PROJECT REPORT

TREATABILITY STUDYAND SITECHARACTERIZATIONC & R BATTERY CO.SUPERFUND SITECHESTERFIELDCOUNTY, VIRGINIA

Prepared forILS. Department of the ArmyCorps of Engineers, Omaha DistrictOmaha, Nebraska

September, 1991

Woodward-Clyde

10842 Old Mill Road, Suite 2Omaha, ME 68154

WCC Project No. 89MC114K

flROOOltl+3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES-1

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1

1,1 SITE BACKGROUND 1-11.2 PREVIOUS STABILIZATION/SOLIDIFICATION

TOEATABILTTY STUDIES 1-2- 13 TYPE AND SCOPE OF STUDY 1-2

ZO TREATABHITY STUDY APPROACH - - 2-1

Zl TEST OBJECTIVES AND RATIONALE 2-122 SUBSURFACE SAMPLING 2-1

Z2.1 Subsurface Program . 2-1

2.3 LABORATORY TESTING 2-3

3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION " 3-1

3.1 DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION 3-1

3.1,1 Analysis of Waste Stream Characteristics 3-1

3.1.1.1 Physical Classification andMoisture Content Tests 3-1

3.1.1.2 Unconfined Compressive Strength(ASTM 2166-85) 3-2

3.1.13 Bulk Density 3-23.1.1.4 Permeability Tests (SW9100) 3-23.1.1.5 Total (TCLP) Metals Analysis of

Untreated Soil Samples 3-23.1.1.6 Analysis of Site Water and

Leachate From Coarse Material 3-3

3.1,2 Analysis of Treatability Study Data - 3-4

89MC114K.ipt/jds/«e - Tasfc 330 ^ 09-06-91C & R Battery Trcttibility Study Report i Rev. 0

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Section

3,1.2.1 Heat of Hydration 3-43.1.2.2 Moisture-Density Relationships

of Compacted Soil-CementMixtures (ASTM D 558-82) 3-4

3.1.2.3 Permeability of Stabilized/Solidified Mixture (SW-9100) 3-5

3.1.2.4 Unconfined Compressive Strengthof Stabilized/Solidified Mixture(ASTM D 1633-84) 3-6

3.1.Z5 TCLP of Soil-Cement Mixtures 3-6

3.2 SUMMARY 3-7

4.0 .REFERENCES 4-1

89MC114K.rpt/jdg/cee - Task 330 __ . (> . . . _ _ . . . . 09-06-91C & R Battery Treatability Study Report if Rev. 0

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1-1 SITE LOCATION ;FIGURE 2-1 SITE PLAN AND SAMPLING LOCATIONS

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 2-1 SOIL-CEMENT-LIME-SODIUM PHOSPHATE MIXTURES

TABLE 2-2 SOÛ CEMENT-LIME-CALCIUM PHOSPHATE MIXTURES

TABLE 3-1 PHYSICAL CLASSIFICATION AND MOISTURE CONTENT

TABLE 3-2 PERCENTAGE OF UPPER FILL AND COARSEMATERIALS IN UNTREATED TREATABILITY SAMPLES

TABLE 3-3 UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OFUNTREATED SOILS

TABLE 3-4 BULK DENSITY OF UNTREATED SOILS

TABLE 3-5 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY PERMEABILITY TESTRESULTS OF UNTREATED SOILS

TABLE 3-6a TOTAL AND TCLP RCRA METALS FOR UNTREATEDSOILS

TABLE 3-6b TOTAL 'LEAD AND TCLP LEAD, pH, AND ALKALINITYOF UNTREATED MATERIAL

TABLE 3-7a TOTAL LEAD ANALYSIS AT C & R BATTERY SITE(mg/kg)

TABLE 3-7b LEAD ANALYSIS AT CAPITAL OIL

TABLE 3-8 RCRA METALS ANALYSIS OF SITE WATER

- Task 330 09-06-91CAR Battery Treatabflity Study Report ill Rev. 0

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

LIST OF TABLES (Continued̂ . . _ , . =

TABLE 3-9 „ - SUMMARY OF TEMPERATURES MEASURED DURINGINITIAL HYDRATION OF SOÛ CEMENT

TABLE 3-10a MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP OF COMPACTEDSOIL-CEMENT MIXTURES (TEST PITS TP-1 AND TP-2)

TABLE 3-10b MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP OF COMPACTEDSOIL-CEMENT MIXTURES (SAMPLE TP456)

TABLE 3-11 "TCLP LEAD, pH, AND ALKALINITY OF SOIL-CEMENT-LIME-SODIUM PHOSPHATE MIXTURES (TEST PITS TP-1AND TP-2)

TABLE 3-12 ...... -TCLP LEAD, pH, AND ALKALINITY OF SOIL-CEMENT-LIME-CALCIUM PHOSPHATE MIXTURES (COMPOSITESAMPLE - TEST PITS 4A, 5A, AND 6A)

LIST OF APPENDIXES ;

APPENDIX A SOIL BORINGSAPPENDIX B TEST PITSAPPENDIX C SOIL SAMPLINGAPPENDIX D LABORATORY TESTINGAPPENDIX E ANALYTICAL DATA

S9MC114K.rpt/jdg/cee - Task 330 ( 09-06-91C & R Battery TreatabOity Study Report iv Rev. 0

flROOOW

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report presents the results of a limited bench-scale treatability study and relatedactivities at the C & R Battery Company, Inc. Superfund site in Chesterfield County,Virginia. This effort was intended as follow-on work to the stabilization/solidificationstudy performed by Hazcon, Inc. (1989) under contract to NUS, Inc. Hie present studywas designed to confirm the recommended stabilization mix components of Type IIPortland, soil, and either lime or sodium phosphate as presented in the EPA Record ofDecision. Due to changes in regulatory requirements, i.e. the adherence to the ToxicityCharacteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) criteria in lieu of the Extraction ProcedureToxicity (EPTOX), it was important to refine and confirm the recommended treatabilitymix.

Additional activities including the installation of test pits and borings and subsequent soilsampling and analysis were performed to better characterize site conditions which mightaffect the overall treatment design. Test pits dug for the purpose of obtainingrepresentative site material (soils) were designed to simulate practical excavationconditions based on the depth of lead contamination above action limits as presentedin the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) performed at the site (NUS,1990). The collected site material was sieved prior to shipping in order to estimate thecomposition and extent of battery casing fragments and cobbles in contaminated soilsthroughout the site. Physical characteristics of the site soils were also examined to assessaffects of soil type on the stabilization of lead.

Initial mixes containing 20,30, and 40 percent Type II Portland cement with respectiveadditional components of 1 and 5 percent lime or 5 percent sodium phosphate wereprepared for soils from two locations, the drainage ditch (Test Pit 1) and in the vicinityof the former acid pond (Test Pit 2). Preliminary results indicated that only two mixesfrom TP-1 soils containing 10,000 ppm lead passed the TCLP criteria of 5 ppm. Nomixes from TP-2 containing 24,000 ppm lead gave TCLP leachate levels below 50 ppm.The two mixes which passed having identical TCLP leachate values of 33 ppm contained40 percent Portland and either 5 percent lime or 5 percent sodium phosphate.

89MCH4ICipt/jdg/cee - Task 330 09-06-91CAR Battery Treatability Study Report ES-1 Rev. 0

fiROOQHB

Based upon these results, two trends were further evaluated which indicated a responsewith respect to TCLP criteria. One was the effect of the percentage of Portland, and theother was the presence of phosphate. As sodium phosphate is not readily available,calcium phosphate supplied as a fertilizer known as triple superphosphate was selectedfor additional testing since it is readily available and typically forms a more stablemineral complex than sodium at a lower pH range.

Additional treatability mixes were then planned to examine a wider range of Portlandcontent (15 - 50 percent) with respect to lime and calcium phosphate. Initially, three siteareas were selected as representative for site treatability. However, furthercharacterization of the site surface soils and underlying clay horizon necessitatedtreatability testing of only the upper 2 to 4 feet of site soils. Therefore, the additionaltreatability mixes were prepared with sieved soils composited from the upper 2 feet fromTest Pits 4, 5, and 6. This material had a lead concentration in excess of 13 percent(130,000 ppm). " -----

Preliminary results from the additional treatability testing of the more contaminated soilsindicated a strong stabilization effect with increasing calcium phosphate levels at a lowerPortland content of 15 percent. Based on these results which included one mix with 10percent calcium phosphate meeting TCLP criteria, a final set of 5 mix ratios wereprepared with 15 to 20 percent Portland and 10 to 20 percent calcium phosphate,respectively:

• Mix 1-60 percent soil, 15 percent Portland, 15 percent CaPO4• Mix 2-65 percent soil, 15 percent Portland, 20 percent CaPO4• Mix 3-70 percent soil, 20 percent Portland, 10 percent CaPO4* Mix 4-65 percent soil, 20 percent Portland, 15 percent CaPO4• Mix 5 - 60 percent "soil, 20 percent Portland, 20 percent CaPO4

Results of TCLP testing on these mix preparations following a seven-day cure indicatedthat all met TCLP criteria with four showing nondetect (ND) for lead.

89MC114K.rpt/jdg/cee - Task 330 .. = . . . 09-06-91C & R Batteiy Treatability Study Report ES-2 Rev. 0

Based on these results and the results of the previous stabilization study mix of 15percent Portland and 10 percent calcium phosphate, combined with economicconsiderations, the mix with 15 percent Portland, 10 percent calcium phosphate wasselected for confirmatory testing given its potential for remedial success at the C & RBattery site. .:

Further confirmatory physical and TCLP leachate testing was performed on this selectedmix. The TCLP leachate contained 8.3 mg/L of lead which is higher than the regulatorycriteria of 5 mg/L. Even though this mix has shown TCLP results from ND to 8.3, thisparticular mix and the other five mixes containing calcium phosphate are presented forinformational purposes as having potential remedial success. The results of further sitecharacterization clearly indicate a heterogeneity of the upper 2 to 4 feet of site soils withrespect to lead contamination. Test results have indicated lead levels across the sitefrom low parts per million to in excess of 15"percent (150,000 ppm). It is thisheterogeneity of concentrations and the physical form of the lead present, i.e. complexedand fine metallic particles which most likely account for differences seen in lead levelsdetermined in TCLP leachate from these mixes.

Mix Soil:Cement:CaPO4

75:15:10

70:15:15

65:15:20

70:20:10

65:20:15

60:20:20

TCLP Lead mg/L- • • • • ; - ND,8.7

..: . ; : ,_:: "'..." ND, 0.6" ; ND, ND

" ..:." " : ' " "T;: - 0.75,5.7

! ND, 052

: : - ' ND, 0^2

Bulk densities indicate an increase of 15 to 20 percent in material after stabilizationcalculated on a dry weight basis. The material or site-soils used in this treatability study,although representative of soil type, was found to contain varying amounts of debrisincluding battery casing fragments of all sizes, battery components, and stone cobbles allof which were sieved out. Also, it was determined that moisture played a significant rolein the mixing process with respect to the availability of lead to reactants. Therefore,

S9MC114K.rpt/jdg/cce - Task 330 09-06-91C & R Battery Treatability Study Report ES-3 = - a D f] H fl j, C f) Rev' Q

various material handling considerations must be addressed prior to treatment such asparticle sizing, drying, and the sequence and residence time in which reactants arecombined, i.e. better results were obtained when samples were dried and mixedthoroughly with reactants such as calcium phosphate prior to the addition of Portlandand finally water. One final factor which was not addressed and may contributesignificantly to the effectiveness of the mix, particularly the last six mixes containingcalcium phosphate was the curing time of the stabilized mix. There was evidence duringthe study that curing beyond seven days appeared to improve the containment efficiency,but these results were not conclusive.

S9MCII4K.rpt/jd2/cee - Task 330 09-0631C & R Bitteiy TretUbility Study Report ES-4 Rev. 0

1.0INTRODUCTION

1.1 SITE BACKGROUND

The C & R Battery Company, Inc. site is approximately 11 acres in size and is locatedin Chesterfield County, Virginia about 6 miles southeast of Richmond, Virginia (Figure1-1). The James River is located about 650 feet north of the site. The site is borderedon the west and north by dense woods, on the, northeast by sparser woods, and on thesouth and east by open fields and several buildings. The general area around the siteis used for industrial purposes. Capitol Oil Company, a small fuel oil distributor, iscurrently located directly to the east.

The site is nearly level and is included in the Coastal Plain of Virginia physiographicregion. The Coastal Plain of Virginia, is made up of various Pleistocene and HoloceneAge sedimentary deposits overlying older sedimentary deposits which overlie the graniticbasement rock. In the region around Richmond, Virginia, and especially in areas nearthe James River, the granitic basement rock is. expected to be shallow. The borings andtest pits indicate that the shallow subsurface profile includes man-placed or disturbed fillover alluvial deposits. The fill consists of a mixture of sand, silt, and clay with varyingamounts of crushed rock, cobbles, and battery casing fragments. The observed thicknessof the fill ranged from 2 to 4 feet. The alluvium is typically low to medium plastic sandy.silty clay and extended to the maximum depth of the test pits and borings 15 feet belowground surface. _This clay horizon appears to be continuous under the site.

The site was used from the early 1970s to 1985 for the recycling of used auto and truckbatteries which were delivered in bulk shipments. After cutting the batteries open anddraining the acid into an on-site retention pond, the lead-containing components of thebatteries were removed and stored on site for later processing. The empty batterycasings were then shredded and also stored on site. Battery casing fragments arecurrently present on the surface and in the shallow subsurface. Whole battery casingswere occasionally unearthed during test pit excavations. The battery breaker and the

89MC114K.rpt/jdg/cee - Task 330 - ' 09-06-91C & R Battery Treatability Study Report 1-1 . Rev. 0

acid and other neutralization ponds were reportedly located within the south-centralportion of the site.

1.2 PREVIOUS STABILIZATION/SOLIDIFICATION TREATABILITY STUDIES

Hazcon Engineering, Inc. (Hazcon) was contracted by NUS, Inc. (NUS) to conduct astabilization/solidification treatability study at the C & R Battery Site completed in Mayof 1989. This study initially investigated,various combinations of soil, Type I Portland,fly ash, lime, and a proprietary component. Based on preliminary results, it wasnecessary to perform additional testing since results with Type I Portland and fly ashwere inconclusive. The additional stabilization mixes consisted of soil, Type II Portland,lime, sodium silicate, sodium phosphate in various combinations. The results of theHazcon study indicated that the two mixes having the greatest reduction in lead mobilityby EP TOX contained 36 and 48 percent Type II Portland combined with about 5percent sodium silicate and about 3 percent lime, respectively. Other mixes includingone with sodium phosphate also were effective with the level of Portland at 48 percent.

These studies seemed to indicate that the likelihood of achieving stabilization of leadwas high using Type II Portland combined with an additive such as lime to control thepH. It was determined that fly ash was not a viable alternative.

13 TYPE AND SCOPE OF STUDY

This report presents the results of a limited bench-scale treatability study designed tosupplement the previous treatability information provided by Hazcon. Although thisstudy is essentially bench-level in scale, representative samples were obtained from seventest pits and a number of borings across the site in order to assess factors which mayaffect the remedial process.

This treatability study also included field activities to better characterize existing siteconditions and a laboratory study to provide for evaluating and confirming representativemixes to be used in the stabilization/solidification of the on-site soils. This study wasdesigned to better define the stabilization mix ratio of soil, Type II Portland, and

89MC114Krpt/jde/cec -Task 330 094)6-91C& RBttteryTrettibility Study Report 1-2 . . Rev. 0

flROOOl*53

potential additives of either lime or sodium phosphate as recommended by the Hazconstudy. The stabilization mix(es) used in the remedial process must meet TCLP criteriafor disposal at a Virginia solid waste landfill.

Representative samples were obtained initially from two test pits, one from the reported"acid pond" area and another from the drainage ditch in order to address possibledifferences in treatability based on soil type, pH, and lead levels. Additional test pitswere excavated to better characterize any lateral variabilities which might affecttreatability. Soil borings were drilled to investigate the shallow subsurface conditions.Undisturbed samples of the soil directly beneath the contaminated soils, were obtainedfrom the borings using 3-inch-diameter Shelby tubes to assess soil characteristics. Thelaboratory testing program of the untreated soil samples consisted of physical andchemical tests, including test of soils from both the upper disturbed soil horizon and theunderlying clay. The physical properties determined included classification according tothe Unified Soil Classification System, moisture content, density, permeability, and shearstrength. The chemical tests included pH and RCRA metals analysis as well as theanalysis of TCLP leachate for RCRA metals, pH, and alkalinity. The results oflaboratory tests of untreated soils provided information concerning properties of the sitematerials important for treatability; levels of metals, particularly lead; permeability andstrength of the soils, the soil types encountered, and the potential volume increase to beexpected from the stabilization/solidification process.

The study involved the preparation of various stabilization/solidification mixes of TypeII portland cement, hydrated lime, and sodium phosphate, and subsequently, calciumphosphate. The mixes were designed to focus the component ratio recommendationusing information from the previous treatability study by Hazcon, A series of selectedphysical and chemical properties of these mixtures were measured. Based onpreliminary test results, the treatability study design was modified to include calciumphosphate in lieu of sodium phosphate. Further physical and chemical tests of thepotentially successful stabilized/solidified mixes were used to assess feasibility in thetreatability process. _ ..._._ —

89MC114K.ipt/jdg/cee - Task 330 "~"" " 09-06-91C & R Batt«y Treatability Study Report 1-3 Rev. 0

In conjunction with the treatability testing of soils, the study included limited chemicaltesting of water within the drainage ditch, decontamination water, and leachate of coarsematerials such as battery casing fragments and cobbles remaining above the 1/4-inchsieve. Lead levels were determined to assess the potential use of these waters duringthe remedial process.

89MClI4K.iptyjds/cee - Task 330 09-06-91CAR Biiteiy Trettrtrility Study Report 1 -4 Rev. 0

flROOOUSS

m s, ja-J-yi"1̂ 1"

SS"̂ jr̂ ŝT̂ .TO,™*-*/ ̂-̂ ^̂ Ŝ 3̂ »-"dSLTE

„$»» fiorssr

Holdcroft

«ffiffi;SSg*CV!iT" .« C.TY!S* /*s~* i'

Colonial' \WTCTS«fflff «*?

y "25V

Crewe —^ nss; / , -.̂ s;——auinenana*WA»T—. A\',«e*--. / A PRINCE

Cliwnddie^

•lackstonê „>,.-_„ '.-T,n̂ i yx *-\ -i703(«J) >21 Ipi DeWin̂

" . ' I 7 ^ i f^ r—"•flaw/wr/ofl ! S ^^K S"

^ _ .t̂ T>k>, J2L.Warfieldq.AX̂ I ^ /T ^f Z^ \ Tutttaton̂ _^ _^

2.0TREATABILITY STUDY APPROACH

2.1 TEST OBJECTIVES AND RATIONALE

The overall objective of the study was to better define the stabilization/solidification mixratio of Type n portland cement, soil/sediment, and additives (lime, sodium phosphate,calcium phosphate). A subsequent objective of the study was to provide insight into thepotential limitations of the design process by better characterizing subsurface soils withrespect to debris, contamination, and soil type.

The study included drilling and sampling of soil, water, and waste debris within theC & R Battery site and the nearby Capitol Oil property. The study also includedphysical and chemical laboratory testing of untreated soil, water, and waste; andstabilized/solidified mixtures. The physical tests physical included classification testsbased on unified soil classification system, permeability, strength, and density tests. Thechemical tests consisted of pH, total metals, TCLP metals, TCLP alkalinity, and TCLPpH. Also, the study included screening of untreated soils to provide information on thepotential extent of nonprocess materials requiring pretreatment such as battery casingchips and cobbles. Testing of untreated materials was also important for assessing therepresentativeness of materials selected for treatability testing.

22 SUBSURFACE SAMPLING

22.1 Subsurface Program

The initial subsurface program consisted of test pits for the purpose of collectingmaterial for treatability testing. Subsequent subsurface activity consisted of excavationof test pits, drilling of borings, and sampling. Twelve test pits were excavated and 25borings were drilled within the C & R Battery site, and 8 borings and 2 hand-augeredborings were drilled on the Capitol Oil property. The subsurface work was phased andsubsequent placement of pits and borings based on the preliminary results of the

09-06-91CAR Btttery Trattbility Study Report 2-1 Rev, 0

flRGOO^S?

laboratory tests in combination with previous RI/FS data. The locations of the test pitsand borings are shown on Figure 2-1.

Initially, samples from seven test pits and three surface water samples were collected inorder to provide representative lead-contaminated samples of these media. Test pitlocations were selected based on the occurrence of specific levels of lead determined bythe RI/FS and representative locations across the site. The location for Test Pit 1(TP-1), located in the drainage ditch, was chosen to assess the treatability of sedimentswhich were not typical of other site soils. The location for Test Pit 2 (TP-2) was chosenbecause of the potential for treatability limitations in the area of the former acidcollection pond due to the high lead levels and potentially acidic soils. The remainingtest pits were located in areas where lead concentrations exceeded the action level of1,000 mg/kg and were spaced in a manner which would maximize site coverage.

Based on preliminary treatability results and other site data three additional test pitswere excavated at the site to supplement the data obtained from the first seven test pits.These new test pits (numbered TP-4A, TP-5A, and TP-6A) were located near thepreviously excavated TP-4, TP-5, and TP-6. These locations were selected based on theirpotential for representativeness. The new test pits were excavated to depths where leadcontamination was equal to or just below 1,000 mg/kg, based on information obtainedfrom laboratory testing and previous investigations. Samples from the new test pits wereseparated into two groups: upper fill material (disturbed materials) and lower,undisturbed, natural soils or clay. Two additional test pits, TP-9 and TP-10, wereexcavated to characterize the subsurface conditions in the reported acid andneutralization pond areas. The depths of all the test pits ranged from about 4 to 6 feet.

In addition to test pits, soil borings were drilled and soil samples were taken on and offsite to assess the representativeness of soils requiring remediation based on resultsindicating background levels of lead in the undisturbed horizon at 2 to 4 feet from thesurface.

Exploratory borings, Borings SB91-01 to SB91-19, were drilled in the area of the formeracid ponds to better define their location and extent for design purposes. All borings

89MC114K.ipt/jdg/cee - Task 330 09-06-91C & R Battery Treatability Study Report 2-2 Rev. 0

flROOLUSS

were about 5 feet deep, except Boring SB91-04 which extended 9 feet below groundsurface. One discrete soil sample was collected for lead analysis from each of theseborings in the undisturbed clay horizon just below the disturbed upper fill.

A total of three additional borings (Borings SB91-23, SB91-24, and SB91-25) were drilledin the acid pond area to supplement the information obtained from the above borings.Analytical and geotechnical samples (undisturbed Shelby tubes) were obtained fromthese new borings to evaluate the acid pond area.

Soil borings SB91-20, SB91-21, and SB91-22 were drilled immediately adjacent to TestPits TP-4A, TP-5A, and TP-6A, respectively. The purpose of these borings, as above,was to obtain undisturbed Shelby tube samples from the natural soil material at thesesites for permeability testing, grain size analysis, Atterberg limits, moisture content, andunconfined compressive strength, again to better characterize conditions which mightaffect the remedial process.

A total of eight shallow soil borings (Borings SB91-26 through SB91-33) were drilled onthe Capitol Oil Co, property to supplement RI/FS data with respect to the extent ofsurface and shallow subsurface contamination. Two borings, designated 91HA-1 and91HA-2, were hand angered in the western berm surrounding the fuel tank area to assessthe potential for treatment of this material.

Description of drilling procedures and boring logs are contained in Appendix A.Description of test pits excavation procedures and test pit logs are presented inAppendix B. Appendix C presents an outline of sampling procedures.

23 LABORATORY TESTING

Laboratory tests consisted of physical and chemical tests of both untreated and treatedsoils/waste. The physical tests included particle size, Atterberg limits, moisture content,permeability, unconfined compressive strength, density, moisture-density relationships forcompacted materials, and heat of hydration. Physical tests were performed accordingto ASTM standard procedures, if applicable. The chemical tests included total metals

89MC114ICrpt/jdj/cee - T«sfc 330 09-06-91CAR Battery Trcatability Study Report 2-3 ... . _ .. ... Rev. 0

AROOOl»59

analysis, pH, TCLP metals (predominantly lead) pH, and alkalinity. A detaileddescription of tests is given in Appendix D.

Samples were shipped to the Chen Northern, Inc. Laboratory in Denver for physical testsand treatability mix preparations. Chemical testing of site samples and stabilized/solidified treatability samples were analyzed by Enseco-California Analytical (ENSECO-CAL) of Sacramento, California. Chemical data are provided in Appendix E.

The untreated material was subdivided into four types: fill material, natural soil or clay,composited material, and water. The treated material consisted of soil-cement mixtureswith hydrated lime sodium phosphate or calcium phosphate.

The mixing procedures for the soil-cement-lime-sodium phosphate and soil-cement-lime-calcium phosphate mixtures are relatively similar. A brief discussion of these proceduresis presented here. After geophysical testing, soil samples were dried for a short periodof time and sieved through a No. 4 (4.76 mm) sieve. The appropriate proportions of theadditives were mixed with the sieved sample. The ratios of the mix were based on thedry weight of the sieved soil sample. Drying of soils and sequencing the componentaddition was different for each type of soil-cement mixture. For the soil-cement-lime-sodium phosphate mixtures, all the materials were added at the same time. In the soil-cement-lime-calcium phosphate mixture, lime and/or calcium phosphate and a smallamount of water were added to the soil 1 hour before the addition of cement to enhancethe exposure of the soil to the stabilizing additives. Twelve treatability samples wereprepared using the soil-cement-lime-sodium phosphate mixtures and subsequently 23samples were prepared using the soil-cement-lime-calcium phosphate mixtures. Thevarious ratios of the mixtures are listed on Tables 2-1 and 2-2. The secondary mixeswere prepared from disturbed soils composited from TP-4A, TP-5A, and TP-6A. Thiscombined sample prepared exclusively from the upper material was identified as TP-456.It was determined from preliminary data that these soils would be most representativeof the soils requiring stabilization/solidification prior to off-site disposal.

89MC114K.rpt/jdg/cee - Task 330 . . . . . . . ... . 09-06-91C & R Batteiy Treatability Study Report 2-4 Rev. 0

analysis, pH, TCLP metals (predominantly lead) pH, and alkalinity. A detaileddescription of tests is given in Appendix D.

Samples were shipped to the Chen Northern, Inc. Laboratory in Denver for physical testsand treatability mix preparations. Chemical testing of site samples and stabilized/solidified treatability samples were analyzed by Enseco-California Analytical (ENSECO-CAL) of Sacramento, California. Chemical data are provided in Appendix E.

The untreated material was subdivided into four types: fill material, natural soil or clay,composited material, and water. The treated material consisted of soil-cement mixtureswith hydrated lime sodium phosphate or calcium phosphate.

The mixing procedures for the soil-cement-lime-sodium phosphate and soii-cement-lime-calcium phosphate mixtures are relatively similar. A brief discussion of these proceduresis presented here. After geophysical testing, soil samples were dried for a short periodof time and sieved through a No. 4 (4.76 mm) sieve. The appropriate proportions of theadditives were mixed with the sieved sample. The ratios of the mix were based on thedry weight of the sieved soil sample. Drying of soils and sequencing the componentaddition was different for each type of soil-cement mixture. For the soil-cement-lime-sodium phosphate mixtures, all the materials were added at the same time. In the soil-cement-lime-calcium phosphate mixture, lime and/or calcium phosphate and a smallamount of water were added to the soil 1 hour before the addition of cement to enhancethe exposure of the soil to the stabilizing additives. Twelve treatability samples wereprepared using the soil-cement-lime-sodium phosphate mixtures and subsequently 23samples were prepared using the soil-cement-lime-calcium phosphate mixtures. Thevarious ratios of the mixtures are listed on Tables 2-1 and 2-2. The secondary mixeswere prepared from disturbed soils composited from TP-4A, TP-5A, and TP-6A. Thiscombined sample prepared exclusively from the.upper material was identified as TP-456.It was determined from preliminary data that these soils would be most representativeof the soils requiring stabilization/solidification prior to off-site disposal.

89MC114K.rpt/jdg/cec - Task 330 . .. . . ...=...,.; _ _.: ._ . 09-06-91C & R Battery Treatability Study Report " 2-4 Rev. 0

TABLE 2-1

SOrLrCEMENT-IJME-SODIUM PHOSPHATE MIXTURES1

Soil •Test Pit (%)TP-1 _. . .. 80 _.

79

75

7570

69

65

65

60

595555

TP-2 ----- --"-80 .

7975

75

70

69

65

65

60

59

5

55

Type II Portland

_._ ___. 20 -_-'- ._

20 . -20

20 :30

: so :.-30

_ ._.. 30 -_,: ...40

40- _4_o__ :

- ._._ .40

20 ;20 . . . . . . .20 :20

3030 -. ' '-

30..30-̂ ,-,

40

4040

- - 40

Lime Sodium Phosphate

. _.. _.. - _

- 1 —5

— 5_ _

15 " -— 5_ _1 —

.5. . — . -.... - 5

- - ; _ - _. :: . — - 1

5 —5

- - -

... 1 --

....... ,5- ,— 5- . -

15 —

5

1 Mixtures prepared from sieved and composited soils from respective test pits. Percentages calculated on a dry weightbasis. . ,

89MC114K.il/jdg-Task330 .. „_ _: : . . - 09-06-91C & R Battery Treatability Study Report Rev, 2

TABLE 2,2

SODXEMEr̂ -UME-CALOUM PHOSPHATE MIXTURES1

son(*)857575656065

70

6560

70

60

605065605550

5040

50404030

Type II Portland(%)15151515151520202030

30

30

30

30

40

4040

4040

50505050

Lime(«)010

010

0

0

00

0

0

10

01000

510

010

0

10

0

10

Calcium Phosphate(%)

0

0

10

10

15

20

10

. 1 5 . . . .20

- . .- =-,.- 00

10

10

- - . 5

0

0

0

10

10

00

10

10

Mixtures prepared from composited surface materials from TP-4A, TP-5A, and TP-6A. Percentages calculated on adry weight basis.

S9MClI4K.iV3dg-Tisk 330 09-06-91CAR Battery TVeitibility Study Report Rev. 2

flROOOU63

3.0RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1 DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

3.1.1 Analysis of Waste Stream Characteristics

3.1.1.1 Physical Classification and Moisture Content Tests

Physical classifications and moisture content tests were conducted on both fill materialand natural soils. The physical classification tests consist of particle size analysis andAtterberg limit tests. The res.ults of the physical classification and moisture content testsare listed in Table 3-1. The particle size gradation curves are provided in Appendix D.The results indicate that the composited subsurface soils are generally low plastic (lean)sandy clay or sandy silt with 1 percent or less gravel (the coarser materials were removedon site). The particle size ranges from about 2 mm (medium-grained sand) to less than0.001 mm (silt or clay particles). The characteristics of the gradation curves (coefficientof uniformity >15 and a coefficient of curvature near 1) and the broad particle sizerange show that the soil is generally well graded. With these observed particle sizecharacteristics, the on-site soils are likely to show favorable physical characteristics afterstabilization/solidification. '•

Table 3-2 presents the amount of coarse material (larger than 1/4 inch in size) sievedfrom samples before laboratory tests. The table also shows the relative proportions ofupper fill material to lower horizon clay present in each of these samples. As expected,little coarse material was noted in the sample from TP-1 excavated in the drainage ditch.These data show that the amount of coarse, sieved material varies throughout the sitefrom 10 to 30 percent of the total on-site upper horizon material.

Measured moisture contents of the shallow soils depend on the amount of rainfall andcan vary throughout the year. Due to the low permeability of the underlying soils,saturation of the shallow soils is frequent. Soils received for geophysical and treatability

89MC114K.rpt/jdg/cee - Task 330 09-06-91C & R Battery Treatability Study Report 3-1 Rev, 0

1*61*

testing ranged in moisture content from about 13 to 23 percent. The variability of thesite soil moisture indicates a requirement of moisture adjustment during the remedialprocess.

3.1.1.2 Unconfined Compressive Strength (ASTM 2166-85)

Table 3-3 shows the unconfined strength of undisturbed soil samples collected in Shelbytubes. The tests indicated that on-site soils exhibit a stiff to very stiff consistency,implying that this soil would be expected to provide reasonable support to mostconstruction equipment during removal of the contaminated soils.

3.1.13 Bulk Density

The measured dry unit weights and moisture contents are contained on Table 3-4 alongwith the corresponding total unit weight (bulk density). The dry unit weight of the testpit samples ranged from about 94 to 110 pounds per cubic foot, with an average of 104pounds per cubic foot The dry unit weight of the Shelby tube samples (average sampledepth about 4 to 5 feet) varied from about 103 to 110 pounds per cubic foot, with anaverage of about 106 pounds per cubic foot.

3.1.1.4 Permeability Tests (S\V910(» _

Table 3-5 shows the laboratory measured permeability of Shelby tube samples from thesoil borings. These samples were taken from the soils directly beneath the disturbedupper layer at the site. The measured permeabilities ranged from 7.1 x 10"8 to 2.0 x 10'6cm/sec. Thus, the soil beneath the undisturbed site zone can be considered a relativelyimpermeable plastic clay that will not allow free migration of water.

3.1.1.5 Total TCLP Metals Analysis of Untreated Soil Samples

Untreated soil samples were collected from test pits and soil borings analyzed todetermine the lead concentrations and other metals present (Table 3-6a). With theexception of lead, other RCRA metals of interest are either not present or they are

S9MCmiCrpt/jd|/cee - Task 330 09-06-91C A R Bttteiy Trcattbflity Study Report 3-2 . Rev. 0

present in small quantities. TCLP results for lead of the composite samples ranged from56.4 mg/L at TP-1 to" 345 rrig/L at TP-4. A discrete sample from the undisturbed claylayer at TP-2 contained about 100 mg/kg of lead and a corresponding TCLP lead of 0.67mg/L. —--- - - - - - - - - -

The pH of untreated soils at the site was typically about 6. A lower pH was obtainedat the drainage ditch (TP-1) and the deeper natural clays. Alkalinity values for TCLPleachates had a considerable range of ND to 92.0 mg/L reflecting the homogeneity ofthe surface soils.

Lead concentrations are presented in Table 3-7 determined for samples from upper fillmaterial, samples from natural soils at depths between 3 to 8 feet, and compositesamples. The samples were obtained from the soil borings as well as test pits within theC & R Battery site (Table 3-7a) and borings at the Capitol Oil property (Table 3-7b).Lead contamination at the site was limited to the upper fill material that ranged inthickness between 2 to 4 feet. Lead contamination was also confined to the top 2 feetat the Capitol Oil property. None of the samples from the 3- to 5-foot depth have leadlevels greater than 120 mg/kg. Two borings in the northwest, corner of the Capitol Oilproperty encountered a 1.5-foot-thick layer of crushed battery casings about 1 foot belowthe surface. It is possible that these are the same materials identified in earlierphotographs as battery chips that were spread over this area prior to the building of theCapitol Oil facility. It appears that the material was covered with clean fill duringconstruction of the tank farm. Two hand-auger samples (Samples HA-1-1.75 and HA-2-1.25) were collected from the western berm surrounding the tank farm. The total leadconcentration in these samples were 41,500 and 27,600 mg/kg, respectively. The otherparts of the berm also were filled with battery chips and it is likely that the entire bermhas high levels of lead contamination, .... '.. .. ... ..

't3.1.1.6 Analvs!s~of Site Water and Leachate From Coarse Material

!

Analysis of decontamination water filtered and unfiltered (CR-DW-01) and drainageditch water (CR-SW-01, CR-SW-02) for RCRA metals was performed to assess the

S9MC114K,rpt/jdg/cee - Task 330 .. .. . ! , , 09-06-91C & R Battery Treatability Study Report 3-3 Rev. 0

AROOOl*66

potential use of this water during the remedial process. Results are presented in Table3-8 and show that generally the water minus the soil particles contains very little lead.There is no evidence that the site waters cannot be used in the remedial process basedon contaminant levels.

In order to provide information concerning the disposition of the coarse material(battery casing fragments, cobbles, etc.) for design or disposal purposes, compositedsamples of this material (CR-WS-1P2-01) were leached for one hour in a TCLPapparatus. Leaching solutions included deionized water, TCLP pH 5.0 leachate buffer,and TCLP pH 3.0 leachate buffer. These leachates were then analyzed for the presenceof RCRA metals (Table 3-8). The results indicate the highest level of leaching from thepH-5 buffer compared to the deionized water and the pH 3 buffer. However, due to thelimited number of samples, these results are inconclusive.

3.1.2 Analysis of Treatability Study Data

3.1.2.1 Heat of Hvdration

A summary of the measured temperature after 5 minutes of initial hydration ofstabilized/solidified mixtures of samples from TP-1 arid TP-2 is shown in Table 3-9. Thetemperature increaseil by 4 to 6°C above the initial temperature. Based on these results,additional heat of hydration tests were not conducted on subsequent mix preparationsbecause the temperature increase was not considered to be significant.

3.122 Moisture-Density Relationships of Compacted Soil-Cement MixturesfASTM D 558-821

Compaction tests were performed the soil-cement mixtures. Samples from TP-1 andTP-2 were mixed with various amounts of cement, lime, and sodium phosphate. Asummary of optimum moisture content - maximum dry density relationship for thesemixtures are tabulated in Table 3-10a. Table 3-10b summarizes the compaction test datafor composited samples from TP-4A, TP-5A, and TP-6A that were mixed with differentamounts of cement, lime, and calcium phosphate. The moisture-density curves for allmixtures are provided in Appendix D.

89Mai4K.rpt/3ds/«e - Task 330 09-06-91C & R Battery Treatability Study Report 3-4 Rev. 0

The results of compaction tests of TP-1 and TP-2 samples show that increase in cementratio produces minor changes in the optimum" moisture content and maximum drydensity. However, the increase in lime and sodium phosphate ratios generally increasedthe optimum moisture content and decreases the maximum dry density. Similar trendswere observed for the TP-456 sample. Maximum dry density for TP-1 and TP-2 mixturesranged between 102 and 110 pounds per cubic foot, with optimum moisture contentbetween 17 and 22 percent. The maximum"dry density of TP-456 mixes varied from 108to 122 pounds per cubic foot and the optimum water content between 13 and 20 percent.Because the TP-456 sandy silt and TP-1 and TP-2 samples are sandy clays, the abovedifference in moisture-density values are expected. TP-456 material is consideredrepresentative of the soils to be remediated at the site.

The TCLP tests and economic considerations indicate that soil-cement mixturecontaining 15 percent cement and 10 percent calcium phosphate has a high potential formeeting disposal requirements. The optimum moisture content and maximum drydensity for this mixture are 14.3 percent and 112.7 pounds per cubic foot, respectively.An estimate of volume of materials that will be handled during the sitestabilization/solidification process can be calculated based on the moisture-density curvefor the above sample and the average dry density of untreated samples. The average drydensity of the on-site soils was determined in the field and summarized in Table 3-4.Based on the available data, the final volume of solidified/stabilized mixture in the fieldis expected to be 10 to 20 percent larger than the volume of untreated soils. Thisestimate assumes that the solidified/stabilized mixture will be compacted to at least.95 percent of the maximum dry density obtained from the laboratory moisture-densitytests using the above ASTM D 558-82 test procedure. The moisture content is assumedto be within ±_ 3 percent of the optimum moisture determined from the above test. Itwas also assumed that the mix ratios are based on the dry weight of soil.

3.1.2.3 Permeability of Stabilized/Solidified Mixture (SW-9100)

The permeability of the recommended soil-cement mixture (15 percent cement and10-percent calcium phosphate) was evaluated using a flexible wall permeability test. Themeasured coefficient of permeability was approximately 1.4 x 10"5 cm/sec. Although this

89MC114K.rpt/jdg/cee - Task 330 : ~:_ !.. : / 09-06-91C & R Battery Treatabifity Study Report 3-5 Rev. 0

value is slightly higher than the maximum permeability of 1.0 10"5 cm/sec recommendedby the EPA the stabilized material must meet TCLP criteria rendering it anoncharacteristic waste.

3-1*2.4 Unconfined Compressive Strength of Stabilized/Solidified Mixture (ASTMD 1633-84)

Two unconfined compression tests were conducted to evaluate the strength of therecommended soil-cement mixture (15 percent cement and 10 percent calciumphosphate). The average unconfined compressive strength was about 340 pounds persquare inch (psi), about 25 times higher than the strength of untreated soil. Themeasured unconfined compressive strength is well above the minimum recommended byEPA (about 50 psi). The stabilized/solidified material is expected to provide stablesupport for construction equipment, cover material, overburden, and any other materialsthat might be placed upon it.

3.12.5 TCLP of Soil-Cement Mixtures

The results of TCLP tests for stabilized/solidified soil-cement mixtures are presented onTables 3-11 and 3-12. Only two samples of the soil-cement-lime-sodium phosphate(Table 3-11) resulted in TCLP lead less than the regulatory level (5 mg/L). Themeasured TCLP lead value for these two mixtures was 3.3 mg/L and contained 40percent cement with 5 percent lime or sodium phosphate. The remaining mixturesexhibited significantly higher TCLP lead values (up to 316 mg/L).

Based on the results shown in Table 3-11, the mix design was re-evaluated and sodiumphosphate was replaced by calcium phosphate in the new soil-cement mixture. TheTCLP lead values were below detection limit in the following samples: 50 percentcement; 15 percent cement and 20 percent calcium phosphate; and 15 percent cementand 10 percent calcium phosphate. Several other samples contained slight amounts ofTCLP lead (samples with cement ratio between 15 and 20 percent and calciumphosphate between 10 and 20 percent). The mixture that contained 15 percent cementand 10 percent calcium phosphate was considered the most suitable mixture for remedialdesign because of the low mix ratios. The mixture also has acceptable physical

S9MC114Kjpt/jdg/cee - Task 330 09-06-91C& R Battery Trealability Study Report 3-6 a r\ r\ n Rev. 0

characteristics such as strength, low permeability, and density. Also, the net increase involume of treated material would be lower for this mix ratio thereby minimizing costsof cement and calcium phosphate.

3.2 SUMMARY

The results of our field and laboratory investigation and analysis are summarized below.

1. Hie surface and subsurface soils at C & R Battery and Capital Oil Co.include upper fill material followed by natural alluvial soils or clay. The upper fillmaterial consists of a mixture of clay, silt, and sand with substantial amounts of gravel,cobbles, and battery casing fragments. The thickness of the upper fill material rangesfrom 2 to 4 feet at the explored locations. The .natural alluvium consists of plastic sandysilty clay and extends more than 15 feet below ground surface.

2. The test results showed that predominantly the upper fill material containslead concentrations requiring excavation and stabilization. Measured lead concentrationlevels in the upper fill material on the C & R Battery site ranged from about 1,000mg/kg to over 150.00D mg/kg. The highest lead concentration levels were measured inthe vicinities of the debris piles and the reported acid and neutralization pond areas.The lead concentrations found in the undisturbed clay material (below 0 to 2 feet) withinthe Capitol Oil property were significantly lower. Measured lead concentration insamples from the berm near the west side of the tank farm ranged from 27,600 to 41,500mg/kg. . -. . _ ;

3. The measured permeability of natural alluvium (clay) underlying the upperfill material on site ranged from 7.0 x 10"8 to 2 x IQ"6 cm/sec. The low permeability ofthe relatively thick alluvium and comparative concentrations of lead in the two distincthorizons at the site indicate that the alluvium has acted as a barrier and has impededdownward migration of the lead into the natural soils and groundwater.

4. The TCLP lead results of most of the soil-cement-lime-sodium phosphatemixtures exceeded the regulatory criteria of 5 mg/L. However, several soil-cement-

S9MC114K.rpt/jdg/cce - Task 330 . - - - . . . - . - , 09-06-91C & R Battery Treatability Study Report - ^_j Rev fl

ftROQOUO

calcium phosphate mixtures met the regulatory requirements. Of these mixtures, the onecontaining 15 percent cement and 10 percent calcium phosphate is the most cost-effective. It should be noted that this particular mix may have to be adjusted slightly tocompensate for extremely high lead levels.

5. The measured unconfined compressive strength of the recommended mixexceeds the minimum strength required for material handling and measured permeabilityof the mixture is slightly higher than the maximum value recommended by EPA.

6. The volume of the treated material is estimated to be 15 to 20 percentlarger than the volume of untreated material. This increase in volume assumes that themix ratios are based on the dry weight of soil and that the mixture will be compactedto at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density at optimum moisture content withinplus or minus 3 percent.

7. The sieved soils used for treatability consisted of a mixture of clay, silt, andsand. No serious difficulties are expected in handling these materials during the fixationprocess. These materials may require moisture adjustment to facilitate thestabilization/solidification process. ... - ... :::.

S9MC114K.rpt/jdj/cee-Task 330 09-06-91C& R Battery Treatability Study Report 3-8 Rev. 0

flROOOU

TABLE 3-1

PHYSICAL CLASSIFICATION AND MOISTURE CONTENT

Test Pit/Soil Boring

TP-1

TP-2

TP-3 ^

TP-4 •-:•— ; -

TP-5

TP-6 . _ . . - _ ' .

TP-7

GR-TP2-2.52 .,_.__... ,

TP-456

SB91-20

SB91-21

SB91-22

SB91-23

SB91-24

SB91-25

TP-4A (at 0.5' depth)4

TP-4A (at 1.5' depth)4

TP-5A (at 0.5' depth)4TP-5A (at IS depth)4

TP-6A (at 0.5* depth)4

TP-6A "(at IS depth)4

TP-9 (at 0.5' depth)4

TP-9 (at 1.5' depth)4

TP-10 (at 0.5' depth)4

TP-10 (at 1.5' depth)4

Description/Classification

._._ Sandy lean clay, CL

--Sandy lean clay, CL .

""Sandy lean clay, CL

"SanSy lean day, CL

Sa'hdylean clay, CL

Sandy lean clay, CL

Sandy sflty clay, CL-ML

Sandy lean clay, CL

Sandy silt, ML

Sandy lean clay, CL

Sandy lean clay, CL

. .-..Sa'riay lean clay, CL

— : Sandy lean clay, CL

- Sandy lean clay, CL

Sandy lean clay, CL

Sandy lean clay, CL

Sandy lean clay, CL

Sandy lean clay, CL

Sandy lean clay, CL

Sandy lean clay, CL

Sandy lean clay, CL

Sandy lean clay, CL

Sandy lean clay, CL

Sandy lean clay, CL

Sandy lean clay, CL

Gravel

TABIJ3 3-2

PERCENTAGE OF UPPER FILLAND COARSE MATERIALS IN

UNTREATED TREATABILITY SAMPLES

Test Pit

TP-1

TP-2

TP-3

TP-4

TP-5

TP-6

TP-7

TP-4A

TP-5A

TP-6A

TP-456

Coarse Materials(above 1/4")(%)

.6

10.5

12.5

13

15

29.4

13

16.7

11.0 _._..

10.5. ._

NA

Upper Material1(%)

NA

_ 25

37.5 ...... .

37,5

37.5

.100

100

33

..._.___J3

50

100

NA - Not applicable

1 This represents the percentage of disturbed upper soils that are combined with the lower clay present in the samplesprepared for treatability testing. In the case of TP-4A, TP-5A, an'd TP-6A, this material was not ultimately combined withday, but was composited as TP-456.

89MC114K.tl/]dg - Task 330 09-06-91C & R Battery Trcttability Study Report Rev. 2

AROOOl.73

TABLE 3-3

UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF UNTREATED SOILS

Unconfined StrengthSoil Boring/Sample No.1 ^ Sample Description (pounds per square foot)

SB91-20

SB91-21

SB91-22

SB91-23

SB91-24

SB91-25

" Sandy lean clay, CL

Sandy lean clay, CL

-Sandy lean clay, CL

Sandy lean clay, CL

Sandy lean clay, CL

Sandy lean clay, CL

2,215

2,710

4,860

3,940

2,555

2,640

Shelby tube samples collected from soil borings at 4- tô -foot depth from surface.

89MC114K.tl/jdg - Task 330 . . 09-06-91C & R Battery Treatability Study Report Rev. 2

TABUS 3-4

BUIX DENSITY OF UNTREATED SOILS

Tea Pit orSoil Boring/Sample No.

TP-2

TP-3

TP-4

TP-5

TP-6

TP-7

SB91-20

SB91-21

SB9I-22

SB91-23

SB91-24

SB91-25

Dry Unit Weight(Ibs/cu-ft.)

105.2

94 J.

110.6

103.4

110.5

101.9

109.8

108.5

103.0

103.9

104.4

105.2

Moisture Content2(%)

22.0 .

27.4

18.7

22.7

17.6

24.2

17.5

18.7

21.7

21.7

19.6

213

Bulk Density1(total unit weight)

(lbs/cu.ft)

128.4

119.93

1313

126.9

129.9

126,5

129.0

128.8

125.4'

129.0 " :

124.9

117.6 .

Remarks

Field test«.

.

\=-n

H

Laboratory test

*"H

».

»

"

1 Bulk density » dry unit weight x (1 -f- % moisture content)/1002 As received

89MC114K.tl/fdj - Talk 330 09-06-91CAR Battery TrcatabiUty Study Report Rev. 2

SROOQ1.75

TABLE 3-5

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY PERMEABILITY TEST RESULTSOF UNTREATED SOILS1

Sample No.

SB91-20 .

SB91-21

SB91-22

SB91-23

SB91-24

SB91-25

Coefficient of Permeability(cm/sec)

.'".." - - : ~ . - : • ,5.9---:•— •— - -:--:- :- 32

; - 7.1:: ."..: -3.6- - - - - - - - 5 3

- -«,.:. .-.— - - -io

x ID'7

x io4xlO-8

x 10*8

xlO'7

xlO-6

1 Undisturbed day material collected in Shelby tubes.

89MC114K.tl/jdg - Task 330 . " ----- _ . _ , I . , .— ...... 09-06-91C & R Battery Treatability Study Report ^ Rev. 2

3

_*>B. .--.-=. u .. P « Q ^ ^ p Q Q

jj&.

Q-E

_ *9 SO3 "i £.i i Is

15 oE-

•3 J*2 26 O

° ' *

QZ

& Q Q g Q Q Q• T «y 25 "y T' "yO A A

TABLE 3-6b

TOTAL LEAD AND TCLP LEAD,pH, AND AUKAIINITY

OF UNTREATED MATERIAL

Test Pit

TP-1

TP-2

TP-3

TP-4

TP-5

TP-6

TP-7

Clay Material1 TP-2-2.5n

"

Total Lead: : (mg/kg)

10,100

24,300

. 48,700 :

30,000 .

45,400

35,700

_7,220

34.8115106

Total pH~

3.4 ' '

utr •6.5 :

"- --5.8

6.3 • • - : - ;

6.3 * :6.2

4.1NA

— ' . --NA

TCLP Lead(mg/L)

56.4

-'--is- -111

345

".' 238

. ..'296 -

: in0.67 .3.9NA

TCLPpH

5

5.8

5.8

53

5.7

52

5,2

NANANA

TCLP Alkalinity(mg/L)

ND

220

920

237

870

220

237

NANANA

NA = Not analyzed ____ _ .. .. _ _ _ _ _ __.. .1 This grab sample was taken at 0.5 feet below upper disturbed fill in TP-2 and analyzed in triplicate.

89MC114K.tl/jdg - Task 330 J , 09-06-91C &R Battery Treatability Study Report Rev. 2

HROQOi.78

TABLE 3-7a

TOTAL LEAD ANALYSIS AT C & R BATTERY SITE(mg/kg)

SampleDepth/Type

Composite1

Upper3

0.5* Horizon*

IS Horizon4

TP-4A

40̂ 00

142,000

61.8 (753)

91.6

TP-5A

17,800

74,700

38.4

43.8

TP-6A

32,600

118,200

42.2

106.0

TP-456

134.0002

NA

NA

NA

TP-9

NA

NA

37.6

35.2

TP-10

NA

NA

18.1 (14.5)

12.6

1 Lead levels in sieved and composited materials from all horizons2 Lead levels in composite of only upper material from TP-4 A, TP-5A, and TP-6A3 Lead levels in composite of only upper material4 Lead levels in composite samples of discrete horizons in the clay at depths below the disturbed upper materialNA - Not analyzed( ) Duplicate sample analysis

89MClWK.a/jdj -Task 330 09-06̂ 91CAR Battery T.reaubtlî Study Report Rev. 2

flROOQl.79

TABI£ 3-7b

LEAD ANALYSIS AT CAPITAL OIL

Sample Number

Capitol Oil Company Borines1

SB91-26-fKTSB91-26-3.5T5

SB91-27-0-2 -SB91-27-35-5 .__. _ = =

SB91-28-0-2SB91-28-3-5

SB91-29-0-2SB91-29-0-2 DUPSB91-29-3-5

SB91-30-0-2SB91-30-3-5 .

SB91-31-0-2SB91-31-3-5 - - -

SB91-32-0-2CRO1 1*> 1. <

SB91-33-0-2SB91-33.3-5 .... _ . .

Hand Aueer Samples in the BermHA-1-175

HA-M.25 ::"

Total Lead(mg/kg)

' 3̂ 80. .,,...._. =, - ------ -.-- -36.4

--" ----- --- ------ 19,500..=...._. -...--_ . ._,=._ _ .41.6

; - 571046.1

. _ ., ..._,_ ,i_,;.^ , .̂̂ —̂ ooo7,800

. .. .__:.. . ..._• _ :/.. _r:. ..•—•-"53.1-, - - - -' 1,930

...,-.- .- - ~: ...... .: .-=—_., 31.4."".-" ~:~~~- ;.:" "" """--13,100

. . ... ,.. _ ..--... -- 483

.44.2-• :- - -I- — ..-.--.;-.: -̂ z-:;: ,:î .-455

' - - - - '- -• - 37.7.,_ , . .. - .- ~. - .:,„._._.. .„ 36.6"

27,600

: _ _ .:_.:: .—_._:: .:: 41,500 1

DUP = Duplicate1 Samples taken from 0-2 feet were grab samples taken from soils above the day layer. Samples taken from 3-5 feet

were taken from the undisturbed clay horizon.

89MC114K.tl/jdg - Task 330 09-06-91C & R Battery Treatability Study Report n _ " Rev. 2

flROOOt.80

°sE«|£ECO&«O

13M

TABI£ 3-9

SUMMARY OF TEMPERATURES MEASURED DURINGINITIAL HYDRATION OF SOIL-CEMENT

Sample No. Cement

TP-1

TP-1

TP-1

TP-1

TP-1

TP-1

TP-1

TP-1

TP-1

TP-1

TP-1

TP-1

TP-2

TP-2

TP-2

TP-2

TP-2

TP-2

TP-2

TP-2

TP-2 — -

TP-2

TP-2TP-2

1 Sodium phosphate

20

20

20

20

30

30

30

30

40

40

40

-40

20

20

20

20

30

30

30

30

40

40

40

40

Other

_ _ ..... 0

1-Lime

5-Lime

5-NaPO4

0

1-Lime

— SrLime

5-NaPO4

---o—— -~ 1-Lime

5-Lime

5-NaPO4

0

- 1-Lime

.; ___.,_ 5-Lime

- -. 5-NaPO4

0

1-Lime

5-Lime

5-NaPO4

0

1-Lime

5-Lime

5-NaPO4

InitialTemperature

(°C)

23.0

23,0: _23.0!

23.0: :23.0:

23.0"

23.0.

23.0*

- 23.0

23.0,

23.0; .- -23.0;

23.o: -23.0'

23.0

23$

I3.o! -

23.0

23.0

23.0

23.0.

23.0;23.0,

23,0.

TemperatureAfter 5 Min.Hydration

28,0

..._ 29.0

29.0

29.0

28.0

29.0

- -29.0

28.0

29.0

29.0

--29.0"

28.0

" 2S.O

28.0

28.0-

27.0

... . 28.0

28.0

- - .28.0

27.0

28.0

28.0

- , 28.0

27.0

89Mai4K.il/jdg-Task330 . . !C & R Battery Treatability Study Report

Increase inTemperature

5

6

6

6

5

6

6

5

6

' 6

6

5

5

5

5

4

5

5

5

4

5

5

5

4

09-06-91Rev. 2

flROOOt.82

TABLE 3-10a

MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIPOF COMPACTED SOIL-CEMENT MIXTURES

Mk

TP-11

MaximumDiy Density

(Prf)

OptimumMoisture(%)

TP-2

MaximumDry Density

(pcf)

OptimumMoisture(*)

20% Cement 106.8 19.0 1083 . 18.8

+ 1% lime 105.8 19.9 107.2 193

+ 5% lime 1043 203 1063 19.9

+ 5% NaPO4 102.5 22.2 103,8 223

30% Cement 106.8 17.5 109.6 19.4

+ 1% lime 1063 - 19.5 _ 107.8 19.1

+ 5% lime 104.2 - 20.7 105.7 213

-i- 5% NaPO4 103.9 21-0 105.6 . 52.0

40% Cement 108.2 183 109.2 "" 19.2

+ 1% lime 107.4 19.9 108.0 18.6

+ 5% lime 1053 20 J _ 106,2.. 19.9

_____"______-i- 5% NaPQ4______104.8_________212______ 105.5.„ .______21.1

Note: Values determined by ASTM D 558-82

1 Drainage ditch

S9MC.HK.tl/3dj - Task 330 09-06-91C & R Batteiy Treatabflity Study Report Rev. 2

flF.OOOi.-83

TABLE 3-10b

MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIPOF COMPACTED SOILrCEMENT MIXTURES

(SAMPLE TP-456)1

Calcium ] Maximum OptimumCement Lime Phosphate Dry Density Moisture Content(%) (%)_ (%) . .(pcf) (%)

Note:

30 -

30

30.

30

30

• 40

50

50

50

50

1515

15

15

40

40

40

40

15

15

20

20

20

Values

1 Composited

- - 10

_-- •:•-;. - •

.: _.,, _ ___10___. ....__.. ,__

5 - _-

-

10

: : : _ io" : .—--- -— -----10

. - ,..- _ . .. L_ ...-=_-» ... . '

-10

^ . _ .

10

__.. ...._- . . . -.. . . . . .

- . ..- - :.""

__ .-.....-._

detennined by ASTM D 558-82

surface material from Test Pits TP-4A,

_ - '. :v

10

io

-* : —_

-10 '"" "~

10 " "~~

— - -- — - --==-. -.- . ; -- =

. ; 10 ".:.-... -10" ~ '

- -_ -._10

10 :,15 : .:20

--io ;15

: 20

TP-5A, and TP-6A.

116.6114.8

1093

...116.7

-122.0

..II1-7120.9

117.1"" ""

114.9

1113 .

1203

. 115.5

: 112.7 "108.7

1213

1172

1193

109.9

111.2

110.7

.1142

112.6

109.8

89MC114!Ctl/jdg - Task 330 _ . . . . . _ ;C&R Battery Treatability Study Report ~

16.9

17.1

173

15.8

14.0

17.7

15.1

15.8

16.9

17.8

133

15.4

143

19.8

145

15.6

15.8

18.5

17.5

17.5

175

17.2

17.7

09-06-91Rev, 2

TABLE 3-11

TCLP IJEAD, pH, AND ALKALINITY OFSOILX.̂ MENT-IJMÊ ODrUM PHOSPHATE MIXTURES

Test SoilPit (%)TP-1 80

7975757069656560595555

TP-2 SO7975

757069656560595555

TypeHPortland(*)1202020203030303040404040

20

2020

20

30

30

3030 .

40-40

40

40

Lime(%)

-15--15

-

-

1

. 5-

_

15--15--15-

SodiumPhosphate TCLP Lead

(%) „ (mg/L)

56.954.951,7

5" " 103283

- 29.6- - — - - 25.15 83

-- 24.2

13.033

5 33

254

316267

5 170

197

. -=. _ 198125

5 90

176163

518

5 565

TCLPpH

4.8. 4.8

5.04.7

. ..525.4 ...

5.4

4.9

5.5

6.06.753 . : .

4.9

4.95.2

4.7

535.86.05.15.96.1

6.65.9

TCLPAlkalinity(mg/L)1,6201,8402,6801,0603,2003,620

4,220

2380

4,180

4̂ 30

4,700

- 3,920

2,500

2,5803,6701,6303,980

4,4104,560

3,430

4,9005,020

4,760

4,500

Mix percentages calculated on a dry weight basts

S9MC114K.tI/jdj -Task 330 09-06-91C&R Battery TreatabDity Study Report Rev. 2

flROOOl*85

TABLE 3-12

TCLP LEAD, pH, AND ALKALDSOTY OFSOILCEMENT-IJME-CALCIUM PHOSPHATE MIXTURES1

soil

85757565706570

65 - '60703606050656050 _ . .-

50

40

5550404030

1 Composited* XJiv ru»i*r**T\t

TypeHPortland

: . - 151515 ,-.,_ -,,.

. -15 :„.. -15_

15-2020-2030 .303030 •-30 ,-.= :.

.-40 , ._ ..

_ . _40

.40

40

40

50

50 . ... -._

5050

Lime

010010 -0o ---.-00

00

100 ~

-10__ 0

.J)10

0- -—

105

- 0-10010

sample from TP-4A, TP-5A,ifTi»c s-ali-iilatfarl nn a Hrv njpitr

CalciumPhosphate

o :-" 0 "

.. _.:,.. io1015

: 2010 •;"

" Jr^ 15... 20 ;._:.... a —\:

0.10 " "^~

10 : "------* =,..^.=

__;:.o ...;o :;

___ _ . 10100

o ... :0

1010

and TP-6 Aif Kacic

TCLP Lead(mg/L)

57.4

46TND (8.7)32.2

= ND(0.6)

ND(ND)0.75 (5.7)ND (0.52)

"ND (0.52)83.936.7

^1276- 50.2.=_49.0

- - 103

".-. 153

34.061.4102ND3B.7

" 47.0553

TCLP pH

113

11.593 (5.1)10.9

5.7 (8.0)63 (6.9)11.0 (63)8.2 (9.6)72 (83)-11.7

11

11.5

11.6 .

11.6

11.2

11.2

10.9

11.5

12

6.4

11.611.511.5

TCLPAlkalinity(mg/L)2,4502,760

1,940 (1,440)2.380

2360 (2,500)

2380 (2,550)2340 (2,290)2,180 (2,580)2,280 (2,620)

2,620

2,860

2,480

2,5402,540

2,6202,8002,720 .

2,580

2,680

4,400

2,820

2,660

2,640

3 Sample tested at moisture content 5% above optimum 'ND - Not detected( ) Parentheses indicate a rerun of the original sample preparation and reanalysis.

89MC114K.tl/jdg - Task 330 _ . ._ . .._. ..._. . . __ .. 09-06-91C & R Battery Treatability Study Report Rev. 2

flROQOt*86

4.0REFERENCES

Hazcon., Inc., 1989; C & R Battery Site Treatability Study Final Report; Prepared forNUS, Inc.; May 24, 1989 . .. "

NUS, Inc., 1989; C & R Battery Site Final Remedial Investigation Report, ChesterfieldCounty, Virginia

NUS, Inc., 1990; C & R Battery Site Final Feasibility Study, Chesterfield County,Virginia

S9MC114K.ipt/jdj/cee - Ttslc 330 09-06-91C & R Battery Treatability Study Report 4-1 Rev. 0

flROOO^S?

APPENDIX ASOIL BORINGS

APPENDIX ASOIL BORINGS

A total of 33 machine-augered borings and 2 hand-augered borings were drilled withinthe C & R Battery site and Capitol Oil property as shown on Figure 3-1. The boringswere located based on information from the RI/FS or from aerial photography or figuresindicating previous activities at the site. The following outlines the general drillingprocedures. Detailed discussion is given in the SOP in the Addendum to the Work Plan.

• Decontaminated hollow-stem augers were used for drilling the borings.

• Deep borings extended 2 feet below the occurrence of native soil.

. • Samples of soils were obtained at selected depths by hydraulically pushing3-inch Shelby tubes into undisturbed soils and by driving a 3-inch ODsplit-spoon sampler with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches using arope and cathead with AW drill rods.

• The ends of the Shelby tube were sealed with wax to prevent drying andthe Shelby tube samples were packed well for shipping.

• The boring logs were prepared by the WCC field geologist based on visualinspection of disturbed and undisturbed samples and observation ofdrilling characteristics of the surface and subsurface formations. Thedetailed boring logs are provided in the enclosed figures.

• The borings were grouted to the surface with cement/bentonite grout anda marker stake was placed at the location.

89MCI14K.rpt/jdg/cee - Task 330 09-05-91C & R Battery Treatability Study Report A-l Rev. 0

PROJECT Is

SURFACE EWATER EN

•t

Xa.LUa

o-

15-

20-

25-

BORING LOGIAME CAR T*att«rv fn TV*»atahtTifv SfiirivOCATIVLEVA1TRYDRFACB

nw Rirhmnnrf, VAS. Vfnrr. . ftfl DRELIiKP BY Rf'pRr Pnv.rf)nmf>ntal

-TDW NM pT,RVATTrtNPATTTMRPTH .NONF. T?WT?.T i-rn 2 ' -DEPT

SAMPLE

UJa.i-

RECOVERY

RESISTANCE

H Nf> PT 24 hrg \^> x~

DESCRIPTION

Loose to medium dense, tan, no a- plastic, Sandy SILT to Silty SAND, dry --, with some very fine to fine SAND and —-\some crushed battery casings /Stiff, light orange-brown, low to

" medium plastic Clayey SILT or SUtyCLAY with some fine SAND and traceGravel, moist

— - . . . . . . . . __

uCO

ML tcSM

ML t<CL

SYMBOL

^i

-

BORING SB91-01

SHEE1PROJJTASK

RIGMETE

ELEVATION

r f_.™ of 1. ,,,.y"TNrt JWM1I41C1wn T

5/15/91Acker AD9

nn 8.25" HSA

FIELDNOTES

Fill

Alluvium

Bottom of boringat 5.0 feet

Note: Boringlogged off ofcuttings

^Woodward-Clyde Consultants WCCCRBAT Figure No. A-lflRQQQl*9Q

BORING LOG | BORING SB91-02PROJECT NAMP, ,„., PAR Battery Co. Trffafahiliry Study flHF.ET I Af 1PRO2Fr

BORING LOG BORING SB91-03PprvTEyrr-fJAMFr C A: R Raff ^ RIO ... Ackpi* AD9W^fWR STTWPAriK nP.PTTT ND VT 24 hfS An I VfTP.TWnn 8.25" HSA

»*-•,

Q.Ula

o-

5--

-

_

_

10-

15-

20-

25-

~

SfldPLE

Ula.h-

S

crUlooUJa:

17/18

BORING LOG BORING SB91-04PROJECT NAME CAR Rattffry C.n. Trffatahtlitv Study SHEET 1 of 1PRmwrrr.nr̂ 'nr̂ Richmond, VA PR̂ Ê T tfr» RQMItdKITrnn_rs;'ni fay S, Mnrri

PROJEPROJELOGGESURFAWATE!WATEI

*4-

X

aao-

5-

10-

15-

20-

25-

CTf)CTL;DBGEE1ENISU

BORING LOGAME H & R Rattf.rv fn Treatahili'tv StiidvOCATIVLEVA1TRYDfcFACE

nfa Rif^hmnnrf. VAS Morris.; ft tte PRTT.T.F.P BY RftTpar T-nvTrnqmenfnl

'TON NM flT.KVATTONPATTTM .. ,BPTH NONE, ... FFFT ATP. 2DEpn

SAMPLE

Ula.t-

RECOVERY

RESISTONCE

j NT) ^f 24 hrs AP ẑ

DESCRIPTION

. T-oo.se, light tan m light brown and-\ gray, non-plastic very Sandy SILT, ary -With crushed rock and trace batterV

- \chips, limey /i-\ Loose, to medium dense, medium /

~\orange-brown, very fine to fine grained,"\poorly graded Silty SAND, damp /Stiff, light orange-brown, low tomedium plastic Clayey SILT or SiltyCLAY, moist with trace very fine

- SAND

_ . _ _ . . ... --- . . - - - ^

uw

MT.SM

ML tcCL

SYMBOL

1

•̂ ^

BORING SB91-05SHEE1PROJETASKDATERIGMETH

1

IUlUJ

r ^ iy«r vn RQMIldK"!wn 3

S/I4/Q1Ackf-r ADQ

rm 8.25" HSA

FIELDNOTES

FillFillRough drilling from0.5 to 2.5 feet

Alluvium

Bottom of boringat 5.0 feet

Note: Boringlogged off ofcuttings

^Woodward-Clyde Consultants WCCCRBAT Figure NO. A-S

PROJECT LLOGGED E

WATER ENWATER SIT

M-

o-

5-

10-

15-

20-

25-

BORING LOGt^E C. & R Batterv Co. Treflfnh.litv StudvOCATIV ,LEVAITRYDRFACE

ny Richmond. VAS. Morrissette PRILLED BY Rftlp^r FnvirnnmentnlION NM „ , F.T.RVATTON DATT.TMEPTH NHNTr r?«"(.-r A-rn 2DEPT1

SfWPLE

UJQ.

RECOVERY

RESISTANCE

% NH FT 24 hrs AP x—

DESCRIPTION

Loose to medium dense, light and dark_ brown, non-plastic Sandy SILT to Silty --. SAND, dry with very fine SAND and- —-\ 80% to 90% battery casings from 0.5 to -\1.5 feet /

" Loose to medium dense, medium\ Drown, tine-grainea, poorly graded/-\SiItySAND, damp /

Stiff, light orange-brown, low tomedium plastic Clayey SILT or Silty

_ CLAY, moist with some very fineSAND

oCO=3

ML tcSM

SM

ML tcCL

dQ3

CO

V/y/

Ĥ H

| BORING SB91-G6

SHEE1PROJETASK

METH

1 ELEVATION

1 of ]-.rypvn 8Q\f1!4K1NO 3

Arlro*- Anô t̂nn 8.25" H-̂ f

FIELDNOTES

Fill

Fill

Alluvium

Bottom of boringat 5.0 feet

Note: Boringlogged off ofcuttings

Woodward-Clyde Consultants ĝ n̂ . q c rigure No' A'6

BORING LOG BORING SB91-07PFrTTRCT NAMT! ,. „ ^ A-_ R R»ttf»rv Pn Tr 2 wjr; Ar^pr ADOWATF.R simPinw nirPTW ND PT 24 hrs An X MTrTtTr,r» R_25" HSA

4-

XQ.LUa

o-_

-

~

_

5-• -

--

.

10-

15-

20-

25-

*"

SAMPLE

Ula.i—

ceUlooUla:

Ul

COHCOUlCE

DESCRIPTION

Loose to medium dense, light brown to- gray, non-plastic Sandy SILT, dry with .v trace bsttery casings —̂ ...." Soft, medium gray, slightly ClayeySILT, moist with fine to coarse SAND— ~

- Stiff, light orange-brown, low tomedium plastic, Clayey SILT to Silty

— CLAY, moist with some very fine -SAND

- - - -

• .

1

.

- - - - - _

— - . - -

-

-

uCO

ML

ML

ML tcCL

oCO

//,'//

zoH

1UJill

FIELDNOTES

Fill

FillRough drilling from2.5 to 3.5 feetAlluvium

Bottom of boring at5.0 feet

Note: Boringlogged off ofcuttings

-

Woodward-Clyde Consultants Jj??Jff Figure No. A-7

PROJECT NPROJECT LLOGGED B"SURFACESWATER ENWATER SU.

*

iao-

10-

15-

20-

25-

BORING LOGAMg PAR Rflfterv Pn. Trpnfahilitv ShirlvOCATI*LEVATTRYDI*FACS

nw Richmond, VAS. MV>rri«:«;.»tt« DRILLEO BY ^̂ 'n̂ T" FnvirnnmJT> PT 24 hr? AT) T—

DESCRIPTION

Loose to medium dense, light brown to- medium brown, fine-grained, poorlygraded Silty SAND, dry with some

-̂ crushed rock and battery casing chips — -Stiff, light orange-brown, low to

" medium plastic Clayey SILT to SiltyCLAY, moist with some veryfine-grained SAND

_ ' _ . . _ . . _

u(O

SM toSP

ML tcCL

•

THOMAS

1

*m̂ m

| BORING SB91-03

SHEETPROJETASKDiTW

' . ? of „ 1r-rvn RQMIUKINO . 3

5/14/01 —mG Arlf(»r AFtf̂ Â

METH

ELEVATION

8.25" d̂ P

FIELDNOTES

Fill

Rough drilling from1.0 to 2.0 feetAlluvium

Bottom of boringat 5.0 feet

Note: Boringlogged off ofcuttings

Woodward-Clyde Consultants wcĉ An n Q k Q 7 Fifiure No'A-8

BORING LOG 1 BORING SB91-09PftOlprT "NAMF CAT? Battprv C*n TYpa fertility Srurfy ffFfRKT r if fPROJECT LOCATION".., ...RichF11"*"̂ VA PRrt̂ F(rT T*n 89M1I4KIl/wsnan nv S. Mnrrtsttttta PPTTiTr^P PY R̂ 'pnr Fnvirnnmenffll fA*' »" 3CTn?FAr!W ISr.EVATTnN NM KTWVATTnwnATTTVf pA^H 5/14/91

WATFR RNTRY OP.PTH NONE,,.,. FEET ATI) 2 Rlfl AckP^ ADOWATRH

BORING LOG | BORING SB91-10PP

PROJEPROJELOGGESURFAWATSWATE

XQ.Illa

0-

5-

10-

15-

20-

25-

C™art:DBGEEEL ENEISTJ

BORING LOGFAME C.

PROJECT NPROJECT L

WATER ENWATER SU

^«*-

o-

*

10-

15-

20-

25-

BORING LOGA.ME C & R Ram»rv Pn Trearflhilitv SfndvOCATIr1.LEVAlTRYDRFACE

ny Richmond, VAS_ Mnn-ksettft DRILLED PY Bftlpa1" "Environmental'TON NM , ELEVATION DATUMfiPTTF NONT= PT?I?T» 4-rr* ZDEPT3

SAttPLE

1RECOVERY

RESISTANCE

^ ND I?T 24 hrs~ AP i~

DESCRIPTION

Loose, light brown, non-plastic Sandy. SIT.T, dry with some crushed rock and\battery casing chips /

_~\ Medium dense, light gray, tine grained,\poorly graded Silty SAND, moist /

~\ Medium dense, dark gray, fine-grai/ied,\ pnnrly graded SAND, damp, metal Ifc\^heen //1 , • J~i Medium dense, light orange-brownJI fine-grained, poorly graded slightly

- £ilty SAND, damp /_ Stiff, light orange-brown, low tomedium plastic Clayey SILT to Silty

_ CLAY, moist with some fine-grainedSAND and Gravel

uCO

SM

SM

SP

SM

ML tcCL

SYMBOL

k

•«•

BORING SB91-12

SHEE1PROJETASK

METH

ELEVATION

1 „/ In-pTMn ftQMl T4K 1NO.-- —— 3......

Aclcftr ArtOÎ ĤO i en UĈ ^̂ ^

FIELDNOTES

FillFillSRAFillFill

Rough drilling at3.0 feetAlluvium

Bottom of boringat 5.0 feet

Note: Boringlogged off ofcuttings _

SRA = Slightreaction to acid

Woodward-Clyde Consultants fl JDQ n n c n r A-12

BORING LOG | BORING SB91-13PBO1F.TNAME r A R Battery Co. Treatabilitv Study SWTKSVP I «*• 7PROJECT LOCATION Rlchmonn', VA PROJECT NO 89M114KIT.OTrKT) RY S. Mnrriitte DRILLED PY Bftlpar ̂ nv'rnnmfinta,l TASK NO 3

X.T1 f — . . . . . ff I * t ff\ m

WATRR KNTRYPFtPTH NON"F FRET ATD 2 RIG Acker AHQWATRW STTOFArra TW.PTW ND VT 24 hrs An X \.n?TTTnn 8.25" HSA

^**•XI—o.UJa

o-

-

5--

-_

10-

15-

20-

25-

—SAMPLE

Ula.>a:SouUJCC

Hz«COHCOUJcc

DESCRIPTION

Light tan, non-plastic Sandy SILT, dry_ with some crushed rock and battery . ———\casing chips /

..~\ Medium dense, medium brown, /\ fine-grained, poorly graded Silty /~ \SAND, damp /_ Stiff, light orange-brown, low tomedium plastic Clayey SILT to SiltyCLAY, moist with some fine grainedSAND and Gravel

. , . - . . . . . -

-

_

\. . . ._._ - ., ,. ..... ..

......

_._ .... —— _._... .... ._.___..._.._._ .....

-

- - - - - - - - -

CJCO.3

ML

SM

ML tcCL

--

_ioCOx=CO

(//

'///Y///.

••••

3a

1Ulri

FIELDNOTES

FillRough drilling to1.0 footFillAlluvium

Bottom of boringat 5.0 feet

Note: Boringlogged off ofcuttings

•

Woodward-Clyde Consultants *£c?̂ * n n Rsurc No. A-ISflR000502

BORING LOG | BORING SB91-14PROJF.OT NAMB . ..„ CAR Rarfrffry ("*n_ Trefltabilirv Study *?HKRT ' nf 1PROJECT LOCATION . ,„ . R tf hmond, VA pp,O-iFrT Nn ^^MII4K1LOTTED RY S - MorrisKfttte DRILLED P-Y Rplpar Fnvironmf»nral TASK Nn ^flTTRFA^ff FLtVATTrtrT NM Ef.RV/Tinv nATTT^f n^T^ 5/I4/QIWATER F.NTRVD^PTH NONE FRF.T ATH 2 ,pTf? A^kPF A™̂ ^̂WATT^W .inwFAOp.nFPTff ND PT 24hrs An r »™«.TT̂ « s 9^- i-̂ B̂

V

tUJa

o--

-

-

_

-

_

10-

15-

20-

25-

"̂ ^̂ ^SAI1PLE

UJ

RECOVERY

RESISTANCE

DESCRIPTION

Loose, light tan, non-plastic Sandy. STTT, dry with .some cnishrd rock and\battery casing chips /" Medium dense, dark brown,fine-grained, poorly graded Silty

" SAND, damp with some crushed\ battery casings /~ \With crushed rock /Stiff, light orange-brown, low tomedium plastic Clayey SILT to Silty

_ CLAY, moist with some fine grainedSand and Gravel

_

_ • —

-

-

-

-

CO3

ML

SM

ML tcPT

-

SYMBOL

y/yy

n

ELEVATION

FIELDNOTES

Fill

Fill.ii

Rough drilling at |3.0 feet ;Alluvium

Bottom of boringat 5.0 feet

Note: Boringlogged off of *cuttings ;

*

•Woodward-Clyde Consultants WCCCRBAT Figurc No.

flR000503

BORING LOG | BORING SB91-15'PKO3T.r,T WAMB _ C ft R Rattery Cf\ Trpatahtliry Srnrfy PFTRRT / nf 'PR07FT TAXATION Tich"innrf VA ponTPrr wn 89M114K"!rjr» T?T 24 hrs AH X \wmnn 8.25" HSA*-i-«*•

o.UJa

o-

-

5-

_

10-

15-

20-

25-

—

SAMPLE

Ula.i- CO

VERY

UJa:ISTANCE

COUJ

DESCRIPTION

Loose to medium dense, light tan,non-plastic Sandy SILT, dry with some —

\crushed rock and battery casing cĥ ps~ Firm, light brown, low to medium•\plastic very Silty CLAY, moist / ——Soft, gray, low to medium plastic verySilty TT.AY, moist wifh trace crushed\rock and battery casing chips /Stiff, light orange-brown, low tomedium plastic Clayey SILT to Silty

" CLAY, moist with some fine "Sand and ~Gravel

- - = - - - • - - - _

.. ,

- : — ••— - •"" ~ -

- , - . - _

— " - • ; -

™ ~

uCO=3

ML

CL

ri

ML t

PROJEPROJSLOGGE3URFAWATEIWATEI

4-**-

1

o-

5-

—

~

10-

15-

20-

25-

CTNCTLDB'GEEI EN1SXT

AMEOCATI7.LEVA!TRYDRFACE

BORING LOGr & R Rartery Co. TrflatahiTJty Study

nw Richmond, VAS MorrisRftttft DPrTtrTrRT) PY Relpa.r "RnvironmenralTAW NM" PT.P.VATTrtVnATTTM

SPTHJDEPT]

SAMPLE

UJ0.

RECOVERY

RESISTANCE

N.ON.E __ PrlKT ATD 2T ND w 24 hrs AP T—

DESCRIPTION

Medium dense, medium greenish- gray,_ fine-grained, poorly graded SiltySAND, dry to damp

- With trace crushed rock_ Stiff, light orange-brown, low tomedium plastic Clayey SILT to Silty

_ CLAY, moist with some fine-grainedSand and Gravel

-

"" ""

™

-

—

_ _

-

uCO

SM

ML t<CL

- -

•

SYMBOL

\

MMMI

BORING SB91-16

SHEETPROJITASKDATERIGMETH

ELEVATION

1 of 1vrrvn SQMIMKMNn 3

5/J4/9IAckftr ATX̂ ^̂

nn 8.25" r̂ ^̂ P

FIELDNOTES

Fill

Rough drilling at2.0 feet

Alluvium !i

Bottom of boringat 5.0 feet j

Note: Boring Ilogged off ofcuttings i

t̂̂ .̂ '

•Woodward-Clyde Consultants WCCCRBAT Figure NO. A-16

AR000505

PROJECT L

WATER ENWATER StT

4-

XQ.UlQ

o-

5-

10-

15-

20-

25-

BORING LOGAME

BORING LOG BORING SB91-18PRO J1RCT NAME _...,., C & R Rnttftry C.n. Trcatahiliry Study SHFrET ' «' 1Dwn.TPrrrT.

BORING LOG j BORING SB91-19PROJECT NAME ^ *- ̂ Battery Cn Treatahilitv Study "HEET ! i* 'PROJECT LOCATION »'• Richmond^ VA - PROiTrlT NO 89M1I4TCITjÔ ED BY S Mnrrissette PRILLED BY R̂ 'p̂ r Fnv'mnmfinTal TAPKNO ^STTRPAfltf FIT.P.VATTnW NM P.T.RVATTrtV H ATTTM D ATK 5/14/91

WATER FfNTRY DEPTH NONE FEET ATT) 2 RICT .„ Ackf»r ATV3WATEK ST.TP.FACR DEPTH ND_,...._ FT 24n_hr5iiiiinii ̂D x , METHOD §,25" HSA—

*4-

zh-O.LUa

o-_

-

-

_

10-

15-

20-

25-

SAMPLE

UJQ_1—

1ooUJsr

UJCJ

PROJECT NPROJECT LLOGGED B1SURFACE!WATER ENWATER SU1

•*•t*.•»IQ_

Eo-

-

5-

10-

15-

20-

25-

BORING LOGAME r & R Rattftrv Tn Treafahilirv StndvOCATIt•LSVA1TRYD1EtPACE

nw Richmnnd, VAS. Mnrrissftft̂ T>RTTJiET> FY Bclpnr "Rnvironr'ION NM ELEVATION DATUM5PTH N^NF fT?T?T 4Tn 2DEPTI

SflrtPLE

UJ

U

R:ECOV

ERY

24/24

RESISTANCE

P

j ND p-p 24 hrs Ap x~

DESCRIPTION

Medium dense, grayish-brown,_. fine-grained, poorly graded Silty f ———\ SAND, dry with some crushed rociy- Vnd battery casing chips /

Stiff, light orange-brown, low to" medium plastic Clayey SILT to SiltyCLAY, moist with some fine Sand and

" Gravel

— -

ieflfa|

uCD3

SM

ML t.CL

SYMBOL

1

*••

BORING SB91-20

SHEETPROJETASKDATE.RIGMETH

ELEVATION

1 of 1rTvo 8Qlvf114K!NO, 3

5/14/Qt^^Ac!«" Ar^B

™ 8.25" Hl̂

FIELDNOTES

Fill

Alluvium

Bottom of boringat 5.0 feet

•

•Woodward-Clyde Consultation Q̂ jf̂ ffq Figure No- A"20

PROJEPROJELOGGISURPAWATB1WATE1

*•H

XQ_UJa

0-

-

5-

10-

15-

20-

25-

CTI>CTlJOBGEEI EN*SU

FAMEOCATIVJLEVA1TRYDRFACE

BORING LOGr & R Battery Cn. TrnatahiTity SrnHv

rtfj Riclimnnd, VAS Mnrrf̂ ftet't'ff PRTM.EP BY RftTpar Fnvirnnrf̂̂ fl NM RTrKVATIOM PATTJM6PTH..NON"E FEET ATH 2DEPT]

SAMPLE

UJa.t-

U

RECOVERY

16/18

RESISTANCE

P

3 NTH FT 24 hrs" AP x""

DESCRIPTION

Loose to medium dense, light brown,-, very fine to fine grained, poorly graded\ Silty SAND, dry with some crushed/- \rocic and battery casing chips /Stiff, light orange-brown, low to

" medium plastic Clayey SILT to SiltyCLAY, moist with some fine Sand andGravel

m^ ' ' ' *—

^» " — •

Tflnta,]_

UCO3

SM

ML tcCL

SYMBOL

1

^̂ M

BORING SB91-21SHEETPROJI

METH

ELEVATION

1 «, 1

vn ^5/14/Q1

Aclcftr ADQrtn 8.25" HSA

FIELDNOTES •

Fill

Alluvium

Sampler metrefusal at 4.5 feet

Bottom of boringat 4.5 feet

^Woodward-Clyde Consultants fl̂ fffHtB | Q Fis«« NO. A-2i

BORING LOG BORING SB91-22PBrYTrrrrwAn/ni r & R Rarterv Co. Treatability Shirty SWP.RT 1 «/ IPFOJETT r,̂ ATTRTTJfEn BY Belpar T-nvirnnmenfnl TASKNn 3STTTMPArra P.r.RVATTAW NM RT.RVATTnW riATTTM pATR S/U/01̂ ^

W^T^T> E-.WTSY PEPTTT NOMF. FEET ATT> 2 »Tn Arlf*»i- A n̂ B̂WAT^TfSTTOPArwnFPTTT ND FT 24 hrs An I wpTtirtn a_2S" HŜ ^

-t-q.

I

a

o--

*

5-

-

10-

15-

20-

25-

—SAMPLE

UIc_i—

U

RHCOVERY

22/24

UJ

RESISTING

P

DESCRIPTION

Loose and medium dense, dark and_ medium gray and light orange-brown, -

fine to coarse grained, well graded SiltyŜAND, damp , ———Firm and stiff, light orange-brown,with gray mottling, low to mediumplastic Clayey SILT, moist with somevery fine Sand and roots

-

-

— -

— - -- -

.

u0)=3

SM

SM

--

--

SYilBOL

%'s$

1

•̂

£

ELEVATE

FIELD jNOTES i

Fill*

Alluvium

Bottom of boringat 5.0 feet

•

•Woodward-Clyde ConsultatAi? OTOPH F̂ ure No- A'22

BORING LOG BORING SB91-23PROJETNAMR CAR Rnttery Cn Trftatahtliry Sfnrfy SHEET ' of fPROJECT TjQCATTOPi-..,, , Ritchmnnd, VA PROJECT NO 89M114K1LoO^EH RY S- MnrrtMflJtff DRTTjT.ED BY Rdpar Fiwironmen^M TASK XO ^RTTRFACE ET.EVATTON— . NM ELEVATION PATTTM PATE S/7? /QlWATFR FNTRVnWPTW NONF, TfV.TTT ATH 2 B^ Aclfflr ADQWAT^B simPAfflB ORPTW ND «r 2 hrS An X ; unmmn 8.25" HS A

*

«*•

H.Q_UlO

o-

-

5-

-

10-

15-

20-

25-

""

SAMPLE

UJQ_

1-

S

S

u

s

>•ce%ouUJ(K

20/24

21/24

22/24

23/24

STANCE

HCOUJ

23344657P

518191 9

DESCRIPTION

Stiff, light brown to gray, low to_ medium plastic very Clayey SILT to-. Silty CLAY, moist with some SANE) ———-\and crushed battery casings, crushed\rock /

~ Firm, orange-brown and brown, low to\ medium plastic tn

k//////4'//

^̂•i

iVATION

_i

FIELDNOTES

Fill

Fill

Alluvium

Bottom of boring at8.0 feet

•

Woodward-Clyde Consultants 7o'ffrm c i o Fieure No-MnUUUD I 2A-23

BORING LOG BORING SB91-24PROJECT NAME RY S Mnrri«ffif»ttf» DRILLED FY Rft!par Environmental TA^K Nn ^SURFACREt.F>.VATTON,,,,...NM, ,.,.. ... ET/EVATTOf fATTTM DATE 5/21/91WATKR FNTRY DEPTH NON^ FEET ATT? 2 RTT Aclf(»rAn|̂ ^WATEP QrTOPAnTPnB-tvrtr MH PT 2 hrs An X x̂ î r̂ r* X.2.S" f-̂ M̂

•s-•.X

3HbJ

0-

5-

_

-

10-

15-

20-

25-

"" ^̂ ^̂ r̂

SAMPLE

Bt-

s

s

u

s

^̂

1uUJce

13/24

19/24

19/24

24/24

7s

t-eoHCOUJcc45657336P

71415

DESCRIPTION

Loose, brown and gray, low to medium- plastic Clayey SILT to Sandy SILT,damp with some crushed batteries and

- crushed rockWith light gray crushed rock and sand.

\wet from 2.5 to 3.0 /- Stiff, light orange-brown, low tomedium plastic Clayey SILT to Silty

— CLAY, moist with some fine SAND -and Gravel

_

-

-

— -

- -

-

uCO

ML

ML tcCL

-

1

CO

//,

%'/,'//

Ĥ BB

2!

OH

1Ul-1Ul

FIELDNOTES

Fill

Alluvium

Bottom of boring at8.0 feet ^̂

•fWoodward-Clyde Consultanjta Q n n *?

BORING LOG BORING SB91-25P^OJKrr NAMF. f & R Ram*ry (To. Tr(»fltahi!iry Sfiirty ffFTBET ' ~f 'PROJECT LOCATION, ..... pichmnnd, VA pRfijfli-yp ĵ O £9MI|4K1T.oniED RY S. Mnrrissfiftfl DRTT.r.EP RY BeIPnr pnvirr)nmftrlta