NCD991278953_19970902_National Starch & Chemical Corp._FRBCERCLA RA_Natural Degredation Treatability Study Progress Report for OU-4-OCR

D
0
u
u
n
n
H
0
0
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
I I
NATURAL DEGRADATION TREATABLITY STUDY
PROGRESS REPORT
FOR
OPERABLE UNIT 4
NATIONAL STARCH & CHEMICAL COMPANY
CEDAR SPRINGS ROAD PLANT SITE
SALISBURY, NORTH CAROLINA
Prepared by:
National Starch & Chemical Company
10 Finderne Avenue
Bridgewater, New Jersey 08807
AUGUST 1997
L
lfl::!.tional Starch and Chemical Company
10 Finderne Avenue
P .0. Box 6500
Bridgewater, New Jersey 08807-0500
908-685-5000
Cable Address: NASPROD,BAIDGEWATEANEWJEASEY
Writer's Direct Dial Number:
Fax Number:
Mr. Jon Bornholm
Remedial Project Manager
(908)-685-7085
(908)-707-3763
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region IV
I 00 Alabama Street, SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104
RECEIVED
SEP 051997
SUPERFUND SECTl0N
September 2, 1997
Subject: Progress Report for Natural Degradation Treatability Study
Superfund Project Operable Unit 4
Cedar Springs Road Plant Site, Salisbury, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Bornholm:
Enclosed please find one (1) unbound and seven (7) bound copies ofNatural Degradation Treatability
Study Progress Report for Operable Unit 4. This progress report describes the treatability activities
being conducted at the Cedar Springs Road Plant under the Remedial Design/Remedial Action Work
Plan for Operable Unit 4 dated July 8, 1997 and covers activities conducted through June 1997. If you
have any questions regarding the report, please feel free to call me.
Very truly yours, .
~/~
Michael L. Ford
Environmental Projects Supervisor
encl. Natural Degradation Treatability Study Progress Report dated August 1997.
cc. D. Lown, NCDEHNR w/o encl.
R. Franklin, NSCC
D.Cregar w/o encl.
S. Rogers, NCDEHNR w/o encl.
A. Alam, NSCC w/o encl.
File
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8:!_tional Starch and Chemical Company
10 Finderne Avenue
P.O. Box 6500
Bridgewater, New Jersey 08807-0500
908-685-5000
Cable Address: NASPROD,BAIOGEWATEANEWJEASEY
Writer's Direct Dial Number:
Fax Number:
Mr. Jon Bornholm
Remedial Project Manager
(908)-685-7085
(908)-707-3763
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region IV
100 Alabama Street, SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104
Subject: Progress Report for Natural Degradation Treatability Study
Superfund Project Operable Unit 4
Cedar Springs Road Plant Site, Salisbury, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Bornholm:
RECEIVED
SEP 05 1997
SUPERFUND SECTION
September 2, I 997
Enclosed please find one (I) unbound and seven (7) bound copies of Natural Degradation Treatability
Study Progress Report for Operable Unit 4. This progress report describes the treatability activities
being conducted at the Cedar Springs Road Plant under the Remedial Design/Remedial Action Work
Plan for Operable Unit 4 dated July 8, 1997 and covers activities conducted through June 1997. If you
have any questions regarding the report, please feel free to call me.
Very truly yours, .
~~
Michael L. Ford
Environmental Projects Supervisor
encl. Natural Degradation Treatability Study Progress Report dated August 1997.
cc. D. Lown, NCDEHNR w/o encl.
R. Franklin, NSCC
D.Cregar w/o encl.
S. Rogers, NCDEHNR w/o encl.
A. Alam, NSCC w/o encl.
File
D
D
D
u
0
D
D
D
D
D
: E
I I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................ iii
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
Introduction ............................................................ I
Biotreatability Study ..................................................... I
Soil Plots and Soil Gas Monitoring Wells .................................... 3
Treatment and Monitoring Act;vities ........................................ 4
4.1 Soil Sampling ....................................................... 5
4.2 Soil Gas Monitoring .................................................. 5
4.3 Microbial Activity Monitoring .......................................... 7
5.0 Preliminary Observations ................................................. 7
Appendix A-Blue Planet Technologies, Phase I B!Oreport #1060, September 17, 1996 and
Blue Planet Technologies, Phase II B!Oreport #1060, November 19, 1996
Appendix B -Copy of Weekly Moisture and Nutrient Addition Log
Appendix C-Copy of Blue Planet Analytical Reports dated January 11, 1997,
January 27, 1997, April 4, 1997, and June 31, 1997.
0
D
0
D
0
n
D
0
D
D
D
E
D
E
D
D
6
I
M
List of Figures
Figures Description
3-1 Location of Soil Plots and Soil Gas Monitoring Wells in Area 2 ............ .
3-2 Location of Soil Plots and Soil Gas Monitoring Wells in Lagoon Area ....... .
3-3 Soil Gas Monitoring Well Construction Detail .......................... .
4-1 Soil Plot Detail .................................................. .
4-2 November 1996, Soil Sample Locatior.s ............................... .
4-3 March 1997, Soil Sample Locations .................................. .
4-4 June 1997, Soil Sample Locations ................................... .
4-5 Average Concentration of Methane in Soil Gas ......................... .
4-6 Average Concentration of Carbon Dioxide in Soil Gas ................... .
4-7 Average Concentration of Oxygen in Soil Gas .......................... .
4-8 Average Concentration of Hydrogen Sulfide in Soil Gas .................. .
11
Page
m
D
D
D
D
D
I
m
I
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
List of Tables
Table Description Page
3-1 Volatile Organic Compounds, OU4 NDTS ............................. .
4-1 Summary of Treatment and Monitoring Schemes, OU4 NOTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4-2 Summary of Soil Analytical Parameters and Methodology ................ .
4-3 Soil Plot I, Volatile Organic Compounds In Soil ........................ .
4-4 Soil Plot 2, Volatile Organic Compounds In Soil ........................ .
4-5 Soil Plot 3, Volatile Organic Compounds In Soil ........................ .
4-6 Soil Plot 4, Volatile Organic Compounds In Soil ........................ .
4-7 Soil Plot 1, Nutrients, Metals and Other Parameters ...................... .
4-8 Soil Plot 2, Nutrients, Metals and Other Parameters ...................... .
4-9 Soil Plot 3, Nutrients, Metals and Other Parameters ...................... .
4-10 Soil Plot 4, Nutrients, Metals and Other Parameters ...................... .
4-11 Monthly Summa Canister Sampling, Soil Gas Monitoring Wells 1, 2 and 3 .. .
4-12 Quarterly Summa Canister Sampling, Soil Gas Monitoring Wells 5, 6, 7 and 8 .
g
u
n
0
0
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Semi-Annual Progress Report is prepared to apprise the USEPA and NCDEHNR of the
current status of Operable Unit 4 (OU4) Natural Degradation Treatability Study (NOTS)
and the activities being conducted at Cedar Spring Road Plant Superfund Site in Salisbury,
North Carolina. These activities are being conducted under Unilateral Administrative Order
for the Remedial Design/Remedial Action (RD/RA) program for Operable Unit 4. The
technical details of the Natural Degradation Treatability Study were presented in the RD/RA
Work Plan for Operable Unit 4 dated July 8, 1997. The appendices of the Work Plan also
contain supporting documents such as the Sampling and Analysis Plan, the Quality Assurance
Project Plan and the Health and Safety Plan.
USEPA approved the NOTS Work Plan on August 20, 1996. Subsequently, a kickoff meeting
for the OU4 NOTS Project was held at the Cedar Spring site on October 4, 1996. The purpose
cf the kickoff meeting was to review the details of the Natural Degradation Treatability Study
with the regulatory agencies, contractors, and Plant personnel.
The USEPA approved Work Plan for the Natural Degradation Treatability Study included
construction of Soil Plots, and installation of Soil Gas Monitoring Wells (SGMWs) to conduct
in-situ experiments including sampling and monitoring of soil and gas to detect concentrations of
1,2-dichloroethane (1,2-DCA) and its degradation by-products.
The field activities for the installation of the Soil Plots and Soil Gas Monitoring Wells
commenced in August and finished in early December of 1996. Upon installation of the Soil
Plots and SGMWs, the OU4 Natural Degradation Treatability Study was initiated beginning
with the treatment and monitoring activities as described in the Work Plan. This Progress
Report presents (1) an overview of the field activities, (2) the analytical results and (3) briefly
describes the preliminary observations and findings based on data collected up to June 1997.
2.0 BIO-TREATABILITY STUDY
Before initiation of the Natural Degradation Treatability Study, USEPA suggested that NSCC
conduct a Laboratory Bio-Treatability Study using soil from the contaminated areas of the
site. NSCC concurred with this excellent USEP A suggestion and started the Project with a
Laboratory Bio-Treatability Study.
On August 21, 1996, a total of four contaminated soil samples from Area 2 of the Plant and
from near the Wastewater Lagoon 2 area were collected from this site and shipped to the
laboratory of Blue Planet Technologies in Michigan. The samples were collected using 2-inch
split spoons with the assistance of a driller, Trigon Engineering Consultants, Inc. The samples
from Area 2 were labeled as BT-1 and BT-IA and the samples from the Wastewater Lagoon 2
were labeled as BT-2 and BT-2A. Blue Planet Technologies used these samples to perform the
1
n
0
D
D
m
E
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Bio-Treatability study as a part of the OU4 NDTS. The objectives of the Bio-Treatability
Study were as follows:
I. To evaluate the capability of indigenous microorganisms to degrade 1,2
dichloroethane;
2. To determine which conditions ( aerobic or anaerobic), most favor the
biodegradation of 1,2-dichloroethane;
3. To evaluate the effects of modification of environmental parameters such as
moisture addition, pH variation, nutrients addition, and presence of trace
metals on the biodegradation process;
4. To establish biodegradation rates under controlled conditions in a
laboratory; and .
5. To establish partitioning coefficients of 1,2-dichloroethane between water,
soil and vapor phases.
Upon receipt of the samples, Blue Planet Technologies conducted the study in two separate
phases. Phase I consisted of physical, chemical, and biological characterization of the
contaminated soil samples. Phase I of the Laboratory Bio-Treatability Study determined the
following:
I. Confirmed presence of the contaminant of concern( i.e., 1,2-DCA);
2. Assessed the nature of the indigenous microbial activity;
3. Identified the availability of nutrients for biodegradation to take place;; and
4. Determined the presence of other factors that limit microbial growth.
Blue Planet Technologies completed this task by analyzing the soil samples for:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
pH of the samples;
Concentrations of 1,2-dichloroethane in the samples;
Total heterotrophic plate counts;
Bacteria identificatiim; and
Determination of co~·centrations of total khejdhal nitrogen, ammonia
nitrogen, total phosphorus, total organic carbon, phenols, cyanide and
various metals.
The results of the Phase I study are included in Appendix A of this Progress Report.
Phase II of the Laboratory Biotreatability Study consisted of microcosm studies under aerobic
and anaerobic conditions. The measurement of concentrations of 1,2-dichloroethane and carbon
dioxide, and total heterotrophic plate counts as compared to an abiotic control was monitored in
order to confirm that indigenous microorganisms were capable of biodegrading the site
contaminant. The concentrations of volatile organic compounds were measured using GC/MS
technology at day 0, day 14 and day 28. The concentration of nitrate in the samples was
2
g
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i I I
I
I
I
I
I
measured at day O and day 28. The total heterotrophic plate counts and concentration of carbon
dioxide was measured at day 0, day 7, day 14, day 21, and day 28. Blue Planet Technologies
used soil sample BT1(4-6) from Area 2 and soil sample BT2(4-6) from the Wastewater Lagoon
area to perform the study. A copy of the Phase II BioReport #1060 dated November 16, 1996 is
also included in Appendix A of this Progress Report.
Blue Planet has also performed a test to establish the partitioning of 1,2-dichloroethane between
water, soil and vapor phases. The test consisted of spiking the soil samples with a known 1,2-
DCA concentration of 1 ppm (used as control). A composite of 50 grams from each soil sample
B-1 and 8-2 was placed in a 500 ml bio flask with 100 ml of deionized water. The mixture was
sealed and rotated for two hours. After two hours, samples of the head space, water fraction,
and solid fraction were removed and analyzed. The results of this partitioning test are_ also
presented in the Phase II Bio Report# 1060 included in Appendix A.
3.0 SOIL PLOTS AND SOIL GAS MONITORING WELLS
The four Soil Plots and eight Soil Gas Monitoring Wells for conducting the OU4 NOTS were
installed during December 1996. The Soil Plots and Soil Gas Monitoring Wells were installed
as described in the RD/RA Work Plan for Operable Unit 4. The locations of the four Soil
Plots and eight Soil Gas Monitoring Wells are shown on Figures 3-1 and 3-2. As discussed and
agreed with the USEPA and NCDEHNR during the kickoff meeting, the Soil Plot 4 was moved
to an area where there were no known production activities in the past and no production related
activities now. This area of the Plant site is considered to be free from contamination by 1,2-
DCA.
Prior to installation of the Soil Gas Monitoring Wells, soil samples were collected from the
proposed locations. The soil samples were collected to confirm the presence of
1,2-dichloroethane and ensure that these Soil Gas Monitoring Wells were sited in areas
contaminated with 1,2-dichloroethane.
In October, eleven borings were performed and two soil samples were collected from each
boring at depths ranging from the 4 to 6 feet and 6 to 8 feet below the ground surface. Table 3-1
summarizes the sample locations, sample depths, and detected concentrations of volatile organic
compounds. Upon review and evaluation of the analytical results, the Soil Gas Monitoring
Wells were installed. The eight Soil Gas Monitoring Wells, SGMW-1 through SGMW-8,
were installed between November 8 and November 14, 1996. A typical construction diagram
for the Soil Gas Monitoring Wells is shown in Figure 3-3.
Following installation of the SGMWs, three Soil Plots were installed in Area 2. The actual
"installation was delayed several weeks because the 4 feet by 6 feet watertight metal boxes were
delivered to the site without the appropriate epoxy primer and coat of paint. NSCC hired a local
painter, Salisbury Coatings, to properly sandblast, prime and paint the steel boxes. The boxes
3
0
D
0
u
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
were installed during week beginning November 25, 1995.
After installation of the Soil Plots, NSCC has had problems of water entering into Soil Plots I, 2
and 3. NSCC has attempted to remedy the problem by removing and reinstalling the metal
boxes in order to direct the drainage away from the boxes. In addition, NSCC has installed a
continuous piece of sheet metal around the plots down to 2 feet but water still enters the boxes
during heavy rain events. Currently, NSCC is draining the Soil Plots immediately after each
rain event.
4.0 TREATMENT AND MONITORING ACTIVITIES
The treatment and monitoring activities for the OU4 NDTS are carried out by the NSCC's Plant
personnel under the direct supervision of the project field coordinator. The treatment schemes
for the OU4 Natural Degradation Treatability Study are as shown in Table 4-1
Soil Plot No.
I
(Contaminated soil)
2
(Contaminated soil)
3
(Contaminated soil)
4
(Uncontaminated soil)
Table 4-1
Summary of Treatment and Monitoring Schemes
OU4NDTS
Moisture Addition Nutrient Addition
No No
Yes No
Yes Yes
No No
Soil Gas Monitoring
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
The three soil plots within the contaminated area, Soil Plot I, 2 and 3, are being used as
Reactors to conduct the moisture and nutrient addition experiments, and sampling and analysis
for the NDTS. The fourth soil plot, Soil Plot 4, was located in an uncontaminated area of the site
and is being used as a Control Plot to establish baseline conditions for the site.
Treatment activities began on December 14, 1996 following the installation of the Soil Plots.
The treatment activities consist of weekly addition of(a) 3 liters of water to soil Plot 2 and (b) 3
4
B
D
0
0
n
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, I
I
I
liters of water containing 27 grams of ammonium phosphate to Soil Plot 3. The source of the
water used in the experiments is tap water supplied by the City of Salisbury Water Treatment
Plant. The tap water is aerated with ambient air for approximately 30 minutes to remove any
residual chlorine before adding the water to the Soil Plots. The aerated tap water is then
distributed evenly over the Soil Plots using a watering can. A copy of the field log of the
moisture and nutrient addition experiments is presented in Appendix B.
4.1 SOIL SAMPLING
Under Phase I of the OU4 Natural Degradation Treatability Study, soil samples were
collected initially to establish baseline concentrations and thereafter soil samples were collected
quarterly to monitor the concentration of selected organic compounds and other parameters to
establish changes over time. Baseline samples were collected on November 13, 1996.
Quarterly soil samples were collected on March 26 and June 16, 1997 approximately 3 and 6
months after the first addition of moisture and nutrients to the Soil Plots. The samples have been
collected as described in the Sampling and Analysis Plan in the RD/RA Work Plan for OU4.
The sample locations have been randomly selected using a random numbers table. Before each
soil sampling event, all available sampling locations are sequentially assigned a number. Then,
numbers are selected from a random numbers table until three numbers matched the selected
sampling locations. Figure 4-1 shows the details of a Soil Plot. Figures 4-2 through 4-4 show
respectively the actual sampling locations used during November 1996, March 1997 and June
1997.
Upon collection, the sample jars are placed on ice and shipped to Pace Analytical Services for
analyses. The samples are analyzed for parameters listed in Table 4-2. Table 4-2 also shows the
Methods used for analyses together with the Method Detection Limits. Tables 4-3 through 4-6
show the analytical results for volatile organic compounds for Soil Plots I, 2, 3 and 4,
respectively. Tables 4-7 through 4-10 show the analytical results for Nutrients, Metals and Other
Parameters in Soil Plots I, 2, 3 and 4, respectively.
4.2 SOIL GAS MONITORING
Soil gas monitoring activities began on December 6, 1996 with the collection of weekly soil gas
readings. Soil gas samples are collected weekly, monthly and quarterly from the eight Soil Gas
Monitoring Wells. Soil gas concentrations for methane, carbon dioxide, oxygen and hydrogen
sulfide are recorded weekly at the 2 to 4 feet interval and 6 to 8 feet interval from the eight
SGMWs using a real time instrument GA-90.
Prior to conducting real time monitoring, the GA-90 is calibrated each week against standard
gases in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. The GA-90 is then connected by
5
D
0
0
D
D
D
D
0
D
D
0
R
D
I
D
D
I
u
D
flexible tubing to the 1/4 inch female quick disconnect installed at the top of each Soil Gas
Monitoring Well. After the connection is made, the internal pump of the GA-90 is turned on
and air is drawn from the soil gas monitoring well through the instrument. Air readings are
recorded at the 60 second and 360 second intervals and entered onto the field log sheet. The GA-
90 is then disconnected form the Soil Gas Monitoring Well and its pump and monitoring
equipment is cleaned by purging the instrument with ambient air in accordance with
manufacturers recommendations. The average concentration of methane, carbon dioxide,
oxygen and hydrogen sulfide for the eight SGMWs are shown in Figures 4-5 through 4-8.
Soil gas concentrations are also collected monthly from SGMWs 1, 2, 3 and 4 and quarterly
from SGMWs 5, 6, 7 and 8 using Stainless Steel Summa Canisters. Soil samples are collected
by connecting the Summa Canister to the Soil Gas Monitoring Well. The connection is made
using dedicated Teflon tubing and Swagelock quick connect fittings. Once connected, a valve on
the canister is opened and air from the Soil Gas Monitoring Well is allowed to enter the canister
at a predetermine flowrate. The passive flow controllers are calibrated in the laboratory to
deliver a flowrate of 50 ml/min. After collecting the necessary air volume, the valve is closed.
The canister identification tag and sample location are entered into the field log sheet. These
Summa Canisters are then shipped via UPS ground service to Lancaster Laboratories for
analyses. The soil gas samples are analyzed for volatile organic compounds, ethane, ethene,
methane, carbon dioxide, and oxygen. Table 4-11 presents the analytical results for monthly soil
gas readings which includes Soil Gas Monitoring Wells 1, 2, and 3. Because of high water
level in SGMW4 monthly soil gas monitoring could not be done in SGMW 4 using the Summa
Canister. Table 4-12 shows the analytical results for quarterly soil gas readings collected in Soil
Gas Monitoring Wells 5, 6, 7, and 8. Soil gas monitoring data for SGMW 5 for the 2 to 4 feet
interval could not be collected because of high water level.
During field sampling and monitoring, NSCC has had difficulties with the collection of soil gas
samples using Summa Canisters at some of the SGMWs, especially at the 2 to 4 feet interval.
The difficulty is attributed to the Canister drawing water into the sample tubing and thereby
preventing the collection of an air sample. In order to collect a sample at these locations, NSCC
is now collecting the soil gas sample over a period of two to five days to prevent water entering
the Summa Canister. To prevent water from entering the Summa Canister, NSCC staff draws
the air sample until the appropriate volume is collected or until water starts entering the tube. If
water is drawn first, NSCC staff shuts the valve and stops sampling. To collect a sufficient
volume of gas sample, NSCC staff returns the next day to continue with the air sampling event.
NSCC staff has found this method of collection of soil gas sample to be effective while
preventing water from entering the sample. NSCC believes this technique will provide a
representative sample at these otherwise difficult sampling locations.
6
D
0
D
D
D
6
E
0
D
I
4.3 MICROBIAL ACTIVITY MONITORING
Microbial activity monitoring was not originally included as part of the OU4 Natural
Degradation Treatability Study. However, NSCC decided to ship selected soil samples from
the quarterly soil sampling events to Blue Planet Technologies for bacterial characterization and
enumeration. The soil samples have been analyzed for total heterotrophic plate counts, anaerobic
plate counts and biological identification. The objectives of microbial monitoring are to
demonstrate the existence of indigenous microorganisms for biodegradation of 1,2-DCA as well
as to enumerate their populations to estimate the rate of degradation. A copy of the results of
microbial monitoring is presented in Appendix C.
5.0 PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS
Field experiments including (a) installation of Soil Plots, ~oil Gas Monitoring Wells, and
(b) measurements, sampling and analysis of organic and inorganic chemicals in soil and soil gas
were carried out for a period of six months for the OU4 Natural Degradation Treatability
Study. Based on review and evaluation of the data collected to date following preliminary
observations can be made:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
The primary contaminant found in the soil in Area 2 of the Plant was 1,2-
DCA;
Concentrations of 1,2-DCA in the soil samples varied over a large range both
spatially and vertically with depth;
Moisture content in the soil samples varied between 20 and 30 percent;
pH of the soil samples generally varied between 5.79 (slightly acidic) to 8.73
(slightly alkaline) which is suitable for microbial degradation of organic
compounds;
Natural soil in the area is deficient in ortho-phosphorous and ammonia
nitrogen;
Laboratory Bio-Treatability investigations indicated that sufficient
heterotopic microbial population is present in soil samples where there were
sufficient nutrients ( nitrogen and phosphorous);
Laboratory Bio-Treatability investigations also demonstrated that the
microbes were able to degrade the 1,2-DCA under both aerobic and
anaerobic conditions with the addition of nitrate to the soil samples;
Laboratory Bio-Treatability investigations also indicated that without
presence of microbes there was little or no degradation of 1,2-DCA under
either aerobic or anaerobic conditions;
Soil gas samples collected from the seven Soil Gas Monitoring Wells indicate
presence of high concentrations of 1,2-DCA and significant concentrations of
ethane, ethene, and vinyl chloride which are degradation by-products of
1, 2-DCA;
7
u
D
D
D
R
D
0
D
D
0
m
10. Soil gas samples collected from the seven Soil Gas Monitoring Wells also
measured high concentrations of methane and carbon dioxide indicating
both aerobic and anaerobic degradation of 1,2-DCA in the soil; and
11. Data collected from the Soil Gas Monitoring Wells indicate that microbial
degradation of 1,2-DCA is taking place and is quite effective.
Even at this early stage of the investigations the results of the Natural Degradation
Treatability Study of 1,2-DCA shows the feasibility of in-situ treatment of the contaminated
soil. It appears that addition of moisture and nutrients enhances the degradation process and
might be increased further with increase in nutrient concentrations. NSCC will continue with the
NOTS during the next six months to establish that Soil Plot 3, which is receiving both moisture
and nutrients, should be replicated during Phase II at other locations of the site with 1.2-DCA
contaminated soil.
8
---1!!1111 l!!!!!!!!!I l!!!!!!!!!I l!!!!!!!I l!!!!!!!I I!!!!!! !!!!I !!!!I 1!111 l!!m == == == == == 111111
1·---------------~ ------·-1
r-
1 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
I
L
SGMWs1,2&3
Scale (ft)
0 100 200 300
c '-1rojects\cdrspmg\1997\oU4study\lig3-1.pre
---1 I
500 400
I
I
---.L--__ .)
I
PARKING LOT
f--
(JJ
<(
!JJ iE
"' 0 2
SGMW 4
lj] Soil Plot 4 (Background)
LEGEND
1:=I Soil Plot
• Soil Gas Monitoring Well
\
'_,> 1,2 DCA CONCENTRATION CONTOUR
'e,
NOTE: Confirmation data supplemented by
soil screening data
FIGURE 3-1
LOCATION OF SOIL PLOTS
AND SOIL GAS MONITORING WELLS
NATIONAL STARCH A/JD
CHEMICAL COMPANY
SALISBURY NC
l!!!!!l!!I
, __ _
r
0 100
c::\projects\l;dn.pmg\ 1997\ou4study\figJ..2.pre
!!!!!!I !!!!!!I
DRIVEWAY
LAGOON
1
Scale (ft)
200 300 400
!!!!!I! !!!!!!I
LAGOON
2
500
!!!!!I l!!!!!I
PARKING
AREA
!!!!I
•
l!!!!I ~
LEGEND
Soil Boring Showing 1.2 DCA
Concentration (ppb) and Depth (ft.)
of Maximum Concentration
Soil Gas Monitoring Well
WASTE-WATER LINE. ARROW INDICATES
DIRECTION OF FLOW ' • ABANDONED LINE •
• '--/-_ 1,2DCACONCENTRATIONCONTOUR
10000 --
NOTE: Confirmation data supplemented by
soil screening data.
FIGURE 3-2
LOCATION OF REPLICATION PLOTS
AMD SOIL GAS MONITORING WELLS
IN THE LAGOON AREA
NA T/ONAL STARCH AND
D
0
D
D
D
n
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
WATER TIGHT 1/4" FEMALE QUICK FINISH GRADE TO
DR
BOX SET IN CONCRETE
GRADE AIN AWAY FROM BOX WELL BO~ {COUPLE FINISHED AT
I '
BENT ONITE PELLETS -
1" SCH. 10 SS PIPE -
SILICA SAND
\ ~
OR PROBE VAP
1· D
ss s
~-.. . ..
IA. X 1' LONG -. . - --
CREEN, 0.02 SLOT - --- -- -- - -- - -- --- -- -- --- -----
BEN TONI TE PELLETS -- ---- -- --- --- - - ------- -1/ 4" SCH. 10 SS PIPE -
SILICA SAND · .. ( .
VA POR PROBE \ .
/
(\J
·.I
(\J
-- -- --- -- ---- ------ -(\J - -- -- ---- - -- -® -
I
.
]
1" DIA. X 1 LONG • -----6-----
SS SCREEN, 0.02 SLOT
NOTES: SS = STAINLESS STEEL
Not to scale
{Hj;rtlonal Storch and Chomlcol Company
FIGURE 3-3
Soil Gas Monitoring Well
Construction Detail
0
0
D
D
0
0
0
n
D
D
D
D
E
I
I
m
I
I
I
6'
I I (TYPICAU
-j-s·~
-~s·t-• ' s· • • • • • --t I • • • • • • • -I
8' (TYPICAL)
4' 0 T • • • • • -' -t
• • • • • • • • 2' • • • • • • • •
~3'~
PLAN VIEW
Notes:
C \pro jacl•\c:O'IP"IQ \r,Cll90U4\r,g2-J..dw9
{!J;ational Starch and Chemical Campany
• = Possible Somple Location
SGMW = Soil Gos Monitoring Well
FIGURE 4-1
Soil Plot Detail
0
D
D
D
D
n
D
I
m
E
m
m
• •
m
I
•
E
E
-
4' T
2'
c: \pro jKt1\cchpn11 \i'ldl90U4\r,g2-l.OWQ
I
6'
I I
<TYPICAL)
-+s·-j-
-s·t I s· • • • • • • rt 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I • • • • • • • I 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 8' <TYPICAL) • • © 0 • . ~ '
17 18 1 SGMW 20 21\E) t
• • • • • • •· . 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
• • • G;). • 0 • 31 32 33 3 35 36 37 38
~3-~
PLAN
Notes:
VIEW
35e = Possible Sample Locotion 8 = Actual Sample Location
SGMW = Soil Gos Monitoring Well
[j{'atfonal Starch and Chemical Company
FIGURE 4-2
November 1996
Soil Sample Locations
----------------------------------~
B
0
D
0
0
D
D
u
I
I
I
I
m
•
I
I
I
I
I
6'
l I
<TYPICAU -1-s·-t-~s·t-I -s· • • • • ~0rt 1 2 3 4 5 l • • • • • • • --I 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 8' <TYPICAL)
4' • • X 0 ©· ~, ' T 17 18 SGMW 19 20 I
• • • • • • • • 2' 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
@ • • X • • • • 30 31 32 33 34 35
~ 3' ~
c:\p,ojlaet•\cdr11P"9\ndt90U4\flQ2-J..099
[jptlonal Starch and Chomlcal Company
PLAN VIEW
Notes: 35 • = Possible Som pie Locotion
Used Somple Locotion
Actuol Somple Locotion
SGMW = Soil Gos Monitoring Well
FIGURE 4-3
March 1997
Soil Sample Locations
B
u
D
D
0
D
D
D
I
E
m
I
I
• •
I
I
I
I
-
4' T
2'
6'
I I
(TYP!CAU -+s·~
I -s·t ~Ci)• s· • • • rt 1 2 3 4 I • • • • • • • --I 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 8' (TYPICAL)
X 0 XG;) , ' • • t 16 17 SGMW • ©· • • • • • 19 2 21 22 23 24 25 26
X ~7 ~s X • • • • 29 30 31 32
~3'~
PLAN VIEW
Notes: 35 • = Possible Sample Location
Used Sample Location
Actual Sample Location
SGMW = Soil Gos Monitoring Well
{iil;atlonal Starch and Chemical Company
FIGURE 4-4
June 1997
Soil Sample Locations
0 SGMW1, 2-4 SGMW1, 6-8 SGMW2, 2-4
SGMW2, 6-8
SGMW3, 2-4
SGMW3, 6-8
SGMW4, 2-4
en [ SGMW4, 6-8
Cl ~ ~ ! SGMW5, 2-4
SGMW5, 6-8
SGMW6, 2-4
SGMW6, 6-8
SGMW7, 6-8
SGMW8, 2-4
SGMW8, 6-8
0 N 0 "' 0 Concentr'ation {% by vol.) A 0 u, 0 '" 0 cl a, 0 <0 0 0 0 I I I I I
I
> I
< .. ~ I Ill u, ..
C C"l .. 0 n ::,
m co n 3 .. ""l er ::, -· .. e;' (IQ
~ Ill = --.,
<D o· "' m <D ::, ,I>, O> 0 ' -!JI 0 ...
t.. ;;::
C: .. -::, ':r I .. Ill -::,
<D ..
<D ::, "' (JI
m &
Gl Ill ..
0
0
u
D
D
D
u
I Concentration (% by vol.) I 0 a, O> 0 N ... a, SGMW1, 2-4 I I SGMW2, 2-4 I
SGMW2, 6-8
SGMW3, 2-4 I
> I < SGMW3, 6-8 CD ~ ..
IQ
a, CD I ., 0 SGMW4, 2-4 ◄ ~ Q. 0 ' .,, ~ C:::, =o 0 C CD g ~ n :::, "' C.
CD -m !1, SGMW4, 6-8 3 ~ .. Cl C" !:t ., CD 0 0 ~ :::, "'l ! SGMW5, 2-4 ~ 0 a<i' CD I CD -= a, 0 .. -.. "' 0 ~ r:r .i:-SGMW5, 6-8 '-0 ' C :::, a,, :::, C I CD
~ i5' SGMW6, 2-4 CD )( CD a: ... CD
:i' a SGMW6, 6-8 CJ) g,
G'l D SGMW7, 2-4 ..
"'
SGMW7, 6-8 u
SGMW8, 2-4 u
D nf!! I~~!
I O cnl u ' en .,, I <b n I
I g g !
l ::l o. i
: a. :::0 I ' ;,:, .,, I co I!) •
' ., C.' B 9: 5·
I IE (0
_, --
D
Concentration (% by_ vol.) "' "' 0 "' SGMW1, 2-4 SGMW1, 6-8 SGMW2, 2-4
SGMW2, 6-8
SGMW3, 2-4
SGMW3, 6-8
"' m n ~
◄ <C SGMW4, 2-4 a ~ C ~ a. :;; "' ~ g, SGMW4, 6-8 "' G) m .. :;;
!le SGMW5, 2-4
SGMW5, 6-8
SGMW6, 2-4
SGMW7, 2-4
SGMW7, 6-8
SGMWB, 2-4 -
"' 0
> < CD iil cc CD Co CD 0 n :::, CD n 3 CD er :::,
CD -, , ., .. -<O -· <O 0 en :::, -0
0 ...
... 0 C: )C :::, '<
CD CC .. CD
<O :::,
<O ;;· .... en g,
" ., ..
I I I I I
I
I
I
g
u
D
u
0
D
D
D
l!!!l!I · -
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0 >
~
E 0.5 C. !=
C: 0 .,
i 0.4 .. u C: 0 u 0.3
0.2
0.1
0
"f :); "f :); "f N N N
j;: j;: r r i ::. ::. (!J (!J (!J (!J (!J
<J) <J) <J) <J) <J)
!!!!! I!!!!!!!!! !!!!!t !!!!!t !!!!!
Figure 4-8
Average Concentration of Hydrogen Sulfide in Soil Gas
December 1996 to June 1997
:z g
::. (!J
<J)
Background
Wells
"f N
t ::. (!J
<J)
"I "f "' N
t '° :;; ::. ::.
(!J (!J
<J) <J)
Soil Gas Well
:); "f "I "f
N "' N
'° { ! g
·~ ::. ::.
(!J (!J (!J (!J
<J) <J) <J) <J)
!!!!!t !!!!! !!!!!! !!!!! I!!!!!
[-~----------J ■ 60 Second Reading
El 360 Second Reading ------·------~
"' "f "' <b N <b g .; .; :;; :;; ::. ::. ::.
(!J (!J (!J
<J) <J) <J)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
I
m
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 3-1
Volatile Organic Compounds
OU4 NOTS
·)·••: .. \;•····•i:•·····•·····•.··? r;··•···•?} {:•···•··•··•·::• i·•·····?····••\ •rx·•t•····•·•.it .J.•···•···•···••···•··Y~Jiif.il;:?}gariic•.compouj1ds <f ffg)·····•··· •· ... · ... ·• 1:>~:~TJ1?>···.·. ~:lit!>:···· / ·• ;) \ I> < ••·>/ } •• :t\\ . }yiriy1\\
1 :< · .··•·• "" ,,.,1~~ l •· > r•1> ·,;~ •· ..... cHIOride
BT34.5 I 0/07/96 4.5 to 6.5 96000 6300 U 6300 U
BT36.5 10/07/96 6.5 to 8.5 26000
BT44.6 I 0/07/96 4.6 to 6.6 22000
BT46.6 I 0/07/96 6.6 to 8.6 15000
BT54.4 I 0/07/96 4.4 to 6.4 1700
BT56.4 I 0/07/96 6.4 to 8.4 3600
BT64 I 0/17/96 4 to 6 150000
BT66 10/17/96 6 to 8 240000 D
BT74 I 0/17/96 4 to 6 170000
BT76 I 0/17/96 6 to 8 210000 D
BT84 I 0/17/96 4 to 6 12000
BT86 10/17/96 6 to 8 6600
BT94 10/17/96 4 to 6 24000
BT96 10/17/96 6 to 8 50000 D
BTI04 I 0/17/96 4 to 6 46000 D
BT106 I 0/17/96 6 to 8 59000
BT! 14 10/17/96 4 to 6 180000 D
BT! 16 I 0/17/96 6 to 8 130000
BT124 10/17/96 4 to 6 12000
BT126 I 0/17/96 6 to 8 40000
BTI34 10/17/96 6 to 8 11 J
Notes:
760 J = The reported value is an estimated value.
5500 B = This compound was detected in the associated method blank.
46000 D = Concentration reported from secondary dilution.
IO U = The reported value was not detected at reported detection limit.
C:\PROJECTS\CDRSPRNG\ l 997\OU4STUDY\BT-SOIL.OU4
1800 JB 2200 U
1900 B 1700 U
1800 B 1600 U
1800 B 1600 U
5000 B 1600 U
5500 JB 15000 U
8800 DJB 7200 U
16000 U 16000 U
2600 JB 760 J
1300JB 1500 U
I I 00 JB 1600 U
2800 B 1600 U
1200 JB 1600 U
1200 JB 1700 U
6400U 6400U
7000 U 7000 U
3600 JB 8200 U
5500 B 1500 U
2000 JB 3800 U
2000OB 12 U
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 4-2
Summary of Soil
Analytical Parameters and Methodologies
Parameter MDL (mg/kg)
I ,2 Dichloroethane 0.01
Vinyl Chloride 0.01
1,2 Dichloroethylene, total 0.01
Chloroethane 0.01
Calcium 1000
Iron, Total 20
Magnesium 1000
Chloride 200
Nitrate JO
Sulfate 500
Sulfide 100
Alkalinity 200
Ammonium 500
Phosphate 2.5
pH --
Total Organic Carbon 100
Total Khejdal Nitrogen 50
Orthophosphate I
Total, phosphorus 2.5
EPA 325.3 M -The "M" stands for Modified.
--= Not applicable. PH result will be reported in Standard Units.
C:\PROJECTS\CDRSPRNG\J997\0U4STIJDY\TABLE4-2.WPD
Method
EPA OLM03.0
EPA OLM03.0
EPA OLM03.0
EPA OLM03.0
EPA ILMO4.0
EPA ILMO4.0
EPAILMO4.0
EPA 325.3 M
EPA353.J &354.1 M
EPA 375.4 M
EPA 376.1 M
EPA 310.1 M
EPA 350.2 M
EPA 365.2 M
EPA 9045
EPA 9060
EPA353.IM
EPA 365.2 M
EPA 365.2 M
----------
Table4-3(1 of3)
Soil Plot I
Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil
OU4 NOTS
l!!!!!!!l
Sample 1.0. SPl-19, 4-6 SPl-19, 6-8 SPl-22, 4-6
Sample Depth (ft.) 4 to 6 6 to 8
Date Sampled 11/13/96 11/13/96
Lab. 1.D 72227.2 72230.2
u;;i.,a.r I~
_, : -: ···•Bi ~-·•·• -... >
Chloromethane 1700 U
Bromomethane 1700U
Methylene Chloride 1700U
Acetone 3200 J
1.2 Dichloroethane 2100
2-Butanone 64008
4-Methyl 2-pentanone 1200 J
2-Hexanone 1200 J
I, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 780 J
Toluene 1700U
Notes.
1800 J = The reported value is an estimated value.
1800 B = This compound was detected in the associated method blank.
42000 D = Concentration reported from secondary dilution.
1800 U = The reported value was not detected at the reported detection limit.
C:\PROJECTS\CDRSPRNGll 997\0U4STUDY\SP t -J 296.0U4
1600 U
1600 U
1600U
1700 B
11000
4800
1600U
1600 U
1600 U
1600U
4 to 6
11113/96
72228.0
:•.··
·•··:-~
3500 JB
2200 JB
7200U
5200 JB
65000
4800 J
7200U
7200U
7200 U
7200 U
== ;;a iiiil --
SPl-22, 6-8 SPl-34, 4-6 SPl-34. 6-8
6 to 8 4 to 6 6 to 8
11/13/96 11/13/96 11/13/96
72231.0 72229.0 72232.9
·~·•··•·•· > .· : \\ .. >.\/ •::•:••· -·-:•
8200 U 1800 U 3100 U
8200 U 1800 U 3100 U
8200 U 1800 U 3100 U
8200 U 2100 B 1300 JB
95000 21000 33000
6500 JB 5600 5600
8200 U 1800 U 3100 U
8200 U 1800U 3100 U
8200 U 1800 U 3100 U
8200 U 1800U 3100 U
------ --
Sample I.D. SPl-19-5
Sample Depth (ft.) 4 to 6
Date Sample 3/26/97
Lab. I.D 30915
-l!!!!!I
Table 4-3 (2 of 3)
Soil Plot I
Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil
OU4NDTS
SPl-19-7.5 SPl-29-5
6 to 8 4 to 6
3/26/97 3/26/97
30923 30931
~ !!!!I
SPl-29-7.5
6 to 8
3/26/97
30949
~>, ·•· .. :?·••.••···.·· I·•·•·••··•·•·•·•.•.•··~•-·•····•·•·•·-·•·•·•~ ••· .... ·•·• ..... ( •·•• • · ..
. ·•·
Chloromethane 1800 U
Bromomethane 1800 U
Vinyl Chloride 1800 U
Methylene Chloride l800U
Acetone 1800 JB
1,2 Dichloroethane 19000
2-Butanone 1800 U
I, 1,2-Trichloroethane 1800 U
Bromofonn 1800U
4-Methyl 2-pentanone l800U
2-Hexanone 1800 U
I, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 1800 U
Toluene 1800U
Notes:
1800 J = The reported value is an estimated value.
1800 8 = This compound was detected in the associated method blank.
42000 D = Concentration reported from secondary dilution.
3600 U
3600U
3600 U
3600 U
2200 DJB
42000 D
3600U
3600 U
3600 U
3600 U
3600 U
3600 U
3600 U
1800 U = The reported value was not detected at the reported detection limit.
C :\PROJECTS\CDRSPRNG\ I 997\OU4STUDY\SP 1-0397. OU4
l600U 1600 U
1600 U 1600U
l600U 330 J
1600 U 1600 U
1800 8 1700 8
13000 19000
l600U 1600 U
1600 U 1600 U
l600U 1600 U
l600U 1600U
l600U 1600 U
l600U l600U
l600U 1600 U
liiiiill ilii --
SPl-7-5.5 SPl-7-7
4 to 6 6 to 8
3/26/97 3/26/97
30899 30907
·,:,: __ , ____ :_::=_::-:::::-: :·.::: -:·=:· . ::-·•·-,.:•-,:=:=,-, .. :_·_:;c-:/-:••:·:,::•::.:=,:,•-~:-:.:/-,·:-= . ·.,::: _,_
1800 U 1600U
1800 U 1600 U
1800 U 1600 U
1800 U 1600 U
1900 8 1400 JB
9700 13000
1800 U 1600 U
1800 U 1600 U
1800U 1600 U
1800U 1600 U
1800 U 1600 U
l800U 1600 U
1800 U 1600 U
- ----- -
Sample I.D. SPl-18-3
Sample Depth (ft.) 2 to 4
Date Sample 6/17/97
Lab. I.D 10154722
1,;c,c,;1~h,:~1i . ·.>"'··~ ·.•.•.·
.)····· '""IKSJ 1•·, --
Chloromethane '1700U
Bromomethane 1700U
Vinyl Chloride 1700U
Methylene Chloride 1700U
Acetone 16000
1,2 Dichloroethane 10001
2-Butanone 1700U
I, 1,2-Trichloroethane 1700U
Bromoform 1700U
4-Methyl 2-pentanone 1700U
2-Hexanone 1700U
1, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 1700U
Toluene 1700U
Notes:
I 800 J = The reported value is an estimated value.
--1!!!1!!!11
Table 4-3 (3 of 3)
Soil Plot I
Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil
OU4 NDTS
SPl-18-7.5 SPl-20-5
6 to 8 4 to 6
6/17/97 6/17/97
10154748 10154763
~-........ > ·•
1500U 1600U
1500U 1600U
1500U 1600U
1500U 1600U
1500U 1600U
3701 4601
1500U 1600U
1500U 1600U
1500U 1600U
1500U 1600U
1500U t600U
1500U 1600U
1500U 1600U
1700 U = The reported value was not detected at the reported detection limit.
C:\PROJECTS\CDRSPRNG\ 1997\OU4STUDY\SP 1-0697 .OU4
I!!!!! liiiiiiil liii&ii --- -
SPl-20-7 SPl-6-5.5 SPl-6-7
6 to 8 4 to 6 6 to 8
6/17/97 6/17/97 6/17/97
10154771 10154680 10154706
. •·· -·:,;·,.::::.=·-='-'·-~<~.--: ~--••··· • < ·:-:·-,::.-·:: ',,,
1600U 1900U 1600U
1600U 1900U 1600U
1600U 1900U 1600U
1600U 1900U 1600U
1600U 1900U 1600U
1700 8700 12001
1600U 1900U 1600U
1600U 1900U 1600U
1600U 1900U 1600U
1600U 1900U 1600U
1600U 1900U 1600U
1600U 1900U 1600U
1600U 1900U 1600U
---- -- - --1!!!!!11
Table 4-4 (I of3)
Soil Plot 2
Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil
OU4 NDTS
Sample I.D. SP2-19-4 SP2-l 9-6
Sample Depth (ft.) 4 to 6 6 to 8
Date Sampled 11/13/96 11/13/96
Lab. l.D 72221.3 72222.1
. .:/::C -~a.;. .... ••·· ;, < . ... ·•··· ~ ' ········ ·····•·· .. ii .. ii ··•·· .••. .·.·.•····•·
Chloromethane 1700 U
Bromomethane 1700U
Methylene Chloride 1700U
Acetone 1700U
1,2 Dichloroethane 220000
2-Butanone 1700U
4-Methyl 2-pentanone 1700U
2-Hexanone 1700 U
I, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 1700U
Toluene 52000
1800 J = The reported value 1s an estimated value.
1800 B = This compound was detected in the associated method blank.
42000 D = Concentration reported from secondary dilution.
16000 U
16000 U
16000 U
16000 U
150000
16000 U
16000 U
16000 U
16000 U
16000 U
1800 U = The reported value was not detected at the reported detection limit.
C:IPROJECTS\CDRSPRNG\1997\OU4STUDYISP2-1296.OU4
SP2-22-2
2 to 4
11/13/96
72223.0
·····
··•·•· ·••·• ·····
34000 U
34000 U
34000 U
34000 U
540000
34000 U
34000 U
34000 U
34000 U
34000 U
l!!l!I liiiliil liiii --- -
SP2-22-6 SP2-34-2 SP3-34-6
6 to 8 2 to 4 6 to 8
11/13/96 11/13/96 11/13/96
72224.8 72225.6 72226.4
• .... •
) i-·•··•······ .. ••::(i < ... ··•···•· <· ... ··•· ••··
6700 U 64000U 15000 U
6700U 64000U 15000 U
6700 U 64000U 15000 U
6700 U 64000U 15000 U
79000 69000 180000
5800 J 64000U 76000 JD
6700 U 64000U 15000 U
6700 U 64000U 15000 U
6700U 64000U 15000 U
6700 U 160000 J 15000 U
l!!!!!!!I ll!l!!!I !!!!!I !!!!! ~
Sample I.D. SP2-7-3.5
Sample Depth (ft.) 2 to 4
Date Sample 3/26/97
Lab. I.D 30956
liiiiiil iliiiii
Table 4-4 (2 of 3)
Soil Plot 2
Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil
OU4 NDTS
SP2-7-7.5 SP2-19-3
6 to 8 2 to 4
3/26/97 3/26/97
30964 30972
liiii
I •··••···· ;:2::.2c•,:•~••· .) ......... · I,,., ... , .. •.,,,~
Chloromethane 1800U
Bromomethane 1800 U
Vinyl Chloride !800U
Methylene Chloride 360 J
Acetone 4200 B
1,2 Dichloroethane 120000 D
2-Butanone 1800U
l, 1,2-Trichloroethane 440 J
Bromofonn 410 J
4-Methyl 2-pentanone 2300
2-Hexanone 2300
I, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 680 J
Toluene 1800 U
Notes:
1800 J = The reported value is an estimated value.
1800 8 = This compound was detected in the associated method blank.
42000 D = Concentration reported from secondary dilution.
1600U
1600U
1600U
1600U
2300 B
46000 D
1600 U
1600U
1600U
760 J
800'!
320 J
1600U
1800 U = The reported value was not detected at the reported detection limit.
C:IPROJECTSICDRSPRNGI t 9971OU4STUDY\SP2-0397.OU4
1800U
1800 U
1800 U
1800 U
2500 B
340000 D
1800U
1800U
1800 U
390 J
1800 U
1800U
1800U
-- -- -
SP2-19-7 SP2-29-5 SP2-29-7.5
6 to 8 4 to 6 6 to 8
3/26/97 3/26/97 3/26/97
30980 30998 31004 ... •·•·· ·•·~·•·•·i•:·.•··•····•.·.::•.:.·. ·~··
,, .. ·, . . -.-:''.--,.: ... ··,_.:. ·'{. \ ··. : /·
1300 J 1200 J 1100 J
1700 U 1900U 1700 U
1700 U 1900 U 1700 U
1700 U 320 J 270 J
2000 B 2900 B 3000 B
50000 D 330000 D 170000 D
1700U 1900 U 1700 U
1700U 1900U 1700 U
1700U 1900U 1700U
1700 U 1900U 1700U
1700 U 1900 U 1700 U
1700U 1900 U 1700 U
1700U 1900 U 1700 U
l!!!l!!I l!!!!!!I !!!!!!I Ill!!!!! 5:1
Sample I.D. SP2-I 8-5
Sample Depth (ft.) 4 to 6
Date Sample 6117/97
Lab. I.D 10154805
liia:I =:a liiiiila
Table 4-4 (3 of3)
Soil Plot 2
Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil
OU4 NOTS
SP2-18-7.5 SP2-20-5
6 to 8 4 to 6
6117/97 6/17/97
10154813 10154821
liiiii iiili
SP2-20-7
6 to 8
6117/97
10154839
' ···•,'~ .··•· ·{ . ... J •••• .• :o: .:::\-::·_:, -:-:,:,· .. :·-·.· ', .' ·-:•,• :.--7 ·······•::::,:•::·::·•·••.•······
Chloromethane 1600U 1500U 1500U
Brornomethane 1600U 1500U 1500U
Vinyl Chloride 1600U 1500U 1500U
Methylene Chloride 1600U 1500U 1500U
Acetone 1600U 1500U 2700B
1,2 Dichloroethane 65000D 140000E 120000D
2-Butanone 1600U
1, 1,2-Trichloroethane 1600U
Bromoform 1600U
4-Methyl 2-pentanone 1600U
2-Hexanone 1600U
I, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 1600U
Toluene 1600U
1800 J = The reported value 1s an estimated value.
1800 B = This compound was detected in the associated method blank.
42000 D = Concentration reported from secondary dilution.
1500U
1500U
1500U
1500U
1500U
1500U
1500U
1800 U = The reported value was not detected at the reported detection limit.
32000 E = The reported value exceeds the upper level of the calibration range for the instrument.
C:\PROJECTSICDRSPRNGI I 991\OU4STUDYISP2-0697 .OU4
1500U
1500U
1500U
1500U
1500U
1500U
1500U
1500U
1500U
1500U
1500U
51008
32000E
1500U
1500U
1500U
1500U
1500U
1500U
1500U
liilii -- - --
SP2-6-3 SP2-6-7
2 to 4 6 to 8
6117/97 6/17/97
10154789 10154797
·••· ·••·•·:•:: •.•r? I : :·,::; :::_:}:)->'''···::::
1700U 1600U
1700U 1600U
1700U 1600U
1700U 1600U
1700U 1600U
150000D 5100
1700U 1600U
1700U 1600U
1700U 1600U
1700U 1600U
1700U 1600U
1700U 1600U
1700U 1600U
l!!!!!!!I l!!!!!!I l!!!!!!I !!!!II l!!!!!9 !!!!I
Sample I.D. SP3-19-4
Sample Depth (ft.) 4 to 6
Date Sampled 11/13/96
Lab. I.D 72233. 7
11!!!!!!1
Table 4-5 ( I ofJ)
Soil Plot 3
Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil
OU4 NOTS
SP3-19-6 SP3-22-0 SP3-22-6
6 to 8 0 to 2 6 to 8
11/13/96 11/13/96 11/13/96
72234.5 72237.0 72238.8
;;a liiiil liiii liiii -
SP3-34-2 SP3-34-4 SP3-34-6 SP3-l 9-
6D
2 to 4 4 to 6 6 to 7 6 to 8
11/13/96 11/13/96 11/13/96 11/13/96
72235.3 72236.1 72243.3 72239.6 .. ' ?g)/ •·•· ½Jj({ ...
••·•·•••Ii
n •+•-•···•·::••f /···•·•··•··•···•·~\· ............ } . . ··. ·-:·=y):)J{>· :,:: ·•··· ·•· ·•···.
Ch loromethane 16000 U 15000 U
Bromomethane 16000 U 15000 U
Methylene Chloride 16000 U 7200 JB
Acetone 27000 B 26000 DJB
1,2 Dichloroethane 2!0000 440000 D
2-Butanone 16000 U 15000 U
4-Methyl 2-pentanone 16000 U 15000 U
2-Hexanone 16000 U 15000 U
I, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 16000 U 15000 U
Toluene 52000 15000 U
Notes:
1800 J = The reported value is an estimated value.
1800 B = This compound was detected in the associated method blank.
42000 D = Concentration reported from secondary dilution.
1800 U = The reported value was not detected at the reported detection limit.
C\PROJECTS\CDRSPRNGI I 9971OU4STUDYISPJ-I 296.OU4
8400 U
8400 U
8400U
7900 JB
330000 D
5100 J
8400U
8400 U
8400 U
8400 U
7!00 U 77000 U 1400U 36000 U 1600 U
7!00 U 77000 U 1400 U 36000 U 1600U
7!00 U 49000 JB 1400U 36000 U 1600U
4600 JB 35000 JB 2600 B 72000 DJ 12000 B
110000 3,400,000 480 J 1,200,000 D 6600
4!00 J 77000 U 4200 36000 U 6!00 B
7100U 77000 U 1400 U 36000 U 1600U
7!00 U 77000 U 1400U 36000 U 1600U
7100 U 77000 U 1400 U 36000 U 1600 U
7!00 U 160000 1400 U 110000 3600
- --
SP3-22-
06
6 to 8
11/13/96
72240.0
7400 U
7400 U
7400 U
7700 B
36000
5200 JB
7400 U
7400 U
7400 U
7400 U
-l!!!!!!I I!!!!
Sample l.D. SP3-7-3
Sample Depth (ft.) 2 to 4
Date Sample 3/26/97
Lab. l.D 3l02
Elm! lliii:I
Table 4-5 (2 of 3)
Soil Plot 3
Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil
OU4 NDTS
SP3-7-7 SP3-19-5.5
6 to 8 4 to 6
3/26/97 3/26/97
3l02 31038
.· ..
liiliiiii iiil iiil - - -
SP3-I 9-7.5 SP3-29-3.5 SP3-29-5.5
6 to 8 2 to 4 4 to 6
3/26/97 3/26/97 3/26/97
31046 31053 3 !061
v~1.r:c;;.. ,,"'' : .,,;,;:·;;/Ii~\>··•·•· ·······•·•.•·•··•·1••·;•·· ·••·••• .. Ill ••··••.
t?••••·•·•··•····.••··.•r.T•••I•···••··.•••·•••·• -~/· >\.); 22 ········
Chloromethane 1200/
Bromomethane l600U
Vinyl Chloride l600U
Methylene Chloride 2701
Acetone 4200B
1,2 Dichloroethane 350000D
2-Butanone l600U
1, 1,2-Trichloroethane l600U
Bromofonn l600U
4-Methyl 2-pentanone 4401
2-Hexanone l600U
I, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 1600U
Toluene 14001
Notes:
1800 J = The reported value is an estimated value.
1800 B = This compound was detected in the associated method blank.
42000 D = Concentration reported from secondary dilution.
14001
1600U
l600U
3701
3600B
32000
l600U
1600U
l600U
l600U
l600U
l600U
l600U
1800 U = The reported value was not detected afthe reported detection limit.
C:\PROJECTSICDRSPRNG\ 1997\OU4STUDY\SP3-0397 .OU4
2300 l700U l500U 1700U
l700U l700U l500U 1700U
7301 1700U l500U l700U
11001 1800B l500U l700U
7100B 5700B 4800B 1700U
480000D 260000D 420000D l40000D
l700U l700U l500U 1700U
l700U l700U l500U 1700U
l700U l700U l500U 1700U
3201 3 !0l 48018 4501
l700U l700U l500U l700U
l700U 1700U 1500U 1700U
4300 3500 2700 7301
-
- --!!!!!!!
Sample I.D. SP3-18-5
Sample Depth (ft.) 4 to 6
Date Sample 6/17/97
Lab. l.D 10154904
Iv ·<r. ~--•····••., . ...
Chloromethane 1700U
Bromomethane 1700U
Vinyl Chloride 1700U
Methylene Chloride 1700U
Acetone 1700U
1,2 Dichloroethane 120000D
2-Butanone 1700U
1, 1,2-Trichloroethane 1700U
Bromofonn 1700U
4-Methyl 2-pentanone 1700U
2-Hexanone 1700U
I, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 1700U
Toluene 1700U
Notes:
1800 J = The reported value is an estimated value.
1800 B = This compound was detected in the associated method blank.
42000 D = Concentration reported from secondary dilution.
Table 4-5 ( 3 of3)
Soil Plot 3
Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil
OU4 NDTS
SP3-18-7.5 SP3-20-5
6 to 8 4 to 6
6/17/97 6/17/97
10154912 10154938
·•·· ••?··••·}·•· ~ .))..•
1400U 1700U
1400U 1700U
1400U 1700U
1400U 1700U
1400U 23000
7500 140000E
1400U 1700U
1400U 1700U
1400U 1700U
1400U 1700U
1400U 1700U
1400U 1700U
1400U 7001
1800 U = The reported value was not detected at the reported detection limit.
140000 E = The reported value exceeds the upper level of the calibration range for the instrument.
C:IPROJECTSICDRSPRNG\1997\0U4STUDYISP3-0697.0U4
iiiilil liii -- --
SP3-20-6.5 SP3-6-3.5 SP3-6-7.5
6 to 8 4 to 6 6 to 8
6/17/97 6/17/97 6/17/97
10154946 10154888 10154896
r•.••••:··•·.••i••·••··•·•··•<··· >•••·-•. ···••· ·•··••
•'•.·····•·•· ··•·•···•·······••.••·;i <•·••·••··cc··•·.•· ·•-·•·•r )••·····. \·.r:· ··•--:.: :-·_ -: :·-c,:: .: ._. .. _/:
1600U 1800U !400U
1600U 1800U 1400U
1600U 1800U 1400U
1600U 1800U 1400U
1600U 1800U 1400U
64000E 870000D 1900
1600U 1800U 1400U
1600U 1800U 1400U
1600U 1800U 1400U
1600U 1800U 1400U
1600U 1800U 1400U
lliOOU 1800U 1400U
1600U 7601 1400U
-I!!!!!!!! l!!!!!!I ~
Sample I.D. SP4-I, 4-6
Depth (fl.) 4 to 6
Sample Date 11/13/96
Lab. I.D 72259.0
em Gilia
Table 4-6
Soil Plot 4
Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil
OU4 NDTS
SP4-t, 6-8 SP4-2, 4-6 SP4-2, 6-8
6 to 8 4 to 6 6 to 8
I 1/13/96 11/13/96 11/13/96
72243.4 72255.8 72256.6
~.w .. Jco el I••f\••f!If•-•·• ... : ,. ..
Chloromethane t600U 1600 U
Bromomethane 1600 U 1600 U
Methylene Chloride 1600 U l600U
Acetone 1200 BJ 1200!8
1,2 Dichloroethane 1600 U l600U
2-Butanone 5200 B 4100 B
4-Methyl 2-pentanone 1600U 1600 U
2-Hexanone l600U 1600 U
1, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane l600U 1600 U
Toluene 1600 U
Notes:
1800 J = The reported value is an estimated value.
1800 B = This compound was detected in the associated method blank.
42000 D = Concentration reported from secondary dilution.
1800 U = The reported value was not detected at the reported detection limit.
C:IPROJECTSICDRSPRNG\ 1997\0U4STUDYISP4-l 296.0U4
•··•.•• ......
1500 U l600U
1500 U l600U
l500U 1600 U
I IOO J8 1200 J8
1500 U 1600 U
4!00 B 4600 B
1500 U t600U
1500 U 1600 U
1500 U t600U
1500 U l600U
liiliii liil ----
SP4-3;2-4 SP4-3. 6-8 SP4-4. 4-6
2 to 4 6 to 8 4 to 6
I 1/13/96 11/13/96 11/13/96
72257.4 72258.2 72001.6
rt··•••i••·•·••···•· \-·•-·•••il•••-· /·••\• ·::.:.=-.-:,:==·,:):·?t· ·_·:
·•·• . •.·.
1500 U 1600 U 1800 U
1500 U 1600 U 1800 U
280 J8 310 J8 1800 U
1400 J8 1400 J8 1200 J8
1500 U 660 J 1800 U
4600 B 5100 B 5200 B
1500 U 1600 U t800U
1500 U t600U 1800U
1500 U 1600 U 1800U
1500 U 1600 U 1800 U
-·-!!!!I l!!!I I!!!!!
Sample LD. SPl-19-4-6
Sample Depth (ft.) 4 to 6
11/13/96
!!!II !!!!I ii==, liiiiiiill
Table 4-7 (I of3)
Soil Plot I
Nutrients, Metals and Other Parameters in Soil
OU4 NDTS
SPl-19-6-8 SPl-22-4-6
6 to 8 4 to 6
11/13/96 11/13/96 Date Sampled
·· ... ,\\ ? c••<<•··•· •·•·> •••·······~ 10 •··•· ••·•·•··•• -< ·••·· '" ',.,
Nitrogen, Ammonia 21 LS 15
Nitrogen, Kjeldhal 280 290 209
Nitrogen, Nitrate ND ND ND
Phosphorus, Ortho ND ND ND
ND ND ND
liiiii iiii iiil -- -
SPl-22-6-8 SPl-34-4-6 SPl-34-6-8
6 to 8 4 to 6 6 to 8
11/13/96 11/13/96 11/13/06
·.·· i .. •·•···· . •,:: ·.=::=:-:--:-:.::::/ < ··:\: -:-: •·· •••··••·•·· . ·• .. \. • .. ~ic: '·.:., .. -,:··:,-:•. ··t·'.'>.:\--· .: -.-.--.. __ .-, . .>;:,
3 12 8.9
140 ND ND
ND ND ND
ND ND ND
ND ND ND Phosphorus, Total
~';~·PAU:M:·' e
• ·: < r••·•·•••••·•r•••···• •·•·•·••·•••··•······•·•·•· ·••·•····· ~ -~ ·•······•••··••·•••II•·· I ······· ••·••· .. ... •. . <r ··•· •_·,::,;•:.:··---· .. ·_·
Alkalnity, total ND ND ND ND ND ND
Chloride 98 77 92 89 83 90
Percent Solids (%) 69 80 71 72 78 74
Sulfate in solids ND ND ND ND ND ND
Sulfide ND ND ND 1.4 7.7 ND
Total Organic Carbon 33 32 45 120 26 26
pH (S.U.) 5.79 7.01 5.83 6.78 6.30 6.77
l•METALSlm:;'.'.'"l½it .... •·•·.·.·.·~ . •··• -···· ~ •....... •<··•···· :: • . : ....... .. i
Calcium 5240 6150 4140 5610 3160 7110
Iron 57000 29100 34600 31300 46400 32700
Magnesium 1910 2500 1440 53600 315 2610
C:\PROJECTS\CDRSPRNG\ I 997\0U4STUDY\SP 1-1296.IN
-
--l!!!!!I !!!!I
Sample I.D. SPl-7-5.5
Sample Depth (ft.) 6 to 8
3/26/97
!!!m !!!9 eem
Table 4-7 (2 of3)
Soil Plot I
Nutrients, Metals and Other Parameters in Soil
OU4 NOTS
SPl-7-7 SPl-19-5
6 to 8 4 to 6
3/26/97 3/26/97
liiiii
SPl-19-7.5
6 to 8
3/26/97 Date Sampled
!·-Nu ·:·-~-~-,,-... ·.;.: ~ :.}\•.:••.:·~--·····<•(: :~•:•••. :-: ··)> r
·•···· •·• ·.
Nitrogen, Ammonia 26 3.1 15 10
Nitrogen, Kjeldhal 23 4.5 12 17
Nitrogen, Nitrate ND ND 0.62 ND
Phosphorus, Ortho ND ND ND ND
Phosphorus, Total 78 1000 110 280
~••wT~ : .:·_:.::;:;:;:;:_:::-:_:•·:·::,·=·-'''· ··<·: / i •• ::.;::,.:-:-,:_••,:,:/:·=:::??{::.-=•:·::=:::;.: /
Alkalnity, total 98 280 830 900
Chloride 190 130 110 130
Percent Solids(%) 80 75 73 69
Sulfate in solids ND ND ND ND
Sulfide 1.9 ND ND ND
Total Organic Carbon 400 47 94 110
pH (S.U) 6.15 6.71 5.97 7.36
iiiiii -- -
SPl-29-5 SPl-29-7.5
4 lo 6 6 to8
3/26/97 3/26/97
½ . _··:••<· x·• ·. ·•/··::·.·:·.••:·
:,,.,· :-· __ . ::.: . ' _ _.,·· -.. _ . .-··:
18 ND
17 6.6
ND ND
ND ND
210 1200
··•·•······~ ./) .. • .. ·./ ? . ;
110 180
150 80
68 74
ND ND
ND ND
70 52
6.28 6.64
' · · ~ii11<lil ' )••••••••••:•-•:·-•·Jrt? I•·••••iiiiiliii•·•••·•···•···•••·:·•·• ++···· <•·· ~--... •·•••i••:•r•::•::•r·•••<·•:•:: __ ... ·_•·•-··· ____
··•. -:-:-::-:·,• . .,;,:.:-:-. __ .-·,:_. __ .·
. 1v.d~;J n.L.'.t ·•-:: ... ... ..··•·· . ·•··. :-·-.-:.-·· :·-,-.· ·:-.: ;:_. .•• .·. •··•
Calcium 4690 8100 6800 44500 5580 6850
Iron 76700 33200 65600 36900 83500 34300
Magnesium 894 3890 1400 5670 956 44200
C:IPROJECTSICDRSPRNG\ I 9971OU4STUDY\SP 1-0397.IN
-
---1!!111!1
Sample I.D.
Sample Depth (ft.)
Date Sampled ~. . ••·•
Nitrogen, Ammonia
Nitrogen, Kjeldhal
Nitrogen, Nitrate
Phosphorus, Ortho
Phosphorus, Total
!!!I l!!!!I !!!!!I m=
SPl-6,4-6
4 to 6
6/17/97
t•?>i~•-·:·.•·
5.4
400 -
0.93
ND
54
Table 4-7 (3 of 3)
Soil Plot I
Nutrients, Metals and Other Parameters in Soil
OU4 NOTS
SPl-6,6-8 SPl-18,2-4
6 to 8 2 to 4
6/17/97 6/17/97
··• •·• ·.·.·••·••··•· ?:.:: ..
3.3 7.3
340 580
ND ND
ND ND
76 22
a. liiii --
SPl-18,6-8 SPl-20,4-6 SPl-20.6-8
6 to 8 4 to 6 6 to 8
6/17/97 6/17/97 6/17/97
··•:.•· .) •··•·? >· \· \ ? >: .. : . :\ ··::·<····: ·:•·? ,', .. -.·,.>\
2.7 2.6 ND
240 150 130
ND ND ND
ND ND ND
ND ND 130
.<.>n;I.!lR·.rtRA°kilfrERs~ .• -::: •.•.• <·-::•.:. •'.·-::-:-;:>=•I/-}i/:-:0:• : r·•:·::·:·Ji. ·•· t < it:-.s•·••·.·•-·•··••· ·>r•· : •··::• t·• /-.<·•--•· ( ·• < •·••
Alkalnity, total ND too 35 100 32 63
Chloride 460 400 300 320 170 190
Percent Solids(%) 71 75 71 75 77 79
Sulfate in solids ND ND ND 80 3300 3900
Sulfide ND ND ND ND ND ND
Total Organic Carbon I to 170 61 I to 66 66
pH (S.U) 6.46 6.55 6.35 6.46 6.61 7.11
Mioi<i •i°l,,',sitco) { ~ ......... ~ ~--······· :: ? / .. •·-•· i .,·•·-·· .. ·_·· .· i .·.·• -·••·· <<
. > .. -.: ... · .. ) < ··•.•.·. .· .
Calcium 6820 6940 5490 3680 7570 6720
Iron 95600 46200 81000 29300 86500 76800
Magnesium 1080 3380 to40 1590 2240 2000
C:IPROJECTSICDRSPRNG\l 997\OU4STUDYISP 1-0697.IN
-
- ---l!!!I I!!!! l!!!!!!I ea
Table 4-8 (I of3)
Soil Plot 2
Gliiiia liiiii iiiii --
Nutrients, Metals and Other Parameters in Soil
OU4 NOTS
Sample 1.D_ SP2-19-4-6 SP2-19-6-8 SP2-22-2-4 SP2-22-6-8 SP2-34-2-4 SP2-34-6-8
Date Sampled 11/13/96 11/13/96 11/13/96 11/13/96 11/13/96 11/13/06
~ ,;;;;;;~;;~ /·----••-•---•-·~ -•-•···<--•~···· ··••·-·-•··-··•·-···••-··<·•••ii•••--__ -•••·····•·····•••-•· ,_\·:.-:-=\::::-=-:-·-:::::-:-·:-~ ;u=.Y)D ...
Nitrogen, Ammonia 14 6_9 13 9_3 13 3.2
Nitrogen, Kjeldhal 430 390 560 94 540 220
Nitrogen, Nitrate ND ND ND ND ND ND
Phosphorus, Ortho ND ND ND ND ND ND
Phosphorus, Total ND 1.3 ND 1.4 13 ND
._,_, ·:: ::=· _.,·.:::::,,: /i/i-'.i}~ •:. ,,::::. ,: ,::· ··•-... -·-•• 0 ~ -•-•-• ~··--·
tJ I H,~1<,::r~ ... :_ •·-·•-•••• (.:=·:-r::·--===·_ .. ·,•>. '::: : ::=··,::-;·' .. -:=c:;-,: :., ' ·,: ·:= -,<,,:< ::-:>=, \\./
Alkalnity, total ND ND ND ND 19 ND
Chloride 150 86 160 91 120 57
Percent Solids 71 78 69 74 78 82
Sulfate in solids ND ND ND ND ND ND
Sulfide ND 3_8 ND ND ND ND
Total Organic Carbon 65 130 70 120 98 l00
pH 7_25 8_73 5_42 7_05 7_06 8_ 10
fy!EIAik •--·-······--·~ .. --.-... -.-~ _ ... ----•-----
.•.... •·····\ti6{··••----·--··-•··-·•·-•·-• .•. ·-··-•·· .-.-----• ... ))_ --) )--_ ... --_ ... _ ·.:c-::,:;,,.-c.=-·,::.:::'.':-·· .-...... _.,:::.: .. : .... -'='
Calcium 4980 7050 5120 8050 4760 6080
Iron 43800 27300 78500 24600 74200 18500
Magnesium 2530 1660 718 2090 549 1640
C:\PROJECTS\CORSPRNG\l997\0U4STUDY\SP2-1296_1N
-
- --
Sample I.D. SP2-7-3.5
Sample Depth (ft.) 4-6
Date Sampled 3/26/97
I ::¼tJi~ .:-·::-':··::··.:. -. :-::::_:'·:-::::'::-.·,_,::;·:-/ . j/ /_:: ·'·}/: ,-, :"'::: ,;::,:--:: /
. ·• . ,,
Nitrogen, Ammonia 22
Nitrogen, Kjeldhal 11
Nitrogen, Nitrate ND
Phosphorus, Ortho ND
Phosphorus, Total ND
~ PARi\Ml''rnils, ••• :. :::;"_:::::·:.\:_·-? ,,:,:--:·.,:;,,::·,
Alkalnity, total 180
Chloride 180
Percent Solids(%) 73
Sulfate in solids ND
Sulfide ND
Total Organic Carbon 96
pH (S.U) 5.88
• .. • • •·· •·•• .. •·;i/•··iC······ .....•.•••• • •••••••••.•••• (·•·•···•·•••··•·•~ ··•·· .»•L}.~L,> ...
Calcium 4800
Iron 70800
Magnesium 1170
C•\PROJECTS\CDRSPRNG\1997\OU4STUDY\SP2-0397.IN
!!!!!I
Table 4-8 (2 of 3)
Soil Plot 2
Nutrients, Metals and Other Parameters in Soil
OU4 NOTS
.. -
SP2-7-7.5 SP2-19-3 SP2-19-7 SP2-29-5 SP2-29-7.5
6 to 8 2 to 4 6 to 8 4 to 6 6 to 8
3/26/97 3/26/97 3/26/97 3/26/97 3/26/97 ·······>& ····•·•/·••·· ·• .. ~·.·~·/·> /· < /· .. { y>••· ··••··•·.·. if.
. .... ····· . ·.... ./ .. ··•· ... :·•(. .·. \; > ... . •·
1.8 7.8 3.6 11 6.9
8.8 7.6 8.2 17 4.0
ND ND ND ND ND
ND ND ND ND ND
1900 96 580 34 180
••·••·· :-:-:-:-:_._-·,:e::::,:: -·:::,:-:·:.:•·::: ···•·•· /~. i,' \\ ''{=:/::{j) ·•••I.••·:•r.•••••:.·•·•••·••··••••••· ·•·•.L•··••··••••·.>.· ······ ···•··•·· ·• ....
160 70 240 70 280
50 270 65 80 93
79 74 76 74 75
ND ND ND ND ND
ND ND ND ND ND
190 81 150 110 94
6.32 4.84 6.28 6.05 6.18
~•··•·····•··••·<••·•··•··•·• ··•··· ·•··•·•·•···········•·•··•···••·.• ··· : ••·•·. > c· }ii···•· ·
•· .. · ·: .>i,j{i_ .:::: --,-.• -.--·. ..: ._.:_.:-·:·._
6130 5150 5880 6530 6460
34900 76800 38700 66000 49100
8260 1700 2990 3120 6410
-
---11!!!!!!1 I!!!!! l!!!9
Sample I.D. SP2-6,2-4
Sample Depth (ft.) 2 to 4
Date Sampled 6/17/97
. · ... ·•······ ·•.··•·<1;;::;;••··•·•-·••t······· •·•·•···~ I•I•••••••III· .. .1,,jlJ1 :N·1., -'.-:-C ·-:-·
Nitrogen, Ammonia 1.7
Nitrogen, Kjeldhal 170
Nitrogen, Nitrate ND
Phosphorus, Ortho ND
Phosphorus, Total ND
·,,•.···••··•·• ,p/~icCn:\ (····.·/·· j•••··•·•···.,
Alkalnity, total 660
Chloride 300
Percent Solids(%) 72
Sulfate in solids ND
Sulfide ND
Total Organic Carbon I IO
6.20
I!!!!!! em
Table 4-8 (3 of 3)
Soil Plot 2
Nutrients, Metals and Other Parameters in Soil
OU4 NDTS
SP2-6,6-8 SP2-18,4-6
6 to 8 4 to 6
6/17/97 6/17/97 ---
ND 6.1
130 560
ND ND
ND ND
140 ND
liiiiiiiiil
SP2-I 8.6-8
6 to 8
6/17/97
i-•-·(f' .. -•.•..
ND
88
ND
ND
ND
:·.••· ... ... ·········: . ·.,•.········ l ,? .. ., ~ ........ .
68 ND 35
350 450 160
73 72 71
3500 ND 4500
ND ND ND
140 90 53
6.67 6.63 6.77
liiiiii iiii -
SP2-20,4-6 SP2-20.6-8
4 to 6 6 to 8
6/17/97 6/17/97
: ... ·,.,· •t <: \ . .-,:,'.:?)"'::: ., -: ·.,>:.::,_ ·.·
17 ND
560 130
ND ND
ND ND
16 I IO
..... <, ()if. •<·••·2 ••·•··.: .....
.·,··· -,:-.-:· ... -.. -.-:-. '•-. :
66 90
210 190
76 83
ND 3100
ND ND
180 120
6.49 6.79 pH (S.U) ~ ~ ·····--·•··•··~--·••·••·•<••· i : /i_ .. • . Ml'TAI < ,,: •-·-••·.•·••i·•····•······•··•·•·•·•-·····•·•·····•·•···-··-•··>1•·•f ?::?t:·,: :-: :::/>::-. :'
":',::·::_:_ •:,:-:.-'"·.' •.•.• ·:.:· . ..
Calcium 8680 5440 I 1400 9080 9330 7280
Iron 45800 67900 32700 46700 48100 59700
Magnesium 4380 2170 2230 4650 4790 7190
C:\PROJECTS\CDRSPRNG\l 997\OU4STUDY\SP2-0697.IN
-
- -----l!!!!!!!I
Sample I.D. SP3-19-4-6
Date Sampled 11/13/96 _(,
. , _:··•• 01 ·/···
Nitrogen, Ammonia 31
Nitrogen. Kjeldhal --
Nitrogen, Nitrate ND
Phosphorus, Ortho ND
1.5
1!!11 I!!!! E!l!I
Table 4-9 (I of3)
Soil Plot 3
Nutrients, Metals and Other Parameters in Soil
OU4 NDTS
SP3-19-6-8 SP3-22-0-2
11/13/96 11/13/96
SP3-22-6-8
11/13/96
~· .... ..... :-~·.,::,,::::._,_::::::,\.,:::-:-.
11 19 8.1
440 260 330
ND ND ND
ND ND ND
ND ND 1.6
fiiiii --
SP3-34-2-4 SP3-34-4-6
11/13/96 11/13/06
•• .· .... ~•·•·••···t•.•·•.c ... ····· . ... •·.·•
86 9.1
680 390
ND ND
ND ND
ND 4.3 Phosphorus, Total
v,clSJ{ ·•ri,-TERS/iu,a .... ··•·•· •·•·••••ti••····••c·•·•••••~ -•t·~·•··••······•·•···••··••··••)'•·•·••·•?•···•••>•··•··•\•····•···•x,.·••••·····
Alkalnity, total --56 ND ND 50 ND
Chloride 560 440 260 170 510 650
Percent Solids 71 79 70 73 74 75
Sulfate in solids ND ND ND ND ND ND
Sulfide --ND ND 4.1 43 ND
Total Organic Carbon --280 150 270 810 210
pH
n~
8.30 8.53 6.48 8.42 6.65
META' "'"
·.• '~······•···•···• ; . t: <>··· -.t·=-://: ::=:::.:-. .. i.z·•···.·••· i·•.•/ :-:?" ·-;;·-:,_;,:';:-· .. ·--:: _: .
:= .. -.,:---.-/.==-:. --'·· . ,-.-.. ---.. -·:': .
Calcium 9730 5690 4440 2690 4900 3660
Iron 50300 59300 78000 18000 72800 38700
Magnesium 1580 1020 526 1210 425 1120
C,IPROJECTSICDRSPRNG\1997\OU4STUDY\SPJ-I296.IN
-
- --- ---
Sample I.D. SP3-7-3
Sample Depth (ft.) 2 to 4
Date Sampled 3/26/97
F0fji1¢Nf~ (
•iO:•• ii
-:·: •,=·.:/)}=.>:(:)-' .. >•
Nitrogen, Ammonia 22
Nitrogen, Kjeldhal 17
Nitrogen, Nitrate ND
Phosphorus, Ortho ND
Phosphorus, Total ND
- --
Table 4-9 (2 of 3)
Soil Plot 3
Nutrients, Metals and Other Parameters in Soil
OU4 NDTS
SP37-7 SP3-19-5.5
6 to 8 4 to 6
3/26/97 3/26/97
I!!!!! !!i:11
SP3-l 9-7.5
6 to 8
3/26/97
2~ ...... ····.••.• •·.•··•:••~ ··• . . ··•·• ... ··•· >·
2.7 26 15
13 18 3.2
ND ND ND
ND ND ND
350 29 68
&iiil -
SP3-29-3.5 SP3-29-5.5
2 to 4 4 to 6
3/26/97 3/26/97
.··.•··•(··· .. } --c./~j'. :. -. ',:· . .'·:-<:-:_:_.: --... ,-·.:,:
33 10
14 19
ND 0.32
ND ND
19 ND
··•· ·•·•·•···•·• •v%)••••••• ::\:=:._,::=,00
•·· .. ·•·-.:-•••·· ....... ·_•·••·-.··._-·•·.••••-·••I·•••I/i"••·f···•·-•·••··••·••·•··_•.••·••··••• V' ,i::P: K ····•••·· ..
•••• •• ··•·• ••·•·.
Alkalnity, total 250 1600 1600 260 3400 3400
Chloride 530 250 480 370 420 220
Percent Solids(%) 73 79 80 80 81 85
Sulfate in solids ND ND ND ND ND ND
Sulfide ND ND ND ND ND ND
Total Organic Carbon 210 120 430 120 230 290
pH (S.U) 5.83 6.45 5.75 6.42 7.99 7.00
;.;;ii+,tts iZiitk~ · ··-·.· { II II Ii•·•·· ~ ... • .:··•·••·•·•• )> < /} ;·-· .• ••. .• > \ ± ······ . ··••· .:•
·•···•· .. .. .. ... ··• ..:?·• ··•·> ... ·.· ..
Calcium 4420 6860 4580 6200 5120 6870
Iron 69300 49900 7800 78200 83700 86900
Magnesium 1060 2030 499 1200 540 2020
C•IPROJECTSICDRSPRNG\i 997\OU4STUDY\SP3-0397 .IN
-
--- - -
l!!!!I
Sample I.D. SP3-6,2-4
Sample Depth (fl.) 2 to 4
l!!!!!!!!I I!!!!! ml
Table 4-9 ( 3 of 3)
Soil Plot 3
Nutrients, Metals and Other Parameters in Soil
OU4 NDTS
SP3-6,6-8 SP3-l8,4-6
6 to 8 4 to 6
l:liiliiil liiiiii lilii iiiiil -
SP3-l 8.6-8 SP3-20,4-6 SP3-20.6-8
6 to 8 4 to 6 6 to 8
6/17/97 6/17/97 . Date Sampled 6/17/97 6/17/97 6/17/97 6/17/97
•.• f*;J·•·•········•·····iJ· ..... Ii ··•· ~ ··•· ••••t··•!I ..............•... ~.·••········•··••.··•·······•·••·•• ·············•·i••·•·•·f .. ·•.•••······.·•···.·.•· ········•···•··••··•t·••·?·•··•········•···.·•··
1
•··•.•·•·<·•······ ..• Ni.n cNTS ····•·••· .... .. ..
Nitrogen, Ammonia 100 ND 19 ND 31 ND
Nitrogen, Kjeldhal 500 260 290 220 300 ND
Nitrogen, Nitrate ND ND ND ND ND ND
Phosphorus, Ortho ND ND ND ND ND ND
Phosphorus, Total 14 32
... ~ 38 22 52
.,·~.Alv!g~) ..
·········•··T•···•········•·•···••·
..... }tt····· ~.~ ;.:,=.::=: :}=·-<</:):}:\.}>-· :. ·•.·•· •·/······) < IUIH ··.·•·•·····
Alkalnity, total ND 33 ND 63 96 27
Chloride 440 330 530 490 640 230
Percent Solids(%) 72 76 73 79 78 91
Sulfate in solids ND ND ND ND 89 3000
Sulfide ND ND ND ND ND ND
Total Organic Carbon 180 67 140 120 140 97
pH (S.U) 6.51 6.62 6.55 6.60 7.20 6.21
···•.· . · l < • ·. •··.· -.,,•:,•-· ,:,:-•,:•·:·::-· = iiiR ~ .. ~~ .. ,.;-. ·• /> . ·•·······•···•···· tf tw·••·••••·••••t·<•·•··· ; ,.• ....•.•.... ··.•· .. ··.· .......
"'" .. · > /·· .. ·•··•··· ..... .. •··•··•· •
Calcium 8260 9380 6850 7520 5950 5630
Iron 56600 73900 53800 99400 43800 43400
Magnesium 4680 1270 3080 1700 3190 2730
C:IPROJECTS\CDRSPRNG\ i 997\OU4STUDY\SP3-0697 .IN
-
-I!!!!
Sample l.D. SP4-I, 2-4
Sample Depth (ft.) 2 to 4
Date Sampled 11/13/96
.. •.
. 1'.11 jTDfJ.:NTS'lnlO/liU)/} •·· ·•• .. ·• ··••·
Nitrogen, Ammonia ND
Nitrogen, Kjeldhal 190
Nitrogen, Nitrate 1.3
Phosphorus, Ortho ND
Phosphorus, Total ND
•OH ;;.,~•-•si.t ·•
Alkalnity, total ND
Chloride ND
Percent Solids(%) 79
Sulfate in solids ND
Sulfide 5.1
Total Organic Carbon 14
6.07
lii:ll.il liiiil
Table 4-10
Soil Plot 4
Nutrients, Metals and Other Parameters in Soil
OU4 NOTS
SP4-I, 6-8 SP4-2, 4-6
6 to 8 4 to 6
11/13/96 11/13/96
SP4-2. 6-8
6 to 8
11/13/96
ii Ii•\ . ? ~>•• ~\ >/\
ND ND ND
200 I JO 220
ND ND ND
ND ND ND
ND ND ND
,:,:':'----,:::-:/:t:I::t:t:::;::;::::;:::.-=:':,:::::::c_.=·=--:· ~-··· TI . ·
ND ND ND
ND ND ND
74 80 79
ND ND ND
ND 6.2 ND
II 9.6 II
6.45 6.11 6.23
liiiii --
SP4-3. 2-4 SP4-3, 6-8
2 to 4 6 to 8
11/13/96 11/13/06 ;.:··,,.. ..•............ ·•o;r ..-·.·: ·=-
). .. . ·.· ... •· .. .•,-: ,_ .. ·
ND ND
220 180
ND ND
ND ND
ND ND : : i;y\ ( <
. -: . __ .,_ .
ND ND
ND ND
77 76
ND ND
ND ND
II 20
6. 15 6.21 pH (S.U) . . ·.·· ? I -··•··········2J ... \ \ f.·· }\···• .. · '..J' ./ ···. \· MET Ari~--( m~~:vn I:-.--.,:::::= =:·_:. :::/:/C-\:: ·-:·:': :·. -:' :,,, . .-_,::_{\,:".,:::.:,:., __ :/,/' •.. . .····•· .. . .. .. . . . .;:-. . . . · ..
Calcium 2530 3390 2640 2840 2630 3420
Iron 42500 56400 44900 46400 44400 61600
Magnesium 419 723 432 430 484 401
C:IPROJECTS\CDRSPRNG\l 997\0U4STUDY\SP4-1296.IN
-
-- - -- -
Sample Location
Date Sampled 12/10/96
bY~,!.?~Hf t =·=-~ ____ ,_, __ ::::=
··•·.·•.• r, il'-~)I) ,,:_==-C .'
Vinyl Chloride --
1,2 Dichloroethane --
Toluene --
Chloroethane --
T etrach loroethane --
Benzene --
m/p Xylene --
Xylene --
I· I I M ... " l>~fvu ,·J ....
··-: ~
Ethene (ppb (v)) --
Ethane (ppb (v)) --
Methane (ppb (v)) --
Carbon Dioxide (% vol) --
Oxygen (% vol) --
Notes:
--= No sample.
-l!!!!!I ll!!!!!!I I!!!!!! ~ ~
Table 4-11 (I of6)
Monthly Summa Canister Sampling
Soil Gas Monitoring Well I (2 to 4 ft.)
Volatile Organic Compounds and Other Parameters in Soil Gas
SGMW-1 ( 2 to 4 ft)
01/07/97 4/22/97
liiiiii iiil --
5/19/97 6/16/97
·•·•· I•·• I•-••• .....
2/11/97 &5/97 ·<•· ·-I
•• i
~-i >::::··:•·• > :, •··•·· :· ·\\::••••·•• >>•• .:r
----1200 D ------
----140 D ------
--170 D ' --------
----IOU ------
----10 U ------
----IOU ------
.
----IOU ------
----10 U ------
: :.: :::-:: ···.:•::: .••-~ .·.-: :=\::::=:.?:::::-:-:_:;:::: ,:.c..,-:: --=·· .--·;:"_·.:,, ,:=>::-··;'.:--)-,:., =·= -. -., .. ,-,-::-:, ... -.·, ___ ,,-.:::-r=·· ''''-::--'·:<. =--, ... _ <> :.:
•··•·· :•·: :: (::::/\)\,/ ,:_ -: :-·_. ,-._ .. :_ : .. .-.:::··\.=,;: t?.:)?:' \'/ :-: -: '' ' ·.:--. :'. ·.:,,,· ' ...
----170 ------
----<20 ------
----30 ------
----<0.10 ------
----23 ------
IO U = The reported value was not detected at the reported detection limit.
1200 D= Concentration reported from a secondary dilution.
C:IPROJECTSICDRSPRNG\ I 997\0U4STUDY\SG I 2T04.0U4
-
- - - - - -l!!!!!l!I !!!!!!I !!!!I l!!l!!J EEi l:iiiiiiil liiiiiil liiiiiil iiiiii liiiil -- -
Table 4-11 (2 of 6)
Monthly Sumina Cannister Sampling
Soil Gas Monitoring Well I (6 to 8 ft.)
Volatile Organic Compounds and Other Parameters in Soil Gas
Sample Location SGMW-1 (6 to 8 ft)
Date Sampled 12/09/96 01/07/97 2/11/97 4/03/97
1=-/t·=?t ~i(\· (<~tf<~)) .··-/ ,_
--· ---·== <-·-=······::c,.•-=''' ... =-··=.:-c:.-· '''(="-=:_..:: ,::,=
-· -· .·-CC·. ,., ... -.. --.-::=:·.:, /: ,-,_.:::::;·' ;_,;;: :-.:,_,,,,.:: ·,:_':: :-: ·,::':(<: {/\?:': ==:-=:
Vinyl Chloride 4,3000,00 D 800,000 D 610,000 D IU
1,2 Dichloroethane 31,000,000 D 3,700,000 D 3,100,000 D 53
Toluene 41,000 D 10000 U 10000 U 7
Chloroethane 14000 D 10000 U 10000 U IU
Tetrachloroethane 24000 D 10000 U 10000 U 1 U
Benzene 83000 D 12000D 10000 U 1
m/p Xylene 13000 D 10000 U 10000 U 2
Freon 113 10000 U 10000 U 10000 U 4
I, 1 Dichloroethene 22000 D 10000 U 10000 U IU
Trichloroethene 10000 D 10000 U 10000 U !U
1,2 Dichloropropane 21000 D 10000 U 10000 U JU
. . .
1-------------if ~------•-· ~-/ 1,'QtJ .T"' ...... , ~ A"D" _. 11..· 1 . // •·:l l LJl.""-1 ,:,:-·:·:· ;::.,:_:::\
Ethene (ppb (v)) 42000 79000 69000 27000
Ethane (ppb (v)) < 30000 < 40000 < 20000 4000
Methane (ppb (v)) 120000 300000 280000 80
Carbon Dioxide(% vol) 0.35 0.49 1.6 < 0. 13
Oxygen (% vol) 8.9 2.2 3.1 24
Notes•
IOU= The reported value was not detected at the reported detection limit.
I 0000 D = Concentration reported from secondary dilution.
4/22/97
•.•.--. -·
{\(••t/?•·--.•···-•··•--•··-··-·•·-·.·. ···-
340,000 D
2,000,000D
1500 U
1500 U
1500 U
1500 U
1500 U
1500 U
1500 U
1500 U
1500 U
>
.. .•..... ----•--·/·-·•·•-J••-···••i-•-•---•·.• .·--·--
3330
< 30
140000
2.1
1.8
5/19/97 6/16/97
~ .
·•••r-·••--<·•·•-·••·•··-•-·-·-••-••-·-•••>J\
570000 D 38 D
3,700,000 D 460 D
15000 U 10 D
15000 U 2U
15000 U 2U
15000 U 2U
15000 U 2U
15000 U 2U
15000 U 2U
15000 U 2U
15000 U 2U
v------------> c> /
66000 480
7000 <40
340000 80
3.3 <0.2
6.6 22
--------l!!!!!!!!I !!!!I I!!!!!
Table 4-11 (3 of 6)
Monthly Summa Cannister Sampling
Soil Gas Monitoring Well 2 (2 to 4 ft.)
Volatile Organic Compounds and Other Parameters\in Soil Gas
Sample Location SGMW2 (2 to 4 ft.)
Date Sampled
Vinyl Chloride 920,000 D 66,000 D 74,000 D
1,2 Dichloroethane 36,000,000 D 2,100,000 D 9,100,000 D
10000 U 10000 U
Ethene (ppb (v)) 47000 4000 3400
Ethane (ppb (v)) <20000 <2000 500
Methane (ppb (v)) 91000 6000 400
Carbon Dioxide (% vol) 1.3 0.3 <0.50
Oxygen (% vol) IO 27 26
Notes:
---No sample
920;000 D~ Concentration reported from secondary dilution.
10000 U -The reported value was not detected at the reported detection limit.
liiill liilii iiiiil - - -
06/16/97
44,000 D 580000 D
3,300,000 D 17,000,000 D
15000 U 48000 D
1200 9300
< 30 90
650 2900
0.3 2.8
22 18
- - - - - -11!!!!!!1 I!!!!! 11!!1!1 I!!!!! !!!!!!I == liiiiiiil --iiiil iiliil - - -
Table 4-11 (4 of6)
Monthly Summa Canister Sampling
Soil Gas Monitoring Well 2 (6 to 8 ft.)
Volatile Organic Compounds and Other Parameters in Soil Gas
Sample Location
Date Sampled
Vinyl Chloride 990,000 D 860,000 D
1,2 Dichloroethane I 9,000,000 D 22,000,000 D
Toluene 23,000 D
Ethene (ppb (v)) 27000 98000
Ethane (ppb (v)) < 8000 < 50000
Methane (ppb (v)) 55000 250000
Carbon Dioxide (% vol) 3.1 4.5
Oxygen (% vol) 12 5.5
Notes:
--= No sample
920,000 D= Concentration reported from secondary dilution.
I 0000 U = The reported value was not detected at the reported detection limit.
C:\PROJECTSICDRSPRNG\l 997\0U4STUDYISG26T08.0U4
SGMW2 (6 to 8 ft.)
350,000 D 1,000,000 D
8,000,000 D 33,000,000 D
15000 U 49000 D
19000 47000
16000 5000
74000 190000
I. I 2.7
18 19
05/17/97 06/16/97
140,000 D 1,200,000 D
4,610,000 D 22,000,000 D
15000 U 15000 U
3600 30000
270 2600
11000 !0000
0.61 3.9
22 13
---·---- --l!!!!!!I
liiiiil liliiiil
Table 4-11 (5 of 6)
Monthly Summa Canister Sampling
Soil Gas Monitoring Well 3 (2 to 4 ft.)
Volatile Organic Compounds and Other Parameters in Soil Gas
Sample Location SGMW3 (2 to 4 ft.)
Date Sampled 12/10/97 01/07/97 02/11/97 03/25/97 04/22/97
;;;,,.,,.·.,>;.;• ~ ···•·•· ;i; ,·,., :;,::_.;::-:•-:,• .......... •.•·· Ill m . ~'. ,:_\l-'}JV __ .{VI ::':/: :::,:::'::-} :.,. · .... -·::::::_:,-_;/,:··'·'•" ,_ .. :,•:::::.:·=:, :.::-·:,:-:-.• -<:<'•'<<: /°);/':'
Vinyl Chloride ------
1,2 Dichloroethane ------
Toluene ------
h'rHERPARAMhiERS •• •··•···.,,,,,,••.•••· ::~••<·<• :::• -·,,:-:_ -,:•::::=·:·:::::,-·:,:;:;:
Ethene (ppb (v)) ------
Ethane (ppb (v)) ------
Methane (ppb (v)) ------
Carbon Dioxide (% vol) ------
Oxygen (% vol) ------
Notes:
--= No sample
920,000 D= Concentration reported from secondary dilution.
I 0000 U = The reported value was not detected at the reported detection limit.
C:IPROJECTS\CDRSPRNG\199710U4STUDYISG32T04.0U4
----
----
--06. ::,:••··••··· ......... ,·,,·,
-··-:----.,:(/)::,,;, ,,·,.,.,· .. \\''" ,.
----
----
----
----
----
05/19/97
••••·•••·:•·••••>••·•w•.··••:•• ... ·.•.•·· .. , ...
49,000 D
3,300,000 D
29,000 D
: . .
420
< 50
760
<0.25
22
liiiiil
06/16/97
L ) i >
--
--
--
•·:<. ?,., ...• ,.:••·•f··•······· ~ :.,
--
--
760
--
--
- - - - - - - -l!!!!!!!I I!!! I!!!!!!!! !!!!I ~ == liiiii llii .. - -
Sample Location
Date Sampled 12/09/97
Table 4-11 (6 of 6)
Monthly Summa Canister Sampling
Soil Gas Monitoring Well 3 (6 to 8 ft.)
Volatile Organic Compounds and Other Parameters in Soil Gas
SGMW3 (6 to 8 ft.)
01/07/97 02/11/97 03/25/97 04/22/97 05/19/97 06/16/97
I V/,i~iill " rt--,v~ 00 22' -x-r:= _::':":·./\:>:,---.,:, ' :··=-:,;::_ ;:;::tf'q::}::_):(:;:}'.'i:)(~/!'.\ •.·· .... i"/ ... > •• \\( < /"•.· ... ·· .. ·.
·:-·· -.: '''/-: ... _-: •, .,.•: . .
Vinyl Chloride 1,200,000 D 120,000 D 330,000 D 350,000 D
1,2 Dichloroethane 40,000,000 D 44,000,000 D 87,000,000 D 12,000,000 D
Toluene 1,400,000 D 1,400,000 D 340,000 D 280,000 D
m/p Xylene 15000 U 100000 U 46000 D 10000 U
U·•·•·•·,·•-:.:tJ~ •••• -rz•· ••··•··•.••··•···
Ethene (ppb (v)) 56000 91000 20000
Ethane (ppb (v)) < 10000 < 30000 < 5000
Methane (ppb (v)) 70000 140000 20000
Carbon Dioxide (% vol) 2.8 4 0.95
Oxygen (% vol) 14 11 28
Notes:
--= No sample
770,000 D= Concentration reported from secondary dilution.
15000 U = The reported value was not detected at the reported detection limit.
C:IPROJECTS\CDRSPRNG\I 997\0U4STUDY\SG36T08.0U4
16000
360
14000
0.74
22
770,0v0 D 76,000 D 1,500,000 D
67,000,000 D 3,300,000 D 29,000,000 D
1,000,000 D 60,000 D 740,000 D
15000 U 12 000 U 10000 U
• ~-... > (. ): . ))_.~--·· .. ·· ... ...
36000 4400 68000
1000 120 1200
48000 4700 48000
2.6 0.24 2.4
18 23 17
-------11!!!1!!!!1 l!!!!!!I !!l!I !!!!!
Table4-12(1 of7)
Quarterly Summa Canister Sampling
Soil Gas Monitoring Well 5 (6 to 8 ft.)
== == -iiii
Volatile Organic Compounds and Other Parameters in Soil Gas
Sample Location
Vinyl Chloride 900,000 D
1,2 Dichloroethane 420,000 D
Toluene 1500 U
Chloroethane 36000 D
Ethene (ppb (v)) 26000
Ethane (ppb (v)) < 3000
Methane (ppb (v)) 19000
Carbon Dioxide (% vol) 5
Oxygen (% vol) 4.3
Notes:
--= No sample
900,000 D= Concentration reported from secondary dilution.
15000 U = The reported value was not detected at the reported detection limit.
C:IPROJECTSICDRSPRNGll 99710U4STUDYISG56T08.0U4
SGMW5 (6 to 8 ft.)
370 D 1,000,000 D
59,000 D 520,000 D
230 D 3500 U
1100 32000
160 490
2200 19000
<0.25 7.1
24 12
liii - -
---------
Table 4-12 (2 of 7)
Quarterly Summa Canister Sampling
Soil Gas Monitoring Well 6 (2 to 4 ft.)
l!i!!:iiB == fiiiiiij; liiiiiiii
Volatile Organic Compounds and Other Parameters in Soil Gas
Sample Location
12/09/97
Vinyl Chloride 1,200,000 D
1,2 Dichloroethane 3,000,000 D
Toluene 23000 D
Ethene (ppb (v)) 36000
Ethane (ppb (v)) < 1000
Methane (ppb (v)) 3000
Carbon Dioxide (% vol) 1.6
Oxygen (% vol) 15
Notes:
1,200,000 D-Concentration reported from secondary dilution.
13000 U -The reported value was not detected at the reported detection limit.
C:IPROJECTSICDRSPRNGII 997\0U4STUDY\SG62T04.0U4
SGMW6 (2 to 4 ft.)
03/25/97
2,300,000 D 4,200,000 D
4,100,000 D 5,900,000 D
13000 U JOOOOU
54000 160000
90 130
9000 13000
2.6 IO
I] 2.8
liili - -
---------l!!!!!!t !!!!!9 I!!!!!!! !!!!a Eii!5 iilil liiliil ililil
Sample Location
Vinyl Chloride
1,2 Dichloroethane
Toluene
Ethene (ppb (v))
Ethane (ppb (v))
Methane (ppb (v))
Carbon Dioxide (% vol)
Oxygen (% vol)
Notes:
Table 4-I 2 (3 of 7)
Quarterly Summa Canister Sampling
Soil Gas Monitoring Well 6 (6 to 8 ft.)
Volatile Organic Compounds and Other Parameters in Soil Gas
SGMW6 (6 to 8 ft.)
1,400,000 D 2,400,000 D
13,000,000 BD 15,000,000 D
15,000 U
120000 160000
<3000 340
14000 22000
3.6 7.6
7.1 4.4
1,400,000 D= Concentration reported from secondary dilution.
15,000 U = The reported value was not detected at the reported detection limit.
C:\PROJECTS\CDRSPRNGll 997\0U4STUDYISG66T08.0U4
2,800,000 D
20,000,000 D
160000
210
21000
9.7
6.2
- -
----------_. l!!!!!!I II!!!! !!l!!!I ea c::a liiliiiil liili -
Sample Location
Date Sampled
l\i;;JM;1b >• . ,.,
Vinyl Chloride
1,2 Dichloroethane
Toluene
Tetrachloroethane
Methylene Chloride
I, 1 Dichloroethene
Table 4-12 (4 of7)
Quarterly Summa Canister Sampling
Soil Gas Monitoring Well 7 (2 to 4 ft.)
Volatile Organic Compounds and Other Parameters in Soil Gas
SGMW7 (2 to 4 ft.)
12/10/97 03/25/97
•• . •---j\ t···•·•· ········· ··•· tI ii • ~::-CC·=_:::::, .. ',1.J-'PP,:-.\ VJ --:-:: :-,:,.,·:,:•,•·: :,.::=:·:: ,;:,:-;
8900 D 5100 D
440,000 D 140,000 D
1000 U 790 D
1000 U 390 D
1300 D 250U
1000 U 300 D
06/16/97
'\• ) <••• ( ?•:···.·.·.· .. :·•:•:·.:·•I·'·'•.·••··•: \{)i\ ~-) ·.·. < .
1500 U
380000 D
1500 U
1500 U
2200 D
1500 U
6fii2D;,,..,A' ",I" ·./.• ... ~ ••.· .. •.• ..
,-.,,;,:_.' ·-:-=fil:,::
.. ~-... · t>.. . i .. > : •··.··:·-·····••·•··. ··•·•·. /··· > L .... -.·-.
-~ . .I .r: ···•··••••· .. :•• ....... •• ..:· ·-· . ___ :··· -.-._ :::.c,··. ❖ -.:: _.: ,•
Ethene (ppb (v)) 27000
Ethane (ppb (v)) < 100
Methane (ppb (v)) 1600
Carbon Dioxide (% vol) 5.7
Oxygen (% vol) 7.4
Notes:
8900 D-Concentration reported from secondary dilution.
I 000 U -The reported value was not detected at the reported detection limit.
C:IPROJECTSICDRSPRNG\1991\0U4STUDYISG72T04.0U4
.
34000 9800
50 30
.
1000 1300
7 16
12 4.1
---------l!!!!!!I !!!!!I l!!!!l!I em l:iiiiiil Giiiiia iiii ---
Table 4-12 (5 of7)
Quarterly Summa Canister Sampling
Soil Gas Monitoring Well 7 ( 6 to 8 ft.)
Volatile Organics Compounds and Other Parameters in Soil Gas
Sample Location
Date Sampled 12/09/97
~" }. ·,.,,i { '' •·····•· . ,.
Vinyl Chloride 47,000 D
1,2 Dichloroethane 5,600,000 D
Toluene 4500 D
Tetrachloroethene 4000 D
Benzene 3000 U
m/p Xylene 3000U
Xylene 3000 U
3-Chloropropene 3000 U
Ethylbenzene 3000 U
Methylene Chloride 9800 D
Trichloroethene 3500 D
OTHl'ii PA u;_:; ::::: :--:,::· :=·.:,::-::;::,:::-:::,,:·,::-,:.:
cltK~ ,:,:.=:.::-=: ' ... '"
Ethene (ppb (v)) 470000
Ethane (ppb (v)) <300
Methane (ppb (v)) 5600
Carbon Dioxide (% vol) 19
Oxygen (% vol) < 1.5
Notes:
900,000 D-
C:IPROJECTSICDRSPRNGll99710U4STUDYISG76T08.0U4
:!-/•
SGMW7 (6 to 8 ft.)
03/25/97 06/16/97
?·•i ... -... ,,. -· .· _,-.-· --:::--.:-:-·.-~ ---=:::-::-c
/ . ••. •·)•···-••·· // \ r•······-••-·•• .. •.· ··•xi · __ :.:===:.::;,:.;.: ·:.-,,--'=/;:-:·,,.·:c-:::-·-:-:-·-:c_. __ . _ ::,.::" -· ..
IU --
310D --
7 --
I U --
2 --
6 --
2 --
5 --
2 --
IU --
IU --
•··•· .. -,-. __ .,... Hi \r•-•-···•··<··•·.. >•·._.-< · .. · ... . · .. ... :.':. .. .. : > · ..
.
600 --
<40 --
130 --
<0.2 --
25 --
- - - - - - - --!!!!I I!!!!! ~ ~ == liiiiii iiiil - - -
Table 4-12 (6 of 7)
Quarterly Summa Canister Sampling
Soil Gas Monitoring Well 8 (2 to 4 ft.)
Volatile Organic Compounds and Other Parameters in Soil Gas
Sample Location SGMW8 (6 to 8 ft.)
Date Sampled 12/09/97 03/25/97 06/16/97
' iC C { •·•·•·· .•••••• ·•··.••·•· ,;·· 'y)) cc
i!'I!:)f.:•:':--.,:··,,,,,_,=· ··········
·•-··•··•···•·•·•·•··•••••••••••··•··••·••··•:<c·
7
,.sz
1
r• .. ·.••·••·•···.••·••···
,.:; ,-1 :mro11nn<:' ,;:;_:;;;:i:;::'jv 1 . ••·• .·••·•···· :·.···•···• .. ·•?· ., .. :.,.=:,-_,, ·CJ?I\)/\ -·-_.· ,_,-___ · ·==
Vinyl Chloride 180 D ----
1,2 Dichloroethane 25 U ----
Toluene -94D ----
Chloroethane 280 D ----
Tetrachloroethene 750 D ----
1,1 Dichloroethene 66D ----
3-Chloropropene 54 D ----
Methylene Chloride 350 D ----
I, I Dichloroethene 96 D ----
Chloroform 500 D ----
Trichloroethene 280 D ----
1,2 Dichloropropane 770 D ----
I, 1,2 Trichloroethane 180 D ----, ... ·•·•·•· ·••· : .... •:· .. II ~ ····· ~ ·•·•• ·•·{ < > .· j\ i/·•······ .. ··•··• i·•· .• .>•····•···2. •· :_V1JILJ~=PAuA·~ "' ·,•·::•:·-···:.::: :·: :·,:•.•:::.:,:,•_:::::;;_
Ethene (ppb (v)) 48000 ----
Ethane (ppb (v)) <200 ----
Methane (ppb (v)) 1100 ----
Carbon Dioxide (% vol) 6.5 ----
Oxygen (% vol) 13 ----
--= No sample
180 D= Concentration reported from secondary dilution. C:IPROJECTSICDRSPRNG\ l 997\0U4STUDYISG82T04.0U4
- - - - - - - --!!!!!!I !!!!II !I!!! !!a Ei;;I == ;;a iiiiiiil --
Table 4-12 (7 of7)
Quarterly Summa Canister Sampling
Soil Gas Monitoring Well 8 (6 to 8 ft.)
Volatile Organic Compounds and Other Parameters in Soil Gas
Sample Location
Date Sampled 12/09/97
.. ''-'~ (ppb (v)1 • ·· 80% ···•:· } ,::.::::: .. ·:::::::-:;://":::.::
Vinyl Chloride 6100 D
1,2 Dichloroethane 3,800,000 D
Toluene 4600 D
Tetrachloroethene 4600 D
~" ~,._,;;-;~,e···.· •·•.•.·· ..... /:=:.-:::::.\:;?:·=·,.:·=··•,:,-··~:_ .,_
Ethene (ppb (v)) 22000
Ethane (ppb (v)) <60
Methane (ppb (v)) 420
Carbon Dioxide (% vol) 11
Oxygen (% vol) 6.8
Notes:
--= No sample
770,000 D= Concentration reported from secondary dilution.
C:\PROJECTS\CDRSPRNG\1997\0U4STUDY\SG86T08.0U4
SGMWS (6 to 8 ft.)
03/25/97 06/16/97
•.··•··•·····)i""\.·:· X >·-·•··· N-t····· .. :,·· ./ z ·•· ..... · ·. .
----
----
----
----
.. · ... •.•·•··•·• >~ •··<•.· . ··•·······•if i} }i.}{(i••· \ t•···•:·•· i•··•·.··· ··•·•( .. ···••··· . ·•·•·· :•.•· ....
----
----
----
----
----
• .. i
n,~
1:-,
t:.:
1,-
\.
I:.:
i :
Ir· I I..
Ir··
L :
1,,
l .
11· , .
IL
le
lo
lu
•u
lo
•□
Blue Planet Technologies
Phase I BIOreport™ #1060
September 17, 1996
Prepared for:
Mike Ford
National Starch
10 Finderne Ave.
Bridgewater, NJ 08807
Blue Planet Technologies
32384 Edward Street
Madison Heights, Michigan 48071
[phone]
Iii
l ..
Ir·
l. -~ 1,-,
I:
f
Ir·
!
Ir·~.
Ir·
I.
I[:
IL,
I[.
IL\
•u •~.
lo
ID
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report # I 060
September 17, I 996
Laboratory Data
Customer Sample I.D.: Attention: Mike Ford
Laboratory Sample I.D.: National Starch and Chemical Co.
Matrix: Soil
Date Sampled:
Analytical Results for 1,2-Dichloroethane
Sample I.D. Concentration Detection Limit
Micrograms/kilogram
<ooh)
BT-I 4-6' 7400 4
BT-IA4-6' ND 4
BT-I 6-8' 1300 3
BT-IA 6-8' ND 3
BT-2 4-6' 14 4
BT-2A4-6' ND 0.003
BT-2 6-8' ND 4
BT-2A 6-8' ND 3
m-
l·,
:_.~
Ir
I·
•t-
•r·
I,--
l.
Ir· . '
It:
IL
•c
lo
lu
lo
•o
•u
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies R.epon #1060
September 17, 1996
Customer Sample I.D.:
Laboratory Sample l.D.:
Matrix:
Date Sampled:
Phase I B!Oreport
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
BT-I 4-6'
Ll8968-l
Soil
Attention: Mike Ford
National Starch and Chemical Co.
Nutrient Analysis
Parameters Result Units Method
Organisms
Parameters Result Units
Total Heterotroohic Plate Count <I 00/g Ornanisms oer <1rarn/ml
Bacteria Identification
Species Percent
•··· , ..
I:
Ir
l..
I:
I l
I 1·
' '·
Ir·
i
11
I .
I 1·
' .
I l
I I·
' -
•u
I ,, u
_I fl
I 0
I !J
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report # 1060
September 17, I 996
Phase I BIOreport (Conti11ued)
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
Customer Sample I.D.:
Laboratory Sample I.D.:
Matrix:
Date Sampled:
BT-I 4-6'
Ll8968-l
Soil
Attention: Mike Ford
National Starch and Chemical Co.
Factors that Limit Microbial Growth
Parameters
METALS
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmuim
Chromium
Cooner
Iron
Lead
Mercurv
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
OTHERS
oH
Moisture Content
TOC
Phenols
Cyanide (total)
Maureen K. Boman .
Technical Director
Result
<2.7
54.7
9.5
38.3
75.9
112,000
28.6
0.21
337
<3.8
<0.4.
20.8
6.70
23.2
6300
<1.0
<1.0
Units Method
oom 6010
nnm 6010
nnm 6010
ppm 6010
oorn 6010
oom 6010
nnm 6010
nnm 6010
oom 7471
nnm 258.1
nnm 7740
nnm 6010
oom 6010
units 150.2
% 160.3
nnm 415.1
oom 420.1
nnm 335.2
Shehdeh Jodeh
Laboratory Manager
I
I··
"··
I
I
I;
Ii ' t
11 \,
11
i.. ..
•u
•u
•u
I 0
•u
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Repon # I 060
September 17, 1996
Customer Sample I.D.:
Laboratory Sample I. D.:
Matrix:
Date Sampled:
Phase I BIOreport
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
BT-IA 4-6'
Ll8985-3
Soil
Attention: Mike Ford
National Starch and Chemical Co.
Nutrient Analysis
Parameters Result Units Method
84.8 rn 6010
20 m 350.2
73 m 351.3
Organisms
Parameters Result Units
Total Heterotrophic Plate Count 150,000/g Organisms per
11:rarn/ml
Bacteria Identification
Species Percent
Pseudomonas so. 55
Micrococcus so. 30
Bacillus so 15
I
I-
I
I
Ir
I:
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report #1060
September 17, 1996
Phase I B!Oreport (Continued)
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
Customer Sample l.D.:
Laboratory Sample l.D.:
Matrix:
Date Sampled:
BT-IA 4-6'
Li8985-3.
Soil
Attention: Mike Ford
National Starch and Chemical Co.
Factors that Limit Microbial Growth
Parameters
METALS
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmuim
Chromium
Conner
Iron
Lead
Mercurv
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
OTHERS
pH
Moisture Content
TOC
Phenols
Cvanide (total)
'v1fvVJ»-
Maureen K. Boman
Technical Director
Result
<2.7
173
2.9
7.0
43.3
29800
15.3
<0.05
455
<3.8
<0.4
114
4.1
13.9
1000
<1.0
<l.0
Units Method
ppm 6010
ppm 6010
nnm 6010
oom 6010
nnm 6010
nnm 6010
DDm 6010
ppm 6010
nnm 7471
DDm 258.1
nnm 7740
DDm 6010
DDm 6010
units 150.2
% 160.3
nnm 415.1
nnm 420.1
ppm 335.2
Shehdeh Jodeh
Laboratory Manager
I
I
I
I \ l
I, .. ' .
Ir
11
I
National Surch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report #1060
September 17, 1996
Customer Sample I.D.:
Laboratory Sample I.D.:
Matrix:
Date Sampl~d:
Phase I BIOreport
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
BT-I 6-8'
Ll8985-2
Soil
Attention: Mike Ford
National Starch and Chemical Co.
Nutrient Analysis
Parameters Result Units Method
105 m 6010
<IO m 350.2
<IO m 351.3
Organisms
Parameters Result Units
Total Heterotrophic Plate Count <JOO Organisms per
11ram/ml
Bacteria Identification
Species Percent
I
11
Ir-. ' Ir
'
I[:.: .,
.. ,
I,, l.i
IE!
lo
•u
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report # 1060
September 17, 1996
Phase I BIOreport (Continued)
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
Customer Sample l.D.:
Laboratory Sample l.D.:
Matrix:
Date Sampled:
BT-I 6-8'
L18985-2
Soil
Attention: Mike Ford
National _Starch and Chemical Co.
Factors that Limit Microbial Growth
Parameters
METALS
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmuim
Chromium
Coooer
Iron
Lead
Mercurv
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
011-IERS
oH
Moisture Content
TOC
Phenols
Cvanide (total)
Maureen K. Boman
Technical Director
Result
<2.7
266
2.9
IO. I
81.8
32,200
14.8
<0.05
588
<3.8
<0.4
178
7.10
17.2
3400
<1.0
<1.0
Units Method
oom 6010
oom 6010
nnm 6010
nnm 6010
nom 6010
oom 6010
nnm 6010
nnm 6010
nnm 7471
oom 258.1
nnm 7740
oom 6010
oom 6010
units 150.2
% 160.3
nnm 415.1
oom 420.1
nnm 335.2
Shehdeh Jodeh
Laboratory Manager
I,. I :.,
. ;j
I· ·. /
I:
I
' '.
I
I. I .
Ir·
I
Ir:
Ir,
I
Ir:
I
I.
I[
lt1
•u
lo
lo
lo
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report # 1060
September 17, 1996
Customer Sample I.D. :
Laboratory Sample I.D.:
Matrix:
Date Sampled:
Phase I B!Oreport
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
BT-IA 6-8'
L18985-4
Soil
Attention: Mike Ford
National Starch and Chemical Co.
Nutrient Analysis
Parameters Result Units Method
16 I 6010
<IO m 350.2
<10 m 351.3
Organisms
Parameters Result Units
Total Heterotrophic Plate Count <100 Organisms per
gram/ml
Bacteria Identification
Species Percent
I
I·
I
I
I.
I
I:
I .
Ir L
iu
IL
le
lo
•u
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report # I 060
September 17, 1996
Phase I BIOreport (Continued)
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
Customer Sample I.D.:
Laboratory Sample I.D.:
Matrix:
Date Sampled:
BT-IA 6-8'
LI 8985-4
Soil
Attention: Mike Ford
National Starch and Chemical Co.
Factors that Limit Microbial Growth
Parameters Result
l\.1ETALS
Arsenic <2.7
Barium 172
Cadmuim 2.7
Chromium 9.1
Conner 50.2
Iron 25,800
Lead 10.5
Mercuiv <0.05
Potassium 405
Selenium <3.8
Silver <0.4
Zinc I 13
OTHERS
pH 3.8
Moisture Content 11.2
TOC 2200
Phenols <1.0
Cyanide (total) <1.0
'--fo~\ct{_
Maureen K. Boman
Technical Director
Units Method
nnm 6010
oom 6010
ppm 6010
oom 6010
ppm 6010
oom 6010
nom 6010
ppm 6010
oom 7471
nnm 258.1
nnm 7740
nnm 6010
nnm 6010
units 150.2
% 160.3
ppm 415.1
oom 420.1
nnm 335.2
Shehdeh Jodeh
Laboratory Manager
I
l 'I
.J -..:!
1~
I
••• ••
I
1,-
i'
If'.
Ir
I! i
\,.
I[
•u
•u
•u
lo
•u
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Repon # I 060
September I 7, 1996
Phase I B!Oreport
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
Customer Sample LD.: BT-2 4-6'
L18985-5
Soil
Attention: Mike Ford
Laboratory Sample LD.: National Starch and Chemical Co.
Matrix:
Date Sampled:
Nutrient Analysis
Parameters Result Units Method
Phosphorous 70 oom 6010
Nitrogen CrJlu 1 <IO ppm 350.2
Nitrogen I l "-'"' IO oom 351.3
Organisms
Parameters Result Units
Total Heterotrophic Plate Count l,I00,000/g Organisms per
1rrarn/ml
Bacteria Identification
Species Percent
Bacillus sp, 60
Pseudomonas SP. 20
Coiynebacterium sp. 20
I
I
I:
I
I:
i
I:
11·
'
I
I;
'
I: '··.
I[
I l]
•u
In
l •.
National Stareh and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report# 1060
September I 7, I 996
Phase I B!Oreport (Continued)
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
Customer Sample I.D.:
Laboratory Sample I.D.:
Matrix:
Date Sampled:
BT-2 4-6'
L18985-5
Soil
Attention: Mike Ford
National Starch and Chemical Co.
Factors that Limit Microbial Growth
Parameters
METALS
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmuirn
Chromium
Cooner
Iron
Lead
Mercurv
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
OTHERS
oH
Moisture Content
TOC
Phenols·
Cvanide (total)
½)~~~-
Maureen K. Boman
Technical Director
Result
<2.7
149
2.7
47.5
148
32.600
17.1
<0.05
196
<3.8
<0.4
99.4
7.6
30.9
1200
<1.0
<1.0
Units Method
oom 6010
nnm 6010
oom 6010
nnrn 6010
nnm 6010
oom 6010
nnm 6010
nnrn 6010
nnm 7471
nnm 258.1
oom 7740
nnm 6010
nnm 6010
units 150.2
% 160.3
ppm 415.1
nnm 420.1
oom 335.2
Shehdeh Jodeh
Laboratory Manager
I
I '.· -I.
I\
Ir·
11
I
I:
I: I ' ..
11
L
If:
•. J
•u
lo
lo
I Ll
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report #1060
September 17. 1996 ,
Customer Sample I.D.:
Laboratory Sample I. D.:
Matrix: .
Date S~pled:
Phase I B!Oreport
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
BT-2A 4-6'
L 18985-1
Soil
Attention: Mike Ford
National Starch and Chemical Co.
Nutrient Analysis
Parameters Result Units Method
1.2 m 6010
0.8 m 350.2
1.9 m 351.3
Organisms
Parameters Result Units
Total Heterotrophic Plate Count 140,000,000/g Organisms per
llram/ml
Bacteria Identification
Species Percent
Bacillus sp. 45
Pseudomonas SP. 30
Corynebacterium sp. 25
I
I:
Ii I • ....
I;:
1·
Ir \
I:
11 l. ..
I [l
lo
I t!
lo
lo
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Repart # 1060
September 17. 1996
Phase I BIOreport (Continued)
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
Customer Sample LO.:
Laboratory Sample I. D.:
Matrix:
Date Sampled:
BT-2A 4-6'
Ll8985-1
Soil
Attention: Mike Ford
National Starch and Chemical Co.
Factors that Limit Microbial Growth
Parameters
METALS
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmuim
Chromium
Conner
Iron
Lead
Mercurv
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
OTIIERS
oH
Moisture Content
TOC
Phenols
Maureen K. Boman
Technical Director
Cvanide (total)
Result
<2.7
199
2.7
14.8
23.3
32.200
4.7
<0.05
375
<3.8
<0.4
132
7.4
19.7
1100
<1.0
<1.0
Units Method
ppm 6010
nnm 6010
oom 6010
oom 6010
nnm 6010
oom 6010
oom 6010
ppm 6010
oom 7471
ppm 258.1
oom 7740
oom 6010
oom 6010
units 150.2
% 160.3
nnm 415.1
oom 420.1
oom 335.2
Shehdeh Jodeh
Laboratory Manager
I
11 .,
I
If.
Ir
Ir
I
I: ' '
I;
\...
I[
I[]
ILi
I[!
lo
I tl
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report #1060
September 17, 1996 '
Phase I B!Oreport
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
Customer Sample I.D.: BT-2 6-8'
LJ8985-7
Soil
Attention: Mike Ford
Laboratory Sample I.D.: National Starch and Chemical Co.
Matrix:
Date Sampled:
Nutrient Analysis
Parameters Result Units Method
Phosphorous 43 nnm 6010
Nitrogen <NIB) <10 nnm 350.2
Nitrogen l I t<.. N) 125 nnm 351.3
Organisms
Parameters Result Units
Total Heterotrophic Plate Count 161,000,000/g Organisms per
gram/ml
Bacteria Identification
Species Percent
Bacillus so. 35
Pseudomonas so. 35
Micrococcus so. 30
I
I,· . .-..
l
Ii
!
I l..,
le
.1 [l _J
lo
lo
lo
lo
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report #1060
September l 7. 1996 ·
Phase I B!Oreport (Continued)
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
Customer Sample I.D.:
Laboratory Sample I.D.:
Matrix:
Date Sampled:
BT-2 6-8'
LI8985-7
Soil
Attention: Mike Ford
National Starch and Chemical Co.
Factors that Limit Microbial Growth
Parameters
METALS
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmuim
Chromium
Conner
Iron
Lead
Mercurv
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
OTHERS
pH
Moisture Content
TOC
Maureen K. Boman
Technical Director
Phenols
Cvanide (total)
Result
<2.7
165
0.5
7.0
12.1
3910
3.7
<0.05
417
<3.8
<0.4
110
7.7
26.2
2000
<1.0
<1.0
Units Method
oom 6010
nnm 6010
nnm 6010
nnm 6010
nnm 6010
oom 6010
oom 6010
nnm 6010
nnm 7471
nnm 258.1
oom 7740
onm 6010
nnm 6010
units 150.2
% 160.3
nnm 415.1
nnm 420.1
nnm 335.2
Shehdeh Jodeh
Laboratory Manager
I
I
I
Ir '
I:
I: l.
I:
I
Ir,
l[i
IL
•u
lo
•u
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report# 1060
September 17. 1996 '
Customer Sample I.D. :
Laboratory Sample I.D.:
Matrix:
Date Sampled:
Phase I B!Oreport
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
BT-2A 6-8'
L18985-6
Soil
Attention: Mike Ford
National Starch and Chemical Co.
Nutrient Analysis
Parameters Result Units Method
36 6010
1.2 350.2
2.3 351.3
Organisms
Parameters Result Units
Total Heterotrophic Plate Count 12,000, 000/g Organisms per
gram/ml
Bacteria Identification
Species Percent
Corvnebacteruim so .. 80
Pseudomonas so. 20
I
I
1-
1
I
IL
I[]
•u
IQ
lo
•u
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report # l 060
September 17, 1996 '
Phase I B!Oreport (Continued)
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
Customer Sample I.D.:
Laboratory Sample I.D.:
Matrix:
Date Sampled:
BT-2A6-8'
L18985-6
Soil
Attention: Mike Ford
National Starch and Chemical Co.
Factors that Limit Microbial Growth
Parameters
J'vfETALS
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmuim
Chromium
Cooner
Iron
Lead
Mercurv
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
OTHERS
oH
Moisture Content
TOC
Maureen K. Boman
Technical Director
Phenols
Cvanide (total)
Result
<2.7
183
1.4
18.4
29.3
11200
8.9
<0.05
338
<3.8
<0.4
124
6.8
13.8
980
<1.0
<1.0
Units Method
nnm 6010
nnm 6010
nnm 6010
nnm 6010
oom 6010
oom 6010
nnm 6010
nnm 6010
nnm 7471
oom 258.1
nnm 7740
oom 6010
oom 6010
units 150.2
% 160.3
nnm 415.1
ppm 420.1
oom 335.2
Shehdeh Jodeh
Laboratory Manager
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
RECEIVED
FEBO ~ '1997
SEA-LAB
Blue Planet Technologies
Phase II BIOreport™ #1060
November 19, 1996
Prepared for:
Mike Ford
National Starch and Chemical Company
10 Finderne Ave.
Bridgewater, NJ 08807
Blue Planet Technologies
32384 Edward Street
Madison Heights, Michigan 48071
[phone]
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Repon #1060
November 19, 1996
Table of Contents
Introduction . . .. .. ... .. ... .. . .. . .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. . .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. ... ... .. ... . ... . .. . 3
Objective .. .. . .. ..... ... .. . .. .. .. ... .. .. . . . .. . .. .. . .. ... .. . . . .. . .. .. . .. ... ... .. ... .. . .. ... . .. .. .. . .. ... ... . .. ... . .. 3
Methods .......................................................................................................... 3
Results ········································································································ 4
Aerobic, Abiotic LI 8968-1 A .. .. .. ...... .. . .... .. ...... .. ...... ...... .. ...... .. .. ...... ........... 5
Aerobic, Biotic LI 8968-I B .. .. ...... .. .......... .... .. ...... .. ...... .. .... .. ...... .. .. .... .... ... 9
Anaerobic, Abiotic L 18968-1 C ...... .. ........ ...... .. ...... .. ...... .. .... ... .. .. ...... .. .... .... . I 3
Anaerobic, Biotic L 18968-1 D .. .. ...... .. .. ...... ...... ............ .... .. .... .. ........ ...... .... .. 17
Anaerobic, Biotic Li8985-5A .................................................................... 21
Anaerobic, Abiotic LI 8985-SB ................................................................... 25
Aerobic, Abiotic Li8985-5C .................................................................... 29
Aerobic, Biotic LI 8985-5D ...................................................................... 33
Table 1
Table 2
Discussion
·············································· ··························································· 37
·············································· ··························································· 37
Partitioning with Composite Samples ···························································· 42
2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch Blue Planet Technologies #1060
November 19, 1996
Introduction
Blue Planet Technologies (BPT) was contacted by Mike Ford of National Starch and
Chemical Company to perform a report of bioremediation on soil samples collected from
their Cedar Springs Road Plant in Salisbury, North Carolina. This investigation was
conducted as discussed between Maureen Boman and Mike Ford.
Objective
The objective of the investigation was to determine the feasibility of successfully
implementing bioremediation at the site in question. The basis for making this assessment
involved a study of the indigenous microflora's ability to biodegrade the site contaminants.
The results obtained from the laboratory studies are presented and conclusions are
discussed.
Methods
The following is a brief description of the laboratory methods used in conducting the
studies included in this investigation.
Bacterial Enumerations. Heterotrophic bacteria were enumerated by spreading aliquots
of ten-fold serial dilutions of groundwater and soil extract onto a sterile agar surface and
counting the colonies after incubation (Method 92 I 5B, modified)
Nutrient Analysis. Analysis (methods listed in the data table) were performed to
determine the levels of nutrients. The analyses determine if the levels of nutrient essential
for bacterial proliferation fall within published ratios.
Factors that Limit Microbial Growth. Analysis were performed by the appropriate
method (listed in the data table) to determine if any factors were dominant that may limit
or restrict microbial growth.
Bacteria Identification. Bacteria were identified using the Biolog microcomputerized
identification system.
Carbon Dioxide Generation. Carbon dioxide was measured at the listed time points
using a direct reading probe.
Confirmation of Contaminant Degradation. Studies were performed in a.Brunswick Incubation Rotation Chamber using a one liter specially designed biometer flask with ports for measuring and adding gasses and nutrients. The closed system is rotated at 200 rpm's/min at 25 degrees centigrade with the oxygen source (if required) supplied from
3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report #1060
November 19, 1996 ·
ambient atmosphere at weekly intervals. This protocol is found in 40CFR Ch 1 (7-1-88
edition) modified for CO2 measurements.
Results
The following pages are the results of the report of bioremediation for the soil samples:
4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch Blue Planet Technologies Repon #1060
November 19, 1996
Phase II B!Oreport™
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
Customer Sample l.D.: BT-I 4-6' Attention:
Aerobic, Abiotic
Laboratory Sample l.D.:
Matrix:
Parameters
L 18968-1 A
Soil
Organisms
Total Heterotrophic Plate Count Initial••
Final***
**Initial plate count performed prior to incubation
***Final plate count performed after the 28 days
Result
<JOO/{!
<100/g
Bacteria Identification
Mike Ford
National Starch
JO Finderne Ave.
Bridgewater, NJ 08807
Units
Ornanisms per gram/ml
Ornanisms oer gram/ml
Species Percent
Carbon Dioxide Generation
Day0 Day 7 Dayl4 Dav 21 Dav 28
I 0/08/96 10/15/96 I 0/22/96 10/29/96 11/05/96
Plate counts form T <JOO <JOO <JOO <JOO <JOO
Levels in PPM 300 500 650 350 325
Bio-Fluids Addition
Day0 Day 7 Dav 14 Dav 21 Dav 28
Methane <JO PPM <JO PPM <JO PPM <JO PPM <JO PPM
~~ilJ!.;>a<½aI> !:00 11.1,c . ./l.:f-, !:00 ,n,,, '1~~
5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Companv Blue Planet Technologies Report #1060
November 19, 1996 ·
Customer Sample I.D.:
Aerobic, Abiotic
Laboratory Sample I.D.:
Matrix:
Phase II BIO report™ (Continued)
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
BT-I 4-6' Attention:
LI 8968-1 A
Soil
Mike Ford
National Starch
IO Finderne Ave.
Bridgewater, NJ 08807
Confirmation of Contaminant Degradation
Results are reported in ppb
Parameters
BTEX
Benzene
Ethvlbenzene
Toluene
Xylene
1,2-Dichloroethane
TPH
Methylene Chloride
* Not Detected
Maureen K. Boman
Technical Director
Dav0
7400
Dav?
6
Day 14 Dav 21
320
11
Shehdeh Jodeh
Laboratory Manager
Dav28
205
ND
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch £llue Plane! Technologies Report #1060
November I 9. 1996
Gas Chromatog,·aphy -Mass Spectrometry Report
Client: 14 DAY NATIONAL STARCH
Description: Bl I L18968-IA
Analysis: Method 624
Matrix: Soil
Amount
Detected M.Q.L.
Compounds (ug/Kg) (og/Kg)
Benzene N.D. 10
Bromoform N.D. IO
Bromomethane N.D. 10
Carbon tetrachloride N.D. 10
Chlorobenzene N.D. 10
Chloroethane N.D. IO
2-Chloroeth:tl vin:tl ether N.D. IO
Chloroform N.D. IO
Chloromethane N.D. 10
Dibromochloromethane N.D. 10
1,2-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
I J-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
1,4-Dichlorobenzene N.D. IO
Dichlorobromomethane N.D. 10
I, 1-Dichloroethane N.D. 10
1,2-Dichloroethane 320 10
I, 1-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
trans-I ,2;-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
1,2-Dichloroeroeane N.D. 10
cis-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
trans-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
Eth:tlbenzene N.D. 10
Meth:tlene chloride 11 10
I, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane N.D. 10
Tetrachloroethene N.D. 10
Toluene N.D. 10
I, I, I-Trichloroethane N.D. 10 J, 1,2-Trichloroethane N.D. 10
Trichloroethene N.D. 10
T richlorofluoromethane N.D. 10
_Vin:tl chloride N.D. 10
rtll Standard Surrogates were recovered within QNQC limits.
N.D. : Not Detected at or above the Practical Quantitation Limit.
M.Q.L. : Method Quantitation Limit
7 P.Q.L. : Practical Quantitatii,ti-Liniit
. ··:;:,·•.·:· .. ,
P.Q.L.
(ug/Kg)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Am<lunt Purged: 0.5
Dilution Factor: I 0
Amount Dilution
Detected Corrected
in Blank Blank Amt.
(ug/Kg) (ug/Kg)
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch Blue Planet Technologies Report #1060
NovC':mbcr 19, 1996,
Gas Chrom.:tography -Mass 5pectromctry Report
Client: 28 DAY NATIONAL STARCH
Description: 81 I L18968-IA
Analysis: Method 624
Matrix: Soil
Amount
Detected M.Q.L.
Compounds (og/Kg) (ug/Kg)
Benzene N.D. 10
Bromofonn N.D. 10
Bromomethane N.D. 10
Carbon tetrachloride N.D. JO
Chlorobenzene N.D. 10
Chloroethane N.D. 10
2-Chloroeth:z:I vin:z:1 ether N.D. 10
Chloroform N.D. 10
Chloromethane N.D. 10
Dibromochloromethane N.D. 10
..!_,2-Dichlorobenzene N.D . 10
1,3-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
I , 4-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
Dichlorobromomethane N.D. 10
I , 1-Dichloroethane N.D. 10
1,2-Dichloroethane 205 10
I , 1-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
1,2-Dichloroeroeane N.D. 10
cis-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
lrans-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
Eth:z:lbenzene N.D. 10
Meth:z:lene chloride N.D. 10
I, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane N.D. 10
Tetrachloroethene N.D. 10
Toluene N.D. 10
I, I, I-Trichloroethane N.D. 10
I , 1.2-Trichloroethane N.D. 10
Trichloroethene N.D. IO
·1: rich lorofluoromethane N.D. IO
".'_in:z:1 chloride N.D. 10
· Standard Surrogates were recovered within QNQC limits.
N.D. : Not Detected at or above the Practical Quantitation Limit.
M .Q.L. : Method Quantitation Limit
P.Q.L. : Pra¢tical Quantitation Limit 8
P.Q.L.
(ug/Kg)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
JOO
100
JOO
100
100
100
100
100
100
Amount Purged: 0.5
Dilution Factor: I 0
Amount Dilution
Detected Corrected
in Blank Blank Amt.
(ug/Kg) (og/Kg)
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Stan.:h
November I 9, I 996
Customer Sample LO, :
Aerobic, Biotic
Laboratory Sample LO.:
Matrix:
Parameters
Blue Planet Technologies Report #1060
Phase II B!Oreport Th•
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
BT-1 4-6' Attention:
L l 8968-1 B
Soil
Organisms
Result
Mike Ford
National Starch
l O Finderne Ave_
Bridgewater, NJ 08807
Units
Total Heterotrophic Plate Count Initial•• <100/g Organisms per gram/ml
Final*** 81,000/g
••Initial plate count performed prior to incubation
***Final plate count performed after the 28 days
Bacteria Identification
Species Percent
Bacillus SD, 60
Corvnebacterium SP. 20
Pseudomonas SD. 20
Carbon Dioxide Generation
DavO Day 7 Day 14
l 0/08/96 l 0/15/96 l 0/22/96
Plate counts from T <100 5,900,000 1,580,000
Levels in PPM 300 625 425
Bio-Fluids Addition
Organisms per gram/ml
Dav 21 Dav 28
l 0/29/96 11/05/96
110,000 8 l ,000
225 275
DayO Dav 7 Day 14 Dav 21 Dav 28
Methane <10 PPM <10 PPM <JO PPM <JO PPM <JO PPM
Nitrate 500 m0kg 185 mg/kg
9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Repon # l060
November 19. 1996 ·
Phase II B!Oreport™ (Continued)
Biorernediation Feasibility Study
Customer Sample I.D.:
Aerobic, Biotic
Laboratory Sample I.D.:
Matrix:
BT-I 4-6' Attention:
LJ8968-1B
Soil
Mike Ford
National Starch
10 Finderne Ave.
Bridgewater, NJ 08807
Confirmation of Contaminant Degradation
Results are reported in ppb
Parameters
BTEX
Benzene
Ethvlbenzene
Toluene
Xylene
1,2-Dichloroethane
TPH
Methylene Chloride
* Not Detected
M~ureen K. Boman
Technical Director
Day0
7400
Dav 7
10
Dav 14 Dav 21 Dav28
110
38
Shehdeh Jodeh
Laboratory Manager
ND
ND
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch
November I 9. 199<;
Blue Planet Technologies ~n # 1060
Gas Chromatography -Mass Spectrometry Report
Client: 14 DAY NATIONAL STARCH
Description: Bl 2 L18968-IB
Analysis: Method 624
Matrix: Soil
Amount
Detected M.Q.L.
Compounds (ug/Kg) (ug/Kg)
Benzene N.D. 10
Bromofonn N.D. 10
Bromomethane N.D. 10
Carbon tetrachloride N.D. 10
Chlorobc:nzcne N.D. 10
Chloroethane N.D. 10
2-Chlornethrl vinrl ether N.D. 10
Chloroform N.D. 10
Chloromethane N.D. 10
Dibromochloromethane N.D. 10
1,2-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
1,3-Dichlorobc:nzcne N.D. 10
1,4-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
Dichlorobromomethane N.D. 10
l, 1-Dichloroethane N.D. 10
1,2-Dichloroethane 110 10
l, 1-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
trans-I 2-Dichloroethene N.D. 10 I ,2-Dichloroeroeane N.D. 10
cis-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
trans-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
Eth:t:lbenzene N.D. 10
M ethrlene chloride 38 IO
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane N.D. 10
T ctrachloroethene N.D. IO
Toluene N.D. 10
I. I ,I-Trichloroethane N.D. · I 0
I, I ,2-Trichloroethane N.D. IO
l'richloroethene N.D. 10
·rrichloronuoromethane N.D. IO
Vinyl chloride N.D. IO
Standard Surrogates were recovered within QNOC limits.
N.D. : Not Detected at or above the Practical Quantitation Limit.
,vl.Q.L. : Method Quantitation Limit
II P.Q.L. : Practical Quantitation Limit
P.Q.L.
(ug/Kg)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Am•Junt Purged: 0.5
Dilution Factor: I 0
Amount Dilution
Detected Corrected
in Blank Blank Amt.
(ug/Kg) (ug/Kg)
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch Blue Plane! Technologies Report # I 060
November 19, 1996
Gas Chrnmatography -Mass Spectrometry Report
Client: 28 DAY NATIONAL STARCH ' Description: BI 2 L18968-1B
Analysis: Method 624
Matrix: Soil
Amount
Detected
Compounds (ug/Kg)
Benzene N.D.
Bromoform N.D.
Bromomethane N.D.
Carbon tetrachloride N.D.
Chlorobenzene N.D.
Chloroethane N.D.
2-Chloroeth:z-l vin:z-1 ether N.D.
Chloroform N.D.
Chloromethane N.D.
Dibromochloromethane N.D.
1,2-Dichlorobenzene N.D.
1,3-Dichlorobenzene N.D.
1,4-Dichlorobenzene N.D.
Dichlorobromomethane N.D.
1,1-Dichloroethane N.D.
1,2-Dichloroethane N.D.
I , 1-Dichloroethene N.D.
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene N.D.
I ,2-Dichloroeroeane N.D.
cis-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D.
trans-I ,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D.
~th:z-lbenzene N.D.
Meth:z-lene chloride N.D.
I, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane N.D.
l'ctrachloroethene N.D.
J'oluene N.D.
1.1, I-Trichloroethane N.D.
I, I ,2-Trichloroethane N.D.
J'richloroethene N.D.
f' richloronuoromethane N.D.
,1inyl chloride N.D.
. Standard Surrogales were recovered wilhln QNQC limils.
M.Q.L.
(ng/Kg)
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
,.D. : Not Detected at or above the Practical Quantitation Limit.
v1.Q.L. : Melhod Quantitation Limit
'.Q.L. : Practical Quantitation Limit 12
P.Q.L.
(ug/Kg)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Amount Purged: 0.5
Dilution Factor: I 0
Amount Dilution
Detected Corrected
in Blank Blank Amt.
(ng/Kg) (ug/Kg)
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch Blue Planet Technologies Report #1060
November I 9. 1996
Phase II BIO report™
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
Customer Sample l.D.: BT-I 4-6' Attention:
Anaerobic, Abiotic
Laboratory Sample l.D.:
Matrix:
Parameters
L18968-IC
Soil
Organisms
Total Heterotroohic Plate Count Initial**
Final***
**Initial plate count performed prior to incubation
***Final plate count performed after the 28 days
Result
<100/g
<100/Q
Bacteria Identification
Mike Ford
National Sta,ch
IO Finderne Ave.
Bridgewater, NJ 08807
Units
Ornanisms oer gram/ml
Organisms oer gram/ml
Species Percent
Carbon Dioxide Generation
Dav0 Dav 7 Day 14 Dav 21 Dav28
10/08/96 I 0/15/96 10/22/96 10/29/96 11/05/96
Plate counts form T <100 <100 <100 <100 <100
Levels in PPM 300 I, 175 350 425 325
Bio-Fluids Addition
Dav0 Dav 7 Dav 14 Dav 21 Dav 28
Methane <IO PPM <IO PPM <IO PPM <JO PPM <JO PPM
Nitrate 500 m"/kg 390 mg/kg
13
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Rcpon #1060
November 19, 1996
Customer Sample I.D.:
Anaerobic, Abiotic
Laboratory Sample l.D.:
Matrix:
Phase II BIOreport ™ (Continued)
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
BT-1 4-6' Attention:
Ll8968-1C
Soil
Mike Ford
National Starch
10 Findeme Ave.
Bridgewater, NJ 08807
Confirmation of Contaminant Degradation
Results are reported in ppb
Parameters
BTEX
Benzene
Ethvlbenzene
Toluene
Xvlene
1,2-Dichloroethane
TPH
Methylene Chloride
• Not Detected
Maureen K. Boman
Technical Director
Dav0
7400
Dav7
14
Dav 14 Dav 21
i
I
470
15
Shehdeh Jodeh
Laboratory Manager
Dav28
330
ND
'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch 131uc Planet Technologies Report# 1060
November 19, 1996
Gas Chromatography -Mass Spectrometry Report
Client: 14 DAY NATIONAL STARCH
Description: Bl 3 Ll8968-IC
Analysis: Method 624
Matrix: Soil
Amount
Detected M.Q.L.
Compounds (og/Kg) (ug/Kg)
Benzene N.D. 10
Bromoform N.D. 10
Bromomethane N.D. 10
Carbon tetrachloride N.D. 10
Chlorobertzene N.D. 10
:::hloroethane N.D. 10
2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether N.D. IO
:::hloroform N.D. 10
:::hloromethane N.D. 10
=>ibromochloromethane N.D. 10
l__,2-Dichlorobertzene N.D. 10
! ,J-Dichlorobertzene N.D. 10
,4-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
)ichlorobromomethane N.D. 10
,1-Dichloroethane N.D. 10
,2-Dichloroethane 470 10
, 1-Dichloroethene N.D. IO
:ans-I 2-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
,2-Dichloroeroeane N.D. 10
is-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
:ans-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
. thylbertzene N.D . IO
1ethylene chloride 15 10
, I ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane N.D. IO
ctrachloroethene N.D. IO
oluene N.D. IO
, I, I -Trichloroethane N.D. 10
. I ,2-Trichloroethane N.D. 10
richloroethene N.D. IO
richloronuoromethane N.D. IO
· inyl chloride N.D. IO
Standard Surrogates were recovered within QNQC limits .
. D. : Not Detected at or above the Practical Quantitation Limit.
1.Q.L. : Method Quantitation Limit
.Q.L : Practical Quantitation Limit 15
P.Q.L.
(ug/Kg)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
JOO
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Amount Purged: 0.5
Dilution Factor: I 0
Amount Dilution
Detected Corrected
in Blank Blank Amt.
(ug/Kg) (ug/Kg)
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D . N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch Blue Planet Technologies Repon # 1060
November 19, 1996,
Gas Chromatography -Mass Spectrometry Report
Client: 28 DAY NATIONAL STA RCI I
Description: 131 J Ll8968-IC
Analysis: Method 624
Matrix: Soil
Amount
Detected M.Q.L.
Compounds (ug/Kg) (ug/Kg)
13enzene N.D. 10
Oromoform N.D. 10
R romomethane N.D. 10
Carbon tetrachloride N.D. 10
Chlorobenzene N.D. 10
Chloroethane N.D. 10
2-Chloroeth~I vin~I ether N.D. 10
Chloroform N.D. 10
Chloromethane N.D. 10
Dibromochloromethane N.D. 10
I, 2-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
1,3-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
1,4-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
Dichlorobromomethane N.D. 10
I, 1-Dichloroethane N.D. 10
1,2-Dichloroethane -330 10
: , 1-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
1,2-Dichloroeroi:iane N.D. 10
cis-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
trans-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
!~~!benzene N.D. 10
Meth~lene chloride N.D. 10
I, I ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane N.D. 10
Tetrachloroethene N.D. IO
Toluene N.D. IO
I ,l.,,l: Trichloroethane N.D. IO
1,1_.1_:Trichloroethane N.D. 10
l'richloroethene N.D. IO
·1 ·rich lo ro0 u ororn ethane N.D. 10
V_i~yl chloride N.D. 10
Standard Surrogates were recovered wilhin QNQC limils.
N.D. : Not Detected at or above the Practical Quantitation Limit.
vl.Q.L. : Method Quantitation Limit
!'.Q.L. : Practical Quantitation Limit 16
P.Q.L.
(ug/Kg)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Amount Purged: 0.5
Dilution Factor: I 0
Amount Dilution
Detected Corrected
in lllank lllank Amt.
(ug/Kg) (ug/Kg)
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch
November 19. 1996
Customer Sample I.D.:
Anaerobic, Biotic
Laboratory Sample I.D.:
Matrix:
Parameters
Blue Planet Technologies Repon #1060
Phase II BI Oreport Thi
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
BT-I 4-6' Attention:
Ll8968-ID
Soil
Organisms
Result
Mike Ford
National Starch
IO Finderne Ave.
Bridgewater, NJ 08807
Units
Total Heterotroohic Plate Count Initial** <100/g Organisms per gram/ml
Final***
• *Initial plate count performed prior to incubation
***Final plate count performed after the 28 days
830/g
Bacteria Identification
Species Percent
Bacillus so. 60
Corvnebacterium sp. 20
Pseudomonas so. 20
Carbon Dioxide Generation
DavO Dav 7 Dav 14
Organisms per ,:,ram/ml
Day 21 Dav 28
10/08/96 10/15/96 I 0/22/96 I 0/29/96 11/05/96
Plate counts from T <JOO 1,200,000 160,000 4,000 830
Levels in PPM 300 I, 125 650 175 75
Bio-Fluids Addition
Dav0 Dav 7 Day 14 Dav 21 Day28
Methane <IO PPM <IO PPM <IO PPM <10 PPM <IO PPM
Nitrate 500 mg/kg 225 mg/kg
17
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Tec!mologies Report # 1060
November 19. 1996 ·
Phase II BIOreport (Continued)
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
Customer Sample I.D.:
Anaerobic, Biotic
Laboratory Sample I.D.:
Matrix:
BT-I 4-6'
LI8968-!D
Soil
Attention: Mike Ford
National Starch
IO Findeme Ave.
Bridgewater, NJ 08807
Confirmation of Contaminant Degradation
Results are reported in ppb
Parameters
BTEX
Benzene
Ethvlbenzene
Toluene
Xylene
I ,2-Dichloroethane
TPH
Methylene Chloride
* Not Detected
Maureen K. Boman
Technical Director
Dav O
7400
Dav7
18
Dav 14 Dav 21 Dav 28
430
ND
Shehd~h Jodeh
Laboratory Manager
365
ND
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch Blue Planet Technologies Report #1060
November I 9, I 996
Gas Chromatography -Mass Spectrometry Report
Client: 14 DAY NATIONAL STARCH
Description: Bl 4 Ll8968-ID
Analysis: Method 624
Matrix: Soil
Amount
Detected M.Q.L.
Compounds (og/Kg) (ug/Kg)
13cnzene N.D. 10
8romoform N.D. IO
8romomethane N.D. 10
:::aroon tetrachloride N.D. IO
:::hlorobenzene N.D. 10
:::hloroethane N.D. 10
1-ChloroethxI vin>_'.l ether N.D. 10
:hloroforrn N.D. 10
=hloromethane N.D. 10
)ibromochloromethane N.D. 10
,2 -Dichlorobenzene N.D. JO
,3-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
,4-Dichlorobenzene N.D. JO
>ichlorobromomethane N.D. 10
, I -Dichloroethane N.D. 10
,2-Dichloroethane 430 JO
, I -Dichloroethene N.D. 10
ans-1,2-Dichloroethene N.D. JO
. 2 -Dichloroeroeane N.D . 10
s-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
ans-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
th;ilbenzene N.D. IO
lcthxlene chloride N.D. 10
. 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane N.D. 10
etrachloroethene N.D. IO
oluene N.D. 10 ! , I -Trichloroethane N.D. IO
I ,2-Trichloroethane N.D. IO
·ichloroethenc N.D. 10
·ichloro fluoromelhane N.D. 10
inyl chloride N.D. 10
Standard Surrogates were recovered within ONQC limits.
D. : Not Detected at or above the Practical Quantitation Limit.
.Q.L. : Method Quantitation Limit 19 '.:).L. : Practical Quantitation Limit
P.Q.L.
(ug/Kg)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Amourtt Purged: 0.5
Dilution Factor: I 0
Amount Dilution
Detected Corrected
in Blank Blank Amt.
(ug/Kg) (og/Kg)
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D .
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch
November I 9, 1996,
llluc Plane! Technologies RcPort #1060
Gas Chromatography -Mass Spectrometry Report
Client: 28 DAY NATIONAL STARCH
Description: Bl 4 Ll8968-ID
Analysis: Method 624
Matrix: Soil
Amount
Detected M.Q.L.
Compounds (ug/Kg) (ng/Kg)
Benzene N.D. 10
Bromoforrn N.D. 10
Bromomethane N.D. 10
Carbon tetrachloride N.D. 10
Chlorobenzene N.D. 10
Chloroethane N.D. 10
2-Chloroeth:,:I vin:,:I ether N.D. 10
Chloroform N.D. 10
Chloromethane N.D. 10
Dibromochloromethane N.D. IO
I 2-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
1,3-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
I ,4-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
Dichlorobromomethane N.D. 10
I, 1-Dichloroethane N.D. IO
I 2-Dichloroethane 365 10
1,1-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
I ,2-Dichloroeroeane N.D. 10
cis-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
trans-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
Eth:,:lbenzene N.D. 10
tvlethrlene chloride N.D. 10
I , 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane N.D. IO
T etrachloroethene N.D. 10
foluene N.D. 10
I ,I ,I-Trichloroethane N.D. 10 I ,I ,2-Trichloroethane N.D. 10
l'richloroethene N.D. 10
I" richlorofl uoromethane N.D. 10
,'inyl chloride N.D. 10
,tandard Surrogates were recovered within QNQC limits.
-1.D. : Not Detected at or above the Practical Quantitation Limit.
.1.Q.L. : Method Quantitation Limit
'.Q.L. : Practical Quantitation Limit 20
P.Q.L.
(ug/Kg)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
JOO
JOO
100
100
100
100
100
100
Amount Purged: 0.5
Dilution Factor: IO
Amount Dilution
Detected Corrected
in Blank Blank Ami.
(ug/Kg) (ug/Kg)
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch Blue Planet Technologies Report #1060
November I'>, I 996
Phase II BIOreport™
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
Customer Sample I.D.:
Anaerobic, Biotic
Laboratory Sample I.D.:
Matrix:
Parameters
BT-2 4-6'
L l 8985-5A
Soil
Attention:
Organisms
Result
Mike Ford
National Starch
10 Finderne Ave.
Bridgewater, NJ 08807
Units
Total Heterotrophic Plate Count Initial** 1,100,000/g Organisms per gram/ml
Final***
**Initial plate count performed prior to incubation
***Final plate count performed after the 28 days
21,000/g
Bacteria Identification
Organisms per gram/ml
Species Percent
Bacillus so. 60
Corvnebacterium so. 20
Pseudomonas SP. 20
Carbon Dioxide Generation
Dav0 Dav 7 Day 14 Dav 21 Dav 28
10/08/96 10/15/96 10/22/96 10/29/96 11/05/96
Plate counts form T I, I 00,000 61,260 37,000 16,000 11,000
Levels in PPM 300 1,075 1,050 775 625
Bio-Fluids Addition
Dav0 Dav 7 Dav 14 Dav 21 Dav 28
Methane <JO PPM 25 PPM 13 PPM <JO PPM <JO PPM
Nitrate 500 mg/kg 380 mg/kg
21
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report #1060
November 19, 1996 '
Customer Sample I.D.:
Anaerobic, Biotic
Laboratory Sample I.D.:
Mattix:
Phase II BIOreport™ (Continued)
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
BT-2 4-6' Attention:
L 18985-SA
Soil
Mike Ford
National Starch
IO Finderne Ave.
Bridgewater, NJ 08807
Confirmation of Contaminant Degradation
Results are reported in ppb
Parameters
BTEX
Benzene
Ethvlbenzene
Toluene
Xvlene
1,2-Dichloroethane
TPH
Methvlene Chloride
• Not Detected
Maureen K. Boman
Technical Director
,
Dav0 Dav7
500
22
Dav 14 Dav 21
290
18
Shehdeh Jodeh
Laboratory Manager
Dav 28
240
ND
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch Dlue Planet Technologies Repon #1060
November 19, 199?
Gas Chromatography -Mass Spectrometry Report
Client: 14 DAY NATIONAL STARCH
Description: 82 5 LI8985-SA
Analysis: Method 624
Matrix: Soil
Amount
Detected M.Q.L.
Compounds (ug/Kg) (ug/Kg)
Benzene N.D. 10
Bromofonn N.D. 10
Bromomethane N.D. 10
Carbon tetrachloride N.D. 10
Chlorobenzene N.D. 10
Chloroethane N.D. 10
2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether N.D. 10
Chloroform N.D. 10
Chloromethane N.D. 10
Dibromochloromethane N.D. 10
1.2-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
1,3-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
I ,4-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
Dichlorobromomethane N.D. 10
I, 1-Dichloroethane N.D. 10
1,2-Dichloroethane 290 10
I, 1-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
1,2-Dichloroeroeane N.D. 10
cis-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
trans-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. JO
Ethylbenzene N.D. 10
M elhy lene chloride 18 10
I, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane N.D. 10
Tetrachloroethene N.D. 10
Toluene N.D. 10
I, I, I-Trichloroethane N.D. 10
I, 1,2-T richloroethane N.D. 10
Trichloroethene N.D. 10
Trichloro0uoromethane N.D. 10
Vinyl chloride N.D. 10
· Standard Surrogales were recovered within QNQC limits.
N.D. : Not Detected at or above the Practical Quantitation Limit.
,vf.Q.L. : Method Quantitation Limit
P.Q.L. : Practical Quantitation Limit 23
P.Q.L.
(ug/Kg)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Amount Purged: 0.5
Dilution Factor: I 0
Amount Dilution
Detected Corrected
in Blank Blank Amt.
(ug/Kg) (ug/Kg)
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
National Srarch
November 19. I 996
£llue Plane! Technologies Report #1060
Gas Chromatography'-Mass Spectrometry Report
Client: 28 DAY NATIONAL STARCH
Description: 82 5 LI 8985-SA
Analysis: Method 624
Matrix: Soil
Amount
Detected M.Q.L.
Compounds (ng/Kg) (ng/Kg)
Benzene N.D. 10
Bromofonn N.D. 10
Bromomethane N.D. 10
Carbon tetrachloride N.D. 10
Chlorobenzene N.D. 10
Chloroethane N.D. 10
2-Chloroeth:z:1 vin:z:1 ether N.D. 10
Chloroform N.D. 10
Chloromethane N.D. 10
Dibromochloromethane N.D. 10
\ ,2-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10 I 3-Dichlorobeni:ene N.D. 10
I ,4-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
Dichlorobromomethane N.D. 10
I, 1-Dichloroethane N.D. 10
1,2-Dichloroethane 240 10
1,1-Dichloroethene N.D. 10 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
1,2-Dichloroeroeane N.D. 10
cis-1,3-Dichloroeropene N.D. 10
trans-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
Eth:z:lbenzene N.D. 10 Meth:z:lene chloride N.D. 10 I, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane N.D. 10 Tetrachloroethene N.D. 10
Toluene N.D. 10
I ,I, I-Trichloroethane N.D. 10 I, I ,2-Trichloroethane N.D. 10
Trichloroethene N.D. IO Trichloronuoromethane N.D. 10
Vin:z:1 chloride N.D. 10
Standard Surrogates were recovered within ONQC limits.
N.D. : Not Detected at or above the Practical Quantitation Limit.
,vl.Q.L. : Method Quantitation Limit 24 P.Q.L. : Practical Quantitation Limit
P.Q.L.
(ng/Kg)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Amount Purged: 0.5
Dilution Factor: I 0
Amount Dilution
Detected Corrected
in Blank Blank Amt.
(ug/Kg) (ug/Kg)
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch
November 19. 1996
Customer Sample I.D.:
Anaerobic, Abiotic
Laboratory Sample I.D.:
Matrix:
Parameters
Blue Planet Technologies Report # I 060
Phase II BI Oreport ™
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
BT-2 4-6' Attention:
L18985-5B
Soil
Organisms
Result
Mike Ford
National Starch
10 Finderne Ave.
Bridgewater, NJ 08807
Units
Total Heterotronhic Plate Count Initial** 1,100,000/g Organisms oer gram/ml
Final*** <100
**Initial plate count performed prior to incubation
***Final plate count performed after the 28 days
Bacteria Identification
Species Percent
Carbon Dioxide Generation
Dav0 Dav 7 Dav 14
10/08/96 10/15/96 10/22/96
Plate counts from T 0 0 0
Levels in PPM 300 700 800
Bio-Fluids Addition
Dav 0 Dav 7 Dav 14
Omanisms oer eram/ml
Day 21 Day28
10/29/96 11/05/96
0 ' 0
400 50
Dav 21 Day 28
Methane <10 PPM <10 PPM 10 PPM <10 PPM <10 PPM
Nitrate 500 ml!/k[! 380 mg/kg
25
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report # I 060
November 19, I 996
Phase II B!OreportTM (Continued)
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
Customer Sample l.D.:
Anaerobic, Abiotic
Laboratory Sample l.D.:
Matrix:
BT-2 4-6' Attention:
L18985-5B
Soil
Mike Ford
National Starch
10 Findeme Ave.
Bridgewater, NJ 08807
Confirmation of Contaminant Degradation
Results are reported in ppb
Parameters
BTEX
Benzene
Ethvlbenzene
Toluene
Xvlene
1,2-Dichloroethane
TPH
Methylene Chloride
• Not Detected
Maureen K. Boman
Technical Director
Day0
500
Day 7
26
Dav 14 Dav 21 Dav28
425
28
Shehdeh Jodeh
Laboratory Manager
310
ND
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch Blue Planet Technologies Report #1060
November 19. 1996
Gas Chromatography -Mass Spectrometry Report
Client: 14 DAY NATIONAL STARCH
Description: B2 6 Ll898S-5Il
Analysis: Method 624
Matrix: Soil
Amount
Detected M.Q.L.
Compounds· (ug/Kg) (ug/KJ:)
Benzene N.D. 10
Bromofonn N.D. 10
Bromomethane N.D. 10
Carbon tetrachloride N.D. 10
Chlorobenzene N.D. 10
Chloroethane N.D. 10
2-Chloroeth):'.l vin):'.l ether N.D. 10
Chloroform N.D. 10
Chloromethane N.D. 10
Dibromochloromethane N.D. 10
1 .2-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
I , J-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
1,4-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
Dichlorobromomethane N.D. 10
I, 1-Dichloroethane N.D. 10
1,2-Dichloroethane 425 10
I, 1-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
1,2-Dichloroeroeane N.D. 10
cis-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
:rans-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
fah):'.lbenzene N.D. 10
Meth):'.lene chloride 28 10
I, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane N.D. 10
Tetrachloroethene N.D. 10
Toluene N.D. 10
I , I , 1-T richloroethane N.D. 10
I, 1,2-Trichloroethane N.D. 10
Trichloroethcne N.D. 10
Trichlorofluoromethane N.D. 10
Vin):'.! chloride N.D. 10
Standard Surrogates were recovered within ONQC limits.
N.D. : Not Detected at or above the Practical Quantitation Limil.
,vl.Q.L. : Method Quantitation Limit
P.Q.L. : Practical Quantitation Limit 27
P.Q.L.
(ug/J{g)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100 ·
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Amount Purged: 0.5
Dilution Factor: I 0
Amount Dilution
Detected Corrected
in Blank Blank Amt.
(og/Kg) (ug/Kg)
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch
November I 9, I 996
131ue Planet Technologies R~#I060
Gas Chromatography -Mass Spectrometry Report.
Client: 28 DAY NATIONAL STARCH
Description: 82 6 Ll8985-SB
Analysis: Method 624
Matrix: Soil
Amount
Detected M.Q.L.
Compounds (og/Kg) (ug/Kg)
llenzene N.D. 10
Bromofonn N.D. 10
Bromomethane N.D. 10
Carbon tetrachloride N.D. 10
Chlorobenzene N.D. 10
Chloroethane N.D. 10
2-Chloroethil vinil ether N.D. 10
Chloroform N.D. 10
Chloromethane N.D. 10
Dibromochloromethane N.D. 10
1,2-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
1,3-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
1,4-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
Dichlorobromomethane N.D. 10
I, 1-Dichloroethane N.D. 10
1,2-Dichloroethane 310 10
I , 1-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
1,2-Dichloroeroeane N.D. 10
cis-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
trans-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. IO
Ethilbenzene N.D. 10
Methilene chloride N.D. 10
_I, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane N.D. 10
Tetrachloroethene N.D. 10
Toluene N.D. 10
I , I , 1-T richloroethane N.D. 10
I, I ,2-Trichloroethane N.D. 10
Trichloroethene N.D. 10
T richlorofluoromethane N.D. 10
Vinyl chloride N.D. 10
Standard Surrogates were recovered within QNQC limits.
N.D. : Nol Detected at or above the Practical Quantitation Limit.
,v1 .Q.L. : Method Quantitation Limit
P.Q.L. : Practical Quantitation Limit 28
P.Q.L.
(ug/Kg)
100
100
l00
l00
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
l00
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Amotmt Purged: 0.5
Dilution Factor: I 0
Amount Dilution
Detected Corrected
in Blank Blank Amt.
(og/Kg) (ug/Kg)
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
••
I
I
National Starch
November 19, 1996
Customer Sample l.D.:
Aerobic, Abiotic
Laboratory Sample l.D.:
Matrix:
Parameters
Blue Planet Technologies Repon #1060
Phase II BI Oreport Tht
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
BT-2 4-6' Attention:
L18985-5C
Soil
Organisms
Result
Mike Ford
National Starch
10 Finderne Ave.
Bridgewater, NJ 08807
Units
Total Heterotrophic Plate Count Initial** <100/g Organisms per gram/ml
Final*** <100/g
**Initial plate count performed prior to incubation
••*Final plate count performed after the 28 days
Bacteria Identification
Species Percent
Carbon Dioxide Generation
Day0 Day 7 Day 14
10/08/96 10/15/96 10/22/96
Plate counts from T 0 0 0
Levels in PPM 300 1,275 975
Bio-Fluids Addition
Dav0 Dav7 Dav 14
Organisms per gram/ml
Day 21 Day 28
10/29/96 1 l /05/96
0 0
875 600
Day 21 Dav 28
Methane <10 PPM <10 PPM <10 PPM <10 PPM <10 PPM
Nitrate 500 mrr/kg 330 mg/kg
29
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Company
No\'embcr 19, 1996 '
Blue Planet Technol0gics Report # I 060
Phase II BIOreport™ (Continued)
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
Customer Sample I.D.:
Aerobic, Abiotic
Laboratory Sample I.D.:
Matrix:
BT-2 4-6' Attention:
LI 8985-5C
Soil
Mike Ford
National Starch
IO Findeme Ave.
Bridgewater, NJ 08807
Confirmation of Contaminant Degradation
Results are reported in ppb
Parameters
BTEX
Benzene
Ethvlbenzene
Toluene
Xylene
1,2-Dichloroethane
TPH
Methvlene Chloride
* Not Detected
Maureen K. Boman
Technical Director
Dav0
500
Day 7
30
Dav 14 Dav 21 Day28
410
55
Shehdeh Jodeh
Laboratory Manager
375
ND
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Nalional Starch Ellue Planet Tcchnolog1es Repon # 1060
November 19, 1996
Gas Chromatography -Mass Spc.:tromctry Rcporl
Client: 14 DAY NATIONAL STARCH
Description: B2 7 L18985-SC
Analysis: Method 624
Matrix: Soil
Amount
Detected M.Q.L.
Compounds (ug/Kg) (ug/Kg)
Benzene N.D. 10
Bromoform N.D. 10
Bromomethane N.D. 10
Carbon tetrachloride N.D. 10
Chlorobenzene N.D. 10
Chloroethane N.D. 10
2-Chloroeth;i:I vin;tl ether N.D. 10
Chloroform N.D. 10
Chloromethane N.D. 10
Dibromochloromethane N.D. IO
I ,2-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
1,3-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
I ,4-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
)ichlorobromomethane N.D. 10
I, 1-Dichloroethane N.D. 10
[,2-Dichloroethane 410 10
, 1-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
rans-1,2-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
,2-Dichloroeroeane N.D. 10
:is-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
rans-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
:th;tlbenzene N.D. 10
,1 eth;i:lene chloride 55 10
, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane N.D. 10 ·etrachloroethene N.D. 10 ·oluene N.D. 10
,I ,I-Trichloroethane N.D. 10
, I ,2-Trichloroethane N.D. 10 richloroethene N.D. 10 richlorofluoromethane N.D. 10 'inyl chloride N.D. 10
,tandard Surrogates were recovered within QNQC limits .
. D. : Not Detected at or above the Practical Quantitation Limit.
l.Q.L. : Method Quantitation Limit
Q.L. : Practical Quantitation Limit 31
P.Q.L.
(ug/Kg)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Amount Purged: 0.5
Dilution Factor: I 0
Amount Dilution
Detected Corrected
in Blank Blank Amt.
(ug/Kg) (uefKg)
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch Blue Planer Technologies Report #1060
November 19. 199('.
Gas Chromatography -Mass Spectrometry Report
Client; 28 DAY NATIONAL STARCH
Description: 82 7 Ll8985-SC
Analysis: Method 624
Matrix: Soil
Amount
Detected M.Q.L.
Compounds (ug/Kg) (ug/Kg)
Benzene N.D. 10
Bromofonn N.D. 10
Bromomethane N.D. 10
Carbon tetrachloride N.D. 10
Chlorobcnzene N.D. 10
Chloroethane N.D. 10 2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether N.D. 10
Chlorofonn N.D. 10
Chloromethane N.D. 10
Dibromochloromethane N.D. 10
I 2-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
1,3-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10 I ,4-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
Dichlorobromomethane N.D. 10
I , I -Dichloroethane N.D. 10 1,2-Dichloroethane 375 10
!..,!-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
I ,2-Dichloroeroeane N.D. 10
crs-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
trans-1,3-Dichloroeroe~ne N.D. 10
Ethylbenzene N.D. 10
'v!eth}'.lene chloride 48 10 _I, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane N.D. 10 Tetrachloroethene N.D. 10 roluene N.D. 10
I . I , I -Trichloroethane N.D. 10 I_. I ,2-Trichloroethane N.D. 10 ,'richloroethene N.D. 10 1 · richlorolluoromethane N.D. 10
v' inyl chloride N.D. 10
~tandard Surrogates were recovered within ONOC limits.
'l.D. : Not Detected at or above the Practical Quantitation Limit.
-1.Q.L. : Method Quantitation Limit
'.Q.L. : Practical Quantitation Limit 32
P.Q.L.
(ug/Kg)
100
100
JOO
100
100
100
100
100
100
JOO
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Amou,,t Purged: 0.5
Dilution Factor: I 0
Amount Dilution
Detected Corre;:ted
in Blank Blank Amt.
(ug/Kg) {ug/Kg)
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch Blue Planet Technologies Report #1060
November 19. 1996
Phase II BIOreportTh1
Bioremediatlon Feasibility Study
Customer Sample l.D.:
Aerobic, Biotic
Laboratory Sample l.D.:
Matrix:
Parameters
BT-2 4-6' Attention:
Ll8985-5D
Soil
Organisms
Result
Mike Ford
National Starch
10 Findeme Ave.
Bridgewater, NJ 08807
Units
Total Heterotrophic Plate Count Initial** I, 100,000/[1 Organisms per gram/ml
Final*** 630,000,000/g Organisms oer gram/ml
**Initial plate count performed prior to incubation
***Final plate count performed after the 28 days
Bacteria Identification
Species Percent
Bacillus sp. 60
Corvnebacterium sp. 20
Pseudomonas so. 20
Carbon Dioxide Generation
Day0 Day 7 Dav 14 Dav 21 Dav 28
10/08/96 10/15/96 10/22/96 10/29/96 11/05/96
Plate counts from T 1,100,000 14,6000,000 118,000,000 120,000,000 630,000,000
Levels in PPM 300 900 2,775 3,200 2,925
Bio-Fluids Addition
Dav 0 Day 7 Dav 14 Dav 21 Dav28
Methane <10 PPM <10 PPM <10 PPM <10 PPM <10 PPM
Nitrate 500 mg/kg 300 mg/kg
33
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch Blue Planet Technologies Repon # 1060
November 19. I 996
Phase JI BIO report TM (Continued)
Bioremediation Feasibility Study
Customer Sample I.D. :
Aerobic, Biotic
Laboratory Sample I.D.:
Matrix:
BT-2 4-6' Attention:
Ll8985-5D
Soil
Mike Ford
National Starch
IO Findeme Ave.
Bridgewater, NJ 08807
Confirmation of Contaminant Degradation
Results are reported in ppb
Parameters
BTEX
Benzene
Ethvlbenzene
Toluene
Xylene
I ,2-Dichloroethane
TPH
Methylene Chloride
* Not Detected
Maureen K. Boman
Technical Director
Dav0
500
Dav 7
34
Dav 14 Dav 21 Day28
125
68
Shehdeh Jodeh
Laboratory Manager
ND
ND
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch Blue Planet Techno!£g!es Report# 1060
November I 9, I 996,
Gas Chromatography -Mass Spectrometry Report
Client: 14 DAY NATIONAL STARCH
Description: B2 8 LI8985-SD
Analysis: Method 624
Matrix: Soil
Amount
Detected M.Q.L.
Componnds (ug/Kg) (ug/Kg)
Benzene N.D. 10
Bromoform N.D. 10
Bromomethane N.D. 10
Carbon tetrachloride N.D. 10
Chlorobenzene N.D. 10
Chloroethane N.D. 10
_2-Chloroethil vin~I ether N.D. IO
Chloroform N.D. 10
Chloromethane N.D. 10
Dibromochloromethane N.D. 10
1.2-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
l ,3 -Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
1,4-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
Dichlorobromomethanc N.D. 10
I , 1-Dichloroethane N.D. 10
1,2-Dichloroethane 125 10 I , 1-bichloroethene N.D. 10
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
1,2-DkhloroE!roeanc N.D. 10
cis-1,3-Dichloroeropene N.D. IO
1rans-l ,3-Dichloroeropene N.D. 10
r~lb!=-ene N.D. 10 ------t:~e_th~lene chloride 68 IO
I, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane N.D. 10
Tetrachloroethene N.D. 10
I"oluene N.D. 10
I , I , 1-Trichloroethane N.D. IO
I ,_I_ ,2-Trichloroethane N.D. IO
l'richloroethene N.D. IO .
l'richloronuoromethane N.D. IO
✓inyt chloride ______ . N.D. IO
>landard Surrogates were recovered within QNQC limits.
~.L) : Not Det~cted at or above the Practical Quantitation Limit.
,1.Q.L : Method Quantitation Limit
35 . Q.L. : Practical Quantitation Limit
P.Q.L.
(ug/Kg)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Amount Purged: 0.5
Dilution Factor: I 0
Amount Dilution
Detected Corrected
in Blank Blank Amt.
(ug/Kg) (11g/Kg)
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D .
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch 131uc Planet Technologies Report # 1060
November 19, I 996
Gas Chromatography -Mass Spectrometry Report
Client: 28 DAY NATIONAL STARCH
Description: 82 8 LI8985-SD
Analysis: Method 624
Matrix: Soil
Amount
Detected M.Q.L.
Compounds (ug/Kg) (ug/Kg)
Benzene N.D. 10
Bromofonn N.D. 10
Bromomethane N.D. 10
Carbon tetrachloride N.D. 10
Chlorobenzene N.D. 10
Chloroethane N.D. 10
2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether N.D. 10
Chloroform N.D. 10
Chloromethane N.D. 10
Dibromochloromethane N.D. 10
I .2-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
1,3-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
1,4-Dichlorobenzene N.D. 10
Dichlorobromomethane N.D. 10
I , 1-Dichloroethane N.D. 10
I ,2-Dichloroethane N.D. 10
I, 1-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
trans-I ~-Dichloroethene N.D. 10
1,2-Dichloroeroeane N.D. 10
cis-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
trans-1,3-Dichloroeroeene N.D. 10
l:thylbenzene N.D. 10
Methylene chloride N.D. 10
1.1,2.2-Tetrachloroethane N.D. 10
Tetrachloroethene N.D. 10
foluene N.D. 10
I, I, 1-Trichloroethane N.D. 10
I, I ,2-Trichloroethane N.D. 10
J'richloroethene N.D. 10
I' richlorofluoromethane N.D. IO
Vinyl chloride N.D. 10
Standard Surrogates were recovered within QNQC limits.
•.D. : Not Detected al or above the Practical Quantitation Limit.
v1.Q.L. : Method Quantitation Limit
'.Q.L. : Practical Quantitation Limit 36
P.Q.L.
(ug/Kg)
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Amount Purged: 0.5
Dilution Factor: I 0
Amount Dilution
Detected Corrected
in Blank Blank Amt.
(ug/Kg) (ng/Kg)
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.C. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
N.D. N.D.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report # 1060 November 19, 1996
TABLE 1
Confirmation of 1,2 Dichloroethane Degradation
Lab ID
• . .
Ll8968-IA
Ll8968-IB
Ll8968-I C
Ll8968-ID
Ll8985-5A
Ll8985-5B
Ll8985-5C
Ll8985-5D
*ND = Not Detected
Lab ID
L18968-!B
L18968-ID
L18985-5A
L18985-5D
Sample ID Conditions Day
0
BT-I 4-6' Aerobic, Abiotic 7400
BT-I 4-6' Aerobic, Biotic 7400
BT-I 4-6' Anaerobic, Abiotic 7400
BT-I 4-6' Anaerobic, Biotic 7400
BT-2 4-6' Anaerobic, Biotic 500
BT-2 4-6' Anaerobic, Abiotic 500
BT-2 4-6' Aerobic, Abiotic 500
BT-2 4-6' Aerobic, Biotic 500
TABLE2
Biodegradation Rate of Contaminant
(Corrected for Abiotic Loss)
Day Day
14 28
320 205
I I 0 ND
470 330
430 365
290 240
425 310
410 375
125 ND
Sample ID Conditions Biodegradation
Rate
(ppb/dayJ
BT-I 4-6' Aerobic, Biotic 7.32
BT-I 4-6' Anaerobic, Biotic 1.25
BT-2 4-6' Anaerobic, Biotic 2.49
BT-2 4-6' Aerobic, Biotic 13.39
37
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report # I 060
November 19, 1996
Discussion
Organic substrates when acted upon by degradating microbes (e.g.) yeasts, fungi and
certain bacteria are metabolized into organic compounds through oxidation-reduction to
form less complex organics. In these metabolic reactions both the electron donors and
acceptors are organic compounds. That, not withstanding the presence of methanogens
requiring strict reducing environments, may be acted upon by methanotrophs that utilize
the very methane that has been produced by the methogenic bacteria, a very complicated
scenario when one attempts to decipher the metabolic pathways and transfers that have
been in progress during a 28 day period with fixed rotation and temperature.
The highlights and conclusions of this in depth study then are as follows, unit by unit.
After seeding the eight bioflasks with sufficient nitrate to insure a minimum of 28 days of
reaction, flasks BT-2( 4-6) were supplemented with 1,2 Dichloroethane to effect a
concentration of 500 ppb per unit. Because of the size of the biosphere, it was felt that
I 000 ppb was too critical a level owing to the potential for bacteriacidal or even static
action. Historically, when large doses of substrate are added to bioflasks, there is a latent
or delay phenomena that negates promulgation during the first weeks of incubation,
yielding very little or biased data. In addition, the PQL (practical quantitative level) was
determined to be 500 ppb, owing to the matrix and interstitial binding of the soil under
investigation.
Because the B-1 series had less than 100 organisms per gram, the bioflask were seeded
with a suspension of indigenous organisms that were prevalent in the B-2 series, allowing
for a more normal process ofbiodegradation.
The primary criteria used for determining the eventual biodegradation fate of the
contaminants of concern was by mass balance using GC/MS, owing to the excellent results
that are historical for the quantitative and qualitative results for a broad spectrum of
contaminants.
The subject site was characterized predominantly by a Bacillus sp. and to a lesser degree
by Pseudomonas and Corynebacterium. The wide range of organic compounds and the
number of compounds utilized by the Bacillus sp. as well as Pseudomonas is immense.
One of the unique physiological features of the group is their remarkable nutritional
versatility. Having very simple nutritional requirements, they can utilize ammonium soils,
nitrate or amino acids as a source of nitrogen (e.g.) the aerobic assimilation of nitrite
involves reduction to ammonia which eventually becomes incorporated in all of the
nitrogen compounds of the cell.
The following synopsis then exhibits strong indication that the contaminants of concern in
the subsurface can be remediated by biostimulation of the indigenous micro flora with the
provision that adequate nutritional factors are present and maintained throughout the
remediation.
38
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report# 1060
November I 9, I 996 '
Whether or not the addition of surfactants for the removal of pollutants that might be
sorbed to the contaminated soils was not within the scope of this investigation. Because
the soil that was utilized in the bench scale was not fresh, the addition of an added
substrate was necessary. The soil was not fresh due to the fact that preliminary biological
and analytical laboratory work was performed on the samples prior to the Phase II
Bioreport. It is very possible when adding a substrate to duplicate the exact interstitial
binding of the actual contaminated soil not is it possible to duplicate the effect of various
cations/anions that exert in influence of the particular molecules that the pollutants have
sorbed to. It is in the most part, merely an in depth study to determine if the organisms
recovered are capable, whether by the influence of consortium plasmid transfer, genetic
lending, or bond transfer, to degradate a specific organic under controlled laboratory
conditions that hopefully, will be repeated in a actual field condition.
The following report of analysis then represents are findings from a controlled laboratory
bench scale study.
BT-1 (4-6 ft.) Aerobic, Abiotic L18968-1A
Probably the single most elementary result of the eight bioflasks involved indicated that
the lack of organisms did not result in the generation of CO2/methane from the substrate
present. The NO, available substitute electron utilization remained constant owing to the
lack of organotrophs, aerobic, facultative and/or anaerobic life forms. The initial and final
loss of supplemented substrate is in large part due to the incubation temperature and the
constant rotation of the bioflask. The presence and volatilization of the Methylene
chloride was a surprise, not expected, but its loss over time may be attributed to the
mechanical rotation and fixed temperatures of the bioflask. Volatilization of 100 to 200
ppb of organics is not unusual in controlled laboratory studies that involve mechanical
manipulation of the soil/water under surveillance.
BT-1 (4-6 ft.) Aerobic Biotic L18969-1B
The aerobic biotic bioflask, supplemented with planted indigenous organisms responded
vehemently in the initial phases of the study reaching its maximum ofS,900,000 organisms
per gram in only seven days, but gradually diminishing to a level of only 81,000 at day 28.
This declination may be attributed to the utilization and final complete removal of organic
carbon that was present. At the 14 day interval, the recorded loss of the target substrate
was 390 ppb. It seems apparent that in addition to oxygen, the consortium utilized the
N03 radical extensively throughout the entire span of 28 days.
The CO2 generation reached a maximum after only seven days, correlating very nicely
with the total organotrophic count. The CO2 generation than declined to levels less than
the base line of 3 00 PPM. Again, the presence of organic carbon was depleted and
lacking a substrate, the diminution of the various microorganisms into a lag phase was
very predictable.
39
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report #l060
November 19, 1996 ·
Because methane generation depends upon methanogens being present, being strict
anaerobes they required a reducing environment and were obviously not present. The
obvious utilization of the Nitrate radical cannot be overemphasized as being a critical
nutritional factor in the mechanics of various soil/water biodegradation with the
consortium of bacterium present.
BT-1 (4-6 ft.) Anaerobic Abiotic Ll8968-1C
The diminution of the target substrate was particularly absent in this bioflask, owing to the
lack of any detectable microbial life as well as the lack of oxygen, an electron carrier
necessary for the consortium of organisms present in the aerobic studies to degradate.
The disappearance of the small levels of Methylene chloride present ( 15 ppb) are
attributable to the rotation of the bioflask and the controlled temperatures. Nor did we
expect to find a diminution of the target substrate of substantial degree.
The CO2 generation that was detected is a phenomena that randomly occurs without any
factual basis for its presence. There is good reason to believe that this relatively small
amount of CO2 may have been held interstially and only released upon the lessening of the
oxygen present. This seems reasonable in light of the fact that prior to the laboratory
preparation of the abiotic control, organisms were in the process of degradating any low
levels of substrate that might have been present, substrate that may not be detectable. The
NO3 additive was reduced to 330 mg/kg but again, the mechanical mixing and handling,
plus the presence of transitional entities not readily discernible must be taken into all
account.
The loss of the substrate through 28 days of rotation and manipulation was only 170 ppb
and must not be interpreted as the product of any degradation process occurring. The loss
of Methylene chloride must also be viewed in that perspective.
BT-1 (4-6 ft.) Anaerobic Biotic L18968-1D
The presence of organotrophs in this bioflask did contribute to the degradation of the
substrate but only to a small degree, being limited by the lack of oxygen present.
The CO2 generation reached a maximum of only I, 125 PPM at day seven and then
progressed levels fall below the base line of 300 PPM. The steady decline of viable
organotrophs into a lag phase continued well into the end of the 28 day study.
It is noteworthy that owing to the lack of oxygen, the consortium did utilize a significant
level of the NO3 as an electron acceptor, a radical that is frequently utilized by strict,
facultative or other microaerophilic organisms.
Although the evidence does hint that anaerobic respiration is taken place at lower levels,
the absence of methane adds credence that microcosm is composed chiefly of consortium
40
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report #1060
November I 9, 1996 '
of aerobic organisms, requiring oxygen and nitrate in generous levels for minerilazation of
the target substrate present.
The presence of the supplemented substrate detected on day 14 of 430 and the resultant
level of 365 ppb at the 28th day of the study does not justify a conclusion that the system
is anaerobic in nature. The lack of obvious promulgation in the presence of adequate
substrate, electron transfer substrate, and sufficient nutrition eliminate any validity or
credibility that the system is anaerobic in nature.
BT-2 (4-6 ft.) Anaerobic Biotic Ll8985-SA
This biosphere was similar to the biosphere of L 18968-1 D in which there was a slow,
subtle progression of the aerobic bacterium present to an eventual lag phase, utilizing in
some respects, the nitrate radical for an oxygen acceptor, generating only a minimum of
CO2
Although there appears to be a limited amount of anaerobic respiration in process, a gross
differentiation between anaerobic respiration, fermentation, and methanogenesis must be
made. Anaerobic degradation produces a higher volume of biomass than aerobic systems.
This is not organotrophs over a period of time in the presence of adequate substrate and
electron acceptors. Again, the declination of the CO2 generation is compared to an
aerobic condition is unmistakable not to mention the availability of an adequate anaerobic
electron donor.
An increase of methane to 25 PPM must only be considered a result of respiration
products. Methanogens will, under certain condition, degrade to CO2 and methane.
Facultative aerobic degradation of the limited substrate present to small amounts of
methane and CO2 is well within the range of probability.
The decrease of substrate (e.g.) 50 ppb of 1,2 Dichloroethane in 14 days, does not indicate
that anaerobic degradation is a viable alternative to Bioremediation.
BT-2 (4-6 ft.) Anaerobic Abiotic Ll8985-5B
A complete absence of mineralization, minor anaerobic promulgation. and substrate
reductions is evidence that the microcosm in the bioflask is at best static. The reduction of
N03 from 500 to 380 is not evidence that the nitrogen radical has undergone any type of
electron transfer via microbial action.
That the N03 was not utilized by aerobes, facultative aerobes and anaerobes is evident
from the lack of substantial CO2 generation, methane production, and/or bacterial
promulgation.
41
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Report # 1060
November I 9, 1996 '
The loss of 1,2 Dichloroethane over 28 days does not represent a significant reduction of
the substrate and may be attributed to volatilization via temperature and continual mixing
of the soil over the course of the study.
BT-2 (4-6 ft.) Aerobic Abiotic Ll8985-5C
Despite a slight increase in CO2 measurement, the absence of methane, significant electron
activity via the N03 radical, and the absence of viable organisms, this bioflask may be
considered static.
The depletion of I 90 ppb of 1,2 Dichloroethane and Methylene chlorid11 may be attributed
to volatilization that occurred via mixing of the bioflask over 28 days. The Methylene
chloride should not be considered as a cometabolite in the absence of any degradation
products of gross substrate reduction.
BT-2 (4-6 ft.) Aerobic Biotic Ll8985-5D
The following results of this bioflask perhaps represent a classical case of aerobic
degradation of substrate via a consortium of organotrophic bacterium.
Provided with a generous supply of oxygen, substrate and an alternate electron donor, the
consortium of bacterial minerilization rapidly promulgated to a high of 63 0 million
organisms in 28 days of the bench scale treatability study. The generation of the CO2 was
in decline at day 14 owing to the complete minerilization the substrate
There was a corresponding elevation in a gross generation of CO2 that reached a high of
3200 PPM on the 21st day. Interestingly, there was a complete absence of methane
production and only 200 ppb of the N03 radical was depleted at the end of the study.
500 ppb of the substrate were degradated at the end of the study with a fraction above a
fifth remaining at the end of the 14 day period. Whether or not the Methylene chloride
that was also degradated acted as a comemetabolite remains to be seen, but it is doubtful.
The mass of evidence weighs heavily for an aerobic form of degradation, whether in situ,
fluidized bed reactor, or by reactor cells. A generous supply of nutrients, oxygen an a
alternate electron donor must be always maintained at optimum conditions and any
opportunities of creating an anaerobic condition (e.g.) via excess water, oxygen depletion,
etc. must be avoided.
The indigenous organisms present are viable and seem well acclimated to the substrate
present. The consortium of species must be maintained as there is an apparent symbiosis
in which each population, whether by plasmid sharing or individual species specificity,
contributes to the overall welfare of the group.
42
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Company Blue Planet Technologies Repon #1060
November 19, 1996 '
Partitioning with composite samples
Results of partitioning with composite samples from B 1 and B2 ( 4-6 ft.). Owing to the
low levels of 1,2 Dichloroethane present, it was necessary to spike the samples with a
known control of I ppm. Because the substrate in the actual site soil was held
interstitially, the actual results of this of this determination may vary considerably from the
laboratory model.
'
A composite of 50 grams from each soil sample B-1 and B-2 was removed and placed in a
500 ml bioflask and I 00 ml of deionized water added. The mixture was then sealed with
parafilm and rotated at 125 RPM for two hours.
A sample of the head space, water fraction, and solid sample was then removed for
analysis:
The results were as follows:
Head Space
Water Fraction
Soil Fraction
125 ppb
210 ppb
540 ppb
There was a loss of 125 ppb in the mechanical processing that is not accounted for.
43
___ 1.18,:n,9; _l.J:03 F.n l iO.J 63i 8912 c-SC CEDAR SPRGS · 1.··,•:::?/.•'•cf'•·:;7;J;~;z~~-·~~:-;;,/\•\·~.-•':)r~ty~;2'.::'.}w~~il~fs~i:'.::::;:;•·· .•..• · .· .
· · ·· · · · Moisture and Nutrient Addition 1 ·•· ·. OU4 Natural Degradation Treatability Study
Cedar Springs Road Plant
!I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Week
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Samplers
Date Initials
/-Zlo/lu /11~
/z/u/91. --/4µ...-
/.~' /_. ..,..,, ,_ :r.P.
"' ,,,,Je,~ 1..,.a. D l.l
I'\ i' , ... ~ J:t c:i:._,;._ ., .,,-A 01 1 ,_ le?
e\ '"' ~ v1.1~~c:...
<,l 'rn 'a, A,
"9/, , •-Krr!A AH ,
:'17 r ~~ 5, Gt1
"'i? 1,2 /(I"", .,g
r,7. /,,,, 1;.', ~u
I I " 0,.2/,, ... ,'" --r',1..
o.,J.,.,.;' ., -r'A
:l. J, ,/~'.., .\'"---
~-·/f-4t-: 'TJ.-1-rf?,
l'.?-2; i;/ -:a '--, -r{J 4'.:,. 97
4 C\ .£:\1 ~~
ti.//_ .q· -r f) 1f:.
'1 -?&f ~ -rB T
. I/, J'.') .Cf) o/4
~-'l~-I
J. ~ ,,_<!._~R
5-/1/9/ o/4
5 ,,., .(f'] -'[15
C.Jf_t:i· 9.4
' ,
SOIL PLOT 2 SOIL PLOT 3
Water Water Ammonium
(liters) (liters) Phosphate (g)
3 .r., "5. ~ :r1-
5-.? 7, (., P.-=1--
3.? 3. {. 'JI '7
~. (. 3 ' I.,, ? '7 ... .r.
'OI. I (-.7-,, 1.
,,
-~"-1 .: n,
,,; 1"/.c'J., s. " ).b
'7.'i,:•· I
,
.· ,. -:z.l;t,.' :2--.' I. 7 rJ n~
• 17';!, :.z...; L. :Z.,t_ ~I;!-~"-~:i ~. t., 0 ,, ? ,:;;i. ·~ fl--
"?-i.t Q.,, l.. r" -· l/ o, -:--0~)<. <.
, 'l .,...) .,, '2,,'--s., c..-..,,.,..a
~. I .. .:_ • I • , ' -
J, /_ V <.' l. 17,, .. -
3-C. 3-t ✓ 2 7 ,_ __ ~
~-{_
I
-~ 1--,7,..., __
<' (. ?,c J,.1 ! A
.1. l --:,_,. I ~
'J"'). ·--~
--i,. C, 3 -/_ ?7C ----I ~ {_ ·-?., L ""'-, . -' -
~. /_ 3 C. -7') 7 ,,_ ... ,.,
~. " ~7
'? ' '">"). ,_,..'
3 I. J.C. ,.
') / ~A/". .... S
t"2,, L ,,L • 7
::'I 7 n .,-r:, '(VI..<:..
3. (... 3 ./: 17;;? __ ('
?. ' ?. I" ?1~r,.,.. S
3-t. J. /. '); ~ -s
d -
'u.,o},FAX ,l ~
0l>:~1~~r!t~~~~~~1~Hl~dJil~;r-· ----:-1 ' OU4 Natural Oegrad~tio~ Treatabllity Study
08 .-21.-9; 141 uuJ .-uuJ
Cedar Springs Road Plant
I ,--I ---r-----,,--.1 ~ __ ,..., .-.. -. --;--cc_ cc-_c-. ~r1::,-i7S.07··_:::,IL:::::/P::-t:c::._O::=T:--::2:---r------=s:-::o~,L:-,::-P:-LO:::T::-: .. :::3,-:-. ---
1 week.·. -• Date [ ~f ri~~~ra . ;fft~~--;fft~1!\ : .. P~~s~~~~~isl
i---------+l.!e.le .L.!J./4:_J._:./qzLJ___.._.+e,! t[:.L...J:f,.µ"'13--·-----'--~'-'-'· "'"----t----'3""-'-::,__·'---'f.~"-----.-----.2, 1~---
01, ... 10.:1 I&~ RI,-! ~~b V k 'l.7
1
It 2
•i 3
4
5
I 6
I 7 II ! 8 I I 9 1· I 10
Ii 11
12
I: 13
14 I
Ii 15
16 I
f------'--------i------,------""7-------
I 17
· L._1_a_--'------,-----------·---i------·---,----------____ _ 11 19
I
I
I
I
! 20
' 21
22 i
I
23 I
24
25
26
I d:\lotus 123\kluttzk\forms\ou4Iog dfs
I
i
:
'
I ;
' I .
' ' ;
--.....
i
.... ' ' : i I ·-·· -
i
···1 ·--
·---
i ' -----
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
January I I, I 997
National Starch and Chemical Company
IO Finderne Ave.
Bridgewater, NJ 08807
Attention: Mike Ford
Dear Mike:
BLUE PLANET
technologies
32384 Edward Street
Madison HeiQhts, Ml 48071
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
We thank you for providing Blue Planet Technologies the opportunity to serve your
analytical needs.
Enclosed you will find the final report on the analysis requested for the attached samples.
If you have any questions regarding the aforementioned report, please contact me at (8 I 0)
597-1400
Sincerely,
~
Maureen Boman
Technical Director
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Compnav Blue Planet Technologies #7002
January 11, 1996
Introduction
Blue Planet Technologies (BPT) was contracted by National Starch and Chemical
Company to perform Heterotrophic Plate Counts and Bacteria Identification on eighteen
soil samples from their Cedar Springs Road Plant in Salisbury, North Carolina. The
laboratory analysis were conducted as discussed between Maureen Boman and Mike Ford.
The following describes the method and result of this study.
Methods
Bacterial Plate Counts. Heterotrophic bacteria were enumerated by spreading aliquots
of serial dilutions of groundwater or soil onto sterile R2A agar surfaces Plates were
incubated for under aerobic conditions, and then counted with a Quebec colony counter
(modified method 92 I 5B from Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Waste Water, APHA, AWWA, WEF, 18th ed., 1992).
Bacteria Identification. Bacteria were identified using the Biolog Microcomputerized
Identification System.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Compnav
January II, 1996
Sample
SPl-19-(5-<>)
SPl-19-(7-8)
SP 1-22-(5-<>)
SPl-22-(7-8)
SPl-34-(7-8)
SPl-34-(7-8)
SP2-19-(3.5)
SP2-19-(7-8)
SP2-22-(5.5)
SP2-22-(7.5-8)
SP2-34-(3.5)
SP2-34-(7.5-8)
SP3-19-(3-3.5)
SP3-19-(7)
SP3-22-(3.8)
SP3-22-(7)
SP3-34-(5)
SP3-34-(3)
Results
Table I
Heterotrophic Plate Counts
Lab ID number
L20169-2
L20169-7
L20169-4
L20169-<>
L20169-10
L20169-12
L20169-18
L20169-8
L20169-16
L20169-5
L20169-15
L20169-I
L20169-9
L20169-14
L20169-17
L20169-3
L20169-13
L20169-II
Blue Planet Technologies #7002
Heterotrophic
Plate Counts
organisms/g
17000
300
730000
ND
40000
300
ND
20
ND
8800
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Note: ND denotes none detected above Practical Quantitative Limit
2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Compnav Blue Planet Technologies #7002
January 11, 1996
Table D
Bacteria Identification
Samele Lab ID number Bacteria Identification
SPI-19-(5-Q) L20169-2 Staphlococcus sp.
Pseudomonas syringae
Pseudomonas corrugata
SPI-19-(7-8) L20169-7 Pseudomonas corrugata
Psuedomonas syringae
SPl-22-(5-Q) L20169-4 Staphlococcus sp.
Pseudomonas syringac
Pseudomonas corrugata
SPl-34-(7-8) L20169-10 Staphylococci sp.
Pseudomonas syringac
Pseudomonas corrugata
Micrococci sn.
SP2-19-(7-8) L20169-8 Pseudomonas syringae
Pseudomonas corrugata
SP2-22-(7.5-8) L20169-5 Pseudomonas syringae
Psuedomonas corrugata
If you would like to discuss these results, or have any further questions, please feel free to
contact us at your convenience
s;'""'"'of--< /:JL __.--r Helvey /
. Microbiologis~
Signature~
Maureen Boman
Technical Director
3
Date / -, I -1 7
Date I -II -q '7
CITY, STATE, ZIP:
TELEPHONE & FAX NO.:
CUSTOMER PROJECT NO:
-------Analytical Laboratory Submittal and
Chain of Custody Form
COMPANY:
MAILING ADDRESS:
CITY, STATE, ZIP:
TELEPHONE & FAX NO.:
CUSTOMER PROJECT NO:
Special Instructions. (methods, limit ol detection, reporting requests, etc.) For BPT Use Only
024 Hour
01
Project No.
Date Logged In: ..
DYES ONO Logged In By:
. .
D Phone D Fax
Date/Time Sample Received by Transporter: Date/Time
Date/Tlrru, Sample Received by laboratory by: Date/Time
NOTE TO CUSTOMER: PLEASE RETURN TOP COPY TO BLUE PLANET
---

-
--32384 Edward Street. Madison Heights. Ml 48071
Phone: [phone]
FAX: [phone].
ANALYSES REQUESTED
(Place a check in the box to indicate a request)
SAMPLE CONOftfON
D Acceptable
0 Other (explain)
Method of Shipment
To Laboratory
--- - -- - - -
'llllllft.... ___ B_LU_E_P_LA_N_ET
. • technologies
TELEPHONE & FAX NO.:
CUSTOMER PROJECT NO:
ns: (methods, limit of detection, reporUng requests, etc.)
Analytical Laboratory Submittal and
Chain of Custody Form
MAILING ADDRESS:
CITY, STATE, ZIP:
TELEPHONE & FAX NO.:
CUSTOMER PROJECT NO:
Date Logged In: ..
DYES D NO
D Other
eek
. .
D Phone D Fax
Date/Time Sample Recetved by Laboratory by:
Date/Tlme
Datemme
32384 Edward Street, Madison Heights, Ml 48071
Phone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
ANALYSES REQUESTED
(Place ■ check ln the box to lndh:ate • reques1)
O Acceptable
0 Other (explain)
Method of Shipment
To Laboratory
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
BLUE PLANET
technologies
January 27, 1997
Mr. Mike Ford
National Starch and Chemical Company
10 Findeme Avenue
Bridgewater, New Jersey 08807-0500
Dear Mr. Ford:
Thank you for providing Blue Planet Technologies the opportunity to serve your
analytical needs. The samples received by this laboratory have been analyzed as
requested. The results are compiled in the enclosed report.
32384 Edward Street
Madison Heights. Mt,48071
Phone: [phone]
Fax: (810) 589·2652
If you have any questions regarding the results or ifwe may be of further assistance to
you, please call me at the published telephone number.
Yours very truly,
Maureen Boman
Technical Director
I U. A-Alc...t. ;/11/'11-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Compnay Blue Planet Technologies #7010
January 27, 1997
Introduction
Blue Planet Technologies (BPT) was contracted by National Starch and Chemical
Company to perform Anaerobic Plate Counts on nine soil sampies from their Cedar
Springs Road Plant in Salisbury, North Carolina. The laboratory analysis were conducted
as discussed between Maureen Boman and Mike Ford .. The following describes the
method and result of this study.
Methods
Bacterial Plate Counts. Heterotrophic bacteria were enumerated by spreading aliquots
of serial dilutions of groundwater or soil onto sterile R2A agar surfaces. Plates were
incubated for under anaerobic conditions, and then counted with a Quebec colony counter
(modified method 921 SB from Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Waste Water,APHA,AWWA, WEF, 18th ed., 1992).
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Compnay
January 27, 1997
Sample
SPl-19-(7-8)
SP 1-22-(7-8)
SP 1-34-(7-8)
SP2-l 9-(3.5)
SP2-22-(7.5-8)
SP2-34-(7.5-8)
SP3-19-(3-3.5)
SP3-19-(7)
SP3-34-(5)
Results
Table I
Anaerobic Plate Counts
Lab ID number
L20169-7
L20169-6
L20169-10
L20169-18
L20169-5
L20169-I
L20169-9
L20169-14
L20169-13
Blue Planet Technologies #7010
Anaerobic
Plate Counts
orranisms/g
<100
<100
5,900
6,600
<100
<100
200
<100
4,100
Note: ND denotes none detected above Practical Quantitative Limit
Si'"''""~~ ~
Maureen Born~
Technical Director
2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
BLUE PLANET
technologies
April 4, 1997
Mr. Micheal Ford
National Starch and Chemical Company
IO Finderne Ave.
Bridgewater NJ 08807
Dear Mr. Ford:
Thank you for providing Blue Planet Technologies the opportunity to serve your
analytical and biological needs. The samples received by this laboratory have been
analyzed as requested. The results are compiled in the enclosed report.
32384 Eclward Strwt
Madison Heights, Ml <18071
Phone: {810) 597-1400
Fax: {810) S89-2652
If you have any questions regarding the results or if we may be of further assistance to
you, please call me at the published telephone number.
Yours very truly,
'-1\A_ow,--rP--
Maureen Boman
Technical Director
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
. 1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Compnay Blue Planet Technologies #7015
April 3, I 996
Introduction
Blue Planet Technologies (BPT) was contracted by National Starch and Chemical
Company to perform Aerobic and Anaerobic Plate Counts on twelve soil samples from
their Cedar Springs Road Plant in Salisbury, North Carolina The laboratory analysis
were conducted as discussed between Maureen Boman and Mike Ford. The following
describes the method and result of this study.
Methods
Bacterial Plate Counts. Heterotrophic bacteria were enumerated by spreading aliquots
of serial dilutions of groundwater or soil onto sterile R2A agar surfaces. Plates were
incubated under aerobic and anaerobic conditions, and then counted with a Quebec
colony counter (modified method 9215B from Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Waste Water, APHA, A WWA, WEF, 18th ed., 1992) .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Compnay
April 3, 1996
Sample
SPl-7-5.5
SPJ-19-5
SPl-19-7.5
SPl-29-7.5
SP2-7-3.5
SP2-7-7.5
SP2-29-5
SP2-29-7.5
SP3-7-3
SP3-19-5.5
SP3-19-7.5
SP3-29-5.5
.
Results
Table I
Anaerobic Plate Counts
Lab ID number
L20966-1
L20966-2
L20966-3
L20966-4
L20966-5
L20966-6
L20966-7
L20966-8
L20966-9
L20966-10
L20966-I I
L20966-12
Blue Planet Technologies #7015
Anaerobic
Plate Counts
organisms/g
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Note: ND denotes none detected above Practical Quantitative Limit
Signature i\~tU.Lttv-~--Date t/ /3 / °[ 7 ----------'-,.....C..------------· I l Maureen Boman
Technical Director
2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Compnay
April 3, l 996
Sample
SPl-7-5.5
SPl-19-5
SPl-19-7.5
SPl-29-7.5
SP2-7-3.5
SP2-7-7.5
SP2-29-5
SP2-29-7.5
SP3-7-3
SP3-19-5.5
SP3-19-7.5
SP3-29-5.5
Results
Table II
Aerobic Plate Counts
Lab ID number
L20966-I
L20966-2
L20966-3
L209664
L20966-5
L20966-6
L20966-7
L20966-8
L20966-9
L20966-10
L20966-I I
L20966-12
Blue Planet Technologies #7015
Aerobic
Plate Counts
organisms/g
216
6000000
60000
10000
20000
106
1000
2000
30000
19000
300
96
Note: ND denotes none detected above Practical Quantitative Limit
Signature Lfv)~ ~
Maureen Boman
Technical Director
3
Date Y /3 /9 2 I ~ I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
June 3 I , I 997
Mr. Michael Ford
National Starch and Chemical Company
10 Findeme Ave.
Bridgewater, NJ 08822
Dear Mr. Ford:
BLUE PLANET
technologies
3238-( Edward Str"1
Madison Heights. Ml 48071
PhOne: (810) 597•UOO
Fax: (81 OJ 589·2652
Thank you for providing Blue Planet Technologies the opportunity to serve your
analytical and biological needs.
Enclosed you will find the final report on the analysis requested for the attached samples ..
If you have any questions regarding the results or if we may be of further assistance to
you, please call me at the published telephone number.
Yours very truly,
Maureen Boman
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Compnay Blue Planet Technologies #7019
June 31, 1997
Introduction
Blue Planet Technologies (BPT) was contracted by National Starch and Chemical
Company to perform Aerobic and Anaerobic Plate Counts on nine soil samples from
their Cedar Springs Road Plant in Salisbury, North Carolina. The laboratory analysis
were conducted as discussed between Maureen Boman and Mike Ford. The following
describes the method and result of this study.
Methods
Bacterial Plate Counts. Heterotrophic bacteria were enumerated by spreading aliquots
of serial dilutions of groundwater or soil onto sterile R2A agar surfaces. Plates were
incubated under aerobic and anaerobic conditions, and then counted with a Quebec
colony counter (modified method 921 SB from Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Waste Water, APHA, A WWA, WEF, 18th ed., 1992).
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Compnay
June 31, 1997
Sample
SPl-6-7.5
SPl-20-7
SP2-6-5
SP2-20-5
SP2-20-7
SP2-18-6.5
SP3-20-5
SP3-18-7.5
SP3-6-7.5
Results
Table I
Anaerobic Plate Counts
Lab ID number
L21729-3
L21729-6
L21729-8
L21729-5
L21729-1
L21729-4
L21729-2
L21729-9
L21729-7
Blue Planet Technologies #7019
Anaerob!C
Plate Counts
organisms/g
470000
380000
80000
630000
740000
60000
700000
640000
50000
Note: ND denotes none detected above Practical Quantitative Limit
Signaturtn\ Q½--i:#--
Maureen B~
Technical Director
2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
National Starch and Chemical Compnay
June 31, 1997
Sample
SPl-6-7.5
SPl-20-7
SP2-6-5
SP2-20-5
SP2-20-7
SP2-18-6.5
SP3-20-5
SP3-18-7.5
SP3-6-7.5
Results
Table II
Aerobic Plate Counts
Lab ID number
L21729-3
L21729-6
L21729-8
L21729-5
L21729-1
L21729-4
L21729-2
L21729-9
L21729-7
Blue Planet Technologies #7019
Aerobic
Plate Counts
organisms/g
660000
3400
240000
260000
260000
30000
50000000
10000
560000
Note: ND denotes none detected above Practical Quantitative Limit
s;,.,rure '-:-1)\ Ow, {if2
Maureen Born
Technical Director
Date
3
--technologies
CITY, STATE, ZIP:
TELEPHONE & FAX NO.:
CUSTOMER PROJECT NO:
----

-
-Analytical Laboratory Submittal and
Chain of Custody Form
COMPANY:
MAILING ADDRESS:
CITY, STATE, ZIP:
TELEPHONE & FAX NO.:
CUSTOMER PROJECT NO:
Special Instructions: (methods, limit of detection, reporting requests, etc.) For BPT Use Only
• •
Hours
01 We
Project No.
Date Logged In: ..
DYES C!l"NO Logged In By:
. .
Analysis Assigned To:
O Phone O Fax
Date/Time Sample Received by Transporter:
Sample Received by Laboratory by:
Date/Time
Daten'"lme
:n
UJIJJ ...... <o o--u. o-zO -UJ 0..
NOTE TO CUSTOMER: PLEASE RETURN TOP COPY TO BLUE PLANET
---

-

-
-' 32384 Edward Street. Madison Heights. Ml 48071
Phone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
ANALYSES REQUESTED
(Place a check In the box to Indicate a request)
SAMPLE CONDITION
O Acceptable
□ Other (explain)
Method of Shipment
To Laboratory