NCD122263825_19901001_JFD Electronics - Channel Master_FRBCERCLA RI_Work Plan for the Remedial Investion - Feasibility Study-OCR

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Bechtel
Oak Ridge Corporate Center
151 Lafayette Drive
P.O. Box350
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-0350
Facsimile: [phone]
Mr. Jack Butler
Superfund Section
North Carolina Division of SW Management
Suite 150, 401 Oberlin Road
Raleigh, NC 27605
August 29, 1991
SUBJECT: Contract Number 68-W9 0058, Bechtel Job No. 20385-003
ARCS IV Program, Channel Master Site
PHASE I RI/FS WORK PLAN & FOP
Subject Code: 0020
Dear Mr. Butler:
Mr. McKenzie Mallary (USEPA, Region IV, RPM -Channel Master
Site) requested me that I transmit the following documents to you:
1. Work Plan -Final (Phase I)
2. Field Operations Plan -Final (Phase I)
Please call me at [phone] if you have any questions.
Enclosure: As stated
Very truly yours,
~~
G. Ganapathi
Project Manager
cc: McKenzie Mallary, EPA Region IV (w/o)
bee: A. Yazdi (w/o)
Tl31
~ Bechtel Environmental
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ARCS IV
CONTRACT NUMBER 68-W9-0058
WORK ASSIGNMENT NUMBER 03-41..31
IFJINAIL
________ WORK PLAN-------
FOR THE
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study
at the JFD Electronics/Channel Master Site
PREPARED FOR
UNITED STA TES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
_________ BY ________ _
BECHTEL ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
October 1990
Cl005
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
WORX PLAN
FOR
Contract Number 6B-W9-0058
FINAL
THE REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY STUDY
AT THE
JFD ELECTRONICS/CHANNEL MASTER SITE
PREPARED FOR
THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
BY
BECHTEL ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
OCTOBER 1990
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
INTRODUCTION •••••
overview ..... .
RI/FS Objectives
Project Organization
CONTENTS
• •
• •
1
1
5
5
2.0 SITE BACKGROUND, PHYSICAL SETTING, AND EXISTING CONDITIONS 7
2.1 General Site Background 7
2 . 1 . 1 Lagoon • • • • • . • . • • • 7
2.1.2 voe contamination. • • • • • • • • 8
2.1.3 Sludge Drying Beds • • • • 11
2.1.4 Chronology of Channel Master Site 11
2.2 Physical Setting • • • • • • • • • 15
2.2.1 Regional Geology/Hydrogeology • 15
2.2.2 Site Geology/Hydrogeology 16
2.2.3 Meteorology. • • 16
2.2.4 Land Use • . • 18
2.3 Existing Condition 18
3.0 INITIAL EVALUATION.
3.1 Site Model . . . . . ...... .
3.1.1 Nature and Extent of Contamination
3.1.2 Migration Pathways ••••••.•
3.1.3 Exposure Pathways •••••••••••••
3.2 Preliminary Health and Environmental Assessment
3.2.1 Identification of Chemicals of Concern
3.2.2 Exposure Assessment ••••••••
3.2.3 Toxicity Assessment ••••••••
3.2.4 Human Health Risk Characterization
22
22
22
27
31
34
34
34
36
39
40 3.2.5 Ecological Assessment •••••••
3.3 Remedial Response ARARs and Preliminary
Objectives • • • • • • •
Remedial Response
40
4. 0 WORK PLAN RATIONALE • • •
4. 1 Scope of Remedial Action • • • • • • • • • •
4.2 Preliminary Assessment of Remedial Technologies.
4.2.1 No Action ••••
4.2.2 Soil ............. .
4.2.3 Water •.............
4.3 Treatability studies ••••••••
4.3.1 Summary of Waste Characteristics
4.3.2 Potential Treatability Studies •••
4.4 Data Requirements/Data Quality Objectives
4.4.1 Characterization Data ••••••••
4.4.2 Geotechnical/Hydrogeologic Data
4.4.3 Feasibility Study Data
4.4.4 Health and Safety Data
4.4.5 Quality Assurance •••
i
• • •
•
41
41
41
42
42
46
48
49
49
49
50
51
51
51
52
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
CONTENTS
(cont'd)
5.0 RI/FS TASKS ....•••..
5.1 Task 1: Project Planning ••
5.2 Task 2: Community Relations
5.3 Task 3: Field Investigations
•
5.3.1 Surveying and Mapping of the Site
5.3.2 Waste Characterization ••••••
5.3.3 Hydrogeologic Investigation •••
•
5.3.4 Soils Investigation. • • • • • • • • •
5.3.5 Surface Water and Sediment Investigation •
5.3.6 Air Investigation •••••••••
5.4 Task 4: Sample Analysis and Validation
5.5 Task 5: Data Evaluation •••
5.6 Task 6: Risk Assessment •••
5.6.1 Contaminant Identification
5.6.2 Exposure Assessment •••
5.6.3 Toxicity Assessment •••
5.6.4 Risk Characterization ••
5.7 Task 7: Treatability Studies
•
•
5.8 Task 8: RI Report . . . . . . . . . ..
•
•
•
• •
5.9 Task 9: Remedial Alternatives Development and Screening
5.9.1 Establish Remedial Action Objectives and General
Response Actions ........... .
5.9.2 Identify and Screen Technologies ••••
5.9.3 Configure and Screen Alternatives ••••
5.10 Task 10: Detailed Analysis of Alternatives
5.11 Task 11: FS Report
6.0 HEALTH AND SAFETY
7.0 SCHEDULE.
REFERENCES • • •
ii
• •
53
53
53
53
60
60
61
62
62
65
65
66
67
67
67
68
68
69
70
70
71
71
72
72
72
74
75
76
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
Figure
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
3-1
5-1
5-2
5-3
5-4
5-5
No.
LIST OP FIGURES
Title
Location of Channel Master Site
PreClean-up Site Map
Channel Master Existing Site Plan
Project Organization
Monitoring Wells Installed by
Channel Master
Soil Boring Locations at the
Sludge Drying Area
Total Volatile Organics Concentrations
Isopleth Map
Well construction Record for MW-5
Installed by Channel Master
Blow-count Details for MW-5
Installed by Channel Master
Channel Master Site Model
Channel Master Site-Conceptual Model
Channel Master Site Hydrocone Sample
Locations for Preliminary Onsite
Screening
Channel Master Site Surface Water,
Sediment and Offsite Hydrocone
Sample Locations
Channel Master Site Monitoring Well
Locations
Channel Master Borehole Locations
Relationship of Screening Criteria
to the Nine Evaluation Criteria
iii
2
3
4
6
9
10
12
17
19
21
23
58
59
63
64
73
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table No.
3-1
3-2
3-3
3-4
3-5
3-6
3-7
5-1
LIST OP TABLES
Title
Maximum Concentrations of
Detectable Groundwater Contaminants
Maximum Concentrations of Detectable
Volatile Organic Compounds in the
Soil and Waste Oil Tank
Sediment Contamination Summary
Summary of Analytical Results for
Inorganic Contaminants from Composite
Sludge Sample
Maximum Concentrations of Detectable
Inorganic Contaminants in Existing
Sludge Drying Beds
Media, Continuation Concerns and
Potential Migration Pathway
Preliminary Identification of
Contaminants and contaminant-Specific
ARARS for the Channel Master Site
Sampling and Analysis Details
iv
24
26
28
29
30
32
35
54
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
ARAR
ATSDR
ACRONYMS
applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry
CEC cation exchange capacity
CERCLA
CFR
CLP
CRP
DCA
DCE
DQO
Comprehensive Environmentai Response Compensations and
Liability Act of 1980
Code of Federal Regulations
contract laboratory program
Community Relations Plan
dichloroethane
dichloroethene
data quality objective
EP Extraction Procedure
EPA
ESB
FFS
HSP
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Engineering Support Branch of EPA Region IV
focused feasibility study
health and safety plan
JFD JFD Electronics
MCL Maximum Contaminant Level
NCDHR -North Carolina Department of Human Resources -
CERCLA CERCLA Unit
NCP National Contingency Plan
OSWER Office of Solid Wastes and Emergency Response
PCE tetrachloroethene
POTW
QA
publicly owned treatment works
quality assurance
V
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
QA/QC
QAPP
QC
RCRA
RI
RI/FS
RPM
SARA
SHSP
S&ME
SOPQAM
sow
quality
quality
quality
Resource
remedial
ACRONYMS
(cont'd)
assurance/quality control
assurance project plan
control
Conservation and Recovery Act
investigation
remedial investigation/feasibility study
remedial project manager (EPA)
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
site health and safety plan
Soil and Materials Engineers
Standard Operating Procedures Quality Assurance Manual
statement of work
TAT technical assistance team
TCA trichloroethane
TCE trichloroethene
TCL
TCLP
TOC
USGS
voe
Target Compound List
Toxicity Characteristics Leaching Procedures
total organic carbon
United States Geological Survey
volatile organic compound
vi
I
I ABBREVIATIONS
I ft feet
I ft2 square feet
gal gallon
I in inches
kg kilograms
I L liter
I mi miles
ppb parts per billion
I ppm parts per million
RfD reference dose
I yd yards
I yd3 cubic. yards
ug micrograms
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I vii
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region IV, under
Work Assignment No. 03-4L3L, has retained Bechtel Environmental
Inc., (Bechtel) to perform a remedial investigation/feasibility
study (RI/FS) at the JFD Electronics/Channel Master (Channel
Master) site, Oxford, North Carolina. The purpose of this Work
Plan is to define the scope of services, level of effort, costs,
and schedule associated with performing the tasks required to
complete the RI/FS for this site.
The following is an overview of the scope of work, RI/FS
objectives, and the project organization.
1.1 overview
The Channel Master site is located on Industrial Drive, Oxford,
North Carolina in central Granville Countr (Figure 1-1). The
coordinates of the site are: latitude 36 17' 59 11 and longitude
78° 36' 23". Electroplating operations were conducted at the
Channel Master site (shown in Figures 1-1 and 1-2) from 1968 to
1979 by JFD Electronics (JFD). These operations resulted in the
generation of electroplating wastes, including metal-contaminated
sludge and wastewater. A lagoon covering approximately 23,400
ft2 was used to dispose of the sludge.
In 1980, Channel Master bought the site from JFD and started
manufacturing indoor antennas and satellite dishes. Some organic
solvents such as trichloroethane (TCA) were used onsite for
cleaning. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which reportedly
originated from a concrete waste oil tank and chemical storage
area, were also released at the site during these operations.
Based on the evaluations of a limited soil and groundwater
investigation conducted by Channel Master, certain clean-up
actions were conducted, including removal of sludge, sludge mixed
with soil, and subsoil from the containment lagoon, and removal
of two fuel oil tanks and one concrete waste oil tank from the
south side of the main building (Figure 1-2). This cleanup was
carried out by Channel Master in cooperation with the North
Carolina Department of Human Resources, CERCLA Unit (NCDHR-
CERCLA) during 1987 and 1988. Areas affected by these efforts
are south of the main building. The lagoon area was excavated as
shown in Figure 1-3, and the excavated material was disposed of
at a permitted waste facility. voe-contaminated soil around the
areas of the removed tanks was excavated and treated onsite.
Prior to being treated through an onsite rotary dryer, these
soils were stored in the pile areas identified on Figure 1-3.
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.3.7/1406.1
SCALE 1:24 000
0
\\
QUADRANGLE LOCATION
I ,,,,.-:-,.. ,-..... \
1oooea::::s::Ea:o ===':;ooo:isea==ei23oooc::::==='oooE====•ooos:::::=:::::5000::E==eaei6000s::::::::=~7000. FEET
FIGURE 1-1
CHANNEL MASTER SITE-LOCATION MAP
2
·-------------------
w
0 200
I' = 200'
20J8'j F JG29.0GN
400 600
RGROUNO V[NIS
ERGROUNO fll[L 01
FIGURE 1-2
PRECLEAN-UP SITE MAP
CHANNEL MASTER SITE
'
SHALLOW DEPRESS!~ LOCATED ON f'
AERIAL'PHOIO)-. '"',
RAILROAD
OITOl
~
Q SHALLOW NJNJTCIII~ WUS
rm II Sl ll>C( PITS
BACUILL[O PMT!c,t <J" LAGOON
Sl.Rr &CE ORAINA(;t
·-------------------
I
I
';:!I
0 200
I' = 200'
20185-f IG28.DGN
400 600
UNDERGROUND
I ANK VENTS
FORMER run
Oil TANK AREAS
F I CURE 1 -3
CHANNEL MASTER EXISTING SITE PLAN
'
SHALLOW DEPRESS!~
LOCATED ON f
AERIAL PHOTO"""\. '"",
-RllLROlD
DITCH
~
0 UISllNG IOflTOAJNG W.Ll
Pill Of' VOC·C<JfTANJN.UED SOIL PRIil' JO lRCATtUH
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
These treated soils were then returned as fill material to the
excavated areas. Site visits were conducted by representatives
of The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR)
in March 1989 and later by EPA in September 1989. Based on these
inspections, both agencies concluded that residual contamination
from Channel Master's clean-up efforts may remain at the site.
1.2 RI/FS Objectives
The overall objectives of the Channel Master RI/FS are to:
• Determine the nature and extent of contamination at the
Channel Master site
• Assess the environmental and public health risks associated
with the contamination
• Develop and evaluate potential remedial alternatives,
consistent with the National Contingency Plan, that will
effectively clean up and/or prevent further migration of the
contamination found in the soil and groundwater so that any
threat to public health and environment is reduced or
eliminated
1.3 Project Organization
The Bechtel project organization for the Channel Master RI/FS is
shown in Figure 1-4. The organization provides for direct access
by the EPA remedial project manager (RPM) to the Bechtel Project
Manager,which ensures prompt response to questions and
availability for guidance. Specific details of responsibilities
are included in the quality assurance project plan (QAPP).
5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 120 1342.2
I
EPA
REMEDIAL PROJECT
MAHAGER
McKenzie Mallary
ARCS IV
PROGRAM MAHAGER
QUALITY PROJECT MANAGER ASSURANCE ... •••
Dean Wolfe Gomes Gananathl
ON-SITE H&S OFFICER ON-SITE GEOLOGIST
Joe Duncan Steve Kautz
Figure 1-4
PROJECT ORGANIZATION
Phll Crotwell
HEALTH & SAFID
Merv Atwood
RISK
ASSESSMENT
ICF
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
2.0 SITE BACKGROUND, PHYSICAL SETTING, AND EXISTING CONDITIONS
2.1 General Site Background
The Channel Master site was vacant prior to being purchased by
JFD Electronics. JFD Electronics, which became a subsidiary of
Unimax Corporation in 1968, manufactured and electroplated
television antennas until 1979. Sludge generated from the
chromate conversion and electroplating processes rinse waters was
collected in an onsite lagoon.
The site was leased in 1979 by Ventura Electronics Corporation,
who continued manufacturing television antennas but sent them
offsite to be electroplated. Plastic bases for the antennas were
also produced using an injection molding process. The chrome
conversion process may still have been operating at this time.
In 1980, Ventura Electronics Corporation (later named as Channel
Master Satellite systems, Inc. and known as Channel Master, a
division of Avnet, Inc.) bought the site from JFD Electronics.
In 1986, Channel Master began to manufacture satellite receiver
dishes and systems using a resin transfer molding process.
Solvents, including methylene chloride and 1,1,l-TCA were
purchased and used by Channel Master for cleaning purposes. In
1984, Channel Master transferred all of its manufacturing
operations from the site to Smithfield, North Carolina.
The two buildings onsite are presently being leased by Channel
Master (Figure 1-3). A portion of the main building
(approximately 100 ft by 800 ft) has been leased by Time
Electronics since 1987, for the distribution of electronic
components. The other building (approximately 180 ft by 323 ft)
on a 3.94-acre portion of the site has been leased by Bandag,
Inc., since 1975 as a storage facility.
2.1.1 Lagoon
The lagoon was originally 240 ft long and 75 ft wide at the east
end and 120 ft wide at the west end, with the sides sloping to a
12-ft depth at its center. Based on the NCDHR site visit report,
the lagoon was unlined and held between 800,000 and 1,000,000
gal. of sludge prior to being excavated (Ref. 1). JFD
Electronics operated a chromate conversion process and
copper/nickel electroplating process onsite from 1968 through
1979. The rinse water from these processes was gravity fed
through two lines running from the main building to a series of
concrete treatment tanks located adjacent to the lagoon. These
treatment tanks were used for reducing hexavalent chromium to
trivalent chromium. The treated rinse water was then pumped into
the lagoon and allowed to settle. The supernatant was decanted
from the surface of the lagoon through a pipe located on its east
end and discharged to the city sewer system (Ref. 2).
Electroplating operations ceased in 1979 when the site was
7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
subleased to Ventura Electronics Corp., although it is not
certain when the chromate conversion operations ceased.
Channel Master manufactured satellite receiver dishes and systems
using a different process from those employed previously at the
facility. In the summer of 1983, permission was granted by the
City of Oxford to decant wastewater from the sludge lagoon and
discharge it into the sanitary sewer system. The west half of
the lagoon was then backfilled by Channel Master and used as a
truck parking area.
A permit was issued in 1985 by NCDHR to dispose of the lagoon
sludge by land application. This permit was withdrawn, also in
1985, before any land application of the sludge occurred.
Therefore, Channel Master contracted Soil and Material Engineers
(S&ME) to conduct a soil and groundwater investigation of the
site in 1986 (Ref. 3). Based on the results of this Phase I
Groundwater Evaluation showing heavy metal contamination in the
sludge lagoon, Channel Master submitted a draft clean-up plan to
NCDHR-CERCLA and EPA, Region IV, in 1987 (Ref. 4). NCDHR
approved the clean-up plan in 1987. Clean-up of the lagoon
involved combining sludge in the unfilled portion of the lagoon
with water in the old concrete treatment tanks, pumping the
slurry through a filter, and collecting the filtrate material
(Ref. 2). The city issued a temporary discharge permit (6/24/87
to 10/31/89) to allow this filtrate to be discharged to the city
sewer system (Ref. 2). Excavation of the lagoon area involved
hauling 17,000 yd3 of sludge, sludge mixed with soil, and subsoil
to the GSX hazardous waste landfill in Pinewood South Carolina.
The excavated lagoon area was regraded with clean fill materials.
No post-removal sampling of the areas surrounding the lagoon has
been conducted to date.
2.1.2 voe contlllllination
voe contamination was discovered at the Channel Master site based
on sampling results of 11 temporary wells installed by Channel
Master between June and August 1986 and 5 permanent wells
installed during 1985-1986 (Figure 2-1). Based on an isopleth
map showing concentration levels of sampling results, the
contamination plume extends from the scrap metal trailer parking
area and in-ground concrete waste oil tank, toward the lagoon, as
shown in Figure 2-2 (Ref. 5).
An in-depth soil study was conducted by S&ME in September 1986 to
better define the areas of contamination. Based on the results
of an organic vapor site survey, soil samples were collected from
the scrap metal parking area, concrete waste oil tank area,
chemical storage area, and in a ditch beneath an eight inch
8
1------------------
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.,
:,.
'" ,_, D
Cl
>, ... .,
"' ::,
"O
C ....
Main
Building
Railroad
::; '-· '.) 4 0 N
LEGEND:
• Permanent Monitor Well
■ Temporary Shallow Monitor
Well
4 Temporary Deep Monitor
Well
SOURCE:Soil&Materia/Engineers,lnc.,Nov.1986 Q Proposed Additional Well • .,____ ____________ _
PROJECT
I -
Channel Master
Oxford, N.C.
FIGURE 2-1
Monitoring Wells Installed by Channel Master
I -
,_.
0
-- - - -
~:
-coooc:r .. t••TIOOIII .. 9'1\
- - -- - - -
t N
~
- -- - -
•• ., .... If
~
. ..----~--.,,,.,. . -------. ---~ .....__ ,._.,..~ /'
;.------------
Source: Son & M■tertal EnglnNra, Inc., Nov 1988
FIGURE2-2
Total Volatile Organics ·
Concentration Isopleth
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
discharge pipe. Results from this sampling showed the primary
area of contamination to be the scrap metal trailer parking area
and waste oil tank area. A second area of contamination
immediately downgradient of the concrete chemical pad (Figure 1-
2) was also noted (Ref. 5). According to the site inspection
report by NCDHR including interviews with Channel Master
personnel, equipment drippings, equipment washdown, overflow of
the waste oil storage tank, and other small losses may have
contributed to volatile organic contamination in the scrap metal
trailer parking area (Ref. 1).
A cleanup plan for the Channel Master site developed by S&ME in
July 1987 estimated the volume of the contaminated soil to be
100 ft by 120 ft by 3.5 ft. During June/July 1988, Channel
Master removed two No. 2 fuel oil underground tanks and the in-
ground concrete waste oil tank (Ref. 6). These tanks were
disposed of at the GSX landfill in Pinewood, South Carolina.
Approximately 2,000 yd3 of voe-contaminated soil was also
excavated south of the main building. The excavated soil was
stockpiled (Figure 1-3) prior to being run through a rotary dryer
to drive off the volatiles. Chemical analysis of the cleaned
soil showed greatly reduced voe contamination. In November 1988,
after receiving information from ATSDR through NeDHR, this soil
was used to backfill the excavated areas south of the main
building (Ref. 7).
2.1.3 Sludge Drying Beds
Eleven rectangular areas were identified south of the Bandag
Warehouse in a 1965 aerial photograph of the Channel Master site
(Figure 1-2). Some of the former JFD employees have stated that
several sludge drying beds were located in this area of the site
(Ref. 8). Westinghouse Environmental Services (formerly S&ME)
collected five soil samples in this area in October 1988 (Figure
2-3). Four of the five samples were collected in the former
sludge drying bed area and a fifth sample was collected in a
shallow depression beneath the present Bandag Warehouse that had
been identified in the 1965 aerial photo. A moist blue/green
sludge was discovered in all of the samples collected in the
former sludge drying area (Ref. 9). Analyses of these samples
indicated the presence of chromium, copper, nickel and cyanide
(Ref. 8).
2.1.4 Chronology of Channel Master Site
Prior to 1961
1961-1979
Site vacant.
Site operated by JFD Electronics and the
Unimax Corporation for the manufacture of
television antennas. Activities included
electroplating and aluminum/chrome
conversion.
11
I
.....
"'
-
PCPLANAJIQN:
- -
• SOil IOAING LOCATIONS
- - ----- -- --- ---
-·· ,.,----...... ,.--'\ ( ----·· '
t FOIIIMEft UGOOH
t
I
SOIL BORING LOCATION MAP
FIGURE 2-3
Soll Boring Locations at the
Sludge Drying Area
.........
SMALi.OU DP.PIIIIIOII
WCATtD ON AHIAJ. -~--"'
// \I ~
/ ' / eNA•S ) 0VERl'\.0W
/ /
( ,_ ....... ... .....
0 !IO 100 100
SCALE
SOURCE: Westtnghouse, Aug.1988
-
I
I
I Oct. 1979 -
July 1980
I
I Oct. 1979 -
Spring 1980
I Fall 1980
I July 1980
I Spring 1981
I
I Summer 1983
I
1983
I
1984
I
I 1984-1985
I Fall 1985
I 1986-1987
I
I
I -
Operations conducted by Channel Master
included manufacture of indoor antennas,
which were sent offsite for electroplating.
Some solvents, such as trichlorethylene (TCE)
were used onsite for cleaning. An injection
molding process generated waste plastic,
which was sent to the municipal landfill.
Channel Master used up inventory left over by
JFD by continuing the manufacture of outdoor
antennas.
All manufacturing processes generating
electroplating and aluminum/chrome conversion
wastes discontinued.
Site purchased by Channel Master from JFD.
Channel Master began production of satellite
receiver dishes and systems. Approximately
85 drums of solvents were purchased for
cleaning purposes, including methylene
chloride and 1,1,1-TCA.
After receiving permission from the City of
Oxford, Channel Master decanted wastewater
from the sludge lagoon and discharged this
wastewater into the municipal sanitary sewer
system.
Half of the sludge lagoon was backfilled for
use as a truck parking area.
All manufacturing operations were
discontinued at the site and transferred to
Smithfield, North Carolina.
Channel Master requested permit from the
State of North Carolina to dispose of lagoon
sludge at an offsite disposal facility.
Permit granted, then withdrawn in April 1985.
Channel Master conducted initial soil and
groundwater investigations at the site.
Site leased to Roses Department Store.
13
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fall 1986
Jan. 1987
May 1987
June 1987
Dec. 1987
May 1988
June 24,1988
July 1988
July 1988 -
Nov. 1988
June 21, 1988
Sept. 25, 1989
Sept. 25, 1989
Nov. 14, 1989
Phase I soil and groundwater evaluation
reports issued by S&ME/Westinghouse
Environmental Services.
Channel Master submitted draft cleanup plan
to the NCDHR-CERCLA and to EPA, Region IV.
NCDHR-CERCLA completed site inspection
report.
State approved Channel Master's
subject to minor modification.
cleanup activities took place.
Site leased to Time Electronics.
cleanup plan,
Lagoon area
Site leased to Hamilton/Avnet Electronics.
Site proposed for placement on National
Priorities List.
Westinghouse Environmental Services completed
hand auger borings in the scrap metal trailer
parking area and the outfall of the discharge
line at the drainage ditch.
Excavation, treatment, and replacement of
voe-contaminated soil in area adjacent to
main building.
ATSDR indicated in a letter to NCDHR-CERCLA
that no further cleanup of the sludge lagoon
was necessary to protect public health.
EPA issued work assignment to Bechtel to
perform RI/FS.
EPA issued work assignment to Bechtel to
perform RI/FS. EPA performed a removal
program inspection of Channel Master site.
EPA's Technical Assistance Team (TAT)
contractor collected one composite soil
sample from around the inground concrete
tanks and one composite water sample from the
tanks at the Channel Master site.
Preliminary analytic results of soil samples
revealed 42.9 ppm total chromium, 12.1 ppm
hexavalent-chromium, 145 ppm arsenic and 21.1
ppm lead.
14
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
2.2 Physical Setting
2.2.1 Regional Geology/Bydrogeology
The Channel Master site is located near the city of Oxford, in
Granville County, North Carolina, which lies within the Piedmont
physiographic province. Formations underlying the Piedmont
mountains (Piedmont) consist of soil, saprolite and bedrock.
Saprolite (or residuum) is the weathered rock underlying the land
surface. The saprolite in this region forms a layer from l to
100 ft thick. The regional bedrock which weathered to produce
the saprolite is mainly metavolcanic and granodioritic rocks
(Ref. 10).
The metavolcanic sequence is composed primarily of slightly
metamorphosed rocks of volcanic origin, interspersed with some
minor sedimentary beds. The volcanic rocks in this sequence
include felsic and mafic tuffs, breccia, a few rhyolite flows and
basalts. The tuffs predominate. The felsic to intermediate
tuffs range in composition from fine-grained rocks composed of
volcanic ash to lithic tuffs that contain fragments of feldspar
and quartz set in a fine-grained matrix. Mafic tuffs are
interbedded with the felsic tuffs at several places. The
tuffaceous rocks have a well-developed cleavage at most places
that strikes north to northeast. Massive basalt and rhyolite are
also minor rock types in the sequence (Ref. 11). The interbedded
sedimentary rocks include a few beds of conglomerate and at least
one bed of quartzite (Ref. 10).
In this central portion of Granville County, granodiorite rocks
are exposed and surrounded by metavolcanic rocks or bordered by
the younger sediments of Triassic age. These granodiorite rocks
are gray to pinkish-gray crystalline rocks mainly composed of
feldspars, quartz, and micas. Inclusion of rocks of the
metavolcanic unit is common in the granodiorite, but the
inclusions do not contain metamorphic minerals indicative of
intense dynamic and thermal metamorphism. Around the edges of
the bodies, rocks of the metavolcanic unit and granodiorite are
interlayered (Ref. 11).
Most of the water in these rocks is contained in secondary
interstices that were formed after the rock was lithified. There
is no evidence of confining layers in this region, indicating
that there may be only one aquifer in this region. The aquifer
of concern at the Channel Master site is known as the Carolina
Slate Aquifer (Ref. 11).
Groundwater in the Piedmont is recharged by precipitation on
interstream areas. The precipitation infiltrates through the
unsaturated zone to the water table, normally located within the
saprolite zone. The groundwater moves laterally downward through
the saprolite zone to seep out as springs on the hillsides and to
15
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
recharge streams in adjacent valleys (Ref. 10). "Some of the
water in the saprolite also moves downward into the bedrock and
thereafter through the fractures to adjacent valleys"(Ref. 10).
2.2.2 Site Geology/Hydrogeology
Knowledge of the geology of the Channel Master site is based on
the MW-5, well construction record (Figure 2-4). This well was
installed through the eastern abandoned portion of the sludge
lagoon by S&ME in March 1986 (Ref. 3). This monitoring well was
drilled to a depth of 58 ft into weathered granitic rock (Figure
2-4). The upper 20 ft of material was labeled as "fill". A
hard orange-tan silt with dark brown laminations was identified
as saprolite from 20 to 28 ft. Coarse sand with lenses of
metamorphosed granite was also identified as saprolite from 28 to
58 ft. No bedrock was identified within this 58 ft boring. The
test boring record showing blow counts is shown in Figure 2-5.
Site surface drainage is to a ditch along the southwestern edge
of the property (Ref. 12). Water flows about 1,300 ft in the
ditch to the east of an unnamed, intermittent stream, which is
about 0.5 mi from an unnamed tributary. The unnamed tributary
flows about 2.25 mi to Fishing Creek. Fishing Creek flows to the
Tar River and is used for recreational fishing (Ref. 12).
Groundwater flow at the site remains to be confirmed. Channel
Master conducted a minimal onsite groundwater study by installing
a series of temporary wells. Water levels from these temporary
wells and five permanent wells (one upgradient and four in close
proximity to the lagoon) installed by Channel Master indicated
groundwater flowing in a south/southeasterly direction (Ref. 3).
All of these monitoring wells, except the upstream well (CM-1),
were destroyed during the site clean-up.
2.2.3 Meteorology
Oxford, North Carolina lies within the northeastern section of
the Piedmont Mountains. The climate is relatively moderate with
mild winters and hot, humid summers in this region. Seasonal
temperatures average between 42 to 44°F in January and 78 to 8cl°F
in July. Yearly rainfall across this region of the Piedmont
averages between 44 to 48 in. (Ref. 13). The greatest amount of
precipitation occurs in the summer months, with the least amount
occurring in the fall (Ref. 13). In the winter, snowfall
averages between 6 to 8 in. per year (Ref. 13). The average wind
speed throughout the Piedmont is 9 mi. per hour. Winds blow most
frequently from a south/southwesterly direction. Seasonally, the
winter months show the greatest wind speeds due to the greater
temperature contrasts. Summer months have the lowest wind speeds
(Ref. 13) .
16
I NORTH ~ DEPAATIEHT OF N4 'IUW. AESQ.l'ICES ANO C()O,N.MTY DEVB.0P'E><T
0M$K)H OF E'HYIAOf,A,,ENT AL ..,...,. aE>-ENT -QAOI.N)WATel SECTION FOR OFFICE USE ONL y
P.O. BOX 27887 -AAl.BQf-f,,H.C. 27111. PHONE (818) 7~150a3 ' 0 I ' Ouad. No, " ·J .,
Lat.
Minor Basin
_______ Serial No. ___ _
_______ Long. ____ Pc __
WELL CONSTRUCTION RECORD MW-5 Basin Code I
DRILLING CONTRACTOR ___ s_&_ME __ D_r_i_l_li_n_g_C_o_m_p_a_n_y __
RILLER REGISTRATION NUMBER __ _,_#4:,..1:..:2~-----
i WELL LOCATION: (Show sketch of lhe loca1ion below)
Oxford Neares1 Town: -,,--,------,--------------
:I. " J. ... ,. -\.,, 'l l) ,: "' <..
I (Road. Communily, or Subdivision and Lot No.)
OWNER __ C_h_a_n_n_e_l_Ma_s_t_e_r __ s_a_t_e_l_l_i_t_e_S_y_s_t_e_m_s_, _I_n_c_._
ADDRESS_~P_.~0~._B_o~x_14~16.,._.-~--,-,,------
I (Streer or Route N.l).) Smithfield N.c. 27577
City or Town Staie Zip Code
DATE DRILLEfi/3/86-3/4/86 USE OF WELL Monitor I TOT AL DEPTH 58. 0' CUTTINGS COLLECTED ~ Yes O No
. DOES WELL REPLACE EXISTING WELL? 0 Yes la No
I STATIC WATER LEVEL:----FT. D aoo,e TOP OF CASING, D below TOP OF CASING IS 5' FT. ABOVE LAND SURFACE
Yi~Lu {gom) ______ METHOD OF TEST ______ _
1,·,aT:'R ZONES {oeoth): -----------------
ICl-!:.QRIN.~ TIOif
C ~ 5:,,G•
Tyoe ·-----Amouni
Wat! Thickness Deoth D•ar:ieter or We1ght/F1. Material
Header Ent. ------GW-1 Ent, __ _
STATE WELL CONSTRUCTION PERMIT NUMBER: ___________ _
Granville Coun1y;
Depth DRILLING LOG
From
o.o
0.5
5.5
14.5
17.0
20.0
28,Q
To
o.5'
5.5'
14.5'
17.0'
20.0'
28.0'
56,Q'
F orm~lion J)e~riotion Gray Silty ~andy ~ravel (Fill
Orange-Brown Gravelly Slight]
Sandy clayey SILT (Fill)
Tan Brown Clayey Slightly Sa"
STLT {Fill)
Dark Gray-Green Very Wet Sligt
Sandy Silty CLAY to Clayey Sil
Orange-Brown Clayey Silty tbt
to Very Cparse SAND (Fill)
Hard Orange-Tan SILT with Dar
Bro\.'n Lamination (Saproli:e)
Verv Dense Da.r)<. Bro1.-n Sil:v
Coarse to Very Coarse s;,::J ~i
JPnses of Meramor2hosed G:ani
H aooi1iona1 stRccks 6~0Jl;it::e~k O'. rc,~rn-
I ,,om -1~--5~_ To 45.1 Ft.l.:.L-0. 71//ft. PVC Sch LOC~TIOfJ SKETCH
fs~ow c1rec1ion and distance from a, least 1wc Srate Roa:s. or other m.;::, reference 0:>1n:sJ
From ____ To ___ Fr. ___ _
I From ----To F't.----
GRQUT
Oeolh Ma1er1a1 Memoc
I r'rom 0.0 To 39.5 Fr !.!I Portland Tremmie
rrom 39 5 To 42 B Fr. 1,,.11 Bentoni te Pellets
lsc~;c::r,.
Oeolh Q,.;~e,er S101 S,ze t.1Jtcriat
: rorn t, 5. l To 55. I Ft 2.0 ,r. 0. 0l0 ,n PVC Sch I .-,JM ____ To ___ Ft
=rom ____ To ___ Fr. ____ on ___ on. IGR~ ... El PACK
=furn 42.8
Oeo1h
IO 54. 0 Ft
Sizt:
Sand
t.1a1e,1ar
Quartz
W-4
40
SOURCE: Soil & Material Engineers, Inc., Nov. 1986
I t:orn ____ To ___ Ft
R:":!:.,:.f,~S -----------------·-·-----------.-------------------
I 17 -
FIGURE 2-4
Well Construction Record for MW-5
Installed by Channel Master
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
]
J
2,2,4 Land Use
Land use within a 1-mi radius of the Channel Master site is as
follows: the City of Oxford, which is residential, lies
approximately 0.6 mi east/northeast of the site. There is also a
sparsely populated area located 0.5 mi southeast of the site.
West/northwest of the site are assumed to be recreational areas
including the Thorndale Country Club (0.5 mi northwest of the
site). Lake Devin is located 0.5 mi west of the site. An
agricultural experiment station is located at about 0.3 mi
northwest of the site. Immediately southwest of the site, within
0.25 mi, is an industrial park area.
2,2,5 Population and Water Supply
The population of the City of Oxford is 6,978 which is the most
populated area near the site (Ref, 10). Residents of Oxford draw
municipal water from Kerr Lake, which is approximately 10 mi
northeast of the city. Lake Devin, about 0.7 mi west of the
site, is the emergency water source for the city (Ref. 1). Both
of these surface water sources are upgradient. The Channel
Master site, other facilities in the industrial park, and
residences in the area are also served by municipal water. Wells
supplying potable water are reportedly situated in a single
continuous aquifer system. "A house count on the USGS map of the
area within 3 mi of the Channel Master site excluding areas
served by the City of Oxford, reveals 656 houses. Assuming 3.8
residents per house yields 2,493 residents utilizing groundwater"
(Ref. 1). Groundwater usage in the vicinity of the site needs to
be verified.
2,3 Existing Condition
Channel Master's remediation efforts to date have included
excavation/removal of the former sludge lagoon and
excavation/treatment of voe-contaminated soils associated with
leaking tanks. Records do not indicate that Channel Master
resampled the areas south of the main building after remediation
efforts were completed, Contamination remaining onsite is
associated with contaminants that have migrated from the Channel
Master remediated areas or from the former sludge drying area,
Contaminants detected in a composite sample collected from the
lagoon before the clean-up was performed included hexavalent and
trivalent chromium (99,000 ppm total chromium), lead (320 ppm),
arsenic (52 ppm), selenium (13 ppm), and cyanide (31.9 ppm)
(Ref. 2). Soil sampling from the lagoon area showed the presence
of 1,2-dichloroethane (DCA). Tetrachloroethane and TCE were
detected in the sludge. voe contaminants detected in the soil
outside of the lagoon included toluene, xylene, TCE,
tetrachloroethene (PCE), and trans-1,2-dichloroethene (DCE)
(Ref. 2). The primary area of voe contamination has been
18
I DEPTH
FT.
DESCRIPTION . _ ·, ~ 4 l' ELEV. ePEt£TRATION-BLONS PER FT.
I 0.0
0.5 Orange-Brown Gravelly Slightly Sandy
Clayey SILT (Fill)
I 5.5
Tan-Brown Plastic Clayey Slightly
Sandy SILT (Fill) (ML)
I
14.5
I 17.0
20.0
Uark (;ray-Green very wet :,ugnuy -Sane
r,11 -• "IV ~ f'l ,.,."'T' ,,..,:11\ ~--,,
Orange-Brown Clayey Silty Coarse to
Verv Coarse SAND <Fi 11) -(SM)
I Hard Orange-Tan SILT with Dark Brown
Lamination (Saproli te)
I 28.0
Very Dense Dark Brown Silty Coarse
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
to
Very Coarse SAND with Lenses of
Metamorphosed Granitic Rock (Saproli te
58.0
Boring Terminated at 58.0 feet
in SAND with Lenses of Metacorphosed
Granitic Rock (Saprolite)
BORING ANO SAl.<PL/NG MEETS ASTM 0·1586
CORE DRILLING '-<EETS AST'-< 0-2113
}
I
I PENETRATION IS THE NLMBC1 OF BLCM"S OF 140 LB HAl.<MER
FALLING 30 IN. REQUIRED TO ORIVE 14 IN. I 0. SAl.<PLER I FT. I -L.NOISTURBEO SAMPLE !xi 0/o ROCK CORE REcoYE RY
◄ LOSS OF OR/LL/NG Wl>TER
-=-WATE.R TAEl..E-24HR_
--=--WATER TABi..E·IHR.
19
:5 /..J,
0 IO 20 30 40 60 80 100
• 3
4 I 9
-
4 -8
SOURCE: Soil l Material Engineefl, Inc .. Nov. 1966
>
100
78
100+
100
JOO+
FIGURE 2•5
Blow-Count details for MW-5
Installed by Channel Master
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
TABLE 3-1
MAXIMUM CONCENTRATIONS OF DETECTABLE
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS
CONTAMINANT
Metals1
Chromium
Nickel
Copper
Volatile organics
Tetrachloroethene2
Toluene1
Trichlorethene2
Ref. 3
Ref. 12
CONCENTRATION
0.08 mg/1
0.28 mg/1
0.05 mg/1
39,000 ug/1
JO ug/1
190,000 ug/1
1
2
3 Maximum contaminant level
ARARS
0.05 mg/L3
0.015 mg/L4
1.0 mg/L
0.88 ug/1
15,000 ug/1
2.8 ug/1
' Water quality criteria adjusted for drinking water
24
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
surface water
No surface water sampling has been performed at the Channel
Master site. The current RI will include an evaluation of on-
and offsite contamination of surface water. The surface water
investigation will include a determination of whether groundwater
discharges to surface water occur and the locations of these
interfaces. Locations of runoff discharges into surface water
bodies will also be identified.
Soils
Soil samples were collected by Channel Master from the scrap
trailer loading area and the waste oil tank area (Ref. 5). The
samples were analyzed for priority pollutants and oil and grease.
voes, primarily in the form of halogenated hydrocarbons, and oil
and grease were found at significant concentrations. A summary
of the maximum voe concentration levels found is provided in
Table 3-2.
Two base neutral extractables, bis(2-ethylexyl) phthalate and
diethyl phthalate, were detected at concentrations of 1000 ug/kg
and 1300 ug/kg, respectively (Ref. 5). Acid extractables, PCBs,
and pesticides were not detected. Samples were not analyzed for
metals.
The primary areas of contamination were found to be the scrap
metal trailer parking area and the waste oil tank drainage area,
with contamination extending to a depth of 7 ft. A secondary
area of voe contamination was found in the chemical pad area to a
depth of 3 ft (Ref. 5).
The subsequent groundwater evaluation, conducted by Channel
Master, included the analysis of well boring soils from MW-5.
Soil samples were collected from 19 to 50 ft. Only
1,2-dichloroethane was found at detectable concentrations
(30 ug/kg) at a depth of 23.5 to 24.8 ft.
Residual soil contamination may exist to the south of the main
Channel Master building, including the lagoon area, the scrap
metal trailer parking area, and the chemical pad area.
Sediment
Drainage ditch sediment samples were collected in July 1988, by
Channel Master's contractor. The samples were collected from
along the southwestern edge of the property and showed some voe
contamination. The maximum values are given in Table 3-3. No
samples were analyzed for inorganic contamination of sediments.
25
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 3-2
MAXIMUM CONCENTRATIONS OF DETECTABLE
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS IN THE
SOIL AND WASTE OIL TANK
CONTAMINANT
Soils
1,1-dichloroethane
1,2-dichloroethane
1,1-dichloroethene
trans-1,2-dichloroethene
methylene chloride
1,1,1-trichloroethane
trichloroethene
xylene
tetrachloroethene
vinyl chloride
acetone
waste Oil Tank
trichloroethene
1,1,1 trichloroethane
CONCENTRATION
70 ug/kg
26 ug/kg
670 ug/kg
170 ug/kg
290 ug/kg
6,500 ug/kg
670 ug/kg
210 ug/kg
5,400 ug/kg
210 ug/kg
290 ug/kg
83,000 ug/kg
16,000 ug/kg
I source: Ref. 3
I
I
I
I -
26
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
One offsite sample was taken downstream from the site in a
drainage ditch at a depth near the water table. voe
contamination was detected. Results are presented in Table 3-3.
Sludge
In 1986, sampling and analysis of the sludge and the lagoon area
was conducted by Channel Master to determine the volume of
material to be removed and the limits of remediation. Samples
were collected from the soil above and below the sludge and a
composite sample of the sludge was taken from the lagoon. Soil
samples were analyzed for total chromium and the composite sample
was analyzed for metals, EP toxicity metals and voes, and
cyanide. No chromium contamination was found in the fill
material or in the soil. Table 3-4 summarizes the inorganic
contamination found in the composite sludge sample taken from the
lagoon. Tetrachloroethene at a concentration of 13.4 ug/kg was
the only voe detected (Ref. 3).
The lagoon area underwent remediation in 1987. Existing
concentrations of residual contamination are not known.
An investigation of the sludge drying area discussed in Section
2.1.3 was performed by Channel Master in 1989. Samples were
analyzed for metals, EP toxicity metals, and cyanide. A summary
of the maximum concentrations found in these samples is presented
in Table 3-5.
Air
No ambient air sampling data were available for evaluation.
other Units
During a site visit by the EPA RPM and Bechtel personnel
(December 18, 1989), a concrete treatment tank near the lagoon
was noted.
3.1.2 Migration Pathways
Based on the existing information from the Channel Master site, a
generalized site conceptual model depicting potential migration
pathways for contamination transport was developed and is
presented in Figure 3-1. Additionally, Table 3-6 identifies the
Channel Master site media, possible contamination concerns, and
potential migration pathways. Figure 3-1 and Table 3-6 will be
revised as additional data become available during the course of
the RI.
27
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 3-3
SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION SUMMARY
(SEPTEMBER 1986)
CONTAMINANT
onsite:
trans 1,2-dichloroethene
tetrachloroethene
trichloroethene
Offsite:
trans 1,2-dichloroethene
tetrachloroethene
trichloroethene ·
vinyl chloride
Source: Ref. 12
28
MAXIMUM CONCENTRATION
(mg/kg)
18
34
<5
110
5,400
670
210
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 3-4
SUMMARY OP ANALYTICAL RESULTS POR INORGANIC
CONTAMINANTS PROM COMPOSITE SLUDGE SAMPLE
PROM LAGOON AREAS (1986)
CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATION1
Total Arsenic 52 mg/kg
Total Barium 800 mg/kg
Total Cadmium 20 mg/kg
Total Chromium 99,000 mg/kg
Total Lead 320 mg/kg
Total Mercury < 0.02 mg/kg
Total Selenium 13 mg/kg
Total Silver < 2.5 mg/kg
Cyanide (total) 31.9 mg/kg
EP-TOX Arsenic < 0.005 mg/1
EP-TOX Barium < 0.2 mg/1
EP-TOX Cadmium < 0.01 mg/1
EP-TOX Chromium 0.05 mg/1
EP-TOX Lead < 0.005 mg/1
EP-TOX Mercury < 0.002 mg/1
EP-TOX Selenium 0.012 mg/1
EP-TOX Silver < 0.05 mg/1
1 Results for total metals are reported
Sources: Ref. 1, Ref. 5, Ref. 3
29
EP-TOX
MCLs
5.0
100.0
mg/1
mg/1
1.0 mg/1
5.0 mg/1
5.0 mg/1
0.2 mg/1
1.0 mg/1
5.0 mg/1
on a dry weight basis.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 3-5
MAXIMUM CONCENTRATIONS OF DETECTABLE
INORGANIC CONTAMINANTS IN EXISTING SLUDGE
DRYING BEDS (1989)
CONTAMINANT
ChromiWII
Total (mg/kg)
EP-TOX (mg/1)
Copper
Total (mg/kg)
EP-TOX (mg/1)
Nickel
Total (mg/kg)
EP-TOX (mg/1)
Total cyanide (mg/kg)
Free cyanide (mg/kg)
Source: Ref. 8
30
CONCENTRATION
35,000
0.29
2,700
0.08
14,000
6.2
1,200
120
J
J
]
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
To accurately identify migration pathways and predict
contamination fate and transport at the Channel Master site,
additional data regarding the current state of the site are
necessary. Post-remediation data are needed to identify and/or
verify existing contamination source areas and to determine the
exact nature of the existing contamination. Additionally, a
detailed hydrogeologic investigation is required to verify
groundwater flow direction (reported to be to the southeast),
determine water table depth, and identify groundwater/surface
water interfaces.
Details regarding the chemical, geochemical, and hydrogeologic
data requirements are provided in Section 4.4.
3.1.3 Exposure Pathways
Figure 3-1 depicts the potential exposure pathways at the Channel
Master site. Remediation efforts, conducted in 1987 by Channel
Master, have reduced the potential for exposure of humans to the
soil contaminants from the Channel Master site; however, the
possible presence of residual contamination, and the presence of
contaminated sludge drying areas and groundwater pose a potential
threat of exposure. A preliminary evaluation of potential human
exposure pathways was performed by ATSDR during their preliminary
health assessment conducted in 1989.
Inorganics
Although the lagoon and the backfilled truck parking lot (west
half of the original lagoon) were excavated and backfilled with
uncontaminated soil, residual contamination may exist.
Therefore, the potential for human exposure to inorganic
toxicants through this medium will be evaluated. Groundwater
data from monitoring wells did not indicate any significant
contamination by inorganics, with the exception of chromium (0.08
mg/L) and nickel (0.28 mg/L), which exceeded the EPA drinking
water standards of 0.05 mg/Land 0.015 mg/L respectively. There
were no air, surface water, or sediment data available,
therefore, no conclusions were drawn regarding human exposure to
inorganics contamination from these media. Although sediment
data for chromium were not found in the reviewed materials,
potential for bioaccumulation in aquatic animals is not high.
organics
The majority of the voe contamination was reported near the
vicinity of the in-ground concrete waste oil tank. The tank has
been removed and the contaminated soils around the tank have been
cleaned and/or excavated and backfilled with soil acceptable to
NCDHR-CERCLA. Human exposure pathways relating to soil media
31
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 3-6
MEDIA, CONTAMINATION CONCERNS, AND
POTENTIAL MIGRATION PATHWAY
MEDitJM
Groundwater
Soil/dust
PRIMARY
CONTAMINATION CONCERN
Chromium and voes
voes, semi-volatiles,
oil and grease
voes
Sludges Heavy metals, (Ba,
Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb,
Se), cyanide, arsenic
Surface water Unknown
and sediments
Onsite
. treatment
tank
Unknown
32
MIGRATION
PATHWAY
Natural movement of
groundwater (flow
direction believed to be
to the southeast)
Infiltration/
percolation to
groundwater
Transmission by surface
water runoff
Transmission by wind
Volatilization into air
Infiltration/
Percolation to
soil and groundwater
Storm water
runoff
Food chain
bioaccumulation and
transport through mobile
organisms
Spills or leaks
from tank
Volatilization of voes if
present
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
have been limited since the soils contaminated with voes were
removed. No air sampling has been conducted for voes, however,
with the bulk of the contaminated soil removed, voes are not
expected to be a problem with respect to human exposure via
inhalation. There were no surface water data regarding voes,
therefore, human exposure pathways via surface water cannot be
evaluated until the RI has been completed. Groundwater and
sediments were found to be contaminated with voes as noted in
Section 3.1.1. However, as noted above, these data are not
current since they were.obtained before removal of voe-
contaminated soils and may not represent present conditions.
Assuming that concentrations of contaminants listed in Table 3-1
represent current conditions for onsite groundwater, the
potential human exposure pathways for voes present in groundwater
are ingestion, inhalation, and dermal contact/absorption from
activities such as showering, cooking, washing, and eating.
Remedial workers may also be exposed during site remediation of
the groundwater. Currently, there do not appear to be any onsite
human exposure pathways because municipal water is used at the
Channel Master site and is available to residents in this area.
Site groundwater flow is reported to be generally toward the
southeast; however, groundwater flow direction at the site needs
to be confirmed. The nearest private drinking water well,
located 2,000 ft. southeast of the site, was sampled in 1987 and
did not indicate contamination.
Assuming that concentrations of contaminants listed in Table 3-3
represent current conditions for on-and offsite voe sediment
contamination, the potential human pathways are inadvertent
ingestion, pica and dermal contact. Onsite sediment
contamination is not expected to be a problem since voe
concentrations are low and the site is restricted. voes, as a
class, do not bioaccumulate appreciably. Therefore, ingestion of
fish is not expected to be a pathway of concern.
Exposure Potential
Because access to the Channel Master site is restricted by a
fence, exposure to the general public is limited to migration
paths that transport the contaminants offsite or to onsite
personnel that come in direct contact with seepage or sludge.
The treatment tank is fenced and is not accessible to workers or
the public.
33
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
3,2 Preliminary Health and Environmental Assessment
3,2,1 Identification of Chemicals of Concern
A list of chemicals that are suspected or known to be present at
the Channel Master site is given in Table 3-7. This list is
based on the pre-remediation data presented in the Phase I
Groundwater Quality Evaluation (Ref. 3) and the Report on the
Soil Quality (Ref. 5) as well as the results of the analyses of
samples collected from the currently:existing sludge drying areas
in 1989.
The presence or absence of these chemicals and the concentrations
of chemicals existing at the site will be determined during the
course of the RI.
Once this information is obtained, indicator chemicals will be
selected, for the purposes of performing the health assessment,
in accordance with the US EPA Superfund Public Health Evaluation
Manual (Ref. 15).
3,2,2 Exposure Assessment
Inorganics
Chromium, cadmium, lead, barium, selenium, arsenic, cyanide,
nickel, and copper were the inorganics detected at the Channel
Master site. Past remediation efforts involving excavation of
sludges and sludge/soils from the lagoon and lagoon vicinity
should have limited human exposure pathways relating to soil
media for these metals. surface water and sediment data for
chromium were not available, however, bioaccumulation of chromium
in aquatic animals with subsequent human ingestion is not
expected to be a pathway· of concern. While the inorganics at
this site probably do not pose a public health concern, post-
remediation sampling of the lagoon soils, groundwater and the
sludge drying area south of the warehouse will be conducted.
organics
voes in the onsite groundwater are of potential public health
concern if the concentrations indicated in Table 3-1 are
currently valid and use of the onsite groundwater occurs.
Presently, onsite groundwater is not being utilized. The highest
concentrations of voes were found in the groundwater near the in-
ground concrete waste oil storage tank. Samples collected in
1987 from monitoring wells located near the site boundary showed
some voe contamination, indicating the existence of a
contamination plume which may be escaping offsite. These wells
were destroyed during excavation of the lagoon area. The
locations of these former wells are shown in Figure 2-1. Although
the nearest offsite well did not show site-related contamination
34
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
_I
TABLE 3-7
PRELIMINARY IDENTIFICATION OF CONTAMINANTS AND
CONTAMINANT-SPECIFIC ARARS
FOR.THE CHANNEL KASTER SITE
IIAXIIUI EPA AIEIEIIT
IDITAIIIIWIT 1111 TER IIIAI. I TT
IDITAIIIIWIT LEVEL CRITERIA
Of IDICERII 1111/L Soll 111;/q (1 >
Jnorganic:
Araenfc 50 0,002
Barii.n 1000
tactn;a.n 10 10
Chromhn 50 170,000
Lead 50 50
Seleniua 10 10
Cyanide 200
Nick.el 15,4
Copper 1,000
Organic:
1,1·dichloroethane
(1,1·DCA)
1,2-dichloroethane 5 0.94
(1,2·DCA)
1,1•dichloroethene 7 0.033
(1,1·DC£)
*trens-1,2-dichloroethene 100
(trans·1,2·DCEl
*tetrachloroethene 5 0.88
(PCE)
1,1,1-trichloroethane 200 19.0
(1,1,1·TCA)
*Trichloroethene 5 2,8
(TCE)
•vinyl Chloride 2 2.0
*Xylene 10000
Methylene chloride
Toluene 15,000
(1) Adjusted for drinking water • Ref. 3
35
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
in 1987, offsite users of the groundwater may be affected in the
future if the contamination plume continues to spread.
Conclusions regarding the extent of voe migration offsite can
only be drawn after additional sampling and analysis of
groundwater and soils both on and offsite.
voes in the offsite drainage ditch sediment and surface water may
be of potential health concern to children playing in these
areas. The exposure pathways (inadvertent ingestion and dermal
contact) associated with this scenario are believed to be of less
consequence with respect to voe toxicity than that of deliberate
ingestion (pica) because of the frequency of occurrence and the
mode of exposure. Although surface waters were not sampled, the
groundwater is thought to have contaminated the offsite sediment
and the surface water because of the high water table in some
areas. It is not known how far the groundwater/surface
water/sediment contamination extends downstream of the ditch.
3.2.3 Toxicity Assessment
The toxicological characteristics of the inorganic and organic
compounds which have been found at the Channel Master site are
discussed below. Based on the existing information, it is not
known whether contamination concentrations are present at levels
which would manifest any of the toxicological effects described.
• Inorganics
Inorganic contaminants found at detectable concentrations at the
Channel Master site include chromium, cadmium, lead, arsenic,
barium, selenium, cyanide, nickel and copper.
Chromic acid and its salts have a corrosive action on the skin
and mucous membranes. The lesions are confined to the exposed
parts, affecting chiefly the skin of the hands and forearms and
the mucous membranes of the nasal septum. The characteristic
lesion is a deep, penetrating ulcer, which, for the most part,
does not tend to suppurate, and which is slow in healing. Small
ulcers, about the size of a matchhead or end of a lead pencil may
be found, chiefly around the base of the nails, on the knuckles,
dorsum of the hands and forearms. These ulcers tend to be clean,
and progress slowly. They are frequently painless, even though
quite deep. They heal slowly and leave scars. On the mucous
· membrane of the nasal septum the ulcers are usually accompanied
by purulent discharge and crusting. If exposure continues,
perforation of the nasal septum may result, but produces no
deformity of the nose. Hexavalent compounds are said to be more
toxic than the trivalent. Eczematous dermatitis due to trivalent
chromium compounds has been reported.
36
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The inhalation of fumes or dusts of cadmium primarily affects the.
respiratory tract; the kidneys may also be affected. Even brief
exposure to high concentrations may result in pulmonary edema and
death. Usually the edema is not massive, with little pleural
effusion. In fatal cases, fatty degeneration of the liver and
acute inflammatory changes in the kidneys have been noted.
Ingestion of cadmium results in a gastrointestinal type of
poisoning resembling food poisoning in its symptoms. Inhalation
of dust or fumes may cause dryness of the throat, cough,
headache, a sense of constriction in the chest, shortness of
breath (dyspnea) and vomiting. More severe exposure results in
marked lung changes, with persistent cough, pain in the chest,
severe dyspnea and prostration which may terminate fatally. X-
ray changes are usually similar to those seen in bronchi-
pneumonia. The urine is frequently dark. These symptoms are
usually delayed for some hours after exposure and a fatal
concentration may be breathed without sufficient discomfort to
warn the workman to leave the exposure. Ingestion of cadmium
results-in sudden nausea, salivation, vomiting, diarrhea and
abdominal pain and discomfort. Symptoms begin almost immediately
after ingestion. A yellow discoloration of the teeth has been
reported in exposed workers.
The presence of lead compounds at the site will not result in
eXJ?osure unless lead is in such form, and so distributed, as to
gain access into the body or tissues in measurable quantity.
Mode of entry into the body can be through inhalation of dusts,
ingestion, or through the skin. Absorption through the skin is
of special importance in the case of organic compounds of lead,
which are absorbed rapidly through the skin and lungs and
selectively absorbed by the central nervous system. In the case
of inorganic forms of lead, this route is of no practical
importance. When lead is ingested, much of it passes through the
body unabsorbed and is eliminated in the feces. the greater
portion of the lead that is absorbed is caught by the liver and
excreted, in part, in the bile. For this reason, larger amounts
of lead are necessary to cause poisoning if absorption is by this
route and a longer period of exposure is usually necessary to
produce symptoms. On the other hand, upon inhalation, absorption
takes place easily from the respiratory tract and symptoms tend
to develop more quickly. From the point of view of industrial
poisoning, inhalation of lead is much more important than is
ingestion. Lead is a cumulative poison. Increasing amounts
build up in the body and eventually a point is reached where
symptoms and disability occur. In mild cases of short duration,
there may be symptoms of headache, dizziness and insomnia.
Poisoning from arsenic compounds may be acute or chronic. Acute
poisoning usually results from swallowing arsenic compounds;
chronic poisoning from either swallowing or inhalation. Acute
allergic reactions to arsenic compounds used in medical therapy
have been fairly common; the type and severity of reaction
37
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
depending upon the compound of arsenic. Inorganic arsenical are
more toxic than organics. Trivalent is more toxic than
pentavalent. Acute arsenic poisoning (from ingestion) results in
marked irritation of the stomach and intestines with nausea,
vomiting and diarrhea. In severe cases, the vomitus and stools
are bloody and the patient goes into collapse and shock with
weak, rapid pulse, cold sweats, coma and death. Chronic arsenic
poisoning, whether through ingestion or inhalation, may manifest
itself in many different ways. There may be disturbances of the
digestive system such as loss of appetite, cramps, nausea,
constipation or diarrhea. Liver damage may occur, resulting in
jaundice. Disturbances of the blood, kidneys and nervous system
are not infrequent. Arsenic can cause a variety of skin
abnormalities including itching, pigmentation and cancerous
changes.
Barium, in the form of soluble barium salts, are poisonous if
ingested. Symptoms of exposure include severe abdominal pain,
vomiting, dyspnea, rapid pulse, paralysis of the arm and leg, and
eventually cyanosis and death.
Elemental Selenium has low acute systemic toxicity, but dust or
fumes can cause serious irritation of the respiratory tract.
Some organic selenium compounds have the high toxicity of other
organic metal. Inorganic selenium compounds can cause
dermatitis. Garlic odor of breath is a common symptom. Chronic
exposure can produce symptoms such as pallor, nervousness,
depression, and digestive disturbances.
Cyanide and hydrocyanic acid are protoplasmic poisons. Exposure
to concentrations of 100-200 ppm for periods of 30-60 minutes can
cause death. In cases of acute cyanide poisoning, death is
extremely rapid. In less acute cases, there is cyanosis,
headache, dizziness, unsteadiness of gait, a feeling of
suffocation, and nausea. Where the patient recovers, there is
rarely any disability.
Nickel and many of its compounds are poisons and carcinogens.
Some are human carcinogens by inhalation. All airborne nickel
contaminating dusts are regarded as carcinogenic by inhalation.
Ingestion of large doses of nickel compounds (1-3 mg/kg) has been
shown to cause intestinal disorders, convulsions, and asphyxia.
Hypersensitivity to nickel is common and can cause allergic
contact dermatitis, pulmonary asthma, conjunctivitis, and
inflammatory reactions around nickel-containing medical implants
and prostheses. The most common effect resulting from exposure
to nickel compounds is the development of "nickel itch". It
occurs primarily in persons doing nickel-plating and is most
frequent under conditions of high temperature and humidity, when
the skin is moist, and mainly affects the hands and arms. There
is marked variation in individual susceptibility to the
dermatitis.
38
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Copper chloride and sulfate have been reported as causing
irritation of the skin and conjunctivae which may be on an
allergic basis. cuprous oxide is irritating to the eyes and
upper respiratory tract. Discoloration of the skin is often seen
in persons handling copper, but this does not indicate any actual
injury. The ingestion of a large quantity of copper sulfate has
caused vomiting, gastric pain, dizziness, exhaustion, anemia,
cramps, convulsions, shock, coma and death.
Toxicity information for inorganics was taken from Dangerous
Properties of Industrial Material. Sixth Edition, 1984.
Organics
Generally, voes may cause eye irritation and repeated skin
contact to high concentrations of the chemicals may result in
dry, scaly dermatitis. voes tend to defat the skin. When
inhaled at high concentrations, voes act as a narcotic and a
central nervous system depressant. Acute narcotic and a central
nervous system depressant. Acute exposures via inhalation and/or
ingestion may cause dizziness, lack of coordination, drowsiness,
slowing of mental ability, fatigue, unconsciousness, respiratory
and circulatory failure, and possible death. Long-term or
chronic ingestion exposures would have serious health effects.
Chronic exposure to voes by inhalation or ingestion have been
associated with hepatic damage, immune system disturbances, and
kidney function impairment. In addition, a number of the voes
found at the site. However, long-term or chronic ingestion
exposures at these levels would have serious health effects.
Chronic exposures to voes via inhalation or ingestion have been
associated with hepatic damage, immune system disturbances, and
kidney function impairment. In addition, a number of the voes
found in the onsite groundwater are classed as possible (1,1-
DCE), probable (1,2-DCA, PCE, TCE, chloroform), and known (vinyl
chloride) human carcinogens by EPA and the International Agency
for Research on Cancer. Additional information regarding
toxicity of the individual voes and chromium may be obtained from
toxicological profiles developed by ATSDR (ATSDR, 1989). The
toxological profiles for voes have not been published by ATSDR.
3.2.4 Human Health Risk Characterization
The human health risk characterization is a quantitative
· assessment and is performed by utilizing information from the
exposure assessment and toxicity assessment. Because data
regarding existing site conditions is limited, even a
quantitative preliminary health risk characterization is not
possible at this time. Data collected during the RI will be used
to perform a risk characterization as described in section 5.6.4.
The human health risk presented by the inorganic contaminants at
39
.I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
the Channel Master site is relatively low since the exposure
opportunities are limited and contamination concentrations are
not believed to be extremely high.
Concentrations of voes in the onsite groundwater could be fairly
high; however, the human health risk is believed to be fairly
low as the exposure potential to the surrounding population is
limited.
The greatest current health risk is to onsite employees with
access to the fenced areas, and site remediation workers.
3.2.5 Ecological Assessment
As with the human health risk assessment, the ecological
assessment is performed by utilizing information from the
exposure assessment and toxicity assessment. Data regarding
existing site conditions is limited. No surface water or
biological media data exist and sediment data is limited.
Therefore, even preliminary ecological assessment is not possible
at this time. Data collected during the RI will be used to
perform an ecological assessment as described in section 5.6.4.
3.3 Remedial Response ARARs and Preliminary Remedial Response
Objectives
In accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended by the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), site-
specific applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements
(ARARs) must be identified and primary consideration given to
those remedial alternatives that meet or exceed all ARARs.
The Remedial Response Objective is to meet or exceed ARARs for
the contaminants of concern as given in Table 3-7. A preliminary
assessment of remedial technologies which may be employed to
attain remedial response objectives are given in Section 4-2.
40
I
I
I
I
I
4.0 WORK PLAN RATIONALE
4.1 Scopa of Remedial Action
For the Channel Master site, the general goals of the remedial
action as detailed in 40 CFR 300.68 (j), are to "mitigate and
minimize damage to and provide adequate protection of public
health, welfare, or the environment." Remediation of Channel
Master may encompass groundwater, sediments, soil and sludge. An
assessment of remedial technologies is presented in this section
followed by descriptions of potential treatability studies used
to evaluate these alternatives.
I 4.2 Preliminary Assessment of Remedial Technologies
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Previous remedial efforts at Channel Master have focused on
removal of contaminant sources including the sludge from the
lagoon that resulted from the plating wastewater treatment, and
two oil tanks and voe-contaminated soil adjacent to the tanks.
Remedial technologies presented here address: l) containment
and/or removal of any remaining voe contamination in both the
soil and groundwater; and 2) removal of contaminants from the
sludge drying area where eleven sludge pits were identified in a
1965 aerial photo of the site. Once field sampling efforts
identify the extent of contamination, the remedial technologies
presented here will be more closely scrutinized to select the
technology which meets clean-up objectives in the most cost
effective manner. Treatability studies will be recommended at
that time if required. Remedial technologies presented here
include:
•No Action
•Soil
•Water
Offsite RCRA disposal
Low permeability clay cap
Low temperature thermal treatment
Incineration
Insitu biological treatment
Soil washing/extraction
Solidification/stabilization
Vitrification
vacuum extraction of voes
Discharge to publicly owned treatment works
Air stripping
Carbon adsorption/ion exchange
Biological treatment
Chemical precipitation
Reverse osmosis
41
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
4.2.1 No Action
Description. In this case, "no action" means "no further
remedial action. " Instead, institutional measures are taken to
isolate the public from the contaminated media, specifically the
soil and the groundwater. This can be accomplished through deed
restrictions, installation of a perimeter fence and warning signs
to keep people offsite, and restricted use of the groundwater.
Groundwater monitoring can help to determine if contaminants are
leaching from the soil, or if contaminant concentration is
decreasing due to natural soil flushing.
Applicability. "No action" establishes a baseline by which to
compare other remedial alternatives, both for soil and water. It
is required under the NCP.
4.2.2 Boil
The following is a discussion of remedial technologies for
contaminated soil and their applicability to the Channel Master
site.
OffSite RCRA Disposal
Description.
excavating the
disposal.
Offsite disposal in a RCRA vault involves
soil and transporting it to a RCRA facility for
Applicability. The applicability of RCRA disposal depends on the
contaminants present in the soil, volume of the soil to be
handled, the distance to the nearest approved facility, and unit
hauling and disposal costs. Land-ban restrictions now prohibit
land disposal of soil contaminated with chlorinated solvent
wastes without first removing or destroying the solvent. If
testing reveals that the soil contains no listed land-ban solvent
waste then land-ban restrictions would not apply to the waste.
LOW-Permeability Cap
Description. This alternative involves reducing surface water
drainage onto the site and capping the site with a low
permeability clay on top of a synthetic liner. Storm water that
drains from the roofs and parking lots would be diverted away
• from contaminated areas. The cap would prevent rainwater from
percolating through the soil and then into the groundwater.
While contaminants would not be removed from the soil, their
tendency to migrate into the groundwater and then offsite would
be reduced.
42
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Applicability. The Channel Master site is generally flat,
making the construction of a cap relatively easy. A suitable
clay and synthetic liner would probably be required for the cap.
While the tendency of the contaminants to migrate offsite would
be reduced, deed restrictions affecting site use and long term
monitoring of the cap integrity would be required.
Low Temperature Thermal Treatment
Description. Low temperature thermal treatment is a process
whereby volatile organics are removed from the soil through
evaporation. The soil is screened and then heated to
approximately 200° c. During the heating process the soil is
mixed and agitated, thus allowing moisture and volatiles to
vaporize and escape. The volatiles can be destroyed by use of an
afterburner, recovered by a condenser and carbon adsorption
system, or released directly into the atmosphere. This treatment
technology is also referred to as enhanced volatilization.
Applicability. The system is capable of processing various types
of soil and would be an effective means of removing volatile
organics contamination. The heating temperatures are low
relative to incineration, thus it is cheaper than incineration.
If semi-volatiles are detected in significant quantities, this
treatment will not be able to treat them. This method could only
be used as preliminary treatment for any soil/sludge that is also
contaminated with chromium. The processed soil may then be
suitable for a soil washing or solidification/stabilization
process to remove any remaining contaminants.
Incineration
Description. Incineration units can take the form of multiple
hearth furnaces, rotary kilns, infrared incineration, and
fluidized beds. Soils are subjected to temperatures of 800 -
1100° C, which will evaporate moisture, destroy organic matter
and vaporize volatiles. In commercial chromium production the
ore (chromite, Fe(Cr02)2] is processed by heating it with sodium
carbonate and nitrate to form sodium chromate, Na2cro4 which.is
then extracted in water. Many chromium compounds are then
derived from sodium chromate. Sodium chromate technology may
also be applicable to extract chromium (99,000 ppm), from the
soils and sludges at the Channel Master site. The chromium could
. then be reconcentrated if necessary by evaporation, precipitation,
or ion exchange.
Applicability. Incinerators may be used to process both the soil
and sludge at the site. Incineration alone is ineffective on
heavy metals, unless they are volatile at high temperatures.
Therefore, this process would probably precede chromium treatment
(removal or stabilization). The cost of equipment and heating
fuel are critically important considerations. The chromium may
43
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
be in a reduced form at present, incineration might oxidize the
chromium to the more toxic hexavalent form. If lead is present
it could vaporize at high temperatures.
Xnsitu Biological Treatment
Description. Insitu biological treatment is the process of
stimulating microorganisms to degrade waste material. Microbial
activity is enhanced by the introduction of oxygen and nutrients
into the soil. If the waste material is not a suitable carbon
source, the bacteria will require another carbon source which it
will degrade through co-metabolism. If indigenous bacteria are
not present, or are unable to degrade the waste, genetically
engineered organisms may be used to degrade the material.
Applicability. For insitu biological treatment, the soil and
contaminants would have to be assessed with regard to contaminant
types and concentration and soil characteristics. This method
would have no effect on fixing or removing chromium, which might
be toxic to the micro-organisms that ~egrade chlorinated
solvents. It is not known if indigenous bacteria are present.
soil washing/Extraction
Description. Soil washing is a process that removes fine
particles such as clay and organics from the rest of the soil.
It can be performed on excavated soil or insitu (termed soil
flushing). Soil is screened, an appropriate cleansing agent
(i.e. solvent, surfactant) is introduced, and wash water
separates clays and organics from coarser soil. The result is a
significant volume reduction of contaminated material.
Applicability. This procedure is a separation process. Thus,
residuals would require further treatment or disposal. This
process might be appropriate for the chromium-contaminated
sludge/soil. However, the chromium sludge was the precipitate
from a reducing process and is already concentrated. Metal
precipitates might be extracted from the sludge/soil and
dissolved into the wash solution if the pH is adjusted by the
addition of acid or base. Washing might serve only to dilute the
chrome, making a larger volume of waste. Organic contamination
could be removed from soil through washing, however, the wash
would then require additional treatment to remove the organic
contamination. If metal-contaminated sludge is confined to
discrete areas such as the sludge drying area of lagoon site, it
would probably be more feasible to excavate and treat the
contaminated material rather than attempt insitu metals removal,
Insitu treatment would require the installation of injection and
extraction wells.
44
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Solidification/Stabilization
Description. The contaminated soil/sludge is excavated to the
limit of contamination and then mixed with a stabilizing agent,
such as cement and water to fix the contaminants in a matrix that
reduces the potential for leaching. The mixture is returned to
the pit from which the soil/sludge was excavated and capped with
clean soil.
Applicability. This process would require no dewatering since
the moisture in soil would be used in the pozzolanic reaction
that occurs when water is added to cement. The chemicals
originally used to treat the electroplating wastes might affect
the cement. Bench testing would be required to determine the
appropriate stabilizing agent and mix ratio for the process.
Organics present in the sludge/soil would also affect the type of
cement selected and the mixture used. Land-ban restrictions may
apply to this waste.
Vitrification
Description. Vitrification is a thermal treatment process which
immobilizes contaminants in a vitreous mass and can be performed
on excavated soil or insitu. For excavated material, the metals-
contaminated sludge/soil would be excavated and charged to a
vitrifying unit either on a batch or continuous basis. Organics
would be destroyed by the extremely high temperature developed
with this electric furnace and the metals would be contained in a
non-leaching glass-like product. Insitu treatment requires the
installation of electrodes in the ground and applying a large
electrical current to these electrodes. Glass frit and carbon
are placed on the ground surface between the electrodes.
Electrical resistance of the soil generates heat.
Applicability. Cost is a primary consideration for this option.
The soil/sludge would have to be evaluated to see if
vitrification would work. Bench tests would have to be conducted
to see that the vitrified mass passes the extraction procedure
toxicity test for chromium. The process requires high electrical
energy input. Vitrification has been tried on a limited basis in
the field. Some of the information reviewed for the Channel
Master site indicated that groundwater may be contaminated with
chromium. This would have a negative impact on insitu
vitrification. Electrical power requirements would be greatly
· increased by the presence of water.
vacuUIII Extraction of voes
Description. This process is used to extract voes from soils.
When performed insitu the basic components are production wells,
monitoring well, and high-vacuum pumps. Production wells are
drilled to just above the water table when groundwater is not
45
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
contaminated. If groundwater contamination is present and the
water table is shallow, the production wells are drilled directly
into the water table. Placement of production wells would be
determined from field testing. A manifold connects vacuum pumps
to the production wells and the vacuum pumps draw voe-
contaminated air through the soil to the production well. Fresh
air from the surface is drawn through, and essentially flushes,
voes from the soil. voe-contaminated air drawn from production
wells is either vented to the atmosphere or treated to
concentrate or destroy the voes. carbon adsorption or
incineration are two possible treatment methods for voe laden
air.
Applicability. The Phase I Groundwater Evaluation Report
indicates a very shallow groundwater depth of 8 to 12 ft.
Drilling data provided indicates that the water table is
typically 10 ft. below the surface. Additional field tests would
have to be conducted to see if the soil is suitable for this
treatment technology. With the water table close to the surface,
shallow (and therefore less expensive) wells could be installed.
This technology would not address any contamination from metals.
A treatability study would be required to evaluate this option.
,.2.3 Water
The following describes remedial technologies for water and
discussed their applicability to the Channel Master site.
Pump and Discharge to a Publicly owned Treatment Works (POTW)
Description. This remedial activity would involve pumping voe-
contaminated groundwater from extraction wells and discharging it
to a POTW at an acceptable flow rate. Wells are placed down
gradient, and peripheral to, site contamination and serve as
interceptors, preventing the migration of contaminants offsite.
Applicability. Discharging voe-contaminated water to the POTW
would require the approval of regulators and local authorities,
however, this alternative would be relatively easy to implement.
The Channel Master site has sanitary sewer service which
discharges to a POTW. In a typical activated sludge system, voes
would probably be biodegraded or air-stripped from the waste
water during treatment. A treatability study may be necessary to
determine if this treatment method would remove voes from the
· contaminated groundwater.
Air Stripping
Description. Air stripping of contaminated water consists of the
transfer of the contaminant from the water phase to the gas
phase. The gas (usually air) is contacted with the water either
by bubbling air through the water, by intense mechanical
46
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
agitation of the water, by spraying the water into the air, or by
water flowing through packed towers. Removal of the contaminant
will occur as long as the water is kept in contact with the air,
and the air has a lesser concentration of contaminant.
Applicability. Air stripping has been proven effective in
removing voes in both groundwater and surface water. It would be
applicable as a pump and treat method for groundwater treatment
and might be considered as a preliminary treatment step for the
water that is removed from chromium contaminated soil/sludge.
carbon Adsorption/Ion Exchange
Description. Carbon adsorption and ion exchange are water
treatment processes where contaminants are removed from solution
and adsorbed to surface of finely divided granular media. The
electrostatic forces which attract the adsorbate (contaminant) to
the adsorbent (activated carbon or ion exchange media) must be
great enough to overcome the adsorbate-solvent bonds. Carbon
adsorption is used to remove non-polar organics while ion
exchange is effective means of removing select dissolved metal
ions.
Applicability. Carbon adsorption can remove organics at low
levels. The adsorbativity of compounds is influenced by
solubility, molecular size and polarity. Chlorinated solvents
found in the soil and groundwater at this site are readily
adsorbed by activated carbon. Ion-exchange media specifically
designed to remove dissolved metals are available. Batch or
column tests can be performed to predict removal efficiency for
carbon adsorption and ion exchange.
Biological Treatment
Description. Biological treatment is a process in which bacteria
degrade organic wastes. This can be done either under aerobic or
anaerobic conditions. In aerobic treatment systems, organics and
oxygen are broken down into carbon dioxide and water. In
anaerobic treatment systems, organics are broken down into
methane and carbon dioxide. Aerobic degradation is usually more
rapid and complete, but anaerobic degradation is preferred when
there are volatile organics present.
Applicability. The applicability of biological treatment of the
groundwater is dependent upon the degradability of the
constituents. Genetically engineered bacteria can be developed
to degrade specific hazardous wastes. If halogenated volatile
organics are present, anaerobic degradation is preferred. Strict
anaerobic conditions must be maintained, such as would be
provided by an airtight reactor. Anaerobic degradation
technology has not yet been applied to contaminated groundwater.
47
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Chemical Precipitation
Description. This treatment process requires the addition of a
suitable coagulant such as lime, alum, or polymer to contaminated
water. The coagulant forms charged complexes which bind to
dissolved metal ions. Flocculation causes these particles to
agglomerate. Gravity then causes these particles to precipitate.
The metals are concentrated in the precipitate which is removed
as a sludge.
Applicability. This process may be an effective means of
removing metal ions or metal ion complexes from contaminated
groundwater, although it is typically most cost-effective with
concentrated solutions. This proces is also suitable for removal
of organics if powdered activated carbon is added with the
coagulant. A treatability test may be appropriate for this
option.
Reverse Osmosis
Description. Reverse osmosis is a membrane separation process
which results in a smaller volume of a more highly contaminated
solution. Pure water flows from the contaminated solution
through a semipermeable membrane. The concentration of
contaminant in the remaining solution becomes more concentrated.
External pressure is applied in order to overcome osmotic
pressure.
Applicability. Reverse osmosis is used in the desalination of
seawater and can be used to remove organics from solution.
Because of the high pressure involved, this process is
prohibitively expensive for large scale operations and therefore
may not be appropriate technology for concentrating voes or
metals from groundwater.
4.3 Treatability Studies
To achieve clean-up goals in the most cost effective manner many
of the remedial alternatives presented here would have to be·
tested. These treatability studies would involve field and
laboratory work. The goal of these studies would be to
demonstrate the technology on a site-specific basis and develop
an estimated unit cost for each of the remedial alternatives.
More data is needed to determine the extent of organic and
inorganic contamination at the Channel Master site. Once the
extent of contamination has been established, the treatment
technologies presented here should be reconsidered.
Treatability studies should identify the most appropriate mix of
technologies for treating Channel Master wastes.
48
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4.3.1 summary of Waste Characteristics
For the Channel Master site, matrices requiring treatment may
include soil/sludge and groundwater. The following observations
will be considered in selecting suitable treatability studies:
• The organic contamination present reportedly consists of
volatile components most of which are halogenated.
• voe contamination was reportedly found in the soil and
groundwater south of the main building.
• voes have been reported at concentrations up to 9000 ppm.
Tetrachloroethene, trichloroethene, 1,1,1 trichloroethane,
methylene chloride, toluene, and acetone are the voes reported
to be present at Channel Master.
• Chromium is the predominant heavy metal that was found in
sludges from the lagoon and sludge drying area at the Channel
Master site. Other inorganics present in these sludges
include cyanide, cadmium, arsenic, copper, and nickel.
• If the present chromium is probably in the trivalent (reduced)
form and exists as a relatively insoluble precipitate from the
treatment process.
4.3.2 Potential Treatability studies
Treatability studies may be required to identify the appropriate
mix and sequence of treatment technologies. For soils
contaminated with voes alone a low temperature thermal treatment
process may be appropriate. However, for soils that are also
contaminated with heavy metals additional treatment to remove or
fix the metals may be investigated. If field screening sample
and analysis reveals the presence of heavy metals, then a
treatment technology for metals removal should be considered.
Vacuum extraction, carbon adsorption~ air stripping, and
biodegradation should be investigated for voe removal. If
discharging voe-contaminated groundwater to the POTW is an
acceptable option a bench scale bioreactor simulating unit
operations, such as activated sludge or trickling filter,
employed at the local POTW may be an appropriate treatability
study. The details of treatability studies will be better
defined once additional field sampling data are available.
4.4 Data Requirements/Data Quality Objectives
Data requirements for both the RI and FS were evaluated after
review of existing and available information. Data needs were
determined by first examining what decisions needed to be made
for the site and what additional information was required to make
those decisions.
DQOs are presented in the QAPP. DQOs were based on the intended
49
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
use of the data and were selected in accordance with EPA's Data
Quality Objectives for Remediation Response Activities, OSWER
Directive 9335.0-7B, and recommendations given in Guidance for
Conducting Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Studies under
CERCLA.
,.,.1 Characterization Data
Sampling and analysis of soil, sediment, surface water, and
groundwater is needed to characterize the site. These data are
needed to define contamination boundary lines, verify existing
data, verify the existence and extent of the sludge drying area,
identify contaminants of concern, and define volume projections
for site remediation activities.
Contamination boundary lines need to be defined because the
existing information is not adequate to accurately delineate the
extent of contamination. The information available is inadequate
because: (1) existing data do not conform to technical and
quality assurance requirements, (2) not enough sample data are
available for peripheral areas of the site, (3) previous
investigations of the sludge drying area are inadequate, and (4)
records do not indicate that any sampling was done after the
Channel Master clean-up.
Review of existing data indicates that gaps exist in defining the
nature and extent of contamination present at the site. Analysis
is necessary for potential contaminants of concern such as
hexavalent chromium, voes and cyanide, which may be present in
surface water, soil, sediment, and groundwater. Additionally,
the target compound list of organic and inorganic analities will
be analyzed for in accordance with EPA Contract Laboratory
Program protocol. The RI effort will produce a comprehensive set
of data of known quality.
For the Channel Master site, samples will be collected and
analyzed in accordance with established DQOs and using EPA-
approved sampling protocols presented in the EPA Region IV ESB
SOPQAM. Data needs, DQO level and analytical requirements,
sampling locations, and number of samples for each medium are
discussed in detail in Section 5.3 under Field Investigations.
Finally, an accurate determination of the nature and extent of
contamination at the site is necessary to provide reliable volume
· estimates. These volume estimates are essential in the selection
of an appropriate remediation alternative and developing
realistic cost estimates.
50
I
I 4.4.2 Geotechnical/Hydrogeologic Data
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Additional hydrogeologic data are needed to verify the accuracy
of existing data, and to understand potential migration pathways
and mechanisms for contaminants. Specific data requirements for
geotechnical and hydrogeologic data are presented in Section 5.3.
The groundwater flow direction and gradient data will be
confirmed to determine potential migration pathways and rates.
Groundwater levels will be measured over a period of time to
determine if the gradient and flow direction of the aquifer is
affected by factors such as surface recharge, and seasonal
precipitation patterns. To obtain this data, monitoring wells
will be installed to obtain the necessary information. Local,
offsite, private wells will be used to make water level
measurements if installation details can be verified and access
agreements secured.
Additional data are needed to understand the geochemistry of the
soils and their response to the contaminants. Tests such as
cation exchange capacity and distribution ratio (partitioning
coefficient) will determine the soil's potential to fix metal
contaminants. The partitioning ratio will determine a similar
soil capacity for the organic compounds.
4.4.3 Feasibility Study Data
Additional remediation options and technologies will be explored
so that the best remediation alternative for the site can be
selected.
4.4.4 Health and Safety Data
The Health and Safety Plan (HSP) for the Channel Master Site is
designed to protect project personnel involved in site activities
and the surrounding community. The plan addresses applicable
regulatory requirements contained in:
• 29 CFR 1910.120(i)(2) Occupational Health and Safety
Administration, Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency
Response, Final Rule, March 6, 1989;
• US EPA Order 1440.2 -Health and Safety Requirements for
Employees Engaged in Field Activities: US EPA Order 1440.3 -
Respiratory Protection;
• US EPA Occupational Health and Safety Manual; and
• US EPA Interim Standard Operating Procedures (September,
1982).
51
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
The plan provides a site background discussion and describes
personnel responsibilities, protective equipment, health and
safety training, and the types and extent of medical
surveillance. The plan identifies problems and hazards that may
be encountered and how they will be addressed. Procedures for
protecting third parties, such as visitors and the surrounding
community, are also provided.
,.,.s Quality Assurance
Bechtel's Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for the Channel
Master site QC presents the policies, organization, objectives,
functional activities, and specific QA activities designed to
achieve the data quality goals. The QA/QC plan covers the 14
elements of QA as outlined by EPA's Guideline For Conducting
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Studies Under CERCLA,
Interim Final OSWER Directive 9355.3-01 (EPA, 1988).
52
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5.0 RI/FS TASKS
Tasks 1 through 11 are detailed in the following subsections.
5.1 Task 1: Project Planning
Task 1, Project Planning, is comprised of this Work Plan, the
Field Operations Plan (FOP), QAPP and HSP.
5.2 Task 2: Community Relations
The existing community relations plan (CRP) will be modified to
include the remedial action phase of the project and will reflect
an assessment of the successes and failures of the community
relations program to date. The plan will be modified to provide
guidelines for encouraging community participation in remedial
planning activities at the site and the decision-making process
regarding clean-up; the plan will also highlight any possible
approaches to determine public awareness and information needs
including conducting personal interviews with members of the
community.
5.3 Task 3: Field Investigations
Site investigations will be conducted to characterize the site
and its actual and/or potential hazard to public health and the
environment. The investigations will allow development of
preliminary remedial alternatives and will support the detailed
evaluation of alternatives in the feasibility study.
This section outlines the data needs, the medium to be sampled,
number of samples in each category, the rationale for sampling
from the specified locations, the analytical requirements, and
use for data. The logistics of the field investigations
including sample types, sample methods, sample code, preparatory
activities, field equipment, personal protective equipment,
responsibilities of the field team, and health and safety
guidelines are presented in the FOP for the Channel Master site.
During the RI, the historical development of the site area will
be reviewed to identify occasions when quantities of contaminated
soils or other materials may have been disturbed or carried from
the site. Aerial photographs, maps, and other historical
documents will be examined to identify events that may have
· resulted in the disturbance of soils or structures. If
available, utility maps and building permits will be examined to
determine dates of construction activities.
For the purpose of performing the site investigation described in
this work plan, EPA will obtain permission to enter the
properties from which samples will be collected and buildings on
the site.
53
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 5-1
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS DETAILS
A. Field Screening of Groundwater
Brief Description
Rationale for S~ling
S~le Locations
Rationale for Sarrple
Locations
On-site/CLP Lab
(OQD Level)
Analyte(s)
Rationale for
Analysis
Detection Level
B. Surface soil
•Initial site screening will involve obtaining grOISldwater s~les using hydrocone
technique.
•Analyzing saq,les on-she using a portable GC.
•Delineate areal extent of VOC·contamination using preliminary screening.
•Aid in finalizing locations for boreholes and monitoring wells.
•See Figures 5·1 and 5-2.
•Approximately 40 grOIA"dwater &arlfjles.
•Two backgrOl.nd &Bffl)les are labeled HC-1 and HC·2.
•The remaining s~l ing locations were chosen based on:
Previous waste related activities.
-Previous sarq:,ling results.
• Downgradient of Chal'Ylel Master remediated areas.
•On-site (Level II); approximately 20X of the &Bn1Jles to CLP lab for calibration
purposes (Level JV).
•Volatile organic contaminants including: TCE, PCE. 1,1,1-TCA, 1,1·DCE.
•The above mentioned contaminants were identified during previous sarrpl ing
investigations conducted at the Channel Master site (Ref. 3 and 5).
•Less than 1 ppn.
Brief Description •Obtain surface soil aarrple from an approximate 5 in depth.
Rationale for SSltlJling •To delineate the surficial extent of soil contamination.
Saq:,le Locations •S~ Figure 5-4.
NUTi:>er of Saq:,les •12 surface soil aaaples a 1 S8111Jle per borehole location.
Rationale for S""l'l•
On-site/CLP lab
(DQD Level)
Analyte(s)
Rationale for
Analysis
Detection Level
•One backgrOU'ld •""l'le labeled BH-1.
•Four downgradient • ...,les labeled BH·Z, BH-3, BH-4 & BH-5.
•The remaining saq,le locations were chosen based on previous waste activities, and
are labeled BH·6 thru BH·1Z.
•All surface_,toil l""l'les will be analyzed thru the CLP lab (Level IV).
TCLP and Cr (Level Y).
•TCL, Cr◄-6, TCLP and dissociable cyanide.
•Th~TCL includes the entire suite of contaminants of concern.
•Cr and dissociable cyanide were identified durh'l9 previous aanpl ing investigations.
•The TCLP procedure has replaced EP-Tox. TCLP procedure also provides toxicity
characteristics for 39 contaminants, including those that have been detected at the
Channel Master site.
• CLP requirements.
54
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
TABLE 5-1 (continued)
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS DETAILS
c. Subsurface Soil samples
Brief Description •Obtain split-spoon soil aanples every 5 ft from each borehole.
Rationale for SM1)ling •To define the nature and extent of subsurface soft contamination.
N"1D<r of S-les
Rationale for Sanple
On-she/CLP Lab
(DQO Level)
Analyte(sl
Rationale for
Analysis
Detection Level
A total of 75 subsurface soil &Bn1Jles:
•35 saq:,lu; seven boreholes at 5 SM1)les per borehole.
•40 sanplu; five 1110nitoril"IQ wells at 8 spl ftspoon sanples per well.
•one backgrOU'ld location •-le labeled BH-1.
•Four downgredient locations labeled 8H·2, BH·3, BH·4 & BH-5.
•The remaining SM1)le locations were chosen based on previous waste activities, and
are labeled BH·6 thru BH·12.
•All subsurf.!&e soil sa~les will be analyzed thru the CLP lab (Level IV).
TCLP and Cr (Level V).
•TCL, Cr+6, TCLP and dissociable cyanide.
•The above mentioned contaminants were identified during previous sa~ling
investigations conducted at the Charnel Master site (Ref. 3 and 5).
•CLP requirements.
D. Groundwater S11111ples
Brief Description •Bechtel will install and develop 5 MW1s.
•Obtain grOl..ndwater sarrples from these 5 IIN's.
Rationale for S811'pling •To define the nature and extent of grOU'ldwater contamination.
S~le Locations
N"1D<r of S-les
Rationale for Sa,rple
Locations
On-site/CLP Lab
(DQO Level)
Analyte(sl
Rationale for
Analysis
Detection Level
A total of 6 grOl.l"ldwater sarrples:
•5 sa,rples; five MW at 1 sarrple per well.
•1 •-le; existing Cherne! Nester well et •-le.
•Two backgrOU'ld •-le labeled NW·1 & CM-1.
•The remaining san-ple locations, MW-2, MW-3, MW-4 & MW-5 were chosen based on:
Previous waste related activities.
Contamination was identified fn Charnel Master wells.
• Downgradient of Charnel Master remediated areas.
•On-site sanples will be analyzed for pH, terrperature and conductivity.
•All groundwater •-les will be analyzed thru the CLP lab (Level IV).
•TCL, Cr-Hi and dissociable cyanide.
•Th~TCL includes the entire suite of contaminants of concern.
• Cr and dissociable cyanide were identified during previous saq:,l fng investigations.
•CLP requirements.
55
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 5-1 (continued)
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS DETAILS
E. surface Water samples
Brief Description
Rationale for San:pling
S~le Locations
Niirber of Saq,les
Rationale for Saq>le
On-site/CLP Lab
(DQO Levell
Analyte(sl
Rationale for
Analysis
Detection Level
•Obtain surface water saq>les from the creek rlZW'ling through the site and the pond
located south of the site; backgrOU'ld sarq:,le frcrn the creek in the north.
•To define the nature and extent of surface water contamination.
•To delineate pathways of contaminant migration off-site.
•See Figure 5-2.
•One upgradient saq,le labeled S\J-4.
•Three downgradient s~les labeled: SW-1, S\J-2, and SW-3.
•On-site saq,les will be analyzed for pH, teq>erature and conductivity.
•All surface water s~les will be analyzed thru the CLP lab:
TCL (Level IV)
cr•e and dissociated cyanide (Level V).
•TCL, cr•e and dissociable cyanide.
•The TCL includes the entire suite of contaminants of concern.
•er•" end dissociable cyanide were identified during previous saq,ling investigations.
• CLP requirements.
F. sediment samples
Brief Description •Obtain sediment sanples frcxn the creek rU'Yling through the site and the pond located
south of the aite.
Rationale for Sarl1)ling •To define the nature and extent of surface water contamination.
•To delineate pathways of contaminant migration off-site.
S~le Locations •See Figures 5-2.
NLIJDer of .S&ffl)les •4 senples.
Rationale-for Sanple •One upgradient S8ff1)le labeled SD-4.
On-site/CLP Lab
(DQO Levell
Analyte(sl
Rationale for
Analysis
Detection Level
•Three downgrl!ldient saq,les labeled: SD-1, S0-2, end so-3.
•All sediment 1""'1les will be analyzed thru the CLP lab:
• TCL (Level IV)
-er•" end dissociated cyanide (Level V).
•Tel, er•" end dissociable cyanide.
•The TCL includes the entire suite of contaminants of concern.
•er•" and dissociable cyanide were identified during previous saq,l ing investigations.
• CLP requirements.
56
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 5-1 (continued)
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS DETAILS
G. Residential/Municipal Wells
Brief Description •Obtain grOU'ldwater saq,les from local ruidentfal and n.nicipal wells.
Rationale for Sanplif'ISI •To define the nature and extent of grtu'Glater contamination.
•To delineate off-site migration of gro.rdwater contamination.
Se,rple Locations •The closest private well fs ahown on figure 5·2. Other residential/fflllicipal well
On-site/CLP Lab
(DQD Level)
Analyte(s)
Rationale for
Anelysis
Detection Level
aanple locations will be decided while on-site.
•One private well located south of the site labeled P~-1.
•Remaining wells to be •11111'led will be Identified and labeled PW (residential wells)
or MN (nuiicipal wells). All wells are downgracHent.
•On·site s~les will be analyzed for pH, tefl1)erature and corductfvity.
•All residential/nu,icipal water saq,les will be analyzed thru the CLP lab:
TC~(Level IV)
Cr and dissociated cyanide (Level V).
•TCL, Cr+6 and dissociable cyanide.
•Th~TCL includes the entire suite of contaminants of concern.
•Cr and dissociable cyanide were identified during previous sarrpl ing investigations.
•CLP requirements.
57
Lil ex,
0
2018~ f IG21.DGN
200 400
I'= 200'
600
FIGURE 5-1
CHANNEL MASTER SITE
HYOROCONE SAMPLE LOCATIONS
FOR PRELIMINARY ON-SITE SCREENING
0
HC-2 '
SHALLOW OEPRESSIO~ LOCATED ON f
AERIAL PHOTO 1. . ""'
PR<ffRTY 8(Ur()ARY
trJSTINC f[NC[
-RAILROAD
DITCH
PROPOSE.D HYDROCON[ SDl'l.[ LOCI 111'.JfS
""'
0
0 EXfjTING CHAll("L NASTEA 0 TOOING llll
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
2
0
0 300
mas V!CSITE.OGN VloflCS.2
FIGURE 5-2
CHANNEL MASTER SITE
SURFACE WATER, SEDIMENT AND
OFF-SITE HYDROCONE SAMPLING LOCATIONS
0 .,
HC-40 J---···· 0--··· . ..
• C-39 O l)
~ 0 a c::::::,
H C -3 7 t:::::J t:::J
c::J .........,_,_._ -
~···-
*
0
r///;'l.
0
LEGEND
BUILDING
RAILROAD
CREEK
ROAD
DITCH
0
0 a
0
PROPOSED SURFACE WATER ANO
SEDIMENT SAMPLING LOCATIONS
PROPSEO OFF-SITE HYOROCONE SAMPLING LOCATIONS
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PRIVATE WELL
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
5.3.1 surveying and Mapping of the Site
The existing topographic survey map for the Channel Master site
was developed in April 1980. Remediation activities conducted by
Channel Master may have caused significant changes in the
topography at the site. A visual survey of the site will be
conducted and the map of the site will be updated as needed. A
licensed surveyor will be contracted to conduct a field survey to
develop a planimetric map that includes topographic information
and physical features and vicinity properties. One concrete
monument for use as a permanent bench mark based on USGS Datum,
1929 general adjustment, will be established for the site.
Aerial photographs will be used when available, along with
information gathered during the preliminary site visit to
identify physical features of the area.
5.3.2 Waste Characterization
Table 5-1 summarizes the data needs required to supplement the
existing data, DQO level, rationale for sampling, proposed number
and type of samples, and the analytical requirement for each
matrix.
A field screening program will be conducted to define the areal
extent of organic contamination in groundwater (Table 5-lA and
Figure 5-1). Groundwater samples will be collected using a
hydrocone-type groundwater sampling technique. Hydrocone sample
locations have been selected downgradient of: the excavated in-
ground concrete waste oil tank and in-ground No. 2 fuel tank
areas, the former lagoon area and in/around the sludge drying
area (Figures 5-1 and 5-2) including two upstream locations. The
locations identified in this work plan for hydrocone-type
groundwater sampling are only tentative. They will be modified,
if required, depending on the site conditions. Approximately 40
hydrocone groundwater samples will be collected and analyzed for
TCE, TCA, PCE, and trans-1,2 DCE using a portable HNU gas
chromatograph. Survey contour maps will be developed based on
analytical results and used to qualitatively define the geometry
of the source area(s), which will then be used to delineate the
plume •.
Existing lithographic information indicates potential
difficulties in utilizing the hydrocone technology. The depth of
the required sampling combined with the hardness of the
overburden (100 blowcounts) could make direct penetration of the
hydrocone difficult. Insitu Technology, the developer of the
hydrocone technology, believes that inserting a "piezocone" to
obtain additional lithographic information will unconsolidate the
soils sufficiently to allow the hydrocone to be inserted. If
this approach is unsuccessful, the driller should auger a small
diameter hole. The driller will attempt to drill the hole and
extract the drill bit without surfacing spoils. The soils would
60
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
be sufficiently loosened to allow for the insertion of the
hydrocone sampler.
5.3.3 Bydrogeologic rnvestigation
A hydrogeologic investigation will be conducted at the Channel
Master Site to determine the present and potential extent of
groundwater contamination. Permanent monitoring wells will be
installed to carry out the initial characterization of the
hydrogeologic conditions at the site.
Groundwater-level measurements will be taken to establish site
groundwater gradient and flow direction, and most importantly,
the rate at which these characteristics may change as a function
of factors such as precipitation and recharge of the aquifer.
Field permeability tests will be conducted during drilling
operations to confirm and clarify the hydraulic conductivity at
the site. Hydraulic conductivity will be determined using a slug
test. This test involves dropping a weighted object of known
volume into the bottom of the well. The amount of time it takes
for the top of the water column to return to its original height
is recorded.
The results of the preliminary screening program will verify the
proposed monitoring well locations (Figure 5-3). One background
15 ft. deep monitoring well (CM-1) installed by S&ME still exists
onsite. This well is located in the NW corner of the property.
Five permanent monitoring wells will be installed. The results
of the preliminary screening program will verify the proposed
monitoring well locations (Figure 5-3). Any property owners will
be identified and permission to install offsite wells will be
obtained. All monitoring wells will be surveyed for location and
elevation. The data will include elevations of the ground
surface at each well and the top of the inner casing elevations
with the cap removed.
Regional aquifers will be identified, characterized, and
classified according to EPA Groundwater Protection Strategy (Ref.
1). Existing information will be used to the extent possible.
Following the development of new wells, groundwater samples will
be collected in accordance with the EPA Region rv, ESB SOPQAM
(April 1986) for laboratory analysis.
The objective of the groundwater sampling analysis is to
determine the degree and extent of groundwater contamination from
detectable chemical concentrations. Groundwater sample locations
are shown in Figures 5-2 (offsite private well) and 5-3 (proposed
monitoring wells). The analytical parameters for the groundwater
samples are shown in Table 5-1. The survey will address the
degree of hazard and mobility of the contaminants present, the
61
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
attenuation capacity and characteristics of the soil, possible
additional sources of contamination, and background contaminant
levels. Field measurements on the groundwater samples will
include temperature, pH, and specific conductivity.
5.3.4 Soils Investigation
Surface and subsurface soil samples will be collected from
locations shown in Figures 5-3 and 5-4. It is proposed to
install five monitoring wells (Figure 5-3) and seven boreholes
(Figure 5-4). Surface soil samples will be collected from all
twelve locations. BH-1 will serve as a background sample and the
remaining boreholes are located downgradient of this.
Subsurface soil samples will be collected from the soil boreholes
at 5 ft. intervals to a depth of 25 ft. and from the monitoring
well boreholes at 5 ft. intervals to a depth of 40 ft.
Four geologic borehole samples will be collected for geotechnical
tests such as permeability, dry density, percent moisture,
centrifuge moisture equivalent, soil classification, and grain
size distribution. Additionally, two soil samples will be
analyzed for cation exchange capacity (CEC) and the distribution
coefficient (Kd). These tests will provide information regarding
the ability of soils to fix or mobilize contaminants. This data
is necessary to determine aquifer characteristics such as
effective porosity and other parameters important to transport
modeling and remedial design.
All surface and subsurface samples will be shipped to CLP lab and
analyzed for TCL, total cyanide, dissociable cyanide, TCLP and
hexavalent chromium known to have been used during site
operations.
I 5.3.5 surface Water and Sediment Investigation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
A program will be developed and conducted to determine the
location and extent of surface water and sediment contamination.
This investigation will include sampling of all local surface
waters, lake sediments, and sediments from ditches.
Drainage patterns within the study area will be identified to
determine potential routes of contaminant migration resulting
from surface water runoff and to identify locations where
sediments from this runoff may accumulate. A historical
evaluation of the changes in drainage patterns will also be
completed to determine where past sediment accumulation may have
occurred.
Surface water and sediment samples from areas of runoff will be
collected from the locations shown in Figure 5-2 and analyzed for
the parameters listed in Table 5-1. Analytical results will be
62
·-------------------
a-w
0
20385 r JG26.()(,H
200 400
I'= 200'
500
FIGURE 5-3
CHANNEL MASTER SITE
MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS
-•n--
()
0
@
•
DITCH
PRCf'OS(O BOREM!lE I r.R(UN()WU[R S.ut>t.ES
_______.
EXISTING CMANlll MASTER
KHI TOA ING 11[.ll
CMANNEL MASTER KJtlfORING
IIELLS IOCSlROTtOI
·-------------------
0 200 400
I' = 200'
20385 f Hi 25. OtN
600
FIGURE 5-4
CHANNEL MASTER SITE
BOREHOLE LOCATIONS
• ()
0
DITCH
PIHl'OYD BMEIO.E SAlf'lES
PROPOSED BfJUQ.E AM) r.ROI.H)•A T[R SilWl[S
EXJSTINC OWIU NAS1£R MONITORING llllll
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
used to determine the potential for contaminants to be carried
from the site dissolved in storm water runoff. Temperature, pH,
and specific conductivity of surface water will be measured
onsite and the samples will be analyzed for conventional water
quality parameters in addition to the contaminants of concern.
Drainage patterns will be identified from U.S. Geological Survey
quadrangle maps. Additional data on rainfall and soil
characteristics will be collected to predict the likelihood of
future soil erosion. This data will be used in assessing the
potential for future offsite migration of contaminants.
Data on sewer systems layout will be obtained from as-built
drawings, municipal records, and previous system studies to
determine the layouts, elevations, capacities, and ages of the
storm and sanitary sewer systems carrying drainage and sewage.
If such data is not available, it will be obtained by onsite
inspection of the systems. Areas where contaminants from the
site may have accumulated will be identified for investigation
during the RI.
S.3.6 Air Investigation
Atmospheric conditions at the site will be monitored to determine
the need for a formal air investigation. During drilling and
sampling operations, air monitoring will be performed to evaluate
the potential for contaminants to be carried offsite. If the
need for air investigation exists for the protection of the
public in excess of that specifies in the health and safety
plans, a plan will be submitted to the RPM and approval will be
obtained prior to implementation.
An organic vapor monitor (HNU or OVA) will be utilized to monitor
the breathing zone during drilling and sampling operations for
health and safety reasons. If the monitor detects levels greater
than l ppm, the worker personal protection will be upgraded.
s., Task 4: Sample Analysis and Validation
Bechtel will summarize the results of all site investigations and
present these in the RI report. The objective of this task will
be to ensure that this data is sufficient to support the FS. A
data management system will be developed including field logs,
sample management and tracking procedures, and document control
and inventory procedures for both laboratory data and field
measurements (see the QAPP).
Analytic data will be reviewed to ensure that the data is
accurate, precise, and suitable for use in the evaluation of
remedial alternatives. Quality control (QC) checking of the
analytical data will be conducted, and data validation will be
performed at the appropriate field or laboratory QC level
65
I
I determine whether it is appropriate for its intended use. For
CLP analyses, EPA will validate the data.
I s.s Tasks: Data Evaluation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
All site investigations will be analyzed and a summary will be
prepared of the type and extent of contamination at the site.
The data from the source, characterizations of the site, and
investigations at the vicinity properties will be organized and
presented so that the relationships among data collected for each
medium in each phase of the investigation are apparent.
The data will be evaluated to ensure that they are sufficient in
quality and quantity to:
•
•
•
•
Ascertain QA/QC procedures
Define surface and subsurface hydrology, flow patterns,
soils, and geology, as well as environmental, public health,
and ecological consequences
Identify and characterize contaminants, pathways, receptors
of concern; delineate the type and extent of air, surface
water, groundwater and soil/sediment contamination
Conduct risk assessment, modeling studies, (if necessary),
and develop remedial measures to be considered for
evaluation
• Evaluate the need for additional remedial investigations
The evaluation will include all significant pathways of
contamination and an exposure assessment. Contaminant pathways
are pathways that may result in an actual or potential threat to
public health, welfare, or the environment. Contaminant pathways
from source material identified during the field investigation
will be identified.
An exposure pathway is identified by four elements: (1) a source
and mechanism of release to the environment, (2) an environmental
transport medium for the released material, (3) a point of
potential contact of humans with the contaminated medium, and (4)
an exposure route (e.g., drinking water ingestion).
Estimating environmental concentrations at potential receptors
will involve quantification of the amounts of contaminant that
will be released to the environment over time by the various
sources identified in the exposure pathway analysis, prediction
of the environmental transport and fate of each indicator
substance in the identified medium of the exposure pathway, and
derivation of time-dependent (both short-and long-term)
environment concentrations at the point of exposure. It is
66
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
expected that simple analytical models will be sufficient for
this evaluation. If it is found that more complex numerical
models are needed, an expanded scope of work will be prepared.
5.6 Task 6: Risk Assessment
A baseline risk assessment will be conducted to establish the
extent to which contamination present at the site is released
from the site and the extent to which it presents an imminent and
substantial danger to public health, welfare, or the environment.
The potential effects of chronic exposures will also be
addressed. This risk assessment will evaluate conditions at the
site in the absence of any further remedial actions, which in
essence constitutes an assessment of the no-action remedial
alternative. The assessment will be in accordance with
procedures developed by EPA, and will utilize the Risk Assessment
Guidance for Superfund (Ref. 27). Other reference documents will
include the Exposure Factors Handbook (Ref. 23), the Superfund
Exposure Assessment Manual (Ref. 24), and the Integrated Risk
Information System, as well as specific ATSDR toxicological
profiles.
The risk assessment will involve four components: contaminant
identification, exposure assessment, toxicity assessment, and
risk characterization. These components are discussed in the
subsections below.
5.6.1 Contaminant Identification
Contaminants of potential concern are those for which data are of
sufficient quality to use in a quantitative risk assessment.
Selection will be based on intrinsic toxicological properties,
quantities present, and potential and actual migration into
critical exposure pathways.
5.6.2 Exposure Assessment
Exposure assessment is the determination or estimation
(qualitative or quantitative) of the magnitude, frequency,
duration, and route of exposure. The numerous variables used to
quantify exposure include the following:
• Estimation of exposure point concentration. Methods include
direct use of environmental media monitoring data and use of
environmental fate and transport models to predict
contaminant release and migration.
• Estimation of contaminant intake/exposure. Human chemical
intake is estimated from the concentration of contaminant at
exchange boundaries available for absorption, normalized for
exposure frequency/duration and body weight.
67
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
• Quantification of pathway-specific exposures. Specific
chemical intakes can be calculated for several different
exposure scenarios such as ingestion of/dermal contact with
contaminants in drinking water, ingestion of/dermal contact
with contaminants in soil, or inhalation of airborne
contaminants.
5.6.3 Toxicity Assessmentt
Toxicity assessment is the determination of the potential for
adverse effects resulting from human and biota exposure to
contaminants. It may also be used to provide an estimate of the
relationship between the extent of exposure to a contaminant and
the incidence of disease.
To evaluate human exposure to noncarcinogenic contaminants at the
Channel Master site, an RfD, when available, will be the toxicity
value used. Variables affecting RfDs include exposure route
(ingestion, inhalation, or dermal contact), critical effect, and
length of exposure (chronic, subchronic, or single event).
A slope factor with accompanying weight-of-evidence
determination, if available, will comprise the toxicity data used
to evaluate potential human chemical carcinogenic risks. The
slope factor represents a toxicity value that quantitatively
defines the relationship between dose and response. The weight-
of-evidence determination is used to determine the likelihood
that the agent is a human carcinogen. The slope factor is used
to estimate an upper bound probability of an individual
developing cancer as a result of a lifetime of exposure to a
particular level of a potential carcinogen.
5.6.4 Risk Characterization
Risk characterization utilizes information from the exposure
assessment and toxicity assessment to assess risks to human
health and biota from contaminants at a site. Estimate of risk
to biota will be qualitative and quantitative, where possible.
Components of the human health risk characterization include the
following:
• Reviews of toxicity and exposure assessments
• Quantification of chemical risks from noncarcinogenic
substances. This potential is evaluated by comparing an
exposure level over a specified time period with an RFD
derived for a similar exposure period. The ratio of
exposure to toxicity will generate a hazard quotient that
can be used to determine the level of concern. Additional
calculations will be made to estimate chemical risks from
multiple noncarcinogenic substances.
68
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• Quantification of chemical risks from carcinogenic
substances. This is determined from the incremental
probability of an individual developing cancer over a
lifetime as a result of exposure to the potential
carcinogen. Separate risk calculations will be made for low
and high estimated probabilities. Additional calculations
will be made to estimate chemical risks from multiple
carcinogenic substances.
• Combining risks across pathways. The need for combining
risks will be determined by considering (1) the
identification of reasonable exposure pathway combinations
and (2) the likelihood that the same individuals would
consistently face the reasonable maximum exposure by more
than one pathway. If it is reasonable to combine risks
across pathways, the cancer risks and the noncancer risks
will be combined separately.
5.7 Task 7: Treatability studies
Bechtel may recommend certain treatability studies. If these are
approved by EPA and funding is provided, bench and/or pilot
studies will be conducted to determine the suitability of
remedial technologies to site conditions and problems.
Technologies that may be suitable to the site will be identified
as early as possible to determine whether there is a need to
conduct treatability studies to better estimate costs and
performance capabilities.
If treatability studies are approved, a testing plan identifying
the types and goals of the studies, the level of effort needed, a
schedule for completion, and the data management guidelines will
be submitted to EPA for review and approval. Upon EPA approval,
a test facility and any necessary equipment, vendors, and
analytical services will be procured.
Laboratory and bench-scale treatability studies will be conducted
as required to evaluate the effectiveness of remedial
technologies and establish engineering criteria (e.g., leachate
treatment, recovery techniques, groundwater treatment,
compatibility of waste/leachate with site barrier walls, cover
and other materials proposed for use in the remedy). A
literature survey will be conducted to identify applicable
treatability data and collect additional field data, as
appropriate, to refine and further assess remedial alternatives.
Upon completion of the testing, the results will be evaluated to
assess the technologies with respect to the goals identified in
the test plan. A report summarizing the testing program and its
results will be prepared and presented in the final RI/FS report.
69
I
I
I
5.8 Task 8: RI Report
Monthly reports will be prepared to
financial progress of the project.
the following items:
describe the technical and
Status reports will include
I • Status of work and the progress to date
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• Percentage of work completed and the status of the schedule
• Difficulties encountered during the month and corrective
actions to be taken
• Activities in progress
• Activities planned for the following month
• Any changes in key project personnel
• Expenditures (including fee) and direct labor hours expended
for the month
• CUmulative expenditures (including fee) and cumulative direct
hours expended to date, as well as the percent expended of
total amounts dedicated for each
• Projection of expenditures to project completion, including an
explanation of any significant variation from the project
budget.
Monthly reports will be submitted to EPA as specified in the
contract. In addition, the activities conducted and the
conclusions drawn during the RI (Tasks 3 through 7) will be
documented in an RI report with supporting data and information
included in the appendices. A draft RI report will be submitted
to EPA for review, and comments received will be incorporated
into the final RI report.
5.9 Task 9: Remedial Alternatives Development and screening
To provide adequate protection of human health and the
environment, a range of distinct hazardous waste management
alternatives will be developed to remediate or control any
contaminated media (i.e., soil, surface water, groundwater,
sediments) remaining at the site, as deemed necessary in the RI.
The potential alternatives will encompass, as appropriate, a
range of alternatives in which treatment is used to reduce the
toxicity, mobility, or volume of wastes but vary in the degree to
which long-term management of residuals or untreated waste is
required. The potential alternatives will also include one or
more alternatives involving containment with little or no
treatment as well as a no-action alternative. Alternatives that
70
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
involve minimal efforts to reduce potential exposures (e.g., site
fencing, deed restrictions) will be presented as "limited action"
alternatives.
The steps to be conducted in determining the appropriate range of
alternatives are described in the subsections below.
5.9.1 Establish Remedial Action Objectives and General Response
Actions
Based on existing information, site-specific remedial action
objectives to protect human health and the environment will be
developed. The objectives will specify the contaminant(s) and
media of concern, the exposure route(s) and receptor(s), and an
acceptable contaminant level or range of levels for each exposure
route.
Preliminary remediation goals will be established based on
readily available information (e.g., RfDs, maximum concentration
levels). Bechtel will meet with EPA to discuss the remedial
action objectives for the site. As more information is collected
during the RI, the remedial action objectives will be refined as
appropriate.
General response actions will be developed for each medium of
interest defining containment, treatment, excavation, pumping, or
other actions, singly or in combination to satisfy remedial
action objectives. Volumes or areas of media to which general
response actions may apply will be identified, taking into
account requirements for protectiveness as identified in the
remedial action objectives and the chemical and physical
characteristics of the site.
5.9.2 Identify and Screen Technologies
Based on the developed general response actions, hazardous waste
treatment technologies will be identified and screened to ensure
that only those technologies applicable to the contaminants
present, their physical matrix, and other site characteristics
will be considered. This screening will be based primarily on a
technology's ability to effectively address the contaminants at
the site, but will also take into account a technology's
implementability and cost. Representative process options will
be selected as appropriate to carry forward into alternative
development. The need for treatability testing (as described
under Task 7) will be identified for those technologies that are
probable candidates for consideration during the detailed
analysis.
71
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5.9.3 Configure and Screen Alternatives
The potential technologies and process options will be combined
into media-specific or site-wide alternatives. The developed
alternatives will be defined with respect to size and
configuration of the representative process options: time for
remediation: rates of flow or treatment: spatial requirements:
distances for disposal: and required permits, imposed
limitations, and other factors necessary to evaluate the
alternatives. If many distinct, viable options are available and
developed, a screening of alternatives will be conducted to limit
the number of alternatives that undergo the detailed analysis and
to provide consideration of the most promising process options.
The alternatives will be screened on a general basis with respect
to their effectiveness, implementability, and cost. BEI will
meet with EPA to discuss which alternatives will be evaluated in
the detailed analysis and to facilitate the identification of
action-specific ARARs.
s.10 Task 10: Detailed Analysis of Alternatives
As outlined by the EPA (Ref. 18), a detailed analysis of
alternatives will be conducted which will consist of an
individual analysis of each alternative against short-and long-
term aspects of three broad criteria: effectiveness,
implementability, and cost. All the alternatives shall be
evaluated relative to a set of nine criteria. This evaluation
strategy is presented in Figure 5-5.
Each individual alternative analysis will include: (1) a
technical description of the alternative that outlines the waste
management strategy involved and identifies the key ARARs
associated with the alternative: and (2) a discussion that
profiles the performance of that alternative with respect to each
of the evaluation criteria. A table will be prepared that
summarizes the results of each analysis. After completion of the
individual analyses, the alternatives will be compared and
contrasted to one another with respect to each of the evaluation
criteria.
s.11 Task 11: FS Report
The results of Tasks 9 and 10 will be presented in a FS report.
Supporting data, information, and calculations will be included
in appendices to the report. A draft FS report will be submitted
to EPA for review, and comments received will be incorporated
into the final FS report. Copies of the final report will be
distributed to those individuals identified by EPA.
72
·-------------------
_,
w
121151U
SCREENING .CRITERIA
EFFECTIVENESS
NINE EVALUATION CRITERIA
Overall Protection of
Human Health and Environment
Compliance with ARARs
Long-term Effectiveness and
Permanence
Reductions In Toxicity, Mobility,
and Volume through Treatment
Short-term Effectiveness
I IMPLEMENTABILITY t-1---•-~I lmplementablllty
I COST .. , Cffl
SOURCE: OuldancttorCon4JC:lngAlirnlldal ... c Sg 5 •
Ind FN!dbaty Stucln Unc11r CERC1.A. U.S. C:1,1io.w1aal
Pn:nctlon .-,C,, EP~. Octat,.,.1888.
I State Acceptance
I Community Acceptance
Figure 5-5
ROLE OF CRITERIA DURING
REMEDY SELECTION
"THRESHOLO-FACTORS
"PRIMARY BALANCING• FACTORS
"MODIFYING" CONSIDERATIONS
RELATIONSHIP OF SCREENING CRITERIA TO THE NINE EVALUATION CRITERIA
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
6.0 HEALTH AND SAFETY
Bechtel will develop a Health and Safety Plan (HSP) on the basis
of site conditions to protect personnel involved in site
activities and the surrounding community. The HSP will include
requirements by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration
including those found in 29 CFR 1910.120, "Hazardous Waste
Operations and Emergency Response". The HSP will also include
requirements in EPA Order 1440.2, "Health and Safety Requirements
for Employees Engaged in Field Activities"; EPA Order 1440.3,
"Respiratory Protection"; EPA's Occupational Health and Safety
Manual; and the EPA Standard Operating Safety Guides (Ref. 21).
Whenever there is a conflict in regulatory requirements, the
stricter standard will be used.
The HSP will describe site background and history, medical and
training requirements, personal protective equipment, air
~onitoring protocols, decontamination procedures, emergency
response, visitors requirements, and standard operating
procedures for monitoring worker safety.
74
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
....
7.0 SCHEDULE
The schedule for the Channel Master RI/FS is shown in Figure 7-1.
EPA review periods were included; however, duration may require
adjustment based on EPA workload. No time is included for
natural disasters or adverse weather conditions that might affect
the field work or for potential responsible parties/ public
delays.
To ensure that the RI/FS is performed to EPA's satisfaction, BEI
recommends scheduling at least five interface meetings with the
RPM at the following stages of work:
• During the third week of field screening to agree on the
locations (of how to determine the locations) for the
remaining boreholes and wells. The necessity of budget or
schedule revisions would also be determined. If revisions are
required, BEI will request a work plan revision. If
budget/schedule revisions are not necessary BEI will request a
technical directive memo will be requested.
• Prior to screening of remedial alternatives, during which BEI
will propose a limited list of alternatives for EPA approval.
• Halfway through the development of the public health
evaluation to reach agreement on appropriate routes of
exposure and assumptions for the baseline risk assessment.
• At completion of the draft RI report to describe its contents
and indicate specific sections and issues that require EPA
direction.
• At completion of the draft FS report, also to describe its
contents and indicate specific sections and issues that
require EPA direction.
75
90 90 91 91 92
NBS Start Date Finish Date 1kt Nov Dec Jcin Feb Mar wr Mai .iJll .lJI Auo Sec Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Allr Mai .lln .lJI Au( Se[ Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar
I NIH( ASSIOOT AllIPTANCE 10/11/89 10/11/09 D
2
3 NIH( PUN JI.ENIIIWffil 10 II 09 10 2'.i 89 C
4 NIH( PUN MAil 10 to 89 1 9 90 I I
5 EPA IEVIEV MAil N111( IUN 1 I, 90 4 2'.i 90 ..
6 FINAL NIH( IUN IIDIJlAIIIJi 6 18 90 10 19 90 I
7 PHOJ:CT Pl.Alfl!N6 1.0 11 18 89 10 19 90 I
8 COll!UlITY 111A TIIWS IUIHOOill 1989 2.0 to to 89 10 10 09 D
9
to FIELD INVEST PllllLUOOIT/MOOILIZAIIIJi 3.0 917/90 II 30 90 I
II SlllVEY AHO SITE MAP 3.1 11 3/90 12 5 90
12 NASTE CHAil/RES NEllS m m !cl!IIIBIT 3.2 11 4/90 12 7, 90
13 6EO 00 HY0006EO INVEST !Nil HYimlJE 3.3 l1 7 90 I II 91 =]
14 500.f ANALYSIS / VALIDATIIJi 4.0 I 14 91 430 91
15 DATA EVALUATI0/1 5.0 3 18 91 5 28 91 I
16 RI~ ASSESH .. 6.0 5 I 91 7 9 91 I
17 EPA IEETIN6 -RI~ ASffOOT 6 I, 91 6 I 91 D
18 TIEATABILIIY STIDIES 7.0 5 I 91 7 9/91 I
19 RI REPORT o.o 11 10 90 7 29 91
20 EPA IEVIEV MAil RI IOOlT 730 91 0/28 91 --
2i IEV!i DRAFT RI REPORT 8/29/91 9 27 91 --22 EPA REVIEW FINAL RI IEPDRT 9/30/91 10 29 91 -
23 EPA IEETIN6 RI BRIEFIN6 7/31 91 7/31/91 i
24 FEASIBILITY STlllY 9.10.11 5/29 91 12 4/91 I
25 EPA IEETIN6 -FS BRIEFIN6 12/ 5 91 12 5/91
26 EPA REVIEW lllWl FS 12/ 5 91 I 3 92 -
27 REVI1 MAil FS REPORT I/ 6 92 2 4 92 ~J
2B PROJ:CT COMPI.ETillll 2/ 4 92 2 4 92 ]
ARCS IV CHANNEL MASTER SITE
RI/FS
Proiect: ARCWA3SF Date: 10-18-90 FINAL WORK PLAN SCHEDULE
-------------------·
I
I REFERENCES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1. Site inspection report prepared by: Jack Butler, NC Solid
and Hazardous Waste Management Branch, 18 May 1987.
2. Clean-up Plan for Channel Master, Division of Avnet, Inc.,
prepared by Channel Master, 7 July 1987.
3. Phase I Groundwater Quality Evaluation, Channel Master,
Division of Avnet, Inc., prepared by Solid and Material
Engineers, Inc., November 1986.
4. Draft Clean-up Plan for Channel Master, Division of Avnet,
Inc., prepared by Channel Master, January 1987.
5. Report on the Soil Quality, Channel Master, Division of
Avnet, Inc., prepared by Soil and Material Engineers, Inc.,
16 September 1986.
6. Response to CERCLA and RCRA Information Request, 10 February
1989.
7. Letter from: ATSDR Department of Health and Human Services,
to: Mr. Jack Butler, NCDHR, 4 November 1988.
8. Letter from: Coffield, Ungaretti, Harris and Slavin, to: Mr.
Bruce Clemens, Bechtel, 26 December 1989.
9. Letter from: Smith, Helms, Mulliss and Moore, to: Mr. Bruce
Clemens, Bechtel Environmental, Inc., 22 January 1990.
10. Basic Elements of Ground Water Hydrology with Reference to
Conditions in North Carolina. U.S. Geological Survey Water
Resources Investigations Open-File Report 80-44.
11. Geology and Groundwater Resources in the Raleigh Area, NC,
Groundwater Bulletin No. 15, 1968.
12. ATSDR (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry),
1989. Channel Master/JFD Electronics {Channel Master)
Proposed National Priorities List Site, Oxford, Granville
County, North Carolina. ATSDR, CERCLIS No. NCD122263825.
13. North Carolina Atlas, Edited by James w. Clay, Douglas M,
Orr, Jr., and Alfred W. Stuart. University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC, 1975,
14. Installation of Ground Water Monitor Wells Channel Master
Satellite Systems, Inc., prepared by Soil & Material
Engineers, Inc., October 7, 1985.
76
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
REFERENCES (Cont'd)
15. EPA Superfund Public Health Evaluation Manual, (OSWER
Directive 9285.4-1)
16. Dangerous Properties of Industrial Material, Sixth Edition,
1984.
17. EPA Data Quality Objectives for Remediation Response
Activities, OSWER Directive 9335.0-713.
18. EPA, 1988. Guidance for Conducting Remedial Investigations
and Feasibility Studies Under CERCLA. EPA/G-89/004.
19. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency), 1986.
Engineering Support Branch Standard Operating Procedures and
Quality Assurance Manual. Region IV, Environmental Services
Division.
20. EPA occupational Health and Safety Manual.
21. EPA Standard Operating Safety Guides (July 1988).
22. EPA, 1989. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund,
EPA/540/1-89/001.
23. EPA, 1989. Exposure Factors Handbook. EPA/600/8-89/043.
24. EPA, 1988. Superfund Exposure Assessment Manual,
EPA/540/1-88/001.
77
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
identified as the area extending south from the former scrap
metal trailer parking area, including the area that surrounded
the leaking concrete waste oil tank, and the adjacent drainage
ditch (Figure 1-1). This information is based on the data
collected during the Channel Master groundwater evaluation. TCE,
PCE and trans-1,2-DCE were detected in temporary shallow
monitoring wells installed on the site. A model of the Channel
Master site is provided in (Figure 2-6).
20
·-------------------
"-' ,_.
Plllltlll IS CWlwlullN-+
1 21 1509
~-.!! _._ ~1•111'!!
II
of . I
Figure 2-6
CHANNEL MASTER SITE MODEL
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
3.0 INITIAL EVALUATION
3.1 site Model
A conceptual model for the Channel Master site is provided in
Figure 3-1. This model identifies potential sources, release
mechanisms, pathways, exposure routes, and receptors for
contaminants originating from the Channel Master site.
3.1.1 Nature and Extent of contamination
The present nature and extent of contamination at the
Channel Master site is not well defined by the existing data.
Data collected from the site prior to remediation efforts can be
used to determine the types of wastes that may exist at the site;
however, the present nature and extent of contamination cannot be
established without further investigation.
Groundwater
Groundwater samples were collected in June, 1986, by Channel
Master (Ref. 3). The samples were analyzed for EPA drinking
water parameters, water quality parameters, and priority
pollutants.
voes, primarily in the form of halogenated hydrocarbons, were
found to be present in the onsite groundwater at significant
concentrations. A summary of the maximum concentration levels of
voes found is provided in Table 3-1. Metals were not found to be
present at levels of concern, with the exception of chromium
(0.08 mg/L) and nickel (0.28 mg/L). Semivolatiles and pesticides
were all below detectable levels.
The highest concentrations of voe contamination were found in the
lagoon area and at surface water discharge points and drainage
areas along the southern boundary of the site. The groundwater
contamination extends from the scrap trailer loading area towards
the former lagoon area and probably moves off the property.
The nearest private drinking water well is approximately 2,000 ft
southeast of the site (Ref. 12). This well was sampled on
February 23, 1987 and no significant organic or inorganic
contamination was reported.
The current status of groundwater contamination is unknown,
however, any existing groundwater contamination would most likely
occur in the area of the main building and extend southward
toward the lagoon area.
22
I - - - - - --· - - - - - - - - - - - -
"' w
PRIMARY
SOURCES
FORMER ON-SITE ....
LAGOON
A
SLUDGE Pml-
OII-SITE I CONTIGUOUS
PROPERTY
PRIMARY
RELEASE
MECHANISM
Percolation
lnffltntlon
Percolatlon
SECONDARY
SOURCE
SOIL -
~
SECONDARY
RELEASE
MECHANISM
tttt
lnffllratlon .. Percolation
~:Jill!
➔ Sloloim11m,1w'81atterer
'----------I►~~
POTENTIAL RECEPTOR
HUMAN BIOTA
EXPOSURE PATHWAY ROUTE Araa Sita Terrestrial Aquatic (Activity) Rnldente Vl11tore
INGESTION • • •
DERMAL
CONTACT • • •
INGESTION • •
INHALATION • Groun--DERMAL
CONTACT • •
INGESTION • • • •
surtace INHALATION
Water
Sedlmenta DERMAL • CONTACT • • •
INGESTION
INHALATION • • • I WIND I I DERMAL
CONTACT
m~!:":NT ·o·II·· ~ ___________________ E_-_•l_o•-•--------1 .. .Jl-;~;;;;;;;~;;;;;;:CT;:-~-ON:r_;;:_T_..;:;....-11--.--i-----il
Figure 3-1
CHANNEL MASTER SITE -CONCEPTUAL MODEL
1 21 1509.2