NCD986187128_19980216_North Belmont PCE_FRBCERCLA RD_Final Remedial Design Work Plan Volume I-OCR

:I
·,-,.:,
, .. '
.... ,• ,.
1-
!"I•,
·:~1:~-/-:
· J .'
L
\. A,
i
. \-., ..
. . \ ...... ,· .. ., . -~ :.-·
.. , .
• •. \
' '
I',·.
: f :,l'I, ., ___ v· ...
, '
.: • j ., • j ·, -~ . \ '\ . . . ,, .\
, , i,· ''-•r ,: ..-':·, . .', •
,· .
•• 1 I ~~-, ,
'.J ---/·._·: ·1-:· . ,_; >:•,
·.· •. :._:.j;_'
_j ~'
>.,-i .. ',\•
~.-'.". li -; ,
'-,,/.:, .<{,
:,···· . ·._ .. ~;·
.,,··. .. ·,:.
",I
:-,{· :·-
' ,,:• :
I-,._
:._:" ·, :.
f· .• ,•
,,; ~: .-·
.:,(··•··
. ·•.· ~----, .
. ;. ·: ..
• l•'·
,t '•··
. ,,
. '· ' . ~. ·~ ~' ', . ,·•,,.'
... ·.
t
' ., . ~ . ~ ~-....
,J
.. ,
' , .,
..
·;le,..:
' . ~,-.,: ·.:~ .·
'' ·'•
.. , .. ·,
' ,
·',r,>,'
1 ,.i_::: .•... ·
..,
r, ·.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
REMEDIAL PLANNING ACTIVITIES AT SELECTED
UNCONTROLLED HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES DISPOSAL SITES
Prepared for:
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION IV
The data contained in all pages of this proposal have been submitted in confidence and contain trade secrets and/or privileged or confidential,
commercial, or financial information, and such data shall be used or disclosed only for evaluation purposes provided that, if a contract i1 awarded
to thi1 proposer as a result of or in connection with the submission of this proposal, the Government shall have the right to use or disclose the
data herein to the cXlc:nt provided in the contract. This restriction does n'ot limit the Government's right to use or disclose data obtained without
restriction from any source, includini the proposer.
FINAL
REMEDIAL DESIGN WORK PLAN
FOR THE
NORTH BELMONT PCE SITE
NORTH BELMONT, NORTH CAROLINA
VOLUME!
FEBRUARY 16, 1998
U.S. EPA CONTRACT NO. 68-W9-0056
WORK ASSIGNMENT NO. 076-4RDQD
DOCUMENT CONTROL NO. 7740-076-WP-BSQM
Prepared Byl1A,14l ~1 Pp j
Michael Profit ff ,
Project Manager
Approved By:. __ 6(l_flt__,1/'--_,_/_. _______ _
Gary P. Clemons, Ph.D.
Program Manager
Prepared by:
CDM FEDERAL PROGRAMS CORPORATION
2030 Powers Ferry Road. Suite 490
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
ARCS REGION IV
Date:
Date:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
Section
1.0
2.0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION .................. .
PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........ .
2.1 Site Location and Description ..
2.2 Site History ................ .
2.3 Environmental Setting .............. .
2.3 .1 Geology
2.3.2 Hydrogeology .
2.3.3 Hydrology ...... .
2.3 .4 Climate ............. .
2.4 Remedial Investigation Summary
2.5 Risk Assessment Summary ..... : ....
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.5.1 Chemicals of Potential Concern .
2. 5. 2 Exposure Assessment ..
2.5.3 Toxicity Assessment ..
2.5.4 Risk Characterization
2.5.5 Conclusions ....... .
Feasibility Study Summary
2.6.1 Alternative 1 -No Action
2.6.2 Alternative 2 -Limited Action ........................... .
2.6.3 Alternative 3 -Groundwater Exposure Abatement
2.6.4 Alternative 4 -Groundwater Exposure Abatement plus
Groundwater Treatment ..
2.6.5 Comparative Analysis of Remedial Alternatives ..
Record of Decision Summary .... , .
2.7:1 Groundwater Remediation ..
2.7.2 Performance Standards : ....
2.7.3 Additional Sampling Requirements
Proposed Remedial Design Activities
11
£age
1-1
2-1
2-1
2-3
2-5
2-5
2-7
2-8
2-9
2-9
2-10
2-11
2-11
2-12
2-13
2-15
2-15
2-15
2-16
2-16
2al6
2-17
2s.J8
2-19
2-20
2-22
2-22
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1·
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)
SCOPE OF WORK
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
Task 1 -Project Planning
3.1.1 Remedial Design Work Plan Preparation ................... .
3 .1.2 Field Operations Plan Preparation .....
Task 2 -Field Data Acquisition/Sample Analysis
3 .2.1 Subcontractor Procurement ........... .
3.2.2 Monitor Well Installation a'nd Sampling.
3.2.3 Private Well Survey ..... .
Task 3 -In Situ Bioremediation Assessment Work Plan
Task 4 -Potable Water Supply ..... .
3.4.1
3.4.2
Coordination with the City of North Belmont
Wellhead Treatment Unit Design ..
3.5 Task 5 -Community Relations Support ......................... .
3 .6 Task 6 -Project Completion and Closeout
3.7 Task 7 - Quality Management ... .' ............................. .
3.8 Task 8 -Technical and Financial M,anagement .... .
SCHEDULE OF ACTIVITIES AND DELIVERABLES ........... .
PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES
5.1 Project Organization ........................................ .
5.2 Quality Assurance Organization .. '
5.3 Team Firms ..... .
5.4 Subcontractors .............. .
REFERENCES
Ill .
3-1
3-1
3-1
3-3
3-3
3-3
3-10
3-10
3-11
3-11
3-12
3-12
3-12
3-13
3-16
4-1
5-1
5-1
5-4.
5.;5
5:5
6-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LIST OF
0
FIGURES
Figure
2-1 Site Location ...................................... .
2-2 North Belmont PCE Area ............................... .
3-1 Proposed Shallow Monitor Well Location ..................... .
3-2 Proposed Deep Monitor Well Location . · ...................... .
3-3 Top of Bedrock Monitor Well Construction Diagram .............. .
4-1 Project Schedule .............................................. .
5-1 Project Organization Chart ....................................... .
LIST OF TABLES
Iahl.e
2-1 Comparative Analysis of Alternatives ....................... .
2-2 Performance Standards ................................. .
4-1 Schedule of Deliverables ......... : . , ................... .
IV
.eage
2-2
2-4
3-4
3-5
3-7
4-2
5-2
.eage
2-18
2.21
4-5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I·
I
I
I
'I
I
I
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The objective of this work assignment is to provide to EPA technical, contractual, and
engineering support services for remedial design (RD) activities at the North Belmont PCE.
Superfund Site (hereinafter referred to as the "Site" or the "North Belmont Site") in North
Belmont, North Carolina. These services include additional characterization studies, surveys,
and the design of the groundwater recovery and treatment system described in the Record of
Decision (ROD) for the North Belmont PCE Site (EPA 1997a).
This work plan describes the scope of work, identifies key personnel, and presents the
associated level of effort, costs, and schedule for performing these tasks. The scope of work
is an abbreviated version of the tasks identified in the Agency's Statement of Work (EPA
1997b). The reason for this is that much of the design is contingent on the results of two
proposed studies: the in-well vapor stripper pilot study and the in situ bioremediation
'
evaluation. Once these studies are complete, it will be possible to finish the design described
in the original SOW in Phase II of the RD. Eight tasks are described in this work plan, the
first five of which will be conducted in Phase I of the RD. The final three tasks apply equally
to Phase I and Phase II of the RD.
•..
•
Project Planning -preparation of this work plan and the field operations plan
Field Data Acquisition/Sample Analysis -performance of all field activities
including installation of monitor wells, sampling and analysis of groundwater,
and private well surveys
Treatability Studies Work Plan Preparation -work plan preparation to conduct
an in-well vapor stripper pilot test and to evaluate in situ bioremediation
Potable Water Supply -coordination with the local water company to connect
private well users in the affected area to the city's system and the design of
wellhead treatment units for private well users who decline to be connected .
1-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• Community Relations Support -supporting EPA at public meetings concerning
the remedial design
• Project Completion and Closeout -performance of all activities required to
complete and closeout the work assignment for EPA
• Quality Management -monitoring of the technical accuracy and quality of all
deliverables prepared during the ,RD
• Technical and Financial Management -management and reporting of all
activities conducted during the RD
These tasks will be conducted and all deliverables will be prepared in accordance with all
applicable EPA guidance documents. The work will be conducted under Contract No. 68-W9-
0056 and work assignment number 76-4RDQD issued to CDM Federal Programs Corporation
(CDM Federal) on August 27, 1997.
1-2 .
I
-I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ,,
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This section presents the site description, the environmental setting, the operational history,
and the known nature and extent of contamination. This information was excerpted from
Record of Decision document (EPA 1997a).
2.1 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The North Belmont Site consists of two closed dry cleaning operations located in North
Belmont, Gaston County, North Carolina (latitude 35°16'24.5" and longitude 81°03'04.5").
' These two areas are referred to as "Source Area A" and "Source Area B" (Figure 2-1).
Source Area A is located at Roper's Shopping C,enter in Land Lot 5, Parcel 15-18A on
Woodlawn Avenue. The shopping center includes Roper's Furniture Store, a Baptist church,
and a cabinet manufacturing shop. The former dry cleaner facility is approximately 0. 75 acres
in size and is bounded to the east and west by residential neighborhoods; to the north by a
cemetery and an undeveloped wooded tract; and :to the south by North Belmont Elementary
School.
Two mobile homes are located on the property in the back of the shopping center, each
occupied by one tenant. There was believed to be a buried septic tank behind the shopping
center building near the mobile homes. A flea m,arket is held on the lawn between the-.
shopping center and the elementary school five days per week. The shopping center is ·fenced
along the southern and eastern boundary. The western portion of the shopping center is
covered with an asphalt parking lot, and the easte,rn portion is covered with soil and grass.
The terrain is relatively flat with a gentle slope toward the northeast to an unnamed tributary of
Fites Creek.
Source Area B is located at the northeastern corner of Acme Road and Suggs Road in Land
Lot 11, Parcel 15-18. This parcel has been converted to residential property. The majority of
2-1.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J\I .
l IL. Po•d -• .;, ,..~
SOURCE: DeLORME MAP EXPERT
CDM FEDERAL ARC& IV
SITE LOCATION MAP
NORTH BELMONT .PCE SUPERFUND SITE
NORTH BELMONT, NORTH CAROLINA
~
NOTE: NOT TO SCALE
FIGURE NO.
2-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
the area surrounding Source Area B is residential with a few small businesses. A cabinet shop
is located to the north.
In addition, a previous refrigerator repair shop and a machine shop were also suspected to be
potential sources of contamination. The refrigerator repair shop, now closed, is located at the
intersection of Julia Street and Acme Road in land lot 15-18A parcel #32. This is a small
commercial strip area with residential property surrounding the Site, except for a cabinet shop
and a well drilling company located to the east. • The machine shop is located at the comer of
Acme and Centerview Roads and is encompassed by residential neighborhoods. Figure 2~2
shows the approximate study area.
2.2 SITE HISTORY
Source Area A was operated by the Untz family from 1960 to 1975 as a dry-cleaning
establishment. A boiler located behind the building was used to "distill" the waste dry
cleaning solvents. The spent solvent residue from the boiler distillation unit was reportedly
disposed onto the ground surface behind the building, and spent solvents were disposed
through the on-site septic tank system. Source Area B was also operated by the Untz's family
prior to moving the dry cleaning establishment to. Roper's Shopping Center. Source Area B
was discovered during the site reconnaissance in October 1995 from an interview with a local
resident.
In February 1991, the Gaston County Health Department sampled the well that provided water
to the North Belmont Elementary School and two single family dwellings. This sampling was
associated with an effort by the County to evaluate community water supplies for volatile·
organic compounds (VOCs) contamination. The results of this sampling indicated significant
VOC contamination in the well.
2-3
-
0
- - -
02 LDT NUMBERS
• PREVIOUS DR'I' a.E.WNG rACLmES
.& ~ REFRIQERATOR REP~R f'M:IUTY
■ MACHINE SHOP
500' 1000: - -
. , ---
- -
CDMl'edenl
;i"
.. - - -- -
, ~:~~~~r ... r-t,~~i!.~-~CDI FEDERAL.' ARCS IV1'·"'·'r":~.•"' '~~~•:-1':'"1·1"'~~\l',>;tte,:•;;,;.,i ·
tloD
. ' ' ; .
NORTH BELMONT PCE AREA
NORTH BELMONT PCE SUPERFUND SITE
'NORTH BELMONT, NORTH CAROLINA ·
---
N
2-2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
----------
EPA Region 4 Emergency Response was notified. EPA and the Gaston County Health
Department sampled 25 drinking water wells. Tetrachloroethene (PCE), trichloroethene
(TCE) and cis-1,2-dichloroethene (1,2-DCE) "'.ere detected in sixteen samples. PCE
concentrations were found as high as 15,000 parts per billion (ppb). The elementary school
was immediately connected to the City of Belmont water system. Twenty-nine of the
neighborhood drinking water wells were taken out of service and connected to the Belmont city
water service. All but 12 of the residential wells were subsequently abandoned by grouting
them to the surface; 12 wells remained intact arid were proposed as monitoring wells. Seven
residences in the neighborhood were informed of the contamination but chose to continue to
use their wells and not connect to city water. Wells still in use in the vicinity of the Site were
scheduled to be sampled by the Gaston County Health Department. However, these wells
were not sampled until EPA's investigation in 1996.
2.3 ENYIBQNMENTAL SETTING
This section provides a description of the geology, hydrogeology, hydrology, and climate, in
the Site vicinity.
2.3.1 GEOLOGY
The Site is located within the central portion of the Charlotte Belt of North Carolina. The
rock types that underlie this terrain are dominated by granitic type rocks, metavolcanics, and
gneisses and schists of varying types. The rock. types are of varying metamorphic grade·and
all rock units trend parallel with the strike of the Appalachian Mountains, which is typically
northeast to southwest. These same units typically dip to the southeast along with the regional
topographic trend. Structurally, the area is complex with rock units displaying one or two
types of metamorphism or structural changes, such as faulting or folding. A large, unnamed
fault is located approximately six miles to the west of the Site.
2-5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
According to the Geologic Map of North Carolina (1985), the Site is underlain by foliated to
massive metamorphosed quartz diorite and massive to weakly foliated, hornblende rich granitic
type rock. These rock units have undergone periods of deformation that have produced
' folding and fracture planes in the rock, as well as brittle zones where the rock is actually
crushed, sheared, or faulted in some manner. As these rock types become weathered, soil
profiles develop that are characteristic of the original rock (also referred to as saprolite). For
example, the granite rock tends to weather to a clay rich loam or a dry rich sand, especially
with depth. The sand originates from quartz content within the original parent rock; in some
'
cases, larger grains of quartz sand can be found in the saprolite.
As described above, the bedrock types have been fractured during metamorphic phases and, in
some cases, the fracture places have been "resealed" by quartz. As the rock weathers, these
quartz fillings are retained in the soil indicating that fractures existed in the rock. In addition,
remnant fractures can be seen in the soil profile' without quartz infilling as indicated by the
presence of iron staining along the fracture plane. The iron staining, which is also referred to
as the mineral limonite, is a result of groundwater leaching iron from the surrounding
material, and as the groundwater travels along a fracture plane, the iron is being redeposited
along the plane. Fracture planes were also detected during drilling as zones of weak to
inc,ompetent rock that were not resistant to the cutting action of the drill bit. These fracture
zones, or secondary porosity features, were typically saturated.
During the field activities, the soil profile varied with each location; however, a common
pattern was observed. From top to bottom, the materials consist of a saprolite layer, a
partially weathered rock zone, and the underlying fractured crystalline bedrock. The saprolite
is clay-rich, residual material derived from in-place weathering of bedrock. Typically, the
saprolite is silty clay near the surface. With increasing depth, the amount of mica, silt, and
fine-grained sand and gravel tend to increase. Remnant fracture planes with quartz infilling
appear in this layer. The saprolite zone is thickest (approximately 125 feet) along the ridgeline
on the western edge of the Site, thinning towards the lower elevations or stream valleys to·
2-6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
approximately 30 feet in thickness. Underlying the saprolite is a partially weathered rock layer
derived from the weathering of bedrock that ranges in thickness from approximately 10 to 50
feet. This layer is composed of saprolite and fragments of weathered bedrock. Particle sizes
range from silts and clays to large boulders of unweathered bedrock. The weathering occurs
in bedrock zones less resistant to physical and chemical degradation (i.e., fault zones, stress
relief fractures, and mineralogic zones).
The predominant rock types, based on rock cores obtained during bedrock monitoring well
drilling, appear to be metamorphosed quartz diorite and metamorphosed granite or granitic
gneiss. The bedrock is fractured and these fractures contain quartz deposits that remain
unweathered in the saprolite. The rock quality designation (RQD) which is the measure of the
quality of a rock mass ranged from 0 to 45 percent; RQD values less than 50 percent indicate
very poor to poor rock and generally high in fractures.
2.3.2 HYDROGEOLOGY
Regionally, the water bearing units that underlie the Site and surrounding areas represent an
aquifer system consisting of metamorphosed and fractured quartz diorite and granitic type
rocks in varying proportions and thicknesses. Geologic structures that produce high-yielding
wells include contact zones of multilayered rock units, zones of fracture concentration, and
stress-relief fracture zones. According to LeGrand and Mundorff (1952), wells in Gaston
County that are set within granite have an average depth of 165 feet and an average yield of 18
gallons per minute. Within this area, LeGrand and Mundorff indicate that well depths range
from 85 to over 1,000 feet and that well yields range from 2 ½ to I I 6 gallons per minute. The
aquifer system underlying the Site generally consists of the saprolite/partially weathered rock
aquifer and the underlying bedrock aquifer; however, interconnection between these units is
likely which would influence contaminant transport.
2-7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
In the Site area, the top of the water table is typically found in the saprolite aquifer and will
generally mimic the overlying land surface. The depth to water across the area ranges from
approximately 3 to 35 feet below ground surface. The relatively shallow depths to water occur
within the basin of the stream located along the northern edge of the Site. The greatest depth
to water is found along the ridgeline on the western portion of the plume area, the location of
the Roper's Shopping Center and North Belmont Elementary School.
Using groundwater elevations collected in November 1996 and potentiometric maps drawn
from these groundwater elevations, groundwater within the saprolite and bedrock aquifer
generally flows to the northeast to east across the site. Based upon the potentiometric
contours, Roper's Shopping Center appears to be positioned within the top of a localized
groundwater mound with potentiometric contou~s emanating in a semi-circular pattern from
this point. Insufficient data of groundwater elevations along the western edge of the Site
prevent completion of the potentiometric contours.
Based on depth-to-water measurements for monitor wells MW-13 and MW-21, groundwater
discharges from the saprolite and bedrock aquifers into the small stream along the northern
edge of the Site; however, fractures present in the partially weathered rock and bedrock will
affect the direction of groundwater flow and reli<;:t fractures present in the saprolite may also
control groundwater flow directions. According to Harned (I 989), while working in the
Piedmont Province of Guilford and Mecklenburg Counties of North Carolina, most of the·
natural flow in the bedrock system is probably confined to the upper 30 feet of bedrock where
fractures are concentrated, and the overlying transition zone which apparently has the.highest
hydraulic conductivity of any part of the hydrogeologic system.
2.3.3 HYDROLOGY
The Site is located between the Catawba River and the South Fork of the Catawba River.
Gaston County is drained by the Catawba River, which flows north to south and forms the east
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
boundary of Gaston County. Surface water drainage from the Site is to an intermittent creek
(unnamed tributary "A") located approximately 1000 feet to the north. The intermittent creek
flows 0.5 miles east and joins another intermittent creek (unnamed tributary "B") to form an ·
unnamed perennial stream. The unnamed strea~ continues approximately 0. 75 miles to the
confluence with Fites Creek. The surface water pathway continues along Fites Creek
approximately 1.5 miles where it merges with the Catawba River.
The Catawba River is classified as WS-III by the North Carolina Water Quality Standards.
These standards are established under the North Carolina Administrative Code (Title 15,
Chapter 2, Subchapter 2B). The code establishes classes of freshwaters based on discharges to
the water body and its quality. Chemical quality standards for surface waters are also
established under the Code (Section 2B.021 l). Flow rates in Fites Creek near Catawba
Heights were calculated to be 4.6 cubic feet per second (cfs). The average flow rate along the
Catawba River at US 85 near Belmont is 2,109 cfs.
2.3.4 CL™A TE
The climate is moderate with approximately one half of the winter days falling below freezing.
Little snow falls and the occasional heavy snow usually melts within one or two days. The
average freeze-free period is 216 days. The summers are warm with temperatures into the
90°F range.
2.4 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY
·:/}:.,
A Remedial Investigation was conducted by EPA to determine the nature and extent of '.,i
contamination at the Site (EPA 1997c). Based on the data that were collected, the following_
conclusions were drawn:
2-9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.
2.
4.
5.
6.
2.5
The contaminant plume is spreading. Private wells in the vicinity of the Site that were
not contaminated in 1991 when EPA first investigated the Site are now contaminated.
Contamination detected in the shallow aquifer appears to be localized in Source Area A
(Ropers Shopping Center).
Contaminants have migrated from the shallow aquifer into the top of bedrock zone and
into the bedrock aquifer.
The source of contamination in the southern edged of the plume may be either Source
Area A or Source Area B.
Neither source area contains residual volatile organic contamination. It is believed that
the contaminants migrated through the soil directly into the shallow aquifer. Volatile
organics in surface soi I evaporated.
Surface water and sediment in the area are not affected by the volatile organic site
contaminants.
RISK ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
The Baseline Risk Assessment Report presents the results of a comprehensive risk assessment
that addresses the potential threats to public health and the environment posed by the Site
under current and future conditions, assuming that no remedial actions take place, and that the
surrounding area will remain a residential community.
The Baseline Risk Assessment Report consists of the following sections: identification of
chemicals of potential concern; toxicity assessment; human exposure assessment, and risk .
characterization. All sections are summarized below.
2-10
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.5.1 CHEMICALS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN
Data collected during the RI were reviewed and evaluated to determine the chemicals of
potential concern at the Site which are most likely to pose risks to the public health. These
contaminants were chosen for each environmental media sampled.
The chemicals of potential concern in groundwater are: 1, 1-dichloroethene, cis-1,2-
dichloroethene, 1,4-dichlorobenzene, trichloroethene, trichlorofluoromethane,
tetrachloroethene, methylene chloride, chloroform, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, alpha-
chlordane, gamma-chlordane, heptachlor epoxide, aluminum, cadmium, chromium, lead,
manganese, and zinc.
The chemicals of potential concern in soil are benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(b and/or k)fluoranthene,
benzo(a)anthracene, dibenzo(a,h) anthracene, indeno(l ,2,3-cd) pyrene, aluminum, chromium,
manganese, and vanadium.
2.5.2 EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT
The exposure assessment evaluates and identifies complete pathways of exposure to human
population on or near the Site. Current exposure pathways include exposure through
incidental ingestion of soil; inhalation of fugitive dusts from soils; dermal contact with soilsr ... •,'._,_i,
. : .. ··.JJ.tt;~,.:,;i.'<-,; ..
and ingestion of water from private wells. Land use assumptions include residential and· , .. , -~~!;i/;;:,· j. -
commercial. --,_~~;if.t~;'!'.:
::•..,;.,,,. ··' ' -. ' '""'~""ffi:' ----•.·-::,,,,~, Future use scenarios consider construction of a water supply well within the groundwater --· ·· · ~~ 1· )_.,;:; ." /: '
contaminant plume and ingestion of soil, inhalation of dusts and dermal contact with sqils as a
worse-case scenario. Possible exposure pathways for, groundwater include exposure to
contaminants of concern from the groundwater plume in drinking water and through inhalation
of volatiles evolved from water through household water use.
2-11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.5.3 TOXICITY ASSESSMENT
Under current EPA guidelines, the likelihood of adverse effects occurring in humans from
carcinogens and noncarcinogens are considered separately. EPA uses a weight-of-evidence
system to classify a chemical's potential to cause cancer in humans. All regulated chemicals
fall into one of the following categories: Class A -Known Human Carcinogen; Class B -
Probable Human Carcinogen; Class C -Possible Human Carcinogen; Class D -Not
classifiable as to human carcinogenicity; and Class E -Evidence of Noncarcinogenicity in
humans.
Cancer slope factors have been developed by EPA for estimating excess lifetime cancer risks
associated with exposure to potentially carcinogenic chemicals. Slope factors, which are
expressed in units of kg-day/mg, are multiplied by the estimated intake of a potential
carcinogen, in mg/kg-day, to provide an upper-bound estimate of the excess lifetime cancer
risk associated with exposure at that intake level. The term "upperbound" reflects the
conservative estimate of the risks calculated from the slope factor. Use of this approach makes
underestimation of the actual cancer risk highly unlikely.
Reference doses (RfDs) have been developed by EPA for indicating the potential for adverse
health effects from exposure to chemicals exhibiting noncarcinogenic effects. RfDs, which are
expressed in units of mg/kg-day, are estimates of lifetime daily exposure levels for hum~s,'..r ·;.,,., •. :'· ·
including sensitive individuals; that are free of any adverse effects. ,;:j:;;,~f i:,,:
~;---~(~f:t};. ... ,..,.
Estimated intakes of chemicals from environmental media can be compared to the RID. RfDs . . . ~-,. _'}_.~~.~~;,.
are derived from human epidemiological studies or animal studies to which uncertainty factors . . ,-z. ......
have been applied. These uncertainty factors help ensure that the RfDs will not underestimate ·
the potential for adverse noncarcinogenic effects to occur.
2:12
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.5.4 RISK CHARACTERIZATION
The risk characterization integrates the toxicity and exposure assessments into quantitative and ·
qualitative expressions of risk. The output of this process is a characterization of the Site
related potential noncarcinogenic and carcinogenic health effects.
Potential concern for noncarcinogenic effects of a single contaminant in a single medium is.
expressed as the hazard quotient (HQ), or the ratio of the estimated intake derived from the
contaminant concentration in a given medium to the contaminant's RID. By adding the HQs
for all contaminants within a medium or across all media to which a given population may be
reasonably exposed, the Hazard Index (HI) can be generated. Calculation of a HI in excess of
unity indicates the potential for adverse health effects. Indices greater than one will be
generated anytime intake for any of the chemicals of concern exceeds its RID. However,
given a sufficient number of chemicals under consideration, it is also possible to generate a HI
greater than one even if none of the individual chemical intakes exceeds their respective RIDs.
Carcinogenic risk is exp~essed as a probability of developing cancer as a result of lifetime.
exposure. Excess lifetime cancer risks are determined by multiplying the intake level with the
cancer potency factor. EPA' s acceptable target range for carcinogenic risk is one-in-ten-
thousand (lE-4) to one-in-one-million (IE-6).
SOIL
The screening-level Reasonable Maximum Exposure (RME) Hazard Index for soil is below a .
· ~· :.•:Li::-,;:.
level of concern for adults (HI = 0.22), but is slightly above levels of concern for children,-·~(-
(HI = 1.8). This value is due to contributions from aluminum, chromium, manganese, and-·.
vanadium. Because none of these chemicals cause n?ncancer effects on the same target
tissues, and because none of the chemical-specific HQ values exceed a value of one, it is
concluded that exposure to soil is not like! y to pose a significant noncancer risk to children.
2-13
'~;-·' ., .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
· Estimated RME excess cancer risks from soil to residents (child plus adult) are SE-05. This
risk is due entirely to the presence of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in soil,
especially benzo(a)pyrene. The risk is contributed about equally by ingestion exposure and
dermal contact. These risk levels are within the range (lE-04 to lE-06) that are generally
_considered to be acceptable by EPA.
GROUNDWATER
The screening level RME Hazard Index would be in a range of concern for both children
(HI=20.89) and adults (HI=S.96) if water from the center of the plume were used for
drinking and showering. This risk is primarily due to PCE, with a smaller but still significant
contribution from cis-1,2-DCE. Other chemic~ls in the center of the plume do not have HQ
values that exceed one, and do not appear to pose significant noncancer risk.
Estimated RME excess cancer risk to residents (child plus adult) from water at the center of
the plume is 2.2E-03, substantially above the usual acceptable risk range of lE-04 to IE-06.
This estimated excess ca,ncer risk is due primarily to PCE (l.9E-03), with a smaller but still
significant contribution (2.6E-04) from I, 1-DCE. These risks are derived mainly from the
in~estion route (2. lE-03), with a relatively small contribution due to inhalation of volatiles
while showering (l. lE-04). Other chemicals which contribute RME risks greater than lE-06
include chloroform, TCE, bis (2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, heptachlor epoxide, and 1,4-
dichlorobenzene. The combined RME risks from all of these chemicals is 6. 9E-05. •.--.
LEAD
Lead concentration data are available for 31 groundwater wells. Most of these wells (24 out of·
31) had lead levels at or below detection limits ( < 3_ ug/1), and 29 of 31 had concentrations at
or below the current EPA action level for lead in drinking water (15 ug/1). Only two
wells(converted wells NB007 and NB009) had concentrations above the action level, with
2sl4
I
I
I
I
measured values of 48 and 280ug/l, respectively. Based on the groundwater data, it seems
likely that most wells will be associated with lead levels that are not in a range of concern.
2.5.5 CONCLUSIONS
I Actual or threatened releases of hazardous substances from this Site if not addressed by
implementing the response action selected in the ROD, may present an imminent and I substantial endangerment to public health, welfare, or the environment.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.6 FEASIBILITY STUDY SUMM.ARY
The Feasibility Study (FS) (EPA 1997d) developed a list of four potential remedial alternatives
to, address the groundwater contamination at the' Site:
1. No Action
2. Limited Action
3. Groundwater Exposure Abatement
4. Groundwater Exposure Abatement plus Groundwater Treatment
Brief descriptions of the alternatives are described below.
2.6;1 ALTERNATIVE 1-NO ACTION
,':t:L·~--t~~;_;ff.
.. : '.·1f4-f::i~f;
--;·~:: :•L.t ,.••
Under the No Action alternative, the Site. is left "as is", and no funds are expended for active · · • ..
. : . :,·.~;/~::'~::·.
control of the groundwater contaminant plume. Contaminated groundwater would remain
uncontrolled allowing for the potential migration farther downgradient and deeper into .
bedrock. The National Contingency Plan (NCP) (EPA 1990) requires consideration of this
alternative as a baseline for comparing other remedial actions and the level of improvement
achieved. However, five-year reviews of the Site remediation decision, which consist of one
2-15
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, I
I
I
I
I
round of sampling of selected monitoring and potable wells, would be conducted over an
estimated 30-year period.
2.6.2 ALTERNATIVE 2 -LIMITED ACTION
In this alternative, deeds in the area would be required to record the fact that groundwater
contamination exists under the property, and if a potable well is constructed, a strong
possibility exists that the water will be contaminated with unacceptable levels of volatile
organic contaminants. These recordations would remain in place until the groundwater quality
would allow unrestricted use.
2.6.3 ALTERNATIVE 3 -GROUNDWATER EXPOSURE ABATEMENT
Under this alternative, all homes, churches, and businesses in the North Belmont PCE Site
area not currently connected to the City of Gastonia or Gaston County public water supply
would be connected. In addition, residents will also be given the option to obtain wellhead
treatment of their private, well, i.e. groundwater treatment such as a carbon filter unit would be
connected to the private water supply well.
2.6.4 ALTERNATIVE 4 -GROUNDWATER EXPOSURE ABATEMENT PLUS
GROUNDWATER TREATMENT
This alternative would include all the provisions of Alternative 3 plus would add treatment of ·
~ .... -,•
the contaminated groundwater plume. The groundwater plume has been divided into three_
distinct plumes contained within the shallow, saprolite aquifer, the top of bedrock aquifer, and
the bedrock aquifer. The treatment process will consist of a combination of two different
process options: in-well vapor stripping and in-situ biological treatment. The in-well vapor
stripping and in-situ bioremediation fechnologies would be used throughout the plume. A
2-16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
treatability study would be performed to determine the optimum combination of these two
treatment processes, and the best conditions for the use of each.
2.6.5 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES
Each alternative was assessed using seven evaluation criteria required under CERCLA. The
ranking scores for each evaluation criterion, excluding cost, are presented in Table 2-1. Each
alternative's performance was ranked on a scale of zero to five, with zero indicating none of
the criterion's requirements were met, and five indicating all of the requirements were met.
The ranking scores are not intended to be quantitative or additive. They are summary
indicators only of each alternative's performance against the evaluation criteria. The ranking
scores combined with the present worth costs provide the basis for comparison among
alternatives.
Under overall protection, the no action alternative (Alternative 1) is ranked the lowest ("0")
since contaminated groundwater is left onsite with no further actions being conducted.
Alternative 2 is ranked slightly higher(" I") since deed recordations will be implemented in an
attempt to limit contact with the contaminated groundwater. Alternative 4 is ranked higher
("5") than Alternative 3 ("4 ") since this alternative provides for treatment of the entire
contaminant plume and would provide added protection to residents downgradient of the Site
who are currently not affected by the Site. · '·-"·'
Under compliance with ARARs, Alternatives I and 2 are ranked the lowest ("0") since
contaminated groundwater remains onsite and c_hemical-specific ARARs are not met. .. '" .. ~· ·.,
Alternative 3 is ranked lower than Alternative 4 since ARARs will not be met over the enti~:' i4::.:·
plume.
Under long-term effectiveness, the no action alternative is ranked the lowest since
contaminated groundwater would be left onsite with no further actions being conducted.
2,17
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-,-_,_ ,; M ., h v,·,;;•:::i::.....•._
Alternative 2 is ranked slightly higher since deed recordations would somewhat limit contaot
with the contaminated groundwater. Alternative 4 is ranked highest since contaminated
groundwater over the entire plume would be remediated.
Under reduction of mobility, toxicity, and volume (T/M/V), Alternatives 1 and 2 are ranked
the lowest since contaminated groundwater remains as is. The mobility, toxicity, and volume
are reduced in both Alternatives 3 and 4, however, to a greater extent in Alternative 4.
Under short-term effectiveness and implementability, Alternative I is ranked the highest since
no further actions are being conducted. Alternative 2 is ranked next since the only actions
taking place are deed recordations and groundwater monitoring. The remaining alternatives
are ranked equally.
Table 2-1. Comparative Analysis of Alternatives
Evaluation Criteria 1-No Action 2-Limited 3-Groun<lwater Exposure 4-Groun<l water Exposure
Action Abatement Abatement & Treatment
Overall Protection 0 I 4 5
Compliance w/ ARARs 0 0 4 5
Long• Term Effectiveness 0 I 4 5
Reduction of M/T N 0 0 4 5
Short-Tenn Effectiveness 5 4 3 3
Implementability 5 4 3 3 ,
Present Worth Costs $291,066 $432,255 $2,196,275 $4,716,400
2.7 RECORD OF DECISION SUMMARY
Based upon consideration of the requirements of CERCLA, the NCP, the detailed analysis of
alternatives and public and state comments, EPA selected Alternative 4 as the groundwater
remedy for this Site. The remedy includes connectin·g all homes, churches and businesses in
th~ "North Belmont PCE Area" as depicted in Figure 2-2 to the City of Belmont public water
t·_-., •
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-,c,.-,-,•c,.:.:.:.:.i.;:.,,,,·;tr,•?••• -•• •...;i:-rt:j~i-:-.
supply; optional installation of granulated carbon filters on private wells with operation and
maintenance of the filter for one year with a filter replacement after the first year of operation;
and groundwater treatment by in situ biological treatment and in-well vapor stripping. At the
completion of this remedy, the risk associated with this Site has been calculated to be within
the accepted risk range determined to be protective of human health and the environment. The
total present worth of the selected remedy is $4,716,400.
2.7.1 GROUNDWATER REMEDIATION
Groundwater remediation will address the contaminated groundwater at the Site. The major
components of the groundwater treatment option include in-well vapor stripping and in-situ
biological treatment. The in-well voe removal system volatilizes voes contained in
groundwater and removes them as a vapor. The vapor is retrieved using vacuum extraction
and is treated above ground by adsorption onto granular activated carbon (GAe). The voe-
enriched vapor is extracted and the partially cleaned water is returned to the aquifer. The
system recirculates the groundwater through air-lift pumping. The system converts
groundwater contamination into a vapor that is vacuum-extracted and treated. At the same
time, air-lift pumping circulates the groundwater, which becomes cleaner with each pass
through the in-well air stripper. The only input to the system is gas, which is injected into the
well. The injected gas is typically air and can be recycled during the process.
. -~;:r~rr•
The only output of the system is gas that is removed from the well; this gas contains the·.VOCs ·
removed from the groundwater. After removal, this voe vapor is adsorbed onto GAC. The
GAC is regenerated and reused. No major facilities are needed for this technology. Pow~:'ir"'"'",.
. . . ,;-~:::t: . .:.:::'{;~f ...
needed to operate the pumps and compressors. The method itself involves no moving parts ·. •::,;_ -·
-. ·: ½"~:~ _,.._
beneath the ground surface; however, careful packer and well designs would be required to
successfully divert the groundwater from the well ba_ck into the saturated zone and to the water
table. The system is expected to operate approximately 10 years.
2sl9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
••
I
I
I
The second component of the treatment system would be in-situ bioremediation to degrade the
contaminants in the aquifer. The process involves the addition of microorganisms, nutrients,
and an oxygen source (if aerobic) to the aquifer to enhance the natural degradation process. A·:
treatability study will be .conducted to determine the optimum concentrations of nitrogen,
phosphorus, and other trace minerals that are required by the microorganisms to best degrade
the organic compounds.
The groundwater treatment is expected to last approximately 10 years. Groundwater
monitoring will be conducted quarterly for the first three years, semi-annually for the next
seven years, and annually for five years thereafter.·
2.7.2 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The goal of this remedial action is to restore the groundwater to its beneficial use. Based on
information obtained during the RI, and the analysis of all remedial alternatives, EPA and the
State of North Carolina believe that the selected remedy will be able to achieve this goal:
· Groundwater contamination may be especially persistent in the immediate vicinity of the
contaminants' source, where concentrations are relatively high. The ability to achieve
remediation levels at all points throughout the area of attainment, or plume, cannot be
determined until the treatment system has been implemented, modified, as necessary, ani:•--· -: · .. _.
plume response monitored over time. ,,: · ·: :~~,-{_ ·
Groundwater shall be treated until the following performance standards are attained througJ:tout
the contaminant plumes:
2-20
"'r:..,,..,.,-,,,t..,_.';!'"'
.-.:. :'t~'-:, · ..
,.
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
••
I
I
I
Table 2-2. Performance Standards
Contaminant Remediation Level Risk Level
Lead 15 u2/l NA
Methvlene Chloride 5 ue/1 IE-05
Cis -1,2-Dichloroethene 70 u2/l HI = 0.4
Trichloroethene 2.8 uo/J IE-06
Tetrachloroethene I uo/1 IE-06
B is(2-eth v lh ex v I) n h th al ate Juo/1 IE-06
Chloroform I ue/1 IE-06
1, 1-Dichloroethene I ug/1 IE-05
Hazard Index (HI) -Relates to non-cancer risks
lE-06 Risk Level -Probability for carcinogenic ~ffects
NA -Not applicable. Risk from lead is not calculated using HI or risk level.
ug/1 -micrograms per liter
If it is determined that certain portions of the aquifer cannot 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:
a) engineering controls such as physical barriers, or long-term gradient control provided
by low level pumping, as contaminant measure;
b) performance standards may be waived for the cleanup of those portions of the aquifer
based on the technical impracticability of achieving further contaminant reduction; ·.--',-,...
' 's;-,: '
c) institutional controls may be provided/maintained to restrict access to those portions or~
d)
e)
the aquifer which remain above remediation levels;
continued monitoring of specified wells; and
periodic reevaluation of remedial technologies for groundwater restoration.
2-21
I
I
I
I
I
I
·I ,,
I, ,.
I
I
I
1:
I
I,
,•,
I
I
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 5 year intervals in accordance with CERCLA Section
12l(c). The remedial actions shall comply with all ARARs (See Section VII).
2.7.3 ADDITIONAL SAMPLING REQUIREMENTS
Additional groundwater sampling shall be conducted to further define the extent of
contamination. Specifically, the following shall be obtained at a minimum:
L Additional monitoring wells are needed in the following areas:
• West and southwest of Source Area A (across Woodlawn Dr), surficial zone;
• South of Source Area Band MW-10, top of bedrock zone; and
• East of Source Area B and TW-l l/MW-10, top of bedrock zone.
2. · Periodic private well sampling to determine if any of the residents' wells exceed the
Emergency Response action level of 70 ug/1 for PCE.
2.8 PROPOSED REMEDIAL DESIGN ACTIVITIES
As mentioned previously, there is currently too little information to proceed with all of the.
design tasks specified in the Agency's SOW (EPA 1997b). As such, the design will be
conducted in two phases. Phase I, described in this document, will consist of the preparation
of an in situ bioremediation treatability study work plan, summarization of preliminary designs
and cost estimates submitted by vendors of in well vapor strippers, coordination with the local
water company to provide service to private well users in the affected area, and the design of
wellhead treatment units for private well users who decline the opportunity to be connected to
the city's network. The results of the in situ bioremediation evaluation and the information
2-22
I
I
i
I
'I
,I
I
,·.
I
I
I
I
I
obtained from vendors of in well vapor strippers will dictate the course of Phase II of the RD.
Phase II tasks will be described and budgeted in an addendum to this work plan.
2-23
•• , ••ca. a . ··•--', ,.., .
·. '
I
I
I
I
,I,
I
I
,I
I·
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i·
3.0 SCOPE OF WORK
The following sections describe in detail each of the tasks that will be completed in Phase I of ·
the RD.
3.1 TASK 1 -PROTECT PLANNING
The principal subtasks that were identified as part of project planning are remedial design work
plan preparation (this document) and the preparation of a field operations plan. Each of these
s~btasks is described below.
3.1.1 REMEDIAL DESIGN WORK PLAN PREPARATION
CDM Federal prepared this work plan to describe the work effort required to complete Phase I
of this assignment. The work plan defines the scope of work, identifies key personnel, and
presents the level of effort, costs, and schedule associated with the work assignment. Within
15 days after receipt ofEPA's comments on the draft work plan, CDM Federal will prepare
and deliver three copies of the final work plan addressing.EPA' s comments.
This work plan is a product of other preliminary steps including a scoping meeting between the
Agency and CDM Federal to discuss the goals of the assignment, and a review of background~
material from EPA files. A site visit by the senior project engineer, and the junior project' '":'{,
engineer is planned as well. :·:;·• >·, ,L
3.1.2 F1ELD OPERATIONS PLAN PREPARATION
CDM Federal will prepare a Field Operations Plan (FOP) for the field investigation. This
plan will be used to ensure that all sample collection and analytical activities are conducted in
accordance with technically accepted protocols, and that the data generated will meet the
3-1
.. ·.,;.;
I
I ,,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DQOs established. The FOP will consist of a detailed Field Sampling and Analysis Plan
(FSAP), a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP), and a Health and Safety Plan (HSP).
The FSAP will describe in detail the various field activities scoped for this assignment. The
FSAP will state the sampling objectives; identify the location, number of samples, sample
types, and analyses necessary to define site contamination; and list the necessary equipment for
performing the field sampling activities. This plan will provide a guide for all field work,
identify the individuals responsible for site work activities, and provide detailed procedures for
conducting all field activities.
The QAPP will be prepared in accordance with CDM Federal and EPA Region IV guidelines,
for all site sampling activities. The QAPP specifies the procedures that must be implemented
to ensure that data gathered at the site are consistent with specific quality goals of accuracy,
precision, and completeness.
The HSP will be prepared to protect personnel involved in site activities and the surrounding,,
community. This plan will be developed in accordance with the CDM Federal Corporate:
Health and Safety Plan and all applicable regulatory requirements contained in 29 CFR
1910.120 (1) (2) -Occupational, Health, and Safety Administration, Hazardous Waste
Operations and Emergency Response, Interim Rule, December 19, 1986; U.S. EPA Orders
1440.2 and 1440.3; and U.S. EPA Interim Standard Operating Procedures. The HSP will~'
provide health and safety requirements for all COM Federal personnel working at the site:for. _, .. ,,._.
each task identified in the Work Plan. The HSP will describe personnel monitoring and ,-,,-; -
...-.'< ~ decontamination procedures in detail, and will address health and safety training procedures .--
and requirements for all onsite personnel. The plan will identify problems or hazards that m~/;\-,; -~
' . ,·
be encountered and how these are to be addressed. In addition, procedures for protecting third ·,
~ . _, -·
parties, such as visitors or the surrounding community, will be provided. Standard operating.
procedures for ensuring worker safety will be referenced and will not be duplicated in the
HSP.
3-2
I
I
I ,,
•• ,,
1·
I
I
I
' I
••
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.2 TASK 2 -DATA ACQUISITION/SAMPLE ANALYSIS
The data acquisition task is comprised of the procurement of a drilling subcontractor to install
three additional monitor wells, monitor well installation and sampling, and a private well
survey. These subtasks are described below .
3.2.1 SUBCONTRACT PROCUREMENT AND SUPPORT
A drilling subcontractor will be procured to install three monitor wells. CDM Federal will
prepare a list of bidders for this subcontract that includes local companies to the greatest extent
possible. Statements of work describing the detailed requirements for these tasks will be
prepared and combined with the contractual language and bid sheets to form an invitation for
bid (IFB). Every effort will be made to identify at least three potential bidders. In addition,
the solicitation will be evaluated to determine if the potential exists for award to Small
Disadvantaged Businesses (SDB). The lowest cost, qualified, and responsive bidder will be
selected for contract award.
3.2.2 MONITOR WELL INSTALLATION AND SAMPLING
Consistent with the ROD, three additional groundwater monitor wells will be installed in the
following areas:
• South of Source Area Band TW-11/MW-10 (top of bedrock zone).
• East of Source Area B and TW-11/MW-10 (top of bedrock zone).
• West and southwest of Source Area A (surficial zone).
The proposed locations for these wells are shown in Figures 3-1 and 3-2; actual locations may
vary slightly depending on accessibility. The wells will be screened to monitor groundwater in
the top of the bedrock and the surficial zone of the bedrock aquifer.
3-3
562000. / .::=~~;;.::~rt.V'f~1 -···
/
561500.
561000.
560500.
560000.
559500.
1387000.00 1387 .00 1388000.00 13 00.00 1389000.00 1389500.00 1390000.00 1390500.00
LEGEND:
8'1 PrOJ)Osed Shallow Monitor Well location
t,,:j' J.'; •\J.; •~ ;'!-1i!•t:f,'t 1/i;f'lllt ~~~!l;-r-!!'j-J
o Shallow Monitor Well Location 4 J .. 4·, • ' J I ' , ' t!
NOTTO SCALE .. ;,; i:I!!\! f!=DERAL ARCS !'! ~ coM ....._. __ c...-Jtl!-~~~~"'~ &!'f~-,:.Lo~ · MqtHT9~ ~~+ !-~F!T!~N
0 A_,.-a.o,_,_, .-1• ,
. . NORTH' BELMONT PCE SUPERFUND SITE
. NORTH BELMONT,' NORT0H CAROLINA .. . •-' .
FIGURE NO r 1\., . • l1
562000.00
561500.00
561000.00
560500.00
560000.00
559500.00
1386500.00 1387000.00 1387500.00 1388000.00
NOTTO SCALE
TW4
Oj
/
1388500.00
iW5 13
0
1389000.00 1389500.00 1390000.00 1390 0.00 1391000.00
FIGURE NO ' I' . 'II ''. i ,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
All monitor wells will be installed according to EPA standards specified in the Environmental
Investigations Standard Operating Procedures and Quality Assurance Manual, U.S. EPA
Region IV, Sciences and Ecosystem Support Division, May 1996. Monitor wells will either
be constructed with a flush mount or with stick-up casing, depending on which type of
construction is preferred by the property owner. Procedures for drilling, constructing, and
developing the wells, and decontaminating the equipment are described below. All
decontamination by-products, drill cuttings, well development water, and purge water will be
managed as follows:
• · Alcohol decontamination byproducts and rinsate decontamination byproducts
will be containerized in 55-gallon drums, labeled, and stored for disposal at a
later date.
•· Drill cuttings will be containerized in 55-gallon drums, labeled, and stored for
disposal at a later date.
•· Development water and purge water will be containerized in 55-gallon drums,
labeled, and stored for disposal at a later date.
The drilling, construction, and development of all wells will be performed under the
continuous supervision of an experienced geologist. All wells will be installed in a manner
that will minimize the chance of cross-contamination. Typical well construction details for the
permanent monitor wells are shown in Figures 3-3. Clean quartz sand, graded to a larger
particle size than the screen slots, will be used to pack the annular space adjacent to the.screen.
3.2.2.1 Top of Bedrock Wells
Two new top of bedrock monitoring wells will be installed with 4 ¾-inch inner diameter (i:d.)
hollow stem augers (HSA). Based on the depths to bedrock encountered in the RI, these wells
may be as shallow 28 feet or as deep as 140 feet. After auger refusal is encountered, drilling
3-6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I ~
I
I ~
CAP WITH LOCK
PROTECTIVE
STEEL CASING
. •.•. "<J .,
NOTES:
__J_--,-
CONCRETE
PAD
PROTECTIVE
POSTS
2" STAINLESS STEEL
CASING
9" BOREHOLE
2" DIAMETER
STAINLESS STEEL
~-SCREEN--
SAND PACK
(20/40)
1. The shallow permanent wells will be
completed on the top of the bedrock,
estimated at 140 feet bgs.
2. Two wells are shown on this diagram to
illustrate construction details for stick-up.
and flush-mount types of well completion.
One type will be chosen for each location,
QlM.....,.
COM FEDERAL ARCS IV
TOPOFBEDROCKMONITORWELL
CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAM
NORTH BELMONT PCE SUPERFUND SITE
NORTH BELMONT; NORTH CAROLINA
FLUSH MOUNTED
PROTECTIVE. COVER
INTERNAL CAP
WITH LOCK
CONCRETE.
TOP OF BEDROCK
FIGURE NO.
I
I
I
I
I
I
will cease and the well will be constructed inside the augers using 2-inch outer diameter·flush
threaded stainless steel well casing and screen (0.010-inch slot size).
The bottom of the screen will be sealed with a stainless steel sediment sump. A washed,
graded sand will then be tremied using potable water in the borehole annulus. As the level of
the filter pack rises, the auger and tremie pipe will be gradually removed and the filter pack
will be emplaced to a level of 2 feet above the top of the screen. With the filter pack in·place,
a pure bentonite slurry will be placed directly onto the sand using the tremie pipe to an
approximate distance of 21/2 feet below ground surface. Potable water and groundwater I present in the borehole during the placement of the sand will be allowed to hydrate the
bentonite seal for approximately 24 hours.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
A flush mounted manhole or protective cover will be placed over the top of the well casing
and grouted into place within a three foot by three foot concrete pad. A lockable cap will then
be placed on top of the well casing and secured with a padlock. For locations with a
protective casing, the padlock will be placed on the outside of the cover and three protective
posts will be placed arou,nd the concrete pad in a roughly triangular shape.
3.2.2.2 Temporary Surficial Zone Monitoring Well
One temporary surficial zone well will be installed as a single cased well where the water·table
is located within the screen interval. Advancement of the surficial monitoring well boring0_~;1r'·/,. ·
be with 4¾-inch i.d. HSA. Drilling will cease after the cutter head penetrates approximately
8 feet below the water table. At this time the Teflon plug from the lead auger will be r~~o~ed· ,,,
and well installation will begin. Anticipated depth of the well is approximately 50 feet.
-Techniques for subsurface and surface installation of_wells in the surficial zone of the aquifer
are the same as those used for top of bedrock wells. Details are included in the previous
section.
3-8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.2.2.3 Well Development
The monitoring wells will be developed to eliminate all fine material from the well screen
area, thus allowing for the collection of a sample that is free of suspended materials and is
visibly clear. Development will continue until: l) temperature, pH, and conductivity of the
development water have stabilized; 2) turbidity is less than 5 NTU (higher turbidity readings
may be acceptable if the driller can demonstrate that the development method chosen is
suitable for the conditions, and turbidity readings have stabilized); and 3) a minimum of five
well volumes are evacuated from the well.
COM Federal will periodically measure pH, specific conductance, and turbidity of water
removed during well development to evaluate the adequacy of development. This information
will be recorded in a log. All materials introduced into wells during development, such as
airlines, pumps, etc., will be subject to decontamination procedures. Development water will
be contained in 55-gallon drums and stored for future disposal.
3.2.2.4 Monitor Well and Private Well Sampling
Approximately 30 groundwater samples will be collected from existing and newly installed
monitor wells and private wells. Samples will be sent to an EPA Contract Laboratory
Program laboratory for definitive data analysis. All samples will be collected for VOC · •,;-·;,;, •-: < ~1'~-t;<.~,
analyses with approximately 25 percent submitted for full target compound list/target analyte ·· ,1::o;
list (TCL/TAL) scan. Where possible (the water level is less than 25 feet deep), groundwater ,.:"-
-" ••• .:-. ••J· ':;.;,--,~. samples will be collected using peristaltic pumps to minimize sample turbidity. If the water •. I
:,•'.:,.\1:'-... level is more than 25 feet deep, submersible pumps will be used to collect the samples. Both "''
techniques will be described in detail in the field operations plan.
:· "'.:·~ -~.:,f ... :~:;;_-
3-9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
3.2.3 PRIVATE WELL SURVEY
A private well survey, building on an extensive survey that has already been done, will be
conducted to determine the exact number of households requiring connections to the public
water system. The survey will also identify those residents who may elect to continue using
their private well and will therefore require the installation of a wellhead treatment unit. The
survey will be conducted door-to-door, supplemented by postage-paid questionnaires if the·
homeowner is unavailable. For costing purposes, it was assumed that approximately 80
private wells in the affected area will require documentation.
3.3 TASK 3 -IN SITU BIOREMEDIATION ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN
CDM Federal will prepare a work plan to assess the applicability of in situ bioremediation as a
treatment option for this site. The work plan will include:
•
•
An evaluation of the existing data to determine what additional field or laboratory
data ( e.g., dissolved oxygen, total organic carbon, nutrients, bench tests of soil or
groundwater, etc.), if any, needs to be collected in order to recommend a
particular bioaugmentation technology to field test;
If additional data are needed, a strategy and budget estimate to collect the data will
be presented. Specifically, this will include a budget estimate to procure necessary
subcontractors (e.g., laboratories and a DPT company to obtain the samples), and
a cost estimate and schedule for performing this work;
The work plan will include a budget estimate to evaluate the data and prepare a
report that recommends a course of action. The recommendation will be to eitlier
(1) optimize electron donor addition; (2) optimize sequential anaerobic-aerobic ..
bioremediation; (3) optimize enhanced anaerobic plus aerobic bioaugmentation; or
(4) optimize enhanced aerobic bioaugmentation. A budget and a schedule to field
test the preferred option will be presented in the report. A summary of
preliminary designs and cost estimates submitted by vendors of in well vapor
strippers will also be presented in this report.
3-10
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
In the event that sufficient information exists to recommend a particular technology to field test,
tasks related to data gathering will not be conducted.
3.4 TASK 4 -POTABLE WATER SUPPLY
The ROD for this site states: "The remedy includes connecting all homes, churches and
businesses in the "North Belmont PCE Area" as depicted in Figure 1-2 of the ROD (Figure 2-
2 of this work plan) to the City of Belmont public water supply; optional installation of
granulated carbon filters on private wells with operation and maintenance of the filter for one
year with a filter replacement after the first year of operation." In order to complete this part
of the RD, the following subtasks will be completed:
3.4.1 COORDINATION WITH THE CITY OF NORTH BELMONT
CDM Federal will use the information generated from the private well survey (Task 2) to
determine which of the affected areas are not currently hooked to the City water supply. This
information will be reviewed with the appropriate City officials to determine what
improvements or additions to the City's water distribution system would be necessary to
provide City water to these areas. Information regarding approximate costs and time to
implement the modifications will be obtained from the City. In addition, CDM will determine
the requirements and approximate costs of making individual household connections to the•
City's system.
The results of this coordination effort will be provided to EPA in a letter report that includes
the following:
• Listing of the areas requiring modifications for public water
• Summary of cost and schedule estimates from the City for making the modifications
• Requirements and estimated costs of household connections
3-11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
It is anticipated that this coordination can occur by telephone and written correspondence; no
trips to North Belmont for this task have been included.
3.4.2 WELLHEAD TREATMENT UNIT DESIGN
CDM Federal will develop specifications and sketches of the wellhead treatment system
recommended in the event this option is chosen for individual water supplies. It is assumed
that the wellhead treatment system will be "off-the shelf" type of equipment, and special
design and fabrication will not be required. A summary will be prepared which includes the
equipment specification, expected performance, availability, and an engineering cost estimate.
3.5 TASK 5 · COMMUNITY RELATIONS SUPPORT
CDM Federal will provide technical support to EPA during public meetings. For costing-
purposes, two persons attending one public meeting in North Belmont, North Carolina was
assumed.
3.6 TASK 6 · PRO.JECT COMPLETION AND CLOSEOUT
Project closeout procedures will be implemented upon completion of the work assignment.
Closeout of the work assignment will be divided into two major activities: technical/financial· .,, . .
and work assignment files. The technical/financial activities will include, as appropriate: · ·· ''.:?i;:·
•·
Closeout of purchase order accounts
Property identification, inventory, and turnover
Review and reconciliation of work assignment accounting status
Review and reconciliation of work pla_n and work plan amendment approval
status
• · Technology transfer database update
3-12
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..
•
. -···------•-·--···-·-,· .. ·
Completion of the Work Assignment Completion Report
Finalization and invoicing of the award fee
Submission of the final invoice
The work assignment file closeout and transfer activities will include the following:
3.7
•
•·
•
Collection and organization of work assignment files
File microfiching
File inventory and shipping
Quality control review
• File duplication and disposition
TASK 7 -QUALITY MANAGEMENT
All work by CDM Federal on this work assignment will be performed in accordance with the
following guidance documents:
•·
•··
•·
•·
•·
Sections 3.0 and 4.0 of CDM Federal Programs Corporation Quality Assurance
Manual, Revision 8, October 30, 1997.
CDM Federal ARCS Region JV Quality Assurance Management Plan Revision I,
Document Control No. 7740-999-QA-BGDS, June 15, 1992 (QAMP), ASL . 0, .••
amended January 26, 1995, Document Control No. 7740-999-QA-BMSH. · .": . ·-;~::~·.}:
Interim Guidelines and Specifications for Preparing Quality Assurance Project ... •. • 1,e:;,.' Plans, QAMS-005/80, EPA 600/4-83-004, U.S. EPA, 1983. . .. -~·:· .. ~ ,· -;~~-Y-·-
Environmental Investigations Standard Operating Procedures and Quality .,;',;" : ....
Assurance Manual," Science and Ecosystem Support Division. U.S. EPA, May: · ·
1996.
CDM Federal Design Quality Control Plan, Revision 0, March 1997.
3-13
I
I
I
I
I
•·
I
I
I
I
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•• EPA QA/RS "EPA Requirements for QAPPs for Environmental Data
Operations," Interim Final, August 1997.
Mr. Tony Isolda, the ARCS IV Regional QA Coordinator, has reviewed this work plan for
QA requirements and will maintain QA oversight for the duration of the work assignment.
Mr. Isolda determined that a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) is required. The QAPP
will be submitted as part of the field operations plan.
Key components of the quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) program for this project are
outlined below. The project manager is responsible for including QC requirements referenced
or defined in this work plan.
Technical Review Requirements
Technical review requirements in the QAMP, Section 5.2 and Appendix B will be followed on
this work assignment. Deliverables and their technical review requirements are listed in
Section 4.0 .
Project File Maintenance and Storage
The project manager is responsible for project file maintenance and storage for this work
assignment. Project files will be established for each task of this project with subfiles created ·
as needed. Project files will be maintained in the CDM Federal Atlanta office throughout thee -,-~,i
project duration. The ARCS Management Information System (ARMIS) will be used to track
documents through the use of the document control system. The document control system and
ARMIS are described in detail in Section 3.5 of the ARCS Final Management Plan (Document ·~---:~ .
Control No. 7740-999-OP-BBCH). During project closeout, the project files will be
microfiched and submitted to EPA in accordance with the ARCS contract.
3-14
--·-~~ --...·
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-Additional QC Measures
Field-related QC measures will be described in the field operations plan.
QA Review Requirements
All CDM Federal ARCS IV work assignment work plans are reviewed by the QA staff prior to
submission to EPA. Reports that present measurement data, procurement documents and
responses and purchase requisitions for measurement and testing items will also receive a QA
review.
QA Audits
The ARCS QA program includes both performance and system audits as independent checks
on the quality of data generated on this work assignment. Performance audits are quantitative
checks most appropriate to sampling, field measurements, and laboratory analysis activities.
System audits are qualitative reviews of project activity to check that the overall quality
program is functioning and that the appropriate QC measures are being implemented.
System audits may be conducted in the office, field, or laboratory. The ARCS IV QAMP
requires the following audit frequency :
•· For Remedial Designs, one office system audit per year.
The ARCS IV Regional Quality Assurance Coordinator will conduct or coordinate audits as
directed by the QA Director. In addition, the CDM Federal team will cooperate fully in any
performance or system audits conducted or arranged by EPA.
3-15
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
g
~1e--:-:,::.;b;~. r-·
3.8 TASK 8 -TECHNICAL AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
CDM Federal will provide technical and financial management throughout all phases of this
work assignment. Technical and financial management includes:
• · Project coordination and day-to-day project guidance
•· Monitoring budgets, schedules, and financial performance
• Managing key technical resources
• Maintaining quality control
, ~
Part of technical and financial management is preparing and submitting monthly progress
reports and monthly invoices to EPA. These reports will be used to track progress of the work
assignment and to inform EPA of the project status. Budget information will be included in
the monthly status reports along with any unexpected technical difficulties encountered, and
recommendations for corrective action.
CDM Federal will provide technical and financial management throughout all phases of this
work assignment. Technical and financial management includes:
•· Project coordination and day-to-day project guidance
•· Monitoring budgets, schedules, and financial performance
• Managing key technical resources
•· Maintaining quality control
. ·•~--~·~;;~~;/•·
Part of technical and financial management is preparing and submitting monthly progress. · /J.ii:i'.·
. ~-.. ~-~-•-::,:.
reports and monthly invoices to EPA. These reports will be used to track progress of the.work ·•~~~:· ::;·-~; :-.;
assignment and to inform EPA of the project status. Budget information will be included in ___ )¥._:
the monthly status reports along with any unexpected technical difficulties encountered, and
recommendations for corrective action.
3-16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
I
4.0 SCHEDULE OF ACTIVITIES AND DELIVERABLES
An estimated project schedule is presented in Figure 4-1. An estimated schedule of
deliverables for this work assignment, with QA/QC requirements, is presented in Table 4-1.
This expected schedule of deliverables includes 'project planning documents.
4-1
------ -------- -- -
PROJECT SCHEDULE
NORTH BELMONT PCE SITE REMEDIAL DESIGN
NORTH BELMONT, GASTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA . . . . . ' .
97 I 1998 1999 21
ID Task No./ Name Duration Start Finish Qtr 3 Qtr4 I Qtr 1 Qlr2 Qlr 3 Qlr4 Qlr 1 Qlr2 Qlr 3 Qlr4 Qlr 1 Qtr 2
1 + 1.0 Project Planning 141d 9/8197 3123198
± 2 1.1 Document Review 45d 9/8197 1117197
3 1.2 Pre-Design Coordination Meetings 45d 9/8197 11/8197
4 1.3 Pre-Design Site Visit Od 311198 311/99 i
5 1.4 Remedial Design Work Plan 116d 9/8/97 2/16/98
' ., j.
.Jo. L~-y .. •''"'i 6 1.4.1 Draft Remedial Design Work Plan 46d 9/8/97 11/10/97 '' : . ' .. '
7 ~-1·2 ~inal Remedial Design ~o~k Pl~ry 5d 2/10/98 2/16/98 ♦ Final Remedial Lslgn Work P an . j '
i ........... -. ., ..
8 1·5 field Operations Plan Preparation 16d 311198 3123/98
9 1·5· 1 ~raft Fiel~ Operatio!1s Plan 10d 311198 3113198 , I -I I
10 ~.5.2 f!~al Fi~ld Oper~t!ons ~!an 2d 3120198 3123198 ◄ Final Field Operations plan
11 +2.0 Field Data Acquisition/Sample Analysis 53d 311198 5113198
• I • ' •
12 2.1 Subcontractor Procurement 40d 311r:'~ 4124198 @ill ,. '' ,. ' ' ' .
-·•·· ·-'J_"f• ooww11~w@ ' S~bmittal ♦ Figure 4"-1 · Task Summary 1 l , 'I : • ' l I H• ., ,, 'I ' \.;' ·t-2 ' I I\ , ( ·f Revison Date: 2/16/98 J fl •. I !;f •,~ _-:.;. -' Note: Duration is work days ·, · ·1'i ' ,,, .. , .· ,.\ fl'·•~ .. , '. " ' ·•.• 'v.!-" 0 ! ...... . 'r'1l ~ -C " . 1
--- -- - ---------- --
PROJECT SC!-IEPULE T
NORTH BELMONT PCE SITE REMEDIAL DESIGN
NORTH BELMONT, GASTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
7 1998 1999 2
ID Task No./ Name Duration Start Finish Qtr 3 Qtr4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr3 Qtr4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2
13 2.2 Mobilization!pemobilization 5d 4/24/98 4130/98 ' I .. '
14 2.3 Private Well Survey 5d 4/30/98 5/6/98 I
15 2.4 Monitor Well Installation and Sampling 10d 4130/98 5/13/98 D '
16 +3.0 In Situ Bioremediation Assessment Work 24d 3/1/98 4/2/98
Plan '
17 3.1 Ora_ft Work Plan 15d 3/1/98 3/20/98 I~ Draft Work Plan
~ Final Work llan 18 3.~ final ~ork Plan 5d 3/27/98 4/2/98
19 ~4.0 Potable Water Supply 14d 5/6/98 5/25/98 •
20 4.1 Coordinate with Local Water Company 10d 5/6/98 5/19/98 m . ':
21 4.2 Wellhead Treatment Unit Design 6d 5/19/98 5/25/98 I
22 5.0 Cornnunity ~elations Support 87d 3/1/98 6/30/98 1·-23 6.0 Project Completion a~d Closeout 4d 6/25/98 6/30/98
24 7 .0 Quality Management 212d 9~/97 6/30/98 li!ffil!fill!!ffi&li!ib"'ff@&.l!WI . ., ,,. .. , . ' .
' .
Figure 4°1 Ta·sk -liiili[#i!ti&iiWll Submittal ♦ Sum111ary
Revison Date: 2/16/98 '
Note: D~ration is' work days
•., 1 1 '! -~ ~i11 ._ 'I!! . 2
- - - - - --- - - - - - - -·-- - -
ID Task No./ Name
25 8.0 Technical and Financial Managemen~
PROJECT SCHEDULE
NORTH BELMONT PCE SITE REMEDIAL DESIGN
NORTH BELMONT, GASTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA . . '
7 1999 2
Duration Start Finish Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr3 Qtr4 Qtr1 Qtr2 Qtr3 Qtr4 Qtr1 Qtr2
212d 9/8/97 6130/98
lrol'l:~,y, = H.J.m~:!i'.~»00
•r: . Submittal ♦ I ., .Summary ' . .
3
- - - - - - --.. - - - - --· - - - -
TABLE 4-1
SCHEDULE OF DELIVERABLES
NORTH BELMONT PCE SUPERFUND SITE
NORTH BELMONT, NORTH CAROLINA
S!JBMITTAL TECHNICAL REVIEW APPROVAL SIGNATURE
Draft Remedial Desio n Work Plan
Final Remedial Design Work Plan
Draft Field Operations Plan
Final Field Operations Plan
Draft In Situ Bioremediation Assessment Work Plan
Final In Situ Bioremediation Assessment Work Plan
Activity Codes
A: Peer review and signoff
B: Committee 'review and signoff
Activitv Review Date
B 11/5/97
A 2/11/98
A 3/11/98
A 3/21/98
B 3/18/98
A 3/31/98
Approval Signatures
PM: Program Manager
PM
X
X
X
X
X
X
QAD: Quality Assurance Director
HSM: Health and Safety Manager
QAD
X
X
X
X
FAM: Finance and Administration Manager
HSM FAM
X
X
X
X
X
DUE DATE
TO EPA
11/10/97
2/16/98
3/13/98
3/23/98
3/20/98
4/2/98
! I
~• • r ~•
df:"" ~!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5.0 PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES
5.1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION
The project organization for this assignment is depicted in Figure 5-1. For the most part,
project control is centered around the CDM Federal project manager. This organizational·
structure acts a control mechanism to:
• Identify appropriate lines of communication and coordination
• Monitor overall project quality control, budgets, and schedules
•· Oversee and manage technical resources
The following is a list of the key personnel assigned to this project and their areas of
responsibility:
NAME LEVEL ROLE
G•rv P. Clemons, Ph.D. P4 Proe.ram Manae.er
Patricia Kraieski P4 Finance and Administration Manae.er
Michael Profit P3 Proiect Manaeer
Chris Provost P4 Senior Proiect Ene.ineer
RoseMarv Ellersick P4 nualitv Assurance Director
Tonv Isolda P3 nualitv Assurance Coordinator
Program Manager
, ~.~·;;;:( . . .:
Gary P. Clemons, Ph.D. is the ARCS Region IV program manager. Dr. Clemons is
responsible for the overall technical and administrative performance of the ARCS contract.. He.
-will assign resources in support of all technical work products and has final sign-off
5-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
U.S. EPA REGION IV
PROJECT OFFICER
Robert Stern I
COM FEDERAL
PROGRAM MANAGER
U.S. EPA REGION IV Gary Clemons, Ph.D.
REMEDIAL PROJECT
MANAGER I
Giezelle Bennett
CDM FEDERAL CDM FEDERAL SUBCONTRACTOR
PROJECT SUPPORT -PROJECT MANAGER Well Driller
Finance & Administration Michael Profit
Quality Assurance
Health & Safety
CDM FEDERAL
.
SENIOR ENGINEER
Chris Provost
CDM INC.
BIOREMEDIATION EXPERT
Al Borquin, Ph.D.
CDM FEDERAL ARCS IV FIGURE NO.
PROJECT ORGANIZATION CHART
5:1
NORTH BELMONT PCE SITE REMEDIAL DESIGN
NORTH BELMONT, NORTH CAROLINA
~ .•
. .,,.
' ,.
.
'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
responsibility on all technical and cost documents. He will work directly with CDM Federal
ARCS support staff to arrange and ~nsure critical quality assurance activities and will work to
facilitate project implementation.
Finance and Administration Manager
Patricia Krajeski is the finance and administration manager. Ms. Krajeski is responsible for
adherence to all contract requirements, preparation and presentation of financial reports,
project invoicing, and all contract accounting. Additionally, Ms. Krajeski is responsible for
monitoring the financial aspects, maintaining the management information system budgets and
schedules, and controlling and monitoring the use of all government-owned property for this
work assignment.
Project Manager
Michael Profit is the project manager. Mr. Profit is responsible for day-to-day work
assignment management, including staffing, schedule, and costs. Mr. Profit will work closely
with the EPA Remedial Project Manager to ensure timely completion of project activities, and
with the regional quality assurance coordinator to assure that all aspects of the project proceed
as planned.
:'.~~-:-:.-,,~ '.. ..
.. :f::t~~~~:~. Senior Project Engineer
, __ ,,,_, .. .. ::1.-'-=t-=
"i--·,_1
Chris Provost is the Senior Project Engineer. Mr. Provost is responsible for all aspects of"the ··· '
RD, including preparation of the treatability study planning documents, evaluation of the .· '· --. =}~_,:;: . _, .
results of the treatability study, and the design of the groundwater extraction and treatment
system.
5-3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5.2 QUAIJTY ASSURANCE ORGANIZATION
CDM Federal's organization of the QA program for ARCS Region IV is designed to ensure
that appropriate QA/QC procedures are implemented during all phases of this work
assignment. The ARCS Region IV QA organization and responsibilities are discussed in-detail
in Sections 2.0 and 3.0 of the ARCS IV Quality Assurance Management Plan., Revision J:
Highlights of the QA organization and responsibilities applicable to this project are provided
below.
Quality Assurance Director
RoseMary Ellersick is the Quality Assurance Director. Ms. Ellersick is responsible for all
aspects of the ARCS Quality Assurance Management Plan, including approving QA I procedures, conducting system and performance audits, and ensuring that QA personnel are
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
trained. Ms. Ellersick will provide guidance and direction to the Regional QA Coordinator
and will interface with EPA on QA matters.
Regional Quality Assurance Coordinator
Tony Isolda is the Regional QA Coordinator. Mr. Isolda is responsible for all procedures and
tasks pertaining to QA for this assignment, and reports directly to the QA Director. Mr; · ·";-?'-'.'~:
.. ·i·
Isolda will monitor project activity to verify compliance with QA plans, review appropriatt' i-l!•;;,'j,\fot
sections of the work plan for approval, provide QA on all technical document deliverables for · · · '?
.. ,.,.;; . .,... ..
this project, and assist the quality assurance director in conducting system and performance ·· ·. ,,,,:,.•
audits.
5-4
·1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5.3 TEAM FIRMS
CDM Federal will utilize the services of Dr. Al Borquin, a bioremediation expert with CDM
Inc., in this work assignment. Dr. Borquin will conduct the in situ bioremediation evaluation
described in Section 3. 3.
5.4 SUBCONTRACTORS
CDM Federal plans to subcontract the monitor well installation portion of this work
assignment. Subcontractor personnel will be .required to perform all work in strict compliance
with the appropriate contract specifications.
..,.~.:-,; · .. , ....
i?.t~~A~~·~.
5-5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
6.0 REFERENCES
U.S. EPA, 1990. "National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; Final
Rule." 55 Federal Register, No. 46, March 8, 1990, pp.8666-8865.
U.S. EPA, 1996. Environmental Investigations Standard Operating Procedures and Quality
Assurance Manual, Science and Ecosystem Support Division. May.
U.S. EPA, 1997a. "North Belmont PCE Site, North Belmont, Gaston Count, North Carolina:
Record of Decision." September.
U.S. EPA, 1997b. "Statement of Work for Technical, Engineering, and Contractual Support
Services for the Remedial Design at the North Belmont PCE Superfund Site, North
Belmont, Gaston Count, North Carolina" August 27.
u:s. EPA, 1997c. "North Belmont PCE Site, North Belmont, Gaston Count, North Carolina:
Remedial Investigation Report." June.
U.S. EPA, 1997d. "North Belmont PCE Site, North Belmont, Gaston Count, North Carolina:
Feasibility Study Report." July.
6-1