WI0700012_Report_20011206

Radian Engineering Inc.
December 6, 2001
Mark Pritzl
Hydrogeological Technician II
Underground Injection Control Program
North Carolina DENR
2728 Capital Blvd.
Raleigh, NC 27604
RE: CleanOX® Pilot Test Report
Washington, North Carolina
Dear Mark:
(Shipping) 1600 Perimeter Park Drive
Morrisville, NC 27560
(Mailing) P.O. Box 13000
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
[phone]
FAX # [phone]
On behalf of Hamilton BeachOProctor-Silex (HBPS), Radian Engineering, Inc. (Radian)
is submitting the enclosed copy of the referenced report as required by UIC Permit No.
WI0700030. This report, which was prepared by the chemical oxidation technology
provider, Mantech, describes the pilot test and summarizes the results of chemical
oxidation at the Hamilton BeachOProctor-Silex (HBPS) facility in Washington, NC.
According to permit requirements, Radian has also included contaminant plume and
potentiometric surface maps. These maps were added to the enclosed report provided by
our CleanOX® technology provider, Mantech. These maps were prepared in August 2001
as part of groundwater sampling conducted at the site following the completion of
injection.
The pilot test demonstrated that the CleanOX° process can be safely implemented at the
site with no disruptions to operations or local activities. Groundwater parameter
monitoring and vapor monitoring at the site indicated no evidence of potentially unsafe
conditions during the pilot test.
Analytical results from groundwater samples indicated reductions of the contaminant
levels in much of the treatment areas. However, test results also indicated that
contaminant levels increased in some locations due to the redistribution of contaminants
as the application process progressed. The test results also indicate that the radius of
influence and the rate of reagent application are less than anticipated for both the
unsaturated and saturated zones.
Radian is currently reviewing the report as part of an evaluation into the feasibility of
implementing full-scale application.

Radian Engineering DLC.
Mark Pritzl
December 6, 2001
Page 2
Please call me (919-461-1290) or Jim Narkunas with any additional questions or
concerns (919-461-1270).
Sincerely,
RADIAN ENGINEERING
Brett Berra
Enclosure
cc: Willie Hardison, NCDENR-WaRO
Kenneth Rudo, NCDHHS
Mario K. Kuhar, HBOPS
Brad De Vore, Womble Carlyle Sandridge and Rice

Radian Engineering Inc.
February 7, 2001
Mark Pritzl
Hydrogeological Technician II
Underground Injection Control Program
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
2728 Capital Blvd.
Raleigh, NC 27604
RE: CleanOX® Bench -Scale Test Report
Hamilton BeachGProctor-Silex, Inc.
Washington, North Carolina
Groundwater Incident No. 14338
Dear Mark:
(Shipping) 1600 Perimeter Park Drive
Morrisville, NC 27560
(Mailing) P.O. Box 13000
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
[phone]
FAX # [phone]
Radian Engineering, on behalf of Hamilton Beach0Proctor-Silex, Inc., is pleased to submit the
attached CleanOX® Process Bench Test Letter Report. The report describes the bench testing
objectives and procedures, provides a summary of the analytical results, and discusses the bench
testing results as they relate to the use of in -situ chemical oxidation as a groundwater and soil
remediation tool at the site. The results of the bench test were very favorable, and we look
forward to utilizing this technology in an effort to expedite the remediation of this site.
Upon your review and comment we will begin pilot -scale testing of the CleanOX® Process in
accordance with Permit No. WI0700030 issued on 18 September 2000. Please call me at
919.461.1290 if you have any questions or comments regarding this submittal.
Sincerely,
RADIAN ENGINEERING
Brett Berra
cc: Willie Hardison, NCDENR-WARO
Mario Kuhar, Hamilton Beach/Proctor-Silex
Bradford A. De Vore, Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice

MANTECH ENVIRONME/V !ML
CORPORA 11ON
A JYtantech International Suis,thar ,
January 24, 2001
Mr. Brett Berra
Radian Engineering
1600 Perimeter Park Drive
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
RE: CleanOX® Process Bench Test Letter Report —Revision 1
Hamilton Beach — Proctor Silex Site, Washington, North Carolina
ManTech Project No.8234-000
Dear Mr. Berra:
This letter report presents the C1eanOX® Process results for the bench test recently completed by
ManTech Environmental Corporation (ManTech) for Radian Engineering (Radian). Radian provided
groundwater and soil samples from the Proctor Silex Site (site) located in Washington North Carolina
for CleanOX° Process bench testing as a preliminary step to evaluating in situ chemical oxidation for
remediation of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semi-VOCs, and petroleum hydrocarbons in
groundwater and soil at the site. ManTech completed CleanOX® Process bench testing on the
groundwater and soil samples provided and submitted treated and control bench test samples to
Severn Trent Services (STL) in Austin, Texas for laboratory analysis. The following report describes
bench testing objectives and procedures, provides a summary of the analytical results, and discusses
the bench testing results as they relate to use of in -situ chemical oxidation as a groundwater
remediation tool at the site.
BENCH TEST OBJECTIVES
The overall objective of the bench test was to verify that the CleanOX® Process is capable of effecting
substantial reductions in organic constituent concentrations in the groundwater and soil samples
collected from the site. Specific bench testing objectives include:
• Evaluate the Reactivity of the Samples. The application of CleanOX® reagents to
groundwater and soil impacted with organic contaminants will result in an exothermic
reaction. The reactivity of the samples will, to some extent, govern the rate at which the
oxidizing reagent (hydrogen peroxide) can be applied during full-scale CleanOX® remediation
programs. During the bench test, the reaction is visually observed and temperature is
recorded as the oxidizer is added to samples in order to obtain a qualitative measure of
reactivity. This information is considered in the design of pilot and full-scale programs.
• Validate Reagent Requirements. The quantities of conditioning agents and oxidizer needed
for field scale application of the CleanOX® Process at each application well are estimated
prior to bench testing. A proportionate quantity of CleanOX® reagents is added to the
samples during the bench test. The actual reduction in target constituent concentrations is
MOM 14290 Sullyfield Circle, Suite 100, Chantilly, Virginia 20151 Telephone [phone] Facsimile 703.3783396

Mr. Brett Berra
January 24, 2001
Page 2
determined by a comparison of the results of laboratory analysis of treated and untreated
(control) samples. From this comparison reagent formulations can then be adjusted for field
applications.
• Estimate Contaminant Reduction Potential Per Application. Reduction potential is
determined primarily by the magnitude of organic constituent concentration reduction
detected in the treated groundwater samples. Organic constituent concentration reduction
potential is important because it will determine the number of applications that will be needed
to meet the expected concentration reduction and remediation objective for the full-scale
applications.
• Verify Groundwater Quality Parameters. A number of groundwater quality parameters are
critical to the design and performance of the CleanOX® Process. These parameters include:
pH, conductivity, oxidation-reduction potential (ORP), target organic constituents
concentration, total organic carbon (TOC), and level of dissolved solids. Some of these
parameters have been provided to ManTech prior to conducting the bench test and are used
to develop the bench testing protocol. ManTech measures pH, temperature, and ORP in the
samples during bench testing procedures. The remaining parameters are considered if organic
constituent concentration reduction observed during the bench test are not commensurate
with those expected.
CLEAN OX®-PROCESS GROUNJWA'I ER BENCH TEST PRO
Bench test samples are received, prepared for testing, bench tested, and sent to an analytical
laboratory following the procedures outlined below.
Groundwater Sample Receipt and Preparation
Groundwater samples were collected by Radian field personnel on October 18, 2000, and received
at the ManTech testing facility in Chantilly, Virginia, on October 19, 2000. The samples were
collected from monitoring well MW-228 and consisted of twelve (12), one -liter amber bottles of
groundwater.
In preparation for bench testing, the sample was separated into four separate reaction containers to
form Lab Baseline, Lab Reacted 1, Lab Reacted 2, and Lab Reacted 3 samples. The Baseline sample
served as a control sample in the bench test; the Reacted samples received the CleanOX® Process
reagents.

Mr. Brett Berra
January 24, 2001
Page 3
Groundwater Sample Testing Procedure
Described below is the general, stepwise procedure followed in completing CleanOX® Process bench
testing:
1. The groundwater sample received from the site is inverted and shaken once in order to
provide a homogeneous medium prior to sample separation into Baseline and Reacted
samples.
2. The groundwater sample is separated by pouring equal volumes into clean reaction jars,
forming the Baseline and Reacted samples. The Baseline and Reacted volume is dependent
on the required volume for post -treatment laboratory analysis.
3. The reaction jar containing the Baseline sample is the control for the bench test. Because the
Reacted sample will be subjected to treatment in an open reaction vessel, the Baseline sample
is set aside, open to ambient air, for the duration of the bench testing procedure.
4. CleanOX® Process reagents were then added by pipette to the Reacted sample in volumes
estimated based on groundwater quality data (i.e. pH, conductivity, TOC, TDS, estimated
target organic constituents concentration) and known hydrogeological site conditions. The
reagents include: hydrochloric acid, ferrous sulfate, and hydrogen peroxide.
5. In order to assess the progress of the conditioning process and oxidation reaction, and gauge
the level of reactivity, temperature, pH, and ORP data are collected before, during, and after
the addition of CleanOX® reagents to the Reacted sample vessels.
6. After the reaction process is complete (determined visually and by sample temperature), the
Reacted sample is transferred from the reaction vessel to a laboratory container appropriately
designated as the Reacted sample (e.g. Lab Reacted 1). At this time, the Baseline sample is
also transferred to a laboratory container appropriately designated as the bench test control
sample (e.g. Lab Baseline).
7. The containerized Baseline and Reacted groundwater samples are immediately preserved on
ice and prepared for shipping via overnight carrier to the client -designated laboratory for
analysis.
CLEANOX® PROCESS GROUNDWATER BENCH TEST RESULTS
A groundwater sample was collected by Radian on October 18, 2000 and was received at the
ManTech testing facility on October 19, 2000. Bench testing was conducted on October 24, 2000.
ManTech shipped post -bench test samples on October 24, 2000 to STL for analyses of volatile

Mr. Brett Berra
January 24, 2001
Page 4
organic compounds. Samples submitted for analysis included:
• Lab Baseline Sample represents groundwater collected from monitoring well MW-228
at the site, shipped to the ManTech testing facility, and used as a bench test control.
This sample was then shipped to the laboratory for analysis.
• Lab Reacted 1 Sample represents groundwater collected from monitoring well MW-
228, shipped to the ManTech testing facility, treated with one half the typical amount
of CleanOX® reagents, and shipped to the laboratory for analysis. This sample serves
as an example of the treatment potential of the CleanOX® Process for site
groundwater.
• Lab Reacted 2 Sample represents groundwater collected from monitoring well MW-
228, shipped to the ManTech testing facility, treated with the typical amount of
CleanOX® reagents, and shipped to the laboratory for analysis. This sample serves as
an example of the treatment potential of the CleanOX® Process for site groundwater.
• Lab Reacted 3 Sample represents groundwater collected from monitoring well MW-
228, shipped to the ManTech testing facility, treated with one and one half times the
typical amount of CleanOX® reagents, and shipped to the laboratory for analysis. This
sample serves as an example of the treatment potential of the CleanOX® Process for
site groundwater
CleanOX® Testing Facility Groundwater Measurements
The groundwater sample collected from monitoring well MW-228 at the site and received by
ManTech personnel for use in the bench test was clear in appearance. The table below presents
sample parameter measurements made during the bench test.
pH (s.u.)
3.53
Bench Testing Parameters
2.53
2.53
2.49
Temperature
13.5 °C
19.2 °C
20.9
24.1°C
ORP (mV)
197.5
259.4
259.0
265.2
Measurements for pH are taken to determine if the groundwater sample is properly acidified during
the bench test. A properly acidified aqueous medium is required for hydrogen peroxide to react with
ferrous ions and produce hydroxyl radicals. Baseline measurements for pH were below 4.0 s.u., so

Mr. Brett Berra
January 24, 2001
Page 5
the addition of acid was not necessary. A pH of below 3.0 s.u. was recorded in all of the reacted
samples immediately after the addition of CleanOX® reagents.
Temperature measurements are made to confirm visual observations of peak exothermic reactions,
and also to confirm when the reactions are substantially completed. Temperature is an important
parameter during the bench test because it gives an indication of the exothermic extent of the
reactions. Higher than expected reaction temperatures indicate the presence of unexpected levels of
organic constituents in the samples. The Reacted samples showed peak temperatures of 19.2 —
24.1°C; a temperature within the range expected during bench testing. The time needed to reach peak
temperature was observed to be within thirty minutes. This is a useful parameter to anticipate site
response during the pilot test.
ORP measurements are taken to compare Baseline and Reacted ionic conditions during the CleanOX®
Process and provide a qualitative indication of hydroxyl radical formation. The Reacted sample ORP
reading increased in all of the samples to a peak of 259.0 to 265.2 mV. This measurement suggests
that the proper quantities of C1eanOX® reagents were used to effectively change the ORP of each
sample to favorable oxidative conditions.
Groundwater Laboratory Analytical Results
Analytical results from the groundwater samples associated with the bench test are summarized in
Table 1.
CLEANOX® PROCESS SOIL BENCH TEST PROCEDURE
The bench test procedure for soil includes sample receipt and preparation, sample testing using the
CleanOX® reagents, and laboratory analyses of the treated and untreated soil samples.
Soil Sample Receipt and Preparation
A soil sample was collected from the site by Radian field personnel on October 19, 2000 and received
at the ManTech testing facility in Chantilly, Virginia, on October 20, 2000. The sample included
twelve (12) soil jars, collected near monitoring well MW-228.
The soil samples were combined and then separated into four different reaction containers and
saturated with deionized water. This separation process was performed to create the bench test soil
samples: Lab Baseline, Lab Reacted 1, Lab Reacted 2, and Lab Reacted 3. The Baseline sample
served as a control sample in the bench test, and the Reacted sample received CleanOX® Process
reagents.

Mr. Brett Berra
January 24, 2001
Page 6
Soil Sample Testing Procedure
Listed below is the general, stepwise procedure used to complete the bench testing on the Baseline
and Reacted samples:
1. Soil sample containers are emptied into a stainless -steel bowl and mixed together forming a
composite sample ensuring consistency throughout the sample.
2. The composite soil sample is divided into four clean reaction jars in a quantity required for
the post -treatment laboratory analysis. The four samples are Lab Baseline, Lab Reacted 1,
Lab Reacted 2, and Lab Reacted 3.
The reaction jar containing the Baseline sample is a control for the Reacted samples. Because
the Reacted samples are subjected to treatment in an open reaction vessel, the Baseline
sample is set aside, open to ambient air, for the duration of the bench testing procedure.
4. C1eanOX® Process reagents are added by pipette to the Reacted samples in estimated volumes
developed from known hydrogeological conditions and available soil and groundwater quality
data. The reagents include. hydrochloric acid, ferrous sulfate, and hydrogen peroxide.
5. Temperature, pH, and ORP data are collected before, during, and after the addition of the
C e1 ari0X® reagents to the Reacted sample vessel to assess the progress of the reaction and
gauge reactivity.
6. After the reaction process is complete, the aqueous solution is decanted from the Reacted and
Baseline samples.
7. Soil from each Reacted and Baseline sample is transferred from the reaction vessels to
appropriate laboratory containers.
The containerized Baseline and Reacted samples are preserved on ice and shipped via over
night courier to the client -designated laboratory for analyses by the designated laboratory
protocol.
CLEANOX® PROCESS SOIL BENCH TEST RESULTS
Soil samples were collected by Radian on October 19, 2000 and were received at the ManTech
testing facility on October 20, 2000. Bench testing was conducted on October 24, 2000. ManTech
shipped post -bench test samples on October 24, 2000 to STL for analyses of volatile organic
compounds. Samples submitted for analysis included:

Mr. Brett Berra
January 24, 2001
Page 7
• Lab Baseline Sample represents soil collected at the site, shipped to the ManTech
testing facility, and used as a bench test control. This sample was then shipped to the
laboratory for analysis.
• Lab Reacted 1 Sample represents soil collected at the site, shipped to the ManTech
testing facility, treated with one half the typical amount of CleanOX® reagents, and
shipped to the laboratory for analysis.
• Lab Reacted 2 Sample represents soil collected at the site, shipped to the ManTech
testing facility, treated with the typical amount of CleanOX® reagents, and shipped
to the laboratory for analysis.
• Lab Reacted 3 Sample represents soil collected at the site, shipped to the ManTech
testing facility, treated with one and one half times the typical amount of CleanOX®
reagents, and shipped to the laboratory for analysis.
CleanOX® Testing Facility Saturated Soil Measurements
The following measurements were made at ManTech's testing facility during the bench test:
Bench Testing Parameters
l x:
pH (s.u.)
3.28
2.57
2.52
2.74
Temperature
21.6 °C
28.3 °C
38.4 °C
55.1 °C
ORP (mV)
218.4
264.0
276.7
275.1
Measurements for pH are taken to determine if the soil sample is properly acidified during the bench
test using the estimated reagent volume to provide the acidified medium required for hydrogen
peroxide to react with ferrous ions and produce hydroxyl radicals. A pH value of less than 3.00 s.u.
was measured immediately after the addition of CleanOX® reagents. Baseline measurements for pH
were below 4.0 s.u., so the addition of acid was not necessary.
Temperature measurements are made to observe the peak temperature and to confirm visual
observations that the reactions are substantially completed. Peak temperature is an important
parameter, because it gives an indication of the exothermic extent of the reactions. A peak
temperature of 28.3 to 55.1 °C was observed in the reacted samples and is within the expected range
of reaction temperatures for the CleanOX® Process. The time needed to reach peak temperature was
observed to be within twenty to thirty minutes and is a useful parameter to anticipate site response
during the pilot test.

Mr. Brett Berra
January 24, 2001
Page 8
ORP measurements are taken to compare Baseline and Reacted ionic conditions during the CleanOX®
Process and provide a qualitative indication of hydroxyl radical formation. The Reacted samples ORP
readings increased to a peak of 264.0 to 275.1 mV. This measurement suggests that appropriate
quantities of CleanOX® reagents were used to effectively raise the ORP in the sample.
Saturated Soil Laboratory Analytical Results
Analytical results from the soil samples associated with the bench test are summarized in Table 2.
CONCLUSIONS
Of the 19 VOC compounds detected in the field baseline (excluding "J" estimated values), only five
were detected in the laboratory baseline sample: 1,1 DCA, 1,1 DCE, cis-1,2-DCE, 1,1,1-TCA, and
TCE. However, the detection limit for the Laboratory Baseline was elevated, so this data may be
somewhat misleading. Of these five compounds, 1,1-DCA and 1,1,1-TCA were the only VOCs
detected above the PQL in all three reacted samples.
Evaluation of 1,1-DCA and 1,1,1-TCA is useful for determining the proper reagent dosage for the
site. The following table summarizes the percent reduction associated with each compound for each
reagent dosage level.
Compound
Laboratory
Baseline
(ug/1)
Reacted I
Reacted 2
Reacted 3
Concentration
(u�)
Percent
Reduction
Concentration '
Percent
Reduction
Concentration
Percent
Reduction
(ug/1)
(ug/l)
1,1-DCA
11,000
765
93%
342
97%
92.8
99%
1,1,1-TCA
54,400
8,480
84%
4,590
92%
939
98%
Reactant level 3 attained substantial additional concentration reductions as compared to reactant level
2, particularly for 1,1,1-TCA.
Evaluation of the semi -volatile organic' compound results shows a close correlation for the Field and
Laboratory Baseline groundwater samples. Of the 16 SVOC compounds identified above the method
detection limit in the laboratory baseline, 15 were reduced to below the detection limit in the reactant
level 1 bench test. Only bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate was present in the Reacted 1 sample. All SVOC
concentrations were reduced below the detection limit in both the Reacted 2 and Reacted 3 samples.

Mr. Brett Berra
January 24, 2001
Page 9
A quantitative evaluation of the soil bench test is difficult due to the wide variations expected in soil
analytical results. A relative percent difference (RPD) of 20% is considered acceptable for soil
duplicates thus direct comparison of the reacted sample results to the laboratory baseline can be
misleading because the exact initial concentration of the reacted sample is not known. A qualitative
review of the data indicates that the bench test was able to significantly reduce the concentrations of
both volatile and semi -volatile organic compounds. Of the 24 compounds detected above the method
detection limit (Including estimated "J" compounds) in the Laboratory Baseline, reagent level 1
reduced 17 compounds, while the concentrations of seven compounds appeared to increase. This
apparent increase may be due to incomplete homogenization of the soil matrix. The initial
concentrations in Reacted 1, 2, and 3 were potentially higher than the baseline concentrations due to
incomplete homogenization. Comparison of Reacted 2 and Laboratory Baseline results indicate that
reagent level 2 resulted in reduced concentrations for 22 of the 24 detected compounds. Comparison
of Reacted 3 and Laboratory Baseline results indicate that reagent level 3 resulted in reduced
concentrations for all 24 of the compounds detected in the baseline sample.
To provide a basis for comparison with the groundwater results, the following table presents a more
detailed evaluation of the 1,1-DCA and 1,1,1-TCA results.
Compound__Baseline
Laboratory
Reacted I
Reacted 2
Reacted 3
ent
(ug/kg)
Concentration
(ug/kg)
- --
Concentration
(ug/kg) (ug/kg)
Percent
Reduction
Concentration
(ug/kg)
Percent
Reduction
1,1-DCA
425 J
722 J
-70%
470 J
-11%
199 J
53%
1,1,1-TCA
4,050
4,010
1%
2,090
' 48%
515 J
87%
The data illustrates the problems inherent in direct comparison of the bench test soil results with a set
baseline. The 1,1-DCA results appeared to increase for the Reacted 1 and Reacted 2 samples,
although these values are lower than the Field Baseline sample. In general, the data indicate that
reagent level 3 was required to significantly reduce the concentrations of these two compounds.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Bench test results for the site indicate substantial reductions in organic compounds of concern are
possible using chemical oxidation reagents. As presented above, the results indicate that application
of reagent level 3 provides significant additional concentration reduction as compared to reagent level
1 and 2. Based on these results, ManTech recommends conducting the pilot test program utilizing

Mr. Brett Berra
January 24, 2001
Page 10
the dosage represented by Reacted Sample 3 to evaluate chemical oxidation as a remediation option
under field application conditions.
Prior to proceeding with selection of the reagent dosage and implementation of the pilot program,
ManTech recommends that Radian closely evaluate the data in light of potential risk based action
levels. If the data indicates that reagent level 1 or 2 provides sufficient treatment to meet the site -
specific action levels, there may be no reason to proceed with the more costly increased dosage.
However, any evaluation of the bench test data must consider that initial field applications are not
likely to achieve the degree of treatment obtained in the ideal conditions modeled by the bench test.
In order to maximize the C1eanOX® Process effects in lowering contaminant concentrations in the
groundwater at the site, a pilot test application program consisting of a two-cycle treatment approach
is recommended. The primary reason for this two step approach is to allow performance of an
interim sampling event. The use of three data points (baseline, interim, and post -treatment samples)
provides for a more thorough evaluation of the C1eanOX® Process. In addition to the analytical data
collected, field observations of site -specific responses during the pilot test application will be used
to evaluate the need for adjustments to the application scheme in order to achieve optimum results.
I hope these results and the discussion above are useful in evaluating the CleanOX® Process for use
at the Site. Please call Eric Klink at 317-598-9799 or me at 703-814-8362 if you need additional
information or have any questions.
Sincerely,
fig
Colin Toole
Project Manager
c: E. Klink

Table 1
Summary of Analytical Results for Chemical Oxidation Bench Scale Testing (Water Samples)
Hamilton BeachoProctor-Silex, Washington, North Carolina
Analyte
Units
n
Field •Baseline
(Sample #228)
,Laboratory
Baseline `.
Reacted',1 -
Reacted 2
-'Reacted,
-
Sample Date::
10/18/00 ,
_:1Q/23/00 -
10/23/00 '
. 10/23/00
10/23/00
Volatile Organic Compounds
Benzene
µg/L
72.3
ND (128)
ND (6.41) '
ND (6.41)
ND (1.28)
2-Butanone (MEK)
µg/L
1,110
ND (400)
ND (20.0)
ND (20.0)
ND (4.00)
n-Butylbenzene
µg/L
42.7 J
ND (204)
ND (10.2)
ND (10.2)
ND (2.04)
Chloroethane
µg/L
145
ND (185)
ND (9.25)
ND (9.25)
ND (1.85)
Chloroform
µg/I,
14.5 J
ND (179)
ND (8.96)
ND (8.96)
ND (1.79)
1,1-Dichloroethane
µg/L
15,000
11,000
765
342
92.8
1,2-Dichloroethane
µg/L
259
ND (204)
ND (10.2)
ND (10.2)
ND (2.04)
1,1-Dichloroethene
µg/L
52,200
35,000
112
24.5 J
4.84 J
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
µg/L
4,320
2,370
ND (11.2)
ND (11.2)
ND (2.24)
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
µg/L
55.5
ND (238)
ND (11.9)
ND (11.9)
ND (2.38)
Ethylbenzene
µg/L
763
336 J
ND (13.6)
ND (13.6)
ND (2.72)
Isopropylbenzene
µg/L
58.9 J
ND (186)
ND (9.31)
ND (9.31)
ND (1.86)
4-Isopropyltoluene
µg/L
36.5 J
ND (230)
ND (11.5)
ND (11.5)
ND (2.30)
Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE)
µg/L
18.6 J
ND (232)
ND (11.6)
ND (11.6)
ND (2.32)
Naphthalene
µg/L
1,110
ND (160)
ND (8.01)
ND (8.01)
ND (1.60)
n-Propylbenzene
µg/L
355
ND (280)
ND (14.0)
ND (14.0)
ND (2.80)
Styrene
µg/L
24.6 J
ND (195)
ND (9.77)
ND (9.77)
ND (1.95)
Toluene
µg/L
1,850
897 J
ND (6.37)
ND (6.37)
ND (1.27)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
µg/L
78,600
54,400
8,480
4,590
939
Tichloroethene
µg/L
10,600
6,890
AID (13.7)
-ND (13.7) -
ND (2.74)
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
µg/L
2,070
947 J
ND (12.4)
ND (12.4)
ND (2.48)
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
µg/L
507
ND (181)
ND (9.05)
ND (9.05)
ND (1.81)
Vinyl Chloride
µg/L
340
ND (228)
ND (11.4)
ND (11.4)
ND (2.28)
o-Xylene
µg/L
1,800
846 J
ND (8.44)
ND (8.44)
ND (1.69)
p-Xylene/m-Xylene
µg/L
2,200
1,070 J
ND (16.7)
ND (16.7)
ND (3.34)
Semi -Volatile Organic Compounds
Acenaphthene
µg/L
3.68 J
3.80 J
ND (0.320)
ND (0.320)
ND (0.323)
Anthracene
µg/L
0.405 J
0.257 J
ND (0.291)
ND (0.291)
ND (0.294)
Benzoic Acid
µg/L
142
109 J
ND (7.49)
ND (7.49)
ND (7.56)
Benzyl Alcohol
µg/L
10.3
10.7
ND (0.521)
ND (0.521)
ND (0.526)
Carbazole
µg/L
0.396 J
0.403 J
ND (0.289)
ND (0.289)
ND (0.292)
Di-n-butylphthalate
µg/L
ND (0.255)
1.42 J
ND (0.252)
ND (0.252)
ND (0.255)
Dibenzofuran
µg/L
3.54 J
4.10 J
ND (0.249)
ND (0.249)
ND (0.251)
Diethylphthalate
µg/L
0.851 J
0.789 J
ND (0.302)
ND (0.302)
ND (0.305)
bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate
µg/L
5.48 J
4.31 J
2.52 J
ND (0.480)
ND (0.485)
Fluorene
µg/L
5.87 J
6.41 J
ND (0.316)
ND (0.316)
ND (0.319)
Isophorone
µg/L
0.779 J
0.790 J
ND (0.254)
ND (0.254)
ND (0.257)
2-Methylnaphthalene
µg/L
140
137
ND (0.272)
ND (0.272)
ND (0.275)
2-Methylphenol
µg/L
5.13 J
ND (0.262)
ND (0.240)
ND (0.240)
ND (0.242)

Table 1 (continued)
Analyte
Units =
Field Baseline
(Sample #228)
Laboratory'
-Baseline
Reacted-1
'
Reacted 2 '
'j-Reacted 3"
Sample Date; °_
10/18/00
10/23/00 '
10/23/00 `,'
10/23/00
10/23/00
4-MethylphenoV3-Methylphenol
µg/L
38.7 J (F)
45.0 J (F)
ND (0.514)
ND (0.397)
ND (0.401)
Naphthalene
µg/L
687
595
ND (0.272)
ND (0.272)
ND (0.275)
Phenanthrene
µg/L
5.69 J
5.63 J
ND (0.302)
ND (0.302)
ND (0.305)
Phenol
µg/L
32.5
38.5
ND (0.330)
ND (0.330)
ND (0.333)
2,4,5- Trichlorophenol
µg/L
2:03 J
ND (0.372)
ND (0.424)
ND (0.424) .
ND (0.428)
Miscellaneous Analyses
Total Alkalinity
mg/L
ND (0.129)
NA
NA
NA
NA
Total Dissolved Solids
mg/L
1,430
NA
NA
NA
NA
Total Organic Carbon
mg/L
115
NA
NA
NA
NA
TPH = Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
DRO = Diesel Range Organics
mg/L = milligrams per liter
µg/L = micrograms per liter
J =Estimated value; result is less than practical quantitaion limit (PQL).
F = Interference or coelution suspected.
ND =Not detected; associated sample -specific detection limit reported in parentheses.
NA =Not applicable.

Table 2
Summary of Analytical Results for Chemical Oxidation Bench Scale Testing (Soil Samples)
Hamilton BeachoProctor-Silex, Washington, North Carolina
nalyte
Units.
yield -Baseline
(Sample#228)
Laboratory
Baseline_;
Reacted 1
Reacted 2
' Reacted 3
Sample Date: , �=
:
10/18/00
`> 10/23/00',
10/23/00
10/23/00
- 10/23/00
Volatile Organic Compounds
Benzene
µg/Kg
67.8
32.5 J
26.1
11.2
12.1
2-Butanone (MEK)
µg/Kg
159
ND (176 U)
52.6
88.5
79.9
n-Butylbenzene
µg/Kg
157
1,340
64.6
111
24.4
sec-Butylbenzene
µg/Kg
93.6
365 J
24.5
33.3
6.83 J
Carbon disulfide
µg/Kg
ND (3.72 U)
ND (36.7 U)
1.53 J
ND (1.05 U)
ND (0.995 U)
Carbon tetrachloride
µg/Kg
6.05 J
ND (80.0)
2.58 J
2.85 J
2.72 J
Chloroethane
µg/Kg
19.7
ND (86.6)
10.4 J
3.57 J
4.88 J
Chloroform
µg/Kg
2.75 J
ND (77.0)
1.08 J
0.777 J
0.876 J
1,3-Dichlorobenzene _
µg/Kg
1.58 J
27.3 J
0.432 J
0.424 J
ND (1.07)
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
µg/Kg
ND (1.06)
29.3 J
ND (1.21)
ND (1.21)
ND (1.12)
1,1-Dichloroethane
gg/Kg
912
425 J
722 J
470 J
199 J
1,2-Dichloroethane
µg/Kg
40.7
ND (100)
12.1
13.3
15.8
1,1-Dichloroethene
µg/Kg
786
979
1,240
682 J
202 J
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
µg/Kg
430 J
199 J
250 J
283
69.6 J
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
µg/Kg
8.06
ND (91.5)
2.66 J
1.37 J
1.65 J
Ethylbenzene
µg/Kg
484 J
785
223
128
45.0 V
2-Hexanone
µg/Kg
13.5
ND (93.9)
3.71 J
4.13 J
5.74 J
Iodomethane
µg/Kg_
ND (0.574)
ND (63.5)
ND (0.655)
ND (0.653)
0.857 J
Isopropylbenzene
µg/Kg
126
244 J
37.6
32.4
7.96
4-Isopropyltoluene
µg/Kg
311 J
474 J
132
42.4 J (F)
8.81 V
Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE)
µg/Kg
16.4
ND (90.5)
3.33 J
3.98 J
5.93 J
4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)
µg/Kg
5.08 J
ND (602)
3.20 J
2.62 J
3.36 J
Naphthalene
µg/Kg
17.3
1,970
124
76.3
97.5
n-Propylbenzene
µg/Kg
1,240
2,060
247
258
57.1 V
Styrene
µg/Kg
5.91 J
ND (122)
0.922 J
0.769 J
0.406 J
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
µg/Kg
ND (0.696)
ND (77.1)
ND (0.795)
ND (0.793)
0.509 J
Tetrachloroethene
µg/Kg
52.3
ND (133 U)
16.9
13.2
8.76
Toluene
µg/Kg
732
1,040
647 J
253
149 V
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
µg/Kg
3,590
4,050
4,010
2,090
515 J
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
µg/Kg
21.4
ND (85.8 U)
8.53
8.63
9.33
Trichloroethene
µg/Kg
1,890
2,170
1,510
628 J
178 J
1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane
µg/Kg
2.65 J
ND (46.0 U)
1.30 J
ND (1.48 U)
ND (1.38)
Trichlorofluoromethane
µg/Kg
3.24 J
ND (163)
ND (1.68)
ND (1.68)
ND (1.56)
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
µg/Kg
7,770
11,800
5,110
1,620
399 J
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
µg/Kg
2,360
3,710
1,630
504 J
103 V
Vinyl Acetate
µg/Kg
ND (3.74)
ND (414)
29.2
76.6
18.3
Vinyl Chloride
µg/Kg
113
ND (128)
34.0
10.6 J
17.1
p-Xylene/m-Xylene
µg/Kg
1,880
3,030
1,570
546
177 V
o-Xylene
µg/Kg
1,260
1,960
974
296 J
126 V

r 4-
Table 2 (continued)
Analyte
Cinits
Field Baseline
ample#228)_
Laboratory
Basell
Reacked 1
Reacted
Reacted S:
SantpleDate
=
10118/00
;; I0/2310,0_`
)0123/00
= 10/23/00
Semi -Volatile Organic Compounds
bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate
•mg/Kg
3.58
2.66
3.50
0.630
0.604
2-Methylnaphthalene
mg/Kg
3.93
2.90 _
3.03
0.491 J
0.475 J
Naphthalene
mg/Kg
1.57
1.25
1.17
0.197J
0.187 J
Phenanthrene
mg/Kg
0.665
0.563
0.632
0.244 J
0.136 J
Petroleum Hydrocarbons
Oil-& Grease
mg/Kg
454
935
202
40.6 J
177 J
TPH- GRO
mg/Kg
59
35.4
36.8
10.4
2.8
TPH-DRO —
mg/Kg
1,990 -
957-
1,240
479
289
TPH = Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons -
GRO = Gasoline Range Organics
DRO = Diesel Range -Organics
mg/Kg = milligrams per kilogram (or parts per million)
pg/Kg = micrograms per kilogram (or parts per billion)
µg/g = micrograms per gram (or parts per million)
J = Estimated value; result is less than practical quantitation limit (PQL).
F = Interference or coelution suspected.
ND = Not detected; associated sample -specific detection limit reported in parentheses.
U = Not present above the associated level; blank contamination exists.
V = Carryover suspected. Result may be biased high.