NCD991278953_20010803_National Starch & Chemical Corp._FRBCERCLA FYR_Draft Final Five-Year Review-OCR

D
n
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, REPORT I
'
Drcift
Final Five Year Review
National Starch & Chemical
Company
Cedar Springs Road Plant
Salisbury, North Carolina
August 2001
BBL
________________ BLASLAND, BOUCK&LEE, INC.
engineers & scientists
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
1·
TECHNICAL REPORT
JOJ1IE t \U Ill IE ~
\~ SEP 6 2001 \~
<'UoEp,i:UND SEC1\0N i..__;:J~f-vro t
Final Five Year Review
National Starch & Chemical
Company
Cedar Springs Road Plant
Salisbury, North Carolina
August 2001
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC.
engineers & scientists
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
B
Executive Summary
,
Blasland, Bouck & Lee, Inc. (BBL) has prepared this Five-Year Review on behalf of National Starch &
Chemical Company (NSCC) to evaluate the effectiveness of the ongoing remedial action program for the Cedar
Springs Plant Site in Salisbury, North Carolina. This five-year review has been conducted as a Level I,
Statutory Review. "Statutory Reviews" are five-year reviews that the United States Environmental Protection
Agency (USEPA) implements consistent with Section 121(c) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 and Section 300.430(1)(4)(ii) of the National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan. These reviews are conducted at least every five years or until
contaminant levels allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure (USEPA, 1991).
The Site is located on Cedar Springs Road in Salisbury, Rowan County, North Carolina, approximately five
miles south of the City of Salisbury. The Site is situated on a 500-acre parcel and includes operating laboratory
and manufacturing facilities in the southeast portion of the Site. The plant produces textile-finishing chemicals
and custom specialty chemicals. Operations at the Site have occurred since 1970.
From 1971 to I 978 reaction vessel wash waters were disposed of in trenches constructed in a 5-acre tract of land
located west of the production area of the Site. NSCC discontinued the use of the trenches for disposal in 1978
at the request of the state of North Carolina and connected the wastewater treatment lagoons to a sewer
interceptor line. Between 1978 and 1984 the three wastewater treatment lagoons were excavated and lined with
concrete. Currently four lagoons are used to pretreat plant effluent and groundwater extracted from the trench
and plume periphery areas before discharge to the Salisbury Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW).
The Site was finalized on the National Priorities List in October 1989: An Administrative Order of Consent was
signed on December I, 1986 and the Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study were completed in June 1988
and September I 988, respectively. US EPA issued the Record of Decision (ROD) for the Site in September
1988, which divided the site into two Operable Units (OUs): OUI for the groundwater in the west/southwest
portion of the Site, and OU2 for the soils in the trench area. A Supplemental RI/FS was completed for OU2 in
May 1990 and a ROD for OU2 was issued in September 1990. A third operable unit consisting of surface water
impacts in the Northeast Tributary was identified in the OU2 ROD. In June 1993, the RI/FS was completed for
OU3 and two additional RODs were issued for OU3 and OU4 on October 7, 1993 and October 6, 1994,
respectively. OU3 consists of groundwater impacts beneath the Production Area of the Site and OU4 consists of
impacted soil in the Production Area. A Unilateral Administrative Order and Statement of Work for Remedial
Design/Remedial Action for OU3 and OU4 was issued by USEPA on September 29, 1995.
The selected remedies and their effectiveness are described in the following sections.
OU1
The selected remedy for OU I is a groundwater interception and extraction system to manage groundwater
impacts in the trench area. From 1993 to 2000 four bedrock wells extracted groundwater from the Plume
Periphery area adjacent to the Unnamed Tributary. Since 1995, six wells have been extracting groundwater
from the former Trench Area. Extracted groundwater is pretreated in the OUI pretreatment system (which was
upgraded in February 2000) and undergoes further treatment in the on-site wastewater lagoon system before
discharge to the POTW.
B/31,{)I
202!2188cxec
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
engineers & scientists 1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
n
I
The OU 1 remedial action is protective of human health and the environment. Based on the data and remedy
evaluations the trench area extraction system is more successful than the plume periphery extraction system at
remediating impacted groundwater. Recommendations to improve the remedial action for OU 1 include a
supplemental Remedy Evaluation to include evaluation of potential fractures and elimination of selected
monitoring parameters.
OU2
The remedy for soils in the former trench area selected in the 1990 ROD was no further action and natural soil
flushing by percolating rainfall. Leachate produced by the infiltrating rainwater is captured by extraction wells
in the Trench Area and treated as part of the OU I remedial action.
OU3
The remedy selected for OU3 is extraction and on-site treatment of impacted groundwater from the production
area of the Site. The remedial action for OU3 consists of a groundwater collection and treatment system to
provide hydraulic control of groundwater impacts. Groundwater has been extracted from the collection system,
consisting of a groundwater interception trench and two extraction wells, since February 2000.
Initial data collected since the groundwater collection system has been in operation indicate that the remedy is
effective in containing groundwater in the area of impacts. The OU3 remedial action appears to attain the
desired level of protectiveness for human health and the environment by preventing further migration of
groundwater impacts. Groundwater, surface water, and sediment" monitoring will continue in OU3. The
additional data will be used to validate the effectiveness of the remedy.
OU4
The OU4 ROD called for a Natural Degradation Treatability Study (NOTS) to assess the effectiveness of natural
attenuation as a remedy to address 1,2-dichloroethane impacts in the unsaturated soil in the production area.
The NOTS was completed in 1997 and indicated that degradation is occurring in the soil.
The OU4 remedy is protective of human health and the environment because the OU3 remedial action appears
to be effective and there is limited opportunity for exposure to impacted soils in the Plant Area. A second phase
of the NOTS will be performed to satisfy the ROD requirements of evaluation of degradation rate in the vadoze
zone and estimate the time required to attain the prescribed performance standard for 1,2-DCA in soil.
Mitigating circumstances have been identified that reduce the risk that may be posed by the soils in OU4. These
circumstances include: groundwater extraction is in place at the site, so any additional releases from soil to
groundwater will not pose a risk outside the site; and the risk from soils at the site is relatively low compared to
other Superfund sites and impacts are not widespread.
Community Advisory Panel group meetings are held at the plant to keep the community appraised of plant
activities, including those undertaken to advance the remedial activities at the Site.
The next five-year review for the Cedar Springs Plant should be completed by the end of September 2006.
8/31,01
20212188e~ec
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE. INC.
engineers & scientists 2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
n
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFT
Table of Contents
Section 1. lntroduction .............................................................................................................. 1-1
1.1 Purpose and Objectives .................................................................................................. 1-1
1.2 Regulatory Requirements and Guidance ......................................................................... 1-2
1.3 Report Organization ........................................................................................................ 1-2
Section 2. Site Background ...................................................................................................... 2-1
2.1 Site Description ............................ : ................................................................................... 2-1
2.2 Site Operations and History ............................................................................................. 2-1
2.3 Regulatory History ............................................................................................................ 2-2
Section 3. OU1 Remedy Evaluation ......................................... : ............................................... 3-1
3.1 Description of the OU1 Remedy ........ : ............................................................................. 3-1
3.2 Remedial Objectives ........................................................................................................ 3-2
3.3 ARARs Review ................................................................................................................. 3-2
3.4 Compliance with Remediation Requirements .................................................................. 3-3
3.5 Remedy Effectiveness ..................................................................................................... 3-3
Section 4. OU2 Remedy Evaluation ......................................................................................... 4-1
Section 5. OU3 Remedy Evaluation ......................................................................................... 5-1
5.1 Description of the OU3 Remedy .................................................................................... 5-1
5.2 Remedial Objectives................... .. ...................................... 5-1
5.3 ARARs Review ................................................................................................................. 5-2
5.4 Compliance with Remediation Requirements .................................................................. 5-2
5.5 Remedy Effectiveness ..................................................................................................... 5-3
Section 6. OU4 Remedy Evaluation ......................................................................................... 6-1
6.1 Description of the OU4 Remedy ..................................................................................... 6-1
6.2 Remedial Objectives ........................................................................................................ 6-2
6.3 ARARs Review ................................................................................................................. 6-2
6.4 Remedy Effectiveness ..................................................................................................... 6-2
Section 7. Summary of Community Involvement.. .................................................................. 7-1
Section 8. Recommendations ................................................................................................... 8-1
8/]1,01
20212188
8.1
8.2
OU1 .................................................................................................................................. 8-1
8.1.1 Evaluation of Potential Fractures ........................................................................ 8-1
8.1.2 Elimination of Selected Monitoring Parameters .................................................. 8-1
8.1.3 Statement of Protectiveness ............................................................................... 8-2
OU3.... . ............................................................ 8-2
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC.
engineers & scientists 1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
R
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFf
8.3 OU4 .................................................................................................................................. 8-2
8.4 Next Review ..................................................................................................................... 8-3
8.5 Implementation Requirements ......................................................................................... 8-3
Section 9. References ............................................................................................................... 9-1
Tables
1 OU1 and OU3 Performance Standards
2 Historical Analytical Results -Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
3 Historical Analytical Results -Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
4 Analytical Results Summary -Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
5 Analytical Results Summary -Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
6 Analytical Results -OU3 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
7 Analytical Results -OU3 Surface Water and Sediment Monitoring
Figures
1 Site Location Map
2 Site Map
Attachment
1 Groundwater Data Evaluation
8/3 l,{11
20212188
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC.
engineers & scientists 2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
R
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFT
1. Introduction
This Five-Year Review has been prepared by Blasland, Bouck & Lee, Inc. (BBL) on behalf of National Starch
& Chemical Company (NSCC) to evaluate the effectiveness of the ongoing remedial action (RA) program for
the Cedar Springs Plant Site (Site) in Salisbury, North Carolina (Figure I).
The site consists of four Operable Units (OUs) which address soil or groundwater impacts at different locations
at the Site. The four OUs and their selected remedies include the following:
• OU I: groundwater impacts attributed to historic use of wastewater effluent trenches (Trench Area) on the
western portion of the Site within the _drainage basin of the Unnamed Tributary of Grants Creek. The
selected remedy for· OU 1 includes a two-phased groundwater pump-and-treat system. The first phase
consists of the extraction of groundwater from the Plume Periphery Extraction System (PPES) wells
located adjacent to the Unnamed Tributary. The second phase consists of the extraction of groundwater
from the Trench Area Extraction System (TAES) wells located in the vicinity of the former Trench Area.
• OU2: soil impacts in the vicinity of the former wastewater trenches. No further action was selected as the
remedy for OU2 based on the operation of the groundwater collection.systems.
• OU3: groundwater impacts attributed to former unlined wastewater treatment lagoons, underground terra-
cotta sewerage, and miscellaneous spills within the drainage basin of the Northeast Tributary. The
selected remedy consists of groundwater extraction to maintain substantial hydraulic control over a zone
of potential dense non-aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL).
• OU4: soil impacts in the vicinity of OU3. The selected remedy for OU4 consists of the evaluation of
Natural Degradation to address residual soil impacts.
1.1 Purpose and Objectives
The purpose of the Five-Year Review is to evaluate whether the response actions selected in the Records of
Decision (RODs) remain protective of public health and the environment (United States Environmental
Protection Agency [US EPA], 1991 ). Specifically, the objectives of the Five-Year Review are to:
• confirm that the remedies as specified in the RODs and Remedial Designs (RDs) remain effective at
protecting human health and the environment; and
• evaluate whether the original cleanup levels (Performance Standards) specified in the RODs remain
protective of human health and the environment, and reflect current regulatory standards applicable to the
site.
The OU 1, OU2, OU3, and OU4 remedies are "Long-Term Remedial Actions" (L TRA), and this Five-Year
Review focuses on the effectiveness of the technology and the specific performance levels established in the
RODs (US EPA, 1991 ).
eni,-01
20212188
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC.
engineers & scientists 1-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFf
1.2 Regulatory Requirements and Guidance
Section 12l(c) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of
1980, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986 provides that:
If the President selects a remedial action that results in any hazardous substances, pollutants, or
contaminants remaining al the Site, the President shall review such remedial action no less often than each
five years after the initiation of such remedial action to assure that human health and the environment are
being protected by the remedial action being implemented. In addition, if upon such review, it is the
judgement of the President that action is appropriated at such site in accordance with Section 9604 or 9606 of
this title, the President shall take or require such action. The President shall report to the Congress a list of
facilities for which such review is required, the results of all such reviews, and any actions taken as a result of
such reviews.
Section 300.430(f)(4)(ii) of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP)
states that:
If a remedial action is selected that results in hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remaining at
the site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure, the lead agency shall review such
action no less often than every five years after initiation of the selected remedial action.
The USEPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) has developed three guidance
documents related to five-year reviews:
• "Structure and Components of Five-Year Reviews" (OSWER Directive No. 9355.7-02; May 23, 1991);
• "Supplemental Five-Year Review Guidance" (OSWER Directive No. 9355.7-02A; July 26, 1994); and
• "Second Supplemental Five-Year Review Guidance" (OSWER Directive 9355.7-03A; Dec. 21, 1995).
As indicated in these directives, five-year reviews are classified as either "Statutory Reviews" or "Policy
Reviews". "Statutory Reviews" are five-year reviews that the USEPA implements consistent with CERCLA
§12l(c) and the NCP, and will be conducted at least every five years or until contaminant levels allow for
unlimited use and unrestricted exposure (US EPA, 1991 ). "Policy Reviews" are five-year reviews that the
USEPA believes should be conducted as a matter of policy, although they are not expressly required by
CERCLA §12l(c).
The US EPA has established a three-tier approach for conducting five-year reviews. The level of review is based
on site-specific considerations, including the nature of the response action, the status of on-site response
activities, proximity to populated areas and sensitive environmental areas, and the interval since the last review
was conducted (USEPA, 1991). A Level I review is the most basic and provides a minimum protectiveness
evaluation. Levels II and Ill reviews are intended to provide the flexibility to respond to varying site-specific
considerations. The five-year review for the Site presented herein is conducted as a Level I, Statutory Review.
1.3 Report Organization
The remainder of the report is organized into the following sections:
8/31,0t
20212188
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE. INC.
engineers & scientists 1-2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFf
• Section 2 -Site Background, including a description of the site, site operations and history, and regulatory
history;
• Section 3 -OU! Remedy Evaluation, including a description of the remedy, the remedial objectives, the
components of the remedy, an evaluation of the applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements
(ARARs), compliance with the remediation requirements, and the effectiveness of the remedy;
• Section 4 -OU2 Remedy Evaluation, including a description of the remedy;
• Section 5 -OU3 Remedy Evaluation, including a description of the remedy, the remedial objectives, the
components of the remedy, an evaluation of the ARA Rs; compliance with the remediation requirements,
and the effectiveness of the remedy;
• Section 6 -OU4 Remedy Evaluation, including a description of the remedy, the remedial objectives, the
components of the remedy, an evaluation of the ARA Rs, compliance with the remediation requirements,
and the effectiveness of the remedy;
• Section 7 -Community Involvement, including a description of ongoing activities;
• Section 8 -Recommendations, including recommended changes to the sampling, analytical, and reporting
requirements, a statement of the remedies' protect.iveness, a schedule for the next review, and
implementation requirements; and
• Section 9 -References.
B/31 ,.01
20212188
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC.
engineers & scientists 1-3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2. Site Background
This section includes a description of the site, site operations and history, and regulatory history.
2.1 Site Description
DRAFT
The NSCC Site is located on Cedar Springs Road in Salisbury, Rowan County, North Carolina (Figure I),
approximately five miles south of the city of Salisbury (Figure 1), approximately 40 miles northeast of
Charlotte. The Site is situated on a 500-acre parcel and includes operating laboratory and manufacturing
facilities (Production Area) in the southeast portion of the Site. Commercial, industrial, and residential
developments surround the Site. Grants Creek forms the western property boundary. Two separate tributaries of
Grants Creek, the Unnamed Tributary and the Northeast Tributary, are located in the southwest and northeast
portions of the Site, respectively. Figure 2 presents a site map.
2.2 Site Operations and History
Construction of the Cedar Springs Road Plant began in 1970 and included the production facility and three
wastewater lagoons located in an area of clay in the southeast portion of the site. The plant produces textile-
finishing chemicals and custom specialty chemicals, and chemical production takes place on a batch basis and
varies depending on demand. Volatile and semivolatile chemicals are used in the manufacturing process, and
acid and alkaline solutions are used in both the manufacturing and cleaning processes.
From 1971 to 1978, approximately 350,000 gallons of reaction vessel wash waters were disposed of in trenches
constructed in a 5-acre tract of land located west of the production ·area of the Site. The liquid waste included
salt brines, sulfuric acid solution, and sulfonating fats and oils containing trace quantities of organic
constituents. The trenches measured approximately 200 to 300 feet long and 8 feet deep and ran both east to
west and north to south. During this time, effluent was pumped from the plant to the easternmost pretreatment
lagoon and subsequently pumped to an active trench in the Trench Area. Each trench was used until liquid no
longer readily percolated into the ground. When this occurred, the trench was backfilled and seeded, and a new
trench was constructed.
NSCC discontinued the use of the trenches for disposal in 1978 at the request of the state of North Carolina, and
the wastewater treatment lagoons were connected to a sewer interceptor line. Lagoons 1 and 2 were excavated
and lined with concrete in 1984 and Lagoon 3 was lined with concrete in 1978. The three lagoons were used for
pretreatment, including equalization, settling, and surface aeration of the raw waste stream before controlled
discharge to the City of Salisbury Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW).
In 1992, Lagoon 4 was constructed as part of the RA for OUl to pretreat plant effluent and groundwater
extracted from the trench and plume periphery areas. After construction of the Lagoon 4, the plant effluent and
groundwater extracted from the TAES was aerated in Lagoons 1 and 2 and combined with PPES water in
Lagoon 3. Lagoon 4 is operated as a continuous flow activated sludge bio-treatment system for all of the waters.
The effluent from the bio-treatment lagoon is clarified before discharge to the Salisbury POTW.
8/31,QI
20212188
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
engineers & scientists 2-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFT
2.3 Regulatory History
The NSCC facility was proposed for inclusion on the National Priorities List (NPL) in April 1985, re-proposed
in June 1988, and finalized on the list in October 1989 with a Hazardous Ranking System (HRS) score of 46.51.
The HRS score was based on an exposure via groundwater pathway score of 80.46 and a score of 0.00 for both
exposure via surface water and air. The Site was cataloged as Number 257 of the 1,249 Superfund sites across
the country on the NPL (USEPA, 1994a).
In May 1986, the USEPA sent a special notice letter to NSCC providing an opportunity to conduct the remedial
investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS). A good faith offer was submitted and negotiations between the USEPA
and NSCC with the December I, 1986 Administrative Order of Consent (AOC). The RI and FS were completed
in June 1988 and September 1988, respectively.
Based on the RI/FS, the USEPA issued the ROD for the Site in September 1988, which divided the site into two
operable units: OU I for the groundwater in the west/southwest portion of the site and OU2 for the soils in the
Trench Area. ·
In accordance with the OU! ROD, a Supplemental RI/FS was completed for OU2 in May 1990. The USEPA
issued a ROD for OU2 in September 1990. Based on the OU2 ROD, no further action was selected for the
Trench Area soil because constituents remaining in the soil were expected to mobilize to groundwater, which
will undergo remediation in accordance with the OUI ROD. The OU2 ROD divided the Site into a third
operable unit.
The third RI/FS for the Site was completed for OU3 in June 1993 in accordance with the OU2 ROD to identify
the source of surface water impacts in the Northeast Tributary. As a result of the RI/FS, two additional RODs
were issued for the Site for OU3 and OU4 on October 7, 1993 and October 6, 1994, respectively. OU3 consists
of groundwater impacts beneath the Production Area, including Area 2, the parking lot, and the wastewater
lagoons, and surface water and sediment in the Northeast Tributary and OU4 consists of impacted soil in the
Production Area. A Unilateral Administrative Order and Statement of Work for Remedial Design/Remedial
Action for OU3 and OU4 was issued by USEPA on September 29, 1995.
8/)1,.01
20212188
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC.
engineers & scientists 2-2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFT
3. OU1 Remedy Evaluation
The remedy for OU I addresses groundwater impacts in the west-southwest portion of the site due to the historic
use of wastewater effluent trenches.
3.1 Description of the OU1 Remedy
The 1988 ROD for OU I required the installation of a groundwater interception and extraction system to manage
groundwater impacts in the Trench Area. Groundwater is intercepted, extracted, and treated to remove the COCs
from the plume and prevent the impacted groundwater from migrating from the Site. Extracted groundwater is
pretreated prior to discharge to the City of Salisbury POTW, and the pretreatment process includes air stripping,
filtration through activated carbon filters, metals removal, and treatment in the wastewater lagoon system.
In accordance with the ROD for OU I, a two-phase pump-and-treat system has been implemented to contain and
remediate impacted groundwater downgradient of the Trench Area. The first phase was installed in 1993 and
pumps groundwater from four bedrock wells (EX-01 through EX-04) at the Plume Periphery (Figure 2).
The Plume Periphery is located roughly adjacent to the Unnamed Tributary, which runs along the southwestern
portion of the property. From mid-1993 to early 2000, the PPES was operated at a combined rate ranging from
35 to 85 gallons per minute (gpm). Extracted groundwater was conveyed to the wastewater treatment lagoons
for treatment by equilization and biological processes prior to discharge to the POTW.
The second phase was installed in 1995 and extracts groundwater from six wells (EX-05 through EX-I 0) in the
vicinity of the former Trench Area (Figure 2). From 1995 to present, the TAES has been operating at a
combined rate of approximately 12 gpm. Groundwater extracted from the six Trench Area extraction wells is
treated in the on-site groundwater pretreatment facility. The OU I pretreatment system was upgraded· in
February 2000 to improve operations and treat the combined groundwater streams extracted from OU! and
OU3. The pretreatment system uses an equilization tank, an air stripper, and a catalytic oxidizer and scrubbing
system to remediate the impacted groundwater and mitigate potential impacts to the air. The effluent
groundwater from the pretreatment facility undergoes further treatment in the on-site wastewater lagoon system
to comply with POTW effluent standards.
The metals removal component of the pretreatment system specified in the OU I ROD has not been implemented
because it has not been necessary to meet the design effluents. Concentrations of metals in the influent stream
of the pretreatment system are less than the effluent requirements.
The US EPA ( 1988) declared that the remedy for OU I is protective of human health and the environment
because the potential threat due to groundwater impacts is permanently and significantly reduced. The extraction
and interception system:
• restores impacted groundwater on site for potential beneficial use;
• mitigates the potential human health risks posed by potential consumption of groundwater at the Site;
• prevents the migration of impacted groundwater; and
• prevents the off-site migration of affected surface water and sediments that may pertain to groundwater.
The ROD specifies that the groundwater treatment system shall continue to operate until the concentrations of
the COCs in groundwater in the Trench Area meet the groundwater performance standards specified in the ROD
and listed in Table I throughout the entire plume.
8/JI ,.0 I
20212188
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE, INC.
engineers & scientists 3-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFT
3.2 Remedial Objectives
The general objective of the OU I remedial action is to effectively contain and remediate impacted groundwater
in the former Trench Area and a groundwater monitoring program is in place to monitor the performance of the
selected remedy. OU 1 remedial objectives specified in the ROD include:
• operating bedrock groundwater extraction (PPES) and monitoring wells near the plume periphery
migrating from the Trench Area towards the Unnamed Tributary;
,· • treating groundwater extracted from the PPES in the existing wastewater lagoon pretreatment system;
• operating transition zone/bedrock groundwater extraction (TAES) and monitoring wells immediately
downgradient of the Trench Area;
• pumping groundwater from the TAES to the pretreatment system prior to being commingled with the
groundwater from the PPES and plant effluent.in Lagoon 3; and
• treating the groundwater in the-Groundwater Pretreatment System through equilization, hydrolysis, and
air stripping.
3.3 ARARs Review
(
A purpose of the Five-Year Review is to review federal and state regulations promulgated or modified after the
ROD signature to determine if they are applicable or relevant and appropriate. The ROD for OU 1 considered
the following federal regulations to be ARARs as ROD Performance.Standards:
• Clean Water Act (CWA);
• Safe Drinking Water Act (SOWA);
• Clean Air Act (CAA); and
• Endangered Species Act.
ARARs for the 25 COCs for OU I were based upon SOWA Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs), detection
limits, Reference Doses (RfDs), and Acceptable Chronic Intake (ACI) concentrations. If a MCL was not
available, the RID or AC! concentration was specified as the performance standard. Newly promulgated or
modified federal requirements that could be considered for OU I may include the modifications to the SOW A.
MC Ls that could be considered as ARARs for the OU 1 remedy are indicated in Table 1.
As documented in the 1998 ROD, the state of North Carolina did not incorporate its groundwater standards into
the ROD. While it is recognized that the North Carolina Groundwater Standards are potential ARARs, the
scope of the remedial action would not have been altered if the more stringent groundwater standards were
embodied in the ROD Performance Standards. Newly promulgated state requirements considered in the ARARs
review include:
• North Carolina Groundwater Standards and Classifications (NCA T15A:02L.0200, November 23, 1993);
• North Carolina Water Quality Standards (NCAC Tl SA: 2B, March 3, 1993);
• North Carolina Air Quality Standards (NCAC Tl SA: 2D, April 1, 1995); and
• North Carolina Air Quality Permit Requirements (NCAC Tl SA: 2Q, August 1, 1995).
8/] 1,01
20212188
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC.
engineers & scientists 3-2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFT
The current North Carolina Groundwater Standards are identified in Table I.
3.4 Compliance with Remediation Requirements
Groundwater samples collected annually from the Plume Periphery and Trench Area extraction and monitoring
wells are analyzed for volatile organic compounds (YOCs), semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), and
metals to monitor the effectiveness of the selected remedy. Groundwater COCs for OU! include the following
14 VOCs, two SVOCs, and nine metals:
•~-',,"l¾f!'IJY0€s"'i&~~ .:.:t~J.\,,r~1~.~,.~.J,, .. ""'~"~•.,~1w: . ·" .,, '·"'l'i'f'""'·'> S V 0€ ilrr:"'liii£"·'"il'1 \;~.i;:1,e-:~ltMt .,,,: .'I,,._.,.:._§ ci..:.4':t'lf't~~ ,i it•'it~MetlilsR;,1r,~,~ },.ii--.r~=-.,,._-... • .__,._ ,._.,..,,:,;;
Acetone 4-Nitrophenol Arsenic
Benzene Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether Barium
Bromodichloromethane Beryllium
Chloroform Cadmium
I, 1-Dichloroethene Chromium
1,2-Dichloroethane Manganese
1,2-Dichloropropane Nickel
Ethyl benzene Selenium
Methylene Chloride Zinc
Toluene
I, 1,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Vinyl Chloride
Xylene
Groundwater monitoring in OU! occurs on an annual basis in compliance with the OU! ROD. Groundwater
samples are collected from the following monitoring and extraction wells as a part of the monitoring program
for OUI:
• Plume Periphery Extraction Wells: EX-01, EX-02, EX-03, and EX-04;
• Plume Periphery Monitoring Wells: NS-29, NS-30, NS-31, and NS-32;
• Trench Area Extraction Wells: EX-OS, EX-06, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, and EX-10; and
• Trench Area Monitoring Wells: NS-09, NS-I 0, NS-I I, and NS-1 S (Figure 2).
Plume Periphery extraction and monitoring wells have been sampled quarterly for 24 quarters from first quarter
1993 through fourth quarter 1998, with the exception of extraction well EX-02, which was not sampled during
first quarter 1993. Trench Area extraction wells have been sampled quarterly for 11 quarters from second
quarter 1996 through fourth quarter 1998, and Trench Area monitoring wells have been sampled quarterly for 23
quarters from second quarter 1993 through fourth quarter 1998. The frequency for the Plume Periphery and
Trench Area extraction and monitoring wells was reduced from quarterly to annually in December 1999 with the
approval of the USEPA. Plume Periphery and Trench Area extraction and monitoring wells have been sampled
annually for two years from fourth quarter 1999 through the present. Analytical results for the 26 monitoring
events are shown in Tables 2 and 3 for VOCs, SYOCs, and metals for Plume Periphery and Trench Area
extraction and monitoring wells, respectively.
3.5 Remedy Effectiveness
B/JliOI
20212188
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC.
engineers & scientists 3-3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFT
A thorough analysis of the OU I remedial activities commenced in 1998. At that time, A Groundwater Data
Evaluation for Plume Periphery and Trench Area Extraction Wells (BBL, 1998) was prepared to evaluate the
effectiveness of the OU I remedy (Attachment I). The data evaluation indicated that the TAES has been
successful and that the PPES has been less successful at preventing the migration of the plume and remediating
impacted groundwater. As part of the OU I Remedy Evaluation, the Plume Periphery System was shut down in
January 2000 and hydraulic and geochemical analyses were performed to identify opportunities to implement a
more effective remedy. A Remedy Evaluation Report for Operable Unit One (BBL, 2000) was submitted in
November 2000 which included a proposal for additional investigation to identify potential bedrock conduits
which may be responsible for migration of impacted groundwater from the Trench Area to the Plume Periphery
Area. Based on the remedy evaluation, resumption of groundwater pumping from the existing PPES in any
capacity did not appear to further the remedial objectives in the vicinity of.the Unnamed Tributary. Therefore,
the focus of the monitoring program changed from monitoring the effectiveness of the extraction system to
monitoring and evaluating water quality. ·
A work plan for a Supplemental Remedy Evaluation for OU I is currently being prepared. Additional
investigation activities will likely include excavating test pits, installing one or two additional bedrock wells,
performing hydraulic tests on the newly installed wells, and collecting groundwater samples from additional
wells
Since the initial data evaluation, OU I extraction and monitoring wells have been sampled during five
groundwater monitoring events. Tables 4 and 5 summarize the analytical results for the Plume Periphery and
Trench Area monitoring events, respectively, and the additional groundwater data collected during these
sampling events generally supports the findings of the 1998 data evaluation. Analytical results from the fourth
quarter 2000 monitoring event demonstrate that the shut down of the plume periphery extraction wells has not
adversely impacted local groundwater quality. ·
B/3!,QI
20212188
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
engineers & scientists 3.4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFf
4. OU2 Remedy Evaluation
OU2 consists of constituents impacting soil in the vicinity of the former wastewater trenches. The remedy for
the Trench Area soil selected in the 1990 ROD was no further action and natural soil flushing by percolating
rainfall which will reduce impacts in the Trench Area subsurface soil over time through leaching by infiltrating
rainwater. The leachate is captured by extraction wells placed in the Trench Area and treated as part of the OU I
remedial action.
8/Jl,(ll
20212188
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
engineers & scientists 4-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFT
5. OU3 Remedy Evaluation
OU3 consists of constituents in the groundwater beneath the Production Area and surface water and sediments
in the Northeast Tributary.
5.1 Description of the OU3 Remedy
As indicated in the 1993 ROD for OU3, the selected remedy consists of extraction and on-site treatment of
impacted groundwater prior to the discharge of the treated groundwater. The groundwater pretreatment system
includes an air stripper to remove the voes· from extracted groundwater and vapor-phase carbon adsorption
filters to control emissions from the air stripper to the atmosphere. The treated groundwater is commingled with
effluent from the plant prior to discharge to the POTW.
The remedial action for OU3 consists of a groundwater collection and treatment system to provide hydraulic
control for the aqueous phase impacts emanating from a zone of DNAPL. The groundwater collection system
includes a groundwater interception trench and two extraction wells. In 1999, a groundwater interception trench
was installed in a low-lying area in the northeastern part of the Site and a pumping well was installed at the
eastern end of the trench to provide removal of groundwater. Two extraction wells (NS-49 and NS-51) also
collect groundwater in the vicinity of the wastewater treatment lagoons (Figure 2). Groundwater extracted from
the collection trench and extraction wells is treated in the combined OU 1 and OU3 pretreatment system and
wastewater treatment lagoons prior to discharge to the POTW. Since February 2000, the collection trench has
been pumping approximately 6 gpm and the two extraction wells have been pumping at a combined rate of
approximately 20 gpm.
The USEPA declared that the selected remedy is protective of human health and the environment because the
OU3 remedy:
• indirectly remediates the surface water and sediment by decreasing the potential for impacted
groundwater to reach the tributary via groundwater discharge;
• eliminates potential health threats due to exposure via ingestion of groundwater and surface water; and
• protects the environment by removing COCs from groundwater, controlling the extent of groundwater
impacts, and reducing the impacts in the adjacent tributary and downstream surface waters.
The OU3 ROD requires long-term monitoring of the groundwater and the surface water/sediment m the
Northeast Tributary to evaluate the effectiveness of the remedial activities.
5.2 Remedial Objectives
The general objective of the OU3 remedial action is to effectively contain and remediate impacted groundwater
in the Production Area. A groundwater monitoring program is in place to identify and vertically define the
concentrations of the COCs to monitor the performance of the selected remedy. The OU3 remedial objectives
specified in the ROD include:
• operating groundwater extraction and monitoring wells in the impacted area;
• pumping groundwater from OU3 to the pretreatment system;
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE. INC.
8/) l,{)1
20212188
engineers & scientists 5-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFI
• treating the groundwater in the combined OU 1 and OU3 pretreatment facility through equalization,
hydrolysis, and air stripping; and
• monitoring groundwater, surface water, and sediments in the Northeast Tributary.
5.3 ARARs Review
The ROD for OU3 considered the following federal and state regulations to be ARARS in the development of
the OU3 ROD Performance Standards
• Federal Regulations:
Clean Water Act;
Safe Drinking Water Act; and
Clean Air Act.
• State Regulations:
North Carolina Drinking Water and Groundwater Standards;
-North Carolina Water Pollution Control Regulations;
North Carolina Air Pollution Control Requirements; and
North Carolina Surface Water Quality Standards.
ARARs for OU3 were based upon SOWA MCLs, North Carolina Groundwater Quality Standards, and the Limit
of Detectability. lf the most stringent groundwater standards wer_e-less than the method detection limits, the
method detection limit of each COC were included in the OU3 ROD Performance Standards. The OU3
Performance Standards, North Carolina Groundwater Standards, MCLs, and Method Detection Limits are
presented in Table I.
5.4 Compliance with Remediation Requirements
Groundwater, surface water, and sediment monitoring in OU3 occur in compliance with the OU3 ROD to
monitor the performance of remedial activities. Groundwater samples collected from the OU3 extraction and
monitoring wells are analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs, and metals. Groundwater COCs for OU3 include the
following I I VOCs, two SVOCs, and five metals:
8/]I fl I
202121118
ii;!1!iiil~V.Q.C~fl,;i'i'Jii~?ii!i
Acetone
Chloroform
1, 1-Dichloroethene
1,2-Dichloroethane
1,2-Dichloropropane
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
Methylene chloride
Tetrachloroethene
I, 1,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Vinyl chloride
il~~~i~V..Q.G~iiP'{~.£¥Jt,jtf l!t_\lii·,~~~~M•!l!l•~f.~-lli1;,1,l!
B is(2-ch loroethy !)ether Antimony
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate Chromium
Manganese
Thallium
Zinc
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
engineers & scientists 5-2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFT
Sediment and surface water samples are collected 111 OUJ on an annual basis and are analyzed for 1,2-
dichloroethane (1,2-DCA).
Extraction and monitoring wells sampled as part of the groundwater monitoring program for OUJ include wells
located inside and outside the groundwater extraction system zone of hydraulic control:
• Wells Inside Zone of Hydraulic Control
Monitoring Wells: NS-13, NS-14, NS-39, NS-40, NS-41, NS-42, NS-45, NS-46, NS-47, NS-48, NS-
50, NS-52, NS-53, and NS-54
-Extraction Wells: NS-49 and NS-51
Collection Trench: CT-I
• Wells Outside Zone of Hydraulic Control
-Monitoring Wells: NS-24, NS-35, NS-36, NS-37, NS-38, NS-43, and NS-44
Monitoring wells in OUJ were sampled twice in 1998. Beginning in 1999, the monitoring frequency for OUJ
wells was based on the OUJ Performance Verification Plan (PVP), which was submitted as an appendix to the
OUJ Final Design Report (BBL, 1998). Monitoring wells located inside the zone of hydraulic control are
sampled annually and have been sampled twice since third quarter 1999. Monitoring wells located outside the
zone of hydraulic control, the extraction wells, and the collection trench are sampled semi-annually, and these
wells have been sampled four times since third quarter 1999. As specified in the PVP, the semi~annual sampling
was scheduled for two years, after which all monitored wells in OU3-are to be sampled annually. The analytical
results of all groundwater monitoring events are provided in Table 6.
5.5 Remedy Effectiveness
The effectiveness of the OUJ remedy cannot be comprehensively evaluated at this time due to the limited data
currently available. While seven monitoring events have occurred since the second quarter 1998, only two
monitoring events have occurred since the installation of the combined pretreatment system for OU I and OUJ
in February 2000. These initial data indicate that the extraction system is effective in containing groundwater in
the area of impacts and wells outside the zone of hydraulic control have not exhibited an increase in
concentration. A comprehensive data analysis for the OUJ remedy will be conducted prior to the next five-year
review.
8/) 1,.01
202\21118
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE. INC.
engineers & scientists 5-3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFT
6. OU4 Remedy Evaluation
OU4 consists of constituents impacting soil in the vicinity ofOU3 and is being addressed through an evaluation
of natural degradation.
6.1 Description of the OU4 Remedy
As specified in the ROD, OU4 is being addressed through a contingency remedy which relies on natural
degradation processes to reduce the level of COCs in the soil. A contingent remedial alternative (soil vapor
extraction system with emissions control technology) has been selected in the ROD for OU4.
The ROD for OU4 calls for the completion of a Natural Degradation Treatability Study (NOTS) to address the
presence of 1,2-DCA in unsaturated soil in the Production Area. If natural degradation cannot be demonstrated
to be effective, the contingent remedy is Soil Vapor Extraction. In 1996 and I 997, the first phase of the NOTS
was completed. The NOTS Phase I included:
• laboratory testing;
• installation of field plots, from which soil samples were collected; and
• installation of soil gas monitoring wells, from which soil gas samples were collected.
The selected remedial alternative includes the following components:
• · Devise and implement a biodegradative study to:
substantiate that natural degradation is occurring;
identify where in the subsurface the degradation is occurring; and
assess the rate of degradation.
• Implement institutional controls, including deed restrictions and maintenance of fencing around the plant
operations area and the paved areas around Area 2.
• Develop and implement a long-term monitoring plan to ensure that natural degradation continues to be
effective until the specified performance standard is achieved and maintained.
In the event that natural degradation fails to remediate the soil, the contingent remedial alternative will include
the following components:
• Volatile organic impacts will be removed from the soils by means of a vapor extraction system.
• Impacted air will initially be treated using fume incineration. After the concentrations of the COCs
decrease in the extracted air, the impacted vapor will be treated via vapor-phase activated carbon
adsorption filters prior to releasing the stream into the atmosphere.
• Air extracted from the lagoon area will be treated using vapor-phase activated carbon adsorption filters to
remove the VOCs prior to release into the atmosphere.
6/3(,()1
202!2188
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC.
engineers & scientists 6-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFT
• The destruction of COCs captured by the vapor-phase carbon filters through the thennal regeneration of
the used activated carbon at an off-site, commercial regeneration facility.
6.2 Remedial Objectives
The general objective of the OU4 remedial action is to prevent the release of COCs from the soil that could
result in impact levels in excess of groundwater cleanup levels specified in the OU3 ROD. The OU4 remedial
objectives specified in the ROD include:
• implementing a biodegradative study to substantiate the occurrence of natural degradation and determine
where and at what rate degradation is occurring; and
• developing a long-term monitoring program to ensure natural degradation continues to be effective until
the ROD Performance Standards are achieved and maintained.
6.3 ARARs Review
Currently, there are no federal or state ARARs that govern the remediation of impacted soils present in OU4.
The soil performance standard for 1,2-DCA was based on groundwater protection and potential leaching into
groundwater. Based on the OU4 ROD, the concentration of 1,2-DCA that could be in the soil without adversely
impacting groundwater quality was estimated to be 169 ug/kg.
6.4 Remedy Effectiveness
In March 1998, the Phase I NOTS Report (Envirogen, I 998) was sul:imitted to the USEPA. The Phase I Report
conclusions indicate that degradation was occurring in the soil and identified the probable process of
degradation. In order to satisfy the ROD, an evaluation of degradation rate and estimated time required to clean
up the soil is required. The Phase II NOTS will address the final components of the Natural Degradation Study
outlined in the ROD, and the Phase II NOTS activities are described in the Phase II Natural Degradation
Treatability Study Work Plan for Operable Unit Four (BBL, 2000a). Mitigating circumstances have been
identified that reduce the risk that may be posed by the soils in OU4. These circumstances include:
• Groundwater extraction is in place at the site, so any additional releases from soil to groundwater will not
pose a risk outside the site; and
• The risk from soils at the site is relatively low compared to other Superfund sites and impacts are not
widespread.
81)1,0\
20212188
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE. INC.
engineers & scientists 6-2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFT
7. Summary of Community Involvement
NSCC holds Community Advisory Panel (CAP) group meetings at the Cedar Springs Plant bimonthly.
Attendees at these meeting have included NSCC personnel, city of Salisbury Firemen, Rowan County
Emergency Response members, residents of adjoining or nearby communities, City of Salisbury Utilities
personnel, Rescue Squad members, and others. Plant activities, including those undertaken to advance the
remedial activities at the Site, are discussed during the meetings and questions or concerns that attendees raise at
the meetings are addressed by the CAP Coordinator at the plant.
8/31,{II
20212188
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
engineers & scientists 7-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFT
8. Recommendations
8.1 OU1
Recommendations for OU! include the evaluation of potential fractures and elimination of selected monitoring
parameters.
8.1.1 Evaluation of Potential Fractures
Groundwater data collected from OU! during the monitoring program indicates that the PPES is not an effective
remedy for controlling groundwater impacts and preventing impacted groundwater from migrating toward the
area of the Northeast Tributary. The OU I Remedy Evaluation performed in 2000 indicates that there may be
fracture(s) not intercepted by the current PPES that could provide a conduit for groundwater flow from the
Trench Area to the Plume Periphery Area.
As part of the effort to improve the groundwater remedy in the Plume Periphery Area, a second phase of the
Remedy Evaluation has been proposed. The objective of the second phase· will be to locate the potential
fracture(s) serving to transport impacted groundwater from the Trench Area to the Plume Periphery Area. The
second phase of the Remedy Evaluation will include the following activities:
• Fracture trace analysis to identify locations of potential fractures;
• Trench excavation in the area between the Trench and the Plu'me Periphery Areas to augment the fracture
trace analysis with field data on location and orientation of relic fractures in the overburden;
• Installation and packer testing of additional bedrock wells in identified fracture or fracture sets;
• Installation of additional monitoring wells in the vicinity of the Trench Area and other areas where
additional data regarding groundwater quality and flow direction is necessary; and
• Sampling of the newly installed wells.
A Supplemental Remedy Evaluation Report will be prepared at the conclusion of the second phase of the
Remedy Evaluation. This report will include the results of the Remedy Evaluation activities as well as a
recommendation for an improved groundwater remedy.
If results of the Remedy Evaluation's second phase indicate significant additional data gaps, additional
investigation will be recommended and implemented.
8.1.2 Elimination of Selected Monitoring Parameters
Based on a review of historic groundwater analytical results, selected constituents do not appear to be COCs for
selected wells based on detected concentrations and/or detection limits consistently less than the ROD
Performance Standards, North Carolina Groundwater Standards, and MCLs. Therefore, continued monitoring
of these parameters is not warranted for the indicated well groups, and the following parameters will be
eliminated from groundwater analysis in future monitoring events:
81)1,01
20212188
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE. INC.
engineers & scientists 8-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells:
VOC: xylene;
SVOC: 4-nitrophenol; and
Metals: arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, and zinc.
• Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells:
SVOC: 4-nitrophenol (with the exception of extraction wells EX-08 and EX-09); and
Metals: arsenic, barium, and zinc.
8.1.3 Statement of Protectiveness
DRAFT
Based on the findings of this review, the OU I remedial action is protective of human health and the
environment. As demonstrated in the data and remedy evaluations the TAES is generally more successful than
the PPES at remediating impacted groundwater. Additional investigations are being performed to develop a
more efficient remedy for the Plume Periphery Area.
8.2 OU3
The installation of the remedy outlined in the OU3 ROD was completed in February 2000. A comprehensive
data evaluation cannot be completed at this time due to the limited data available. While a statistical data
analysis cannot be performed to validate the level of protectiveness of the remedy, the OU3 remedial action
appears to attain the desired level of protectiveness for human health.and the environment by preventing further
migration of the plume based on the initial data collected following the startup of the OU3 extraction system ..
Groundwater monitoring will continue to occur on an annual basis in OU3 wells, in accordance with the OU3
PVP, and this additional data will be used to perform a comprehensive data analysis for the next five-year
review. Sediment and surface water sampling will continue on an annual basis from four locations in the
Northeast Tributary through third quarter 2003.
8.3 OU4
The selected remedy for OU4 is ongoing and the Phase II of the NOTS is scheduled to begin in October 2001.
The following activities will be performed during the NOTS Phase II:
• Yearly soil sampling over a grid located in the Lagoon Area and at five locations in Area 2;
• Installation of an upgradient soil gas monitoring well; and
• Yearly soil gas sampling from soil gas monitoring wells located in the Lagoon Area, Area 2 and an
upgradient location.
The data collected during the NOTS Phase II will be analyzed and used to estimate a degradation rate by
evaluating the temporal trend of 1,2-DCA concentration at locations where multiple samples are collected.
Information on the concentration and extent of 1,2-DCA impacts will also be collected as random samples are
collected from the grid in the Lagoon Area.
8/31,()1
20212188
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE, INC.
engineers & scientists 8-2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFT
The OU4 remedy appears to be protective of human health and the environment because the OU3 remedial
action appears to be effective and there is limited opportunity for exposure to impacted soils in the Plant Area.
The remedy for OU3 mitigates the soil impacts in OU4. Additional investigation in OU4 will estimate the rate
of degradation in the vadoze zone and estimate the time required to attain the prescribed performance standard
for 1,2-DCA in soil.
8.4 Next Review
The next five-year review for the Cedar Springs Plant should be completed by the end of September 2006.
8.5 Implementation Requirements
The OU I groundwater monitoring program will be revised to reflect the changes proposed to the sampling
parameters (Section 8.1.2). The OU I remedy will be continued for the TAES and the changes proposed to the
PPES remedial action will be implemented (Section 3 .5). The OU3 and OU4 remedies will be continued.
8/31 i()I
20212188
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC.
engineers & scientists 8-3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFT
9. References
BBL. 1998. Final Design Report Operable Unit Three, National Starch & Chemical Company, Cedar Springs
Road Plant Site, Salisbury, North Carolina.
BBL. 2000. Remedy Evaluation Report for Operable Unit One, National Starch & Chemical Company, Cedar
Springs Road Plant Site, Salisbury, North Carolina.
BBL. 2000a. Phase II Natural Degradation Treatability Study for Operable Unit 4, National Starch & Chemical
Company, Cedar Springs Road Plant Site, Salisbury, North Carolina.
Envirogen. 1998. Phase I Natural Degradation Treatability Study for Operable Unit 4, Cedar Springs Road
Plan( Salisbury, North Carolina.
USEPA. 1988. Record of Decision for Operable Unit # I at the National Starch & Chemical Company.
September 1988.
_USEPA. 1990. Record of Decision for Operable Unit # 2 at the National Starch & Chemical Company.
September 1990.
USEPA. 1991. Structure and Components of Five-Year Reviews. OSWER Directive 9355.7-02. May 1991
USEPA. 1993. Record of Decision for Operable Unit# 3 at the National Starch & Chemical Company. October
1993.
USEPA. 1994. Supplemental Five-Year Review Guidance. OSWER Directive 9355.7-02A. July 1994.
USEPA. 1994a. Record of Decision for Operable Unit # 4 at the National Starch & Chemical Company.
September 1994.
USEPA. 1995. Second Supplemental Five-Year Review Guidance. OSWER Directive 9355.7-03A. December
1995.
8/31,.01
20212188
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE. INC.
engineers & scientists 9-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Constituent
voes
Acetone
Benzene
Bromodichloromethane
Chloroform
1, 1-Dichloroethene
1,2-Dichloroethane
1,2-Dichloropropane
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
Ethyl benzene
Methylene chloride
Toluene
Tetrachloroethene
1, 1,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Vinyl chloride
Xylene
SVOCs
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
4-Nitrophenol
Metals
Arsenic
Antimony
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Manganese
Nickel
Selenium
Thallium
Zinc
Units in ug/1
1 -OU1 ROD, page 10
2 -OU3 ROD, page 81
OU1
Table 1
OU1 and OU3 Performance Standards
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
OU3 North Carolina
Performance Performance Groundwater
Standard' Standard' Standards'
3,500 700 700
5 -1
5 --0.6
5 1 0.19
7 7 7
5 1 0.38
6 1 0.56
-70 70
-70 70
3,500 -29
5 5 5
2,000 -1,000
-1 0.7
5 5 -
5 2.8 2.8
2 1 0.015
350 -530
5 5 -
-5 -
350 . -
10 . 50
-6 -
1,000 -2,000
17.5 . .
10 -5
50 50 50
7,700 50 50
350 -21
10 . 50 . 2 -
7,350 2,100 2,100
3 -State Groundwater Quality Standards (NCAC 15-2L.0202)
4 -Maximum Concentration Limits as specified in Safe Drinking Water Act
5 -Method Detection Limits provided by Severn Trent Laboratories, Inc. (Baltimore, MD)
Method MCL4
Detection Limits5
-1.0
5 0.6
-0.6
-0.6
7 1,0
5 0.8
5 0.7
70 0.8
100 1.0
70 0.7
5 1.0
1,000 0.7
5 1.0
5 0.7
5 1.0
2 0.9
10,000 1.0
-2.0
-2.0
-4.0
50 1.7
6 1.4
2,000 4.5
4 0.1
5 0.5
100 0.9
50 1.2
-2.4
50 2.3
2 3.8
5,000 8.6
-- -- - - --- - -
Table 2A
Historical Analytical Results -voes
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
ACETONE
Quarter EX..01 EX-02 EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
1093 75 NS 1300 D 1200 D 12000 D
2093 10 u 29000 D 2200 D 10 u 10 u
3093 6 J 34000 DB 6100 DB 29 B 10
4093 10 u 2';1000 1200 27 10 u
1094 10 u 26000 2200 21 10 u
2094 10 u 31000 B 3700 B 30 B 10 u
3094 10 u 41000 1400 20 10 u
4094 10 u I 2aooo!-?t~1Ei 3700 15 10 u
1095 10 u 27000 1000 10 u 39
2095 33 D 24000 D 9200 D 1100 D 1100 D
3095 70 29000 D 2500 D 2000 D 42000 D
4095 39 50000 1900 820 80000
1096 10 u 10000 5800 9 J 12000
2096 14 ;.12000] ~El'.-if1;c2ioofJ·0iE2 tw,130o~~je~ ~',J6400i¼~ .. 7.E~
3096 12 33000 D 8800
4096 10 u 25000 D 7200
1097 8 BJ 30000 DB 14000
2097 4.5 JS 7800 DB 12000
3097 10 J 12000 D 15000
4097 10 u 7900 D 8000
1098 4 JB 3200 DB 10400
2098 3 J 3800 6900
3Q98 10 u 14000 D 5900
4098 10 u 31000 DB 4600
4099 10 u 33000 1500
4000 2 u 200 u 100
Units in ug/J
ROD Performance Standard: 3,500 ug/L
U -Not Detected
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
D 675 D 100000 D
D 460 D 50000 D
DB 810 DB 39000 DB
DB 2200 DB 37000 DB
D 2400 100000 DB
D 460 D 59000 D
DB 850 DB 93000 DB
D 7 J 100000 DE
D 9 99000 D
DB 10 u 220000 D
4 49 4 110000 4
u 2 u 2000 u
B -Constituent also detected in associated method blank (concentration in method blank unknown)
E -Exceeded calibration range
D -Concentration from diluted run sample .
4 -Compound concentration exceeds calibration range of the instrument
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
Shading indicates "E" qualified concentration for which a diluted run concentration is unavailable.
NS -Not Sampled
NS-30
2900
10
11
10
10
10
13
10
10
10
32
10
10
13
6
10
6
4
6
10
8
91
1600
3100
3000
100
- - - ---11!!!!!!1
Page 1 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
4700 D 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
18 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
11 10 u
u 130 B 10 u
u 9200 10 u
u 15000 D 10 u
4800 D 10 u
u 16000 10 u
u 3500 10 u
~\1i1000j,~Ej 10 u
J 33000 D 10 u
u 41000 D 10 u
BJ 43000 DB 10 BJ
JS 30000 DB 3 JS
BJ 19000 B 4 BJ
u 31000 D 10 u
JS 45000 DB 13 8
47000 DB 4 J
D 52000 D 10 u
D 19000 D 140 B
4 770 4 10 u
u 2900 u 2 u
-- - - - - -- - - - -
Quarter EX-01 EX-02
1093 5 u NS
2093 5 u 5 u
3093 10 u 1 J
4093 10 u 3300 u
1094 10 u 2500 u
2094 5 u 1700 u
3094 5 u 1200 u
4094 5 u 660 u
1095 5 u 1000 u
2095 5 u 42 u
3095 5 u 250 u
4095 5 u 2500 u
1096 5 u 500 u
2096 5 u 50 u
3096 10 u 1000 u
4096 10 u 250 u
1097 10 u 250 u
2097 10 u 250 u
3097 10 u 250 u
4097 10 u 250 u
1098 10 u 50 u
2098 10 u 250 u
3098 10 u 100 u
4098 10 u 100 u
4099 1 u \ 1 u
4000 1 u 100 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
u • Not Detected
Table 28
Historical Analytical Results -voes
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
BENZENE
EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
5 u 2 J 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
10 u 1 J 10 u
170 u 10 u 10 u
250 u 10 u 10 u
120 u 5 u 5 u
50 u 5 u 5 u
93 u 5 u 5 u
33 u 5 u 5 u
45 u 5 u 12 u
17 u 17 u 250 u
50 u 62 u 3100 u
500 u 5 u 500 u
25 u 25 u 50 u
250 u 2 J 97 J
250 u 0.6 J 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 2 J 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
100 u 10 u 500 u
100 u 10 u 500 u
200 u 10 u 2500 u
200 u 10 u 250 u
1 u 1 u 1 u
50 u 1 1000 u
J • Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
NS-30
120
5
10
10
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
50
10
1
50
- - - ---l!!!!!!!!I
Page 2 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 10 u 10 u u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u u 5 u 5 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 10 u 5 u u 32 u 5 u u 500 u 5 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 100 u 5 u
u 1000 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u
u 250 u 10 u
u 2500 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u u 100 u 10 u u 1 u 1 u
u 1 u 1 u
------ -- - - - -
Quarter EX-01 EX-02
1093 5 u NS
2093 5 u 5 u
3093 10 u 10 u
4093 10 u 3300 u
1094 10 u 2500 u
2094 5 u 1700 u
3094 5 u 1200 u
4094 5 u 660 u
1095 5 u 1000 u
2095 5 u 42 u
3095 5 u 250 u
4095 5 u 2500 u
1096 5 u 500 u
2096 5 u 50 u
3096 10 u 1000 u
4096 10 u 250 u
1097 10 u 250 u
2097 10 u 250 u
3097 10 u 250 u
4097 10 u 250 u
1098 10 u 50 u
2098 10 u 250 u
3098 10 u 100 u
4098 10 u 100 u
4099 1 u 1 u
4000 1 u 100 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
U -Not Detected
Table 2C
Historical Analytical Results -voes
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
BROMODICHLOROMETHANE
EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
10 u 10 u 10 u
170 u 10 u 10 u
250 u 10 u 10 u
120 u 5 u 5 u
50 u 5 u 5 u
93 u 5 u 5 u
33 u 5 u 5 u
45 u 5 u 12 u
17 u 17 u 250 u
50 u 62 u 3100 u
500 u 5 u 500 u
25 u 25 u so u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
100 u 10 u 500 u
100 u 10 u 500 u
200 u 10 u 2500 u
200 u 10 u 250 u
1 u 1 u 1 u
50 u 1 u 1000 u
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
NS-30
120
5
10
10
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
50
10
1
50
- - - ---l!!!!!!!!I
Page 3 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 10 u 10 u u 10 u 10 u u 10 u 10 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 10 u 5 u
u 32 u 5 u
u 500 u 5 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 100 u 5 u
u 1000 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u u 250 u 10 u
u 2500 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u u 100 u 10 u
u 1 u 1 u
u 1 u 1 u
----- - --- ---
Quarter EX-01 EX-02
1093 5 u NS
2093 5 u 5 u
3093 10 u 10 u
4093 10 u 3300 u
1094 10 u 2500 u
2094 5 u 1700 u
3094 5 u 1200 u
4094 5 u 660 u
1095 5 u 1000 u
2095 5 u 42 u
3095 5 u 250 u
4095 5 u 2500 u
1096 5 u 500 u
2096 5 u 50 u
3096 10 u 1000 u
4096 10 u 250 u
1097 10 u 250 u
2097 10 u 250 u
3097 10 u 250 u
4097 10 u 250 u
1098 10 u 50 u
2098 10 u 250 u
3098 10 u 100 u
4098 10 u 100 u
4099 1 u 1 u
4000 1 u 100 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
U -Not Detected
Table 2D
Historical Analytical Results -VOCs
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
CHLOROFORM
EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
10 u 10 u 10 u
170 u 10 u 10 u
250 u 10 u 10 u
120 u 5 u 5 u
50 u 5 u 5 u
93 u 5 u 5 u
33 u 5 u 5 u
45 u 5 u 12 u
17 u 17 u 250 u
50 u 62 u 3100 u
500 u 5 u 500 u
25 u 25 u 50 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
100 u 10 u 500 u
100 u 10 u 500 u
200 u 10 u 2500 u
200 u 10 u 250 u
1 u 1 u 1 u
50 u 1 u 1000 u
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Pertorrnance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
NS-30
120
5
10
10
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
50
10
1
50
- - - ---Page 4 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
u 2 J 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 10 u 10 u u 10 u 10 u u 10 u 10 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 10 u 5 u
u 32 I u 5 u
u 500 u 5 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 100 u 5 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 250 u 10 u u 2500 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u
u 100 u 10 u
u 1 u 1 u u 1 u 1 u
-- - - - - -
Quarter EX-01 EX--02
1093 20 NS
2093 5 u 460 DJ
3093 10 u 510 DJ
4093 10 u 3300 u
1094 10 u 2500 u
2094 5 u 1700 u
3094 5 u 1200 u
4094 5 u 550 J
1095 5 u 1000 u
2095 5 u 750
3095 3 J 570
4095 5 2500 u
1096 5 u 1200
2096 4 J 590
3096 10 u 610 J
4096 5 J 140 J
1097 7 J 520
2097 3.5 J 290
3097 10 u 690
4097 10 u 920
1098 10 u 230
2098 10 u 410
3098 10 u 600
4098 10 u 1000
4099 1 u 880
4000 1 u 100 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
U -Not Detected
- ---
Table 2E
Historical Analytical Results -voes
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
1,2-0ICHLOROETHANE
EX--03 EX-04 NS-29
23 4 J 110
65 3 J 22
60 5 J 3 J
55 J 10 u 3 J
250 u 10 u 10 u
120 u 5 u 17
50 u 5 3 J
93 u 3 J 43
33 u 7 8
59 5 37
10 J 17 u 690
61 62 u 3100 u
150 J 4 J 860
42 25 u 300
250 u 10 u 500 u
60 J 3 J 1200
220 J 5 J 760
240 J 6 J 680
200 J 5 J 1900
230 J 10 u 1700
200 10 u 2300
190 10 u 4200
200 u 5 J 2400 J
200 u 10 u 3600
9.1 1 u 3500
50 u 1 u 1000 u
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
D -Concentration from diluted run sample
E -Exceeded calibration range
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
Shading Indicates "E" qualified concentration for which a diluted run concentration is unavailable.
NS -Not Sampled
-- -- ----Page 5 of 25
NS-30 NS-31 NS-32
79 J 100 5 u
8 71 5 u
56 49 10 u
10 u 20 10 u
10 u 9 J 10 u
4 J 5 5 u
5 u 4 J 5 u
5 u 4 J 5 u
5 u 250 u 5 u
5 u 41 5 u
5 u 120 5 u
5 u 500 u 5 u
5 u 250 u 5 u
5 u 100 u 5 u
10 u 1000 u 10 u
10 u 170 J 10 u
3 J 150 J 10 u
10 u 1000 u 10 u
10 u 1000 u 10 u
10 u 1000 u 10 u
10 u 260 10 u
5 J 2500 u 10 u
42 J 1000 u 10 u
58 100 u 10 u
84 62 1 u
50 u :lii\1,10-E~ 1 u
-- - - - - -- --- -
Quarter EX-01 EX-02
1093 5 u NS
2093 5 u 5 u
3093 10 u 10 u
4093 10 u 3300 u
1094 10 u 2500 u
2094 7 u 2300 u
3094 7 u 1800 u
4094 7 u 920 u
1095 7 u 1400 u
2095 7 u 59 u
3095 7 u 350 u
4095 7 u 3500 u
1096 5 u 500 u
2096 5 u 50 u
3096 10 u 1000 u
4096 10 u 250 u
1097 10 u 250 u
2097 10 u 2so u
3097 10 u ~50 u
4097 10 u 250 u
1098 10 u 50 u
2098 10 u 250 u
3098 10 u 100 u
4098 10 u 100 u
4099 1 u 1 u
4000 1 u 100 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 7 ug/L
U -Not Detected
Table 2F
Historical Analytical Results • voes
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
1,1-DICHLOROETHENE
EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
10 u 10 u 10 u
170 u 10 u 10 u
250 u 10 u 10 u
180 u 7 .U 7 u
70 u 7 u 7 u
130 u 7 u 7 u
47 u 7 u 7 u
63 u 7 u 18 u
23 u 23 u 350 u
70 u BB u 4400 u
500 u 5 u 500 u
25 u 25 u 50 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
100 u 10 u 500 u
100 u 10 u 500 u
200 u 10 u 2500 u
200 u 10 u 250 u
1 u 1 u 3.8
50 u 1 u 1000 u
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
NS-30
120
5
10
10
10
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
50
10
1
50
- -- -- --Page 6 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u u 10 u 10 u u 10 u 10 u u 10 u 10 u
u 7 u 7 u
u 7 u 7 u
u 7 u 7 u
u 350 u 7 u
u 15 u 7 u
u 45 u 7 u
u 700 u 7 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 100 u 5 u
u 1000 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u
u 250 u 10 u
u 2500 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u u 100 u 10 u
u 1 u 1 u
u 1 u 1 u
-- - - ---- -- - -
Quarter EX-01 EX-02
1093 35 NS
2093 4 J 820 DJ
3093 10 u 1000 DJ
4093 10 u 3300 u
1094 10 u 2500 u
2094 6 u 1600 J
3094 6 u 1200 J
4094 6 u 1200
1095 6 u 670 J
2095 6 u 1300
3095 6 u 890
4095 6 u 3000 u
1096 5 u 830
2096 5 u 650
3096 10 u 640 J
4096 1 J 100 J
1097 7 J 400
2097 3 J 190 J
3097 2 J 460
4097 10 u 730
1098 10 u 130
2098 10 u 170 J
3098 10 u 360
4098 10 u 490
4099 1 u 810
4000 1 u 100 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 6 ug/L
U -Not Detected
Table 2G
Historical Analytical Results -VOCs
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
1,2-DICHLOROPROPANE
EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
120 5 u 350 D
180 5 u 46.5
150 10 u 5 J
170 u 10 u 10 u
250 u 10 u 10 u
70 J 6 u 6 u
44 J 6 u 6 u
53 J 6 u 6 u
40 u 6 u 6 u
160 6 12 J
24 26 1000
130 75 u 2200 J
140 J 5 u 1600
33 25 u 710
87 J 2 J 1900
71 J 1 J 1800
150 J 7 J 1200
240 J 17 980
230 J 7 J 2500
310 2 J 2700
200 3 J 2700
235 10 u 3700
100 J 10 u 2100 J
200 u 10 u 2700
30 1 u 3100
50 u 1 u 1000 u
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
0 -Concentration from diluted run sample
E -Exceeded calibration range
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
Shading indicates "E" qualified concentration for which a diluted run concentration is unavailable.
NS -Not Sampled
NS-30
190
23
97
10
10
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
5
68
54
20
50
-- - ----Page 7 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
170 5 u
200 5 u
83 1 J
u 31 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 3 J 6 u
u 6 u 6 u
u 6 u 6 u
u 300 u 6 u
u 50 6 u
u 260 6 u
u 340 J 6 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 94 J 5 u u 1000 u 10 u u 160 J 10 u u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u u 170 J 10 u
J 2500 u 10 u
1000 u 10 u
100 u 10 u
160 1 u
u ~.'t-180i1Ei'.1!EXI 1 u
- --- - - -- - - - -
Historical Analytical Results -voes
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
ETHYLBENZENE
Quarter EX-01 EX--02 EX-03
1093 5 u NS 5
2093 5 u 9 2
3093 10 u 13 3
4093 10 u 3300 u 170
1094 10 u 2500 u 250
2094 10 u 3300 u 250
3094 10 u 2500 u 100
4094 10 u 1300 u 190
1095 10 u 2000 u 67
2095 10 u 85 u 89
3095 10 u 500 u 33
4095 10 u 5000 u 100
1096 5 u 500 u 500
2096 5 u 12 J 25
3096 10 u 1000 u 250
4096 10 u 32 J 250
1097 10 u 250 u 250
2097 10 u 250 u 250
3097 10 u 250 u 250
4097 10 u 250 u 250
1098 10 u 50 u 100
2098 10 u 250 u 100
3098 10 u 100 u 200
4098 10 u 18 J 200
4099 1 u 24 6.3
4000 1 u 72 JD 50
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 3,500 ug/L
U -Not Detected
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
EX--04
u 2
J 5
J 10
u 10
u 10
u 3
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 33
u 120
u 5
u 25
u 2
u 2
u 3
u 4
u 10
u 2
u 2
u 2
u 3
u 3
2.4
u 2
4 -Compound concentration exceeds calibration range of the instrument
D -Concentration from diluted run sample
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
NS-29
J 5
u 5
u 10
u 10
u 10
J 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 25
u 500
u 6200
u 500
u 50
J 500
J 500
J 500
J 500
u 500
J 500
J 500
J 500
J 2500
J 74
68
1000
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
J
4
u
NS-30
120
5
1
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
50
10
1.8
50
-- - ----Page 8 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
u 2 J 5 u
u 2 J 5 u
J 1 J 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 I u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 500 u 10 u
u 21 u 10 u
u 65 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 100 u 5 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 250 u 10 u
u 2500 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 48 J 10 u
5.9 1 u
u 3 1 u
- - ---- --- - --
Quarter EX-01 EX-02
1093 2 BJ NS
2093 1 J 4 J
3093 2 BJ 10 u
4093 NR NR
1094 NR NR
2094 5 u 1700 u
3094 9 B 2900 B
4094 5 u 1200 B
1095 5 u 1300 B
2095 3 BJ 44 B
3095 5 u 250 u
4095 5 u 2500 u
1096 2 BJ 150 BJ
2096 1 BJ 13 J
3096 10 u 620 J
4096 0.6 J 74 J
1097 10 u 250 u
2097 10 u 250 u
3097 10 u 250 u
4097 10 u 40 J
1098 10 u 50 u
2098 10 u 250 u
3098 10 u 100 u
4098 10 u 9 J
4099 1 u 7.5 1
4000 1 u 300 BD
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
U -Not Detected
Table 21
Historical Analytical Results -voes
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
2 BJ 5 u 3 BJ
2 J 2 J 2 J
10 u 5 BJ 2 BJ
NR NR NR
NR NR NR
120 u 5 u 5 u
110 B 7 B 8 B
150 B 6 B 7 B
37 B 3 BJ 3 BJ
41 BJ 7 B 13 B
17 u 17 u 250 u
72 B 62 u 3100 u
160 BJ 2 BJ 150 BJ
25 u 5 BJ 50 u
140 J 4 J 2200
16 J 1 J 37 J
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
40 J 10 u 89 J
100 u 10 u 500 u
100 u 10 u 500 u
110 J 10 u 1100 J
200 u 10 u 250 u
1 u 1 u 14 1
160 BD 1 u 2000 BD
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
B -Constituent also detected in associated method blank (concentration in method blank unknown)
1 -Common laboratory contaminant
D -Concentration from diluted run sample
E • Exceeded calibration range
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
Shading indicates "E" qualified concentration for which a diluted run concentration is unavailable.
NS -Not Sampled
NR -Not Reported
NS-30
48
5
2
NR
NR
5
8
5
5
10
5
5
2
5
10
0.6
10
10
10
10
10
10
12
10
1
38
----liiilil
Page 9 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
BJ 3 BJ 2 BJ
u 5 u 1 J
BJ 2 BJ 1 J
NR NR
NR NR
u 5 u 5 u
B 9 B 9 B
u 6 B 9 B
u 200 BJ 4 BJ
B 16 B 11 B
u 32 u 5 u
u 480 BJ 5 u
BJ 71 BJ 2 BJ
u 21 J 5 u u 310 J 10 u
J 110 J 0.7 J
u 1600 B 3 J u 1000 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u
u 160 J 10 u
u 250 u 10 u u 2500 u 10 u
J 1000 u 10 u
u 100 u 10 u
u 1 u 1 u
JBD 1 I u 1 u
-- - - - - -- -- - -
Table 2J
Historical Analytical Results -VOCs
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
TOLUENE
Quarter EX--01 EX-02 EX--03
1093 13 NS 58
2093 5 u 110 46
3093 10 u 2500 u 55
4093 10 u 3300 u 66
1094 10 u 25-00 u 250
2094 10 u 3300 u 91
3094 10 u 2500 u 60
4094 10 u 420 J 87
1095 10 u 2000 u 69
2095 10 u 280 80
3095 10 u ?so J 32
4095 10 u spoo u 60
1096 5 u 290 J 130
2096 5 u 260 55
3096 10 u 340 J 99
4096 1 J 280 120
1097 10 u 300 190
2097 10 u 110 J 160
3097 10 u 210 J 180
4097 10 u 290 200
1098 10 u 62 165
2098 10 u 130 J 185
3O9B 10 u 260 150
4098 10 u 540 220
4099 1 u 430 100
4000 1 u 1400 D 480
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 2,000 ug/L
U -Not Detected
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
EX--04
5
2
3
J 3
u 10
J 7
J 4
J 7
10
J 26
J 31
J 120
J 2
46
J 31
J 26
J 41
J 33
J 23
J 17
22
11
J 17
19
4 10
D 0.7
4 -Compound concentration exceeds calibration range of the instrument
D -Concentration from diluted run sample
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS· Not Sampled
J
J
J
u
J
J
J
u
J
u
J
J
J
NS-29
60
6.5
3
10
10
10
10
10
10
25
200
6200
370
150
850
440
400
260
910
1100
950
1400
1000
1800
1400
5500
J
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
J
u
J
J
J
J
J
0
NS-30
34
2
23
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
12
26
36
560
- ---- --Page 10 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
J 34 5 u
J 34 5 u
15 10 u
u 6 J 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 500 u 10 u
u 12 J 10 u
u 45 J 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 64 J 5 u
u 150 5 u
u 310 J 10 u
u 370 J 0.8 J
u 315 J 10 u
u 370 J 10 u
u 390 J 10 u
u 610 J 10 u
u 620 10 u
u 980 J 10 u
J 940 J 10 u
1200 10 u
140 1 u
0 31 1 u
-·-- - - - -- - - --
Quarter EX-01 EX-02
1093 5 u NS
2093 5 u 5 u
3093 10 u 10 u
4093 10 u 3300 u
1094 10 u 2500 u
2094 5 u 1700 u
3094 5 u 1200 u
4094 5 u 660 u
1095 5 u 1000 u
2095 5 u 42 u
3095 5 u 250 u
4095 5 u 2500 u
1096 5 u 500 u
2096 5 u 50 u
3096 10 u 1000 u
4096 10 u 250 u
1097 10 u 250 u
2097 10 u 250 u
3097 10 u 250 u
4097 10 u 250 u
1098 10 u 50 u
2098 10 u 250 u
3098 10 u 100 u
4098 10 u 100 u
4099 1 u 1 u
4000 1 u 100 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
U -Not Detected
Table 2K
Historical Analytical Results -VOCs
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
1,1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE
EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
10 u 10 u 10 u
170 u 10 u 10 u
250 u 10 u 10 u
120 u 5 u 5 u
50 u 5 u 5 u
93 u 5 u 5 u
33 u 5 u 5 u
45 u 5 u 12 u
17 u 17 u 250 u
50 u 62 u 3100 u
500 u 5 u 500 u
25 u 25 u 50 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
100 u 10 u 500 u
100 u 10 u 500 u
200 u 10 u 2500 u
200 u 10 u 250 u
1 u 1 u 1 u
50 u 1 u 1000 u
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled \
NS-30
120
5
10
10
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
50
2
1
50
- -- ----Page 11 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 10 u 10 u u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 10 u 5 u
u 32 u 5 u
u 500 u 5 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 100 u 5 u
u 1000 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u u 250 u 10 u u 2500 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
J 100 u 10 u
u 1 u 1 u
u 1 u 1 u
---·-- - -- - - - -
Quarter EX-01 EX-02
1093 5 u NS
2093 5 u 5 u
3093 10 u 10 u
4093 10 u 3300 u
1094 10 u 2500 u
2094 5 u 1700 u
3094 5 u 1200 u
4094 5 u 660 u
1095 5 u 1000 u
2095 5 u 42 u
3095 5 u 250 u
4095 5 u 2500 u
1096 5 u 500 u
2096 5 u 50 u
3096 10 u 1000 u
4096 10 u 250 u
1097 10 u 250 u
2097 10 u 250 u
3097 10 u 250 u
4097 10 u 250 u
1098 10 u 50 u
2098 10 u 250 u
3098 10 u 100 u
4098 2 J 4 J
4099 1 u 1 u
4000 1 u 100 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
U -Not Detected
Table 2L
Historical Analytical Results -voes
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
TRlCHLOROETHENE
EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
10 u 10 u 10 u
170 u 10 u 10 u
250 u 10 u 10 u
120 u 5 u 5 u
50 u 5 u 5 u
93 u 5 u 5 u
33 u 5 u 5 u
45 u 5 u 12 u
17 u 17 u 250 u
50 u 62 u 3100 u
500 u 5 u 500 u
25 u 25 u 50 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
100 u 10 u 500 u
100 u 10 u 500 u
200 u 10 u 2500 u
200 u 10 u 150 J
1 u 1 u 1 u
50 u 1 u 1000 u
J • Estimated concentration !ess than the detection limit
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
NS•30
120
5
10
10
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
50
10
1
50
--- ----Page 12 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 10 u 5 u
u 32 u 5 u
u 500 u 5 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 100 u 5 u u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 250 u 10 u u 2500 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u
u 100 u 10 u
u 1 u 1 u
u 1 u 1 u
-- - --- -- -- - -
Quarter EX-01 EX-02
1093 10 u NS
2093 10 u 10 u
3093 10 u 19
4093 10 u 3300 u
1094 10 u 2500 u
2094 2 u 670 u
3094 2 u 500 u
4094 2 u 260 u
1095 2 u 400 u
2095 2 u 17 u
3095 2 u 100 u
4095 2 u 1000 u
1096 10 u 1000 u
2096 10 u 100 u
3096 10 u 1000 u
4096 10 u 250 u
1097 10 u 250 u
2097 10 u 250 u
3097 10 u 250 u
4097 10 u 250 u
1098 10 u 50 u
2098 10 u 250 u
3098 10 u 100 u
4098 10 u 15
4099 1 u 6.5
4000 1 u 100 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 2 ug/L
U -Not Detected
Table 2M
Historical Analytical Results . VOCs
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
VINYL CHLORIDE
EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
10 u 28 10 u
10 u 10 u 10 u
10 u 10 u 10 u
170 u 10 u 10 u
250 u 10 u 10 u
50 u 2 u 2 u
20 u 2 u 2 u
37 u 2 u 2 u
13 u 2 u 2 u
18 u 2 u 5 u
7 u 7 u 100 u
20 u 25 u 1200 u
1000 u 10 u 1000 u
50 u 50 u 100 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
250 u 10 u 500 u
100 u 10 u 500 u
100 u 10 u 500 u
200 u 10 u 2500 u
200 u 10 u 250 u
1.9 1 u 5.8
50 u 1 u 1000 u
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
NS-30
250
10
10
10
10
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
50
10
' 50
- ---- --Page 13of25
NS-31 NS-32
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 2 J 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 2 u 2 u
u 2 u 2 u
u 2 u 2 u
u 100 u 2 u
u 4 u 2 u
u 13 u 2 u
u 200 u 2 u
u 500 u 10 u u 200 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u u 1000 I u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 250 u 10 u
u 2500 u 10 u u 1000 u 10 u u 100 u 10 u
u 1.7 1 u
u 1 u ' u
- - - - -- --- - - -
Table 2N
Historical Analytical Results -VOCs
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
XYLENE
Quarter EX.01 EX-02
1093 2 J NS
2093 5 u 38
3093 10 u ,52
4093 10 u 3300 u ' 1094 10 u 2500 u
2094 10 u 3'300 u
3094 10 u 2500 u
4094 10 u 1300 u
1095 10 2000 u
2095 10 u 24 J
3095 10 u 500 u
4095 10 u 5000 u
1096 5 u 500 u
2096 5 u 34 J
3096 10 u 1000 u
4096 10 u 26 J
1097 10 u 250 u
2097 10 u 250 u
3097 10 u 250 u
4097 10 u 250 u
1098 10 u 50 u
2098 10 u 250 J
3098 10 u 30 J
4098 10 u 68 J
4099 3 u 98
4000 1 u 290 D
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 350 ug/L
U -Not Detected
EX-03
10
7
10
170
250
250
100
190
67
89
33
100
500
6
250
250
250
250
250
250
17
33,5
200
200
18.9
75
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
EX-04
2
1
2
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 33
u 120 u 5
J 25
u 6
u 5
u 6
u 10
u 2
u 4
J 5
J 6
u 4
u 4
1.5
D 1
4 -Compound concentration exceeds calibration range of the instrument
D -Concentration from diluted run sample
J
J
J
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
NS-29
12
2
2
10
10
10
10
10
10
25
500
6200
500
20
110
56
500
500
110
160
130
220
2500
320
270
1200
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
J
J
u
u
u
u
u
u
u u
u u
J
J
J
u u
J
J
J
J u
4
D
NS-30
120
5
4
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
50
5
7.3
42
--- -- --Page 14 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
u 6 5 u
u 7 5 u
J 4 J 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 500 u 10 u
u 21 u 10 u
u 65 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 100 u 5 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 89 J 10 u
u 2500 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
J 200 10 u
23.2 3 u
D 9 1 u
- - -- - -- - - - -
Quarter EX-01 EX-02
1093 38 NS
2093 4 J 380 D
3093 11 u 540 D
4093 11 u 440
1094 10 u 510
2094 11 u 770
3094 6 u 680
4094 5 u 570
1095 5 u 540
2095 3 J 650
3095 14 570
4095 11 570
1096 9 J 400
2096 7 J ~:&1 soo ~Jg E ij1
3096 10 u 430
4096 17 320 D
1097 31 490 D
2097 21 250 D
3097 24 310 D
4097 17 43
1098 46 180 D
2098 14 140 D
3098 23 310 D
4098 34 850 D
4099 20 1300
4000 2 u ~700~d~EtJ
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
U -Not Detected
Table 20
Historkal Analytical Results -SVOCs
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
BI5(2-CHLOROETHYL)ETHER
EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
82 12 190
100 5 J 52
10 u 11 25
74 53 u 18
150 D 22 J 8 J
120 17 J 12
56 13 J 12
110 21 J 17
130 14 J 13
180 D 55 32
120 64 450
140 41 1100
130 10 590 D
93 71 250
170 48 1400 D
130 49 740
180 68 D 810
180 74 D 410
210 D 68 D 1400 D
260 D 47 D 1400 D
350 D 94 D 2400 D
195 D 28 3100 D
230 D 26.5 100 u
10 u 58 D 3600 D
310 51 3800
1100 D 1 7100 D
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
D -concentration in diluted run sample
E -Exceeded calibration range
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
Shading indicates "E" qualified concentration for which a diluted run concentration is unavailable.
NS· Not Sampled
NS-30
44
32
10
10
41
29
17
21
17.5
16
12
10
5
7
7
4
10
7
8
10
9
2
23
37
57
1000
-- - ----Page 15 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
71 10 u
95 10 u
u 38 10 u
J 25 11 u
24 11 u
20 10 u
21 5 u
14 5 u
11 5 u
78 5 u
130 6 u
320 370
J 72 10 u
J 160 10 u
J 380 10 u
J 200 D 10 u
J 540 D 10 u
J 390 D 10 u
J 21 u 650 D
u 19 560 D
J 1500 D 10 u
J 2700 D 10 u
2400 D 10 u
2200 D 10 u
160 10 u
D 2 u 52 u
- - - -- - -- - ---
Quarter EX-01 EX-02
1093 50 u NS
2093 50 u 52 u
3093 26 u 26 u
4093 27 u 260 u
1094 26 u 250 u
2094 27 u 1100 u
3094 29 u 530 u
4094 27 u 1400 u
1095 27 u 540 u
2095 26 u 270 u
3095 28 u 670 u
4095 25 u 500 u
1096 25 u 500 u
2096 25 u 120 u
3096 25 u 250 u
4096 25 u 25 u
1097 26 u 25 u
2097 25 u 26 u
3097 25 u 26 u
4097 26 u 26 u
1098 26 u 26 u
2098 26 u 26 u
3098 26 u 26 u
4098 26 u 26 u
4099 50 u 50 u
4000 4 u 4 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 350 ug/L
U -Not Detected
Table 2P
Historical Analytical Results . SVOCs
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
4-NITROPHENOL
EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
52 u 50 u 52 u
56 u 54 u 54 u
25 u 25 u 26 u
52 u 130 u 26 u
26 u 100 u 25 u
54 u 100 u 26 u
27 u 110 u 27 u
53 u 260 u 26 u
53 u 260 u 29 u
52 u 140 u 27 u
110 u 140 u 690 u
53 u 54 u 1300 u
50 u 25 u 25 u
50 u 120 u 120 u
250 u 50 u 250 u
100 u 25 u 250 u
100 u 25 u 260 u
100 u 25 u 250 u
26 u 26 u 250 u
26 u 28 u 260 u
26 u 27 u 130 u
26 u 26 u 260 u
27 u 26 u 260 u
26 u 26 u 280 u
50 u 50 u 50 u
41 u 4 u 410 u
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
NS-30
50
50
26
27
26
27
26
26
26
28
27
26
25
25
25
25
26
25
26
26
26
26
27
27
50
51
--- ----Page 16 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
u 50 u 50 u
u 52 u 50 u
u 25 u 25 u
u 26 u 26 u
u 27 u 27 u
u 26 u 26 u
u 27 u 26 u
u 26 u 27 u
u 26 u 25 u
u 51 u 26 u
u 130 u 28 u
u 260 u 520 u
u 25 u 25 u
u 120 u 25 u
u 120 u 25 u
u 50 u 25 u
u 50 u 26 u
u 50 u 25 u
u 52 u 26 u
u 26 u 26 u
u 26 u 26 u
u 260 u 26 u
u 26 u 26 u
u 270 u 26 u
u 50 u 50 u
u 4 u 10 u
- --- ---
Quarter EX-01 EX-02
1093 2 u NS
2093 2 u 2 u
3093 2 u 2 u
4093 2.4 u 4.8 u
1094 2.9 u 5.8 u
2094 2.6 u 7.8 u
3094 2.1 u 2.1 u
4094 3.3 B 2.1 u
1095 0.8 u 1.1 B
2095 2.7 u 3.8 B
3095 1 9 u 2.8 B
4095 1.5 u 1.5 u
1096 1.1 u 1.1 u
2096 1.1 u 1.1 u
3096 ,., u 1.1 u
4096 1.1 u 1.1 u
1097 7 u 7 u
2097 7 u 7 u
3097 7 u 7 u
4097 6 u 6 u
1098 6 u 6 u
2098 1.3 u 1.3 u
3098 1.3 u 1.3 u
4098 5 u 5 u
4099 5 u 5 u
4000 1.5 u 2.9 B
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 10 ug/L
U -Not Detected
-- - --
Table 20
Historical Analytical Results. Metals
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring We!ls
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
ARSENIC
EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
2 u 2 u 2 u
2 u 2 u 2 u
2 u 2 u 2 u
4.8 u 2.4 u 2.4 u
5.8 u 2.9 u 2.9 u
2.6 u 2.6 u 2.6 u
2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1 u
2.1 u 2.8 B 2.1 u
0.8 u 0.8 u 1.5 B
2.7 u 2.7 u 2.7 u
1.9 u 1.9 u 2.2 B
1.5 u 1.5 u 1 5 u
1.1 u ,., u 1.1 u
1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u
1.1 u ,., u 1.5 B
1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u
7 u 7 u 7 u
7 u 7 u 7 u
7 u 7 u 7 u
6 u 6 u 6 u
6 u 6 u 6 u
1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u
1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
1.5 u 3 B 9.1 B
NS-30
2
2
2
2.4
2.9
2.9
2.1
2.1
0.8
27
1.9
1.5
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
7
7
7
7
6
1.3
1.3
5
5
37.2
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but Jess than the Reporting Limit
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Periormance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
- - - ----Page 17 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
u 2 u 2 u
u 2 u 2 u
u 2 u 2 u
u 2.9 B 2.4 B
u 2.9 u 2.9 u
B 3.7 B 2.6 u
u 2.1 u 2.1 u
B 2. 1 u 3.1 B
u 1.3 B 0.8 u
u 2.9 B 2.8 B
u 1.9 u 2.3 B
u 1.5 I u 15 u
u 1.1 u 1.1 u
u ,., u 1.1 u
u 1.1 u 1.1 u
u 1.1 u 1.1 u
u 7 u 7 u
u 7 u 7 u
u 7 u 7 u
B 6 u 6 u
u 6 u 6 u
u 1.3 u 1.3 u
u 2.6 u 1.3 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
B 3.8 B 1.5 u
- - - - ---
Quarter EX-01 EX-02
1093 68.2 B NS
2093 25.3 B 1250
3093 27.2 B 1780
4093 22.8 B 1490
1094 17.1 B 1680
2094 23 B 1830
3094 18.3 B 1540
4094 25.3 B 1070
1095 17.7 B 1080
2095 26.5 B 1860
3095 61.4 B 1820
4095 54.5 B 1930
1096 104 B 1970
2096 93.6 B 1780
3096 37.9 B 1560
4096 126 B 1370
1097 154 B 1170
2097 163 B 982
3097 173 B 1110
4097 181 B 1210
1098 213 713
2098 137 J 1130
3098 89.7 864
4098 138 1485
4099 5 u 1600
-----
Table 2R
Historical Analytical Results -Metals
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
BARIUM
EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
166 B 37.3 B 182 B
140 B 26.9 B 87.4 B
235 29.4 B 80.9 B
278 36.3 B 61.7 B
405 29,3 B 45.3 B
516 56.4 B 64.1 B
608 27 B 52.2 B
498 45.9 B 57.6 B
625 34.4 B 64 B
475 72.7 B 84.7 B
265 52.6 B 190 B
387 42.8 B 1420
553 35.4 B 867
415 114 B 324
440 71.6 B 2490
349 61.5 B 1150
519 40.8 B 1360
647 45.1 B 720
722 44.7 B 1800
703 42 B 2110
717 46 B 1600
676 36 J 1370
390 26.5 636
592 47.7 1410
490 53 1800
NS-30
23.4
31.8
33
29.8
49.4
35.6
31.6
26.9
27.3
27.5
19.7
18.1
28
31.1
32.5
32.1
27.4
28
29.1
25.8
28.7
36
18.5
53.4
57
--
NS-31
B 193 B
B 36.3 B
B 19.5 B
B 15.6 B
B 2.4 u
B 17.4 B
B 8.2 B
B 1.7 B
B 19.6 B
B 12.6 B
B 207
B 1680
B 1630
B 3350
B 5180
B 6280
B 6780
B 6870
B 9280
B 4680
B 9850
J 9330
11400
18900
36
4000 40.9 B 8580 968 61.6 B 8530 ~~232~~E?\ 87.6 B
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 1,000 ug/L
U -Not Detected
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting Limit
J -Estimated concentration Jess than the detection limit
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
- ----Page 18 of 25
NS-32
65.8 B
69 B
86 B
85.6 B
85.5 B
82.6 B
85.2 B
85.5 B
85 B
93.3 B
89.7
86.6 B
87.8 B
96.5 B
95.8 B
91.5 B
97.3 B
93 B
96.3 B
98.2 B
99.1 B
105 J
61.9
103
100
105 B
- ---- ---- - - -
Quarter EX-01 EX-02
1093 1 u NS
2093 1 u 1 u
3093 1.5 B 1.7 8
4093 0.4 u 0.4 u
1094 0.4 u 0.4 u
2094 0.2 u 0.32 8
3094 0.3 u 0.3 u
4094 0.3 u 0.3 u
1095 0.3 u 0.3 u
2095 0.2 u 0.23 8
3095 0.32 B 0.3 u
4095 0.3 u 0.3 u
1096 0.3 u 0.3 u
2096 0.3 u 0.3 u
3096 0.3 u 0.3 u
4096 0.3 u 0.3 u
1097 2 u 2 u
2097 2 u 2 u
3097 2 u \~ u
4097 1 u u
1098 1 u 1 u
2098 1 u 1 u
3098 1 u 1 u
4098 1 u 1 u
4099 1 u 1 u
4000 0.1 u 0.2 8
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 17.5 ug/L
U -Not Detected
Table 2S
Historical Analytical Results -Metals
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
BERYLLIUM
EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
1 u 1 u 1 u
1 u 1 u 1 u
1.6 8 1.5 8 1.4 8
0.4 u 0.4 u 0.4 u
0.4 u 0.4 u 0.4 u
0.24 8 0.23 8 0.23 8
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u
0.2 u 0.28 8 0.2 u
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u
0.3 u 0.45 8 0.3 u
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u
2 u 2 u 2 u
2 u 2 u 2 u
2 u 2 u 2 u
1 u 1 u 1 u
1 u 1 u 1 u
1 u 1 u 1.2 J
1 u 1 u 2.1 J
1 u 1 u 1 u
1 u 1 u 1 u
0.1 u 0.1 u 0.1 u
NS-30
1
1
1.4
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
0.1
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection limit but less than the Reporting limit
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
NS -Not Sampled
----- --Page 19 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
u 1 u 1 u
u 1 u 1 u
8 1.6 8 1.6 8
u 0.4 u 0.4 u
u 0.4 u 0.4 u
u 0.2 u 0.2 u
u 0.3 u 0.3 u
u 0.3 u 0.3 u
u 0.3 u 0.3 u
u 0.2 u 0.28 B
u 0.3 u 0.3 u
u 0.3 u 0.3 u
8 0.3 u 0.3 u
u 0.3 u 0.3 u
u 0.3 u 0.3 u
u 0.3 u 0.3 u
u 2 u 2 u
u 2 u 2 u
u 2 u 2 u
u 1 u 1 u
u 1 u 1 u
u 1 u 1 u
u 1 u 1 u
u 1 u 1 u
u 1 u 1 u
u 0.1 u 0.1 u
-- - - -- -- - ---
Quarter EX-01 EX-02
1093 5 u NS
2093 5 u 5 u
3093 5 u 5 u
4093 2.3 u 2.3 u
1094 2.1 u 2.1 u
2094 1 3 u 1.7 B
3094 1.6 u 1.6 u
4094 1.6 u 1.6 u
1095 2.1 u 2.1 u
2095 1.4 u 1.4 u
3095 1.2 u 1.2 u
4095 1.9 u 1.9 u
1096 4.8 u 4.8 u
2096 5 u 5 u
3096 5 u 5 u
4096 4.8 u 4.8 u
1097 0.5 u 0.74 B
2097 3 u 3 u
3097 3 u 3 u
4097 4 u 4.5 B
1098 4 u 4 u
2098 0.26 u 0.26 u
3098 0.26 u 0.26 u
4098 0,5 u 0.5 u
4099 1 u 1 u
4000 0.5 u 0,5 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 1 O ug/L
U -Not Detected
Table 2T
Historical Analytical Results. Metals
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
CADMIUM
EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
2.3 u 2.3 u 2.3 u
2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1 u
1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u
1.6 u 1.7 B 1.6 u
1.6 u 1.7 B 1.6 u
2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1 u
1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u
1.2 u 1.2 u 1.2 u
1.9 u 1.9 u 1.9 u
4.8 u 4.8 u 4.8 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
4.8 u 4.8 u 4.8 u
0.5 u 0.5 u 0.5 u
3 u 3 u 3 u
10.4 3 u 3 u
4 u 17.8 4,5 B
4 u 4 u 4 u
0.26 u 0.26 u 0.26 u
0.26 u 0.26 u 0.26 u
0,5 u 0.5 u 0.5 u
1 u 1 u 1 u
0.5 u 0.5 u 0.5 u
NS-30
5
5
5
2.3
2.1
1.3
1.6
1.6
2.1
1.4
1.2
1.9
4.8
5
5
4.8
0.5
3
3
4
4
0.26
0.26
0.5
1
0.5
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting Limit
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
-- - ----Page 20 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 2.3 u 2.3 u
u 2.1 u 2.1 u
u 1.3 u 1.3 u
u 1.6 u 1.6 u
u 1.6 u 1.6 u
u 2.1 u 2.1 u
u 1.4 u 1.4 u
u 1.2 u 1.2 u
u 1.9 u 1.9 u
u 4.8 u 4.8 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 4.8 u 4.8 u
u 0.5 u 0.5 u
u 3 u 3 u
u 26.9 3 u
u 4 u 4 u
u 4 u 4 u
u 0.26 u 0.26 u
u 0.53 u 0.26 u
u 0.5 u 0.5 u
u 1 u 1 u
u 0.5 u 0.5 u
-- - - ---
Quarter EX-01 EX--02
1093 12 NS
2093 10 u 12.8
3093 10 u 13.7
4093 2.7 u 2.7 u
1094 2.3 u 3.1 B
2094 2.9 u 2.9 u
3094 2.4 u 2.4 u
4094 3 B 3 B
1095 4.3 u 4.3 u
2095 2 u 2 u
3095 3.1 u 5.1 B
4095 2.4 u 2.9 B
1096 7.7 B 4.9 u
2096 5 u 5 u
3096 5 u 31.1
4096 4.9 u 17.1
1097 5 u 5 u
2097 5 u 5.6 B
3097 5 u 5 u
4097 4 u 4 u
1098 4 u 4 u
2098 4.8 J 4.2 J
3098 4 u 4 J
4098 7.6 J 14.6
4099 2 u 2 u
4000 11.9 12.7
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 50 ug/L
U -Not Detected
- - - -
Table 2U
Historical Analytical Results -Metals
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
CHROMIUM
EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
10 u 10 u 11.1
10 u 10 u 14.5
10 u 10 u 10 u
2.8 B 2.7 u 2.7 u
2.4 B 4.3 B 3 B
2.9 u 2.9 u 2.9 u
2.4 u 2.4 u 2.4 u
2.4 u 3.9 B 2.4 u
4.3 u 4.3 u 4.3 u
2 u 2 u 2 u
3.4 B 3.1 u 3.1 u
2.4 u 2.4 u 2.4 u
7.8 B 7.4 B 6.9 B
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
62.6 4.9 u 4.9 u
5 u 11.6 5.8 B
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
4 u 4 u 4.3 B
4 u 4 u 4 u
8.25 J 4.1 J 12.3
4 u 4 u 8.8 J
8.2 J 5.1 J 10.8
2 u 2 u 9.9
16.7 1.9 B 36.8
-
NS-30
10
10
10
2.7
2.7
2.9
2.6
2.4
4.3
2
3.1
2.4
9.8
5
5
4.9
5
5
5
4
4
4.1
4
4.8
2
1.9
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting Limit
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
NS -Not Sampled
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
-- --- --Page 21 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
u 77.5 10 u
u 74 10 u
u 22.2 10
u 2.7 u 2.7 u
B 2.3 I u 2.3 u
u 13.3 2.9 u
B 2.4 u 3.1 B
u 2.4 u 2.4 B
u 4.3 u 4.3 u
u 2 u 2 u
u 3.1 u 3.1 u
u 2.4 u 2.4 u
B 4.9 u 8.8 B
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 4.9 u 4.9 u
u 7.2 B 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 4 u 4 u
u 101 4 u
J 12.9 4 u
u 5.5 J 4 u
J 12.9 8.6 J
u 25 2 u
B 2 B 0.9 u
- - - -- - -
Quarter EX-01 EX-02
1093 222 NS
2093 206 7180
3093 112 10800
4093 24.3 10800
1094 25.1 14300
2094 78.8 17100
3094 50.3 15100
4094 42 14000
1095 9.9 8 11900
2095 53.4 18800
3095 117 18300
4095 98.6 19000
1096 142 17900
2096 132 16100
3096 53, 1 16300
4096 205 16800
1097 345 18000
2097 461 11600
3097 316 13900
4097 332 16900
1098 345 11000
2098 237 12100
3098 182 11500
4098 285 20600
4099 320 20000
- - - - -
Table 2V
Historical Analytical Results -Metals
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
MANGANESE
EX-03 EX--04 NS-29
3950 4290 475
2760 3270 192.5
3380 4810 201
11200 5090 177
11000 5610 153
3980 5280 265
1430 5430 287
3640 4970 259
2010 4730 239
4810 4170 268
3970 3210 611
3380 4750 3810
2130 3580 4030
2855 3880 1780
4270 3165 8560
3920 3340 5840
2610 5140 4820
3960 4530 3710
3840 4330 12000
4510 3880 18400
4695 4520 22200
4575 4130 32100
3040 3055 13600
4810 5250 39300
3300 5300 3600
NS-30
839
1620
1435
2110
2170
2270
1930
2480
2360
2290
1800
1990
1540
1720
1570
1400
1660
1510
1530
1520
147
1250
831
1040
970
- -
NS-31
17.9
47.1
28.9
21.4
22.1
52
26.1
20.4
372
25.8
35.7
63.9
60.3
141
123
510
1110
993
1100
1870
2670
4150
1980
2150
340
4000 80.6 38100 3270 3980 117000 ~k1230irtt--.1Eff 82.5
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 7,700 ug/L
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting limit
E -Exceeded calibration range
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Shading indicates "E" qualified concentration for which a diluted run concentration is unavailable.
NS -Not Sampled
--- --Page 22 of 25
NS-32
80.6
78.2
108
99.8
107
106
106
108
107
117
107
112
92.6
105
109
109
114
114
115
118
118
139
81.4
131
120
125
----- - ----- -
Quarter EX-01 EX-02
1093 20 u NS
2093 20 u 75.5
3093 20 u 20 u
4093 11.8 B 13.8 B
1094 10.4 u 10.4 u
2094 6.2 u 6.2 u
3094 6.9 u 6.9 u
4094 6.9 u 6.9 u
1095 10.3 u 10.3 u
2095 5.5 u 5.5 u
3095 7.2 u 7.2 u
4095 8.8 u 'a.a u
1096 15.3 u 1s.J u
2096 15 u 15 u
3096 15 u 43.8
4096 15.3 u 15.3 u
1097 20 u 20 u
2097 20 u 20 u
3097 20 u 20 u
4097 16 u 16 u
1098 16 u 16 u
2098 14 u 14 u
3098 14 u 14 u
4098 14 u 14 u
4099 5 u 8.8
4000 30.4 22.7
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 350 ug/L
U -Not Detected
Table 2W
Historical Analytical Results -Metals
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
NICKEL
EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
20 u 20 u 20 u
20 u 20 u 20 u
20 u 20 u 20 u
8.4 u 8.4 u 8.4 u
10.4 u 10.4 u 10.4 u
6.2 u 6.2 u 6.2 u
6.9 u 6.9 u 6.9 u
6.9 u 6.9 u 6.9 u
10.3 u 10.3 u 10.3 u
5.5 u 5.5 u 5.5 u
7.2 u 7.2 u 7.2 u
8.8 u 8.8 u 8.8 u
15.3 u 15.3 u 15.3 u
15 u 15 u 15 u
15 u 15 u 15 u
81.6 15.3 u 15.3 u
20 u 20 u 20 u
20 u 20 u 20 u
20 u 20 u 20 u
16 u 16 u 16 u
16 u 16 u 16 u
14 u 14 u 14 u
14 u 14 u 14 u
14 u 14 u 14 u
5 u 5 u 51
12.5 4.7 B 46.9
NS-30
20
20
20
8.4
10.4
6.2
6.9
6.9
10.3
5.5
7.2
8.8
15.3
15
15
15.3
20
20
20
16
16
14
14
14
5
1.8
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection limit but less than the Reporting limit
J • Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
NS· Not Sampled
-- - ----Page 23 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
u 39.3 B 20 u
u 47.5 20 u
u 20 u 20 u
u 8.4 u 8.4 u
u 10.4 u 10.4 u
u 9.6 B 6.2 u
u 6.9 u 6.9 u
u 6.9 u 6.9 u
u 10.3 u 10.3 u
u 5.5 u 5.5 u
u 7.2 u 7.2 u
u 8.8 u 8.8 u
u 15.3 u 15.3 u
u 15 u 15 u
u 15 u 15 u
u 15.3 u 15.3 u
u 20 u 20 u
u 20 u 20 u
u 20 u 20 u
u 16 u 16 u
u 51.6 16 u
u 23.2 J 14 u
u 14 u 14 u
u 14 u 14 u
u 17 5 u
B 1.7 8 1 u
-·-- ----
Quarter EX-01 EX-02
1093 2 u NS
2093 2 u 2 u
3Q93 2 u 2 u
4093 2.3 u 4.6 u
1094 1.7 u 3.4 u
2094 2.6 u 1.6 B
3094 3.1 u 3.1 u
4094 3.1 u 3.1 u
1095 0.9 u 0.9 u
2095 2.7 B 3 B
3095 1.7 u 1.8 B
4095 1 u 1 u
1096 1.6 u 3.2 u
2096 0.8 u 1.6 u
3096 0.8 u 1.6 u
4096 0.8 u 0.8 u
1097 6.9 12.4
2097 5 u 9.8
3097 5 u 5 u
4097 5 u 10.5
1098 5 u 5.5
2098 4.3 u 4.4 J
3098 4.3 u 4.3 u
4098 5 u 5.6
4099 5 u 7.4
4000 2.3 u 14.9
Units in ug/1
ROO Performance Standard: 10 ug/L
U -Not Detected
-- - - -
Table 2X
Historical Analytical Results -Metals
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
SELENIUM
EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
4 u 4 u 2 u
2 u 2 u 2 u
2 u 2 u 2 u
4.6 u 2.3 u 2.3 u
3.4 u 1.7 u 1.7 u
2.6 u 2.6 u 2.6 u
3.1 u 3.1 u 3.1 u
3.1 u 3.1 u 3.1 u
0.9 u 0.9 u 0.9 u
2.7 u 2.7 u 2.7 u
1.7 u 1.7 u 3 B
1 u 1 u 1 u
1.6 u 1.6 u 3.2 u
0.8 u 0.8 u 0.8 u
1.6 u 0.8 u 1.6 u
0.8 u 0.8 u 1.6 u
5 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 7.2
6.3 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 12.8
4.3 u 4.3 u 15.6
4.3 u 4.3 u 5.9
5 u 5 u 14.7
5 u 5 u 14
2.3 u 2.3 u 50.7
NS-30
2
2
2
2.3
1.7
2.6
3.1
3.1
0.9
2.7
2
1
1.6
0.8
1.6
0.8
5
5
5
5
5
4.3
4.3
5
5
2.8
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting limit
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
- ---- --Page 24 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
u 2 u 2 u
u 2 u 2 u
u 2 u 2 u
u 2.3 u 2.3 u
u 1.7 u 1.7 u
u 2.6 u 2.6 u
u 3.1 u 3.1 u
u 3.1 u 3.1 u
u 0.9 u 0.9 u
u 2.7 u 3.2 B
B 2.7 B 2 B
u 1 u 1 u
u 1.6 u 16 u
u 0.8 u 0.8 u
u 0.8 u 0.8 u
u 0.8 u 0.8 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 4.3 u 4.3 u
u 8.6 u 4.3 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
B 2.3 u 2.3 u
- - - - - - -- -- - -
Quarter EX-01 EX-02
1093 35.3 NS
2093 32.7 15.4 8
3093 15.5 B 29.5
4093 9.7 B 56.5
1094 15.5 8 5.4 8
2094 15.3 8 3.4 8
3094 9.5 8 76.5
4094 11.3 8 11.1 8
1095 15.7 8 15.4 8
2095 9.4 B 5.8 u
3095 43.6 2.6 u
4095 5.2 u 5.2 u
1096 7.6 8 14.3 B
2096 12.1 8 7.7 8
3096 57.6 31.9
4096 33.9 28.2
1097 6.9 8 8.6 8
2097 5 u 10.9 8
3097 13.8 8 28.4
4097 15.1 B 15 u
1098 15 u 15 u
2098 5 u 5 u
3098 5 u 5 u
4098 5 u 22.5
4099 15 10 u
4000 18.8 8 63.2
Units in ug/1
Table 2Y
Historical Analytical Results • Metals
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
ZINC
EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
11.2 8 13 B 10.3 8
16.9 8 17.2 8 17 8
7.6 8 7 8 11.1 8
2.5 8 1.8 u 2.6 8
9 8 55.2 5.2 8
0.9 u 37.7 2 8
3.8 u 12.4 8 11.8 8
8.8 8 13 8 6.5 8
48 7.6 8 4.5 B
16 B 5.8 u 5.8 u
2.6 u 4 8 2.6 u
5.2 u 5.2 u 5.2 u
9 8 15.6 8 2.4 u
16.2 8.8 8 6.6 8
14.7 8 2 u 3.1 8
34 109 19 8
12.1 8 14.5 8 10.3 8
5 u 5 u 5 u
8.6 8 18.1 8 21.8
15 u 15 u 15 u
15 u 15 u 15 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 8.2 J 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
10 u 10 u 18
72.8 234 24.4
ROD Performance Standard: 7,350 ug/L
u . Not Detected
NS-30
8.2
12.1
5
2.2
1.7
0.9
3.8
15.7
3.6
5.8
2.6
5.2
2.4
6.4
2
23.5
7.7
5
13.2
15
15
5
5
5
13
17.2
B. Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting Limit
J • Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
NS· Not Sampled
- ------Page 25 of 25
NS-31 NS-32
8 27.9 6.4 8
8 1640 57
u 26.6 25.2
8 2.6 8 1.8 u
u 1.7 u 3.3 8
u 10.7 8 3.4 8
u 4 8 7.9 8
8 5 8 10.2 8
8 14.4 8 11.3 8
u 5.8 u 6 8
u 2.6 u 2.6 u
u 5.2 u 5.2 u
8 3.2 8 9.4 8
8 5.5 8 6.9 8
u 2.1 8 4.4 8
15.3 B 19.9 B
8 15.5 8 23.7
u 5 u 5 u
B 15.9 8 31.8
u 15 u 15 u
u 15.2 8 15 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 17.2 J 5 u
21 10 u
8 31.4 8.6 u
- -
I - - - --
Quarter EX--05 EX-06 EX-07
1093 NS NS NS
2093 NS NS NS
3093 NS NS NS
4093 NS NS NS
1094 NS NS NS
2094 NS NS NS
3094 NS NS NS
4094 NS NS NS
1095 NS NS NS
2095 NS NS NS
3095 NS NS NS
4095 NS NS NS
1096 NS NS NS
2096 24000 D 420 7100
3096 3200 J 36 920
4096 28000 300 D 550
1097 27000 B 170 B 4900
2097 33000 B 470 DB 4000
3097 34000 500 D 2000
4097 36000 540 D 3600
1098 29000 B 120 B 3300
2098 17000 B 430 B 59
3098 29000 120 47000
4098 45000 DB 73 36000
4099 86000 4 11 5000
4000 100000 D 2 u 10
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 3,500 ug/L
U • Not Detected
J -Estimated concentration !ess than the detection limit
DJ
J
DJ
B
B
B
B
JB
D
D
u
u
----
Table 3A
Historical Analytical Results -VOCs
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
ACETONE
EX-08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
230000 D 23000 D 43000 D
11000 8100 8200
72000 37000 75000
120000 DB 53000 DB 96000 B
130000 DB 40000 B 92000 B
67000 B 23000 B 49000 B
220000 D 19000 ~210000!,'" E~
63000 DB 24000 DB 82000 DB
72000 D 14000 93000 B
130000 D 21000 200000 D
65000 D 13000 77000 D
100000 100000 u 150000 4
4000 u 10000 u 93000 D
B. Constituent also detected in associated method blank (concentration in method blank unknown)
E • Exceeds calibration range
D -Concentration from diluted run sample
4 -Compound exceeds calibration range of the instrument
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
Shading indicates "E" qualified concentration for which a diluted run concentration is unavailable
NR -Not Reported
NS· Not Sampled
-- ---- --Page 1 of 25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
10 u 10 u 10 u NR
3000 D 100 15 10 u
720 330 u 130 67 u
130 500 u 4100 50 u
65000 B 2100 B 44 B 25 u
330000 670 u 29 530
390000 270 54 18 B
5400 D 620 u 21 25 u
87000 D 800 10 u 10 u
450 D 170 u 10 u 120
1600 670 u 17 27
7 J 500 u 10 u 20 u
110 100 u 10 u 5 J
22 J 8 J 7 J 8 J
200 100 u 10 u 10 u
110 B 88 BJ 6 BJ 15 B
94 JB 78 JB 22 B 10 u
830 B 300 DB 32 OBJ 40 B
180 100 I u 14 7 J
79 JB 10 u 10 u 9 JB
53 J 6 J 2 J 6 J
570 10 u 10 u 10 u
22 J 2 J 6 J 10 u
10 u 12 16 120 4
20 u 42 4 u 20 u
----- -
Quarter EX-05 EX-06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 49 J 25 u
3096 5000 u 10 u
4096 2000 u 10 u
1097 2000 u 10 u
2097 2000 u 10 u
3097 2000 u 10 u
4097 2000 u 10 u
1098 5000 u 10 u
2098 5000 u 10 u
3098 5000 u 10 u
4098 2500 u 10 u
4099 500 u 1 u
4000 5000 u 1 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
U -Not Detected
-
EX-07
NS
NS
NS
\ NS NS
,NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
30
3300
250
250
250
250
250
1000
100
500
1000
500
5
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
J
u
u u
u u u u u u
u u
u
-- --
Table 38
Historical Analytical Results -voes
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
BENZENE
EX-08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
34 J 64 J 40 J
5000 u 3300 u 1700 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
2500 u 1000 u 500 u
2500 u 1000 u 500 u
1000 u 2000 u 5000 u
2500 u 1000 u 500 u
1200 u 5000 u 1000 u
2000 u 2000 u 5000 u
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Periormance Standard
NR -Not Reported
NS -Not Sampled
-- -- ----Page 2 of 25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
5 u 5 u 5 u NR
10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
250 u 330 u 25 u 67 u
10 u 500 u 500 u 50 u
3100 u 310 u 5 u 12 u
8300 u 330 u 5 u 25 u
10000 u 17 u 5 u 5 u
1 J 310 u 5 u 12 u
500 u 89 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 83 u 5 u 5 u
57 u 330 u 5 u 8 u
10 u 250 u 5 u 10 u
50 u 50 u 5 u 5 u
50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 20 u 10 u 10 u
500 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
1 u 1 u 1 u 1 u
10 u 1 u 2 u 10 u
- - - - --
Quarter EX-05 EX-06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 120 u 25 u
3096 5000 u 10 u
4096 2000 u 10 u
1097 2000 u 10 u
2097 2000 u 10 u
3097 2000 u 10 u
4097 2000 u 10 u
1098 5000 u 10 u
2098 5000 u 10 u
3098 5000 u 10 u
4098 2500 u 10 u
4099 500 u 1 u
4000 5000 u 1 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
U -Not Detected
-
EX-07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
120
3300
250
250
250
250
250
1000
100
500
1000
5-00
5
u u
u
u u u
u u u u
u u
u
-- --
Table 3C
Historical Analytical Results -voes
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbul)', North Carolina
BROMODICHLOROMETHANE
EX-08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
120 u 120 u 120 u
5000 u 3300 u 1700 u
5-000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
2500 u 1000 u 500 u
2500 u 1000 u 500 u
1000 u 2000 u 5000 u
2500 u 1000 u 500 u
1200 u 1000 u 1000 u
2000 u 5000 u 5000 u
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NR -Not Reported
NS -Not Sampled
- ---- - - -Page 3 of 25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
5 u 5 u 5 u NR
10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
250 u 330 u 25 u 67 u
10 u 5-00 u 5-00 u 50 u
3100 u 310 u 5 u 12 u
8300 u 330 u 5 u 25 u
10000 u 17 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 310 u 5 u 12 u
500 u 89 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 83 u 5 u 5 u
57 u 330 u 5 u 8 u
10 u 250 u 5 u 10 u
50 u 50 u 5 u 5 u
50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 20 u 10 u 10 u
500 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
1 u 1 u 1 u 1 u
10 u 1 u 2 u 10 u
-- ---
Quarter EX-05 EX-06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 44 J 25 u
3096 5000 u 10 u
4096 2000 u 10 u
1097 2000 u 10 u
2097 2000 u 10 u
3097 2000 u 10 u
4097 2000 u 10 u
1098 5000 u 10 u
2098 5000 u 10 u
3098 5000 u 10 u
4098 2500 u 10 u
4099 500 u 1 u
4000 5000 u 1 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
U -Not Detected
-
EX-07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
120
3300
25-0
250
250
250
25-0
1000
100
500
1000
500
5
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
u u
u u u u u
u u u u
u
u
- - - -
Table 3D
Historical Analytical Results -voes
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
CHLOROFORM
EX-08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
120 u 120 u 120 u
5000 u 3300 u 1700 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5-000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
2500 u 1000 u 500 u
2500 u 1000 u 500 u
1000 u 2000 u 5-000 u
2500 u 1000 u 500 u
1200 u 5000 u 1000 u
2000 u 5000 u 5000 u
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NR . Not Reported
NS -Not Sampled
- - - - -- --Page 4 of 25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
5 u 5 u 5 u NR
10 u 1 J 10 u 10 u
250 u 330 u 25 u 67 u
10 u 500 u 500 u 50 u
3100 u 310 u 5 u 12 u
8300 u 330 u 5 u 25 u
10000 u 17 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 310 u 5 u 12 u
500 u 89 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 83 u 5 u 5 u
57 u 330 u 5 u 8 u
10 u 250 u 5 u 10 u
50 u 50 u 5 u 5 u
50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 2 J 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 20 u 10 u 10 u
500 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
1.8 1 u 1 u 1 u
10 u 1 u 2 u 10 u
- ---- - -
Quarter EX-05 EX-06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 350000 D 920
3096 5000 u 10 u
4096 430000 D 240 D
1097 510000 D 53
2097 470000 D 530 D
3097 340000 D 550 D
4097 380000 D 140
1098 340000 D BO
2098 340000 D 550
3098 230000 D 120
4098 300000 D 12
4099 400000 1 u
4000 530000 D 1 u
Units in ugn
ROD Perfonnance Standard: 5 ug/L
u . Not Detected
-
EX-07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
83000
3300
50000
34000
35000
36000
27000
19000
100
140000
130000
500
180
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
E -Exceeds calibration range
D -Concentration from diluted run sample
D
u
D
D
D
D
D
u
D
D
u
D
- - --
Table 3E
Historical Analytical Results. voes
Trench Area Extraction and Monltonng Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
EX-08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
330000 D 71000 D 28000 D
5000 u 3300 u 1700 u
350000 D 190000 D 35000
390000 D 180000 D 31000
290000 D 130000 D 30000
310000 D 160000 D 53000
270000 D 130000 D 59000
220000 D 110000 D 44000 D
220000 D 85000 D 29000 D
210000 D 79000 D 39000
180000 D 71000 D 36000 D
180000 100000 25000
190000 D 160000 D 40000 D
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
Shading indicates "E" qualified concentration for which a diluted run concentration is unavailable
NR • Not Reported
NS· Not Sampled
-- - - --- -Page 5 of 25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
10000 D 16000 D 5 u NR
14000 D 8000 D 100 440 D
4700 2800 25 u 530
170 8800 500 u 480
3100 u 9700 8 400
8300 u 7100 5 u 380
10000 u 420 5 u ~380i~~E~
30 9100 5 u 370
500 u 9800 D 5 u 330 D
11 7600 D 6 250 D
1700 8100 5 260
9 J 6100 i 9 250
840 !;4100~"'~E\j 5 u t~210J:;~~
2100 D 2200 D 11 67
7100 D 4500 D 34 150
10000 D 2000 D 400 D 190
4400 D 870 3 J 120
4900 D 1800 170 D 160 D
5900 D 1600 260 D 160
10000 D 920 D 24 100
25000 1900 D 4 J 130
25000 D 1200 D 15 20
17000 D 460 D 15 98
21000 330 1 u 69
550 D 13 2 u 76 D
-- ----
Quarter EX..05 EX-06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 120 u 25 u
3096 5000 u 10 u
4096 2000 u 10 u
1097 2000 u 10 u
2097 2000 u 10 u
3097 2000 u 10 u
4097 2000 u 10 u
1098 5000 u 10 u
2098 5000 u 10 u
3098 5000 u 10 u
4098 2500 u 10 u
4099 500 u , u
4000 5000 u , u
Units in ug/l
ROD Performance Standard: 7 ug/L
u . Not Detected
-
EX-07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
120
3300
250
250
250
250
250
1000
100
500
1000
500
5
J -Estimated concentration less than the detectlon limit
u u
u u u u u u
u u u u
u
-- --
Table 3F
Historical Analytical Results -voes
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
1, 1-DICHLOROETHENE
EX-08 EX--09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
120 u 120 u 120 u
5000 u 3300 u 1700 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
2500 u 1000 u 500 u
2500 u 1000 u 500 u
1000 u 2000 u 5000 u
2500 u 1000 u 500 u
1200 u 5000 u 1000 u
2000 u 5000 u 5000 u
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NR · Not Reported
NS· Not Sampled
------ --Page 6 of 25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
10 5 u 5 u NR
18 2 J 10 u 10 u
250 u 330 u 25 u 67 u
10 u 500 u 500 u 50 u
4400 u 440 u 7 u 18 u
12000 u 470 u 7 u 35 u
14000 u 23 u 7 u 7 u
6 J 440 u 7 u 18 u
700 u 130 u 7 u 7 u
9 120 u 7 u 7 u
80 u 470 u 7 u 12 u
9 J 250 u 5 u 10 u
50 u 50 u 5 u 5 u
50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
15 J 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
25 J 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 20 u 10 u 10 u
500 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
30 1 u 1 u 1 u
18 D 1 u 2 u 10 u
-- --- -
Quarter EX-05 EX-06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 350 25 u
3096 5000 u 10 u
4096 250 J 10 u
1097 2000 u 10 u
2097 2000 u 10 u
3097 2000 u 10 u
4097 2000 u 10 u
1098 5000 u 10 u
2098 5000 u 10 u
3098 5000 u 10 u
4098 2500 u 10 u
4099 500 u 1 u
4000 5000 u 1 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 6 ug/L
U -Nol Detected
-
EX-07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
120
3300
250
250
250
250
2so
1000
ioo
88
1000
500
5
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
O -Concentration from diluted run sample
u
u u u
u
u u u u
J
u u
u
- - --
Table 3G
Historical Analytical Results -VOCs
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
1,2-DICHLOROPROPANE
EX-08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
530 9400 D 82000 D
5000 u 12000 81000 D
5000 u 11000 78000
5000 u 12000 68000
5000 u 9100 56000
5000 u 11000 60000
1000 J 12000 75000
1200 J 12000 41000 D
2800 13000 44000 D
3100 14000 54000
3600 15000 42000 D
2700 13000 22000
1500 JD 16000 D 31000 D
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NR -Not Reported
NS -Not Sampled
--- --- --Page 7 of 25
NS--09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
5 u 2 J 5 u NR
10 u 1 J 10 u 2 J
250 u 330 u 25 u 67 u
10 u 500 u 500 u 50 u
3800 u 380 u 6 u 15 u
10000 u 400 u 6 u 30 u
12000 u 20 u 6 u 6 u
6 u 380 u 6 u 15 u
600 u 110 u 6 u 6 u
6 u 100 u 6 u 6 u
68 u 400 u 6 u 10 u
10 u 250 u 5 u 10 u
50 u 50 u 5 u 5 u
50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 20 u 10 u 10 u
500 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
2 1 u 1 u 1.5
10 u 1 2 u 10 u
-- - --- -
Quarter EX-05 EX-06 EX-07
1093 NS NS NS
2093 NS NS NS
3093 NS NS NS
4093 NS NS NS
1094 NS NS NS
2094 NS NS NS
3094 NS NS NS
4094 NS NS NS
1095 NS NS NS
2095 NS NS NS
3095 NS NS NS
4095 NS NS NS
1096 NS NS NS
2096 190 25 u 120
3096 5000 u 10 u 3300
4096 120 J 10 u 250
1097 2000 u 10 u 250
2097 2000 u 10 u 250
3097 2000 u 10 u 250
4097 2000 u 10 u 250
1098 5000 u 10 u 1000
2098 5000 u 10 J 100
3098 5000 u 10 u 81
4098 2500 u 10 u 1000
4099 500 u 1 u 500
4000 5000 u 1 u 2
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 3,500 ug/L
U . Not Detected
J -Estimated concentration Jess than the detection limit
D -Concentration from diluted run sample
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
J
u
u
JD
-- --
Table 3H
Historical Analytical Results. voes
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
ETHYLBENZENE
EX-08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
140 1300 2400
5000 u 590 J 2400
5000 u 480 J 2400 J
5000 u 410 J 2200 J
5000 u 2500 u 1800 J
5000 u 2500 u 1900 J
5000 u 500 J 2500 J
2500 u 490 J 1900
2500 u 660 J 2000
370 J 560 J 2100 J
380 J 630 J 2200
1200 u 5000 u 1700
2000 u 5000 u 3400 JD
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NR. Not Reported
NS· Not Sampled
- ------Page a of 25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
32 4 J 95 NR
98 4 J 140 10 u
250 u 330 u 300 67 u
6 J 500 u 500 u 50 u
6200 u 620 u 10 u 25 u
17000 u 670 u 91 50 u
20000 u 33 u 40 10 u
4 J 620 u 120 25 u
1000 u 180 u 76 10 u
5 J 170 u 98 10 u
110 u 670 u 57 17 u
10 250 u 62 10 u
50 u 50 u 81 5 u
50 u 10 u 100 10 u
8 J 100 u 92 10 u
100 u 100 u 140 10 u
100 u 100 u 20 10 u
100 u 100 u 5 J 10 u
100 u 100 u 22 10 u
100 u 10 u 54 10 u
100 u 20 u 15 10 u
500 u 10 u 22 10 u
100 u 2 J 29 10 u
1.8 1 u 6.5 1 u
5 JD 1 u 8 D 10 u
- -----
Quarter EX-05 EX-06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 56 J 25 u
3096 1900 BJ 4 BJ
4096 130 J 2 J
1097 2000 u 10 u
2097 2000 u 10 u
3097 2000 u 10 u
4097 340 J 10 u
1098 5000 u 10 u
2098 5000 u 10 u
3098 5000 u 10 u
4098 2500 u 10 u
4099 500 u 1 u
4000 5100 BD 1 u
Units in ug/l
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
U -Not Detected
-
EX-07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
120
1200
16
250
250
250
44
1000
100
170
1000
500
4
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
u
BJ
J u u
u
J
u u
J
u u
JBD
- -- -
Table 31
Historical Analytical Results -VOCs
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
EX-08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
40 J 48 J 94 J
5000 u 490 BJ 880 BJ
300 J 170 J 370 J
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
2500 u 1000 u 200 J
420 J 220 J 130 J
270 J 550 J 980 J
2500 u 1000 u 500 u
1200 u 500 u 1000 u
1600 JBD 5100 BO 3800 JBD
B -Constituent also detected in associated method blank (concentration in method blank unknown)
1 -Common laboratory contaminant
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NR -Not Reported
NS -Not Sampled
- --- --- -Page 9 of 25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
5 u 3 J 1 J NR
9 BJ 6 BJ 4 BJ 3 BJ
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
3100 u 170 I BJ 5 u 12 u
14000 B 930 B 8 B 24 BJ
13000 B 17 u 5 u 11 B
4 BJ 350 B 2 BJ 12 u
1300 B 230 B 7 B 5 B
5 u 83 u 5 u 5 u
57 u 330 u 5 u 7 BJ
10 u 73 BJ 2 BJ 3 BJ
50 u 10 BJ 5 u 2 J
50 u 2 J 10 u 2 J
7 J 7 J 10 u 1 J
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 20 u 10 u 10 u
500 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
8.8 1 1 u 1 u 8.9 1
14 D 1 u 1 JBD 8 JBD
--- -- -
Quarter EX-05 EX-06 EX-07
1093 NS NS NS
2093 NS NS NS
3093 NS NS NS
4093 NS NS NS
1094 NS NS NS
2094 NS NS NS
3094 NS NS NS
4094 NS NS NS
1095 NS NS NS
2095 NS NS NS
3095 NS NS NS
4095 NS NS NS
1096 NS NS NS
2096 16000 D 74 3200
3096 19000 67 2200
4096 20000 65 1700
1097 24000 42 1600
2097 23000 37 1200
3097 22000 82 1100
4097 21000 43 1100
1098 21000 40 820
2098 14000 75 56
3098 13000 48 6800
4098 14000 31 6600
4099 24000 4 1 u 500
4000 51000 □ 1 u 120
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 2,000 ug/L
U -Not Detected
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
D -Concentration from diluted run sample
J
J
J
u
D
-- --
Table 3J
Historical Analytical Results -VOCs
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
TOLUENE
EX-08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
68000 D 38000 D 14000 D
28000 29000 15000
25000 28000 15000
30000 28000 16000
24000 20000 12000
25000 23000 12000
26000 22000 14000
24000 21000 D 9000
20000 15000 7600
22000 D 18000 10000
20000 18000 9000
34000 31000 5000
26000 D 65000 D 9500 D
4 -Compound concentration exceeds calibration range of the instrument
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NR -Not Reported
NS -Not Sampled
-- ----- -Page 10 of 25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
400 D 2 J 61 NR
1100 D 17 59 23
330 330 u 120 18 J
100 500 u 500 u 50 u
6200 u 620 u 7 J 13 J
17000 u 670 u 13 17 J
20000 u 33 u 6 J 10
47 620 u 23 10 J
340 J 180 u 11 8 J
130 170 u 15 5 J
410 670 u 6 J 9 J
180 250 u 6 11
170 50 u 11 15
69 4 J 12 2 J
200 9 J 19 6 J
100 u 100 u 28 5 J
BO J 100 u 5 J 4 J
150 100 u 7 J 10
110 100 u 29 8 J
30 J 10 u 9 J 3 J
76 J 5 J 6 J 7 J
500 u 5 J 10 10 u
29 J 10 28 2 J
53 4 1 u 3.3 2.6
110 D 1 6 D 13 D
----- - -
Quarter EX-05 EX-06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 66 J 25 u
3096 5000 u 10 u
1097 2000 u 10 u
2097 2000 u 10 u
3097 2000 u 10 u
4097 2000 u 10 u
1098 5000 u 10 u
2098 5000 u 10 u
3098 5000 u 10 u
4098 2500 u 10 u
4099 500 u 1 u
4000 5000 u 1 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
u -Not Detected
-
EX-07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
~s NS ' 1f0
3300
250
250
250
250
1000
100
500
1000
500
5
J -Estimated concentration fess than the detection limit
u u u
u
u
u u u
u u u
u
-- - -
Table 3K
Historical Analytical Results -VOCs
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
1, 1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE
EX-08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
120 J 120 u 120 u
5000 u 3300 u 1700 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
2500 u 1000 u 500 u
2500 u 1000 u 500 u
1000 u 2000 u 5000 u
2500 u 1000 u 79 J
1200 u 5000 u 100 u
2000 u 5000 u 5000 u
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NR -Not Reported
NS -Not Sampled
- -------Page11of25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
3 J 10 5 u NR
6 J 12 10 u 10 u
250 u 330 u 25 u 67 u
10 u 500 u 500 u 50 u
3100 u 310 u 5 u 12 u
8300 u 330 u 5 u 25 u
10000 u 17 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 310 u 5 u 12 u
500 u 89 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 83 u 5 u 5 u
57 u 330 u 5 u 8 u
10 u 250 u 5 u 10 u
50 u 50 u 5 u 5 u
50 u 6 J 10 u 10 u
100 u 20 J 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 2 J 10 u 10 u
100 u 20 u 10 u 10 u
500 u 2 J 10 u 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
7.7 1 u 1 u 1 u
10 u , u 2 u 10 u
-- -- --
Quarter EX-05 EX-06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 120 u 25 u
3096 5000 u 10 u
4096 2000 u 10 u
1097 2000 u 10 u
2097 2000 u 10 u
3097 2000 u 10 u
4097 2000 u 10 u
1098 5000 u 10 u
2098 5000 u 10 u
3098 5000 u 10 u
4098 2500 u 2 J
4099 500 u 1 u
4000 5000 u 1 u
Units in ugn
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
U -Not Detected
-
EX-07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
120
3300
250
250
250
250
250
1000
100
500
1000
500
5
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
D -Concentration from diluted run sample
u u u
u u u
u
u
u u
u
u
u
- - - -
Table 3l
Historical Analytical Results . voes
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
TRICHLOROETHENE
EX-08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
120 u 120 u 120 u
5000 u 3300 u 1700 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
2500 u 1000 u 500 u
2500 u 1000 u 500 u
1000 u 2000 u 5000 u
2500 u 1000 u 500 u
1200 u 5000 u 1000 u
2000 u 5000 u 5000 u
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NR • Not Reported \
NS· Not Sampled ,
- - - --- --Page 12 of 25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
5 u 1 J 5 u NR
3 J 10 u 10 u 10 u
250 u 330 u 25 u 67 u
10 u 500 u 500 u 50 u
3100 u 310 u 5 u 12 u
8300 u 330 u 5 u 25 u
10000 u 17 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 310 u 5 u 12 u
500 u 89 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 83 u 5 u 5 u
57 u 330 u 5 u 8 u
10 u 250 u 5 u 10 u
50 u 50 u 5 u 5 u
50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 20 u 10 u 10 u
500 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
17 J 10 u 10 u 10 u
5.3 1 u 1 u 1 u
7 JD 1 u 2 u 10 u
-- - - -
Quarter EX-OS EX-06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 990 50 u
3096 5000 u 10 u
4096 2000 u 4 J
1097 970 J 4 J
2097 1200 J 3 J
3097 580 J 3 J
4097 820 J 10 u
1098 5000 u 10 u
2098 5000 u 2 J
3098 5000 u 2 J
4098 500 J 10 u
4099 500 u 1 u
4000 5000 u , u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 2 ug/L
U -Not Detected
-
EX-07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
250
3300
250
53
250
250
250
1000
100
270
220
500
5
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
D -Concentration from diluted run sample
u u
u
J u
u
u
u u
J
J
u u
- - - -
Table 3M
Historical Analytical Results -voes
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
VINYL CHLORIDE
EX-08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
250 u 250 u 220 J
5000 u 3300 u 1700 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
5000 u 2500 u 5000 u
2500 u 1000 u 250 J
2500 u 1000 u 210 J
1000 u 2000 u 5000 u
2500 u 1000 u 200 J
2500 u 10000 u 1000 u
2000 u 5000 u 5000 u
4 -Compound concentration exceeds calibration range of the instrument
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NR · Not Reported
NS · Not Sampled
-- - -----Page 13 of 25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
10 u 8 J 10 u NR
480 DJ 10 u 10 u 18
75 J 330 u 25 u 67 u
48 500 u 500 u 50 u
1200 u 120 u 2 u 5 u
3300 u 130 u 2 u 10 u
4000 u 7 u 2 u 2 u
46 120 u 2 u 6
200 u 36 u 2 u 4
81 33 u 2 u 4
160 130 u 2 u 5
62 500 u 10 u 20 u
89 J 100 u 10 u 10 u
50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
110 100 u 10 u 10 u
20 J 100 u 10 u 3 J
49 J 100 u 10 u 2 J
84 J 100 u 10 u 2 J
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
53 J 10 u 10 u 10 u
17 J 20 u 10 u 10 u
500 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
25 J 10 u 10 u 10 u
140 4 1.3 1 u 1.2
140 D , u 2 u 10 u
- - - -- -
Quarter EX.OS EX-06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 470 25 u
3096 5000 u 10 u
4096 250 J 0.6 J
1097 2000 u 10 u
2097 2000 u 10 u
3097 390 J 10 u
4097 340 J 10 u
1098 5000 u 10 u
2098 5000 u 10 u
3098 5000 u 2 J
4098 2500 u 10 u
4099 1500 u 3 u
4000 5000 u 1 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 350 ug/L
U -Not Detected
\ -
EX-07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
29
3300
18
250
250
250
250
1000
100
150
160
1500
6
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
D -Concentration from diluted run sample
J u
J
u
u
u
u u
u
J
J u
D
- - - -
Table 3N
Historical Analytical Results . voes
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
XYLENE
EX-08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
550 3000 7700 D
5000 u 2300 J 7800
5000 u 1800 J 7300
5000 u 1300 J 6800
5000 u 1000 J 5800
5000 u 1100 J 6300
5000 u 1800 J 8300
680 J 1800 6200
1100 J 2300 6200
1400 2000 6800
1600 J 2200 7900
3700 u 15000 u 5800
1800 D 5000 JD 12000 D
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NR -Not Reported
NS -Nol Sampled
--------Page 14 of 25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
69 10 150 NR
120 DJ 10 220 1 J
250 u 330 u 560 67 u
13 500 u 500 u so u
6200 u 620 u 100 25 u
17000 u 670 u 110 so u
20000 u 33 u so 10 u
4 J 620 u 120 25 u
1000 u 180 u 44 10 u
15 170 u 66 10 u
110 u 670 u 22 17 u
23 250 u 21 10 u
12 J so u 46 5 u
6 J 10 u so 10 u
21 J 100 u 140 1 J
100 u 100 u 180 10 u
100 u 100 u 35 10 u
100 u 100 u 4 J 10 u
100 u 100 u 42 10 u
100 u 2 J 110 10 u
22 J 4 I J 64 10 u
500 u 10 u 47 10 u
100 u 5 J 53 10 u
8 3 u 23.4 3 u
20 D 1 u 35 D 10 u
- --- --
Quarter EX--05 EX-06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 2500 u 100 u
3096 5000 u 4 J
4096 170 J 16
1097 530 u 10 u
2097 110 u 10 u
3097 500 u 10 u
4097 55 J 10 u
1098 53 u 10 u
2098 110 u 11 u
3098 110 u 10 u
4098 120 J 10 u
4099 200 u 10 u
4000 260 u 51 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
U -Not Detected
-
EX-07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
200
100
100
100
100
110
18
14
11
990
100
10
51
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
E -Exceeds calibration range
D -Concentration from diluted run sample
u u
u
u u u
J
J
u
D u
u u
- - - -
Table 30
Historical Analytical Results -SVOCs
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
. BI5(2-CHLOROETHYL)ETHER
EX-08 EX--09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
320 J 10000 35000 D
5000 u NR 47000
2500 u 6600 29000 D
210 7200 29000 D
390 3800 D 14000
620 7500 30000 D
810 7400 D 16000 D
1100 10000 D 68000 D
1900 7100 D 23000 D
1400 6200 D 15000 D
2900 18000 D 14000 D
200 u 500 u 11000
51 u 2600 u ~510.t~&ED!
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection !imlt greater than ROD Performance Standard
Shading indicates "E" qualified concentration for which a diluted run concentration is unavailable
NR. Not Reported
NS· Not Sampled
- ------ -Page 15 of 25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
10 u 11 u 11 u 11 u
56 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
530 u so u 10 u 42 u
8 J 220 u 10 u 10 u
20 u 1100 u 11 u 22 u
6 u 110 u 5 u 21 u
11 u 22 u 5 u 10 u
53 u 520 u 5 u 11 u
27 u 250 u 5 u 6 u
28 u 310 u 6 u 5 u
50 u 260 u 5 u 5 u
10 u 500 u 10 u 10 u
50 u 200 u 50 u 50 u
50 u 200 u 10 u 20 u
20 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
20 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
20 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
2 J 11 u 11 u 10 u
11 u 10 u 10 u 11 u
3 J 10 u 11 u 10 u
2 J 10 u 10 u 10 u
2 J 10 u 2 J 11 u
10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
51 u NA 51 u 52 u
-- - -- -
Quarter EX-05 EX-06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 6200 u 250 u
3096 12000 u 25 u
4096 6200 u 25 u
1097 1300 u 25 u
2097 260 u 25 u
3097 1200 u 26 u
4097 260 u 26 u
1098 130 u 26 u
2098 280 u 28 u
3098 270 u 26 u
4098 2800 u 26 u
4099 1000 u 50 u
4000 53 u 10 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 350 ug/L
U • Not Detected
E -Exceeds calibration range
D -Concentration from diluted run sample
-
EX-07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
500 u
250 u
250 u
260 u
250 u
280 u
260 u
260 u
26 u
260 u
260 u
50 u
10 u
- - - -
Table 3P
Historical Analytical Results -SVOCs
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
4-NITROPHENOL
EX-08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
6200 u 6200 u 2500 u
12000 u 12000 u 25000 u
6200 u 2500 u 7500 u
25 u 520 u 260 u
250 u 100 u 5300 u
1400 u 530 u 1000 u
260 u 260 u 260 u
260 u 260 u 270 u
260 u 270 u 260 u
270 u 270 u 260 u
2600 u 2600 u 1300 u
1000 u 2500 u 1000 u
i1l410?~-~~'.E1: !"' 7600 ,\g'Ji ED J 8800 u
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
Shading indicates "E" qualified concentration for which a diluted run concentration is unavailable
NR -Not Reported
NS -Not Sampled
- - ---- --Page 16 of 25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
50 u 53 u 56 u 54 u
140 u 25 u 26 u 25 u
1300 u 120 u 26 u 110 u
25 u 540 u 26 u 26 u
50 u 2600 u 27 u 54 u
28 u 530 u 27 u 110 u
56 u 110 u 26 u 51 u
260 u 2600 u 26 u 54 u
140 u 1200 u 27 u 28 u
140 u 1600 u 26 u 27 u
250 u 1300 u 25 u 26 u
25 u 1200 u 25 u 25 u
120 u 500 u 120 u 120 u
120 u 500 u 25 u 50 u
3 J 250 u 25 u 25 u
25 u 26 u 26 u 26 u
50 u 250 u 25 u 25 u
50 u 26 u 26 u 26 u
26 u 27 u 26 u 26 u
27 u 26 u 26 u 26 u
26 u 26 u 27 u 26 u
26 u 26 u 26 u 25 u
26 u 26 u 26 u 27 u
50 u 50 u 50 u 50 u
10 u NA 10 u 10 u
--- - --
Quarter EX-05 EX-06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 11 1.1 u
3096 2.2 u 1.1 u
4096 4.4 u 1.1 u
1097 7 u 7 u
2097 10.6 7 u
3097 7 u 7 u
4097 6 u 6 u
1098 6 u 6 u
2098 1.3 u 1.3 u
3098 4.5 J 1.3 u
4098 9.21 5 u
4099 7.7 5 u
4000 3.6 B 1.5 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 10 ug/L
U -Not Detected
-
EX-07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
1.1
1.1
1.1
7
7
7
6
6
1.3
2.3
5.37
5
1.5
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
J
u
u
- - - -
Table 30
Historical Analytical Results • Metals
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
ARSENIC
EX-08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
22 u 11 u 11 u
2.2 u 2.2 u 2.2 u
2.2 u 4.4 u 2.2 u
7 u 9.8 B 7 u
7 u 7 u 7 u
7 u 7 u 7 u
9 B 8.5 B 9.5 B
6 u 6 u 6 u
1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u
7.4 5 4.1 J
14.8 10.5 9.2
11 8.3 5.8
1.5 u 3 B 1.5 B
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting Limit
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indlcates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Nol Sampled
- - - - ----Page 17 of 25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
2 u 2 u 2 u 2 u
2.2 B 2 u 2 u 2 u
8.2 B 2.4 u 2.4 u 4.8 u
2.9 u 2.9 u 2.9 u 5.8 u
2.6 u 2.6 u 2.6 u 5.2 u
2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1 u
2.1 u 2.9 B 2.1 u 3.7 B
1.5 B 1.7 B 2 B 0.8 u
2.7 u 2.7 u 2.7 u 2.7 u
3.2 B 2.2 B 2.4 B 1.9 u
1.5 u 1.5 u 1.5 u 1.5 u
1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u
1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u
1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u
1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u
7 u 7 u 7 u 7 u
7 u 7 u 7 u 7 u
7.4 B 7 u 7 u 7 u
6 u 6 u 6 u 6 u
6 u 6 u 6 u 6 u
1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u
1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u
5 u 5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u 5 u
1.5 u 1.6 B 1.5 u 1.5 u
- - - -- -
Quarter EX-05 EX--06 EX-07
1093 NS NS NS
2093 NS NS NS
3093 NS NS NS
4093 NS NS NS
1094 NS NS NS
2094 NS NS NS
3094 NS NS NS
4094 NS NS NS
1095 NS NS NS
2095 NS NS NS
3095 NS NS NS
4095 NS NS NS
1096 NS NS NS
2096 124 B 313 425
3096 159 B 106 B 305
4096 157 B 107 B 319
1097 158 B 80.9 B 335
2097 138 B 87.6 B 315
3097 179 B 98.2 B 280
4097 217 70.8 B 260
1098 244 81.6 B 290
2098 540 J 90.3 J 248
3098 186 63.2 129
4098 281 142 204
4099 500 40 230
4000 239 20 B 171
Units in ug/l
ROD Performance Standard: 1,000 ug/L
U -Not Detected
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
B
- - --
Table 3R
Historical Analytical Results -Metals
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
BARIUM
EX-08 EX--09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
25.6 B 12.9 B 19.3 B
28.6 B 17.9 B 16.6 B
29.1 B 17.1 B 21.4 B
21 B 10.9 B 29.2 B
22.9 B 11.8 B 18 B
26 B 15.7 B 19.1 B
25.5 B 15.5 B 17.8 B
21.3 B ,, B 15.7 B
80 u 80 u 80 u
15.9 10.1 11.8
22.1 J 20 u 20 u
21 12 16
17.5 B 7 B 14.2 B
B. Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting Limit
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS · Not Sampled
--- - -- --Page 18 of 25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
1480 297 115 B 448
3160 155 B 190 B 445
1020 155 B 85.9 B 444
412 276 143 B 416
264 144 B 134 B 418
227 131 B 127 B 461
428 96.3 B 151 B 370
573 124 B 169 B 364
2030 193 B 140 B 428
1200 176 B 237 387
1340 164 B 98.8 B 452
993 156 B 156 B 432
752 277/ 136 B 533
504 181 B 144 B 296
785 293 301 405
1270 305 124 B 398
329 205 199 B 342
523 236 576 506
507 280 178 B 467
605 234 178 B 365
270 259 180 J 469
186 132 113 125
305 156 270 368
420 110 120 420
309 72.7 B 80.3 364
--- -- -
Quarter EX-05 EX-06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 0.3 u 0.3 u
3096 0.3 u 0.3 u
4096 0.3 u 0.3 u
1097 2 u 2 u
2097 2 u 2 u
3097 2 u 2 u
4097 1 u 1 u
1098 1 u 1 u
2098 40 u 1 u
3098 1 u 1 u
4098 10 u 1 u
4099 1 u 1 u
4000 0.2 B 0.1 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 17.5 ug/L
U -Not Detected
-
) EX-07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
0.3
0.3
0.3
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
10
1
0.1
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
- - --
Table 3S
Historical Analytical Results -Metals
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
BERYLLIUM
EX-08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
34 26.1 25.1
22.7 27.5 21.3
20.6 25.6 18.8
18.5 22 14.9
15.4 17.1 12.1
14 19.8 14.3
13.4 18.4 13.8
14.1 18.9 14.9
40 u 46.8 J 40 u
7.7 9.7 8
16.8 J 22 J 15.9 J
14 12 9.7
7.2 16.7 10.6
8 -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting Limit
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Pertormance Standard
NS· Not Sampled
- - ---- --Page 19 of 25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
1 u 1 u 1 u 1 u
3.4 B 1.8 B 1.9 B 1.2 B
0.75 B 0.4 u 0.4 u 0.4 u
0.4 u 0.4 u 0.4 u 0.4 u
0.21 B 0.2 u 0.2 u 0.32 B
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u
0.3 u 0.3 u 03 u 0.3 u
0.22 B 0.2 u 0.24 B 0.2 u
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.55 B 0.3 u
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u
0.3 u 0.4 B 0.3 u 0.3 u
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u
0.4 B 0.3 u 0.6 B 0.3 u
2 u 2 u 2 u 2 u
2 u 2 u 2 u 2 u
2 u 2 u 2 u 2 u
1 u 1 u 1 u 1 u
1 u 1 u 1 u 1 u
1 u 1 u 1 u 1 u
1 u 1 u 1 u 1 u
1 u 1 u 1.1 J 1 u
1 u 1 u 1 u 1 u
0.1 u 0.1 u 0.1 u 0.1 u
,----------------------- ---
Quarter EX..05 EX-06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 17.5 5 u
3096 10.6 4.8 u
4096 6.8 4.8 u
1097 6.9 0.5 u
2097 12.8 3 u
3097 15.4 18
4097 21 4 u
1098 10.1 4 u
2098 8.9 0,26 u
3098 28.1 0.26 u
4098 31.7 0.5 u
4099 9.5 1 u
4000 6.1 0.5 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 1 O ug/L
U -Not Detected
-
EX--07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
5
4.8
4.8
0.74
4.2
4.7
1:
q.26
0.26
7.63
1
0.5
u
u
u
B
B
B
u
u
u
u
u
u
--- -
Table 3T
Historical Analytical Results . Metals
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury. North Carolina
CADMIUM
EX--08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
44 12.7 12.6
18.7 7.7 6.6
15.5 8.4 4.8 u
13.4 6.1 4.3 B
3 u 3 u 3 u
7.4 4.6 3 u
4.1 B 4 u 4.3 B
12.7 5.4 6.3
7.5 1.9 2.3
3.9 1.5 1.5
11.5 3.61 3.72
7.1 1.7 1.3
2 B 2.6 B 3.8 B
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection limit but less than the Reporting limit
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS· Not Sampled
- - ---- --Page 20 of 25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
5 u 5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u 5 u
2.3 u 2.3 u 2.3 u 2.3 u
2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1 u
1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u
4.9 B 1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u
1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u
2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1 u
1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u
1.8 B 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.2 u
1.9 u 1.9 u 1.9 u 1.9 u
4.8 u 4.8 u 4.8 u 4.8 u
5 u 5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u 5 u
48 u 4.8 u 4.8 u 4.8 u
1.5 B 0.5 u 0.5 u 0.5 u
3 u 3 u 3 u 3 u
3 u 3 u 3 u 3 u
4 u 18 4 u 4 u
4 u 4 u 4 u 4 u
0.26 u 0.26 u 0.26 u 0.26 u
0.26 u 0.26 u 0.26 u 0.26 u
0.5 u 0.5 u 0.5 u 0.5 u
1 u 1 u 1 u 1 u
0.5 u 0.5 u 0.5 u 0.5 u
------ -
Quarter EX-05 EX-06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 18.1 5 u
3096 25.1 4.9 u
4096 26.2 4.9 u
1097 5 u 5 u
2097 5 u 5 u
3097 5 u 5 u
4097 11 4 u
1098 4 u 4 u
2098 160 u 4 u
3098 11.1 4 u
4098 85.9 J 12.1
4099 2 u 2 u
4000 14.1 3.5 B
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 50 ug/L
U -Not Detected
-
EX-07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
7.5
14.8
16.9
5
5
5.8
4
4
15.4
19.4
231
2
2.9
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
B
u
u
B
u
u
u
B
-·-- -
Table 3U
Historical Analytical Results -Metals
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
CHROMIUM
EX-08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
80.2 48 44.4
84.7 63.9 56.1
79.8 63.5 46.5
19.8 27.4 16.3
12.6 19.5 10.3
9.6 B 19.2 11.8
9.9 B 17.6 11.2
4 u 14.4 4 u
160 u 160 u 160 u
11.5 16.4 24
101 85.5 J 82.5 J
2 u 4.6 2 u
31.4 34 28.3
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting Limit
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
-- - -- --Page 21 of 25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
50.1 14.2 10 u 11.7
304 11.7 35.6 10.6
127 16.3 17.4 3.6 B
20.6 36.9 4.2 B 3.6 B
11.9 6.1 B 2.9 u 2.9 u
24.3 3.1 B 2.4 u 4.3 B
7.1 B 8.8 B 4.1 B 4.3 B
8.8 B 9.1 B 4.3 u 4.3 u
127 4 B 2 u 2 u
42 6.7 B 5.2 B 3.1 u
31.1 2.4 u 2.4 u 2.4 u
4.9 u 4.9 u 7 B 9.4 B
5 u 5 u 5 u 5 u
20.3 5 u 5 u 5 u
97.2 49 u 34.2 4.9 u
375 5 u 5 u 5 u
21.7 5 u 8.2 B 5 u
62.7 5 u 57.2 5 u
69.6 4 u 4 u 4 u
175 5.1 B 4 u 4 u
8.4 J 5.5 J 4 u 5.2 J
12.3 4 u 4 u 4 u
74.5 10 41.6 9.6 J
25 2 u 5 2 u
7.2 B 2.2 B 0.9 u 3.2 B
--- - - - -
Quarter EX-05 EX-06 EX-07
1093 NS NS NS
2093 NS NS NS
3093 NS NS NS
4093 NS NS NS
1094 NS NS NS
2094 NS NS NS
3094 NS NS NS
4094 NS NS NS
1095 NS NS NS
2095 NS NS NS
3095 NS NS NS
4095 NS NS NS
1096 NS NS NS
2096 200000 7680 73700
3096 170000 3250 64200
4096 144000 3620 60400
1097 138000 2520 68000
2097 125000 2850 43600
3097 118000 3300 41300
4097 98900 2180 40200
1098 161000 2810 43400
2098 255000 3170 26200
3098 84700 2230 48000
4098 134000 3100 81100
4099 62000 850 36000
4000 56300 402 9310
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 7,700 ug/L
- --
Table 3V
Historical Analytical Results • Metals
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
MANGANESE
EX-08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
516000 98800 198000
393000 160000 159000
332000 170000 138000
352000 192000 126000
232000 114000 91900
231000 143000 132000
203000 113000 103000
271000 138000 143000
311000 178000 184000
134000 69400 79100
212000 122000 138000
210000 110000 120000
100000 129000 114000
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS· Not Sampled
- -- -----Page 22 of 25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
51300 14300 63.1 15200
60500 7760 118 15000
28100 3540 55,6 15100
15300 7930 71.5 17600
11000 9650, 47 17800
6760 9200[ 67 18600
14300 2760 83.2 14900
18800 14400 124 14300
51800 8960 62.6 16800
33600 9320 248 13400
34600 8880 37.8 16200
25700 5860 32 14200
20500 10050 48.2 16400
13800 2290 44 8670
18200 4850 841 13800
31600 4260 67.2 14300
10300 2150 889 11800
22400 2730 366 16700
19600 2760 136 15500
8280 1830 132 13000
12400 2670 133 15600
3400 1450 42.7 3980
8340 1410 335 12800
12000 2400 190 14000
15000 441 90.9 13100
---- - -
Quarter EX--05 EX-06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 678 19.7 B
3096 601 15.3 u
4096 654 15.3 u
1097 732 20 u
2097 587 20 u
3097 622 20 u
4097 566 16 u
1098 591 16 u
2098 960 J 14 u
3098 503 14 u
4098 698 14 u
4099 640 5 u
4000 1540 1.5 B
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 350 ug/L
U -Not Detected
-
EX--07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
117
110
91.1
69.7
61.3
35.8
22.9
16
14
213
690
53
1.9
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
B
B
u
u
B
- - --
Table 3W
Historical Analytical Results . Metals
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
NICKEL
EX--08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
1990 645 698
1440 798 549
1350 906 sos
1270 843 444
1140 653 365
1120 706 451
989 657 410
1020 680 484
1330 J 940 J 560 u
567 329 271
1100 771 501
800 430 320
575 599 370
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting Umit
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
- -- -----Page 23 of 25
NS--09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
23.9 B 45.2 20 u 20 u
102 25.1 B 28.2 B 20 u
54 33.9 B 35.1 B 10.3 B
10.4 u 57.5 10.4 u 10.4 u
13.8 B 30.2 B 6.4 B 6.2 u
19.2 B 27.5 B 6.9 u 6.9 u
10.5 B 25.6 B 10.3 B 7 B
10.3 u 33.7 B 16.2 B 10.3 u
43.6 20.1 B 5.5 u 5.5 u
9.4 B 20.6 B 12 B 7.2 u
20.1 B 26.9 B 8.8 u 8.8 u
15.3 u 15.3 u 15.3 u 15.3 u
15 u 27.6 B 15 u 15 u
15 u 22.9 B 15 u 15 u
40.9 35.4 B 40.7 15.3 u
223 35.6 B 20 u 20 u
20 u 23.2 B 21.9 B 20 u
34.8 B 21 B 64.3 20 u
63.2 30.5 B 16.5 B 16 u
81.9 23.6 B 16 u 16 u
23.3 J 14 u 14 u 14 u
14 u 14 u 14 u 14 u
17.9 J 14 u 42.9 14 u
12 5.7 22 5 u
4 B 5.7 B 1.6 B 1 u
- ---- - -- - - - -
Quarter EX-05 EX-06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 8 u 0.8 u
3096 16 u 0.8 u
4096 5.2 u 1.3 u
1097 86.1 5 u
2097 77.3 5 u
3097 68.1 5 u
4097 66.1 5 u
1098 64.6 5 u
2098 66.9 4.3 u
3098 36.2 4.3 u
4098 50.2 5 u
4099 26 5 u
4000 30.2 2.3 u
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 10 ug/L
U -Not Detected
EX-07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
\ 1.6
1.6
1.3
31.7
24.7
24.7
19.5
20.6
8.2
18.2
26
6.5
2.3
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
u
u
u
u
Table 3X
Historical Analytical Results -Metals
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
SELENIUM
EX-08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
8 u 8 u 8 u
1.6 u 1.6 u 4 u
5.2 u 5.2 u 2.6 u
171 88.3 67.9
59.9 19.7 25.8
58.9 23.5 32.8
118 61.1 63.7
104 61.6 58.2
78.7 43 46
47.3 26.4 27.3
61.6 39.4 39.9
67 38 34
49.1 47 42.2
8 -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting Limlt
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
NS-09
NS
10
4
6.9
1.7
2.6
3.1
3.1
0.9
2.7
2
1
1.6
0.8
0.8
0.8
21.9
6.8
18.8
12.6
5
4.3
4.3
5
5
2.6
- - -----Page 24 of 25
NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS
u 2 u 2 u 2 u
u 2 u 2 u 2 u
u 2.3 u 2.3 u 4.6 u
u 1.7 u 1.7 u 3.4 u
u 2.6 u 2.6 u 5.2 u
u 3.1 u 3.1 u 3.1 u
u 3.1 u 3.1 u 3.1 u
u 0.9 u 0.9 u 0.9 u
u 2.7 u 2.7 u 2.7 u
B 1.7 u 3.6 B 1.7 u
u 1 u 1 u 1 u
u 1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u
u 0.8 u 0.8 u 0.8 u
u 0.8 u 0.8 u 0.8 u
u 0.8 u 0.8 u 0.8 u
5 u 5.2 6.6
5 u 5 u 5 u
6.8 5 u 9.1
5 u 5 u 11.4
u 5 u 5 u 9
u 4.3 u 4.3 u 4.6 J
u 4.3 u 4.3 u 4.3 u
u 5 u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u 5 u
B 2.3 u 2.3 u 3 B
---·-- - -
Quarter EX-05 EX-06 EX-07
1093 NS NS NS
2093 NS NS NS
3093 NS NS NS
4093 NS NS NS
1094 NS NS NS
2094 NS NS NS
3094 NS NS NS
4094 NS NS NS
1095 NS NS NS
2095 NS NS NS
3095 NS NS NS
4095 NS NS NS
1096 NS NS NS
2096 363 10.2 B 43.2
3096 234 3.7 B 34.3
4096 220 2.4 u 20.1
1097 221 25.1 35.3
2097 219 25.4 113
3097 188 24.7 119
4097 135 15 u 15
1098 126 15 u 15
2098 200 u 5 u 6.7
3098 883 5 u 27.5
4098 1320 9.3 J 306
4099 350 10 u 12
4000 186 8.6 u 8.6
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 7,350 ug/L
U -Not Detected
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
u
u
J
u
- - - -
Table 3Y
Historical Analytical Results -Metals
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
ZINC
EX-08 EX-09 EX-10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
3200 2880 3280
1820 2750 2320
1690 2850 2120
1860 2900 2010
1510 2060 1360
1400 2230 1370
1250 1940 1230
1320 1960 1540
1540 2450 1950
686 936 924
1320 1800 1630
1200 1300 1000
598 1600 1150
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting Limit
NS -Not Sampled
- -- -----Page 25 of25
NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
NS NS NS NS
49.2 47.4 32.5 14,5 B
156 54 37.4 12.6 B
75.6 43.2 15 B 1.8 u
11.4 B 852/ 7.2 B 1.7 u
8.7 B 20.1 3.1 B 0.9 u
217 54.1 12.8 B 3.8 u
35.6 33.1 27.8 3.8 u
31 44.9 38.7 3.5 u
141 24.8 13.2 B 5.8 u
46.6 16.6 B 41.3 2.6 u
13.8 B 24.5 5.2 u 5.2 u
10,8 B 28.6 8.2 B 3.6 B
37.8 24 9.6 B 6.4 B
16.3 B 25.4 3.9 B 2.5 B
84.2 41.1 65 30.6
111 50.6 11.9 B 11.7 B
10.9 B 37.2 22.4 5 u
47.9 54 127 15.1 B
107 49 31.2 15 u
153 91.1 29.8 15 u
47.1 32.2 11.3 J 5 u
26 18.6 J 5.2 J 5 u
97.5 45.5 71.7 5 u
25 14 84 10 u
8.6 u 29.5 6.6 u 8.6 u
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EX-01
Constituent Performance
Standard Frequency Range of
of Detection Detections
voes
Acetone 3,500 12125 co1 I ND-75
Benzene 5
Bromodichloromethane 5
Chloroform 5 -
1, 1-0ichloroethene 7 -
1,2-0ichloroethane 5 5126 (1 I 3J -20
1,2-0ichlaropropane 6 6/26 (2) 1J • 35
Ethylbenzene 3,500
Methylene chloride 5 10124 (1 I 98
Toluene 2,000 1126 (0) 1J
1, 1,2-Trichloroethane 5 .
Trich!oroethene 5 1/26 (0) 2J
Vinyl chloride 2
Xylene 350 2/26 (0) 2J -10
SVOCs
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 5 I 11125 c1s1 I 3J-46
4-Nitrophenof 350 -
Metals
Arsenic 10 1/26 (0) ·3_39
Barium 1,000 25126 (0) 17.78 -213
Beryllium 18 2126 (0) 0.32B -1.5B
Cadmium 10 -
Chromium 50 5126 (0) 38 -12
Manganese 7,700 26126 (0) 9.9 -461
Nickel 350 2126 (0) 11.8B-30.4
Selenium 10 2126 (0) 2.78 -6.9
Zinc 7,350 20126 (0) 6.98 -43.6
(n) • Number of limes detection levels exceeded Performance Standards
'-' -Compound was not detected during any monitoring event
All concentrations are in ug/l
J -Estimated concentration be!oW method detection limit
D -Compound result is from a secondary dilution
B (organics) -Constituent detected in method blank
EX.02
Frequency Range of
of Detection Detections
24125 (231 I ND· 50,000
-
-
18125 (18) 140J -1,000
21125 (21 I 130-1,600
-
13/23 (12) 4J. 2,900B
19/25 (0) 62 -1,400D
-
1125 (0) 4J
3/25 (3) 6-5-19
10/25 (0) 24J • 2,900
I 2s12s c2s1 I 43 -1.700E
4/25 (0) 1.18 -3.88
2s12s c221 I 713-8,580
4/26 (0) 0.2B-1.78
3125 (0) 0.74B -4:S-a-·
12125 (0) 2.9B-31.1
25125 (24) 7,180-38,100
5125 (0) 8.8 -75.5
10126 (3) 1.68 -14.9
17125 (0) 3.4B -76.5
B (inorganic) -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting Umit
ND -Compound was not detected
Table 4
Analytical Results Summary
Plume Periphery Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
EX.OJ EX-04
Frequency Range of Frequency Range of Frequency
of Detection Detections of Detection Detections of Detection
2s126 (1s1 I ND -15,000 22126 (0) ND· 2,400 19/26 (17)
. . 1126 (1)
. .
--
--
18/26 (18) 9.1 -240J 13126 (2) 3J - 7 22/26 (19)
21126 c121 I 24 · 310 9126 (4) 2J • 26 19126(181 I
-
13124 c11J I 2BJ -160 BJ 12124 (3) 1 J -78 14/24 (91 I
25126 (0) 32 J -480D 23126 (0) O.?J-46 1a125 c11 I
-
. 1126(1)
1126 (0) 1.9 1126(1) 28 1/26 (1)
8126 (0) 6J -75D 15126 (0) 1 -10 13126 (1)
24/26 (24) 56-1,1000 25/26 (23) SJ -94D 2s126 c2s1 I
-
. 2126 (0) 2.88 -3B 4126 (0)
26/26 (0) 140B • 722 26126 (0) 26.5 -114B 26126 (11)
2/26 (0) 0.248 -1.88 4126 (0) 0.238 -1.58 2/26 (0)
1126(1) 10.4 3126 (1) 1.78-17.8 1126 (0)
8126 (1 I 2.4B-62.6 7126 (0) 1.98 -11.6 11/26 (0)
26126 (2) 1,430-11,200 26126 (0) 3,055 -5,610 26/26 (8)
2126 (0) 12.5 -81.6 1126 (0) 4.7B 2126 (0)
2/26 (0) 5-6.3 -8/26 (5)
11126 (0) 2.58 -72.8 15125 co1 I 48 -234 16/26 (0)
NS-29
Range of-
Detections
ND -220,000
97J
-
.
-
8 -4,200
12J · 3,700
-
2J -2,200
3J -5,5000
1SOJ
5.8
2J-1,200D
BJ-7,100D
1.58 -9.1B
45.3B -8,530
0.238 -1.48
4.58
3B -36.8
153-117,000
46.9-51
3B -50.7
2B -24.4
NS-30 NS-31 NS-32
Frequency Range of· Frequency Range of Frequency Range of
of Detection Detections of Detection Detections of Detection Detections
14/26 (0) ND. 3,000 21126 (15) ND -52.000 6/26 (0) NO -140
. .
. --
--
--
9126 (6) 3J -84 15/26 (12) 4J -260
7126 (6) 5J-190, 13/26 (12) 31 -340 1/26 (0) 1J
. --
8/24 (4) 0.6J • 48BJ 13/24(11) 2BJ -1,6008 10124(3) O.?J-118
7126 (0) 2J -5600 20/26 (0) 6J-1,200 1/26 (0) OBJ
1126 (0) 2J --
--
. 2/26 (0) 1.7 -2J -
4126 (0) 4J-42D ~ 7126 (0) 4J -200 -
24126 (21 I SJ -1,000D I 24126 (241 11 -2,700D I 3/26 (3) 370 -650D
---
4/26 (1) 2.18 • 37.28 5126 (0) 1.38 -3.8B 4/26 (0) 2.38 • 3.18
26/26 (0) 18.1B-232E 25/26 (13) 1.78 -18,900 26126 (0) 61.9-105
2126 (0) 0.3B -1.48 1126 (0) 1.8B 2126 (0) 0.288 -1.68
-1126 (1) 26.9
6/26 (0) 1.98 -9.8B 12/26 (3) 2B -101 5126(0) I 2.48 -10
26/26 (0) 147 -2,480 26/26 (0) 17.9-4,150 26126 (0) 79.2 -139
1126 (0) 1.88 7/26 (0) 1.78-51.6 -
2/26 (0) 28 -2.88 1/26 (0) 278 2126 (0) 28 · 3.28
12126 (0) 2.40 -23.s·· 18126 (0) 2.18-1,640 1 s,26 co1 I 3.38 -31.8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EX-05
Constituent Performance
Standard Frequency Range of
of Detection Detections
voes
Acetone 3,500 13/13 (12) I 3,200 -100,000
Benzene 5 1113 (1) I 49J
Bromodichloromethane 5 -
Chloroform 5 1113 (1) I 44J
1, 1-Dichloroethene 7
1,2-Dichloroethane 5 12/13 (12) 230,000 • 530,000D
1,2-Dichloropropane 6 2/13 (2) 250J • 350
Ethylbenzene 3,500 2/13 (0) 120 -190
Methylene chloride 5 5113 (5) 56J -5,1008D
Toluene 2,000 13/13 (13) 13,000-51,000
1, 1,2-Trichloroethane 5 1/13 (1) 66J
Trichloroethene 5 1/13 (0) 2J
Vinyl chloride 2 6/16 (6) 500J • 1,200J
Xylene 350 4/13 (2) 250J • 470
SVOCs
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 5 I 3113 (3) 55J • 170J
4-Nitrophenol 350 I
Metals
Arsenic 10 6/13 (2) 3.68-11
Barium 1,000 13/13 (0) 1248 -540J
Beryllium 18 1/13 (0) 0.2B
Cadmium 10 13/13 (8) 3.1-31.7
Chromium 50 7/13 {1) 11.1 -85.9J
Manganese 7,700 13/13 (13) 56,300 • 255,000
Nickel 350 13/13 (13) 503 -1,540
Selenium 10 10/13 (10) 26-86.1
Zinc 7,350 12/13 (OJ 126-1,320
(n) -Number of limes detection levels e:icceeded Performance Standards
'.'•Compound was not detected during any monitoring event
All concentrations are in ug/1
J -Estimated concentration below method detection limit __ _
D -Compound result is from a secondary dilution
B (organics) -Consli11.Jent detected in method blank
.
EX..06
F~quency Range of
of Detection Detections
'
12/13 (0) I 11-540D
10/13 (10) 12 -920 .
1/13 (0) 10J
2/13 (0) 2J -4BJ
11/13 (0) 31 -82
6/13 (4) I 2J -4J
2/13 (0) I 0.6J • 2J
2/13 (1) 4J • 16
13/13 (0) 208-313
1/18 (1) 18
2/13 (1) 3.5B-12.1
13/13 (0) 402 -7,680
2/13 (0) 1.58-19.78
6/13 (0) 3.7B -25.4
B (inorganic) • Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection limit but less than the Reporting limit
ND -Compound was not detected
EX-07
Frequency Range of
of DetecUon Detections
11/13 (6) 59JB • 47,0000
1/13 (1) 30J
10/13 (10) 180□ -140,000
1/13 (1) SBJ
2/13 (0) 2JD • 81J
5113 (4) 4JBO • 1,200BJ
12/13 (4) 56J -6,800
3113 (3) I 53J -270J
5113 (O) I 6D -t60J
3113 (3) I 14J • 9900
I
2/13 (0) I 2.3 -5.4
13113 (0) 129 -425
4/13 (0) 0.74B -7.638
8/13 {1) 2.98 -231
13113 (13) 9,310-81,100
11/13 (1) 1.9B-690
9/13 (7) 6.5 -31.7
10/13 (OJ 3.7J -306
Frequency
Table 5
Analytical Results Summary
Trench Area Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
EX-<18 EX-09
Range of Frequency Range of Frequency
of Detection Detections of Detection Detections of Detection
EX-10
f!ange of
□elections
12/13 (12) 11,000 -230;DOOD 11113(11) I 81.00-53,000DB 13113 (13) I s,200-200,0000
1/13 (1) 34J 1113 (t) I 64J 1113(1) T 40J
-
12/13 (12) 180,000. 390,000D 12/13 (12) 71,000-190,000D 12/13 (12) 25,000 -59,000
8/13 (8) 530 -3,600 13/13 (13) 9,100-16,0000 13/13 (13) 22,000 -82,000D
3/13 (0) 140 • 380J 9/13 (0) 41QJ -1,300 13113 (0) 1,700-3,400JD
5/13 (5) ◄OJ • 1,600JBD 6/13 (6) 48J -5, 100B0 7/13 (7) 94J -3,800JBD
13/13 (13) 20,000 • 68,000 13113 (13) 15,000 -65,000 13/13 (13) 5,000 • 16,000
1/13 (1) 120J 1/13 (1) 79J
-4/13 (4) 200J -250J
6/13 {6) I 550 • 1,800D 12113(12)T 1,000J • 5,000JD 13113 (130 5,800 -12,000D
9113(9) l 210 · 2,900 1 10/12 {10) I 3,800D-18,0000 13/13 (13) 510ED • 68,000D I
1113 (1) I 470E I 1113 (1J I 7,600ED I
4/13 (2) 7.4-14.8 6/13 (1) 3B -10.5 5/13 (0) 1.58 -9.58
12/13 (OJ 15.9-29.18 11/13 (0) 78 • 17.98 11/13 (0) 11.8 -29.2B
12/13 (4) 7.2. 34 13113 (9) 9.7 • 46.8J 12/13 (3) 8-25.1
12/13 (6) 28-44 11/13 (1) 1.5-12.7 10/13 (1) 1.3 -12.6
10/13 (4) 9.6B -101 12/13 (3) 4.6 • 85.5J 10/13 (2) 10.3 -82.SJ
13/13 (13) 100,000 -516,000 13113 (13) 69,400 -192,000 13113 (13) 79,100-198,000
13/13 {13) 567 -1,990 13113 (12) 329 -940J 12/13 (10) 271 -698
10/13 (10) 47.3 -171 10/13 (10) 19.7. 88.3 10/13 (10) 25.8 • 67.9
13113 (0) 598 • 3,200 13113 (0) 936-2,900 13/13 (0) 924. 3,280
Frequency
of Detection
22125 (4)
9/25 (8)
21/25 {21)
1/25 (0)
9/25 (0)
8/23 (7)
20125 (0)
3/25 (2)
4/25 (3)
17/25 (17)
12/25(0)
5/25 (1)
1/13 (0)
5/25 (0)
25/25 (7)
5/25(0)
3125 (0)
23/25 (10)
25125 {23)
18/25 (0)
6125 (3)
24125 (0)
NS--09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
Range of Frequency, Range of Frequency Range of Frequency Range of
Detections of Detection Detections of Detection Detections of Detection Detections
7J -390,000 13/25 (0) 2J-2,1008 16/25 (l) I 2J-4,100 12/24 (0) I 5J -530
6J • 30 1/25 (0) 2J -
9 -25,000 25/25 (25) 13-16,0000 15125 (12) 3J -400D 24/24 (24) 20 -530
2 3/25 (OJ 1 -2J 2/24 (OJ 1.5-2J
1.8-98 3/25 (0) 2J -4J 23/25 (0) 5J • 300
◄BJ· 13,000B 10/23 (8) 2J • 930 BJ 7123 (2) I 1J -8B 11122 (5J I 1J-24BJ
29J-1,1000 8/25 (0) 1 -17 24125 (0) 3.3 -120 22/24 (0) 2J • 23
JJ-7.7 6/25 (4) 2J -20J -
3J -17J 1/25 (0) 1J
17J -480 OJ 2/25 (1} 1.3-8J 9/24 (6) 1.2 • 18
4J. 120DJ 5/25 (OJ 2J • 10 24/25 {1) I 4J -560 2/24 (OJ I 1J -
2J-8J ' I 1/25 (0) 2J I
I 3J I -I I
1.58 • 8.28 4/25 (OJ 1.6B-2.98 2/25 (0) I 2B -2.4B 1/25 (0) I 3,7B
186 • 3160 25/25 (0) 72.78 -305 25/25 (0) 80.3 -576 25125 (0) 125 • 533
.218 -3.48 2125 (OJ 0.48 -1.8B 5125 (0) 0.248 • 1.98 2/25 (0)
1.5B -4.98 1/25 (1) 18
7.18-375 14125 (0) 2.28 • 36.9 11/25 (1) 4.1B-57.2 10/25 (0) 3.28-11.7
8,280 • 60,500 25125 (10): 441 • 14,400 25/25 (0) 32 -889 25125 (24) 3,950 • 18,600
48 -223 21/25 (0) .' 5.7-57.5 13/25 (OJ 1.6B • 64.3 21/25 (0) 7-10.3
2B-21.9 1/25 (OJ 6.8 2/25{0) 3.6B • 5.2 6/25 (0) 38-11.4
8.78 -217 25125 (0) 14 -91.1 23/25 {OJ 3.1B -127 B/25 (0) 2.5B -30.6
---- - - -- - - -
Table 6A
Historical Analytical Results -VOCs
OU3 Extraction and Monitoring Wens
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury. North Carolina
ACETONE
Quarter N$.13 NS-14
2098 1000 u 10 u
3098 NS NS
3Q99 100 u 100 u
1000 NS NS
3000 10 u 10 u
1001 NS NS
Quarter NS-44 NS-45
2098 10 u 140
3098 NS NS
3099 100 u 100 u
1000 10 u NS
3000 10 u 10 u
1001 2 u NS
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 700 ug/L
U -Not Detected
NS-24
NR
NS
100
10
10
20
NS-46
10
NS
100
NS
1000
NS
J -Estimated concentration less than the detecUon limit
NS-35 NS-36 NS-37
2500 u 500 u 10
NS 23 NS
u 100 u 25000 u 100
u 10 u 10 u 10
u 10 u 8 J 10
u 20 u 5 u 2
NS-47 NS-48 NS-49
u 10000 u 180 J 2900
NS NS NS
u 100 u 100 u 10000
NS NS 10000
u 10 u 10 u 10
NS NS 5000
B -Constituent also detected in associated method blank (concentration in method blank unknown)
E -Exceeded calibration range
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection timit greater than ROD Performance Standard
Shading indicates "E" qualified concentration for which a diluted run concentration is unavailable.
NS -Not Sampled
u
u
u
u
u u
u
u
NS-38
49
10 u
180
160
10 u
110 D
NS-50
2500
NS
100 u
NS
10 u
2 u
-l!l!!!!I l!!!!!!!!I == liiiiiil liiii --Page 1 of 19
NS-39 NS-40 NS-41 NS-42 NS-43
250 u 2000 u 5000 u 1200 J 4 J
38 50 u NS 2400 10 u
100 u 100 u 200 u 10000 u 100 u
10 u NS NS NS 10 u
10 u 10000 u 10 u ~J 1200 i:· £,,' 1:·: 10 u
NS NSI NS NS 2 u
'
NS-51 NS-52 NS-53 NS-54 CT-1
10000 u 2500 u 2200 J 500 u NS
NS NS NS NS NS
10000 u 10000 u 100 u 20000 u 100 u
25000 u NS NS NS 10 u
20 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
NS NS NS 2 u 5 u
----
Quarter NS-13 NS-14
2098 1000 u 10 u
3098 NS NS
3099 14 5 u
1000 NS NS
3000 5 5 u
1001 NS NS
Quarter NS-44 NS-45
2098 10 u 100 u
3098 NS NS
3099 5 u 5 u
1000 1 u NS
3000 5 u 5 u
1001 1 u NS
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 1 ug/L
U -Not Detected
-
NS-24
5 u
NS
5 u
1 u
5 u
1 u
NS-46
10 u
NS
5 u
NS
500 u
NS
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
-
NS-35
2500 u
100 u
5 u
1 u
5 u
1 u
NS-47
10000 u
NS
5 u
NS
3 J
NS
-- -
1!!11
Table 68
Historical Analytical Results • VOCs
OU3 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
CHLOROFORM
NS-36 NS-37 NS-38
500 u 10 u 10 u
10 u NS 10 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
2.3 1 u 1 u
3 J 5 u 5 u
4 1 u 5 u
NS-48 NS-49 NS-50
250 u 2500 u 2500 u
NS NS NS
5 u 500 u 5 u
NS 1000 u NS
3 J 3 J 4 J
NS 1000 u 3
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
l!!!!!!I liiiiiil liiil iiiiil --Page 2 of 19
NS-39 NS-40 NS-41 NS-42 NS-43
250 u 2000 u 5000 u 2500 u 10 u
5 J 50 u NS 500 u 10 u
5 u 5 u 10 u 500 u 5 u
NS NS NS NS 1 u
5 u 5000 u 5 u 20 5 u
NS NS NS NS 1 u
NS-51 NS-52 NS-53 NS-54 CT-1
10000 u 2500 u 2500 u 500 u NS
NS NS NS NS NS
500 u 500 u 5 u 1000 u 5 u
25000 u NS NS NS 1 u
10 u 5 u 55 19 5 u
NS NS NS 22 1 u
-- - - - -
Quarter NS-13 NS-14
2098 1000 u 10 u
3098 NS NS
3099 76 5 u
1000 NS NS
3000 ~~Ef }¾?a20¥:t·S~E]
1001 NS NS
Quarter NS-44 NS-45
2098 10 u 100 u
3098 NS 20 u
3099 5 u 3100
1000 1 u NS
3000 5 u 190
1001 1 u NS
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 1 ug/L
U -Not Detected
NS-24
NS
NS
5
1
5
21
NS-46
10
NS
18
NS
3000
NS
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
E -Exceeded calibration range
D -Concentration from diluted run sample
u
u
u
u
D
-
NS-35
2500 u
100 u
40000
41000 4
fe2900fir:e~ lt1 ='~ii'! ~ . ,,J7,10-.r"'. --~E-,.
NS-47
10000 u
NS
310000
NS
R10oi:?t">1E~
NS
4 -Compound concentration exceeds calibration range of the instrument
---
Tab!e 6C
Historical Analytical Results -voes
OU3 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
1,2-0ICHLOROETHANE
NS-36 NS-37 NS-38
500 u 10 u 10 u
10 u NS 10 u
52000 5 u 5 u
60000 1 u 1 u
,,.,t•4000.iiRf.e'"'" 5 u 5 u Ii 'r,i-=i~ ,~li :.\:3400 , · 1c e1' · 1 u 5 u ~ ,,,.,,,.,,. -:fJ
NS-48 NS-49 NS-50
250 u 2500 u 2500 u
NS NS NS
67 15000 29000
NS 34000 NS
18 M:46oot~>'.fd·ev lfi1160~• E~ ~ •... ,_ ~"f., • .;
NS 22000 D :~3100,::,,,~ ~e:s
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
Shading Indicates "E" qualified concentration for which a diluted run concentration is unavailable.
NS -Not Sampled
l!!!!I == iiiiil ---Page 3 of 19
NS-39 NS-40 NS-41 NS-42 NS-43
250 u 2000 u 5000 u 2500 u 10 u
10 u 50 u NS 500 u 10 u
270 92000 84 92000 5 u
NS NS NS NS 1 u
19 84000 D 130 £'. 11 soooS¢=:,;EYJ 5 u
NS NS NS NS 1 u
NS-51 NS-52 NS-53 NS-54 CT-1
10000 u 2500 u 2500 u 500 u NS
NS NS NS NS NS
290000 8400 13000 31000 5 u
410000 NS NS NS 8.1 r·~s300~7mm ,;;E2000fui\({/Je~t w,.1300:&.'WEJl &~~g,~-gJ 2 J
NS NS NS 2300., .E\~ 25
-- - - -
Quarter NS-13 NS-14
2098 1000 u 10 u
3098 NS NS
3Q99 5 u 5 u
1000 NS NS
3000 3 J 5 u
1001 NS NS
Quarter NS-44 NS-45
2098 10 u 100 u
3098 NS NS
3099 5 u 24
1000 1 u NS
3000 5 u 16
1001 1 u NS
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 7 ug/L
U -Not Detected
-
NS-24
NS
NS
5 u
1 u
5 u
1 u
NS-46
10 u
NS
5 u
NS
500 u
NS
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
-
NS-35
2500 u
100 u
5 u
1.6
5 u
0.7 J
NS-47
10000 u
NS
5 u
NS
3 J
NS
- - - -
Table 60
Historical Analytical Results• VOCs
OU3 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
1, 1-0ICHLOROETHENE
NS-36 NS-37 NS-38
500 u 10 u 10 u
10 u · NS 10 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
5.4 1 u 1 u
7 5 u 5 u
NS 1 u 5 u
NS-48 NS-49 NS-50
250 u 2500 u 2500 u
NS NS NS
5 u 500 u 5 u
NS 1000 u NS
5 u NS 4 J
NS 1000 u 4
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
liiiiiil liiiii liiiil -Page 4 of 19
NS-39 NS-40 NS-41 NS-42 NS-43
250 u 2000 u 5000 u 2500 u 10 u
10 u 50 u NS 500 u 10 u
5 u 5 u 10 u 500 u 5 u
NS NS NS NS 1 u
NS 5000 u 5 u NS 5 u
NS NS NS NS 1 u
NS-51 NS-52 NS-53 NS-54 CT-1
10000 u 2500 u 2500 u 500 u NS
NS NS NS NS NS
500 u 500 u 5 u 1000 u 5 u
25000 u NS NS NS 1.2
10 u 5 u 5 u 3 J 5 u
NS NS NS 10 2
- - -- - -
Quarter NS-13 NS-14
2098 NS NS
3098 NS NS
3099 5 u 5 u
1000 NS NS
3000 5 u 5 u
1001 NS NS
Quarter NS-44 NS-45
2098 NS NS
3098 NS NS
3099 5 u 16
1000 1 u NS
3000 5 u 11
1001 1 u NS
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 70 ug/L
U -Not Detected
NS-24
NS
NS
5
1
5
1
NS-46
NS
NS
5
NS
500
NS
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
u
u
u
u
u
u
-
NS-35
NS
NS
5 u
1.2
5 u
2
NS-47
NS
NS
5 u
NS
5 u
NS
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
---
Table 6E
Historical Analytical Results -voes
OU3 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
CIS-1,2-0ICHLOROETHENE
NS-36 NS-37 NS-38
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
5 u 5 u 5 u
1.3 1 u 1 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
3 1 u 5 u
NS-48 NS-49 NS-50
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
5 u 500 u 5 u
NS 1000 u NS
5 u NS 5 u
NS 1000 u 5
1!!!!11
NS-39
NS
NS
5 u
NS
NS
NS
NS-51
NS
NS
500 u
25000 u
10 u
NS
== liiiiiiiiiil iiii iiii --Page 5 of 19
NS-40 NS-41 NS-42 NS-43
NS NS NS NS
NS NS NS NS
5 u 10 u 500 u 5 u
NS NS NS 1 u
5000 u 5 u NS 5 u
NS NS NS 1 u
NS-52 NS-53 NS-54 CT-1
NS NS NS NS
NS NS NS NS
500 u 5 u 1000 u 5 u
NS NS NS 1 u
5 J 5 u 5 u 5 u
NS NS 1 u 1
-- - --
Quarter NS-13 NS-14
2098 NS NS
3Q98 NS NS
3099 5 u 5 u
1000 NS NS
3QOO 5 u 5 u
1001 NS NS
Quarter NS-44 NS-45
2098 NS NS
3098 NS NS
3099 5 u 5 u
1000 1 u NS
3000 5 u 5 u
1001 1 u NS
Units in ug/I
ROD Performance Standard: 70 ug/L
U -Not Detected
NS-24
NS
NS
5
1
5
1
NS-46
NS
NS
5
NS
500
NS
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
NS-35
NS
100 u
u 5 u
u 1 u
u 5 u
u 1 u
NS-47
NS
NS
u 5 u
NS u 5 u
NS
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
---l!!!!!!I
Table 6F
Historical Analytical Results -VOCs
OU3 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
TRANS-1,2-DICHLOROETHENE
NS-36 NS-37 NS-38
NS NS NS
10 u NS 10 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
1 u 1 u 1 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
0.9 J 1 u 5 u
NS-48 NS-49 NS-50
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
5 u 500 u 5 u
NS 1000 u NS
5 u NS 5 u
NS 1000 u 1 u
!!!!!I
NS-39
NS
10
5
NS
NS
NS
NS-51
NS
NS
500
25000
10
NS
== liiiiiiiil liiiiii --Page 6 of 19
NS-40 NS-41 NS-42 NS-43
NS NS NS NS
u so u NS 500 u 10 u
u 5 u 10 u 500 u 5 u
NS NS NS 1 u
5000 u 5 u NS 5 u
NS NS NS 1 u
NS-52 NS-53 NS-54 CT-1
NS NS NS NS
NS NS NS NS u 500 u 5 u 1000 u 5 u
u NS NS NS 1 u
u 5 u 5 u 5 u 5 u
NS NS 1 u 1 u
- - -- - -
Quarter NS-13 NS-14
2098 1000 u 10 u
3098 NS NS
JQ99 14 5 u
1QOO NS NS
JQOO 7 5 u
1001 NS NS
Quarter NS-44 NS-45
2098 10 u 100 u
3098 NS NS
3099 5 u 5 u
1000 1 u NS
3000 5 u 5 u
1001 1 u NS
NS -Not Sampled
ROD Performance Standard: 1 ug/L
U -Not Detected
NS-24
NS
NS
5
1
5
1
NS-46
10
NS
5
NS
500
NS
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
D -Concentration from diluted run sample
u
u u
u
u
u
u
-
NS-35
2500 u
100 u
5 u
2.7
5 u
\1 u
I
NS-47
10000 u
NS
5 u
NS
3 J
NS
- - -
Table 6G
Historical Analytical Results • voes
OU3 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury. North Carolina
1,2-0ICHLOROPROPANE
NS-36 NS-37 NS-38
500 u 10 u 10 u
10 u NS 10 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
2.1 1 u 2.7
3 J 5 u 5 u
1 u 1 u 5 u
NS-48 NS-49 NS-50
250 u 2500 u 2500 u
NS NS NS
5 u 500 u 5 u
NS 1000 u NS
5 u 5 u 5 u
NS 1000 u 1 u
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS~ Not Sampled
!!!!! l!!!!!!!!!I m=D ra;a liliiiiiii -Page 7 of 19
NS-39 NS-40 NS-41 NS-42 NS-43
250 u 2000 u 5000 u 2500 u 10 u
5 J 50 u NS 500 u 10 u
5 u 5 u 10 u 500 u 5 u
NS NS NS NS 1 u
5 u 5000 u 5 u 5 u 5 u
NS NS NS NS 1 u
NS-51 NS-52 NS-53 NS-54 CT-1
10000 u 2500 u 2500 u 500 u NS
NS NS NS NS NS
500 u 500 u 5 u 1000 u 5 u
25000 u NS NS NS 1 u
12 D 2 J 5 u 5 u 5 u
NS NS NS 1 u 1 u
- - -- --
Quarter NS-13 NS-14
2098 1000 u 10 u
3098 NS NS
3099 7.6 5 u
1000 NS NS
3000 6 6
1001 NS NS
Quarter NS-44 NS-45
2098 10 u 100 u
3098 NS NS
3099 5 u 5 u
1000 1 u NS
3000 5 u 5 u
1001 1 u NS
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
U -Not Detected
NS-24
NS
NS
5
1
5
1
NS-46
10
NS
5
NS
500
NS
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
-
NS-35
2500 u
100 u
5 u
1 u
5 u
1 u
NS-47
10000 u
NS
5 u
NS
5 u
NS
- - - -
Table SH
Historical Analytical Results -voes
OU3 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Caro!ina
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
NS-36 NS-37 NS-38
500 u 10 u 10 u
10 u NS 10 u
5 u 5 u 5.9
2.3 4 1 u 3 4
4 J 5 u 5 u
6 B 0.2 JB 5 u
NS-48 NS-49 NS-50
250 u 2500 u 2500 u
NS NS NS
6.6 500 u 52
NS 1000 u NS
5 u 21 17
NS 1000 u ~';;144~f$]~EB':
B -Constituent also detected in associated method blank (concentration in method blank unknown)
E -Exceeded calibration range
D • Concentration from diluted run sample
4 -Compound concentration exceeds calibration range of the instrument
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font Indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
Shading indicates "E" qualified concentration for which a diluted run concentration is unavailable.
NS -Not Sampled
-l!!!!!I == liiiiiiii iiii -Page 8 of 19
NS-39 NS-40 NS-41 NS-42 NS-43
250 u 2000 u 5000 u 2500 u 10 u
6 J 120 NS 500 u 10 u
5 u 87 10 u 500 u 5 u
NS NS NS NS 1 u
5 u 5000 u 5 u 32 5 u
NS NS NS NS 0.2 JB
NS-51 NS-52 NS-53 NS-54 CT-1 I
10000 u 1300 J 2500 u 500 u NS
NS NS NS NS NS
500 u 500 u 14 1000 u 5 u
25000 u NS NS NS 1 u
38 D 18 5 20 5 u
NS NS NS ~-s2:.~P!E'~ 1 u
- - - - --
Quarter NS-13 NS-14
2098 1000 u 10 u
3098 NS NS
3099 5 u 5 u
1000 NS NS
3000 4 J 5 u
1001 NS NS
Quarter NS-44 NS-45
2098 10 u 100 u
3098 NS NS
3099 5 u 5 u
1000 1 u NS
3000 5 u 5 u
1001 1 u NS
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 1 ug/L
U -Not Detected
NS-24
NS
NS
5
1
5
1
NS-46
10
NS
5
NS
500
NS
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
D -Concentration from diluted n.m sample
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
-
NS-35
2500 u
100 u
5 u
3.8
4 J
0.9 J
NS47
10000 u
NS
9.6
NS
8
NS
- - -
Table 61
Historical Analytical Results -voes
OU3 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury. North Carolina
TETRACHLORETHENE
NS-36 NS-37 NS-38
500 u 10 u 10 u
10 u NS 10 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
3.5 1 u 1 u
4 J 5 u 5 u
7 1 u 5 u
NS-48 NS-49 NS-50
250 u 2500 u 2500 u
NS NS NS
5 u 500 u 6.3
NS 1000 u NS
5 u 6 5 u
NS 1000 u 7
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
~ 1!!!!!!!11 == l&ii --Page 9 of 19
NS-39 NS-40 NS-41 NS-42 NS-43
250 u 2000 u 5000 u 2500 u 10 u
10 u 10 J NS 500 u 10 ·u
5 u 13 10 u 500 u 5 u
NS NS NS NS 1 u
5 u 5000 u 5 u 37 5 u
NS NS NS NS 1 u
NS-51 NS-52 NS-53 NS-54 CT-1
10000 u 2500 u 2500 u 500 u NS
NS NS NS NS NS
500 u 500 u 5 u 1000 u 5 u
25000 u NS NS NS 1 u
7 JD 3 J 5 u 7 5 u
NS NS NS 16 1 u
-- -- -
Quarter NS-13 NS-14
2098 1000 u 10 u
3098 NS NS
3099 41 5 u
1000 NS NS
3QOO 28 5 u
1001 NS NS
Quarter NS-44 NS-45
2098 10 u 100 u
3098 NS NS
3099 5 u 5 u
1000 1 u NS
3000 5 u 5 u
1001 1 u NS
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
U -Not Detected
NS-24
NS
NS
5
1
5
1
NS-46
10
NS
5
NS
500
NS
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
D -Concentration from diluted run sample
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
-
NS-35
2500 u
100 u
5 u
2.8
5 u
1 u
NS-47
10000 u
NS
2500 u
NS
12
NS
-- -
Table 6J
Historical Analytical Results -voes
OU3 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Sallsbury, ~orth Carolina
1, 1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE
NS-36 NS-37 NS-38
500 u 10 u 10 u
10 u NS 10 u
20 5 u 5 u
23 1 u 1 u
20 5 u 5 u
1 u 1 u 5 u
NS-48 NS-49 NS-50
250 u 2500 u 2500 u
NS NS NS
5 u 500 u 6.1
NS 1000 u NS
5 u 12 13
NS 1000 u 1 u
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
!!!!I ~ == liiiail iiiii --Page 10 of 19
NS-39 NS-40 NS-41 NS-42 NS-43
250 u 2000 u 5000 u 2500 u 10 u
2 J 7 J NS 83 J 10 u
5 u 8.5 10 u 500 u 5 u
NS NS NS NS 1 u
5 u 5000 u 5 u 160 5 u
NS NS NS NS 1 u
NS-51 NS-52 NS-53 NS-54 CT-1
10000 u 2500 u 2500 u 500 u NS
NS NS NS NS NS
500 u 500 u 5 u 1000 u 5 u
25000 u NS NS NS 1 u
42 D 5 u 5 u 4 J 5 u
NS NSI NS 7 1 u
-- - -- -
Quarter NS-13 NS-14
2098 1000 u 10 u
3098 NS NS
3099 12 5 u
1000 NS NS
3000 8 2 J
1001 NS NS
Quarter NS-44 NS-45
2098 10 u 100 u
3098 NS NS
3099 5 u 6.3
1000 1 u NS
3000 5 u 5 J
1001 1 u NS
Units In ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 2.8 ug/L
U -Not Detected
NS-24
NS
NS
5
1
5
1
NS-46
10
NS
5
NS
500
NS
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
D -Concentration from diluted run sample
u
u u
u
u
u
u
-
NS-35
2500 u
100 u
5 u
5.2
6
3
NS-47
10000 u
NS
13
NS
9
NS
- - -
l!l!!!I
Table SK
Historical Analytical Results• VOCs
OU3 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
TRICHLOROETHENE
NS-36 NS-37 NS-38
500 u 10 u 10 u
10 u NS 10 u
6.7 5 u 5 u
8 1 u 1 u
12 5 u 5 u
21 1 u 5 u
NS-48 NS-49 NS-50
250 u 2500 u 2500 u
NS NS NS
5 u 500 u 5.6
NS 1000 u NS
5 u 7 2 J
NS 1000 u 16
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
I!!!!!! liiiii liiiii ---Page11 of19
NS-39 NS-40 NS-41 NS-42 NS-43
250 u 2000 u 5000 u 2500 u 10 u
10 u 7 J NS 500 u 10 u
5 u 9.2 10 u 500 u 5 u
NS NS NS NS 1 u
5 u 5000 u 5 u 66 5 u
NS NS NS NS 1 u
NS-51 NS-52 NS-53 NS-54 CT-1
10000 u 2500 u 2500 u 500 u NS
NS NS NS NS NS
500 u 500 u 5 u 1000 u 5 u
25000 u NS NS NS 1 u
12 D 4 J 5 u 2 J 5 u
NS NS NS 13 1
- -- - - --
Quarter NS-13 NS-14
2Q98 1000 u 10 u
3Q98 NS NS
3099 10 u 10 u
1000 NS NS
3Q00 5 u 4 J
1001 NS NS
Quarter NS-44 NS-45
2098 10 u 100 u
3098 NS NS
3Q99 10 u 10 u
1000 1 u NS
3000 5 u 4 J
1001 1 u NS
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 1 ug/L
U -Not Detected
NS-24 NS-35
NS 2500 u
NS 60 J
10 u 58
1 u 110 4
5 u l!:~1~~~7~Ei 1 u ~48d,.~E'il
NS-46 NS-47
10 u 10000 u
NS NS
10 u 580
NS NS
500 u ~-570~,Ji~E11
NS NS
J -Estimated concentration fess than the detection limit
E -Exceeded calibration range
D -Concentration from diluted run sample \
4 -Compound concentration exceeds calibration range of the instrLment
-I!!!!!!!! I!!!!!
Table 6L
Historical Analytical Results -voes
OU3 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury. North Carolina
VINYL CHLORIDE
NS-36 NS-37 NS-38
500 u 10 u 10 u
12 NS 9 J
99 10 u 23
130 4 1 u 14
~Wt; ~82 .e,\tB ~-£& 5 u 24
:t~350~::~iE'J 1 u 27 D
NS-48 NS-49 NS-50
250 u 2500 u 2500 u
NS NS NS
10 u 1000 u 10 u
NS 1000 u NS
5 u 46 ~.;;"S2sofft 1_ ~
NS 1000 u ~r"' r,..~-_S1 ! " 'If 73 ,l.,1,'.A~tl: E · :
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
Shading indicates "E" qualified concentration for which a diluted run concentration is unavailable.
NS -Not Sampled
== liiiiiia liiiiiiiil iiiii 1111 - --Page 12 of 19
NS-39 NS-40 NS-41 NS-42 NS-43
250 u 2000 u 5000 u 2500 u 10 u
12 79 NS 500 u 10 u
10 u 56 20 u 1000 u 10 u
NS NS NS NS 1 u
4 J 5000 u 5 u 200 5 u
NS NS NS NS 1 u
NS-51 NS-52 NS-53 NS-54 CT-1
10000 u 2500 u 2500 u 78 J NS
NS NS NS NS NS
1000 u 1000 u 10 u 2000 u 10 u
NS 25000 u NS NS 1 u
28 D 60 8 110 5 u
NS NS NS 5~2so:if~~E~ 1 u
- --- -
Quarter NS-13 NS-14
2098 NS NS
3098 NS NS
3099 10 u 10 u
1000 NS NS
3QOO 1 J 10 u
1001 NS NS
Quarter NS-44 NS-45
2098 NS NS
3098 NS NS
3099 10 u 10 u
1000 10 u NS
3000 10 u 10 u
1001 10 u NS
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
U -Not Detected
-
NS-24
NS
NS
57
45
50
53
NS-46
NS
NS
10 u
NS
10 u
NS
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
-
NS-35
NS
NS
10 u
10 u
10 u
10 u
NS-47
NS
NS
10 u
NS
10 u
NS
111!!1 l!!!!!!!I l!!!!I
Table 6M
Historical Analytical Results -SVOCs
OU3 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)ETHER
NS-36 NS-37 NS-38
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
10 u 10 u 10 u
11 u 10 u NS
10 u 10 u 4 J
1 J 10 u 7 J
NS-48 NS-49 NS-50
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
10 u 14 12
NS 10 u NS
10 u 20 19
NS 17 10 u
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
== 1iiiiiii1 I iiiii iiiiii ----Page 13 of 19
NS-39 NS-40 NS-41 NS-42 NS-43
NS NS NS NS NS
NS NS NS NS NS
10 u 11 10 u 10 u 10 u
NS NS NS NS 10 u
4.2 J 17 10 u 9.5 u 10 u
NS NS NS NS 10 u
NS-51 NS-52 NS-53 NS-54 CT-1
NS NS NS NS
NS NS NS NS
10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
10 u NS NS NS 10 u
10 u 10 u 2 J 10 u 10 u
NS NS NS 10 u
-- - -
Quarter NS-13 NS-14
2098 NS NS
3098 NS NS
3099 10 u 10 u
1000 NS NS
3QOO 10 u 10 u
1001 NS NS
Quarter NS-44 NS-45
2098 NS NS
3098 NS NS
3099 10 u 10 u
1000 10 u NS
3000 10 u 10 u
1001 10 u NS
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
U -Not Detected
l!!!!!!I
NS-24
NS
NS
57
10 u
10 u
10 u
NS-46
NS
NS
10 u
NS
10 u
NS
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
1!!11!!!!!1
NS-35
NS
NS
10 u
10 u
3 J
10 u
NS-47
NS
NS
10 u
NS
10 U·
NS
l!!!!!!I 11!!!1
Table 6N
Historical Analytical Results • SVOCs
OU3 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
8I5(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE
NS-36 NS-37 NS-38
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
10 u 10 u 10 u
11 u 10 u 10 u
2 J 10 u 10 u
10 u 1 J 10 u
NS-48 NS-49 NS-50
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
10 u 10 u 10 u
NS 10 u NS
10 u 6.3 J 4 J
NS 10 u 10 u
8 -Constituent also detected in associated method blank {concentration in method blank unknown)
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
l:iilil liiiilll liiiii liiiil - ---Page 14 of 19
NS-39 NS-40 NS-41 NS-42 NS-43
NS NS NS NS NS
NS NS NS NS NS
10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
NS NS NS NS 10 u
9.5 u 10 u 10 u 9.5 u 10 u
NS NS NS NS 10 u
NS-51 NS!.52 NS-53 NS-54 CT-1
NS NS NS NS NS
NS NS NS NS NS
10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
10 u NS NS NS 10 u
10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
NS NS NS 4 JB 10 u
-11!!!!!1 l!!!!!!!!!I I!!!!! !!!!I
Quarter NS-13 NS-14
2098 4.2 u NS
3098 NS NS
3099 5 u 5 u
1000 NS NS
3000 1.6 u 1.6 u
1001 NS NS
Quarter NS-44 NS-45
2098 NS 4.2 u
3098 NS 4.2 u
3099 5 u 5 u
1000 5 u NS
3000 1.6 u 1.6 u
1001 NS NS
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 6 ug/L
U -Not Detected
NS-24
NS
NS
5 u
5 u
1.6 u
1 u
NS-46
4.2 u
4.2 u
5 u
NS
1.6 u
NS
NS-35
4.2 u
4.2 u
5 u
5 u
1.6 u
1 u
NS-47
4.2 u
4.2 u
5 u
NS
1.6 u
NS
liiiiiiil liiii
Table 60
Historical Analytical Results -Metals
OU3 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
ANTIMONY
NS-36 NS-37 NS-38
NS NS NS
NS NS 5.8
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u
1 u NS 1.4 8
NS-48 NS-49 NS-50
4.2 u 4.2 u 4.2 u
4.2 u 4.2 u 4.2 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
NS 5 u NS
1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u
NS 1 u 2 B
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection limit but less than the Reporting limit
NS · Nol Sampled
liiii iiii - - -- --Page 15 of 19
NS-39 NS-40 NS-41 NS-42 NS-43
NS 4.2 u NS 4.2 u NS
NS 4.2 u NS 4.2 u 4.2 u
5 u 5 u 5 u 5 u 5 u
NS NS NS NS 5 u
1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u
NS NS NS NS NS
NS-51 NS-52 NS-53 NS-54 CT-1
4.2 u 4.2 u 4.2 u 4.2 u NS
4.2 u 4.2 u 4.2 u 4.2 u NS
5 u 5 u 5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u NS NS NS 5 u
1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u
NS NS NS 1 u 3.2 8
- -- -
11!!!1 I!!!!!!!!
Quarter NS-13 NS-14
2098 9.8 J NS
3098 NS NS
3099 2 u 4.4
1000 NS NS
3000 50.5 7.8 B
1001 NS NS
Quarter NS-44 NS-45
2098 NS 10.8
3098 NS 4 u
3099 3.8 2 u
1000 2.6 NS
3000 1.3 B 0.7 u
1001 2.9 B NS
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 50 ug/L
U -Not Detected
NS-24
NS
NS
2 u
2 u
0.7 u
0.9 u
NS-46
4 u
4 u
2 u
NS
0.7 u
NS
l!!!I
NS-35
13
7.3 J
2 u
2 u
0.7 u
3.1 B
NS-47
10.2
4 u
2 u
NS
0.7 u
NS
== i::;;a iiiil
Table SP
Historical Analytical Results -Metals
OU3 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
CHROMIUM
NS-36 NS-37 NS-38
NS NS NS
NS NS 8 J
2 u 240 2 u
2 u 38 2.5
0.7 u 7.4 B 4.7 B
1.2 B 5.7 B 9.1 B
NS-48 NS-49 NS-50
4 u 4 u 4 u
4 u 4.9 J 4 u
2 u 2 u 2 u
NS 2 u NS
0.7 u 4.9 u 1.4 B
NS 3.1 B 1.3 B
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting Limit
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
liiil iiiil - - -- --Page 16 of 19
NS-39 NS-40 NS-41 NS-42 NS-43
NS 6.6 J NS 5.2 J NS
NS 4 u NS 4 u 10.4
2 u 2 u 25 26 u 14
NS NS NS NS 13
4.9 u 0.96 B 8.2 B 4.9 u 2.4 B
NS NS NS NS 4.3 B
NS-51 NS-52 NS-53 NS-54 CT-1
4 u 4.5 J 4 u 4 u NS
4 u 4 u 4 u 4 u NS
2 u 3.9 2 u 2 u 2 u
2 u NS NS NS 2 u
0.89 B 0.7 u 0.7 u 0.7 u 0.7 u
NS NS NS 3.1 B 0.99 B
- --l!!!!!l!I 1!!!11!! l!!!!l!I
Quarter NS-13 NS-14 NS-24
2098 240 NS NS
3098 NS NS NS
3099 2900 8.2 7600
1000 NS NS 4900
3Q00 2060 80 4880
1001 NS NS re; ?4a20J..l~e2!
Quarter NS-44 NS-45 NS-46
2Q98 NS 3790 80
3098 NS 3220 117
3099 8.5 4500 190
1000 5 u NS NS
3000 11.9 8 5240 69.7
1001 r:111:az;;:;,J·se:: NS NS
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 50 ug/L
U -Not Detected
NS-35
780
928
3600
5300
6730
~9730,i!!.~E~
NS-47
1500
808
1100
NS
1490
NS
iiiiii
Table 60
Historical Analytical Results -Metals
OU3 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
MANGANESE
NS-36 NS-37 NS-38
NS NS NS
NS NS 15000
1200 490 27000
1300 150 22000
1850 91.5 29500
f"22290''\i,JE~ 1,!:,1.142,, \~E~ ; ~364002:~ 'E~
NS-48 NS-49 NS-50
6840 9870 10600
4100 6440 10700
4900 7000 6900
NS 8600 NS
7540 8180 4860
NS ~ . .1.}270~!.-~Et ~3620_~'1EJ
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection limit but less than the Reporting limit
E -Exceeded calibration range
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Shading indicates "E" qualified concentration for which a diluted run concentration is unavailable.
NS -Not Sampled
liiil iiii iiii --- --Page 17 of 19
NS-39 NS-40 NS-41 NS-42 NS-43
NS 13500 NS 1800 NS
NS 10100 NS 4110 17,3
170 14000 2300 8200 76
NS NS NS NS 75
97.6 9600 2420 14900 28
NS NS NS NS ~'.i;13•~-BE1
NS-51 NS-52 NS-53 NS-54 CT-1
5590 584 4760 1540 NS
4040 561 3320 1160 NS
12000 360 840 4000 2500
3500 NS NS NS 320
3400 4280 960 3610 606
NS NS NS M4320.,.;}1.fue·~ JS1010~~E~
l!l!!!!!!I I!!!!!!! !!!!!I
Quarter NS-13 NS-14
2098 3.3 u NS
3098 NS NS
3099 2 u 2 u
1000 NS NS
3000 1.3 UNW 1.3 UN
1001 NS NS
Quarter NS-44 NS-45
2098 NS 4.1 J
3098 NS 3.3 u
3099 2 u 2 u
1000 2 u NS
3000 1.3 UN 1.3 UNW
1001 NS NS
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 2 ug/L
U -Not Detected
NS-24
NS
NS
2 u
2 u
1.3 UNW
1.7 u
NS-46
3.7 J
3.3 u
2 u
NS
1.3 UN
NS
NS-35
5.7 J
3.3 u
2 u
2 u
1.3 u
1.7 u
NS-47
5.6 J
3.3 u
2 u
NS
1.3 u
NS
;;;;a liiiiii iiiil
Table 6R
Historical Analytical Results -Metals
OU3 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
THALLIUM
NS-36 NS-37 NS-38
NS NS NS
NS NS 20.2
2 u 2 u 2 u
2 u 2 u 2 u
1.3 uw 1.3 UN 1.3 UNW
1.7 u NS 1.7 uw
NS-48 NS-49 NS-50
5.2 J 6.3 J 5.8 J
3.3 u 6.1 J 9.7 J
2 u 2 u 2 u
NS 2 u NS
1.3 UNW 1.3 u 1.3 u
NS 1.7 uw 1.7 uw
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting limit
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
N -Spiked sample recovery is not within control limits
W -Post digestion spike for furnace atomic absorption spectrophotometric analysis is out of control limits
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
lliiiiil iiiil -- -- --Page 18 of 19
NS-39 NS--40 NS-41 NS-42 NS-43
NS 6.8' J NS 3.3 u NS
NS 10.7 NS 3.3 u 3.3 u
2 u 2 u 2 u 2 u 2 u
NS NS NS NS 2 u
1.3 uw 1.3 u 1.3 UN 1.3 uw 1.3 UN
NS NS NS NS NS
NS-51 NS-52 NS-53 NS-54 CT-1
6.7 J 3.3 u 3.8 J 3.4 J NS
4.6 J 3.3 u 3.3 u 3.3 u NS
2 u 2 u 2 u 2 u 2 u
2 u NS NS NS 2 u
1.3 UNW 1.3 uw 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u
NS NS NS 1.7 u 40.3
iliil liiiiiii liiil - - -
Quarter NS-13 NS-14 NS-24
2098 5 u NS NS
3098 NS NS NS
3099 16 16 BB
1000 NS NS 10
3000 1.7 B 137 1.6
1001 NS NS 31
Quarter NS-44 NS-45 NS-46
2098 NS 9.4 J 21.7
3098 NS 9.7 J 5
3099 12 16 14
1000 10 u NS NS
3000 1.6 u 1.6 u 1.9
1001 10.6 B NS NS
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 2,100 ug/L
U -Not Detected
u
u
u
B
NS-35
5.1 J
9.2 J
17
10 u
7.8 B
24.1
NS-47
35.8
5 u
17
NS
1.6 u
NS
- - --
Table 6S
Historical Analytical Results -Metals
OU3 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
ZINC
NS-36 NS-37 NS-38
NS NS NS
NS NS 7.5 J
17 66 14
10 u 10 u 10 u
1.6 u 21.6 31.9
8.6 u 24.1 21.2
NS-48 NS-49 NS-50
5 u 5 u 14.2 J
5 u 5 u 5 u
18 14 16
NS 41 NS
1.6 u 76.9 1.6 u
NS 37.5 46
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection limit but less than the Reporting limit
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
- - -- ----Page 19 of 19
NS-39 NS-40 NS-41 NS-42 NS-43
NS 5 u NS 180 NS
NS 5 u NS 15.5 J 5 u
16 16 26 40 17
NS NS NS NS 10 u
1.6 u 1.6 u 3.9 B 4.4 B 1.6 u
NS NS NS NS 8.6 u
NS-51 NS-52 NS-53 NS-54 CT-1
130 5 u 9.3 J 587 NS
5 u 5 u 5 u 474 NS
14 28 20 3400 27
84 NS NS NS 38
1390 6.2 B 1.6 u 1290 15.7 B
NS NS NS 154 1.7 u
-111!!!1 11111 I!!!!!!! I!!!!! 1!!!!S i=m !I!!! =:I r:= a;;;; ;;;a liiliiil iiilliil iiii1 iiii1 liiiiil _. lliii
Sample Surface Water
Location 1999Q3
SW-09 5 u 19
SW-10 5 u 160
SW-11 5 u 5
SW-13 10 3
Units in ug/I
ROD Performance Standard: 2,000 ug/L
U -Not Detected
Table 7
Analytical Results
OU3 Surface Water and Sediment Monitoring
National Starch and Chemical Company
Cedar Springs Plant Site
Salisbury, North Carolina
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
Sample
2000Q3 Location
SW-09
SW-10
u SW-11
J SW-13
Units in ug/kg
Sediment
1999Q3
7.7 u 7
7.4 u 7
23 u 12
7.4 u 6
ROD Performance Standard: 169 ug/kg
U -Not Dectected
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
NS -Not Sampled
NS-Not Sampled
2000Q3
u
u
u
u
I SOURCES:
ROWAN MILLS, CHINA GROVE,
NORTH CAROLINA
7.5 MINUTE QUADRANGLE I CONTOUR INTERVAL= 10 FEET
I
I
I
08/30/01' CRA-54-IY
05007001/05791596.cdr
* MN
UTM GRID ANO 1987 MAGNETIC NORTH
DECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET
2000' 0 2000'
Approximate Scale: 1" = 2000'
NATIONAL STARCH AND CHEMICAL COMPANY
CEDAR SPRINGS ROAD PLANT
SALISBURY, NORTH CAROLINA
FIVE-YEAR REVIEW
SITE LOCATION MAP
I
FIGURE BBL BlASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC. 1
engineers & scientists
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
X: NSC01.0WC
t.; OfT•REr
P: STO-F'O'/l)l oe/J0/01 CRA-54-01 0505 7001 \0~7801.DWC
• P-2
C
NS-2e•
\
I
I
I
/
I
~
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
I
'\
/
\
LEGEND
• MONITORING WELL LOCATION
♦ EXTRACTION WELL LOCATION
A SURFACE WATER/SEDIMENT SAMPLE LOCATION
SOURCES:
~~b e~rJ}-Jfl "fg~p~~r llf~.fllt?A~g~A~AftOJU~J-oCJt~CH
CORPORATION, KNOXVILLE. TENN., DATED 5/18/93.
MONITORING 'M:'.:ll SURVEY BY SCHULEt,IBE,RGER SURVEYING COMPANY, SALISBURY, N.C., DATED 1/21/97
MONITORING WELL SUR\IE;Y BY TA'r1..0R WEISMAN &: TAYLOR, RALEIGH N.C., DATED 3/98
'1".
SCALE IN FEET
NATIONAL STARCH AND CHE~ICAL CO~PANY
CEDAR SPRINGS ROAD PLANT, SALISBURY, NORTH CAROLINA
FIVE-YEAR REVIEW
SITE MAP
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ATTACHMENT 1
GROUNDWATER DAT A EVALUATION
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TECHNICAL REPORT
BBL
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC,
ongineors & scientists
8 South River Road
Cranbury, New Jersey 08512-9502
[phone]
Ground-Water Data
Evaluation for Plume
Periphery and Trench
I Area Extraction Wells
National Starch & Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
August 1998
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table of Contents
Section 1.
Section 2.
Section 3.
Section 4.
s2ooos62.WPO .. an.sm
Introduction .......................................... 1-1
1.1 Purpose and Objectives ........................... 1-2
Methods ............................................. 2-1
Plume Periphery Wells ................................. 3-1
3.1
3.1.1
3.1.2
3.1.3
3.1.4
3.1.5
3.1.6
3.1.7
3.1.8
3.1.9
3.1.10
3.1.11
3.1.12
3.1.13
3.1.14
3.1.15
3.2
3.2.1
3.2.2
3.3
3.3.1
3.3.2
3.3.3
3.3.4
3.3.5
3.3.6
3.3.7
3.3.8
3.3.9
3.4
voes ......................................... 3-1 Acetone ....................................... 3-1 Benzene ..................... , ................. 3-3 Bromodichloromethane .......... · ........... · ...... 3-4 Chloroform ..................................... 3-4 1,2-Dichloroethane ............................... 3-5 1, 1-Dichloroethene ............................... 3-7
1,2-Dichloropropane .................... , ......... 3-7 Ethylbenzene ................................... 3-9 Methylene Chloride ............................... 3-9 Toluene ...................................... 3-11 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ............................ 3-12 Trichloroethene ....... • ......................... 3-12 Vinyl Chloride .................................. 3-13 Xylene ....................................... 3-13
Summary ..................................... 3-14 SVOCs ....................................... 3-15 Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether ........................... 3-15 4-Nitrophenol .................................. 3-16 Metals ......................................... 3-17
A;senic ....................................... 3-17 Barium ....................................... 3-17 Beryllium ..................................... 3-18 Cadmium ..................................... 3-18 Chromium ..................................... 3-19 Manganese ................................... 3-19 Nickel ........................................ 3-21 Selenium ..................................... 3-21 Zinc ......................................... 3-22 Summary ..................................... 3-22
Trench Area Wells ..................................... 4-1
4.1
4.1.1
4.1.2
4.1.3
voes ......................................... 4-1 Acetone ....................................... 4-1
Benzene ....................................... 4-3 Bromodichloromethane ........................... 4-3
BlASlAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
engineers & scientists
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i I
Section 5.
Ta!:!!es.
S2000562.'NPO .• 8/25/18
4.1.4 Chloroform ..................................... 4-4
4.1.5 1,2-Dichloroethane ............................... 4-5
4.1.6 1, 1-Dichloroethene ............................... 4-7
4.1.7 1,2-Dichloropropane .............................. 4-8
4. 1.8 Ethylbenzene ................................... 4-9
4.1.9 Methylene Chloride ............................... 4-9
4.1.10 Toluene ...................................... 4-11
4.1.11 . 1, 1,2-Trichloroethane ............................ 4-12
4.1.12 Trichloroethene ................................ 4-14
4.1.13 Vinyl Chloride ............................. : .... 4-14
4.1.14 Xylene ....................................... 4-16
4.1.15 Summary .................... , ................ 4-17
4.2 SVOCs ....................................... 4-18
4.2:i Bis(2-chioroethyl)ether ........................... 4-18
4.2.2 4-Nitrophenol .................................. 4-19
4.3 Metals ........................ _. ............... 4-20
4.3.1 Arsenic ....................................... 4-20
4.3.2 Barium .............................. : ........ 4-20
4.3.3 Beryllium ........................... • .......... 4-21
4.3.4 Cadmium ..................................... 4-22
4.3.5 Chromium ..................................... 4-23
4.3.6 Manganese ................................... 4-24
4.3.7 Nickel ........................................ 4-26
4.3.8 Selenium ..................................... 4-27
4.3.9 Zinc ......................................... 4-28
4.4 Summary ..................................... 4-28
Recommendations .................................... 5-1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Ar.alytical Results -voes -OU 1 i=xtraciion and Monitoring Weiis
Analytical Results -SVOCs -OU 1 Extraction and Mor:,itoring
Wells
Analytical Results -Metals -OU1 Extraction and Monitoring
Wells
Summary of voe Grouping -OU1 Extraction and Monitoring
Wells
Analytical Results -voes -OU2 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
Analytical Results -SVOes -OU2 Extraction and Monitoring
Wells
Analytical Results -Metals -OU2 Extraction and Monitoring
Wells
Summary of voe Grouping -OU2 Extraction and Monitoring
Wells ·
Analytical Parameters for Future Monitoring Events
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE. INC.
engineers & scientists
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Appendices,
52080562.W'PD --8/25198
A
B
C
D
Shapiro-Wilks W-Test
Calculation of Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) Concentrations
Interquartile Range (IQR) Test
Mann-Kendall Test for Trend
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC
engineers & scientists
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Executive Summary
A data evaluation was conducted for ground-water samples collected from the Plume Periphery and Trench Area
extraction and monitoring wells at the National Starch and Chemical Company (NSCC) facilit/ in Salisbury, North
Carolina.
Plume Periphery extraction wells and monitoring wells have been sampled 21 times on a quarterly schedule from
first quarter 1993 through first quarter 1998 with the exception of extraction well EX-02, which was not sampled
during first quarter 1993. Trench Area extraction wells have been sampled eight times on a quarterly schedule from
second quarter 1996 through first quarter 1998 and Trench Area monitoring wells have been sampled 20 times on
a quarterly schedule from second quarter 1993 through first quarter 1998.
As required by the OU I Record of Decision (ROD), ground-water samples collected from the Plume Periphery and
Trench Area extraction and monitoring wells have been analyzed for 14 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), two
Semivolatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs), and nine metals.
The purpose of the data evaluation is to evaluate ground-water quality data collected since 1993 and rec.ommend
revisions to improve the Plume Periphery and Trench Area monitoring programs. The objectives of the data
evaluation were·to:
• conduct statistical tests on the Plume Periphery and Trench Area ground-water data sets to identify general
characteristics, statistical outliers, and concentration trends;
• identify constituents of concern (COCs) that could be eliminated from further monitoring based on
concentrations less than Performance Standards; and
• recommend changes to improve the current monitoring program.
The ground-water data for the Plume Periphery and Trench Area wells were evaluated using the following
procedure:
• A tabular summary was prepared for each COC which shows the analytical results for the wells sampled
during the quarterly monitoring events conducted since first quarter 1993; and
• Detected concentrations and detection limits for each COC in each well were compared to the Performance
Standards listed in the OU! ROD.
For COCs retained for further data evaluation, the data sets were evaluated by the following methods:
• testing the data for normality using the Shapiro-Wilks W-test and obtaining descriptive statistics (e.g., mean,
standard deviation);
• calculating a 95 percent Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) concentration on the mean if the data fit normal or
lognormal distributions;
• testing the data for potential outliers using the Interquartile Range (!QR) Test;
• conducting the Mann-Kendall Test for Trend to identify overall concentration trends and their statistical
significance.
BLASI.AND. BOUCK & LEE, INC.
OU!2EXEC'M'O ·-sn5fl8 engineers & scientists 1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Plume Periphery Wells
Based on the data evaluation, the following eoes were retained for future monitoring events for the Plume
Periphery wells:
Well voe, SVOCs Metals
EX-01 None B is(2-chloroethyl)ether None
EX-02 Acetone; 1,2-Dichloroethane; 1,2-Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether Barium; Manganese; Selenium•
Dichloropropane; Methylene chloride
EX-03 Acetone; 1,2-Dichloroethane; 1,2-B is(2-chloroethyl)ether None
Dichloropropane; Methylene chloride
EX-04 1,2-Dichloropropane Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether Cadmium•
NS-29 Acetone; 1,2-Dichloroethane; 1,2· Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether Barithn; Manganese; Selenium•
Dichloropropane; Methylene chloride
NS-30 None Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether None ...
NS-31 Acetone; 1,2-Dichloroethane; 1,2-Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether Barium; Cadmium•; Chromium•
Dichloropropane; Methylene chloride
NS-32 None Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether None
*Monitormg to venfy recent detect10n(s) greater than ROD Perfonnance Standard only
However, to be conservative, future monitoring events will include acetone, 1,2-dichloroethane, 1,2-
dichloropropane, and methylene chloride for all eight Plume Periphery'wells.
The following seven voes cannot currently be eliminated from monitoring in wells EX-02 and EX-03 due to non-
detectable concentrations at detection limits greater than the ROD Performance Standards and dilution factors
greater than one:
• benzene; • bromodichloromethane;
• chloroform; • 1, 1-dichloroethene;
• 1, 1,2-trichloroethane; • trichloroethene; and
• vinyl chloride.
These voes will be re-evaluated in the monitoring program for EX-02 and EX-03 when dilution factors are
reduced so that detection limits are equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standards.
Trench Area Wells
Based on the data evaluation, the following eoes were retained for future monitoring events for the Trench Area
wells:
BLASI.AND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
OUllEXEC.wPD .. snsm engineers & scientists 2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Well voe, svoe, Metals
EX-05 Acetone; 1,2-Dichloroethane; Toluene; Vinyl chloride; None Cadmium; Manganese; Nickel;
Xylene Selenium
EX-06 1,2-Dichloroethane; Vinyl chloride None None
EX-07 Acetone; 1,2-0ichloroethane None Manganese; Selenium
EX-08 Acetone; 1,2-Dichloroethane; 1,2-Dichloropropane; Bis(2-ch loroethyl)ether Cadmium; Manganese; Nickel;
Toluene; Xylene Selenium
EX-09 Acetone; 1,2-Dichloroethane; 1,2-Dichloropropane; Bis(2-ch loroethy I )ether Manganese; Nickel; Selenium
Toluene; Xylene
EX-10 Acetone; I ,2-Dichloroethanc; 1,2-Dichloropropane; 8 is(2-ch I oroethy I )ether Manganese; Nickel; Selenium
Toluene; Vinyl chloride; Xylene
NS-09 Acetone; 1,2-Dichloroethane; Vinyl chloride None Chromium; Manganese;
Selenium
NS-10 Benzene; Bromodichloromethane; Chloroform; 1,2-None None
Dichloroethane; I, 1-Dichloroethene; 1,2-
Dichloropropane; Methylene chloride; I, 1,2-
Trichloroethane; Trichloroethene; Vinyl chloride
NS-I I 1,2-Dichloroethanc None None
NS-15 1,2-Dichlorocthane; Vinyl chloride None Manganese; Selenium•
*Momtormg to verify recent detect1on(s) greater than ROD Perfonnance Standard only,.
The following VOCs and SVOCs could not currently be eliminated from monitoring in wells EX-05, EX-07, EX-
08, EX-09, EX-I 0, and NS-09 due to non-detectable concentrations at detection limits greater than the ROD
Performance Standards and dilution factors greater than one:
Well voes SVOes
EX-05. 9c:izene; Bromodichlcro:r.::!hane; Ch!crofcr~; ! , !-Dichlcr:::::th:::1e; 1,2-3 i s(2 -ch l G ,octh y I )cthe r
Dichloropropane; Methylene chloride; I, 1,2-Trichloroethane; Trichloroethene
EX-07 Benzene; Bromodichloromethane; Chlorofonn; I, 1-Dichloroethene; 1,2-Bis(2-ch loroethyl)ether
Dichloropropane; Methylene chloride; I, 1,2-Trichloroethane; Trichloroethene:
Vinyl chloride
EX-08 Benzene: Bromodichloromethanc; Chlorofonn; I, 1-Dichloroethene; Methylene None
chloride; I, 1,2-Trichloroethane; Trichloroethene; Vinyl chloride
EX-09 Benzene: Bromodichloromethane: Chlorofonn; 1,1-Dichloroethene: Methylene None
chloride; 1,1.2-Trichlorocthane; Trichloroethcne; Vinyl chloride
EX-10 Benzene; Bromodichloromcthane; Chloroform; I, 1-Dichloroethene; Methylene None
chloride; I, 1,2-Trichlorocthanc; Trichlorocthene
NS-09 Benzene; Dromodichloromcthane; Chloroform; I, 1-Dichloroethene; 1,2-None
Dichloropropane; Methylene chloride; I, 1,2-Trichloroethane; Trichloroethene
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
0U12EXEC.WPD ·· BnSflB engineers & scientists 3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
These VOCs will be reevaluated in the monitoring program for EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, EX-I 0, and NS-09
when dilution factors are reduced so that detection limits are equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standards.
Recommendations
Based on the results of the data evaluation, the following actions are recommended:
Reduce ground-water monitoring from a quarterly to a semi-annual or annual basis.
The majority of constituent concentrations appear to be relatively stable (same order of magnitude) from quarter
to quarter based on the five years of historical monitoring, and no rapid changes are apparent in the concentration
trends that would require quarterly monitoring. Therefore, semi-annual monitoring is recommended for VOCs
in the Plume Periphery wells and annual monitoring is recommended for SVOCs and metals in the Plume
Periphery wells and VOCs, SVOCs, and metals in the Trench Area wells. Semi-annual or annual ground-water
monitoring will provide adequate data to track constituent concentrations in ground water and to evaluate the
effectiveness and protectiveness of the OUI and OU2 remedies.
Eliminate selecieJ muniiuring parameters for Group i welis.
Based on the data evaluation, selected constituents do not appear to be constituents of concern for selected wells
based on detected concentrations and/or detection limits consistently less than the ROD Performance Standards.
Therefore, continued monitoring of these parameters is not warranted for the indicated wells.
Change analytical method for VOCs.
Detection limits for VOCs are greater than the ROD Performance Standards during some of the monitoring
events even for samples analyzed at a dilution factor equal to one. This indicates that the lowest detection limits
for the analytical methods used previously (CLP) cannot meet the ROD Performance Standard in undiluted
samples. Therefore, the analytical method for VOCs should be changed to a USEPA-approved method (e.g.,
SW-846) that can achieve detection limits equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standards.
Re-evaluate the OUJ remedy.
Based on the evaluation of concentration trends for the Plume Periphery wells, the OU I remedy does not appear
to be improving ground-water quality. Thirty Mann-Kendall tests for trend were conducted on four VOCs
(acetone; 1,2-dichloroethane; 1,2-dichloropropane; and methylene chloride), one SVOC (bis(2-
chloroethyl)ether), and two metab (bari~m and se!en:~m) for Ph.me Periphery weils. The results uftlies~ tests
are summarized below:
Constituent No. Tests Increasing Trend Decreasing Trend
Significant Not Significant Significant Not Significant
voes 16 7 (44%) 3 ( 19%) 2 ( 13%) 4 (25%)
SVOCs 8 4 (50%) 2 (25%) 2 (25%) 0
Metals 6 4 (67%) I (17%) 0 I (17%)
TOTAL 30 15 (50%) 6 (20%) 4 (13%) 5 ( 17%)
21 (70%) 9 (30%)
As shown above. 70 percent of the tests showed increasing concentration trends and only 30 percent showed
decreasing trends. Fifty percent the total number of tests and 70 percent of the increasing trends were statistically
BlASlAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
OUI 2EXEC.WPD •. anS,98 engineers & scientists 4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
significant for Plume Periphery wells; only 13 percent of the total number of tests for Plume Periphery wells
were statistically significant decreasing trends. Additionally, approximately 50 percent of the statistically
significant increasing trends were for voes, which are the primary constituents of concern for ground water.
These results were compared to the results of the trend analysis for the Trench Area wells. Sixty-one Mann-
Kendall tests for trend were conducted on six voes (acetone; 1,2-dichloroethane; 1,2-dichloropropane; toluene;
vinyl chloride; and xylene), one SVOe (bis(2-chloroethyl)ether), and seven metals (barium; beryllium; cadmium;
chromium; manganese; nickel; and selenium) for Trench Area wells. The results of these tests are summarized
below:
Constituent No. Tests Increasing Trend Decreasing Trend
Significant Not Significant Significanl Not Significant
voes 28 3 (I 1%) 6 (21%) 5(18%) I 14 (50%)
SVOCs 3 I (33%) I (33%) .. 0 i (j3%)
Metals 30 3 (10%) 4(13%) 14(47%). 9 (30%)
TOTAL 61 7 (I 1%) 11(18%) 19 (31%) 24 (39"/o)
18 (30%) 43 (70%)
As shown above, only 30 percent of the tests showed increasing concentration trends and 70 percent showed
decreasing trends. Thirty-one percent of the total number of tests and 44 percent of the decreasing trends were
statistically significant for Trench Area wells; only 11 percent of the tests showed statistically significant
increasing trends.
This comparison indicates that the OUI remedy does not appear to be improving ground-water quality, and may,
in fact, be worsening the constituent concentrations, as demonstrated by the number of statistically significant
increasing concentration trends. Ground-water quality in the Trench Area, on the other hand, appears to be
showing improvement under the current OU2 remedy. Therefore, the effectiveness of the current OU I remedy
to improve ground-water quality should be re-evaluated.
BlASlAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC
OUI 2EXEC.wPO •• a12sna engineers & scientists 5
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1. Introduction
A data evaluation was conducted for ground-water samples collected from the Plume Periphery and Trench Area
extraction and monitoring wells at the National Starch & Chemical Company (NSCC) facility in Salisbury, North
Carolina. Extraction and monitoring wells include the following:
Plume Peri hcrv Wells
Well ID
EX-01
EX-02
EX-03
EX-04
NS-29
NS-30 ·
NS-31
NS-32
BE -Bedrock Extraction Well
BM -Bedrock Monitoring Well
SM -Shallow Monitoring Well
Well Type
BE
BE
BE
BE
BM
BM
BM
BM
,.
Trench Area Wells
Well ID Well Type
EX-05 BE
EX-06 BE
EX-07 BE
EX-08 BE
EX-09 BE
EX-10 BE
NS-09 SM
NS-10 SM
NS-I I SM
NS-15 BM
Plume Periphery extraction wells and monitoring wells have been sampled 21 times on a quarterly schedule from first
quarter 1993 through first quarter 1998, with the exception of extraction well EX-02, which was not sampled during
first quarter 1993. Trench Arca extraction wells have been sampled eight times on a quarterly schedule from second
quarter 1996 through first quarter 1998, and Trench Area monitoring wells have been sampled 20 times on a quarterly
schedule from second quarter 1993 through first quarter 1998.
As required by the OU I Record of Decision (ROD), ground-water samples collected from the Plume Periphery and
Trench Area extraction and monitoring wells have been analyzed for the following 14 volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), two semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), and nine metals:
Acetone 4-Nitrophcnol Arsenic
Benzene Bis(2-ch lorocthy I )ether Barium
Bromodichloromcthane Beryllium
Chloroform Cadmium
I, 1-Dichloroethcne Chromium
1,2-Dichloroethane Manganese
1.2-Dichloropropane Nickel
Ethyl benzene Selenium
Methylene Chloride Zinc
Toluene
I, 1,2-Trichloroethane
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC.
A:\52080562.WPD --B/J 1,01 engineers & scientists 1-1
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Trichlorocthcne
. Vinyl chloride
Xylene
1.1 Purpose and Objectives
The purpose of the data evaluation is to evaluate ground-water quality data collected since 1993 and recommend
revisions to improve the Plume Periphery and Trench Area monitoring programs. The objectives of the data
evaluation were to:
• conduct statistical tests on the Plume P·eriphery and Trench Area ground-water data sets to identify general
characteristics, statistical outliers, and concentration trends;
• identify constituents of concern (COCs) that could be eliminated from further monitoring based on
concentrations less than Performance Standards; and
• recommend changes to improve the current monitoring program.
BlASlAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A\52080562.WPO .• B/31,01 engineers & scientists 1-2
D
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2. Methods
The ground-water data for Plume Periphery and Trench Area wells were evaluated using the following procedure:
• A tabular summary was prepared for each COC which shows the analytical results for the wells sampled during
the quarterly monitoring events conducted since first quarter 1993.
• Detected concentrations and detection limits for each COC in each well were compared to the Performance
Standards listed in the OU I ROD. COCs in each well were grouped into one of three groups based on the
results of this comparison:
Group I: COC was not detected in any monitoring event and detection limits were less than or equal to the
ROD Performance Standards or all of the detected concentrations were less than the ROD
Performance Standard. COCs in Group I were eliminated from further data evaluation. It is also
recommended that these COCs be eliminated from future monitoring events for the indicated
wells.
Group 2: COC was not detected, but the detection limit was greater than the ROD Performance Standards
and the analytical laboratory dilution factors were greater than one. Conclusions regarding
ground-water concentrations of these COCs cannot currently be drawn because the detection
limits have been repeatedly elevated above the ROD Performance Standards due to high dilution
factors. Recommendations regarding continued monitoring for these COCs will be made after
additional data is obtained using a lower detection limit and reduced dilution factors. (If the
detection Jim its for COCs are greater than the ROD Performance Standards and the dilution
factors are equal to one, it is recommended that the analytical methods be changed to obtain a
lower detection limit and the COC was retained for future monitoring.)
Group 3: One or more of the detected concentrations of a COC were greater than the ROD Performance
Standard. COCs in Group 3 were retained for further data evaluation, and may be retained ·for
future monitoring based on the results of the data evaluation.
For COCs retained for further data evaluation (Group 3), the data sets were evaluated by the following methods:
• testing the data for normality using the Shapiro-Wilks W-test and obtaining descriptive statistics (e.g., mean,
standard deviation);
• calculating a 95 percent Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) concentration on the mean if the data fit normal or
lognormal distributions;
• testing the data for potential outliers using the Interquartile Range (IQR) Test; and
• conducting the Mann-Kendall Test for Trend to identify overall concentration trends and their statistical
significance.
Concentrations less than the detection limit will be represented in the data set by one-halfof the value of the detection
limit. lfone-halfthe detection limit is greater than the greatest detected concentration (e.g., high dilution factors
resulting in elevated detection limits), both the sample and the concentration will be excluded from the evaluation.
Potential sources will be evaluated for outliers identified by the IQR test. If a sampling or laboratory error is
identified, the concentration and the sample will be eliminated from the data evaluation. If no specific error in sample
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC
A:\520805 "2. PD·· 8/30,UI engineers & scientists 2-1
D
D
R
u
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
collection or laboratory analysis can be identified, the potential outlier samples and their concentrations will be
retained as representative of ground-water sample concentrations.
Background information on these tests and interpretation of their results is provided in Appendices A through D.
The results of the data evaluation are summarized below for the Plume Periphery wells (Section 3) and the Trench
Area wells (Section 4). Recommendations for future monitoring are provided in Section 5.
BLASI.AND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A\S2080S 2, PD .. 8/.l0,01 engineers & scientists 2-2
fl
n
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3. Plume Periphery Wells
Summaries of the data sets for the eight Plume Periphery wells are shown in Tables 1, 2, and 3 for voes, SVOes,
and metals, respectively. The data evaluation for the Plume Periphery extraction and monitoring wells was based on
analytical results for the 20 monitoring events conducted from first quarter 1993 through fourth quarter 1997.
Analytical results for the first quarter 1998 sampling are also shown in Tables 1, 2, and 3, but were excluded from
the quantitative data evaluation to provide an equal number of first, second, third, and fourth quarter monitoring
events for seven of the eight Plume Periphery wells. Inclusion of the first quarter 1998 results would provide 21
quarters of data for seven of the eight Plume Periphery wells: six monitoring events ( 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997,
and 1998) for first quarter, but only five monitoring events (1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, and 1997) for second, third,
and fourth quarters. It should be noted that although only 19 monitoring events were conducted for extraction well
EX-02 during first quarter 1993 through fourth quarter 1997 (EX-02 was not sampled during first quarter 1993), first
quarter 1998 results were also excluded for EX-02 to maintain consistency among the monitoring events evaluated
for all the Plume Periphery wells. Analytical results for first quarter 1998 were qualitatively evaluated and were taken
into consideration in making recommendations for future monitoring for Plume Periphery wells. Analytical results
for first quarter 1998 are noted where they vary substantially from the historical results.
3.1 voes
The data evaluation for the I 4 voes monitored in the Plume Periphery wells is discussed below for each voe. Each
section is organized to discuss the wells in Groups I, 2, and 3.
3.1.1 Acetone
Group I Wells
As shown in Table I A, detected concentrations of acetone and detection limits were less than the ROD Performance
Standard (3,500 ug/1) for wells EX-0 I, EX-04, NS-30, and NS-32. It should be noted that the acetone concentration
in EX-04 in second quarter 1996 was "E" qualified and diluted run results are unavailable. Although a quantifiable
concentration for this detection is unavailable, the "E" qualified concentration (l,300E ug/1) is approximately three
times less than the ROD Performance Standard (3,500 ug/1), and it is reasonab)c·to assume that the diluted
concentration would also be less than the ROD Performance Standard; the maximum detected acetone concentration
in EX-04 is 2,400 ug/1. Therefore, it is recommended that acetone be eliminated from future monitoring events for
wells EX-0 I, EX-04, NS-30, and NS-32.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Acetone has been detected at concentrations greater than the ROD Performance Standard in wells EX-02, EX-03,
NS-29, and NS-31, and detection limits have been less than the ROD Performance Standard during quarters when
acetone was not detected. Acetone concentrations for extraction wells EX-02 and EX-03. and monitoring wells NS-29
and NS-3 I are summarized as follows:
EX-02 19/19(4) 7,800OB -50,000 17 / 19' 7,800 -50,000
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC.
A\5:20805 2. PO --8/30t01 engineers & scientists 3-1
D
u
u
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EX-03 20/20(4) 1,200 - I S,000D
NS-29 14/20(3) 39 - I 00,000DB
NS-31 16/20(4) 11 -43,000DB
Units in ug/1
D -concentration in diluted run sample
B -analyte was also detected in the associated laboratory method blank
(n) -number of''B" qualified detections
ROD Performance Standard: 3,500 ug/1
11 / 20' 3,700-15,000
10 / 14' 12,000 - I 00,000
11 / 16' 4,700 -43,000
*Quantifiable concentrations cannot be identified using "E" qualified data, and diluted concentrations unavailable for two monitoring
events for EX-02 and one monitoring event for EX-03, NS-29, and NS-31.
It should be noted that several of the detected concentrations of acetone were "B" qualified, indicating that acetone
was also detected in the associated method blank, and some tinknown amount in the ground-water sample may be
attributed to laboratory contamination. Because detected concentrations in the method blanks for historical sampling
events were unavailable, the data evaluation for acetone was completed using the concentrations reported by the
laboratory, regardless of "B" qualifiers. Using the "B" qualified concentrations is conservative because it may
overestimate the acetone concentrations in the ground-water samples by including contributions of acetone from the
laboratory.
Analytical results were unavailable for two monitoring events for EX-02 (fourth quarter 1994 and second quarter
1996) and for one monitoring event for EX-03, NS-29, and NS-3 I (second quarter 1996); detected concentrations
were "E" qualified and diluted run sample results were not available from the laboratory. These events were treated
as missing data points in the data evaluation.
The results of the data evaluation for wells EX-02, EX-03, NS-29, and NS-31 are summarized below:
Mean
EX-02 Normal 26,100 (A)
EX-03 Lognormal 4,008 (G)
NS-29 None 28,009 (A)
NS-31 None 13,178/A)
Units m ug/1
(G) • Geometric Mean; (A) Arithmetic Mean
NC -Not Calculated
* At 95 percent confidence level
Standard Deviation
11,431
4,484
35,291
15,211
95 % UCL Direction Significant•
30.941 None Decreasing YES
10,106 None Increasing YES
NC None Increasing YES
NC None Increasine YES
As shown above, average concentrations of acetone in all four wells (EX-02, EX-03, NS-29, and NS-3 I) are greater
than the ROD Performance Standard (3,500 ug/1), and none of the detected concentrations were considered to be
outliers. Three of the four wells show increasing concentration trends, and these three increasing trends, as well as
the decreasing trend in EX-02, are statistically significant at a 95 percent confidence level. Based on the results of
the data evaluation, it is recommended that acetone be retained as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-02, EX-03,
NS-29, and NS-31 for future monitoring events.
3.1.2 Benzene
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC
A:\520805 2. PO --8/30t0 I engineers & scientists 3-2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Group 1 Wells
As shown in Table I B, benzene was not detected in wells EX-01, EX-03, NS-30, NS-31, and NS-32, and was
detected infrequently in wells EX-02, EX-04, and NS-29 as shown below:
:(-:·:::{(e<.-~:~n_:i:i.:o.r, :':'=,:,: :fi-J}~':tj_~f ~~:':~~t_C~fr(i.\/' ·i.:-:tir~_{l~f~:cfAt:=:::r::: )·.::::,(DCtCction: ·· :·, -:',Con·centi-3ti0ns>::-· : ·.-:·'.,IEX:c·eeda·nce·s:---···:= ·
EX-02 l / 19 ll
EX-04 5 / 20 0.61 -21
NS-29 1 / 20 971
Units in ug/1
J -estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/1
0 / 1
0/5
1 / 1 971
Detected concentrations of benzene were less than the ROD Performance Standards (5 ug/1), with the exception of
one detection in well NS-29 in third quarter 1996 (97J ug/1).
It is recommended that benzene be eliminated from future monitoring for wells EX-01, EX-04, NS-29, NS-30, NS-31,
and NS-32 because:
• The detection limits were equal to the ROD Performance Standards during 25 to 55 percent of the historical
monitoring events for these wells, and benzene was not detected. This indicates that benzene is absent or present
at a concentration less than the ROD Performance Standard.
• Benzene was only detected during seven monitoring events. for the six wells and six of the detected
concentrations were less than the ROD Performance Standard.
• The detected concentration of benzene greater than the ROD Performance Standard in NS-29 occurred in third
quarter 1996, and benzene was not detected during any of the other 19 monitoring events for NS-29.
Group 2 Wells
Benzene cannot currently be eliminated from future monitoring events for wells EX-02 and EX-03 because the
dilution factors are greater than one and the detection limits for approximately 90 percent of the monitoring events
are greater than the ROD Performance Standard. Benzene will be re-evaluated as a monitoring parameter for wells
EX-02 and EX-03 after the analytical method is changed and the dilution factors are reduced so that the detection
limits are equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standard. Should consecutive future monitoring events indicate
that benzene is absent or present at concentrations less than the ROD Performance Standard, elimination of benzene
as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-02 and EX-03 will be recommended.
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.
A:\520805 2. PD·· B/.30,01
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
engineers & scientists 3-3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.1.3 Bromodichloromethane
Group I Wells•
As shown in Table IC, bromodichloromethane was not detected in any of the 20 monitoring events in any of the
Plume Periphery wells. It is recommended that bromodichloromethane be eliminated from future monitoring for
wells EX-01, EX-04, NS-29, NS-30, NS-31, and NS-32 because the detection limits were equal to the ROD
Performance Standards during 25 to 55 percent of the historical monitoring events for these wells, and
bromodichloromethane was not detected. This indicates that bromodichloromethane is absent or present at a
concentration less than the ROD Performance Standard.
Group 2 Wells
Bromodichloromethane cannot currently be eliminated from future monitoring events for wells EX-02 and EX-03
because the dilution factors are greater than one and the detection limits for 90 to 95 percent of the monitoring events
are greater than the ROD Performance Standard. Bromodichloromethane will be re-evaluated as a monitoring
parameter for wells EX-02 and EX-03 after the anaiytical method is changed and the dilution factors are reduced so
that the detection limits are equal _to or less than the ROD Performance Standard. Should consecutive future
monitoring events indicate that bromodichloromethane is absent or present at concentrations less than the ROD
Performance Standard, elimination of bromodichloromethane as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-02 and EX-03
will be recommended.
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.
3.1.4 Chloroform
Group I Wells
As shown in Table ID, chloroform was not detected in any of the 20 monitoring events for the Plume Periphery wells,
with the exception of an estimated detection in well NS-31 in first quarter 1993 (2J ug/1). The detected concentration
was less than the ROD Performance Standard (5 ug/1). It is recommended that chloroform be eliminated from future
monitoring for wells EX-01, EX-04, NS-29, NS-30, NS-31, and NS-32 because:
• The detection limits were equal to the ROD Performance Standards during 25 to 55 percent of the historical
monitoring events for these wells, and chloroform was not detected. This indicates that chloroform is absent
or present at a concentration less than the ROD Performance Standard.
• Chloroform was only detected once at an estimated concentration in NS-31, and the detected concentration is
less than the ROD Performance Standard.
Group 2 Wells
Chloroform cannot currently be eliminated from future monitoring events for wells EX-02 and EX-03 (although it
has not been detected) because the dilution factors are greater than one and the detection limits for 90 to 95 percent
of the monitoring events are greater than the ROD Performance Standard. Chloroform will be re-evaluated as a
monitoring parameter for wells EX-02 and EX-03 after the analytical method is changed and the dilution factors are
reduced so that the detection limits are equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standard. Should consecutive
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A\520805 2. PO-· 8/J0,OI engineers & scientists 3-4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
future monitoring events indicate that chloroform is absent or present at concentrations less than the ROD
Performance Standard, elimination of chloroform as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-02 and EX-03 will be
recommended.
Group 3 Well.I'
Not applicable.
3.1.5 1,2-Dichloroethane
Group 1 Wells
As shown in Table IE, 1,2-dichloroethane was not detected in well NS-32, and was detected in wells EX-01, EX-04,
and NS-30, as shown below:
EX-01 7 / 20 3J -20
EX-04 12 / 20 3J - 7
NS-30 4 I 20 3J -79)
. Units in ug/1
J -estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/1
2 /7 7J; 20
2 / 12 6J; 7
3/4 8; 56; 79)
It is recommended that 1,2-dichloroethane be eliminated as monitorintparameter for wells EX-01, EX-04, NS-30,
and NS-32 because:
• 1,2-Dichloroethane was not detected in NS-32 and detection limits for 55 percent of the monitoring events were
equal to the ROD Performance Standard.
• Detection limits for EX-01, EX-04, and NS-30 were equal to the ROD Performance Standards during
approximately 40 percent of the monitoring events, and 1,2-dichlorocthane was not detected. This indicates that
1,2-dichloroethane is absent or present at a concentration less than the ROD Performance Standard.
• Detected concentrations of 1,2-dichloroethane are less than the ROD Perfonnance Standard, with the exception
of two detections in EX-0 I and EX-04 and three detections in NS-30.
• One of the detections in EX-0 I (71 ug/1) and the two detections in EX-04 (61 ug/1 and 71 ug/1) were quantitative
estimates comparable in magnitude to the ROD Performance Standard.
• The remaining detection in EX-01 (20 ug/1) and the three detections in NS-30 (8 ug/1, 56 ug/1, and 791 ug/1)
occurred in the first year of monitoring ( 1993) and 1,2-dichloroethane has not been detected or has been reported
at estimated concentrations in subsequent monitoring events.
BLASI.AND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A.\520805 2. PD-· 8/30,01 engineers & scientists 3-5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
The results of the data evaluation for extraction wells EX-02 and EX-03 and monitoring wells NS-29 and NS-31 are
summarized as follows:
l::::=::\C = ,.,,,-,,,,.,' ::· .. ".F.-.·.•.·.•.· .. q,'u .. e.n .•. c. Y:.o.r .. (.{.·:.' ,.:,.1 .•• '.•.: .. •.R ..... •.· ·.".· g. c ... ··.• .• o. r .. ,.o ...... • ... t .. c.·.c •. t .. c.·.d.··'==.· .•. r.:: ,:: \\.Fr.·.•.• .. ·qu .. ·· .. c. ·"·.·c·y•·.·.· : .. " .. r ... •.i.':::://.: :=:=:-::,.:.::=:':-:':'Ra"iigt:!"Of-EXCeCdiiiiCt('=-·· , .. ·•·
·-.,·:•-::-·'=-· '>\\.'-. )) }toCtt!'ctiOrl··:'· . -.. ·. cOriCentratiOnS:<< .-· .. · EXcee·da·nces:::: =::.='\\\:t\Cii'~'C-~:ri't'J'a'tiO.~'S\/i'?
EX-02 13 / 19 140) -1,700
EX-03 14 / 20 I0J -240
NS-29 17 / 20 3) -1,900
NS-31 12 /20 4 J -170 J
Units in ug/1
J -estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/1
The results of the data evaluation are summarized below:
Mean Standard Deviation
EX-02 Normal 609(A)
EX-03 Lognormal 67 (G)
NS-29 None 452 (A)
NS-31 Normal 90 (A)
Units in ug/1
(G) • Geometric Mean; (A) Arithmetic Mean
NC -Not Calculated
• At 95 percent confidence level
246
75
600
85
13 / 13 140) -1,700
14 / 14 IOJ -240
14 / 17 8-1,900
9 / 12 9)-170)
95 % UCL Direction Significant*
717 1,200 Increasing NO
70 None Increasing YES
NC 1,900 Increasing YES
129 None Dccrcasinl! YES
As shown above, average concentrations of 1,2-dichloroethane in the four wells are greater than the ROD
Performance Standard (5 ug/1) and the maximum detected concentrations for two of the wells (EX-02 and NS-29)
were considered to be outliers; average concentrations would be reduced to 534 ug/1 and 372 ug/1, respectively, if
these outliers are excluded. However, because no specific sampling or laboratory error could be identified, these
concentrations were retained as part of the data set.
Three of the four wells (EX-02, EX-03, and NS-29) show increasing concentration trends, and two of these increasing
trends (EX-03 and NS-29), as well as the decreasing trend in NS-31, are statistically significant at a 95 percent
confidence level. Based on the results of the data evaluation, it is recommended that 1,2-dichloroethane be retained
as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-02, EX-03, NS-29, and NS-31.
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC
A\520805 2. Pl) --8/30,.01 engineers & scientists 3-6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.1.6 1, 1-Dichloroethene
Group 1 Wells
As shown in Table IF, I, 1-dichloroethene was not detected in any of the 20 monitoring events in any of the Plume
Periphery wells. It is recommended that I, 1-dichloroethene be eliminated from future monitoring for wells EX-0I,
EX-04, NS-29, NS-30, NS-31, and NS-32 because the detection limits were equal to the ROD Performance Standards
during 25 to 55 percent of the historical monitoring events for wells, and I, 1-dichloroethene was not detected. This
indicates that I, 1-dichloroethene is absent or present at a concentration less than the ROD Performance Standard.
Group 2 Wells
I, 1-Dichloroethene cannot currently be eliminated from future monitoring events for wells EX-02 and EX-03 because
the dilution factors are greater than one and the detection limits for 90 to 95 percent of the monitoring events are
greater than the ROD Perforrnance Standard. I, 1-Dichloroethene will be re-evaluated as a monitoring parameter for
wells EX-02 and EX-03 after the analytical method is changed and the dilution factors are reduced so that the
detection limits are equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standard. Should consecutive future monitoring
events indicate that I, 1-dichloroethcne is absent or present at concentrations less than the ROD Performance
Standard, elimination of 1,1-dichloroethene as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-02 and EX-03 will be
recomniended.
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.
3.1. 7 1,2-Dichloropropane
Group 1 Wells
As shown in Table IG, 1,2-dichloropropane was infrequently detected in wells EX-01, NS-30, and NS-32. These
detections are summarized below:
EX-01 6 / 20 IJ -35
NS-30 3 I 20 23-190
NS-32 I/ 20 IJ
Units in ug/1
J -estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 6 ug/1
2/6 7); 35
3/3 23;97; 190
0 I I
It is recommended that 1,2-dichloropropane be eliminated as monitoring parameter for wells EX-0 I, NS'.J0, and NS-
32 because:
• Detection limits for these wells were equal to the ROD Performance Standards during 45 to 55 percent of the
monitoring events, and 1,2-dichloropropane was not detected. This indicates that 1,2-dichloropropane is absent
or present at a concentration less than the ROD Performance Standard.
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A:\520805 2. PO •. 8/JO,OI engineers & scientists 3-7
a
0
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• Detected concentrations of 1,2-dichloropropane in these wells are less than the ROD Perfonnance Standard, with
the exception of two detections in EX-01 and three detections in NS-30.
• One of the detections in EX-01 (7 J ug/1) was a quantitative estimate comparable in magnitude to the ROD
Performance Standard (6 ug/1), and the other detection in EX-IO (35 ug/1) occurred in first quarter 1993.
• The three detections in NS-30 occurred in 1993 and 1,2-dichloropropane has not been detected in subsequent,
more recent monitoring events.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
1,2-Dichloropropane concentrations for extraction wells EX-02, EX-03, and EX-04 and monitoring wells NS-29 and
NS-31 are summarized as follows:
EX-02 16 I 19 I00J -1,600 16 I 16 I 00J -1,600
EX-03 17 / 20 24 -3 JO 17 / 17 24-3IO
EX-04 8 / 20 IJ -26 4/8 7J; 7J; 17; 26
NS-29 14 / 20 5J -2,700 13 / 14 46.5 -2,700
NS-31 10 I 20 31 -340 J 9 I 10 31 -340)
Units m ug/1
J -estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 6 ug/1
It is recommended that 1,2-dichloropropane be retained as a monitoring parameter for EX-04 to verify the recent
(second quarter 1997) detection of 1,2-dichloropropane at 17 ug/1.
The results of the data evaluation conducted for these wells are summarized below:
Mean Standard Deviation
EX-02 Lognormal 773 (G)
EX-03 Normal 121 (A)
NS-29 None 851 (A)
NS-31 None 112 (A)
Units m ug/1
(G) -Geometric Mean; (A) Arithmetic Mean
NC -Not Calculated
* At 95 percent confidence level
78
78
955
103
95% UCL Direction
821 None Decreasing
151 310 Increasing
NC None Increasing
NC None Decreasing
Significant*
NO
YES
YES
NO
As shown above, average concentrations of 1,2-dichloroethane in all four wells are greater than the ROD Perfonnance
Standard (6 ug/1) and the maximum detected concentration for well EX-03 was considered to be an outlier. However,
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A\520005 2. PD·· 8/30i0I engineers & scientists 3-8
H
D
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i I
I
I
because no specific sampling or laboratory error could be identified, this concentrations were retained as part of the
data set.
Two of the four wells (EX-03 and NS-29) show increasing concentration trends, which are statistically significant
at a 95 percent confidence level; neither of the decreasing trends in EX-02 and NS-31 are statistically significant.
Based on the results of the data evaluation, it is recommended that 1,2-dichloropropane be retained as a monitoring
parameter for wells EX-02, EX-03, NS-29, and NS-31.
3.1.8 Ethylbenzene
Group 1 Wells
As shown in Table I H, ethyl benzene was not detected in wells EX-0 I, NS-29, or NS-32, and was detected
infrequently in wells EX-02, EX-03, EX-04, NS-30, and NS-31, as shown below:
EX-02 4 / 19 9 -321 0/4
EX-03 2 / 20 21 -31 0/2
EX-04 7 / 20 21 -41 0/7
NS-30 I/ 20 IJ 0 / I
NS-3 I 3 I 20 11 -21 0/3
Units m ug/1
J -estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 3,500 ug/1
The detected concentrations of ethylbenzene are less than the ROD Performance Standard (3,500 ug/1) and it is
recommended that ethylbcnzene be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for the eight Plume Periphery wells. It
should be noted that all of the detection limits for the Plume Periphery wells are less than the ROD Performance
Standard, with the exception ofone detection limit in EX-02 and one detection limit in NS-29 in fourth quarter 1995.
Detection limits for the nine subsequent quarters of sampling have been equal to or less than the ROD Performance
Standards.
3.1.9 Methylene Chloride
Methylene chloride concentrations shown in Table I I for the eight Plume Periphery wells are summarized as follows:
EX-01 8/18'(6) 181-9B 1/ 8 98
EX-02 10/ 17' (5) 41 -2,9001) 9 I 10 131 -2,9008
EX-03 11/18'(7) 21-160B1 9 / 11 161 -16081
EX-04 IO/ I 8' (7) IJ -78 3 / 10 68 -78
NS-29 11/18'(7) 2) -2,200 7 I 11 713 -2,200
NS-30 6/ 18' (5) 0.6) -4813) 3/6 88 -4813)
NS-31 13 / 18' (9) 281 -1,6008 11 / 13 68 -l,600B
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC.
A\520B05 2. PD --8/30i0 I engineers & scientists 3-9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INS-32 I 10/18'(6) I IJ -118 3 / 10
Units in ug/1
B -analytc was also detected in the associated laboratory method blank
J -estimated concentration less than the detection limit
(n)-number of"B" qualified detections
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/1 ·
98 -118
• Methylene chloride results were not reported for fourth quarter 1993 or first quarter 1994 sampling events.
It should be noted that 50 to 80 percent of all of the detected concentrations of methylene chloride were "B" qualified,
indicating that methylene chloride was also detected in the associated method blank, and some amount of the detected
concentration may be attributed to laboratory contamination. Because detected concentrations in the method blanks
for historical sampling events are unavailable, the data evaluation for methylene chloride was conducted using the
concentrations reported by the laboratory, regardless of"B" qualifiers. Using the "B" qualified concentrations is
conservative because it overestimates the methylene chloride concentrations in the ground-water samples by including
contributions of methylene chloride from the laboratory.
Group I Wells
It is recommended that methylene chloride be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for EX-01, EX-04, NS-30, and
NS-32 because:
• 60 to 80 percent of the detections in EX-01, EX-04, NS-30, and NS-32 were "B" qualified concentrations;
• the remaining detections in the four wells were estimated concentrations less than the detection limit ("J"
qualified); and
• the only detections greater than the ROD Performance Standard in these four wells were "B" qualified
concentrations.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
The results of the data evaluation conducted for wells EX-02, EX-03, NS-29, and NS-31 are summarized below:
I ·,:.we11•:: ::1 :::DiSfrib·u·ti()i,•c: !f·>·•••·····
Mean Standard Deviation 95 % UCL
EX-02 Lognormal 142 (G)
EX-03 None 68 (A)
NS-29 Lognormal 35 (G)
NS-31 l.,oonormal 42 (G)
Units m ug/1
(G) -Geometric Mean; (A) Arithmetic Mean
NC -Not Calculated
* At 95 percent confidence level
A'\)20805 2. PD·· 8/J0,OI
774 10.012
58 NC
599 6.857
389 5,950
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE. INC.
engineers & scientists
Direction Significant'
None Decreasing NO
None Decreasing NO
None Increasing NO
None Increasing: NO
3-10
D
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
As shown above, average concentrations of methylene chloride in the four wells are greater than the ROD
Performance Standard (S ug/1) and none of the detected concentrations were considered to be outliers. Two of the
four wells (NS-29 and NS-31) show increasing concentration trends, but none of the concentration trends are
statistically significant at a 95 percent confidence level. Based on the results of the data evaluation, it is
recommended that methylene chloride be retained as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-02, EX-03, NS-29, and
NS-31.
3.1.10 Toluene
Group I Wells
As shown in Table I J, toluene was detected infrequently or at low concentrations in all eight Plume Periphery wells:
EX-01 2 / 20 11 -13 0/2
EX-02 12 / 19 1101 -4201 0 / 12
EX-03 19120 321 -2001 0 I 19
EX-04 17 / 20 21-46 0 / 17
NS-29 12 / 20 31-1,100 0 / 12
NS-30 3120 21 -341 0/3
NS-31 14 / 20 61 -6101 0114
NS-32 · l / 20 0.81 011
Units in ug/1
J -estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 2,000 ug/1
Detected concentrations are less than the ROD Performance Standard (2,000 ug/1), and it is recommended that toluene
be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for the eight Plume Periphery wells. It should be noted that detection limits
were less than the ROD Performance Standard, with the exception of six of the detection limits in EX-02 and one
of the detection limits in NS-29. These elevated detection limits occurred in or prior to fourth quarter 1995, and
detection limits for the eight subsequent quarters of sampling have been equal to or less than the ROD Performance
Standards.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.
3.1.11 1,1,2-Trichloroethane
Group I Wells
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC
A.\520805 2. PD --8/30,0 I engineers & scientists 3-11
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
As shown in Table I K, I, I ,2-trichloroethane was not detected in any of the 20 monitoring events in any of the Plume
Periphery wells. It is recommended that I, 1,2-trichloroethane be eliminated from future monitoring for wells EX-01,
EX-04, NS-29, NS-30, NS-31, and NS-32 because (I) the detection limits were equal to the ROD Performance
Standards during 25 to 55 percent of the historical monitoring events for these wells, and (2) I, I ,2-trichloroethane
was not detected, indicating that I, 1,2-trichloroethane is absent or present at a concentration less than the ROD
Performance Standard.
Group 2 Wells
I, 1,2-Trichloroethane cannot currently be eliminated from future monitoring events for wells EX-02 and EX-03
because the dilution factors are greater than one and the detection limits for most of the monitoring events are greater
than the ROD Performance Standard. I, 1,2-Trichloroethane will be re-evaluated as a monitoring parameter for wells
EX-02 and EX-03 when the analytical method is changed.and the dilution factors are reduced so that the detection
limits are equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standard. Should consecutive future monitoring events indicate
that I, I, I-trichloroethane is absent or present at concentrations less than the ROD Performance Standard, elimination
of I, I-trichloroethane as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-02 and EX-03 will be recommended.
3.1.12 Trichloroethene
Group I Wells
As shown in Table IL, trichloroethene was not detected in any of the 20 monitoring events in any of the Plume
Periphery wells. It is recommended that trichloroethene be eliminated from future monitoring for wells EX-01, EX-
04, NS-29, NS-30, NS-31, andNS-32 because (I) the detection limits were equal to the ROD Performance Standards
during 25 to 55 percent of the historical monitoring events for these wells, and (2) trichloroethene was not detected,
indicating that trichloroethene is absent from the ground water or is present at a concentration less than the ROD
Performance Standard.
Group 2 Wells
Trichloroethene cannot currently be eliminated from future monitoring events for wells EX-02 and EX-03 because
the dilution factors are greater than one and the detection limits for most of the monitoring events are greater than
the ROD Performance Standard. Trichloroethene will be re-evaluated as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-02
and EX-03 after the analytical method is changed and the dilution factors are reduced so that the detection limits are
equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standard. Should consecutive future monitoring events indicate that
trichloroethene is absent or present at concentrations less than the ROD Performance Standard, elimination of
trichloroethene as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-02 and EX-03 will be recommended.
BIJISLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC
A:\520805 2. PD --Bi30NJ engineers & scientists 3-12
I
I
D
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.
3.1.13 Vinyl Chloride
Group 1 Wells
As shown in Table IM, vinyl chloride was not detected in any of the monitoring events for wells EX-01, EX-03, NS-
29, NS-30, and NS-32, and was only detected in third quarter 1993 in EX-02 (19 ug/1), first quarter 1993 in EX-04
(28 ug/1), and third quarter 1993 in NS-31 (2J ug/1). It is recommended that vinyl chloride be eliminated from future
monitoring for wells EX-01, EX-04, NS-29, NS-30, NS-31 and NS-32 because:
• Vinyl chloride was only detected during two events for these wells, and the detected concentration in NS-31 is
a quantitative estimate equal to the ROD Performance Standard (2 ug/1).
• The detected concentration in EX-04 is greater than the ROD Performance Standard (2 ug/1), but this detection
occurred in the first year of monitoring and vinyl chloride was not detected in any of the subsequent monitoring
events.
• The detection limits were equal to the ROD Performance Standards during 25 to 55 percent of the monitoring
events for these wells, and vinyl chloride was not detected. This indicates that vinyl chloride is absent or present
at a concentration less than the ROD Performance Standard.
Group 2 Wells
Vinyl chloride cannot currently be eliminated from future monitoring events for wells EX-02 and EX-03 because the
dilution factors are greater than one and the detection limits for 95 to I 00 percent of the monitoring events are greater
than the ROD Performance Standard. Vinyl chloride will be re-evaluated as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-02
and EX-03 after the analytical method is changed and the dilution factors are reduced so that the detection limits are
equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standard. Should consecutive future monitoring events indicate that vinyl
chloride is absent or present at concentrations less than the ROD Performance Standard, elimination of vinyl chloride
as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-02 and EX-03 will be recommended.
3.1.14 Xylene
Group 1 Wells
As shown in Table IN, xylene was not detected in NS-32 and was detected infrequently or at low-level concentrations
in the remaining Plume Periphery wells. These detections are summarized below:
EX-01 2 / 20 21 -10 0/2
EX-02 5119 241 -52 0/5
EX-03 4 / 20 61 -10 0/4
EX-04 9 I 20 IJ -10 019
BlASlAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A\520805 2. PD •• 8/30i01 engineers & scientists 3-13
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NS-29 8 / 20 2) -160)
NS-30 I/ 20 41
NS-31 3 / 20 4) -7
Units in ug/1
J ¥ estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 350 ug/1
0/8
0/3
Detected concentrations are less than the ROD Performance Standard (350 ug/1), and it is recommended that xylene
be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for the eight Plume Periphery wells. It should be noted that detection limits
were less than the ROD Performance Standard, with the exception of 10 of the detection limits in EX-02, one of the
detection limits in EX-03,.five of the detection limits in NS-29, and eight of the detection limits in NS-32. However,
the detection limits for the remaining sampling events are less than the ROD Performance Standard.
3.1.15 Summary
Grouping of the 14 voes for the eight Plume Periphery wells is shown in Table 4. Based on the results of the data
evaluation, voes were grouped into the following three categories (described in Section 2):
I""'···· . voe I :-' wc11:cro·u~in·g·s ·:; ;-.:.::::-. ·•.,., ..••.•.... "''I
Group I Group 2 Group 3
Acetone EX-01, EX-04, NS-JO, NS-32 -EX-02, EX-OJ, NS-29, NS-JI
Benzene EX-01, EX-04, NS-29, NS-JO, NS-JI, NS-32 EX-02. EX-OJ -
B romod ichl o romcth anc EX-0 I. EX-04, NS-29, NS-JO, NS-3 I, NS-32 EX-02, EX-OJ -
Chloroform EX-01, EX-04, NS-29, NS-JO, NS-JI, NS-32 EX-02, EX-03 -
I, I -Dichlorocthene EX-01, EX-04, NS-29, NS-30, NS-31, NS-32 EX-02, EX-03 -
1,2-Dichlorocthane EX-01, EX-04, NS-30, NS-32 -EX-02, EX-03, NS-29, NS-31
1,2-Dichloropropanc EX-01, NS-30, NS-32 -EX-02, EX-03, EX-04, NS-29, NS-31
Ethylbenzcne EX-01, EX-02, EX-03, EX-04, NS-29, NS-30, -
NS-31, NS-32
Methylene chloride EX-0 I, EX-04, NS-30, NS-32 -EX-02, EX-OJ, NS-29, NS-31
Toluene EX-01, EX-02, EX-03, EX-04, NS-29, NS-30, --
NS-31, NS-32
l, 1,2-Trichloroethanc EX-01, EX-04, NS-29, NS-30, NS-31, NS-32 EX-02, EX-03 -
Trichloroethene EX-0 I, EX-04, NS-29, NS-JO, NS-31, NS-32 EX-02, EX-03 -
Vinyl chloride EX-01, EX-04. NS-29, NS-30, NS-31, NS-32 EX-02, EX-03 -
Xylenes EX-01, EX-02, EX-03, EX-04, NS-29, NS-30, --
NS-31, NS-32 .. Group I: COCs Recommended To Be l~limmatcd From Further Monitoring
Group 2: COCs Cannot Be Currently Eliminated -Detection Limits Greater than ROD Performance Standards and Dilution Factors Greater Than One
Group 3: COCs Recommended To Be Retained For Further Monitoring
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC
A.\520805 2. PO--B/30,01 engineers & scientists 3-14
n
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.2 SVOCs
The data evaluation for the two SVOCs [bis(2-chloroethyl)ether and 4-nitrophenol] monitored in the Plume Periphery
wells is discussed below for each SVOC. Each section is organized to discuss the wells by group.
3.2.1 Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Group I Wells
Not applicable.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
A data evaluation was conducted for all eight Plume Periphery wells. Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether concentrations shown
in Table 2A for the eight Plume Periphery wells are summarized as follows:
I\\
·•· "' ,.
EX-01 12 / 20 3J -38
EX-02 19 / 19 43 -770
EX-03 19 / 20 56 -260
EX-04 19120 51 -74
NS-29 20 / 20 81 • 1,400
NS-30 18 / 20 4J -44
NS-31 19120 II -540
NS-32 3 / 20 370 -650
Units in ug/1
J -estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/1
"'
8 / 12 71 -38
18 / 19' 43-770
19 I 19 56 -260
18 / 19 11 -74
20 I 20 81 -1,400
16 / 18 71 -44
19 I 19 11 -540
3/3 370 -650
• Diluted concentrations unavailable for second quarter 1996 and detected concentration cannot be determined using "E" qualified data.
The results of the data evaluation for the Plume Periphery wells are summarized below:
I ':'Well ·/\i DiSfribu'tiC>"ll Il•t·• .::·:;.: :,:::•:\:-DCScfi~t iVit Sla"tis'tici\:::'" · .. . ·:1·: OUtliC"ri(\/ I \.Trhi'd:) .:::.•••<:(: •• !
Mean Standard Deviation 95 % UCL Direction Significant•
EX-01 Lognormal 8 (G) 10 8.6 None Increasing YES
EX-02 Normal 470 (A) 172 541 None Decreasing YES
EX-03 Normal 131 (A) 57 153 None Increasing YES
EX-04 Lognormal 28 (G) 24 27 None Increasing YES
NS-29 None 446 (A) 520 NC None Increasing YES
NS-30 Lognormal 12 (G) 12 12 None Decreasing YES
BLASI.AND, BOUCK & LEE, INC
A\)/0805 2. PO .. 8/JO,{)I engineers & scientists 3-15
E
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NS-31 Lognormal 64 (G)
NS-32 None 83 fA)
Units in ug/1
(G) -Geometric Mean; (A) Arithmetic Mean
NC -Not Calculated
• At 95 percent confidence level
156 88 None Increasing NO
197 NC 370; 560;650 Increasing-NO
As shown above, average concentrations of bis(2-chloroethyl)ether in all eight wells are greater than the ROD
Performance Standard (5 ug/1) and the three maximum detected concentrations in NS-32 were considered to be
outliers. However, no specific sampling or laboratory error could be identified and the outlier concentrations were
retained as part of the data set.
Six of the wells (EX-0 I, EX-03, EX-04, Ns:29, NS-31, and NS-32) show increasing concentration trends, and four
of these increasing trends (EX-0 I, EX-03, EX-04, and NS-29), as well as the decreasing trends in EX-02 and NS-30,
are statistically significant at a 95 percent confidence level. Based on the results of this data evaluation, it is
recommended that bis(2-chloroethyl)ether be retained as a monitoring parameter for, all eight Plume Periphery wells.
3.2.2 4-Nitrophenol
Group I Wells
As shown in Table 2B, 4-nitrophenol was not detected in any of the Plume Periphery wells during any of the
monitoring events, and it is recommended that 4-nitrophenol be eliminated from future monitoring events for all eight
Plume Periphery wells. It should be noted that detection limits for 4-nitrophenol were less than the ROD Performance
Standard (350 ug/1) during the 20 quarters of monitoring, with the exception of the following:
• EX-02: second, third, and fourth quarters 1994; first, third, and fourth quarters 1995; and first quarter 1996
• NS-29: third and fourth quarter 1995
• NS-32: fourth quarter 1995.
The detection limits in the seven or eight subsequent monitoring events in these wells were less than the ROD
Performance Standard.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.
A:\520805 2. PD,. 8/30,.01
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE. INC.
engineers & scientists 3-16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
3.3 Metals
The data evaluation for the metals monitored in the Plume Periphery wells is discussed below for each metal. Each
section is organized to discuss the wells by group.
3.3.1 Arsenic
Group 1 Wells
As shown in Table 3A, arsenic was not detected at detection limits equal to or less than the ROD Performance
Standards or was detected at concentrations less than the ROD Performance Standards for the 20 monitoring events
in the eight Plume Periphery wells sampled. Therefore, it is recommended that arsenic be eliminated from future
monitoring.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.
3.3.2 Barium
Group 1 Wells
As shown in Table 38, detection limits and detected concentrations of barium were less than the ROD Performance
Standard (1,000 ug/1) in all sampling events for wells EX-01, EX-03, EX-04, NS-30, and NS-32, and it is
recommended that barium be excluded from further monitoring for these wells.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Detected concentrations of barium in wells EX-02, NS-29, and NS-31 are shown below:
EX-02 19 / 19 982 -1,970 18 / 19 1,070-1,970
NS-29 20 / 20 45.3 -2,490 6 I 20 1,150-2,490
NS-31 19 I 20 1.7 -9,280 9119 1,630 -9,280
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 1,000 ug/1
The results of the data evaluation for wells EX-02, NS-29, and NS-31 are summarized below:
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A;\S2000S 2. PD-· 8/30,01 engineers & scientists 3-17
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EX-02 Normal
NS-29 None
NS-3 I None
Units m ug/1
(A) Arithmetic Mean
NC -Not Calculaicd
Mean
1,499 (A)
661 (A)
2,313 (A)
* At 95 percent confidence level
>l Outliers' I} · ... : Trend<. : .. · . I
Standard Deviation 95 % UCL Direction Significant•
333 1,631 None Decreasing NO
789 NC None Increasing YES
3,054 NC None Increasing YES
As shown above, average concentration.of barium in NS-29 is less than the ROD Performance Standard (1,000 ug/1)
and none of the detected concentrations were considered to be outliers. Two of the wells (NS-29 and NS-31) show
increasing concentration trends, which are statistically significant at a 95 percent confidence level. Based on the
results of the data evaluation, it is recommended that barium be retained as a monitoring parameter for future
monitoring events for wells EX-02, NS-29, and NS-31.
3.3.3 Beryllium
Group 1 Wells
As shown in Table 3C, beryllium was not detected at detection limits equal to or less than the ROD Performance
Standards or was detected at concentrations less than the ROD Performance Standards for the 20 monitoring events
in the eight Plume Periphery wells sampled. Therefore, it is recommended that beryllium be eliminated from future
monitoring events for all eight Plume Periphery wells.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.
3.3.4 Cadmium
Group 1 Wells
As shown in Table3D, detection limits and detected concentrations of cadmium were less than the ROD Performance
Standard (IO ug/1) in all sampling events for the eight Plume Periphery wells, with the exception of one detection in
fourt_h quarter 1997 in EX-04 (17.8 ug/1) and one detection in third quarter 1997 in NS-31 (26.9 ug/1). Therefore,
it is recommended that cadmium be eliminated from future monitoring in wells EX-0 I, EX-02, EX-03, NS-29, NS-
30, and NS-32.
It is also recommended that cadmium be retained as a monitoring parameter for future monitoring events for wells
EX-04 and NS-31 to verify the recent detections. It should be noted that cadmium was not detected in first quarter
· 1998 in EX-04 or in fourth quarter 1997 and first quarter 1998 in NS-3 I, and the detections of cadmium greater than
the ROD Performance Standard in third and fourth quarters 1997 in these two wells are most likely anomalous values.
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE. INC
A\520805 2. PD •• 8/30,01 engineers & scientists 3-18
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.
3.3.5 Chromium
Group I Wells
As shown in Table 3E, detection limits and detected concentrations of chromium were less than the ROD
Performance Standard (50 ug/1) in all sampling events for the eight Plume Periphery wells, with the exception of one
detection in fourth quarter 1996 in EX-03 (62.6 ug/1) and two detections in first and second quarters 1993 in NS-31
(77.5 ug/1 and 74 ug/1, respectively). Therefore, it is recommended that chromium be eliminated as a monitoring
parameter for wells EX-01, EX-02, EX-03, EX-04, NS-29, NS-30, and NS-32.
Chromium was retained as a monitoring parameter for NS-31. Although chromium in well NS-31 shows a
statistically significant decreasing trend at a 95 percent confidence level, and the concentrations greater than the ROD
Performance Standard were detected in the first two monitoring events in 1993, chromium was also detected at a
concentration greater than the ROD Performance Standard in first quarter 1998 (101 ug/1). Therefore, ground-water
samples collected from well NS-31 will be sampled for chromium to verify the recent detection greater than the ROD
Performance Standard. If the chromium concentrations in NS-31 are less than the ROD Performance Standard for
two consecutive monitoring events, chromium will be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for NS-31.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.
3.3.6 Manganese
Group I Wells
As shown in Table 3F, detection limits and detected concentrations of manganese were less than the ROD
Performance Standard (7,700 ug/1) in all sampling events in wells EX-0 I, EX-04, NS-30, NS-31, and NS-32, and
it is recommended that manganese be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for these wells.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Detected concentrations of manganese are summarized below:
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC.
A:\520805 2. PD .. 8/J0,{)I engineers & scientists 3-19
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EX-02 19 / 19 7,180-19,000 18 / 19 10,800 -19,000
EX-03 20 I 20 1,430 -11,200 2 / 20 11,000 -11,200
NS-29 20 / 20 153 -18,400 3 / 20 8,560 -18,400
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 7,700 ug/1
The results of the data evaluation for wells EX-02, EX-03, and NS-29 are summarized below:
I Well I Distribution 1 · .. -DCSci-iJ)tiVe·St8tiStiCs':
EX-02 Normal
EX-03 None
NS-29 None
Units in ug/1
(A) -Arithmetic Mean
NC -Not Calculated
Mean
14,988 (A)
4,180 (A)
3,304 (A)
• At 95 percent confidence level
Standard 95 % UCL
Deviation
3,276 16,291
2,523 NC
4,832 NC
Direction Significant•
None Increasing YES
11,000; 11,200 Increasing NO
8,560; I 2,000; Increasing YES
18,400
As shown above, the average concentrations of manganese in EX-03 and NS-29 are less than the ROD Perfonnance
Standard (7,700 ug/1), and the five concentrations greater than the ROD Performance Standard in wells EX-03 and
NS-29 were considered to be outliers. However, no specific sampling or laboratory error could. be identified and
the outlier concentrations were retained as part of the data set
All three wells show increasing concentration trends, and two of these trends (EX-02 and NS-29) are statistically
significant at a 95 percent confidence level. Based on the results of the data evaluation, it is recommended that
manganese be retained as a monitoring parameter for EX-02 and NS-29 and be eliminated as a monitoring parameter
for EX-03 because:
• the two detections greater than the ROD Performance Standard were considered to be outliers;
• the average concentration (4,180 ug/1) is less than the ROD Perfonnance Standard, and is reduced to 3,411 ug/1
without the two out I iers;
• the increasing trend is not statistically significant; and
• the two detections greater than the ROD Performance Standard occurred in fourth quarter 1993 and first quarter
1994, and manganese concentrations were less than the ROD Performance Slandard in the subsequent 16
quarters, including first quarter 1998.
3.3.7 Nickel
Group I Wells
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC
A\520805 2. PD·· 8/.lOrOI engineers & scientists 3-20
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
As shown in Table 3G, nickel was not detected at detection limits-equal to or less than the ROD Performance
Standards or was detected at concentrations less than the ROD Performance Standards for the 20 monitoring events
in the eight Pl~e Periphery wells sampled. Therefore, it is recommended that nickel be eliminated from future
monitoring events for all eight Plume Periphery wells.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.
3.3.8 Selenium
Group 1 Wells
As shown in Table 3H, detection limits and detected concentrations of selenium were less than the ROD Performance
Standard (IO ug/1) in all sampling events for the eight Plume Periphery wells, with the exception of two detections
in first and fourth quarters 1997 in EX-02 ( 12.4 ug/1 and 10.5 ug/1, respectively). It is recommended that selenium
be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-01, EX-03, EX-04, NS-30, NS-31, and NS-32.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Selenium was retained as a monitoring parameter for EX-02 to verify the two 1997 detections greater than the ROD
Performance Standard. It should be noted that selenium was not detected or detected at concentrations less than the
ROD Performance Standard in the other 17 quarters of sampling. If the selenium concentrations in EX-02 are less
than the ROD Performance Standard for two consecutive monitoring events, selenium will be eliminated as a
monitoring parameter for EX-02.
Selenium was also retained as a monitoring parameter for well NS-29 to verify the first quarter 1998 concentration
greater than the ROD Performance Standard ( 12.8 ug/1). Selenium was not detected in NS-29 in the other 20 quarters
of monitoring, with the exception of an estimated detection in third quarter I 995 (3 ug/1) and a low-level detection
in second quarter 1997 (7.2 ug/1). The recent detection of selenium at a concentration greater than the ROD
Performance Standard is most likely an anomalous value. If the selenium concentrations in NS-29 are less than the
ROD Performance Standard for two consecutive monitoring events, selenium will be eliminated as a monitoring
parameter for NS-29.
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A\520605 2. PO --8/.l0,01 engineers & scientists 3-21
I
E
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.3.9 Zinc
Group 1 Wells
As shown in Table 31, zinc was not detected at detection limits equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standards
or was detected at concentrations less than the ROD Performance Standards for the 20 monitoring events in the eight
Plume Periphery wells sampled. Therefore, it is recommended that zinc be eliminated from future monitoring events
for all eight Plume Periphery wells.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.
3.4 Summary
Based on the data evaluation, the following COCs were retained for future monitoring events for the Plume Periphery
wells:
I :well l ···•.:voe,· ·•l ···.···•·· •·::<svocs\?•·· .... > I -~ • .. ::·. ·.·='·''==--' ::-=/\MCfalS ··::-·::·:.,::.,,:,>:c::: ..... I
EX-01 None llis(2-chloroethy !)ether None
EX-02 Acetone; 1.2-Dichloroethanc; 1,2-B is(2-chlorocthy!)Cihcr Barium; Manganese; Selenium•
Dichloropropanc; Methylene chloride
EX-03 Acetone; 1.2-Dich\oroethanc; 1,2-llis(2-chlorocthyl)cthcr None
Dichloropropanc; Methylene chloride
EX-04 1,2-0ichloropropane Bis(2-chlorocthy !)ether Cadmium•
NS-29 Acetone; 1,2-Dichloroethane; 1.2-Bis(2-chlorocthyl)cthcr Barium; Manganese; Selenium•
Dichloropropane; Methylene chloride
NS-30 None llis(2-ch lorocthy I )ether None
NS-31 Acetone; 1,2-Dichloroethanc; 1,2-Bis(2-chlorocthyl)cther Barium; Cadmium•; Chromium•
Dichloropropane; Methylene chloride
NS-32 None Bis(2-chlorocthyl )ether None
*Monitoring to verify recent dctcct10n(s) greater than ROD Performance Standard only
However, to be conservative, monitoring will be continued for acetone; 1,2-dichloroethane; l ,2-dichloropropane; and
methylene chloride in all eight Plume Periphery wells.
The following seven VOCs cannot currently be eliminated from monitoring in wells EX-02 and EX-03 due to non-
detectable concentrations at detection limits greater than the ROD Performance Standards and dilution factors greater
than one:
• benzene; • bromodichloromethane;
• chloroform; • l, 1-dichloroethene;
• I, l ,2-trichloroethane; • trichloroethene; and
BlASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC
A.\520805 2. PD ·· 8/30N I engineers & scientists 3-22
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• vinyl chloride.
These VOCs will be re-evaluated in the monitoring program for EX-02 and EX-03 when dilution factors are reduced
so that detection limits are equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standards.
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A\520005 2. PO •. 6/30,QI engineers & scientists 3-23
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4. Trench Area Wells
Data sets for the Trench Area wells are shown in Tables 5, 6, and 7 for voes, SVOes, and metals, respectively. The
six Trench Area extraction wells have been sampled eight times on a quarterly schedule from second quarter 1996
through first quarter 1998, and the four Trench Area monitoring wells have been sampled 20 times on a quarterly
schedule from second quarter 1993 through first quarter 1998. The eight quarters of data for the extraction wells and
the 20 quarters for data for the monitoring four wells were included in the data evaluation.
4.1 voes
The data evaluation for the 14 voes monitored in the Plume Periphery wells is discussed below for each voe. Each
section is organized to discuss the wells according to the same groupings as the Plume Periphery wells. It should be
noted that second quarter 1993 results are unavailable for NS-I 5, and this quarter was handled as a missing data
point.
4.1.1 Acetone
Group 1 Wells
As shown in Table SA, dete_cted concentrations of acetone and detection limits were less than the ROD Performance
Standard (3,500 ug/1) for wells EX-06, NS-I 0, and NS-I 5, and it is recommended that acetone be eliminated as a
monitoring parameter for these wells. Acetone should also be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for NS-I I
because:
• detected concentrations are less than the ROD Performance Standard (3,500 ug/1), with the exception of one
detection ( 4, I 00 ug/1) in first quarter 1994;
• acetone was not detected or detected at concentrations two orders of magnitude less than the ROD Performance
Standard in the subsequent 16 monitoring events; and
• four of the subsequent detections were "B" qualified, indicating that acetone was also detected in the associated
method blank.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Detected concentrations of acetone in wells EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, EX-10, and NS-09 are summarized as
follows:
EX-05 8 / 8 (3) 3,200) -36,000 7/8 24,000D -36,000
EX-07 8 / 8 (4) 550D! -7,IOODJ 4/8 3,600-7,IOODJ
EX-08 8 / 8 (4) 11,000 -230,000D 8/8 I 1.000 -230,000D
EX-09 8/8(4) 8,100-53,000DB 8/8 8, I 00 -53,000DB
EX-10 8 / 8 (4) 8,200 -96,000B 7 / 8' 8,200 -96,0008
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC.
A.\520605 2. PO --81)0,01 engineers & scientists 4-1
I
I
I
I
I
0
u
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INS-09 19/20(5) 7)-390,000 I 4/19 I
Units in ug/1
D -concentration in diluted run sample
B -analyte was also detected in the associated laboratory method blank
J -estimated concentration less than the detection limit
(n)-number of"B" qualified detections
D -concentration in diluted run sample
ROD Performance Standard: 3,500 ug/1
65,0008 -390,000
*Quuntifiablc concentrations cannot be identified using "E" qualified data, and diluted concentrations unavailable for one monitoring
event for EX-10.
It should be noted that 26 to 50 percent of the detected concentrations of acetone were "B" qualified, indicating that
acetone was also detected in the associated method blank, and some amount of the reported concentration may be
attributed to laboratory contamination. Because detected concentrations in the method blanks for historical sampling
events were unavailable, the data evaluation for acetone was conducted using the concentrations reported by the
laboratory, regardless of "B" qualifiers. Using the "B" qualified concentrations is conservative because they
overestimate the acetone concentrations in the ground-water samples by including contributions of acetone from the
laboratory.
The results of the data evaluation are summarized below:
I Well I ,:·; DisfribUtiOrl·::·: I}•· . ·' "=':?\ oeSfr i (! tiVC :S fa tis ti cs·:.\
Mean
EX-05 None 26,775 (A)
EX-07 Normal 3,296 (A)
EX-08 Normal 114,125 (A)
EX-09 Normal 28,388 (A)
EX-10 Normal 63,600 (A)
NS-09 Lognormal 726 (G)
Units 111 ug/1
(G) -Geometric Mean: (A) Arithmetic Mean
NC -Not Calculated
• At 95 percent confidence level
Standard Deviation
10,324
2,155
77,613
14,101
31,706
I 10,901
\,:.:::::-: ········•·•·· .... 1 :::Ou'tliCS"S:: I> ·:·/-':·:(\ ,.,c=:=.=-.:.:Tr'Crid·//=: ····· ••:rrl
95 % UCL Direction Significant•
NC None Increasing YES
4,740 7,100 Decreasing NO
166,124 230,000 Decreasing NO
37,835 53,000 Increasing NO
86,884 None Increasing NO
29,634,363 None Decreasing NO
As shown above, average concentrations of acetone in wells EX-07 and NS-09 are less than the ROD Performance
Standard (3,500 ug/1), and maximum detected concentrations in EX-07, EX-08, and EX-09 were considered to be
outliers. However, no specific sampling or laboratory error could be identified and the concentrations were retained
as part of the data set.
Two of the six wells (EX-09 and EX-I 0) show increasing concentration trends, but only the decreasing trend in well
EX-05 is statistically significant at a 95 percent confidence level. Based on the results of the data evaluation, it is
recommended that acetone be retained as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, EX-I 0,
and NS-09.
4.1.2 Benzene
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A\520805 2. PO ·· B/IOiO I engineers & scientists 4-2
I
I
I
I
I
g
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
As shown in Table 58, benzene was not detected in wells EX-06, NS-I 0, NS-I I, and NS-I 5, and was detected during
only one monitoring event in wells EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, EX-10 (second quarter 1996) and NS-09 (first
quarter 1995). The detected concentration of benzene in NS-09 is less than the ROD Performance Standards (5 ug/1).
Group 1 Wells
It is recommended that benzene be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for NS-! I because:
• benzene was not detected; and
• the detection limit was equal to the ROD Performance Standard in 50 percent of the historical monitoring events,
and benzene was not detected. This indicates that benzene is present at a concentration less than the ROD
Performance Standard.
It is also recommended that benzene be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for EX-06 and NS-15 because it has
not been detected and the detection limits for these wells are low enough that any benzene in these samples would
have been reported as estimated concentrations equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standard.
Group 2 Wells
Benzene cannot currently be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, EX-I 0,
and NS-09 because the dilution factors are greater than one and the detection limits for 85 to 90 percent of the
monitoring events are greater than the ROD Performance Standard. Benzene will be re-evaluated as a monitoring
parameter for these wells when the dilution factors are reduced so that the detection limits are equal to or less than
the ROD Performance Standard. Should consecutive future monitoring events indicate that benzene is absent or
present at concentrations less than the ROD Performance Standard, elimination of benzene as a monitoring parameter
for wells EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, EX-I 0, and NS-09 will be recommended.
It is also recommended that benzene be retained as a monitoring parameter for well NS-IO (although it has not been
detected in any sample) because the detection limits are greater than the ROD Performance Standard and the dilution
factors are equal to one. The analytical method for VOCs will be changed so that the detection limits for undiluted
samples are equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standard. Additional data evaluation will be conducted after
the analytical method is changed to identify whether benzene should be retained or eliminated as a monitoring
parameter for NS-IO in the future.
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.
4.1.3 Bromodichloromethane
As shown in Table 5C, bromodichloromethane was not detected in any of the Trench Area wells.
B1.ASLAND, BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A\520B05 2. PO --B/30,01 engineers & scientists 4-3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Group I Wells
It is recommended that bromodichloromethane be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for NS-I I because the
detection limit was equal to the ROD Performance Standard in 50 percent of the monitoring events, and
bromodichloromethane was not detected. This indicates that bromodichloromethane is absent from the ground water
or present at a concentration less than the ROD Performance Standard.
It is also recommended that bromodichloromethane be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for EX-06 and NS-15
because the detection limits for these wells are low enough that any bromodichloromethane in these samples would
be detected as estimated concentrations equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standard.
Group 2 Wells
Bromodichloromethane cannot currently be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-05, EX-07, EX-08,
EX-09, EX-I 0, and NS-09 because the dilution factors are greater than one and the detection limits for 85 to I 00
percent of the monitoring events are greater than the ROD Performance Standard. Bromodichloromethane will be
reinstated as a monitoring parameter for these wells when the dilution factors are reduced so that the detection limits
are equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standard. Should consecutive future monitoring events indicate that
bromodichloromethane is absent or present at concentrations less than the ROD Performance Standard, elimination
· ofbromodichloromethane as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, EX-I 0, and NS-09 will
be recommended.
It is also recommended that bromodichloromethane be retained as a monitoring parameter for well NS-IO (although
it has not been detected in any sample) because the detection limits are greater than the ROD Performance Standard
and the dilution factors are equal to one. The analytical method for VOCs will be changed so that the detection limits
for undiluted samples are equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standard. Additional data evaluation will be
conducted after the analytical method is changed to identify whether bromodichloromethane should be retained or
eliminated as a monitoring parameter for NS-IO in the future.
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.
4.1.4 Chloroform
As shown in Table 50, chloroform was not detected in the Trench Area wells, with the exception of one detection
in EX-05 in second quarter I 996 ( 44J ug/1), NS-IO in third quarter I 993 ( IJ ug/1), and NS-I I in fourth quarter 1997
(2J ug/1). Detected concentrations in NS-IO and NS-I I are less than the ROD Performance Standard (5 ug/1).
Group I Wells
It is recommended that chloroform be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for NS-I! because the detection limit
was equal to the ROD Performance Standard in 50 percent of the monitoring events, and chloroform was not
detected. This indicates that chloroform is absent from the ground water or present at a concentration less than the
ROD Performance Standard.
It is also recommended that chloroform be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for EX-06 and NS-15 because it has
not been detected and the detection limits for these wells are low enough that any chloroform in these samples would
have been reported as estimated concentrations equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standard.
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A.\520805 2. PO --B/30,.01 engineers & scientists 4-4
D
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Group 2 Wells
Chloroform cannot currently be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, EX-
I 0, and NS-09 because the dilution factors are greater than one and the detection limits for 85 to I 00 percent of the
monitoring events are greater than the ROD Performance Standard. Chloroform will be re-evaluated as a monitoring
parameter for these wells when the dilution factors arc reduced so that the detection limits are equal to or less than
the ROD Performance Standard. Should consecutive future monitoring events indicate that chloroform is absent or
present at concentrations less than the ROD Performance Standard, elimination of chloroform as a monitoring
parameter for wells EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, EX-I 0, and NS-09 will be recommended.
It is also recommended that chloroform be retained as a monitoring parameter for well NS-10 because the detection
limits are greater than the ROD Performance Standard and the dilution factors are equal to one. The analytical
method for VOCs will be changed so that the detection limits for undiluted samples are equal to or less than the ROD
Performance Standard. Additional data evaluation will be conducted after the analytical method is changed to
identify if chloroform should be retained or eliminated as a monitoring parameter for NS-IO in the future.
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.·
4.1.5 1,2-Dichloroethane
Group I Wells
Not applicable.
Gro11p 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Gro11p 3 Wells
As shown in Table SE, 1,2-dichloroethane was detected in the IO Trench Area wells. Detected concentrations of 1,2-
dichloroethane in the ten Trench Area wells are summarized below:
1··c:·•••;···•··••.··•··.·••··•·<.: :))!X~f~-~~:~JY-::.1.f-.-/l · ::i}~ii_-~ge,:'.,~ r, __ pe_~ett~-~.(:< :::,r-: .. t:r;~:9~l~_Cf1 . .r: .-.. -,:• <tt .. ·.·· ... • ...
: :, .. -:-:-:/?} ··'/j .. --::,: :-::':'-:: ,·:\: ,;::;:::::: :-'.:.:':\ --,:. :...::l' ·, ~--·:.': :::,
I ·• • '. ·oetection:t .. ,:,• -·,.:., CCtnCeritriltiOriiP · :,: EXceeda'ni::es:,. u, ''
EX-05 7/8 340.000 - 5 I 0,000 7 / 7 340,000 -510,000
EX-06 7/8 53 -920 7 /7 53 -920
EX-07 7/8 19,000 -83,000D 7 /7 19,000 -83,000D
EX-08 7/8 220,000D -390,000D 7 /7 220,000D -390.000D
EX-09 7/8 71,000D -190,0001) 7 /7 71,000D -190,000D
EX-10 7/8 28,000D -59,000 7 /7 28,0001) -59,000
NS-09 16 I 20 91 -14,0001) 16 I 16 91 -14,000D
NS-IO 20 / 20 420 -16,000D 19 / 20* 420 • 16,000D
NS-I I 12 / 20 31 -400D 10 I 12 6 -400D
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC
A\520805 2. PD --8/30,01 engineers & scientists 4-5
I
n
0
n
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
20 / 20
Units in ug/1
D -concentration in diluted run sample
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/1
67 -530 17 / 20' 67 -530
• Quantifiable concentrations cannot be identified using "E" qualified data. Diluted concentrations unavailable for one monitoring event
for NS-IO and three monitoring events for NS-15.
The results of the data evaluation are summarized below:
I Well <I :IDiSfribUtiOO'
EX-05 None
EX-06 Normal
EX-07 Normal
EX-08 Normal
EX-09 Normal
EX-10 Normal
NS-09 None
NS-10 Normal
NS-I I None
NS-15 Normal
Units m ug/1
(A) Arithmetic Mean
NC • Not Calculated
I ,;,;•,;-·-.·.;,'_;: r>oesci-iritiVC' St8tiStiCs
Mean Standard
Deviation
352,813 (A) 155,008
315 (A) 322
35,706 (A) 23,782
270.313 (A) I 19,795
121,581 (A) 61,861
35,106 (A) 17,877
4,341 (A) 4,121
5,653 (A) 4,208
65 (A) 114
273 (A) 142
• At 9S percent confidence level
"'"""<•\tc:1:
95 % UCL
NC
531
51,640
350,574
163,027
47,083
NC
7,280
NC
333
/:":::\OUtliC·rs·c:::.,;:: ""'I . "" · <::::: '"\\-Tl'Ci{d:=::::::: •·•·········••·•.•.•·•··.,.\1
Direction Significant•
None Decreasing NO
None Decreasing NO
50,000: 83,000 Decreasing NO
None Decreasing NO
None Decreasing NO
None Increasing YES
14,000 Increasing NO
None Decreasing YES
100: 170: 250; Increasing YES
260;400
None Decreasing YES
As shown above, average concentrations of 1,2-dichloroethanc in all eight wells are greater than the ROD
Performance Standard (5 ug/1) and the maximum detected concentrations for EX-07, NS-09, and NS-I I were
considered to be outliers. However, no specific sampling or laboratory error could be identified and the outlier
concentrations were retained as part of the data set.
Only three of the ten wells (EX-I 0, NS-09, and NS-I I) show increasing concentration trends, and two of these
increasing trends (EX-IO and NS-I I), as well as the decreasing trends in NS-IO and NS-15, are statistically
significant at a 95 percent confidence level. Based on the results of the data evaluation, it is recommended that 1,2-
dichloroethane be retained as a monitoring parameter for the ten Trench Area wells.
4, 1.6 1, 1-Dichloroethene
As shown in Table SF, 1, 1-dichloroethenc was not detected in the Trench Area wells, with the exception of six
detections in NS-09 and one detection in NS-I 0. These detections are summarized below:
BLASlAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC.
A\520805 2. PO --8/J0N I engineers & scientists 4-6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NS-09 7 / 20 61 -251
NS-10 I/ 20 21
Units in ug/1
J -estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 7 ug/1
Group 1 Wells
6/7 9 -251
0 I I
It is recommended that I, 1-dichloroethene be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for NS-I I because the detection
limit was equal to the ROD Performance Standard in ten of the 20 monitoring events, and I, 1-dichloroethene was
not detected. This indicates that I, 1-dichloroethcne is absent from the ground water or present at a concentration less
than the ROD Performance Standard.
It is also recommended that 1,1-dichloroethene be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for EX-06 and NS-15
because it has not been detected and the detection limits for these wells are low enough that any I, 1-dichloroethene
in these samples would have been _reported as estimated concentrations equal to or less than the ROD Performance
Standard.
· Group 2 Wells
I, 1-Dichloroethene cannot currently be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09,
EX-I 0, and NS-09 because the dilution factors are greater than one and the detection limits for 65 to I 00 percent of
the monitoring events are greater than the ROD Performance Standard .. I, 1-Dichloroethene will be re-evaluated as
a monitoring parameter for these wells when the dilution factors are reduced so that the detection limits are equal to
or less than the ROD Performance Standard. Should consecutive future monitoring events indicate that l,1-
dichloroethene is absent or present at concentrations less than the ROD Performance Standard, elimination of I, 1-
dichloroethene as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, EX-10, and NS-09 will be
recommended.
It is also recommended that I, 1-dichloroethene be retained as a monitoring parameter for well NS-IO (although it has
not been detected in any sample) because the detection limits are greater than the ROD Performance Standard and
the dilution factors are equal to one. The analytical method for YOCs will be changed so that the detection limits
for undiluted samples are equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standard. Additional data evaluation will be
conducted after the analytical method is changed to identify whether I, 1-dichloroethene should be retained or
eliminated as a monitoring parameter for NS-IO in the future.
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.
BlASlAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A\520B05 2. PO •• 8/30i01 engineers & scientists 4-7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4.1.7 1,2-Dichloropropane
As shown in Table 5G, 1,2-dichloropropane was not detected in wells EX-06, EX-07, NS-09, and NS-I I. Detected
concentrations in wells EX-05, EX-08, EX-09, EX-10, NS-10, and NS-15 are summarized below:
EX-05 2/8 250] -350
EX-08 3/8 530 -1,200]
EX-09 8/8 9,100 -12,000
EX-10 8/8 41,000D -82,000D
NS-10 2 / 20 I J -2J
NS-15 I/ 19 2J
Units in ug/1
D -concentration in diluted run sample
J -estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 6 ug/1
Group I Wells
2/2 250] -350
3/3 530 -1,200)
8/8 9,100-12,000
8/8 4 I ,000D -82,000D
0/2
0 I I
It is recommended that 1,2-dichloropropane be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for NS-I I because the detection
limit was equal to the ROD Performance Standard in 50 percent of the monitoring events, and 1,2-dichloropropane
was not detected. This indicates that 1,2-dichloropropane is absent from the ground water or is present at a
concentration less than the ROD Performance Standard.
It is also recommended that 1,2-dichloropropane be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for EX-06 and NS-15
because the detection limits for these wells are low enough that any 1,2-dichloropropane in these samples would be
detected as estimated concentrations equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standard.
Group 2 Wells
1,2-Dichloropropane cannot currently be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-05, EX-07, and NS-09
because although 1,2-dichloropropane was not detected during recent monitoring events, the dilution factors are
greater than one, and the detection limits for 85 to I 00 percent of the monitoring events are greater than the ROD
Performance Standard. 1,2-Dichloropropane will be re-evaluated as a monitoring parameter for these wells when the
dilution factors are reduced so that the detection limits are equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standard.
Should consecutive future monitoring events indicate that 1,2-dichloropropane is absent or present at concentrations
less than the ROD Performance Standard, elimination of 1,2-dichloropropane as a monitoring parameter will be
recommended.
It is also recommended that l,2-dichloropropane be retained as a monitoring parameter for well NS-l 0 (although it
has not been detected in any sample) because the detection limits are greater than the ROD Performance Standard
and the dilution factors are equal to one. The analytical method for VOCs will be changed so that the detection limits
for undiluted samples are equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standard. Additional data evaluation will be
conducted after the analytical method is changed to identify whether 1,2-dichloropropane should be retained or
eliminated as a monitoring parameter for NS-IO in the future.
Group 3 Wells
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC
A:\520005 2. PD --8/30,01 engineers & scientists 4-8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Although, 1,2-dichloropropane was not detected in five of the eight monitoring events for EX-08, it is recommended
that 1,2-dichloropropane be retained as a monitoring parameter for EX-08 based on recent detections greater than the
ROD Performance Standard.
A data evaluation was conducted for EX-09 and EX-I 0, and the results are summarized below:
I Well· > I Distribution I{
EX-09 None
Normal
Units m ug/1
(A) Arithmetic Mean
NC -Not Calculated
Alean Standard Deviation 95 % UCL
11,063 (A) 1,203 NC
67,625 (A) 14,392 77.267
• At 95 percent confidence level
Direction
None Increasing
None Decreasing
Significant*
NO
YES
As shown above, average concentrations of 1,2-dichloropropane in the two wells are greater than the ROD
Performance Standard (6 ug/1). Well EX-IO shows a statistically significant decreasing trend at a 95 percent
confidence level and the increasing trend in EX-09 is.not statistically significant. Based on the results of the data
evaluation, it is recommended that 1,2-dichloropropanc be retained as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-09 and ·
EX-10.
4.1.8 Ethylbenzene
Group 1 Wells
As shown in Table SH, detection limits and detected concentrations of ethylbenzene were less than the ROD
Performance Standard (3,500 ug/1) in the ten Trench Area wells, with the exception of two detection limits in EX-05,
six detection limits in EX-08, and three detection limits in NS-09. Detection limits in other monitoring events were
less than the ROD Performance Standard, and it is recommended that ethylbenzene be eliminated as a monitoring
parameter for all ten Trench Area wells.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.
4.1.9 Methylene Chloride
Methylene chloride concentrations shown in Table 51 for the ten Trench Area wells are summarized as follows:
EX-05 418(1) 56J -1,900 BJ 414 56J -1,900 BJ
EX-06 218(1) 2J -4BJ 012
EX-07 3/8(1) I 6J -1,200BJ 313 I 6J -I ,200BJ
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A:\520005 2. PO •• 8/30A)! engineers & scientists 4-9
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EX-08 2 / 8 (0) 40) -300) 2/2
EX-09 3/8(1) 481 -490BJ 3/3
EX-10 4 / 8 (I) 941 -880BJ 4/4
NS-09 6/18'(5) 481 -14,000B 5/6
NS-10 10 / 18* (7) 2) -9308 8 / 10
NS-I I 6/ 18* (5) IJ -8B
NS-15 9/17'(6) ll -24BJ
Units in ug/1
I3 -analyte was also detected in the associated laboratory method blank
J -estimated concentration less than the detection limit
(n) -number of"B'' qualified detections
ROD Pcrfonnancc Standard: 5 ug/1
2/6
3/9
40) -3001
48J -490BJ
94) -8808)
7J -14,000B
6BJ -930B
7B -8B
7B1 -24B1
• Methylene chloride results were not reported for fourth quarter 1993 or first quarter 1994 sampling events.
It should be noted that up to 80 percent of the detected concentrations of methylene chloride were "B" qualified,
indicating that methylene chloride was also detected in the associated method blank, and some amount of the reported
concentration may be attributed to laboratory contamination. Because detected concentrations in the method blanks
for historical sampling events were unavailable, the data evaluation for methylene chloride was conducted using the
concentrations reported by the laboratory, regardless of"B" qualifiers. Using the "B" qualified concentrations is
conservative because they overestimate the methylene chloride concentrations in the ground-water samples by
including contributions of methylene chloride from the laboratory.
Group 1 Wells
It is recommended that methylene chloride be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for NS-I I and NS-15 because:
• five of the six detections in NS-I I and six of the nine detections in NS-15 were "B" qualified concentrations;
• the remaining detections in the two wells were estimated concentrations less than the detection limit ("J"
qualified); and
• the only detections greater than the ROD Performance Standard in these four wells were "B" qualified
concentrations.
It is also recommended that methylene chloride be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for EX-06 because the only
detections were quantitative estimates less than the ROD Performance Standard, and the detection limits for recent
samples from this well are low enough that any methylene chloride in these samples would have been reported as
estimated concentrations equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standard.
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC.
A\520805 2. PD --8/30,GI engineers & scientists 4-10
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Group 2 Wells
Methylene chloride cannot currently be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09,
EX-10, and NS-09 because the dilution factors are greater than one, and the detection limits for 50 to 75 percent of
the monitoring events are greater than the ROD Performance Standard. Methylene chloride will be re-evaluated as
a monitoring parameter for these wells when the dilution factors are reduced so that the detection limits are equal to
or less than the ROD Performance Standard. Should consecutive future monitoring events indicate that methylene
chloride is absent or present at concentrations less than the ROD Performance Standard, elimination of methylene
chloride as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, EX-10, and NS-09 will be recommended.
It is also recommended that methylene_ chloride was retained as a monitoring parameter for well NS-IO because the
detection limits are greater than the ROD Performance Standard and the dilution factors are equal to one. The
analytical method for VOCs will be changed so that the detection limits for undiluted samples are equal to or less than
the ROD Performance Standard. Additional data evaluation will be conducted after the analytical method is changed
to identify whether methylene chloride should be retained or eliminated as a monitoring parameter for NS-IO in the
future.
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.
4.1.10 Toluene
Group I Wells
As shown in Table SJ, detection limits and detected concentrations of toluene are less than the ROD Performance
Standard in wells EX-06, NS-09, NS-10, NS-I 1, and NS-15, with the exception of three detection limits in NS-09
in second, third, and fourth quarters 1994; detected concentrations and detection limits were less than the ROD
Performance Standard in NS-09 in the 13 subsequent monitoring events. It is recommended that toluene be
eliminated as a monitoring parameter for these wells.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Detected concentrations of toluene in wells EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, and EX-10 are summarized as follows:
EX-05
EX-07
EX-08
EX-09
EX-10
Units in ug/1
8/8
8/8
8/8
8/8
8/8
D -concentration in diluted run sample
A\520805 2. PD --8(.30,0 I
16.0000 • 24,000
820] -3,200
24,000 -68,0000
20,000 -38,0000
9,000 -16,000
8/8
2/8
8/8
8/8
8/8
BLASLANO, BOUCK & LEE. INC.
engineers & scientists
16,0000 · 24,000
2,200] -3.200
24,000 -68,0000
20,000 -38,0000
9,000 -16,000
4-11
I
I
I
I
a
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J -estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 2,000 ug/1
The results of the data evaluation are summarized below:
I <Well
: "' ·:· DiStribU.tiOn' :· I< i/ DeSd'i(!iiV'e' StatistiCS :::_\:\:·:·: . ,:,·: I
EX-05 Normal
EX-07 Normal
EX-08 None
EX-09 Normal
EX-10 Normal
Units in ug/1
(A) Arithmetic Mean
NC -Not Calculated
Mean
20,750 (A)
1,615 (A)
31,250 (A)
26,125 (A)
13,375 /A)
* At 95 percent confidence level
Standard Deviation 95% UCL
2,493 22,422
774 2,134
14,993 NC
5,939 30,104
2,264 14,892
:.:: OU ti i(:"t'S r· I·''' .. '. :<"j ''Ti-·en d :,/'=':·': .-"'<I
Direction Significant•
None Increasing NO
3,200 Decreasing YES
68,000 Decreasing NO
38,000 Decreasing YES
None Decreasing_ NO
As shown above, average and 95 percent UCL concentrations of toluene in EX-07 are less than or similar to the ROD
Performance Standard (2,000 ug/1). Maximum concentrations in wells EX-07, EX-08, and EX-09 were considered
to be outliers. However, no specific sampling or laboratory error could be identified, and these outlier concentrations
were retained in the data sets.
Four of the wells (EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, and EX-I 0) show decreasing trends, and two of these trends (EX-07 and
EX-09) are statistically significant at a 95 percent confidence level. Ba,sed on the results of the data evaluation, it is
recommended that toluene be retained as a monitoring parameter for EX-05, EX-08, EX-09, and EX-I 0. It is also
recommended that toluene be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for EX-07 because:
• the average and 95 percent UCL concentrations are less than or similar to the ROD Performance Standard;
• the concentrations greater than the ROD Performance Standard were detected in the first two quarters of
monitoring only; and
• there is a statistically significant decreasing concentration trend.
4.1.11 1, 1,2-Trichloroethane
As shown in Table SK, I, I ,2-trichloroethane was not detected in wells EX-06, EX-09, EX-I 0, NS-I I, and NS-15,
and was detected infrequently in wells EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, NS-09, and NS-10, as shown below:
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC.
A\520805 2. PO --8/)0,01 engineers & scientists 4-12
u
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EX-05 l I 8 66) l I l 66)
EX-07 l / 8 14) l I l 14)
EX-08 l / 8 120) l I l 120)
NS-09 2 /20 3) -6) I / 2 6)
NS-IO 5 I 20 2) -20) 4/5 6) -201
Units in ug/1
J -estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/1
Group I Wells
It is recommended that I, 1 ,2-trichloroethane be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for NS-I I because the detection
limit was equal to the ROD Performance Standard in 50 percent of the monitoring events, and I, I ,2-trich!oroethane
was not detected. This indicates that I, 1,2-trichloroethane is absent from the ground water or present at a
concentration less than the ROD Performance Standard.
It is also recommended that I, 1,2-tiichloroethane be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for EX-06 and NS-15
because it has not been detected in any sample and the detection limits for these wells are low enough that any I, 1,2-
trichloroethane in these samples would have been reported as estimated concentrations equal to or less than the ROD
Performance Standard.
Group 2 Wells
I, 1,2-Trichloroethane cannot currently be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, EX-
09, EX-I 0, and NS-09. Although I, I ,2-trichloroethane was not detected during recent monitoring events, the dilution
factors are greater than one, and the detection limits for 80 to I 00 percent of the monitoring events are greater than
the ROD Performance Standard. I, 1,2-Trichloroethane will be re-evaluated as a monitoring parameter for these wells
when the dilution factors are reduced so that the detection limits are equal to or less than the ROD Performance
Standard. Should consecutive future monitoring events indicate that 1,1,2-trichloroethane is absent or present at
concentrations less than the ROD Performance Standard, elimination of I, 1,2-trichloroethane as a monitoring
parameter for wells EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, EX-10, and NS-09 will be recommended.
lt is also recommended that I, 1,2-trichloroethane be retained as a monitoring parameter for well NS-IO because the
detection limits are greater than the ROD Performance Standard and the dilution factors are equal to one. The
analytical method for VOCs will be changed so that the detection limits for undiluted samples are equal to or less than
the ROD Performance Standard. Additional data evaluation will be conducted after the analytical method is changed
to identify whether I, I ,2-trichloroethane should be retained or eliminated as a monitoring parameter for NS-IO in
~fu=. .
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.
A\520005 2. PD --8/J0,OI
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
engineers & scientists 4-13
I
I
I
I
I
D
n
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4.1.12 Trichloroethene
As shown in Table SL, trichloroethene was not detected in the Trench Area wells, with the exception of estimated
concentrations less than the ROD Performance Standard in third quarter 1993 in NS-09 and second quarter 1993 in
NS-10.
Group 1 Wells
It is recommended that trichloroethene be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for NS-I I because the detection limit
was equal to the ROD Performance Standard in ten of the 20 monitoring events, and trichloroethene was not detected.
This indicates that trichloroethene is absent from the ground water or present at a concentration less than the ROD
Performance Standard.
It is also recommended that trichloroethene be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for EX-06 and NS-IS because
it has not been detected in any sample and the detection limits for these wells are low enough that any trichloroethene
in these samples would have been reported as estimated concentrations equal to or less than the ROD Performance
Standard.
Group 2 Wells
Trichloroethene cannot currently be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-OS, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09,
EX-I 0, and NS-09. Although trichloroethene was not detected during recent monitoring events, the dilution factors
are greater than one, and the detection limits for 80 to I 00 percent of the monitoring events are greater than the ROD
Performance Standard. Trichloroethene will be re-evaluated as a monitoring parameter for these wells when the
dilution factors are reduced so that the detection limits are equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standard.
Should.consecutive future monitoring events indicate that trichloroethene is absent or present at concentrations less
than the ROD Performance Standard, elimination oftrichloroethene as a monitoring parameter will be recommended.
It is also recommended that trichloroethene be retained as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-06, NS-I 0, and NS-15
because the detection limits are greater than the ROD Performance Standard and the dilution factors are equal to one.
The analytical method f9r VOCs will be changed so that the detection limits for undiluted samples are equal to or
less than the ROD Performance Standard. Additional data evaluation will be conducted after the analytical method
is changed to identify whether trichloroethene should be retained or eliminated as a monitoring parameter for NS-I 0
in the future.
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.
4.1.13 Vinyl Chloride
As shown in Table 5M, vinyl chloride was not detected in wells EX-08, EX-09, and NS-I I. Detected concentrations
in the remaining wells are summarized below:
EX-05 5/8 580) -1,200) 5/5 5801 -1,200)
EX-07 l / 8 53) I / I 53)
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE, INC.
A:\520805 2. PO --8/30,UI engineers & scientists 4-14
I
I
g
u
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EX-10 2/8 220) -250)
NS-09 13 / 20 20) -480DJ
NS-10 l / 20 8)
NS-15 8 / 19 2J -18
Units in ug/1
D • concentration in diluted run sample
J -estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 2 ug/1
Group I Wells
2/2 220) -250)
13 / 13 20J -480DJ
1 / 1 8)
6 I 8 3) -18
It is recommended that vinyl chloride be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for NS-I I because the detection limit
was equal to the ROD Performance Standard in ten of the 20 monitoring events, and vinyl chloride was not detected.
This indicates that vinyl chloride is absent from the ground water or present at a concentration less than the ROD
Performance Standard.
Group 2 Wells
Vinyl chloride cannot currently be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-07, EX-08, and EX-09.
Although vinyl chloride was not detected during recent monitoring events, the dilution factors are greater than one,
and the detection limits for 90 to I 00 percent of the monitoring events are greater than the ROD Performance
Standard. Vinyl chloride will be re-evaluated as a monitoring parameter for these wells when the dilution factors are
reduced so that the detection limits are equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standard. Should consecutive
future monitoring events indicate that vinyl chloride is absent or present at concentrations less than the ROD
Perfomiance Standard, elimination of vinyl chloride as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-07, EX-08, and EX009
will be recommended.
It is also recommended that vinyl chloride be retained as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-06 and NS-IO because
the detection limits are greater than the ROD Performance Standard and the dilution factors are equal to one. The
analytical method for VOCs will be changed so that the detection limits for undiluted samples are equal to or less than
the ROD Performance Standard. Additional data evaluation will be conducted after the analytical method is changed
to identify whether vinyl chloride should be retained or eliminated as a monitoring parameter for these wells in the
future.
Group 3 Wells
The results of the data evaluation for EX-05, NS-09, and NS-15 are summarized below:
I· Well XI Disfribution ,: I\
EX-05
NS-09
NS-15
Units m ug/1
Normal
Lognormal
LoPnormal
}dean
927 (A)
GO (G)
4.2 (G)
(G) Geometric Mean; (A) Arithmetic Mean
* At 95 percent confidence level
A:\520005 2. PD-· B/J0,01
Standard Deviation 95 % UCL Direction
209 1.099 None Decreasing
107 185 480 Increasing
3.9 6.7 18 Decrcasin2
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE. INC.
engineers & scientists
Significant•
NO
NO
NO
4-15
I
I
I
I
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
As shown above, average concentrations of vinyl chloride are greater than the ROD Performance Standard (2 ug/1)
in EX-05 and NS-09 and are similar to the ROD Performance Standard in NS-I 5. NS-09 shows an increasing trend
and EX-05 and NS-15 show decreasing trends, but none of the trends are statistically significant at a 95 percent
confidence level. Based on the results of the data evaluation, it is recommended that vinyl chloride be retained as
a monitoring parameter for EX-05, NS-09, and NS-I 5.
4.1.14 Xylene
Group I Wells
As shown in Table SN, detection limits and detected concentrations of xylene are less than the ROD Performance
Standard (350 ug/1) in wells EX-06, EX-07, NS-09, NS-10, and NS-I 5, with the exception of one detection limit in
EX-07, four detection limits in NS-09, and five detection limits in NS-10. Detection limits were equal to or less than
the ROD Performance Standard in subsequent monitoring events, and it is recommended that xylene be eliminated
as a monitoring parameter for these five wells.
It is also recommended that xylene be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for NS-I I because:
• detected concentrations were less than the ROD Performance Standard, with the exception of one detection in
fourth quarter 1993;
• detection limits were less than the ROD Performance Standard, with the exception of first quarter 1994; and
• detected concentrations and detection limits were less than the ROD Performance Standard in the other 18
monitoring events.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
It is recommended that xylene be retained as a monitoring parameter for EX-05 and EX-08. Although xylene was
not detected in EX-05 and EX-08 during several historical events, recent detections of xylene in these wells are
greater than the ROD Performance Standard.
Detected concentrations of xylene in_ EX-09 and EX-10 are summarized below:
EX-09
EX-10
Units in ug/1
8/8
8/8
1,000J -3,000
5,800 · 8,300
J -estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 350 ug/1
The results of the data evaluation are summarized below:
8/8
8 / 8
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC
A.:\520B05 2. PD-• B/30,01 engineer,s & scientists
1,000J -3,000
5,800 -8,300
4-16
0
D
u
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EX-09 Normal
EX-10 Normal
Units m ug/1
(A) Arithmetic Mean
NC -Not Calculated
Mean
1,763 (A)
7,025 (A)
• At 95 percent confidence level
Standard Deviation
661
888
95 % UCL Direction Significant•
2,206 3,000 Decreasing NO
7,620 None Dccrcasin!! NO
As shown above, average concentrations of xylene are greater than the ROD Performance Standard (3 50 ug/1). Both
of the wells shows decreasing trends, neither of which are statistically significant at a 95 percent confidence level.
Based on the results of the data evaluation, it. is recommended that xylene be retained as a monitoring parameter for
EX-09 and EX-I 0.
4,1.15 Summary
Grouping of the 14 voes for the ten Trench Area wells is shown in Table 8. Based on the results of the data
evaluation, voes were grouped into the following three categories ( described in Section 2):
1···•·· •·••.voe •····· .. · 1•·•· .. ...... .... ...... ':····,,·_:, Wcll·Grriii°ei1igs .,:·-:··· .. ••:I
Group I Group 2 Group 3
Acetone EX-06. NS-10. NS-I I, NS-15 -EX-05. EX-07. EX-08, EX-09, EX-10, NS-09
13enzcnc EX-06, NS-I 1, NS-15 EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, NS-10
EX-09, EX-I 0, NS-09
Bromodichloromethanc EX-06, NS-11, NS-15 EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, NS-10
EX-09. EX-10. NS-09
Chloroform EX-06. NS-11, NS-15 EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, NS-10
EX-09, EX-10, NS-09
I, 1-Dichlorocthcnc EX-06, NS-11. NS-15 EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, NS-10
EX-09, EX-I 0. NS-09
1,2-Dichlorocthanc -EX-05, EX-06, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, EX-10,
NS-09, NS-10, NS-11, NS-15
1,2-Dichloropropane EX-06, NS-I I, NS-15 EX-05, EX-07, NS-09 EX-08. EX-09. EX-10, NS-10
Ethyl benzene EX-05, EX-06, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, --
EX-10, NS-09, NS-10, NS-11, NS-15
Methylene chloride EX-06, NS-11, NS-15 EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, NS-10
EX-09, EX-10, NS-09
Toluene EX-06, EX-07, NS-09, NS-10, NS-I I. -EX-05, EX-08, EX-09, EX-10
NS-15
I, 1,2-Trichlorocthanc EX-06, NS-11, NS-15 EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, NS-10
EX-09, EX-10, NS-09
Trichlorocthcnc EX-06, NS-11, NS-15 EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, NS-10
EX-09, EX-10. NS-09
Vinyl chloride NS-I I EX-07, EX-08, EX-09 EX-05. EX-06. EX-10, NS-09, NS-10, NS-15
Xylcnes EX-06, EX-07. NS-09. NS-10, NS-I I. -EX-05, EX-08, EX-09, EX-10
NS-15
Group I: COCs Recommended To Re Elunmated 1-rom Further Momtonng
Group 2: COCs Cannot Be Currently Eliminated -Detection Limits Greater than ROD Performance Standards and Dilution Factors Greater Than One
Group 3: COCs Recommended To Be Retained For Further Monitoring
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC
A\520005 2. PO .. 6/)0iQI engineers & scientists 4-17
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4.2 SVOCs
The data evaluation for the 2 SVOCs (bis(2-chloroethyl)ether and 4-nitrophenol) monitored in the Trench Area wells
is discussed below for each SVOC. Each section is organized to discuss the wells according to group.
4.2.1 Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
As shown in Table 6A, bis(2-chloroethyl)ethcr was not detected in wells NS-I 0, NS-I I, and NS-I 5, and was detected
infrequently in wells EX-05, EX-06, EX-07, and NS-09, as shown below:
EX-05 2/8 55) -170)
EX-06 2/8 4J · 16
EX-07 2 / 8 14) -18)
EX-08 6/8 210-1,100
EX-09 8/8 3,800D -I 0,0001)
EX-10 8 / 8 14,000 · 68,0001)
NS-09 2120 21 • 8J
Units m ug/1
D -concentration in diluted run sample
J -estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/1
2/2 55); 170)
I / 2 16
2/2 l4J; I 81
6/6 210-1,100
7 / 8' 3,800D -I0,000D
8/8 14,000 - 68,0001)
I / 2 8J
* Diluted concentration unavailable for third quarter I 996 and detected concent~ation cannot be determined using ''E" qualified data.
Group I Wells
It is also recommended that bis(2-chloroethyl)ether be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for EX-06, NS-09, NS-
I 0, NS-I 1, and NS-15 because the detection limits in the most recent sampling events for these wells are low enough
that any bis(2-chloroethyl)cther in these samples would be detected as estimated concentrations equal to or less than
the ROD Performance Standard.
Group 2 Wells
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether cannot currently be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-05 and EX-07 due
to dilution factors greater than one during I 00 percent of the monitoring events and detection limits one to two orders
of magnitude greater than the ROD Performance Standard. Should consecutive future monitoring events indicate
that bis(2-chloroethyl)ether is absent or present at concentrations less than the ROD Performance Standard,
elimination of bis(2-chloroethyl)ether as a monitoring parameter will be recommended.
Group 3 Wells
The results of the data evaluation for wells EX-08, EX-09, and EX-10 are summarized below:
,. ,Trend . . . . .. ·,. I
Mean Standard Deviation 95 % UCL Direction Significant•
EX-08 Normal 575 (A) 336 851 None Increasing YES
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A:\520805 2, PO •• 8/30,0 I engineers & scientists 4-18
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EX-09 Normal 7,500 (A) 2,125
Nonna! 33,500 (A) 17,378
Units m ug/1
(A) Arithmetic Mean
• At 95 percent confidence level
9,061
45,143
None
47,000;
68,000
Increasing NO
Decreasing NO
As shown above, average concentrations of bis(2-chloroethyl)ether in the three wells are greater than the ROD
Performance Standard (5 ug/1) and the two maximum detected concentrations in EX-IO were considered to be
outliers. However, no specific sampling or laboratory error could be identified and the outliers were retained as part
of the data set.
Two of the wells (EX-08 and EX-09) show increasing concentration trends, but only the increasing trend in EX-08
is statistically significant at a 95 percent confidence level. Based on the results of this data evaluation, it is
recommended that bis(2-chloroethyl)ether be retained as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-08, EX-09, and EX-I 0.
4.2.2 4-Nitrophenol
Group I Wells
As shown in Table 6B, 4-nitrophenol was not detected in any of the Trench Area wells during any of the monitoring
events, and it is recommended that 4-nitrophenol be eliminated from future monitoring for all ten Trench Area wells.
It should be noted that detection limits for 4-nitrophenol were less than the ROD Performance Standard (350 ug/1)
during 60 percent of the extraction well sampling events and 85 percent of the monitoring well sampling events, and
that detection limits were less than the ROD Performance Standard for all ten wells in the most recent two quarters
of sampling.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Not applicable.
4.3 Metals
The data evaluation for the metals monitored in the Trench Area wells is discussed below for each metal. Each section
is organized to discuss the wells according to the same groupings as the Plume Periphery wells.
4.3.1 Arsenic
Group I Wells
As shown in Table 7 A, arsenic was not detected or detected at low-level, estimated concentrations less than the ROD
Perfonnance Standard (IO ug/1) in all sampling events for the Trench Area wells, with the exception of one detection
in EX-05 in second quarter 1996 (11 ug/1) and second quarter 1997 (10.6 ug/1). It is recommended that arsenic be
eliminated as a monitoring parameter for the ten Trench Area wells based on concentrations less than the ROD
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A:\520005 2. PD .. 8/10,01 engineers & scientists 4-19
I
I
I
n
n
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Performance Standard; the two detections in EX-05 are comparable to the ROD Performance Standard, and arsenic
was not detected in the other six monitoring events.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Well.f
Not applicable.
4.3.2 Barium
Group I Wells
As shown in Table 7B, detected concentrations of barium were less than the ROD Performance Standard (1,000 ug/1)
in all sampling events in wells EX-05, EX-06, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, EX-10, NS-10, NS-I I, and NS-15. It is
recommended that barium be eliminated from future monitoring for these wells.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Detected concentrations of barium in NS-09. are summarized below'
:,_·.:_._-:_::_-::.' F_fe_ q·.-. u_····_eri· Cy ... _ O_f.\:::--:: \' Rii il_. ·g\_~ __ .:"o_·-· f_ :_D_. _e __ t_ e_ ... C __ fo_ ·. d_> ' : ·.·,-.--· Ff ifrl liCl'i"c §" 0 r •:❖,---. : JI\Etfe~di'n·~·;~...: ::·
I NS-09 20 / 20 227-3,160 7 / 20 1,020-3,160
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 1,000 ug/1
The results of the data evaluation are summarized below:
Mean Standard Deviation 95 % UCL Direction Significant•
NS-09 Lognonnal 137(G) 722 1,359 None Decreasing NO
Units m ug/1
(G) Geometric Mean
• At 95 percent confidence level
As shown above, average concentration of barium in wells NS-09 is less than the ROD Performance Standard (1,000
ug/1) and the 95 percent UCL is comparable to the ROD Performance Standard. The decreasing trend in well NS-09
is not statistically significant at a 95 percent confidence level. However, it is recommended that barium be eliminated
as a monitoring parameter for future monitoring events for well NS-09 based on the average and UCL concentrations,
a decreasing concentration trend, and the analytical results for the most recent four quarters of sampling, as well as
the low concentrations in other Trench Area wells.
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC.
A:\520005 2. PD-· 8130,0! engineers & scientists 4-20
I
I
I
0
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4.3.3 Beryllium
Group 1 Wells
As shown in Table 7C, beryllium was not detected or was detected at low-level, estimated concentrations less than
the ROD Performance Standard (17.5 ug/1) for all monitoring events in wells EX-05, EX-06, EX-07, NS-09, NS-10,
NS-11, and NS-15. It is recommended that beryllium be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for these wells.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Detected concentrations of beryllium in wells EX-08, EX-09, and EX-10 are summarized as follows:
EX-08 8/8 14.1 -34 4/8 18.5 -34
EX-09 8 / 8 17.1 -27.5 7/8 18.4 -27.5
EX-10 8/8 12.1 -25.1 3/8 18.8-25.1
Units m ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 17 .5 ug/1
The results of the data evaluation for wells EX-08, EX-09, and EX-10 are summarized below:
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A.\520605 2. PO .• 8/30,01 engineers & scientists 4-21
I
I
I
u
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mean
EX-08 Lognormal 18.2 (G)
EX-09 Normal 21.9 (A)
EX-IQ Normal 169(A)
Units in ug/l
(G) Geometric Mean; (A) Arithmetic Mean
• At 95 percent confidence level
Standard Deviation
6.9
4.0
4.4
t I Outliers I
95% UCL Direction Significant•
24.7 None Decreasing YES
24.6 None Decreasing YES
19.8 None Decreasinl': YES
As shown above, average and 95 percent UCL concentrations of beryllium are less than or similar to the ROD
Performance Standard (17.5 ug/1), and the decreasing trends in all three wells are statistically significant at a 95
percent confidence level. Based on the results of the data evaluation and the analytical results for the most recent four
quarters of sampling, it is recommended that beryllium be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for future monitoring
events for EX-08, EX-09, and EX-I 0.
4.3.4 Cadmium
Group 1 Wells
As shown in Table 7D, cadmium was not detected or was detected at low-level, estimated concentrations less than
the ROD Performance Standard (IO ug/1) in all sampling events for wells EX-07, NS-09, NS-11, and NS-15, and it
is recommended that cadmium be eliminated as a future monitoring parameter for these wells.
It is also recommended that cadmium be eliminated as a future monitoring parameter for wells EX-06 and NS-10
because cadmium was not detected in wells EX-06 and NS-10, with the exception of one detection in each well in
third quarter 1997 and fourth quarter 1997, respectively. Although these individual concentrations are greater than
the ROD Performance Standards, these concentrations are outliers, and do not accurately reflect ground-water
conditions.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Detected concentrations of cadmium in wells EX-05, EX-08, EX-09, and EX-IO are summarized as follows:
EX-05 8 / 8 6.8 -21 6/8 10.1 -21
EX-08 7/8 4.113-44 517 12.7 -44
EX-09 6/8 4.6 -12.7 1 / 6 12.7
EX-10 5/8 4.3 -12.6 I/ 6 12.6
Units in ug/1
B • estimated concentration between the instrument Detection Limit (IDL) and the Contract Required Detection Limit (CRDL)
ROD Performance Standard: 10 ug/1
The results of the data evaluation are summarized below:
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A\520805 2. PD .. 8/30.01 engineers & scientists 4-22
I
I
I
g
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, .... .. :WclL <I Disfribii'tiOri':'.,-I . . ·"': DCSCrieiiVC·st·atiStiCS·:<:-: .• I '>OiitliC"rS I ·•·:-:.Tre·n.d''' ••·•<•.• \I\j
Mean Standard Deviation 95 % UCL Direction Significant•
EX-05 Normal 12.6 (A) 5.1 16.0 None Increasing NO
EX-08 Nonna! 14.7 (A) 13.2 23.5 44 Decreasing YES
EX-09 Normal 6.1 (A) 3.6 8.5 12.7 Decreasing YES
EX-10 Normal 4.9 (A) 3.7 7.4 12.7 Decreasing NO
Units m ug/1
(A) Arithmetic Mean
• At 95 percent confidence level
As shown above, average and 95 percent UCL concentrations of cadmium in wells EX-09 and EX-l 0 are less than
the ROD Performance Standard ( l O ug/1). The maximum detected concentrations in wells EX-08, EX-09, and EX-l 0
arc considered to be outliers, and the maximum detected concentrations in wells EX-09 and EX-l O were the only
concentrations greater than the ROD Performance Standard in these wells. The decreasing trends in wells EX-08
and EX-09 are statistically significant at a 95 percent confidence level. Based on the results of the data evaluation,
cadmium was eliminated as a monitoring parameter for future monitoring events for wells EX-09 and EX-l O and was
retained as a monitoring paramete~ for wells EX-05 and EX-08.
4.3.5 Chromium
Group 1 Wells
As shown in Table 7E, detection limits and detected concentrations of chromium were less than the ROD
Performance Standard (50 ug/1) in all sampling events for wells EX-05, EX-06, EX-07, NS-l 0, and NS-IS, and it
is recommended that chromium be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for these wells.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Detected concentrations of chromium in EX-08, EX-09, EX-I 0, NS-09, and NS-I I are summarized below:
EX-08 7/8 9.6 -84.7 3 /7 79.8 -84.7
EX-09 8/8 14.4 -63.9 2/8 63.5 -63.9
EX-t0 7 I 8 10.3 -56.1 I / 7 56.1
NS-09 18 I 20 7.18-375 9 I 18 SO. I -375
NS-I I 9 I 20 4.1 -57.2 I I 9 57.2
Units in ug/1
B -estimated concentration between the Instrument Detection Limit (IDL) and the Contract Required Detection Limit (CRDL)
ROD Pcrfonnancc Standard: 50 ug/1
The results of the data evaluation for wells EX-08, EX-09, EX-10, NS-09, and NS-11 arc summarized below:
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A\520805 2. PD·· B/30,01 engineers & scientists 4-23
I
I
n
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Well >I DiSfribu'tiOn >I .::::·::,,.,_. :·:··.;::fne'sc"rie°tiV·C st8iiStiCSfY ::: .,-. .. ·-,:: •·•:!'· :-.·:-OiJtliCrit: ·rj:: .. .-.. ·.·: .:::.'"·-TrClld :>,, . i(::' .:\<:!
Mean Standard Deviation 95 % UCL Direction Significant•
EX-08 Lognormal 20.0 (G)
EX-09 Lognormal 29.0 (G)
EX-10 Normal 24.8 (A)
NS-09 Lognormal 32.4 (G)
NS-I I None 9.8 (A)
Units m ug/1
NC -Not Calculated
(G) Gcornclric Mean; (A) Arithmetic Mean
+ At 95 percent confidence level
37
21
20.7
101.9
15.1
411 None Decreasing YES
65.8 None Decreasing YES
38.7 None Decreasing YES
267.3 None Decreasing NO
NC 17.4, 34.2, Increasing NO
35.6. 57.2
As shown above, average concentrations of chromium in all five wells and the 95 percent UCL concentration in EX-
10 are less than the ROD Performance Standard (50 ug/1), and the four maximum detected concentrations in NS-11
were considered to be outliers. No specific sampling or laboratory error could be identified for these outliers, and
the concentrations were retained in the data set. It should be noted that these four concentrations are the only non-
estimated detected concentrations of chromium in NS-I I.
Four of the five wells show decreasing concentration trends, and the decreasing trends in wells EX-08, EX-09, and
EX-IO are statistically significant at a 95 percent confidence level. Based on the results of the data evaluation, it is
recommended that chromium be retained as a monitoring parameter for NS-09. It is recommended that chromium
be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for future monitoring events for wells EX-08, EX-09, EX-I 0, and NS-I I
because:
• average concentrations are less than the ROD Performance Standard;
• concentrations greater than the ROD Performance Standard were only detected in the first three quarters of
monitoring for EX-08, EX-09, and EX-IO;
• the four non-estimated detected concentrations in NS-I I are considered to be outliers; and
• the decreasing concentration trends in EX-08, EX-09, and EX-IO are statistically significant.
4.3.6 Manganese
Group 1 Wells
As shown in Table 7F, detected concentrations of manganese were less than the ROD Performance Standard (7,700
ug/1) in all sampling events in wells EX-06 and NS-I 1, and it is recommended that manganese be excluded from
further monitoring for these wells.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
A.\S20BOS 2. PO .. 8/30,01
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE, INC
engineers & scientists 4-24
I
I
I
g
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Detected concentrationsofmanganese in EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, EX-I 0, NS-09, NS-I 0, and NS-IS are shown below:
:f •rw::;tt·· <\\.F~~q~:cn.~f_q(Jt: \)'.::~~-!ig~_:_Of:_p~t_C~_.t~-~ ::, , __ ,:\ r f <r<1 ~fn ff ~t:::: ,,, ) _:· .. :·::,,··:,,:_:·,:c:-:·-:·: :.::::,· ·:·;-,:"·
··•·•
.. .• ,J]'II ·Y" /;.._i~f.J/ ··•., >---::·:-·::::::,;;::.·;,· '·:-: :---:,-·o,itectfori\:··:: •' .. . Con·ccntra·tiol1S?: -,,, . · .· -:.::/ EXC·eed:i'i-1CCS //
EX-05 8/8 98,900 -200,000 8/8 98,900 -200,000
EX-07 8/ 8 40,200 -73,700 8/8 40,200 -73,700
EX-08 8/8 203,000 -516.000 8/8 203,000 -516,000
EX-09 8/8 98,800 -192,000 8/8 98,800 • 192,000
EX-IO 8/8 91,900-I 98,000 8/8 91,900-198,000
NS-09 20 / 20 6. 760 -60,500 19 I 20 8,280 -60,500
.NS-10 20 / 20 1,830 -14,400 10 I 20 7,760-14,400
NS-15 20 / 20 8.670 -18,600 20 I 20 8,670 -18,600
Units m ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 7.700 ug/1
The results of the data evaluation arc summarized below:
I .:'Well I ::: oiSiribii"tiC•n '/I::::-· 'nes·crietiv·e'st8tis·tkS }\::,•·•··•·:/••······1 ·/?Oi.itlie·ri) jl•>>• :.t\·-):{/\ Ti Cid'-,'-•-:: · ... •I
Mean
EX-05 Normal 144,363 (A)
EX-07 Normal 54,350 (A)
EX-OR Normal 316,250 (A)
EX-09 Normal 141,100 (A)
EX-10 Normal 136,363 (A)
NS-09 Lognormal 20,894 (G)
NS-10 Lognormal 5,513 (G)
NS-15 Normal 14,964 (A)
Units in ug/1
(G) Geometric Mean; (A) -Arithmetic Mean
• Al 95 percent confidence level
Standard
Deviation
32,087
13,630
I 04,578
31,870
32,895
15,198
3,929
2,263
95 % UCL Direction Significant•
165,861 None Decreasing YES
63,482 None Decreasing YES
386,316 None Decreasing YES
162,452 None Decreasing NO
158,402 I 98,000 Decreasing NO
19,031 None Decreasing NO
5,315 None Decreasing YES
15,839 None Decreasing YES
Based on the results of this evaluation, the average and 95 percent UCL concentrations of manganese in NS-10 are
less than the ROD Performance Standard (7,700 ug/1), and the maximum detected concentration in EX-10 was
considered to be an outlier. No specific sampling or laboratory error could be identified for the outliers, and the
concentrations were retained in the data set.
All eight wells show decreasing concentration trends, and five of these trends (EX-OS, EX-07, EX-08, NS-10, and
NS-15) are statistically significant at a 95 percent confidence level. Based on the results of the data evaluation, it is
recommended that manganese be retained as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-OS, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, EX-10,
NS-09, and NS-I 5. It is also recommended that manganese be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for NS-10
because:
• the average and 95 percent UCL concentrations are less than the ROD Performance Standard;
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE, INC
A:\520805 2. PO .. Bfl0,01 engineers & scientists 4-25
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• the decreasing concentration trend is statistically significant; and
• detected concentrations are less than the ROD Performance Standard in the most recent seven quarters.
4.3.7 Nickel
Group I Wells
As shown in Table 7G, detection limits and detected concentrations of nickel are less than the ROD Performance
Standard (350 ug/1) in wells EX-06, EX-07, NS-09, NS-I 0, NS-11, and NS-! 5, and it is recommended that nickel
be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for these wells.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Detected concentrations of nickel in wells EX-05, EX-08, EX-09, and EX-IO are summarized below:
EX-05 8/8 591-732 8/8 591-732
EX-08 8/8 989 -1,990 8/8 989 -1,990
EX-09 8/8 645 -906 8/8 645 -906
EX-10 8/8 365 -698 8/8 365 -698
Units m ug/1
*ROD Performance Standard: 350 ug/1
The results of the data evaluation are summarized below:
Well >I. Distribution I
Mean Standard 95 % UCL Direction Significant•
Deviation
EX-05 Normal 629 (A) 56 667 None Decreasing NO
EX-08 Normal 1,290 (A) 323 1,506 1,990 Decreasing YES
EX-09 Normal 736 (A) JOO 803 None Decreasing NO
EX-10 Normal 488(A) 102 556 698 Decreasing NO
Units in ug/1
(A) -Arithmetic Mean
* At 95 percent confidence level
As shown above, the average and 95 percent UCL concentrations of nickel in the four wells are greater than the ROD
Performance Standard (350 ug/1), and the maximum detected concentrations in EX-08 and EX-IO were considered
to be outliers. All four wells show decreasing concentration trends, and one of these trends (EX-08) is statistically
significant at a 95 percent confidence level. Based on the results of the data evaluation, it is recommended that nickel
be retained as a monitoring parameter for wells EX-05, EX-08, EX-09, and EX-10.
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC
A:\520805 2. PD .. 8/.l0,OI engineers & scientists 4-26
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4.3.8 Selenium
Group I Wells
As shown in Table 7H, selenium was not detected or detected at low-level, estimated concentrations less than the
ROD Performance Standard (IO ug/1) in all sampling events for wells EX-06, NS-10, and NS-11, and it is
recommended that selenium be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for these wells.
Although selenium was not detected or detected at concentrations less than the ROD Performance Standard in 19 of
the 20 monitoring events, selenium was retained as a monitoring parameter for NS-IS to verify a recent (fourth
quarter 1997) concentration (11.4 ug/1) greater than the ROD Performance Standard. This detection is only slightly
greater than the ROD Performance Standard and is most likely an anomalous value.
Group 2 Wells
Not applicable.
Group 3 Wells
Detected concentrations _of selenium in wells EX-OS, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, EX-10, and NS-09 are summarized
below:
EX-05 5/8 64.6 -86. t 5/5 64.6 -86. t
EX-07 5 I 8 19.5-31.7 5/5 19.5-31.7
EX-08 5/8 58.9-171 5/5 58.9-t71
EX-09 5/8 19.7 -88.3 5/5 t 9.7 -88.3
EX-to 5/8 25.8 -67.9 5/5 25.8 -67.9
NS-09 5 / 20 2 -21.9 3/5 12.6-2t.9
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 10 ug/1
The results of the data evaluation arc summarized below:
·:0.Wc!J:i l: Distribution< I-,.
Mean Standard 95 % UC!. Direction Significant•
Deviation
EX-05 None 47.1 (A) 35.7 NC None Increasing NO
EX-07 Normal 15.4 (A) 12.7 23.9 None Increasing NO
EX-08 Normal 64.9 (A) 62.5 106.7 None Increasing NO
EX-09 Normal 32.7 (A) 33.2 54.9 None Increasing YES
EX-10 Normal 32 (A) 28.4 51 None Increasing YES
NS-09 Lognormal t.9 (G) 6.2 38.1 None Increasine. YES
Units in ug/1
(G) Geometric Mean: (A) -Arithmetic Mean
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A_\S20805 2. PD-· B/JO,QI engineers & scientists 4-27
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NC -Not Calculated
* At 95 percent confidence level
As shown above, the average concentrations of selenium in the six wells are greater than the ROD Performance
Standard (IO ug/1), with the exception of the geometric mean in NS-09. All six wells show increasing concentration
trends, and three of these increasing trends (EX-09, EX-10, and NS-09) are statistically significant at a 95 percent
confidence level. Based on the results of the data evaluation, it is recommended that selenium be retained as a
monitoring parameter for wells EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, EX-I 0, and NS-09.
4.3.9 Zinc
As shown in Table 71, detection limits and detected concentrations of zinc are less than the ROD Performance
Standard in all ten Trench Area wells, and it is recommended that zinc be eliminated as a monitoring parameter for
Trench Area wells.
4.4 Summary
Based on the data evaluation, the following COCs were retained for future monitoring events for the Trench Area
wells:
I Well •:1:),•···· ··•••·• •·•• •. ·•··• \voe,·••··· ' , .. ......... ,., .. 'I ,. ·· ··svocs· ,·,•, :•1:·•·· .. :,,':·,.= '}>Metalf·= c.-::: .. :<,I
EX-05 Acetone; 1,2-Dichloroethanc; Toluene; Vinyl chloride; None Cadmium; Manganese; Nickel;
. Xylene Selenium
EX-06 1,2-Dichlorocthanc; Vinyl chloride None None
EX-07 Acetone; 1,2-Dichloroethane None Manganese; Selenium
EX-08 Acetone; 1,2-Dichloroethane; 1,2-0ichloropropanc; Bis(2-ch loroethyl)ethcr Cadmium; Manganese; Nickel;
Toluene; Xylene Selenium
EX-09 Acetone; 1,2-Dichloroethane; 1,2-Dichloropropanc; B is(2-chloroethy I )ether Manganese; Nickel; Selenium
Toluene; Xylene
EX-'10 Acetone; 1,2-Dichlorocthanc; 1,2-Dichloropropanc; 13is(2-ch\oroethyl)cther Manganese; Nickel; Selenium
Toluene; Vinyl chloride; Xylene
NS-09 Acetone; 1,2-Dichloroethane; Vinyl chloride None Chromium; Manganese; Selenium
NS-10 Benzene; Bromodichlorometharn::; Chloroform; 1,2-None None
Dich\orocthane; I, 1-Dichloroethene; 1,2-
Dichloropropane; Methylene chloride; 1,1,2-
Trichloroethane; Trichloroethene; Vinyl chloride
NS-I I 1,2-Dichloroethane None None
NS-15 1,2-Dichloroethane; Vinvl chloride None Man12anesc; Selenium•
•Monitoring to verify recent detcction(s) greater than ROD Performance Standard only
The following VOCs and SVOCs could not currently be eliminated from monitoring in wells EX-05, EX-07, EX-08,
EX-09, EX-I 0, and NS-09 due to non-detectable concentrations at detection limits greater than the ROD Performance
Standards and dilution factors greater than one:
EX-05
A-\520005 2. PD --81)0,01
Benzene; Bromodichloromethane; ChlorofOrm; 1,1-Dichloroethene; 1,2-
Dich\oropropane; Methylene chloride; l, 1,2-Trichlorocthanc; Trichloroethene
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE, INC
engineers & scientists
····svoc,\ •· I
Bis(2-ehloroethyl)ether
4-28
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I \Well') c;lecJ·.•· c:::~· :' -., . ··· ··•···voc,::c.:e'""'''''· ....... •:•1·•··· · •·:::csvoc,•· I
EX-07 Benzene; Bromodichloromcthane; Chlorofonn; I, 1-Dichlorocthenc; 1,2-Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Dichloropr~pane; Methylene chloride; I, 1,2-Trichlorocthanc; Trichloroethene:
Vinyl chloride
EX-08 Benzene: Bromodichloromcthane; Chloroform; I, 1-Dichloroethcne: Methylene None
chloride; I, 1,2-Trichloroethane; Trichlorocthene; Vinyl chloride
EX-09 Benzene; Bromodichloromcthanc; Chloroform; I, 1-Dichlorocthcne; Methylene None
chloride; 1,t,2-Trichloroethanc; Trichloroethene; Vinyl chloride
EX-10 Benzene; Bromodichloromcthane; Chloroform; I, 1-Dichlorocthcnc; Methylene None
chloride; I, I ,2-Trichloroethane; Trichlorocthcne
NS-09 Benzene; Bromodichloromcthane; Chloroform;' I, l~Dichlorocthcnc; 1,2-None
Dichloroorooane: Methylene chloride; 1.1,2-Trichloroethanc; Trichlorocthenc
These VOCs will be reevaluated in the monitoring program for EX-05, EX-07, EX-08, EX-09, EX-10, and NS-09
when dilution factors are reduced so that detection limits are equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standards.
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE. INC.
A\520805 2. PD .. 8/30,{)I engineers & scientists 4-29
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5. Recommendations
Based on the results of the data evaluation, the following actions are recommended:
Reduce Ground-Water Monitoring from a Quarterly to" Semi-Annual or Annuli/ Basis
The majority of constituent concentrations appear to be relatively stable (same order of magnitude) from quarter to
quarter based on the five years of historical monitoring, and no rapid changes are apparent in the concentration trends
that would require quarterly monitoring. Therefore, semi-annul monitoring is proposed for VOCs in Plume Periphery
wells, and annual monitoring is proposed for SVOCs and metals in Plume Periphery wells and VOCs, SVOCs, and
metals in Trench Area wells. Semi-annual and annual ground-water monitoring will provide adequate data to track
constituent concentrations in ground water and to evaluate the effectiveness and protectiveness.of the OU I and OU2
remedies.
Eliminate Selected Monitoring Parameters for Group I Wells
Based on the data evaluation, selected constituents do not appear to be constituents of concern for selected we\\s
based on detected concentrations and/or detection limits consistently less than the ROD Performance Standards.
Therefore, continued monitoring of these parameters is not warranted for the indicated wells. Future monitoring
events will include parameters listed in Table 9.
Change Analyticlll Method for VOCs
Detection limits for VOCs are greater than the ROD Performance Standards during some of the monitoring events
even for samples analyzed at a dilution factor equal to one. This indicates that the lowest detection limits for the
analytical methods used previously (CLP) cannot meet the ROD Performance Standard in undiluted samples.
Therefore, the analytical method for VOCs should be changed to a US EPA-approved method (e.g., SW-846) that can
achieve detection limits equal to or less than the ROD Performance Standards.
Re-Evaluation of the OU/ Remedy
Based on the evaluation of concentration trends for the Plume Periphery wells, the OU I remedy does not appear to
be improving ground-water quality. Thirty Mann-Kendall tests for trend were conducted on four VOCs (acetone;
l,2-dichloroethane; l,2-dichloropropane; and methylene chloride), one SVOC (bis(2-chloroethyl)ether), and two
metals (barium and selenium) for Plume Periphery wells. The results of these tests are summarized below:
I .,.:;:: Cc)riStitUC'llt:>'/{ I :NO":".:TCSts': ,1::'-// .... ,-:-:-.. :=·1··1ncFeasingTrend:.-.·' I ....... -.. -----·-· oeC'Fe"8Sirig'::Tr'e"rid-J··· ·············•··· 1
Significant Not Significant Significant Not Significant
voes 16 7 (44%) 3 (19%) 2 (13%) 4 (25%)
SYOCs 8 4 (50%) 2 (25%) 2 (25%) 0
Metals 6 4 (67%) I (17%) 0 I (17%)
TOTAL 30 I 5 (50%) 6 (20%) 4(13%) 5 (17%)
21 (70%) 9 (30%)
As shown above, 70 percent of the tests showed increasing concentration trends and only 30 percent showed
decreasing trends. Fifty percent the total number of tests and 70 percent of the increasing trends were statistically
significant for Plume Periphery wells; only 13 percent of the total number of tests for Plume Periphery wells were
statistically significant decreasing trends. Additionally, approximately 50 percent of the statistically significant
increasing trends were for VOCs, which are the primary constituents of concern for ground water.
BLASLAND, BOUCK & LEE, INC
A.\520805 2. PD --8/30,01 engineers & scientists 5-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
These results were compared to the results of the trend analysis for the Trench Area wells. Sixty-one Mann-Kendall
tests for trend were conducted on six VOCs (acetone; 1,2-dichloroethane; 1,2-dichloropropane; toluene; vinyl
chloride; and xylene), one SVOC (bis(2-chloroethyl)ether), and seven metals (barium; beryllium; cadmium;
chromium; manganese; nickel; and selenium) for Trench Area wells. The results of these tests are summarized below:
I< '·' Cofls·tifoeii f-:r-: :1 ::NO;",Te'StS: I ,_._,.,-.. ::-,-,_.,., '----:.:=-Iii·c·reasin"g" Trcnc:, .-. I/ .... ..... ,-, ..... 1·:,.::,>oec"rcasiTig:Trc·nc1t'":<,-.·-:-:::1
Significant Not Significant Significant Not Significant
voes 28 3 (I 1%) 6(21%) 5 (18%) 14 (50%)
SVOCs 3 I (33%) I (33%) 0 I (33%)
Metals 30 3(10%) 4 (13%) 14 (47%) 9 (30%)
TOTAL 61 7 (11%) 11(18%) 19(31%) 24 (39%)
18 (30%) 43 (70%)
As shown above, only 30 percent of the tests showed increasing concentration trends and 70 percent showed
decreasing trends.· Thirty-one percent of the total number of tests and 44 percent of the decreasing trends were
statistically significant for Trench Area wells; only 11 percent of the tests showed statistically significant increasing
trends.
This comparison indicates that the OU I remedy does not appear to be improving ground-water quality, and may, in
fact, be worsening the constituent concentrations, as demonstrated by the number of statistically significant increasing
concentration trends. Ground-water quality in Trench Area, on the other hand, appears to be showing improvement
under the current OU2 remedy. Therefore, the effectiveness of the current OU I remedy to improve ground-water
quality should be re-evaluated.
BLASLAND. BOUCK & LEE. INC
A:\520805 2. PD --8/30MI engineers & scientists 5-2
------

-
-·•1A--Analytk:.al Results -voes
OU1 Ex1rac1ion and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
ACETONE
Quarter EX01 EX02 EX03 EX0-4 NS29
1093 75 NS 1300 D 1200 D
2093 10 u 29000 D 2200 D 10 u
3093 6 J 34000 DB 6100 DB 29 B
4093 10 u 27000 1200 27
1094 10 u 26000 2200 21
2094 10 u 31000 B 3700 B 30 B
3094 10 u 41000 1400 20
4094 10 u :.t!800<i···· ·~ ~' •.• ,.< ,. . . •-.~.c~,.;c_._ 3700 15
1095 10 u 27000 1000 10 u
2095 33 D 24000 D 9200 D 1100 D
3095 70 29000 D 2500 D 2000 D
4095 39 50000 1900 820
1096 10 u 10000 5800 9 J
2096 14 ;-~~j~~-d}?~'~·::L~j~ ~ii!lli~lf ei@i, ' . '. 1. '"i®IJ.ffl.Ul«E'.~ ...
3096 12 33000 D 8800 D
4096 10 u 25000 D 7200 D
1097 8 BJ 30000 DB 14000 DB
2097 4.5 JB 7800 DB 12000 DB
3097 10 J 12000 D 15000 D
4097 10 u 7900 D 8000 D
1098 4 JB 3200 DB 10400 DB
Units in ug/1
U · Not Detected
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
B -Constituent also detected in associated method blank (concentration in meth·xi blank unknown)
E -Exceeded calibration rangu
0 -Concentration from diluted run sample
ROD Performance Standard: 3,500 ug/L
Bold font indicates detectud concentration greater than ROD Perfonnance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Perlormance Standard
Shading indicates MEH qualified concentration for which a diluted run concentretion is unavailabla.
NS -Not Sampled
F:\PROJECTS\NSCC\MONITOR\HISTORiC.'•i\i8'i.
675 D
460 D
810 DB
2200 DB
2400
460 D
850 DB
12000
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
39
1100
42000
80000
12000 -·~ .. -
100000
50000
39000
37000
100000
59000
93000
----

-
-

-
NS30 NS31 NS32
D 2900 4700 D 10 u
u 10 u 10 u 10 u
11 18 10 u
u 10 u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u 10 u
u 13 11 10 u
u 10 u 130 B 10 u
10 u 9200 10 u
D 10 u 15000 D 10 u
D 32 4800 D · 10 u
10 u 16000 10 u
10 u 3500 10 u . 13 iii11QRQJ!..:~sTu.t•,F .. i.:.f~i 10 u
D 8 J 33000 D 10 u
D 10 u 41000 D 10 u
DB 6 BJ 43000 DB 10 BJ
DB 4 JB 30000 DB 3 JB
DB 6 BJ 19000 B 4 BJ
D 10 u 31000 D 10 u
DB 8 JB 45000 DB 13 B
... ---· ---·----·
--·-------
Quarter EX01 EXD2
1093 5 u NS
2093 5 u 5
3093 10 u 1
4093 10 u 3300
1094 10 u 2500
2094 5 u 1100
3094 5 u 1200
4094 5 u 660
1095 5 u 1000
2095 5 u 42
3095 5 u 250
4095 5 u 2500
1096 5 u 500
2096 5 u 50
3096 10 u 1000
4096 10 u 250
1097 10 u 250
2097 10 u 250
3097 10 u 250
◄097 10 u 250
1098 10 u 50
Units in ugA
U · Not Detected
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
EX03
5
u 5
J 10
u 110
u 250
u 120
u 50
u 93
u 33
u 45
u 11
u 50
u 500
u 25
u 250
u 250
u 250
u 250
u 250
u 250
u 100
8o'd tont indicates detected ooncentration greater than ROD Performanc:e Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS · Not Sampled
F;\PROJECTS\NSCC\MONITOR\HISTORIC.W82
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
-·--Table 1B
Analytical Rasutts • voes
-
OU1 Extniction and Monitoring Walla
National Slarth and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
BENZENE
EX04 NS29
2 J 5
5 u 5
1 J 10
10 u 10
10 u 10
5 u 5
5 u 5
5 u 5
5 u· 5
5 u 12
11 u 250
62 u 3100
5 u 500
25 u 50
2 J 97
0,6 J 500
10 u 500
2 J 500
10 u 500
10 u 500
10 u 500
--- --
NS30 NS31 NS32
u 120 u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u 5 u
u 10 u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u 10 u
u 5 u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 250 u 5 u
u 5 u 10 u .5 u
u 5 u 32 u 5 u
u 5 u 500 u 5 u
u 5 u 250 u 5 u
u 5 u 100 u 5 u
J 10 u 1000 u 10 u
u 10 u 1000 u 10 u
u 10 u 1000 u 10 u
u 10 u 1000 u 10 u
u 10 u 1000 u 10 u
u 10 u 1000 u 10 u
u 10 u 250 u 10 u
--

-
-

-
--
Quarter EX01 EX02
1093 5 u NS 5
2093 5 u 5 u 5
3093 10 u 10 u 10
4093 10 u 3300 u 170
1094 10 u 2500 u 250
2094 5 u 1700 u 120
3094 5 u 1200 u 50
4094 5 u 660 u · 93
1095 5 u 1000 u 33
2095 5 u 42 u 45
3095 5 u 250 u 17
4095 5 u 2500 u 50
1096 5 u 500 u 500
2096 5 u 50 u 25
3096 10 u 1000 u 250
4096 10 u 250 u 250
1097 10 u 250 u 250
2097 10 u 250 u . 250
3097 10 u 250 u 250
4097 10 u 250 u 250
tQ98 10 u 50 u 100
Units Ul ug/l
U • Not Detected
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
F.\PROJECTSINSCCIMONITOHIHISTORIC.WB2
EX03
-
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
---Table 1C
Anatytical Results -voes
OU 1 Extraction and Monitoring WeUs
National Starch and ChemK;SI Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
BROMODICHLOROMETHANE
-
EX04 NS29
5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u
10 u 10 u
10 u 10 u
10 u 10 u
5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u
5 u, 5 u
5 u 5 u
5 u 12 u
17 u 250 u
62 u 3100 u
5 u 500 u
25 u 50 u
10 u 500 u
10 u 500 u
10 u 500 u
10 u 500 u
10 u 500 u
10 u 500 u
10 u 500 u
-

-
NS30
120
5
10
10
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
---
NS31 NS32
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 10 u 5 u
u 32 u 5 u
u 500 u 5 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 100 u 5 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 250 u 10 u
- - - - -
Quarter EX01 EX02
1093 5 u NS
2093 5 u 5
3093 10 u 10
4093 10 u 3300
1094 10 u 2500
2094 5 u 1700
3094 5 u 1200
4094 5 u 660
1095 5 u 1000
2095 5 u 42
3095 5 u 250
4095 5 u 2500
1096 5 u 500
2096 5 u 50
3096 10 u 1000
4096 10 u 250
1097 10 u 250
2097 10 u 250
3097 10 u 250
4097 10 u 250
1098 10 u 50
Units in ug/1
U -Not Detected
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
- -
5
u 5
u 10
u 170
u 250
u 120
u 50
u 93
u 33
u 45
u 17
u 50
u 500
u 25
u 250
u 250
u 250
u 250
u 250
u 250
u 100
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Nol Sampled
F:\PROJECTSINSCCIMONITORIHISTORIC.WB2
-
EXD3
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
- - - -
Table 1D
Analytical Results • voes
OU1 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
NationaJ Stardl and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North CllfOiina
CHLOROFORM
EX04 NS29
5 u 5
5 u 5
10 u 10
10 u 10
10 u 10
5 u 5
5 u 5
5 u 5
5 u 5
5 u 12
17 u· 250
62 u 3100
5 u 500
25 u 50
10 u 500
10 u 500
10 u 500
10 u 500
10 u 500
10 u 500
10 u 500
-
u 120
u 5
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 5
u 5
u 5
u 5
u 5
u 5
u 5
u 5
u 5
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
----I!!!!!!!! !!!!!I
NS30 NS31 NS32
u 2 J 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 10 u . 5. u
u 32 u 5 u
u 500 u 5 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 100 u 5 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 250 u 10 u
-----
Quarter EX01 EX02
1093 20 NS
2093 5 u 460
3093 10 u 510
4093 10 u 3300
1094 10 u 2500
2094 5 u 1700
3094 5 u 1200
4094 5 u 550
1095 5 u 1000
2095 5 u 750
3095 3 J 570
4095 5 2500
1096 5 u 1200
2096 4 J 590
3096 10 u 610
4096 5 J 140
1097 7 J 520
2097 3.5 J 290
3097 10 u 690
4097 10 u 920
1098 10 u 230
Units in ug/1
U -Not Detected
J -Estimated concenlration less than the detection limit
D -concentration from diluted run sample
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
--
EX03
23
DJ 65
DJ 60
u 55
u 250
u 120
u 50
J 93
u 33
59
10
u 61
150
42
J 250
J 60
220
240
200
230
200
Bok:S font indicates detected ooncentration greater than ROD Perfonnance Stancia rd
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performanc.e Standard
NS • Not Sampled
F:\PROJECTSINSCC\MONITORIHISTORIC.WB2
-
J
u
u
u
u
u
J
J
u
J
J
J
J
J
---Table tE
Analytical Results -voes
OU 1 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Stare/I and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
-
EX04 NS29
4 J 110
3 J 22
5 J 3 J
10 u 3 J
10 u 10 u
5 u 17
5 3 J
3 J 43
7 8
5 37
17 u 690
62 u 3100 u
4 J 860
25 u 300
10 u 500 u
3 J 1200
5 J 760
6 J 680
5 J 1900
10 u 1700
10 u 2300
-
79
8
58
10
10
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
10
3
10
10
10
10
-----l!!!!I
NS30 NS31 NS32
J 100 5 u
71 5 u
49 10 u
u 20 10 u
u 9 J 10 u
J 5 5 u
u 4 J 5 u
u 4 J 5 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 41 5 u
u 120 5 u
u 500 u 5 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 100 u 5 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 170 J 10 u
J 150 J 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 260 10 u
------ --'
Quarter EX01 EX02
1093 5 u NS 5
2093 5 u 5 u 5
3093 10 u 10 u 10
4093 10 u 3300 u 170
1094 10 u 2500 u 250
2094 7 u 2300 u 180
3094 7 u 1800 u 70
4094 7 u 920 u 130
1095 7 u 1400 u 47
2095 7 u 59 u 63
3095 7 u 350 u 23
4095 7 u 3500 u 70
1096 5 u 500 u 500
2096 5 u 50 u 25
3096 10 u 1000 u 250
4096 10 u 250 u 250
1097 10 u 250 u 250
2097 10 u 250 u 250
3097 10 u 250 u 250
4097 10 u 250 u 250
1098 10 u 50 u 100
Units in ug/1
U -Not Detected
ROD Performance Slandard: 7 ug/L
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
F:\PROJECTS\NSCC\MONITOR\HISTORIC.WB2
EXC1J
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
T-1F
Analytical Results -VOCa
OU 1 Ex1ractlon and Monitoring Walla
National Starm and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
1, 1-DICHLOROETHENE
-
EX04 NS29
5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u
10 u 10 u
10 u 10 u
10 u 10 u
7 u 7 u
7 u 7 u
7 u ·. 7 u
7 u 7 u
7 u 18 u
23 u 350 u
BB u 4400 u
5 u 500 u
25 u 50 u
10 ·u 500 u
10 u 500 u
10 u 500 u
10 u 500 u
10 u 500 u
10 u 500 u
10 u 500 u
-I!!!!!!!! liiiii __ 6_
NS30 NS31 NS32
120 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
10 u 10 u 10 u
10 u 10 u 10 u
10 u 10 u 10 u
7 u 7 u 7 u
7 u 7 u 7 u
7 u 7 u 7 u
7 u 350 u 7 u
7 u 15 u ·7 u
7 u 45 u 7 u
7 u 700 u 7 u
5 u 250 u 5 u
5 u 100 u 5 u
10 u 1000 u 10 u
10 u 1000 u 10 u
10 u 1000 u 10 u
10 u 1000 u 10 u
10 u 1000 u 10 u
10 u 1000 u 10 u
10 u 250 u 10 u
--- - - - -------•--. l!!!!!!!!I
Quarter EX01 EX02
1093 35 NS
2093 4 J 820
3093 10 u 1000
4093 10 u 3300
1094 10 u 2500
2094 6 u 1600
3094 6 u 1200
4094 6 u 1200
1095 6 u 670
2095 6 u 1300
3095 6 u 890
4095 6 u 3000
1096 5 u 830
2096 5 u 650
3096 10 u 640
4096 1 J 100
1097 7 J 400
2097 3 J 190
3097 2 J 460
4097 10 u 730
1098 10 u 130
Units in ug/1
U • Not Detected
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
D -ooncentration from diluted run sample
ROD Performance Standard: 6 ug/L
EX03
120
DJ 180
DJ 150
u 170
u 250
J 70
J 44
53
J 40
160
24
u 130
140
33
J 87
J 71
150
J 240
230
310
200
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater tnan ROD Parioonanee Stenduci
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS • Not Sampled
F:\PROJECTS\NSCC\MONITOR\HISTORIC.WB2
u
u
J
J
J
u
J
J
J
J
J
J
Tabte 1G
AnalyticaJ Reiults -voes
OU 1 Extraction and Monitoring Welb
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
1,2-DICHLOROPROPANE
EX04 NS29
5 u 350
5 u 46.5
10 u 5
10 u 10
10 u 10
6 u 6
6 u 6
6 U, 8
6 u 6
6 12
26 1000
75 u 2200
5 u 1600
25 u 710
2 J 1900
1 J 1800
7 J 1200
17 980
7 J 2500
2 J 2700
3 J 2700
D 190
23
J 97
u 10
u 10
u 6
u 6
u 8
u 8
J 8
6
J 8
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
1!!!!!!11 == == i;;;;;;;; 7 i;;;;;;i
NS30 NS31 NS32
170 5 u
200 5 u
83 1 J
u 31 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 3 J 6 u
u 6 u 6 u
u 6 u 8 u
u 300 u 6 u
u 50 6 u
u 260 6 u
u 340 J 6 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 94 J 5 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 160 J 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 170 J 10 u
-------
Quarter EX01 EX02
1093 5 u NS
2093 5 u 9
3093 10 u 13
4093 10 u 3300
1094 10 u 2500
2094 10 u 3300
3094 10 u 2500
4094 10 u 1300
1095 10 u 2000
2095 10 u 85
3095 10 u 500
4095 10 u 5000
1096 5 u 500
2096 5 u 12
3096 10 u 1000
4096 10 u 32
1097 10 u 250
2097 10 u 250
3097 10 u 250
4097 10 u 250
1098 10 u 50
Units in ug/1
U -Nol Detected
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 3,500 ug/L
5
2
3
u 170
u 250
u 250
u 100
u 190
u 67
u 89
u 33
u 100
u 500
J 25
u 250
J 250
u 250
u 250
u 250
u 250
u 100
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
~S -Not Sampled
F:\PROJECTSINSCCIMONITOR\HISTORIC.WB2
EX03
-
u
J
J
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
Table1H
Analytical Results • VOCs
OU 1 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical COmpany
Salisbury, North Carolina
ETHYLBENZENE
1!!!!!11
EX04 NS29
2 J 5 u
5 u 5 u
10 u 10 u
10 u 10 u
10 u 10 u
3 J 10 u
10 u 10 u
10 u 10 u
10 u 10 u
10 u 25 u
33 u 500 u
120 u 6200 u
5 u 500 u
25 u 50 u
2 J 500 u
2 J 500 u
3 J 500 u
4 J 500 u
10 u 500 u
2 J 500 u
2 J 500 u
!!!!!I
120
5
1
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
== ==
NS30 NS31 NS32
u 2 J 5 u
u 2 J 5 u
J 1 J 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 500 u 10 u
u 21 u 10 u
u 65 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 100 u 5 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 250 u 10 u
----

-
--

-
-l!!!!!!!!!!I !!!!!!!!I
Table 11
Analytical Results -voes
OU1 Extraction and Monito~ng Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
METHYLENE CliLORIDE
!!!!!!!I
Quarter EX01 EX02 EX03 EX04 NS29
1093 2 BJ NS 2 BJ
2093 1 J 4 J 2 J
3093 2 BJ 10 u 10 u
4093 NR NR NR
1094 NR NR NR
2094 5 u 1700 u 120 u
3094 9 B 2900 B 110 B
4094 5 u 1200 B 150 B
1095 5 u 1300 B 37 B
2095 3 BJ 44 B 41 BJ
3095 5 u 250 u 17 u
4095 5 u 2500 u 72 B
1096 2 BJ 150 BJ 160 BJ
2096 1 BJ 13 J 25 u
3096 10 u 620 J 140 J
4096 0.6 J 74 J 16 J
1097 10 u 250 u 250 u
2097 10 u 250 u 250 u
3097 10 u 250 u 250 u
4Q97 10 u 40 J 40 J
1098 10 u 50 u 100 u
Units in ug/l
U • Not Detected
J -Estimaled concentration less than the detection limit
B -Constituent also detected in associated method blank (concentration in meth•>d blank unknown)
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
Boid font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Pe~ance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NR -Not Reported
NS · Not Sampled
F:\PROJECTs\Nscc\MONITOR\HISTOR1c.ws2
5 u 3 BJ
2 J 2 J
5 BJ 2 BJ
NR NR
NR NR
5 u 5 u
7 B 8 B
6 B 7 B
3 BJ 3 BJ
7 B. 13 B
17 u· 250 u
62 u 3100 u
2 BJ 150 BJ
5 BJ 50 u
4 J 2200
1 J 37 J
10 u 500 u
10 u 500 u
10 u 500 u
10 u 89 J
10 u 500 u
!!!!I == == == ==
NS30 NS31 NS32
.a BJ 3 BJ 2 BJ
5 u 5 u 1 J
2 BJ 2 BJ 1 J
NR NR NR
NR NR NR
5 u 5 u 5 u
8 B 9 B 9 B
5 u 6 B 9 B
5 u 200 BJ 4 BJ
10 B 16 B 11 B
5 u 32 u 5 u
5 u .ao BJ 5 u
2 BJ 71 BJ 2 BJ
5 u 21 J 5 u
10 u 310 J 10 u
0.6 J 110 J 0.7 J
10 u 1600 B 3 J
10 u 1000 u 10 u
10 u 1000 u 10 u
10 u 160 J 10 u
10 u 250 u 10 u
---

-
---
Quarter EX01 EX02
1093 13 NS
2093 5 u 110
3093 10 u 2500
4093 10 u 3300
1094 10 u 2500
2094 10 u 3300
3094 10 u 2500
4094 10 u 420
1095 10 u 2000
2095 10 u 280
3095 10 u 280
4095 10 u 5000
1096 5 u 290
2096 5 u 260
3096 10 u 340
4096 1 J 280
1097 10 u 300
2097 10 u 110
3097 10 u 210
4097 10 u 290
1098 10 u 62
Units in ug/1
U -Not Detected
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 2,000 ug/l
58
48
u 55
u 66
u 250
u 91
u 60
J 87
u 69
80
J 32
u 60
J 130
55
J 99
120
190
J 160
J 180
200
165
ltal)C font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS • Not Sampled
F:\PROJECTS\NSCC\MONITOR\HISTORIC.WB2
EX03
-
J
u
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
---Table 1J
Analytical Results -voe,
OU1 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
TOLUENE
EX04 NS29
5 60
2 J 6.5
3 J 3
3 J 10
10 u 10
7 J 10
4 J 10
7 J 10
10 u 10
26 25
31 J 200
120 u 6200
2 J 370
46 150
31 J 850
26 440
41 400
33 260
23 910
17 1100
22 950
l!!!!!!!!!I
34
2
J 23
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
J 10
u 10
J 5
5
10
J 10
J 10
J 10
10
10
10
l!!!!!!!!!I I!!!!!!! ==
NS30 NS31 NS32
J 34 5 u
J 34 5 u
15 10 u
u 6 J 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 500 u 10 u
u 12 J 10 u
u 45 J 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 64 J 5 u
u 150 5 u
u 310 J 10 u
u 370 J 0.8 J
u 315 J 10 u
u 370 J 10 u
u 390 J 10 u
u 610 J 10 u
u 620 10 u
- - - - -- -
Quarter EX01 EX02
1093 5 u NS 5
2093 5 u 5 u 5
3093 10 u 10 u 10
4093 10 u 3300 u 170
1094 10 u 2500 u 250
2094 5 u 1700 u 120
3094 5 u 1200 u 50
4094 5 u 660 u 93
1095 5 u 1000 u 33
2095 5 u 42 u <5
3095 5 u 250 u 17
4095 5 u 2500 u 50
1096 5 u 500 u 500
2096 5 u 50 u 25
3096 10 u 1000 u 250
4096 10 u 250 u 250
1097 10 u 250 u 250
2097 10 u 250 u 250
3Q97 10 u 250 u 250
4097 10 u 250 u 250
1098 10 u 50 u 100
Units in ug/1
U · Not Detected
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS • Not Sampled
F:\PROJECTS\NSCCIMOMITORIHISTORIC,WB2
-
EX03
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
- --Table 1K
Analytical Results -voes
OU 1 Extradion and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
1, 1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE
EX04 NS29
5 u 5
5 u 5
10 u 10
10 u 10
10 u 10
5 u 5
5 u 5
5 U, 5
5 u 5
5 u 12
17 u 250
62 u 3100
5 u 500
25 u 50
10 u 500
10 u 500
10 u 500
10 u 500
10 u 500
10 u 500
10 u 500
!!!!!!!I
NS30
u 120
u 5
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 5
u 5
u 5
u 5
u 5
u 5
u 5
u 5
u 5
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
l!!!!!!I l!!!!!!!I !!iii=
NS31 NS32
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 10 u 5 u
u 32 u 5 u
u 500 u 5 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 100 u 5 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 250 u 10 u
---( - --i ---. ,. ,.
Quarter EX01 EX02
1093 5 u NS 5
2093 5 u 5 u 5
3093 10 u 10 u 10
•093 10 u 3300 u 170
1094 10 u 2500 u 250
2094 5 u 1700 u 120
3094 5 u 1200 u 50
4094 5 u 660 u 93
1095 5 u 1000 u 33
2095 5 u 42 u 45
3095 5 u 250 u 17
4095 5 u 2500 u 50
1096 5 u 500 u 500
2096 5 u 50 u 25
3096 10 u 1000 u 250
4096 10 u 250 u 250
1097 10 u 250 u 250
2097 10 u 250 u 250
3097 10 u 250 u 250
4097 10 u 250 u 250
1098 10 u 50 u 100
Units in ug/1
U -Not Detected
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS · Not Sampled
F:IPROJECTSINSCCIMONITOR\HISTORIC.WB2
EX03
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
------;
Table 1L
Analy.ic:al Resulu; -voes
OU 1 Extraction and Monitoring Walls
National Stardl and Chemall Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
TRICHLOROETHENE
EX04 NS29
5 u 5
5 u 5
10 u 10
10 u 10
10 u 10
5 u 5
5 u 5
5 u. 5
5 u 5
5 u 12
17 u 250
62 u 3100
5 u SOD
25 u 50
10 u 500
10 u SOD
10 u SOD
10 u 500
10 u SOD
10 u SOD
10 u SOD
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
-
120
5
10
10
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
--- -
NS30 NS31 NS32
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 5 u 5 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 10 u 5 u
u 32 u 5 u
u SOD u 5 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 100 u 5 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 250 u 10 u
- - - --- --
Quarter EX01 EX02 EX03
1093 10 u NS 10
2093 10 u 10 u 10
3093 10 u 19 10
4093 10 u 3300 u 170
1094 10 u 2500 u 250
2094 2 u 670 u 50
3094 2 u 500 u 20
4094 2 u 260 u 37
1095 2 u 400 u 13
2095 2 u 17 u 18
3095 2 u 100 u 7
4095 2 u 1000 u 20
1096 10 u 1000 u 1000
2096 10 u 100 u 50
3096 10 u 1000 u 250
4096 10 u 250 u 250
1097 10 u 250 u 250
2097 10 u 250 u 250
3097 10 u 250 u 250
4097 10 u 250 u 250
1098 10 u 50 u 100
Unils in ug/1
U -Not Detected
ROD Performance Standard: 2 ug/L
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Stand:ud
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Nol Sampled
f;IPROJECTS\NSCCIMONITOR\HISTORIC.WB2
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
--l!!!!!!!!!!I
Table 1M
Analytical Result& -voes
OU1 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
VINYL CHLORIDE
EX04 NS29
28 10
10 u 10
10 u 10
10 u 10
10 u 10
2 u 2
2 u 2
2 u 2
2 u 2
2 u 5
7 u·. 100
25 u 1200
10 u 1000
50 u 100
10 u 500
10 u 500
10 u 500
10 u 500
10 u 500
10 ·u 500
10 u 500
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
NSJO
250
10
10
10
10
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
== ;:;;;i liE5I
NS31 NS32
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 2 J 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 2 u 2 u
u 2 u 2 u
u 2 u 2 u
u 100 u 2 u
u 4 u 2 u
u 13 u 2 u
u 200 u 2 u
u 500 u 10 u
u 200 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 250 u 10 u
-----
Quarter EX01 EX02
1093 2 J NS
2093 5 u 38
3093 10 u 52
4093 10 u 3300
1094 10 u 2500
2094 10 u 3300
3094 10 u 2500
4094 10 u 1300
1095 10 2000
2095 10 u 24
3095 10 u 500
4095 10 u 5000
1096 5 u 500
2096 5 u 34
3096 10 u 1000
4096 10 u 26
1097 10 u 250
2097 10 u 250
3097 10 u 250
4097 10 u 250
1098 10 u 50
Units in ug/1
U -Not Detected
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 350 ug/L
-·-
10
7
10
u 170
u 250
u 250
u 100
u 190
u 67
J 89
u 33
u 100
u 500
J 6
u 250
J 250
u 250
u 250
u 250
u 250
u 17
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS · Not Sampled
F:IPROJECTS\NSCCIMONITOR\HISTORIC.WB2
-
EX03
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
J
u
u
u
u
u
u
J
---Table 1N
Analytical Results • voes
-
OU1 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
XYLENE
EX04 NS29
2 J 12
1 J 2
2 J 2
10 u 10
10 u 10
10 u 10
10 u 10
10 u 10
10 u· 10
10 u 25
33 u 500
120 u 6200
5 u 500
25 u 20
6 J 110
5 J 56
6 J 500
10 500
2 J 110
4 J 160
5 J 130
-
120
J 5
J 4
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 10
u 5
J 5
J 10
J 10
u 10
u 10
J 10
J 10
J 10
-I!!!!!! l!!!!!I 11!!!!!1
NSJO NS31 NS32
u 6 5 u
u 7 5 u
J 4 J 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 10 u 10 u
u 500 u 10 u
u 21 u 10 u
u 65 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 250 u 5 u
u 100 u 5 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 1000 u 10 u
u 89 J 10 u
- - - - -- -- -
Table 2A
Analytical Results -SVOCs
OU1 Extrac:tion and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
815(2-CHLOROETHYL)ETHER
-
Quarter EX01 EX02 EX03 EX04 N529
1093 38 NS
2093 4 J 380 D
3Q93 11 u 540 D
4093 11 u 440
1094 10 u 510
2094 11 u 770
3094 6 u 680
4094 5 u 570
1095 5 u 540
2095 3 J 650
3095 14 570
4095 11 570
1096 9 J 400
2096 7 J •£~.~·soo:r:·:(·i:· .. ::g,·E·~:~
3096 10 u 430
4096 17 320
1097 31 490
2097 21 250
3097 24 310
4097 17 43
1098 48 180
Units in ug/1
U -Not Detected
J • Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
0 -concentration in diluted run sample
E · Exceeded calibration range
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
D
D
D
D
D
82
100
10
74
150
120
56
110
130
180
120
140
130
93
170
130
180
180
210
260
350
Bo!d font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standsrd
Italic font indicates detection limit gre8ter than ROD Performance Standard
u
D
D
D
D
D
Shading indicates ME" qualified concentration for which a diluted run concentmtion is unavailable.
NS -Nol Sampled
F:IPROJECTSINSCC\MONITOP.IHISTORIC.WB2
12 190
5 J 52
11 25
53 u 18
22 J 8 J
17 J 12
13 J 12
21 J 17
14 J 13
55 32
64 450
41 1100
10 590 D
71 250
48 1400 D
49 740
68 D 810
74 D 410
68 D 1400 D
47 D 1400 D
94 D 2400 D
-l!!l!!!!I I!!!!! == == •;;;a
NS30 NS31 NS32
44 71· 10 u
32 95 10 u
10 u 38 10 u
10 J 25 11 u
41 24 11 u
29 20 10 u
17 21 5 u
21 14 5 u
17.5 11 5 u
16 78 5 u
12 130 6 u
10 320 370
5 J 72 10 u
7 J 160 10 u
7 J 380 10 u
4 J 200 D 10 u
10 J 540 D 10 u
7 J 390 D 10 u
8 J 21 u 650 D
10 u 19 560 D
9 J 1500 D 10 u
----

-
--
Quarter EX01 EX02
1093 so u NS 52
2093 50 u 52 u 56
3093 26 u 26 u 25
4093 27 u 260 u 52
1094 26 u 250 u 26
2094 27 u 1100 u 54
3094 29 u 530 u 27
4094 27 u 1400 u 53
1095 27 u 540 u 53
2095 26 u 270 u 52
3095 28 u 670 u 110
4095 25 u 500 u 53
1096 25 u 500 u so
2096 25 u 120 u 50
3096 25 u 250 u 250
4096 25 u 25 u 100
1097 26 u 25 u 100
2097 25 u 26 u 100
3097 25 u 26 u 26
4097 26 u 26 u 26
109B 26 u 26 u 26
Units in ug/1
U -Not Detected
ROD Performance Standard: 350 ug/L
Italic font indicates delection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS . Not Sampled
F:\PROJECTS\NSCC\MONITOR\HISTORIC.WB2
-
EX03
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
----Table 2B
Analytical Results -SVOCs
OU 1 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
Nationai Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
4-NITROPHENOL
EX04 NS29
so u 52
54 u 54
25 u 26
130 u 26
100 u 25
100 u 26
110 u 27
260 u 26
260 u 29
140 u 27
140 U' 690
54 u 1300
25 u 25
120 u 120
so u 250
25 u 250
25 u 260
25 u 250
26 u 250
28 u 260
27 u 130
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
111!!!!!!!!1
50
so
26
27
26
27
26
26
26
26
27
26
25
25
25
25
26
25
26
26
26
l!!!!!!!IJI !!!!!!I l!!!l!I == == ==
NS30 NS31 NS32
u 50 u 50 u
u 52 u so u
u 25 u 25 u
u 26 u 26 u
u 27 u 27 u
u 26 u 26 u
u 27 u 26 u
u 26 u 27 u
u 26 u 25 u
u 51 u 26 u
u 130 u 28 u
u 260 u 520 u
u 25 u 25 u
u 120 u 25 u
u 120 u 25 u
u 50 u 25 u
u 50 u 26 u
u 50 u 25 u
u 52 u 26 u
u 26 u 26 u
u 26 u 26 u
-- --- - -- - --Table 3A
Analytical Results -Metals
OU1 Extraction and Mo."litoring Wells
National Starch end Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
ARSENIC
-
Quarter EX01 EX02 EX03 EX04 NS29
1093 2 u NS 2 u 2
2093 2 u 2 u 2 u 2
3093 2 u 2 u 2 u 2
4093 2.4 u 4.8 u 4.8 u 2.4
1094 2.9 u 5.8 u 5.8 u 2.9
2094 2.6 u 7.8 u 2.6 u 2.6
3094 2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1
4094 3.3 B 2.1 u 2.1 u 2.8
1095 0.8 u 1.1 B 0.8 u 0.8
2095 2.7 u 3.8 B 2.7 u 2.7
3095 1.9 u 2.8 B 1.9 u 1.9
4095 1.5 u 1.5 u 1.5 u 1.5
1096 1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1
2096 1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1
3096 1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1
4096 1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1
1097 7 u 7 u 7 u 7
2097 7 u 7 u 7 u 7
3097 7 u 7 u 7 u 7
4097 6 u 6 u 6 u 6
1096 6 u 6 u 6 u 6
Units in ug/1
U -Not Oelected
B . Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection limit but less than the Reporting limit
ROD Performance Standard: 10 ug/L
NS · Not Sampled
F:IPROJECTSINSCCIMONITORIHISTORIC.WB2
u 2 u
u 2 u
u 2 u
u 2.4 u
u 2.9 u
u 2.6 u
u 2.1 u
B 2.1 u
u 1.5 B
U, 2.7 u
u 2.2 B
u 1.5 u
u 1.1 u
u 1.1 u
u 1.5 B
u 1.1 u
u 7 u
u 7 u
u 7 u
u 6 u
u 6 u
l!!!!!I I!!!!! == l.iiiiiil
NS30 NS31 N532
2 u 2 u 2 u
2 u 2 u 2 u
2 -u 2 u 2 u
2.4 u 2.9 B 2.4 B
2.9 u 2.9 u 2.9 u
2.9 B 3.7 B 2.6 u
2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1 u
2.1 B 2.1 u 3.1 B
0.8 u 1.3 B 0.8 u
2.7 u 2.9 B 2.8 e'
1.9 u 1.9 u 2.3 B
1.5 u 1.5 u 1.5 u
1. 1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u
1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u
1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u
1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u
7 u 7 u 7 u
7 u 7 u 7 u
7 u 7 u 7 u
7 B 6 u 6 u
6 u 6 u 6 u
-- - - -- --- - - -
Quarter EX01 EX02
1093 68.2 B NS
2093 25.3 B 1250
3093 27.2 B 1780
4093 22.8 B 1490
1094 17.1 B 1680
2094 23 B 1830
3094 18.3 B 1540
4094 25.3 B 1070
1095 17.7 B 1080
2095 26.5 B 1860
3095 61.4 B 1820
4095 54.5 B 1930
1096 104 B 1970
2096 93.6 B 1780
3096 37.9 B 1560
4096 126 B 1370
1097 154 B 1170
2097 163 B 982
3097 173 B 1110
4097 161 B 1210
1098 213 713
Units in ug/1
U · Not Detected
EX03
166 B
140 B
235
278
405
516
608
496
625
475
265
387
553
415
440
349
519
647
722
703
717
Table 3B
Analytical Results • Metala
OU 1 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Star<h and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
BARIUM
EX04 NS29
37.3 B 182
26.9 B 87.4
29.4 B 80.9
36.3 B 61.7
29.3 B 45.3
56.4 B 64.1
27 B 52.2
45.9 B, 57.6
34.4 B 64
72.7 B 64.7
52.6 B 190
42.8 B 1420
35.4 B 667
114 B 324
71.6 B 2490
61.5 B 1150
40.8 B 1360
45.1 B 720
44.7 B 1800
42 B 2110
46 B 1600
B . Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting Limit
ROD Performance Standard: 1,000 ug/L
&Md font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Slandc1rci
NS· Not Sampled
F:IPROJECTSINSCCIMONITORIHISTORIC.WB2
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
l!!!!!!!!!I !!!!!!!I I!!!!!! == a:a:::il '1:iiil
NS30 NS31 NS32
23.4 B 193 B 65.8 B
31.8 B 36.3 B 69 B
33 B 19.5 B 86 B
29.8 B 15.6 B 85.6 B
49.4 B 2.4 u 85.5 B
35.6 B 17.4 B 82.6 B
31.6 B 8.2 B 85.2 B
26.9 B 1.7 B 65.5 B
27.3 B 19.6 B 85 B
27.5 B 12.6 B 93.3 B
19.7 B 207 69.7
18.1 B 1680 86.6 B
26 B 1630 87.6 B
31.1 B 3350 96.5 B
32.5 B 5180 95.8 B
32.1 B 6280 91.5 B
27.4 B 6780 97.3 B
26 B 6870 93 B
29.1 B 9280 96.3 B
25.8 B 4680 98.2 B
28.7 B 9850 99,1 B
--_,_ I -·· ---··• --_ .. _, -Table 3C
Analytical Results -Metals
OU1 Extraction and Morutoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
BERYLLIUM
---
Quarter EX01 EX02 EX03 EX04 NS29
1093 , u NS , u ,
2093 1 u 1 u 1 u 1
3093 1.5 B 1.7 B 1.8 B 1.5
4093 0.4 u 0.4 u 0,4 u 0.4
1094 0.4 u 0.4 u 0.4 u 0.4
2094 0.2 u 0.32 B 0.24 B 0.23
3094 0.3 u 0,3 u 0.3 u 0.3
4094 0.3 u 0.3 u 0,3 u 0.3
1095 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3
2095 0.2 u 0.23 B 0.2 u 0.28
3095 0.32 B 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3
4095 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0,3
1096 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.45
2096 0.3 u 0,3 u 0.3 u 0.3
3096 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3
4096 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3
1097 2 u 2 u 2 u 2
2097 2 u 2 u 2 u 2
3097 2 u 2 u 2 u 2
4097 1 u 1 u 1 u 1
1098 1 u 1 u 1 u 1
Units in ug/l
U -Not Detected
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection limit but less U1an the Reporting Limit
ROD Performance Standard: 17.5 ug/L
NS -Not Sampled
F,IPROJECTSINSCCIMONITORIHISTORIC.WB2
u , u 1
u 1 u 1
B 1.4 B 1.4
u 0.4 u 0.4
u 0.4 u 0.4
B 0.23 B 0.2
u 0.3 u 0.3
u ·-0.3 u 0.3
u 0.3 u 0,3
B 0,2 u 0.2
u 0.3 u 0.3
u 0.3 u 0.3
B 0.3 u 0.3
u 0,3 u 0.3
u 0,3 u 0.3
u 0.3 u 0.3
u 2 u 2
u 2 u 2
u 2 u 2
u 1 u 1
u 1 u 1
1111!!!!!1 l!I!!! ' I!!!!!!
NS30 NS31 NS32
u 1 u , u
u 1 u 1 u
B 1.8 B 1.6 B
u 0,4 u 0.4 u
u 0.4 u 0.4 u
u 0.2 u 0.2 u
u 0,3 u 0.3 u
u 0.3 u 0.3 u
u 0.3 u 0.3 u
u 0.2 u 0.28 B
u 0.3 u 0.3 u
u 0.3 u 0.3 u
B 0.3 u 0.3 u
u 0,3 u 0.3 u
u 0,3 u 0.3 u
u 0.3 u 0.3 u
u 2 u 2 u
u 2 u 2 u
u 2 u 2 u
u 1 u 1 u
u 1 u 1 . u
- ---- - -- - - -
Table 30
Analytical Results -Metals
OU1 Extraction and Moni10ring Wells
National St~n:h and Chemicai Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
CADMIUM
-
Quarter EX01 EX02 EXUJ EX04 NS29
1093 5 u NS 5 u 5
2093 5 u 5 u 5 u 5
3093 5 u 5 u 5 u 5
4093 2.3 u 2.3 u 2.3 u 2.3
1094 2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1
2094 1.3 u 1.7 8 1.3 u 1.3
3094 1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u 1.7
4094 1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u 1.7
1095 2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1
2095 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4
3095 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.2
4095 1.9 u 1.9 u 1.9 u 1.9
1096 4.8 u 4.8 u 4.8 u 4.8
2096 5 u 5 u 5 u 5
3096 5 u 5 u 5 u 5
4096 4.8 u 4.8 u 4.8 u 4.8
1097 0.5 u 0,74 8 0.5 u 0.5
2097 3 u 3 u 3 u 3
3097 3 u 3 u 10.4 3
4097 4 u 4.5 8 4 u 17.8
1098 4 u 4 u 4 u 4
Units in ug.,1
U -Nol Detected
B -Estimated concentralion greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting Limit
ROD Performance Standard: 10 ug/L
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
F:\PROJECTS\NSCC\MONITOR\HISTORIC.I/VB2
u 5 u
u 5 u
u 5 u
u 2.3 u
u 2.1 u
u 1.3 u
8 1.6 u
8 1.6 u
u 2.1 u
u 1.4 u
u 1.2 u
u 1.9 u
u 4.8 u
u 5 u
u 5 u
u 4.8 u
u 0.5 u
u 3 u
u 3 u
4.5 8
u 4 u
-l!!!!!I !!!!!!II == ==
I NS30 NS31 NS32
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
2.3 u 2.3 u 2.3 u
2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1 u
1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u
1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u
1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u
2.1 u 2.1 u 2. 1 u
1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 · u
1.2 u 1.2 u 1.2 u
1.9 u 1.9 u 1.9 u
4.8 u 4.8 u 4.8 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
4.8 u 4.8 u 4.8 u
0.5 u 0.5 u 0.5 u
3 u 3 u 3 u
3 u 26.9 3 u
4 u 4 u 4 u
4 u 4 u 4 u
- ---------Tabte 3E
Analytical Results -Metals
OU 1 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Caro\lna
CHROMIUM
-
Quarter EX01 EX02 EXtlJ EX04 NS29
1093 12 NS 10 u 10
2093 10 u 12.8 10 u 10
3093 10 u 13.7 10 u 10
4093 2.7 u 2.7 u 2.B B 2.7
1094 2.3 u 3.1 B 2.4 B 4.3
2094 2.9 u 2.9 u 2.9 u 2.9
3094 2.4 u 2.4 u 2.4 u 2.4
4094 3 B 3 B 2.4 u 3.9
1095 4.3 u 4.3 u 4.3 u 4.3
2095 2 u 2 u 2 u 2
3095 3.1 u 5.1 B 3.4 B 3.1
4095 2.4 u 2.9 B 2.4 u 2.4
1096 7.7 B 4.9 u 7.B B 7.4
2096 5 u 5 u 5 u 5
3096 5 u 31.1 5 u 5
4096 4.9 u 17.1 62.6 4.9
1097 5 u 5 u 5 u 11.6
2097 5 u 5.6 B 5 u 5
3097 5 u 5 u 5 u 5
4097 4 u 4 u . 4 u 4
1098 4 u 4 u 4 u 4
Units in ug/1
U · Nol Detected
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less thilrl the Reporting limit
ROD Periormance Standard: 50 ug/L
Bold font indicates detected conc:entration greater than ROD Performance Standa,d
NS · Not Sampled
F:\PROJECTS\NSCC\MONlTOR\HISTORIC.V/82
u 11.1
u 14.5
u 10 u
u 2.7 u
B 3 B
u 2.9 u
u 2.4 u
B 2.4 u
u 4.3 u
u ._ 2 u
u 3.1 u
u 2.4 u
B 6.9 B
u 5 u
u 5 u
u 4.9 u
5.B B
u 5 u
u 5 u
u 4.3 B
u 4 u
----

-
--
NS30 NS31 NS32
10 u 77.5 10 u
10 u 74 10 u
10 u 22.2 10
2.7 u 2.7 u 2.7 u
2.7 B 2.3 u 2.3 u
2.9 u 13.3 2.9 u
2.B B 2.4 u 3.1 B
2.4 u 2.4 u 2.4 B
4.3 u 4.3 u 4.3 u
2 u 2 u 2 u
3.1 u 3.1 u 3.1 u
2.4 u 2.4 u 2.4 u
9.B B 4.9 u B.B B
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
4.9 u 4.9 u 4.9 u
5 u 7.2 B 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
4 u 4 u 4 u
4 u 101 4 u
------·--

-
-Table 3F
Analytk:al Results • Metals
OU1 Extraction end Monitori_ng Wells
National Starch end Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
MANGANESE
-
Qua.rt.er EX01 EX02 EXt)3 EX04 NS29
1093 222 NS 3950 4290
2093 206 7180 2760 3270
3093 112 10800 3380 4810
4093 24.3 10800 11200 5090
1094 25.1 14300 11000 5610
2094 78.8 17100 3980 5280
3094 50.3 15100 1430 5430
4094 42 14000 3640 4970
1095 9.9 B 11900 2010 4730
2095 53.4 18800 4810 4170
3095 117 18300 3970 3210
4095 98.6 19000 3380 4750
1096 142 17900 2130 3580
2096 132 16100 2855 3880
3096 53.1 16300 4270 3165
4096 205 16800 3920 3340
1097 345 18000 2610 5140
2097 461 11600 3960 4530
3097 316 13900 3840 4330
4097 332 16900 4510 3880
1098 345 11000 4695 4520
Units in ug/1
B • Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less t~an the Reporting Limit
ROD Performance Standard: 7,700 ug/L
8okj font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
MS -Nol Sampled
F:IPROJECTSINSCCIMONITORIHISTORIC.WB2
475
192.5
201
177
153
265
287
259
239
268
611
3810
4030
1780
8580
5840
4820
3710
12000
18400
22200
--I!!!!! I!!!!!!
NS30 NS31 NS32
839 17.9 80.6
1620 47.1 78.2
1435 28.9 108
2110 21.4 99.8
2170 22.1 107
2270 52 106
1930 26.1 106
2480 20.4 108
2360 372 107
2290 25.8 117
1800 35.7 107
1990 63.9 112
1540 60.3 92.6
1720 141 105
1570 123 109
1400 510 109
1660 1110 114
1510 993 114
1530 1100 115
1520 1870 118
147 2670 118
- ---,. ' ,. ... ---·-Table 3G
Analytical Results -Metals
OU1 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
NICKEL
-
Quarter EX01 EX02 EX(13 EX04 NS29
1093 20 u NS 20 u 20
2093 20 u 75.5 20 u 20
3093 20 u 20 u 20 u 20
4093 11.8 B 13.8 B 6.4 u 6.4
1094 10.4 u 10.4 u 10.4 u 10.4
2094 6.2 u 6.2 u 6.2 u 6.2
3094 6.9 u 6.9 u 6.9 u 6.9
4094 6.9 u 6.9 u 6.9 u 6.9
1095 10.3 u 10.3 u 10.3 u 10.3
2095 5.5 u 5.5 u 5.5 u 5.5
3095 7.2 u 7.2 u 7.2 u 7.2
4095 8.6 u 6.6 u 8.6 u 8.8
1096 15.3 u 15.3 u 15.3 u 15.3
2096 15 u 15 u 15 u 15
3096 15 u 43.8 15 u 15
4096 15.3 u 15.3 u 81.6 15.3
1097 20 u 20 u 20 u 20
2097 20 u 20 u 20 u 20
3097 20 u 20 u 20 u 20
4097 16 u 16 u 16 u 16
1098 16 u 16 u 16 u 16
Units in ug/1
u -Nol Detected
8 -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection limit but less tt1asi the Reporting limit
ROD Performance Standard: 350 ug/L
NS -Not Sampled
F:\PROJECTS\NSCC\MONITOR\HISTORIC.W82
u 20 u
u 20 u
u 20 u
u 6.4 u
u 10.4 u
u 6.2 u
u 6.9 u
u 6.9 u
u 10.3 u
u 5.5 u
u 7.2 u
u 8.8 u
u 15,3 u
u 15 u
u 15 u
u 15.3 u
u 20 u
u 20 u
u 20 u
u 16 u
u 16 u
--1!!!!11 II!!!!!!! I!!!!!
NS30 NS31 NS32
20 u 39.3 B 20 u
20 u 47.5 20 u
i 20 u 20 u 20 u
6.4 u 6.4 u 6.4 u
10.4 u 10.4 u 10.4 u
6.2 u 9.6 B 6.2 u
6.9 u 6.9 u 6.9 u
6.9 u 6.9 u 6.9 u
10.3 u 10.3 u 10.3 u
5.5 u 5.5 u 5_5· u
7.2 u 7.2 u 7.2 u
8.8 u 8.8 u 8.8 u
15.3 u 15.3 u 15.3 u
15 u 15 u 15 u
15 u 15 u 15 u
15.3 u 15.3 u 15.3 u
20 u 20 u 20 u
20 u 20 u 20 u
20 u 20 u 20 u
16 u 16 u 16 u
16 u 51.6 16 u
-----

-
--Table 3H
Analytical Results -Metals
OU1 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemicm Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
SELENIUM
-
Quarter EX01 EX02 EXUl EX04 NS29
1093 2 u NS 4 u 4
2093 2 u 2 u 2 u 2
3093 2 u 2 u 2 u 2
◄093 2.3 u 4.6 u 4.6 u 2.3
1094 1.7 u 3.4 u 3.4 u 1.7
2094 2.6 u 1.6 B 2.6 u 2.6
3094 3.1 u 3.1 u 3.1 u 3.1
4094 3.1 u 3., u 3.1 u 3.1
1095 0.9 u 0.9 u 0.9 u 0.9
2095 2.7 B 3 B 2.7 u 2.7
3095 17 u 1.8 B 1.7 u 1.7
4095 1 u 1 u 1 u 1
1096 1.6 u 3.2 u 1.6 u 1.6
2096 0.8 u 1.6 u 0.8 u 0.6
3096 0.8 u 1.6 u 1.6 u 0.8
4096 0.8 u 0.8 u 0.8 u 0.8
1097 6.9 12.4 5 5
2097 5 u 9.8 5 u 5
3097 5 u 5 u 6.3 5
4097 5 u 10.5 5 u 5
,ass 5 u 5.5 5 u 5
Units in ug/\
U -Not Detected
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less lhan the Reporting Limit
ROD Performance Standard: 10 ug/L
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Perfonnance Stand :ltd
NS -Not Sampled
F:\PROJECTSINSCCIMONITORIHISTORIC.WB2
u 2 u
u 2 u
u 2 u
u 2.3 u
u 1.7 u
u 2.6 u
u 3.1 u
u 3.1 u
u 0.9 u
u 2.7 u
u 3 B
u 1 u
u 3.2 u
u 0.8 u
u 1.6 u
u 1.6 u
u 5 u
u 7.2
u 5 u
u 5 u
u 12.8
-!!!!!!!I 1!!!111! l!!!!lll!ll
NS30 NS31 NS32
2 u 2 u 2 u
2 u 2 u 2 u
2 u 2 u 2 u
2.3 u 2.3 u 2.3 u
1.7 u 1.7 u 1.7 u
2.6 u 2.6 u 2.6 u
3.1 u 3.1 u 3.1 u
3.1 u 3.1 u 3.1 u
0.9 u 0.9 u 0.9 u
2.7 u 2.7 u 3.2 B
2 B 2.7 B 2 B
1 u 1 u 1 u
1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u
0.8 u 0.8 u 0.8 u
1.8 u 0.8 u 0.8 u
0.8 u 0.8 u 0.8 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u
-----------Table 31
OU 1 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
ZINC
-
Quarter EX01 EX02 EX1)3 EX04 NS29
1093 35.3 NS 11.2 B 13
2093 32.7 15.4 B 16.9 B 17.2
3093 15.5 B 29.5 1.6 B 1
4093 9.7 B 56.5 2.5 B 1.8
1094 15.5 B 5.4 B 9 B 55.2
2094 15.3 B 3.4 B 0.9 u 37.7
3094 9.5 B 76.5 3.8 u 12.4
4094 11.3 B 11.1 B 8.8 B 13
1095 15. 7 B 15.4 B 48 7.6
2095 9.4 B 5.8 u 16 B 5.8
3095 43.6 2.6 u 2.6 u 4
4095 5.2 u 5.2 u 5.2 u 5.2
1096 7.6 B 14.3 B 9 B 15.6
2096 12.1 B 7.1 B 16.2 8.8
3096 57.6 31.9 14.7 B 2
4096 33.9 28.2 34 109
1097 6.9 B 8.6 B 12. 1 B 14.5
2097 5 u 10.9 B 5 u 5
3097 13.8 B 28.4 8.6 B 18.1
4097 15.1 B 15 u 15 u 15
1098 15 u 15 u 15 u 15
Units in ug/1
U -Not Detected
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting limit
ROD Performance Standard: 7,350 ug/L
NS · Not Sampled
F:\PROJECTSINSCCIMOMITORIHISTORIC.WB2
B 10.3 B
B 17 B
B 11.1 B
u 2.6 B
5.2 B
2 B
B 11.8 B
B 6.5 B
B 4.5 B
u 5.8 u
B 2.6 u
u 5.2 u
B 2.4 u
B 6,6 B
u 3.1 B
19 B
B 10.3 B
u 5 u
B 21.8
u 15 u
u 15 u
---l!!!!!!I !!!!!!!9
NS30 NS31 NS32
8,2 B 27.9 6.4 B
12.1 B 1640 57
5 u 26.6 25.2
2.2 B 2.6 B 1.8 u
1.7 u 1.7 u 3.3 B
0.9 u 10.7 B 3.4 B
3.8 u 4 B 7.8 B
15.7 B 5 B 10.2 B
3.6 B 14.4 B 11.3 B
5.8 u 5.8 u 6 B
2.6 u 2.6 u 2.6 u
5.2 u 5.2 u 5.2 u
2.4 B 3.2 B 9.4 B
6.4 B 5.5 B 6.9 B
2 u 2.1 B 4.4 B
23.5 15.3 B 19.9 B
1,1 B 15.5 B 23.7
5 u 5 u 5 u
13.2 B 15.9 B 31.8
15 u 15 u 15 u
15 u 15.2 B 15 u
-I -L
Well EX-01
Acetone
Benzene
Bromodichloromethane
Chloroform
_1,2-Dichloroethane
1, 1-Dichloroethene
1,2-Dichloropropane
Ethylbenzene
Methylene chloride
Toluene
1, 1,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Vinyl chloride
Xylene
Table 4
Summary of voe; Grouping -
OU 1 Extraction and Monltortng Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
. Group Number
EX-02 EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
3 3 3
2 2 1
2 2 1
2 2 1
3 3 3
2 2 1
3 3 3 3
1 1
3 3 3
1 1 1
2 2 1
2 2
2 2
-
NS-30
1
1
--
NS-31
3
1
1
1
3
3
3
NS-32
1
1
l!!!!!!!I
Group 1: voes recommended to be eliminated from further monitoring . .
Group 2: voes that cannot currently be elirninated from further monitoring: detection limits greater than ROD Performance Standard and dilution factors
Group 3: voes retained for further monitoring
F:IPROJECTSINSCCIGROUP.WB2
~ !!!!:!J
-----
Qu,rter EX05 EXO< EX07
1093 NS NS NS NS
2093 NS NS NS NS
3093 NS NS NS NS
4093 NS NS NS NS
109< NS NS NS NS
209< NS NS NS NS
309< NS NS NS NS
,a.. NS NS NS NS
1095 NS NS NS NS
2095 NS NS NS NS
3095 NS NS NS NS
4095 NS NS NS NS
1096 NS NS NS NS
2096 2-4000 D 420 7100 DJ 230000
3096 3200 J 36 920 J 11000
◄096 21000 300 D 550 DJ 72000
1097 27000 B 170 B 000 8 120000
2097 33000 8 470 OB ,ooo 8 1,0000
3097 34000 500 D 2000 B 07000
4097 36000 540 D 3600 220000
1098 29000 8 120 B 3300 8 63000
UntlStnuo,1
U • Not D816C1Bd
J . E111ma1ad concen11auon less tnan the cletecilon limit
B • Constituent also detected 1n auoCiatad melhod blank (concentrallon in meUlOd blank~ n)
E -Exceeds cal1brallon ,anga
O . Concentra11on lrom diluted run sample
ROD Performance Standard: 3,500 ug/L
Bold lom indicates detuctad concentrallon greater than ROD Performance Standard
U.allc font 1ndlc.ates datecllon llmat greater than ROD Perfonnance Standard
sriaoing Ullllcales ·e· quahfled wncentrauon lor which a d~uted run concentration is unavaileble
NR -Not Reported
NS -Not Sampled
EXoa
F. \PROJECT S\NSCC\MONI T OR\HIS T OR1C. IIVl32
D
DB
08
8
D
08
---Table 5A
w..:(.ic.: Rawti -voe,
OU2 ExtrKtlon and Mrritorlng wells
National Slal'dl and Chwnlcil ~1
Salisbury, North Cat0llna
ACETONE
-
EXot mo
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
23000 D 0000 D
0100 1200
'7000 7IOOO
53000 OB ..... B
◄0000 8 12000 B
23000 8 ..... 8
1to00 1.i"2-iMM.;~i\!1.JJ~f-l!fll
24000 DB ,2000 OB
----l!!!!!!I I!!!!!!
NSot NS10 NS11 NStl
NS NS NS NS
10 u 10 u 10 u NR
3000 D 1()() 15 10 u
720 330 u 130 67 u
130 500 u 4100 so u ·-B 2100 B .. B " u ,,.... 670 u ,. 530 ,_
270 .. 18 B
5'00 D 620 u 21 25 u
17000 D BOO 10 u 10 u ,,. D 170 u 10 u 120
1800 670 u 17 27
7 J 500 u 10 u 20 u
110 100 u 10 u ' J
22 J B J 7 J 8 J
200 100 u 10 u 10 u
110 8 " BJ 6 BJ 15 B .. JB 78 JB 22 B 10 u
B30 8 300 08 32 OBJ .. 8
180 100 u " 7 J
" JS 10 u 10 u • JS
-----
Quuter EX05 EX06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
309' NS NS
◄093 NS NS
10 .. NS NS
209' NS NS
309' NS NS
,o .. NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 .. J " 3096 5000 u 10
<096 2000 u 10
1097 2000 u 10
2097 2000 u 10
3097 2000 u 10
4097 2000 u 10
1098 5000 u 10
UMJui~
U -NOi [)elected
J _ Estimated concenuation less than the detection l1m1t
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
-
EX07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
lO
3300
250
250
250
250
250
1000
Bold 1on1 ltldieates detecied concentration g,eatar than ROD Performance Standard
Italic lont indicates deteCllon 11m1t greater than ROD Performance Standard
NR • Nol Reported
NS -Not Sampled
F.\PROJECTS\NSCC\MON1TOR\HISTOR1C,WB2
--
....
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
J " J
u 5000 u
u 5000 u
u 5000 u
u 5000 u
u 5000 u
u 5000 u
u 2500 u
-~---002 Extradlon and Monitoring wena
Nati,:,nal Slttt:h ~ CMm!C!! Ct'!!!Per.y
Salllbu'y,N;Ottt1Cttollna
BENZENE
EXOI EX10
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS .. J "' 3300 u 1700
2500 u 5000
2500 u. 5000
2500 u 5000
2500 u 5000
2500 u 5000
1000 u 500
-----l!!!!!!I l!!!!!I
NSOI NS10 NS11 HSII
NS NS NS NS
• u ' u ' u NR
10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
"" u 330 u 25 u ., u
10 u 500 u 500 u 50 u
l!OO u 310 u ' u 12 u
8300 u 330 u ' u 25 u
10000 u 17 u ' u ' u
1 J 310 u ' u 12 u
500 u " u ' u ' u
' u 83 u ' u ' u
57 u 330 u ' u • u
10 u 250 u ' u 10 u
J 50 u 50 u ' u • u
u 50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
u 100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
u 100 u 100 u !O u 10 u
u 100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
u 100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
u 100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
u 100 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
- - - -- -
Qu1.rter EXOS EX06
1Qlil3 NS NS NS
2093 NS NS NS
3093 NS NS NS
4093 NS NS NS
10'4 NS NS NS
209< NS NS NS
309< NS NS NS ,o,. NS NS NS
1095 NS NS NS
2095 NS NS NS
3095 NS NS NS
•095 NS NS NS
1096 NS NS NS
2096 120 u 25 u 120
3096 sooo u 10 u 3300
<096 2000 u 10 u ,so
1097 2000 u 10 u ,so
2097 2000 u 10 u ,so
3097 2000 u IO u ,so
◄097 2000 u 10 u ,so
1098 sooo u IO u 1000
UnrlS inug,1
U · Not Oet.a&d
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
tlallC Ion! indicates deLection hmit g1eater than ROD Per1ormanai Standatd
NR . Nol Repo(lad
NS· NOC Sampl&a
F.IPROJECTS\NSCC\MQNITORIHISTORIC WB2
--
EX07 EXOI
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
u 120
u sooo
u sooo
u sooo
u sooo
u sooo
u sooo
u 2500
-...Jll"•OC-~esults
002 Extrecuon and Morvloring 'Neils
Nabonal Starch and Cl'lamlGal Company
Salltbury, Nonh C110Una
BROMODICHLOROMETHANE
-
EX09 mo
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
u 120 u 120 u
u 3300 u 1700 u
u 2500 u sooo u
u 2500 u sooo u
u 2500 u sooo u
u 2500 u sooo u
.u 2500 u sooo u
u 1000 u 500 u
----1!!!11!!!!
NSO, NS10 NS11 NS11
NS NS NS NS
' u ' u ' u NR
10 u IO u 10 u 10 u
250 u 330 u 25 u " u
10 u 500 u 500 u so u
3100 u 310 u ' u 12 u
8300 u 330 u ' u ,, u
10000 u 17 u ' u ' u • u 310 u ' u 12 u
500 u " u ' u ' u
' u 83 u ' u ' u
" u 330 u • u • u
10 u ,so u ' u 10 u
so u so u ' u ' u
so u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u to u
-- - --
Quarter EXOS EX06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
109' NS NS
209' NS NS
309' NS NS
,o .. NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
309' NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 .. J 25
3096 sooo u 10
<096 2000 u 10
1097 2000 u 10
2097 2000 u 10
3097 2000 u 10
4097 2000 u 10
1098 5000 u 10
.
Units in ug/1
U -Not Detectea
J . Esbmated conc.entratloo len 1t1an the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
u
u u
u
u
u
u
u
-
EJ<07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
120
3300
250
250 ,so
250
250
1000
Bold font iflClcales detected concentration greater ltlan ROD Pefformence Standard
Italic tont andlcat11 detection hmit greater ll'lan ROD Performance Standard
NR • Not Reported
NS • Nol Sampled
f. \PROJECTSWSCC\MONITOR\HISTORIC. W82
--
EX0II
NS
NS
NS
NS
. NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
u 120
u 5000
u 5000
u 5000
u 5000
u 5000
u 5000
u 2500
-...-~~-OU2 ExltllCtioli and lr,h..rilOMg 'Neils
Nallonal Stan::h and ChemlCal Company
SaUMJtrt, NontlC&obna
CHLOROFORM
-
m, EX10
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
u 120 u 120 u
u 3300 u 1700 u
u 2.00 u 5000 u
u 2,00 u 5000 u
u , ... u 5000 u
u 2,00 u 5000 u
u 2500 u 5000 u
u 1000 u ... u
- ------
.... NS10 NS1t NS11
NS NS NS NS
' u 5 u ' u NR
10 u 1 J 10 u 10 u
250 u 330 u 25 u ., u
10 u ... u ... u 50 u
,)100 u 310 u 5 u 12 u
J300 u 330 u 5 u 25 u
10000 u 17 u ' u 5 u
' u 310 u 5 u 12 u ... u " u 5 u 5 u
5 u 83 u 5 u ' u
57 u 330 u 5 u • u
10 u 250 u ' u 10 u
50 u 50 u ' u 5 u
50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u IO u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 2 J 10 u
100 u IO u 10 u 10 u
---•
Quuter EXOS EX06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
10"" NS NS
209' NS NS
3094 NS NS
'"" NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 350000 D "' 3096 5000 u ,0
<096 430000 D 240
1097 510000 D 5l
2097 470000 D 530
3097 340000 D ...
4097 310000 D 1'0
1098 '40000 D ..
Unit.sinuo,1
U . Not Oetocu,a
J . Estrmated c.oncen11a1ron less than the dutectlon hnul
E -E•coe<b cal1brallon range
D . Concenlfallon lfom diluted run sample
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/l
-'
EJt07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
13000
u 3300
D 50000
'4000
D 35000
D 36000
27000
11000
Bold lont iooic.ates detected concantra1ron greater than ROD Perfomianca Standard
llalic ford indicates detsct1on bmit gteater ll'lan ROD Performance Standard
-
D
u
D
D
D
D
D
Sl1adlng indicates ·e· quahlietJ concentration fOl which a dllu!el1 run contentl'atiOn is tnivailable
NR • Not Reported
NS . Not Samplel1
F.\PROJECTS\NSCC\MONITOR\HISTORIC.'/"82
-
exoa
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
'30000 D
5000 u ,,..., D , ..... D , ..... D
310000 D
270000 D
220000 D
11!111, •. ,-.-,-·---Table SE
Ana1yica1 Ruulll · VOC1
002 El:trection and Monll0c1nQ \Neils
NatlOnal Sta-ch and Chemic.al Company
S'11abury, NoM Carollnt
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
., .. EX10
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
71000 D 21000
3300 u 1700
1■-D 35000
100000 D 31000
uoooo D ,0000 ,._ D .....
1l0000 D .....
110000 D .....
NS
1-
10000
.1700
170
)100
0300
10000 ,.
500
11
1700
I
D ...
u 2100
7100
10000 .... .... ....
D ,_
Nsot NS10
NS NS
D 10000 D s
D 1000 D 100
2100 25
HOO 500
u 1700 I
u 7100 ' u 420 5
'100 ' u HOO D ' 7100 D I
1100 ' J 1100 I
~~,·41_~:.;:,:·,~-·:X.E:i\:'-5
D 2200 D 11
D .. oo D ,.
D 2000 D ...
D "' 3
D 1100 170
D 1100 , ..
D '" D 24
---
NS11 NS11
NS
u NR ... D
u ...
u ... ...
u , ..
u r~-~.,,:wa,s .. ;·g·-:~s
u ,,.
u ,,. D ... D
no
HO
"_; 2.~fi;!:\iil._E . ·~-u C f<-'i.'t
17
1'0
D , ..
J 120
D 100 D
D 1IO
100
- - -- -- -
Quarter EXOS EX06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 120 u 25
3096 5000 u 10
4096 2000 u 10
1097 2000 u 10
2097 2000 u 10
3097 2000 u 10
◄097 2000 u 10
10,a 5000 u 10
U111ll II\ ug.,,
U • Not Detected
J • Esbmatad c.ooc.enuauon leu ttlan the detection lmut
ROD Performance Standard: 7 ug/L
EX07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
u 120
u JJOO
u 250
u 250
u 250
u 250
u 250
u 1000
Bold lont 1ndlcates aatectad concentrabon greater than ROD Parlonnance Slandard
Italic font 11'\dlcates detecuon luTlll greater than ROD Pertormance Standard
NR -Not Rapon&d
NS -Not Sampled
F:\PROJECTS\NSCC\MONITOR\t-us·roRIC.W82
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
-
""'' NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
120
5000
5000
5000
5000
5000
5000
2500
- - -
Tabla 5F .._
Ana1yt1C111 Rasut.s. voe,
OU2 Extredlon and Monitoring Wells
Naliooal Starch ll'ld Chlllfflk:al Company
Sal11bury, NoMl.:arolln.1
1, 1-DICHLDRDETHENE
-
EXot mo
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
u 120 ·u 120 u
u JJOO u 1700 u
u 2500 u 5000 u
u 2500 u 5000 u
u 2500 u 5000 u
u 2500 u 5000 u
u 2500 u 5000 u
u 1000 u 500 u
- - ----
NSOI NS10 NS11 NS11
NS NS NS NS
to 5 u 5 u NR
11 2 J 10 u 10 u
250 u JJO u 25 u ., u
10 u 500 u 500 u 50 u
,UDO u .. , u 7 u " u
12000 u 470 u 7 u 35 u
1<000 u 2J u 7 u 7 u
• J .., u 7 u " u
700 u IJO u 7 u 7 u
' 120 u 7 u 7 u
,0 u 470 u 7 u 12 u
' J 250 u ' u 10 u
50 u 50 u 5 u 5 u
50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
" J 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
" J 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
----
QoIt1er EX05 EX06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
•094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
,0'5 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 350 25
3096 5000 u 10 ,o,. 250 J ,0
1097 2000 u ,0
2097 2000 u ,0
3097 2000 u ,0
4097 2000 u ,0
,o .. 5000 u 10
Un1ts inug/1
u -Nol Detected
J. Estimated coocontraboo less than Iha deleCbon hm1t
ROD Performance Standard: 6 ug/L
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
-
""" NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
120
3300
250
250
250
250
250
1000
Bold loot indlcatH delected cooe,entrallon greater lhan ROD Per1ormance Standard
ltahc 1on1 lf'ldlcates oetecbon Limit greater than ROD Per1ormance Standard
NR -Not Reported
NS -Not Samplea
F:\PROJECTSWSCC\MON1TOR\H1S TOR1C.v-.'82
--
Exoa
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
u 530
u 5000 u
u 5000 u
u 5000 u
u 5000 u
u 5000 u
u 1000 J
u 1200 J
-.,,.-,:_
OU2 E.-dtadion and Monitoring Weill
Nallonal SWtfl and CtM.mical Company
Salisbury, No.1tl Camclna
1 2-0ICHLOROPROPANE
-
EXOI EX10
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
"" D moo D
12000 11000 D
11000 moo
12000 HOOO
'100 51000
11000 10000
12000 76000
12000 41000 D
--
NSOt
NS
' u
10 u
250 u
10 u
3800 u
10000 u
12000 u
' u
600 u • u .. u
10 u
50 u
50 u
100 u
100 u
100 u
100 u
too u
too u
-I!!!!!!! I!!!!! ==
NS10 NS11 NS11
NS NS NS
2 J ' u NR
1 J 10 u 2 J
330 u 25 u ., u
500 u 500 u 50 u
JBO u • u 15 u
«JO u • u JO u
20 u ' u • u
380 u • u 15 u
110 u • u • u
100 u • u • u
,oo u • u 10 u
250 u ' u 10 u
50 u ' u ' u
10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u ,0 u 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u
10 u 10 u 10 u
- -- - -
Qu111er EXOS EX06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 190 2S
3098 5000 u ,0
,o .. 120 J ,0
1097 2000 u ,0
2097 2000 u ,0
3097 2000 u ,0
4097 2000 u 10
1098 5000 u 10
UI\IIS m ug,1
U -Not Detected
J -Estimated concentrallon leu than lhe detection llm1t
ROD Performance Standard: 3,500 ug/L
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
-
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
120
3300
250
250
250
250
250
1000
Halle Ion! llldlcates daleCbon ~mil greater than ROD Pef1ormance Standard
NR . Not Reporled
NS . Not SamplelJ
F \PROJECTS\NSCC\MONITOR\HISTOR1C.WB2
--
EX07 EXOI
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
u 140
u 5000
u 5000
u 5000
u 5000
u 5000
u 5000
u 2500
- -
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
OU2 ExtradlOn and MOMOrtng Weal
National Starch and Chsmk:al Company
Sall&bufy, NOl'th Carolina
ETHYLBENZENE
EXot EX10
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
1300 2400
590 J 2400 ... J 2400
410 '·J 2200
2500 u 1800
2500 u 1900
500 J 2500
490 J 1900
J
J
J
J
J
----11!!!!!!1 !!!!!I l!!!!!I
NSot NS10 NS11 NS11
NS NS NS NS
32 4 J ., NR .. 4 J 140 10 u
250 u 330 u 300 ., u
• J 500 u 500 u 50 u
0200 u 620 u 10 u 2• u
17000 u 670 u 91 .. u
:10000 u 33 u 40 10 u
4 J 620 u 120 25 u
1000 u 180 u 78 10 u • J 170 u .. 10 u
110 u 670 u ., 17 u
10 250 u ., 10 u .. u 50 u 81 • u .. u 10 u 100 10 u
• J 100 u 92 10 u
100 u 100 u 140 10 u
100 u 100 u 20 10 u
100 u 100 u ' J 10 u
100 u 100 u 22 10 u
100 u 10 u .. 10 u
--
Quutet
1Q9J
2Cl93
3093
.t093
109'
209'
309'
,o<><
1095
2095
3095
4095
1096
2096
3096 ,o,.
1097
2097
3097
4097
1098
uniu io 1.,g/1
U · Not Oe\ltd.ed
-;
EX05
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS ..
1900
1)0
2000
2000
2000
"' 5000
-.-
Ell.06
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
J 25 u
BJ • BJ
J 2 J
u ,o u
u ,o u
u ,o u
J ,o u
u ,o u
J -Estimated c:oncentrabon ten than trnt detedlon limit
--
EX07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
no u
1200 BJ
11 J
250 u
250 u
250 u .. J
1000 u
B • Consutuent allO detected 1n assooatod melhod blank (concentretton in method blank unknown)
ROD Pertormance Standard: 5 ug/L
Bold fool indlca1os de1ectod conc.entrauon greater than ROD Perfonnance Standard
ltabc fool indlcales ae1ec1Joo llrn1t greater than ROD Per10011ance St.andaJd
NR • Not Reponed
NS • Nol Samplod
F.\PROJECTSWSCC\MONITOlt\H1S'fORIC IM:32
EXOI
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS .. J
5000 u
300 J
5000 u
5000 u
5000 u
5000 u
2500 u
Table !.I
Anllytlcal RellJts • VCX:1
OU2 Exnc:tion end Mcwvtonng W8111
Nluonal Stan::tl and OMmcal Company
Slllilt:uy, Nor1h Catollnt
METHYLENE CHLORIOE
-
EXOI EX10
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS .. J .. J ... BJ ... BJ
170 J "' J
2500 u 5000 u
2500 u 5000 u
2500 u 5000 u
2500 u 5000 u
1000 u 200 J
---I!!!!!! !!!!!!I ==
NSOI NS10 NS11 Nl11
NS NS NS NS
• u 3 J 1 J NR
• BJ • BJ • BJ ' BJ
NR NR NR NR
NR NR NR NR
3l00 u 170 BJ 5 u 12 u
1<000 B "' B • B ,. BJ
nooo B 17 u 5 u ,, B
• BJ 360 B 2 BJ 12 u
noo B "' B 1 B 5 B
5 u 83 u 5 u 5 u
" u JJO u 5 u 1 BJ
10 u " BJ 2 BJ ' BJ
50 u 10 BJ 5 u 2 J
50 u 2 J 10 u ' J
1 J 1 J ,o u 1 J
100 u ,oo u 10 u 10 u
100 u ,oo u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u ,o u IO u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u IO u 10 u 10 u
... ... -I --
Quuter EXOS EX06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
,o .. NS NS
,o .. NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 16000 D " 3096 19000 67
4096 20000 " 1097 24000 ,2
2097 23000 37
3097 22000 82
4097 21000 " 1098 21000 ,o
UnilSmuo,\
U -Not Det&eted
J -e,11matad concentration ten than lhe detection 11/Tlll
D -Concentraoon from diluted run sample
ROD Performance Standard: 2,000 ug/L
-
EJt07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
3200
2200
1700
1600
1200
1100
1100
820
Bold font and1c.a1es detoctad conc.enlration greater lhan ROD Performance Standard
Italic font 11'\dlca\es detectton hm1t greatet lhan ROD Performance Standard
NR -Not Reponlltd
NS . Nol Sampled
F.\PROJECTSINSCCIMON1T0R\HISTORIC WB2
-
EXOI
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
HOOO D
J 21000
25000
30000
24000
25000
21000
J 25000
--

-
Table SJ
Anal)'tic,,11 RUUIS · VOCI
OU2 Exnction and Monitoring Welti
National Swctl aod ChMrical Company
Sallil::u'y, NoMCarollna
TOLUENE
-
EJ(O, Elt10
· NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
,aooo .D 14000 D
2'000 16000
21000 15000
20000 16000
20000 12000
23000 12000
22000 14000
11000 D ,000
-------
.... NStO NS11 Nll11
NS NS NS NS
""' 0 2 J " NR
1100 0 17 " " 330 330 u 120 ,. J
100 500 u 500 u 50 u
0200 u 620 u 7 J 13 J
17000 u 670 u 13 17 J
20000 u " u 6 J 10
" 620 u " 10 J ,... J 160 u 11 6 J
130 170 u 15 • J
'10 670 u 6 J • J
160 250 u • 11
\10 50 u 11 ,.
" ' J 12 2 J
200 • J 10 6 J
100 u 100 u 28 • J
60 J 100 u • J • J
150 100 u 7 J 10
110 100 u ,. ' J
30 J 10 u ' J ' J
-----
Qu.art•r EX05 exo,
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3Q9J NS NS
4093 NS NS ,o,,. NS NS
2094 NS NS
309' NS NS ,o .. NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 " J " 3096 .... u 10
1097 2000 u 10
2097 2000 u IO
3091 2000 u IO
4097 2000 u 10
\098 .... u 10
Ul'IIIS in ugll
u . Not Detected
J. Eswnated concentration less ttian the t;Jetecllon hm1t
ROD Pertormance Standard: 5 ug/L
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
-
EX07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
120
3300 , ..
250 , .. , ..
1000
Bold !Onl 1nd1c.ates detected coocentration greater than ROD Pertormanc.e Standard
Italic lonl indicates detection 11/T\lt greater than ROD Performance Standard
NR -Not Reported
NS -NOi Sampled
F.\PHOJECl SINSCC\MONllOHIHISi ORIC ""132
--
EX08
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
u 120 J
u .... u
u .... u
u .... u
u .... u
u 5000 u
u , ... u
.... ;Jll,. -~ ... •--OU2 E.idrac:Uon and MMtonng W.UI
Na~onal Starch and Chemical~
SaliWI.I)', NOl'th Carolina
1, 1,2· TRICHLOROETHANE
-
E)(O, EX10
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
120 u 120 u
3300 u 1100 u , ... u .... u , ... iJ .... u , ... u .... u , ... u .... u
1000 u ... u
---!!!!!I
Nffl NS10 NS11 Nl11
NS NS NS NS
3 J ,o ' u NR
• J " 10 u 10 u , .. u 330 u 25 u ., u
" u ... u ... u .. u
3100 u 310 u ' u " u
8300 u 330 u ' u 25 u
10000 u 11 u ' u ' u
' u 310 u ' u " u ... u " u ' u • u
' u 83 u ' u ' u
" u 330 u ' u • u
10 u , .. u ' u 10 u .. u .. u • u ' u .. u • J 10 u 10 u
100 u 20 J 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 2 J 10 u 10 u
- - - - -
Qu.111er EX05 EX06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS ,a .. NS NS
20 .. NS NS
30 .. NS NS ,a .. NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS ,a., 120 u 25
30o; 5000 u 10 ,a., 2000 u 10
1097 2000 u 10
2097 2000 u 10
3097 2000 u 10
4087 2000 u 10
1Ql/6 ,000 u "
Ul"IIIS In U\)11
U · Not Dvtected
J. Estimated concanlrallon less than lt1e de!&Ctlon ~mil
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/l
u
u
u u
u
u
u
u
-
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
120
3300
250
250
250
250
250
1000
Italic font lndlca!es delection II/flit greater Lhan ROD Performance Standard
NR -Not Reponed
NS • Not Sampled
F.\PROJECTSWSCC\MQNITOR\HtSTORIC.IN82
--
EX07 EXOS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
u 120
u 5000
u 5000 u 5000
u 5000
u 5000
u 5000
u 1500
-OU2 EXb"action and Mcrilonng 1Nells
NallOn&I Starch and ChefriCal Company
Sal15bury, Nonh Carolina
TRICHLOROETHENE
-
EXot EX10
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
u 120 u 120 u
u JJOO u 1100 u
u 2500 u 5000 u
u 2500 u 5000 u
u 2500 u 5000 u
u 2500 u 5000 u
u 2500 u 5000 u
u 1000 u 500 u
---I!!!!!!! !!!!!I
NS0I NS10 NS11 NS11
NS NS NS NS
5 u , J 5 u NR
3 J ,o u 10 u 10 u
250 u JJO u " u ., u
10 u 500 u 500 u 50 u
3100 u JIO u 5 u 12 u
8300 u 330 u 5 u 25 u
,·oooo u 11 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 3'0 u 5 u 12 u
500 u 89 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 83 u 5 u ' u ,, u 330 u ' u ' u
10 u 250 u ' u 10 u
50 u 50 u 5 u ' u
50 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u " u 10 u
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
100 u 100 u ,o u 10 u
100 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
-- - - - --
Cuuter EXOS EX06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS ,o.,. NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 '" NS
•095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 990 50
3096 5000 u 10
<096 2000 u •
1097 "' J •
2097 1200 J l
3097 510 J l
4097 !20 J 10
10,a 5000 u 10
Ur.ti in~
U . Not Oe\octed
J • Esllmated concenllabon less than lhe detection limit
O. Conc.enlfaboo from diluted run s2mple
ROD Pertormance Standard: 2 ug/l
EX07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
u 250
u 3300
J 250
J " J 250
J ,so
u 250
u 1000
Bold loot inG1cates detected conaintretion greater than ROD Per1ormance S~aru
Italic toot Indicates detection IIITIII greater than ROD Per101Tnanca Standard
NR . Not Reponed
NS · Not Sampled
F.IPROJECTS\NSCCWIONITOR\HlSTORIC.'1-102
u
u
u
J
u
u
u
u
-
EX08
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
'"' 5000
5000
5000
5000
5000
5000
2500
-.......... -
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
OU2 ExtradJOn and Monitonng wen,
National SW'Ch and Chdrnical Company
Satilbury, North Carolina
VINYL CHLORIDE
EXOI EX10
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
,so u 220
33"0 u 1700
2500 u 5000
2500 ,LJ 5000
2500 u 5000
2500 u 5000
2500 u 5000
1000 u 250
J
u
u
u
u
u
u
J
---I!!!!!!!!! 1!!!11
NSOI NS10 NS11 NS11
NS NS NS NS
10 u I J 10 u NR ... DJ 10 u 10 u " 71 J 330 u 25 u " u
41 500 u 500 u 50 u
1200 u 120 u 2 u • u
""" u 130 u 2 u 10 u .... u 7 u 2 u 2 u .. 120 u 2 u I
200 u " u 2 u •
11 33 u ' u • , .. 13" u ' u I
12 500 u 10 u 20 u
II J 100 u 10 u 10 u
so u 10 u 10 u 10 u
110 100 u 10 u 10 u
20 J 100 u 10 u • J .. J 100 u 10 u ' J .. J 100 u 10 u 2 J
100 u 100 u 10 u 10 u .. J 10 u 10 u 10 u
------
Quaner EXOS EXO& EXOT
1093 NS NS NS
2093 NS NS NS
309J NS NS NS
4093 NS NS NS
109' NS NS NS
20" NS NS NS·
,o .. NS NS NS
,o .. NS NS NS
1095 NS NS NS
2095 NS NS NS
3095 NS NS NS
4095 NS NS NS
1096 NS NS NS
2096 "' 25 u 29
3096 "100 u ,o u JlOO
•096 250 J 06 J ,.
1097 2000 u 10 u 250
2097 2000 u 10 u 250
3097 '" J 10 u 250
4097 340 J 10 u 250
1098 "100 u ,o u \000
Uruts1nuQl'I
u -Nol Detected
J • E1umalad eonc.entrauon less tnan the de\ad.lon limit
D. Concentration horn diluted run sample
ROD Performance Standard: 350 ug/L
Bold lont 1ooca1as oetected concentration greater than ROD Perlormance Standard
1tahc lonl indicates dated.Ion hmit great&f ltlan ROD Per1ormance Standard
NR . Nol Reported
NS . Nol Sampled
F.\PROJECTSINSCC\MONtTOR\HISTORIC.v..132
--
Exoa
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
J "" u .... u
J .... u
u .... u
u .... u
u .... u
u 0000 u
u "' J
-An ... , ..... _ -
. OU2 EJC!Jlldian and MOl"ilOnnO Wells
Nalional Swct, and Chemical Company
Sallltu),Nonhc.roh
XYLENE
EX09 EX10
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
3000 7700
2100 J 7100
1000 J 7300
1300 J 1100
1000 ,. ....
l\00 J 1300
1100 J e,oo
1100 1200
D
--
NSOI
NS •• 120 OJ , .. u
13
1•200 u
17000 u
20000 u • J
·1000 u
" \\0 u
" 12 J • J
21 J
100 u
\00 u
100 u
\00 u
\00 u
-l!!!!!!I I!!!! l!m
NS10 NStt NS11
NS NS NS
10 100 NR
10 220 1 J
330 u ... 87 u
""' u ""' u "' u ,,. u ""' " u
'70 u \\0 "' u
33 u .. \0 u
'20 u 120 " u
\BO u .. \0 u
170 u .. \0 u
'10 u 22 17 u
, .. u 21 \0 u
50 u .. ' u
10 u .. \0 u
100 u \◄O l J
100 u \BO 10 u
100 u 35 10 u
100 u • J 10 u
100 u " \0 u
2 J 1\0 \0 u
-- - --- -- -
IIJl!llsA--
Quarter EX05 EX06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 2500 u 100 u
3096 5000 u 4 J
4096 170 J 16
1097 530 u 10 u
2097 110 u 10 u
3097 500 u 10 u
4097 55 J 10 u
1098 53 u 10 u
Units in ug/1
U -Not Detected
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 5 ug/L
EX07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
200
100
100
100
100
110
18
14
u
u
u
u
u
u
J
J
Analytical Results -SVOCs
OU2 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
B1$(2-CHLOROETHYL)ETHER
EX0B EX09 EX10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
320 J 10000 35000
5000 u NR 47000
2500 u 6600 29000
210 7200 29000
390 3800 D 14000
620 7500 30000
810 7400 D 16000
1100 10000 D 66000
Bold fonl indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performanc3 Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NR -Nol Reported
NS -Nol Sampled
F:\PROJECTS\NSCCIMONITOR\HISTORIC.WB2
D
D
D
D
D
D
- --l!!!!I liiiil
NS09 NS10 NS11 NS15
NS NS NS NS
10 u 11 u 11 u 11 u
56 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
530 u 50 u 10 u 42 u
8 J 220 u 10 u 10 u
20 u 1100 u 11 u 22 u
6 u 110 u 5 u 21 u
11 u 22 u 5 u 10 u
53 u 520 u 5 u 11 u
27 u 250 u 5 u 6 u
28 u 310 u 6 u 5 u
50 u 260 u 5 u 5 u
10 u 500 u 10 u 10 u
50 u 200 u 50 u 50 u
50 u 200 u 10 u 20 u
20 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
10 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
20 u 100 u 10 u 10 u
20 u 10 u 10 u 10 u
2 J 11 u 11 u 10 u
11 u 10 u 10 u 11 u
---,. .. ' ... l --.---·-,--Table 68
Analytical Results -SVOCs
OU2 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
4-NITROPHENOL
Quarter EX05 EX06 EX07 EX08 EX09 EX10
1093 NS NS NS. NS
2093 NS NS NS NS
3093 NS NS NS NS
4093 NS NS NS NS
1094 NS NS NS NS
2094 NS NS NS NS
3094 NS NS NS NS
4094 NS NS NS NS
1095 NS NS NS NS
2095 NS NS NS NS
3095 NS NS NS NS
4095 NS NS NS NS
1096 NS NS NS NS
2096 6200 u 250 u 500 u 6200
3096 12000 u 25 u 250 u 12000
4096 6200 u 25 u
1097 1300 u 25 u
2097 260 u 25 u
3097 1200 u 26 u
4097 260 u 26 u
1098 130 u 26 u
Units in ug/1
U -Not Detected
J -Estimated concentration less than the detection limit
ROD Performance Standard: 350 ug/L
250 u
260 u
250 u
280 u
260 u
260 u
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance StaridaiC
NS -Not Sampled
F:IPROJECTSINSCCIMONITOR\HISTORIC.WB2
6200
25
250
1400
260
260
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
NS NS
u 6200 u 2500
u 12000 u 25000
u 2500 u 7500
u 520 u 260
u 100 u 5300
u 530 u 1000
u 260 u 260
u 260 u 270
-

-
-l!!!!!!I
NS09 NS10 NS11 NS15
NS NS NS NS
50 u 53 u 56 u 54 u
140 u 25 u 26 u 25 u
1300 u 120 u 26 u 110 u
25 u 540 u 26 u 26 u
50 u 2500 u 27 u 54 u
28 u 530 u 27 u 110 u
56 u 110 u 26 u 51 u
260 u 2600 u 26 u 54 u
140 u 1200 u 27 u 28 u
140 u 1600 u 28 u 27 u
250 u 1300 u 25 u 26 u
25 u 1200 u 25 u 25 u
u 120 u 500 u 120 u 120 u
u 120 u 500 u 25 u 50 u
u 3 J 250 u 25 u 25 u
u 25 u 26 u 26 u 26 u
u 50 u 250 u 25 u 25 u
u 50 u 26 u 26 u 26 u
u 26 u . 27 u 26 u 26 u
u 27 u 26 u 26 u 26 u
---

-
------

-
-
Quarter EX05 EX06 EX07
1093 NS NS NS
2093 NS NS NS
3093 NS NS NS
4093 NS NS NS
1094 NS NS NS
2094 NS NS NS
3094 NS NS NS
4094 NS NS NS
1095 NS NS NS
2095 NS NS NS
3095 NS NS NS
4095 NS NS NS
1096 NS NS NS
2096 11 1.1 u 1 .1
3096 2.2 u 1.1 u 1.1
4096 4.4 u 1.1 u 1.1
1097 7 u 7 u 7
2097 10.6 7 u 7
3097 7 u 7 u 7
4097 6 u 6 u 6
1098 6 u 6 u 6
Units in ug/1
u -Not Detected
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
Table 7A
Analytical Results -Metals
OU2 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Cnemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
ARSENIC
EX08 EX09 EX10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
22 u 11 u 11
2.2 u 2.2 u 2.2
2.2 u 4.4 u 2.2
7 u 9.8 B 7
7 u 7 u 7
7 u 7 u 7
9 B 8.5 B 9.5
6 u 6 u 6
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limi_t but less than the Reporting Limit
ROD Performance Standard: 10 ug/L
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD.Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
F:IPROJECTS\NSCCIMONITORIHISTORIC.WB2
u
u
u
u
u
u
B
u
---l!!!!!!!!I l!!!!!I
NS09 NS10 NS11 NS15
NS NS NS NS
2 u 2 u 2 u 2 u
2.2 B 2 u 2 u 2 u
8.2 B 2.4 u 2.4 u 4.8 u
2.9 u 2.9 u 2.9 u 5.8 u
2.6 u 2.6 u 2.6 u 5.2 u
2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1 u
2.1 u 2.9 B 2.1 u 3.7 B
1.5 B 1.7 B 2 B 0.8 u
2.7 u 2.7 u 2.7 u 2.7 u
3.2 B 2.2 B 2.4 B 1.9 u
1.5 u 1.5 u 1.5 u 1.5 u
1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u
1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u 1 .1 u
1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u 1.1 u
1.1 u 1.1 u 1. 1 u 1.1 u
7 u 7 u 7 u 7 u
7 u 7 u 7 u 7 u
7.4 B 7 u 7 u 7 u
6 u 6 u 6 u 6 u
6 u 6 u 6 u 6 u
----------·-__ ,_ ·-' '
Quarter EX05 EX06 EX07
1093 NS NS NS
2093 NS NS NS
3093 NS NS NS
4093 NS NS NS
1094 NS NS NS
2094 NS NS NS
3094 NS NS NS
4094 NS NS NS
1095 NS NS NS
2095 NS NS NS
3095 NS NS NS
4095 NS NS NS
1096 NS NS NS
2096 124 B 313 425
3096 159 B 106 B 305
4096 157 B 107 B 319
1097 158 B 80.9 B 335
2097 138 B 87.6 B 315
3097 179 B 98.2 B 280
4097 217 70.8 B 260
1098 244 81.6 B 290
Units in ug/1
Table 7B
Analytical Results • Metals
OU2 Extraction and Monooring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
BARIUM
EX08 EX09 EX10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
25.6 B 12.9 B 19.3
28.6 B 17.9 B 18.6
29.1 B 17.1 B 21.4
21 B 10.9 B 29.2
22.9 B 11.8 B 18
26 B 15.7 B 19.1
25.5 B 15.5 B 17.8
21.3 B 11 B 15.7
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Urr it but less than the Reporting Limit
ROD Performance Standard: 1,000 ug/L
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS · Not Sampled
F:IPROJECTS\NSCC\MONITORIHISTORIC.WB2
----
NS09 NS10 NS11 NS15
NS NS NS NS
1480 297 115 B 448
3160 155 B 190 B 445
1020 155 B 85.9 B 444
412 276 143 B 416
264 144 B 134 B 418
227 131 B 127 B 461
428 96.3 B 151 B 370
573 124 B 169 B 364
2030 193 B 140 B 428
1200 176 B 237 387
1340 164 B 98.8 B 452
993 156 B 156 B 432
B 752 277 136 B 533
B 504 181 B 144 B 296
B 785 293 301 405
B 1270 305 124 B 398
B 329 205 199 B 342
B 523 236 576 506
B 507 280 178 B 467
B 605 234 178 B 365
----

-
Quarter EX05 EX06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 0.3 u 03 u
3096 0.3 u 0.3 u
4096 0.3 u 0.3 u
1097 2 u 2 u
2097 2 u 2 u
3097 2 u 2 u
4097 1 u 1 u
1098 1 u 1 u
Units in ug/1
U -Not Detected
--
EX07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
0.3 u
0.3 u
0.3 u
2 u
2 u
2 u
1 u
1 u
--llillllll1c--Analytical Resul!s .Meiaj5
OU2 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
BERYLLIUM
EX08 EX09 EX10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
34 26.1 25.1
22.7 27.5 21.3
20.6 25.6 18.8
18.5 22 14.9
15.4 17.1 12.1
14 19.8 14.3
13.4 18.4 13.8
14.1 18.9 14.9
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting Limit
ROD Performance Standard: 17. 5 ug/L
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performa11ce Standard
NS · Not Sampled
F:IPROJECTS\NSCCIMONITORIHISTORIC.WB2
--!!!!!!!!I l!!!!!I m== liiiiiiil
NS09 NS10 NS11 NS15
NS NS NS NS
1 u 1 u 1 u 1 u
3.4 B 1.8 B 1.9 B 1.2 B
0.75 B 0.4 u 0.4 u 0.4 u
0.4 u 0.4 u 0.4 u 0.4 u
0.21 B 0.2 u 0.2 u 0.32 B
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u
0.22 B 0.2 u 0.24 B 0.2 u
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.55 B 0.3 u
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u
0.3 u 0.4 B 0.3 u 0.3 u
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u
0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u 0.3 u
0.4 B 0.3 u 0.6 B 0.3 u
2 u 2 u 2 u 2 u
2 u 2 u 2 u 2 u
2 u 2 u 2 u 2 u
1 u 1 u 1 u 1 u
1 u 1 u 1 u 1 u
-------

-
--
Quarter EX05 EX06 EX07
1093 NS NS NS
2093 NS NS NS
3093 NS NS NS
4093 NS NS NS
1094 NS NS NS
2094 NS NS NS
3094 NS NS NS
4094 NS NS NS
1095 NS NS NS
2095 NS NS NS
3095 NS NS NS
4095 NS NS NS
1096 NS NS NS
2096 17.5 5 u 5
3096 10.6 4.8 u 4.8
4096 6.8 4.8 u 4.8
1097 6.9 0.5 u 0.74
2097 12.8 3 u 4.2
3097 15.4 18 4.7
4097 21 4 u 4
1098 10.1 4 u 4
Units in ug/1
U -Not Detected
u
u
u
B
B
B
u
u
Analytical Results • Metals
OU2 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
CADMIUM
EX08 EX09 EX10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
44 12.7 12.6
18.7 7.7 6.6
15.5 8.4 4.8
13.4 6.1 4.3
3 u 3 u 3
7.4 4.6 3
4.1 B 4 u 4.3
12.7 5.4 6.3
B -Estimated conceniration greater than the Instrument Detection Limi'. but less than the Reporting Limit
ROD Performance Standard: 10 ug/L
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Perfom1a11~ Standard
NS • Not Sampled
F:\PROJECTS\NSCCIMONITOR\HISTORIC.WB2
u
B
u
u
B
--11!!!!1 !!!!!!I ~ == liliiiiil
NS09 NS10 NS11 NS15
NS NS NS NS
5 u 5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u 5 u
2.3 u 2.3 u 2.3 u 2.3 u
2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1 u
1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u 1.3 u
4.9 B 1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u
1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u
2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1 u 2.1 u
1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u 1.4 u
1.8 B 1.2 u 1.2 u 1.2 u
1.9 u 1.9 u 1.9 u 1.9 u
4.8 u 4.8 u 4.8 u 4.8 u
5 u 5 u 5 u 5 u
5 u 5 u 5 u 5 u
4.8 u 4.8 u 4.8 u 4.8 u
1.5 B 0.5 u 0.5 u 0.5 u
3 u 3 u 3 u 3 u
3 u 3 u 3 u 3 u
4 u 18 4 u 4 u
4 u 4 u 4 u 4 u
l!!!!!!!!!!I liiii ---

-
-...,E --
Quarter EXOS EX06 EX07
1093 NS NS NS
2093 NS NS NS
3093 NS NS NS
4093 NS NS NS
1094 NS NS NS
2094 NS NS NS
3094 NS NS NS
4094 NS NS NS
1095 NS NS NS
2095 NS NS NS
3095 NS NS NS
4095 NS NS NS
1096 NS NS NS
2096 18.1 5 u 7.5
3096 25.1 4.9 u 14.8
4096 26.2 4.9 u 16.9
1097 5 u 5 u 5
2097 5 u 5 u 5
3097 5 u 5 u 5.8
1098 4 u 4 u 4
Units in ug/1
U -Not Detected
B
u
u
B
u
Analytical Results• Metals
OU2 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chamlcal Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
CHROMIUM
EXOB EX09 EX10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
80.2 48 44.4
84.7 63.9 56.1
79.8 63.5 46.5
19.8 27.4 16.3
12.6 19.5 10.3
9.6 B 19.2 11.8
4 u 14.4 4
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting Limit
ROD Performance Standard: 50 ug/L
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performai·1ce Standard
NS -Not Sampled
F:IPROJECTS\NSCCIMONITORIHISTORiC.W82
u
---l!!!!!!!I 11!!!11 r.iiiiiil
NS09 NS10 NS11 NS15
NS NS NS NS
50.1 14.2 10 u 11. 7
304 11. 7 35.6 10.6
127 16.3 17.4 3.6 B
20.6 36.9 4.2 B 3.6 B
11.9 6.1 B 2.9 u 2.9 u
24.3 3.1 B 2.4 u 4.3 B
7.1 B 8.8 B 4.1 B 4.3 B
8.8 B 9.1 B 4.3 u 4.3 u
127 4 B 2 u 2 u
42 6.7 B 5.2 B 3.1 u
31.1 2.4 u 2.4 u 2.4 u
4.9 u 4.9 u 7 B 9.4 B
5 u 5 u 5 u 5 u
20.3 5 u 5 u 5 u
97.2 4.9 u 34.2 4.9 u
375 5 u 5 u 5 u
21.7 5 u 8.2 B 5 u
62.7 5 u 57.2 5 u
175 5.1 B 4 u 4 u
l!!!!!l!!!!!I -liiiiiii iiiiiil
Quarter EX05 EX06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 200000 7680
3096 170000 3250
4096 144000 3620
1097 138000 2520
2097 125000 2850
3097 118000 3300
4097 98900 2180
1098 161000 2810
Units in ug/1
ROD Performance Standard: 7,700 ug/L
--
EX07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
73700
64200
60400
68000
43600
41300
40200
43400
---Analytical Results -Metals
OU2 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
MANGANESE
EX08 EX09 EX10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
516000 98800 198000
393000 160000 159000
332000 170000 138000
352000 192000 126000
232000 114000 91900
231000 143000 132000
203000 113000 103000
271000 138000 143000
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance :::>tandard
NS • Not Sampled
F:IPROJECTSINSCC\MONITORIHISTORIC.WB2
--·-11!!111 I!!!!
NS09 NS10 NS11 NS15
NS NS NS NS
51300 14300 63.1 15200
60500 7760 118 16000
28100 3540 55.6 15100
15300 7930 71.5 17800
11000 9650 47 17800
6760 9200 67 18800
14300 2760 83.2 14900
18800 14400 124 14300
61800 8960 62.6 18800
33800 9320 248 13400
34800 8880 37.8 18200
25700 5860 32 14200
20500 10050 48.2 16400
13800 2290 44 8870
18200 4850 841 13800
31800 4260 67.2 14300
10300 2150 889 11800
22400 2730 366 16700
19100 2760 136 16500
8280 1830 132 13000
----· -
Quarter EX05 EX06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 678 19.7 B
3096 601 15.3 u
4096 654 15.3 u
1097 732 20 u
2097 587 20 u
3097 622 20 u
4097 566 16 u
1098 591 16 u
Units in ug/1
U • Nol Detecled
--
EX07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
117
110
91.1
69.7
61.3
35.8 B
22.9 B
16 u
---Analytical Results • Metals
OU2 Extraction and Monttoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company ·
Salisbury, North Carolina
NICKEL
EX08 EX09 EX10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
1990 645 698
1440 798 549
1350 906 505
1270 843 444
1140 653 365
1120 706 451
989 657 410
1020 680 454.
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting limit
ROD Performance Standard: 350 ug/L
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Perfonnance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
F :IPROJECTS\NSCC\MONITOR\HISTORIC. WB2
--l!!!!!!!I miiiliil
NS09 NS10 NS11 NS15
NS NS NS NS
23.9 B 45.2 20 u 20 u
102 25.1 B 28.2 B 20 u
54 33.9 B 35.1 B 10.3 B
10.4 u 57.5 10.4 u 10.4 u
13.8 B 30.2 B 6.4 B 6.2 u
19.2 B 27.5 B 6.9 u 8.9 u
10.5 B 25.6 B 10.3 B 7 B
10.3 u 33.7 B 16.2 B 10.3 u
43.6 20.1 B 5.5 u 5.5 u
9.4 B 20.6 B 12 B 7.2 u
20.1 B 26.9 B 8.8 u 8.8 u
15.3 u 15.3 u 15.3 u 15.3 u
15 u 27.6 B 15 u 15 u
15 u 22.9 B 15 u 15 u
40.9 35.4 B 40.7 15.3 u
223 35.6 B 20 u 20 u
20 u 23.2 B 21.9 B 20 u
34.8 B 21 B 64.3 20 u
63.2 30.5 B 16.5 B 16 u
81.9 23.6 B 16 u 16 u
- - - - - - -- --
Quarter EX05 EX06 EX07
1093 NS NS NS
2093 NS NS NS
3093 NS NS NS
4093 NS NS NS
1094 NS NS NS
2094 NS NS NS
3094 NS NS NS
4094 NS NS NS
1095 NS NS NS
2095 NS NS NS
3095 NS NS NS
4095 NS NS NS
1096 NS NS NS
2096 8 u 0.8 u 1.6
3096 16 u 0.8 u 1.6
4096 5.2 u 1.3 u 1.3
1097 86.1 5 u 31.7
2097 77.3 5 u 24.7
3097 68.1 5 u 24.7
4097 66.1 5 u 19.5
1098 64.6 5 u 20.6
Units in ug/1
U -Not Detected
u
u
u
Anatytical Results -Metals
OU2 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Cneniical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
SELENIUM
EX08 EX09 EX10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
8 u 8 u 8
1.6 u 1.6 u 4
5.2 u 5.2 u 2.6
171 88.3 67.9
59.9 19.7 25.8
58.9 23.5 32.8
118 61.1 63.7
104 61.6 58.2
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting limit
ROD Performance Standard: 10 ug/L
Bold font indicates detected concentration greater than ROD Performance Standard
Italic font indicates detection limit greater than ROD Performance Standard
NS -Not Sampled
F:IPROJECTSINSCCIMONITORIHISTORIC.WB2
u
u
u
- -- -
I!!!!!!!! !!!!!I
NS09 NS10 NS11 NS15
NS NS NS NS
10 u 2 u 2 u 2 u
4 u 2 u 2 u 2 u
6.9 u 2.3 u 2.3 u 4.6 u
1.7 u 1.7 u 1.7 u 3.4 u
2.6 u 2.6 u 2.6 u 5.2 u
3.1 u 3.1 u 3.1 u 3.1 u
3.1 u 3.1 u 3.1 u 3.1 u
0.9 u 0.9 u 0.9 u 0.9 u
2.7 u 2.7 u 2.7 u 2.7 u
2 B 1.7 u 3.6 B 1.7 u
1 u 1 u 1 u 1 u
1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u 1.6 u
0.8 u 0.8 u 0.8 u 0.8 u
0.8 u 0.8 u 0.8 u 0.8 u
0.8 u 0.8 u 0.8 u 0.8 u
21.9 5 u 5.2 6.6
6.8 5 u 5 u 5 u
18.8 6.8 5 u 9.1
12.6 5 u 5 u 11.4
5 u 5 u 5 u 9
- - - --
Quarter EX05 EX06
1093 NS NS
2093 NS NS
3093 NS NS
4093 NS NS
1094 NS NS
2094 NS NS
3094 NS NS
4094 NS NS
1095 NS NS
2095 NS NS
3095 NS NS
4095 NS NS
1096 NS NS
2096 363 10.2 B
3096 234 3.7 B
4096 220 2.4 u
1097 221 25.1
2097 219 25.4
3097 188 24.7
4097 135 15 u
1098 126 15 u
Units in ug/1
U -Not Detected
- -
EX07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
43.2
34.3
20.1
35.3
113
119
15 u
15 u
---Analytical Results -Metals
OU2 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
ZINC
EX08 EX09 EX10
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
NS NS NS
3200 2880 3280
1820 2750 2320
1690 2850 2120
1860 2900 2010
1510 2060 1360
1400 2230 1370
1250 1940 1230
1320 1960 1540
B -Estimated concentration greater than the Instrument Detection Limit but less than the Reporting Limit
ROD Performance Standard: 7,350 ug/L
NS -Not Sampled
F:IPROJECTS\NSCCIMONITORIHISTORIC.WB2
- --11!!!!!1 ~ ==
NS09 NS10 NS11 NS16
NS NS NS NS
49.2 47.4 32.5 14.5 B
156 54 37.4 12.6 B
75.6 43.2 15 B 1.8 u
11 .4 B 85.2 7.2 B 1.7 u
8.7 B 20.1 3.1 B 0.9 u
217 54.1 12.8 B 3.8 u
35.6 33.1 27.8 3.8 u
31 44.9 38.7 3.5 u
141 24.8 13.2 B 5.8 u
46.6 16.6 B 41.3 2.6 u
13.8 B 24.5 5.2 u 5.2 u
10.8 B 28.6 8.2 B 3.6 B
37.8 24 9.6 B 6.4 B
16.3 B 25.4 3.9 B 2.5 B
84.2 41.1 65 30.6
111 50.6 11.9 B 11.7 B
10.9 B 37.2 22.4 5 u
47.9 54 127 15.1 B
107 49 31.2 15 u
153 91.1 29.8 15 u
-----------------1!!11!!!1 =a
Tabled
Summary of voe Grouping
OU2 Extraction and Monitoring Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
Group Number
Well EX-05 EX-06 EX-07 EX-08 EX-09 EX-10 NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
Acetone 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1
Benzene 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 3
Bromodichloromethane 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 3
Chloroform 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 1 3
1,2-Dichloroethane 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
1, 1-0ichloroethene 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 3
1,2-0ichloropropane 2 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 3
Ethylbenzene 1 1 1 1 1 1
Methylene chloride 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 3
Toluene 3 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 1
1, 1,2-Trichloroethane 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 1 3
Trichloroethene 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 3
Vinyl chloride 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 3
Xylene 3 3 3 3
Group 1 · voes recommended to be eliminated from further monitoring . t
1
Group 2; voes that cannot currently be elimineted from further monitoring; ~etection limits greater than ROD Performance Standard and dilution factors grea er
Group 3: voes retained for further monitoring
F:IPROJECTSINSCCIGROUP.WB2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Plume Periphery Wells
COCs EX-01 EX-02 EX-03 EX-04 NS-29
voes
Acetone -. -X·-X X
Benzene
Bromodichloromethane
Chloroform
1.1-Dichloroethene
1,2-Dichloroethane X X X X X
1,2-Dichloropropane X X X X X
Ethylbenzene
Methylene chloride X X X X X
Toluene
1, 1,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
Vinyl chloride
Xylene
SVOCs
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether X X X X X
4-Nitrophenol
Metals
Arsenic
Barium X X
Beryllium
Cadmium X
Chromium
Manganese X X
Nickel
Selenium x· x·
Zinc
• Monitoring to verify recent detection(s) greater than ROD Performance Standard only
Table 9
Analytical Parameters for Future Monitoring Events
Plume Periphery and Trench Area Wells
National Starch and Chemical Company
Salisbury, North Carolina
NS-30 NS-31 NS-32 EX-05 EX-06
X X X
X X X X X
X X X ~lxill
X X X ~~~i';tj
X
X
X X X
X
x· X
x·
X
X
X
Shading indicates VOC and/or SVOC that could not be evaluated in the data evaluation due to elevated detection limits -------
F:\PROJECTS\NSCC\OU12EVALWB2
Page 1 of 1
Trench Area Wells
EX-07 EX-08 EX-09 EX-10 NS-09 NS-10 NS-11 NS-15
X I X
X
X
X X X
X
X
X
X
X X
X X X
X
X
X X X X X X
X X X
X X X X X x·
I
I
I
I
I
I
Appendix A
Shapiro-Wilks W-test
The Shapiro-Wilks W-test is an effective method for testing whether a data set has been drav.n from an
underlying normal or lognormal distribution. For a data set of n .S. 50, x1 ,x2 , ... , Xm are drawn at random from
some population. The null hypothesis to be tested is:
• H0 : The population has a normal distribution.
versus
• H. : The population does not have a normal distribution .
The W-test is conducted as follows:
I. Compute the denominator d of the W test statistic, using then data in Equation No. t.
n n n
I 2. Order the n data from smallest to largest to obtain the sample order statistics x11/ ~s. x1,1 S ... .S. x1•1.
I
I
I
g
I
m
n
I
D
I
I
3. Compute k, where:
k = n/2 if n is even
k = (n-1)/2 if n is odd
4. For the observed n; obtain the coefficients a,, a,, ... a, from Table A6 in Gilbert ( 1987).
5. Then compute the Wtest statistic using Equation No. 2.
k
W = (lid) •/Ia, (x1~,.,1 -x/1)} 2
i=J
6. Reject H0 at the alpha (a) significance level if Wis less than the critical W quantile given in Table A7 of
Gilbert ( I 987).
To test the null hypothesis
• H,, : The population has a lognormal distribution .
versus
• H0 : The population does not have a lognormal distribution .
the proceeding procedure is used on the logarithms of the data. That is, dis computed usingy,, y2 , ... , y.,
where y, = In x,, and the sample order statistics of the logarithms y1,1.s_y1,1 .S. ... .S.y1•1 are used in place of the
x1,1 in Equation 2.
Obtained from Gilbert, R.O. 1987. Statistical Methods for Environmental Pollution Monitoring. New York:
Yan Nostrand Reinhold.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Appendix B
Calculation of Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) Concentrations
Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) concentrations of the arithmetic mean were calculated according to
USEPA's Supplemental Guidance to RAGS: Calculating the Concentration Term (USEPA 1992). UCL
concentrations are calculated for normally and lognormally distributed data sets using the following
equations:
Normal Distributions
where:
UCL
X
s
t
sqrt
n
UCL= x + t{s/ sqrt (n)}
= Upper Confidence Limit concentration of the arithmetic mean
= mean of untransformed data
= standard deviation of untransformed data
= Student !-statistic from Gilbert (1987)
= square root
= number of samples
I Lognormal Distributions
n
B
n
D
R
I
I
I
where:
UCL
X
s
H
sqrt
n
UCL:;; e [,i:+0.5s:?+sH/{sqn(n-1)1]
= Upper Confidence Limit concentration of the arithmetic mean
= mean of transformed data
= standard deviation oftransfor!1]ed data
= H-statistic from Gilbert (1987)
= square root
:...: i"1u11ibt=r of sampies
References
Gilbert, R.O. 1987. Statistical Methods for Environmental Pollution Monitoring. New York: Van Nostrand
Reinhold.
USEPA. 1992. Supplemental Guidance to RAGS: Calculating the Concentration Term. Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency Response. Directive 9285.7-081.
I
I
I
I
D
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
AppendixC
Interquartile Range (IQR) Test
Data were tested for outliers using the Interquartile Range (!QR) test, which is based on quartiles for a data
set ordered from smallest value to largest value. In the ordered data set, the 25th quartile (Q25) is that value
which divides the data so that 25 percent of the sample values are less than the Q25 value and 75 percent of
the sample values are greater than the Q25 value. The 75th quartile (Q,,) is that value that divides the data
so that 25 percent of the sample values are greater than the Q,, value and 75 percent of the sample values
are less than the Q,, value. These quartiles are shown graphically below:
minimum Q,, median Q,, maximum
25% 25% 25% 25%
The !QR is calculated as the Q75 value minus the Q, value. The Upper Cutoff (UC) for the !QR test is
calculated as the Q75 value plus 1.5 times the IQR, and the Lower Cutoff (LC) for the, !QR test is calculated
as the Q25 value minus 1.5 times the !QR. Any value that is greater than the UC or less than the LC is
considered an outlier.
I
I
I
I
I
I
g
I
g
D
n
n
n
n
D
I
I
n
Appendix D
Mann-Kendall Test for Trend
The Mann-Kendall test for trend is a nonparan,etric test which can account for missing values and does not
require that the data fit a particular statistical distribution (Gilbert 1987). In this test, the data are listed in
the order in which they were collected. The sign of all n(n-1)/2 possible differences is calculated for xi -x,
where}> k. These differences are x,-x,, x1-x1 , ..• , x.-x,, x;-x,, x,-x2, ... , x.-x •. 2 , x.-x •. 1. If xj is greater than
x., then the sign will be positive; if xi is less than x., then the sign will be negative. The Mann-Kendall
statistic (S) is calculated as the number of positive differences minus the number of negative differences.
If Sis positive, there is an increasing trend, and if Sis negative, there is a decreasing trend.
The significance of the trend was tested using the following hypotheses:
•
there is no significant trend; and
there is a significant upward trend; or
there is a significant downward trend.
The probability value (p) for each test was obtained for n _:,; 50 from Table A 18 in Gilbert ( 1987). The p
value indicates the probability of obtaining the absolute value of the calculated S value based on the number
of samples (n). The p value indicates significance as follows:
For an upward trend (H,,)_
If the p value is less than the designated value for alpha (a; in this case, 0.05), and Sis positive, then one
rejects H,. and accepts H.,,. If the p value is greater than the designated value for a, and Sis positive, then
one fails to reject H0, and the upward trend indicated by the positive S value cannot be considered statistically
significant.
For a downward trend (H,,)
If the p value is less than the designated value for a (0.05), and Sis negative, then one rejects H
0
and accepts
H,,. If the p value is greater than the designated value for a, and Sis negative, then one fails to reject H,,,
and the downward trend indicated by the negative S value cannot be considered statistically significant.
Obtained from Gilbert, R.O. 1987. Statistical Methods/or Environmental Pollution Monitoring. New York:
Van Nustfand R.einho!J.