NCD981475932_20021220_FCX Inc. (Washington Plant)_FRBCERCLA RD_Technical Memorandum-OCR

,;
I
I
I· I !
RESP.QNSE AC'llON CONTRACT
Contract No. 68;.W~99-043
BLACK & VEATCH Special Projects Corp. ~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APR 1 6 2003
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
REMEDIAL DESIGN
FCX WASHINGTON SITE
WASHINGTON, BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
I
I
I
I
I
Technical
Memorandum
To: Michael Townsend
From: David Russell, PE
Date: December20,2002
RE: Field Investigation Results, Bioscreen Analysis and Recommendations -FCX I Washington, NC 68-W-99-043, 044-RDRD-049
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Introduction
Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp. (Black & Veatch) was tasked by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Waste Management Division, Region 4, to prepare a technical memorandum
prior to the Remedial Design (RD) for the FCX Washington site located in Washington, Beaufort County,
North Carolina. The May 2002 field investigation effort was performed under the authority of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) and the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA). This document has been prepared by
Black & Veatch under Contract Number 68-W-99-043. It was prepared under specific authorization of
EPA Region 4 through Work Assignment Number 044-RDRD-049H and was performed in accordance
with the objectives specified in the Statement of Work (SOW) dated September 25, 2001.
Objective
The overall purpose of this technical memorandum is to support an assessment ofutilizing monitored natural
attenuation (MNA) and a permeable reactive barrier(PRB) as remedial measures to replace pump-and-
treat for remediating groundwater contaminated with pesticides at the FCX Washington site. In the 1993
Remedial lnvestigation/Feasability Study (RI/FS) MNA, was not considered as a remedial alternative for
the site. This technical memorandum evaluates the feasability ofMNA in conjunction with a PRB at the
site.
The following objectives were considered during this evaluation of the FCX Washington site:
• Consider the use ofall relevant existing data including the April 1993 RI/FS sampling event and
the February 1998 sampling event.
• Evaluate the nature and extent of contamination at the FCX Washington site.
• Detem1ine the flow characteristics of the groundwater in the site area.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Determine the trend of decreasing data.
• Determine the process of site specific data.
Evaluate natural attenuation mechanisms of the site using the May 2002 groundwater data in the
BIOSCREEN model.
Summary of Field Investigation -FCX Washington
Black & Veatch conducted a field investigation atthe FCX Washington Superfund Site between April 30,
2002, and May 3, 2002. The sampling event was performed in accordance with the Field Sampling Plan
submitted to the EPA on April 26, 2002. All existing site wells were observed securely locked and in
sound condition with the exception of well MW-2B. MW-2B was the deep aquifer well ofa two-well
cluster. The well was observed as abandoned via grouting of the well casing.
Two wells, MW-2B and MW-3B, were observed buried. Two additional wells, MW-9A and MW-9B,
were found in very thick brush. Locating these wells and excavation/clearing of their locations increased
the field event schedule by one day.
One sample container was damaged during shipment for MW-7 A. As a result, pesticide analytical data
for this well is not available.
Summary of Findings
Groundwater samples were collected from 15 existing site wells and were analyzed for metals,
pesticides/polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), pesticide daughter products, volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), and select natural attenuation parameters. Field paran1eters (see Table I) were measured and
recorded. Soil samples were collected at three locations and analyzed for total organic carbon (Table 2).
Groundwater analytical results are presented in Table 3. Figure I and 2 present data from the I 993 and
1998 sampling events. Figure 3 presents groundwater analytical results that exceeded the Remedial Action
Objectives (RAO) presented in the 1993 Record ofDecision(ROD) for the FCX Washington site. Figure
4 presents the analytical results of the pesticide daughter product in groundwater monitoring wells.
Most analytes detected above RAO levels were only slightly higher than those levels. Two exceptions
were benzene and toxaphene. Benzene was detected at 55 micrograms per liter ( ug/L) and toxaphene was
detected at 45 ug/L, exceeding the RAO level of I ug/L for both constituents.
Pesticide daughter products were not identified in the ROD as contaminants of concern; therefore, RA Os
for these compounds were not established. However, the presence of pesticide daughter products is an
indication of the breakdown or attenuation of the parent compounds.
Daughter products were detected for the following contaminants:
• Toxaphene
2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Chlordane
• DDT, DOE, and ODD
Alpha-HCH, Beta-HCH, and Gamma-HCH
Groundwater levels were measured and recorded for all upper and lower aquifer wells. Wei I elevation data
is shown in Table 4. Potentiometric surface maps prepared for the upper and lower aquifers are presented
as Figures 5 and 6, respectively. Groundwater flow direction for both aquifers is to the southwest.
Evaluation of Monitored Natural Attenuation for Pesticides and Benzene
The analytical data was reviewed according to the EPA's guidance document for reviewing MNA in
groundwater titled BIOSCREENNatural Attenuation Decision Support System, Version l .3, dated August
l 996. BIOSCREEN was developed through a collaboration between the U.S. EPA National Risk
Management Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, and the U.S. Air Force Center
for Environmental Excellence, Brooks Air Force Base. EPA contributed conceptual guidance in the
development of the BIOSCREEN mathematical model. Extensive investigation in site characteri7.ation and
mathematical modeling is necessary to establish the contribution of MN A to the fate of contaminants at a
site. The BIOSCREEN model was developed to simulate natural attenuation of dissolved hydrocarbons
at petrolelll11 fuel related sites. BIOSCREEN has the ability to simulate advection, dispersion, adsorption,
and aerobic decay, as well as anaerobic reactions that have been shown to be the dominant biodegradation
processes for petroleum hydrocarbons. The model has been used to evaluate benzene (a hydrocarbon) and
toxaphene (a pesticide) at the FCX Washington site.
Line of Evidence No. I -Trend of Decreasing Concentration -Analytical results indicate decreasing
contaminant concentrations in all wells from the levels detected in 1998. Notably, wells MW-2B, MW-
3A, MW-3B, MW-5B, MW-9A, M~-9B, MW-IOA, MW-1 IA, and MW-l2A all indicated lower
levels of contan1ination in May 2002 than in the 1998 sampling event. Well clusters 1, 5, and 7 indicated
no contamination above screening levels.
Line of Evidence No. 2 -Process Specific Data -Dispersion and diffusion would appear to be
occurring at the site. Groundwater flow velocities were calculated for the upperaquifer at a low range of
4.69 feet per year (ft/yr) and a high range of659. I 6 ft/yr with a mean of 24. 7 ft/yr. Groundwater flow
velocities for the loweraquiferwere calculated at a low of9.6 ft/yr and a high of 138.8 ft/yr with a mean
of38.5 ft/yr. These rates of flow are sufficiently high enough to consider dispersion and diffusion important
attenuation phenomena for the low levels of pesticide contamination downgradient of the site.
Three subsurface soil samples were analyzed for organic carbon. No samples contained measurable
quantities of organic carbon. Therefore, it can be assumed that the mechanism of organic carbon sorption
is not taking place at the site.
3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The evidence of pesticide daughter products would indicate that breakdown of pesticides is occurring at
the FCX site due to biotransformation. The biotransformation process is slow for pesticides, but both
aerobic and anaerobic environments can provide conditions for transformation reactions .
Line of Evidence No. 3 -Field or Microcosm Studies -No microcosm studies have been performed
or are scheduled for the FCX Washington site. Therefore, this line of evidence is not applicable to this
analysis.
Bioscreen Analysis and Recommendations
During this investigation, Black & Veatch prepared a BIOSCREEN model for benzene and toxaphene.
Typically, BIOSCREEN is used early in the investigation to determine if MN A should be implemented to
quantify the natural attenuation occurring at a site. This model can be used to help develop long-term
monitoring plans for MNA projects. Also, this model allows groundwater remediation managers to identify
sites where natural attenuation is most likely to be protective ofhuman health and the environment. The
models are presented in Appendix A.
The following sections discuss the input parameters that were selected for the BIOSCREEN models
developed for this site.
BIOSCREEN Step I -Hydrogeology -Black & Veatch determined the hydraulic conductivity,
hydraulic gradient, and porosity which resulted in the calculation of an average seepage velocity of9 Ii/yr.
The hydrogeology calculation was determined based on area site hydrogeology references (for hydraulic
conductivity) and water level surveys taken during the May 2002 sampling event (hydraulic gradients). The
seepage velocity was used for modeling both benzene and toxaphene.
BIOSCREEN Step 2 -Dispersion -Based on analytical results from the Black & Veatch field
investigation, the plume length for benzene and toxaphene was estimated to be 150 feet and 200 feet,
respectively. The longitudinal, transverse, and vertical dispersivity values were automatically calculated
based on information entered in the model. Dispersion refers to the process whereby a plume will spread
out in a longitudinal direction, transversely, and vertically downwards due to a mechanical mixing in the
aquifer and chemical diffusion. In BIOSCREEN, dispersion is used as the primary calibration parameter.
BIOSCREEN Step 3 -Adsorption -The adsorption retardation factor for benzene and toxaphene was
assumed to be I. Adsorption is the rate at which dissolved contaminants moving through an aquifer can
be reduced by sorption of contaminants to the solid aquifer matrix. The retardation factor is the ratio of
the groundwater seepage velocity to the rate that organic chemicals migrate in the groundwater. The
retardation factor value is dependent on both the aquifer and constituent properties. Because no
measurable amounts of total organic carbon were detected in soil samples, the fraction organic was
assumed to be negligible, resulting in a retardation factor of I. This means contaminants are assumed to
migrate at the same rate as the groundwater.
4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
BIOSCREEN Step 4 -Biodegradation -Published BIOSCREEN literature values indicates the
degradation half-life for benzene is 0.02 to 2 years. A conservative estimate of2 years was used for this
model. Based on the March 2000 Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (!NEEL)
report, the degradation half-life for toxaphene is IO to 20 years in soil and sediment conditions. It is
inferred that constituents would decay at significantly longer rates in groundwater because toxaphcne
appears to be very persistent in groundwater. Degradation oftoxaphene occurs under anaerobic conditions
as well as under aerobic conditions. Therefore, the degradation half-life for toxaphene was estimated to
be 40 years, two times the determined half-life oftoxaphene for soil and sediment. Based on these source
half-life values entered in the BIOSCREEN model, the first order decay coefficient for benzene is 0.35 per
year and toxaphene is 0.017 per year. The first order decay degradation that occurs is related to the time
the contaminants spend in the aquifer and is not related to the time it takes for the source concentrations
to decay by half. Source half-life is the time in years for dissolved plume concentrations to decay by one
half as contaminants migrate through the aquifer.
BIOSCREEN Step 5-General Data-The modeled area length and width are the physical dimensions
of the rectangular area to be modeled. These values should be slightly higher than the final plume
dimensions or should extend to the downgradient point of concern. The modeled area for benzene is 160
feet long and 100 feet wide. The modeled area for toxaphene is 600 feet long and 600 feet wide. A
simulation time of 10 years was modeled for benzene and 30 years for toxaphene.
BIOSCREEN Step 6-Source Data -Based on the Black & Veatch field investigation data, the source
thickness in the saturated zone was assumed to be 10 feet for both benzene and toxaphene. "Zone 3" on
BlOSCREEN's input screen was the only zone used to calculate the source data. Based on analytical
results from the 2002 Black & Veatch field investigation, a uniform concentration of0.055 mg/L was
modeled in zone 3 with a source width of 100 feet for benzene. Similarly, the toxaphene model had a
source zone concentration of0.045 mg/Land a source width of200 feet in "zone 3". BIOSCREEN
automatically selects the correct source half-life depending on which kinetic model is being used. The
calculated source half-life for benzene in the first order decay model is 80 years and toxaphcne is 200
years.
Black & Veatch calculated the soluble mass for benzene (0.4 kg) and toxaphene ( 1. 7 kg). The soluble
mass values were automatically rounded to O kg and 2 kg, respectively. Soluble mass quantity is used to
estimate the rate that the source zone concentration declines. For benzene, the total mass in the plume
remains the same for the "no degradation" model, and the total soluble mass decreases by 63% in the first
order decay models. The toxaphene "no degradation" model also shows no reduction in the plume mass.
but the first order decay model shows a 21 % reduction in the mass oftoxaphene in the plume over the 30
year model. The centerline output of the BIOSCREEN model shows the average concentration at the top
of the saturated zone along the centerline of the plume. The soluble mass calculations are presented in
Appendix B.
5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
BIOSCREEN Step 7 -Field Data for Comparison -The current geometry of the FCX Washington
monitoring wells does not provide down gradient data for comparison. This step was therefore omitted
from the modeling process.
BIOSCREEN Models -BIOSCREEN presents three model types (no degradation, first order decay
or instantaneous reaction). The no degradation model assumes the total amount of source contaminants
have left the source zone or assume a declining source is present. The first order decay model assumes
biodegradation starts immediately downgradient of the source, and that the rate of dissolution is reflected
by the concentration of dissolved contaminants actually measured in monitoring wells. The instantaneous
reaction model assumes biodegradation is occurring directly in the source zone and that the effective source
zone concentration is equal to the measured concentration in the source zone plus any missing concentration
due to biodegradation. The no degradation model and the first order decay model were used to evaluate
this site.
The I 0-year BIOSCREEN model for benzene indicates that at the plume centerline point, 160 feet down
gradient of the source, the "No Degradation" model has a concentration (2 ug/L) within 25 feet of the
plume centerline that still exceeds the RAO of I ug/L. However, with the degradation ofbenzene modeled
over the same time period, the concentration of benzene falls below the RAO value of! ug/L at a distance
of 112 feet (within 50 feet on either side of the plume's centerline).
The 30-year BIOSCREEN model fortoxaphene shows a much larger plume length. The concentration
oftoxaphene in the groundwater plume does not reach the RAO of 1 ug/L until a distance of 420 feet down
gradient, for both the "No Degradation" and the "First Order Decay" models.
Conclusions
Previous site investigations include groundwater sampling in 1993, an emergency removal action in 1995
and 1996, and another round of groundwater sampling in 1998. The contaminant levels observed between
1993 and 1998 were significantly lower. The sampling event completed in May of 2002 showed a
continuation of decreasing concentrations to levels below or slightly above RA Os. Two contaminants of
concern, toxaphene and benzene, showed a lowering of concentrations from 1998, but are much higher
than the published RA Os for the site.
Analysis of the data concludes that pesticide attenuation atthe FCX Washington site is occurring due to
diffusion, dispersion, and biotransformation. Recommendations for future actions are as follows:
• The Remedial Action indicated in the ROD, pump and treat, should be re-examined for its
applicability. Based on results of the BIOSCREEN models, trending data, and daughter product
pump and treat does not appear to be a cost-effective or appropriate RA for the site. Pump and treat
is a costly source of groundwater remediation. Alternatives that should be examined include
Monitored Natural Attenuation with the placement of a Permeable Reactive Barrier in certain areas.
6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
•
A Permeable Reactive Barrier should be used downgradient ofMW-3 for the toxaphene plume.
The existing well network is not sufficient to examine trending of decreasing concentrations
downgradient of the site. The installation of four proposed new monitoring wells are recommended
downgradient of the site to monitor the effects of the diffusion and dispersion processes and to allow
monitoring of the contaminant plume in order to monitor contaminant levels as compared to RAOs.
Implement a MNA groundwater monitoring program and conduct statistical analyses to meet U.S .
EPA guidelines which are detailed in the Guidance Document on the Statistical Analysis ofGround-
Water Monitoring Data at RCRA Facilities.
7
J ~99.1!-! m1111J, 'I i! p pll . -q l I ! -·pi l lll!--11 ··--i•jFJ 1 -, 1--rll HfJf'1IJH ,,;.,.~=•e• ~-"".} l i1 ! H h n • H+t-+ti--tii, , 1n11 q Ui0,:ac\ia I! nu ... 0 % I I •liliHel~I• I e I• 1;1~ 01•liH•l•l,I ·1§1~1~ • ,~liHtl§ltl e 1~1~1; ,1e111 • l,l!l•I t l!lil; i I i • I , i I .. ~ i I i ~ • ... ~ : 111111111111 , L i ~ f Q; , 1;111° 1,1:lil t lel~ls ... 13 S.!=c::-1 g_ 2'. l l 111111111111 •~~l~ i I , i • liilliilliil~ lliilliilliillii lliillii[lii I! !!!.I . z. ., b g_ I I I I I I I I I I I I • a ~ -I -j "' ;l -~ ,rmH.i.lsl ·l!li1, ,r,liH!l:lll~lcl~l§I I i I j -•1,l&H~lel~ltltl:l;I I i I i -0'"iil0i;l•l~lel,lil~I 11 I i -•l•liH•l*lelel~IEI I i I! • •l•l~H~l•lile!El•l~I I i •l•l&H•l•l~l*l~l~I I i al•l~H•l•l~I ·l•IEl~I I i -; \ /
--- ------- - --------
Table 2
FCX Washington Site
Washington, Beaufort County, North Carolina
Parameters FC-SB-01 FC-SB-02 I FC-SB-03
TOC (mg/kg)
n otal Organic Carbon 1000UJ 1000UJ I 1000UJ
Notes:
mg/kg milligrams per kilogram
NE Not Evaluated
u Material was analyzed for but not detected. Constituent was below detection limit.
µ Estimated Value
------- --- - -- - --
Table 3
2002 Groundwater Analytical Data
FCX Washington Site
Washin( ton, Beaufort Coun ... North Carolina
ROD 1993-NC Drinking EPA FC-MW-01A FC-MW-018 FC-MW-028 FC-MW-o3A FC-MW-038 FC-MW-OM FC-MW~B FC-MW.OSB-0 FC-MW-07A F~-MW-078 FC-MW-088 FC-MW-09A FC-MW-098 FC-MW-1DA FC-MW•11A FC-MW-12A
Parameters Remedial Wati>, Region 9 Action
ObJectlve1 Standarde2 PRG's3 -· -· 511/2002' 511/2002' =· "'9/2002. 4/30/2002. -· 511t2002' 511'2002' 5/2/2002. ""2002' 5/3/2002. 5/2/2002. "'2/2002. 5/2/2002.
\
l Metals (U;fl..)
11A1um!num NE NE 36,000 1,200J 4,000J
I.JV Ba,rum NE 2,000 2,600 100 29 180 13 27 20 22 21 19 15 19 83 16 97 25 52
llradmlum NE 5 18 0.57 1.1R
~ ir, lclum NE NE NE 53,000 85,000 310,000 19,000 89,000 12,000 71,000 72,000 17,000 79,000 69,000 110,000 82,000 65,000 110,000 66,000
iChrnmlum L 50 50 NE UR 19 2.3 7.1 " 2.6R 1.8
,? ~---, NE 1,000 1,400 1.7R 40 •2:aoo• 5.8 19 5.1 3.1 18 3.6 " 33 6.1
'"'" NE 300 11,000 8,400 700 130 360 -SEO 160 870 .,2:000• 250 5,700 ••2:oooa 200
Load -15 15 NE --2.9R
Maanesium NE NE NE 5,000 4,000 20,000 800 4,800 3,300 2,000 2,100 1,200 1,200 640 3,900 1,300 3,300 7,200 4,100
Manaanese 697 50 880 300J 63J 280J 11J 36J 0.85J 100J 60J 100.J 23J 72J ""' 29J 98.J . 1,i500J . 89J
~ lckel -100 100 730 " 1.7R 12 3.6 2.1 11 " 4
otasslum NE NE NE 1,000J 3,200J 300,000J 1,200J 22,000J 3,800J 4,800J 4,800J 2,800J 2,700J 3,000J 4,400J 2,000J 8,200J 8,100J 3,500J
, .. , NE 18 180
1.3R 1.1R
1,m NE NE NE 5,000 5,500 37,000 -6,100 5,700 5,700 16,000 15,000 9,200 12,000 4,900 8,400
n-alllum NE NE 2.4 --3!7 ... 5.7R
--0.90R 9
1'-ianadlum NE NE 260
'"' NE 2,100 11,000 1.8 280 1.9 16 80 2.5 20 9.2
yankle NE 154 62 10UR 10UR 10UR 10UR 10UR 10UR 10UR 10UR 10UR 10UR 10UR 10UR 10UR 10UR
('
Postlcldn/PCBs (ug/L) -u
ha-Chlordane/2 0.027 0.027 0.19 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U 0.75J%.'{ 0.013J 0.025\J 0.025U 0.025U NA 0.025U 0.025U 0.023JN 0.10U 0.23" 0.14JN 0.0000.J
-l.lnha-BHC 0.014 NE NE 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U a.sou 0.10U 0.025U 0,025U 0.025U NA 0.025U 0.025U 0.25U 0.10U 0.0092J 0.099J 0.025U
' .&.ldrln) . --. ,-0.01 NE 0.004 0.025\J 0.025U 0.025U 0.50U 0.10U 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U NA 0.025U 0.025\J 0.25U · 0.10U -0~19--2.•7 ... 0.025U
-i:a,;;__BHC . 0.047 NE NE 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U 0.50U 0.10U 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U NA 0.025U 0.025U 0.25U O.tOU 0.67J a.sou 0.025U
Delta-BHC NE NE NE 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U 0.50U 0.10U 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U NA 0.025U 0.025U 0.25U 0.10U 0.052J a.sou 0.025U
,4'-0ichlorobenzophenone NE NE 1, 100 0.10U 0.10U 0.10U 4.0U 0.10U 1.10U 0.10U 0.10U NA 0.10U 0.10U 0.084 0.10U 0.40\J 1.4N 0.0022J
ieldr1n lU-t_':) _fu't)"fl. 0.02 NE 0.00-42 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U •o~53J-•0~0094:J■ 0.025U ■0.00:19J■ -0:001)'.J-NA 0.025U 0.025U •01,.,_ 0.10U -o:a-•o:38J• -0:03-
IEndosultan II l,\) NE NE NE 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U 2.0U 0.10U 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U NA 0.025U 0.025U 0.24J 0.10U 0.10U 0.50U 0.025U
Endrtn 0.2 2 11 0.025U 0.025U 0.033J 2.0U 0.023 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U NA 0.025U 0.025U 0.25U 0.10U 0.12 O.SOU 0.013J
IEndr1n Ketone -, I NE NE NE 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U 2.0U 0.10U 0.025U 0.013J 0.012J NA 0.025U 0.025U 0.15 0.10U 0.6 a.sou 0.053
-amma-BHC 0.0265 0.2 NE 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U 0.50U 0.10U 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U NA 0.025U 0.025U 0.25U _ 0.10U 0.10U 0.23 0.025U
-amma-Chlordane/2 0.027 0.027 0.19 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U · -o.◄tJ ' 0.0015.J 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U NA 0.025U 0.025U 0.25\J O.tOU -o.·~-0.50U O.OIJ.42J
MethOYI.Chlor NE 35 180 O.OSOU 0.050U 0.011JN 2.0U 0.10U 0.050U 0.050U O.OSOU NA 0.025U 0.050U 0.50U 0.20U 0.20U 1.0U 0,050U
~Nonachlor NE NE NE 0.025U 0,025U 0.0251.J 2.0U 0.01SJN 0.025U 0.025U 0,025U NA 0.025U 0.0251.J 0.25U O.tOU 0.026J 0.11JN 0.001SJN
-oxachene 0-.. I 1 0.031 0.061 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U " 3.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U NA 1.0U 1.0U 10U 3.0U 4.0U 20U 1.0U
otal DDT ' NE NE NE 0.025U 0.025U 0 0088J 2.0U 0.10U 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U NA 0.025U 0.025U 0.02SJ 0.10U 0.036J 0.50U 0.085.JN
rans-nonachlor/2 NE NE NE 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U 0.58JN 0.0033JN 0.025\J 0.025U 0.025U NA 0.0251.J 0.025U 0.041J 0.10U 0.60N 0.50U 0.0060JN
----- --- --- ----------
Table 3
2002 Groundwater Analytical Data
FCX Washington Site
Washin1 ton, Beaufort Countu, North Carolina
ROD 1993-NC Drinking EPA FC-MW-01A FC-MW-018 FC-MW--028 FC-MW-03A FC-MW-038 FC-MW-06A FC-MW-058 FC-MW-068-0 FC-MW-07A FC-MW-078 FC-MW-088 FC-MW-08A FC-MW-098 FC-MW-10A FC-MW-11A FC-MW•12A
Paramete~ Remedial Water Region 9 Action Standards2 PRG's3
Objeetlve1 =· "30/2002. 1511/2002 • 15/1/2002' l5/3l2002. .,,.,,..,. 4/30/2002' "30/2002. 1511/2002' 1511/2002' 0/2/2002. 0/3/2002' "'12002' "2/2002. "2/2002. "2/2002.
Pesticides Daughter Products (ug/L} ,.,,
Chlordene/2 NE NE NE 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U 0.50U 0.10U 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U NA 0.025U 0.025U 0.25U 0.10U 0.0012JN 0.50U 0,025U
,4'-DDD NE NE NE 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U 2.0U 0.10U 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U NA 0.025U 0.025U 0.25U 0.10U 0.10U 0.50U 0.43N
,4-DDD . .,.., .1'1 0.02 NE NE 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U 2.0U 0.10U 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U NA 0.025U 0.025U 0.25U 0.10U 0.10U 0.50U 0.025N
14,4'-DDMU NE NE NE 0.10U 0.10U 0.10U 4.0U 0.10U 0.025U 0.10U 0.10U NA 0.10U o.,ou 0.50U 0.10U 0.027JN 2.0U 0.10U
12.4'-DDE NE NE NE 0.025U 0.025U 0.0088J 2.0U 0.10U 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U NA 0.025U 0.025U 0.25U 0.10U 0.10U 0.50U 0.025U -14,4'-DDE . 0 ....... J 002 NE NE 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U 2.0\J 0.10U 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U NA 0.025U 0.025U 0.028J 0.10U 0.10U 0.50U 0.025U
,4'-DDT NE NE NE 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U 2.0U 0.10U 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U NA 0.025U 0.025U 0.25U 0.10U 0.036J 0.50U 0.025U
-,4'-DDT .·•~ \ 0.02 NE NE 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U 2.0U 0.10U 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U NA 0.025U 0.025U 0.25U 0.10U 0.14U 0.50U 0.017J
-"' chlor Ennxlde -0.038 0004 0.0074 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U 0.50U •o:0098J■ 0.025U 0.0039J -0-~2J-NA 0.025U 0.025U 0,25U 0.10U •0:0.1.1~-0.50U 0.025U
1-Hvd hlordene "°" NE NE NE 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U 2.0U 0.02lJ 0.025U 0.025U 0.025U NA 0.025U 0.025U 0.078JN 0.10U 0.13 0.50U 0.025U
Par1ar 26 NE NE NE 0.010U 0.10U 0.10U 1.2JN 0.020U 0.010U 0.0050U 0.010U NA 0.010U 0.010U 0.10U 0.020U 0.040U 0.11JN 0.10U
P<>r1ar 32 NE NE NE 0.010U 0.10U 0.10U 0.55J 0.013N 0.010U 0.010U 0.010U NA 0.010U 0.010U 0.10U 0.020U 0.040\J 0.20U 0.10U
Par1ar 39 NE NE NE 0.010U 0.10U 0.10U 0.88N 0.020U 0.010U 0.010U 0.010U NA 0.010U 0.010U 0.10U 0.020U 0.040U 0.060J 0.10U
Par1ar 40 NE NE NE 0.010U 0.10U 0.10U 1.2N 0.0091JN 0.010U 0.010U 0.010U NA 0.010U 0.010U 0.10U 0.020U 0.040U 0.20U 0.10U
Partar 41 NE NE NE 0.010U 0.10U 0.10U 0.40U 0.020U 0.010U 0.010U 0.010U NA 0.010U 0.010U 0.10U 0.020U 0.040U 0.21N 0.10U
Parlar 44 NE NE NE 0.010U 0.10U 0.10U 0.48N 0.011 0.010U 0.010U 0.010U NA 0.010U 0.010U 0.10U 0.020U 0.040U 0.20U 0.10U
Partar 62 NE NE NE 0.010U 0.10U 0.10U 0.41 0.0021JN 0.010U 0.010U 0.010U NA 0.010U 0.010U 0.10U 0.020U 0.012J 0.20U 0.10U
Volatlle Organic Compound• (ug/L)
nzene 1 1 0.35 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0\J 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 55 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1,0U
hlorobenzene 100 50 110 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 10U 1.0U 1.0U 2.4A 1.0U
°" lohexane NE NE 35,000 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 9.6J 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U
Eth, lmethv1benzene { 2 isomer11 NE NE NE 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 200JN 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U
Eth\ lbenzene NE 29 1,300 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 3JO 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U
Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene NE NE NE 1.0U 1.0U 1.0\J 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 10U 1.0U 1.0U 1.6A 1.0U
lndane NE NE NE 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U ,.ou 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 200JN 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U
lso.,rcoanol NE NE NE 10JN
tsonrcnv1benzene ::, "' NE NE 660 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 32 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1,0U
Methane ' NE NE NE .. 0.37J 0.40J 1.4U 084.J 1.4U 1.4U 1.4U 1.4U 1.4U 1.4U 9,000 2.9 1.4U 26A 1.4U
Methvl t-butvl ether (MTBEl NE 200 20 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1,0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 10U 1.3 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U
luethv!cvc lohexane NE NE 5,200 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 8.6J 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U
n-.,ro••.,•benzene "~ NE NE 61 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U
_ .. _
1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U
etrachloroethene -; NE NE NE 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 10U 1.0U 0.61J 1.0U 1.0U
oluene . 1.000 1,000 720 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0\J 1.0U 1.0U 83 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U
1,3,5-Trimeth,dbenzene < "' NE NE 120 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1,0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 96 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U
1,2,3-Trimethvlbenzene -NE NE NE 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1,0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0\J 1.0U 200J . 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U
1,2,4-Trimetri'llbenzene 3-n> NE NE 120 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U -000-1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U
-m-and/or p-DCVlene 400 "" 1.400 1.0U 1.0U t.OU 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 850L 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U
xylene " 400 "" 1,400 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 160 1.0U 1.0\J 1.0U 1.0U
' ~ l ) ""-\-~ '-µ_ "" to & ' -
-
50/Y"'
--,_ ---- --- --- -
Table 3
2002 Groundwater Analytical Data
FCX Washington Site
Washin ton, Beaufort Coun , North Carolina
ROD 1993-NC Drinking EPA FC-MW-01A FC-MW-01B FC-MW-02B FC-MW-03A FC-MW-038 FC-MW-05A FC-MW--05B
Parameters Remedial Water Region 9 Action Standarda2 PRG's3
Objective' 4/3012002' 4/30/2002. 51112002 • 5/112002 • 5f312002 • 4/29/2002 • 4130/2002 •
Semlvolatlle Organic Compounds & Mlscellaneous Compounds (ug/L)
1, 1-BIPHENYL
,2'-BIS(P-CHLOROPHENYL)ETHANOL
2-METHYLPHENOL
CENAPHTHENE
HLOROBENZENE
DIETHYL PHTHALATE
FLUORANTHENE
FLUORENE
HEXACHLOROBENZENE HCB
HEXACHLOROBUTAD!ENE
HEXACHLOROC:YCLOPENTADIENE
HEXAMErHYLCYCLOTRISILOXANE
NITROBENZENE
TAMErHYLCYCLOTRISILOXANE
PHENANTHRENE
""'
,gJL
mg/L
us/cm
D
N
R
A
u
L
NE
NA
Rl
BMR
HCCP)
z...
NE 10U 10U 10U
NE 10U 10U 10U
NE 10U 10U 10U
NE 10U 10U 10U
NE 10U 10U 10U
NE 10U 10U 10U
NE 10U 10U 10U
NE 10U 10U 10U
NE 10U 10U 10U
NE 10U 10U 10U
NE 10U 10U 10U
NE 10U 10U 10U
NE 10U 10U 10U
NE 10U 10U 10U
NE 10U 10U 10U
92 160 250
33 16A 640
0.050U 0.24 70
0.050U 0.050U 0.050U
41 55 260
6.4 1.0U 1.4
1.0U 1.0U 1.0U
1.0UJ 1.0UJ 1.0UJ
Exceeds North carollna Drinking Water standards
Exceeds Environmental Protection Agency Region 9 Preliminary Remediation Goals
Exceeds Record of Decision 1993 Remedial Action ObjectM!s
Exceeds two of the screening criteria
Exceeds three of the screening criteria
micrograms per liter
milligrams per liter
Duplicate Sample
Indicates presumptive evidence ol presence of material.
Estimated Value
Rejected data, QC indicates data is unuseable
Average value
Material was analyzed ror but not detected. Constttuent was below detection limit
Actual value Is known to be greater than value given.
Not evaluated
Not analyzed
Less than reporting Umit
Below measuring range Hmlt
No reading available, Instrument problem
FN?ld Test Kil used to measure Nitnte
Record of Decisk:ln 1993-Remedlal Action Objectives
North carollna Drinking Water standards
Environmental Protection Agency Region 9 Preliminary Remediation Goals
Sample COiiection Date
10U 10U 10U 2.SJ
10U 10U 10U 10U
10U 10U 10U 10U
10U 10U 10U 10U
10U 10U 10U 10U
10U 10U 10U 10U
10U 10U NR 10U
10U 10U 10U 10U
10U 10U 10U 10U
10U 10U 10U 10U
10U 10U ,ou 10U
10U 10U 10U 50JN
10U 10U 10U 10U
10U 10U 10U OOJN
10U 10U 10U 10U
45 150 26 140
2.4A 33 2.4A 21
0.45 6.3 5.4 2.8
0.050U o-0.060U 0.050U
50A 59 12 32
21 1.0U 1.0U
1.0U 1.0UJ 1.0U 1.0U
1.0UJ 1.0UJ 1.0UJ 1.0UJ
--------•
FC-MW--05B-O FC-MW-07A FC-MW-07B FC-MW-08B FC-MW--09A FC-MW-09B FC-MW-10A FC-MW-11A FC-MW-12A
4/30/2002 • 51112002 • 511/2002' 512/2002 • 61312002' "'12002 • 0/2/2002. 51212002' 5/212002'
10U NA 10U 10U 2.8J 10U 10U 10U 10U
10U NA 10U 10U 30JN 10U 1ou 10U 10U
10U NA 10U 10U 42 10U 10U 10U 10U
10U NA 10U 10U 20U 10U 10U 1.4J 10U
10U NA 10U 10U 1.1J 10U 10U 10U 10U
10U NA 10U 10U 1J 10U 10U 10U 10U
10U NA 10U 10U 10U 10U 10U 500JN 10U
10U NA 10U 10U 20JN 10U 10U 10U 10U
10U NA 10U 10U 10U 10U 10U 2.3J 10U
10U NA 10U 10U 1.7J 10U 10U 10U 10U
10U NA 10U 10U 10U 10U 10U 2J 10U
10U NA 10U 10U 10U 10U 10U 10U 10U
10U NA 10U 10U 14-0J 10U 10U 10U 10U
10U NA 10U 10U 10U 10U 10U 50JN 10U
10U NA 10U 10U 1.6J 10U 10U 10U 10U
140 38 180 150 270 180 140 100 100
26 20 14A 5.6 14A 16A 5.5 8.5 5.4A
2.8 0.52 0.050U 0.16 0.77 0.14 2.5 0.058 3.6
0.050U 0.050U 0.050U 0.050U o-o-0.050U 0.050U 0.050U .
40 19 38A 21 30A 30A 26 230 69
1.0U 1.6 1.3 17A 1.8 1.2 4.4 1.2
1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0U 1.0UJ 1.0UJ 1.ou· 1.0U 1.0U
1.0UJ 1.0UJ 1.0UJ 1.0UJ 1.0UJ 1.0UJ 1.0UJ 1.0UJ 1.0UJ
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
FC-MW-OIA 1 9.64
FC-MW-0181 9.57
FC-MW-02A1 7.87
FC-MW-03A1 9.30
FC-MW-0381 8.90
FC-MW-05A1 12.76
FC-MW-0581 12.83
FC-MW-07A1 9.40
FC-MW-0781 9.40
FC-MW-0881 14.25
FC-MW-09A1 12.19
FC-MW-0981 12.24
FC-MW-IOA2 11.47
FC-MW-l lA2 11.67
FC-MW-12A2 10.74
NOTES:
Table 4
Water Table Elevations
FCX Washington Site
6.61
6.61
8.23
9.51
9.51
9.54
9.54
9.60
9.60
11.26
9.28
9.28
5.87
5.89
4.3
5.05
5.1
8.89
9.07
6.3
6.24
11.34
9.41
9.49
8.49
8.67
7.55
1 Well data taken from Table 3-3 ofRI/FS prepared by on COM April 15, 1993. Reference datum was not stated.
3.77
3.68
3.57
4.25
3.80
3.87
3.76
3.10
3.16
2.91
2.78
2.75
2.98
3.00
3.19
2 Well elevations were established using top of casing (TOC) ofFC-MW-08B at elevation of !4.25 feet. Survey perfonned by BVSPC
field team members
3 Vertical datum established for well elevations could not be referenced in supplied information.
feet btoc Feet below top of casing.
R:148141-48150\481441126\lables for gw and soil.xis
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CONTAMINANT UG/L
\
LEAD 21 J
CONTAMINANT UG/L
MANGANESE 1200
CONTAMINANT UG/L
. . ~ Ci-J.RU£ TOMS
~\_ P.ES:".lU;.NT & 0'15.'IR RAR
I t ~;e ~~
DIELDRIN 2.6 N 'lo
rC_O_N_T_A_M-IN_A_N_T ____ U_G/-L--,I 4•4-DDD 4.1 ]:&'; , ~~
ALDRIN o.63 N ~f~iNH~1\oNE l] J ~~~--~-:;~~~
HEPTACHLOR 2.1 MANGANESE 1200 'l',~-._
HEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE 0.49 I'--_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-..., -_t~ ________________ j_"-:;~ •. ~<,:; ALPHA-BHC 1. 7 r / -~ BETA-BHC 1.7 CONTAMINANT UG L ,. , :
GAMMA-BHC 1.4
DIELDRIN 2.2 C ,.. .. v•i
CONTAMINANT UG L
51 J
77 J
5900 J
UG/L
6
:::=gg~ 6:~2 C ~~~GANESE lf oi ✓J~S:~rd',
4,4-DDD 2.9 C ~:,v
~~~:~-CHLORDANE ):~ ' ~ (
ALPHA-CHLORDANE 0_77 CONTAMINANT UG/L ..,, /
53 J
1300
~ff~UM ;/J 68 )\~-/?/ t',se_"':_~..,L----1 MANGANESE 2500 J BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) J/ _
PHTHALA TE i' fl 'c~
UG/L .({r CONTAMINANT
CONTAMINANT
GAMMA-BHC
BERYLLIUM
ALDRIN
CONTAMINANT
HEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE
4,4-DDT
4,4-DDD
BERYLLIUM
CHROMIUM
LEAD
MANGANESE
0.14
UG/L
0.051
1.3
0.57
19
56
85 J
4800
CONTAMINANT
ALDRIN
ALPHA-BHC
BETA-BHC
GAMMA-BHC (LINDANE)
DIELDRIN
4,4-DDT
4,4-DDD
UG/L
0.98
3.9
1.5 N
7.7
1.6N
1.8
11
CONTAMINANT
ALDRIN
ALPHA-BHC
BETA-BHC
GAMMA-BHC (LINDANE)
DIELDRIN
0.82
4.1
1.4 N
8
2
13
35
,{' CHROMIUM
LEAD
MANGANESE
CONTAMINANT
LEAD
CONTAMINANT UG/L
CONTAMINANT UG/L ALPHA-BHC 0.061
4,4-DDT 0.15
5 1, 2-DI CHLOROPROP ANE 100 J
BENZENE 830
TOLUENE 2200
CONTAMINANT UG/L TOTAL XYLENES 3300
CARBAZOLE 10 J
BERYLLIUM 9 J
LEAD 29 J
300
UG/L
0.050
21
56
32 J
4600
UG/L
47 J
ENDRIN
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
1,2-DICHLOROPROPANE
CHLOROBENZENE
PENTACHLOROPHENOL
1.2
33
6 J
160
78
4,4-DDD
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
1,2-DICHLOROPROPANE
CHLOROBENZENE
PENTACHLOROPHENOL
10
150
76
CHLOROFORM
1,2-DICHLOROPROPANE
BENZENE
11 J
390
12 J
MANGANESE 8300 J
FIGURE CXFIED ~ PfPEQ CE OfOS<lt ER 'NtS11H9Ill4 H<JUH (;lRQ ffi!A ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECtlON AQENCY, 1913
VAU.£S SHCNN ARE RESU..lS MIO\£ ESTABUSHED BAQ<GROUND VALUES.
FCX WASHINGTON SITE ~ WASHINGTON, BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
MONITORING RESULTS
RI/FS (1993) MONITORING WEtL LOCATION MAP
150
LEGEND
----SOU~( A.~~:. 8Ul).-..0,1,~~
·~ SCuRC::E .:!is,:.
o
,•-300·
DUPLICATE
0.061
790
2100
3200
10 J
9 J
35 J
9500 J
300
FIGURE
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CONTAMINANT UG/L
ENDRIN
BETA-BHC
TOXAPHENE
0.7N
0.078J
19N
ONT AMIN ANT UG/L
LPHA-BHC 0.046J AMMA-BHC 0.051
IELDRIN 1.0N
LORIN 0.14N
LPHA CHLORDANE 0.29 AMMA CHLORDANE 0.38N
IS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PH TH ALA TE 24
CONTAMINANT UG/L
MANGANESE
DIELDRIN
ALDRIN
2100
0.14
0.47N
CONTAMINANT
MANGANESE
ALPHA-BHC
BETA-BHC
GAMMA-BHC
BENZENE
TOTAL XYLENE
UG/L
840J
D.042J
0.13
0.04JN
120
600
CONTAMINANT
LEAD
FIGURE COPIED FROM PfCf8Q Cf" PEQ$QN fCX WMHINQUII HAIJH CNP INA ENWIONMENTAL. PROTECTION AGENCY, 189.3 RESUl TS SHO-..N ARE FOR VAUJES OETEC1[D ABO\t: THE RAO. FROM THE REcce> Of DEaslON.
UG/L
38J
CONTAMINANT UG/L
LEAD 54J
I-DP
_ !i-SH,
(<
ESllENCE
CONTAMINANT UG/L
DIELDRIN 0.074J
LEGEND
-X-FENCE
,......_, TREE LINE
--SURFACE WATER
_ -__ SOURCE AREA
BOUNDARY
30~0 .... ,...1~5~0=..._0"""""'""'""'""'~300
1 ·=300'
rs 1998 MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS
FCX WASHINGTON SITE FIGURE
2 WASHINGTON, BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CONTAMINANT UG/L
ALPHA-CHLORDANE/2 0. 75J
DIELDRIN 0.53J
GAMMA-CHLORDANE/2 0.41J
TOXAPHENE 45
ONTAMINANT
LPHA CHLORDANE/2
LDRIN
ETA-BHC
IELDRIN
AMMA-CHLORDANE/2
CONTAMINANT UG/L
MANGANESE
ALPH-BHC
ALDRIN
DIELDRIN
GAMMA-BHC
1,500J
0.099J
2.7
0.38J
0.23
CONTAMINANT
DIELDRIN
4,4'-DDE
BENZENE
UG/L
0.23
0.19
0.67J
0.8
0.4
UG/L
0.11
0.028J
55
RGURE COPED FROM RfJX8Q SI" CfP$Qf f'Q( WMtlH9J9N NQRJH GARA /NA DMROt6EMTAl PROTECllON AGENCY, 1113
RESULTS SHOW ARE FOR VALUES DE1ECTED ABOVE. TIE RAOli FROM THE RECORD OIF DEOSKlN.
300
MAY 2002 SAMPLING RESULTS
FCX WASHINGTON SITE
WASHINGTON, BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH
CONTAMINANT UG/L
DIELDRIN
LEGENr,
~x-•:::~ICE
___...., -i<~ll.NE
----:;::u:;:;::,: ... ~::,:. a:u,OARv ® o::,:u:.cE ... ~s,.
150 0
1 "=300'
CAROLINA
0.03
300
FIGURE
3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CONTAMINANT
2,4'-DDE
CONTAMINANT
PARLAR 26
PARLAR 39
PARLAR 40
PARLAR 44
CONTAMINANT
CHLORDENE/2
4,4'-DDMU
2,4'-DDT
UG/L
0.0088J
UG/L
1.2 JN
0.88 N
1.2 N
0.48 N
HEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE
1-HYOROXYCHLORDENE
PARLAR 62
CONTAMINANT UG/L
PARLAR 26
PARLAR 39
PARLAR 41
0.11 JN
0.06 J
0.21 N
CONTAMINANT
4,4'-DDE
1-HYDROXYCHLORDENE
UG/L
0.0012 JN
0.027 JN
0.036 J
0.011 J
0.13
0.012 J
UG/L
0.028 J
0.078 JN
f1QR CCPIED F1IOM ,.M2 PE ~ fR WWfNRJPN HABJM G&RA SN!
DNIIONIIENTAt. PRO AGENCY, 1
AESULTI s«Mi1 ARE FOR VM.18 DETEC1ED NlfN£. M RAOt FRCl,I THE RECORD fl -
CONTAMINANT UG/L
HEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE 0.0098 J ~
1-HYDROXYCHLORDENE 0.023 J -N-PARLAR 32
PARLAR 40
PARLAR 44
PARLAR 62
300
0.013 N ~ 0.0091 J
0.011
0.0021
UG/L
CONTAMINANT UG/L
2,4'-DDD
4,4-DDD
4,4'-DDT
0.43 N
0.025 N
0.017 J
LEGENC
-,-~:'.NCf
--.·c1~t!.f~
-

-
--$:.~u:;:-::::: ... ~~ a:u,o~v
@ -::cu~CE A.REI,
150 0
1 "=300'
300
MAY 2002 SAMPLING RESULTS-PESTICIDE DAUGHTER PRODUCTS
FCX WASHINGTON SITE
FIGURE
4 WASHINGTON, BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
AGURE COPED FROM 8fY!!Q (f' QfPICII EA! W:!:S:ftHRJPrl H98Il1 CNKI IN! ENWKNIENTAL PROT[cnc:N A«Mr:'f, 1993
RESUllS SHOlfl M£. FOR VALLO DE1ECTED ABCM: THE RAOa FROM 1HE RECORD f1F -300
LEGENr,
-l-~:}JCf
_....._,-I-IU.LtF.
--__ :.::u~:;::: ,.;,t.:.
6:lN)AAV
@ '-•'.::U~Ct ....,;.s,-,
150 0
1 "=300'
Ill UPPER AQUIFER POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE MAP -MAY 2002
FCX WASHINGTON SITE
WASHINGTON, BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
300
FIGURE
5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IIW~lo;:.SH --DP
F•RMI.AHD
LEG ENC
-~-r::~1cr
,--.,-..., -~~l1.IF.:
- - - -~::u:;;r:~ .. ~::.,:, e:u,DAA"
@ -:::cu~ce: .\ls£/,
FIGURE C<PlfD FROM Bfl29 <F QfQSIAH fQf NSINffIQI NORTH CMQ INA EHWWNMDITAI... PROTECTION AGENCY, 1113
RESULTS 9tOWN ARE FOR VALUES DETECTID A80IJE Tl£ RAO. FROM THE RECORD Of
DEQSION.
Joeo;...=~,s~oze,;_,,,~o;;,,,,""'""'""'""'~Joo
1"=300'
LOWER AQUIFER POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE MAP -MAY 2002
FCX WASHINGTON SITE
WASHINGTON, BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
FIGURE
6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PROPOSED PRB _/
LOCATIONS
FARMIJJID
FlQJRE OOPE> FROlf RfQ'.'8D Cl" DfDSCN fCI WMtfNGillf, H9BDt CNtO WA
EN'JIRCINME)ITAL PR01[Cll0N AGENCY, 1913
RESUl.TS SH0WIN ARE RJR VALLES DETECTED NKN£ THE RAOa FROM THE RECORD Of
Dt:asKlN.
-i-
"'""" .,, ~ ROM ROD (9/15/93)
LEGENC
-x-r£~CE
,--.,-..., -•kl1.UE
-···-!:iLRi,!.C WAi~R
____ :r:u:;:::::: ~.-::.: a:u,QARv ® o;,::u:.ce: ... ,.~,
30~0...,...;15so..,.=~o.,,,,,,.,,,,.,,,,.,,,,.,,~3oo
1 "=300'
PRB AND DOWNGRADIENT MONITORING RECOMMENDATIONS
FCX WASHINGTON SITE
FIGURE
7 WASHINGTON, BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
I
I APPENDIX A
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- - --------- - - - -- --
Paste Example Dataset
Restore Formulas for Vs, Dispersivities, 'N
R, lambda, other
----
0.040
0.030
0.010
0.000
·•"'--C
0 . ·;:: ~ " ...l --,_ --C bl)
"' e --... ~ C
0 u
.
Distance --
----
0.051 0.050 0.048
. ---~-· --,~
I
.
..
............... •
'
-.... ,,•-·_,_, -~ .-·.
I From Source (ft)
' ' -' ·-' ,. _, __ '
- - -- ----- - -
0.045 0.040 0.033 0.024 0.016 0.010 0.005 0.002
_. "'"· .
--, ....
--.......... ,,
~ ' . ·:.',
~ .
. .~
I -~'• -'
100 -' 120 140 160 180
--- -- -- - - - -- - -- -- --
N~~~;'i ,.;_~;_ -. ~"-'~,1_~¥~'%~&.~ffi':JJ'3~~-;~~~h~3-~'~*,~~~~~~~-;;:~~~i~-~~~ ·n~t~{4r .. ~~ •,t~~i~~: h!R~ fr~i/'!5.lf."[S DI~S9 LY,.~Dt!J~l'IZENE_~CO l'\'.GE_NIRNf;H1l'lfiiINiPUUME-\( n.nVJ/at;Z.'j: 0)£K'.,'c'.lj1\• . •":ti' ;,Ji.'<;;,~:; '.;", • ,.,· ,:,;,'.A~:::, ,>;,':-,"').'!,-;,;,J,r,~•, J:-•~.@3)f.'";;o~;.•;;>;~••'ll'~'¼~~~q?$,ffe..-.r-,i?,;;~.,_}~'J"'~t~~1!: "!e°'~fiPt§?~~':;.,.~"..,;i<..,;,it,<,,_",.E.i•!.';•f•~•,; W.,h'-\ ,,_,.,~, ,,J., • /'.'fr..,_'7P,•.$-::.•/• .JJ-: .. v.,J~ '"''{-•-;:--:---;•~~ tP!~.tcJ/!R/?,:fft): ,i~i-~""'-"'~ ~i·:~\'""1:~?t-.~<.:>DiStance1fromiSOurce•(N)~i-"~~-::-bs.i,t~~~;~ ::;':,s:,j:'i.··-1.'~5':li':.~t~G'~~~-:f· -.' ;;, v-~t~. ·;:·"":,;;.,-~Mq<jef:t9~{]isp/a~~i~~1 ff:~t:lt&fi i!J:/..0J:ti!f{fJ:";-g;•J\~6J~·~1l~i3_2~iiil~J~,f.48.~:_i~liff$J6_4m~ifil~S01./A-£ll}ffi9_6~~~1~t:~~:~2}'.~\l·~ir;-,1i_sm'i~lt[s;!~j144i\?flf:~~;1_60?-~~ / No Degradation
'fi;:il!.f.,(l'(S---0 0.051 0.025 0.024 0.022 0.020 0.016 0.012 0.008 0.005 0.003 0.001 Model
'.,:}.'}·~1¥25 0.051 0.050 0.048 0.045 0.039 0.032 0.024 0.016 0.009 0.005 ~:,,J;:.z/J:o
,, ·.<,cit,25
"f?;.~&-;:·j~S.O
r
(
0.051 0.050
0.051 0.050
0.051 0.025
8.8E+O 8.0E+O
0.048 0.045 0.040
0.048 0.045 0.039
0.024 0.022 0.020
7.7E+O 7.2E+O 6.3E+O
0.033 0.024 0.016 0.010 0.005
0.032 0.024 0.016 0.009 0.005
0.016 0.012 0.008 0.005 0.003
5.2E+O 3.8E+O 2.5E+O 1.5E+O 7.9E-1
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.001
3.7E-1
1st Order Decay
Model
---------- --------
0.051 0.016 0.010 0.006 0.004 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000
0.051 0.032 0.020 0.012 0.007 0.004 0.003 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000
0.051 0.032 0.020 0.012 0.008 0.005 0.003 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000
0.051 0.032 0.020 0.012 0.007 0.004 0.003 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000
0.051 0.016 0.010 0.006 0.004 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000
8.8E+O 5.1E+O 3.2E+O 2.0E+O 1.2E+O 7.2E-1 4.1E-1 2.2E-1 1.1 E-1 5.2E-2 2.1 E-2
-50
·:( Plot All Data _] . ,
• ,-(-_. _P_l_o_t _D_a_ta_>_T_a_rg_e_t_)
(ft) 128 144
---- ----- --- - ----
- - ---
0.045-
0.040'
.
.
---
·--
,--
•. ·--
= 0 ·.::
~ ,_ -= c; c; = 0
0.030
.0.025
0.020
o.oiY
0. 010
0.005
0.000
.~u
0.041
. .,.,,;,. .. , .. ~ ,.
I
. I '-'"-'
~
e:1 bl) e ~
I
. Distance
. -I
; -: . ,
--- - -
0.042 0.042 0.038 0.029
. , ~ :,c·_. . •·
~I '
.. '
~I" .. ----"' ' .............. ......... "~.
" " ··-·
~-· .,
From Source (ft)
_......._
--. . . ' , ...
--- ---- --
0.016 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000
.; .. :... ..
\ .
.
.
-o·• :
(
.
-. . •. . . . · .. .
- - - --
0.041
0.000
0.000
( Plot All Data )
=======:'.
0.042
0.000
0.000
-
0.042
0.000
0.000
Plot Data> Target ) ~~-.. ~,--~~--, .; :-~cW:.•:fi,.,-
--- -
0.000 0.000
0.038 0.029 0.016
0.000 0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000 0.000
480 .' 540
-
0.000
0.005
0.000
0.000
.,,,:,,_.., --:~.-,-:,
. ;~·/:.
~ ... ~,· .. _-
,:~• ..... .
- - -
0.000 0.000
0.001 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
Mass HELP . -: ,._
:·.-<:-~"-·,:
- ---
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
'l Recalculate j
------- - - - ----- - -
0.000
0.041 0.037 0.033 0.028 0.020 0.010 0.003 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
( Plot All Data I
Plot Data> Target l Recalculate F
I
It
LACK & VEATCH Plant-------~-Unit ___ Dote .,a.==:..:L...,,,L_-,-
Project No. f(;i'/ff /.-24,le No. Verified By _____ _
Title _JA/24/ ....e_. ff~ i' Dote _____ 20
,$-t'c:'.'. :Z ~,,A/e Page ___ of ___ _
1=::::::;;:::::===============
I
I
I
I
I w u
I <( o_
Ul
II Ul
I
f-
I z
w
f-
I O'.'.
3:
f-0
I z
0
0
I
I
0)
I t') r---
~
I z
I c.:> 0...
f
I
/CA'e3(__'
' ,c~/4~
' I ..
Se,.,,.~? ~----e
J~f~/~ [ /'--1~ P1
. ~~µp;_-5~
--,-------, ... ------.! ~ -------,--
. I .
. I
I
I
I . I
. I
I I '
I I ' ! . I
&·' :
1 ______________ ....,__ ___ I --· _ ------.-
1 -
' t
l
I .
' ' 1
REVISED, SUPERSEDED, AND VOID CALCULATIONS MUST BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED,
INITIALED, AND DATED BY THE RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL.
I Ii~. Owner ,Ee ct: ?,,,)~~ ft.,c}computed By &.rr__~47
Plant ______ ~,....,..... Unit ___ Dote &-:'.<>V· /£: 20,b.,2_
BLACK & VEATCH Project No. 1"8_/ff. /...7Je No. ----Verified By -----1 Title ~ ,6/..e. ~ T Dote _____ 20
.. ,. Z:x 4;,Afde-(_ Page 7 / of ,/ I =:::::::-=====:::::::::======::::::::::::====;=
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
w
(.)
<( a..
(/)
z
w f-
0:: ~
f-
0 z
0
0
m
I ~
I
I'
I
z
(.'.) n.
LtA r;:5 e .-.
~ C.:>/4,~/~ ,_s~/4,£(:= /Y~_ ~-;
_;:;0,x~,4~_,-_,_.e -~ ~/4/ 7-_j'~'.
I .
I .
I
' ' !
• I
• , -I
I
! -, ----------/
,·
' I •.
I
REVISED, SUPERSEDED, AND VOID CALCULATIONS MUST BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED,
INITIALED. AND DATED BY THE RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL.
I
I -1
--1
I
I
' : I
-4
I '