LQGJ3F BQRING AND WELLL ANGSTON LABORATORIES, INC. Research • Testing • Problem Solving 2005 W. 103rd Terrace (B) • Leawood. KS 66206-2695 • Ph./FAX 913-341-7800 LABORATORY

MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION REPORT75".2 3 J

Wellfo-^- i -o.- r '«• S - DTi -^ - -

Top of Seal Elev-Type of Seal Material

-Top of Filter ElevType of Filter Material

-Size of Openings^Q_i_E-

-Diometer ofTip a."\8 . ^ c W

-Bottom of Well Elev..

i_^u_—EJottom of Boring ElevU—-H——Diameter of Boring

Remarks _ _ S~ F* e-T To f

SK»T

MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION REPORTWell No.

ite NameActivity _ Installed By

I nrntinn Kcc. Ic./- ST/-«-eT R o . 10

Dote ^/'7/ 81____ Timo i>o e>

Method of Installation .i-> T.w. »'.-j_l-i^_4'£ f-l-JB.. , U-I"*,, LI .- -S" Pe«.X

S P o o tvi —— £ •*• ~>.yi l^c /—. .. ,S O ' .'"...N .__

e- t .>. ->

'So «4"-t o cT ft«-i«o»'*-Oi«. 6-*

S.V.T

"V s,o c 5

of 17. 3T|»«»T

(A

Inside Top of Protect iveCasing

Type of Protect iveCasing

"

L2

L4=-^-_PTL7

'J7. 5"i a-

/̂w^^^

-ID. of Riser Pipe a.^Type of Pipe F^SS

Type of Backfill Around

TO* 'i ~^j——Top of Seal Elev lit,?^4——Type of Seal Material ——

E-1 -f Openings _iJDJ-S__— Diameter of

Tip * 5*(» .-**K———

—Bottom of Well Elev. ±12̂ 3

._.__——..._|;^:v-'••;:':L—Bottom of Boring Elev. JL&lf£U—-*J——Diameter of Boring fc ^fe i-

ernorks _ M * a- DO

-Qt ft*]) ff»'~ TO g

MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION REPORTfcp C.

Activity Instolled Ry 5. . C

Well No. e^A * \Locution £''"• ? - T ^ e T go .Dote f t />7/t ts Time f3c

Method of Installation »**'TI«f o--a. , r-fc, n-«f ; M - '*} oftT-A.-rji ky H y f l x^^-

QCHMITZSERVICES P.A.

KANSAS CITY, KANSAS

.IDRNAMF cftf- OCT. C.fean Up PAGE __/___ OF .PARTY CHIEF ^J. &-.L,™,'-ti. JOB # ________INRTRUMFNTMAN ________ DATF V ~ / ~ ?RODMAN_____-J- G^^^-e._____ WEATHER_C

BM

/•f-SO (-'

0 i 15 "JilO Line

73

4-7V -

v -

V6-7

/oo3. 30

/oo3./7

/(*

/003.71 tf^Q.2.^ C.- 23 '

l-ao. C- &Ik'

.c-i\ -.

14 r'. & £ •

7$'

-

BORING LOGSHEET 1 OF

PROJECT NAME C K c /*» i c * C fa r^ ~t e> . n«-5 — O(_*,~H\.t PROJECT NO. k 1 "i i) *\/ ' ' * 7

' *""*" #/J A»X^i-^_ ^/^(*»*.S

_V»'h«Vrt>~'S UT. fi-^-CT*..^^ p,̂ c 7,»,^«^

- —

u.s.c. SPECIAL NOTES ANDFIELD OBSERVATIONS

V" 0.« ^TA.

>— ̂ -»tt- /MHKai >v V> -giu. > 001.°

Ov> ^ ^ ft (___ —

—

—

?£ :.««', »,.•«-ftoYf*'^ »P &»'•*** J

-2.-}. 0 FT. -

BORING LOGSHEET I OF I

PROJECT NAMF

LJAIt ±Jfil

SIO. top oP US -

23. 3 FT.

^1^1 ir-*r~ & IS*N

BORING LOGSHEET I OF '

PROJECT NAME cL«.,. l l fc.c C t, ,k ,•> o o , Ti t .f ~ O^l-.t PROJECT NO. fij;?, ̂

K 1C PR

SURFACE ELEVATION

DEPTH

0 -

$—

/o —

i*-

-

-

-

JiO

LO

DATE ^ / t / ^ l

OJECT LOCATION t o o - ~iXT3 S. C»ialv^ RIG /Vc

L ANGSTON LABORATORIES, INC.Research • Testing • Problem Solving

2005 W. 103rd Terrace (B) • Leawood. KS 66206-2695 • Ph./FAX 913-341-7800

LABORATORY REPORT

CLIENT: Chemical Commodities, Inc,300-320 S. Blake St.P. 0. Box 155Olathe, KS 66061

ATTN: Jerald Gershon

RECEIVED: November 21, 1988COMPLETED: Dececber 5, 1988

I.LI NO.: 88-8899

SAMPLE DESCRIPTION: Water Sample

SAMPLEIDENTIFICATION

MW II

ANALYSIS

ArsenicBariumCadmiumChromiumLeadMercurySeleniumSilver

RESULTS

0.006 ag/llter0.206 mg/llter< 0.001 ag/liter< 0.010 mg/llter0.003 mg/liter< 0.001 Bg/llter< 0.001 mg/llter0.003 mg/llter

CHEMIST

BSMT

MTMTMT

MTBSMT

DATEANALYZED

12/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/5/8812/1/8812/2/8812/5/88

APPROVED:ith A. Russell

iboratory Manager

G 0000669


"7L S-i I C


MW II

ANALYSIS

PesticidesAlpha-BHCBeta-BHCDelta-BHCGamma-BHCHeptachlorAldrinHeptachlor EpoxldeAlpha-EndosulfanBe ta-EndosulfanDieldrin4,4'-DDDEndrln4,4'-DDE4.4'-DDTEndosulfan SulfateMethoxychlorEndrln AldehydeToxapheneChlordanePCB-1221PCB-1232PCB-1242PCB-1248PCB-1254PCB-1260PCB-1016

RESULTS

< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 up/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 vg/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter< 1.0 ug/liter

CHEMIST

CCCC

CCCC

a.CG

CGCC

CG

CGCG

CG

CGCGCGCG

CGCGCGCGCGCGCGCGCGCG

DATEANALYZED

12/5/8812/5/8812/5/8812/5/8812/5/8812/5/8612/5/8812/5/8812/5/8812/5/8812/5/8812/5/8812/5/8812/5/8812/5/8812/5/8812/5/8812/5/8812/5/8812/5/8812/5/8812/5/8812/5/8812/5/8812/5/8812/5/88

C 0000670

\IC( S



MW fl

ANALYSIS

ChloronethaneBroDooethaneVinyl ChlorideChloroethaneMethylene ChlorideAcetoneCarbon Bisulfide1,1-Dichloroethene1.1-Dlchloroethane1.2-Dichloroethene (total)Chloroform1,2-Dlchloroethane2-Butanone1,1,1-TrichloroethaneCarbon TetrachlorideVinyl AcetateBromodichloromethane1,2-Dichloropropaneci«-l,3-DlchloropropeneTrlchloroetheneDibromochloromethane1,1,2-TrlchloroethaneBenzenetrans-1,3-DichloropropeneBromofonn4-Methyl-2-Pentanonte2-HexanoneTetrachloroethene1,1,2,2-TetrachloroethaneTolueneChlorobenzeneEthylbenzeneStyreneXylene (total)

RESULTS

< 10 ug/liter< 10 ug/liter< 10 ug/liter< 10 ug/liter< 5 ug/llter< 5 ug/liter< 5 up/liter2,995 ug/liter< 5 ug/liter< 5 ug/liter1,562 ug/liter3,734 yg/liter< 5 ug/liter6,590 wg/liter1,716 ug/liter< 5 ug/liter< 5 ug/literI,992 ug/liter< 5 ug/literII,112 ug/liter< 5 ug/liter< 5 ug/liter105 ug/liter< 5 ug/liter< 5 ug/liter< 5 ug/liter< 5 ug/liter13,240 ug/liter720 ug/liter326 ug/llter1,761 ug/liter< 5 ug/liter< 5 ug/liter< 5 ug/liter

CHEMIST

MRMR

MR

MR

MR

MP

MR

MR

MR

MRM?:MRMR

MR

MR

MRMR

MRMRMR

MRMRMRMRMRMRMR

MR

MRMRMR

MR

MR

MR

ANALYZED

12/2/88

12/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/8812/2/88

c 0000671

LABO~MX»Y SERVICES AND RESEJ**CHEK ,RONMZKTAL ORGANIC LABORATv. /

TOPEKA, KANSAS 66620*1

REPORT TO:ADDRESS:

GC/MS\s

ANALYSIS REPORT

JIM FISCHERNED-OFFICE, LAWRENCE, KS.

IRE

SAMPLE COLLECTION INFORMATION

SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER: #01 SAMPICOLLECTION SITE: CHEMICAL COMMODITIES; OLATHE, KS. (JCOLLECTED BY: JIM FISCHER DATE: 11-18-8

RESULTS OF ANALYSIS

PURGABLE ORGANICS

CHLOROMETHANEBROMOMETHANEVINYL CHLORIDECHLOROETHANEDICHLOROMETHAME1,1-DICHLOROETHYLENE1.1-DICHLOROETHANETRANS &/OR CIS 1,2-DICHLOROETHYLENETRICHLOROMETHANE (THM)1.2-DICHLOROETHANE1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANETETRACHLOROMETHANEBROMODICHLOROMETHANE (THM)1,2-DICHLOROPROPANBTRANS 1,3-DICHLOROPROPENETRICHLOROETHYLENEBENZENEDIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE (THM)CIS 1,3-DICHLOROPROPENE1,1,2-TRICHLOROETHANEBROMOFORM (THM)1,1,2,2-TETRACHLOROETHANBTETRACHLOROETHYLENETOLUENECHLOROBENZENEETHYLBENZENEMETA-XYLENEORTHO fc/OR PARA-ZYLENE1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE1,2-DICHLOROBENZENB1,4-DICHLOROBENZENEETHYLENE DIBROMIDB

CONCENTRATION(UG/L)

NOT DETECTEDNOT DETECTED1.2

NOT DETECTED18.88626.016611109090130096902.5651NOT DETECTED612000.6NOT DETECTEDNOT DETECTEDNOT DETECTED4.0104096195.24334.72.4

11.4NOT DETECTEDNOT DETECTED745401

DETECTION LIMIT(UG/L)5.01.20.83.70.90.60.50.50.30.60.70.70.50.50.80.60.50.70.90.61.50.61.10.50.50.70.60.61.01.01.0

ANALYST: RICHARD L. PIERCE

COPY TO: TOM GROSS, FORBES BLDG 730

Well not developed when sample collected.Will sample again 1n near_future.

ROGER H. CARLSON, PH.D., DIRECTOR

ic. D. :•:. E.*C 0000672

F.E. YOUNG DRILLING CO., INC. u6355 ROBINHOQO LANE • MERRIAM, KANSAS 66203 • PHONE: (913) 432-2772 / 262-2233 / 631-8413 c

AAOA"^AGREEMENT FOR DRILLING HOLE:

Agreement has been reached between F. E. Young Drilling CompanyIncorporated and the buyer to drill a hole approximately 16 fec_t_deep and install 4" saw slotted plastic pipe with a cap oh the_ Top_ andbottoms "All drilling is to be done tftrough~naturaT~ToTmaTIons with nosand, gravel, or dirty fill material. The cost of the hole and casingas outlined above will be Five Hundred Dollars and no cents ($500.00)no tax included.

If sand, gravel, dirty fill or any other obstruction is encountered,the cost for drilling the hole shall be One Hundred Thirty FiveDollars per hour ($135.00/hr) portal to portal plus the cost forcasing, drilling mud and mud pits.

Testing or other delays requested by the customer will be charged at arate of *135'/hr.

We will not be responsible for damage from mud run off, removal ofcuttings or damage to property or lawn from movement of trucks or thedrilling operation. Customer is toprovide access to locations including, but not limited to, gradingand towing on and off the Job site and be responsible for ALLUNDERGROUND UTILITIES.

TERMS: CASH UPON COMPLETION: Cash upon completion of rig work.Daily interest at an annual rate of 18X will be added to overdueaccounts. If the total amount due is not paid by the date due, Thebuyer agrees to , pay for all collections costs including reasonableattorneys /

SPOUSE

ADDRESS / ] TELEPHOH

cc.'Mf-To: •'•'.•'""•• ______CITY STATE ZIP F. E. Young Drill

C 0000673

WELL A PUMP CONTRACTORS • WATER WELLS • GAS WELLS • OH Wf 11

!. |

t

0—

î

j . r—

mmfm^^~

v Iplt̂

plii I

:•. 4/j,̂

4;.:sA&

^132 s!.... -

. .,.

.". ^

i*'

' l^?P

::/4

USE TYPEWRITER OR BALLPOINT PEN-PRESS FIRMLY,PRINT CLEARIV

WATER WELL RECORDKSA 82o-l20l-1215

RECEIVED

JUN 1,Komos Deportment of iEnvironment-Division of Environment

. Location of well:

County Fraction Section number

33.

Township number

' 13 «bRange number

R .33.2. Distance and direction from nearest town or city: •*> |̂ f̂ j

Street address of well location if in city

3. Owner of well: (jU

R . R . or street

City, stare, zip code:

uJol-f-e-

4. Locate wi th "X" in section below:

t, 1_ - NW - -

11|1

_ _ sw - -1i

i- - NE--

1111

- - SE11

hoo'

5

5. Type and color of material

S /^ /9 /

*-" Oi „?>! t'-C \ to-^-MOO/l t~ I

County:

.OF WATER WELL:

^ j. to

tl ^ I WA'ER WbLL RECORDI Fractioi| A/£J>r 5

Form WWC-5 KbASection Number

Distance ark) direction from nearest town or city street address of well if located within dty?

JtJ WATER WELL OWNER:/

Township NumberI— T 13 s

Range NumberR S3 EAT

"|x^B L

WATER WELL OWNER:(dress, Box #

City, .?)P_Code__31 LOCATE WELL'S LOCATION WITH

AN "X" IN SECTION BOX:N

2 W

„ SJW --^^

_ _ SW - -

11

*-•;-ii1

- - SEI1

-vxy4 DEPTH OF COMPLETED WELL. . . . .«. < . . . . ft ELEVATION:/.*7«.

Board of Agriculture, Division of Water Resourc_AppJicaljon Nurnber: »^2) reconstructed, or (3) plugged under my jurisdiction and was(mo/day/year) . . . .! /~ //7 / 0. * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . and this record Is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. Kansason l

,il Contractor's Licensethe business name

STRUCTIONS: Use typewriter or ball point pen PLEASE

This Water Well Record was letpd on (mo/(signature) -

PRINT clearly Please fill in blanks unde'line or ciro% irre correct answers Send lop

,//partmenl ol Health and Environment. Bureau ot Water Proi«-dion. TopeiTa. Kansas 666?0-7320. Telephone: 913-862-9360 Send one to WATER WEL-_ OWNER and retain one tor yourords

. .LJ_ _._:_•_•. _«^ .>\s_L-.it'l LJtllLOCATION; OF WATER WELL:

L LVI Fraactior

County:om

Section Number3 G,

Township NumberT 13 s

» wI Range NumberDistanco and direction from nearest town or city street address of well If located within cHy?

2j WATER WELL OWNERRP *li'l~6v,/ri* .^fil

Was a chemical/bacteriological sample submitted to Department? Yes. .t-^\... No. ...........; If yes, mo/day/yr sample was sulmined fj^y/fff ______ Waler Well Disinfected? Yes No

^llt'-nij .2J LOCATION OF WATER WELL:County: 1 WAT 'ELL RECORD Form WWC-5 KSA 82a-1k C* "3Fraction Section Number _.ownship NumberJT___Q S Range NumberDistance and direction from nearest town or city street address of well If located within city?

2) W - WELL OWNER: faRR< Idress. Box *City, s>.~v>, ZIP Code

31 LOCATE WELL'S LOCATION WITH-1 AM -v" IM ccorirvw ariv-AN "X IN SECTION BOX:

N

W

_- NW --

_ _ SW - -

11

*-?-•I1

- - st11

. .f ~ l - t L ( J Board of Agriculture

Application Number:

5 *mire îvisiion of Water Resources

t..P.

5j TYPE OF BLANK CASING USED:1 Steel 3 RMP (SR)

S'^VC^) 4 ABSBlank casing diameter . . ,O. . . . . . *-.Tt to . . .j.-. . i. .

i / *~*'Casing height above land surface. . . . . . / . . D~t*>. . .TYPE OF SCREEN OR PERFORATION MATERIAL:

1 Steel 3 Stainless steel2 Brass 4 Galvanized steel

SCREEN OR PERFORATION OPENJNJjS ARE1 Continuous slot2

DEPTH OF COMPLETED WELL. . . . .'.TV. 7 ... ft ELEVATION:Depth(s) Groundwater Encountered 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ft. 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ft. 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ftWELL'S STATIC WATER LEVEL . . . . . . . . . . . ft. below land surface measured on mo/day/yr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pump test data: Well water was . . . . . . . . . . . ft. after . . . . . . . . . . . hours pumpingEsl Yield . . . . . . . . gpm: Well water was . . . . . . . . . . . ft. after . . . . . . . . . . . hours pumpingBore Hole Diameter. . . & . . . .In. to . . . . . .( V.'..?..... .ft., and. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .In. to . . . . . . . . . . . . .WELL WATER TO BE USED AS: 5 Public water supply 8 Air conditioning 11 Injection wen

1 Domestic 3 Feedlot 6 Oil field water supply 9 Dewatering 12 Other (Specify below)2 Irrigation 4 Industrial 7 Lawn and garden only 10 Observation well

Was a chemical/bacteriological sample submitted to Department? Yes..^^~...No............; If yes, mo/day/yr sample was sub-mitted j I £, I ^f Water Well Disinfected? Yes No

gpmgpm

. . .n.

5 Wrought iron 8 Concrete tile CASING JOINTS: Glued6 Asbestos -Cement 9 Other (specify below) Welded7 Fiberglass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (JTveaded

.. ft , Dla . . . . . . . . . . . . .in. to . . . . . . . . . . . . .ft . Dia . . . . . . . . . . . . . in. loweight . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • • • • • • • • • • Ibs./ft. Wall thickness or gauge No.

. . Clamped .

5 Fiberglass6 Concrete tile

_7_PVC~8 RMP (SR)9 ABS

5 Gauzed wrapped6 Wire wrapped

10 Asbestos-cement11 Other (specify) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 None used (open hole)

8 Saw cut 11 None (open hole)9 Drilled holes

SCREEN-PERFORATl

1AVEL PA

mentg_rouE> ^.^^^Bentor^e^) 4 Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .—— — —

WELL RECORD Form WWC-5 KSA 82a- (CDHCtt]J LOCATION OF WATER WELL:

County: '3vb \\ n 1 o jdLb JL15~

21 C"*

BASING USED:3 RMP (S4 ABS

»nd surface. . . .R PERFORATIO

3 Stainles4 Galvanlj

=IATION OPENINt T, O ̂

'£>x-yt>y. ~Y (W

mitted 1 1 Is I f~J W

1

MONITORS WELL INSTALLATION REPORT

Name '- •• • > • •>•••'• : -.••••• .•'>•.< - ;. - ,_.„•. A ,MCt

Method

-^

jv i ty No, } >.J2. . ' _ _ ' _ _ Installed By > H ̂ • .- . , i'.. i - ' , - . ;/. 5

of Installation I'J'~I «•» A ^ r < r o,_;$-- t 8-1 u - i-O ° B T * , - " _ O bv Hv,ft,

-^ Ĵl!L

WeLocofioDote Z

„ Mn ^t"\ -« ^

r, t i '-. '• - .- r f T P o . Time /5o o

« / ! « PVSV ' - ' i t e ̂ «• t, Q 0

' ' "*"" Y / £ " / ' » • J/ '

' i

LOG OF BORING AND WELLBORIf

GRND

JC .

O •-

- o — '

- /o -

-

-to -

ark.> *v »~

*Q

Elev. /000.7

Description

ci^ ciii P ' ^

^—— '"' *^'7,^tk|te/

S K A l t . ...1 * - \ «^4i.^ _ T * * / J * > « € ? * 1 ' 7 ^ / * ^ j ( ' C

' f ' ' / /l~» t a.+'Kf -t o

oJD

>s

FiuL

cu

CH

Inside Top ofCasing Elev.

Protec t i ve

Top of RiserElev. /ool.li

xl-̂ >iX^

L,. 2. SI.

II= (»FT

^:S,

I

-7

I

I

I

5 _

I

I

r, — -Type of Protect ive

x^ CasingfS S^o * - *"i /" »

Jl j V •"*• ——— *

iilj!1

1ifis/

i '£L ..̂-- — -ID. of Riser Pioe ~3. ,^e.iv

Type of Pipe Flui u— ' tfl.^-r Pwc

V

- —— Type of Bockfill AroundRiser t*^»—T- *«.«r«-'re

| V———

^j —— Top of Senl Flev 3 9 1 .1^4 —— Type of Seal MaterialOj 0^-Tt>-.Te. felUTi

\|

^

-^j ——— Top nf Filter Flew

LOCATION OF WATER WELL:xinty:. */""// ' • ' ^*"' /( . D

___wAj_fcH WELLFraction

form WW'J-5 KbA tua-1 /->...Cod_e___lIouL-rl

'C.

LOCATE WELL S LOCATION WITHAN X IN SECTION BOX:

N

- - Nf--* I

I

_L

4J DEPTH OF COMPLETED WELL . . /-5V/Ci. ... ft ELEVATION:

Board of Agriculture. Division of Water ResourcesApplication Number: $_, rpaic t£i./" " '

.ft.Depth(s) Groundwater Encountered 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ft. 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ft. 3.WELL'S STATIC WATER LEVEL . . . . . . . . . . . ft. below land surface measured on mo/day/yr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pump test data: Well water was . . . . . . . . . . . ft. after . . . . . . . . . . . hours pumping . . . . . . . . . . . gpmEsl Yield . . . . . . . . gpm: Well water was . . . . . v . . . . . ft. after . . . . . . . . . . . hours pumping . . . . . . . . . . . gpmBore Hole Diameter S/l-v . . .in. to ...../ J^.y^, . . . . .ft., and. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .in. to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ft.WELL WATER TO BE USED AS: 5 Public water supply 8 Air conditioning 1 1 Injection well

1 Domestic, 3 Feedlot 6 Oirfleld water supply y 9 Dewaterlng .12 Other (Specify below)2 Irrigation 4 Industrial 7 Lawn and garden only 10 Observation well A/^/- •/•T l̂/Q lA'/f/j

Was a chemical/bacteriological sample submitted to Department? Yes ............No.,X......; If yes, mo/day/yr sample was submitted Water Well Disinfected? Yes . No

5 Wrought iron6 Asbestos-Cement

8 Concrete tile9 Other (specify below)

CASING JOINTS Glued X . • • ClampedWelded . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . Threaded. . . . . . . . . . .

.ft . Dla . . . . . . . . . . . . . In. toin., weight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ibs./ft. Wall thickness or gauge No. *£

TYPE OF BLANK CASING USED:1 Steel 3 RMP (SR)

(jTpyC^ 4 ABS _ / 7 Rberglass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ank casing diameter ... .j. ...... .in. to . . ./~:y< &?• . . ft., D i a . . . . . . . . . . . . .In. to . . . . . . . . .asing height above land surface. . . . a?*j. . . . . .fPE OF SCREEN OR PERFORATION MATERIAL

3 Stainless steel4 Galvanized steel

CjLJSaw9 Drilled holes

10 Other (specify) . . . . .. . .ft., From . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ft.. . .ft., From . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ft.

•• 1 Steel2 Brass

2REEN OR PERFORATION OPENINGS ARE:1 Continuous slot < 3 Mill slot2 Louvered shutter 4 Key punched

CREEN-PERFORATED INTERVALS: From. .From. .

7 PVC5 Fiberglass 8 RMP (SR)6 Concrete tile 9 ABS

5 Gauzed wrapped6 Wire wrapped7 Torch cut / ,

. . . . . . ft. to ..

. . . . . . ft. to ..

10 Asbestos-cement11 Other (specify).................12 None used (open hole)

11 None (open hole)

'EL PACK INTERVALS: From.From

ft. to .ft. to

to.to.

£?. . . . .ft.. From . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ft. to.ft., From_____________ft. to

GROUT MATERIAL:rout Intervals: From.tiat Is the nearest source

1 Septic tank2 Sewer lines

Neat cemenT^)... ft. to __£

possible contamination:4 Lateral lines5 Cess pool

2 Cement grout 3 Bentonite 4 OtherFrom . . . . . . . . . . . . ft. to.

3 Watertight sewer lines 6 Seepage pitIrectton from wen? ______

7 Pit privy8 Sewage lagi9 Feedyard jrpisii

. . . . . . . . . . ft.. From .10 Livestock pens11 Fuel storage

storagele storagefeet?

C;

....... ft. to .........14 Abandoned water welt15 Oil well/Gas well16 Other (specify below)

feMCAJ- • •LrrHOLOGIC LOOFROM TO LITHOLOGIC LOG

n UtU i1*. DIVISION OF

VtFONMF

+CL

COimple>

'OR'S OR LANDOWNER'S. CERTIFICATION: This water welt ', mo/day/year) . . . .

reconstructed, or (3) plugged under my jurisdiction and was~Ind this record is true to the best of

ater Well Contractor's License No . '.in'. rf.

oD

epth

§

. rY

T, i

i 1

i i i

i I

i ivi

,

; aT

*. ._

_!--'

~ I IX

IJ-!

< ̂

(\

%

^ r

Jo

^

v

^

*i ^

*! r

i» -X

) v

\ i

^1 S

, F

*A

«^

^ .̂

r»

p

S

r

^ «r

\ r

r\ r-

h-

?*"*

1 r

• * i

'r

t>

1

5>

s u 1

^ynool

^S

tratig

rap

hy

*

H P 3 -D «0 o « M n r̂* O 3

1 •

•o § o

t»

w—t

o

no

H

=

**

"

A

» ?

3a • T> ff

ff "n TJ r> I -n f

3: a z: i~iS

?«

a«

Sif

^«

t '

"••

-,

c, |-

o 2

i —TJ

*

'O •n u. 1 o p

« Q

5

ŝ o p p̂• 4 3 u u •

»

» —

——

1

n z:

^~< •

»^

S-

&

Z&

?

^ 1 X

s>

s '-\ ^

Client".MONITOR WELL INSTALL- IDN

Veil No,'

Top of Steel Casing'

Total D»pthi _ / y.

Conner»t»» _________

a& Sy

ntoo

tS

tra

tig

rap

hy

Sanple Description

Conplv-tion Data

It-

68.

VESTDN REACEDISDN, NJ

MONITOR WELL INSTALLS 'ONEPA-ER1 No.'

Top Casing*.

Total Drpthi

c » T«

Synt

oot

rati

gra

ph

ySample Description

Completion Data

A

C >

(/• __

r-

7 -

WESTDN REACEDISON, NJ

ClientMLJNITGR WELL INSTALLATTQN

EPA-ER..——————. Job No..———_______ Doit. Drill.*

Total D*pthi

Conn»nt«i __

W»U NO.I .

Pad Top of St»fl Casing'

£

a

Syn

boi

ratig

rap

hy

Sanple Description

Conplftlon Data

'5-

/(-I Iff 5

Client.

Site.

.Inh

'/.'L _ IMCTA _ 'TIG.N" . tj* Dot* No.' eer3t

Total

Connentsi

Pad / &QQ ~ > Top of Sieel Casing' _

l> Type' _________________ Screen

Syn

bo

lS

tra

tig

rap

hSanple Description

Conpletion Data

C

v-V ^^ « »< •

'• [ r;r Hal CLXV™ D'Pih-————HJ2—————C**^«^4

VESTDN REACCDISDN, NJ

performed on a Varian SpectrAA-300 equipped for cold vapor technique. Method 7470 formercury analysis was modified with a 50-ml sample size, a 100-ml final volume, and a VarianVGA-76 vapor gas analyser. Analysis for arsenic, antimony, lead, thal l ium, and selenium wereperformed by a graphite furnace atomic absorption using cither a Varian 400-Z or a VarianSpectrAA-20 both equipped with a GTA-95 graphite furnace unit.

3.0 RESULTS

This section highlights the significant evidence from the sampling effort, which determined the extentof coniamination at the CCI site. Table 1 provides a key to the samples taken at the CCI site: theirlocation, their depth (where applicable), the matrix sampled, (he sample number of designation, theanalytical instrument used, and the parameters analyzed. Groundwater analyses are summarized inTables 2 through 5. Groundwater potentiometric head contours arc indicated on Maps 1 to 4. Soilcharacteristics results are in Tables 6 to 9 and Figures 1 and 2. Soil analytical results are in Maps5 (o 16. Finally, the results of the bench-scale treatment studies are summed in Section 3.4 andpresented in Appendix C.

The building decontamination strategy involved two phases: 1) (he nature and extent of contaminationand 2) development of a site-specific decontamination plan. The extent of contamination is presentedin the Results section, while the building decontamination plan is in the Discussion section.

4.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

4.1 Groundwater

Groundwater analyses for all well locations from both the ERT/REAC and the Region VIITechnical Assistance Team (TAT) sampling efforts are summarized in Tables 2, 3, and 4. Thelocation of all wells are shown on Maps 1 to 19.

Trichlorocthene (TCE) was the most prevalent contaminant found in the groundwater at theCCI site, with significant quantities of TCE discovered in the groundwater from all wells exceptK.DHE 4. The most contaminated groundwaters were from Wells ERT 1, ERT 2 and BoreholeERT33 on the east side of the site. These wells were consistently found to have greater than5(X),0()0 ug/L (ppb) VOC. ERT 1 had 671,072 and 661, 300 ug/L VOC on two separatesamplings, while ERT 2 had 591,215 and 748,680 ug/L VOC. Carbon tetrachloride andtrichloroethene were found in well ERT 1 at concentrations greater than 100,000 ug/L. Thegroundwatcr from ERT 1 also contained 1,1-dichloroethcnc, cis-l,2-dichloroethene, chloroform,1,1,1-trichloroethane, and 1,2-dichloroethane in concentrations greater than 10,000 ug/L. Inwell ERT 2, 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane and trichloroelhene concentrations were greater than100,000 ug/L. In addition, the ERT 2 groundwater contained 1,1-dichloroethene, methylenechloride, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, and tetrachloroethene in concentrations greater than 10,000 ug/L.Borehole ERT33 water contained 77,390,000 ug/L VOC. This extremely high VOCconcentration was the result of pure hydrocarbon phase mixed with aqueous phase. A purehydrocarbon liquid was extracted from the bottom of Well ERT2. This liquid contained952,925,0(X) ug/L VOC or approximately 95% hydrocarbon (predominantly trichloroethene andtetrachloroethene).

Groundwater samples from Wells CCI 101, EPA 1, and KDHE 1 were also found to be highlycontaminated. Analyses from three separate samplings showed CCI 101 contained 295,300,42,360, and 356,280 ug/L VOC. EPA 1 had 605,800, 701,300, and 120,961 ug/L VOC, andKDHE 1 had 289,530, 319,766, and 118,779 ug/L. These wells, located in 3 of 4 corners of thesite, also contained the following compounds, with concentrations greater than 10,000 ug/L:

rd:eh/EVNGLSTA/FR-2288

TABLE 2. GROUNDWATER ANALY; JR VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS INUELLS ERT1, ERIi, ERT33, AND ERT34

CHEMICAL COMMODITIES INC. SITE

Compound

0 i ch 1 orof I uoromethaneCh 1 oromethaneVinylchloride

BromomethaneT r i ch 1 orof I uoromethane1 , 1 -Oichloroethene

Methylene Chloridetrans-1,2-Dichloroethene' , 1 -0 ichloroethane

cis-1,2-0ichloroetheneChloroform1,1, 1-Tr ichloroethane

Carbon Tetrachloride1 , 1 - 0 i ch I oropropeneBenzene

1 ,2-0 ichloroethaneTrichloroethene1 , 2 - 0 i ch 1 oropropane

Oibromome thaneBromod i ch I oromethaneToluene

1, 1, 2- Tr ichloroethaneTetrachloroetheneDibromoch I oromethane

1,2-OibromethaneCh 1 orobenzene1,1,1,2- Tetrach I oroethane

Ethylbenzenep- & m-Xyteneo-Xylene

WellLocation ERT 1Date 8/12/89 9/U/89DL* ug/L 10 2000

4722

17,060 15,140

16455989

10,900 6,50011,040 8,42025,660 24,460

238,520 212,4405

32,380 31,120317,060 345,880

4,180 5,140

1031,568 1,980

2010

209616 760388

ERT2-*iddle8/12/89 9/14/89100 2000

10,953 6,220

16,174 13,120265279

1,0533,56032,660 49,800

3,162

30

5,279 4,080408,960 564,000

57

505

60630,320 34,400

ERT2-8ottom8/12/896900 ug/L

70,000

1,012,000

351,03025,0001 1 , 000

45,000450,000

33,900,000

4,500,000

319,000661,000,000

617,000

81,000216,900,000

5,000113,000

20,00060,00022,000

ERT 33 ERT 34•3/29/89 9/29/895000 ug/L 10 ug/L

129

I

334

68790

4,390,000 3,440

48,400,000 13,000

31

24,100,000 8,200

5

*OL = Detection Limit11


*OL = Detection Limit

TABLE 2. GROUNOUATER ANALYSIS FOR VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS INWELLS ERT1, ERT2, ERT33, AND ERT34 (CONT'O)

CHEMICAL COMMODITIES INC. SITE

Compound

Styrene3ro

TABLE 3. GROUNDUATER ANALYSIS FOR VOLATILE ORuANIC COMPOUNDS IN UELLS 330 50 50 250

13

140 44 48 278

260

(

140 85 74330 87 92 850

2,900 730 728 3,530

340 90 100 5557,600 2,243 2,433 15,561

23 22

77 27 26 213

11 9

71

*DL = Detection Limit.


TABLE 3. GROUNOUATER ANALYSIS FOR VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS IN WELLS KDHE1, ICDHE2, AND KDHE 3 (CONT'D)CHEMICAL COMMODITIES INC. SITE

Compound

WellLocationDateOL* ug/L

2/24/89>4200

KDHE #18/12/89

109/14/89100

2/24/8910000

KDHE #28/12/89

1

KDHE 330 50 508/12/89

2509/14/39

n-Propylbenzene2-Chlorotolu*ne1,3,5-THmethylbenzene

',2,4 -Trimethytbenzene1.3-Oichtorobenzene1.4-dichIorobenzene

1,2-Oichlorobenzen*1,2-Oibromo-3-Chloropropane1,2,4-TrjchIorobenzene

HexachIorobutadieneNaphthaleneAcetone

Carbon Oisulfide2-Butanone4-Methyl-2-Pentanone

2,500

3,000 316

13,000

7,800

240

220

7

18 15

1,510

TOTAL VOC 289,530 319.766 118.799 270,400 42.547 22,659 12,318 3,35« 3.567 27.504

*DL = Detection Limit


TABLE 4. GROUNOUATER ANALYSIS FOR VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS IN WELLS KDHE4, CCI101, EPA1 AND EPA2CHEMICAL COMMODITIES INC. SITE

UellLocationDate

Compound DL* ug/L

0 i ch I orodi f I uoromethaneChloromethaneVinylchloride

3romomethaneTr i ch I orof I uoromethane1, 1-D ichloroethene

Methylene Chloridetrans- 1,2-0 ichloroethene1, 1-Dichloroethane

cis-1 ,2-DichloroetheneChloroform1 , 1 , 1 - T r i ch I oroethane

Carbon Tetrachloride1, 1-OichloropropeneBenzene

1,2-DichloroethaneTr ichloroethene1 ,2-Oichloropropane

D i bromomethaneBromodi ch loromethaneToluene

1 , 1 ,2-TrichloroethaneTetrachloroetheneD i bromoch I oromethane

1 , 2-D i bromomethaneChlorobenzene1, 1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane

Ethylbenzenep- & m-Xyleneo-Xylene

KDHE *4 CCI #1012/24/89 8/12/89 9/14/89 2/24/89 8/12/89 9/14/89 2/24/89

>5 1 1 >10000 >10 2000 >13000

933

1

285 1,520 3,600

4,200 91 8,90014 43,000

4 7

4,2201 3 254 3,020

8 1,900 277 6,460 43,000

96 4,500 1,345 42,920 34,00033,000

1

6 17,000 11,110 20,500 30,0006 4 177 220,000 24,135 268,120 330,000

59 1,680

5

173 1 11 3,700 217 4,760 34,000

39 90022 1,300

3 1 2,140

11

EPA *1 EPA #22/24/89 8/12/89 9/14/89>23000 >10 500

53

f527

6,300 842,000 6

6

911,497

47.000 1,466

35,000 6,840

37

31,000 13,000460,000 92,500

935

53

1041,270700

22244 405

44


TABLE 4. GROUNDWATER ANALYSIS FOR VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS IN WELLS KDHE4, CCI101, EPA1 AND EPA2 (CONT'O)CHEMICAL COMMODITIES INC. SITE

Compound

KDHE »42/24/89 8/12/89 9/14/89

>5 1 12/24/89>10000

CC1 *1013/12/89

EPA #19/14/892000

2/24/89>13000

2/24/89>23000

8/12/89EPA 029/14/89

500

StyreneBromoform 1 61,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 2,500 128 1,323

n-PropyIbenzene2-Chlorotoluene1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 3

1,2.4-Triinethylbenzene 1 41.3-Dichlorobenzene 14 331.4-Dichlorobenzene 9 112

1,2-0ichIorobenzene 1 3 2,960 148 7751,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropaoe1,2.4-Trichlorobenzene 1

Hexachlorobutadiene 1NaphthaleneAcetone

Carbon Disulfide2-Butanone 8,5004-Methyl-2-Pemanone 5

TOTAL VDC 309 295,300 42.360 356,280 605.800 701.300 120.961 83.705

*DL = Detection Limit.


mcthylrnc chloride, ir;ms-l,2-dichloroe(hene, 1,1,1-lrichloroclhanc, carbon tctrachloridc, 1.2-dichlorocthanc, trichloroethcnc, tctrachlorocthene, 1,1,2,2-iclrachloroclhanc, acetone, and 2-hutanonc.

Three addilionnl wells also showed significant contamination: KDHE 2, KDHE 3, EPA 2 andFRT34. These wells are on Ihc west side of the site, adjacent to or near residential homes. Thegroundwatcr from KDIIF. 2 contained 270,400, 42,547, and 22,659 ug/L VOC during 3 separatesampling events. The groundwater in KDHE 3 contained the following concentrations of VOC:12.318, 3,358, and 3,567 up/I., while EPA 2 had 83,705 ug/L. ERT34, a borehole, had 25,966 ug/LVOC in its water.

Well KDHE 4 had insignificant levels of VOC contamination in the groundwater. After threesampling events, the groundwaicr was found to have 9, 7, and 309 ug/L VOC. Even though thelatest sample from KDHE 4 contained only 309 ug/L VOC, (his concentration was more than 30times higher than VOC concentrations found in two previous samples.

Table 5 lists all ihc compounds found in the groundwater as well as the number of times that eachindividual contaminant was found to have exceeded the concentrations of 1,000, 10,000, and100,000 ug/L. This table shows that trichloroethene exceeded 100,000 ug/L on nine samplingevents, and exceeded 10,000 and 1,000 ug/L on 17 and 23 occurrences, respectively. To date, thetotal groundwaicr samples taken at the CCl site fs 26. Contaminants other than TCE were alsofound with relative frequency in Ihc groundwatcr samples. Compounds with concentrations greaterthan 1,000 ug/L in more than eight groundwater samples were: 1,1-dichloroethane; mcthylenechloride; 1,1,1-trichloroclhanc; carbon tetrachloride; 1,2-dichloroethane; tctrachloroethene; and1,1,2,2-lctrachlorocthanc. The sampling of the pure hydrocarbon layer at the bottom of ERT 2was not included in the Table 5 frequency distribution.

To provide information on the future impact on adjacent areas by contaminated groundwaicr fromthe site, the groundwatcr flow path was characterized. Six sets of water level readings were takenon six separate occasions between August 11 and October 26, 1989, from on-site monitoring wells.These readings by ERT/REAC, Region VII TAT, and U.S. EPA Region VII were used tocharaclcri/c (he groundwaicr flow path. Also, well casings were surveyed by U.S. EPA RegionVII for relative heights. From this data, groundwatcr elevations were calculated, and 6potentiomciric head contours and flow net diagrams were produced (see Maps 1 thru 6).

These flow net diagrams show Ihal the groundwater on the site generally flows from east to west.A steep groundwater gradient was apparent on the maps in the northeast corner of the site. Thisgradient was probably due to the "bathtub" effect in the open UST excavation pit. A perchedwater condition in this pit possibly influenced the nearby wells; therefore, a localized radial flowcondition may have existed. Contaminant transport may have been more influenced by migrationalong the bedrock surface, by surface water transport to topographically low areas, or by migrationthrough more permeable soil than by the direction of groundwater flow itself. Free product hasonly b«en found in the bottom of monitoring wells on the eastern side of the property, indicatingthat the migration of the contaminants through the groundwater has been inhibited. Thisinhibition can be attributed to the predominantly clay soils on site and their intrinsically lowpermeability (see Section 4.2.1).

rd.eh/EVNGLSTA/FR-228818

4.2 Soil

4.2.1 Geolcchnical characterization

Soil samples were taken from the CCl site for geotcchnical characterization. The samples takenwere #(X)I at 0.5 10 2.5 feet and #002 at 2.5 to 3.5 feet. These samples were mainly characterizedfor particle size distribution and permeability.

Moth samples wcic found to be highly plastic clays with the overwhelming majority of particleshclow #2(X) mesh (75 urn). In addition, the CCl soils have a low hydraulic and pneumaticpermeability. Tables 6 and 7 and Figures 1 and 2 show the particle size distribution for thesamples. Sample #001 contained 78.1% of its particles below #200 mesh. Furthermore, 97.8%of sample #002 particles were smaller than #200. Both samples exhibited higher plastic behavior.These characteristics are an example of a soil containing a high clay content.

Table 8 contains the summary of the triaxial permeability tests. The hydraulic permeability ofsamples 001 and 002 are 3.9 x Iff* and 3.0 x 10"' cm/sec. From the hydraulic permeabilitymeasurements, the pneumatic permeability was calculated. Soils 001 and 002 exhibited pneumaticpermeabilities of 2.6 x 10' and 2.0 x 10"'* cm/sec. These permeability values indicate a soil withlow permeability.

4.2.2 Contaminant characterization

The results of the soil sample analysis were placed on 12 separate site maps (Maps 7 lo 18). Thepurpose of these maps is lo give the reader a complete picture of all the significant contaminantsfound in the CCl soil. Only the significant contaminant concentrations (those greater than 0.5mg/kg) were placed next to the sample location on site maps (Maps 7 to 10). These maps alsodepict the analytic-it instrument used for a particular soil sample. Therefore, VOC analyses byGC/MS arc shown in a blue color than samples analyzed by the Photovac, in green. The Photovacanalytical results and the soil boring logs are listed in Appendices A and B, respectively.

Another two sets of maps arc present to assist the reader in determining the extent ofcontamination. These maps contain the isopleths for two contaminant indicators: trichloroethene(Maps 12 to 15) and total volatile organic compounds/Photovac target compounds (Maps 16 to19). The values used to generate these maps are in Table 9.

Soil samples taken at the surface and to a depth of one fool show contamination in two mainareas (sec Maps 7, 12, and 16). One area is bounded on the east by the warehouse and on thewest by truck trailer H, Shed F, and sample point ERT 20. This area was analyzed for VOC,semi-volatile organics, and heavy metals. Only low amounts of semi-volatiles and moderateamounts of heavy metals were found; however, there were significant quantities of volatile organicspresent. A VOC contaminated area at this depth is the area bounded on the east by the roadsidefence and sample point ERT 29 and on the west by Shed A, Shed B, and sample point PK 877009.At the surface to one foot depth there was no VOC contamination beyond the boundaries of thesite with the exception of a minor amount at ERT 3.

rd:ch/EVNGLSTA/FR-228819

TABLE 6. GEOTECHNICAL SOIL CHARACTERISTICSSAMPLE DEPTH 0.5 TO 2.5 FEET

SOIL DESCRIPTION

dark brown sandy silt or clay

GRAIN SIZE RESULTS

U. S. StandardSieve Size1 1/2"3/4"3/8"#4110#20#50#1001200

Hydrometer

Diameternun

37.50019.0009.5004.7502.0000.8500.3000.1500.0750.02230.01660.01260.00950.00710.00520.00370.00270.00190.0013

% Finer100.0100.0100.0100.0100.099.491.582.478.182.376.768.259.855.550.347.544.741.939.5

EFFECTIVE SIZES

% Finer603010

UniformityCoefficient

NA

Diametermm

0.0100.0010.000

GradationCoefficient

NA

NATURAL MOISTURECONTENT, %_____

28.1

SPECIFIC GRAVITY

2.71

COMMENTS:

NA - NOT APPLICABLESOIL EXHIBITS VERY COHESIVE AND PLASTIC PROPERTIES AND ISVISUALLY IDENTIFIED AS A HIGHLY PLASTIC CLAY

20

90

80

70

Figure 1. Soil particle size distribution, depth 0.5 to 2.5 feet

GRADATION CURVESU. S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES

1 1/2" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #50 #100 #200 HYDROMETER

\

\

SO\

30

20

10

100 10 1 0.1GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS

GRAVEL SANO

21

0.01

SILT OR CLAY

0.001

SAHPLE# 001

TABLE 7. GEOTECHNTCAL SOIL CHARACTERIZATIONSAMPLE DEPTH 2.5 TO 3.5 FEET

SOIL DESCRIPTION

medium brown slightly sandy silt or clay

GRAIN SIZE RESULTS

U. S. StandardSieve Size1 1/2"3/4"3/8"14#10120#5011001200

Hydrometer

Diametermm

37.50019.0009.5004.7502. 0000.8500.3000.1500.0750.02140.01630.01250.00930.00720.00520.00380.00270.0019

. 0.0013

% Finer100.0100.0100.099.999.799.398.998.497.886.779.769.862.755.750.046.243.440.539.6

EFFECTIVE SIZES

% Finer603010

UniformityCoefficient

NA

Diametermm

0.0090.0010.000

GradationCoefficient

NA

NATURAL MOISTURECONTENT, %

28.6

SPECIFIC GRAVITY

2.70

COMMENTS:

NA NOT APPLICABLESOIL EXHIBITS VERY COHESIVE AND PLASTIC PROPERTIES AND ISVISUALLY IDENTIFIED AS A PLASTIC CLAY

22

Fiaure 2. Soil particle size distribution, depth 2.5 to 3.5 feet

GRADATION CURVES

«0 «100 #200 HYDROMETERU. S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES

3" 1 1/2" 3/4" 3/8" UK *10 *20

Pe3cENT

FINER

8Y

WEIGHT

70

60

SO

40

30

20

10

5

100 10 1 0.1GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS

GRAVEL SANO

23

0.01 0.001

SILT OR CLAY

SAMPLE* 002

TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF TRIAXIAL PERMEABILITY TEST RESULTS

ETL Job Number 890801 890801ETL Sample Number 001 002

USCS Classification CH CH

Pre-Permeation DataNatural Moisture Content, % 28.1 28.6Undisturbed Wet Unit Weight, Ib/cu. ft. 122 120Undisturbed Dry Unit Weight, Ib/cu. ft. 95.1 93.3Specific Gravity 2.71 2.7Void Ratio 0.779 0.806Degree of Saturation, % 97.8 95.9

Permeability DataHydraulic Permeability, cm/sec 3.9E-08 3.0E-09Intrinsic Permeability, sq. cm 3.9E-10 3.0E-11Pneumatic Permeability, cm/sec 2.6E-09 2.0E-10

Post-Permeation DataFinal Moisture Content, % 32.2 34.0Molded Wet Unit Weight, Ib/cu. ft. 119 117Molded Dry Unit Weight, Ib/cu. ft. 90.2 87.5Void Ratio 0.876 0.925Degree of Saturation, % 99.6 99.3

24

Soil simples at the five-fool depth show slight contamination beyond the boundaries of the site(sec Maps 8, 13. and 17). ERT 10, Well EPA 2, ERT 7, and ERT 31 had low concentrationsof soil-hound volatile organics (not exceeding 2 mg/kg). At this depth, the grassy area to the westof the boundary formed by the (ruck trailer H, Shed F, and ERT 20 shows low amounts of VOC;however, the area to the cast of this boundary had little VOC contamination. Two other areascontaining VOC at this depth is the grassy area north of Sheds A and B and the area just southof the pit hy ERTI3.

Soil samples at the (en-foot depth show little contamination beyond the boundaries of the site(sec Maps 9. N, and 18). Samples outside the boundary found to contain VOC at this depth wereERT II, Well EPA 1 (a less reliable sample because the drill went through a sewer pipe), ERT2, and FRT 3. This shows that there was some migration of VOC to both the east and the west.The on-sile data indicates an even dispersal of VOC at low concentrations.

Soil samples at the 15-foot depth show no VOC contamination outside the northern, western, orsouthern boundaries of the site (see Maps 10, 18, and 19). However, the presence of VOC tothe cast of the siie was better defined with an analysis of the extra sampling points. The followingsoil sample points show low levels of VOC at the 15-foot depth: ERT 1, ERT 2, ERT 33, andERT 3. As in the ten-foot depth, the analyses of (he samples taken on-site indicates an evendispersal of VOC at low concentrations.

Samples taken at a 20-foot depth indicate a substantial amount of VOC contamination may existat that depth, jusl on (op of the bedrock. Map 8 contrasts these results with the 15 foot sampleresults for sample points ERT 2, ERT 13, ERT 33, and ERT 34. Soil samples for ERT 2 and13 were taken with a split spoon at an approximate 20 foot depth. The spoon was driven throughthe dr i l l tails in the borehole to bedrock and samples were analyzed by Photovac. The results forFR ' ' and 13 indicate a low amount of VOC contamination. For ERT 33 and 34 however, the'•ils were scraped from the drill hit after it hit bedrock and were analyzed by GC/MS. Results

lor ERT 33 and 34 indicate a large quantity of volatile organic compounds exist jusl above thebedrock.

4.3 Building Decontamination

Sweep and chip samples were obtained from the floor of the warehouse's front (north) and back (south)rooms. Wipe sample were taken from the wall of the hallway between the above two rooms. Analysisof the previous samples showed that the floor of the back room contained high concentrations of semi-volatile organics. Table 10, which lists the detected semi-volatile organic compounds, shows that the backroom sweep contained 3,506,923 ug/kg of total semi-volatile organics. The majority of these contaminantswere phenolic. The chip sample from the back room also contained semi-volatile organics (105,618ug/kg). Compared to the back room sweep and chip samples, semi-volatile organic levels in (he frontroom chip and sweep samples were over 20 times lower and nearly eight times lower, respectively thanthe back room samples. Furthermore, both front room samples did not contain the high amounts ofphenols found in the back room (Table 10).

Significant quantities of target priority pollutant metals were found in sweep and chip samples from bothfront and back rooms. Table 11 lists the priority pollutant metals detected. The samples contained thefollowing metals in the highest concentrations: chromium, copper, lead, mercury, and zinc.

rd:ch/E VNG LSTA/FR -228826

the JOO'F maximum temperature which can he achieved by the full-scale LT3 unit.LT3 removed nearly 90.7% of the soil-hound VOC contaminants, from 226 to 21 mg/Kg(after the 3rd pass). Some widely distributed contaminants had higher removals thenthe total VOC: trichloroethene, 96.2% and tetrachloroethene, 96.0%. However, somecompounds had high residual concentrations in the soil: acetone, 14.7; 2-hulanonc, 2.2;and •» Mrtltyl-2-Pcntanone, 1.7 mg/kg.

5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Groundwater

Flow net diagrams (Maps I to 6) show that the groundwater flows from east to west; however, samplingindicates that the groundwatcr contamination maybe moving radially from the site. Wells along all foursides of the sites contain high concentrations of volatile organics. Therefore, an interceptor trench orslurry wall must he installed on the site's perimeter to reduce the threat to the surrounding environmentby contaminated groundwatcr and to capture or contain the pure product along with the groundwatcr.

Wells along the eastern side of ihe site contain water with the highest concentrations of volatile organicand several wells contain a pure hydrocarbon phase at the bottom. Well ERT 2 and Borehole ERT33 contained pure hydrocarbon product at 19 feet (bedrock) and at 15 feet, respectively. Well ERT 1and Borehole ERT 14 showed traces of this product. ERT I, ERT 2 and ERT 33, were found tocontain the most contaminated groundwater on the site. These wells are all located on the east borderof ihe site along the railroad (rack. Along ihe other three sides of the CCI site, wells CCI 101, EPAI, and KDHE I were found to contain high concentrations of volatile organics in their water. Inaddition, wells KDHE 2, KDHE 3, and EPA 2, all on the wesi side of the site, contained contaminatedwater. Well KDHE 4 is relatively contamination free.

To redder the threat of additional groundwater contamination leaving the site, two remedial options arcavailable. In one option, an interceptor trench installed around the site can stop the offsite flow ofcontaminated groundwater. The trench is required to encircle the 1,200 foot perimeter of the site (secMap 11 for location). This drain should contain a slotted 6-inch pipe placed in a 12 inch by 12 inchinner trench dug out of the bedrock (approximately 20 feet deep) with clean gravel fill to 5 foot depth.Figure 4 shows a diagram of a proposed interceptor trench. To construct this trench, a 30 to 36 incheswide excavation lo 2 feet below the bedrock/soil interface is necessary. First, a 6 inch layer of pea gravelis poured on top of the bedrock; if it is desired to "seal" the bedrock, a thin layer of cement-benlonilcgrout can he placed on the bedrock under the pea gravel. To insure proper drainage of the trench, thebottom most be sloped I percent toward the manhole. Next, a 6 inch perforated (with 0.25 inchmaximum perforations) schedule 40 PVC pipe wrapped in geotcxtile is placed on the pea gravel. Thetype geotcxtile should be a 6 ounce per square yard (minimum weight) non-woven needlcpunchcdpolyethylene material. Pea gravel should fill the trench to the bedrock/soil interface. The trench cannow be filled with AASHTO (American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials) CoarseAggregate #57 taking care not to drop the first three feet of aggregate too far from the backhoe bucketor the geotextile will tear. Soil from the site should be placed from the 3 foot depth to the surfacein thin lifts of 8 inches deep properly compacted with a jumping jack.

Water collected by the trench will run to a collection manhole that would vary in size from 2 feeldiameter by 5 feet deep to 4 feet diameter by 3 feet deep containing a minimum of 50 gallons (secFigure 5). More than one manhole may be necessary for collection depending on the grade of thebedrock. Each manhole would contain a small level-actuated pump to pump water to a control tankor tank truck. There is insufficient hydrogeological information to quantify the flow of water into thetrench. Existing wells were hand bailed to dryness and took approximately 1 day to recharge; hence, the

rd :c h/E VNG LSTA/FR -228833

F igu re 4. nicie view of interceptor trench

17'

;

expected water volume flowing into the trench should be very low. Therefore, a 25 gallons per minu t epedestal type centrifugal pump with 50 feet of discharge head power by explosion proof motor will besufficient to pump out the trench intermittently. The collected water should be treated offsite at atrcatment/storage/disposal facility in compliance with the U.S. EPA regional RCRA requirements.

A second option is a slurry wall barrier. Even though the primary groundwater permeability throughthe clay itself is very low, the secondary permeability through the entire overburden is probably muchhigher due to desiccation fractures and micro silt lens. This barrier would provide adequate protectionfrom contaminated groundwater for the surrounding community, and cost less than the fully trenchedperimeter option. Since the gcotechnical characterization found the soil's permeability to be 10"' to 10"' cm/sec, a near perfect situation existed for a soil-bentonite slurry wall. The site's soil mixed withapproximately 1% bentonitc would provide an adequate groundwater barrier along the perimeter of thesite, ("arc must be taken to insure compatibility of the grout used in the slurry wall with the freehydrocarbon product.

Before an interceptor trench or any additional excavation is performed on or near the site, it is stronglyrecommended to do additional geotechnical testing and analysis of the soil. The purpose of this testingand analysis is to determine the necessity of sheeting and shoring an excavation and to provide thespecifications for contractor's involved in the excavation. The sheeting and shoring may be necessaryto prevent one or more of the following calamities due to lateral shifting soil: 1) the settling of theBurlington Northern Railroad tracks with as possible train derailment, 2) the falling of a backhoe intothe collapsed trench, and 3) the sliding or tilting of the warehouse building from a shift in the footing.The lateral earth pressures of soil near the railroad tracks may be exacerbated by the frequent use ofthe tracks with the accompanied ground vibrations and train weight. Any settling of the railroad trackswould 01 use a huge liability to the Agency. In addition to testing soil, an analysis of the bedrockmaterial is necessary to see if a backhoe can excavate the bedrock with a cutting bucket to the 2 footdepth (Figure 4). The use of a cutting bucket precludes the use of a power ram and, hence, the needfor sending a laborer in the trench with the necessary sheeting and shoring to meet health and safelyrequirements.

The recommended sample types and their associated geotechnical tests including the number of samplesrequired and approximate costs per test are listed:

o Split spoon samples are to be taken every 100 feet along the proposed location of the interceptortrench with blow counts using a 140 pound hammer with a 30 inch fall (Standard PenetrationResistance Test ASTM DI586).

o Altcrbcrg limits; 6 tests' $60/test;o Grain size distribution; 6 tests; $60/test;o Natural moisture content; 10 tests; J15/test;o Specific gravity; 6 tests; $40/test;o Sieve and hydrometer; 6 tests; $10/test.

o Shelby tube samples are to be taken on a as needed basis.

o Unconsolidated undrained triaxial sheet test (UU test); 3 tests; $300/test;o Consolidated isotropic undrained sheet strength test (C1U test); 3 tests; $900/test.

o Bedrock borings.

o Rock Quality Designation (RQD) test; as needed; performed on-site;o Percent recovery; as needed; performed on-site.


Figure _;. Manhole and Sump

20'

i

LEGEND

Q 6 inch perforated PVC pipefrom interceptor trench

-- Manhole and Sump

Surface

Soil/Bedrock Interface

Flexible Hose 36

To storage tankeror tank truck

LLevel activated pedistal typecentrifugal pump with explosionproof motor

Check Valve

Pipe to flexible hose quick disconnect

^ 1.5 inch stainless steel pipe withheat tracing

The objective of (he geotcchnical work is to determine the necessity of sheeting and shoring theinterceptor trench. The construction contractor must detail the size of the structural members and thespacing of the sheet piles and cross bracings.

The interceptor trench has two costs associated with it; the cost of the trench system and the cost ofthe pump and storage system. Three costs were obtained from contractors for the 1,200 foot trenchsystem: $38,500, $124,640, and $66,000. Only the last cost includes 40-hour certified t ra ining (OSHA1910.120 requirements) and protective gear. These prices include no sheeting and shoring one manhole,no enveloping gcofabric and on-site disposal of the excess soil. Additional manholes are $5,000 eachinstalled. The installation of the geofabric requires people inside the trench and therefore shoring ofthe trench. According to one contractor, the cost of the geofabric installed will raise the price anadditional $60,000. The estimated cost for the interceptor trench with sheeting and shoring anddewatcring is $1,600,000 to $2,000,000 based on a similar site [10]. A non-traditional interceptor trench,called the biopolymer drain method, uses a biodegradable slurry, geotextile, pea gravel, and 30 inch wellcasings. The contractor estimated cost is $15.00 to $30.00 per foot square or $306,000 to $720,000 forthe 1,200 foot run (see Map 11). The cost of the pump and a tanker truck storage system (as shownin Figure 5) is estimated at $3,000 per manhole plus monthly tanker truck rental (estimated at $4,000/pcrmonth rental). To eliminate this monthly cost, the existing tanks on the south side of the site may beable to be retrofitted to accept groundwater for storage and transfer. If the existing tanks are used, apump with more head will be necessary. An overflow pipe should be set-up from the tanker truck backto the trench to prevent spills. The operation and maintenance of this groundwater recovery should bevery low.

The contractor estimated cost of the slurry wall option around three sides of the site (850 feet in length)is $4.00 per square foot (length x depth) plus mobilization costs (approximately $30,000). Therefore,the 17,000 square fool proposed slurry wall would cost $115,000 which included a 17% contingency.

5.2 Soil

For the on-site surface samples, the heaviest contamination appears in two areas: 1) to the west of thewarehouse, and, 2) the grassy area above Shed A. The former area is probably the location of muchof the day-to-day activities of CCI, while the latter area was used to store drums. Below the surface,the VOC concentrations are generally uniform and low; an exception being the grassy area north of ShedA, which contains moderate concentrations of VOC, and the pit at the five-foot depth. The pit areais a significant source of VOC contamination for the site and surrounding area.

At the present time, little contamination has migrated from the CCI site into the residential areas locatedon the southern, western, and northern sides of the site. Offsile soil samples show no contaminationnorth of the site, and low contamination south of the site near the tanks. On the west side of the CCIsite, analyses of offsite samples indicate low concentration of VOC in the five-foot soil from the housejust north of the site on Keeler Street, and from the house across Keeler Street (next to ERT 11) atthe ten foot depth. These are the only residences that contained contaminated soil. Even though soilcontamination has migrated little from the CCI site, Section 4.1 states and Tables 2, 3, and 4 show thatthe groundwater outside the site contains contaminants.

High concentrations of VOC were found offsite between the railroad track and the eastern site boundaryat the 20 foot depth just at bedrock. This corresponds to pure product found in the bottom of WellERT 2. Pure hydrocarbon product (predominantly trichloroethene and tetrachloroethene) has made itsway from the site down into the soil column and appears to be running along the top of the bedrock.Any excavation or on-site remediation must take this interface into consideration when delineating theextent of contamination.

rd :ch/E VNG LSTA/FR - 228837

SITE LOCATION MAP

AN

CHEMICAL COMMODITIES320 SOUTH BLAKEOLATHE, KANSAS

TDD# T07-8910-0106 PAN* TKS0010RFC

SITE MAP

TDD# T07-8910-010B

PAN# TKS0010RFC

DePh

in

feet

Weekly Fluctuations of Groundwater LevelLocation :ERT#1

10.5 -

9/27 9/29 10/5 10/1210/2010/26 11/2 11 /9 11 /1611 /2211 /30 12/712/1312/2112/28 1 /4 1/11

Date of measurement

HH Depth to Groundwater

* = No data for this date

DePh

n

feet

Weekly Fluctuations of Groundwater LevelLocation: ERT#2

9/27 9/29 10/510/1210/2010/2611/2 11/911/1611/2211/3012/712/1312/2112/28 1/4 1/11

Date of measurement

Depth to Groundwater


Weekly Fluctuations of Groundwater LevelLocation: ERT #33

DePh

in

feet

9/279/29 10/510/1210/2010/2611/2 11/911/1611/2211/3012/712/1312/2112/28 1/4 1/11

Date of measurement



Weekly Fluctuations of Groundwater LevelLocation: ERT #34

DePh

in

feet

9/27 9/29 10/510/1210/2010/2611/2 11/911/1611/2211/3012/712/1312/2112/28 1/4 1/11

Date of measurement


* m No data for this date

Weekly Fluctuations of Groundwater LevelLocation: KDHE#1

DePh

in

feet

9/27 9/29 10/510/1210/2010/2611/2 11/911/1611/2211/3012/712/1312/2112/28 1/4 1/11

Date of measurement


* - No data for this date

DePth

n

feet

Weekly Fluctuations of Groundwater LevelLocation: KDHE #2

9/279/29 10/510/1210/2010/2611/2 11/911/1611/2211/3012/712/1312/2112/28 1/4 1/11

Date of measurement

•• Depth to Groundwater

= No data for this date

DePth

n

feet


9/279/29 10/510/1210/2010/2611/2 11/9 11/1611/2211/30 12A7 12/1312/2112/28 1/4 1/11

Date of measurement

Hi Depth to Groundwater


DePth

n

feet


9/27 9/29 10/5 10/1210/2010/26 11/2 11 /9 11 /1611 /2211 /30 12/7 12/1312/2112/28 1/4 1/11

Date of measurement

IB Depth to Groundwater


DePth

in

feet

Weekly Fluctuations of Groundwater LevelLocation: ERA #1

9/279/29 10/510/1210/2010/2611/2 11/911/1611/2211/3012/712/1312/2112/28 1/4 1/11

Date of measurement

3B Depth to Groundwater


Weekly Fluctuations of Groundwater LevelLocation: ERA #2

DePh

n

feet

9/279/29 10/510/1210/2010/2611/2 11/911/1611/2211/3012/712/1312/2112/28 1/4 1/11

Date of measurement


No data for this date

DePth

n

feet

Weekly Fluctuations of Groundwater LevelLocation: CCI #101

9/27 9/29 10/5 10/1210/2010/26 11/2 11/9 11/1611/2211/30 12/712/1312/2112/28 1/4 1/11

Date of measurement



Weekly Fluctuations of Groundwater LevelLocation: PIT

DePh•

n

feet

9/279/29 10/510/1210/2010/2611/2 11/911/1611/2211/3012/712/1312/2112/28 1/4 1/11

Date of measurement



PC ENTIOMETRIC SURF, 3E MAP

586

CHEMICAL COMMODITIES, INC.

OLATHE, KANSAS

KEY

Monitoring Well

~ j Main Warehouse

->- Approximate Flow Direction

• 99D— Simulated Water Level Contour (Interval - 1 teot)

SCALE75 150 teet

PAN#: TKS0010RFB

TDD#: T07-8910-010B

Data Collected 10/12/89

PC ENTIOMETRIC SURF. 3E MAP


OLATHE, KANSAS

KEY

* Monitoring Well

~ ~ ~ j Main Warehouse

———>~ Approximate Flow Direction

990 — Simulated Water Level Contour (Interval - 1 toot)

SCALE75 150 feet

PAN#: TKS0010RFB

TDD#: T07-8910-010B

Data Collected 11/22/89

HO :N flOMETRIC SURF/ ,E MAP


OLATHE, KANSAS

KEY

Monitoring Well

~ j Main Warehouse

-*- Approximate Flow Direction

990 — Simulated Water Uvel Contour (Interval - 1 foot)

SCALE75 150 feet

PAN#: TKS0010RFBT D D # : T07-8910-010BData Collected 12/13/89

Documents

LQGJ3F BQRING AND WELLL ANGSTON LABORATORIES, INC. Research • Testing • Problem Solving 2005 W. 103rd Terrace (B) • Leawood. KS 66206-2695 • Ph./FAX 913-341-7800 LABORATORY