NCD095458527_20070404_FCX Inc. (Statesville)_FRBCERCLA RD_Remedial Design 1995 - 2007-OCR

;. B ROW N AN o
CALDWELL
501 Grea·;~~-i~i\:· i'.··.•.
Suite 150
Nashvil!e, TN 37228
Td, (6151 255-2288
Fax, (6151 256-8332
April 4, 2007
Mr. Qu Qi
UJC Program
Aquifer Protection Section
North Carolina DENR-DWQ
1636 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1636
27-130006. 003. 003
SUPff·d· .::,;L; SECTION
RE: Application for Permit to Construct and/or Use Wells for Injection
FCX-Statesville Superfund Site Operable Unit Three (OU3)
Statesville, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Qi:
Enclosed is an "Application for Permit to Construct and/ or Use Wells for Injection"
to perform groundwater remediation of volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
associated with the FCX-Statesville Superfund Site OU3 in Statesville, North
Carolina. Also enclosed are the following two reports that are referenced in the
permit application:
• "Phase I Design for Accelerated Natural Attenuation, FCX-Statesville
Superfund Site OU3, Statesville, North Carolina" dated March 2007 by
Brown and Caldwell (the Phase I design)
• "Spring 2006 Semiannual Groundwater Sampling Report, FCX-Statesvillc
Superfund Site OU3, Statesville, North Carolina" dated September 2006 by
Brown and Caldwell (the Spring 2006 sampling report).
The Phase I Design presents the proposed plan and schedule for injecting electron
donors to accelerate the natural attenuation of VOCs as prescribed by the
Explanation of Significant Difference (ESD) for OU3 that was promulgated on
September 8, 2006. The FCX-OU3 Site is complex, and in order to more effectively
implement ANA, the Phase I Design calls for injection of different electron donors
within different areas of OU3 using either direct-push methods or injection wells.
The first step of the proposed injections involves the use of direct-push methods
and is tentatively scheduled to begin on April 23, 2007 contingent upon approval to
proceed by the USEPA, NCDENR, and UJC Program.
We would like to schedule either a conference call or a meeting, perhaps during the
week of April 9, 2007, to discuss the permit application and respond to any questions
you may have at that time.
P:\Clients\El Paso\EPNG FCX\130006\003-003\U!C Permit\L040207.doc
E n v i r o n m r n t a I E n g i n e· r r s & Consultants
• Mr. Qu Qi
April 4, 2007
Page 2 of2
•
Please call me at [phone] or call Nancy Prince of El Paso Natural Gas
Company (EPNG) at [phone] if you have any questions or comments
regarding the permit application.
Sincerely,
Brown and Caldwell
Kenton H. Oma, P.E.
Senior Associate
Environmental Services
Attachments
cc: K. Mallary, USEPA Region 4 (w/o Attachments)
N. Testerman, NCDENR (w/o Attachments)
N. Prince, EPNG (w/o Attachments)
S. Miller, EPNG (w/o Attachments)
P:\Oients\EI Paso\EPNG FCX\130006\003-003\U!C Permit\L040207.doc:
• •
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AND/OR USE A WELL(S) FOR INJECTION
Type 51 Wells-In Situ Groundwater Remediation/ Type ST Wells-Tracer Injection
• Do not use this form for remediation systems that extract contaminated groundwater, treat it, and reinject the treated groundwater.
• Submit TWO copies of the completed application and all attachments to the address on the last page of this form.
• Any changes made to this form will result in the application package being returned.
Application Number (to be completed by DWQ): ____________ _
I. GENERAL INFORMATION:
I. Applicant's Name (generally the responsible party): El Paso Nat, 1ral Gas Corooaov /FPNG)
2. Signing Official's Name: Roger D. Towe Title: Manager of Env. Remediation
3. Mailing address of applicant:~1~D.,.,Qu1~1 .... o.u.1~lis»iaau□a"-'-S~tr~e~e~t ___________________ _
City:J:icwston __________________ State: TX Zip:_7_70_0_2 ___ _
Telephone number: [phone] Fax number: [phone]
4. Property Owner's Name (if different from Applicant):_E_I _P_a_s_o_R_e_m_ed_i_a_ti_o_n_C_o_. __________ _
5. Property Owner's mailing address: _ _j1L.l.Ou.Ou1_Jl..10.u1,.,is'"i.aau□a<w:Suiu,rea.cea.l ________________ _
City:.J:1(ll!SWC1-__________________ State:_T_X __ Zip: 77002
6. Name and address of contact person who can answer questions about the proposed injection project:
Name: Kenton H Qma Title: Senior Associate
Company: Browo and Caldwell
Address: 5D1 Great Circle Raad 81 lite 150
City:•_NllSllilllila__ __________________ State: TN Zip:_3_7_2_28 ___ _
Telephone number: 615-250-1235 Fax number: 615-256-8332
Email Address: koroa@brwocald com
II. PERMIT INFORMATION:
1. Project is: 0New D Modification of existing permit D Renewal of existing permit without modification
2. If this application is being subnutted for renewal or modification to an existing pennit, provide:
existing permit number _________ and the issuance date ___________ _
For renewal without modifications, fill out sections I & II only, sign the certification on the last page of this
form, and obtain the property owner's signature to indicate consent (if the applicant is not the owner).
UIC-51/5T vcr. 12-05 Page I of7
• •
APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AND/OR USE A WELL(S) FOR INJECTION
Type 51 Wells -/11 Situ Groundwater Remediation/ Type ST Wells -Tracer Injection
Ill. INCIDENT & FACILITY DATA
A. FACILITY INFORMATION
B.
C.
I. Facility name: ECX-Statesville $11pert11 □d Sile Operable I loit 3 (Ol 13)
2. Complete physical address of the facility: _ _.2"'041-,P"-l~-1<0;,eun1"iX"-"S"'lr:,;e,ae,-t _______________ _
City: Statesville County:-1.I r1.1ce:1.d"'e0111 ______ State:-'N"'C~--Zip: 28677
INCIDENT DESCRIPTION
1. Describe the source of the contamination:
The site was a former textile plant (approximately 275,000 ft2) where tetrachloroethene (PCE) was used. There
is no estimate on how much PCE was discharged and over how many years. The plume remediation is
proceeding in accordance with the 1996 Record of Decision and 2006 Explanation of Significant Difference
(ESD) (refer to Section 1.2 of the attached Phase I Design).
2. List all contaminants present in soils or groundwater at the site (contaminants may be listed in groups, e.g.,
gasoline, diesel,jet fuel, fuel oil, chlorinated ethenes, chlorinated ethanes, metals, pesticides/herbicides, etc):
Chlorinated ethenes, chlorinated ethanes
3. Has LNAPL or DNAPL ever been observed at the site (even if outside the injection zone)?
□Yes If yes, list maximum measured separate phase thickness: feet
Ill No If no, list maximum concentration of total VOCs observed at site:_1 __ 4...:0..,_,0:..0:...0:......_ _______ ppb
4. Agency managing the contamination incident:
□ UST Section
□ DWQ Aquifer Protection Section
□ Hazardous Waste Section
lllSuperfund Section (including REC Program and DSCA sites)
□ Solid Waste Section
Ill Other: USFPA Region 4
5. Incident number or other site number assigned by the agency managing the contamination incident:
PERMITS
List all permits or construction approvals that have been issued for the facility or incident, including those not
directly related to the proposed injection operation:
1. Hazardous Waste Management program permits under RCRA:_N_/_A _______________ _
2. OWQ Non-Discharge or NPDES permits:_N_/_A ______________________ _
3. County or DEH subsurface wastewater disposal permits:._N_/_A _________________ _
4. Other environmental permits required by state or federal law:.,_,.,_,,._ _______________ _
UIC-51/ST ver. 12-05 Page 2 of7
IV.
A.
• •
APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AND/OR USE A WELL(S) FOR INJECTION
Type SI Wells -It, Situ Groundwater Remediation/ Type ST Wells -Tracer Injection
INJECTION DATA
INJECTION FLUID DAT A
I. List all proposed injectants.
NOTE: Any substance to be injected as a tracer or to promote in situ remediation must be reviewed by the
Occupational and Environmental Epidemiology Section (OEES) of the Division of Public Health, Department of
Health and Human Services. Review the list o(avproved iniectants or contact the UIC Program to determine if
the injectants you are proposing have been reviewed by OEES.
Injectant: HRC-X(TM) (see Section 3 2 1 and Appendix D-1 of Phase 1 Design)
Concentration at point of injection: Ranges from 4 0 lbs/ft lo 5 8 lbs/ft
Jnjectant: HRC-Advanced(TM) (see Section 3.2.2 and Appendix D-2 of Phase 1 Design)
Concentration at point of injection: Ranges tram 1 5 lbs/ft to 3 O lbs/ft of well screen
Injectant: EOS(R) (see Section 3 2 3 and Appendix D-3 ot Phase 1 Design)
Concentration at point of injection: Ranges from 9 4 lbs/ft: to 15 Q lbs/ft
Injectant: WILClear(TM) Lactate Concentrate (see Appendix D-4 of Phase 1 Design)
Concentration at point of injection: 1000 mnlL lo 10,000 mnlL
Injectant: Bio-Dechlor(Ha) (Renenesis)
Concentration at point of injection: 1000 mg/I to 10,000 mg/I
2. Source of fluids used to dilute or chase the injectants listed above•
□None
lZl Municipal water supply
□ Groundwater from private well or any well within ¼ mile of injection site
□Air
□Other: ____________________________ _
3. If groundwater from a private well.or any well within '/4 mile of injection site is to be used as the fluid source,
supply the following information: N/A
a. Location/ID number of source well:.i,,ua.. ________________________ _
b. Depth of source::j',jj'A---------------------------------
c. Formation::.J'sL/A. _________________________________ _
d. Rock/Sediment type:.W'A-------------------------------
e. In Attachment B, provide a current, complete chemical analysis of the water from the source well, including
analyses for all contaminants suspected or historically recognized in soil or groundwater on the site.
NOTE: If contaminated groundwater is to be used as the dilution or chase fluid, this is not the proper permit
application form. You must apply for a closed-loop groundwater remediation permit using annlicatinnJrmn
GWRS.
UIC-51/ST ver. 12-05 Page 3 of7
B.
C.
• •
APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AND/OR USE A WELL(S) FOR INJECTION
Type 51 Wells -In Situ Groundwater Remediation/ Type ST Wells -Tracer Injection
PROPOSED OPERA TING PARAMETERS See attached Table 1.
1. Duration of Injection:
Maximum number of separate injection events: See attached Table 1.
Expected duration of each injection event: See attached Table 1
Expected duration between events (if more than one event):_.N.,./c,A,.._ _____ _
. . See attached Table 1. . 2. lnJect10n rate per well: gallons per nunute (gpm)
. . See attached Table 1. 3. Total lnJect10n volume: ______ gallons per day (gpd); ____ gallons per event (if separate events)
4 I . . See attached Table 1. d / . h ( .) . nJecl!on pressure: poun s square me psi
See attached Table 1. 5. Temperature at point of injection: °F
6. Briefly describe how the above parameters will be measured and controlled: See attached Table 1.
7. Estimated hydraulic capacity of the well: . ...,_=--~------gpm
INJECTION WEI I CONSTRJ JCTJON DATA
1. Injection will be via:
IZl Existing well(s) proposed for use as an injection well. Provide the data in (2) through (6) below to the best of
your knowledge.
IZl Proposed well(s) to be constructed for use as an injection well. Provide the data in (2) through (6) below as
proposed construction specifications.
2. Well Drilling Contractor's Name: Boact I ongyear and/or Precision Sampling
NC Well Contractor Certification number:_Tc.:o:...c:b.:.e..cdcce:..:t.:.e;..;rm=in'-'e"d:..c. _________ _
3. Date to be constructed:Section 4.4 of Phase 1 DesignNumber of borings: See Figure 4-6 of Phase 1 Design
Approximate depth of each boring (feet): See Figures 4-2, 4-3, 4-4, and 4-5 of Phase 1 Design
4. Screened interval/Injection interval of injection wells: See Figures 4-2 through 4-5 of Phase 1 Design
Depth: __ to __ feet below ground surface (if multiple intervals, indicate shallowest and deepest depth).
5. Well casing (NIA if injection is through direct push rods):
Type: IZl PVC D Stainless steel D Other:. ______________ _
Casing depth: ___ to ___ ft. Water table surface to top of bedrock -Figures 4-2 and 4-5
6. Grout (NIA if injection is through direct push rods):
Type: D Cement l;zJ Bentonite D Other:.---------------
Grout depth: __ to __ ft. See Appendix G-2 of Phase 1 Design
UIC-5l15T ver. 12-05 Page 4 of7
• •
APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AND/OR USE A WELL(S) FOR INJECTION
Type 51 Wells-In Situ Groundwater Remediation/ Type ST Wells -Tracer Injection
V. ATTACHMENTS
Provide the following items as attachments with the given headings:
A. HYDROGEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
Provide a hydrogeologic description, soils description, and cross section of the subsurface to a depth that includes the
known or projected depth of contamination. The hydrogeologic description shall include:
(I) the regional geologic setting;
(2) significant changes in lithology;
(3) the hydraulic conductivity, transmissivity, and specific yield of the aquifer to be used for injection, including a
description of the test(s) used to determine these parameters; and
(4) the depth to the mean seasonal high water table.
NOTE: G.S. 89E-18 requires that any geologic plans. reports, or documents in which the pe,jormance is related to the
public welfare or safeguarding cf the environment be prepared by a licensed geologist or subordinate under his or her
direction. G.S. 89E-13 requires that all drawings, reports. or documents involving geologic work which shall have been
prepared or approved by a licensed geologist or a subordinate under his or her direction be signed and sealed by him or
her.
B. INJECTION FLUID COMPOSITION
Describe the chemical, physical, biological and radiological characteristics of each injectant. Attach the Material Safety
Data Sheet (MSDS) for each injectant. !fa private well or a well within¼ mile of the injection site is used as the source
well, include chemical analysis of source fluid here.
C. INJECTION RATIONALE
Attach a brief description of the rationale for selecting the injectants and concentrations proposed for injection, including:
(I) goals of the injection project;
(2) a description of the reactions between the injectants and the contaminants present including specific breakdown
products or intermediate compounds that may be formed by the injection; and
(3) summary results of modeling or testing performed to investigate the injectant's potential or susceptibility to change
(biological, chemical or physical) in the subsurface.
D. INTECTTON PROCEDJ IRE AND EQl /IPMENI
Provide a detailed description of all planned activities related to the proposed injection including but not limited to: ·
(I) construction plans and materials;
(2) operation procedures;
(3) a detailed diagram of the surface and subsurface portions of the system; and
(4) a planned injection schedule.
E. MONITORING PLAN
Provide a plan for monitoring the results of the injection, including:
(I) a list of existing and proposed monitoring wells to be used;
(2) a list of monitoring parameters and analytical methods to be used; and
(3) a schedule for sampling to monitor the proposed injection.
NOTE: The selected monitoring wells must be located so as to detect any movement of injection fluids, process by-
products, or formation fluids outside the injection area or zone. The monitoring parameters should include the target
contaminants as well as secondary or intermediate contaminants which may result from the injection and other
parameters which may serve to indicate the progress of the intended reactions, such as pH, ORP, dissolved oxygen, and
other electron acceptors and donors. The monitoring schedule should be consistent with the pace of the anticipated
reactions and rate of transport of the injectants and contaminants.
UIC-51/ST ver. 12-05 Page 5 of7
F.
• • APPLICATION FOR PERl\fiT TO CONSTRUCT AND/OR USE A WELL(S) FOR INJECTION
Type 51 Wells -In Situ Groundwater Remediation/ Type ST Wells -Tracer Injection
WELL DATA
Provide a tabulation of data on all existing or abandoned wells within¼ mile of the injection well(s) which penetrate the
proposed injection zone, including, but not limited to, monitoring wells and wells proposed for use as injection wells.
Such data shall include a description of each well 's use (water supply, monitoring, etc), total depth, screened or open
borehole depth interval, and well construction or abandonment record, if available.
G. MA£S
Attach the following scaled, site-specific maps:
(I) Area map based on the most recent USGS 7.5' topographic map of the area, at a scale of 1:24,000 and
showing the location of the proposed injection site.
(2) Site map including:
a. all property boundaries;
b. all buildings within the property boundary;
c. existing and proposed injection wells or well field(s)
d. any existing sources of potential or known groundwater contamination, including waste storage,
treatment or disposal systems within¼ mile of the injection well or well system;
e. all surface water bodies within ¼ mile of the injection well or well system; and
f. all existing or abandoned wells within¼ mile of the injection well(s) which penetrate the proposed
injection zone, including, but not limited to, monitoring wells and wells proposed for use as injection
wells.
(3) Potentiometric surface map(s) including:
a. direction of groundwater movement
b. existing and proposed monitoring wells
c. existing and proposed injection wells
(4) Contaminant plume map(s) including:
a. the horizontal extent of the contaminant plume, including isoconcentration lines
b. existing and proposed monitoring wells
c. existing and proposed injection wells
(5) Cross-section(s) to the known or projected depth of contamination, including:
a. horizontal and vertical extent of the contaminant plume, including isoconcentration lines
b. major changes in lithology
UIC-51/ST ver. 12-05 Page 6 of7
• • APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AND/OR USE A WELL(S) FOR INJECTION
Type SI Wells -In Situ Groundwater Remediation I Type ST Wells -Tracer Injection
VI. CERTIFICATION
I, Roaer D. Towe inrilll~·ii nc1mt ,1f~iu11in,, dfil('lalJ hereby certify under penalty of law that
I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments
thereto and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining said information,
I believe that the information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties,
including the possibility of fines and imprisonment, for submitting false information. I agree to construct,
operate, maintain, repair, and if applicable, abandon the injection well(s) and all related appurtenances in
accordance with the approved specifications and conditions of the Permit.
~
Signature: -~ Z) · /4-,,./4 Date:_~'f--_,.,/34/_c, ~_, __ _
Title: Manager of Env. Remediation
ff authorized agent is acting on behalf of the applicant, supply a letter signed by the applicant authorizing the
above agent.
VII. CONSENT OF PROPERTY OWNER (if the property is not owned by the applicant)
("Owner" means any person who holds the fee or other property rights in the well being constructed. A well is
real property and its construction on land shall be deemed to vest ownership in the land owner, in the absence of
contrary agreement in writing.)
I, 1ck~ A'\id~rsD,t\:1f1\hll\('T--:\"1m11d1 • as owner of the property on which the
injection well(s) are to be constructed and operated, hereby consent to allow the applicant to construct each
injection well as outlined in this application and agree that it shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure
that the injection w s) confo to the Well Construction Standards (Title I SA NCAC 2C .0200)
Signature:~~--1".!~-bl::!~'.'.\:'.'.lizt~~==-------
Title:_-+-+---~~------------
Date: °t4~.u7 J
Submit l}YQ copies of the completed application package, including all attachments, to:
UIC-51/5T vcr.09-06
UIC Program
Aquifer Protection Section
North Carolina DENR-DWQ
1636 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699--1636
Telephone [phone]
Page 7 of7
BROWN AND
CALDWELL
•
Environmental Engineering & Consulting TRANSMITTAL MEMORANDUM
To: Mr. McKenzie Mallary Date: 11/22/02 . I File No: 23343.001
North Site Management Branch
EPA Region 4 Subject: FCX Suoerfund Site OU-3
Atlanta Federal Center
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, GA 30303
Contract No:
Eauioment No:
Scee. Ref:
Submittal No:
WE ARE SENDING TO YOU: ~ Attached or D Under separate cover via Make a selection the
D Shoo Drawinas ~Prints
Dconv af letter Dchanae Order
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED AS CHECKED BELOW:
D For approval
D For yaur use
D As requested
~ For review and comment
D With submittal review action noted
Copies Date No. Description
followina items:
□Plans Dsamoles
Dother: Dsoecifications
SUBMITTAL REVIEW ACTIONS:
D No exceptions taken
D Make revisions
D Amend and resubmit
D Rejected--see Remarks
D None
3 11/22/02 Pre-Final Phase II Desiim Plans
REMARKS:
Enclosed please find the design plans for the Phase II Pre-Final Remedial Design for Operable Unit Three (OU3)
FCX-Statesville Superfund Site, Statesville, North Carolina. These plans supplement the technical specifications
transmitted previously.
Please contact Ken Oma of Brown and Caldwell or Nancy Prince of El Paso with any questions.
cc: N. Testerman, NCDENR
N. Prince, El Paso .
H. Mitchell, Jr., Beaunit
M. Garlick, Burlington
150,501 Great Circle Road, Nashville, Tennessee, 37228
Phone: [phone] I FAX: [phone]
If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once
. '' ' .-.-' : . •------
STA T-040-0511319 I
UNITE.ATES ENVIRONMENTAL PRO'ftCTIO.ENCY
REGION 4
Mr. Roger Towe
Project Coordinator
El Paso Energy
ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
61 FORSYTH STREET
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960
July 14, 2000
RE: FCX-Statesville Operable Unit Three
Approval of Remedial Design
Dear Mr. Towe,
RECEIVED
NOV 08 2000
SUPERFUND SECTION
The purpose of this letter is to provide written documentation for EPA's approval of the
Operable Unit Three Remedial Design for the FCX-Statesville site in Statesville, North Carolina.
I would like to again acknowledge the hard work and effort El Paso Energy has expended in
completing the Remedial Design and initiating construction of the air sparging/soil vapor
extraction system to meet EPA's Construction Completion for the entire site by the September
30, 2000 deadline. EPA looks fo1ward to working with El Paso Energy and their consultant
Brown and Caldwell to ensure the air sparging/soil vapor extraction system is properly
constructed and achieves the long-term objectives of the OU3 remedy. Please contact me at
[phone] if you have questions or comments regarding this issue.
Sincerely,
~~A,0 /v'v).Ll~
McKenzie Mallary
Remedial Project Manager
North Site Management Branch
cc: Ken Oma, Brown and Caldwell
Nile Testerman, NCDENR
Internet Address {URL)• http://www.epa.gov
Recycled/Recyclable • Pnnted with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 30% Postconsumef)
JAMES 8. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
BILL HOLMAN
SECRETARY
NOR.CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
20 April 2000
Mr. Ken Mallary
Superfund Branch, Waste Management Division
US EPA Region IV
61 Forsyth Street, SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
DIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT
SUBJECT: Review of Final Remedial Design Report for Operable Unit 3
FCX-Statesville OU 3
Statesville, Iredell County
Dear Mr. Mallary:
The State of North Carolina has reviewed the Final Remedial Design Report for
FCX-Statesville OU3 dated March 2000 and received by the Division on OJ April
2000. The following comments are offered:
I. Page 1-4: PDI is not defined until page 2-1. Please include the
definition for PDI when it is first discussed.
2. Page 1-5: The remediation technologies for the ground water are air
sparging and monitored natural attenuation (MNA). Institutional
controls (IC) are part of the MNA process. There are several methods
IC can be put in place. One method is through an change in the
Record of Decision; e.g., an Explanation of Significant Difference
(ESD). Another method is the PRP's propose IC actions in the
Remedial Design and set a schedule to enact the proposals. IC
actions that our office would prefer include placing restrictive
covenants on the PRP's property and any property that has
contaminated ground water from activities from the site. (Attached
is restrictive covenant language that could be used. The attachment
may be modified to fit site specific conditions.) If restrictive
covenants are not placed on non-PRP owned contaminated properties,
then the PRP's should provide information on a periodic basis
(semiannual?) that no one is being exposed to the contaminated
ground water. Our office does not feel the remedial design is
complete unless institutional controls have been addressed in a
ma --·••·• 1646 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1646
401 OBERLIN ROAD, SUITE 150, RALEIGH, NC 2760S
PHONE 919•733-4996 FAX 919•715•3605
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/ AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPl.OYER • 50% RECYCL.E0/10% POST•CONSUMER PAPER
• manner that would be protective oft.itizens of North Carolina.
If you have any questions, please call me at 919-733-2801 ext. 350.
Sincerely,
-1 .,'J &, ;7 c-?7 ~,
... ,·.· .. ..--// _,,/ -~ ~/ / ,:? , ,
/ /A-/ . / ~<::.-/
Nile P. Testerman, P.E.
Environmental Engineer
Attachment: Restrictive covenant language
DECLARA.N OF PERPETUAL LAND USE .TRICTIONS
_________ Superfund Site, ______ County, North Carolina
The property which is the subject of this Declaration (hereinafter referred to as the
"Site"} is contaminated with hazardous substances, and is an INACTIVE HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCE OR WASTE DISPOSAL SITE under North Carolina's Inactive Hazardous
Sites Response Act, which consists of Section 130A-310 through Section 130A-310.19 of the
North Carolina General Statutes. This Declaration is part of a Remedial Action Plan for the
Site that has been approved by the Secretary of the North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (or its successor in function), or his/her delegate, as
authorized by NCGS Section 130A-310.3(f). The North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources shall hereinafter be referred to as "DENR."
[owner's name) [city & state of HO) is the owner in fee simple of the Site,
which is located in the County of _____ _, State ofNorth Carolina, and is known and legally
described as:
(Insert Real Property Description Here)
For the purpose of protecting public health and the environment, [owner's name] , acting
by and through Name of Atty, or other agent if there is one, (Esq.], hereby declares that all of the real
property described above shall be held, sold and conveyed subject to the following perpetual land
use restrictions, which shall run with the land; shall be binding on all parties having any right, title
or interest in the above-described property or any part thereof, their heirs, successors and assigns;
and shall, as provided in NCGS Section 130A-310.3(f), be enforceable without regard to Jack of
privity of estate or contract, lack of benefit to particular land, or lack of any property interest in
particular land. These restrictions shall continue in perpetuity and cannot be amended or cancelled
unless and until the [ name of county] County Register of Deeds receives and records the written
concurrence of the Secretary of DENR ( or its successor in function), or his/her delegate.
PERPETUAL LAND USE RESTRICTIONS
[Use those applicable.]
1. The Site shall be used for open space only and for no other purpose. "Open space" for
purposes of this restriction means an undeveloped, natural area where the sole human use shall be
non-dermal recreational activities such as biking, running, hunting, fishing, and bird watching. The
real property shall not be developed or utilized for residential, commercial or industrial purposes.
2. The Site shall not be used for organized sporting activities of any kind, including, but not
limited to, golf, football, basketball, soccer, and baseball.
3. The Site shall not be used for any above-or below-ground construction, improvements
(including, but not limited to, utilities, roads, and sidewalks). No alteration, disturbance or removal
of the existing soil, landscape and contours shall occur other than erosion control measures approved
-2-• byDENR.
4. The Site shall nQ! be used for agricultural or grazing purposes.
5. Any surface or underground water located within the open space area shall nQ! be used
for swimming or as a source of potable water.
6. The Site shall not be used for mining, extraction of coal, oil, gas or any other minerals or
non-mineral substances.
7. Mowing of vegetation and tree cutting is allowed on the Site.
ENFORCEMENT
The above land use restrictions shall be enforced by any owner, operator, or other party
responsible for the Site. The above land use restrictions may also be enforced by DENR through the
remedies provided in NCGS Chapter 130A, Article I, Part 2 or by means of a civil action, and may
also be enforced by any unit oflocal government having jurisdiction over any part of the Site. Any
attempt to cancel this Declaration without the approval of DENR or its successor in function shall
constitute noncompliance with the Remedial Action Plan approved by DENR for the Site, and shall
be subject to enforcement by DENR to the full extent of the law. Failure by any party required or
authorized to enforce any of the above restrictions shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right
to do so thereafter as to the same violation or as to one occurring prior or subsequent thereto.
NOTICE
Hazardous substances were stored, released and/or disposed of at the Site. [Include the
following sentence if there has been, or is to be, any remediation.] Following is a description of
remedial action taken, or to be taken, at the Site in order to protect public health and the
environment.
(Describe Remedial Action Here)
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES REMAIN ON THE SITE, BUT ARE NOT A DANGER TO
PUBLIC HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT, PROVIDED THAT THE ABOVE
RESTRICTIONS, AND ANY OTHER MEASURES REQUIRED BY DENR, ARE STRICTLY
COMPLIED WITH. In addition to this Declaration, a Notice oflnactive Hazardous Substance or
Waste Disposal Site, constituting a survey plat identifying the type, location and quantity of
hazardous substances remaining on the Site and approved by DENR pursuant to NCGS Section
130A-310.8, has been recorded at the [name of county] Register of Deeds' office at Book __ , Page
__ , or soon hereafter shall _be so recorded.
• -3-• FUTURE SALES, LEASES, CONVEYANCES AND TRANSFERS
When any portion of the Site is sold, leased, conveyed or transferred, pursuant to NCGS
Section l 30A-310.8( e) the deed or other instrument of transfer shall contain in the description
section, in no smaller type than that used in the body of the deed or instrument, a statement that the
above-described real property has been used as a hazardous substance or waste disposal site and a
reference by book and page to the recordation of the Notice of Inactive Hazardous Substance or
Waste Disposal Site referenced in the preceding paragraph above.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, _______ has caused these presents to be executed in
its name by [name of atty. or other agent if there is one], its [title) , this __ day of
------' 1998.
[name of owner if agent is signing)
By: [signature of atty. or other agent if there is one]
Signatory's name typed or printed:
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF _______ _
I, _______________ _, a Notary Public, do hereby certify that
__________________ personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged that he/she is the ----'-'[twit,.,lee,1) ____ of [owner) and that by
authority duly given, and as the act of [owner) , the foregoing instrument was signed in its
name by such [title]
WITNESS my hand and official seal this __ day of _______ , 1998.
Notary Public
My Commission expires: _______ _
[SEAL]
-----E \I' L...LJ
.EB 2 2 2000
SUPERFUND SECTION
ECKENFELDER"
BROWN ,IND
CALDWELL
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Mr. McKenzie Mallary
DarciM. Scherbak
2/18/00
•
JOB NO: 27-60313.011
SUBJECT: Final Remedial Design Report -FCX Superfund Site, Statesville, NC
We would like to request that the FCX documents sent to you in September, 1999 for the
Pre-Final Design be returned to the Nashville Brown and Caldwell office to be reused for
the Final RD. We will incorporate change pages and certifications, and the final documents
will be sent out. Please send your documents to Ken Oma's attention. Please return the
reports and specifications, however drawings do not need to be returned.
cc: N. Testerman,NCDEHNR
N. Prince, El Paso
H Mitchell, Jr., Beaunit
J. Wright, Burlington
P: \PROJ\60313 \M021800.doc
WAYNE M:::D.E:VITT
SECRC7AP.Y
.... ·-:·:::;.
£.~-s~·.§
•
Mr. Ken Mallary
NORTH,AROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT
fllf COPY
13 October 1999
Superfund Branch, Waste Management Division
US EPA Region IV
61 Forsyth Street, SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
SUBJECT: Review of Pre-Final Remedial Design Report
FCX-Statesville OU-3
Statesville, Iredell County
Dear Mr. Mallary:
The State of North Carolina has reviewed the Pre-Final Remedial Design Report for
FCX-Statesville OU-3 dated September 1999 and received by the Division on 20
September 1999. The following comments are offered:
1. Institutional controls, such as restrictive covenants or some other
mechanism to protect the public from exposure to ground water, need to
be finalized as mentioned in the ESD (page 1-5, I" paragraph).
2. Please submit the rankings that suggest that natural attenuation will
continue the migration ofVOCs (page 2-5, 2"' bullet).
3. The state needs to be informed of any modifications to the sampling plan
that may occur due to the two-and five-year evaluations. (page 3-2,
section 3.2)
If you have any questions, please call me at 919-733-2801 ext. 350 .
Sincerely,
Nile P. Testerman, P.E.
Environmental Engineer
401 OBERLIN ROAD, SUITE 150, RALEJC.H, NC 27605
PHONE9l9-733-4996 FAX 919·715-3605
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/ AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER -50% RECYCLED/I 0% POST•CDNSUMER PAPER
ECKENFELDER"'
AN INTEGRAL PART OF
BROWN AND
CALDWELL
227 French Landing Drive
Nashville. Tas .. see 37228-1605
Tel: {615) 2~88
Fax: {615} 256-8332
January 20, 1999
Mr. McKenzie Mallary
North Site Management Branch
EPA Region4
Atlanta Federal Center
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, GA 30303
•
RECEIVED
JA•• 99646.ois
IV 25 1999
SUPERFIJNO SECTION
RE: Additional Groundwater Sampling Monitoring Wells W-20i, W-24s, and
W-30i, FCX-Statesville Superfund Site, Statesville, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Mallary:
This is to confirm our telephone conversation with you and Nile Testerman of
NCDEHNR on January 19, 1999 .
. -. ··•· I. --·. .
In December 1998 groundwater samples were collected from 26 monitoring wells
at the FCX-Statesville Superfund Site OU-3. The purpose of the sampling event
was to obtain one complete set of data for all of the monitoring wells, including
the newly installed wells. Samples were analyzed for a variety of bioparameters
in the field, and for VOCs in the lab.
The preliminary unvalidated reports indicate that levels of VOCs in three of the
wells were not consistent with those observed in the prior two groundwater
sampling events. These data indicated higher PCE and other VOC concentrations
than had been detected previously in W-19s, W-201, and W-24s. Levels in other
wells appeared to be consistent with previous samples.
Monitoring well W-24s is being used to define the down-gradient extent of the
southern saprolite groundwater plume. Monitoring well W-20i is located in the
down-gradient portion of the northern intermediate plume and is important to the
intrinsic remediation evaluation. Well W-l 9s is located down-gradient of, but
closer to, the source area. Due to the importance of monitoring wells W-20i and
W-24s, we propose additional groundwater sampling of these two wells to
determine whether the December 1998 PCE results are anomalous or indicafr;,e of
a significant change, Monitoring well W-30i has demonstrated consistent
concentrations during each sampling event, and therefore, will be sampled as a
control point
\ \TN\SYS\DATA \oh\99646.0!5\10120.duc
KD
• Mr. McKenzie Mallary
January 20, 1999
Page 2
•
Two additional groundwater samples will be collected from each of the wells
W-20i, W-30i, and W-31s. The groundwater samples for each well will be
collected or two different days; representing two unique sampling events.
Groundwater samples will be analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
Prior to collecting each sample, the wells will be slow purged consistent with
methods previously used at the site. The groundwater sampling and analysis will
be conducted in accordance with the procedures and methods in the Field
Sampling Plan (FSP) dated February 25, 1994 and Quality Assurance Project Plan
(QAPP) dated February 25, 1994. The FSP and QAPP were prepared by
Aquate1rn, Inc. and were approved by the USEPA for the Remedial Investigation.
The VOC analyses will be performed at DQO level IV with independent data
validation since the parameters are a measure of groundwater quality at the Site.
As specified in the QAPP, one duplicate, one equipment blank, and one trip blank
will be collected and analyzed for VOCs. ·
We anticipate re-sampling these monitoring wells during the week of January 25,
1999, and will notify you by telephone of the dates and times of sampling as soon
as plans have been finalized.
As we discussed, we will be requesting 24-hour turn around time from the lab for
these samples, as well as expedited data validation. Unfortunately, this will delay
the preparation of the Pre-Design Investigation Report and the Preliminary Design
Document. We will provide both of these documents on March 22, 1999.
Please call Nancy Prince of El Paso at [phone] or me at [phone] if
you have any questions or comments regarding the project status.
Sincerely,
Brown and Caldwell
~$~Cl:
Gregory L. Christians
Project Manger
Envir6nmental Studies
cc: J. Testerman, NCDEHNR
N. Prince, El Paso
.J. Porter
J. Wright
G. House
\ \TN\SYS\DATA \oh\99646.015\10120.doc
Kenton H. Oma, P.E.
Assistant Technical Director
Waste Management
Well ID
W-19s
W-19s
W-19s
W-20i
W-20i
W-20i
W-24s
W-24s
W-24s
W-30i
W-30i
W-30i
• •
TABLE I
COMPARISON OF SELECTED OF voe RESULTS
FCX-STATESVILLE SUPERFUND SITE
Tetra-cis-1,2-
Sampling chloro-Trichloro-Dichiaro-
Date ethene ethene ethene
(ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L)
Dec-95 26 4 IJ
May-98 26D l.2JD .82DJ
Dec-98 250D 4.8 4.5
Mar-96 240 13J 29
May-98 3 I0DJ 18DJ 25)
Dec-98 I 100D 75D 120D
Dcc-95 2 0.31
May-98 0.35) IU IU
Dec-98 40D 12 7.5
Dec-95 530 28) 28)
May-98 SOOD 34D 20D
Dec-98 560D 46D 28D
Vinyl
chloride
(ug/L)
2U
2.5UD
IU
20U
2UJ
SOUD
IU
IU
0.13)
sou
2.5UD
20UD
•
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Suite 200
5405 Metric Place
•
® Norcross, Georgia 30092-2550
770-263-5400 • Fax [phone]
RECEIVED
DEC 021998
SUPERFUND SECTION
Mr. Ken Mallary
Remedial Project Manager
U.S. Emironmental Protection Agency
6 i Forsyth St., S. \V.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
RE: Remedial Design Oversight Report
FCX-OU3 Site, States;ille, North Carolina
Work Assignment No. 88-4BE8M
Contract No. 68-W9-0057
Document Control No. 4400-88-AHYL
Dear Mr. Mallary:
23 November 1998
Work Order No. 04400-088-097-0002-0l
Roy F. Weston, inc. (WESTON.) performed Remedial Design (RD) oversight of monitoring well installation acti,ities
from No,·ember i I -13 at the above-referenced site. These RD acti,ities were conducted by tlie PRP contractor,
Eckenfeldcr, Inc. Enclosed please find a report docwnenting these activities for your reference.
Please contact me "ith questions at 770/263-5400.
cc: R. Stem (US EPA -Region 4)
R. Doyle
K:\04.!00\088\097\monre~2 Coe
Sincerely,
ROY F. WESTON, fNC.
Qlli11JuL 1~tna K. Ford, EI.T.
V Oversight Engineer
Ralph P. McKecn, P.E.
Work Assignment Manager
Click to WESTON On The Web http://www.rfweston.com
• •
This document was prepared by Roy F. Weston, Inc., expressly for EPA It shall not be disclosed, in whole or in part, without the express \\Titten
pennission of EPA
INTRODUCTION
Remedial Design Ovi:rsig.ht Report
FCX-OUJ
Date: November 1998
REMEDIAL DESIGN OVERSIGHT REPORT
GROUNDWATER WELL INSTALLATION
FCX-OU3 SITE
NOVEMBER 11-13, 1998
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (WESTON®) provided oversight of remedial design (RD) act1v1t1es
conducted by the PRP contractor for EPA Region 4 at the FCX-OU3 Site in Statesville, North
Carolina. This report serves to document the monitoring well installation activities of monitoring
wells W-3 ls, W-3 Ii, and W-32i during the period of November 11-13, 1998. These RD activities
were conducted to further delineate the down-gradient extent of the northern and southern
groundwater plumes. Oversight activities were conducted by Jimmitria Ford of WESTON's
Norcross, Georgia office.
RD OVERSIGHT OBSERVATIONS
On November !Ith, the drilling for W-3ls began using the hollow-stem auger method. W-3ls is
located approximately 2000 feet north of the Burlington Textile Plant. Standard penetration tests
(SPTs) were performed, and split spoon samples were collected at five foot intervals. Rock was
encountered at approximately 16 feet below ground surface (bgs). Because rock was expected to
be at approximately 40 feet bgs, a possibility existed that the rock could have been an isolated
boulder. Thus, the drilling for W-3 li was conducted before W-3 ls was set in order to establish
the true depth of the rock layer. The down-hole hammer method in conjunction with an in-line
organic air filter was used for the drilling of W-31 i. During the drilling for W-31 i, rock was again
encountered at approxim_ately 16 feet bgs, so well W-31 s was set in the shallow borehole. More
details of the installation ofW-3 ls can be found on the attached EPA monitoring well installation
checklist form.
Once the borehole for W-31 i was advanced to a depth of 24 feet bgs, a galvanized steel 6-inch
diameter surface casing was installed.
K:1044001088\097\monrev2.doc
• •
This document was prepared by Roy F. Weston. [nc., expressly for EPA. It shall not be disclosed, in whole or in part. without lhc expro:ss "Tittcn
permission of EPA
Remedial Design Oversight Rcport
FCX-OUJ
Date: November t 998
On November 12th , drilling for W-3 li continued. After advancing to a depth of 32 feet bgs,
interval packer testing was conducted at ten foot intervals. A minimal amount of flow from the
bedrock formation was observed during each interval until a depth of approximately 70 feet bgs
was achieved. At this depth, water discharging from the formation was observed from a higher
depth in the borehole, approximately 37 feet bgs. Thus, on November 13th, a double packer
assembly was used that straddled the interval believed to have produced water.
On November 13th, the borehole for W-3 li was backfilled up to 46 feet bgs, bentonite chips were
placed up to 45 feet bgs, the well was set at 44 feet bgs (screen length of IO feet), No.2 sand was
placed up to 30 feet bgs, bentonite chips were placed up to 23 feet bgs, and the remaining section
of the borehole was grouted with a cement/bentonite grout mix. The grout mix contained four
percent bentonite with seven gallons of water per bag of cement.
Based on telephone conversation with Eckenfelder' s Sam Williams, the following activities were
conducted during the week of November 16th.
On the week of November 16th, drilling activities began on the installation of monitor well W-32i.
Upon drilling to a depth of 93 feet bgs, a six-inch, galvanized steel surface casing was installed
into W-32i. The total depth of the borehole is I 31.45 ft. The well contains a 20 foot length
screen, No. 2 sand was placed up to 110 feet bgs, bentonite chips were placed up to 86 feet bgs
(bentonite was allowed to hydrate overnight),· and the remaining section of the borehole was
grouted to the surface with a cement/bentonite grout mix. The same grout ratio used in W-3 Ii
was used for W-32i. No shallow well was installed at this location. W-3 ls, W-3 li, and W-32i
will be developed and sampled during this week. The groundwater samples will be tested for
VOCs, pesticides, metals, NH3, PO., TOC, 0 3, NO2, TKN, Cl", SO., HCO3/CO3, volatile fatty
acids, methane, methene, ethane, natural attenuation parameters -DO, Fe, Mn, CO2, H2S, and
oxidation/reduction potential (mV).
K·\04400\088\097\monrev2.doc
•
Photograph No. I Date: November 11, I 998
Location: FCX-OU3 Site; Statesville, North Carolina
Description: View of hollow stem auger method@ drilling location W-3 ls.
0 •
'.,,,·:.:·•~;
"•• .
f ~;)t,,tctit
Photograph No. 2 Date: November l l, 1998
Location: FCX-OU3 Site; Statesville, North Carolina
Description: View of split-spoon and containerized drill cuttings from drilling location W-3 ls.
,-i • •
SECTION 6 MON!TORJNG WELL INSTALLATION
(iv:..315)
GENERAL
I. Were the wells installed in the proper locations in accordance with the study plan and/or project
operations plan (POP)?
\ '.'.:,5 CQmm~nt,:
2. Were the wells installed starting in the least contaminated area and proceeding to the most
contaminated are.i?
Comments: ;\,;,4
3. Were proper safety protocols employed during the well installations?
CQmments: \.{ 5 ,
4. Were samples of the drilling mud, water, bentonite pellets, filter pack materials, etc., collected for
quality control analyses?
A{;:; (Qmment,:
EQUIPMENT DECONTAMINATION
5. Were the drilling rig(s), backhoe(s), etc., properly cleaned according to the SOP, Appendix B,
prior to arriving on site? '/4, Comment,: 'L.-_,•
6. What was the condition of the drilling and sampling equipment when it arrived on site?
CQmm~nt,: hcL,'.!) t:·,V:)!:,j,-_((·/V'
I
7. Was a decontamination area located where the cleaning activities would not cross-contaminate
clean nnd/or drying equipment'/ 1/-<
CQmrnents: 1=-~
8. Was clean equipmen\P_\:~perly ,,rnpped and stored in a clean area?
CQmments: / <: .5
9. Was the drilling rig(s) properly cleaned between well borings?
Comments:
10. Were the cleaning and decontamination procedures conducted in accordance with the SOP?
CQmment,:
I I. What type of drilling method(s) was used to install the wells?
CQmment,: /rd.(.c:y.,:--5T,-:-;:,·i A ,t,'" P /7! FTJ-,' cf) ,
12. Was this drilling method(s) the same as proposed in the study plan and/or POP?
(:Qmm:nt:r \,{-_s, ,
I 3. Were soil samples collected for logging and analyses as the wells were installed?
Comment,: 11-</ .1':/: 11"1_:)r r:; C>:-i,i,,[(,:/E!) /~p I ,l)J..; lf/v/,:l.1/_(T~<1 B~-r:-r
14.
... . r;:pt,,iT s/.-::t,.1 1 5A>1pi-'..:f:, cBf:r_1-!VC0
If yes to I,. at what mtcrvals and by what meth_od? . F-f-, ,,o/i§.5ZFZtl'..f£,:'!l/
Comments: ,_; /t:1_:i'" Xiv?('.~ I.J/,•i-5, R1-: ~/L l;f SA;,:·.;v-:Yvt:.,... /Jt,f,,f;Jc .. <~ s: -
' I ,
EISOPQAM 2-38 May !996
I II i
• •
15. If air rotJ.ry WJS used, wns on in-line organic air filter employed? Wns a cyclone H:locity
dissipator used?
.:V/11 (Qmments:
JG. What diameter borehole(s) were installed'/
[Qmment,: ,:..\:1 ;-I. ,l: (!.~/it F
I 7. Were surface outer casings used?
CQmment:r //e,i
I 8. If yes to 17, what size and to what depd1?
[Qmment,:
19. Were the wells double cased?
[Qmment,:
20. If yes to 19, explain procedure.
[Qmment,:
PER.t',,!ANENT WELL INST ALLA TI ON
2 I. What type of ,,·ell casing(s) and screen(s) were used?
[Qmment,: ,L}t.·:.., t;;,;;..; ¼, ' I(, 5_(_,~ T
22. What diameter were the well casing(s) Screen(s)?
[Qmment,: j_ T/\'t/-J u:·/! M c-;€.i.!_
23. Was there a minimum two inch annulus around the casing between casing and borehole was or
inside augers)? v~-'::: 1.< [Qmment,: / ... .', .. ' !3,,:J.._'ff-1::i ic
24. What was the length of the well screen(s)?
[Qmments: Ii F,,,;T
25. What was the slot size of the well screen(s)?
[Qmment,: /I ;·L_·.;r
26. Was the well screen(s) commecciallv manufactured? If so, by whom? \,'~· . [Qmment0: / c.-.>
27. Was the bottom of the well screen(s) plugged or capped?
[Qmment,: It,
I
28. Were sand and/or gravel (filter) packs installed?
[Qmment,: \/-c; -~~jl 1v/)
I
29. Specify type of materials in 28 [(play sand, Ottawa sand, etc.) and grain size (20/30, 20/40, etc.)],
if kn0\\11.
[Qmment,: A<;,;;_ 'ol!til!
30. Was a sieve analysis conducted to determine well screen slot size and filter pack grain size?
[Qmment,: 1~,u
3 I. Were the wells installed to the proper depths?
Comments: \/~ ~:
EISOPQAM 2. 39 May 1996
• •
'? Were well screen/41aced at the proper intervals'1 J __
CQmment,: \ [-·,; ,
" \Vere the filter pncks pbccd n minimum of two feet ~bO\'C the well screens? JJ.
(Qmmcnts: /~':.>' h_,-E i-
34. Was the tremie tube method used to place the filter packs'/
(Qmments: /I. -. !,'
35. Were seals placed above the filter packs'/
CQmment,: \j= 5
36. If yes to 35, what material was used for the seals'/
CQmment,: e·,c;:,]N/ c:i fC' /!:"! c Cl 5
37, Was the vertical thic!wess of the seals a minimum of two feet'/
CQmment:;: 1/~s. ;_,....: ;:tc/
I
38. lfbentonite pellets were used for the seals above the filter packs, were they allowed to hydrate a
minimwn of 8 hours?
CQmment:;: L,4 i.~1J 1.,·:;:J~JE,f /,1//'c,f E £
39, Did contractor/driller have documentation from manufacturer stating recommended hydration
time?
Comment:;: v;_,;
I
40. Was the tremie tube method used to place the bentonite pellets?
CQmment,: ;J{)
41. Was the annulus grout~d from the seal to within two feet of the grow1d surface, or below the frost
line?
CQmment,: .f'/c, t;o-c .r:· .. : ? re.?1 f:'>6 t;. . C ~1.:1;-N/ I> f,.'(E [) J,v;/'c'AO ~ tlr-?,_/((1,,t/ .
I ,
42. Was the tremie tube method used to place the grout in the annulus?
Comment,: /t,~:, ~ ,';Ve V 2 FEc7 ;Jc,7.;; .
/ I
4' J, If no to 42, what method was used?
CQmment:;:
44, What type of grout was used to seal the annulus (neat cement, cement/bentonite, cement/sand,
etc.)?
(~FMi:/'.i; /<i,1/[) CQmment,:
I
45. What grout mix ratio was used? (should be stated in the POP)
CQmment,:
46. What was the density of the grout? (lb/gal, etc.)
CQmment:;:
47. lfbentonite grout was used, was the density at least 9.4 lb/ga[?
CQmment,:
48. Was the density determined using a mud balance?
CQmment:;: fl,{-;-_;)jlL,~f) /N EU.1.~/-.!5
I
49. Was the grout allowed to set a minimum of24 hours before the surface pad was installed?
Comments: /!//i
EISOPQA,vl May 1996
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• •
50. \VJs a concrete \'·¥"!~cc pJd installed with nn outer protective casing .ind locking c:ip?
(:Qmment,: Vcs.
'
51. Ho\\' far below the ground surface did the concrete pnd extend?
(Qmment~:
52. What were the dimensions of the concrete pads?
(:Qmment,: c1·)( _]_ I
53. Did the well casings extend to a minimum of 2.5 feet above the ground surface?
(:Qmment,: /1.t/, /-t-&tcii /A('fei'./
54. How far above the ground~urface did the outer prot~ctive casings extend'1
(:Qmment,: fl/ t)/'iT C':t:I f /'. ,:,; t ~(,;/,'-:_ (i~'(i.'/,J\I/) F1_,,t/1r:.,J/ /':/Jf1~1rV
'
55. Did the outer protective casings have weep holes?
(:Qmment,: 1//IJ
56. Were the wells properly developed?
(:Qmments: kilt S· li:Tit £,;:; ;JF,~(liPf";) tw //IE t,iiEt!/ c:.c A{,F /JT,;i.
57. Describe method of development.
(:Qmment,:
58. Give a general evaluation of the activities observed during the installation of the wells.
(:Qmment,:
TEMPORARY WELL INSTALLATION
59. Describe methods and procedures.
(:Qmment,:
EISOPQAlv! 2 -41 May t996
•
April 28, 1998
Mr. McKenzie Mallary
North Site Management Branch
EPA Region 4
Atlanta Federal Center
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, GA 30303
ECKENFELDER INC:
RE: Baseline Sampling of Groundwater Monitoring Wells,
Remedial Design for OU3,
•
FCX-Statesville Superfund Site, Statesville, North Carolina
Dear Ken:
"f(X-S.-\,.,1,~ ;\ \,.
0 4-~
RECEIVED
MAY 04 1998
SUPERFUND SECTION
0313.02
Mr. Ralph McKeen of Weston called to inform me that the schedule for startup of the
OUl treatment system was ahead of schedule and could occur as early as the week
of May 11, 1998. We had tentatively planned to perform the baseline sampling of
selected monitoring wells the week of May 11 but have now rescheduled the
sampling for this week, so that the data can be obtained prior to startup of the OUl
treatment system.
We would like to make two minor adjustments to the chemical analysis that was
presented in the baseline sampling plan (letter to you dated April 17, 1998). The
proposed adjustments are:
Add the chemical analysis of natural attenuation parameters to the
planned analysis for metals parameters for samples from nwnitoring well
W-9s. The area west of the Burlington Facility near monitoring well W-9s
is a candidate location for the pilot test and we would like to have the
additional groundwater data in advance of installation of any pilot test
wells and monitoring probes.
Remove the chemical analysis for 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene from the list of
VOC analytes. This constituent was not identified as a constituent of
concern in the ROD and 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene requires a modified
procedure for analysis when analyzed with the VOCs, since it is considered
an SVOC.
Q:\PHOJ\0313.02\l,0.\2798.lJOC
227 Fn.:nd1 l~111di11~ Dri\L'
,°\;L',!l\'illc, 'li.:rllll'',',Cl' 57 22H
<1lc,_25c,_22HH
h\X (il7.~'i(1 H."i:'i2
Mr. McKenzie Mallary
Page 2
April 30, 1998
• •
We have set up a conference call for this afternoon, April 30, 1998, to discuss the
project and would like to discuss these proposed adjustments to the· chemical.
analysis at that time.
Please call Nancy Prince of El Paso at [phone] or me at [phone] if you
have any questions or comments regarding the project status.
Sincerely,
ECKENFELDER INC.®
Kenton H. Oma, P.E.
Assistant Technical Director
Waste Management
cc:
N. Testerman, NCDEHNR
N. Prince, El Paso
M. Kipp, El Paso
J. Porter, Andrews & Kurth
Q:\ I'llO,J\0313.02 \J,042798. DOC
H. Mitchell, Jr., Beaunit
J. Wright, Burlington
B. Wicker, Burlington
G. House, BPMH&L
•
April 17, 1998
Mr. McKenzie Mallary
North Site Management Branch
EPA Region 4
Atlanta Federal Center
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, GA 30303
•
ECKENFELDER INC'
Q,o
RECEIVED
APR 20 1998
SUPERFUND SECTION
0313.02
RE: Proposed Baseline Sampling of Groundwater Monitoring Wells,
Remedial Design for OU3,
FCX-Statesville Superfund Site, Statesville, North Carolina
Dear Ken:
This letter presents a plan for the proposed baseline sampling of selected
groundwater monitoring wells at the FCX-Statesville Superfund Site in Statesville,
North Carolina. As we discussed in the conference calls on March 17 and April 3,
1998, we need to collect and analyze baseline samples for the OU3 Remedial Design
(RD) prior to startup of the OUl groundwater extraction system. Since startup of
the OUl groundwater extraction system is expected sometime in June 1998, it is
necessary to collect baseline samples in parallel with preparation of the RD Work
Plan for OU3. This sampling effort is intended to take advantage of the opportunity
to obtain data prior to the initiation of the operation of OUl. Including this effort in
the RD Work Plan would likely result in missing this opportunity. This letter
therefore addresses only baseline sampling of selected monitoring wells and other
efforts will be included in the RD Work Plan that is currently being prepared.
We are prepared to initiate this sampling in May 1998 (contingent upon receipt of
approval). We have set up a conference call on April 30, 1998, to discuss the
schedule and coordination for this sampling.
Selected Monitoring Wells
We propose collecting baseline groundwater samples from monitoring wells located
within the plume and outside the plume. Twenty-one of the monitoring wells have
been identified for baseline sampling and analysis and are listed in Table l. On-Site
and off-Site sampling will be performed to evaluate metals concentrations and to
evaluate natural attenuation. Table 1 also identifies the types of analysis proposed
for each monitoring well to he sampled.
F:\OATA' proj\O'.l I :\.02\I0:120'.Jll.cl,K:
227 Frt:nd1 J;u1din~ l >riH_'
.-.::t.,Jl\'ilk:, 'IL·rulC.'>'>(.'L° :1-; .QH
()]<i,2"i"i.22~
l·:•\X (11':i.2"i(1.H.-\52
• Mr. McKenzie Mallary
Page 2
April 17, 1998
Metals Concentrations
•
Metals concentrations were observed at greater than twice the background levels in
data collected during the Remedial Investigation (Aquaterra, 1996). Historical data
and soils analysis indicated that significant sources of metals have not been
associated with the Site. As a result, a select number of monitoring wells· were
sampled f,ir total and filtered metals analyses. In all cases, metals concentrations
are significantly lower in the filtered sample. These results strongly supported the
conclusions that:
metals in Site groundwater exist as suspended solids or colloids due to the
sampling technique and that
metals are not considered to be associated with Site activities and present
no risk of migration.
Because filtered groundwater results are generally not accepted by the USEPA, the
groundwater from selected wells that was previously analyzed as filtered samples
will be re-sampled using a slow purge technique. Slow purge techniques have been
accepted by the USEPA and allow for an unfiltered sample to be collected with
significant reductions in suspended solids. The slow purge method involves purging
the wells at rates of less than 1 liter per minute. Eight monitoring wells will be
sampled, including background well W-lls, to evaluate metals concentrations in
groundwater (Table 1). Table 2 presents the analytical reference methods for
analyses of these baseline samples.
Natural Attenuation
Natural attenuation is being evaluated to address the constituents of concern in
groundwater in conjunction with source control remedies. The necessary natural
attenuation parameters that will be used to evaluate the Site for the occurrence of
reductive dechlorination in Site groundwater are presented in Table 2. The
groundwater samples will be evaluated using a combination of measurements to be
performed by the field sampling personnel and laboratory analyses to be performed
by the Analytical and Testing Services Division of ECKENFELDER INC. Because
of the sample's sensitivity to exposure to the atmosphere, carbon dioxide, iron (II),
manganese (ll), sulfide, and dissolved oxygen will be measured in the field, as will
the traditional field parameters (conductivity, oxidation-reduction potential, pH, and
temperature). Dissolved oxygen will be measured using a Hach kit. Alkalinity will
be measured in the laboratory. (Personal communication with John Wilson of
USEPA, Ada, Oklahoma indicates that the Ada group has seen little difference
between field and laboratory measurements of alkalinity.)
~-:\ll,\TA '\proj\0313.02\1032098.cloc
• Mr. McKenzie Mallary
Page 3
April 17, 1998
•
The list of natural attenuation parameters in Table 2 includes all of the parameters
identified in the ROD as "should be added to the current list" and all of the
"additional parameters (that) may be added" except for hydrogen. The list is
consistent with the preliminary "Technical Protocol for Natural Attenuation of
Chlorinated Hydrocarbons in Groundwater" developed by the U. S. Air Force Center
for Environmental Excellence. In addition, the list is consistent with the "Draft
Region IV Approach to Natural Attenuation of Chlorinated Solvents", with the
exception of alkalinity, which will be measured in the laboratory.
Procedures and Methods
The groundwater sampling and analysis will be conducted in accordance with the
procedures and methods in the Field Sampling Plan (FSP) dated February 25, 1994
and Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated February 25, 1994, except as
amended by the analytical methods listed in Table 2. The FSP and QAPP were
prepared by Aquaterra,' Inc. and were approved by the USEPA for the Remedial
Investigation. Data Quality Objects (DQOs) are also listed in Table 2. Metals
analysis and VOC analysis will be performed using DQO level IV with independent
data validation since the parameters are a measure of groundwater quality at the
Site. DQO level I will be used for the natural attenuation field measurements and
DQO level III will be used for other natural attenuation parameters. The field
activities will be performed under a Site-Specific Health and Safety Plan prepared
by ECKENFELDER INC.
Please call Nancy Prince of El Paso at [phone] or me at [phone] if you
have any questions or comments regarding the project status.
Sincerely,
ECKENFELDER INC.®
Kenton H. Oma, P.E.
Assistant Technical Director
Waste Management
cc:
N. Testerman, NCDEHNR
N. Prince, El Paso
M. Kipp, El Paso
J. Porter, Andrews & Kurth
F: \DATA\ p roj \0:1 I :l, 02 \l0320!J8 .doc
H. Mitchell, Jr., Beaunit
J. Wright, Burlington
B. Wicker, Burlington
G. House, BPMH&L
• •
TABLE 1
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS SELECTED FOR BASELINE SAMPLING
Monitoring Well
W-5s
W-6s
W-7s
W-9s
W-16s
W-16i
W-17s
W-llsa
W-5i
W-lOib
W-12ib
W-12sb
W-lssb
W-20s
W-20i
W-22s
W-22i
W-24s
W-28i
W-29i
W-30i
al\1etals evaluation background well.
bNatural attenuation background well.
J,':\DAT A \PRO,l'\0313.02\ TO! .DOC
Metals
Parameters
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Natural Attenuation
Parameters
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF CHEMICAL ANALYSES AND ANALYTICAL METHOD REFERENCES
FOR BASELINE SAMPLING OF GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS
Sample Evaluation
Metals
Natural Attenuation
Field Measurements:
Laboratory Analyses:
Chemical Test/Analyte Parameter
TAL metals only
Carbon dioxide
Iron (II)
Manganese (II)
Sulfide
Conductivity
Oxidation-reduction potential (ORP)
pH
Dissolved oxygen (DO)
Temperature
Ammonium nitrogen
Chloride
Iron (total)
Manganese (total)
Nitrate/nitrite
Phosphate (total)
Sulfate
Total Kjcldahl Nitrogen (TKN)
Ethane, ethene, and methanee
VO Cs (PCE degradation parameters)f
Alkalinity (carbonate/bicarbonate)g
Dissolved total organic carbon (TOC)
Volatile fatty acids
Analytical Reference Method a
Aquaterra QAPP Table 3
Hach Kitc
Hach K.itC
Hach K.itC
Hach KitC
ASTM Method D-1125-82
ASTM Method D-1498-76
ASTM Method D-1293-84
Hach K.itc
NAd
USEPA Method 350.3
USEPA Method 325.2
Aquaterra QAPP Table 3
Aquaterra QAPP Table 3
USEPA Method 353.2
USEPA Method 365.2
USEPA Method 375.4/9038
USEPA Method 351.4
USEPA Method 8015-Modified
Aquaterra QAPP Table 2
Standard Methods 2320B
USEPA Method 415.1
Standard i\Iethods 5560C
DQO Levelb
IV
II
II
II
I
II
II
II
II
II
III
III
IV
IV
III
III
III
III
III
IV
III
III
III
asample preservatives, when required by the method, will be added to sample containers at the analytical laboratory prior to sampling.
bDQOs and QA/QC frequencies per "Environmental Investigations Standard Operating Procedures and Quality Assurance Manual",
!\fay 1996, USEPA Region 4. Level I = Field Screening; Level II = Field Analyses; Level III = Screening Data with Definitive Confirmation;
Level IV= Definitive Data.
Cr.fothod will be per manufacture's procedures.
dNot Applicable.
€Analysis will be subcontracted to Specialized Assays, Nashville, Tennessee.
fCarbon tetrachloride, chloroethane, chloroform, 1,1-DCA, 1,1-DCE, cis-1,2-DCE, trans-1,2-DCE, 1,2-dichloropropane, methylene chloride,
chloromethane, PCE, 1,1,1-TCA, 1,1,2-TCA, 1,2-DCA, TCE, vinyl chloride, toluene, and 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene.
gSamples to be collected in zero headspace containers to prevent exchange of carbon dioxide between the samples and the atmosphere.
F:\DATA WRO.f\0313.02\ T02.DOC Page l of l
•
•
•
April 13, 1998
Mr. McKenzie Mallary
North Site Management Branch
EPA Region 4
Atlanta Federal Center
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, GA 30303
•
ECKENFELDER INC.'
RECEIVED
APR 141998
SUPERFUND SECTION
RE: Proposed Baseline Sampling of Groundwater Monitoring Wells,
Remedial Design for OU3,
FCX-Statesville Superfund Site, Statesville, North Cf!rolina
Dear Ken:
0313.02
This letter presents a plan for the proposed baseline sampling of selected
groundwater monitoring wells at the FCX-Statesville Superfund Site·in Statesville,
North Carolina. As we discussed in the conference calls on March 17 and April 3,
1998, we need to collect and analyze baseline samples for the OU3 Remedial Design
(RD) prior to startup of the OUl groundwater extraction system. Since startup of
the OUl groundwater extraction system is expected sometime in June 1998, it is
necessary to collect baseline samples in parallel with preparation of the RD Work
Plan for OU3. This sampling effort is intended to take advantage of the opportunity
to obtain data prior to the initiation of the operation of OUl. Including this effort in
the RD Work Plan would likely result in missing this opportunity. This letter
therefore addresses only baseline sampling of selected monitoring wells and other
efforts will be included in the RD Work Plan which is currently being prepared.
We are prepared to initiate this sampling in May 1998 (contingent upon receipt of
approval). We have set up a conference call on April 17, 1998, to discuss this plan
and the project status.
Selected Monitoring Wells
We propose collecting baseline groundwater samples from monitoring wells located
within the plume and outside the plume. Twenty-one of the monitoring wells have
been identified for baseline sampling and analysis and are listed in Table l. On-Site
and off-Site sampling will be performed to evaluate metals concentrntions and to
evaluate natural attenuation. Table 1 also identifies the types of analysis proposed
for each monitoring well to be sampled.
F,\ll,\ T,\ '\prnj \(rl I ;1.()2\IO:mmll.c!m:
l.!.'7 French J:u1di11g I l1 i\L'
\';1.<,h\·illc. 'Ji·1111t·.'>'>L'L" :1,~.!.!H
(d').:.!';"i . .!.!XH
IAX(,J"i . .!"i(,H,-\.t!
• Mr. McKenzie Mallary
Page 2
April 13, 1998
Metals Concentrations
•
Metals concentrations were observed at greater than twice the background levels in
data collected during the Remedial Investigation (Aquaterra, 1996). Historical data
and soils analysis i11dicated that significant sources of metals have not been
associated with the Site. As a result, a select number of monitoring wells were
sampled for total and filtered metals analyses. In all cases, metals concentrations
are significantly lower in the filtered sample. These results strongly supported the
conclusions that:
metals in Site groundwater exist as suspended solids or colloids clue to the
sampling technique and that
metals are not considered to be associated with Site activities and present
no risk of migration.
Because filtered groundwater results are generally not accepted by the USEPA, the
groundwater from selected wells that was previously analyzed as filtered samples
will be re-sampled using a slow purge technique. Slow purge techniques have been
accepted by the USEPA and allow for an unfiltered sample to be collected with
significant reductions in suspended solids. The slow purge method involves purging
the wells at rates of less than ! liter per minute. Eight monitoring wells will be .
sampled, including background well W-lls, to evaluate metals concentrations in
groundwater ('!'able l). '!'able 2 presents the analytical reference methods for
analyses of these baseline samples.
Natural Attenuation
Natural attenuation is being evaluated to address the constituents of concern in
groundwater in conjunctio~ with source control remedies. The neces1,ary natural
attenuation parameters that will be used to evaluate the Site for the occurrence of
reductive dechlorination in Site groundwater are presented in Table 2. The
groundwater samples will be evaluated using a combination of measurements to be
performed by the field sampling personnel and laboratory analyses to be performed
by the Analytical and Testing Services Division of ECKENFELDER INC. Because
of the sample's sensitivity to exposure to the atmosphere, carbon dioxide, iron (11),
manganese (II), sulfide, and dissolved oxygen will be measured in the field as will
the traditional field parameters (conductivity, oxidation-reduction potential, pH, and
temperature). Dissolved oxygen will be measured using a Hach kit. Alkalinity will
be measured in the laboratory. (Personal communication with John Wilson of
USEPA, Ada, Oklahoma indicates that the Ada group has seen little difference
between field and laboratory measurements of alkalinity.)
F:\DAT A \proj\0:J i'.l,02\l0:120D8.doc
• Mr. Mcl(enzie Mallary
Page 3
April 13, 1998
•
The list of natural attenuation parameters in Table 2 includes all of the parameters
identified in the ROD as "should be added to the current list" and all of the
"additional parameters (that) may be added" except for hydrogen. The list is
consistent with the preliminary "Technical Protocol for Natural Attenuation of
Chlorinated Hydrocarbons in Groundwater" developed by the U.S. Air Force Center
for Environmental Excellence. In addition, the list is consistent with the "Draft
Region IV Approach to Natural Attenuation of Chlorinated Solvents", with the
exception of allrnlinity, which will be measured in the laboratory.
Procedures and Methods
The groundwater sampling and analysis will be conducted in accordance with the
procedures and methods in the Field Sampling Plan (FSP) dated February 25, l\)94
and Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated February 25, 1994, except as
amended by the analytical methods listed in Table 2. The FSP and QAPP were
prepared by Aquaterra, Inc. and were approved by the USEPA for the Remedial
Investigation. Data Quality Objects (DQOs) are also listed in Table 2. Metals
analysis and VOC analysis will be performed using DQO level IV with independent
data validation since the parameters are a measure of groundwater quality at the
Site. DQO level I will be used for the natural attenuation field measurements and
DQO level III will be used for other natural attenuation parameters. The field
activities will be performed under a Site-Specific Health and ·safety Plan prepared
by ECKENFELDER INC.
Please call Nancy Prince of El Paso at [phone] or me at (Gl5) 255-2288 if you
have any questions or comments regarding the project status.
Sincerely,
ECKENFELDER INC:•
Kenton H. Oma, P.E.
Assistant Technical Director
Waste Management
cc:
N. Testerman, NCDEHNR
N. Prince, El Paso
M. Kipp, El Paso
J. Porter, Andrews & Kurth
1-':\I l,\T,\ \proj\O:l l :I.O;!'.lO:l'lO!J8.doc
H. Mitchell, Jr., Beaunit
J. Wright, Burlington
B. Wicker, Burlington
G. House, BPMI-l&L
• •
TABLE 1
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS SELECTED FOR BASELINE SAMPLING
Monitoring Well
W-5s
W-6s
W-7s
W-9s
W-16s
W-16i
W-17s
W-llsa
W-5i
W-lOib
W-12ib
W-lzsb
W-18sb
W-20s
W-20i
W-22s
W-22i
W-24s
W-28i
W-29i
W-30i
aMetals evaluation background well.
bNatural attenuation background well.
Q:\proj\0313.02\ TO I .DOC
Metals
Parameters
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Natural Attenuation
Parameters
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
i'n(:r. I of I
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF CHEMICAL ANALYSES AND ANALYTICAL METHOD REFERENCES
FOR BASELINE SAMPLING OF GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS
Sample Evaluation
Metals
Natural Attenuation
Field Measurements:
Laboratory Analyses:
Chemical Test/Analyte Parameter
TAL metals only
Carbon dioxide
Iron (II)
Manganese (II)
Sulfide
Conductivity
Oxidation-reduction potential (ORP)
pH
Dissolved oxygen (DO)
Temperature
Ammonium nitrogen
Chloride
Iron (total)
Manganese (total)
Nitrate/nitrite
Phosphate (total)
Sulfate
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKJ\Jl
Ethane, ethene, and methanee
VOCs (PCE degradation parameters)f
Alkalinity (carbonatelbicarbonate)g
Dissolved total organic carbon (TOC)
Volatile fatty acids
Analytical Reference Methoda
Aquaterra QAPP Table 3
Hach KitC
Hach Kitc
Hach KitC
Hach KitC
ASTM l\>lethod D-1125-82
ASTM Method D-1498-76
ASTM lvlethod D-1293-84
Hach KitC
NAd
USEPA Method 350.3
USEPA Method 325.2
Aquaterra QAPP Table 3
Aquaterra QAPP Table 3
USEPA Method 353.2
USEPA Method 365.2
USEPA Method 375.4/9038
USEPA Method 351.4
USEPA i'vlethod 8015-Modified
Aquaterra QAPP Table 2
Standard Methods 2320B
USEPA Ivlethod 415.1
Standard Methods 5560C
DQO Levelb
IV
II
II
II
I
II
II
II
JI
JI
III
Ill
IV
IV
III
III
III
III
III
IV
III
III
III
asample preservatives, when required by the method, will be added to sample containers at the analytical laboratory prior to sampling.
bDQOs and QA/QC frequencies per -"Environmental Investigations Standard Operating Procedures and Quality Assurance Manual",
Ilfay 1996, USEPA Region 4. Level I= Field Screening; Level II= Field Analyses; Level III= Screening Data with Definitive Confirmation;
Level IV= Definitive Data.
CMethod will be per manufacture's procedures.
dNot Applicable.
eAnalysis will be subcontracted to Specialized Assays, Nashville, Tennessee.
fCarbon tetrachloride, chloroform, 1,1-DCE, cis-1,2-DCE, trans-1,2-DCE, 1,2-dichloropropane, methylene chloride, chloromethane, PCE,
1,1,1-TCA, 1,1,2-TCA, 1,2-DCA, TCE, vinyl chloride, and 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene.
gSamples to be collected in zero headspace containers to prevent exchange of carbon dioxide between the samples and the atmosphere.
F: '\D ,\ T :\ \proj\ 0313 .02\ tOZ_rloc Page I of l
•
•
..,. •
March 25, 1998
Mr. McKenzie Mallary
North Site Management Branch
EPA Region 4
Atlanta Federal Center
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, GA 30303
•
ECKENFELDER INC'
RE: Proposed Baseline Sampling of Groundwater Monitoring Wells,
Remedial Design for OU3,
FCX-Statesville Superfund Site, Statesville, North Carolina
Dear Ken:
12D \-C )(~.S-\,,\es.,' ii \a
QI..{. 3
0313.02
This letter presents a plan for the proposed baseline sampling of selected
groundwater monitoring wells at the FCX-Statesville Superfund Site in Statesville,
North Carolina. As we discussed in the conference call on March 17, 1998, we need
to collect and analyze baseline samples for the OU3 Remedial Design prior to
startup of the OUl groundwater extraction system. Since startup of the OUl
groundwater extraction system is expected sometime in June 1998, it is necessary to
collect baseline samples in parallel with preparation of the Remedial Design Work
Plan for OU3.
We are prepared to initiate this sampling in May 1998 (contingent upon receipt of
approval). We will set up a conference call on April 2 or 3, 1998, to discuss this plan
and the project status.
Selected Monitoring Wells
We propose collecting baseline groundwater samples from monitoring wells located
within the plume and outside the plume. Nineteen of the monitoring wells have
been identified for baseline sampling and analysis and are listed in Table 1. On-Site
and off-Site sampling will be performed to evaluate metals concentrations and to
evaluate natural attenuation. Table 1 also identifies the investigation proposed for
each monitoring well to be sampled.
F: \DATA\ p ruj \O:l J :1, 0 2\l0320!JS. doc
227 Fn.:nch l~llKlillg l )l'i\l'
?\;1...,\wilk:, ·li:1111t·S'-l.ac _"ii 22H
61 'i.2'1'i.22K~
IAX ()1-;.2:;(, S;',,~2
• • Mr. McKenzie Mallary
Page 2
March 25, 1998
Metals Concentrations
Metals concentrations were observed at greater than twice the background levels in
data collected during the Remedial Investigation (Aquaterra, 1996). Historical data
and soils analysis indicated that significant sources of metals have not been
associated with the Site. As a result, a select number of monitoring wells were
sampled for total and filtered metals analyses. In all cases, metals concentrations
drop significantly in the filtered sample. These results strongly supported the
conclusions that:
metals in Site groundwater exist as suspended solids or colloids due to the
sampling technique and that
metals are not considered_ to be associated with Site activities and present
no risk of migration.
Because filtered groundwater results are generally not accepted by the USEPA, the
groundwater from selected wells that was previously analyzed as filtered samples
will be re-sampled using a slow purge technique. Slow purge techniques have been
accepted by the USEPA and allow for an unfiltered sample to be collected with
significant reductions in suspended solids. The slow purge method involves purging
the wells at rates of less than l liter per minute. Eight monitoring wells will be
sampled, including background well W-lls, to evaluate metals concentrations in
groundwater (Table 1). Table 2 presents the analytical reference methods for
analyses of these baseline samples.
Natural Attenuation
Natural attenuation is being evaluated to address the constituents of concern in
groundwater in conjunction with source control remedies. The necessary natural
attenuation parameters that will be used to evaluate the Site for the occurrence of
reductive dechlorination in Site groundwater are presented in Table 2. The
groundwater samples will be evaluated using a combination of measurements to be
performed by the field sampling personnel and laboratory analyses to be performed
by the Analytical and Testing Services Division of ECKENFELDER INC. Because
of the sample's sensitivity to exposure to the atmosphere, carbon dioxide, iron (II),
manganese (II), sulfide, and dissolved oxygen will be measured in the field as will
tho traditional field parameters (conductivity, oxidation-reduction potential, pH, and
temperature).
The list of natural attenuation parameters in Table 2 includes all of the parameters
identified in the ROD as "should be added to the current list" and all of the
"additional parameters (that) may be added" except for hydrogen. The list is
consistent with the preliminary "Technical Protocol for Natural Attenuation of
Chlorinated Hydrocarbons in Groundwater" developed by the U. S. Air Force Center
F:\DATA \proj\0313.02\10::12098.doc
• Mr. McKenzie Mallary
Page 3
March 25, 1998
•
for Environmental Excellence in conjunction with the USEPA and the "Draft
Region IV Approach to Natural Attenuation of Chlorinated Solvents".
Procedures and Methods
The groundwater sampling and analysis will be conducted in accordance with the
procedures and methods in the Field Sampling Plan (FSP) dated February 25, 1994
and Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated February 25, 1994, except as
amended by the analytical methods listed in Table 2. The FSP and QAPP were
prepared by Aquaterra, Inc. and were approved by the USEPA for the Remedial
Investigation. Data Quality Objects (DQOs) are also listed in Table 2. Metals
analysis and VOC analysis will be performed using DQO level IV with independent
data validation since the parameters are a measure of groundwater quality at the
Site. DQO level I will be used for the natural attenuation field measurements and
DQO level III will be used for other natural attenuation parameters. The field
activities will be performed under a Site-Specific Health and Safety/Contingency
Plan prepared by ECKENFELDER INC.
Please call Nancy Prince of El Paso at [phone] or me at [phone] if you
have any questions or comments regarding the project status.
Sincerely,
ECKENFELDER INC.®
--~~1/{L
Kenton H. Oma, P.E.
Assistant Technical Director
Waste Management
cc:
<Nc-Testei,man,-NCDEHNRJ
N. Prince, El Paso
M. Kipp, El Paso
J. Porter, Andrews & Kurth
F:'\ DATA \proj\0:1 13. 02 \1032098 .doc
H. Mitchell, Jr., Beaunit
J. Wright, Burlington
B. Wicker, Burlington
G. House, BPMH&L
• •
TABLE 1
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS SELECTED FOR BASELINE SAMPLING
Metals Natural Attenuation
Monitoring Well Parameters Parameters
W-5s X X ' W-6s X ~~ W-7s X X
W-9s X
W-lGs X
W-16i X
W-17s X X
W-lls• X
W-5i X
W-lOi X
W-18s X
W-20s X
W-20i X
W-22s X
W-22i X
W-24s X
W-28i X
W-29i X
W-30i X
'Metals evaluation background well.
\ \TN\SYS\DAT A \PHOJ\0313.02\tO I .doc
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF CHEMICAL ANALYSES AND ANALYTICAL METHOD REFERENCES
FOR BASELINE SAMPLING OF GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS
Sample Evaluation Chemical Test/Analyte Parameter
Metals TAL metals only
Natural Attenuation
Field Measurements: Carbon dioxide
Iron (II) -
Manganese (II)
Sulfide
Conductivity
Oxidation-reduction potential (ORP)
pH
Dissolved oxygen (DO)
Temperature
Laboratory Analyses: Ammonium nitrogen
Chloride
Iron (total)
Manganese (total)
\'sc9..I. Nitrate/nitrite . • -
Phosphate (total)
Sulfate
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN)
Ethane, ethene, and methanee
VOCs (PCE degradation parameters)f f ;,/,J-AJkalinity (carbonate/bicarbonate)
Dissolved total organic carbon (TOC)
Volatile fatty acids
Analytical Reference Method a
Aquaterra QAPP Table 3
HACH KitC
HACH KitC '>?l'ib
HACH futc
HACH KitC
ASTM Method D-1125-82 E tJo. 1/S"' qo;o
ASTM Method D-1498-76 tl ;;>'5~0 6
ASTM Method D-1293-84 p, ..l=
Flow through probe or HACH KitC D• l"flE(
NAd ficl.,l ~01'<.
USEPA Method 350.3
USEPA Method 325.2 i: )c.v
Aquaterra QAPP Table 3
Aquaterra QAPP Table 3
USEPA Method 353.2 """"'
USEPA Method 365.2
USEPA Method 375.4/9038 :;:-C E3DO
USEPA Method 351.4
USEPA Method 8015-Modified
Aquaterra QAPP Table 2
Standard Methods 2320B H~o-1 A/Jf1"6rL
USEPA Method 415.1 'i'oo2>
Standard Methods 5560C
DQO Lev_elb
IV
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ill
Ill
IV
IV
III
III
III
III
III
IV
III
III
III
asample preservatives, when required by the method, will be added to sample containers at the analytical laboratory prior to sampling.
bDQOs and QA/QC frequencies per "Environmental Compliance Branch Standard Operating Procedures and Quality Assurance Manual"
February 1, 1991, USEPA Region IV.
Cl\1ethod will be per manufacture's procedures.
dNot Applicable.
eAnalysis will be subcontracted to Specialized Assays, Nashville, Tennessee.
fCarbon tetrachloride, chloroform, 1,1-DCE, cis-1,2-DCE, trans-1,2-DCE, 1,2-dichloropropane, methylene chloride, chloromethane, PCE,
1,1,1-TCA, 1,1,2-TCA, 1,2-DCA, TCE, vinyl chloride, and 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene.
'\ '\ T:-. "\SYS\DAT A \PRO.T\0313 .02\ t02 .DOC Page I of I
•
•
f C.'1---Sbb .;i I k
UNID STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECIN AGENCY
Ms. Nancy Prince
El Paso Naµtral Gas
P.O. Bcix 2511 __.; > . Houston, TX 77252-2511
REGION 4
ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
61 FORSYTH STREET, SW
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8909
March 5, 1998
Subject: Approval of Remedial Design _Contractor/
Notification to Proceed with Remedial'Design
FCX-Statesville (Operable Unit Three)
Statesville, Nmth Carolina
Dear Ms, Prince:
RECEIVED
MAR O 9 1998
SUPERFUND SECTIO~I
The purpose of this letter is to approve Eckenfelder as the Remedial Design contractor for
Operable Unit Three at the FCX-Statesviile Site located in Statesville, North Carolina. Further,
this letter serves as the notification to proceed with the Remedial Design for Operable Unit Three,
I would also like to thank you again for organizing the meeting held at the Site on March
3, 1998, to discuss the upcoming activities for the entire Site. Let's continue to work hard
coordinating the remedial design and. remedial action activities for operable units one, two, and
· three.
Please call me at [phone] if you have questions regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
'rvt914i~ /4W-Uv/
McKenzie Mallary ·
RPM, North Site Mana~ement Branch
cc: Nile Testerman, NCDENR
Rocyclod/Rocyclabl• • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based tnks on 100% Recycled Paper (40% Postconsumer)
RD
\
~;'21/98 _ .WED 16: 5.0 FAX _713 757 6825
, •
.._ ELPASO ~ NATUMLQAS
January 21, 1998
Mr. McKenzie Mallary
U.S. EPA Region 4
Atlanta Federal Center
61 Forsyth St.
Atlanta, GA 30303
EHS SERVICES
Subject: FCX-Statesville Superfund Site, OU-3
Remedial Design Contractor
Dear Ken,
•
P.O. Box:2l l l
Housta,, TXml2-2lll
?JJ-757-3306
1n order to meet the terms of the Consent Decree, EPEC has selected Eckenfelder Inc. of
Nashville, Tennessee as the contractor that EPEC proposes to have conduct the Remedial Design
activities at OU-3. Attached for your consideration in approving this company is Section 4 and S
from their proposal which outlines the project team, lists some Eckenfelder Inc. qualifications and
three references. Copies of personnel resumes and additional infonnation about the company will
be submitted under separate cover.
Also as we discussed, EPEC has arranged a technology transfer and project management contract
with the RI/FS contractor, Aquaterra. This will facilitate use of the site knowledge and electronic
data that Aquaterra has developed.
Both Eckenfelder and Aquaterra would be available for a start-up site visit on February 10 if that
date is convenient for you. Eckenfelder proposes to send their project manager as well as the team
leaders for the additional investigation and design portions of the work plan. We anticipate that this
will be a good start for a team approach to the challenges of OU-I and OU-3.
Please call me at [phone] as soon as possible if you have any questions or concerns about
the team that EPEC is proposing. l look forward to receipt of your approval of Eckenfelder as the
next step in moving this project forward.
Sincerely,
/)OM-ey I(~
Nancy K. Prince, CGWP
Principal Environmental Scientist
Environmental Affairs Department
OU-3 Project Coordinator
01/21/98 WED 16: 51 FAX [phone]
cc:
•
N. Testerman, NCDEHNR
G. House, BPMH & L
D. Sparrow, Beaunit Fabrics Corp.
M. Ferries
File
EHS SERVICES •
J. Wright, Burlington
J. Porter, Andrews & Kurth
H. Mitchell, Jr., Beaunit Corporation
G. Odegard
@003
01/21/98 WED 16: 51 FAX [phone] EHS SERVICES • •
4.0 PROJECT TEAM
ECKENFELDER INC. has identified a uniquely qualified project team with extensive
experience applicable to the proposed scope of work. The proposed project team ie shown on
Figure 4-1. The Project Manager and Director have managed numerous Superfund designs
including implementing pilot studies, aquifer pumping tests, and the design of multiple-
component remediations. The proposed Project Manager has extensive experience in
developing pilot studies and designs for vapor extraction and air handling equipment
related to innovative technologies, mechanical equipment (blowers and compressore),
instrumentation, valving, piping, and controls. The proposed Project Director has extensive
experience coordinating multidisciplinary project teams, coordinating with PRP groups,
regulatory representation, and the preparation and actual implementation of remedial
designs. Multidisciplinary task managers and project staff, including engineers, geologists,
and scientists, will assist throughout the project. We have also identified Technical
Advisors to assist in the various components of the remedial design. Resumes for key
project team members are included in Appendix A. Additional resources are available as
required.
All project team members are located in our Nashville, Tennessee office. Two
subcontractors will be utilized for this project, including the following:
• Smith Seckman Reid, Inc. of Nashville will be utilized for electrical design.
Richard Simmons Drilling, Inc. of Mooreville, North Carolina will be used for
drilling services.
5.0 ECKENFELDER INC. QUALIFICATIONS
ECKENFELDER INC. provides over three decades of experience in environmental
engineering and consulting services. This experience has been obtained before,
during, and since the inception of the Superfund process and many state agency
programs. As a result of our long-term involvement at many sites prior to the Superfund
process, we have developed an in-depth understanding of the CERCLA process and have
developed strategies for working within this program.
Within the Superfund program we have provided environmental engineering and
consulting services ranging from assessments through implementation of remedial actions.
This extensive experience includes Remedial Designs (RD), pilot tests, construction
oversight, implementation of Remedial Designs, and investigation and implementation of
Natural Attenuation (NA). Other Superfund and state program experience includes
Remedial Investigations (RI), supplemental Ris, Risk Assessments (RA), Feasibility Studies
\\'l'N\SYB\DATA\OH\7411C\pp~.dac 13
@004
01/21/98 WED 16: 52 FAX [phone] EHS SERVICES • •
(FS), treatability testa, analytical services, and wast.ewater and groundwater treatment
testing and design.
ECKENFELDER INC. not only has significant relevant experience in a wide
range of environmental projects, but has set itself apart from other firms
providing similar services. USEPA recently issued a list of the 100 Superfund sites
identified as having "cooperative and capable parties" who may qualify for reduced
oversight by USEPA in 1997. The draft list was developed by USEPA as part of the
implementation of a recent guidance that is intended to eave participating parties as much
as 26 percent in reduced oversight costs. Of the 100 sites listed, ECKENFELDER INC. is
currently assisting or has assisted the participating parties aBBOciated with the following
sites:
Caldwell Trucking, New Jersey
Naecolite Corporation, New Jersey
• Natrona Lindane Site, Pennsylvania
Lord-Shope Landfill, Pennsylvania
T.H. Agriculture & Nutrition, Alabama
New Lyme, Ohio
Comments received from agencies include that from USEPA Region IV:
"l'he Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has reviewed the
Remedial Action Workplan for the Interim Remedial Action for OU-1
(the Groundwater Operable Unit). This Workplan [prepared by
ECKENFELDER INC.] indicates a thorough knowledge of the
Superfund process." (The Workplan was approved without
comment.) -Alan W. Yarbrough, USEPA Region IV
The following list is representative of the Superfund and RCRA sites that we have worked on:
THAN Superfund Site, Montgomery Alabama (Region IV)
Flowood Superfund Site, Flowood, Mississippi (Region IV)
Cedartown Superfund Site, Cedartown, Georgia (Region IV)
Randall Textron Site (new RCRA site), Grenada, Mississippi (Region IV)
Shopes Landfill Superfund Site, Erie, Pennsylvania
RMI Sodium Plant RCRA Site, Ashtabula, Ohio
RMI Uranium Extrusion Plant RCRA Site, Ashtabula, Ohio
Nascolite Superfund Site, Millville, New Jersey
D'Imperio Superfund Site, Hamilton Township, New Jersey
Gems Landfill, Gloucester Township, New Jersey
Hercules RCRA Site, Glen Falls, New York
Chemical Land Holdings Superfund Site, Newark, New Jersey
American Electric, Athens, Tennessee
French Limited Superfund Site, Crosby, Texas
ALSCO Community Park NPL Site, Harrison Township, Pennsylvania
Goose Farm Superfund Site, New Jersey
DICO Superfund Site, Des Moines, Iowa
\\'JN\SYB\DATA\OH\7.f7G,pptodr,.doc, 14
~005
01/21/98 WED 16: 53 FAX [phone] EHS SERVICES • •
ECKENFELDER INC. hae provided environmental services in the state of North Carolina
over the last 30 years. Recent work in North Carolina has included consulting projects, one
of which included frequent meetings with the North Carolina Department of
Environmental Health and Natural Resources. This work was provided in conjunction with
the Weck Site, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. ECKENFELDER INC. has
provided oversight, on behalf of the current owner, of remedial investigations and
regulatory negotiations at the site of this surgical instrument manufacturer. Past practices
resulted in impacts ro groundwater by chlorinated solvents (primarily DCA and TCA) and
hydrocarbon fuels. ECKENFELDER INC. performed soil investigations at the sit.e;
provided close review of the former owner's investigation work plans, results, and reports;
negotiated further activities at the site; and actively participated in discussions with the
North Carolina Department of Environmental Health and Natural Resources regarding
remedial planning. Notably, the site is under consideration for a natural attenuation
remedy and many of the site activities have focused on the feasibility of this approach.
ECKENFELDER INC.'s Project Director, Robert Ash, has an application pending for a
temporary engineering permit and is currently applying for a permanent license. Mr. Ash
meets the requirements for licensure and we anticipate no delays related to licensing. We
are also pursuing a corporate registration. It is anticipated that permanent corporate and
• individual licensing will be obtained prior to the expiration of the 90-day temporary permit.
As requested, we have provided three references:
Mr. Douglas Lout>.enhiser
Director, Operations
Health, Environment and ·safety
EH Atochom North America, Inc.
2000 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103-3222
[phone]
Mr. Eugene A. Miller
Environmental Manager
Lord Corporation
2000 West Grandview Blvd
P. 0. Box 10038
Erie, PA 16514-0038
[phone]
Mr. Alan Yarbrough
Remedial Project Manager
USEPA, Region IV
Atlanta Federal Center
100 Alabama Street, BW
Atlanta, GA 30303-3104
[phone]
liiloos
"
JECH"!1CAI AQYJSORS
ROBERT D. NORRIS, Ph.D.
JEFFREY L PINTENICH, PE.,. CHMM
ROWILD A. BURT, Ph.D •• P.G. ·
PILQI JEST
M. MARIA MEGfHEE
JONATHAN P. t.111.l..ER, E.I.T.
SAMUEL P. WIUJAMS, P.G.
ECKENF'ELDER INC.
I ABORAJQBY
O. RICK DAVIS
k 3-
u
FCX-STATESVILLE OU-3
PRP GROUP
PROJECT MANAGER
KOJTON H. OMA, P .E.
HYPRQG£QLOGY
GREGORY L CHRISAANS, P,G,
SAMUEL P. WILI..IAMS, P .G.
PROJECT DIRECTOR
ROBERT E. ASH fol, P.E.
I
DESIGN STAFF
STEPHEN A. BATISTE, E.I.T.
U. MARIA MEGEHEE
JONATHAN P. Mlll..ER, E.1.T.
.:. . .)
0 ,. ,,
"' ,. ..._
"' .,
"' "' "' ,.
"'
"' w
::.' H ..., ,.
w _...,
/:3 ., .,
"' "'
ECKENFELDER INC.• I CL:::=================================================1Ji
.......... ,
JIRDIA.J D!Aa
~1/~1/98_____!ED 16: 50 FAX [phone]
• •
.._.ELPASO
..: tfATUIW.(;AS
EHS SERVICES •
P.O. Box2~11
Ilouston. TX772.S2-2Sll
713-7,j7-3306
T.R.A.NSl.V.I1 'rI"AT ◄
January 21, 1998
From: Nancy K. Prince
OU-3 Project Coordinator
DISTRIBUTION:
__LK. Mallary, USEPA, Reg. IV
____k_N. Testerman, NCDEHNR
_L_l. Wright, Burlington
_K:_G. House, BPMH & L
~J. Porter, Andrews & Kurth
__L,D. Sparrow, Beaunit Fab. Corp.
-,K._H. Mitchell, Jr., Beaunit Corp.
X: M. Kipp, EPNG
__,JC._G. Odegard, EPNG
_LM. Ferries, EPNG
X K. 0 lt)a.. £cte~.fe.ldev
Number of Pages: b + C:.Oue.-v-
713-757-6825 713-757~3306
FAX Number Phone Number
404-562-8788 404-562-8802
919-7~3-4811 919-733-2801 X 350
910-379-4953 910-379-2289
910-378-1001 910-271-3114
202-662-2739 202-662-2718
910-273-9353 910-373-1300
919-821-6800 919-821-1220
915-541-5030 915-541-3841
713-757-713-757-4265
713-757-6825 713-757-3120
6 IS-~56-Ei:3~ ',,._ ,25$. '! ;zt8'
</1'1-~5'1-9930 r1 r -K5Cf-'1'187
f = tax, e = e-mail, m = regular mail, x = overnight mail (am/pm delivery)
~001
_---....c,1=2/ 18 / 9 7 THU 14 : 2 6
>
FAX 713 757 •
.._.ELMS()
_.: NATURAI.CiAS
December l 7, 1997
6825 EHS SERVICES
I
Subject: FCX-Stntesville Superfund Site, OU-3
Statesville, North Carolina
Dear Bidder:
•
P.O. l!a<:1511
-TX 71252-3i11
PHONE: [phone]:Dj
Thank you for your presentation this week in Atlanta. It was a pleasure meeting you and your
team. All of the presentations were very good, and addressed the issues that we believe will be
important in preparing the appropriate design for the remedial technologies at OU-3.
We plan to contact the references listed in your proposals during the next few weeks. If you ha,·e
any changes to your reference list that you have not already forwarded, please fax the information
to my attention (713-757-6825) before December 29. As we are going through the proposals and
notes from the presentations, other questions may come up, and we may contact you again for
clarification.
We anticipate that a preliminary selection will be made early in Januaiy and discussed with EPA
Region lV and North Carolina. Following their concurrence, we plan to begin the contracting
process with the selected contractor in January and hope to begin the Work in February.
'
Please feel free to call me at 713-757-3306 if you have any other questions.
Sincerely,
FCX-Statesville OU-3 Group
Y/._ OMC-<f 9~~
Nancy Prince, CGWP
Project Coordinator
12/18/97 THU 14: 25 FAX [phone]
Aquaterra
490 I Waters Edge Drive
Raleigh, NC 27606
Blasland, Bouck & Lee, Inc.
•
185 NW Spanish Rivr Blvd. STE 110
Boca Raton. FL 33431-4230
Echenfulder Inc.
227 F1CJ1ch Landing Drive
Nashville, TN 37228
Fluor Daniel-OU
I 000 Perimeter Parl<
Morrisville, NC 27560
Ogden Enviromnental
145 W. Campbell Ave., STE 305
Crystal Tower Building
Roanake, VA 24011
Parsons Engineering Science
5 7 Executive Paik S STE 500
Atlanta, GA 30329
bee: W/0 attachments
EHS SERVICES •
BIDDERS
Sharon Myers [phone]; lax [phone]
')"
Dave Chuslo [phone], &x (561) 39/-6715
Bob Norris [phone], fax [phone]
Tom Raymond [phone], :mx [phone]
Robert Martin [phone]; fax [phone]
Bjoy Ghosh [phone]; :mx [phone]
M. Fenies C. McArthur1 J. Porter B. Dowell
J. Wright G. House D. Sparrow
K. Mallery N. Testennan
li!JOOl
12/03/97
'
WED 13: 22 F.U 713 7 57 6825 • EHS SERVICES •
1:: a.PASO
A!111 NATURALCAS
December 2, 1997
Subject:
Dear Bidder;
FCX-Statesville Superfuud Site, OU-3
Statesville, North Carolina
P.O. BmZS11
~ 1lC ~11
PHONE: [phone]
We appreciate your responsiveness in submiting a proposal to the FCX-Statesville OU-3 PRP Group for completing the remedial design (RD) work scope for the subject site. We received 11 number of excellent proposals, and it was difficult to select the six contractors for the "short list".
Although we asked for a rapid response to help EPA meet their goals last September, Consent Decree negotiations were completed later than anticipated, delaying the decision on the RD contractor. Understanding that bidders were given a limited amowrt of time to prepare, we elected to review the proposals and meet the team members (project manager, lead design engineer, etc.) from each firm individually prior to making the final RD contractor selection.
In order to make this review time and cost effective fur all parties, we have arranged for meeting space at the Hilton Hotel at the Atlanta airport on Monday, December 15 and Tuesday, December 16. The audience will consist ofNancy Prince, Marc Ferries and Ed Schaper, all ofEI Paso, and possibly Jim Wright from Burlington Industries.
Each firm has been given 1. 5 hours to make a brief, private presentation and to discuss ideas and issues with the PRP group. The fonnal presentation pan of the interview should talce 20 to 30 minutes and cover critical elements of the proposal. As was discussed in the pre-bid meeting in Statesville, imponant criteria in the selection process will include:
• experience of the design team and the finn with designing air sparge and vapor
extraction systems for Superfund projects,
• experience of the design team and the finu with designing air sparge and vapor
extraction systems for fractured and/or deep bedrock projects,
• experience of the design team and the firm with EPA Region N and North Carolina personnel,
• experience of the design team and the firm in developing and supporting narural
attenuation strategies to the Superfund and North Carolina regulatory comnwnilies,
• strategy and approach to deal with other issues raised by EPA in the R.OD, including,
but not limited to off-site VOCs, extent of contamination and the poSS1bility of metals
contamination in ground'.water
• overall strategy to develop a cost effective design, including II description of cost
tracking measures and resources available to meet project schedules.
1i!J 002
12/03/97 WED 13:23 FAX [phone] • EHS SERVICES •
We anticipate that a preliminary se1'iction will be made before Christmas and discussed with EPA Region IV and North Carolina. Following their concurrence, we plan to begin the contracting process with the selected contractor in January and to begin the Work as soon as poSSJ"ble.
The hotel has a free shuttle from the airport. A block of rooms at $106.00 plus tax has been set aside under the name of "El Paso Energy". Please call Hilton Reservations at 404-767-9000 to reserve one of these rooms if you are interested. Maria Rodriguez at El Paso (713-757-4498) can help with arrangements for slide projectors, screens etc. upon request.
Please feel free to call me at 713-757-3306 if you have any other questions. I look forward IO meeting you in Atlanta.
Sincerely,
FCX-Statesville OU-3 Group
'--/} dM.~U-
Nancy Prince, CGWP
Project Coordinator
li!l003
12/03/97 WED 13: 23 PAI 713 757 6825 EHS SERVICES •
PRESENTATION SCHEDULE
Monday December 15
1:00 pm to 2:30 pm
3:00 pm to 4:30 pm
5 :00 pm to 6:30 pm
T uosday December l 6
8:00 am to 9:30 am
10:00 am to 11:30 am
12:00 pm to 1:30 pm
Fluor Daniel-GTI
Blasland, Bouck & Lee, Inc.
Aquaterra
Ogden Environmental
Echenfelder Inc.
Parsons Engineering Science
•
r 12/03/97 WED 13:22 FAX [phone] • EHS SERVICES • li!JOOl
":ELMSO
... ~QAS P.ae..2:111
8-1X=U
713-7n3305
TRAN'&!IM i'ITf'i T ◄ ,,.,,_
December 3, 1997 Number of Pages: 4
From: Nancy K. Prince 713-757~25 713-757-3306
OU-3 Project Coordinator
DISTRIBUTION: FAX Number Phone Number
__ K. Mallary, USEPA, Reg. IV 404-562-8788 404-562-8802
/N': Testerman, NCDEHNR 919-733-4811 919-733-2801 X 350
__ J. Wright, Burlington 910-379-4953 910-379-2289
__ H. Vaden, Burlington 910-379-4953 910-379-2046
__ G. House, BPMH & L 910-378-1001 910-271-3114
__ J. Porter, Andrews & Kurth 202-662-2739 202-<J62-2718
__ D. Sparrow, Beaunit Fab. C-Orp. 910-m-9353 91~373-1300
II. Mitchell, Jr., Beaunit Corp. 919-821-6800 919-&l-1220 ,,,,..
__ M. Kipp, EPNG . ~15-541-5030 915-541-3841
__ G. Odegard, EPNG 713-757-713-7S7-4265
__ M. Ferries, EPNG 713-757-&25 713-757-3120
f = rax, c = e-mail, m = regular mail, x = ovemigbt mail (am/pm delively)
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
RE:
•
September 22, 1995
File
Randy McElveen
Environmental Engineer
NC Superfund
Public Meeting at N.B. Mills Elementary School
Superfund Update and Public Information Presentation
FCX Statesville Site, Operable Unit (Ou)#J, Groundwater
and Soils at Burlington Industries, Oul groundwater at
FCX Property, and Ou2 Soil at FCX Property.
NCD 095 458 527
Statesville, Iredell County, NC
On 14 September 1995, representatives of the NC Superfund
Section participated a public meeting held by the EPA for the FCX
Statesville NPL Site. The meeting was held to update the public
on the progress of the Remedial Design work on Oul & Ou2 and the
progress to the Remedial Investigation for OuJ for the FCX
Statesville NPL Site located in Statesville, Iredell County, North
Carolina. The public was also informed of the proposed Superfund
reform legislation and its potential negative effects on the
cleanup of Superfund Sites.
The primary concerns raised by the public were potential
health concerns that may exist to property owners living adjacent
to the Site. They were also concerned about the future of the
cleanup if certain government legislation is passed. General
information questions were also asked; such as how the presence of
the voe Plume from the Bulington property affects the FCX property
and groundwater; how far the groundwater plume extends to the north
and south of the Site, and who is responsible for keeping the
facility grass cut until the cleanup is complete.
cc: Jack Butler, NC Superfund Section
R.D