NCD980729602_19910926_Jadco-Hughes_FRBCERCLA RD_Remedial Design Work Plan-OCR

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
REMEDIAL DESIGN
WORK PLAN
Jadco-Hughes Site
Gaston County, North Carolina
SEPTEMBER 1991
REF. NO. 3669 (6) CONESTOGA-ROVERS & ASSOOATES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CRA
Consulting Engineers
September 26, 1991
Ms. Barbara Benoy
Superfund Projecf Office
CONESTOGA-ROVERS & ASSOCIATES LIMITED
651 Colby Drive,
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2V 1C2
[phone]
Reference No. 3669
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region IV
Air and Waste Management Division
345 Courtland St.
Atlanta, Georgia
U.S.A. 30365
Dear Ms. Benoy:
Re: Remedial Design (RD) Work Plan
Jadco-Hughes Superfund Site (Site)
Gaston County. North Carolina
Enclosed please find fifteen (15) copies of the above captioned Work Plan. The
Work Plan has been prt?pared on behalf of the Jadco-Hughes Steering Committee by
CRA, in fulfillment of the r!:!quirements of Section VIII, Paragraph 6 of the
Administrative Order for the Site dated June 19, 1991 (Docket No. 91-31-C).
The fifteen copies of the Work Plan are submitted to fulfill the requirements of the
"Summary of Major Deliverables" which is attached to the Scope of Work (SOW)
for the RD at the Site. Included as attachments to the RD Work Plan are the
following submittals:
• Health and Safety Plan -Remedial Design Work Plan Submittal A (five
submitted);
• Sampling and Analysis Plan -Remedial Design Work Plan Submittal B (fifteen
submitted); and
• Treatability Study Work Plan -Remedial Design Work Plan Submittal C (fifteen
submitted).
The SOW requires the RD Work Plan to include a schedule for completion of each
required activity and submission of deliverables required by the Order. Please note
that the RD Work Plan schedule allows USEPA 45 days from receipt to review and
approve submittals. The Jadco-Hughes Steering Committee is committed to
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CONESTOGA-ROVERS & ASSOCIATES LIMITED
Consulting Engineers
September 26, 1991
- 2 -
Reference No. 3669
completing work on time and where possible ahead of schedule. To keep the project
moving we request that USEPA perform its review within the RD Work Plan
schedule.
If you should have any questions, please contact our office.
Yours truly,
CONESTOGA-ROVERS & ASSOCIATES
SMQ/bjr/3
Encl.
c.c.: Reuben Bussey, USEPA Region IV
Jadco-Hughes Steering Committee
Jimmy Kirkland, King & Spalding
Rick Shepherd, CRA
/
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 1
1.1 GENERAL. ....................................................................................................... 1
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................. 8
, 2.1 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................. 8
,( 2.2 CONTAMINATION PROFILES ................................................................. 12
J 2.3 SPECIFIC TARGETS OF REMEDIA TION ................................................. 13
3.0 REMEDIAL OBJECTIVES ......................................................................................... 14
3.1 GENERAL. ....................................................................................................... 14
3.2 SOIL ................................................................................................................... 15
3.3 GROUNDWATER. ........................................................................................ 16
4.0 PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT ....................................... 20
4.1 GENERAL. ....................................................................................................... 20
4.1.1 CRA's Project Team ...................................................................................... 21
5.0 RD/RA PROJECT PLANS ........................................................................................ 24
5.1 HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN .................................................................. 24
5.2 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN ....................................................... 25
5.3 TREATABILITY STUDY WORK PLAN ................................................... 25
6.0 PREDESIGN /REMEDIAL ACTIVffiES ................................................................ 27
6.1 PREDESIGN ACTIVITIES ............................................................................ 27
6.2 REMEDIAL DESIGN ACTIVITIES ............................................................. 28
6.2.1 General ............................................................................................................. 28
6.2.2 Plan to Satisfy Permitting Requirements ................................................. 29
6.2.3 Design Process ................................................................................................. 30
6.2.4 Design Submittals .......................................................................................... 35
7.0 REPORTS AND DOCUMENTATION ................................................................. .41
7.1 EPA MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORTS .................................................. .41
7.2 DATA MANAGEMENT PLAN ................................................................ .41
7.3 PRE-DESIGN SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION ............................... 41
7.4 PRE-DESIGN TECHNICAL MEMORANDA ........................................... 42
7.5 DESIGN REPORTS ........................................................................................ 42
7.6 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE ................................................................... 42
7.7 LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE and
MONITORING AND TESTING REPORTS ............................................ .43
8.0 COMMUNITY RELATIONS SUPPORT ............................................................... 44
9.0 SCHEDULE .................................................................................................................. 46
CONESTOGA-ROVERS I!, ASSOCIATES
1·
I TABLE OF CONTENTS
I 10.0
Page
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 47
.I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
:1
I
I
I
I
I
I COi'!ESTOGt'.·ROVERS 8 ASSOC!ATES
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I .,
I
I
I
I
I
I
.; FIGURE 1.1
FIGURE 1.2
FIGURE 1.3
FIGURE 2.1
FIGURE 2.2
FIGURE 2.3
FIGURE 2.4
FIGURE 2.5
FIGURE 2.6
FIGURE 2.7
FIGURE 2.8
FIGURE 2.9
FIGURE 2.10
FIGURE 2.11
FIGURE 4.1
FIGURE 9.1
LIST OF FIGURES
Following
Page
SITE LOCATION 1
HISTORICAL SITE FEATURES 1
RI INSTALLATIONS AND SAMPLING LOCATIONS 2
SITE DRAINAGE PATTERN 9
GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTION A-A' 9
SHALLOW GROUNDWATER FLOW PATTERNS 10
DEEP GROUNDWATER FLOW PATTERNS 10
TOTAL voe CONCENTRATIONS IN SUBSURFACE
SOIL 10
TOTAL BNA CONCENTRATIONS IN SUBSURFACE
SOIL 10
IRM EXCAVATION AREAS 11
TOTAL voe CONCENTRATIONS -SHALLOW
AQUIFER 11
TOTAL BNA CONCENTRATIONS -SHALLOW
AQUIFER 11
TOTAL voe CONCENTRATIONS-DEEP AQUIFER 11
TOTAL BNA CONCENTRATIONS -DEEP AQUIFER 11
PROJECT TEAM 20
RD/RA SCHEDULE 46
COi\!ESTOGA·ROVERS & ASSOCIATES
I
I LIST OF TABLES
I Following
Page
I TABLE 2.1 CONTAMINATION PROFILE -FORMER LANDFILL
SUBSURFACE SOILS 12
I TABLE 2.2 CONTAMINATION PROFILE -ON-SITE
GROUNDWATER 13
I TABLE 3.1 SOIL CLEANUP GOALS 15
I TABLE 3.2 GROUNDWATER REMEDIATION OBJECTIVES 16
TABLE 7.1 SUMMARY OF PRE-DESIGN TECHNICAL
I MEMORANDA 42
TABLE 9.1
I
SUMMARY OF MAJOR DELIVERABLES 46
I LIST OF APPENDICES
I APPENDIX A CURRICULA VITAE -KEY PROJECT PERSONNEL
11 APPENDIX B DATA MANAGEMENT PLAN
o·
I LIST OF ASSOCIATED SUB MITT ALS
I SUBMITTAL A RD HEAL TH AND SAFETY PLAN
SUBMITTAL B SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
•-SUBMITTAL C TREAT ABILITY STUDY WORK PLAN
I.
I I
I CDiliESTOGA-ROVERS 2. ASSOCIAF:S
I
I
I ,,
I
I
.J
,I
-I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
u
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the Remedial Design (RD) Work Plan
for the Jadco-Hughes Site (Site).
1.1 GENERAL
The Site is located in Gaston County, North Carolina,
approximately 15 miles west of Charlotte. Figure 1. 1 shows the location of the
Site and Figure 1.2 presents historical features of the Site.
The 6-acre Site is a former solvent reclamation and waste
storage facility which had two operators: C.A. Hughes, Inc. (1971 to 1975); and
Jadco, Inc. (1975). The Site was closed in 1975 and a North Carolina (State)
ordered cleanup was completed by 1983. After closure of the Site, several
reconnaissance evaluations were conducted by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (USEP A) and the State which identified
residual contamination. The Site was subsequently placed on the National
Priorities List (NPL) in May 1986. Later in 1986, an Administrative Order on
Consent was entered'into between USEPA and a group of companies
identified as potentially responsible parties (PRPs) who formed the
Jadco-Hughes Steering Committee (Committee).
Conestoga-Rovers & Associates (CRA) was retained by the
Committee to conduct a Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI and
FS) and Superfund Risk Assessment (SRA).
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
o' 1000'
~-~, '/.
/1:r / .. · . ) '
' . ,., .
--~"'?.··• .... ~ ... -··, ·
\\::·: ::••·
!o·· · !\\L.,· ....
~--------'.TR[BUTA -, ~
·"'·"""·"' -N
::::-:A_.-
" --;:::... ..:;._
b./ --"~-
-....~ ,,..,~S.ubsta ,,_· __
1
• • -f I' ,' :~ ~ .', / '
41,r., ljl. .· ,' I 1!11 lo,
:' /' I 1CJ
' .· ! ,'
:;--·,·~-
: ,,· e ;, .
al"
8
I
~ .':2) /
--...;\_~ ''-
;.i_r-c--.c~,.,...,_
-·;.--~ . ' . ,./(0:'~---:--. : .
'I -. .:.·..,..:; v
.--. ·::. / ,s-➔ / j , if 11 0 ,,
Ch \ L l">.t-: __
, _/ I •/_<: _/ :;;;·.,
. -->q, ....::::::-.
b . ·.
~~-:;:3.--:-
.•,..,~·.>,r, .-.'--""-/,/
_,, '..[\/,,...,_· I
SOURCE: USGS QUADRANGLE MAP,
MOUNT HOU. Y, N.C.
CRA
3669-11 /09 /91-6-0
. .
,_ / ---.__..
-· I , , ,ii ' -(I ( I §
figure 1.1
SITE LOCATION
JADCO-HUGHES SITE
Gaston County, NC
---
-···-......-~!,'~~I
~·
I CRA
J661i-11/09/V1-!l-0
-.. --- ---.. ---
CASON STREET S.R. 2035
(
/
I
I
C '''""
1. COMPOSITE AREAS SHOWN ARE BASED ON AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS
DATED FEBRUARY 12, 1968, MARot 17, 1969, AND NOVEMBER 18.
FROM 11-iE USEPA DOCUMENT .SITE ANALYSIS -JADCO-HUGHES,
NORTH BElMONT, NORTH CAROLINA•, DAITD DECEMBER 19B5.
4,0001:-'L llORA(l[ TNIICS
1975
2 THE LOCATIONS AND LIMITS OF AU. FEA lURES SHO'M'i ARE APPROXIMATE.
J. LOCA TlON OF" T AHKS AND EOUIPMOH BASED Otl
SITE MAP F"ROI.I GASTON COUNTY OSH nus (UUOA TEO).
LEGEND
PROPERTY UNE
LIGHT STANDARD
COMPOSJif A.BEAS
~ POSSIBL£ ~OUNOSTAINS AND/OR L'.:::.3 ST ANDING UOUIOS
h,:::c::aj oRuM AND/OR OPEN srORAGE AREAS
c:J DEBRIS STORAGE AND/OR Fll.L AREAS
ORUM AND/OR OPEN STORAGE AREAS
NOVEMBER 18, 1975
--11!!!!!9
0 ,o 100n
figure 1.2
HISTORICAL Sl1E FEATURES
JADCO-HUGHES SITE
Goston County, NC
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Based on soil, groundwater, surface water and sediment
samples collected from locations shown on Figure 1.3, the RI delineated Site
contamination which included:
• polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) contamination of approximately
435 cubic yards (C.Y.) of surface soil;
• contamination of approximately 6,000 C.Y. of subsurface soil principally
with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and base/neutral and acid
extractable compounds (BNAs);
• contamination of Site groundwater by VOCs and BNAs; and
• contamination of surface water in Tributary B, principally by VOCs.
The SRA concluded that the groundwater and surface
water pathways at the Site presented an unacceptable current and future risks
to human health and to the environment.
During the RI and FS, an Interim Remedial Measure
(IRM) was completed between September and December 1990 which resulted
in the excavation and disposal of PCB contaminated soils in the southeast
swale area. Approximately 900 C.Y. of soils were excavated and disposed of
off-Site by landfilling at the Chemical Waste Management Inc. landfill in
Emelle, Alabama.
Upon completion of the RI and FS, USEP A issued a
Record of Decision (ROD) on September 27, 1990. The final remedy selected
by USEP A in the ROD requires the following actions:
2
I
I LEGEND
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
------PROPERTY LINE
eMW9S MONITORING WELL
ePZ4 PIEZOMETER WELL
aPWl PUMP WELL
111TP9 TEST PIT
111""' 9 OBSERVATION PIT
■BH11 BOREHOLE
t:, SS29 SEDIMENT SAMPLE
gSf3 STREAM FLOW MEASUREMENT LOCATION
I
I I
I I
I I
/ I
I I ~~~~-~~~~~~~~~~-=~~~~~V 11
-=====~ -S:. _-~---------=--------' ,' _ c"AsoN sm~= rs,;;;~:":0:5)-\ .. ~----~--~-----..:_ ------~ ~=-t==JL __ _
\ I! 8 \ l-------l(-------s--::-~-----J<--==----l(·-~'~\ SS128_1
\
eMW'1
650'±
CRA
'
3669-5/09/91-6-0 (P-03)
\ , II !2:" BH1 ■ 1 I • PZ4 PZS e ■ 8H3 4, 1 , '-"•• ■ 8H10 / / ■ BH2 . I '. ..JI II) MW3i) / t PZ7. . ...J
\
/f,", Ill W2 Ill ;;A MW3S,, □ □ / / TPSIII 111DP31 111 OP32 I
1 '.. '-Ill 1 1 OP33
\' 8H11 ■ ■BH? 1 1 ■BH15 Ill Ill\ 1 ■BH12
' I\ RAISED CONCRETE PADS 1 /■BH6 OP35111 ■BH4
\
rn,
1 1
1
1
1
Ill OP15 OP19tzl OP29 PZ5 •■8H16
\ \
,, t MW7S TPS 111 111 MWSS '1 ',', 0 ■""9 .■BHB ,' / 11111\a"W?D 111TP12 BH~3 111 □P34 IMwso llrwa M BH5■aBH14 ,J,,-..,.-r-....-vv'v-rrr' I -- -7 {7 TP4
'\\' Ill OPlJ III OP14 1 BH21 ■ L -J i!a BH17 IIIOP30 ,\ Q Ill OP17 OP1B111 D L - 7 ¥ • PZ3
\' f1JMW4D DEBRIS 1 -------------------------
.. r-·--::,.S:l,.._~~---OP16 MW4S • PZ2e 1 -···-···-···-· ·--··· ✓ \' - - - - - - --•--- - -------~ .! ~~B~ g1!:~..! I ,,,,,u.._,,..,, =rr-==><>..,--,-rvv .... ---.....,..,,..,,.,,,~vv--TRIBUTARY ·s· . -.. -... ~.
~, TP11111 lPZi OP36JII --iziOP37--.---~-=-:-:-P-
• MWBS PW1 OP21 8H20 I SS10 BH25■ MW2D e Ill e MW10D l
sr7//
MW2S e 1 ' MW6S 1 Ill OP20 ■ BH22 Ill OP271
SS29t:, SS>Ot:, SS31A ■Ill ~2:S32
mw;eH2D fj, SS33 Ill 6, SS34 DI, 5S35
Mwsol ■'
8Ht8 1
I
■ BH24 BH23 OP24 OP25 OP26 ss41 D,. S542 --ss
MW'! me l:l. ss21 .. _ ......--SS44 ~ SS+e 6. ssso t::,. ssst
SPRING S57
ss2a-fl/ f / LL TP10
It:, -SS37:.,!;.:,+.,.;"Y-.
SS36 t:, SS48
s/t:, t:, SS47
=•
8 M'N9S
t:, SS45
\
MW12S • I::. •
S516 ~~MWlZD ~v>-.>:,,·. .,,,,. .. ~ S·
SS17
SS1B
1/6 mi. to 5S17
1/3 ml. to 5518
I RI
I
INSTALLATIONS AND
figure 1.3
SAMPLING LOCATIONS
JADCO-HUGHES SITE
Goston County, NC
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2)
3)
4)
5)
Provision of deed and access restrictions;
Treatment of soils in the former landfill and approximately 500 C.Y. of
soil from the Former Operations Area which are to be consolidated
into the former landfill. The soils shall be treated by a combination of
soil vapor extraction (SVE) and soil flushing. The SVE system will be
constructed and operated until data indicate that no further VOCs can
practicably be removed. The soil flushing system will be operated as an
integral component of the groundwater collection and treatment
system;
Construction of a groundwater extraction system within the Site
boundaries including four extraction wells, in areas of elevated
contaminant levels, -am:r-a subsurface drainage tile trench to collect
contaminated groundwater; ltd tolJI\Jv.,dcV cliec.h"irl\ 5uft a·-
~0-p.,.., i o,ntMJf/)s o~ 5/i(-(,l,.;_J Cv ve,
Construction of an on-Site treatment system. The system would
consist of aeration and equalization tanks. The air vented from the
aeration tank would be treated by carbon adsorption. The effluent from
the treatment system would be pumped to the nearest City of Belmont
sanitary sewer system manhole for subsequent treatment at the
Belmont publicly owned treatment works (POTW);
Excavation and repair of the damaged sections of the Site culvert
followed by slip-lining of the culvert with butt-welded polyethylene
pipe;
3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
6) Construction of a gravity drainage line to carry uncontaminated
groundwater from the spring discharge to the Tributary B north of the
Former Operations Area;
7) Construction of a surface water diversion consisting of a Site spillway;
8) Provision of long-term operation and maintenance including
monitoring of system controls; and
9) Implementation of a monitoring program to assess the performance of
groundwater extraction, aeration and discharge system components.
Periodic monitoring of the groundwater will be performed to assure
that the remedy is working.
Remediation required by the ROD are limited to remedial
activities within the Site boundaries.
Following issuance of the ROD by USEP A, the Committee
was issued with a judicial order under Section 106 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (the 106 Order) on
June 19, 1991. Accompanying the 106 Order was USEPA's Scope of Work
(SOW) for the Remedial Design/Remedial Action (RD/RA) for the final
remedy. CRA has been retained to prepare the RD/RA Work Plans and
perform all associated design activities.
RO is generally defined as those activities to be
undertaken by the PRPs to develop the final plans and specifications, general
4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
_I
provisions and specific requirements necessary to translate the ROD and
SOW into the remedy to be constructed under the RA phase. RA is generally
the implementation phase of site remediation or actual construction of the
remedy, including necessary operation and maintenance and performance
monitoring. The RA is based on the RD to achieve the remediation goals
specified in the ROD.
As specified in the SOW, the final RD and RA Work Plans
will include project plans as outlined below:
Remedial Design
1) RD Work Plan
• Statement of Site Concerns;
• Background Summary;
• Detailed Description of Tasks to be Performed;
• RD Schedule;
• Project Management Plans; and
• Community Support Plans.
2) Health and Safety Plan
3) Sampling and Analysis Plan
• Field Sampling and Analysis Plan (FSAP); and
• Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP).
4) Treatability Study Work Plan(s)
5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• Treatability Study Sampling and Analysis Plan; and
• Treatability Study Health and Safety Plan.
Remedial Action
1) RA Work Plan
• Detailed Description of Tasks to Be Performed;
• RA Schedule;
• Project Management Plan;
• Community Relations Support; and
• Strategy of Settling Defendants for Delivering Project.
2) Construction Management Plan
3) Construction Quality Assurance Plan
4) Construction Health and Safety/Contingency Plan
This report presents the RD Work Plan for the
Jadco-Hughes Site and includes each of the required elements as outlined
above for the RD Work Plan.
The RD work plan is organized into major sections and
Appendices as follows:
• Section 2.0 provides a detailed Site description including Site
location, Site background, contamination profiles;
6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Section 3.0 presents the remedial objectives for the Site;
Section 4.0 presents a project organization and management
plan;
Section 5.0 introduces other required RD project plans including
a Health and Safety Plan, a Sampling and Analysis Plan and a
Treatability Study Work Plan;
Section 6.0 presents predesign/remedial design activities;
Section 7.0 presents reports and documentation to be submitted;
Section 8.0 presents activities to be undertaken to provide
community relations support; and
Section 9.0 presents the RD/RA schedule .
Section 10.0 presents a list of references .
7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
2.1 BACKGROUND
Background for the Site is summarized herein based on
the detailed presentation of the RI and FS report(s) (CRA, July 1990).
The Site derives its name from two previous operators of
the former industrial facility which was operated from 1971 to 1975 as a
solvent reclamation/ chemical waste storage facility by C.A. Hughes Inc. The
facility was subsequently leased to Jadco Inc. who operated the Site until
operations were suspended and eventually terminated in 1975 by a temporary
restraining order and judgement registered by the State.
The Site was used for reclaiming spent solvents for resale
using on-Site distillation apparatus. In addition, the facility was used for the
open storage of drummed materials consisting of numerous waste chemicals
and chemical waste sludges. Sludge was reported to have been generated as
distillation bottoms which were stored on Site. The former drum storage
areas and the Former Operation Area are shown on Figure 1.2.
Subsequent to the cessation of Site activities, several
environmental studies and remedial efforts were conducted at the Site. Most
notable was the State ordered cleanup which was conducted in two phases
from 1975 to 1978 and from 1981 to 1983. This cleanup included the
excavation of two in-ground pits which were used for decanting solvents.
Under the State ordered cleanup, on-Site contaminated surface soil was
8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
consolidated and covered in an on-Site landfill located in the southwest
corner of the Site in 1978.
As previously noted, the Site was placed on NPL in
October 1984. CRA was retained by the Committee to perform the RI and the
FS with oversight provided by USEP A.
The Remedial Investigation was completed in two phases
and included the excavation of 12 test pits, 25 observation pits, 26 boreholes,
the installation of 29 monitoring wells, as well as the collection and analyses
of 184 water samples and 244 soil samples (Figure 1.3).
The Remedial Investigation achieved its objective to
identify and characterize the nature and extent of contamination present in
surface water, sediment, soil and groundwater.
Drainage from the Site flows to tributaries of Fites Creek
and ultimately to the Catawba River approximately 2.5 miles downstream.
Figure 2.1 illustrates the drainage pattern of the Site and downstream
watercourses.
The Site is predominantly underlain by a unit of
weathered granite known as saprolite to a depth of 95 feet below ground
surface. Lenses of fluvial deposits of clay, silt and sand lie upon this unit near
ground surface. Granite bedrock underlies the saprolite and is found at
depths below 95 feet. Figure 2.2 illustrates the geology underlying the Site by
9
----- - - -
WiEllil.
- - - - -PROPERTY LINE
---.so GROUND CONTOUR (fl. AMSL) + SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE
... ... ... .,,
"' ,,.
..
CRA
3&6a-11/oa/a1-e-o
- --- -
I
~
--
0 ~ 100N
I
---·-
..,
figure 2.1
SITE DRAINAGE PATTERN
JADCO-HUGHES SITE
Gaston County, NC
- ---
A • ,
oi ~
680.0
670.0
660.0
g 650.0
~ ~ 640.0
630.0
620.0
,,.,,.,
,~-
---------
0
- - - - - --
w z 3
I:
i ~
f
---------------------------------------------
CONCRETE CULVERT/'
SAPROLITE UNIT
JOO 600 900
LEGEND HORIZONTAL DISTANCE (FITT)
CRA
,~-1 .. ...,. STATIC WATER LE\.£1. (9/18/89)
MONITORING Yl£U. SCREEN LOCATION
GROUND SURFACE
STRA TIGRAPHlC DESCRIPTION
JHi-11/09/91-B-0
--
1200
-- ----
Ut.U
131.1.1
1500
A'
•
....,
1800
figure 2.2
GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTION A-A'
JADCO-HUGHES SITE
Gaston County, NC
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
means of cross-section A-A' which transects the Site. The section location is
shown on Figure 2.1.
A water table is found at a depth of approximately 9 feet
below ground surface. Groundwater within the saprolite migrates north at a
rate of approximately 8 to 14 ft/year and is strongly influenced by
groundwater discharge into the on-Site culvert and tributaries to Fites Creek.
Figure 2.3 presents the groundwater flow patterns in the shallow saprolite
(approximately 15 feet below ground surface). Figure 2.4 presents the
groundwater flow patterns in the deep saprolite (approximately 45 feet below
ground surface).
The extent of soil contamination on the Site was
characterized by the presence of VOCs, BNAs, and to lesser extent, by some
PCBs and metals. Figures 2.5 and 2.6 present contaminant concentrations in
soil on Site.
The former landfill was confirmed to be a significant area
of soil contamination, characterized by VOCs, BNAs and to a lesser extent by
PCBs and metals. The contaminated soil occupies an approximate geologic
volume of 5,500 C.Y. Concentrations in the soil based on the average of
detections are 586 mg/kg VOCs, 212 mg/kg BNAs and 20 mg/kg PCBs.
The Former Operations Area, the former south decant pit
and the former north decant pit were found to be less significant areas of soil
contamination characterized mainly by the presence of VOCs.
10
----
CRA
JU9-11/0Q/IU-8-0
----
------PROPERTY LINE
t.40NITORING WEU.
Plf'.ZOIAETER WEU
•P., PU ... P WEU.
-
----650 GROUNDWAT[R CONTOUR (FT. At.451..)
GROUNDW.-.TER FLOW DIRECTION
GROUNDWATER El.EVATION (SEPT. 18, 1989)
-
;= r;~=
I
I
~, '
{6$4.7J) ' -------·
---------
0 50 100tt
figure 2.3
SHALLOW GROUNDWATER FLOW PATTERNS
JADCO-HUGHES SITE
Gaston County, NC
--
{Na.JI) -~
CRA
-
JSaa-11/09/91-e-o
- - -
---650
I
I
=cC>
- -
PROPERTY LINE
MONITORING Mli..
PUMP 'M':U.
-
GROUNDWATER CON TOUR (FT. AMSL)
GROUNDWAT[R flOW DIRECTION
GROUNDWATER ELEVATION (SEPT. 16, 1989)
----- -- - --
D 50 lDDtt
figure 2.4
DEEP GROUNDWATER FLOW PATTERNS
JADCO-HUGHES SITE
Goston County, NC
I
I LEGEND
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- ---- -PROPERTY UNE
eMW9S
1111?9
MONITORING WELL
TEST PIT
BOREHOLE
{Q206) mg/kg TOTAL voe
APPROXIMATE UMIT OF LANDFILL
I
I
I
I I
f I
0 50 100ft
-======~--'----'\""7~-;-,;:---,ai-b=----l!~=---l<---------lE-----+-----~
e MV.1 Q0/5)
650'±
CAA
\
~' l~I~ BH1 ■ ~ I ■8H3 '\' : , '-''·• ■BH10 (0.018) 1 / ■BH2 (ao,o) t
, .,flj(] "0.206 1 I , ''2011'' 'v,-'' , Ill lP3 {aot) MW3D lPS 111 '' , -'
\
11' , 111 lP2 {1119.0) ew,s#{aot) □ □ ,' ,' {a020)
I ' '\ (264.9) I / \ 8H11 ■ ■8H7 I I ■BH15---------BH12
' !El \ \ (926..J) {0.01J) RAISED CONCRETE PADS / / {NO) -~-(O.a
\
~t~A / / (0.014} (__ BH16
\ \ ...... _-9.IIJ:i!~:"'""---~ 1 I tr.tW7S TP6 Ill ~ ■ · ■ \~ '\', 0 aoo.e>' ,BHB{a57) , ,' lll~(QOl8) Ill' 12 {, " , lP8 ' , MW7D BH5■ {a017) BH13 ND,
, \ {a652) r --· ---, n lP<{l.513) {13.03} ■ ',!JJJ
■BH4 {ao12)
M'NSS {0.019) a MWSD
I
I
\
\ 1 BH21 L-J IIBH17
\ Q {a23.3) ■ , {a.JS?) TRisurARy •8• , o , , _ ... _ \, f/J MW4D (a.034) DEBRIS 1 -----------------------· · · -· · ·-..... .. _ ~ · --.:..:~~J.~\, ------_________ -___ M~45 _ 35•• CONCRETE CULvERT \ --· · · -· · · -· · · -· · · -TRisurARY ~-· · · -· · · -
I
)
I
\.. TP11 ----------------------------~... t • ~ •• _. _
, ' {a032)111 ■ r ---
0
SPRING
FORMER SOUTH DECANT PIT
8H20 I
{QOOJ)
I {266) 1 MW6S
awsoll ■' {a21') BHf!! 1
{a I I {aoot)'
FORMER NORTH DECANT PIT
FORMER OPERATIONS AREA
figure 2.5
TOTAL voe CONCENTRATIONS
IN SUBSURFACE SOIL
JADCO-HUGHES SITE
Gaston County, NC
3669-12 09/91-6-0 P-04
I
I
I
I
I
I
a
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LEGEND
------PROPERTY UNE
eMW9S MONITORING WELL ~ 111TP9 TEST PIT
■BH11 BOREHOLE 0 50 100ft
(1.58} mg/kg TOTAL BNA I I ~
I _______ J_
-------\---
: : ~-'t
I I ~
I I ~
I I . -'-I I I
LANDFILL I I "-vv-.Jcfa._,_.,...,__,,_.,._...,vv..,.,...__,_____,...,..__._,._,.--v...,.,._.\.A,_-\,v-->JJ.=--,...)'--' I '
------//_~sew STREET _ (SIDEROAD 2035) ---,-----------------------,~-=t~_lL __ _
\ ' '
\ \ Ill} f ----------\ ------><-------><------><---;;=--------;,
\, //Q:' ' BH1 ■ I I 11BH3 , '-"·• f ■ BH10 ) (0.018) I / ■ BH2 (0.560) '-t~~ ( (1.68} TP2 Ill TP3 (UH) MW.30 ,/_ / TPS 111 (a690)
,t--' Ill (3.16.5) ('19.•J ew,s#(0.51) □ [7 , , (0.20)
I;\\ l . ~;,i;,, ,, -~~,;'; _J /~/ ■m;J--------:_::;>-aH12 ■BH4
TPi \ \ RAISED CONCRETE PADS , ~ (f.S?O}
\
0.51~A ...._ -/ / / (1.000) BH\6
\
......... ___ 1 I MW7S TP6111 ■ a77) MWSS \, 0 --------111 aHB(o.090J , ' "9(0.sooJ 111 12 11 (o.?ooJlewso ~ \, im-TPa ' ,' :i MW70 BHS■ (0.<2) BH\3(0.19) r"~r-,...,-..,.-,,y-y-v--<"
\ (0.,10) r ---7 n (0.410) (0.7)
'\, 1 BH21 ■ L -J II BH17
\
I
I
TRIBUTARY •8, ---·--. \ Q D (NO) ' (NO)
\, # MW40 (0.204) OEBRIS
1 1r;==lr_=-=-=-===:-:-=-:,;,-::...:~= .... ::l!:-::.~=-::= .,,C::-~c~~:z-::-~y=-:-:=-:...=-E~= y==-~~= ~~-:==---=· ~-~ -'=-~~~-~==:,;;:;d,J__,_"--'U..,=~ ··-...... ___ ~----'..,ll.-~~ MW4S 36• 1 II __ ✓ -,,~-----------------;-~ --- ---- -_! ~':N~R~ -~~.!:~~-----------..:1--:,-.. - . -..-
CRA
3669-12/09/91-6-0 (P-05)
I
)
I
"-.' (0.85) Ill ■ r ---
BH20 I
{NO)
0
SPRING
SOUT11 DECANT PIT
I
I
I
I ((O.J)
(0.25) 1 MW6S
MW60. 111 I
(0.34) BHry ~\
TP7 (0.65~
FORMER NORT11 DECANT PIT
FORMER OPERATIONS AREA
figure 2.6
TOTAL BNA CONCENTRATIONS
IN SUBSURFACE SOIL
JADCO-HUGHES SITE
Gaston County, NC
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Areas of ~urface soil contamination were identified in the
southeast swale area of the Site. During the RI, a volume of approximately
' ' 435 C.Y. of soil having PCB concentrations above 10 mg/kg was delineated.
'
This soil was removed and landfilled off-Site in late 1990. Approximately
I 900 C.Y. of soil was excavated and disposed off-Site. The excavations were
then backfilled and regraded, covered with topsoil and seeded. The areas
excavated are shown on Figure 2.7. The IRM included the construction of an
8 foot high chain link fence 4round the perimeter of the Site.
On-Site groundwater contamination is present and is
I characterized primarily by voes, BNAs and to a lesser extent by some metals.
Figures 2.8 through 2.11 present voe and BNA concentrations in the shallow
and deep aquifers. As shown, there are five areas of elevated contaminant
'
concentration in groundwater identified as:
• MW2D • MW3S • MW8S
• MW6S • MWSD
Analytic~l data from the analyses of groundwater samples
collected from monitoring \\!'ells in the area immediately surrounding the
Site, and residential wells 100 feet to 1,000 feet downgradient of the Site, did
not exhibit water quality exc~ding drinking water standards or criteria.
Low levels of Voes (below 10 µg/L) in surface water were
identified and characterized. This contamination is attributed to discharge of
contaminated groundwater to the on-Site culvert (which lies within the
water table) and to tributari~s of Fites Creek. This voe contamination
11
cc,,,,~SY'JGt-'.-FIOVERS r, ASSOCIAT!cS
--- -
CRA
Jee9-11/09/91-e-o
----
WiElW.
-

-
-PROPERTY LINE
PERMANENT FENCE
1•~~-n SCXl EXCAVATION AREAS
I ' I I
I I
i
-
.....
0
--
I
L---
--- ----
~
0 50 100ft
M.AJN GA TE
-_-_--

-
--

-

-
--,~ Li_
ACCESS GAlE
,,
figure 2. 7
IRM EXCAVATION AREAS
JADCO-HUGHES SITE
Gaston County, NC
----
CRA
36611-11/09/lill-6-0
---
------PROPERTY,UN£ .....
(40.7)
MONITOfUNG 'AEll
TOTAL VOC CONCENTRATION
AT VeEll. SITE (u9/l)
(SAMPUNG ROUND J)
(ND • NOT DElECTID)
--/00--TOTAL VOC CQrila>ITRATION
CONTOUR (u;/l)
)
I
----
.til21E;_ MAXIMUM VALUES SHO~.
-- -.. ---
0 ,0 100ft
(CL7J)
figure 2.8
TOTAL voe CONCENlRAllONS SHALLOW AQUIFER
JADCO-HUGHES SITE
Gaston County, NC
----
C!IA
38159-11/09/91-15-0
--- -
I
I
WiEli.D.
-

-
---

-
PROPERTY LINE ......
(U..5)
MONITORING WEU
TOTAL BNA CONCENTRATION
AT 'flEl..1.. SHE (u;/L) (SAMPUNG ROUND J)
(NO • NOT DETECTED)
--100--TOTAL BHA CONCENTRATION
CONTOOR (uo/L)
.. --
l:illlE;. MAXIMUM VALU[S SHOVIN.
(3.1) .....
----
0 50 100ft
-
(1.4) ..,,,
•
figure 2.9
TOTAL BNA CONCENTRATIONS SHALLOW AQUIFER
JADCO-HUGHES SITE Gaston County, NC
---
•
CRA
3669-11/09/91-6-0
-- - - --
------PROPERTY LINE
MONITORING 'NEU.. .... PUMP VIEU.
TOTAL voe CONCENIATION ~JAM~NflfoJ~~ tNo • NOT OETrC )
(0.74)
)
I
--/00--TOTAL VOC CONC£NTRATION
CONTOUR (ug/1..)
.~11l'110 0 (2.1) -
-- -
.tilllE,;.. MAXIMUM VALUES SHO"'111i.)
- -----
0 so 100ft
-;_
figure 2.10
TOTAL voe CONCENlRATIONS -DEEP AQUIFER
JADCO-HUGHES SITE
Goston County, NC
--
(2.1) ..,
•
Cl!IA
-
-~~.!_
J669-11/0ll/lil1-6-0
---- ----
··~ ... ._,,-·
)
I
l.EliWl2
------PROPERTY UNE .....
(:t.1)
MONITORING WEll
PUMP WEU
TOTAL BNA CONCENiA TION ~JAM~Jillrc,JN~ tNo • NOT DETEC )
--/00-TOTAL SHA CCJ,ICEHTRATION
CONTOUR (u9/l)
eWWIID 0 {1.5) _,
tilllE;_ MAXJIAUM VALUES SHOWN.)
-- - --..
0 50 100ft
figure 2.11
TOTAL BNA CONCENTRATIONS -DEEP AQUIFER
JADCO-HUGHES SITE
Caston County. NC
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
g
dissipates to levels below drinking water standards or criteria, immediately
downstream of the Site.
2.2 CONTAMINATION PROFILES
The following paragraphs present contamination profile
for the Former Operation Area, the former landfill and groundwater at the
Site, as developed in the FS.
A volume of contaminated soil within the former landfill
was estimated to be approximately 5,500 C.Y. based on the physical size of the
former landfill and the amount of soil above the water table. A volume of
contaminated soil associated with the Former Operations Area was estimated
to be 500 C.Y. which represents contaminated soil adjacent to the eastern edge
of the concrete pad.
Table 2.1 provides a contamination profile for soil and is
'
based on soil samples collected from the former landfill.
A review of the RI groundwater database indicated that
'
the majority of on-Site shallo'Y groundwater and two deep locations (MW2D
and MWSD) exceed the remedial objectives presented in the ROD and SOW.
The data from analyses of samples collected from the remainder of the RI
deep monitoring wells indicated that the remedial objectives were not
exceeded in these wells.
12
<: _1,h~ fOC!-1-ROVEFlS C tlSSOCit-.TES
I
I
I
I
I
E
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
u
I
E
I
Page 1 of 2
TABLE2.l
CONTAMINATION PROFILE-FORMER LANDFILL SUBSURFACE SOILS
JADCO-HUGHES RD/RA
Compound
voes <wgfkg/
acetone
2-butanone
1, 1-dichloroethane
1,2-dichloroethane
ethylbenzene
methylene chloride
4-methyl-2-pentanone
1, 1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
tetrachloroethane
toluene
1, 1,1-trichloroethane
1, 1,2-trichloroethane
trichloroethene
total xylenes
BNAs (mg/kg/
acenaphthene
anthracene
benzo(a)pyrene
benzo(b)fluoranthene
benzo(g,h,i)perylene
benzo(k)fluoranthene
benzoic acid
bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
bis(2-ethy lhexyl )phthalate
butylbentzylphthalate
2-chlorophenol
chrysene
1,2-dichlorobenzene
1,4-dichlorobenzene
di-n-butylphthalate
di-n-octyl phthalate
fluoranthene
fluorene
indeno(l,2,3-<:d)pyrene
2-methylnaphthalene
2-methylphenol
4-methylphenol
naphthalene
phenanthrene
phenol
pyrene
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
Range of Detects
Low High
0.006
21
0.0027
1.6
8.4
0.0019
10:000
0.0095
0.0016
0.0018
0.014
0.0028
0.0075
0.0013
0.17
: 1
:3.6
2.7
' 1.4
2.2
·13
1.2
0.09
12
:14
0,27
1.4
0.57
2.4
4.6
0.48
' 0)9
2.0
0.11
2.5
.1
1.8
3.4
8.2
0.48
0.18
72
170
0.0027
9.3
65
11.0
19.000
0.0095
12
620
0.014
0.0028
3.5
320
0.98
1
3.6
2.7
1.4
2.2
35
1.7
260
8.2
90
3.4
2.1
0.98
8.4
6.1
5.4
0.69
2.0
2.9
9.1
2.5
6.3
3.4
24.0
5.6
86.0
Representative
Concentration (1)
9.9
72
0.0027
5.7
36.4
3.1
14.5
0.0095
4.7
303.6
0.014
0.0028
1.8
134.6
0.58
1.0
3.6
2.7
1.4
2.2
19.4
1.5
53.8
5.0
42.4
1.8
1.7
0.78
3.4
5.4
2.9
0.44
2.0
1.1
5.1
1.9
3.6
3.4
16.0
3.0
24.2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Page2 of 2
TABLE 2.1
I CONTAMINATION PROFILE· FORMER LANDFILL SUBSURFACE SOILS
JAD~O-HUGHES RD/RA
Cumpound
PesticideslPCBs (mg/kg)
PCB Aroclor 1248
Metals and Total (l/1/nide Im glkg/
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Potassium
Sodium
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
Total Cyanide
Notes:
Range of Detects
Lqw High
11.0 36.0
1-,570 27,600
16.1 47.5
~0.9 47.0
27.6 268
0.75 1.7
1.0 4.0
1,177 16,400
5.8 190
10 30.6
35.4 1,010
17,000 63,690
5.1 596
1,426 8,900
110 990
0.06 0.18
5.6 60
130.4 885
227.3 757
0.08 0.11
· 37 290
23.6 175
4.0 8.9
• Based on soil data for the former landfill.
• VOCs = volatile organic compounds.
• BNAs = base/neutral and acid extractable compounds.
Representative
Concentration (1)
20.3
13,856
30.9
39.0
102
1.2
2.5
4,031
66
20
219
36,354
301
4,087
487
0.11
21
358
530
0.09
122
71
6.8
• The above profile is based on samples collected from the following locations: BH(MW-3), BH-7,
BH-8, BH-9, BH-10, BH-11, TP-2 ,TP-3.
(1) Mean concentration calculated by an arithmetic average of detections.
!
t,.1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 2.2 presents the contamination profile for on-Site
groundwater.
2.3 SPECIFIC TARGETS OF REMEDIATION
Site features which pose a potential current and future
' risk to human health and the environment include the following:
• subsurface soils located in the former landfill and Former Operations Area
which are contaminated with certain VOCs and BNAs;
• surface water in Tributary: B which is contaminated principally by VOCs
through the discharge of groundwater to the tributary; and
• Site groundwater which is contaminated with VOCs and BNAs.
Risks to h,uman health and the environment are possible
due to transportation of conta,minants off-Site. The selected remedy mitigates
transport of Site contaminan~ thereby minimizing the potential risk to
human health and the environment.
13
('c_>;,!E3 iOG?, ROVERS ~ ASSOCIATES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Page 1 of 2
TABLE2.2
CONTAMINATION PROFILE-ON-SITE GROUNDWATER
JADCO-HUGHES RD/RA
Compound
voes <u~tLJ
acetone
benzene
2-butanone
carbon-disulfide
carbon· tetrachloride
chlorobenzene
chloroethane
chloroform
1, 1-dichloroethane
1,2-dichloroethane
1, 1-dichloroethene
1,2-dichloroethene ( total)
1,2-dichloropropane
ethylbenzene
2-hexanone
methylene chloride
4-methyl-2-pentanone
1, 1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
tetrachloroethane
toluene
1, 1, 1-trichloroethane
1, 1,2-trichloroethane
trichloroethene
vinyl-chloride
total xylenes
BNAs lu~ILJ
benzoic acid
bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether
bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
1,2-dichlorobenzene
1,3-dichlorobenzene
1,4-dichlorobenzene
di-n-bu typhthala te
di-n-octyl phthalate
2-methylphenol
4-methylphenol
naphthalene
phenol
1,2,4-trichorobenzene
Range of Detects
Low High
6.6
0.25
50,249
1.8
0.28
0.3~
0.47
0.63
0.76
0.44
0.16,
1.6
0.29
440
0.49
0.55
3,100
0.26
0.76'
0.36'
0.23
0.70,
0.45
0.60
0.30•
550
4.3
11
1.3
17
1.7
3.6
2.3
1.9'
26
74
8.1 ,
28
3.7
140,563
1,285
64,000
1.8
26,118
340
15
103,589
110
5,531
839
15,000
0.34
1,268
1,800
10,981
10,277
0.26
13
98,808
672
2.8
580
68,000
5,402
4,800
29,000
11
270
89
89
590
680
1.9
26
74
8.1
1,700
3,000
Representative
Concentration
30,524
277
57,124
1.8
7,153
96
7.7
17,083
22
986
141
2,561
0.32
749
900
1,750
6,688
0.26
6.2
17,359
168
1.6
69
11,451
1,376
2,675
4,623
11
41
56
19
121
196
1.9
26
74
8.1
1,109
606
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE2.2
CONTAMINATION-PROFILE-ON-SITE GROUNDWATER
JADCO-HUGHES RD/RA
'
Page2 of 2
Range of Detects
Compound Low High
Representative
Concentration
Metals and Cyanide /mg/LJ
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Ma,nganese
Nickel
Potassium
Silver
Sod_ium
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc __
Cyanide;.•
Notes:
Pesticides/PCBs were not detected,
ND -Not detected,
0-47
o.o5i
0,005
0,046
0,001
0,006
39
0,0093
0,00~
0,022
4-2
0,0023
16
0-24
0,031
6,7
0,011
9,6
0.001I
0,013
0,022
ND
130 35
0-39 0-22
0,09 0,04
056 0,2
0,001 0,001
0,008 0,0067
470 136
0-76 0,14
0,14 0,068
OA 0,17
200 55
0,037 0,0095
170 63
56 8,9
058 0,15
11 7,7
0,01 O.Dl
36 18
0,001 0,001
0-38 0,14
0-49 0,18
ND ND
i On-Site Groundwater is groundwater within_ the Site boundaries represented by wells in which
detections above MCLs were recorded: MW2S, MW2D, MW3S, MW4S, MWSD, MW6S, MW7S, MW8S,
!
v \
tVv1
cu;-•~:::TOGA-R\)I/EH3 e, ASSOCIATES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
a
u
3.0 REMEDIAL OBJECTIVES
3.1 GENERAL
The objectives of the final remedy are to:
'
1) mitigate impact of the i°n-Site contamination to groundwater by
I
remediating the source of contaminants in the former landfill and
I
consolidated soils from the Former Operations Area;
2) provide adequate control of VOC emissions to air from the soil
treatment process through the use of vapor treatment equipment;
3) remediate groundwater contamination by installing extraction wells, a
subsurface drain and providing pre-treatment for the extracted
groundwater by aeration before discharge to the Belmont POTW; and
4) mitigate impact to surface water by reconstruction of the buried culvert
and construction of a spillway.
The remedy will be designed and implemented such that
the above remedial objectives are met. The following sections present specific
remediation goals for soil andlgroundwater as described in the SOW.
14
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• a
g,
R
I
I
I
I
3.2 SOIL
Thirteen specific remediation goals for soil contaminants
were identified in the ROD and are presented in Table 3.1.
The soil cleanup goals were developed to predict the level
of soil cleanup necessary to protect groundwater. The rate of cleanup of the
I
groundwater should be increased by soil cleanup through soil vapor
extraction and soil flushing. During the cleanup operations, the soil vapor
extraction system will be operated until it is no longer effective. The soil
flushing system will then be operated as an integral part of the groundwater
extraction system until the sp'ecific groundwater remediation objectives have
been achieved, or technical i111practicability has been demonstrated.
' I
The SOW indicates that soil column testing is required to
' define the soil cleanup goals for the Site. Recent guidance from USEPA,
however, indicates that soil column tests generally are used to "answer the
question: Is SVE a potentially viable remediation technology?". Further,
I
USEPA states that soil column tests are "suited for evaluation of SVE
technology when the vapor pressure of the target contaminants equals or
exceeds 10 mm Hg." (USEPA, March 91). The guidance document indicates
that the only way to assess the ,effectiveness of SVE in the field is to conduct a
I
pilot scale study to determine ;,the radius of influence of the vapor extraction
wells, moisture removal rates, and contaminant flow rates".
Because the ROD has already selected SVE for the Site, soil
'
column tests at this stage will not provide useful information regarding the
15
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE 3.1
SOIL CLEANUP GOALS
JAoc:;o-HUGHES RD/RA
Compound Remediation Goal
arsenic 48.0
barium 360.0
cadmium 6.0
carbon tetrachloride 3.689
chloroform 15.865
chromium 140.0
1,2-dichlorobenzene 1.5
lead --3:Z
mercury 0.15
PCBs ® selenium
silver 0.6
vinyl chloride 0.014
All concentrations are ,stated in mg/kg.
I
I.,:!>
,o "e-h
10 vu{(D'f.tv
The above identified soil cleanup goals are developed for the
protection of the grouhdwater and are designed to ultimately eliminate
any leachability from soil contamination that would exceed the
• I estabhshed groundwater cleanup goals.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
selection of SVE as a remedial technology. Therefore, soil column tests will
not be conducted as part of the RD. The soil treatment process described
I
above, designed from data collected in a field pilot study, coupled with
groundwater extraction and monitoring, will provide adequate assurance that
the remedy will, as the ROD requires, result in concentrations of
contaminants in the soil that do not produce 'leachate' which results in
groundwater concentrations which are in exceedance of the groundwater
remedial objectives.
3.3 GROUNDWATER
The groundwater remediation objectives developed in the
ROD are listed in Table 3.2. These objectives are based on State Groundwater
Standards, Federal Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) and Proposed
MCLs.
If the background concentrations of any metal exceeds the
groundwater remediation goal for that metal, the background concentration
of that metal will be the groundwater remediation goal. Background will be
determined by USEPA. Analytical data will be developed during the RD, on
submission to USEPA, which documents background groundwater quality.
Any changes to background concentrations of those groundwater remediation
I
' goals, which are based on the.State Groundwater Standards, will be subject to
State approval.
16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE3.2
GROUNDWATER REMEDIATION OBJECTIVES
JAQCO-HUGHES RD/RA
Compound
voes <1n{L/
Acetone
Benzene
2-Butanone
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Chloroform
1,1-Dichloroethane
1,2-Dichloroethane
1, 1-Dichloroethylene
1,2-Dichloroethylene (total)
1,2-Dichloropropane
Ethylbenzene
2-Hexanone
Methylene Chloride
4-Methyl-2-Pentanone
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
1, 1, I-Trichloroethane
1, 1,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Chloride
Xylene
Remediation
Goal
700
1
170
0.3
300
10
0.19
0.3
0.3
7
70
0.56
29
10
5
350
0.7
1,000
200
3
2.8
0.015
400
I BNAs !ug!L/
I
I
I
I
I
I
Benzoic acid
Bis(2-chloroethy 1 )ether
Bis(2-ethy lbenzy l)phthala te
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
Di-n-Butyl Phthalate
Phenol
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
28,000
0.03
4
620
620
1.8
700
4,200
9
Page 1 of 2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Compound
TABLE3.2
GROUNDWATER REMEDIATION OBJECTIVES
JADCO-HUGHES RD/RA
Remediation
Goal
Metals and Total Cvanide lul'IL/
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Nickel
Vanadium
Zinc
50
3
50
1,000
1
5
50
300
15
150 ;so----so
20
5,000
Page 2of 2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Based on information obtained during the RI and on a
I
careful analysis of all remedial alternatives, USEPA believes that the selected
remedy or the contingency remedy will achieve the goal of restoring
groundwater to its beneficial use. However, there is a possibility that during
implementation or operation of the groundwater extraction system and its
modifications, that contaminant levels may cease to decline prior to reaching
I
I
the remediation goals over some portion or all of the Site. In such a case, the
system performance standards and/or the remedy may be reevaluated.
The selected or contingency remedy will include
groundwater extraction for an estimated period of 30 years, during which the
I
system's performance will be' carefully monitored on a regular basis and
adjusted as warranted by the performance data collected during operation.
Modifications may include: ,
1)
2)
3)
at individual wells where cleanup goals have been attained, and after
analytical confirmatio11, pumping may be discontinued;
'
I alternating pumping a~ wells to eliminate stagnation points;
pulse pumping to allow aquifer equilibration and to allow adsorbed
contaminants to partition into groundwater; and
I
4) installation of additional extraction wells to facilitate or accelerate
cleanup of the contaminant plume.
17
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
To ensure that cleanup goals continue to be maintained,
the aquifer will be monitore,d once annually at those wells where pumping
has ceased following discon#nuation of groundwater extraction. This yearly
monitoring will continue for a period of five years.
I
If, in USEPA's judgment, implementation of the selected
I
remedy clearly demonstrates, in corroboration with strong hydrogeological
;
and chemic;al evidence, that it will be technically impracticable to achieve and
i
maintain remediation goals throughout the area of attainment (the Site), a
groundwater remedy contingency will be developed and implemented. For
I example, a contingency may be invoked when it has been demonstrated that
. contaminant levels have ceased to decline over time, and are remaining
' constant at some statistically, significant level above remediation goals, in a
. '
discrete portion of the area of attainment, as verified by multiple monitoring
wells.
Where such a contingency situation arises, groundwater
I
extraction and treatment may continue if technically appropriate.
'
If it is determined, on the basis of the preceding criteria
. and the system performance 1data, that certain portions of the aquifer cannot
I
be restored to their beneficial use, all of the following measures involving
long-term management may occur, for an indefinite period of time, as a
• modification of the existing system:
1
1) engineering controls such as long-term gradient control provided by
' low level pumping, as: a containment measure;
18
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2) chemical-specific ARARs will be waived for the cleanup of those
portions of the aquifer based on the technical impracticability of
achieving further contaminant reduction;
3) institutional controls will be provided/maintained to restrict access to
' those portions of the ~quifer which remain above health-based goals,
since this aquifer is classified a potential drinking water source; and
4) continued monitoring\ of specified wells.
I
The decision to invoke any or all of these measures may
, be made during a periodic review of the remedial action, which will occur at
intervals no less frequent than every five years.
The decision to invoke any or all these measures shall be
I made following the appropri11te petition, or demonstration filed by the
Committee to the State and USEPA for a waiver of specific State cleanup goals
I
and/or consideration of technical impracticability and the granting of such
waiver.
19
I
I 4.0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
u
u
I
I
I
I
I
PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
4.1 GENERAL
As the Supervising Contractor, CRA has assembled the
'
, following project managem~nt team and technical resource personnel with
I
·. the necessary experience and capabilities required for the project. CRA's
I I
project management team will consist of Rick Shepherd; Steve Quigley;
, I
Wolfe Engler; Gerry Kestle; Ian McRae; Mike Mateyk; Dave Dempsey and
! I
\ Ron Campbell. Brief descrip:tions of all personnel roles and qualifications are
' ' 1 listed below, and curricula vitae are included in Appendix A. Figure 4.1
' I
; presents an organizational chart for the project team and assigned personnel.
, I
I
Subcontr~ctors will be selected to perform specific tasks
: ! :during pre-design and remedial design phases. Predesign phases will include:
. I
. ' ,a geophysical survey, analytical testing; monitoring well installations; and
I !
{reatability testing of the SVE; and aeration treatment systems.
I I;
CRA has s,ubcontracted ENSECO-Air Toxics and
ENSECO-Rocky Mountain Ajalytical to perform all analytical testing. : I
The RA p~rtion of the work is to be undertaken by
' qualified contractors selected in a prequalified bidding process. The remedial . I
action will be administered an1d monitored by the Supervising Contractor and
' '
~pproved by USEP A.
20
r.oi,•,=.s,OG/\·HOI/E!~S L AS50CIATcS
-- --I!!!!! -·Ciill iiii1i -- - -·-- - - --..
CRA
3669-09/10/91-DEW
1faiixv~~~~~¥X 1 i!l;m=mt!
:::::>:: rr:;:: ..
ji~!!~~~;~~~!i
_,::·::-:-:-:-:,:;.:::::.:; .... : .......... : ..
;l£iig~t::
··:· ··.:::.::·_:.>: .. :·:···:;;:·:.:: ~::i~;;?;;;;;;~:❖: •••• ·: ••••••••••
figure 4.1
Project Team
Remedial Design/Remedial Action
Jadcr>-Hughes Site
Gaston County, NC
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4.1.1 CRA's Project Team
' CRA has I assembled a project team consisting of both
professional and technical staff to perform the RD actions at the Site.
· Members of the project team' have the necessary experience and qualifications
'
to successfully complete the 1esign and construction of the remedy. Key
members of the project team:have worked together effectively on various RI
and FS projects throughout the United States.
The proposed project team consists of CRA personnel
based at CRA offices in Minneapolis, Minnesota and Waterloo, Ontario. Field
personnel would be qualified ~echnical support staff based at CRA offices in
Chicago, Illinois or Minneapolis, Minnesota. Further back up staff are
I
available from CRA's Niagara, Falls, New York office.
Project teain members identified for the RD/RA include
the following:
R. Shepherd -Principal-In-Cha_rge
-provides overall corporate project management
-ensures professional services provided by CRA are cost effective and of
highest quality
-ensures all resources of CRA are available on an as-required basis
-managerial and technical gtiidance to CRA's Project Coordinator
' ' -final review of CRA submitt,als prior to issue
21
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
S. Quigley -Project Coordinator
I
-supervisor of engineering project team members during the development
of Work Plans, Contract Documents and Specifications and reports to State
and Federal Agencies
-technical manager of RA field activities
I
-administrator of project ~osts and schedule
-coordination of CRA's te!=hnical group
W. Engler -RA Technical Advisor
-provides technical assistance to CRA's project coordinator during
preparation for RA field activities
G. Kestle -RD Technical Advisor
-provides technical review of project designs and specifications
-supervises project design staff
I. McRae -Contract Administrator
-development of Bid Docurients
-provides assistance to project design staff in the preparation of project
specifications
' -coordination of competitive bidding
-administration of contracts (bonds, insurance, payment certificates,
contract addenda, change orders)
22
I
I
'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
M. Mateyk -Hydrogeologic Technical Advisor
! I
-development of hydroge
1
ologic components associated with preparation of
the RD Work Plan and RD documents
I
-provides hydrogeologic expertise support function for reporting to State
I
and Federal Agencies
D. Dempsey -Analytical Chemistry Technical Advisor
!
-provides technical assistance to Quality Assurance/Quality Control
(QA/QC) personnel durihg preparation of the RD Work Plan
I ' -provides analytical expertise support function for reporting to State and
I
Federal Agencies
Ron Campbell -Project Industrial Hygienist
-provides technical assistance to CRA's Project Coordinator for
development and implementation of the health and safety program
components of the RD/RA Work Plan
'
1 -reviews Contractor(s') health and safety plans
Field Engineer
!-provides Site supervision of construction of each of the remedial
components
-administrator of project costs & schedule
In addition to these key personnel, the Project Team will
be supported by qualified professional, technical, clerical and administrative
staff throughout the duration of the project.
23
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
0
5.0 RD/RA PROTECT PLANS
A brief description of the various project plans necessary
for implementing the RD/RA is provided below. These plans are considered
working documents, structured to accommodate changes during the course of
the RD/RA implementation. If substantive modifications to the approved
, plans are proposed by the Committee, the modifications will be forwarded to
. USEP A for review and comment prior to commencing any of the work
· outlined. A summary of plans and reports required for subsequent submittals
is included in Section 7.0 of this report.
5.1 HEAL TH AND SAFETY PLAN
The RD Health and Safety Plan (RD HASP) (Submittal A)
was prepared to protect personnel from potential hazards which may be
present at the Site as a result of activities conducted during the RD phase of
the project. RD investigative activities (Section 6.1) which require a Health
and Safety Plan (i.e. SVE and aeration treatability studies and monitoring well
installations and sampling) are addressed in the RD HASP. The plan
'
provides guidance to field personnel as to the potential hazardous materials
which may be encountered; specifies the personal protective equipment and
levels of protection (clothing, respirators, etc.) necessary for completing
various activities at the Site; air emissions monitoring to be performed;
action levels at which the level of protection must be upgraded; and
decontamination procedures. The plan also identifies the available local
emergency response groups to be contacted should the need arise.
24
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5.2 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
A Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) (Submittal B) was
prepared to ensure that sample collection and analytical activities are
conducted in accordance with technically acceptable protocols and that the
data generated will meet the Data Quality Objectives (DQOs) established in the
Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). In general, the plan contains
protocols and requirements for the type and frequency of soil, water and
air/vapor samples to be collected during the RD. The SAP also includes
procedures and methods for monitoring well construction and a geophysical
survey. The SAP consists of a Field Sampling and Analysis Plan (FSAP) and a
, QAPP. In order to address monitoring requirements for the SVE and aeration
treatability studies, the SAP includes provisions for the collection of samples
relevant to those studies.
.5.3 TREATABILITY STUDY WORK PLAN
A Treatability Study Work Plan (Submittal C) was
prepared to ensure that the selected remedy (SVE and aeration treatment) will
be designed consistent with the treatment requirements outlined in the ROD.
:The Plan describes the remedial technology to be tested as well as the
following: test objectives, experimental procedures, treatability conditions,
measurements of performance, analytical methods, data management, health
and safety, residual waste management, and DQOs. Since pilot testing is
25
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
performed, the Plan will also outline the pilot scale installation, operation
and maintenance procedures and any permitting requirements.
A schedule of completing specific tasks including the
procurement of contractors, sample collection and analysis, performance and
report preparation will be included in the Treatability Study Work Plan.
26
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
6.0 . PREDESIGN/REMEDIAL ACTIVITIES
RD is divided into two phases; predesign and design. The
predesign activities must be completed before the design for some remedy
components can be undertaken.
6.1 PREDESIGN ACTIVITIES
As part of the design of the SVE system and groundwater
extraction and treatment system, pre-design activities must be carried out.
Submittal C is a pre-design Work Plan for the SVE and groundwater aeration
treatability studies.
The pre-design Work Plan contains a description of each
component of the pre-design investigation and specific guidelines, procedures
and implementation schedules for conducting pre-design activities.
The pre-design investigation will consist of the following
components which are more fully discussed in the SAP or the Treatability
Study Work Plan:
1) a geophysical survey in the northern portion of the Site (included in
SAP);
2) analyses of one round of groundwater samples from existing
monitoring wells (included in the SAP);
3) construction of monitoring wells (included in SAP);
27
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
n
I
4) analyses of one round of groundwater samples from the new
monitoring wells (included in the SAP);
5) an SVE treatability study (included in the Treatability Study Work
Plan);
6) an aeration treatability study (included in the Treatability Study Work
Plan); and
7) analyses of up to three samples from residential wells downgradient of
the Site if requested by USEPA and if access is granted to collect the
samples.
Supporting documents required before commencing the
pre-design investigation have been prepared and are submitted as
attachments to this Work Plan. These include the RD Health and Safety Plan
which is attached as Submittal A and the Sampling and Analysis Plan which
is attached as Submittal B. A QAPP is included as part of the Sampling and
Analysis Plan.
The results of the pre-design investigations will be
reported in technical memoranda as discussed in Section 7.0.
6.2 REMEDIAL DESIGN ACTIVffiES
6.2.1 General
Remedial design activities generally consist of preparing
engineering drawings, specifications and supporting calculations for the
28
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
u
u
I
I
I
I
I
I
various components of the remedial construction. The design of each
component must also reflect the requirements imposed by permit approvals.
This is sometimes an iterative process where a preliminary design is
developed and reviewed by the permitting authority before permit approval
requirements which affect the final design can be incorporated.
'
1
6.2.2 Plan to Satisfy Permitting Requirements
During the initial design phases, each component of the
remedy will be evaluated to determine which permit programs are
potentially applicable. This will include discussion with local, State and
Federal agencies. At this time, it is envisioned that the major permit
programs to be considered are related to discharge of pretreated water to the
Belmont POTW, and air emissions from the groundwater treatment system
and the SVE system. Other permit programs that need to be considered
'
would be related to construction of monitoring wells, sewers and structures.
The design requirements that are imposed by the respective permit program
will then be incorporated into the later design phases.
Permits which are required to complete the RD are
limited to permits from the State for the construction of monitoring wells.
These permits are being sought from the State Department of Natural
Resources.
29
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
u
I
I
I
I
I
6.2.3 Design Process
The remedial design process for each major component of
the remedial action is described in this section.
SVE System
SVE is a vacuum extraction process which enhances the
volatilization of VOCs by the application of a subsurface vacuum. The
subsurface negative pressure gradient induces the migration of vaporized
VOCs toward specially designed vacuum extraction trenches, and drives them
to the surface for recovery and treatment. The vacuum extraction process
removes the contaminants from the unsaturated zone before they enter the
groundwater, and also can assist in reducing contaminant concentrations in
groundwater.
The design of the SVE system will be based on results
achieved in the pre-design investigation (treatability study) and data from the
RI. The scope of the treatability study is discussed below.
The objectives of the treatability study will be to:
• determine the radius of influence and flow characteristics of soil vapor to
the vacuum trench(es) at the Site;
• quantify removal rates of voes and BNAs from Site soils;
• determine voe and BNA concentrations in the extracted gas; and
• estimate the in-situ permeability of the former landfill soils.
30
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
u
D
I
I
The treatability study of the SVE system is based on data
from the RI. The data includes; the vertical and areal distribution of VOCs in
the former landfill soil; water permeability in soils; moisture content; and
organic carbon content.
The treatability study will include construction of a capped
trench and collection system. The treatability study will develop data which
will meet the objectives described above. The collected data, along with RI
data, will be used to design a full-scale SVE system.
The SVE treatability study will also develop profiles of the
concentration of extracted vapors in the off-gas. These estimates will be used
to design the treatment system for the gas which may be based on activated
carbon. These results will be reported in the Treatability Study Report.
Soil Flushin~
In situ soil flushing involves increasing the infiltration of
water through contaminated soils to accelerate the natural removal of
~ontaminants in the unsaturated zone. Water will be introduced and charged
into the soil through a leaching bed which would be comprised of the
decommissioned SVE system. The contaminants in the soil partition
(i.e. migrate from the soil) to the infiltrating water. The resultant
I
contaminated water will be collected and treated.
31
r,o;,:;sTOGA-ROVERS 11 ASSOCIATES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
a
i u
u
I
I
I
I
The soil flushing system will be operated in conjunction
with the groundwater extraction and treatment system. The soil flushing
system will be constructed only when it is demonstrated that the SVE system
can no longer effectively treat VOCs located in soils in the former landfill.
The soil flushing system will be designed as an integral part of the SVE
system to be implemented following completion of soil SVE treatment.
Since the soil flushing system will be constructed after
• operation of the SVE system is terminated, the final design of the soil
flushing system will not be completed in the RD. Technical memoranda and
reports will be submitted to USEP A concerning the final design of the soil
flushing system during the preliminary stages of the RA as appropriate.
Groundwater Extraction System
A conceptual design detailing extraction well and
subsurface collection drain location(s), intended pumping rates, and zone of
capture was completed for use in the FS. Appendix D of the FS presents this
conceptual design. A pump test was completed on well PW-1 (Figure 1.3)
during the RI to confirm the pumping rate and zone of capture of extraction
wells at the Site. This information, along with an analysis of the areal and
vertical extent of groundwater contamination requiring remediation as
confirmed by RD groundwater sampling and analyses, will then be used to
confirm the number, location, pumping rates and construction details of the
wells in the full scale groundwater extraction system. This will be completed
using standard hydrogeologic principles.
32
r.a;,,~t.TOG,'.-ROVERS IA ASSOCIATES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
I
a
D
•
I
I
I
I
On-Site Groundwater Treatment System
The proposed method of pretreating groundwater prior to
, discharge of the treated water for supplementary treatment at the Belmont
; POTW consists of aeration of the collected groundwater. Air is brought into
intimate contact with the extracted groundwater thereby transferring VOCs
· and some BNAs from water to the vapor phase.
The groundwater treatment system will consist of an
aeration and an equalization tank. The air vented from the aeration tank will
1be treated by carbon adsorption prior to atmospheric discharge. The effluent
I
'
1from the treatment system will be pumped to the nearest City of Belmont
I
'sanitary sewer system manhole.
The pre-design investigation will consist of a bench scale
aeration treatability study. The aeration treatability study will consist of the
following components:
• collection and analysis of an on-Site groundwater sample from extraction
well MW-2D and/or PW-1;
• design of a bench scale aeration system;
• experimentation of the bench scale aeration system to determine
1 treatment effectiveness using different air flow rates with a constant
groundwater flowrate;
• analyses of treated groundwater; and
• mass balances to determine VOC loading on the vapor phase treatment
1 system.
33
;~O"!ESTOG•·.-:'lOVE;:tS 11 .ll.SSOCIATES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
a
D
I
I
I
I
I
The full-scale aeration system will be designed using the
data derived from the aeration treatability study, groundwater contamination
profiles, and the developing design of the groundwater extraction system.
· The treatment system will be designed to comply with the City of Belmont's
pretreatment requirements.
Culvert Replacement/Surface Water Diversion
The reconstruction of the culvert and design and
construction of a Site spillway will not require any special pre-design efforts.
The preliminary design of these features was completed during the FS. The
developed design will consider factors such as storm water management and
grading of surface contours.
Monitoring
Monitoring will be performed during the treatability
studies. The scope of this monitoring is described in the Treatability Study
Work Plan (Submittal C). Monitoring will assess the performance in the
SVE, and aeration treatability studies. Soil gas sampling and analyses will be
conducted to confirm the effectiveness of the SVE system.
One groundwater monitoring round will also be
conducted to confirm RI groundwater analytical data and to provide
additional data for the design of the groundwater extraction and treatment
system.
34
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
g
D
I
I
I
These monitoring/sampling plans are described in the
Sampling and Analysis Plan (Submittal B).
6.2.4 Desiw Submittals
Design submittals will be made at four stages of
development for each remedial component (i.e. SVE system, culvert
replacement/spillway construction, groundwater extraction and treatment
system). The four stages are 30% (preliminary), 60% (intermediate),
90% (pre-final) and 100% (final). It is expected that the submittals at each stage
will be as outlined below:
30% Design (Preliminary)
The 30% initial design submittal for each component will
include preliminary plans and specifications showing the basic detail of each
component. This will include plans showing information such as the limit
and volume of the former landfill, extraction well and subsurface drain
location(s); SVE system layout; groundwater treatment system location;
location of Site spillways; and the location of the culvert. Preliminary
specifications will include conceptual design of: the SVE system;
groundwater extraction and treatment system; extraction well pumping rates;
culvert replacement; and Site spillway.
35
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
m
I
At 30% design level for each component, an assessment of
permitting requirements will be made. Section 6.2.2 details permits and
associated requirements to be submitted.
Included in the 30% submittal will be a report presenting
· an evaluation of the treatability studies for the SVE system and the
groundwater aeration treatment system. The report(s) will present the results
1
of the treatability studies as follows: the design and methodology used in the
treatability studies; the predicted level of treatment; full scale design;
i , implementation factors; and an estimated capital cost for the full-scale design.
Documentation/memoranda will be submitted at the 30%
design stage which will present the results of additional data acquisition
I .
activities. Data gathered during the pre-design phase will be compiled,
!summarized and submitted along with an analyses of the impact of the
results on the design activities. Results of the geophysical survey and an
evaluation of the utility requirements for the full scale treatment system will
be presented.
A design criteria report supporting technical aspects of the
remedial design will be submitted at the 30% design stage. This report will
detail preliminary design assumptions and parameters including:
contamination profiles for the former landfill and groundwater;
2) remediation goals for on-Site soils and groundwater;
3) former landfill volume and volume of groundwater to be treated;
36
,:nll!'.cS"iOG!',·!lOIJERS 11 /~SSOCIATES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
m
u
D
I
m
I
I
I
4) conceptual design of the SVE system and groundwater extraction and
treatment system;
5) influent/effluent rates with respect to the SVE system and
groundwater treatment system;
6) equipment/materials to be used in the SVE and groundwater
extraction and treatment systems, and culvert reconstruction and Site
spillway construction; and
7) an assessment of methods to provide system monitoring to ensure that
remediation goals are being met.
60% Design (Intermediate)
The 60% design submittal for each component will
incorporate the information from the initial design, as previously discussed,
'
and will also provide further detail in the design.
For the SVE component, the 60% design submittal would
include the following drafts:
1) preliminary plans and specifications from the 30% design;
2) plan showing SVE system details;
3) plan showing cap details (if required);
4) detailed specifications for SVE system construction;
5) specifications for cap construction (if required); and
6) generic operations and maintenance (O&M) Plan.
37
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
u
0
I
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
For the groundwater extraction and treatment system
component, the 60% design submittal would include:
1) preliminary plans and specifications from the 30% design;
2) plan showing piping values and controls;
3) plan showing groundwater treatment system construction details;
4) plan showing treated groundwater discharge system;
5) detailed specifications for construction of extraction wells, piping,
treatment system; and
6) a generic O&M Plan.
For the culvert replacement and Site spillway component,
the 60% design submittal would include:
1) preliminary plans and specifications from the 30% design;
2) plan showing cross-section and elevations of the Site spillway; and
3) detailed specifications and construction methods for relining the
culvert and constructing the Site spillway.
Included in the 60% design submitted will be a draft
construction and implementation schedule for implementation of the RA.
The schedule will identify timing for initiation and completion of all critical
RA tasks. Specific construction startup and completion dates will be
identified for the following RA tasks:
• SVE system;
• groundwater extraction and treatment system; and
38
r~ :J,·' ,ci'IO::" f.-;'101!EHS C. ASSOCIATES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'• culvert replacement and Site spillway construction.
90% Design (Pre-Final}
The 90% design submittals for each component will
,include plans, specifications and details from the 60% design submittal
.incorporating preliminary comments from USEPA. Design calculations will
also be submitted.
A construction cost estimate will also be submitted which
will be accurate to within +15% to -10% for all components of the RD/RA.
The O&M plans will be developed to ensure the safe and
effective operation of the respective component. The elements of the O&M
plan will include discussion of the following items at minimum:
1) start up phase;
,2) normal operation and maintenance;
3) potential operating problems;
4) routine monitoring and testing;
5) operation and maintenance; and
6) long term monitoring and maintenance.
The generic operations and maintenance plans developed
during the remedial design will be updated with specific data supplied by
vendors for various components of the remedy when the remedial
construction is completed.
39
CONESTOGA-ROVERS & ASSOCIATES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
I
I
100% (Final) Desiim
The 100% design submittals will include finalized plans,
details and specifications addressing final comments from USEP A.
40
C'Oi''.ES·rocr·, ROVERS 8 ASSOCIATES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
7.0 REPORTS AND DOCUMENTATION
'7.1 EPA MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORTS
Monthly progress reports will be provided to USEPA, by
the fifth of each month, as required by the 106 Order and will include the
following major items:
1) description of actions taken toward achieving compliance with the
106 Order and RD and RA Work Plans;
2) description of work scheduled for next month; and
3) a project schedule update.
7.2 DATA MANAGEMENT PLAN
The Data Management Plan (DMP) presented in
Appendix B identifies procedures to be employed for managing all
iinformation, reports and correspondence (documents) associated with
,RD/RA program to be conducted at the Site.
7.3 PRE-DESIGN SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
The supporting documents for the pre-design
investigation includes:
41
r,Qr,!2.STOG/l,•!'lOVEAS Ii, 1'.SSOC!ATES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1) Health and Safety Plan (Submittal A);
2) Sampling and Analysis Plan (Submittal B); and
3) SVE and Aeration Treatability Study Work Plan (Submittal C).
7.4 PRE-DESIGN TECHNICAL MEMORANDA
The results of the pre-design investigation for various
items of work will be provided in a series of technical memoranda which are
described in Table 7.1.
7.5 DESIGN REPORTS
Design reports will be submitted to USEP A for review at
four stages of their development for the remedial components as noted in
Section 6.2.3.
7.6 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
A construction schedule will be issued with 60% and 90%
submittals which will detail construction and implementation timing with
regard to all aspects of the RA.
42
r:;Q,,'i:SYOG'l-'.-F.Ol!Ef-1S 8 .'~SSOCIATES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE7.1
SUMMARY OF PREDESIGN
TECHNICAL MEMORANDA
JADCO-HUGHES REMEDIAL DESIGN
· Technical Memorandum Title
SVE Technical Memorandum
Aeration Technical Memorandum
'
Additional Data Acquisition
Technical Memorandum
Design Criteria Technical Memorandum
I
Contents/Purpose
-presentation and evaluation
results of SVE treatability
study
-presentation of and
evaluation results of
aeration treatability study
-presentation of
results of geophysical survey
-data relative to SVE and
aeration treatability studies
-utility requirements and
acquisition for SVE and
groundwater
extraction/ treatment systems
-presentation of technical
aspects of remedial design
CONESTOGA·FiOVEflS A ASSOCIATES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
D
D
I
I
I
I
7.7 LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AND
MONITORING AND TESTING REPORTS
Long term operation and maintenance and monitoring
and testing reports will be completed on a periodic basis (to be specified in the
Operation and Maintenance Plan) and will detail operation and maintenance
activities and monitoring and testing results. These reports will also include
assessments of the progress towards meeting remedial objectives.
43
I
~·2,-:i'$T.JG:.-,:01.'tilS u ASSOCIATES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
8.0 COMMUNITY RELATIONS SUPPORT
The Committee is committed to supporting USEPA's
community relations program for the RD/RA to be conducted at the
Jadco-Hughes Site, and recommends that USEPA hold public meetings
approximately once every six months until the remedy is implemented and
operational.
As USEP A has assumed the lead position on all
community relations activities, the Committee will provide technical support
to USEPA at all public meetings. The Committee will provide assistance to
USEPA through its Project Coordinator. Assistance will include the
provision of information to be used in community relations efforts and
technical representation at public meetings and information sessions by
personnel familiar with the RD/RA activities to be conducted. ·
USEPA will have overall authority for coordinating
community relations activities and ensuring that the public is kept informed
'
a11d has the opportunity to review information and comment during the
progress of the RD/RA. The community relations activities to be conducted
by USEP A will:
1) familiarize area residents with the RD/RA process;
2) keep area residents and other interested parties informed of the
RD/RA activities to be conducted, especially with regard the on-Site
activities;
3) provide a mechanism for input to the RD/RA;
44
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
a
0
D
I
m
I
I
I
4)
5)
provide a channel of communication for responding to Site specific
contamination issues; and
ensure that all regulatory requirements concerning community
relations are met.
45
c.,1,,;e,;y:JC.1.\·RO\IERS w ASSOCIATES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
m
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
9.0 SCHEDULE
Figure 9.1 presents a preliminary schedule for the RD.
The schedule identifies timing for submission of design submittals, RA Work
Plan and associated submittals and the results of treatability studies. The
summary of major deliverables for all associated tasks are presented in
Table9.1.
A schedule of construction activities and anticipated SVE
system and groundwater extraction and treatment system startup and
operation will be included with the 60% and 90% design submittals
respectively. The construction schedule will also identify activities associated
with the culvert reconstruction and Site spillway construction. This schedule
will address major construction milestones; inspection activities; sampling to
be performed prior to system startup (if required); and SVE and groundwater
extraction and treatment operation activities. Routine sampling for O&M
purposes to be performed during the SVE and the groundwater extraction and
treatment system operation will be scheduled according to the O&M plan.
Scheduling of field activities are subject to contractor
availability and weather considerations and may be modified as approved by
USEPA and the State as the project develops.
46
-- - - -- --1!!119 ;;;;a - -.. -
A11pU,l"I
ACTIVITY DURATION ldavsl
45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360 405 450 495 540 585
1 U5EPA APPROVAL OF -~ SUPERVISING CONTRACTOR 8 :
2 SCOPING ~:
3 RD WORK PLAN ""
USEPA REVIEW '"
4 PRELIMINARY DESIGN '"'
U5EPA REVIEW '"
5 INTERMEDIATE DESIGN 90d:
USEPA REVIEW "'
..
6 PREFINAL DESIGN
USEPA REVIEW :
:
7 FINAL REMEDIAL DESIGN ---:
8 REMEDIAL ACTION WORK PLAN : \aJd~l) :
. : USEPA REVIEW
9 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN 90i,n,
USEPA REVIEW .. ~=
JO REMEDIATION GOAL 18Cld~I :
VERIFICATION PLAN ....
USEPA REVIEW :
JI TREAT ABILITY STUDY
SAMPLING & ANALYSIS REPORT
USEPA REVIEW "''
RD Work Plan indudes: L~G~l:ll! RA Work Plan includes: figure 9.1
Sampling 6: Analysis, Health&: Safety and -Duration of Activity Construction Manag~ent, Construction Treatability Study Plans. Quality Assurance, and Construdion Health RD/RA SCHEDULE 0) Coincident deadline provided ill the SOW. * Event and Safety/ Contingency Plans. JADCO-HUGH£5 SITE
CRA I Approved August 15, 1991 GASTON COUNTY, NC
3669-09/10,'JI DEW .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
m
D
u
D
I
I
I
I
I
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
(a)
TABLE9.1
SUMMARY OF MAJOR DELIVERABLES
JADCO-HUGHES RD/RA
Deliverables Submittal Date to USEPA
Scoping September 4, 1991
RD Work Plan September 30, 1991
Preliminary Design (30%) (a) April 6, 1992
Intermediate Design (60%) August 19, 1992
Prefinal Design (90%) January 1, 1993
I
Final Design (100%) April 1, 1993
RA Work Plan August 19, 1992
O&MPlan January 1, 1993
~emediation Goal
Verification Plan August 19, 1992
'Freatability Study Report is submitted as an attachment to the Preliminary
Design Report.
I
These schedule dates are contingent upon USEPA review and approval
within the schedule limits shown in Figure 9.1.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
a
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
10.0 · REFERENCES
1. "Remedial Investigation Report, Jadco-Hughes Site, Gaston County,
North Carolina", CRA, July 1990.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
"Feasibility Study Report, Jadco-Hughes Site, Gaston County,
North Carolina", CRA, July 1990.
"Superfund Risk Assessment Report, Jadco-Hughes Site,
Gaston County, North Carolina", CRA, February 1990.
"Construction Report Interim Removal Measures, Jadco-Hughes Site,
Gaston County, North Carolina", CRA, January 1991.
"National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan;
Final Rule", Federal Register 40CFR Part 300, March 8, 1990.
"Guidance for Conducting Remedial Investigations and Feasibility
Studies under CERCLA, Interim Final", USEP A, Office of Emergency
and Remedial Response, OSWER, May 1989.
"Water Engineering Research Laboratory Treatability Database",
USEPA, 1989.
"Guidance for Conducting Treatability Studies under CERCLA: Soil
Vapor Extraction, Revised Final Draft", USEPA, Office of Research and
Development and Office of Emergency and Remedial Response,
March 1, 1991.
47
I
I
I
I
I
I
g
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
:1
I
APPENDIX A
CURRICULA VITAE -KEY PROJECT PERSONNEL
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RICHARD G. SHEPHERD, B.A,Sc., P. Eng,
EDUCATION:
B.A.Sc. University of Waterloo 1975
Numerous continuing education courses and seminars in hydrogeology, waste
management, construction management and health & safety: 1980 to present.
EMPLOYMENT:
1983-
Present
1981-
1983
1979-81
1976-79
1975-76
1974-75
1974-75
1973
1971-72
1968-71
Principal
Conestoga-Rovers & Associates Limited
Associate
Conestoga-Rovers & Associates Limited
Senior Engineer
Conestoga-Rovers & Associates
Engineering Services Manager
Malawi/Canada Railway Project
Project Engineer, Steed and Evans Co. Ltd., Kitchener
Project Supervisor, Steed and Evans Co. Ltd., Kitchener
University of Waterloo, Department of Civil Engineering
Construction Layout Supervisor,
Steed and Evans Co. Ltd., Kitchener
Design Technician, City of Brantford Engineering Department
Survey party chief, J.D. Lee Engineering
Limited, Kingston and Brantford
PROFESSI0NAL AFFILIATIONS:
Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario
Canadian Society of Civil Engineers
I
I
I
I
I
I
n
I
I
I
I
I
I
·1
I
I
I
I
I
Richard G. Shepherd
PROFILE OF PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES:
• Corporate responsibility for all construction and project management of
remedial construction related to remedial action implementation.
• Corporate responsibility for Health and Safety.
• Senior Engineering Supervisor /Project Manager for in excess of 200
environmental remedial projects. Areas of experience with selected example
projects are:
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Studies
-Yellow Water Road Site, Baldwin Florida (NPL Site)
-Love Springs Site, Cherokee County, South Carolina (State Listed Site)
-Carolawn Site, Chester County, South Carolina (NPL Site)
-Mallory Capacitor Site, Waynesboro, Tennessee (NPL Site)
-North Hollywood Dump, Memphis Tennessee (NPL Site)
-Jadco-Hughes Site, North Carolina (NPL Site)
-FMC South Site, Fridley, Minnesota (NPL Site)
-Universal Manufacturing, Bridgeport, Connecticut (State Listed Site)
-FMC Plant Site, Middleport, N.Y. (State Listed Site)
-Mallory Site, Glasgow, Kentucky
Design and Project Management of Remedial Construction
-Chem-Dyne Site, Hamilton, Ohio (NPL Site)
-Yellow Water Road Site, Baldwin, Florida (NPL Site)
-Ellis Road Site, Jacksonville, Florida
-North Hollywood Dump, Memphis, Tennessee (NPL Site)
-Hardeman County Landfill, Tennessee (NPL Site)
-LaBounty Landfill Site, Charles City, Iowa (NPL Site)
-FMC South Site, Fridley, Minnesota (NPL Site)
-Michigan Chemical (Velsicol) Site, St. Louis, Michigan (NPL Site)
-FMC Plant Site, Middleport, New York (State Listed Site)
I
I
I
I
I
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Richard G. Shepherd
-Mallory Site, Crawfordsville, Indiana (State Listed Site)
-Decontamination of four capacitor plants, Kentucky, Tennessee and Indiana
-Universal Manufacturing Sites, Totawa; New Jersey and Bridgeport,
Connecticut (State Listed Sites)
-Love Canal, Niagara Falls, New York (NPL Site)
-Plant demolition and cleanup, Racine, Wisconsin (J.I. Case)
-Manville Waukegan Site, Waukegan, Illinois (NPL Site)
-Cleanup and demolition of manufacturing plant, Manville, New Jersey (State
Site)
-Velsicol Chemical Corporation Site, Marshall, Illinois (NPL Site)
Acquisition/Sale of Industrial/Commercial Facilities
-Site assessment, design of remedial measures, management of remedial
construction for the sale of over 80 surplus properties and five manufacturing
facilities (J.I. Case Co)
-Assessment and investigation of a 76 retail gasoline facility chain,
recommendation of remedial actions, preparation of remedial cost estimates
(Florida, Georgia)
-Assessment and investigation of nine bottling facilities in Louisiana,
Arkansas and Texas, recommendation of remedial actions, preparation of
remedial cost estimates (Coca-Cola)
-Assessment and investigation of retail/wholesale gasoline chain,
recommendation of remedial actions, preparation of remedial cost estimates
(City Corp.)
-Assessment and investigation of 8,000-acre manufacturing and mining
complex, development of remedial alternatives, preparation of remedial cost
estimates (Tennessee)
Special Court Master
-Appointed Special Court Master to the Federal District Court, Northern
District, Illinois. Responsible for the design and management of remedial
activities including the decommissioning, demolition and cleanup of a 270
acre oil refinery in East Chicago, Indiana.
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
I
E
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Technical Negotiator for Consent Order/ Agreements
or Selected Remedy Settlements
Richard G. Shepherd
-Michigan Chemical Site, St. Louis Michigan (USEP A, MDNR)
-FMC Fridley Site, Fridley, Minnesota (USEP A, MPCA)
-North Hollywood Dump, Memphis, Tennessee (USEPA, TDHE)
-Two manufacturing sites (IBM), New York (NYDEC)
-Several Remedial Actions, Middleport, New York (NYDEC)
-Mallory Site, Crawfordsville, Indiana (USEP A, IDEM)
-Chem-Dyne Site, Hamilton, Ohio (USEP A, OEP A)
-Summit National Site, Deerfield County, Ohio (USEPA, OEPA)
-Miami County Incinerator Site, Troy, Ohio (USEPA, OEPA)
-Mallory Site, Waynesboro, Tennessee (USEPA,TDHE)
Expert Testimony
-Litigation involving PCB and volatile organic contamination of building, soil
and groundwater in Waynesboro, Tennessee. Testimony focussed on
appropriate level of cleanup, construction methods to be used for cleanup,
cost of cleanup.
-Litigation involving excavation and disposal of drummed wastes and
cont,aminated soils, Picillio Site, Rhode Island. Testimony focussed on
appropriateness of remedial construction techniques employed by State,
appropriateness of costs incurred by State.
-Deposition testimony provided for seven additional cases, settlements
reached prior to trial.
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
D
I
I
I
I
I
••
I
I
I
I
I
STEPHEN M, QUIGLEY, P. ENG,
EDUCATION: ·
1979-'84 B. Tech. (Chemical Engineering), Ryerson Polytechnical Institute
EMPLOYMENT:
1989-
Present
1988-89
1987-88
1984-87
1984
Engineer,
Conestoga-Rovers & Associates
Project Engineer,
Canada Packers Specialty Chemical Group
Production Foreman,
Canada Packers Specialty Chemicals Group
Health, Safety and Environmental Supervisor,
Canada Packers Chemicals Division
Quality Control Technician
Canada Packers Chemicals Division
AFFILIATIONS:
Member -Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario.
PROFILE OF PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES:
• Environmental Engineer responsible for one or more of the following: site
investigation, site characterization, feasibility studies, litigation/hearings
support, remedial design and contract document and specifications for the
following projects/ clients:
-Remedial Investigation (RI) and Feasibility Study (FS) including coordination
of field work, database management, laboratory service coordination,
preparation of Treatability Study Work Plan and completion of RI and FS
reports for a former solvent recycling/disposal facility, Jadco-Hughes NPL
Site, Belmont, North Carolina (Generator Group), 1989 -ongoing.
I
I
I
I
I
I
g
I
I
I
I
I
I
••
I
I
·1 \.
I
I
I
Stephen M. Quigley
-Remedial Action, design of remedial measures for a drummed inventory of
wood treating solution recovered from underground storage tanks, including
the development of work plans and contract documents and construction
supervision, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida (PRP), 1989 -ongoing.
-Feasibility Study, development and evaluation of remedial alternatives for a
former hazardous waste landfill including the preparation and oversight of a
TO-1/T0-2 air monitoring program, and critique of the EPA Risk Assessment,
Hassayampa Landfill NPL Site, Maricopa County, Arizona, 1989 -ongoing.
-Technical overview of groundwater remedial action plan and technical
review of 30% Remedial Design for a VOC contaminated aquifer, Indian Bend
Wash Operable Unit Feasibility Study and Record of Decision, Scottsdale,
Arizona, (PRP Group), 1989-ongoing.
-Litigation support including preparation of a critique of a contractor's RI/FS, a
conceptual closure design and reports on state-of-the-art of landfill practise,
19th Avenue Landfill Superfund Site, Maricopa County, Arizona,
1990-ongoing.
-Litigation support for suit related to the potential contamination of a food
product including plant assessment, collection of environmental samples and
data assessment (location confidential) 1990-ongoing.
-Critique of plaintiff's release estimates, air dispersion modeling and litigation
support related to U.S. Department of Energy Facility (PRP), 1989-ongoing.
-Technical coordination of intervenor group, environmental assessment
hearings related to 25 year demand/supply plan, Ontario Hydro,
1991-ongoing .
-Feasibility Study -buried waste, groundwater remediation project
coordination and technical support for Environmental Appeal Board
hearings for a large chemical manufacturing facility, Elmira, Ontario 1990
ongoing.
-Site assessment and evaluation of remedial alternatives, former solvent
bulking and storage facility, Hartford, Connecticut 1989-ongoing.
Plant Assessment for discharges to municipal treatment plant including a
critique of municipal consultants sewage treatment plant design, data
assessment, plant operations assessment, design and construction of
pretreatment facilities, dairy plant, Ontario, 1990-ongoing.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Stephen M. Quigley
• Technical Specialist/Project Engineer for the following project areas:
-Development and implementation of environmental waste treatment and
general engineering projects
-Supervision and operation of a continuous batch process specialty chemical
plant
-Development and implementation of an Environmental Protection Plan and
spill response plan for Canadian chemical manufacturer
-Preparation of hazardous effluent discharge permits
-Project management of source monitoring for small scale 502 emission
generator
-Development and implementation of national training program for
dangerous goods transportation and Health, Safety and. Environmental
Protection
-Participation in Environmental Risk Assessments
-Co-development of corporate Health and Safety rating system for a Canadian
food company
-Development and implementation of Industrial hygiene surveys and
analyses
-Supervision of the development on asbestos removal training program
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
WOLFGANG (WOLFE> K. F. ENGLER. C.E.T.
EDUCATION:
Diploma Civil Technician, 1970, Cambrian College, Sudbury Campus
EXPERIENCE:
1980-
Present
1981-
Present
1976-81
1975-76
1975
1971-75
Associate
Conestoga-Rovers & Associates Limited
Resident Engineer
Conestoga-Rovers & Associates Limited
Manager, Kincardine Branch
Conestoga-Rovers & Associates
Manager -Kincardine Branch
Conestoga Engineering Limited
Proctor and Redfern Consulting Engineers
Dennis Consultants Limited
AFFILIATIONS:
Engineering Technologist -1986, Ontario Association of Certified Engineering
Technicians & Technologists
Senior Engineering Technician -1974, Ontario Association of Certified Engineering
Technicians & Technologists
Technical Affiliate -The Engineering Institute of Canada
Technical Affiliate -The Canadian Society for Civil Engineering
Member -American Society of Certified Engineering Technicians (ASCET)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wolfgang (Wolfe) K.F. Engler
COMMUNITY AFFILIATIONS:
Past-President -Kincardine Rotary Club
Member -Kincardine and District Chamber of Commerce
PROFILE OF PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES:
-Eight years experience in field investigations, design, contract administration and
field supervision of numerous environmentally oriented projects
-Quality Assurance Supervisor, Industrial Waste Treatment Plant Expansion,
IBM Corporation, Poughkeepsie, New York
-Site Monitoring Supervisor, drum and contaminated soil removal, Novak Farm
Site, Chenango County, New York
-Resident Engineer for drum sampling, staging and site securement, Gibbs Plating
Site, Charlotte, North Carolina
-Resident Engineer, drum and contaminated soil removal, Ardenwood Estates,
Staten Island, New York
-Field Supervisor for the disposal of oil refinery products, ECI, East Chicago,
Indiana
-Resident Engineer on numerous environmentally related projects, IBM
Corporation, Poughkeepsie, New York
-Resident Engineer, numerous tank closures, IBM Corporation, Poughkeepsie,
New York
-Resident Engineer, fuel tank replacements with double wall tanks, IBM
Corporation, Poughkeepsie, New York
-Resident Engineer, lagoon closure, IBM Corporation, Poughkeepsie, New York
-Resident Engineer and Safety Officer, Disposal of underground tank, Town of
New Hempstead, Long Island, New York
-Field Supervisor and technician for borehole sampling of contaminated soils
(chlorinated solvents, IBM Corporation, Poughkeepsie, New York
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
g
u
D
Wolfgang (Wolfe) K.F. Engler
-Resident Supervisor and Safety Officer for borehole sampling of contaminated
soils, and installation of monitoring wells, Chem-Dyne Site, Hamilton, Ohio
-Resident Engineer and Safety Officer; Cleanup and disposal of contaminated soils
(chlorinated solvents), IBM Corporation, Poughkeepsie, New York
-Resident Supervisor for test pit and borehole sampling of contaminated soils,
and construction of decontamination facilities, FMC -Northern Ordnance Plant,
Minneapolis, Minnesota
-Resident Engineer, cleanup and disposal of surficial drummed and tanked
hazardous wastes, P.A.S. Site, Oswego, New York
-Resident Supervisor in charge of site survey, drummed waste cleanup, and
hazardous waste inventory at the S.C.R & D Bluff Road Site, Columbia, South
Carolina
-Resident Supervisor and assistant project manager, securement of hazardous
waste landfill, Hardeman County, Tennessee
-Field technician responsible for securement and disposal of radioactive soils and
equipment, at Velsicol Plant Site, St. Louis, Michigan
-Field ,technician involved in preliminary and final design, securement of
hazardous waste, Velsicol Plant Site, St. Louis, Michigan
-Field technician involved in preliminary and final design of several toxic and
hazardous waste projects in the Niagara Falls, New York area
-Seven years experience in design and field supervision of municipal engineering
projects
-Experience in cost analysis for determining project feasibility
-Extensive exposure to the planning and approval process of varied forms of
development projects
-Preparation of recreation feasibility studies for municipalities in the Bruce
County area
-Resident inspector for the Bruce Agripark Joint Venture in the construction of a
combined one acre prototype greenhouse and hydroponic house utilizing waste
heat
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
a
D
D
I
I
I
I
Wolfgang (Wolfe) K.F. Engler
-Project Manager on several municipal and residential developments in the
Bruce County area. These projects have included the necessary planning and
engineering approval procedures
-Project Manager of a 750 lot subdivision in the Town of Kincardine
-Preliminary field pick-up and design of a 270 lot subdivision in the City of
Sudbury
-Inspector for a Ministry of Transportation and Communications urban road .
reconstruction project in the City of Sudbury (urban removal)
-Design, supervision and inspection of numerous park projects and school sites
in the Sudbury and surrounding areas
-Project supervision and inspector for a ski hill in Sudbury
employing lighting and snow making apparatus
-Site inspector for numerous subdivisions in the Sudbury and surrounding area
-Fifteen years experience in field surveying, drafting, minor design for municipal
engineering projects
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
••
I
I
I
I
I
MICHAEL G. MATEYK, B.Sc.
EDUCATION:
1973 B.Sc., Geological Sciences, Brock University
1977-78 Graduate Courses in Hydrogeology
University of Alberta
June 1982 Short Course -Contaminant Hydrogeology
University of Waterloo
EMPLOYMENT:
1990
1985-90
Present
1983-85
1977-83
1976-77
1974-76
1973-74
Associate
Senior Hydrogeologist
Conestoga-Rovers & Associates Limited
President and Senior Hydrogeologist
MLM Ground-Water Services Ltd.
Project Hydrogeologist and Principal
MLM Ground-Water Engineering
Project Hydrogeologist
EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd.
Hydrogeologist
James F. MacLaren Ltd .
H ydrogeologist
Water Quality Division
Ministry of the Environment, Ontario
AFFILIATIONS:
Association of Ground-Water Scientist and Engineers
International Association of Hydrogeologists
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
B
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Michael G. Mateyk
PROFILE OF PROFESSIONAL AcnvmES:
-Responsibility for the hydrogeologic component of Remedial Investigations at
hazardous waste sites in the United States
-Design and supervision of hydrogeologic evaluations at existing and former
waste disposal sites
-Evaluation of groundwater contamination due to exfiltration from sewage
lagoons, brine ponds and waste holding ponds
-Design and supervision of landfill site hydrogeologic investigations
-Preparation of hydrogeological constraints to maps to aid in the selection of new
landfill sites
-Assessment of the impacts of a proposed major river division on local
groundwater supplies
-Assessment of the effects of gravel extraction on the regional groundwater flow
system
-Assessment of open pit coal mining on the hydrologic budget of small water
sheds
-Regional groundwater evaluation which includes aquifer delineation and flow
system mapping
-Design and supervision of test drilling, aquifer testing and well construction
programs
-Design of well point and deep well dewatering systems for construction projects
and open pit mines
-Determination of groundwater inflow rates into a proposed underground mine
PUBLICATIONS:
A. Published Refeered Papers
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
u
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
B.
Michael G. Mateyk
-"Salt Water Pumping Controls Sea Water Intrusion", Water and Sewage
Works, June 1977 (with P.L. Hall)
Papers
-"Investigating Leakage from a Brine Pond", preprint for the Third
National Ground-water Quality Symposium", 1977 (with C.J.
MacGillvary)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
n
0
I
·1
I
I
I
I
I
GERRY KESTLE, M,A,Sc,, P, ENG,
EDUCATION:
B.A.Sc.
M.A.Sc.
University of Waterloo, Undergraduate Degree -Major -Mechanical
Engineering, 1970
University of Waterloo, Graduate Degree -Major -Management
Sciences, 1977
Completion of 20 workshops and seminars regarding subjects including
management, energy conservation, energy, environment, computer programming.
EMPLOYMENT:
1985-Conestoga-Rovers & Associates Limited
Present
1983-85
1980-83
1970-80
1968-70
1963-68
Manager of Engineering
J.M. Schneider, Inc.
Plant Engineer
J.M. Schneider, Inc.
Design Engineer
J.M. Schneider, Inc.
Student
J.M. Schneider, Inc.
Student Work Term
Bell Camp Corporation, Ingersoll, Ontario
AFFILIATIONS:
Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario (APEO)
American Society of Heating Refrigeration and Air Conditioning
Engineers (ASHRAE)
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Gerry Kestle
PROFILE OF PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES:
-Liaison with the Ministry of the Environment regarding programs for air
pollution control, process waste water, noise pollution and solid waste disposal
for a major Canadian food processor, packer and renderer.
-Liaison with Regional Municipality of Waterloo regarding process waste water
discharges to the sanitary sewer system, potable water quality and quantity for a
major Canadian food processor, packer and renderer.
-Liaison with environmental consulting engineering firms regarding air
pollution control, process waste water treatment and noise attenuation for a
major Canadian food processor, packer, renderer and trucking operation.
-Past chairman of Canadian Meet Council -Engineering Committee and Energy
Committee.
-Past member of Kitchener Chamber of Commerce Committee on local solid and
liquid waste disposal concerns.
-Past member of Neighborhood Liaison Committee regarding neighbourhood
concerns with large food processor, packer, renderer, receiving and shipping
operations.
-Design and construction of food processing buildings, refrigerated storage and
office buildings.
-Design and construction of food processor meat smoking operations.
-Supervisor of integrated packer and food processor inedible rendering operation.
-Design and implementation of energy conservation programs for major
Canadian food processor, packer, renderer.
-Design of production environments and food processing equipment.
-Design and construction of industrial ammonia refrigeration systems.
-Design, construction and continuing operation of two groundwater extraction
and treatment by air stripping at past semiconductor operation in Santa Clara,
California.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
a
D
0
I
I
I
Gerry Kestle
-Design and specification of 1,600 GPM groundwater extraction and discharge
system in Wausau, Wisconsin.
-Design, construction and start-up of landfill gas control and gas burner for
sanitary landfill in Rigly, Wisconsin.
-Design and construction of groundwater pumping and treatment system for
subsurhce drainage and collection system at Lees Avenue Transit Station,
Ottawa, Ontario to control coal tar migration.
-Design and specification of a groundwater extraction and treatment system in
St. Louis Park, Minnesota.
-Design, construction, maintenance and operation of a 2,800 GPM groundwater
extraction, air stripping and treated water surface discharge system in New
Brighton, Minnesota.
-Design and installation of a 800 feet, above ground, double wall insulated and
heat traced oil deliver pipe (eight inch carrier -12 inch containment pipe) at IBM
site, Poughkeepsie, New York.
-Design and construction of an industrial wastewater volatile organic compounds
(VOC) removal system including air stripping, VOC collection and destruction by
thermal oxidation at color plant in Cincinnati, Ohio.
-Design construction, start-up and operation of a landfill leachate collection and
pumping system in Waterloo, Ontario.
-Design, construction, start-up and operation of a 90,000 gallon storage/ SO gallon
per minute residential water supply system.
-Design and construction of a contaminated groundwater extraction and
forcemain system at pole treatment facility, New Brighton, Minnesota.
-Modification of municipal wastewater treatment plant in Sudbury, Ontario
including addition of oxidation ditch areators, addition of secondary clarifier and
addition of grit removal system.
-Design, construction, start-up and operation of a 24,000 dm landfill gas control
system at sanitary landfill in Maple, Ontario.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IANY, MCRAE
EDUCATION:
1985
1980
1977
1975
1971
Certificate of Completion, Corrosion Prevention and Control,
Carboline Company, St. Louis, Missouri.
Certificate of Completion, Construction Specification Writing, ATB
Courses Inc., Toronto, Ontario.
Certificate of Completion, Maintenance and Marine Coatings
Technology, Mobil Chemical, Toronto, Ontario.
Certificate of Completion, Architectural Hardware Institute, University
of Chicago
Civil Engineering, 3rd Year, University of New Brunswick
EMPLOYMENT:
1986-
Present ·
1985-86
1984-85
1979-84
1974-79
1974
1972-74
Senior Contract/Specification Engineer
Conestoga-Rovers & Associates
Specifications Specialist
Husky Oil Operations Ltd., Calgary, Alberta
Contract Formation Specialist
TransAlta Utilities Corporation, Calgary, Alberta
Contract Administrator
Monenco Consultants Limited, Calgary, Alberta
Senior Specification Writer
New Brunswick Electric Power Commission, Fredericton, New
Brunswick
Civil Technician
Neil and Gunter Ltd., Fredericton, New Brunswick
Surveyor /Estimator
Desourdy Construction Ltd., Montreal, Quebec
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
R
I
I
I
I
I
Ian V. McRae
1971-72 Technical Assistant
Lalonde, Valois, Lamarre, Valois and Associates, Montreal, Quebec
PROFILE OF ACTMTIES:
-Developed model construction specifications, engineering practices, specification
writing practice, and project specifications for the engineering, procurement and
construction of a heavy oil upgrader
-Evaluated corrosion protection options for structural steel in a petro-chemical
environment
-Developed risk management criteria for the safe design and operation of an
upgrader facility
-Reviewed activities of engineering contractors for conformity with established
standards and policies
-Formulated contract strategy and developed terms, conditions and technical
scope for assessing the environmental impact of a hydro-generating complex
-Executed requests for proposals and consulting agreements for environmental
and engineering studies including coordination of input from environmental,
engineering, legal and government agencies
-Developed criteria for surveying public opinion of electrical utility service
-Supervised preparation of bid and contract construction documents including
specifications for nuclear, thermal and hydro generating plants, mining and
airport facilities and equipment
-Performed contract and purchase order administration including tendering, bid
analysis and contract award for public and private sector
-Supervised on-site construction contracts for construction of thermal generating
station
-Developed company-wide specification system including policies and standards
and instructed engineering departments on methods of specification writing
-Designed tank farm protective coating system and supervised application
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
g
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ian V. McRae
-Performed site surveying, estimating and inspection for highway and bridge
construction and municipal work
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
m
D
D
m
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PAYIP DEMPSEY. M, S,
EDUCATION
B. A. College of St. Scholastica, 1984
M. S. University of Illinois, 1988
Thesis Title: "Synthesis and Characterization of Phosphine Adducts of
Copper (I) Alkyls"
EMPLOYMENT;
Oct. 1988-
Present
1988-
Oct. 1988
Environmental Chemist
Conestoga-Rovers & Associates, Inc.
Analytical Chemist
SET Environmental
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS:
American Chemical Society
PROFILE OF PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES
-Quality Control Officer
J. I. Case Corporation Projects
Professional activities included data assessment and liaison with project
laboratories in support of PCB cleanups and/or underground storage tank (UST)
remedial programs
-Quality Control Officer
Generator (PRP) Group
Professional activities included data assessment and direct liaison with the
project laboratory for contaminated groundwater assessment program (Carolawn
NPL Site, South Carolina)
-Quality Control Officer
Generator (PRP) Group
Professional activities included data assessment in support of a Supplemental
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study for Wauconda Sand and Gravel,
Wauconda, Illinois
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
D
fl
I
m
I
I
I
I
I
David Dempsey
-Quality Control Officer
Generator (PRP) Group
Professional activities included preparing the QAPP, data assessment and liaison
with project laboratories in support of a Rl/FS (Willow Run Sludge Lagoons,
Washtenaw County, Michigan)
-Quality Control Officer
Generator (PRP) Group
Professional activities included preparing the QAPP, analytical data assessment
and laboratory liaison.in support of the Remedial Investigation/Corrected
Measures Study (Wausau, Wisconsin)
-Quality Control Officer
Generator (PRP) Group
Professional activities included data assessment and preparing the QAPP for EP
Toxicity characterization of disposed municipal incinerator ash (Miami County
Incinerator NPL Site, Miami County, Ohio)
-Quality Control Officer
Professional activities included data assessment and preparing Sampling and
Analysis Plan in support of Groundwater Investigation Project (Synertek NPL
Site, California)
-Quality Control Officer
Professional activities included data assessment and primary liaison with the
project laboratory in support of Groundwater Monitoring Plan (TCAAP NPL
Site, St. Paul, Minnesota)
-Quality Control Officer
Professional activities included liaison with the laboratory and data assessment
for RI/PS (Charles City, Iowa)
-Quality Control Officer/ Chemist
Professional activities included technical assistance for ambient air monitoring
(T0-1, TO-2), data assessment and liaison with the project laboratory for Rl/FS
(Sterling Drugs NPL Site, Cincinnati, Ohio)
-Quality Control Officer
Generator (PRP) Group
Professional activities included data assessment and laboratory liaison for RI/FS
(Jadco-Hughes NPL Site, North Carolina)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
B
D
D
m
I
I
I
I
I
I
David Dempsey
-Quality Control Officer/Chemist
Generator (PRP) Group
Professional activities including laboratory coordination and aid in developing
protocols for ambient air monitoring program (TO-1), data assessment and
liaison with the project laboratory in support of remedial action (Spiegelberg
NPL Site, Livingston County, Michigan)
-Quality Control Officer/Chemist
Professional activities included data assessment and coordination with the
laboratory, developing NPDES permit sampling plan and degradation
mechanism for organic analytes (Printed Circuits Operations, St. Louis Parks,
Minnesota, State listed site)
-Quality Control Officer/Chemist
Professional activities included data assessment and coordination with the
laboratory, technical assistance in developing ambient air monitoring program
(T0-1, T0-10), initiating site-specific method detection limit study (Rasmussen
NPL. Site, Livingston County, Michigan)
-Research Chemist
University of Illinois
Professional activities included handling highly air sensitive and pyrophoric
materials via Schlenck vacuum line techniques, characterizing compounds via
lH NMR and heteronuclear NMR (13C, 31p, 63Cu), infrared spectroscopy; X-ray
crystallography, elemental analysis. Familiar with atomic absorption,
electrochemical analyses (polarography/ cyclic voltammetry), UV/ vis
spectroscopy, gas chromatography and mass spectrometry
-Analytical Chemist
SET Environmental
Professional duties included identification of organic compounds via infrared
spectrometry and identification of metal complexes via wet chemical methods
CONTINUING EDUCATION:
"Environmental Laboratory; QA/QC Data Validation" ACS Short Course,
September 1989
"Transport Phenomena in Natural Porous Media", University of Minnesota, Fall
Quarter 1990
"Twelfth Annual Conference On Laboratory Technology", University of Minnesota,
February 13-14, 1991
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
m
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
David Dempsey
PUBLICATIONS:
"Copper (P Alkyls. Synthesis and Characterizations of Tertiary Phosphine Adducts
and the,Crystal Structure of the Dimethylcuprate Complex [Cu(PMe3)4][CuMe2.]".
Girolami, G. S.; Dempsey, D. F., Organometallics, 1988, 7, 1208
PRESENTATIONS:
"Effects upon Sample Integrity Due to Well Installation and Materials",
T. Chrisfofferson and D. Dempsey, Monitoring Well Course, Minnesota Department
of Health, November 1990, Bloomington, Minnesota
I
I
I
I
I
RON S, CAMPBELL
EDUCATION:.
Environmental Technologist Fanshawe College, London, Ontario, 1978-1981.
Three year Co-operative program in Air, Water
Resources and Field Technology
I EMPLOYMENT:
g
0
n
I
I
I
I
••
I
I
I
I
I
May 1991-
Present
February 1989-
May 1991
September 1981 -
February 1989
January 1981 -
May 1981
May 1980-
September 1980
September 1979 -
December• 1979
Industrial Hygienist, Conestoga-Rovers & Associates Limited,
Waterloo, Ontario
Operations/Safety Supervisor, Laidlaw Environmental
Services Ltd., Guelph, Ontario (formerly Tricil Environmental
Management, Waterloo, Ontario)
Environmental Technologist/Divisional Safety Supervisor,
Ortech International, Mississauga, Ontario (formerly Ontario
Research Foundation)
Laboratory Technician, Canada Packers, Inc., Toronto, Ontario
(College Co-op Work Term)
Ontario Research Foundation, Mississauga, Ontario
(College Co-op Work Term)
Ontario Research Foundation, Mississauga, Ontario
(College Co-op Work Term)
PROFILE OF PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES:
-Provide measurement and documentation of workplace exposure levels to
various hazardous agents and establish appropriate controls to prevent
exposures above permissible exposure levels.
-Maintain industrial hygiene and gas detection equipment including staff training
on selected equipment, proper calibration and record keeping.
-Perform health and safety audits for clients and health and safety training,
WHMIS, Regulations respecting asbestos.
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ron S. Campbell
-Ensure staff training and medical surveillance program requirements are
maintained for new hires and existing staff.
-Perform on-Site health and safety supervision at hazardous waste sites.
-Provide respiratory selection, use, care and fit testing for CRA staff and contractor
and client training.
-Actively participate in policy making decisions.
-Responsible for timely reporting on the status of hazardous waste cleanup
projects throughout Ontario, including safety regulations and training, staff
scheduling, tracking costs, etc.
-C<r0rdinate and schedule staff training specific to health and safety issues.
-Specific experience in medical surveillance programs, gaseous monitoring,
orientation and WHMIS training for new staff.
-Responsible for hiring contract/temporary employees and ensuring that staff
comply to company and regulatory policies and procedures.
-Chairman of Branch Joint Health and Safety Committee and a member of
Laidlaw Environmental Services Corporate Safety Committee of Burlington.
-Maintain all health and safety training records, Workers' Compensation Board
claims, accident investigations, personal injury reports and unusual occurrences
(near miss) reports.
-Responsible for purchasing, maintenance, calibration and staff training relating
to air monitoring equipment.
-Specific experience in performing thorough investigations from serious
incidents involving personal injury, gaseous exposure, etc.
-Perform emission monitoring from industrial process for gaseous and
particulate pollutants across Canada and the United States.
-Specific characterization tests of emissions at industrial processes including
gaseous emissions (eg. S02, HC, CO, NOx, NCL), particulate and particle size
distribution, odour intensity, fugitive emissions, PCBs, Dioxins, furans, etc.
-Perform indoor air quality studies for urea-formaldehyde, asbestos, respirable
particulate and gaseous ~ontaminants.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
u
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ron S. Campbell
-Division Safety Supervisor, which involved workplace inspections, safety
instruction to staff, accident report writing and accurate recordkeeping.
-Perform project supervision on an extensive methanol vehicle program for
Transport Canada at the Motor Vehicle Test Centre located in Blainville, Quebec.
TRAINING CERTIFICATES/COURSES;
-40 hour OSHA, 29 CFR 1910.120 Certification for Hazardous Waste Operations
and Emergency Response -June 1991
-St. John Ambulance First Aid -May 1990
-Ministry of the Environment (MOE) Activated Sludge Course -May 1990
-C.R.S. Confined Space Entry Certificate -April 1990
-WHMIS Awareness Program -Transportation Safety Association (TSA) -
March 1990
-Defensive Driving (TSA) -March 1990
-MOE Wastewater Treatment Course -February 1990
-Transportation Dangerous Good Act (TOGA) -January 1990
-Field Level Maintenance for Scott 2.2 SCBA -September 1989
-Supervisory Training Certificate -March 1989
-Modem Safety Management Certificate -February 1989
I 1
I
I
I
I
I
D
I APPENDIX B
I DATA MANAGEMENT PLAN
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
/
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
m
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
B.1.0 INTRODUCTION .................. , ................................................................................... B-1
B.2.0 DATA MANAGEMENT .......................................................................................... B-2
B.2.1 MANAGEMENT OF FIELD DATA ........................................................ B-2
B.2.1.1 Field Logbooks ............................................................................................. B-3
B.2.1.2 Still Photographs and Video Film .......................................................... B-3
B.2.1.3 Audio Cassette Recordings ....................................................................... B-4
B.2.1.4 Computer Diskettes .................................................................................... B-5
B.2.2 MANAGEMENT OF LABORATORY ANALYTICAL DATA .......... B-5
B.2.3 DAT A VALIDATION ................................................................................ B-6
B.2.4 DATA SECURITY ....................................................................................... B-6
B.3.0 DOCUMENT CONTROL. ......................................................................................... B-7
B.3.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION FILES ................................................. B-7
B.3.2 PRIMARY DATA DOCUMENTS ............................................................... B-8
B.3.3 PROJECT DOCUMENTS .............................................................................. B-9
I
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
B.1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Data Management Plan (DMP) presented herein will
identify procedures to be employed for managing all information, reports and
correspondence (documents) associated with the Remedial Design/Remedial
Action (RD/RA) to be conducted at the Jadco-Hughes Site (Site) in Gaston
County, North Carolina. These documents may be used as possible evidence
in any court proceedings and as the basis upon which government officials
will make decisions regarding the protection of human health and the
environment. Therefore, these documents must be readily accessible and the
integrity and accuracy of these documents must be maintained. This may be
achieved by restricting access to the materials and implementing data
management procedures.
The DMP is comprised of two separate tasks which are:
1) data management; and
2) document control.
The data management task consists of procedures used to
handle and safeguard all data generated by field and laboratory programs. The
task of document control involves implementing procedures to physically
track all documents associated with the RD/RA. These two tasks will be
expanded upon in the following sections.
B-1
I
I
I
I
R
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
B.2.0 DATA MANAGEMENT
Data generated from the field and analytical programs will
form the basis upon which all decisions regarding remediation of the Site will
be based. Submittal B -Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP), and Appendix B of
Submittal B-Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP), present procedures
relating to the collection and analysis of samples. The data management task
of the DMP presents procedures relating to recording and retrieval of all the
field and laboratory data generated. For ease of discussion, the field and
laboratory data can be categorized as follows:
1) field data;
2) laboratory analytical data; and
3) quality assurance/ quality control data.
These three categories of data and security procedures will
be discussed in the following sections.
B.2.1 MANAGEMENT OF FIELD DATA
Accurate and comprehensive recording of field operations
will be achieved through the use of field logbooks, cameras, tape recording
devices and computers.
B-2
I
I
I
I
D
B
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
B.2.1.1 Field Logbooks
The field logbook is the primary means of recording Site-
related information. Generally, a bound document, the field logbook is used
to record all pertinent Site data such as the following:
1) general field observations;
2) field measurements and observations;
3) sample location and corresponding sample number;
4) relevant comments pertaining to the samples collected;
5) weather conditions;
6) a listing of all personnel involved in Site-related activities; and
7) an accurate log of all telephone conversations and Site meetings.
The field books generated will be numbered consecutively
and maintained in a CRA file where they are not subject to potential damage
or tampering.
B.2.1.2 Still Photographs and Video Film
Still photographs and video documentation provide a
means of visually recording Site conditions and operations.
To ensure quick and accurate retrieval, all photographs
and video films used during Site work will be properly documented,
catalogued and stored. Documentation shall consist of the following:
B-3
I
I
I
I
a
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1) identification of Site and project;
2) identification of the area and/ or activity photographed;
3) date and time of photograph;
4) photographer's name;
5) weather conditions; and
6) project number.
Cataloging of photographs and video films will be done in
a manner that ensures ease of accessibility. Storage of the photographs and
video films will be in a location where they are not subject to damage or
tampering.
B.2.1.3 Audio Cassette Recordings
On occasion, conditions may exist which will prevent the
use of field logbooks. At such times only, an audio cassette tape recorder will
be used. Information recorded on the cassette will be transcribed into the field
logbook within one week of making the recording. The recorded cassette
then will be consecutively numbered, logged and stored. The tapes will be
logged as to the date and purpose of the recording. Provisions will be made to
store the tapes so that they are protected from magnetic fields, temperature
extremes, reuse and tampering.
B-4
I
I
I
I
g
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
B.2.1.4 Computer Diskettes
At this time, it is envisaged that all analytical and field
survey data will be compiled on 3 1;2-inch hard discs. In all cases where Site
data is stored on discs, a backup copy of each computer diskette will be
maintained. Each computer diskette will be consecutively numbered,
identified as a primary or backup diskette, and identified as to the contents.
The computer diskettes will be cataloged and stored as per the audio cassette
tapes. Backup diskettes will be stored separately from primary diskettes.
B.2.2 MANAGEMENT OF LABORATORY ANALYTICAL DATA
Chain-of-custody protocols will be used to transport the
samples to the contract laboratory and to track the samples during the
analytical program, as discussed in Submittal B -SAP and Appendix B of
Submittal B -QAPP. Copies of the generated chain-of-custody forms will be
maintained by both the contract laboratory and CRA.
The contract laboratory will provide the data on a
computer diskette in addition to the hard copy print. The computer diskette
provided by the contract laboratory will be numbered, cataloged and stored as
discussed in Section B.2.1.4.
The contract laboratory will maintain the integrity of their
database through their own internal security procedures.
B-5
I
I
I
I
m
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
B.2.3 DATA VALIDATION
Validation of the data will be performed in accordance
with the quality assurance/ quality control (QA/QC) program as detailed in
Appendix B of Submittal B -QAPP. Laboratory supervisory personnel and
CRA's QA/QC officer will conduct the data validation.
The data will be manually screened as well to isolate any
spurious data not detected by the QA/QC program.
B.2.4 DAT A SECURITY
The integrity and confidentiality of the data generated
during the RD/RA will be maintained by restricting access to the data. Only
personnel actively involved in the project will be permitted access to the data.
It will be the responsibility of these same personnel to ensure that the original
documents are not mutilated or destroyed.
B-6
I
I
I
I
I
0
R
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
E.3.0 DOCUMENT CONTROL
Documents used for and generated during the RD/RA
will be stored and maintained in a unique project file. These documents will
be maintained and stored for a minimum of six years following termination
of the 106 Order, consistent with the judicial order under Section 106 of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
between USEPA and the Committee, signed on June 19, 1991. Access to the
documents will be restricted to personnel actively engaged in the project and
procedures will be implemented to track the documents .
The documents to be covered by the document control
procedures can be categorized as follows:
1) background information files;
2) primary data documents; and
3) project documents generated during the course of the project.
These three categories will be further discussed in the
following sections.
B.3.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION FILES
The background information for the RD/RA consists of
the following:
B-7
I
I
I
I
• u
R
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1) field notes from previous Site sampling programs;
2) hazard ranking system (HRS) package;
3) background information files from the Jadco-Hughes Steering
Committee;
4) the 106 Order dated June 19, 1991;
5) background information collected by CRA (RI and FS reports); and
6) miscellaneous correspondence.
These documents will be included in the document
control system.
B.3.2 PRIMARY DATA DOCUMENTS
Primary data documents for the RD/RA may consist of
the following:
1) field logbooks;
2) analytical reports;
3) chain-of-custody forms;
4) regulatory agency correspondence;
5) Jadco-Hughes Steering Committee correspondence;
6) personnel medical records;
7) logs of meetings and telephone conversations;
8) quality assurance/ quality control data;
9) inventory of samples collected;
10) Site plans and data diskettes; and
B-8
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
11) survey notes.
These documents will be included in the document
control system.
B.3.3 PROJECT DOCUMENTS
Project documents include the monthly reports and all
reports generated during the RD/RA and submitted to USEPA. These
documents will be included in the document control system.
B-9