °276CH2M HILL
^ SACRAMENTO @002/002
5TP7-COMP
Report of Analytical
•a-ssssssssssB Reference NO:tab S«wple ID!
^<<w ~»sk»Cm fel 5«i«M.K
. . j^-A < •« -W^v V J« < y. J-y*X«*t X V>;*^ X }< < XA ^X ' v^
•* V5 <<<*s!!> **"* y^ j* * **i>*:**'<'>''J ** "tix *.*'*'X 'h < x xg*-> ' < > vj !-^x> ^A Xxx; ><£. <xv x-t < > '-"I, >< x( Wwx x-xy x « X xx?xXjXjo' xx"x-x x v < f y > A X x' .•••<
< ' H^>^» < xvi*--. X X* < Xx^Vx X^AH^ f v X *• (Xx?-x-X X^ M X^x x X* x x XV>VA » X S v * ^ ^ A
</ y xv»-1x>--x---*nX>4X*<'.>x-;J)!:x>;*x<-< x ^ > > < A; x xj AV..X* <j> X>HJ x*-*x-j'J
117716)
fORM t0016
•
•
100
90
8O
70crUJ
H 60u.
z 50UJo£40Q-
30
2O
10
02C
Test20
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORTc
c c c:
C C C \ C ~ OO— - ~ *- — •<*- OJ OO O O OO •<*- O
i \ \ \ --fr «— (N -«f <O •<- (N
)O 1OO 1O.O
% + 3"0. 0
LL
% GRAVEL0.0
•q •M "Sv\\1\
V^v\
''sS»••-*X
^
1 .O O. 1 O . O 1 O .OO1
GRAIN SIZE - mm
% SAND36. 1
% SILT50.8
% CLAY
13. 1
PI DBSO. 136
^60 D50
O O48;
D30
> 0.0233
DI
O.OOf
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
' Sandy s I t
Project No.: 2016014-610
Pro jec t : Lava Cap Bench Study
• Locat on. Ca fo rn i a
Date: 1O-O8-01
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORT
EEI TESTING AND INSPECTION, INC.
5 D O52 O O019
usesML
Cc
4.27
cu
34. 7
AASHTO
A-4(0 0)
Rema rks :
Samp e- 5TP7
E i g No 4
FEI Testing & Inspection, Inc.Lava Cap Bench StudyProject 2016014-610
Table 1. Specific Gravity of Soils
(ASTM D 854)
SampleNumber
SampleDepth (feet)
Temperature
5TP7
20
20
Table 2. Natural Water Contents
SampleNumber
5TP7
SampleDepth (feet)
Natural WaterContent (percent)
22.2
Table 3. Sieve Analysis
Sieve Size
#10
#20
#40
#60
#100
#200
Percent Passing
5TP7
100.0
99.6
99.3
98.2
88.0
63.9
5H2IVIHILLipptied Sciences Group
CH2M Hill
Applied Sciences Group
2300 NW Walnut Hvd
CorvalNs. OR
97330-3538
PO Box 428
Cocvaltls. OR
97339-0428
Tel 541.752.4271
fax 541 7520276November 1, 2001
Lava Cap
156197.00.LC
RE: Laboratory Report for Lava CapApplied Sciences Group Reference No. 6158
Tim Maloney/CVO:
On September 20, 2001, CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Group received one sample with arequest for analysis of selected parameters. All analyses were performed by CH2M HILLunless otherwise indicated below.
The analytical results and associated quality control data are enclosed. Any unusualdifficulties encountered during the analysis of your samples are discussed in the casenarrative.
This report does not meet NELAC requirements for the following reasons:• Samples were received at a temperature of 22C with no ice.• NELAC has not provided our lab with accreditation for the following tests:
E245.5.
CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Group appreciates your business and looks forward toserving your analytical needs again. If you should have any questions concerning the data, orif you need additional information, please call Ms. Kathy McKinley at (541) 758-0235,extension 3120.
Sincerely,
(7Doug HardyLaboratory Representative
Enclosures
OR100022
PAGE 1
CH2MHILL Applied Sciences Lab CVO 2300 NWWalnut Boulevard
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD ^TSZ^'^W) 752-0278AND AGREEMENT TO PERFORM SERVICES ( ] ™ *™ FAX (541) 7
coc#Project #
^N l n A^N I CI ~A/0 \ \ j - ( L.) • LA—'
Purchase Order*
Project Name ,
uwrtv CA/P EWvh Su V^MCompany Name | /
Ctt?OA HTZL AS4CReport to:
_r -' /Phone No:
Requested Completion Date: I
C--A<£i
Sampling
Date
rH^Time
Type
COHP
X
QRAB
Matrix
WATER
S01L
X
A1R it
(
Sample Disposal:
Dlipos* ReturnD D
CLIENT SAMPLE ID(8 CHARACTERS)
517P7.' Cr
Relinquished By
Sampled By and Title (Plea» »lgn and print name)
/TOM i m tfTFHIffiffi**CVBtfcelved By \ (Pleaie ilgn and Jrlnt name
U
mtD
LABQC
Date/Time
Date/Time
fttofc/t/Date/rlme
T0TAL
*0F
C0NTA1NERS
Requested Analytical Method #
p-x
-7i
J'?. 0 1.
t
Preservative
X X X X,
Received By
Relinquished By (Please aign and print name)
Relinquished By (Please algn and print name)
Shipped ViaUPS Fed-Ex CVh*r
Special Instructions:
THIS AREA FOR LAB USE ONLY
Lab# '
EPA Tier QC Level
1 (Screening ) 2
Page,
"I
3 4
Alternate Description .
* AS , Sb;R•»*
C<\, Be -\A .Pk'.
Ha ^An Mt 5s. Aa,'Tl V .n x x —; ^
Lab ID
K- jf
'
Date/Time
Date/Time
Date/Time
Shipping #
Instructions and Agreement Provisions on Reverse Side DISTRIBUTION: Original • LAB, Yellmt • LAB, Pink - ClientRev 2/01 Lab form 340
CH2MHILLApplied Sciences Group Sample Receipt Record
Batch Number
Client/Project £M)
Date/Time Received:
Temperature: I
VERIFICATION OF SAMPLE CONDmONS (verify all items) * HD = Client Hand delivered Samplles
ObservationWere custody seals Intact and on the outside of the cooler?Was the Chain of Custody inside the cooler?Was the Chain of Custody properly filled out?Were the sample containers In good condition?Was there Ice In the cooler?
YES NO
If the answer to any of the questions above is NO, a Sample Receipt Exceptions Report Must be written.
VERIFICATION OF SAMPLE PRESERVATION (verify all preserved samples except HAAs, HANs and CH)
SampleNo123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930
NutrientspH<2
Metals pH<2
\
VolatilespH<2
CyanidespH>12
TOCpH<2
Other(specify)
-
Other(specify)
N/A(soils/unpt s)
^
_
/ \ LOGIN AND pH VERIFICATIONS PERFORMED BY
{MimMflti/Jj 3MMCH2M HILL
Applied Sciences Group
23CO NW Walnut Blvd. Comjfc OR 97330-3538PO Box 428 Con/offi OR 97339-0428
rel541 7524271 fax54} 7520276
Mr. Tim MaloneyCH2M HILL/CVO2300 NW Walnut BLVD.CH2M HILLCorvallis, OR 97339-3538
ColumbiaAnalyticalServices
Employee-Owned Company
Columbia Analytical Services ReportLava Cap Bench Study
D0105689/D5689
October 9, 2001
Submitted by:
Bryan JonesProject Manager/Client Services
This report contains a total of 1^ pages. (• ' . ; " : J_
5090 Caterpillar Rood • Redding, CA 96003 • Telephone (500) 244-5227 • Fax (530) 244-4109
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CAS Lab Reference No.: D5689Level 1C
PageNo.
Cover Page 1Table of Contents 2Current CAS Redding Accreditation Programs 3Sample Identification Cross-Reference 5
GENERAL CHEMISTRY 6Case narrative 7Sample results 8
Chain of Custody Documentation 10
0002
Sample ID Cross-reference Table
CAS Client Receive CollectLab Sample ID Sample 10 Date Date Sample Matrix Additional Description
FS = Field Sample
D5689001 FS 5TP7-COMP 09/31/01 09/17/01 00:00 Soil
The above lab sample ID'S and cross reference information apply to samples as received by the laboratory. Modifiersto the lab sample ID may be added for internal tracking purposes. Any modified sample ID w i l l be reflected in theappropriate case narrative only.
0005
Case NarrativeGeneral Chemistry
CAS Lab Reference No./SDG.: D5689
Project: Lava Cap Bench Study
I. RECEIPTNo exceptions were encountered unless a Sample Receipt Exception Report isattached to the Chain-of-Custody included with this data package.
II. HOLDING TIMESAll holding times were met.
III. METHODThe method used is cited in the corresponding Form I.
IV. PREPARATIONSample preparation proceeded normally, if applicable.
V. ANALYSISA. Calibration: All acceptance criteria were met.
B. Blanks: All acceptance criteria were met.
C. Spikes: All acceptance criteria were met.
D. Duplicates: All acceptance criteria were met.
E. Laboratory Control Samples: All acceptance criteria were met.
F. Samples: Sample analyses proceeded normally.
G. Other: No QA/QC except client requested QA/QC has been reported.
I certify that this data package is in compliance with the terms and conditions agreedto by the client and CAS, Inc., both technically and for completeness, except for theconditions noted above. Release of the data contained in this hardcopy data packagehas been authorized by the Laboratory Manager or designated person, as verified by thefollowing signature.
SIGNED: TS<Jw /*•***•*"— DATE: |Q /I /P |RicKy \JensenResource Chemist
Columbia 5090 Caterpillar Rd Phone No.: (530)244-5227Analytical Services Redding, CA 96003-1412 Fax No : (530)244-4109
0007
Report of Analytical Results
Client Sample ID: 5TP7-COMPSample Description: None
Sample Matrix: SoilSite: N/A
Date Collected: 09/17/01 00:00 (Mon)Date Received: 09/21/01 09:45 (Fri)
Reference No: D5689Lab Sample ID: D56S9001
CATEGORY NAMEAnalytical Parameter Result
Reporting Date/Time AnalyticalUnits Level of Analysis Hethod(s)
GENERALOrganic Matter
AGRICULTURALCation Exchange capacity
fl.10 10/01/01
roeq/lOOg 0.8 10/09/01 OQtOO SU9080
(17518)
Columbia Analytical Services -- ReddingFORM I
0008
Report of Analytical Results
Client Sample ID: METHOD BLANKSample Description: None
Sample Matrix: SoilSite: N/A
Date Collected: NoneDate Received: None
Reference No: LABQCLab Sample ID: Various
CATEGORY NAMEAnalytical Parameter Result
Reporting Date/Time AnalyticalUnits Level of Analysis Method(s)
GENERALOrganic Matter
AGRICULTURALCation Exchange Capaci ty < 0.8 meq/100g 0»8 10/09/Ot OOtPO SW9080
(17518)
Columbia Analytical Services -- ReddingFORM I
0009
CH2MHILL Applied Sciences LabCHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORDAND AGREEMENT TO PERFORM SERVICES
CVO 2300 NW Walnut BoulevardCorvallis, OR 97330-3538(541)752-4271 FAX (541) 752-0276
coc#Project #
ISUTKoo.LCPurchase Order #
Project Name
Lcwo,Company Name
C 2 M
Ewch,
/SAC
Requested Completion Date: 1
Sampling
Date Time
Type Matrix
Sample Disposal:
OltpoM R«uirnn n
CLIENT SAMPLE ID(8 CHARACTERS)
LABQC
M
o
Requested Analytical Method *
/JLJCT
Preservative
THIS AREA FOR LAB USE ONLY
Lab* Page of
EP^TieKQC Level"
1 (Screening ) 2 3
Alternate Description Lab ID
Y I £21 K. X-
OO
Special Instructions:
Instructions and Agreement Provisions on Reverse Side DISTRIBUTION: Original• LAB, Yellow- LAB, Pink• ClientRev 2/01 Lab form 340
01/16/2002 12:01 FA1 5302431654 CH2M DILL
—£ee~i0-2001 09:53 FT^: FOUNDATION ENGINEER 5417577650
-» SAC
TO: a
@002/002
P. 002'005
-O.Q10
* _/l ft/It
eO Dilation
Q °
O
ft
O n 1 A
O 0 1 5
4-
—
H*rf-
It
/I
-J- *|
_J
L
.. . ...
..4y_
-t-i-
i
i—
-.„. , A * r\
"i..i
?''
'if...
t*.
-- ~i§
--
*,,
,jIF-
-
„
•
-
-
-
:
-L
^
. ™-
h —
•
..,
. L
...
.
.H-
t*' "**
i
..
— -i
,..• • -
....
** ~~
"•
!/;
.-
:
F*
._»
»
t
-
\",.,
-~*
-|
._
"t"
_„.!
1
-..,
.«
t"
0 0.02500500.0790.100
Hortz. D t a p . , in
1 2.
4 f\
CL Q
«0V- A
v»
2 AJCCO
O
B
:
. .If.
._..
«- nr «i
Y
- -Y-
—
fr
7Ji
•ft'
/"nji
T-t
"r~r
tt
4-_4_
"V
4J T
.„
/:" •
^
i i
fi\~,
-—V,
~i~
i-
•-
/
f» =
..
.«!
...
!^
--
— «tr
. J
-.,
-. ~
i:
:±ti•tt
—
t
.-
...
-
-
:
:
^i^
T
1"
«• •
|
~t
0 0. 025 0.050 0. 075 0,1OO
Hor z . Dtsp l . . In
SAMPLE TYPE! eutk =ampi«DESCRIPTION: Grey sandy s i l t
ASSUMED SPECIFIC GRAVITY-. 2.65
REMARKS: Sample: 5TP7-Comp
Fig. No . : 4
RtSULIS
C. pal -0,00 ....... .
4- J | ^ Q ^ gg ..„-.*,., „„.*
c x . i A r » _ ^ ..^ _ ^
to y^ _ , „ ^ , « . .j, -^^ „ -.^,,,^ . - - - j, « * *.
£- J ^tA /
/ *UJ x* "tt R n — — . i - - « _ - _ «,_^ - _ _ _ „ - , . „ . _ / — - - , - ^^ - - . , — -. -
y . _ , _ . . s „, ,.i i2 " : : , 1 2: ; " i "u, ,-, yp « - -
/
"Jw
/ L^1 i
n t? jL0 8.0 16.0
Normal S trass, pat
/
p ~
* "
24.0
SAMPLE NO . : 1 2 3
WATER CONTENT ,7. 11.7 11.7 11.7
J DRY DENSITY, pcf 95.9 95.9 95.9
H SATURATION. % 42.6 42-6 42.6
S VOID RATIO 0.725 0.725 0.725R DIAMETER, in 2.51 2.51 2.51
HEIGHT, in 0.86 O.86 O.86
WATER CONTENT, % D.O O.O O.O
\- DRY DENSrTY, pcf 96. 0 96.4 97.1
U SATURATION, % O.O O.O O.O
^ VOID RATIO 0.72.3 0.717 O.7O5< DIAMETER. In 2.51 2.51 2.51
HEIGHT, in 0.86 0,85 0.85NORMAL STRESS, pal -V5 6.3 13.8FAILURE STRESS, psi 2.9 S.9 11.7
DISPLACEMENT, in O.O2 O.04 O.07ULTIMATE STRESS, pal
DISPLACEMENT, in
Stroin rote. %/m\r\ O.03 0.03 0.03
CLIENT: CH2M HI 1
PROJECT: Lava Cop Bench Study
SAMPLE LOCATION: CorvaMla, Oregon
PROJ . NO.: 2O16O14-61O DATE: 12-O5-O1
DIRECT SHEAR TEST REPORT
FEI TESTING AND INSPECTION, INC,
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST160 0
1 2O . Oa
w
Q)>COWQ)v_Q.EOO
80.0
40.0
0.00 O.3 0.6
Ax i a I S t ra i n ,
O.9 1 2
SAMPLE NO.: 1
Unconfined strength, psi 124.3
Undrained shear strength, psi 62.2
Fa i lure strain, % 0.9
Strain rate, %/min 0.25
Water content, 19.6
Wet density. pcf 1 1 7 1
Dry dens i ty, pcf 97.9
Satu ratian, % 75 4
Void ratio O 69O7
Specimen diameter, i n 2.86
Specimen height, in 5.71
Height/diameter ratio 2.00Description: 5% Lime Treated
ASS. GS= 2.65 Type: She I by Tube
Project No.: 2016014-610
Date: 11-21-O1
Rema rks
Fig No
Cl ien t : CH2M H i l l
Pro jec t : Lava Cap Bench Study
Location Co rva l I is, Oregon
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
TEE 1ES1LNG AND INSPECTION, INC.
UNCONFTNED COMPRESSION TEST440
330Q.
(D\_-H"
<D
WWQ)\_Q.EOO
220
1 10
0O 0.5 1 1
Ax iaI St ra i n, %
SAMPLE NO.: 1
Unconfined strength, psi 427
Undrained shear strength, psi 214
Fa i t ure st ra i n , 1 .5
Strain rote, %/n 0.25
Water content, 7, 19.2
Wet density, pcf 121 9
Dry density, pcf 102.3Satu rat i on , % 82 2
Void ratio O.6178
Specimen diameter, in 2.86
Specimen height, 5.73
Height/diameter ratio 2.00
Description: 10% Lime Treated
ASS. GS= 2.65 Type: Shelby Tube
Project No.: 2016014-610
Date: 11-22-O1
Rema r ks:
Fig No 3
C l i e n t : CH2M H i l l
Project: Lava Cap Bench Study
Location CorvalI is, Oregon
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
F t_L TESTING AND INSPECTION, INC.
UNCONFINED COMPRI SSION TEST760
570a
COwV-
00
0)
aeou
380
190
0O O 4
Ax i a
O 8 1 2
St ra i n , %
1 6
SAMPLE NO 1
Unconfined strength, psi 729
Und ra ined shears t renc j th , psi 365
Failure strain, % 1
Strain rate, %/mii 0 25
Water content, % 1 6 6
Wet density. pcf 1140
Dry density, pcf 97 7
Saturation, % 63 6
Vo id ratio O 6931
Specimen diameter, in 2 87
Specimen height, i n 5 74
Height/diameter ratio 2 00
Description 20% Lime Treated
ASS GS= 2 65 Type Shelby Tube
Project No 2016014-610
Date- 11-21-O1
Rema rks
Fi g No
C l l e n t CH2M H i l l
Project Lava Cap Bench Study
Loca tion Corva Mis, Oregon
UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST
f L 1 11 S I ENC AND JNSPf C ELON , INC
DEC-10-2001 09:53 FROM:FOUNDPTION ENGINEER 5417577650 TO: 2
Table 1. Permeability Test Specimen Data
P. 003-" 005
2-24
SampleIdentification
5%
Length(inches)
2.6BS
Diameter(inches)
#353
Water Content(percent)
Initial
1R.4
Final
3H5
Wet UnitWeight
(pcf)
us. a.
Dry UnitWeight
(pcH
*1&.&
RelativeCompaction
(percent)
X
Table 2. Permeability Test Data
SampleIdentification
/* **7& /o
*
Cell Pressure(psi)
Ho
HO
Head Pressure(psi)
$S
37
Back Pressure
3<?
3*
k(cm /sec)
3 £ ~0&
3£"°^
DEC-10-2001 09:54 FROM:FOUNDATION ENGINEER 5417577650 TO: P.004'005
2-24
Table 1. Permeability Test Specimen Data
SampleIdentification
*o%
Length(inches)
ass^
Diameter(inches)
3.86%
Water Content(percent)
Initial
I5,S
Final
X"
Wet UnitWeight
(pcf)
\)~7-H
Dry UnitWeight
<pcf>
\&\>&
RelativeCompaction
(percent)
-
Table 2, Permeability Test Data
SampleIdentification
*°z
Cell Pressure(psi)
40
10
Ho
Head Pressure(psi)
23
35
3?
Back Pressure(psi)
3o
3o
3=
k(cm/sec)
2 H -6
« e - - ?
-7 £• "7
DEC-10-2001 09:54 FROM:FOUNDATION ENGINEER 5417577650 TO: 2 P.005'005
2-24
Table 1. Permeability Test Specimen Data
SampleIdentification
°7°
Length(Inches)
Diameter(Inches)
P- $S&
Water Content(percent)
Initial Final
Wet UnitWeight
(pcf)
Dry UnitWeight
(pcf)
t&3.6
RelativeCompaction
(percent)
Table 2. Permeability Test Data
SampleIdentification
2°Z
Cell Pressure(psi)
10
w
fo
Head Pressure(psi)
33
35
37
Back Pressure(psi)
30
3o
k(cm/sec)
36"*
5 £ '*'
CH2MHILLApplied Sciences Group
November 8, 2001
Lava Cap
156197.00.LC
RE: Laboratory Report for Lava CapApplied Sciences Group Reference No. 6330
Rebecca Maco/S AC:
CH2M Hill
Applied Sciences Group
2300 NW Walnut Btvd
Cowallis OR
97.330-3538
PO Box 428
Ccxvallis. Of!
97339-0428
Tel 541.752 4271
Fax 541 7520276
On October 22, 2001, CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Group received three samples with arequest for analysis of selected parameters. All analyses were performed by CH2M HULLunless otherwise indicated below.
The analytical results and associated quality control data are enclosed. Any unusualdifficulties encountered during the analysis of your samples are discussed in the casenarrative.
This report does not meet NELAC requirements for the following reasons:• NELAC has not provided our lab with accreditation for the following tests: EPA
1312.
CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Group appreciates your business and looks forward toserving your analytical needs again. If you should have any questions concerning the data, orif you need additional information, please call Ms. Kathy McKinley at (541) 758-0235,extension 3120.
Sincerely,
Doug HardyLaboratory Representative
EnclosuresCc: Tim Maloney/CVO
OR100022
PAGE 1 of _L
CLIENT SAMPLE CROSS-REFERENCE
CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Group Reference No. 6330
Date TimeSample ID Client Sample ID Collected Collected
633001 LC5 10/22/2001 PM633002 LC10 10/22/2001 PM633003 LC20 10/22/2001 PM
CASE NARRATIVEMETALS
Lab Reference No.: 6330
Client/Project: Lava Cap
I- Holding Time:All acceptance criteria were met.
n. Digestion Exceptions:None.
HI. Analysis:
A. Calibration:All acceptance criteria were met.
B. ICP Interference Check Sample:All acceptance criteria were met.
C. Spike Sample(s):All acceptance criteria were met.
D. Duplicate Sample(s):All acceptance criteria were met.
E. Laboratory Control Sampte(s):All acceptance criteria were met.
F. ICP Serial Dilution:Not Required.
G. Other:None
IV. Documentation Exceptions:Samples are identified by their blend ratios with cement (ie. LC5 = 5% cement).
V. I certify that this data package is in compliance with the terms and conditions agreed to by theclient and CH2M HILL, both technically and for completeness, except for the conditions detailedabove. Release of the data contained in this hardcopy data package has been authorized by theLaboratory Manager or his designee, as verified by the following signature.
Prepared by:
,: -^L_/xi' J: xO_yReviewed by: .
C/
CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Laboratory
Client Information
Client Sample ID: LC5
Project Name: Lava CapProject Manager: Rebecca Maco/SAC
Sampled By: Doug HardySampling Date: 10/22/01Sampling Time: PM
Type: GrabMatrix: SPLP ExtractBasis: Extracted
Analyte
Antimony, SbArsenic, AsBarium, BaBeryllium, BeCadmium, CdChromium, CrCobalt, CoCopper, CuLead, PbMercury, HgMolybdenum, MoNickel, NiSelenium, SeSilver, AgThallium, TlVanadium, VZinc, Zn
MRL
5.010.01004.05.010.010.020.03.00.1025.020.07.010.010.025.050.0
SampleResult
5.016.61004.05.0
41.710.020.03.00.1025.020.07.010.010.025.050.0
Qualifier
U
UUU
UUUUUUUUUUU
Lab Information
Lab Sample ID: 633001
Date Received: 10/22/2001Report Revision No.: 0
Reported By: JG/SHReviewed By: -!>il -~
Units
//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L
AnalysisMethod
EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 245.1EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7
DateAnalyzed
11/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/01
U=Not detected at specified reporting limits
CH2M HILLApplied Sciences Group
2300 NW Walnut Blvd Conallis. OR 97330-3538P O Box 428 Corvofti OR 97339-0423
Tel 541 7524271 fox 541 7520276
CH2M HILL Applied Sciences Laboratory
Client Information
Client Sample ID; LC10
Project Name: Lava CapProject Manager: Rebecca Maco/SAC
Sampled By: Doug HardySampling Date: 10/22/01Sampling Time: PM
Type: GrabMatrix: SPLP ExtractBasis: Extracted
Analyte
Antimony, SbArsenic, AsBarium, BaBeryllium, BeCadmium, CdChromium, CrCobalt, CoCopper, CuLead, PbMercury, HgMolybdenum, MoNickel, NiSelenium, SeSilver, AgThallium, TlVanadium, VZinc, Zn
MRL
5.010.01004.05.010.0io.o20.03.0
0.1025.020.07.010.010.025.050.0
. SampleResult
5.015.21384.05.036.710.028.93.00.1025.020.07.010.010.025.050.0
Qualifier
U
UU
U
UUUUUUUUU
Lab Information
Lab Sample ID: 633002
Date Received: 10/22/2001Report Revision No.: 0
Reported By: JG/SHReviewed By: 2*^
Units
//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L//g/L
AnalysisMethod
EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 245.1EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7EPA 200.7
DateAnalyzed
11/06/011 1/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/011 1/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/0111/06/011 1/06/0111/06/01
U=Not detected at specified reporting limits
CH2M HILLApplied Sciences Group
23OONW Walnut BM. Corvoffls. OR 9733O-3538PO Box 426. Corvollls. OR 97339-O42S
Tel 54! 752 4271 Fax 541 752 0276
CH2MHILL Applied Sciences Lab CVO 2300 NW Walnut BoulevardCorvallls, OR 97330-3538
UMA N Uf UUS 1 UUY HtUJHU C5411 7S? 4?71 FAX fMD 75!" n?7fi J*>AND AGREEMENT TO PERFORM SERVICES (541)7524271 FAX (541) 752 0276
..<Project # Purchase Order #
Project Name
Company Name
Report to: Phone No:
Requested Completion Date:
Sampling
Date
/C/Z2.
|
Jfi-
Time
f/Y\
Type
C0MP
QRAB
X/i
Matrix
WATER
S01L
[
r
A1R S
Sample Disposal:
Di«po«« Return
CLIENT SAMPLE ID(8 CHARACTERS)
L
L
L
^C.
c.
<z11
o0
Relinquished By
*5a?ftpledBy andTttle (Pjiaia «ign and prlnl namal -,
•*- — • A / /
^fffM^^/fi^l^ff xReceived" BV ' (Ptoasesldnandn/inTnama) /
LABQC
Date/Time
DateOlme,*
, (Sate/Time
YLl/O/^Date/Time
Special Instructions:
T0TAL
f
0F
C0NTA
NERS
coc#^Requested Analytical Method #
V)Ih* 0-o
Preservative
X1i
y^iL
Received By
FjBllngulshed By . 1 (Plea»« »lgn and print nama)
Rellnqulshecf&y ^Please sign and print name)
( JT*\Shipped Via ,—UPS Fed-Ex C^wher l *^*-*^*-
^^'
THIS AREA FOR LAB USE ONLY
Lab#
It&b
EPA Tier QC Level
1 (Screenlng^Z)
Page of
3 4
Alternate Description Lab ID
^1-1.
"?>
Date/Time
Date/T my
Date/Time
Shipping #
Instructions and Agreement Provisions on Reverse Side DISTRIBUTION: Original - LAB, Yellow- LAB, Pink • ClientRev 2/01 Lab form 340
GH2MHILLApplied Sciences Group Sample Receipt Record
Batch Number
Client/Project [
Date/Time Received:
Temperature: A//VERIFICATION OF SAMPLE CONDITIONS (verify all items) * HD = Client Hand delivered Samples
ObservationWere custody seals Intact and on the outside of the cooler?Was the Chain of Custody Inside the cooler?Was the Chain of Custody properly filled out?Were the sample containers .In good condition?Was there tee In the cooler?
YES NO
If the answer to any of the questions above is NO, a Sample Receipt Exceptions Report Must be written.
VERIFICATION OF SAMPLE PRESERVATION (verify all preserved samples except HAAs, HANs and CH)
SampleNo123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930
NutrientspH<2
/~\
Metals pH<2
*
VolatilespH<2
CyanidespH>12
TOCpH<2
Other(specify)
Other(specify)
N/A(soils/unpres)
f
.
^
LOGIN AND DH VERIFICATIONS PERFORMED BY
CH2M HILLApplied Sciences Group
Oate/Tlme
23OONW Walnut Blvd, Corvallls. OR 97330-3538PO Box 42d Corvallls. OR 97339-0428
Tel 541 752 4271 fax 541 752 0276
CH2M HILL
2525 Airpark Drive
Redding, CA 96001
Tel 530.243.5831
Fax 530.243.1654
CH2MHILL
April 5,2002
151319.TT.01
Mr. Dave Seter (SFD-7-4)U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX75 Hawthorne StreetSan Francisco, CA 94105
Dear Dave:
Subject: Technical Memorandum-Treatability Study ReportLava Cap Mine Superfund Site
Please find enclosed two (2) copies of the Technical Memoradum-Treatability Study Report,Lava Cap Mine Superfund Site, dated April 2002 for your review. This Report summarizesthe treatability study conducted between August 2001 and October 2001 on mine seepagetreatment and tailings dewatering and solidification for the Lava Cap Mine site.
Please call me at 775 329-7238 x213 if you have any questions on the attached document or ifyou require additional copies.
Sincerely,
CH2M HILL
David TowellProject Manager
RDD/tsJtr.doc