3402_Forsyth_HanesMillRoad_Closed_Unlined_MSWLF_MNA_FID1538047_

hdrinc.com
February 19, 2021
Ms. Jaclynne Drummond, Compliance Hydrogeologist
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Waste Management, Solid Waste Section
1646 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1646
Re: Monitored Natural Attenuation Effectiveness Report
Hanes Mill Road Sanitary Landfill
Permit No. 34-02
Winston-Salem, North Carolina
Dear Ms. Drummond:
On behalf of City of Winston-Salem, HDR Engineering, Inc. of the Carolinas (HDR) is submitting
this Monitored Natural Attenuation Effectiveness Report for the Spring 2019 and Spring 2020
events, as requested in correspondence from the North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources (NCDENR), dated September 22, 2008.
The modeling results indicate that the input parameters for the BIOCHLOR natural attenuation
screening model are applicable and that biodegradation of chlorinated organic compounds via
monitored natural attenuation (MNA) remains active at the site.
From 2019 to 2020, the BIOCHLOR scores have generally decreased from mostly adequate
evidence of biodegradation to mainly limited evidence. BIOCHLOR output for monitoring wells OW-
3, OW-4, OW-1 OD and OW-17D from March 2020 and March 2019 sampling events are included
as Attachment 1 and Attachment 2, respectively.
Based on these data, HDR reviewed the 2nd Semi -Annual 2020 Water Quality Monitoring Event
report prepared by Golder to substantiate the BIOCHLOR results. Specifically, HDR reviewed
groundwater quality data from the September 2020 sampling event for empirical evidence of
biodegradation through detection of tetrachloroethene (PCE) daughter products. If biodegradation
is occurring, concentrations of PCE should decrease over time, while concentrations of
trichloroethene (TCE), 1,2-dichloroethene, and vinyl chloride should increase as PCE breaks down
to its daughter products. HDR prepared concentration versus time graphs for wells OW-3, OW-4,
OW-1 OD, and OW-17D to evaluate trends in chlorinated volatile organic compounds
(Attachment 3). In general, concentrations of PCE and TCE in wells closer to the waste mass
(OW-3 and OW-4) have decreased since 2009. Concentrations of 1,2-dichloroethene have
generally decreased in these wells, while concentrations of vinyl chloride have either decreased
(OW-4) or slightly increased (OW-3).
440 S Church Street, Suite 1000, Charlotte, NC 28202-2075
704.338.6700

City of Winston-Salem I Hanes Mill Road Sanitary Landfill ���
Monitored Natural Attenuation Effectiveness Report
Farther down -gradient from the waste mass, concentrations of TCE, 1,2-dichloroethene, and vinyl
chloride appear to have increased slightly since 2009 in wells OW-10D and OW-17D, while
concentrations of PCE have decreased in the same wells over time.
The trends observed in laboratory data do not directly support the BIOCHLOR results for the
Spring 2019 and Spring 2020 modeling period. One potential explanation for variability in
concentrations could be minor changes in flow direction between seasons or between years. A
second potential explanation for the conflicting interpretations is that BIOCHLOR was designed as
a linear two-dimensional attenuation model assuming a single point source of groundwater impacts.
The Hanes Mill Road Landfill does not represent a single point source for impacts, as the site -
specific contaminants of concern could be distributed throughout some or all of the 71-acre closed
unlined facility. Additionally, given the areal extent of the landfill, components of groundwater likely
flow southeast toward South Branch Creek in the vicinity of wells OW-3 and OW-4 and southwest
toward Grassy Creek in the vicinity of wells OW-1 DID and OW-17D. Thus, a modeled flow path from
OW-3 to OW-4 to OW-1 DID to OW-17D is non -linear and unlikely to be represented adequately by
the BIOCHLOR model.
While HDR understands that modeling via BIOCHLOR is required by the NCDEQ, we recommend
that trending of chlorinated VOCs and daughter products be used to support evidence that
biodegradation is continuing at the closed unlined facility.
Please contact us with any questions or concerns regarding this report.
Sincerely,
HDR Engineering, Inc. of the Carolinas
Mark P. Filardi, PG Michael D. Plummer
Associate, Senior Geologist SAA Waste Section Manager
cc: Jan McHargue, PE, City of Winston-Salem
file
Enclosures

Attachment 1
BIOCHLOR Modeling Results for March 2020 Monitoring Period Hanes
Landfill Closed Unlined Cell
Assumption
The maximum chlorinated compound concentrations (PCE, TCE, DCE, and VC) from the
groundwater monitoring available from 2002 to 2020 were used because the actual source
concentrations are unknown.
Model Input Data
1. Advection: Seepage Velocity, hydraulic gradient, and effective porosity (presented in
figure below) are all based on site conditions at the landfill.
2. Dispersion Input Parameter: ax, ay/ax, and az/ax inputs are all based on the
instruction for the BIOCHLOR program
3. Adsorption: Default values from the BIOCHLOR program were applied. A soil bulk
density of 1.6 kg/L, foc of 1.8 x 10-1, and Koc values of 426 L/kg (PCE), 130 L/kg (TCE),
125 L/kg (DCE), 30 L/kg (VC), and 302 L/kg (ETH) were used within the model to
calculate a retardation factor of 2.87. This value was used throughout the rest of the
model.
4. Biotransformation: The biotransformation first orders Decay coefficients lamda (1/yr)
for PCE-TCE (0.45), TCE-DCE (0.55), DCE-VC (0.8), and VC-ETH (12) from Zone 1
were obtained based on Table 2.2 of the BIOCHLOR Addendum Manual (March 2002);
and were adjusted by fitting 2020 field VOC data to the sequential 1st order decay
modeling VOC concentration curve.
5. General: Only the VOC data from 2002 to current period for the OW wells were
available and the source VOC concentrations unknown. The maximum groundwater
VOC concentrations from 2002 to 2020 were used as the source input and the modeling
time is therefore set for 19 years (from 2002 to 2020). The model width is 1000 ft (limited
zone of VOC detection based on historic data) and modeling length is 600 ft (maximum
distance from landfill to the down gradient stream).
6. Source Data: The source data entered into the model determine how the concentrations
in the source area change over time. The source thickness in the saturated zone is 50 ft.
For the source concentrations the maximum groundwater VOC concentrations from

2002 to 2020 were used. These are: PCE = 0.026 mg/L; TCE 0.19 mg/L; DCE = 0.39
mg/L; VC = 0.13 mg/L; and ETH = 0.028 mg/L. The maximum Decay Rate Constants ks
(1/yr) allowed by the model were used.
7. Field Data: The groundwater data collected in the field efforts from 2020 were used for
the PCE, TCE, DCE and VC concentrations for OW-3 (20 ft from the source), OW-4 (30
ft from the source), OW-1 OD (215 ft from the source), and OW-17D (450 ft from the
source). The field data values can be found in the BIOCHLOR Natural Attenuation
Decision Support System figure below in the seventh section (Field Data for
Comparison).
Results
1. MNA Screening Score: The MNA screening scores were 16, 11, 11, and 13 for OW-3,
OW-4, OW-1 OD, and OW-17D, respectively for the March 2020 event. A score from 6 to
14 means there is limited evidence for anaerobic biodegradation of chlorinated organics,
which was seen in wells OW-17D, OW-4, and OW-10D. Well OW-3 was in the range of
15 to 20 which means adequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation of chlorinated
organics.
2. Biochlor Modeling Results: The Biochlor modeling results of PCE, TCE, DCE and VC
for both No -Degradation and Biotransformation for 0 to 600 ft from the source (landfill
waste border) are tabulated for each compound (see figures below). These results are
compared to the field data collected in March 2020 from OW-3, OW-4, OW-1 OD and
OW-17D. The results showed that the modeling DCE, and VC concentrations decreased
with distance from the landfill and the modeling PCE and TCE appears to increase in
concentration with distance to the landfill. The dissolved chlorinated solvent
concentrations along plume centerline (mg/L) at Z=0 figures below show the modeled No
Degradation (red line), Biotransformation (blue line) and field data from site (black box
with yellow plus sign). The modeling concentrations with biotransformation for all
constituents match more closely the value and magnitude of the value in the
biotransformation line, however only DCE and VC field data from the site show the same
general trend as the Biotransformation line. The modeled TCE concentration at 420 ft (7
ug/L) and 480 ft (5 ug/L) down gradient from the landfill were still slightly above the 2L
standard (3 ug/L). The TCE concentration decreased to the 2L level at 600 ft
downgradient from the landfill. These modeling results indicate that the MNA
biodegradation of the chlorinated organic compounds have limited evidence for
anaerobic biodegradation of chlorinated organics.

Natural enua ion
Screening
Protocol
Interpretation
Score
OW-3
Score: 16
Scroll to End of Table
Inadequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
0 to 5
Limited evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
6 to 14
The following is taken from the usEPA protocol tusEPA, tsgsl.
The results of this scoring process have no regulatory
significance.
Adequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
15 to 20
Strong evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
>20
Concentration in *Mduchvedechlorination Points
Analysis Most Contam. Zone Interpretation Yes No Awarded
Oxygen*
<0.5 mg/L
Tolerated, suppresses the reductive pathway at higher
concentrations
Dp
O
3
> 5mg/L
Not tolerated; however, VC may be oxidized aerobically
0
0
0
Nitrate'
<1 mg/L
At higher concentrations may compete with reductive
pathway
OO
0
2
Iron II*
>1 mg/L
Reductive pathway possible; VC may be oxidized under
Fe III-reducin conditions
0
O
3
Sulfate*
<20 mg/L
At higher concentrations may compete with reductive
pathway
O
O
2
Sulfide*
>1 mg/L
Reductive pathway possible
0
0
Methane*
>0.5 mg/L
Ultimate reductive daughter product, VC Accumulates
O
0
Oxidation
Reduction
<50 millivolts (mV)
Reductive pathway possible
O
0
Potential* (ORP)
<-100mV
Reductive pathway likely
0
0
0
PH'
5 < pH < 9
Optimal range for reductive pathway
Q
O
0
TOC
>20 mg/L
Carbon and energy source; drives dechlorination; can be
natural or anthropogenic
0
0
Temperature*
>20°C
At T >20°C biochemical process is accelerated
0
0
0
Carbon Dioxide
>2x background
Ultimate oxidative daughter product
0
0
0
Alkalinity
>2x background
Results from interaction of carbon dioxide with aquifer
minerals
0
0
Chloride*
>2x background
Daughter product of organic chlorine
0
0
Hydrogen
>1 nM
Reductive pathway possible, VC may accumulate
0
0
Volatile Fatty Acids
>0.1 mg/L
Intermediates resulting from biodegradation of aromatic
compounds; carbon and energy source
0
0
0
BTEX*
>0.1 mg/L
Carbon and energy source; drives dechlorination
O
0
0
PCE*
Material released
0
0
0
TCE*
Daughter product of PCE aiO
O
2
DCE*
Daughter product of TCE.
If cis is greater than 80% of total DCE it is likely a daughter
product of TCEa/; 1,1-DCE can be a them. reaction product of TCA
OO
O
2
VC*
Daughter product of DCE'/
OO
O
2
1,1,1-
Trichloroethane*
Material released
0
0
DCA
Daughter product of TCA under reducing conditions
0
0
Carbon
Tetrachloride
Material released
0
0
0
Chloroethane*
Daughter product of DCA or VC under reducing conditions
0
Q
0
Ethene/Ethane
>0.01 mg/L
Daughter product of VC/ethene
0
0
>0.1 mg/L
Daughter product of VC/ethene
0
0
0
Chloroform
Daughter product of Carbon Tetrachloride
0
0
0
Dichloromethane
Daughter product of Chloroform
O
0
0
* required analysis.
a/ Points awarded only if it can be shown that the compound is a daughter product SCORE Reset I
(i.e., not a constituent of the source NAPL).

Natural enua ion
Screening
Protocol
Interpretation
Score
Ow-4
Score: 11
Scroll to End of Table
Inadequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
0 to 5
Limited evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
6 to 14
The following is taken from the usEPA protocol tusEPA, tsgsl.
The results of this scoring process have no regulatory
significance.
Adequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
15 to 20
Strong evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
>20
Concentration in *Mduchvedechlorination Points
Analysis Most Contam. Zone Interpretation Yes No Awarded
Oxygen*
<0.5 mg/L
Tolerated, suppresses the reductive pathway at higher
concentrations
Op
O
3
> 5mg/L
Not tolerated; however, VC may be oxidized aerobically
O
0
0
Nitrate'
<1 mg/L
At higher concentrations may compete with reductive
pathway
OO
O
2
Iron II*
>1 mg/L
Reductive pathway possible; VC may be oxidized under
Fe III-reducin conditions
O
0
0
Sulfate*
<20 mg/L
At higher concentrations may compete with reductive
pathway
O
O
2
Sulfide*
>1 mg/L
Reductive pathway possible
O
0
Methane*
>0.5 mg/L
Ultimate reductive daughter product, VC Accumulates
O
0
Oxidation
Reduction
<50 millivolts (mV)
Reductive pathway possible
O
0
Potential* (ORP)
<-100mV
Reductive pathway likely
O
0
0
PH'
5 < pH < 9
Optimal range for reductive pathway
Q
O
0
TOC
>20 mg/L
Carbon and energy source; drives dechlorination; can be
natural or anthropogenic
O
0
Temperature*
>20°C
At T >20°C biochemical process is accelerated
O
0
0
Carbon Dioxide
>2x background
Ultimate oxidative daughter product
O
0
0
Alkalinity
>2x background
Results from interaction of carbon dioxide with aquifer
minerals
O
0
Chloride*
>2x background
Daughter product of organic chlorine
O
0
Hydrogen
>1 nM
Reductive pathway possible, VC may accumulate
O
0
Volatile Fatty Acids
>0.1 mg/L
Intermediates resulting from biodegradation of aromatic
compounds; carbon and energy source
O
0
0
BTEX*
>0.1 mg/L
Carbon and energy source; drives dechlorination
O
0
0
PCE*
Material released
0
O
0
TCE*
Daughter product of PCE ai
OO
O
2
DCE*
Daughter product of TCE.
If cis is greater than 80% of total DCE it is likely a daughter
product of TCEa/; 1,1-DCE can be a them. reaction product of TCA
OO
O
2
VC*
Daughter product of DCE'/
O
OO
0
1,1,1-
Trichloroethane*
Material released
O
0
DCA
Daughter product of TCA under reducing conditions
O
0
Carbon
Tetrachloride
Material released
O
0
0
Chloroethane*
Daughter product of DCA or VC under reducing conditions
O
Q
0
Ethene/Ethane
>0.01 mg/L
Daughter product of VC/ethene
O
0
>0.1 mg/L
Daughter product of VC/ethene
O
0
0
Chloroform
Daughter product of Carbon Tetrachloride
O
0
0
Dichloromethane
Daughter product of Chloroform
O
0
0
* required analysis.
a/ Points awarded only if it can be shown that the compound is a daughter product SCORE Reset I
(i.e., not a constituent of the source NAPL).

Natural enua ion
Screening
Protocol
Interpretation
Score
OW-1 0D
Score: 11
Scroll to End of Table
Inadequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
0 to 5
Limited evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
6 to 14
The following is taken from the usEPA protocol tusEPA, tsgsl.
The results of this scoring process have no regulatory
significance.
Adequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
15 to 20
Strong evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
>20
Concentration in *Mduchvedechlorination Points
Analysis Most Contam. Zone Interpretation Yes No Awarded
Oxygen*
<0.5 mg/L
Tolerated, suppresses the reductive pathway at higher
concentrations
Op
O
3
> 5mg/L
Not tolerated; however, VC may be oxidized aerobically
O
0
0
Nitrate'
<1 mg/L
At higher concentrations may compete with reductive
pathway
OO
O
2
Iron II*
>1 mg/L
Reductive pathway possible; VC may be oxidized under
Fe III-reducin conditions
O
0
0
Sulfate*
<20 mg/L
At higher concentrations may compete with reductive
pathway
O
O
2
Sulfide*
>1 mg/L
Reductive pathway possible
O
0
Methane*
>0.5 mg/L
Ultimate reductive daughter product, VC Accumulates
O
0
Oxidation
Reduction
<50 millivolts (mV)
Reductive pathway possible
O
0
Potential* (ORP)
<-100mV
Reductive pathway likely
O
0
0
PH'
5 < pH < 9
Optimal range for reductive pathway
Q
O
0
TOC
>20 mg/L
Carbon and energy source; drives dechlorination; can be
natural or anthropogenic
O
0
Temperature*
>20°C
At T >20°C biochemical process is accelerated
O
0
0
Carbon Dioxide
>2x background
Ultimate oxidative daughter product
O
0
0
Alkalinity
>2x background
Results from interaction of carbon dioxide with aquifer
minerals
O
0
Chloride*
>2x background
Daughter product of organic chlorine
O
0
Hydrogen
>1 nM
Reductive pathway possible, VC may accumulate
O
0
Volatile Fatty Acids
>0.1 mg/L
Intermediates resulting from biodegradation of aromatic
compounds; carbon and energy source
O
0
0
BTEX*
>0.1 mg/L
Carbon and energy source; drives dechlorination
O
0
0
PCE*
Material released
O
0
0
TCE*
Daughter product of PCE aiO
O
2
DCE*
Daughter product of TCE.
If cis is greater than 80% of total DCE it is likely a daughter
product of TCEa/; 1,1-DCE can be a them. reaction product of TCA
OO
O
2
VC*
Daughter product of DCE'/
O
OO
0
1,1,1-
Trichloroethane*
Material released
O
0
DCA
Daughter product of TCA under reducing conditions
O
0
Carbon
Tetrachloride
Material released
O
0
0
Chloroethane*
Daughter product of DCA or VC under reducing conditions
O
Q
0
Ethene/Ethane
>0.01 mg/L
Daughter product of VC/ethene
O
0
>0.1 mg/L
Daughter product of VC/ethene
O
0
0
Chloroform
Daughter product of Carbon Tetrachloride
O
0
0
Dichloromethane
Daughter product of Chloroform
O
0
0
* required analysis.
a/ Points awarded only if it can be shown that the compound is a daughter product SCORE Reset I
(i.e., not a constituent of the source NAPL).

Natural enua ion
Screening
Protocol
Interpretation
Score
OW-17D
Score: 13
Scroll to End of Table
Inadequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
0 to 5
Limited evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
6 to 14
The following is taken from the usEPA protocol tusEPA, tsgsl.
The results of this scoring process have no regulatory
significance.
Adequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
15 to 20
Strong evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
>20
Concentration in *Mduchvedechlorination Points
Analysis Most Contam. Zone Interpretation Yes No Awarded
Oxygen*
<0.5 mg/L
Tolerated, suppresses the reductive pathway at higher
concentrations
Dp
O
3
> 5mg/L
Not tolerated; however, VC may be oxidized aerobically
0
0
0
Nitrate'
<1 mg/L
At higher concentrations may compete with reductive
pathway
OO
0
2
Iron II*
>1 mg/L
Reductive pathway possible; VC may be oxidized under
Fe III-reducin conditions
0
0
0
Sulfate*
<20 mg/L
At higher concentrations may compete with reductive
pathway
O
O
2
Sulfide*
>1 mg/L
Reductive pathway possible
0
0
Methane*
>0.5 mg/L
Ultimate reductive daughter product, VC Accumulates
O
0
Oxidation
Reduction
<50 millivolts (mV)
Reductive pathway possible
O
0
Potential* (ORP)
<-100mV
Reductive pathway likely
0
0
0
PH'
5 < pH < 9
Optimal range for reductive pathway
Q
O
0
TOC
>20 mg/L
Carbon and energy source; drives dechlorination; can be
natural or anthropogenic
0
0
Temperature*
>20°C
At T >20°C biochemical process is accelerated
0
0
0
Carbon Dioxide
>2x background
Ultimate oxidative daughter product
0
0
0
Alkalinity
>2x background
Results from interaction of carbon dioxide with aquifer
minerals
0
0
Chloride*
>2x background
Daughter product of organic chlorine
0
0
Hydrogen
>1 nM
Reductive pathway possible, VC may accumulate
0
0
Volatile Fatty Acids
>0.1 mg/L
Intermediates resulting from biodegradation of aromatic
compounds; carbon and energy source
0
0
0
BTEX*
>0.1 mg/L
Carbon and energy source; drives dechlorination
O
0
0
PCE*
Material released
0
0
0
TCE*
Daughter product of PCE aiO
O
2
DCE*
Daughter product of TCE.
If cis is greater than 80% of total DCE it is likely a daughter
product of TCEa/; 1,1-DCE can be a them. reaction product of TCA
OO
O
2
VC*
Daughter product of DCE'/
OO
O
2
1,1,1-
Trichloroethane*
Material released
0
0
DCA
Daughter product of TCA under reducing conditions
0
0
Carbon
Tetrachloride
Material released
0
0
0
Chloroethane*
Daughter product of DCA or VC under reducing conditions
0
Q
0
Ethene/Ethane
>0.01 mg/L
Daughter product of VC/ethene
0
0
>0.1 mg/L
Daughter product of VC/ethene
0
0
0
Chloroform
Daughter product of Carbon Tetrachloride
0
0
0
Dichloromethane
Daughter product of Chloroform
O
0
0
* required analysis.
a/ Points awarded only if it can be shown that the compound is a daughter product SCORE Reset I
(i.e., not a constituent of the source NAPL).

DISSOLVED CHLORINATED SOLVENT CONCENTRATIONS ALONG PLUME CENTERLINE (mg/L) at Z=0
Distance from Source (ft)
PCE
No Degradation
Biotransformation
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
420
480
540
600
0.026
0.026
0.025
0.023
0.020
0.017
0.014
0.011
0.008
0.005
0.003
0.0260
0.018
0.013
0.008
0.006
0.004
0.002
0.002
0.001
0.001
0.000
Field Data from Site 1 0.003
—No Degradation/Production
0.03
J 0.03
E 0.02
0.02
0.01
c
0.01
c o
V 0.00 0 100
Prepare Animation
Monitorinq Well Locations
0.006 1 1 1 1 1
—Sequential 1st Order Decay C Field Data from Site
See PCE
0 See TCE
0
See DCE
0
0 See VC
J
600 See ETH
200 300 400 500 600 700
Distance From Source (ft.)
i irne:
19.0 Years Return to
Log `:Linear Input To All To Array

DISSOLVED CHLORINATED SOLVENT CONCENTRATIONS ALONG PLUME CENTERLINE (mg/L) at Z=0
Distance from Source (ft)
TCE
No Degradation
Biotransformation
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
420
480
540
600
0.190
0.187
0.180
0.166
0.148
0.126
0.102
0.078
0.057
0.039
0.025
0.1900
0.128
0.086
0.057
0.037
0.024
0.015
0.009
0.006
0.003
0.002
Field Data from Sitel 0.001 1 0.005
—No Degradation/Production
0.20
J 0.18
0.16
E 0.14
= 0.12
0.10
a 0.08
0.06
v 0.04
c 0.02
V0.00 nil
0 100
Prepare Animation
Monitorinq Well Locations
0.006 1 0.012 1
—Sequential 1st Order Decay
200 300
C Field Data from Site
400 500
Distance From Source (ft.)
See PCE
See TCE
See DCE
See VC
600 See ETH
600 700
i irne:
19.0 Years Return to
Input To All To Array
Log ��Linear

DISSOLVED CHLORINATED SOLVENT CONCENTRATIONS ALONG PLUME CENTERLINE (mg/L) at Z=0
Distance from Source (ft)
DCE
No Degradation
Biotransformation
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
420
480
540
600
0.390
0.384
0.369
0.341
0.303
0.258
0.209
0.161
0.117
0.080
0.051
0.3900
0.250
0.159
0.101
0.063
0.039
0.024
0.015
0.009
0.005
0.003
Field Data from Sitel 0.130 1 0.013
—No Degradation/Production
0.45
J 0.40
0.35
0.30
C 0.25
0.20
0.15 0
0.10
= 0.05
V 0.00
0 100
Prepare Animation
Monitorinq Well Locations
0.018 1 0.018 1 1 1 1
—Sequential 1st Order Decay C Field Data from Site
See TCE
0
See DCE
0
0 See VC
600 See ETH
GG
200 300 400 500 600 700
Distance From Source (ft.)
i irne:
19.0 Years Return to
Input To All To Array
Log ��Linear

DISSOLVED CHLORINATED SOLVENT CONCENTRATIONS ALONG PLUME CENTERLINE (mg/L) at Z=0
Distance from Source (ft)
VC
No Degradation
Biotransformation
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
420
480
540
600
0.130
0.128
0.123
0.114
0.101
0.086
0.070
0.054
0.039
0.027
0.017
0.1300
0.016
0.007
0.005
0.003
0.002
0.001
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.000
Field Data from Sitel 0.050 1
—No Degradation/Production
0.14
0.12
E 0.10
= 0.08
O
0.06
o
= 0.04
d
v 0.02
c
V 0.00
0 100
Prepare Animation
Monitorinq Well Locations
1 0.001 1 1 1 1
—Sequential 1st Order Decay C Field Data from Site
See TCE
Q.. yr
—�� 600 See ETH
200 300 400 500 600 700
Distance From Source (ft.)
i irne:
19.0 Years Return to
Input To All To Array
Log ��Linear

Attachment 2
BIOCHLOR Modeling Results for March 2019 Monitoring Period Hanes
Landfill Closed Unlined Cell
Assumption
The maximum chlorinated compound concentrations (PCE, TCE, DCE, and VC) from the
groundwater monitoring available from 2002 to 2019 were used because the actual source
concentrations are unknown.
Model Input Data
1. Advection: Seepage Velocity, hydraulic gradient, and effective porosity (presented in
figure below) are all based on site conditions at the landfill.
2. Dispersion Input Parameter: ax, ay/ax, and az/ax inputs are all based on the
instruction for the BIOCHLOR program
3. Adsorption: Default values from the BIOCHLOR program were applied. A soil bulk
density of 1.6 kg/L, foc of 1.8 x 10-1, and Koc values of 426 L/kg (PCE), 130 L/kg (TCE),
125 L/kg (DCE), 30 L/kg (VC), and 302 L/kg (ETH) were used within the model to
calculate a retardation factor of 2.87. This value was used throughout the rest of the
model.
4. Biotransformation: The biotransformation first orders Decay coefficients lamda (1/yr)
for PCE-TCE (0.45), TCE-DCE (0.55), DCE-VC (0.8), and VC-ETH (12) from Zone 1
were obtained based on Table 2.2 of the BIOCHLOR Addendum Manual (March 2002);
and were adjusted by fitting 2019 field VOC data to the sequential 1st order decay
modeling VOC concentration curve.
5. General: Only the VOC data from 2002 to current period for the OW wells were
available and the source VOC concentrations unknown. The maximum groundwater
VOC concentrations from 2002 to 2019 were used as the source input and the modeling
time is therefore set for 18 years (from 2002 to 2019). The model width is 1000 ft (limited
zone of VOC detection based on historic data) and modeling length is 600 ft (maximum
distance from landfill to the down gradient stream).
6. Source Data: The source data entered into the model determine how the concentrations
in the source area change over time. The source thickness in the saturated zone is 50 ft.
For the source concentrations the maximum groundwater VOC concentrations from

2002 to 2019 were used. These are: PCE = 0.026 mg/L; TCE 0.19 mg/L; DCE = 0.39
mg/L; VC = 0.13 mg/L; and ETH = 0.028 mg/L. The maximum Decay Rate Constants ks
(1/yr) allowed by the model were used.
7. Field Data: The groundwater data collected in the field efforts from 2019 were used for
the PCE, TCE, DCE and VC concentrations for W-3 (20 ft from the source), PW-4 (30 ft
from the source), PW-10D (215 ft from the source), and OW-17D (450 ft from the
source). The field data values can be found in the BIOCHLOR Natural Attenuation
Decision Support System figure below in the seventh section (Field Data for
Comparison).

Natural enua ion
Screening
Protocol
Interpretation
Score
2
OW-3
Score: 18
Scroll to End of Table
Inadequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
0 to 5
Limited evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
6 to 14
The following is taken from the usEPA protocol (USEPn, tssa>.
The results of this scoring process have no regulatory
sigolficance.
Adequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
15 to 20
Strong evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
>20
" reductive dechlorination
Concentration in Points
Analysis Most Contam. Zone Interpretation Yes No Awarded
Oxygen*
<0.5 mg/L
Tolerated, suppresses the reductive pathway at higher
concentrations
0
3
> 5mg/L
Not tolerated; however, VC may be oxidized aerobically
0
O
0
Nitrate*
<1 mg/L
At higher concentrations may compete with reductive
pathway
0
2
Iron II*
>1 mg/L
Reductive pathway possible; VC may be oxidized under
Fe III-reducin conditions
0
3
Sulfate*
<20 mg/L
At higher concentrations may compete with reductive
pathway
0
2
Sulfide*
>1 mg/L
Reductive pathway possible
0
O
0
Methane*
>0.5 mg/L
Ultimate reductive daughter product, VC Accumulates
0
0
Oxidation
Reduction
<50 millivolts (mV)
Reductive pathway possible
0
O
0
Potential* (ORP)
<-100mV
Reductive pathway likely
0
0
pH*
5 < pH < 9
Optimal range for reductive pathway
0
0
TOC
>20 mg/L
Carbon and energy source; drives dechlorination; can be
natural or anthro o enic
0
O
0
Temperature*
>20°C
At T >20°C biochemical process is accelerated
0
O
0
Carbon Dioxide
>2x background
Ultimate oxidative daughter product
0
O
0
Alkalinity
>2x background
Results from interaction of carbon dioxide with aquifer
minerals
0
0
Chloride*
>2x background
Daughter product of organic chlorine
0
Q
0
Hydrogen
>1 nM
Reductive pathway possible, VC may accumulate
0
O
0
Volatile Fatty Acids
>0.1 mg/L
Intermediates resulting from biodegradation of aromatic
compounds; carbon and energy source
0
0
BTEX*
>0.1 mg/L
Carbon and energy source; drives dechlorination
0
0
PCE*
Material released
0
0
TCE*
Daughter product of PCE ai
0
2
DCE*
Daughter product of TCE.
If cis is greater than 80% of total DCE it is likely a daughter
product of TCEa/; 1,1-DCE can be a Chem. reaction product of TCA
OQ
0
2
VC*
Daughter product of DCE'/
0
2
1,1,1-
Trichloroethane*
Material released
0
0
DCA
Daughter product of TCA under reducing conditions
0
0
2
Carbon
Tetrachloride
Material released
0
0
Chloroethane*
Daughter product of DCA or VC under reducing conditions
0
0
Ethene/Ethane
>0.01 mg/L
Daughter product of VC/ethene
0
0
>0.1 mg/L
Daughter product of VC/ethene
0
0
Chloroform
Daughter product of Carbon Tetrachloride
0
0
Dichloromethane
Daughter product of Chloroform
0
O
0
* required analysis.
a/ Points awarded only if it can be shown that the compound is a daughter product SCORE Reset
(i.e., not a constituent of the source NAPL).
i

Natural enua ion
Screening 11
Protocol
Interpretation
Score
OW-4
Score: 15
Scroll fo End of Table
Inadequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
0 to 5
Limited evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
6 to 14
The following is taken from the usEPA protocol (USEPn, tssa>.
The results of this scoring process have no regulatory
sigolficance.
Adequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
15 to 20
Strong evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
>20
" reductive dechlorination
Concentration in Points
Analysis Most Contam. Zone Interpretation Yes No Awarded
Oxygen*
<0.5 mg/L
Tolerated, suppresses the reductive pathway at higher
concentrations
0
3
> 5mg/L
Not tolerated; however, VC may be oxidized aerobically
0
O
0
Nitrate*
<1 mg/L
At higher concentrations may compete with reductive
pathway
0
2
Iron II*
>1 mg/L
Reductive pathway possible; VC may be oxidized under
Fe III-reducin conditions
0
0
Sulfate*
<20 mg/L
At higher concentrations may compete with reductive
pathway
0
2
Sulfide*
>1 mg/L
Reductive pathway possible
0
O
0
Methane*
>0.5 mg/L
Ultimate reductive daughter product, VC Accumulates
0
0
Oxidation
Reduction
<50 millivolts (mV)
Reductive pathway possible
0
O
0
Potential* (ORP)
<-100mV
Reductive pathway likely
0
0
pH*
5 < pH < 9
Optimal range for reductive pathway
0
0
TOC
>20 mg/L
Carbon and energy source; drives dechlorination; can be
natural or anthro o enic
0
O
0
Temperature*
>20°C
At T >20°C biochemical process is accelerated
0
O
0
Carbon Dioxide
>2x background
Ultimate oxidative daughter product
0
O
0
Alkalinity
>2x background
Results from interaction of carbon dioxide with aquifer
minerals
0
0
Chloride*
>2x background
Daughter product of organic chlorine
0
Q
0
Hydrogen
>1 nM
Reductive pathway possible, VC may accumulate
0
O
0
Volatile Fatty Acids
>0.1 mg/L
Intermediates resulting from biodegradation of aromatic
compounds; carbon and energy source
0
0
BTEX*
>0.1 mg/L
Carbon and energy source; drives dechlorination
0
0
PCE*
Material released
(0)
0
0
TCE*
Daughter product of PCE ai
0
2
DCE*
Daughter product of TCE.
If cis is greater than 80% of total DCE it is likely a daughter
product of TCEa/; 1,1-DCE can be a Chem. reaction product of TCA
DQ
0
2
VC*
Daughter product of DCE'/
0
2
1,1,1-
Trichloroethane*
Material released
0
0
DCA
Daughter product of TCA under reducing conditions
0
0
2
Carbon
Tetrachloride
Material released
0
0
Chloroethane*
Daughter product of DCA or VC under reducing conditions
0
0
Ethene/Ethane
>0.01 mg/L
Daughter product of VC/ethene
0
0
>0.1 mg/L
Daughter product of VC/ethene
0
0
Chloroform
Daughter product of Carbon Tetrachloride
0
0
Dichloromethane
Daughter product of Chloroform
0
O
0
* required analysis.
a/ Points awarded only if it can be shown that the compound is a daughter product SCORE Reset
(i.e., not a constituent of the source NAPL).
i

Natural enua ion
Screening 11
Protocol
Interpretation
Score
OW-10D
Score: 18
Scroll fo End of Table
Inadequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
0 to 5
Limited evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
6 to 14
The following is taken from the usEPA protocol (USEPn, tssa>.
The results of this scoring process have no regulatory
sigolficance.
Adequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
15 to 20
Strong evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
>20
" reductive dechlorination
Concentration in Points
Analysis Most Contam. Zone Interpretation Yes No Awarded
Oxygen*
<0.5 mg/L
Tolerated, suppresses the reductive pathway at higher
concentrations
0
3
> 5mg/L
Not tolerated; however, VC may be oxidized aerobically
0
O
0
Nitrate*
<1 mg/L
At higher concentrations may compete with reductive
pathway
0
2
Iron II*
>1 mg/L
Reductive pathway possible; VC may be oxidized under
Fe III-reducin conditions
0
0
Sulfate*
<20 mg/L
At higher concentrations may compete with reductive
pathway
0
2
Sulfide*
>1 mg/L
Reductive pathway possible
0
O
0
Methane*
>0.5 mg/L
Ultimate reductive daughter product, VC Accumulates
0
0
3
Oxidation
Reduction
<50 millivolts (mV)
Reductive pathway possible
0
O
0
Potential* (ORP)
<-100mV
Reductive pathway likely
0
0
pH*
5 < pH < 9
Optimal range for reductive pathway
0
0
TOC
>20 mg/L
Carbon and energy source; drives dechlorination; can be
natural or anthro o enic
0
O
0
Temperature*
>20°C
At T >20°C biochemical process is accelerated
0
O
0
Carbon Dioxide
>2x background
Ultimate oxidative daughter product
0
O
0
Alkalinity
>2x background
Results from interaction of carbon dioxide with aquifer
minerals
0
0
Chloride*
>2x background
Daughter product of organic chlorine
0
Q
0
Hydrogen
>1 nM
Reductive pathway possible, VC may accumulate
0
O
0
Volatile Fatty Acids
>0.1 mg/L
Intermediates resulting from biodegradation of aromatic
compounds; carbon and energy source
0
0
BTEX*
>0.1 mg/L
Carbon and energy source; drives dechlorination
0
0
PCE*
Material released
(0)
0
0
TCE*
Daughter product of PCE ai
0
2
DCE*
Daughter product of TCE.
If cis is greater than 80% of total DCE it is likely a daughter
product of TCEa/; 1,1-DCE can be a Chem. reaction product of TCA
DQ
0
2
VC*
Daughter product of DCE'/
0
2
1,1,1-
Trichloroethane*
Material released
0
0
DCA
Daughter product of TCA under reducing conditions
0
0
2
Carbon
Tetrachloride
Material released
0
0
Chloroethane*
Daughter product of DCA or VC under reducing conditions
0
0
Ethene/Ethane
>0.01 mg/L
Daughter product of VC/ethene
0
0
>0.1 mg/L
Daughter product of VC/ethene
0
0
Chloroform
Daughter product of Carbon Tetrachloride
0
0
Dichloromethane
Daughter product of Chloroform
0
O
0
* required analysis.
a/ Points awarded only if it can be shown that the compound is a daughter product SCORE Reset
(i.e., not a constituent of the source NAPL).
i

Natural enua ion
Screening 11
Protocol
Interpretation
Score
OW-17D
Score: 8
Scroll fo End of Table
Inadequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
0 to 5
Limited evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
6 to 14
The following is taken from the usEPA protocol (USEPn, tssa>.
The results of this scoring process have no regulatory
sigolficance.
Adequate evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
15 to 20
Strong evidence for anaerobic biodegradation* of chlorinated organics
>20
" reductive dechlorination
Concentration in Points
Analysis Most Contam. Zone Interpretation Yes No Awarded
Oxygen*
<0.5 mg/L
Tolerated, suppresses the reductive pathway at higher
concentrations
0
0
> 5mg/L
Not tolerated; however, VC may be oxidized aerobically
0
O
0
Nitrate*
<1 mg/L
At higher concentrations may compete with reductive
pathway
0
2
Iron II*
>1 mg/L
Reductive pathway possible; VC may be oxidized under
Fe III-reducin conditions
0
0
Sulfate*
<20 mg/L
At higher concentrations may compete with reductive
pathway
0
0
Sulfide*
>1 mg/L
Reductive pathway possible
0
O
0
Methane*
>0.5 mg/L
Ultimate reductive daughter product, VC Accumulates
0
0
Oxidation
Reduction
<50 millivolts (mV)
Reductive pathway possible
0
O
0
Potential* (ORP)
<-100mV
Reductive pathway likely
0
0
pH*
5 < pH < 9
Optimal range for reductive pathway
0
0
TOC
>20 mg/L
Carbon and energy source; drives dechlorination; can be
natural or anthro o enic
0
O
0
Temperature*
>20°C
At T >20°C biochemical process is accelerated
0
O
0
Carbon Dioxide
>2x background
Ultimate oxidative daughter product
0
O
0
Alkalinity
>2x background
Results from interaction of carbon dioxide with aquifer
minerals
0
0
Chloride*
>2x background
Daughter product of organic chlorine
0
Q
0
Hydrogen
>1 nM
Reductive pathway possible, VC may accumulate
0
O
0
Volatile Fatty Acids
>0.1 mg/L
Intermediates resulting from biodegradation of aromatic
compounds; carbon and energy source
0
0
BTEX*
>0.1 mg/L
Carbon and energy source; drives dechlorination
0
0
PCE*
Material released
(0)
0
0
TCE*
Daughter product of PCE ai
0
2
DCE*
Daughter product of TCE.
If cis is greater than 80% of total DCE it is likely a daughter
product of TCEa/; 1,1-DCE can be a Chem. reaction product of TCA
DQ
0
2
VC*
Daughter product of DCE'/
0
Q
0
1,1,1-
Trichloroethane*
Material released
0
0
DCA
Daughter product of TCA under reducing conditions
0
0
2
Carbon
Tetrachloride
Material released
0
0
Chloroethane*
Daughter product of DCA or VC under reducing conditions
0
0
Ethene/Ethane
>0.01 mg/L
Daughter product of VC/ethene
0
0
>0.1 mg/L
Daughter product of VC/ethene
0
0
Chloroform
Daughter product of Carbon Tetrachloride
0
0
Dichloromethane
Daughter product of Chloroform
0
O
0
* required analysis.
a/ Points awarded only if it can be shown that the compound is a daughter product SCORE Reset
(i.e., not a constituent of the source NAPL).
i

BIOCHLOR Natural Attenuation Decision Support System
Version 2.2
Exce12000
TYPE OF CHLORINATED SOLVENT: Ethenes U
Ethanes O
1. ADVECTION
Seepage Velocity* Vs 55.0 (ft/yr)
or T
Hydraulic Conductivity K
Hydraulic Gradient i
Effective Porosity n
2. DISPERSION
Alpha x* 60 (ft)
(Alpha y) / (Alpha x)* 1 0.1 1 (-)
(Alpha z) / (Alpha x)* 1.E-99 1 (-)
3. ADSORPTION
Retardation Factor*
or
Soil Bulk Density, rho
Fraction Organ icCarbon, foc
Partition Coefficient
PCE
TCE
DCE
VC
ETH
Common R
4. BIOTRANS FORMATION
Zone 1
PCE TCE
TCE DCE
DCE 4 VC
VC ETH
Zone 2 �
PCE TCE
TCE DCE
DCE -31� VC
VC -> ETH
(cm/sec)
(ft/ft)
5. GENERAL
Simulation Time*
Modeled Area Width*
Modeled Area Length*
Zone 1 Length*
Zone 2 Length*
Hanes Landfill
Closed Unlined
Run Name
(yr)
~ L
(ft)
j
(ft)
(ft)
0
(ft)
Zone 2=
0.2 (-) 6. SOURCE DATA TYPE: Continuous
Source Options I Single Planar
Calc.
Source Thickness in Sat. Zone* F 50 (ft)
Y1
Width* (ft) 200
R ks*
Conc. (mg/L)* C1 (1/yr)
1.6 (kg/L) PCE .026 0
1.8E-3 (-) TCE .19 0
Koc y DCE .39 0
426 (L/kg) 7.13 (-) VC .13 0
130 (L/kg) 2.87 (-) ETH 0.028 0
125 (L/kg) 2.80 (-)
30 (L/kg) 1.43 (-) 7. FIELD DATA FOR COMPARISON
302
(L/kg)
5.35
(-)
PCE Conc. (mg/L)
used in model)* =
2.87
TCE Conc. (mg/L)
-1st Order Decay Coefficient*
DCE Conc. (mg/L)
a, (1/yr)
half-life (yrs) Yield
IVC Conc. (mg/L)
0.450
F
0.79
ETH Conc. (mg/L)
0.550
F
0.74
Distance from Source (ft)
Data Input Instructions:
115 1. Enter value directly .... or
T or 2. Calculate by filling in gray
0.02 cells. Press Enter, then
(To restore formulas, hit "Restore Formulas" button )
Variable* Data used directly in model.
Test if
Biotransformatio4 Natural Attenuation
is Occurrinq
Vertical Plane Source: Determine Source Well
Location and Input Solvent Concentrations
i
View of Plume Looking Down
Observed Centerline Conc. at Monitoring Wells
11
11
11•
1®
11
11
0.800 F 0.64 Date Data Collected_j 2018
12.000 F 0.45 8. CHOOSE TYPE OF OUTPUT TO SEE:
k (1/yr) half-life (yrs)
0.000 F
0.000 F HELP RUN CENTERLINE RUN ARRAY
0.000 F
0.000 F
Help
Restore RESET
SEE OUTPUT
Paste

DISSOLVED CHLORINATED SOLVENT CONCENTRATIONS ALONG PLUME CENTERLINE (mg/L) at Z=0
Distance from Source (ft)
PCE
No Degradation
Biotransformation
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
420
480
540
600
0.026
0.026
0.024
0.022
0.020
0.016
0.013
0.010
0.007
0.005
0.003
0.0260
0.018
0.012
0.008
0.006
0.004
0.002
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.000
Monitoring Well Locations
20 30 215 450
Field Data from Site 1 0.002 0.010
—No Degradation/Production —Sequential 1st Order Decay
0.03
J 0.03
Im 0
E 0.02
40
c
0.02
c�
0.01 0
m
0.01
0 0
U 0.00
0 100 200 300
400
0 Field Data from Site
Distance From Source (ft.)
Time:
18.0 Years
Prepare Animation
Log Linear
•11
600
600
Return to
Input
700
To All
See PCE
See TCE
See ETH
To Array

DISSOLVED CHLORINATED SOLVENT CONCENTRATIONS ALONG PLUME CENTERLINE (mg/L) at Z=0
TCE
No Degradation
Biotransformation
Distance from Source (ft)
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
420
480
540
600
0.190
0.187
0.179
0.164
0.144
0.120
0.096
0.072
0.051
0.033
0.021
0.1900
0.128
0.086
0.057
0.037
0.024
0.015
0.009
0.006
0.003
0.002
20 30
Field Data from Site 0.003 0.005
-No Degradation/Production
0.20
J 0.18
im 0.16
E 0.14
c 0.12
0.10
0.08
c 0.06
v 0.04
0 0.02
V 0.00
0 100
Monitorina Well Locations
215 450
0.009
-Sequential 1st Order Decay
0 Field Data from Site
200 300 400 500 600 700
Distance From Source (ft.)
coo arm
See TCE
See DCE
See VC
Es- ETH
Time:
11 18.0 Years Return to
Prepare Animation To All To Array
Log Linear Input

DISSOLVED CHLORINATED SOLVENT CONCENTRATIONS ALONG PLUME CENTERLINE (mg/L) at Z=0
Distance from Source (ft)
DCE
No Degradation
Biotransformation
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
420
480
540
600
0.390
0.383
0.367
0.336
0.295
0.247
0.196
0.147
0.104
0.069
0.042
0.3900
0.250
0.159
0.100
0.063
0.039
0.024
0.014
0.008
0.005
0.003
20 30
Field Data from Site 0.170 0.014
—No Degradation/Production
0.45
J 0.40
0.35
E 0.30
p 0.25
0.20
0.15 °
v 0.10
0 0.05
V 0.00 °
0 100
Prepare Animation
Monitoring Well Locations (ft)
215 450
0.023
—Sequential 1st Order Decay ° Field Data from Site
See PCE
0 See TCE
40
See DCE
0
0 See VC
7° 600 See ETH
200 300 400 500 600 700
Distance From Source (ft.)
Time:
18.0 Years Return to
Input To All To Array
Log Linear

DISSOLVED CHLORINATED SOLVENT CONCENTRATIONS ALONG PLUME CENTERLINE (mg/L) at Z=0
Distance from Source (ft)
VC
No Degradation
Biotransformation
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
420
480
540
600
0.130
0.128
0.122
0.112
0.098
0.082
0.065
0.049
0.035
0.023
0.014
0.1300
0.016
0.007
0.005
0.003
0.002
0.001
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.000
20 30
Field Data from Site 0.076 0.001
—No Degradation/Production
0.14
J 0.12
as
E 0.10
G 0.08
0 0.06
L
0.04
0.02
O
U 0.00 1 0
0 100
Prepare Animation
Monitoring Well Locations (ft)
215 450
0.001
-Sequential 1st Order Decay a Field Data from Site
See PCE
0
40 See TCE
60 See DCE
0
-�� 600 See ETH
200 300 400 500 600 700
Distance From Source (ft.)
Time:
18.0 Years Return to
Input To All To Array
Log Linear

Attachment 3
400
� 350
300
250
200
m
150
u 100
c
v 50
0
.'I W
...................................
M
O
O
ci
O
i-q
O
i-q
O
i-q
ci
i-q
ci
i-q
ci
ci
Ci
Ci
N
Ci
N
Ci
N
ci
N
Ci
M
Ci
M
Ci
M
ci
M
i-q
-zT
i-q
-zT
i-q
-zT
i-q
-zT
i-q
M
Ci
M
Ci
M M l0 l0
Ci Ci Ci Ci
l0
Ci
lD
ci
r,
ci
n
ci
n
ci
n
ci
W
ci
00
Ci
00
Ci
00
Ci
M O M
ci Ci ci
M
ci
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O O O O
N N N N
\ \ \ \
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O O O
N N N
\ \ \
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
ci
O
c-i
ci
N
ci
zT
ci
n
ci
O
ci
ci
i\-I
ci
T
ci
n
ci
O
C-I
ci
N
ci
ci
n
ci
O
C-I
ci
N
ci
ci
n
ci
O
ci
ci
i\-I
ci
T
ci
n
ci
O
ci
ci
N
ci
ci ci ci ci
n O N
C-I
ci
n
ci
O
ci
ci
i\-I
ci
T
ci
n
ci
O
ci
ci
i\-I
ci
ci
n
ci
O\-I
Ci
ci ci ci
n
ci
O
Ci
ci
i\i
ci
zT
ci
n
Dates
RZ=0.4165
RZ=0.0194
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
Vinyl chloride
• • • •
• •
Linear (cis-1,2-Dichloroethene)
• • •
• • •
Linear
(Vinyl chloride)
OW-3
40
35
30
25Ne
—
c
20
+_o
15
.,
•
(a
...
c
10
.. .. ... ..
5
...........
u°
0
Q)
O
O O O ci
•--i
r-I
N
N
N
N
(n
M
M
M
ItT
ItT 1:t Rt U) UI
Ln
Ln
W
W
W
W
I,
n
n
n
00 00 00 00 N' U. •a).. SJ1 O
O
O
-5 O
O
ci
O
ri ci ri ci ci
O O O O O
ci
O
ci
O
ci
O
ci
O
ci
O
ci
O
ci
O
ci
O
ci
O
ci
O
ci
O
ci ci ci ci ci
O O O O O
ci
O
ci
O
ci
O
ci
O
ci
O
ci
O
ci
O
ci
O
ci
O
ci
O
ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci fV •
O O O O O O O O O
.N,
O'
N
G
N
N
N N N N N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N N N N N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N N N N N N N N N
N
N
_10 c\
c\i
c\i c\ c\ c\ c\i
c\
c\i
c\
c\I
c\
c\
c\i
c\
c—
c\
c-
c— c\ c— c\I c\I
c\
c\
c\I
c\
c\I
c\
c\
c\
c\
c\i
c- c— c— c- c- c\ c— c\ c\i
c\
c\i
O
ci
* n O ci ItT
n
O
ci
Rt
n
O
c4
zl*
n
O
ci
ItT n O ri ItT
n
O
c4
zl*
n
O
-1
zl*
n
O
ri ItT n O c4 zl* n O c4
zl*
n
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
Dates
ci
ci
ci
ci ci
Tetrachloroethene
Trichloroethene
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
RZ = 0.4338
RZ = 0.6042
RZ = 0.1538
• •
• • • •
Linear (Tetrachloroethene)
• • • •
• •
Linear (Trichloroethene)
• •
• • •
• Linear (trans-1,2-Dichloroethene)

OW-4
40
35
................
v 30
............
0 25
.......
...............
.................
15
u 10
v 5
0
—
—
0)
O
O
c-I
O
ri
O O
c-I ri .--I ci ci
-1
.--I
N
ci
N
.--I
N
ci
N
.--I
M
ci
M
.--I
M
ci
M
.--I
ri
ItT 1:t ItT V1 In
c-I ri c-I ri .--I
Ln
ri
In
c-I
lD
ri
W
c-I
W
ci
lD
ci
r�
ci
n
ci
n
ci
n
ci
00 00 00 00 N 01
ci ci ci ri c-I ci
N
.--I
M
ci
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O O O O O
N N N N N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O O O O O
N N N N N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O O O O O O
N N N N N N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
\
c-I
\
C-I
\
c-I
\ \ \ \ \
C-I c-I C-I c-I c-I
\
c-I
\
c-I
\
C-I
\
c-I
\
c-I
\
c-I
\
C-I
\
c-I
\
C-I
\
c-I
\ \ \ \ \
C-I c-I C-I c-I C-I
\
c-I
\
C-I
\
c-I
\
C-I
\
c-I
\
C-I
\
C-I
\
c-I
\
C-I
\
c-I
\ \ \ \ \ \
C-I c-I C-I c-I C-I c-I
\
C-I
\
c-I
\
C-I
\
c-I
\
C-I
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
Dates
Tetrachloroethene
Trichloroethene
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
RZ = 0.4114
R2 = 0.6184
R2 = 0.8922
• •
• • • •
Linear (Tetrachloroethene)
• • •
• • •
Linear (Trichloroethene)
• • • •
• •
Linear (cis-1,2-Dichloroethene)
• A
3
41
Y
o........
v 0.5
0
v
1hr
—
Ql
O
O
c-I
O
.--I
O
c-I
O
c-I
ci
.--I
c1
c-I
.--I
c-I
ci
.--I
N
c-I
N
c-I
N
.--I
N
c-I
M
c-I
M
c-I
M
c-I
M
c-I c-I
c-I
c-I
ItT
c-I
V1 In
c-I c-I
In Ln LD
c-I c-I .--I
LD
.--I
iD
ci
LD
ci
r�
ci
n
ci
n
ci
n
ci
00
ci
00
ci
00
ci
00
c-I
m m m
c-I c-I c-I
m
.--I
O
N
O O
N N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O O
N N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O O
N N
O O O
N N N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O O O
N N N
O
N
O
N
O O
N N
\
c-I
\
c-I
\
c-I
\
c-I
\
c-I
\
c-I
\
c-I
\
c-I
\
C-I
\
c-I
\
c-I
\
c-I
\
c-I
\
c-I
\
c-I
\
c-I
\ \
c-I c-I
\
c-I
\
c-I
\
C-I
\ \
c-I C-I
\ \ \
C-I c-I C-I
\
C-I
\
c-I
\
C-I
\
C-I
\
c-I
\
C-I
\
C-I
\
c-I
\
c-I
\
c-I
\
c-I
\ \ \
c-I C-I c-I
\
C-I
\
c-I
\ \
c-I c-I
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
Dates
RZ = 0.5979
RZ = 0.4755
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
Vinyl chloride
• • • • • • Linear
(trans-1,2-Dichloroethene)
• • • • • •
Linear
(Vinyl chloride)

25
J
20
N
0 15
10
c
v
u 5
c
0
v 0
OW-10D
M O O O O c-I c-I c-I c-I N N N N M M M M -zT -zT �* -zT M M M In lD lD lD lD I, n n n W W W W M M M M O O O
O C-I i--I C-I C-I i--I c-I i--I c-I c-I i--I c-I i--I -4 -4 -4 -4 i--I i--I c-I i--I c-I i--I i--I c-I i--I c-I i--I -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 i--I i--I c-I i--I N N N
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci
O c\-I T n O c\-I n O c\-I n O c\-I n O c\-I n O c\-I T n O c\-I n O c\-I n O c\-I n O c\-I T n O c\-I T n
Tetrachloroethene
RZ = 0.0191
• • • • • • Linear (Tetra chloroethene)
1
0.8
J
ClA
0.6
c
0
Z 0.4
L
u 0.2
c
0
u
0
Dates
Trichloroethene
RZ = 0.3121
• • • • • • Linear (Trichloroethene)
OW-10D
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
RZ = 0.5024
• • • • • • Linear (cis-1,2-Dichloroethene)
Dl
O
O
ci
O
ri
O
ci
O
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
N
ci
N
ci
N
ci
N
ci
M
ci
M
ci
M
ci
M
ci
ci
ci
ci
ItT
ci
In In In In
ci ci ci ci
O
ci
O
ci
O
ci
O
ci
n
ci
r-
ci
r-
ci
r-
ci
W
ci
W W W
ci ci ci
M M
ci ci
M
ci
N
ci
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O O O O
N N N N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O O O
N N N
O O
N N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
c-I
c-I
C-I
C-I
C-I
c-I
C-I
C-I
C-I
C-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
C-I
C-I C-I C-I C-I
C-I
C-I
C-I
C-I
C-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I c-I c-I
c-I c-I
c-I
C-I
c-I
C-I
C-I
Dates
RZ=0.114
R2=0.0512
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
Vinyl
chloride
• • • •
• • Linear (trans-1,2-Dichloroethene)
• • •
• • •
Linear (Vinyl chloride)

OW-17D
30
an
25
f
10 ...
v 10
o 5 ...... .�:. ....................................
.. ..............
U
0
0) O O O O a4 c4 c4 c4 N N N N M Cn Cn Cn In In In In lD lD lD lD I, I" I" I" w w 00 00 m m m 0) O O O
O c4 c4 c4 c4 c4 c4 c4 -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 i--I c-I c-I c-I c-I c4 c4 c4 c4 c4 c4 c4 -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 -4 c4 c4 c4 c4 N N N
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci
O c4 n O c4 n O -4 n O c4 n O c4 n O c4 n O c4 n O -4 n O c4 n O c4 n O c4 n
c-1 c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-1
Dates
RZ = 0.0811 RZ = 0.6945
Trichloroethene cis-1,2-Dichloroethene • • • • • • Linear (Trichloroethene) • • • • • • Linear (cis-1,2-Dichloroethene)
OW-17D
3.5
J
3
2.5
c
2
0
+�
1.5
........
..
............
c1
v
.....
..
c
0.5
.........
u0
...............
.....
................ti
O1
O
O
rc-1
O
c-1
O O c-1 c-1 r.,
c-1 -1
c-I
i--1
N
C-1
N
c-1
N
N
c-1
M
c-1
M
M
c-1
M
c-1
-zT -zT In M M
c-1 C-1 c-1 c-1 c-I c-1 c-1
In
c-I
lD
lD
lD
-4
lD
c 4
I,
C-I
n
C-I
n
c 4
n 00 00 00
c-I c-I c 4 c-I
00
c 4
0)
c 4
Ol
c-I
0)
-4
0)
-4
O
N
O
N
O
N
-0.5
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
C8 C8 C8
O O O O O
N N N N N
\ \ \ \ \
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
CE'
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
CE'
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N
\ \ \ \ \ \ \
O
N
\
O
C8
N
\
O
C8
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O O O O
N N N N
\ \ \ \
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
O
N
\
ci
O
c-I
ci
-4
ci
ci ci ci ci ci
n O c\-1 T n
ci
O
ci
C\-I
ci
ci
n
ci
O
ci
c\-I
ci
zT
ci
n
ci
O
ci ci ci ci ci ci ci
-4 n O -4 n
ci
O
ci
_4
ci
ci
n
ci
O
ci
C\-I
ci
ci
n
ci ci ci ci
O c\-I zT n
ci
O
ci
-4
ci
ci
n
ci
O
ci
-4
ci
ci
n
Dates
Tetrachloroethene
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
Vinyl chloride
RZ = 0.1641
RZ = N/A
RZ = 0.3215
• • •
• • •
Linear (Tetrachloroethene)
• • • •
• • Linear (trans-1,2-Dichloroethene)
• •
• • • •
Linear (Vinyl chloride)