NCD079044426_19980911_General Electric Co. Shepherd Farm_FRBCERCLA RD_Buried Drum Investigation-OCR

Ms. Giezelle Bennett
HSI
GEOTRANS
A TETRA TECH COMPANY
· Remedial Project Manager
U.S. EPA Region 4
JOO Alabama Street, S.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104
1 080 Holcomb Bridge Road
Building 100, Suite 190
Roswell, Georgia
30076
770-642-1000 FAX [phone]
September 11, 199fiECEIVEn
SEP 14 1998
SUPERFUND SECTION
Reference: Shepherd Farm Buried Drum Investigation
GE/Shepherd Farm Site
HSI Geo Trans Project No. N048-905
Dear Ms. Bennett:
Enclosed please find four (4) copies of the above referenced report for your review. This
report describes the results of the drum investigation performed in August 1998. This survey
was performed in accordance with the proposal letter submitted on July 29, I 998.
Please call me if you have any questions.
cc: Lee Humphrey (GELS)
David Mattison (NC DENR)
Peter Rich (HSI Geo Trans)
Sincerely,
~ntTufu Joi
Todd Hagemeyer, P.G. , D
Senior Hydrogeologist
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SHEPHERD FARM BURIED DRUM INVESTIGATION
GENERAL ELECTRIC/SHEPHERD FARM SUPERFUND SITE ECEfVEo
HSI GEOTRANS PROJECT NO. N048-905
SEPTEMBER I 0, l 998
EAST FLAT ROCK, NORTH CAROLINA
Prepared for:
GE Lighting Systems
30 IO Spartanburg Highway
Hendersonville, NC 28792
Prepared by:
HSI GeoTrans, Inc.
I 080 Holcomb Bridge Road
Building 200, Suite 305
Roswell, GA 30076
SEP 14 1998
SUPERFUND SECTION
P,\GE\DOCS\RA WP\DSUR VEY2 WPD
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I INTRODUCTION ......................................................... 1-1
I. I SITE BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1
1.2 SITE HISTORY ................................................... 1-1
1.3 PURPOSE AND SCOPE ............................................. 1-2
2 METHOD OF INVESTIGATION ............................................. 2-1
2.1 SURF ACE GEOPHYSICS METHODS .................................... 2-1
2.1.1 TIME DOMAIN ELECTROMAGNETICS ............................ 2-1
2.1.2 GROUND PENETRATING RADAR ............................... 2-1
2.2 FIELD VERIFICATION .............................................. 2-2
2.3 LABORATORY ANALYSES .......................................... 2-2
2.4 HEALTH AND SAFETY ............................................. 2-3
2.5 MATERIALS HANDLING ............................................ 2-4
3 RESULTS ................................................................ 3-1
3.1 GEOPHYSICS .................................................... 3-1
3.2 TEST PITS ...................................................... 3-1
3.3 ANALYTICAL RESULTS ............................................ 3-2
4 CONCLUSIONS ........................................................... 4-1
5 REFERENCES ............................................................ 5-1
APPENDIX A -Surface Geophysics Report
APPENDIX B -Laboratory Reports
II
D
0
D
D
D
D
D
ti
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
LIST OF TABLES
1-1. Description of drums encountered during Shepherd Farm soil excavation in the
fall of 1997 ........................................................... 1-4
3-1. Summary of surface geophysical measurements at test pit locations ............... 3-3
3-2. Description of material encountered in test pits. . ............................. 3-4
3-3. Results of soil samples collected next to drums in July 1997 ..................... 3-5
3-4. Results of soil sample and duplicate sample collected in septic line trench in
July 1998 .................................. : .......................... 3-6
3-5. Results of groundwater sample collected in septic line trench in July 1998. . ....... 3-7
3-6. Waste characteristics of overpacked material. ................................ 3-8
lll
I
I
I
u
R
I
m
m
I
I
ffl
•
m
I
I
m
m
I
m
1-1.
1-2.
1-3.
1-4.
1-5.
2-1.
2-2.
2-3.
3-1.
3-2.
LIST OF FIGURES
Location of the GE and Shepherd Farm Subsites .............................. 1-5
Site map. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-6
Location of drums encountered during surficial soil excavation in November 1997. . . I-7
Location and approximate layout of new septic systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-8
Extent of study area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-9
Location ofTDEM measurements ......................................... 2-5
Location of GPR transect lines ............................................ 2-6
Test pit locations ....................................................... 2-7
TDEM and GPR results. . ............................................... 3-9
TDEM and GPR results with test pit locations ............................... 3-10
IV
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
u
ti
I
D
I
I
D
D
D
I
I
]
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 SITE BACKGROUND
The GE/Shepherd Farm Superfund Site is located in East Flat Rock, North Carolina. The
site consists of two non-contiguous areas (or Subsites) including the Shepherd Farm property and
the GE Lighting facility, referred to as the Shepherd Farm Subsite and GE Subsite, respectively
(see Figure 1-1). The Shepherd Farm Subsite (Figure 1-2) is located approximately 2500 feet
southwest of the GE Subsite and is the subject ofthis report.
The Shepherd Farm Subsite was historically used for the disposal of wastes. Mr.
Shepherd, the owner and operator of the now defunct disposal company, deposited trash, wastes,
and debris in the area in the l 950's and l 960's. In the Record of Decision (ROD) (EPA, 1995),
the area of waste disposal was estimated to be 3 acres in size. The remedy in the ROD consisted
of the excavation of surficial soil ( depth of O to 12 inches) where total PCBs exceeded 1 part per
million. Based on the PCB results of nearly 400 soil samples collected since the ROD, the
excavation area was 4.4 acres in size.
The Shepherd Farm Subsite is bounded on the north and east by Roper Road, on the south
by the Spring Haven Community, and on the west by Bat Fork Creek. The site and surrounding
area currently supports residential and agricultural land use. Mr. Shepherd still maintains his
residence on this property (see Figure 1-2). The property north and west of the Shepherd
residence is owned by Mrs. Bettie Hill. The Hill property is used for residential and agricultural
purposes. A northern portion of the Spring Haven Community is present on the southern portion
of the subsite. The Spring Haven Community is comprised of approximately 120 manufactured
homes.
1.2 SITE HISTORY
In October and November 1997, HSI Geo Trans performed a Remedial Action (RA) at the
Shepherd Farm Subsite. Approximately 7,000 cubic yards of soil and debris were excavated and
transported to DSI at the GE facility for disposal. The RA was completed in accordance with the
Record of Decision (ROD) (EPA, 1995), Consent Decree (1996), and Remedial Action Work
1-1
I
H
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
B
H
D
B
H
Plan (HSI Geo Trans, 1997), applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs),
and consistent with the National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan
(NCP), the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act
(CERCLA) as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA),
(hereinafter jointly referred to as "CERCLA"), and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA). The details of this RA are summarized in the Remedial Action of Shepherd Farm Soils
Final Report (HSI Geo Trans, 1998a).
During the removal of surficial soils at Shepherd Farm in the fall of 1997, several drums
and drum fragments were encountered. The contents of the drums are described in Table 1-1 and
the locations of these drums are depicted in Figure 1-3. The drums were found near land surface
in a contiguous area of buried metal debris. Complete, intact drums were over-packed and staged
at the GE facility. Drum remnants and fragments were deposited in the OSI.
After the RA activities were performed at Shepherd Farm, two septic systems in the
Spring Haven Community failed. In July and August 1998,_ a septic contractor repaired the
septic systems at 106 and 107 Spring Haven Drive. The locations of these septic repairs
presented in Figure 1-4. On July 23, 1998, during trenching activities associated with the septic
system repair at I 07 Spring Haven Drive, drum remnants were discovered two to three feet
below land surface. The drum remnants were found west of 107 Spring Haven Drive between
the house and the unnamed creek. This encounter with drum remnants prompted additional
investigation which is the subject of this report.
1.3 . PURPOSE AND SCOPE
A buried drum investigation was performed to locate any remaining buried intact 55-
gallon drums whose contents could potentially pose a health risk to residents, or be a source of
groundwater contamination. The drum investigation was performed August 17 through August
21, 1998. The location and extent of the proposed study area is presented in Figure 1-5. The
proposed study area, as shown in Figure 1-5, incorporated the entire contiguous area where
drums or drum remnants had been encountered during the excavation in the fall of 1997. The
actual survey area, as shown in Figure 1-5, was extended beyond the proposed study area. The
study area was extended during the field investigation to locate lateral boundaries around the
1-2
R
I
D
D
I
n
D
R
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
H
H
D
D
entire perimeter of the area suspected of containing buried metal debris. The investigation
included both non-intrusive and intrusive techniques. Surface geophysics were used to
investigate a large area non-intrusively. Test pits were used at select locations to intrusively
provide direct visual observations of the subsurface.
HSI GeoTrans contracted Subsurface Detection Investigations, Incorporated (SDII) to
perform the geophysical survey using time domain electromagnetics (TDEM) and ground
·penetrating radar (GPR). Four Seasons Environmental Inc. was selected to complete the test pits.
A mini-excavator was on site to excavate and field verify representative geophysical anomalies.
HSI GeoTrans performed field oversight, including health and safety oversight.
1-3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 1-1. Description of drums encountered during Shepherd Farm soil excavation in the
fall of 1997.
Drum Date I Location Description of
I Condition of I Handling
ID Material Drum
DRA Oct 16, 1997 Between creek and I 07 Gray paint material, Rusted with holes Overpackcd and transported to
Spr. Haven Dr. solid GE Subsite for sampling
DRB Oct 16, 1997 Between creek and I 07 Gray paint material, Rusted, partially Overpacked and transported to
Spr. Haven Dr. solid missing GE Subsite for sampling
DRC Oct 16, 1997 Between creek and 107 Black roofing tar, Rusted. partially Overpacked and transported to
Spr. Haven Dr. solid missing GE Subsite for sampling
DRD Oct 20, 1997 Between 107 and 109 Spr. Gray paint material, Rusted with holes Overpackcd and transported to
Haven Dr. solid GE Subsite for sampling
DRE Oct 20, 1997 Between I 07 afld l09 Spr. Black roofing tar, Rusted with holes Overpacked and transported to
Haven Dr. solid GE Subsite for Sampling
DRF Oct 20, 1997 Between 107 and I 09 Spr. Gray paint material Rusted with Overpacked and transported to
Haven Dr. with rust pockets cracks GE Subsite for sampling
DRG Oct 20, 1997 Between 107 and 109 Spr. Gray paint material, Rusted with holes Overpacked and transported to
Haven Dr. solid GE Subsite for sampling
Drums Oct 21, 1997 Behind I 09 Spr. Haven None Rusted shells of a Removed with excavated soil
in kiln Dr. drums
1-4
P: \ge\gls-rd30\work _ra\subsita .wor
TITlE
Location of the GE and Shepherd Farm Subsites
0 600 1200 LOCATION East Flat Rock, NC
SCALE IN FEET HSI CHECKED BY PAW
MAF'TEDBY MJW 1 1 ,4 GEOTRANS i-:---,.::-c,NAME----,----t-;;s=ues=ire=woR;;----; •
-A TETll.A nOi COHP'ANT DATE 6-29-98
FIGURE:
P. \ge\gis-rd30\work _ra\sfs~e. wor
Explanation
Surficial soil excavation area
Site monitor well
♦ Residential well
0
MW-65 ~
300
SCALE IN FEET
TITlE
600 LOCATION
SWW-24 •
Site map
SWW-4 ♦
SWW-5
♦
♦
SWW-♦
Shepherd FArm Subsite, East Flat Rock, NC
HSI CHECKED BY PAW
CRAFTED BY MJW 1 2 ,4 GEOTRANS '-m-----"--"-'--'--s,-s,r_E_WO_R _ ____, •
-A TtTRA TE04 COHl"ANY DATE 6-29-98
FIGURE:
- - - - - - - - - -----= -l!!!!!l!B 1!!!!!!11 == ==
P:\ge\gis-s90\worl,;spac\drums.wor
N570600 ---1---~--l----
N570500
Explanation
•
Surficial soil excavation area
Monitor well
Drum or drum fragments discovered
during surficial soil excavation
0 50 100
SCALE IN FEET
nn..e Location of drums encountered during
surficial soil excavation in Fall of 1997
LOCATION
Shepherd Farm Subsite, East Flat Rock, NC
HSI f-'CH---'E.:.._O<E::cO.:...BY-h,-RT=H~-----1 FIGURE:
MAFTEOBY MJW 1 3 GEOTRANS F<ENAME DRUMSWOR -
A Tf11IA ~ COHP'ANY CATI:: 9-2-98
liiii -iiiil iiiii iiii iiii -- - ---- - - - ---
P. \ge\gis-s90\workspac\slseptic. WOl
I L---1------~, ---------
Explanation
Newly installed septic lines
<I> Monitor well 0 60 120 iiiil Septic tank n Drain field SCALE IN FEET
nn.e
LOCATION
~ -N
Location and approximate
layout of septic systems
I
Shepherd Farm Subsite, East Flat Rock, NC
HSI CHECKEDBY RTH
CRAFTED BY MJW
T d GEOTRANS "-'™ s, .. ,,~woR
ATTI1'.ATE04COMPANY DATE 7-29-98
FIGURE:
1-4
------· --- ---P :\gelgis•s90\worl<;spac\dsurv. wor
~, /
-~ ~/¾,4444-~~ . ,,,,, .
. , ' . .
, ______ ,
, , , ,
i---------1 I I I I I "-----
I
I I
I
I I I I I I i------Expla11atio11
•
Surficial soil excavation area
Proposed geophysical investigation
Extent of geophysical investigation
Monitor well
Drum or drum fragments discovered
during surticial soil excavation
✓ , •
0 50
SCALE IN FEET
100
11!!5 i=m -iiiil
mus
LOCATION
MW-62A
---------------------------· ~ M . l
I I I I
~ -N-
I
·-------------
Extent of study area
Shepherd Farm Subsite, East Flat Rock, NC
HSI CHECKED BY RTH
CRAFTEDBY MJ\l'I
FIGURE:
1-5
I
I
g
D
I
I
I
I
u
D
0
6
I
I
I
I
I
m
m
2 METHOD OF INVESTIGATION
2.1 SURFACE GEOPHYSICS METHODS
A combination of two geophysical methods were used at the Shepherd Farm site. Time
domain electromagnetics (TDEM) was first used to identify any metal debris below the surface.
Ground penetrating radar (GPR) was then used to determine the size, shape and depth of buried
objects at the site. The combination of these two geophysical methods allowed SDII to
determine the size, position, and relative composition of the debris in the subsurface.
2.1.1 Time Domain Electromagnetics
The TDEM method measures the secondary electromagnetic (EM) field at specific time
period after an induced EM field. Buried metallic debris causes eddy currents after a EM field is
induced near the surface. These eddy currents produce a voltage in the receiver coil. Measuring
this voltage for a period of time is equivalent to measuring conductivity as a function of depth.
SDII used the EM-61 to conduct this electromagnetic survey. The EM-61 is operated by
pulling the receiver coil along the surface of the study area along a pre-determined grid.
Measurements are taken every 5 feet along each transect. The data gathered during this process
is saved in a portable data logger (Polycorder Digital Data Recorder) and extracted to a personal
computer after the survey is completed. Data is collected at high and low sensitivity ranges. The
low sensitivity range is used when above or near surface interferences are present.
Additional information on TDEM methods and procedures can be found in the Geophysical
Investigation Final Report in Appendix A (SDII, 1998). Figure 2-1 shows the location of the
TDEM measurement locations.
2.1.2 Ground Penetrating Radar
Ground penetrating radar (GPR) detects interfaces between subsurface materials with
differing dielectric constants. The GPR consists of a transmitter, receiver, and a profiling
receiver with a graphical output. The transmitter sends short-wave radar waves into the
2-1
I
I
•
I
g
I
I
I
D
I
I
m
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
subs~ace where they are reflected back to the receiver when there is a change in the
composition of subsurface materials .
SDII performed the GPR investigation by pulling a Geophysical Survey Systems, Inc.
SIR System-3 GPR recorder along the same transect lines used for the EM investigation. The
graphical representation of the data collected is available instantaneously for review. This data
can then be used to expand the search area, if necessary. Additional information on GPR
methods and procedures can be found in the Geophysical Investigation Final Report in Appendix
A (SDII, 1998). Figure 2-2 depicts the location of the GPR transects.
2.2 FIELD VERIFICATION
HSI GeoTrans contracted Four Seasons Environmental, Inc. to perform exploratory
excavations, or test pits, in areas where the geophysical survey indicated the highest probability
of drums or other buried metal debris. Five test pit locations were identified by the TDEM
survey (refer to Section 3 for results). Test pits were excavated in these areas in order to visually
describe the buried debris. Test pit locations are presented in Figure 2-3. A mini-excavator was
used to excavate each test pit over an area of approximately 15 square feet. The test pits
extended downward until native soil was encountered below the buried debris.
2.3 LABORATORY ANALYSES
Soil, water, and waste samples have been collected from July 1997 to present to
determine if hazardous materials were contained in or escaped from any drums at the Shepherd
Farm Subsite. Sampling was performed for three different drum discovery events (July 1997,
October 1997, and July 1998).
The first drum sample event occurred in July 1997, when drum remnants were discovered
at the surface during pre-design soil sampling. Two soil samples were collected next to the
'
drums. The soil samples were analyzed for the 14 target VOCs. This section describes the field
sampling events. The results were presented in the 30% design report (HSI GeoTrans, 1998b)
and summarized in Section 3 .3
2-2
I
I
I
I
I
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
During the remedial action in the fall of 1997, seven drums were encountered during the
excavation. These drums were excavated, overpacked, and transported to the GE facility, and
later sampled. A composite sample of the waste was collected from these drums and analyzed
for voes, SVOes, pesticides, herbicides, and metals using TeLP methods for waste
characterization.
In July 1998, drum fragments were encountered by the septic contractor. The metal drum
shell, its contents, and surrounding soil was placed into two new 55-gallon drums. The drums
were transported to the GE facility. A representative sample of the soil and solid waste material
and a sample of the groundwater from the bottom of the trench were collected and analyzed for
target voes using the EPA Method 8260 for site characterization and health and safety
purposes. Because the laboratory detected gas chromatograph (Ge) peaks for non-targeted
voes during the analysis of the soil and solid waste sample, it was re-analyzed for the entire list
of compounds in the EPA Method 8260 analysis. An additional representative sample of the soil
and solid waste was collected and analyzed for voes, SVOes, pesticides, herbicides, and metals
using TeLP methods for waste characterization and for comparison to the drums previously
encountered during the 1997 excavation.
2.4 HEALTH AND SAFETY
HSI Geo Trans conducted air monitoring with a photoionization detector (PID)
throughout the test pit excavation process for health and safety purposes. Organic vapors
remained below I ppm in the breathing zone throughout the excavation process. The entire drum
survey and exploratory excavation was carried out in modified Level D personal protective
equipment (ppe) as specified in the Shepherd Farm RA Workplan (HSI GeoTrans, 1997). There
were no accidents, OSHA-reportable incidents, or reported injuries during the buried drum
investigation. However, a incident report was filed before the drum investigation when the septic
contractor encountered the drum remnants during the trenching on July 23. There was no lost
work time due to injury. The contractor and his assistant refused to immediately obtain medical
assistance but agreed to be examined by a occupational health physician approximately eight
days after the event. It was not an OSHA-reportable incident. Air monitoring was performed for
2-3
I
I
m
g
g
n
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
all intrusive activities after the July 23 incident. Air monitoring performed during the fall 1997
excavation and during the July 1998 test pit excavating activities never indicated the need for
respiratory protection. The septic installations were completed in August 1998 without further
incident.
2.5 MATERIALS HANDLING
A nearly intact drum was encountered. It was placed into two 55-gallon drums and stored
at the GE chemical storage area. A waste characterization analysis was performed on the
material in the drum (see Section 3.3 for analytical results). The material was removed from the
site by Clean Harbors of Baltimore as non-hazardous waste. Drum fragments were excavated
with the soil and taken to the Dry Sludge Impoundment (OSI) for disposal.
2-4
=--- - ------l!!!EI l!!l!I == ;mi lillil -----lilil
P·\ge\gis-s90\woM<.spac\TDEM.wor
0600
Expla11atio11
+ Location of TDEM measurement
-$-Monitor well 0 50 100 LOCATION
SCALE IN FEET
~ -N-
I
Location of TDEM measurements
Shepherd Farm Subsite, East Flat Rock, NC
HSI CHECKED BY RTH
DRAFTED BY MJW
GEOTRANS "-ENAME TOEMWOR
FIGURE:
2-1
A TE'T1'A TEOI COf1PANY DATE 9·2·98
- - -.. -- --11!!!1 l!!!!!!!I -=:I ==i liiiiili1 -liiiii --iiiil -
P.\gelgis•s90\workspac\GPR.wor
0600
Expla11atio11
GPR transect line
-$-Monitor well
I
I
0 50 100 LOCATION
SCALE IN FEET
'1J-MW-62A
'1J-M -
~ -N-
I
Location of GPR transect lines
Shepherd Farm Subsite, East Flat Rock, NC
[
HS I CHECKED BY RTH FIGURE:
i=IRAFTEC:..:00::..:B"-jY _M_JW ___ ' 2-2
,4 GEOTRANS ,.......... GPRWOR
-AffTP.ATECHCOHl"ANY DATE 9-2-98
--8!1 ---11111 l&J l!!!!!!I l!!l!!!I -lllllml IZiil liiiiilil -lliiiil ,__ iiiil ._
P. \ge\gis-s90\workspac\tpits2. war
0600 --+---------------1~--------cf-------+-----------+---------l------t---
-N-
I
~Test Pit
MW-62A
'1J-MW-62 ~i;:~ ¾
0500 t est Pit /!! 0---3 Test-Pi ;£> • 5 $ c:: • § Test Pit
4
.,.,.,,
'q ~"e .,, ()
~! jt--~-I "---I In !t7 I ~~ r
Explanation
Test pit locations • Test pit
0 50 100 LOCATION Shepherd Fann Subsite, East Flat Rock, NC
Monitor well
SCALE IN FEET
HSI CHECKED BY RTH
mAFTEDBY MJW
,4 GEOTRANS RENAME TPITS2.v.QR
-A ffTRA not COMPANY DATE 9-2-98
FIGURE:
2-3
I
I
I
I
I
I
n
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3 RESULTS
3.1 GEOPHYSICS
The TDEM survey defined an area of suspected buried metallic debris at the Shepherd
Farm Subsite. This area of suspected buried metallic debris is centered between the homes at
107 and 109 Spring Haven Drive (Figure 3-1 ). The GPR confirmed that debris was present in
this area at a depth of one to seven feet below land surface (ft bis). No objects with a diameter
greater than two feet were detected with the GPR. Based on the surface geophysics, no intact
drums are believed to be present in the survey area. The GPR also identified areas of non-
metallic debris north and south of the metallic debris. Based on visual observations from the fall
1997 excavation, this non-metallic debris is typical household trash such as paper, plastic, and
glass. The anomalies identified by the TDEM survey and confirmed by the GPR survey were
used in selecting the five test pit locations at the site. Table 3-1 summarizes they TDEM
response and GPR results at the five selected pit locations. The test pit locations had a high
TDEM response and moderate to high concentration of buried debris based on the GPR.
Metallic debris was present in each of the five test pits as described below.
3.2 TEST PITS
The results of the test pit investigation are summarized in Table 3-2. The five test pits
contained very similar types of debris including rusted drum fragments, solid gray paint material,
black roofing tar, scrap metal, glass, ceramic insulators, and wire. In addition to the debris, one
partially intact drum was found in test pit 5. The drum contained the same solid gray paint
material that was found in the other pits. In Test Pits 2 through 5, the depth of the debris
extended to between 5 and 6.5 ft. bis. The bottom of the debris was not identified in Test Pit I
because the pit was located close to the home at I 07 Spring Haven Drive. The test pit
investigation confirmed the presence of metal debris and verified that there are no intact 55-
gallon drums buried within the subject area.
3-1
I
I
I
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
m
I
I
I
I
3.3 ANALYTICAL RESULTS
The soil and groundwater samples collected at the site were analyzed for VOCs. The
results of these analyses are presented in Appendix Band summarized in Tables 3-3 through 3-5.
As shown in Table 3-3, the two soil samples collected next to the drums in July 1997 contained
traces oftetrachloroethene, trichloroethene, and cis-1,2-Dichloroethene. The results of these
analyses were presented in the 30% Remedial Design Report (HSI GeoTrans, 1998b).
Table 3-4 summarizes the results of a soil sample and duplicate sample collected in the
septic line trench in July 1998. Table 3-4 shows that the trench soil contained traces of
chloroform and methylene chloride, two common laboratory contaminants. Because the
laboratory identified significant GC peaks not included as targeted compounds, the samples were
additionally analyzed for non-targeted VOCs. Table 3-4 shows that 10 non-targeted VOCs
detected in the septic line trench soil. Xylene was detected at the highest concentration, however
xylene and all other VOCs were detected at concentrations significantly lower than North
Carolina remediation goals for soil. The septic trench was excavated to the water table in July
1998. As shown in Table 3-5, no VOCs were detected in this sample.
Samples of the overpacked material were analyzed for waste characteristics for disposal
purposes. Representative samples from the fall 1997 overpacked materials and from the material
overpacked during the July 1998 septic line trenching activities showed that this material is non-
hazardous. The sampled material included the solid paint, black tar, and metal debris. All
parameters analyzed were not detected except for four metals. Table 3-6 lists the concentrations
of the metals detected. All metal concentrations were significantly below the regulatory level for
determining waste as hazardous.
3-2
-I!!!!!!!! l!!!!!I -= 11111 iiii .-----l!!!!!!!!!I l!!i!!!!I em Giiaiil lllil iiiii .. -
Table 3-1. Summary of surface geophysical measurements at test pit locations.
TDEM Response (milli-volts)
Test Pit# Shallow Deep Differential GPR Results
1 463 250 213 High concentration of buried debris 1-7 ft bis, small diameter less than 2 ft.
2 1987 1260 717 Moderate concentration of buried debris 1-6 ft bis, small diameter less than 2 ft.
3 589 312 277 High concentration of buried debris 1-6 ft bis, small diameter less than 2 ft.
4 589 423 166 High concentration of buried debris 1-6 ft bis, small diameter less than 2 ft.
5 275 176 99 High concentration of buried debris 1-7 ft bis, small diameter less than 2 ft.
3-3
I
I
I
D
g
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 3-2. Description of material encountered in test pits
Test Pit
1
2
3
4
5
Notes:
Depth to Depth to
Top of Debris Bottom of
(ft, bgs) Debris (ft, bgs) Description of Debris
Rusted drum fragments, gray paint
material, black roofing tar, scrap metal.
The excavation was stopped at 3.5 feet
to protect the structural integrity of the
1.5 >3.5 home.
Rusted drum fragments, gray paint
material, glass, scrap metal, ceramic
0.5 5.1 insulators, wire.
Rusted drum fragments, gray paint
material, ceramic insulators, scrap metal,
2.0 6.5 glass.
Rusted drum fragments, gray paint
1.0 5.0 material, scrap metal.
Rusted drum fragments including a
partially intact paint drum, gray paint
material.scrap metal, drum lid. The
highest concentration of metal was found
1.5 5.0 in this test pit.
The layer of soil above the debris is fill which consists of a brown fine sand.
The debris layer is a mix1ure of gray silty sand and debris.
The native soil below the debris layer consists of reddish-brown clayey silt.
3-4
9/10/98
Debris.xis
---!!!I == &iiiii iiii - ---a; l!!!!!I !ml liiiiiil liliil iiii .. -
Table 3-3. Results of soil samples collected next to drums in July 1997.
Drum 1 Drum2
TARGETVOCS Concentration Flag Concentration Flag (ppm) (ppm) .
Benzene 0.1 u 0.1 u
Bromodichloromethane 0.1 u 0.1 u
Chloroform 0.1 u 0.1 u
Cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.015 J 0.009 J
Trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.1 u 0.1 u
1, 1-Dichloroethane 0.1 u 0.1 u
1,2-Dichloroethane 0.1 u 0.1 u
1,2-Dichloropropane 0.1 u 0.1 u
Methylene Chloride 0.1 u 0.1 u
1, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.1 u 0.1 u
T etrach loroethene 0.2 0.054
1, 1, 1-Trichloroethane 0.1 u 0.1 u
Trichloroethene 0.048 0.029
Vinyl Chloride 0.1 u 0.1 u
Notes:
• -NC DENR, 1997. Guidelines for Assessment and Cleanup, Inactive Hazardous Sites Program
U -Not detected
J -Estimate value
3-5
Remediation
Goat•
22
10
100
156
320
1560
7
9.4
.85
3.2
12
540
58
0.34
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 3-4. Results of soil sample and duplicate sample collected in septic line trench in July 1998.
SF-VOC-107-1 SF-VOC-107-2 North Carolina
TARGETVOCs Concentration Flag Concentration· · Flag Remediation
(ppm) (ppm) Goal*
Benzene 0.0069 u 0.0066 u 22
Bromodichloromethane 0.0069 u 0.0066 u 10
Chloroform 0.022 0.019 100
Cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.0069 u 0.0066 u 156
Trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.0069 u 0.0066 u 320
1, 1-Dichloroethane 0.0069 u 0.0066 u 1560
1,2-Dichloroethane 0.0069 u 0.0066 u 7
1,2-Dichloropropane 0.0069 u 0.0066 u 9.4
Methylene Chloride 0.0069 u 0.0083 85
1, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0.0069 u 0.0066 u 3.2
Tetrach loroethene 0.0069 u 0.0066 u 12
1, 1, 1-Trichloroethane 0.0069 u 0.0066 u 540
Trichloroethene 0.0069 u 0.0066 u 58
Vinyl Chloride 0.014 u 0.013 u 0.34
DETECTED
NON-TARGET voes
Toluene 0.12 0.054 3200
Ethylbenzene 1.2 0.6 1560
m&p-Xylene 4.6 3 32000
a-Xylene 2.1 1.4 32000
lsopropylbenzene 0.011 0.0069 u NA
n-Propylbenzene 0.013 0.0081 NA
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 0.18 0.14 NA
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 0.31 0.24 NA
p-lsopropyltoluene 0.021 0.021 NA
n-Butylbenzene 0.0084 0.0083 NA
Notes:
• -NC DENR, 1997. Guidelines for Assessment and Cleanup, Inactive Hazardous Sites Program
U -Not detected
NA -Not applicable
3-6
I
I Table 3-6. Waste characteristics of overpacked material.
I
I
I
D
I
D
m
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Silver
Fall 1997 Excavation
Concentration (mg/L) Flag
1. 1
0.09
0.04
1.3
0.05 u
Septic Trench
Concentration (mg/L)
1.4
0.04
0.02 u
0.2
0.05 u
3-8
Regulatory
Flag Level (mg/L)
100
1
5
5
5
R
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 3-5. Results of groundwater sample collected in septic line trench in July 1998.
TARGETVOCs
Benzene
Bromodichloromethane
Chloroform
Cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
Trans-1.2-Dichloroethene
1 , 1-Dich loroethane
1,2-Dichloroethane
1,2-Dichloropropane
Methylene Chloride
1, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
1, 1, 1-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Chloride
Notes:
U -Not detected
NA -Not applicable
GW-107-01
Concentration
(ppb)
5 U
5U
5U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5U
5U
5U
5 U
5 U
10 u
Trip Blank
Concentration ' Flag (ppb) Flag
5U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
10 u
3-7
----------l!!!!!!l!I 1!!11!1 i==, ma liilil liiil ---
P .\gelgis-s90\w!Jfkspac\MET AL. wor
0600
Explanation
___ Extent of buried debris based on GPR survey
,10-... Contour of TDEM response ( in milli-vols)
-$-Monitor well
0
-----------, t .. --------.,}
50
SCALE IN FEET
100 LOCATION
I I I I
I I -:,-------
' I I I I
I I I ,
TDEM and GPR results
Shepherd Farm Subsite, East Flat Rock, NC
HS I CHECKED BY RTH
CRAFTED BY MN/
FIGURE:
3-1
liiiiiil liiiil iiii liiiil iiiii iiiii iiiii iiiii iiiii iiiii iiiil --liill -- - - --
P:\ge\gis-s90\workspac\!pits. wor
Explanation
___ Extent of buried debris based on GPR survey
,,o-._, Contour of TDEM response ( in milli-vols)
-$-Monitor well
0
-----------, t ... ----···-'
50
SCALE IN FEET
100
T1l1.E
LOCATION
TDEM and GPR results with
test pit locations
Shepherd Farm Subsite, East Flat Rock, N
HS I CHECKED BY RTH FIGURE
i-=CRAFTE)C.:.:..::::..:.:.BY-I--M-NV ___ ---1, 3-2 -... GEOTRANS FLENAME TPITSWOR
--A TfTllA ~ COKP'AN'I" DATE 9-2-98
I
m
I
I
I
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4 CONCLUSIONS
The results of the geophysical survey and exploratory test pits indicate that metal debris
is present at the Shepherd Farm Subsite to a depth of 5 to 6.5 feet. The metal debris includes
rusted drum fragments, scrap metal, and wire. No intact drums were indicated by the
geophysical surveys or were found in the test pits. The drum fragments and debris encountered
during the excavation of septic trenches and subsequent test pits were similar to the other drum
fragments encountered during the surficial soil removal in the fall of 1997. These drum remnants
contained old paint, roofing tar, glass, scrap metal, wire and ceramic insulators. Laboratory
analyses of soil samples indicated that no target VOCs were present above North Carolina
remediation goals for the site. Laboratory analyses for the old paint, roofing tar, and debris from
inside the drum remnants shows that it is non-hazardous. Based on these investigations, the
buried debris does not pose a significant health risk or source of groundwater contamination.
Based on these investigations no additional site characterization or remediation activities related
to buried metal debris are necessary at the Shepherd Farm Subsite.
4-1
g
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5 REFERENCES
HSI GeoTrans, 1997, Remedial Action Work Plan, Shepherd Farm surficial soil removal,
· General Electric/Shepherd Farm Site, East' Flat Rock, North Carolina.
HSI Geo Trans, 1998a, Remedial Action of Shepherd Farm Soil, General Electric/Shepherd Farm
Site, East Flat Rock, North Carolina.
HSI GeoTrans, 1998b, Preliminary Design (30%) Report, General Electric/Shepherd Farm Site,
East Flat Rock, North Carolina.
Subsurface Detection Investigations, Inc., 1998, Geophysical Investigation, GE/Shepherd Farm
Site, East Flat Rock, North Carolina.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1995. Record of Decision, General Electric-Shepherd
Farm NPL Site, East Flat Rock, North Carolina.
5-1
m
•
m
I
I
a
D
D
APPENDIX A
B Surface Geophysics Report
I
I
I
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
g
I
D
I
I
u
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SUBSURFACE
DETECTION
INVESTIGATIONS
INCORPORATED
"A Geophysical Services Company"
m
g
I
I
I
I
I
D
D
I
I
E
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
FINAL REPORT
GEOPHYSICAL INVESTIGATION
GE/SHEPHERD FARM SITE
EAST FLAT ROCK, NORTH CAROLINA
Prepared For:
HSI GEOTRANS, INC.
ROSWELL, GEORGIA
AUGUST 1998
m
•
I
I
I
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Todd Hagemeyer, P.G.
HSI GeoTrans, Inc.
1080 Holcomb Bridge Road
Building 200, Suite 305
Roswell, GA 30076
SL:BSURFACE
DETECTIO!\
I!\\' EST I GA Tl 0/\: S
l1'CORPORATED
Subject: Final Report -Geophysical Investigation
GE/Shepherd Farm Site, East Flat Rock, NC
SDII Project No. 1010847
Dear Mr. Hagemeyer:
August 28, 1998
Subsurface Detection Investigations, Inc. (SDII) is pleased to submit the
final report for the above referenced project. The purpose of the investigation was
to utilize geophysical surveying techniques to help identify the location of buried
55-gallon drums or drum fragments within the project site. The project was
performed in accordance with our Proposal Number 0010961 dated August 2,
1998.
SDII appreciates the opportunity to have assisted HSI GeoTrans, Inc., on this
project. If you have any questions or comments about the report, please contact
us.
Sincerely,
CE DETECTION INVESTIGATIONS, INC.
.. - -----------
Michael J. Wight an, P. ., V.P.
Senior Geophysicist
''.A Geophysical Services Company"
I
m
g
I
D
D
B
m
I
•
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES........................................................................................... 11
LIST OF FIGURES........................................................................................... 11
EXECUTIVE SUI\,fl\,fARY............................................................................... 111
1.0 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................... 1-1
1.1 Background .... .............. ...... ..... ...... ... .. .... ... .. .... .... .. .... .... .... .. .... .... .. . 1-1
1.2 Purpose .......................................................................................... 1-1
1.3 Scope of Work................................................................................ 1-1
1.4 SiteDescription .............................................................................. 1-2
2.0 · METHODOLOGY................................................................................... 2-1
2.1 Equipment and Principles.............................................................. 2-1
2.1.1 Time-DomainElectromagnetics......................................... 2-1
2.1.2 Ground Penetrating Radar................................................... 2-3
2.2 Field Procedures............................................................................. 2-4
2.2.1 Establishment of Transects................................................. 2-4
2.2.2 Electromagnetic Survey...................................................... 2-5
2.2.3 Ground Penetrating Radar Survey...................................... 2-5
3.0 RESULTS
3.1
3.2
IDEM Survey .................................................................... .
Ground Penetrating Radar Survey ................................... ..
3-1
3-1
3-2
4.0 LIMITATIONS........................................................................................ 4-1
I 5.0 REFERENCES......................................................................................... 5-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
g
I
I
I
•
I
I
g
H
I
I
I
I
I
I
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
I Project Site Location Map
2 Site Plan Showing Approximate Location of IDEM Survey Stations, .
GPR Transect Lines, Contour of IDEM Response and Areas of
Suspected Buried Debris
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix
I GPR Transect A-A' Showing Area of Suspected Buried Debris
II
I
m
g
I
n
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES........................................................................................... II
LIST OF FIGURES........................................................................................... II
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................... Ill
1.0 IN1RODUCTION.................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Background . .. . ... ..... ... ... ..... ...... .. . .. ... ... . .. ... ... .... .. . ... . ... . .. . ...... .. . . .. . . .. . 1-1
1.2 Purpose ..... ... .. ... ..... ... .. . ... .. . .. ...... ... .. ... ....... ... .. . ... . .. . . .... .. .... . ...... .. . . .. 1-1
1.3 Scope of Work ........................................................ ,....................... 1-1
1.4 Site Description .............................................................................. 1-2
2.0 METIIODOLOGY ................................................................................... 2-1
2.1 Equipment and Principles ................... ; ....... ,. ...................... :........... 2-1
2.1.1 Time-Domain Electromagnetics ......................................... 2-1
2.1.2 Ground Penetrating Radar................................................... 2-3
2.2 Field Procedures............................................................................. 2-4
2.2.1 Establishment of Transects ................................................. 2-4
2.2.2 Electromagnetic Survey...................................................... 2-5
2.2.3 Ground Penetrating Radar Survey...................................... 2-5
3.0 RESULTS
3.1
3.2
IDEM Survey .................................................................... .
Ground Penetrating Radar Survey ..................................... .
3-1
3-1
3-2
I 4.0 LIMITATIONS........................................................................................ 4-1
I 5.0 REFERENCES......................................................................................... 5-1
I
I
I
I
I
m
I
m
H
I
I
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
1 Project Site Location Map
2 Site Plan Showing Approximate Location of IDEM Survey Stations, GPR.
Transect Lines, Contour of IDEM Response and Areas of
Suspected Buried Debris
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix
1 GPR Transect A-A' Showing Area of Suspected Buried Debris
II
m
I
0
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A surface geophysical investigation was performed at the GE/Shepard Farm
Site near the General Electric Lighting Systems facility in East Flat Rock, North
Carolina. The survey was performed to locate potential buried 55-gallon drums or
drum fragments. TDEM and GPR methods were utilized.
The data show that intact 55-gallon drums were not present and that the
subsurface debris is less than I to 2 feet in diameter. Five test pits were performed
at the site in order to characterize subsurface conditions in the areas where
anomalous geophysical responses were observed. Test pit results indicated the
presence of metallic debris consisting of drum fragments and assorted industrial
waste within the geophysical anomaly areas.
The original site area, as delineated in the scope of work, was approximately
0.5 acres. Based on initial findings from the investigation, the survey area was
expanded to the east to create a total site area of approximately I acre. Both
suspected metallic and non-metallic debris were identified within the boundaries
of the project site. Based on the results of the geophysical investigation, the
lateral boundaries of buried metallic debris appears to have been established. The
, boundary of suspected non-metallic debris is suspected to extend beyond the
. eastern project boundary.
Jll
t·
I
I
R
D
I
I
I
B
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
The project site is referred to as the GE/Shepard Farm Site. The site located
near the General Electric Lighting Systems plant in East Flat· Rock, North
Carolina. HSI GeoTrans, Inc. (HSI GeoTrans) is conducting an environmental site
assessment at the site. The geophysical investigation was performed in order to
help determine the presence and lateral extent of buried 55-gallon drums or drum
fragments at the site.
1.2 Purpose
The purpose of this investigation is to utilize time-domain electromagnetics
(IDEM) and ground penetrating radar (GPR) surveying techniques to determine
the presence and map the lateral boundaries of either intact 55-gallon drums or
drum fragments at the project site.
1.3 Scope of Work
SDII implemented the following scope of work to complete this
investigation:
•
•
Mobilize to the project site and perform a IDEM investigation
throughout accessible areas of project site as specified by HSI
Geo Trans personnel;
Analyze the IDEM data in the field and expand the area of
investigation, as necessary, to delineate the lateral boundaries of
buried metallic debris;
Perform a GPR investigation throughout accessible areas of project
site in order to characterize size, shape and depth of burial of objects
within and outside of the areas of elevated IDEM response;
1-1
m
g
u
D
I
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.4
• Demobilize from the site, perform final analysis of IDEM and GPR
data, and prepare a final report that summarizes the IDEM and GPR
methodology, field procedures and results of the investigation.
Site Description
The project site is near the General Electric Lighting Systems Plant in East
Flat Rock, North Carolina (Figure 1). The project site was within a modular home
community. After initial review of the collected IDEM data, the survey area was
extended to the east to create a total survey area of approximately 1 acre (Figure
2). The survey area was covered by either landscaped grass or low-lying native
vegetation. Metal-sided homes were present along the southern portion of the
survey area. The landscaped areas adjacent to the homes or their adjoining
structures (sheds) were not accessible to the geophysical investigation.
The project site was bounded by Spring Haven Drive to the south, a creek to
the west and dense, uncleared vegetation to the north. Near surface soils at the site
consisted of silty sand. Five test pits were dug by HSI Geo Trans personnel to help
confirm the preliminary field interpretation of the geophysical data. Results from
the test pits are presented in Table 1.
1-2
L
m
I
I
I
n
m
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Test Pit Depth to Top
Designation Of Debris (ft
bls)2'
1 1.5
'
2 0.5
3 2.0
4 1.0
5 1.5
TABLE 1
Summary of Results from Test Pits
Dug at the GE/Shepard Farm Site11
Depth to Summary of Test Pit Results
Bottom
Of Debris (ft
bis)
>3.5 Rusted drum fragments, gray paint
material, black roofing tar and scrap
metal. The excavation was stopped at 3.5
ft to protect the structural integrity of the
home
5.1 Rusted drum fragments, gray paint
material, glass, ceramic insulators and
wire.
6.5 Rusted drum fragments, gray paint
material, ceramic insulators, scrap metal
and Diass
5.0 Rusted drum fragments, gray paint
material and scrap metal
5.0 Rusted drum fragments including a
partially intact paint drum, gray paint
material, scrap metal and drum lid. The
highest concentration of metal was found
in this test oit.
1/ Based on test pit results provided by HSI Geotrans
2/ ft bis means feet below land surface
1-3
•
m
I
I
I
I
D
u
m
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.0 METHODOLOGY
2.1 Equipment and Principles
A combination of two geophysical methods were used for the investigation
at the site. The two selected methods are complimentary, in that, IDEM can
relatively rapidly assess the lateral extent of buried metallic objects. GPR, which
is slower, can then be used to evaluate the depth, size, shape and geometry of the
buried metallic objects. By using a combination of these techniques, both the
metallic/non-metallic nature and the size, shape, geometry and depth of burial of
the debris can be determined.
2.1.1 Time Domain Electromagnetics
The IDEM method . simply evaluates the magnitude of an induced
electromagnetic (EM) field from a primary EM field. However, rather than
evaluating the magnitude of a secondary EM field instantaneously after the shut-
off of the primary EM field as with other EM methods, the IDEM method
evaluates the magnitude of the secondary EM field a specific period of time after
the primary EM field is shut off .
During a IDEM sounding, an electrical current is caused to flow in a
horizontal transmitter coil located near the ground. The current is maintained until
a static magnetic field is established, the current is then rapidly terminated. This
produces a strong electromotive force which induces eddy (secondary) currents in
' the ground. The eddy currents are a result of induction caused by subsurface
conductors. Immediately after the transmitter .is shut off, the maximum density of
the eddy currents is at the surface, beneath the transmitter coil. With increasing
, time, the strength of the eddy currents diminishes and the position of the
maximum eddy current density diffuses downward and outward into the
subsurface. The eddy currents induce a voltage in the receiver coil which is
proportional to eddy current strength. Monitoring the voltage output from the
receiver coil with increasing time is equivalent to measuring conductivity as a
function of depth. Measurements are made with the transmitter off.
2-1
I
g
I
I
I
R
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
B
I
I
I
I
When using the EM-61, IDEM soundings are obtained by a set of two
independent coils vertically separated by approximately 2 feet (ft). Each coil acts
as an independent transmitter and receiver. The EM-61 generates EM pulses 150
times per second and measures the magnitude of the eddy currents (in milli-volts
[mV]) in between pulses.
Field measurements consist of the output voltage from the receiver coil
registered at a particular time. After each pulse, secondary EM fields are induced
briefly in moderately conductive earth, and for a longer time in the metallic
targets. Between each pulse, the EM-61 waits until the response from the
conductive earth dissipates, and then measures the prolonged buried metal
response. By sensing only the response from the buried metal, the EM-61 is
capable of detecting targets in highly conductive environments. In addition, the
EM-61 senses the response from the transmitter coil at early (channel 2) and late
( channel 1) times. By comparing the instrument response at the two times, it is
possible to estimate both the depth of the buried item (through a forward modeling
processes) and to minimize the affect of metal-bearing cultural interference
sources such as surface debris, buildings, fences, etc.
The EM-61 survey is performed along predetermined transect lines. The
transect lines are typically uni-directional and orientated parallel to the long axis
of the site. The spacing between transects ranges from 2 to 5 ft, depending upon
the desired size of the target to be identified.
The EM-61 instrument response is recorded on field-portable computerized
data logger (Polycorder Digital Data Recorder). Prior to the commencement of the
survey transect line designation, orientation, and length are entered. Data is
, collected either automatically, at a preset time or distance interval, or at the
discretion of the field operator. Both channel 1 and channel 2 values are recorded.
Two sensitivity ranges (high and low) are available for data collections. A low
sensitivity range is used when interference sources such as above-ground debris
are present. Otherwise, a high sensitivity range is used.
2-2
I
I
D
I
D
I
I
•
I
I
I
I
g
I
I
I
I
I
2.1.2 Ground Penetrating Radar
GPR is an electromagnetic geophysical method that detects interfaces
between subsurface materials with differing dielectric constants. The GPR system
consists of an antenna which houses the transmitter and receiver; a profiling
recorder which processes the received signal and produces a graphic display of the
data; and a video display unit which processes and transmits the output signal to a
color video display.
The transmitter. radiates repetitive short-duration electromagnetic (EM)
waves into the earth from an antenna moving across the ground surface. These
radar waves are reflected back to the receiver by interfaces between materials with
different dielectric constants. The intensity of the reflected signal is a function of
the contrast in the dielectric constant between the materials, the conductivity of the
material which the wave is traveling through, and the frequency of the signal.
Subsurface features which commonly cause such reflections are: 1) natural
geologic conditions such as changes in sediment composition, bedding and
cementation horizons, voids, and water content; or 2) unnatural changes to the
subsurface such as disturbed soils, soil backfill, buried debris, tanks, pipelines, and
utilities. The profiling recorder processes the signal from the receiver and
produces a continuous cross section of the subsurface interface reflections,
referred to as reflectors.
GPR data is output from the recorder as strip charts which present the data as
a continuous profile. A GPR survey is conducted along transects which are
measured paths along which the GPR antenna is moved. During a survey, marks
are placed in the data by the operator at designated points along the GPR transects.
These marks allow for a correlation between the GPR data on the strip charts and
the position of the GPR antenna on the ground.
Features such as buried 55-gallon drums are characterized by: (1) a relatively
high-amplitude reflection of the GPR signal; (2) a parabolic shape to the GPR
signal when the GPR antenna is crossed in a perpendicular direction to the short
axis of the feature, and (3) a horizontally-orientated GPR reflector of limited
2-3
'---------~-~-
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
length which occurs when the GPR antenna is pulled along the longitudinal axis of
the suspected drum.
Subsurface features such as buried debris are characterized by: (1) the
occurrence of multiple high-amplitude GPR reflectors at varying depths with
varying diameters and (2) a discontinuity in subsurface reflectors suspected to' be
associated with soil horizons. Items of buried debris are usually distinguished
from features such as buried drums or underground utilities by the non-occurrence
of the GPR reflector associated with the buried object on successive parallel
transect lines. The non-occurrence of the GPR reflector typically indicates that the
buried object is not laterally extensive.
Depth of investigation of the GPR signal is highly site-specific and is limited
by signal attenuation (absorption) in the subsurface materials. Signal attenuation is
dependent upon the electrical conductivity of the subsurface materials. Signal
attenuation is greatest in materials with relatively high electrical conductivities
such as clays and brackish groundwater, and lowest in relatively low-conductivity
materials such as· dry sand or rock.
Depth of investigation is also dependent on the antenna transm1ttmg
frequency. Depth of investigation generally increases as transmitting frequency
decreases; however, the ability to resolve smaller subsurface features is
diminished as frequency is decreased.
2.2 Field Procedures
2.2.1 Establishment of Transects
The geophysical investigation was conducted over a two-day period on
August 17 and 18, 1998. The investigation was conducted by Mr. Michael J.
Wightman, P.G. (Senior Geophysicist) and Mr. Chris Taylor (Geophysicist).
Survey transect lines were established by SDII personnel prior to the
commencement of the geophysical survey (Figures 2 and 5). Transects were
established on IO-foot centers using a fiberglass measuring tape and marked on
the ground surface using survey pin flags. The transect line designations were
written on the wire pin flags. Based on the results from the initial IDEM survey,
2-4
•
I
I
I
I
n
D
I
m
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
the survey area was expanded to the east in order to define the lateral boundaries
of the suspected buried metallic debris.
2.2.2 TDEM Survey
The TDEM survey was performed by the field geophysicist towing the
TDEM equipment along the transect lines throughout the project site. EM data
was collected using a Polycorder Digital Data Recorder. Data was collected on 5-
foot centers along transect lines with a 5-foot separation.
2.2.3 GPR Survey
A Geophysical Survey Systems, Inc. (GSSI) SIR System-3 GPR recorder
system was utilized during the investigation. Initial GPR survey tests determined
that a 50 nano-second (ns) time range and a 500 mega-Hertz (MHz) antenna
provided the optimum depth of investigation and resolution of the data to
determine the presence and maximum depth of buried debris.
The GPR investigation was performed by a technician pulling the antenna
along the transect lines. The GPR survey was conducted in the areas where an
elevated TDEM response were observed using a 10-foot by 10-foot grid. GPR
transects were also performed outside the TDEM anomaly areas in order to
determine if buried non-metallic debris was present outside of the anomaly areas.
The GPR data was produced during the investigation on a continuous strip chart
printer.
2-5
I
I
I
•
I
I
D
I
u
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.0RESULTS
3.1 IDEM Survey Results
An area of elevated IDEM response was observed in the central portion of
the project site (Figure 2). This area of elevated EM response is suspected to be
associated with the presence of buried metallic objects. Buried metallic objects
were considered to be present when the IDEM contoured lines formed a series of
concentric rings with a minimum value of 100 milli-volts. Buried metallic objects
are suspected to be in the greatest concentration and/or nearest the ground surface
in the areas where the EM response is the highest. For areas within 5 ft of the on-
site metallic structures, it is not possible to determine whether the elevated EM
response is caused only by the metallic structure only or by a combination of the
metallic structure and buried metallic objects.
The 5 test pits dug by HSI Geotrans were performed within the IDEM
anomaly areas. Buried metallic debris was present within each of the pits (Figure
2).
3.2 GPR Survey Results
The results of the GPR investigation indicated that the depth of investigation
across the project site ranged from 5 to 7 ft bls. The depth of investigation is
based upon the generally accepted two-way travel time for silty sand ( 4 to 5 ns per
foot; GSSI, 1987). Objects buried deeper than 5 to 7 ft bls would not have been
identified by the GPR survey. The depth of investigation was controlled by
underlying soil conditions.
Results from the GPR survey indicated the presence of suspected buried
debris within a large portion of the project site. Depth of suspected buried debris
ranged from near land surface to 5 to 7 ft bis.
Areas with suspected of buried debris were characterized by the presence of
10 or more GPR point reflectors, where each GPR point reflector is associated
with a single suspected object, per 10 linear ft of GPR data. An example of GPR
data from transect A-A' (Figure 2) showing an example of an area with and
without buried debris is provided in Appendix 1.
3-1
I
m
g
I
u
H
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The apparent diameters of the GPR anomalies inthe area of suspected buried
debris suggest the presence of small-diameter buried objects with diameters less
than 2 ft. Based on the apparent diameters of the buried objects, it does not appear
that intact 55-gallon drums are present within the surveyed area. Estimates of the
diameter of buried metallic objects, determined using GPR, correlate well to the
test pit results where no intact 55-gallon drums were identified.
3-2
I
m
g
I
g
H
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4.0 LIMITATIONS
The geophysical assessment of this site is based on our professional
evaluation of the geophysical data gathered and our experience with the properties
of time-domain electromagnetics and ground penetrating radar in the geological
setting of the site area. The geophysical evaluation rendered in this report meets
the standards of care of our profession. No other warranty or representation, either
. expressed or implied, is included or intended.
4-1
m
I
I
I
I
a
D
g
I
I
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5.0 REFERENCES
Operations Manual Subsurface Interface Radar Sir System-3, Geophysical Survey
Systems, Inc., 1987.
5-1
-
I
I
I
I
D
R
I
I FIGURES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
g
I
I
I
D
g
g
u
I
D
D
D
D
D
D
R
I
0 •
,' j
/
N
NOTTO SCALE
HSI
..
Jdldm• North Caidina Fa111""nd' . .
,Boodaden f¥Ge
lat Rod< F 01tst
WtJ;mJ.,rkt,
Flat Rock
Ealdbaig Hane HK
Side
Eut Flat Rock
!,Irie°"' ' V
YJn; M,omWn )530 ·
APPROXIMATE
PROJECT SITE
LOCATION~
NORTH
CAROLINA
·,,
PROJECT SITE LOCATION MAP
GE/SHEPARD FARM SITE
EAST FLAT ROCK, NORTH CAROLINA
GEOTRANS, INC.
NORCROSS, GEORGIA DESIGNED BY: MJW PROJECT NO.: 1010847
LOC
08/19/98
CHECKED BY: MJW' DRAWING NO.:
DRAWN BY: · JMW DATE·
FIGURE
1
250.
I'' 200.
'f'. I! A
+ + + + • ,a-+
+ + + + +'--i+ +
I I
+ + 4 + + + + +
150. + + + + + + + + + +
+ + + +@+ + + + +
+ + + + + + + + + +
+ + + + + + + + + + +
+ :~ + + + + + +
+ + + + + + +
+ + + + + + + + + +
I +
+ +(;>+ + + + + + +
+ + + + + + + + +
! 1-
!
+ + + + + + +
+ + + + + + +
+ + + + + + +
+ + + + + + + + + +
I + + + + + + + + + +
+ + + + + + + + + +
+ + + + + + + + + +
+ + + + + + + + + +
50.
I + +
••
+ + + +
~Y~+-'-~Y~-+-'--t-~~'-t++++
+ + + +
~Y'-4~.,,_~4tc-"-+-'--t-±4i~'-t+++++
+ + -+--+ +
+
+ +
+ +
+ +
+
+
+
+ +
+
+ + +
OWER POLE
+
0 40'
EXPLANATION
TEST PIT LOCATIONS (J:lSI GEOTRANS) WITH DESIGNATION
TDEM SURVEY STATION
GPR TRANSECT LINES
A A' ---GPR TRANSECT USED IN APPENDIX
HSI
GEOTRANS, INC_
NORCROSS, GEORGIA
APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY OF SUSPECTED BURIED DEBRIS (BASED
ON GPR RES UL TS)
CONTOUR OF TDEM RESPONSE (IN MILLI-VOLTS)
SDII
SUBSURFACE
DETECTION
INVESTIGATIONS
INCORPORATED
SITE MAP SHOWING APPROXIMATE LOCATION ·oF TDEM
SURVEY STATIONS, GPR TRANSECT LINES, CONTOUR OF
TDEM RESPONSE AND AREAS OF SUSPECTED BURIED DEBRIS
GE/SHEPARD FARM SITE -. EAST FLAT ROCK, NORTH CAROLINA
Designed By: MJW Proj. No-1010847 Fig. No.
Checked By: MJW DWG 0847-2
Drawn By: JMW Date: 08/28/98 2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I APPENDICES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--liiil -

-

-

-

-

-
.. .. -

-

-

-

-

-
.. ..
A
2
3
4
5
6
7
Appendix 1
GPR Transect A -A' Showing Area
of Suspected Buried Debris
GE/Shepard Fann Site
~ I
I
I I
I I I ,, ~· . . I I . ! I\ -I . .
AREA'OF·S . . TED BURIED DEB.
I I I • • • •
A'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I APPENDIXB
I Laboratory Reports
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
. RUG. 3.1998-3:36PM
Pace Analytical
August 03, 1998
Mr, Tedd Hagenneyer
HSI Geotrans
1080 Holcomb Br. Rd. Bldg.
Suite 190
Roswell, GA 30076
PACE ANALYTICAL
RE: Pace Project Number: 92735
Cl 1ent Project IO: G£1.S/N048-903
Dear Hr, Hagermeyer:
1,v • ..,1... ,· • ._ . ...,
' ' P~ Analytical Services, Inc.
98001\<lncey Avenue, Sutte 100 I Hunter.iville, NC 2B078
Tel: 704•875-9092
Fax: 704-B75·9091
i
I
!
I
Enclosed are the results of analyses for Sllll1)1e(sl received by the laboratory on July 30, 1998. If you have any
questions concerning th1S report, please feel free to contact me. · I
Sincerely,
Project Hanager
Enclosures
Labonrtory Certification IPs
NC Waslewater 12
NC Drinking Water 37706
SC 99006
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This N!port ohall not be repr<>duced, except in full.
without the written consent cf Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
'
I I
I
I I
I
Laboratory certlftcation !Ds
KY Drinking Water 90090
TN UST Ust
VA Drinking Waler 213
I
I
I
I HSI Geotrans
1 1080 Holcomb Br. Rd. Bldg,
Su1te 190
Roswell. GA 30076
I Attn: Hr. Todd Hagermeyer
Phone:
PACE ANALYTICAL 1,v .... , -, ,-, _, . .:.
PaJ Analytical Seivlces, Inc.
9800 Kincey Avenue, Suite 100
Huntersville, NC 2B078
i
Tel'. 704•875-9092
Fax, 704-875-9091
CATE: / 0B/03/98
PAGE: I 1
I
Pace Project Number: 92735 /
Client Project IO: GELS/N048·903
I
I
I
I
I
I
Solid results are reported on a dry weight basis
I
g
I
Pace S~le No:
Cl1ent Sample ID:
9246307
Iii 107·01
Parameters Results Units
····························--------·-····· ----·····
GC/HS •• VOA
Date Collected: 07/28/9B
Date Received: 07/30/98
PR!. Analyzed Analyst CASI/
. . . . . . . . -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -....... .
Hatrixr Water
Footnotes
I .. -~1-•••..
I
GC/HS voes by 8260 Method: EPA 8260 Prep Method: EPA 8260
Vinyl Chloride
Methylene Chloride
trans•1,2-D1ch1oroethene
l.l-D1chloroethane
cis•l,2·Dichloroethene
Chloroform
l,l.l•Trichloroethane
l,2•01chloroethane
Benlene
Trichloroethene
l.2·D1chloroprcpane
Bromod1chlor011ethane
Tetrachloroett,ene
l.1.2,2-Tetrachloroethane
D1bromofluoro110thane (Sl
l,2·Dichloroethane•d4 (Sl
Toluene-dB CS)
4·8n>mof1 uorobeniene (Sl
LeboUrtPN Cm:tificatlon IPA
NC Wastewa1er 12
NC O~nklng Warer 37706
SC 9ll00B
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
Nl
Nl
ND
NO
ND
ND
97
102
104
99
ug/L 10 07/30/98 JAC 75·01-4
ug/L 5 07/30/98 JAi', 75·09-2
ug/L 5 07/30/98 JAC 156·60·5
ug/L 5 07/30/98 JAC 75.34.3
ug/L 5 07/30/98 JAC 156-59•2
ug/L 5 07/30/98 J/ll 67·66-3
ug/L 5 07/30/98 JAC 71-55-6
ug/L 5 07/30/98 JAC 107-06-2
ug/L 5 07/30/98 JAi', 71·43·2
ug/L 5 07/30/98 J/ll 79•01·6
ug/L 5 07/30/98 JAC 7B·B7•5
ug/L 5 07/30/9B JAC 75.27.4
ug/L 5 07/30/9B JAC 127•18•4
ug/L 5 07/30/98 JAC 79.34.5
X 07/30/9B JAC 1868·53-7
% 07/30/98 JAC 17060-07-0
% 07/30/98 JAC 2037·26·5
% 07/30/98 JAC 460-00·4
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
Thb repo~ shall not be raproduc:<1d, except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytlcal Services, Inc.
Laborstor:v Certification tDs
KY Drinking Wa1er 90090
TN UST List
VA Drinking Water 21 J
I
I
I
I
I Pace Saq,le No:
Client Sample IO:
9246315
"TRIP BLANK
Parameters I . --. ----. ----. -----... -. -. ---....
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
I
I
I
I
I
GC/115 • • VOA
GC/HS voes by 8260
Vinyl Chloride
Hetl\Ylene Chloride
trans-l.2-D1chloroethene
l,l-D1chloroethane
cis·l,2-0ichloroetnene
Chlorofonn
l, l,l• Trichloroethane
l,2-0ichloroethane
Benzene
Trichloroethene
1,2-Dichloropropane
Brornodichlol"Ollll!thane
Tetrachloroethern,
l,l,2.2-Tetrachloroethone
Dibro1110f1uoromethane (S)
l.2-Dichloroethane-d4 (S)
Toluene-dB (S)
4,8romof1uorobenzene (Sl
LaborAlPD' cerunmon 10,
NC Wastewater 12
NC 011nldng Water 3TTOO
SC 99006
PACE ANALYTICAL I h-'•--. >-. ' •-, -
PaJ Analytlcal Services, Inc.
9600 Kincey Avenue, Suite 100
Huntersville, NC 28076
Tel: 704·675-9092
Fax: 704·675-9091
DA"!E: 08/03/98
PAr.E: 2
Pace Project Humber: 92735
Client Project ID: GELS/N048-903
Date Collected: 07 /28/98 HatriJ Woter
Date Received: 07 /30/98 f
Results Un1ts PRL Analyzed Analyst CAS# Foot~tes
NO
Nil
NO
NO
Nil
NI)
ND
NO
Nil
NO
Ml
Ml
Ml
NI)
98
104
104
99
Method: EPA 8260 Prep Method: EPA 8260
ug/L 10 07 /30/98 Jf,(, 75-01-4
ug/L 5 07/30/98 JAC 75-09·2
Ug/L 5 07/30/98 Jf,(, 156·6"-5
ug/L 5 07/30/98 .lAC 75-34·3
ug/L s 07/30198 .lAC 156-59-2
ug/L 5 07/30/98 JAC 67-66·3
ug/l 5 07/30/98 JAC n-ss-G
ug/L 5 07/30198 Jf,(, 107-06-2
ug/L 5 07/30/98 JAC 71-43-2
ug/L s 07/30198 Jf,f, 79-01·6
ug/L 5 07130/98 JAC 78-87-5
ug/L 5 07/30198 Jf,f, 75-27·4
uglL 5 07/30/98 JAC 127-18-4
ug/L 5 07130/98 JAC 79.34.5
% 07130/98 JAC 1868-53-7
% 07/30/98 JAC 17060-07-0
% 07/30/98 JAC 2037-26-5
% 07130/98 JAC 460-00-4
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
Tnls repo" shall not be reproduced, except In full,
wfthout the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
Laboratory Ccdfficatlon IP·
KY Drinking Waler 9009<
TN UST Ust
\IA Drinking Water 21 s
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
I
PACE RNRLYTlCHL
pace Analytical
Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
9800 Klncsy Avenue, Suite 100
Hunlersl/llle, NC 28078
Tel: 704·875-9092
Fax: 704·875·9091
Pace Sa~le Ne:
C1ient Semple 10:
924632.3
SF•VOC-107•1
Date Collected:
Date Received:
DATE: 08/03/98
PAGE: 3
Pace Project NU1!\ller: 92735
C11ent Project IO: GELS/N048·903
07/28/98
07/30/98
Hetrixi So11
Parameters Results Units PRL Analyzed Analyst C>.S/1 Footnotes
\jet Chemistry
Percent Moisture
Percent Moisture
GC/HS • • VOA
GC/HS voes by 8260 , 1 cw 1 eve 1
Vinyl Chlor1de
Meth,Y'lene Chloride
trans-l,2-Dichlorcethene
l,l•Dichlorcethane
cis-1,2-0ichlcroett,ene
Chloroform
1,l,l-Trichloroethane
l.2·0ichloroethane
Benzene
Trichloroethene
l.2·D1chlorcpropane
Brcmcdichloromethane
Tetrachlcroethene
l,1,2.2-letrachloroethane
Oibromofluorcmethane (S)
1,2-Dich1oroethane-d4 (Sl
Toluene-dB (S)
4-Bromofluorobenzene (Sl
LaboratQN Cenlflcetion IDs
NC Wastew81er 12
NC Dnnk1ng Water 37706
SC 99006
Method: t HOisture
27.4 %
Prep Method:
07 /30/98 ADl1
ND
ND
NO
NO
ND
22
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
101
108
9B
82
Method: EPA 8260 Prep Hethod: EPA B260
ug/kg 14 07/30/98 VFT 75-01·4
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 75-09-2
ug/l<g 6.9 07/30/98 VFT · 156-60-5
ug/l<g 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 75.34.3
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 156-59-2
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 67-66·3
ug/kg 6,9 07/30/98 VFT 71-55•6
ug/1:g 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 107-06-2
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 71-43-2
ug/kg 6,9 07/30/98 VFT 79-01·6
ug/kg 6,9 07/30/98 VFT 78-87·5
ug/l<g 6.9 07/30/9B VFT 75-27-4
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 127-18-4
ug/kg 6,9 07/30/98 VFT 79.34.5
% 07/30/9B VFT 1868-53·7
% 07/30/98 VFT 17060-07-0
t 07/30/98 VFT 2037-26·5
t 07/30/98 VFT 460-00-4
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
Thi$ repo~ shall not be reproduced, except in full,
without the written con,ent o! Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
1
LabQratorv Ceomcation 10--
KY Drinking Waler 9009C
TN UST List
VA Drinking Weter 213
I
I
I
I
RUG. 3.1998-3:37PM PHCt... Hl'iHL T I .l. \..HL p~J; ~n:l~cal Se~~: Inc.
9800 Kincey Avenue, Suite 100
Huntersville, NC 2B07B
Tel: 704-B75·9092
Fax: 704·875-9091
DATE: 0B/03/9B
PAGE:/ 4
Pace Project NUl!lber: 92735
Client Project ID: G£LS/N04 -903
Pace Sample No: I Cl1ent Sample ID:
9246331
SF-VOC-107·2
Date Co 11 ected: 07 /28/9B Matrix Soil
Date Received: 07/30/98
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
D
u
Par,~eters Results Units Pill Analyzed Analyst CASI Foot otes
............. -......... -. . . . . . . . . . .. -..... -... -. . . . . . ... -. . . . . . . . . . -..... -. . . . . . . . ... .
Wet Chel11stry
Percent Moisture Method: % Moisture Prep Hethod:
Percent Moisture 24.6 % 07/31/9B ADM
GC/HS • • VOA
GC/MS voes by 8260, low level
Vinyl Chloride
HethYlene Chloride
trans-1,2-D,chloroethene
1.1-0ichloroethane
cis-1.2-Dichloroethene
ChlorofOMll
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
1,2-Dichloroethane
Benzene
Tr1chloroethene
1,2-Dichloropropane
BromodichloNlllethane
Tetrachloroethene
1,1.2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Dibromofluoromethane (SJ
l,2-Dichloroethane•d4 CS)
Toluene-dB CS)
4-Bromofluorobenzene CS)
L DboratoN Codification 109
NC Wastewater 12
NC Drinking Water 3noe
SC 99006
ND
8,3
ND
Nil
Ml
19
Ml
N1l
ND
ND
NO
NO
ND
NP
97
107
97
87
Method: EPA 8260 Prep Hethod: EPA 8260 i
ug/kg 13 D7/30/9B VFT 75·01·4
ug/kg 6.6 07/30/98 VFT 75-09·2
ug/kg 6.6 07/30/98 VFT 156-60-5
ug/kg 6.6 07/30/9B VFT 75.34.3
u,g/kg 6.6 07/30/9B VFT 156-59-2
ug/kg 6.6 D7/30/9B VFT 67-66-3
ug/kg 6.6 07/30/98 VFT 71-55-6
ug/kg 6.6 07/30/98 VFT 107-D6•2
UQ/kg 6.6 D7/3D/98 VFT 71·43-2
ug/kg 6.6 07/30/9B VFT 79·01·6
ug/kg 6,6 07/30/98 VFT 78-87-5
ug/kg 6,6 07/30/98 VFT 75-27-4
ug/kg 6.6 07/30/98 VFT 127-18-4
ug/kg 6.6 07/30/9B VFT 79.34.5
% 07/30/9B VFT 186B·53· 7
% D7/30/9B VFT 17D60-07-D
% 07/30/9B VFT 2037·26-5
% D7/30/9B VFT 460-00·4
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall nol be reproduced, except In full,
wit1'0ut the Written consent of Pace Analytlcal Service111 Inc.
1
1
La.bonrtmY Ceaiffearloo /Dt
KY Drtnking Water 9009t
TN USTUsl
VA Drtnking Water 213
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RUG. 3.1998-3:37PM
PAFWimll FOOTNOTES
Not Detected
Not calculable
Pace Reporting Limit
Surrogate
PRCE RNRLYTICRL
P e Analyt1ca1 Services, Inc.
980 Kincey Avenue, Suite 100
Huntersville, NC 28078
Tel: 704-875·9092
Fax: [phone]
DATE 08/03/9B
PAGE 5
Pace Project'Number: 92735
Cl 1ent Project ID: GELSIN04 -903
ND
NC
PRL
(S)
[lJ The analyte was found in an associeted blank. as well as in the sample.
Laborn:IP'Y Certttieet!PO IP,
ND Wastewater 12
NC Drinking Water 37706
SC 99006
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced, except In full,
without the written consent of Pace Ana!ytical Servicee, Inc.
Laboreton: Ceattlaation JDs
KY Ortnklng Water 90090
TN USTWsl
VA Drinking Waler 213
I
I
I
I
I
Pace Analytical
August 06, 1998
Mr. Todd Hagermeyer
HSI Geotrans
1080 Holcomb Br. Rd. Bldg.
Suite 190
Roswell. GA 30076
RE: Pace Project Number: 92851
Client Project ID: GELS/N048-903
Dear Mr. Hagenneyer:
. Pace Analy1ical Services, Inc.
9800 Kincey Avenue, Suite 100
Huntersville, NC 28078
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
u
I
Enclosed are the results of analyses for sample(s) received by the laboratory on July 30. 1998. If you have any
questions concerning this report. please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely.
Kelly Wallace ·
Project Manager n Enclosures
I
I
I
I
I Laboratory Certification IDs
NC Wastewater 12
I NC Drinking Water 37706
SC 99006
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
Laboratory Certification IDs
KY Drinking Water 90090
TN UST List
VA Drinking Water 213
I
I
I
Pace Analytical
I HSI Geotrans
1080 Holcomb Br. Rd. Bldg.
Suite 190 I Roswe 11 • GA 30076
II Attn: Hr. Todd Hagermeyer II Phone:
USolid results are reported on a dry weight basis
Pace Sample No: 9254228
Client Sample IO: SF-VOC-107-1 II Parameters Results Units
................................. .......... . ..... -..
I Wet Chemistry
. Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
9800 Kincey Avenue, Suite 100
Huntersville, NC 28078
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
DATE: 08/06/98
PAGE: 1
Pace Project Number: 92851
Client Project ID: GELS/N048-903
Date Collected: 07/28/98 Matrix: Soil
Date Received: 07/30/98
PRL Analyzed Analyst CAS# Footnotes .......... ........ ..... . ......... . .. -... --.
g Percent Moisture Method: X Moisture Prep Method:
Percent Moisture 27.4 X 07/30/98 ADM
GC/MS ·· VOA
D GC/MS voes by 8260, low level Method: EPA 8260 Prep Method: EPA 8260
Oichlorodifluoromethane ND ug/kg 14 07/30/98 VFT 75-71-8
m
Ch 1 oromethane NO ug/kg 14 07/30/98 VFT 74-87•3
Vinyl Chloride NO ug/kg 14 07/30/98 VFT 75-01-4
Bromomethane ND ug/<g 14 07/30/98 VFT 74-83-9
Chloroethane ND ug/kg 14 07/30/98 VFT 75-00-3
I Trichlorofluoromethane ND ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 75-69-4
1.l•Dichloroethene ND ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 75-35-4
Methylene Chloride ND ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 75-09-2
I trans-1.2-0ichloroethene NO ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 156-60-5
1.1-0ichloroethane NO ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 75-34·3
cis-1,2-0ichloroethene NO ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 156-59-2
I 2.2-0ichloropropane NO ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 594-20-7
Chloroform 22 ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 67-66-3 1
Bromochloromethane NO ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 74-97-5
1.1.1-Trichloroethane NO ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 71-55-6
I 1.1-0ichloropropene NO ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 563-58-6
1.2-0ichloroethane NO ug/kg 6.9 07 /30/9B VFT 107-06-2
Carbon Tetrachloride NO ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 56-23-5
I Benzene NO ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 71-43-2
Trichloroethene ND ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 79-01-6
1.2-Dichloropropane ND ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 78-87-5
I LabQtalQD! Qe[lifii;aliQD IQs Labtm.llQ[J'. Ce!lifi1:,;a.tiQD !Os NC Wastewater 12 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS KY Drinking Water 90090
I NC Drinking Water 37706 TN UST List
SC 99006 This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, VA Drinking Water 213
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
I
I
I
Pace Analytical
. Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
9800 Kincey Avenue, Suite 100
Huntersville, NC 28078
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
DATE: 08/06/98
PAGE: 2
Pace Project Number: 92851
____________________________ c_1_ie_n_t_P_r_oJ-·e-ct_1_D,_GE_L_s_1N_o_48_·_9_o3 _______ _
Pace Sample No: 9254228 Date Collected: 07/28/98 Matrix: Soil II Client Sample ID: SF-VOC-107•1 Date Received: 07/30/98
IIParameters Results Units PRL Analyzed Analyst CAS#
I
I
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
Dibromomethane
Bromodichloromethane
Toluene
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
1.3-Dichloropropane
Dibromochloromethane
Tetrachloroethene
1.2-Dibromoethane
Ch l orobenzene
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane
Ethyl benzene
m&p-Xylene
ND
ND
120
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1200
4600
Styrene ND
a-Xylene (1,2-Dimethylbenzene) 2100
Bromoform ND
1.1.2.2-Tetrachloroethane ND
Isopropylbenzene (Cumenel 11
1.2.3-Trichloropropane ND
Bromobenzene ND
n-Propylbenzene 13
2-Chlorotoluene ND
4-Chlorotoluene ND
1.3.5-Trimethylbenzene 180
tert-Butylbenzene ND
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 310
sec-Butyl benzene ND
1.3-Dichlorobenzene ND
p-Isopropyltoluene 21
1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND
1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND
n-Butylbenzene 8.4
1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane ND
1.2.4-Trichlorobenzene ND
Naphthalene ND
Hexachlorobutadiene ND
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND
Dibromofluoromethane CS) 101
l,2-Dichloroethane·d4 (S) 108
Toluene-dB (Sl 98
4•Bromofluorobenzene (Sl 82
I Laboratory Certification 10s
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
ug/kg
X
X
X
X
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
690
6.9
340
6.9
6.9
6.9
6,9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
07/30/98 VFT
07 /30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
07 /30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
07 /30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
07 /30/98 VFT
07 /30/98 VFT
07 /30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
07 /30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
07 /30/98 VFT
07 /30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
.07 /30/98 VFT
07 /30/98 VFT
07 /30/98 VFT
07 /30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
07 /30/98 VFT
07 /30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
07/30/98 VFT
07 /30/98 VFT
07 /30/98 VFT
07 /30/98 VFT
74.95.3
75-27-4
108-88·3
79-00·5
142,28-9
124-48-1
127-18-4
106-93-4
108-90-7
630-20-6
100-41-4
7816-60-0
100-42-5
95-47-6
75-25-2
79.34.5
98-82-8
96·18-4
108-86-1
103-65-1
95-49-8
106-43-4
108-67-8
98-06-6
95-63-6
135-98-8
541-73-1
99-87-6
106-46-7
95-50-1
104-51-8
96-12-8
120-82-1
91-20-3
87-68-3
87-61-6
1868-53-7
17060-07-0
2037-26-5
460-00-4
NC Wastewater 1 2
I NC Drinking Water 37706
SC 99006
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, lnc.
Footnotes
2
2
Laboratory Certification IDs
KY Drinking Water 90090
TN UST List
VA Drinking Water 213
I
I
I
Pace Analytical
. Pace Analytical Services. Inc.
9800 Kincey Avenue. Suite 100
Huntersville, NC 28078
Tel: [phone]
fax: [phone]
DATE: 08/06/98
PAGE: 3
Pace Project Number: 92851
• ___________________________ c_1_ie_n_t_P_r_oJ_·e-ct_1_D,_GE_L_s_1N_o_48_-_90_3 _______ _
Pace Sample No: 9254251 Date Collected: 07/28/98 Matrix: Soil
Client Sample ID: SF-VOC-107-2 Date Received: 07/30/98
I Parameters Results Units PRL Analyzed Analyst CAS# Footnotes
································· ········-· ................... ········ ........................ .
I Wet Chemistry
I Percent Moisture
Percent Moisture
GC/MS --VOA n GC/MS VOCs by 8260. low level
Dichlorodifluoromethane
n Chloromethane
Vinyl Chloride
8romomethane
I Chloroethane
Trichlorofluoromethane
1.l•Dichloroethene
Methylene Chloride
I trans-1.2-Dichloroethene
1.1-Dichloroethane
cis-1.2-Dichloroethene
I 2.2-Dichloropropane
Chloroform
Bromochloromethane
1.1.1-Trichloroethane
H 1.1-Dichloropropene
1.2-Dichloroethane
Carbon Tetrachloride
u Benzene
Tri chl oroethene
1,2-Dichloropropane
I Dibromomethane
Bromodichloromethane
Toluene
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
I 1.3-Dichloropropane
Dibromochloromethane
Tetrachloroethene
I 1.2-Dibromoethane
Ch l orobenzene
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane
I LabocalOCl'. Ce!:lificaliQD IDs
NC Wastewater 12
I NC Drinking Water 37706
SC 99006
Method: t Moisture
27.2 %
Prep Method:
08/05/9B KHW
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
8.6
ND
ND
ND
ND
19
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
54
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Method: EPA 8260 Prep Method: EPA 8260
ug/kg 14 07/30/98 VFT 75-71-8
ug/kg 14 07/30/98 VFT 74-87-3
ug/kg 14 07/30/98 VFT 75-01-4
ug/kg 14 07/30/98 VFT 74-83-9
ug/kg 14 07/30/98 VFT 75-00-3
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 75-69-4
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 75.35.4
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 75-09-2
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 156-60·5
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 75.34.3
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 156-59·2
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 594-20-7
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 67-66-3
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 74.97.5
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 71-55-6
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 563-58-6
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 107-06·2
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 56-23-5
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 71-43-2
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 79-01-6
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 78-87-5
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 74.95.3
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 75-27-4
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 108·88·3
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 79-00-5
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 142-28-9
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 124-48-1
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 127-18-4
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 106-93-4
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 108·90·7
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 630-20-6
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
1
1
Laboratory Certification IDs
KY Drinking Water 90090
TN UST Ust
VA Drinking Water 213
I Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
9800 Kincey Avenue, Suite 100 eake Aaab£likal Huntersville, NC 28078
I Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
DATE: 08/06/98
I PAGE: 4
Pace Project Number: 92851
I Client Project JD: GELS/N048-903
9254251 Date Co 11 ected: 07128/98 Matrix: Soil Pace Sample No:
SF-VOC-107-2 Date Received: 07/30/98 Client Sample ID: I Parameters Results Units PRL Analyzed Analyst CASII Footnotes
I
0
0
I
I
g
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
. . --................... -. --. --... ·········-......... .......... ........ ..........
Ethyl benzene 600
m&p-Xylene 3000
Styrene ND
a-Xylene (1,2-Dimethylbenzene) 1400
8romoform
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
lsopropylbenzene (Cumene)
1,2,3-Trichloropropane
8romobenzene
n-Propylbenzene
2-Chlorotoluene
4-Chlorotoluene
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
tert-8utylbenzene
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
sec-8utylbenzene
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
p-Jsopropyltoluene
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
n-8utylbenzene
1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Naphthalene
Hexachlorobutadiene
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene
Dibromofluoromethane CS)
l,2-Dichloroethane-d4 CS)
Toluene-dB (S)
4-8romofluorobenzene CS)
Laboratory Certification IDs
NC Wastewater 1 2
NC Drinking Water 37706
SC 99006
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
8.1
ND
ND
140
ND
240
ND
ND
21
ND
ND
8.3
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
97
107
97
87
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 100-41-4
ug/kg 690 07/30/98 VFT 7816-60-0
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 100-42-5
ug/kg 340 07/30/98 VFT 95-47-6
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 75-25-2
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 79.34.5
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 98-82-8
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 96-18-4
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 108-86-1
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 103-65-1
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 95-49-8
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 106-43-4
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 108-67-8
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 98-06-6
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 95-63-6
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 135-98-8
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 541-73-1
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 99-87-6
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 106-46-7
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 95-50-1
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 104-51-8
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 96-12-8
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 120-82-1
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 91-20-3
ug/kg I 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 87-68-3
ug/kg 6.9 07/30/98 VFT 87-61-6
X 07/30/98 VFT 1868-53-7
X 07/30/98 VFT 17060-07-0
X 07/30/98 VFT 2037-26-5
X 07/30/98 VFT 460-00-4
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
..........
2
Laboratory Certification IDs
KY Drinking Water 90090
TN UST Ust
VA Drinking Water 213
I
I
I
Pace Analytical
Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
9800 Kincey Avenue, Suite 100
Huntersville, NC 28078
I PARAMITTR FOOTNOTES
II ND II NC
PRL II (S)
Not Detected
Not Calculable
Pace Reporting Limit
Surrogate
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
DATE: 08/06/98
PAGE: 5
Pace Project Number: 92851
Client Project IO: GELS/N048-903
■ [l]
[2]
The analyte was found in an associated blank, as well as in the sample.
I
g
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The response was over the calibration range for this compound. Reported results should be considered an estimate.
Laboratory Certification IDs
NC Wastewater 12
NC Drinking Water 37706
SC 99006
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
Laboratory Certification IDs
KY Drinking Water 90090
TN UST List
VA Drinking Water 213
I
I
I
Pace Analytical
.· Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
9800 Kincey Avenue, Suite 100
Huntersville. NC 28078
I HSI Geotrans
1080 Holcomb Br. Rd. Bldg,
Suite 190 I Roswe 11 , GA 30076
I Attn: Hr. Todd Hagenneyer
Phone:
QC Batch JD: 1300 n Analysis Method: t Hoi sture
Associated Pace Samples:
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Laboratory certification IDs
NC Wastewater 12
I NC Drinking Water 37706
SC 99006
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
QUALITY COtflROL OATA DATE: 08/06/98
PAGE: 6
Pace Project Number: 92851
Client Project IO: GELS/N048·903
QC Batch Method:
Analysis Description: Percent Moisture
9254228 9254251
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
Laboratory Certification IDs
KY Drinking Water 90090
TN UST List
VA Drinking Water 2~ 3
I
I
I
Pace Analytical
. Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
9800 Kincey Avenue, Suite 100
Huntersville, NC 28078
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
I HSI Geotrans
1080 Holcomb Br. Rd, Bldg.
Suite 190 I Roswe 11 , GA 30076
II Attn: Hr. Todd Hagermeyer
U Phone:
11 oc Batch ID: 1313
gAnalysis Method: EPA B260
Associated Pace Samples:
D METHOD BLANK: 9255167
Associated Pace Samples:
D
Parameter
1--·-················-·········
Dichlorodifluoromethane
Ch l oromethane I Vinyl Chloride
Bromomethane
Chloroethane I Tri chl orofl uoromethane
l.l·Dichloroethene
Methylene Chloride
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
11.1-Dichloroethane
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
2.2-Dichloropropane I Chloroform
Bromochloromethane
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
11.1-Dichloropropene
1,2-Dichloroethane
Carbon Tetrachloride
Benzene I Trichl oroethene
1.2-Dichloropropane
Di bromomethane I 8romodi chl oromethane
Toluene
I
I
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
Laboratory Certification IDs
NC Wastewater 12
NC Drinking Water 37706
SC 99006
QUALITY C0NlR0L DATA DATE: 08/06/98
PAGE: 7
Pace Project Number: 92851
Client Project ID: GELS/N048-903
QC Batch Method: EPA B260
Analysis Description: GC/HS voes by 8260, low level
9254228 9254251
9254228 9254251
Method
Blank
Units Result PRL Footnotes
.......... .......... ..........
ug/kg ND 10
ug/kg ND 10
ug/kg ND 10
ug/kg ND 10
ug/kg ND 10
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg 7.0 5 1
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg 16 5 1
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services. Inc.
Laboratory Certification IDs
KY Drinking Water 90090
TN UST List
VA Drinking Water 213
I
I
I
Pace Analytical
Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
9800 Kincey Avenue. Suite 100
Huntersville, NC 28078
I METHOD BLANK: 9255167
Associated Pace Samples:
I
I Parameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -. --.... -
1.3-Dichloropropane
1 Di bromoch 1 oromethane
Tetrachloroethene
1,2-Dibromoethane
Chlorobenzene
11,1,1.2-Tetrachloroethane
Ethyl benzene
m&p-Xylene
DStyrene
a-Xylene (1.2-Dimethylbenzene)
Bromoform
1.1.2,2-Tetrachloroethane
llsopropylbenzene (Cumene)
1,2,3-Trichloropropane
Bromobenzene m n-Propyl benzene
2-Chlorotoluene
4-Chlorotoluene
11.3, 5-Trimethylbenzene
tert-Butylbenzene
1.2.4-Trimethylbenzene
sec-Butyl benzene
.1.3-Dichlorobenzene
p-lsopropyltoluene
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
n-Butylbenzene
.1.2-Dichlorobenzene
1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane
11.2.4-Trichlorobenzene
Naphtha 1 ene
Hexachlorobutadiene
1,2.3-Trichlorobenzene
IDibromofluoromethane (S)
1.2-Dichloroethane-d4 CS)
Toluene-dB CS)
.4-Bromofluorobenzene (S)
I Laboratory Certification IDs
NC Wastewater 12
I NC Drinking Water 37706
SC 99006
QUALITY COITTROL DATA
9254228 9254251
Method
Blank
Units Result PRL
.......... ----------.... -.. -. -
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 10
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
ug/kg ND 5
X 95
X 102
X 90
X 102
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
DATE: 08/06/98
PAGE: 8
Pace Project Number: 92851
Client Project ID: GELS/N048-903
Footnotes
----------
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
Laboratory Certification IDs
KY Drinking Water 90090
TN UST List
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
VA Drinking Water 213
I
I eaca Aaal¥1ical
QUALITY CO~OL DATA
I
Pace Project Number:
I Client Project ID:
LABORATORY CO~OL SAMPLE: 9255175
m ~~~~~~:~~ ---------------------
Spike LCS Spike
Units Cone. Result t Rec Footnotes
·········· ................. ··········
Dichlorodifluoromethane ug/kg 50 89.00 178
gchloromethane ug/kg 50 71.00 142
Vinyl Chloride ug/kg 50 67.00 134
8romomethane ug/kg 50 67.00 134
DChloroethane ug/kg 50 67.00 134
Trichlorofluoromethane ug/kg 50 63.00 126
1.1-Dichloroethene ug/kg 50 64.00 128
Methylene Chloride ug/kg 50 55.00 110
Htrans-1.2-0ichloroethene ug/kg 50 59.00 118
1.1-Dichloroethane ug/kg 50 57.00 114
cis-1.2-Dichloroethene ug/kg 50 57.00 114 R 2 .2-Di chl oropropane ug/kg 50 61.00 122
Chloroform ug/kg 50 57.00 114
Bromochloromethane ug/kg 50 54.00 108
11.1.1-Trichloroethane ug/kg 50 55.00 110
1,1-Dichloropropene ug/kg 50 62.00 124
1.2-Dichloroethane ug/kg 50 56.00 112
Carbon Tetrachloride ug/kg 50 58.00 116 I Benzene ug/kg 50 56.00 112
Trichloroethene ug/kg 50 SB.OD 116
1.2-Dichloropropane ug/kg 50 57.00 114
I Di bromomethane ug/kg 50 58.00 116
Bromodichloromethane ug/kg 50 54.00 108
Toluene ug/kg 50 56.00 112
11.1.2-Trichloroethane ug/kg 50 54.00 108
1,3-Dichloropropane ug/kg 50 57.00 114
Dibromochloromethane ug/kg 50 55.00 110
Tetrachloroethene ug/kg 50 58.00 116
11.2-Dibromoethane ug/kg 50 60.00 120
Ch 1 orobenzene ug/kg 50 56.00 112
1.1.1.2-Tetrachloroethane ug/kg 50 55.00 110
1 Ethyl benzene ug/kg 50 55.00 110
m&p-Xylene ug/kg 100 109.0 109
Styrene ug/kg 50 59.00 118
· o-Xylene (1,2-Dimethylbenzene) ug/kg 50 54.00 108
IBromoform ug/kg 50 58.00 116
1.1.2.2-Tetrachloroethane ug/kg 50 56.00 112
Isopropylbenzene (Cumene) ug/kg 50 54.00 108
11.2.3-Trichloropropane ug/kg 50 57 .00 114
Bromobenzene ug/kg 50 56.00 112
n-Propylbenzene ug/kg 50 54.00 108
Laboratory Certification IDs 'I
I
NC Wastewater 12
NC Drinking Water 37706
SC 99006
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, lnc.
. Pace Analytical Services. Inc.
9800 Kincey Avenue, Suite 100
Huntersville. NC 28078
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
DATE: 08/06/98
PAGE: 9
92851
GELS/N048-903
Laboratory Certification IDs
KY Drinking Water 90090
TN UST List
VA Drinking Water 213
I
I
I
Pace Analytical
I LABORATORY COITTROL SAMPLE: 9255175
II Parameter Units
······························ ..........
2-Chlorotoluene ug/kg
• 4-Chlorotoluene ug/kg
1.3.5-Trimethylbenzene ug/kg
tert-Butylbenzene ug/kg n 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ug/kg
sec-Butyl benzene ug/kg
1.3-Dichlorobenzene ug/kg
p-Isopropyltoluene ug/kg I l.4•0ichlorobenzene ug/kg
1.2-Dichlorobenzene ug/kg
n•Butylbenzene ug/kg I l,2-Dibromo•3·Chloropropane ug/kg
l,2.4•Trichlorobenzene ug/kg
Naphthalene ug/kg
Hexachlorobutadiene ug/kg I 1.2.3-Trichlorobenzene ug/kg
Oibromofluoromethane (SJ
l.2-Dichloroethane·d4 CS) I Toluene-dB (SJ
4-Bromofluorobenzene CS)
Laboratory Certification IDs
QUALITY COITTROL DATA
Spike LCS Spike
Cone. Result t Rec . ..... -...
50 53.00 106
50 54.00 108
50 53.00 106
50 53.00 106
50 54,00 108
50 53,00 106
50 60.00 120
50 54.00 108
50 61.00 122
50 52.00 104
50 56.00 112
50 55,00 110
50 68.00 136
50 63.00 126
50 53.00 106
50 62.00 124
94
106
B9
101
. Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
9800 Kincey Avenue, Suite 100
Huntersville, NC 28078
Tel: 704·875-9092
Fax: 704·875-9091
DATE: 08/06/98
PAGE: 10
Pace Project Number: 92851
Client Project IO: GELS/N048-903
Footnotes
. . . . . . . . . .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NC Wastewater 12
NC Drinking Water 37706
SC 99006
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
Laboratory Certification IDs
KY Drinking Water 90090
TN UST List
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
VA Drinking Water 213
I
I
I
Pace Analytical
I QUALITY CONTROL DATA PARAMETER FDCTIIOTES
. Pace Analytical Services. Inc.
9800 Kincey Avenue, Suite 100
Huntersville. NC 28078
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
DATE: 08/06/98
PAGE: 11
Pace Project Number: 92851
Client Project ID: GELS/N048-903
■consistent with EPA guidelines unrounded concentrations are displayed and have been used to calculate X Rec and RPO values. IIND Not Detected
NC Not Calculable
I PRL Pace Reporting Limit
RPO Relative Percent Difference
(S) Surrogate
1 [1] CoDIOOn laboratory contaminant.
H
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
Laboratory Certification IDs
NC Wastewater 12
NC Drinking Water 37706
SC 99006
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
Laboratory Certification IDs
KY Drinking Water 90090
TN UST List
VA Drinking Water 213
-----------Pace Analytical
z: Pro ect Name / No.
Sampled By {PRINT): \ \~...c L I\'\ \ ..) 1--$-l\,A. \J-'-01
(I) u:: Ill z @ [ ~ 8 w (I)
u. w 0 u::
ci n. z z ::,
1
2
3
4 tJ
55
J O· • 6 0 ~
"I, 0 g z :,: :r.
X
:r
<iJ z
Q 24 Hours
~Hows 0 3-SDays
0 1 Week 2 Weeks
395523
CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY RECORD
Ana lytlcal Request
REMARKS
H s-=e-r----------,-,-,i------t-1-t--t-+-t-t-++--t--lf--l--+-t--Jf--+-+-+---------I
~-:::1-----------r--,--;------t-:t--t-i-t-+-t-i~t-++-+-f-+-+-+--Jf--+--~'-------I
w7 a1,----------,--r--;------t--t--t-i-t-+-t--1-t-++-t--1f--+-+-t-lf-f----------l
CL B
CL l'-01 01-------'-------_,__ ___ .._ ___ _j
,\dditional Comments t------------!---+--+----------1----1----1
a, CJ)
CJ)
~
01
<.!)
if Temp:
ORIGINAL
SAMPLE CONDITION
Samples lnlact:
SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR INSTRUCTIONS am
I
I
I
I
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RUG 25 1998 15=22 FR GELS EHS-FRCIL ENG
Pace Analytical
August 20 1 1998
Mr. Lee Hl.llplrey
o~ncrel Electric Lighting Sye.
3010 Spartanburg Hwy.
Nendersonville, NC 28739
RE: Pace Project Nurber: 93390
Client Project ID: Drun Saai:iles
Dear Mr. H~rey:
828593213121 TO HAGEMEYER
Pace Analytical Services. Inc.
54 Ravenscroft Drive
Asheville. NC 28801
Tel: 704·254·7176
Fax: 704·252-461B
Enclosed are the results of analyses for sample(s) received by the laboratory on August 10, 1998. If you have any
q1.Jestions concerning this report. please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
vxJfmdtJ ~ Jenni fer Jones
Project Managrr
Enclosures
Laboratory Cenificetion 1Pa
NC Wastewater 40
NC Drinking Water 3n12
SC Environmental 99030
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
. This ra~rt ahall not be reproduced, except in full,
without the written consent of ?ace Analytical Service&, Inc.
Wboc?:tpry Ceamcsuoo ID~
TN Drinking Water 02980
Fl Environmental 96317
I
I
I
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RUG 26 1998 10:23 FR GELS EHS-FRCIL ENG 828693213B T[J HHGEMEYEf<
Pace Anaiytjcal
General Eloctrie Lighting Sys.
3010 Spartenburu Hwy.
Mende:rsonville, NC 28739
Attn: Mr. Lee H~rey
Phone: 828·693·2533
Solid results are reported on a dry weight basis
Pace Saflllle No: 9317926
Client Sample ID: DRUM #1 GRAB
Parameters
lnorganies, Prep
RCRA P"lctals, ICP, TCLP Leach.
Date Digested
Metals
RCRA Metals, lCP, TCLP Leach.
Bari\.lTI
Cadmi Llfl
Chr-omil.ffl
Lead
Silver
Date Digested
Arsenic, AAS furnace, TCLP
Arsenic
Oate Oigested
Mercury, CVAAS, TCLP Leachate
Nercury
Seleniun, AAS Furnace, TCLP
Seleni1.111
Date Digested
Laboratory Ccttiflratloo IDs
Results Units
Method: EPA 6010
Method: EPA 6010
1.4 mg/l
0.04 mg/l
NO mg/L
0.20 mg/l
ND 11111/L
Method: EPA 7060
NO 11111/l
Method: EPA 7470
ND mg/L
Method: EPA 7740
ND mg/L
Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
54 Ravenscroft Drive
Asheville, NC 28801
Tel: [phone]
Fax: 704-252·4618
DATE: 08/20/98
PAGE:
Pace Project NLJ'tt>er: 93390
Client Project ID: Dr'611 Saq;,les
Date collected: 08/10/98
08/10/98
Matrix: soil
Date Received:
PRL Analyzed Analyst CAS# Footnote&
Prep Method: EPA 1311
08/12/98
Prep Method: EPA 3010
0.1 DB/14/9B KEK 7440·39-3
0.01 08/14/98 KEK 7440·4]·9
0.02 08/14/98 KEK 7440-47·3
0.1 08/14/98 KEK 7439-92·1
0.05 08/14/98 IC£K 7440•22•4
08/13/9B
Prep Method: EPA 3020
O,DDS 0B/16/98 KEK 7440·38•2
OS/13/98
Prep Method: EPA 7470
0.0002 08/17/98 KEK 7439-97-6
Prep Method: EPA 3020
o.oos 08/17/98 KEK 7782·49·2
08/13/98
NC Wastewater 40
NC Orinkmg Water 3n12
SC Environmental 88030
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS Laboratory Ceamcat!oo !Os
TN Drinking Waler 02980
FL Environmental 96317 lhia report shall not be reproduced, except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
AUG 26 1998 15:23 FR GELS EHS-FAClL ENG 828b'::(:,21~11 TU HHGEMEYfR
Pace Analytical
Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
54 Ravenscrott Onve
Asheville, NC 28801
Pace Silff1lle No: 9317934 Date Collected:
Client S~le ID: #2 COMPOS !TE Date Rece;ved:
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
DATE: 08/20/98
PAGE: 2
Paco Project N~r: 93390
Client Project ID: Dr1.111 Senples
08/10/98
08/10/98
Matr;x: Soil
Parameters . Re&u\u \Jnits PRL Analyzed Analyst CAS# footnotes
lnorgonics, Prep
RCRA Metals, ICP, TCLP Leach.
Dote Digested
Metals
RCRA Metal&, JCP, TCLP Leach.
Bariun
Car:tnit.1n
Chromiun
Lead
Sit ver
Date Digested
Arsen;c, AAS Furnace, TCLP
Arsenic
Date Oigestecl
Mercury, CVAAS, TCLP Leachate
Mercury
Seleni1..m, A.AS Furnace,
Seleni1.1n
Date Digested
Labnrntorv Certification IDs
NC Wastewater 40
NC Drinking Water 37712
SC Environmental 89030
TCLP
Method: EPA 6010 Prep Method: EPA 1311
08/12/98
Method: EPA 6010 Prep Method: EPA 3010
1. 1 mg/L o, 1 08/14/98 <EK 7440·39·3
0.09 mg/L 0.01 08/14/98 .,. 7440-43-9
0.04 mg/L 0.02 08/14/98 •e• 7440-47·3
1.3 mg/L o. 1 08/14/98 KE< 7439-92-1
ND lllg/L 0.05 08/14/98 KEK 7440·22·4
08/13/98
Method: EPA 7060 Prep Method: EPA 3020
ND mg/L 0.005 08/16/98 KEK 7440-38-2
08/13/98
Method: EPA 7470 Prop Method: EPA 7470
ND mg/L 0.0002 08/17/98 KEK 7439-97-6
Method: EPA n40 Prep Method: EPA 3020
NO mg/L 0.005. 08/17/98 KEK 7782•49·2
08/13/98
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full.
without the written consent of Pace Analvtical Services. lnc.
LaboO'Jlory cenificavoa /Os
TN Drinking Water 02980
FL En\lironmentel 96317
I
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
HUG 26 1398 15:23 FR GELS EHS-FRCIL ENG 8285932130 TO HRGEMEYER
Pace Aoalytjcal
Pace Analytical Services. Inc.
54 Ravenscroft Drive
Asheville, NC 28801
PARAMETER FOOTNOTES
ND Mot Detected
NC Hot Calc;ulable
POL Pace Reporting Limit
Laboratory Centflcallon IDs
NC Wastewater 40
NC Drinking Water 37712
SC Environmental 99030
Tel: [phone]
Fax:: [phone]
DATE: 08/20/98
PACE: 3
Poco Project Ni.mber: 93390
Client Project 1D: Drua Saq,les
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report chall ,iot be reproduced, except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
Labocmpry Cealflcarroo /Os
TN Drinking Water 02980
FL Environmental 96317
I
I
I
I
g
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Pace Analytical
General Electric Lighting Sys.
3010 Spartanburg Hwy.
Merdersonville. NC 28739
Attn: Mr. lee Hl,ITf)hrey
Solid results are reported on I dry wei9ht basis
9261900 Pace Sa!Jl)lo NO;
Client Satrf)ll! ID: DRUM 11 GRAB·93179Z6
Parameters R6ults Units
-·······---------------·········----------· ---......
Inorganics, Prep
Volatile Organics, TCLP Leach. Jllethod: EPA 8260
Date Leached o.oo
r:iC --Semi· VOA
Pesticides, TCLP Leachate Method: EPA 8081
Chlordane (Technical) ND mg/L
Endrln ND mg/L
Heptechlor ND mg/L
He~tachlor Epoxide ND mg/L
garmia-BHC (Lindane) ND mg/L
Methoxychtor ND mg/L
Toxaphene ND mg/L
Oecachlorobiphenyl (S) 86 X
Tetrachloro-meta•xylene (S) 63 X
D3te Extracted
Herbicides, TCLP Leachete Method, EPA 8151
2,4·0 NO mg/l
2,4,5-TP(Si lvei() ND mg/L
Oichlorophcnyl Acetic Acid CS) 76 X
Date Extrac:ted
CC/MS·· VOA
Vol.iti le Orgenics, TCLP Leach. Method: EPA 8260
Vinyl Chloride NO mg/L
Laboratory Caalflcatlon IDs
8286932130 TO HHGEMEYER
Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
9800 Kincey Avenue, Suite 100
Huntersville, NC 28078
Tel: 704•875·9092
Fax: 704-875·9091
DATE: 08/19/98
PACE: 1
Pace Project NutDer: 92962
Client Project ID: CE·93390
Date Collected: 08/10/98
08/11/98
Matrix.: Soil
Date Received:
PRL Analyzed Analyst CAS# Footnotes
------------·. --.. ---------------·····-----
Prep Method: EPA 1311
08/13/98 JIIC
Prep Method: EPA 3510
0.0005 08/18/98 NSF 57.74.9
0.0005 08/18/98 NSF 72·20·8
0.0005 08/18/98 MSF 76•44·8
0.0005 08/18/98 MSF 1024•57·3
0.0005 08/18/98 NSF 58·89·9
0.0005 08/18/98 NSF 72.43.5
0.0005 08/18/98 NSF 80D1·35·2
08/18/98 NSF 2051·24•3
08/18/98 NSF 8TT·09·8
08/13/98
Prep Method: EPA 3510
1 08/18/98 MSI 94•75·7 o. 1 08/18/98 NSF 93-72·1
08/18/98 MSF 19719•28·9
08/18/98
Prep Method: EPA 8260
0.02 08/18/98 VFT 75·01·4
NC Wastewater 12
NC Dnnking Water 37708
SC 99006
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
Laboratory CeadlcaUoo IDs
KY Drinking Waler 90090
TN USTUst
This r$po~ shall not be r$produced, except In full,
without the writ1An· consent of Pace Analytical ServiCBs, Inc. VA Drinking Water 213
I
I
I
I
I
H
0
R
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Pace Analytical
Pace Analytical Services, Inc,
9800 Kincey Avenue, Suite 1 oo
Huntersville, NC 28078
Pace Se~le No: 9261900 Date Collected:
Tel: [phone]
Fax: 704-875·9091
DATE: 08/19/98
PAGE: 2
Pace Project NU11ber: 9Z962
Client Project ID: Gl:•93390
Matr'tx:
Client Sefll)le 10; DRUM #1 CRAB-9317926 Date Received:
08/10/98
08/11/98
Poremeter&
········-------------------------1, 1·Dichtoroethene
2-But.:inone
Chloroform
1,2-Dlchloroethane
Carbon Tetradlloride
Benzene
Trichloroethene
Tetrachloroethene
Chlorobenzene
Dibromofluoromethone CS)
1,2·Dichloroethane-d4 (S)
Toluene-dB (S)
4-Brornofluorobenzene
GC/MS ·· Scmi·VOA
Semivoletile Organics,
Pyridine
1,4-0ichlorobenzene
2·Methylphenol
Hexachloroethane
3-Methylphenol
4•J'lethylphenol
Nitroben1en~
Hexachlorobutadionc
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
HexachlorobQnzene
Pentachlorophenol
Nitrobenzene-dS (S)
2-Fluorobiphcnyl (S)
Terphenyl·d14 CS)
Phenol-d6 (S)
2-Fluorophenol (S)
2,4,6-Tribromophenol
Cate Extracted
Laboratory Certification IDs
NC Wastewater 12
NC Drinking Water anos
SC 99006
(S)
!CLP
(S)
Results Units PRL An3lyzed Anelyst CASI Footnotes
----------••••..... -----------------· --·. -... -. ----------ND 1119/l 0.02 08/18/98 VFT 75·35·4
NO mg/L 0.4 08/18/98 VFT 78-93·3
ND mg/l 0.02 08/18/98 VFT 67•66·3
NO mg/L 0.02 08/18/98 VFT 107·06·2
ND 1119/L 0.02 08/18/98 VFT 56-23-5
ND lllg/l 0.02 08/18/98 VFT 71-43·2
NI) 111/L 0,02 08/18/98 VFT 79·01·6
ND mg/L 0.02 08/18/98 VFT 127-18·4
ND mg/L 0.02 08/18/98 VFT 108·90·7
123 X 08/18/98 VFT 1866·53·7
126 X 08/18/98 VFT 17060·07·0
108 X 08/18/98 VFT 2037-26·5
121 r. 08/18/98 VFT 460-00-4
Method, EPA 8270 Pcep Method: EPA 3510
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
NO
NO
ND
ND
NO
NO
NO
NO
65
63
78
22
34
80
mg/L 0.05 08/18/98 OHJ 110-86-1
"'9/L 0.005 08/18/98 OHJ 106·46-7
mg/L 0.005 08/18/98 OHJ 95·48·7
mg/L 0.005 08/18/98 OHJ 67·72·1
mg/l 0.005 08/18/98 OHJ 108·39•4
mg/L 0.005 08/18/98 OHJ 106-44-5
ffl9/l 0.005 08/18/98 DHJ 98·95·3
""'/l D.005 08/18/98 OHJ 87-68-3
mg/L 0.005 08/18/98 DHJ 88-06-2
mg/L 0.005 08/18/98 OHJ 95·95·4
mg/L 0.05 08/18/98 OHJ 121•14·2
mg/L 0.005 08/18/98 DHJ 118-74·1
mg/L 0.05 08/18/98 DHJ 87·86·5
% 08/18/98 DHJ 4165-60·0
% 08/18/98 DHJ 321-60·8
X 08/18/98 DHJ 1718·51·0
% 08/18/98 DHJ 13127-88-3
% 08/18/98 DHJ 367·12·4
X 08/18/98 DHJ 118•79•6
08/14/98
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced, excepl In full,
without the written consent of Pac.e Analytleal SeNleos, Inc.
Laboratory Cectitir.atioo IDs
KY Drinking Water 90090
TN USTL.ist
VA Dnnking Water 213
I
I
I
n
D
I
D
B
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
MUU .C:.0 J.:,:,o .1.0•.C:.'-+ rr,;; LlCL..::i c:.n::i-rHl,_..11... C:.f'lll dO::::db':;l..::,,::'.J,..::,I::) I U MHUC:.l'IC:.1 C:.K r.tJo,, .LtJ
Pace Analytical
Pace Sairple No: 9261926 Dau Collected:
Client S~le ID: tf2 ~POSJTE•9317934 Date Receh1ed:
Pace Analytical Services. Inc.
9800 Kincey Avenue. Suite 100
Huntersville. NC 26076
Tel: [phone]
Fax: 704-675·9091
DATE: 08/19/98
PACE, 3
Pace Project MI.Mmer: 92962
Client Project JD: GE-93390
08/10/98
08/11/98
Soil
Paramcter-s Results Units PRL Analyzed Analyst CAS# Footnotes
lnorsanics, Prep
Vole ti le Organics, TCLP Leach. Method: EPA 8260 Prep Method, EPA 1311
08/13/98 JMC Date Leached 0.00
GC • • Semi -VOA
Pestieides, TCLP leachate
Chlordane (Technical)
Endrin
Heptachtor
Ht>ptachlor Epoxide
ga,rma•SHC (Lindane)
Hethoxychlor
Toxephene
Decachlorobiphenyl (S)
Tetrachloro-rnota•xylene ($)
Date htracted
Herbicides, TCLP Leechete
2,4·0
2,4,5-TP(Si I vex)
oichlorophenyl Acetic Acid
Oete Extracted
GC/HS ·· VOA
Method, EPA 8081
NO mg/L
NO "'9/L
ND mg/L
ND mg/L
NO mg/L
ND mg/L
NO mg/L
103 X
64 X
ND
NO
CS) 611
Method: EPA 8151
mg/L
"'9/L
X
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
0.0005
1
0.1
Prep Method, EPA 3510
08/18/98 MSF 57-74-9
08/18/98 MSF 72·20·8
08/18/98 MSF 76•44•8
08/18/98 MSF 1024·57·3
08/18/98 MSF 58·89-9
08/18/98 HSF 72•43•5
08/18/98 MSF 8001-35·2
08/18/98 HSF 2051•24•3
08/18/98 MSF 877-09•8
08/13/98
08/18/98
08/18/98
08/18/98
08/18/98
Prep Method, EPA 3510
MSF 94·75·7
MSF 93·72· 1
HSF 19719·28·9
Vol~tile Organic$, TCLP leach. Method: EPA 8260 Prep Method: EPA 8260
Vinyl Chlor;de
1, l·Dichloroethene
2-Butanone
Chloroform
i,2·Dichloroethene
Carbon Tetrachloride
Benzene
Trichloroethene
Tetr~chloroethene
Chlorobenzene
Oibromofluoromethane CS)
Laboratory Certification IDs
NC Wastewater 12
NC Drinking Water 3TT06
SC 99006
NO mg/L 0.02 08/18/98 VFT 75·01-,
ND 111!1/L 0.02 08/18/98 VFT 75·35•4
ND mg/L 0. 4 08/18/98 VFT 78-93-3
NO· mg/L 0,02 08/18/98 VFT 67•66·3
NO mg/l 0.02 08/18/98 VFT 107·06·2
ND mg/L 0.02 08/18/98 VFT 56-23-5
ND mg/l 0.02 08/18/98 VFT 71•43·2
NO mg/L 0.02 08/18/98 VFT 79•01•6
ND ffl!il/L 0.02 08/18/98 VFT 127-18-4
NO mg/L 0.02 08/18/98 VFT 108-90-7
102 X 08/18/98 VFT 1868•53·7
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced. except in full.
without die written consent or Pace Analytical Services. Inc.
LabocatoN Cenific:ation IDs
KY Drinking Water 80090
TN UST List
VA Drinking Water 21 J
I
I
u
H
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Pace Analytical
Pace Analytical Services. Inc.
9800 Kincey Avenue, Suite 100
Huntersville. NC 2B07B
Pace S~le Ho: 9261926 Dato Collected:
Tel: 704-B75·9092
Fax: 704•675-9091
DATE: 08/19/98
PAGE: 4
Pace Project ~unber: 92962
Client Project ID: GE-93390
fi!atrix: Soil
Client SB!Jl)le 1D: 112 COl!POSITE-9317934 Date Recaivod:
08/10/98
08/11/98
Paraml:!ters
·····------------------·····-----1,2·Dichloraethane·d4 ($)
Toluene•d8 (S)
4·8romofluorobenzene (S)
GC/HS •. semi-VOA
Semivoletile Organic,.
Pyridine
1,4-0ichlorobtnzene
2·Methylphenat
H~x~chloroethene
3-He!-thylphenol
4·Methylphenol
tlitrobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
2,4,6-Trichloropt,enol
2,4,S-Trichlorophenol
2,4-Dinltrotoluene
Hexachlorobcnzene
Pentachlorophenol
Mitrabenzene-d5 CS)
2·Fluorobiphenyl (S)
Terphenyl-d14 CS)
Phenol-d6 CS)
2-Fluorophenol CS>
2,4,6-Tribromophenol
Date Extr-aeted
Laboretory Certfficetioo IDs
NC Wastewater 12
NC Drinking Waler 3TT06
SC 99006
TCLP
CS)
Results Units PRL Analyzed Analyst CA$# Fc;iotnote& ------.. --. ·------------------... ·-. -. --------·· -----. -. --
90 X 08/18/98 VFT 17060·07·0
106 Y. 08/18/98 VFT 2037·26·5
114 ¾ 08/18/98 VFT 460·00·4
Method: EPA 8270 Prep Method: EPA 3510
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
73
65
90
20
28
65
~g/L 0.05 08/18/98 OHJ 110-86·1
mg/L 0.005 08/18/98 DHJ 106·46·7
lllll/L 0.005 08/18/98 DHJ 95•48·7
mg/L 0,005 08/18/98 DHJ 67·7?·1
mg/L D.005 08/18/98 DHJ 108·39·4
l!ISI/L 0.005 08/18/98 OKJ 106•44·5
lllll/L 0.005 08/18/98 DHJ 98-95-3
mg/L 0.005 08/18/98 DHJ 87·68-3
1119/ L 0.005 08/18/98 DHJ 88·06·2
1119/L 0.005 08/18198 DHJ 95.95.4
mg/L 0.05 08/18/98 DKJ 121•14-2
1119/L 0.005 08/18/98 OKJ 118•74•1
mg/L 0.05 08/18/98 DNJ 87-86-5
~ 08/18/98 DKJ 4165·60·0
t 08/18/98 OHJ 321•60·8
t 08/18/98 DHJ 1718-51·0 t 08/18/98 DHJ 13127·88-3
X 08/18/98 DHJ 367·12•4
X 08/18/98 DKJ 118·79•6
08/14/98
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced. except in full,
without lhe written consent of Pace Analytical Services, Inc.
Laboratory Certification IDs
KY Drinking Water 90090
TN UST List
VA Drinking Water 213
g
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Pace Analytical
PARAMETER FOOTNOTES
Not Detected
Not Calculable
Pace Reporting Limit
Surrogate
t:IC:::OO:,..)~,L..:,I:::) I U MHl.:IC:.l'IC:. l C.I"(
Pace Analyucal Services, Inc.
9800 Kincey Avenue, Suite 100
Huntersville, NC 28078
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
DATE: 08/19/98
PAGE: 5
Pace Project N-r: 92962
' Client Project ID~ GE-9339O
NO
NC
PRL
(S)
(1) The Surroiate recovery value exceeded the ~stablished laboratory control limit value.
Laboratory Cert;fication IDs
NC wastewater 12
NC Drinking Water 3n06
SC 99006
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced, axc.ept in full.
without the written consent of Pace Analytical SeNices, Inc.
Laboratory Cectjficalion IDs
KY Dnnking Water 90090
TN UST List
VA Drinking Water 213
- - - - - -- - -
Pace Analytical
;rtenl
\ddress
~ample<! By (PRINT): )
frl11, k f. wa '1 ,,_
Date Sampled fl-(0-e; f'
en a: w z 0 < UJ ... > z a: 0 UJ 0 en u. UJ
0 a:
ci 0. z z ::,
?, 3
-::> 7
3
4
5
6
7
8
Addilional Comments I-r. I, ,,_,,
j-. -I' J,_rf ')__ < • ::, n~1~ 0(1_,,-~ 1 Ai,j!A t=;f{ ~ t-..
[lln/Ol1'fe ~+ J,/2
-u,..J:, :.--,,,1 UF-/J,L,c,Jc-flJ-f.-1 fq,..J1 cl,ff,,
,r "'' L J a. .vJ ,.,..e'f-,L p-,; ~ ,-,<?--+.l-
Temp:
- - - -
,;;:a Ila iiiiil
PRESERVATIVES ANALYSES
REQUEST
'I;,.,
\\,
::I )(. u
• ;!. 0 ~ r
"l. 0 c1i 'il z REMARKS :c r > z
'1.
{
SAMPLE CONDITION
0c Received on Ice: Y / N Sealed Cooler: Y IN Samples Intact Y/N
SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR INSTRUCTIONS 8,'97
ID ~ l,J "' ~
~
--i D
j5
Cl rn ~ -< rn ;o
"lJ
IS) "-' ' IS)
[..J