DredgingElutriate Test and Column Settling Test …passaic.sharepointspace.com/Public...

Dredging Elutriate Test and Column Settling Test Work Plan (Appendix F to PDI WP) Remedial Design – Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River Operable Unit Two of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site In and About Essex, Hudson, Bergen and Passaic Counties – New Jersey

September 2017 Revision 3

LPROU2-17-2.7.6-14-001

LPROU2-PDI_App F_DRET CST WP_Rev3_2017-09-28

Dredging Elutriate Test and Column Settling Test Work Plan (Appendix F to PDI WP) Remedial Design – Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River Operable Unit Two of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site In and About Essex, Hudson, Bergen and Passaic Counties – New Jersey

September 2017 Revision 3 LPROU2-17-2.7.6-14-001

PREPARED ON BEHALF OF PREPARED BY

Settling Party Supervising Contractor Glenn Springs Holdings, Inc. A Subsidiary of Occidental Petroleum 5 Greenway Plaza, Suite 110 Houston, TX 77046

Tetra Tech Inc. 6 Century Drive, 3rd Floor Parsippany, NJ 07054

P +1-973-630-8000 F +1-973-630-8165 tetratech.com

Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River DRET and CST Work Plan OU 2 of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site Revision 3, September 2017


REVISION RECORD

Revisions to this Dredging Elutriate Test and Column Settling Test Work Plan will be reviewed and approved by someone qualified to have prepared the original document. All revisions must be authorized by the Tetra Tech Project Manager and the Glenn Springs Holdings, Inc. Project Coordinator, or their designee(s) and documented below.

Revision Date Portions Affected Reason Authorized By Agency

Submittal

1 08/11/2017 All Comments received from EPA on Draft/Rev 0

J. Somoano (GSH);

S. McGee (Tetra Tech)

Yes (EPA,

NJDEP)

2 09/22/2017 All Comments received from EPA on Draft/Rev 1

J. Somoano (GSH);


Yes (EPA,

NJDEP)

3 09/28/2017 Section 3.2, Section 3.3

Comments received from EPA on Draft/Rev 2

J. Somoano (GSH);


Yes (EPA,

NJDEP)


i LPROU2-PDI_App F_DRET CST WP_Rev3_2017-09-27

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 1-1

1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................... 1-2 1.2 DRET AND CST STUDY OBJECTIVES ................................................................................... 1-2 1.3 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................. 1-2

2 EXISTING DRET AND CST DATA ...................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 DATA GAP ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................. 2-1

3 SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND TESTING ............................................................................................. 3-1 3.1 SEDIMENT AND SURFACE WATER SAMPLING .................................................................... 3-1 3.2 DRET PROCEDURE ................................................................................................................. 3-6 3.3 CST PROCEDURE .................................................................................................................... 3-7 3.4 DATA ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION ...................................................................................... 3-8

4 QUALITY CONTROL ........................................................................................................................... 4-1 5 DELIVERABLES .................................................................................................................................. 5-1 6 SCHEDULE ......................................................................................................................................... 6-1 7 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 7-1

LIST OF TABLES Table 3-1. Sampling Methodology for DRETs and CSTs .................................................................... 3-3 Table 3-2. Sampling Plan for DRETs and CSTs .................................................................................. 3-4

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1. OU 2 Location and Vicinity Map Figure 1-2. Selected Remedy: Capping with Dredging for Flooding and Navigation Figure 3-1. Dredge Depth Analysis Figure 3-2. Sampling for DRETs and CSTs Overview

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Attachment A DRET and CST Results of Phase I of the Tierra Removal Project Attachment B Dredging Elutriate Test (DRET) Procedure Attachment C Column Settling Test (CST) and Effluent Elutriate Test Procedures Attachment D Project-Specific DRET Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)


ii LPROU2-PDI_App F_DRET CST WP_Rev3_2017-09-27

ACRONYMS / ABBREVIATIONS

Acronyms/Abbreviations Definition COC contaminant of concern

CST column settling test

DDT dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane

DQO data quality objective

DRET dredging elutriate test

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

g/L grams per liter

GSH Glenn Springs Holdings, Inc.

LPR Lower Passaic River

MLW mean lower water

OU Operable Unit

OU 2 Operable Unit 2 (the lower 8.3 miles of the Lower Passaic River); the Project

PAH polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon

PCB polychlorinated biphenyl

PDI pre-design investigation

PDI WP Pre-Design Investigation Work Plan

Project Lower 8.3 miles of the Lower Passaic River (Operable Unit Two) of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site, located in and about Essex, Hudson, Bergen and Passaic Counties, New Jersey

QA quality assurance

QC quality control

RD remedial design

RDWP Remedial Design Work Plan

RI Remedial Investigation

RM river mile

ROD Record of Decision

Settlement Agreement Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent for Remedial Design

Site Diamond Alkali Superfund Site

SOP standard operating procedure

SOW Statement of Work

TSS total suspended solids


iii LPROU2-PDI_App F_DRET CST WP_Rev3_2017-09-27

Acronyms/Abbreviations Definition UFP-QAPP Uniform Federal Policy-Quality Assurance Project Plan

USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

WP Work Plan


1-1 LPROU2-PDI_App F_DRET CST WP_Rev3_2017-09-28

1 INTRODUCTION

This Dredging Elutriate Test (DRET) and Column Settling Test (CST) Work Plan (WP) has been prepared as part of the Pre-Design Investigation Work Plan (PDI WP) pursuant to the requirements set forth in the Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent for Remedial Design (Settlement Agreement) between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Settling Party, effective September 30, 2016, for the lower 8.3 miles of the Lower Passaic River (Operable Unit Two [OU 2]) of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site (the Site), located in and about Essex, Hudson, Bergen, and Passaic Counties, New Jersey (the Project); refer to Figure 1-1.

The Settling Party, as defined in the Settlement Agreement, is Occidental Chemical Corporation. Communications associated with, and execution of, the Settlement Agreement are being led by Glenn Springs Holdings, Inc. (GSH) on behalf of Occidental Chemical Corporation.

The Settlement Agreement provides that the Settling Party shall undertake a Remedial Design (RD), including various procedures and technical analyses, to produce a detailed set of plans and specifications for implementation of the Remedial Action (RA) selected in the EPA's March 3, 2016 Record of Decision (ROD; EPA, 2016a). RD activities include the completion of all pre-design and design activities and deliverables associated with implementation of the RD for the remedy selected in the ROD. The selected remedy was chosen by the EPA in accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended, 42 United States Code §§9601-9675, and, to the extent practicable, the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan.

As stated in the EPA Statement of Work (SOW), pre-design investigation (PDI) activities are to be conducted to gather additional site-specific information that is required to develop the RD, as outlined in the Remedial Design Work Plan (RDWP; Tetra Tech, 2017b). These PDI activities include DRET and CST investigations to study desorption of contaminants from solids and settling behavior of solids to assess the potential impacts of dredging on water quality.

This DRET and CST WP provides a summary of results from background research on the available data and studies, and outlines the study objectives, proposed sample locations, sample methods, and testing. It is organized as follows:

Section 1—Introduction: Presents a brief description of Project, previous investigations, the objectives of this investigation, and data quality objectives.

Section 2—Existing DRET and CST Data: Presents existing DRET and CST data, and a data gap analysis.

Section 3—Sediment Sampling and Testing: Presents the field methodology for core sampling of sediment, a description of the methodology for conducting DRETs and CSTs, and a discussion of data analysis and evaluation.

Section 4—Quality Control: Describes GSH’s approach for quality during the DRET and CST investigation.

Section 5—Deliverables: Presents the description of the report that will be prepared to summarize the findings of the tests.

Section 6—Schedule: Provides the schedule for field work, testing, and reporting.

Section 7—References: Cites references used in compiling this planning document.



1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND The lower 8.3 miles of the Lower Passaic River (LPR), OU 2 of the Site, extends from the confluence of the LPR with Newark Bay at river mile (RM) 0 to RM 8.3. The EPA selected the remedy for OU 2 in the ROD to address contaminated sediments found in the lower 8.3 miles of the LPR (EPA, 2016a).

Contaminants of concern (COCs) in the sediment include dioxins and furans, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), mercury, copper, lead, DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) and its primary breakdown products, dieldrin, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).

PDI activities will be conducted in accordance with the PDI WP, including its appendices. The primary objective of the PDIs is to gather additional site-specific information required to prepare the RD for the selected remedy as identified in the ROD and in the SOW (EPA, 2016b). The EPA selected remedy concept is shown in Figure 1-2.

1.2 DRET AND CST STUDY OBJECTIVES DRET will be performed at locations throughout OU 2 to assess the potential impact(s) to surface water (i.e., mass transfer of contaminants from sediment to surrounding surface water) from contaminated sediment dredging operations. The DRET method is particularly effective for examining the short-term contaminant release at the point of dredging. CST will be performed at locations throughout OU 2 to define the settling behavior of sediment and to predict the distance that suspended solids may travel before settling. DRET and CST results will inform the design as follows:

• Short-term total suspended solids (TSS) and contaminant release during dredging operations will be evaluated. The results will be compared against the water quality criteria.

• The results of DRET and CST will provide site-specific data to support the EPA’s development of engineering performance standards for use during dredging.

• The results of DRET and CST will inform the rationale for managing sediment resuspension during dredging and for selecting applicable best management practices.

• DRET results (i.e., the contamination levels in dredge elutriate) will inform the design of the water treatment system to treat water generated from sediment dewatering to meet applicable standards before discharging it to the LPR or Newark Bay. GSH will also perform a water treatment study as part of the planned treatability studies to evaluate water treatment technologies prior to the full-scale design (Tetra Tech, 2017b).

1.3 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES This investigation will be performed per the Uniform Federal Policy-Quality Assurance Project Plan (UFP-QAPP), which is the basis for the quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) elements of the entire Project (Tetra Tech, 2017c). The UFP-QAPP serves as a “project-specific quality plan” for the Project and encompasses elements of a Field Sampling Plan and a Quality Assurance Project Plan. The plan integrates technical and quality aspects for OU 2 to ensure scientifically sound data of known and documented quality are collected to meet the data quality objectives (DQOs) for the Project. Development of DQOs for this DRET and CST WP followed the seven-step process outlined in Worksheet #11 of the UFP-QAPP. The DQOs include:

• Steps 1 and 2 – Problem statement and goals of the study are presented in Section 1.2. The main



objective of DRETs is to examine the short-term contaminant release at the point of dredging. The main objective CSTs is to define the settling behavior of sediment during dredging.

• Step 3 – Information input (i.e., existing DRET and CST data) is summarized in Section 2. Available DRET and CST data are specific to the sediment at RM 3.4 of Phase 1 of the Tierra Removal. Additional DRETs and CSTs are needed throughout OU 2.

• Steps 4, 5, 6, and 7 – The sediment sampling and analytical testing program, the performance and acceptance criteria, and any specific QC requirements for this proposed investigation were developed based on the data gaps identified in Step 3, the RD objectives, and additional data needs. The proposed 26 DRET and 26 CST sampling locations are shown on Figure 3-2 and in Table 3-2. A total of 34 DRET and 34 CST samples are planned at these locations.



2 EXISTING DRET AND CST DATA

GSH has reviewed pertinent background data provided in the Remedial Investigation (RI) (EPA, 2014a) and Focused Feasibility Study (EPA, 2014b). The LPR project database has electronic data from 60 studies that were funded through various federal, state, and private programs. The project database contains historical non-sediment chemical data, such as those for elutriate testing, water quality, biota tissue, and soil.

Regarding dredging elutriate testing, six elutriate matrices were identified during the RI from studies in the Hackensack River, Port Elizabeth 93, Buttermilk, Hudson River, Exxon, and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. These data were not used in the RI because either the samples were not located in the LPR-Newark Bay watershed or there were too few samples to warrant detailed usability evaluation.

Within OU 2, a non-time-critical removal action (referred to as “Phase 1 of the Tierra Removal”) was completed in 2012. The removal addressed contaminated sediments adjacent to the former Diamond Alkali facility located at 80 – 120 Lister Avenue in Newark, New Jersey (OU 1) at approximately RM 3.4. Pre-design activities associated with Phase 1 of the Tierra Removal included geotechnical assessment investigations and treatability studies where DRETs and CSTs were performed to support sediment handling and processing design (Tierra, 2010).

Pre-design studies associated with Phase 1 of the Tierra Removal included six CSTs and four DRETs that provided data on whether removal and/or post-removal surface-water quality would meet the Phase I Removal Action applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements. The CST is designed to determine the settling characteristics of sediment and to provide an estimate of the suspended solids concentration of settled sediment slurries. The DRET is designed to predict potential water quality impacts due to resuspension at the point of sediment removal. The DRET and CST data were used together to evaluate the water quality during dredging of Phase 1 of the Tierra Removal. DRET results were also used to determine the chemical concentration in the ponded water around the backhoe dredge bucket during dredging, and associated air emissions and odor control measures (Tierra, 2011). The test results are provided in the Data Report on Quality Assurance Project Plan 4 (QAPP 4 – Treatability Studies Plan) Investigation (Tierra, 2010). Excerpts from the Data Report, including the sampling locations and summary of DRET and CST results representing the total water analysis, are compiled in Attachment A.

2.1 DATA GAP ANALYSIS Available DRET and CST data are specific to the sediment at RM 3.4 of Phase 1 of the Tierra Removal. These data will be reviewed in detail during the RD as representative data for the sediment within this section of the river. There were no other DRETs and CSTs performed for the rest of the OU 2 sediment. Additional DRETs and CSTs are needed to represent conditions of the sediment throughout OU 2 to evaluate short-term contaminant release at the point of dredging and settling behavior of sediment during dredging. DRETs and CSTs performed at RM 3.4 represent sediment sample collected from 0 to 6 feet below the mudline. GSH has planned one DRET or CST at RM 3.3 to represent conditions over the planned dredge depth of 2.5 feet at this location. Excerpts from the Data Report, including the sampling locations and summary of DRET and CST results representing the total water analysis, are compiled in Attachment A.



3 SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND TESTING

Sediment cores collected during the sediment chemical coring program (refer to the Sediment Core Collection and Chemical Analysis WP, Appendix C-1 to the PDI WP) will be composited to prepare samples for both DRET and CSTs. The tests will be conducted coincident with the sediment core sampling chemical analyses.

3.1 SEDIMENT AND SURFACE WATER SAMPLING GSH will collect a sufficient volume of sediment and surface water that is representative of the sediment volume to be removed in different areas. Each DRET and CST will be performed on composite samples representative of the location. The number of tests and sampling locations were selected to provide enough spatial coverage and representation of the sediment to be dredged over OU 2 to inform the design in terms of short-term contaminant release during dredging and the settling behavior of sediment. The proposed locations were matched with the locations of the cores to be collected during the sediment core field work for efficiency. Multiple cores adjacent to and representative of the selected locations will be collected to create composite samples for the DRETs and CSTs.

The locations for collection of sediment were selected based on the following:

• According to the ROD (EPA, 2016a), the reach from RM 0 to RM 0.6 will be dredged to -33 feet mean low water (MLW) to achieve an authorized navigation depth of -30 feet MLW within the navigation channel (Figure 1-2). Initial dredge depth analysis indicates that dredge cuts approximately 4 to 20 feet in depth with an average of 10 to 15 feet may be required within this reach. Refer to Figure 3-1. A total of eight DRETs and eight CSTs at four locations will be performed to represent the sediment to be dredged from this reach. Based on the anticipated average dredge cuts of 10 to 15 feet, the approximate dredge depth will be divided into two layers of approximately 6 feet each: 0 to 6 feet below sediment surface will be composited into one sample, and 6 feet and below to the end of the boring will be composited into one sample. A DRET and CST will be performed on each composited sample. Therefore, two DRETs and two CSTs will be performed at each of the four locations, totaling eight DRETs and eight CSTs.

• According to the ROD, outside of the navigational channel, between RM 0 to RM 1.0, the Kearny Point mudflats will be dredged about 2.5 feet (Figure 1-2). A total of five DRETs and five CSTs at five locations will be performed on composite samples to represent the extent of sediment to be dredged from this reach. The locations were selected randomly over the Kearny Point mudflats.

• According to the ROD, the reach from RM 0.6 to RM 1.7 will be dredged to -25.5 feet MLW to achieve an authorized depth of -20 feet MLW within the navigation channel (Figure 1-2). Anticipated dredge cuts will be in the range of 3 to 12 feet within this reach (Figure 3-1). A total of eight DRETs and eight CSTs at four locations will be performed on composited samples that represent sediment to be dredged from this reach. Based on the anticipated average dredge cuts, the approximate dredge depth will be divided into two layers of approximately 6 feet each: 0 to 6 feet below sediment surface will be composited into one sample, and 6 feet and below to the end of the boring will be composited into one sample. A DRET and CST will be performed on each composited sample. Therefore, two DRETs and two CSTs will be performed at each of four locations, totaling eight DRETs and eight CSTs.

• According to the ROD, the reach from RM 1.7 to RM 8.3 will be dredged approximately 2.5 feet to accommodate reasonably anticipated recreational future use (-10 feet MLW over a 200-foot-wide



area [reduced to a 150-foot width between RM 8.1 and RM 8.3]) and to allow placement of a 2-foot engineered cap (Figure 1-2). The dredge extent includes the shoals and mudflats adjacent to the main channel. Composite samples will be tested for 13 DRETs and 13 CSTs from 13 locations to represent the sediment to be dredged from this reach.

The sampling methodology is outlined in Table 3-1. The preliminary sampling plan is shown in Table 3-2. A total of 34 DRETs and 34 CSTs will be performed. Each test will be performed on composited samples, whose locations are identified on Figure 3-2.

Each DRET and CST will require sediment representative of the dredge area be collected in two (2) 5-gallon buckets. Once the specific locations for the DRETs and CSTs are identified, multiple cores will be collected to form the composite of 10 gallons of each sample. Each sample collected with the vibracore will have an estimated volume of about 3 gallons over a 6-foot core with a target recovery of 80 percent. In order to get enough volume of sediment at each locations, it is estimated that three or four adjacent cores will be collected to represent each proposed location. A sample will be collected from the composited sediment and chemical analysis of the homogenized material will be performed. The sampling plan is summarized in Table 3-2.

In addition to sediment sampling, approximately 20 gallons of surface water for each DRET and 20 gallons of surface water for each CST will be collected at selected locations based on the salinity variations of the river. As indicated in the Remedial Investigation/Focused Feasibility Study, under typical flow conditions, the salt front is usually located between RM 2 and RM 10, and moves back and forth about 4 miles each tidal cycle (twice a day). The transition zone from estuarine to freshwater communities in these surveys was located around RM 4 in the fall, RM 5.5 in the spring, and RM 7 in the summer (EPA, 2014a, 2014b). Based on this information, the site surface water will be collected at RM 0.5, RM 1.5, RM 4.0, and RM 7.0. The site water will be collected during the slack tide, and salinity will be monitored during the collection. The sediment samples collected at up to RM 0.7 will be tested with site water collected at RM 0.5; the samples collected between RM 0.7 and RM 2.0 will be tested with site water collected at RM 1.5; the samples collected between RM 2.0 and RM 6.0 will be tested with site water collected at RM 4.0; and the samples collected upstream of RM 6.0 will be tested with site water collected at RM 7.0. Refer to Table 3-2 for the summary of sediment samples and the corresponding site water sampling locations. Surface water will be analyzed for the same analytes as in the DRET for both total and filtered fractions for each batch of site water to characterize the water used in the tests and provide data for evaluating the DRET and CST results. The site water samples will be collected at the first use of the batch and at the last use of the batch for the DRET tests.



Table 3-1. Sampling Methodology for DRETs and CSTs Location Number of Tests and Locations Notes

RM 0 to RM 0.6 8 DRETs and 8 CSTs at 4 locations. Two DRETs and two CSTs at each location.

Represent dredge depths to -33 feet (ft) MLW in the navigation channel. A total of 4 sampling locations were selected, 3 of them at every 0.1 mile in the lower 0.3 miles (RM 0.1, RM 0.2, RM 0.3) and the fourth at RM 0.5. Higher sample density is proposed closer to Newark Bay to better understand sediment resuspension near the project boundary. Composite samples to represent the 0-6 ft and > 6 ft sediment intervals, and DRET and CST to be performed on each composite sample.

RM 0 to RM 1.0 5 DRETs and 5 CSTs at 5 locations. One DRET and one CST at each location.

Represent dredging in Kearny Point mudflat. A total of 5 sampling locations were selected randomly to cover the mudflat area.

RM 0.6 to RM 1.7 8 DRETs and 8 CSTs at 4 locations. Two DRETs and two CSTs at each location.

Represent dredge depths to -25.5 ft MLW. A total of 4 sampling locations were selected at about 0.3 mile intervals to provide data uniformly over 1.1 miles of the river. Composite samples to represent the 0-6 ft and > 6 ft sediment intervals and DRET and CST to be performed on each composite sample.

RM 1.7 to RM 8.3 13 DRETs and 13 CSTs at 13 locations. One DRET and one CST at each location.

Represents average 2.5 ft dredge cuts in the river and mudflats. A total of 13 sampling locations were selected at approximately every 0.6 mile to provide data uniformly over 6.6 miles of the river.

TOTAL: 34 DRETs and 34 CSTs at 26 locations

Note: The locations to be finalized after Sediment Core Collection and Chemical Analysis Work Plan is revised per the new bathymetric data. Number of composite samples may also be revised.



Table 3-2. Sampling Plan for DRETs and CSTs

ID River Mile Northing Easting

Target Depth (ft) Proposed Tests1/ Sampling Intervals/Core2/

Number of Analyses/

Core3/

Site Water

River Mile LPR-0010-04 0.1 683037.33 597358.37 -33 ft MLW DRET, CST Composite samples for 0-6 ft and > 6 ft 2 0.5 LPR-0010-08 0.1 683144.15 597676.04 2.5 ft from

mudline DRET, CST Composite samples for 0-2.5 ft 1 0.5

LPR-0020-03 0.2 683506.75 597097.77 -33 ft MLW DRET, CST Composite samples for 0-6 ft and > 6 ft 2 0.5 LPR-0030-05 0.3 684058.74 597082.70 -33 ft MLW DRET, CST Composite samples for 0-6 ft and > 6 ft 2 0.5 LPR-0032-02 0.32 684458.85 597900.00 2.5 ft from


LPR-0050-03 0.5 685061.94 596782.34 -33 ft MLW DRET, CST Composite samples for 0-6 ft and > 6 ft 2 0.5 LPR-0061-02 0.61 685705.92 597540.00 2.5 ft from


LPR-0066-02 0.66 686017.69 598800.00 2.5 ft from mudline

DRET, CST Composite samples for 0-2.5 ft 1 0.5

LPR-0070-05 0.7 686119.70 596879.75 -25.5 ft MLW DRET, CST Composite samples for 0-6 ft and > 6 ft 2 1.5 LPR-0088-01 0.88 686953.00 597540.00 2.5 ft from


LPR-0100-03 1 687695.72 596910.07 -25.5 ft MLW DRET, CST Composite samples for 0-6 ft and > 6 ft 2 1.5 LPR-0130-03 1.3 689245.08 597265.31 -25.5 ft MLW DRET, CST Composite samples for 0-6 ft and > 6 ft 2 1.5 LPR-0160-04 1.6 690760.48 597723.17 -25.5 ft MLW DRET, CST Composite samples for 0-6 ft and > 6 ft 2 1.5 LPR-0180-04 1.8 691781.13 597964.96 2.5 ft from




LPR-0300-04 3 695393.09 594907.31 2.5 ft from mudline










Table 3-2. Sampling Plan for DRETs and CSTs (continued)

ID River Mile Northing Easting

Target Depth (ft) Proposed Tests1/ Sampling Intervals/Core2/

Number of Analyses/

Core3/

Site Water

River Mile LPR-0480-04 4.8 692592.06 586687.70 2.5 ft from




LPR-0600-03 6 698287.36 584778.02 2.5 ft from mudline










Notes: 1/ Test procedures are included in Attachments B and C. 2/ Samples will be collected by vibracore or sonic drilling. Sampling Standard Operating Procedures are included in Appendix L of PDI WP. 3/ A total of 34 DRETs and 34 CSTs will be performed at 26 locations. CST - column settling test; DRET - dredging elutriate test; ft – foot; MLW – mean low water



3.2 DRET PROCEDURE DRETs will be performed in accordance with the Dredging Elutriate Test Procedure (EPA/USACE, 2003) included in Attachment B. A project-specific standard operating procedure (SOP) including a project-specific procedural note is included in Attachment D. The hold time prior to initiation of the DRET tests is 6 months for this project. As noted above, the DRET is designed to simulate the quality of water resulting from sediment resuspension at the point of dredging. The test consists of mixing a sediment sample with dredging site water to form a slurry, allowing the slurry to settle, then extracting a dredging elutriate sample for chemical analysis. The test includes an aeration step that accounts for geochemical changes occurring in the water column during resuspension. An aeration duration of one hour is typical to represent conditions during dredging, while longer aeration time provides input for conditions of slurry pumping at longer distances and for subsequent water treatment operations. Test procedures allow for estimates of dissolved contaminant concentrations in milligrams per liter and particulate associated contaminant concentrations in milligrams per kilogram TSS.

The CSTs will be performed prior to DRETs to finalize the upper range of elutriate concentrations. TSS levels resulting after 1 to 6 hours of settling in CSTs will be evaluated to determine if the site-specific data demonstrate that the upper range of TSS in the planned target DRET elutriate concentrations might be exceeded. If that occurs, the CST TSS concentrations will be used as the target elutriate concentration. The following elutriates will be generated at each sampling location subject to confirmation using CST results:

• 1.0 percent (10 grams per liter [g/L] target TSS concentration) sediment slurry with 1-hour aeration and a 1-hour settling time

• 1.0 percent (10 g/L target TSS concentration) sediment slurry with 6-hour aeration and a 1-hour settling time



An overview of the procedure is as follows:

Step 1. Slurry Preparation. Sediment and surface water will be mixed to a target concentration (1 to 10 g/L, typically 5 to 10 g/L dry weight basis, per EPA/USACE, 2003). The upper range target concentrations will be determined based on the CST measurements taken after 1 hour and 6 hours of settling time. If the CST results indicate that concentrations of observed suspended solids are higher than the planned sediment slurry concentrations (i.e., 10 g/L), an elutriate sample at that higher concentration will be generated instead of the planned sediment slurry concentration of 10 g/L. The concentration of the well-mixed sediment in g/L (dry weight basis) will be pre-determined by oven drying a small sub-sample of known volume. Each 4-liter cylinder used in the analyses will require a mixed slurry volume of 3.75 liters.

The volumes of sediment and water to be mixed for a 3.75-liter slurry volume will be calculated using the following expressions:

V sediment = 3.75 (C slurry / C sediment)

V water = 3.75 – V sediment



where:

V sediment = volume of sediment (liters)

3.75 = volume of slurry for 4-liter cylinder (liters)

C slurry = desired concentration of slurry (typically 5 to 10 g/L dry weight basis, per EPA/USACE 2003)

C sediment = predetermined concentration of sediment (g/L dry weight basis)

V water = volume of disposal site water (liters)

A 4-liter cylinder is normally used to prepare the effluent elutriate, and the resulting supernatant volume will vary from approximately 3,000 to 3,500 milliliters, depending on the sediment properties, settling times, and initial concentration of the slurry. A total of four setups for each DRET test will be necessary to composite several extracted sample volumes to obtain the total required volume of approximately 12 liters for the planned chemistry tests.

Step 2. Mixing. The 3.75 liters of slurry will be mixed by placing appropriate volumes of collected sediment and surface water in a 1-gallon glass jar and mixing for 5 minutes with a laboratory mixer. The slurry will be mixed to a uniform consistency, without any unmixed clumps of sediment remaining.

Step 3. Aeration. The prepared slurry will be aerated to ensure that oxidizing conditions are present in the supernatant water during the subsequent settling phase. Bubble aeration will be used as a method of sample agitation. The mixed slurry will be poured into a 4-liter graduated cylinder. Glass tubing will be attached to the aeration source and the tubing inserted into the bottom of the cylinder. The tubing will be held in place by insertion through a pre-drilled No. 4 stopper placed in the top of the cylinder. Compressed air will be passed through a deionized water trap, then through the tubing, and bubbled through the slurry. The flow rate will be adjusted to agitate the mixture vigorously for one hour.

Step 4. Settling. Remove the tubing, and allow the aerated slurry to undergo quiescent settling for one hour.

Step 5. Sample Extraction. After the period of quiescent settling, an interface will usually be evident between the supernatant water with a low concentration of suspended solids and the more concentrated settled material below the interface. Samples of the supernatant water should be extracted from the cylinder at a point about 2 inches above the interface using a syringe and tubing. Care should be taken not to re-suspend the settled material. All of the collected water from the four test setups will be combined in a 20-liter container for the analytical sample collection.

Step 6. Sample Preservation and Analyses. The sample should be analyzed as soon as possible after extraction. The elutriate samples should be split and analyzed for both dissolved and total concentrations of COCs, total organic carbon, and TSS. Samples of the supernatant will be divided into the appropriate containers to determine total contaminants and TSS. The remaining supernatant will be centrifuged and samples collected for the analysis of dissolved organics concentrations. Samples to be analyzed for dissolved organics, such as pesticides or PCB materials, must be free of particles but should not be filtered, due to the tendency for these materials to adsorb on the filter. The samples of dissolved metals analysis will be filtered using a 0.45 micron filter. Refer to Attachment B and the SOP in Attachment D for details of sample preservation and analyses

3.3 CST PROCEDURE CST events will be performed in accordance with the Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed For Discharge in Waters of the U.S. – Testing Manual Inland Testing Manual (USACE, 1998) and ERDC/EL TR-03-1 Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Disposal at Island, Nearshore, or Upland Confined



Disposal Facilities — Testing Manual Appendix B (EPA/USACE, 2003). The testing procedure is included in Attachment C, Section B.4 of this WP.

A typical 8-inch-diameter settling column with interchangeable sections and with sample ports at 0.5-foot or closer intervals will be used. The sediment will be slurried to a suspended solids concentration to 150 g/L (approximately 40 liters of sediment representing a composite sample and 60 liters of site water) and will be placed in the test column. The slurry will be allowed to settle, and samples will be withdrawn from each sampling port at regular time intervals to determine the suspended solids concentrations. The water surface height and time at the start of the sampling period will be recorded. Each sample will be analyzed for TSS. The sampling intervals are 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 24, 48 hours, etc., until the end of the test. A 50 milligram per liter sample will be taken from each port. The test will continue until both an interface can be seen near the bottom of the column and the suspended solids concentration in the fluid above the interface is less than 1 g/L, or until the suspended solids concentrations in extracted samples show no decrease.

As recommended by the EPA and New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, CSTs will be performed prior to DRETs to finalize the upper range target elutriate concentrations. The hold time prior to initiation of the DRET tests is 6 months for this project.

3.4 DATA ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION For each elutriate generated, GSH will analyze one total and one dissolved sample for the following parameters using the given methods:

• Dioxins/Furans, including total tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin by EPA 1613

• Pesticides by EPA 1699

• Semi-volatile Organic Compounds by SW-846 8270

• PAHs by SW-846 8270SIM

• PCBs by SW-846 8082 (Aroclors), and EPA 1668 (Congeners)

• Priority pollutant metals by SW-846 6010 and/or 6020 (including mercury by 7470)

• TSS by SM 2540 and Total Organic Carbon by SW-846 9060 and/or SM 5310

The composited homogenized sediment will also be tested for above parameters before the elutriate testing.

As noted in Section 3.2, Step 6, the same filter used to separate the dissolved phase supernatant samples will be used to measure TSS. GSH will communicate with the laboratory that the entire sample volume will be filtered and analyzed for TSS analysis (Method SM2540).

Once the analytical chemistry data have been reviewed and accepted for completeness and usability per the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech, 2017c), GSH will begin the process of data evaluation required to prepare the DRET and CST report. The types of information to obtain through the data evaluation as follows:

• Define water column quality associated with dredging through the performance of DRETs.

• Evaluate settling characteristics of the sediment suspended during sediment removal.

• Evaluate if various degrees of filtration will remove concentrations of contaminants of concern from water generated during sediment dewatering to achieve applicable criteria and/or allow for direct discharge to the Passaic River. GSH will perform a water treatment study to evaluate water treatment technologies prior to the full-scale design (Tetra Tech, 2017b). This study will identify the



applicable water treatment chemicals and processes (e.g., precipitation/flocculation, sedimentation, filtration, carbon adsorption) based on the contaminant levels in dredge elutriate and the discharge goals.



4 QUALITY CONTROL

This section describes the basic QC procedures and activities to be implemented during the DRET and CST activities. The purpose of establishing QC procedures is to ensure that the data collected will be of the type, quantity, and quality required to meet the project objectives. In this case, data are being collected to assess the potential impacts of dredging on water quality. To ensure efficiency and coordination with Project objectives, reliability of data collected, safety, and uniform recording and reporting formats, in addition to this DRET and CST WP, investigation activities will be conducted using EPA-approved, Project-specific plans, including the Project Management Plan (Tetra Tech, 2017a), RDWP (Tetra Tech, 2017b), UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech, 2017c), and Health and Safety Plan (Tetra Tech, 2017d).

QC is integral to the reliability of the results of the DRETs and CSTs. Measures that will be taken to ensure reliable data will include the following:

Personnel Qualifications – All personnel will be trained and experienced in performing the tasks associated with this effort. All field personnel will be experienced in sediment coring, core logging, sample collection, and sample processing.

Verification of Methods – The DRET and CST samples will be collected as part of the sediment coring field work. The sediment coring program is discussed in the Sediment Core Collection and Chemical Analysis Work Plan (Appendix C-1 of the PDI WP), and the associated field SOPs are included in Appendix L of the PDI WP. The DRETs and CSTs will be performed per the methodologies included in Attachments B and C. Specifications for sample containers, preservation and holding times are provided in Worksheets #19 and 30 of the UFP-QAPP. Sample handling and custody are included in Worksheets #26 and 27 of the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech, 2107c).

Data Collection and Management – Raw field data will be clearly and concisely recorded manually on data sheets or within logbook(s), or electronically on mobile computer tablets. Original field data sheets will be scanned and hard and electronic copies of all data will be retained in the Project files. The appropriate Task Lead will be responsible for ensuring that all data forms and related materials pertaining to the Project are properly logged, recorded and entered into the Project files following the requirements of Worksheet #29, Project Documents and Records, in the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech, 2017c).

DRET and CST samples will be analyzed using the methods noted in Section 3.4 and according to the SOPs listed in Worksheets #18 and #23 of the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech, 2017c). No field QC samples (e.g., field duplicates) will be collected for the DRET and CST investigation. If reusable columns are used for the DRETs, a rinsate blank will be collected for analysis to monitor cleaning between the tests. Laboratory sample handling, custody, and disposal procedures are included in Worksheets #26 and #27.

As outlined in Worksheets #26 and #27, to improve data access/usability and data ownership/transferability, GSH has contracted with GHD to serve as the Data Management and Laboratory Program Contractor for the Project. GHD will perform the following:

• Oversee contracted laboratory services.

• Resolve any laboratory quality issues, with input from GSH and Tetra Tech.

• Perform data verification/validation of laboratory data packages (Worksheet #35).

• Perform data quality review/reporting.

• Consolidate Project data into centralized database, including field and laboratory data.



• Provide options for the Project team to access data, including tables, figures, graphs, electronic deliverables, and e:DATTM (an integrated GIS data access tool/query engine).

Field Instrument/Equipment Calibration, Maintenance, Testing, and Inspection – All field equipment will be used in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications and the requirements of Worksheet #22 of the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech, 2017c). All connections and switches will be in good condition to ensure acceptable performance and will be inspected each day by the Field Lead or designee. Malfunctioning and worn parts will be replaced immediately.

Field Supplies/Consumables - Supplies and consumables necessary for the investigation will be obtained through appropriate commercial markets and will meet supply-specific requirements outlined in this WP and corresponding SOPs. All supplies and consumables will be inspected for usability and suitability by field personnel prior to use. Any supplies/consumables that do not meet requirements will be discarded or returned to the supplier. Any certifications/documentation provided by the suppliers will be retained in the project files. Supplies and consumables will be stored so as to be protected from adverse conditions (e.g., weather, heat, etc.) to avoid possible contamination, breakage, etc.

Data Review, Verification and Validation – All data for the Project will be compiled and summarized with an independent verification at each step in the process to prevent transcription/typographical errors. Information collected in the field through visual observation, manual measurement, and/or field instrumentation will be recorded in field notebooks, on data sheets, and/or via mobile computer tablets, and then forwarded to GHD for entry the Project database. During the investigation, raw field data will be sent to the office daily. The field data will be evaluated to check the consistency and reporting methods. Any inconsistency or incorrect methodology for field testing, sampling, or storage and transportation of samples identified in this evaluation will be corrected immediately.

Inputs to data review, verification and validation are outlined in Worksheet #34 of the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech, 2017c). Data verification procedures are provided in Worksheet #35, and Worksheet #36 contains the data validation procedures. The overall quality of data obtained during the investigation will be evaluated, and checked for accuracy, consistency and interpretation of the data following Worksheet #37 of the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech, 2017c).



5 DELIVERABLES

A description of field activities including core locations, sample collection, sample handling, and DRET and CST analytical and chemical laboratory results will be reported as one of the PDI Evaluation Reports. The report will include a description of recent and historical investigation activities, data summary tables and figures depicting sediment sampling locations for this investigation, sediment sample logs, surface water sample logs, field notes, and observations. The test results will be summarized and evaluated and a discussion of how the results will inform design will be presented.

This task also includes updating the geographic information system database and preparing graphical representations of the sampling locations. Data will be presented in tabular form while chemical analytical results will be provided in summary tables with detectable concentrations and detections limits presented. Potential screening and regulatory criteria will be noted in the tables (where applicable) and the results will be compared to these in the text of the report. Project-specific sampling techniques and procedures implemented at each sampling location will be described in the report. The report text will include a narrative summarizing the work completed, findings, and conclusions of the investigation and will be submitted to the EPA for review and approval.



6 SCHEDULE

The schedule for the PDI activities is provided on Figure 11-1 of the PDI WP. Sediment cores for DRETs and CSTs will be collected during the sediment chemical coring program. The tests will be conducted coincident with the sediment core sampling chemical analyses.



7 REFERENCES

EPA/USACE (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2003. Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Disposal at Island, Nearshore, or Upland Confined Disposal Facilities — Testing Manual. ERDC/EL TR-03-1. January.

EPA. 2014a. Remedial Investigation Report for the Focused Feasibility Study. Prepared by The Louis Berger Group in conjunction with Battelle HDR|HydroQual. 2014

EPA. 2014b. Focused Feasibility Study Report for the Lower Eight Miles of the Lower Passaic River. Prepared by The Louis Berger Group, Inc. in conjunction with Battelle HDR|HydroQual. 2014.

EPA. 2016a. Record of Decision for Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River Part of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site Essex and Hudson Counties, New Jersey. EPA Region 2. March 3, 2016.

EPA. 2016b. Statement of Work for Pre-Remedial Design and Remedial Design Lower 8.3 Miles of Lower Passaic River Part of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site. Essex and Hudson Counties, State of New Jersey. EPA Region 2. September 26, 2016.

Tetra Tech. 2017a. Project Management Plan. Remedial Design – Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River, Operable Unit Two of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site, In and About Essex, Hudson, Bergen and Passaic Counties – New Jersey. Parsippany, New Jersey. Revision 1, February 2017.

Tetra Tech. 2017b. Remedial Design Work Plan. Remedial Design – Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River, Operable Unit Two of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site, In and About Essex, Hudson, Bergen and Passaic Counties – New Jersey. Parsippany, New Jersey. Revision 2, March 2017.

Tetra Tech. 2017c. Uniform Federal Policy – Quality Assurance Project Plan (UFP-QAPP) [Field Sampling Plan (FSP) and Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)]. Remedial Design – Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River, Operable Unit Two of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site, In and About Essex, Hudson, Bergen and Passaic Counties – New Jersey. Parsippany, New Jersey. Revision 1, June 2017.

Tetra Tech. 2017d. Health and Safety Plan. Remedial Design – Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River, Operable Unit Two of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site, In and About Essex, Hudson, Bergen and Passaic Counties – New Jersey. Parsippany, New Jersey. Revision 0, April 2017.

Tierra. 2010. Data Report on Quality Assurance Project Plan 4 (QAPP 4 – Treatability Studies Plan) Investigation. Phase I Removal Action, CERCLA Non-Time-Critical Removal Action – Lower Passaic River Study Area. Revision 0. Tierra Solutions, Inc., East Brunswick, New Jersey. April.

Tierra. 2011. Final Design Analysis Report. Phase I Removal Action, CERCLA Non-Time-Critical Removal Action – Lower Passaic River Study Area. Revision 0. Tierra Solutions, Inc., East Brunswick, New Jersey. July.

USACE. 1998. 1998 Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Discharge in Waters of the U.S.—Testing Manual Inland Testing Manual.



FIGURES

EASTNEWARK

JERSEY

HARRISON

TWP

NEWARK

KEARNY

KEARNY

NEWARK

RR

RR

CentralAvenue

RR

I-280

BridgeStreet

RR

JacksonStreet

RRNew Jersey

Turnpike

US 1

US 1Truck

RM 2

RM 4

RM 1

RM 8

RM 6

RM 0

RM

3

RM 7

RM 5

OU 2 NORTHBOUNDARY

OU 2 SOUTHBOUNDARY

Service Layer Credits: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, ' OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community

NewJersey

AtlanticOcean

ESSEX

BERGEN

UNION

PASSAIC

HUDS

ON

/

R:\P

RO

JEC

TS\P

ASS

AIC

_RIV

ER_5

837\

LOC

ATIO

N_M

AP_

2017

0828

.mxd

D

ate:

8/2

8/20

17

OU 2 Location and Vicinity MapLower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River (OU 2)

Figure 1-10 0.50.25

Miles

/NAVIGATION CHANNELRIVER MILENAVIGATION CHANNELCENTERLINE

! ! OU 2 BOUNDARY

RAILROAD (RR)

NAVIGATION CHANNEL

PHASE 1 REMOVAL ACTIONBOUNDARY

MUNICIPALITY

RM 3

0

1

2

3

45

6

7

8

j

j

jj

j

j

jjj

jjj

j

j

US 1 TruckRoute

US 1

Railr

oad

Cros

sing

NJ T

urnp

ike

.tS noskcaJ

Railroad Crossing

Bridge Street

I-280 East

I-280 West

Central Ave

Railroad Crossing

Railroad Crossing

I

F

P

J

C

B

E

D

G

A

K

L

H

N

O

Q

R

M

³

Selected Remedy: Capping with Dredging for Flooding and Navigation Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River (OU 2)

Figure 1-2

0 1,000 2,000500Feet

Newark

Jersey City

Harrison

East Newark

Kearny

DEP

TH R

ELAT

IVE

TO M

LW (F

EET)

DISTANCE FROM WEST BANK (FEET)

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 6+00 6+50 7+00

TRANSECT D

DEP

TH R

ELAT

IVE

TO M

LW (F

EET)


-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 6+00 6+50 7+00

TRANSECT I

DEP

TH R

ELAT

IVE

TO

MLW

(FEE

T)


-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 6+00 6+50 7+00

TRANSECT P

DEP

TH R

ELAT

IVE

TO M

LW (F

EET)


-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 6+00 6+50 7+00

TRANSECT B

DEP

TH R

ELAT

IVE

TO M

LW (F

EET)


-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 6+00 6+50 7+00

TRANSECT R

Record of DecisionTable 33

Dredging and Engineered Capping Expectations for the Selected Remedy

For RM 0 to RM 1.7 Extent of Federally-Authorized Navigation Channel

River Mile

Section

In the Navigation Channel Outside of the

Navigation Channel (in the Shoals)*

Channel Width

Dredging Depth (MLW)

Engineered Cap

Thickness*

Resulting Channel

Depth (MLW)

RM 0 to RM 0.6

300 feet 33 feet generally

2 feet 30 feet

~2.5 feet of dredging and ~2-foot cap

RM 0.6 to RM 1.7

300 feet 25.5 feet generally

2 feet 20 feet

~2.5 feet of dredging and ~2-foot cap

For RM 1.7 to RM 8.3 Dredging and Capping for Recreational Use

River Mile

Section

Areas Dredged for Recreational Use In the

Shoals* Width Dredging Depth** (MLW)

Engineered Cap

Thickness*

Resulting Depth (MLW)

RM 1.7 to RM 8.1

200 feet approx. 2.5 feet

generally 2 feet

10 feet ~2.5 feet of

dredging and ~2-foot cap

RM 8.1 to RM 8.3

150 feet approx. 2.5 feet

generally 2 feet

10 feet ~2.5 feet of

dredging and ~2-foot cap

Notes * Engineered cap thickness is expected to be, on average, 2 feet, although it may be determined during design that the cap thickness can vary in segments of the lower 8.3 miles, as long as protectiveness is maintained. ** Approximately 2.5 feet of dredging is expected to prevent the engineered cap from causing additional flooding, some additional smoothing out of a few areas to achieve at least 10 feet below MLW for reasonably anticipated recreational future use.

R'

Map Legend

Shoreline as defined by NJDEP

Proposed Extent of Cap or Backfill

Federally Authorized Navigation Channel

Navigation Channel River Mile Designation (per Federal Channel centerline)

Federally Authorized (USACE) Navigation Channel Centerline

Tidal Mudflats

Armor Areas

Tierra Removal - Phase 1 and Phase 2

Transectsj Debris Targets (Sunken Cars)

Bridges and Bridge Abutments

Political Boundary - Municipalities

Political Boundary - Counties

Utilities (by Location)

Submerged

Overhead Cable Lines

Unknown

7

Section LegendAuthorized Navigation Channel Lateral LimitsTop of CapApproximate Removal DepthExisting Sediment Surface (2004)Future Use Depth of Navigation ChannelMLW = 0

SourceModified from EPA. 2014. Focused Feasibility Study Report for the Lower Eight Miles of the Lower Passaic River. Prepared by The Louis Berger Group, Inc. in conjunction with Battelle HDR|HydroQual. Acronymsft - feetMLW - Mean Low Water as defined by USACENJDEP - New Jersey Department of Environmental ProtectionNJDOT - New Jersey Department of TransportationNOAA - National Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationUSACE - United States Army Corps of EngineersNoteConceptual sections are shown. Depth, extent of dredging, and capping will be refined during the Remedial Design.

RM

1.1

RM

0.5

RM 0

.1

RM 0

.3 RM 0

.2

RM

1.7

RM

0.8

RM 1

.6

RM

0.7

RM 1

.5

RM 1

.4

RM 1

.3

RM 1

.2

RM

0.9

RM 0

.4

RM

0.6

RM 0

RM

1

OU 2 SOUTHBOUNDARY

NewJersey

AtlanticOcean

ESSEX

BERGEN

UNION

PASSAIC

HUD

SON

R:\P

RO

JEC

TS\P

AS

SA

IC_R

IVE

R_5

837\

DR

ET_

CS

T_W

P_D

RE

DG

E_D

EP

TH_2

0170

919.

mxd

D

ate:

9/1

9/20

17

Dredge Depth AnalysisLower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River (OU 2)

Figure 3-10 800400

Feet

Service Layer Credits: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community

NAVIGATION CHANNEL RIVERMILENAVIGATION CHANNELCENTERLINEOU 2 SOUTHERN BOUNDARYRAILROAD (RR)

NAVIGATION CHANNELMUNICIPALITYDREDGE DEPTH 1 FOOTCONTOUR

DREDGE DEPTH ZONEBOUNDARY

-25.5 ft

-33 ft

DREDGE DEPTH (FT)0

0.1 - 2.5

2.5 - 3

3 - 4

4 - 5

5 - 8

8 - 10

10 - 12

12 - 14

14 - 16

16 - 23

RM 3

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! ! !

OU 2 SOUTHBOUNDARY

OU 2 NORTHBOUNDARY

RR

RR

CentralAvenue

I-280

RR

BridgeStreet

RR

JacksonStreet

New JerseyTurnpike RR

US 1

US 1 Truck

RM 8.3

RM 6

RM 6.2

RM 6.3

RM 8.2

RM 5.9

RM

4.7

RM 5.7

RM 6.4

RM 6.7

RM 4

.8

RM 5.6

RM 4.9

RM 6.8

RM 5.5

RM 6.9

RM 5.4

RM 7.1

RM 8

RM 5.3

RM 7

RM 5

RM 7.3

RM 6.6

RM

4.6

RM 7.2

RM 6.5

RM 3.6

RM 7.9

RM 5.2

RM 7.8

RM 3.7

RM 5.1

RM 7.4

RM 3.5

RM 4

RM 3.8

RM

3.3

RM 3.9

RM 0.3

RM 1.9

RM 4.1

RM 3.4

RM

3.2

RM 0.2

RM

4.2

RM 2.3

RM 7.7

RM

3.1

RM 1.7

RM 0.7

RM 2

RM 0.4

RM

4.5

RM 0.8

RM 0.6

RM 0.5

RM 0.1

RM 2.1

RM 0.9

RM

4.3

RM 1.8

RM 7.6

RM

2.9

RM 1

RM

3

RM

4.4

RM 2

.6

RM 2.2

RM 1.2

RM 2

.5

RM 1.1

RM 7.5

RM 1.4

RM 2.4

RM 1.3

RM 1.6

RM 1.5

Sampling for DRETs and CSTs OverviewLower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River (OU 2)

Figure 3-2

Document Path: R:\PROJECTS\PASSAIC_RIVER_5837\DRET_CST_WP_CORE_LOCATIONS_SAMPLING_OVERVIEW_20170915.mxd Date: 9/15/2017

0 1,000 2,000500

Feet

/

AtlanticOcean

NewJersey

/

NAVIGATION CHANNEL RIVER MILE

NAVIGATION CHANNEL CENTERLINE

! ! ! OU2 BOUNDARY

RAILROAD (RR)

NAVIGATION CHANNEL

PHASE 1 REMOVAL ACTIONBOUNDARY

MUNICIPALITY

SAMPLE LOCATION

DRET-CST LOCATION

CORE LOCATION

SITE WATER COLLECTIONLOCATION (APPROXIMATE)

THALWEG

TRANSECT

DREDGE DEPTH ZONE BOUNDARY

-25.5 FT MLW

-33 FT MLW

2017 NGVD29 CONTOUR

5 FOOT

1 FOOT

2017 NGVD29 ELEVATIONHigh : 5.1 FEET

Low : -42.2 FEET

Service Layer Credits: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, ' OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community

RM 3



ATTACHMENTS



Attachment A—DRET and CST Results of Phase I of the Tierra Removal

Data Report on Quality Assurance Project Plan 4 (QAPP 4 – Treatability Studies Plan) Investigation

Lower Passaic River Study Area Phase I Removal Project

Tierra Solutions, Inc.

East Brunswick, New Jersey

April 2010

Revision 0

senda.ozkan

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT A - DRET AND CST RESULTS OF PHASE I TIERRA REMOVAL PROJECT

Sample Name Matrix Date CollectedPRR1CST-01A-0 Water 9/18/2009 133,000PRR1CST-01B-0 Water 9/18/2009 144,000PRR1CST-01C-0 Water 9/18/2009 115,000PRR1CST-01D-0 Water 9/18/2009 140,000PRR1CST-01E-0 Water 9/18/2009 137,000PRR1CST-01F-0 Water 9/18/2009 136,000PRR1CST-01G-0 Water 9/18/2009 143,000PRR1CST-01H-0 Water 9/18/2009 146,000PRR1CST-01I-0 Water 9/18/2009 147,000PRR1CST-01J-0 Water 9/18/2009 142,000PRR1CST-01K-0 Water 9/18/2009 139,000PRR1CST-01A-1 Water 9/18/2009 32,000PRR1CST-01B-1 Water 9/18/2009 153,000PRR1CST-01C-1 Water 9/18/2009 145,000PRR1CST-01D-1 Water 9/18/2009 147,000PRR1CST-01E-1 Water 9/18/2009 130,000PRR1CST-01F-1 Water 9/18/2009 113,000PRR1CST-01G-1 Water 9/18/2009 121,000PRR1CST-01H-1 Water 9/18/2009 144,000PRR1CST-01I-1 Water 9/18/2009 145,000PRR1CST-01J-1 Water 9/18/2009 167,000PRR1CST-01K-1 Water 9/18/2009 163,000PRR1CST-01B-2 Water 9/18/2009 98,400PRR1CST-01C-2 Water 9/18/2009 129,000PRR1CST-01D-2 Water 9/18/2009 127,000PRR1CST-01E-2 Water 9/18/2009 139,000PRR1CST-01F-2 Water 9/18/2009 131,000PRR1CST-01G-2 Water 9/18/2009 125,000PRR1CST-01H-2 Water 9/18/2009 137,000PRR1CST-01I-2 Water 9/18/2009 131,000PRR1CST-01J-2 Water 9/18/2009 164,000PRR1CST-01K-2 Water 9/18/2009 165,000PRR1CST-01B-4 Water 9/18/2009 1,630PRR1CST-01C-4 Water 9/18/2009 78,000PRR1CST-01D-4 Water 9/18/2009 109,000PRR1CST-01E-4 Water 9/18/2009 127,000PRR1CST-01F-4 Water 9/18/2009 132,000PRR1CST-01G-4 Water 9/18/2009 125,000PRR1CST-01H-4 Water 9/18/2009 149,000PRR1CST-01I-4 Water 9/18/2009 168,000PRR1CST-01J-4 Water 9/18/2009 166,000PRR1CST-01K-4 Water 9/18/2009 164,000PRR1CST-01C-7 Water 9/18/2009 1,190PRR1CST-01D-7 Water 9/18/2009 2,260PRR1CST-01C-12 Water 9/18/2009 148

Lower Passaic River Study AreaData Report on QAPP 4 - Treatability Studies

April 2010Revision 0

Table 3-5Column Settling Test Analytical Data

Total Suspended Solids (mg/L)

6/2/2010Table 3-5 Column Settling Test Analytical Data bco-tmf.xlsx Page 1 of 10

Sample Name Matrix Date Collected





PRR1CST-01D-12 Water 9/18/2009 230PRR1CST-01E-12 Water 9/18/2009 2,560PRR1CST-01C-24 Water 9/19/2009 58.0PRR1CST-01D-24 Water 9/19/2009 100PRR1CST-01E-24 Water 9/19/2009 142PRR1CST-01F-24 Water 9/19/2009 2,190PRR1CST-01D-48 Water 9/20/2009 66.0PRR1CST-01E-48 Water 9/20/2009 72.0PRR1CST-01F-48 Water 9/20/2009 92.0PRR1CST-01G-48 Water 9/20/2009 2,110PRR1CST-01D-72 Water 9/21/2009 64.0PRR1CST-01E-72 Water 9/21/2009 94.0PRR1CST-01F-72 Water 9/21/2009 68.0PRR1CST-01G-72 Water 9/21/2009 68.0PRR1CST-01D-96 Water 9/22/2009 34.0PRR1CST-01E-96 Water 9/22/2009 48.0PRR1CST-01F-96 Water 9/22/2009 62.0PRR1CST-01G-96 Water 9/22/2009 94.0PRR1CST-01E-168 Water 9/25/2009 28.0PRR1CST-01F-168 Water 9/25/2009 42.0PRR1CST-01G-168 Water 9/25/2009 52.0PRR1CST-01H-168 Water 9/25/2009 96.0PRR1CST-01E-264 Water 9/29/2009 56.0PRR1CST-01F-264 Water 9/29/2009 54.0PRR1CST-01G-264 Water 9/29/2009 84.0PRR1CST-01H-264 Water 9/29/2009 50.0PRR1CST-01E-360 Water 10/3/2009 24.4PRR1CST-01F-360 Water 10/3/2009 57.2PRR1CST-01G-360 Water 10/3/2009 47.2PRR1CST-01H-360 Water 10/3/2009 43.2PRR1CST-02A-0 Water 9/18/2009 107,000PRR1CST-02B-0 Water 9/18/2009 109,000PRR1CST-02C-0 Water 9/18/2009 116,000PRR1CST-02D-0 Water 9/18/2009 106,000PRR1CST-02E-0 Water 9/18/2009 104,000PRR1CST-02F-0 Water 9/18/2009 118,000PRR1CST-02G-0 Water 9/18/2009 118,000PRR1CST-02H-0 Water 9/18/2009 105,000PRR1CST-02I-0 Water 9/18/2009 117,000PRR1CST-02J-0 Water 9/18/2009 121,000PRR1CST-02K-0 Water 9/18/2009 128,000PRR1CST-02A-1 Water 9/18/2009 1,810PRR1CST-02A-2 Water 9/18/2009 290PRR1CST-02A-4 Water 9/18/2009 166PRR1CST-02B-4 Water 9/18/2009 1,920







PRR1CST-02B-7 Water 9/18/2009 128PRR1CST-02C-7 Water 9/18/2009 1,980PRR1CST-02B-12 Water 9/18/2009 106PRR1CST-02C-12 Water 9/18/2009 94.0PRR1CST-02D-12 Water 9/18/2009 1,800PRR1CST-02E-12 Water 9/18/2009 2,040PRR1CST-02B-24 Water 9/19/2009 58.0PRR1CST-02C-24 Water 9/19/2009 66.0PRR1CST-02D-24 Water 9/19/2009 144PRR1CST-02E-24 Water 9/19/2009 118PRR1CST-02F-24 Water 9/19/2009 1,990PRR1CST-02G-24 Water 9/19/2009 2,170PRR1CST-02B-48 Water 9/20/2009 38.0PRR1CST-02C-48 Water 9/20/2009 46.0PRR1CST-02D-48 Water 9/20/2009 50.0PRR1CST-02E-48 Water 9/20/2009 62.0PRR1CST-02F-48 Water 9/20/2009 116PRR1CST-02G-48 Water 9/20/2009 88.0PRR1CST-02H-48 Water 9/20/2009 1,510PRR1CST-02C-72 Water 9/21/2009 72.0PRR1CST-02D-72 Water 9/21/2009 82.0PRR1CST-02E-72 Water 9/21/2009 78.0PRR1CST-02F-72 Water 9/21/2009 86.0PRR1CST-02G-72 Water 9/21/2009 94.0PRR1CST-02H-72 Water 9/21/2009 60.0PRR1CST-02C-96 Water 9/22/2009 68.0PRR1CST-02D-96 Water 9/22/2009 68.0PRR1CST-02E-96 Water 9/22/2009 58.0PRR1CST-02F-96 Water 9/22/2009 76.0PRR1CST-02G-96 Water 9/22/2009 78.0PRR1CST-02H-96 Water 9/22/2009 48.0PRR1CST-02D-168 Water 9/25/2009 74.0PRR1CST-02E-168 Water 9/25/2009 114PRR1CST-02F-168 Water 9/25/2009 78.0PRR1CST-02G-168 Water 9/25/2009 184PRR1CST-02H-168 Water 9/25/2009 54.0PRR1CST-02I-168 Water 9/25/2009 60.0PRR1CST-02D-264 Water 9/29/2009 72.0PRR1CST-02E-264 Water 9/29/2009 88.0PRR1CST-02F-264 Water 9/29/2009 88.0PRR1CST-02G-264 Water 9/29/2009 84.0PRR1CST-02H-264 Water 9/29/2009 80.0PRR1CST-02I-264 Water 9/29/2009 72.0PRR1CST-02D-360 Water 10/3/2009 64.0PRR1CST-02E-360 Water 10/3/2009 63.0







PRR1CST-02F-360 Water 10/3/2009 61.0PRR1CST-02G-360 Water 10/3/2009 61.0PRR1CST-02H-360 Water 10/3/2009 60.0PRR1CST-02I-360 Water 10/3/2009 57.0PRR1CST-03A-0 Water 9/18/2009 110,000PRR1CST-03B-0 Water 9/18/2009 126,000PRR1CST-03C-0 Water 9/18/2009 124,000PRR1CST-03D-0 Water 9/18/2009 115,000PRR1CST-03E-0 Water 9/18/2009 121,000PRR1CST-03F-0 Water 9/18/2009 129,000PRR1CST-03G-0 Water 9/18/2009 127,000PRR1CST-03H-0 Water 9/18/2009 130,000PRR1CST-03I-0 Water 9/18/2009 118,000PRR1CST-03J-0 Water 9/18/2009 123,000PRR1CST-03K-0 Water 9/18/2009 131,000PRR1CST-03A-1 Water 9/18/2009 79,400PRR1CST-03A-2 Water 9/18/2009 500PRR1CST-03A-4 Water 9/18/2009 90.0PRR1CST-03A-7 Water 9/18/2009 80.0PRR1CST-03B-7 Water 9/18/2009 1,960PRR1CST-03A-12 Water 9/18/2009 78.0PRR1CST-03B-12 Water 9/18/2009 106PRR1CST-03C-12 Water 9/18/2009 1,820PRR1CST-03D-12 Water 9/18/2009 2,720PRR1CST-03A-24 Water 9/19/2009 64.0PRR1CST-03B-24 Water 9/19/2009 60.0PRR1CST-03C-24 Water 9/19/2009 74.0PRR1CST-03D-24 Water 9/19/2009 96.0PRR1CST-03E-24 Water 9/19/2009 1,900PRR1CST-03F-24 Water 9/19/2009 1,860PRR1CST-03B-48 Water 9/20/2009 58.0PRR1CST-03C-48 Water 9/20/2009 48.0PRR1CST-03D-48 Water 9/20/2009 42.0PRR1CST-03E-48 Water 9/20/2009 80.0PRR1CST-03F-48 Water 9/20/2009 165PRR1CST-03G-48 Water 9/20/2009 744PRR1CST-03B-72 Water 9/21/2009 48.0PRR1CST-03C-72 Water 9/21/2009 50.0PRR1CST-03D-72 Water 9/21/2009 30.0PRR1CST-03E-72 Water 9/21/2009 56.0PRR1CST-03F-72 Water 9/21/2009 50.0PRR1CST-03G-72 Water 9/21/2009 50.0PRR1CST-03C-96 Water 9/22/2009 36.0PRR1CST-03D-96 Water 9/22/2009 42.0PRR1CST-03E-96 Water 9/22/2009 44.0







PRR1CST-03F-96 Water 9/22/2009 32.0PRR1CST-03G-96 Water 9/22/2009 48.0PRR1CST-03C-168 Water 9/25/2009 32.0PRR1CST-03D-168 Water 9/25/2009 28.0PRR1CST-03E-168 Water 9/25/2009 30.0PRR1CST-03F-168 Water 9/25/2009 34.0PRR1CST-03G-168 Water 9/25/2009 32.0PRR1CST-03H-168 Water 9/25/2009 82.0PRR1CST-03C-264 Water 9/29/2009 12.0PRR1CST-03D-264 Water 9/29/2009 16.0PRR1CST-03E-264 Water 9/29/2009 12.0PRR1CST-03F-264 Water 9/29/2009 10.0PRR1CST-03G-264 Water 9/29/2009 10.0 UPRR1CST-03H-264 Water 9/29/2009 24.0PRR1CST-03D-360 Water 10/3/2009 6.4PRR1CST-03E-360 Water 10/3/2009 6.0PRR1CST-03F-360 Water 10/3/2009 5.2PRR1CST-03G-360 Water 10/3/2009 6.4PRR1CST-03H-360 Water 10/3/2009 6.8PRR1CST-03I-360 Water 10/3/2009 1,010PRR1CST-04A-0 Water 9/18/2009 38,700PRR1CST-04B-0 Water 9/18/2009 40,800PRR1CST-04C-0 Water 9/18/2009 42,400PRR1CST-04D-0 Water 9/18/2009 45,300PRR1CST-04E-0 Water 9/18/2009 46,200PRR1CST-04F-0 Water 9/18/2009 50,200PRR1CST-04G-0 Water 9/18/2009 50,200PRR1CST-04H-0 Water 9/18/2009 51,700PRR1CST-04I-0 Water 9/18/2009 53,400PRR1CST-04J-0 Water 9/18/2009 54,300PRR1CST-04K-0 Water 9/18/2009 63,100PRR1CST-04A-1 Water 9/18/2009 1,210PRR1CST-04B-1 Water 9/18/2009 1,180PRR1CST-04A-2 Water 9/18/2009 218PRR1CST-04B-2 Water 9/18/2009 256PRR1CST-04A-4 Water 9/18/2009 78.0PRR1CST-04B-4 Water 9/18/2009 100PRR1CST-04C-4 Water 9/18/2009 855PRR1CST-04D-4 Water 9/18/2009 1,080PRR1CST-04E-4 Water 9/18/2009 1,040PRR1CST-04A-7 Water 9/18/2009 50.0PRR1CST-04B-7 Water 9/18/2009 62.0PRR1CST-04C-7 Water 9/18/2009 70.0PRR1CST-04D-7 Water 9/18/2009 84.0PRR1CST-04E-7 Water 9/18/2009 130







PRR1CST-04F-7 Water 9/18/2009 1,030PRR1CST-04G-7 Water 9/18/2009 1,140PRR1CST-04H-7 Water 9/18/2009 1,240PRR1CST-04B-12 Water 9/18/2009 42.0PRR1CST-04C-12 Water 9/18/2009 42.0PRR1CST-04D-12 Water 9/18/2009 42.0PRR1CST-04E-12 Water 9/18/2009 96.0PRR1CST-04F-12 Water 9/18/2009 98.0PRR1CST-04G-12 Water 9/18/2009 104PRR1CST-04H-12 Water 9/18/2009 220PRR1CST-04B-24 Water 9/19/2009 26.0PRR1CST-04C-24 Water 9/19/2009 30.0PRR1CST-04D-24 Water 9/19/2009 28.0PRR1CST-04E-24 Water 9/19/2009 32.0PRR1CST-04F-24 Water 9/19/2009 18.0PRR1CST-04G-24 Water 9/19/2009 48.0PRR1CST-04H-24 Water 9/19/2009 34.0PRR1CST-04I-24 Water 9/19/2009 1,210PRR1CST-04C-48 Water 9/20/2009 20.0PRR1CST-04D-48 Water 9/20/2009 12.0PRR1CST-04E-48 Water 9/20/2009 18.0PRR1CST-04F-48 Water 9/20/2009 24.0PRR1CST-04G-48 Water 9/20/2009 16.0PRR1CST-04H-48 Water 9/20/2009 18.0PRR1CST-04I-48 Water 9/20/2009 30.0PRR1CST-04C-72 Water 9/21/2009 24.0PRR1CST-04D-72 Water 9/21/2009 18.0PRR1CST-04E-72 Water 9/21/2009 26.0PRR1CST-04F-72 Water 9/21/2009 28.0PRR1CST-04G-72 Water 9/21/2009 56.0PRR1CST-04H-72 Water 9/21/2009 40.0PRR1CST-04I-72 Water 9/21/2009 90.0PRR1CST-04J-72 Water 9/21/2009 945PRR1CST-04C-96 Water 9/22/2009 22.0PRR1CST-04D-96 Water 9/22/2009 28.0PRR1CST-04E-96 Water 9/22/2009 36.0PRR1CST-04F-96 Water 9/22/2009 28.0PRR1CST-04G-96 Water 9/22/2009 20.0PRR1CST-04H-96 Water 9/22/2009 26.0PRR1CST-04I-96 Water 9/22/2009 24.0PRR1CST-04J-96 Water 9/22/2009 32.0PRR1CST-04D-168 Water 9/25/2009 18.0PRR1CST-04E-168 Water 9/25/2009 22.0PRR1CST-04F-168 Water 9/25/2009 14.0PRR1CST-04G-168 Water 9/25/2009 28.0







PRR1CST-04H-168 Water 9/25/2009 14.0PRR1CST-04I-168 Water 9/25/2009 18.0PRR1CST-04J-168 Water 9/25/2009 16.0PRR1CST-04D-264 Water 9/29/2009 10.0 UPRR1CST-04E-264 Water 9/29/2009 10.0PRR1CST-04F-264 Water 9/29/2009 10.0 UPRR1CST-04G-264 Water 9/29/2009 10.0 UPRR1CST-04H-264 Water 9/29/2009 10.0 UPRR1CST-04I-264 Water 9/29/2009 10.0 UPRR1CST-04J-264 Water 9/29/2009 10.0 UPRR1CST-04E-360 Water 10/3/2009 3.6PRR1CST-04F-360 Water 10/3/2009 2.8PRR1CST-04G-360 Water 10/3/2009 2.4PRR1CST-04H-360 Water 10/3/2009 3.6PRR1CST-04I-360 Water 10/3/2009 3.2PRR1CST-04J-360 Water 10/3/2009 6.4PRR1CST-05B-0 Water 10/5/2009 114,000PRR1CST-05C-0 Water 10/5/2009 139,000PRR1CST-05D-0 Water 10/5/2009 156,000PRR1CST-05E-0 Water 10/5/2009 160,000PRR1CST-05F-0 Water 10/5/2009 149,000PRR1CST-05G-0 Water 10/5/2009 156,000PRR1CST-05H-0 Water 10/5/2009 158,000PRR1CST-05I-0 Water 10/5/2009 150,000PRR1CST-05J-0 Water 10/5/2009 151,000PRR1CST-05K-0 Water 10/5/2009 152,000PRR1CST-05C-4 Water 10/5/2009 3,600PRR1CST-05C-7 Water 10/5/2009 184PRR1CST-05C-12 Water 10/5/2009 144PRR1CST-05D-12 Water 10/5/2009 132PRR1CST-05E-12 Water 10/5/2009 146PRR1CST-05F-12 Water 10/5/2009 320PRR1CST-05C-24 Water 10/6/2009 86.0PRR1CST-05D-24 Water 10/6/2009 2,220PRR1CST-05E-24 Water 10/6/2009 2,300PRR1CST-05F-24 Water 10/6/2009 2,380PRR1CST-05C-48 Water 10/7/2009 86.0PRR1CST-05D-48 Water 10/7/2009 124PRR1CST-05E-48 Water 10/7/2009 210PRR1CST-05F-48 Water 10/7/2009 106PRR1CST-05C-72 Water 10/8/2009 74.0PRR1CST-05D-72 Water 10/8/2009 74.0PRR1CST-05E-72 Water 10/8/2009 76.0PRR1CST-05F-72 Water 10/8/2009 66.0PRR1CST-05G-72 Water 10/8/2009 1,840







PRR1CST-05D-96 Water 10/9/2009 58.0PRR1CST-05E-96 Water 10/9/2009 80.0PRR1CST-05F-96 Water 10/9/2009 58.0PRR1CST-05G-96 Water 10/9/2009 92.0PRR1CST-05D-168 Water 10/12/2009 20.0PRR1CST-05E-168 Water 10/12/2009 46.0PRR1CST-05F-168 Water 10/12/2009 42.0PRR1CST-05G-168 Water 10/12/2009 58.8PRR1CST-05H-168 Water 10/12/2009 1,520PRR1CST-05E-264 Water 10/16/2009 62.0PRR1CST-05F-264 Water 10/16/2009 37.2PRR1CST-05G-264 Water 10/16/2009 62.4PRR1CST-05H-264 Water 10/16/2009 82.4PRR1CST-05E-360 Water 10/20/2009 29.2PRR1CST-05F-360 Water 10/20/2009 28.4PRR1CST-05G-360 Water 10/20/2009 38.8PRR1CST-05H-360 Water 10/20/2009 39.2PRR1CST-06C-0 Water 10/5/2009 142,000PRR1CST-06D-0 Water 10/5/2009 141,000PRR1CST-06E-0 Water 10/5/2009 146,000PRR1CST-06F-0 Water 10/5/2009 146,000PRR1CST-06G-0 Water 10/5/2009 144,000PRR1CST-06H-0 Water 10/5/2009 142,000PRR1CST-06I-0 Water 10/5/2009 148,000PRR1CST-06J-0 Water 10/5/2009 146,000PRR1CST-06K-0 Water 10/5/2009 147,000PRR1CST-06C-1 Water 10/5/2009 16,800PRR1CST-06C-2 Water 10/5/2009 765PRR1CST-06C-4 Water 10/5/2009 328PRR1CST-06C-7 Water 10/5/2009 142PRR1CST-06D-7 Water 10/5/2009 2,260PRR1CST-06D-12 Water 10/5/2009 268PRR1CST-06E-12 Water 10/5/2009 1,820PRR1CST-06F-12 Water 10/5/2009 1,920PRR1CST-06D-24 Water 10/6/2009 62.0PRR1CST-06E-24 Water 10/6/2009 120PRR1CST-06F-24 Water 10/6/2009 128PRR1CST-06D-48 Water 10/7/2009 92.0PRR1CST-06E-48 Water 10/7/2009 90.0PRR1CST-06F-48 Water 10/7/2009 80.0PRR1CST-06G-48 Water 10/7/2009 1,480PRR1CST-06D-72 Water 10/8/2009 78.0PRR1CST-06E-72 Water 10/8/2009 68.0PRR1CST-06F-72 Water 10/8/2009 58.0PRR1CST-06G-72 Water 10/8/2009 126







PRR1CST-06E-96 Water 10/9/2009 72.0PRR1CST-06F-96 Water 10/9/2009 66.0PRR1CST-06G-96 Water 10/9/2009 62.0PRR1CST-06E-168 Water 10/12/2009 71.0PRR1CST-06F-168 Water 10/12/2009 64.5PRR1CST-06G-168 Water 10/12/2009 68.5PRR1CST-06H-168 Water 10/12/2009 123PRR1CST-06E-264 Water 10/16/2009 61.6PRR1CST-06F-264 Water 10/16/2009 62.4PRR1CST-06G-264 Water 10/16/2009 58.0PRR1CST-06H-264 Water 10/16/2009 76.5PRR1CST-06F-360 Water 10/20/2009 47.2PRR1CST-06G-360 Water 10/20/2009 55.6PRR1CST-06H-360 Water 10/20/2009 76.0


Notes:CST = column settling testmg/L = milligrams per liter

U = The analyte was analyzed for, but was not detected above the reported sample quantiation limit.

1. The sample name for the CST samples was assigned according to the following:

Characters 8 and 9 are numbers that identify the sediment composites and water samples used in the test (see below).

CST-01 was conducted using PRR1SEDBC-01 and average salinity surface water (PRR1WAT-01-01). CST-02 was conducted using PRR1SEDBC-02 and average salinity surface water (PRR1WAT-01-01). CST-03 was conducted using PRR1SEDBC-03 and average salinity surface water (PRR1WAT-01-01). CST-04 was conducted using PRR1SEDBC-04 and average salinity surface water (PRR1WAT-01-01). CST-05 was conducted using PRR1SEDBC-01 and high salinity water (PRR1WAT-03-01). CST-06 was conducted using PRR1SEDBC-01 and low salinity water (PRR1WAT-02-01).

Character 10 is a letter that describes the sample port from which the sample was collected. The ports were assignedletters from A through K, with A being furthest from the base of the column and K being closest to the base of the column.

Port Height From Base (inches) A 72B 66C 60D 54E 48F 42G 36H 30I 24J 18K 12

Characters 11 to 13 are numbers that describe how many hours after the start of the test the sample was collected (from 0 to 360 hours).



Characters 1 through 7 describe the site: "PR" for Passaic River, the phase during which the sample was collected (i.e., “R1” for Phase I Removal), and the type of treatability test "CST."



Matrix Water Water Water WaterSample Name PRR1DRET-01 PRR1DRET-02 PRR1DRET-03 PRR1DRET-04Sample Date Units 9/28/2009 9/28/2009 9/28/2009 9/28/2009Aroclor PCBsAroclor-1016 µg/L 1.2 U 120 DU 1.2 U 1.0 UAroclor-1221 µg/L 1.2 U 120 DU 1.2 U 1.0 UAroclor-1232 µg/L 1.2 U 120 DU 1.2 U 1.0 UAroclor-1242 µg/L 1.2 U 120 DU 0.13 GP 1.0 UAroclor-1248 µg/L 1.2 U 120 DU 1.2 U 1.0 UAroclor-1254 µg/L 1.2 U 120 DU 0.16 GP 1.0 UAroclor-1260 µg/L 4.4 P 27 DG 1.2 U 1.0 UAroclor-1262 µg/L 1.2 U 120 DU 1.2 U 1.0 UAroclor-1268 µg/L 1.2 U 120 DU 1.2 U 1.0 UTotal Aroclor PCBs (Sum of 9 Aroclors) (Max DL) µg/L 4.4 27 0.29 1.0 UCongener PCBsPCB-1 pg/L 5,270 D 385,000 D 1,700 1,370PCB-2 pg/L 1,730 D 424,000 D 1,340 520PCB-3 pg/L 2,870 D 200,000 D 877 596PCB-4/10 pg/L 4,010 D 142,000 D 1,330 223PCB-5/8 pg/L 17,700 D 626,000 D 3,730 671PCB-6 pg/L 4,300 D 151,000 D 1,190 162PCB-7/9 pg/L 2,510 D 460,000 D 805 170PCB-11 pg/L 13,600 BD 50,500 BD 4,820 B 2,760 BPCB-12/13 pg/L 5,730 D 1,520,000 D 1,580 269PCB-14 pg/L 1,330 D 688,000 D 308 76.7PCB-15 pg/L 11,500 D 145,000 D 2,730 517PCB-16/32 pg/L 29,000 BD 26,300 BD 5,420 B 1,120 BPCB-17 pg/L 20,200 BD 15,600 BD 3,850 B 778 BPCB-18 pg/L 47,300 BD 60,600 BD 8,600 B 1,800 BPCB-19 pg/L 3,310 BD 1,400 BD 630 B 122 BPCB-20/21/33 pg/L 36,500 BD 190,000 BD 7,600 B 1,620 BPCB-22 pg/L 23,100 D 47,200 D 5,000 974PCB-23 pg/L 309 D 66,600 D 89.0 16.7 GPCB-24/27 pg/L 3,820 D 180,000 D 797 156PCB-25 pg/L 7,120 BD 5,920 BD 1,960 B 280 BPCB-26 pg/L 10,200 BD 27,400 BD 2,290 B 423 BPCB-28 pg/L 76,100 BD 160,000 BD 14,900 B 2,920 BPCB-29 pg/L 626 D 29,800 D 114 24.0 GPCB-30 pg/L 90.3 DG 13,100 D 20.3 G 27.1 UPCB-31 pg/L 51,600 BD 108,000 BD 12,500 B 2,460 BPCB-34 pg/L 494 D 34,500 D 160 29.3PCB-35 pg/L 1,990 D 74,800 D 761 314PCB-36 pg/L 186 D 35,000 D 77.8 18.3 GPCB-37 pg/L 14,800 D 286,000 D 3,560 743PCB-38 pg/L 546 D 10,600 D 106 28.0PCB-39 pg/L 410 D 50,000 D 199 37.1PCB-40 pg/L 6,750 D 3,210 D 3,920 702PCB-41/64/71/72 pg/L 45,300 D 43,600 D 17,700 3,270PCB-42/59 pg/L 21,300 BD 6,870 BD 4,890 B 1,020 BPCB-43/49 pg/L 50,100 BD 15,800 BD 12,900 B 2,500 BPCB-44 pg/L 65,500 BD 21,400 BD 20,500 B 3,990 BPCB-45 pg/L 10,500 D 2,470 D 2,570 541PCB-46 pg/L 4,380 D 842 DG 1,140 232PCB-47 pg/L 19,900 BD 19,900 BD 6,290 B 1,190 BPCB-48/75 pg/L 16,600 BD 8,650 BD 5,170 B 853 BPCB-50 pg/L 248 DG 366 DG 65.4 11.5 G

Table 3-6Dredging Elutriate Test Chemistry Data



6/2/2010Table 3-6 Dredging Elutriate Test Chemistry Data.xlsx Page 1 of 7

Matrix Water Water Water WaterSample Name PRR1DRET-01 PRR1DRET-02 PRR1DRET-03 PRR1DRET-04Sample Date Units 9/28/2009 9/28/2009 9/28/2009 9/28/2009




PCB-51 pg/L 4,170 D 829 DG 1,140 186PCB-52/69 pg/L 68,400 BD 28,000 BD 17,100 B 3,650 BPCB-53 pg/L 9,830 D 3,910 D 2,540 528PCB-54 pg/L 227 DG 1,070 UD 53.0 G 8.31 GPCB-55 pg/L 1,390 D 2,980 D 326 71.2PCB-56/60 pg/L 43,300 BD 50,100 BD 10,900 B 2,520 BPCB-57 pg/L 446 D 1,470 D 123 23.1 GPCB-58 pg/L 228 DG 1,280 D 87.0 54.1 UPCB-61/70 pg/L 82,200 BD 59,100 BD 22,600 B 4,940 BPCB-62 pg/L 267 UD 1,610 D 53.3 U 54.1 UPCB-63 pg/L 3,070 D 7,630 D 846 169PCB-65 pg/L 267 UD 715 DG 53.3 U 54.1 UPCB-67 pg/L 2,720 D 1,710 D 815 137PCB-68 pg/L 253 DG 1,390 D 195 31.3 GPCB-73 pg/L 267 UD 306 DG 53.3 U 54.1 UPCB-74 pg/L 44,200 D 107,000 D 9,230 1,970PCB-76/66 pg/L 63,800 D 70,300 D 17,400 4,010PCB-77 pg/L 6,500 D 21,100 D 2,040 442PCB-78 pg/L 200 DG 1,170 UDI 63.4 15.7 GPCB-79 pg/L 890 D 15,700 UDI 276 64.7 UIPCB-80 pg/L 267 UD 3,650 D 53.3 U 54.1 UPCB-81 pg/L 450 D 4,180 D 107 62.9PCB-82 pg/L 8,980 D 3,010 D 2,490 560PCB-83 pg/L 267 UD 637 DG 53.3 U 54.1 UPCB-84/92 pg/L 25,900 D 8,900 D 7,830 1,780PCB-85/116 pg/L 11,500 D 10,200 D 2,790 625PCB-86 pg/L 633 D 4,520 D 159 54.1 UPCB-87/117/125 pg/L 22,600 D 11,100 D 5,150 1,280PCB-88/91 pg/L 10,000 D 3,730 D 3,040 610PCB-89 pg/L 1,220 D 675 DG 420 82.0PCB-90/101 pg/L 62,600 BD 22,800 BD 18,800 B 4,200 BPCB-93 pg/L 267 UD 1,070 UD 53.3 U 54.1 UPCB-94 pg/L 558 D 1,180 D 155 25.1 GPCB-95/98/102 pg/L 46,100 BD 17,100 BD 12,800 B 2,810 BPCB-96 pg/L 513 D 312 DG 242 42.2 GPCB-97 pg/L 19,200 D 5,660 D 5,000 1,130PCB-99 pg/L 31,600 BD 34,700 BD 9,460 B 2,030 BPCB-100 pg/L 813 D 589 DG 251 23.7 GPCB-103 pg/L 771 D 931 DG 239 38.9 GPCB-104 pg/L 106 DG 171 UD 28.5 G 54.1 UPCB-105 pg/L 25,100 D 26,700 D 6,020 1,320PCB-106/118 pg/L 68,400 BD 88,200 BD 17,400 B 3,620 BPCB-107/109 pg/L 4,580 D 4,500 D 1,460 278PCB-108/112 pg/L 2,960 D 1,750 D 815 179PCB-110 pg/L 67,100 D 23,700 D 16,800 3,760PCB-111/115 pg/L 1,460 D 5,570 D 281 46.4 GPCB-113 pg/L 267 UD 1,070 UD 53.3 U 54.1 UPCB-114 pg/L 3,660 D 38,500 UDI 448 97.7PCB-119 pg/L 1,510 D 1,930 D 450 82.3PCB-120 pg/L 97.9 DG 181 DG 53.3 U 54.1 UPCB-121 pg/L 267 UD 1,070 UD 53.3 U 54.1 UPCB-122 pg/L 683 D 1,070 UD 256 46.6 GPCB-123 pg/L 1,430 D 5,020 D 335 65.9






PCB-124 pg/L 2,680 D 3,870 D 685 146PCB-126 pg/L 418 D 3,180 UDI 97.5 19.0 GPCB-127 pg/L 267 UD 1,070 UD 53.3 U 54.1 UPCB-128/162 pg/L 8,840 D 5,300 D 2,690 545PCB-129 pg/L 2,750 D 3,640 D 788 168PCB-130 pg/L 2,870 D 1,250 D 1,180 203PCB-131 pg/L 68.9 DG 1,040 DG 53.3 U 54.1 UPCB-132/161 pg/L 15,300 BD 5,490 BD 4,960 B 1,000 BPCB-133/142 pg/L 1,670 D 1,490 D 571 109PCB-134/143 pg/L 2,880 D 2,290 D 907 188PCB-135 pg/L 7,080 D 3,740 D 2,340 413PCB-136 pg/L 7,530 D 2,570 D 2,130 407PCB-137 pg/L 3,360 D 8,480 D 798 178PCB-138/163/164 pg/L 55,100 BD 37,900 BD 17,300 B 3,400 BPCB-139/149 pg/L 42,700 D 16,800 D 12,500 2,420PCB-140 pg/L 431 D 432 DG 168 22.4 GPCB-141 pg/L 11,900 D 25,200 D 3,240 645PCB-144 pg/L 2,800 D 2,820 D 698 138PCB-145 pg/L 267 UD 1,070 UD 9.38 G 54.1 UPCB-146/165 pg/L 7,880 D 3,840 D 2,980 518PCB-147 pg/L 1,300 D 812 DG 435 65.2PCB-148 pg/L 145 DG 386 DG 40.1 G 54.1 UPCB-150 pg/L 137 DG 493 DG 51.6 G 54.1 UPCB-151 pg/L 12,300 D 5,420 D 3,660 655PCB-152 pg/L 71.1 DG 1,070 UD 25.1 G 54.1 UPCB-153 pg/L 54,100 BD 39,600 BD 17,500 B 3,220 BPCB-154 pg/L 910 D 1,490 D 350 43.1 GPCB-155 pg/L 3,620 D 429 DG 989 42.8 GPCB-156 pg/L 8,790 D 55,100 D 1,760 377PCB-157 pg/L 1,560 D 7,420 D 406 82.4PCB-158/160 pg/L 7,090 D 11,600 D 2,080 398PCB-159 pg/L 550 D 805 DG 192 36.0 GPCB-166 pg/L 604 D 5,670 D 79.2 20.9 GPCB-167 pg/L 2,780 D 11,700 D 712 142PCB-168 pg/L 283 D 557 DG 85.9 54.1 UPCB-169 pg/L 267 UD 665 DG 53.3 U 54.1 UPCB-170 pg/L 14,200 D 19,000 D 4,610 760PCB-171 pg/L 3,870 D 3,960 D 1,220 207PCB-172 pg/L 2,640 D 4,940 D 792 143PCB-173 pg/L 427 D 1,760 D 129 22.7 GPCB-174 pg/L 16,200 D 11,200 D 4,950 885PCB-175 pg/L 676 D 1,410 D 231 35.6 GPCB-176 pg/L 1,980 D 396 DG 730 121PCB-177 pg/L 8,980 D 4,080 D 2,970 500PCB-178 pg/L 3,120 D 2,020 D 1,080 175PCB-179 pg/L 7,460 D 3,060 D 2,570 404PCB-180 pg/L 37,000 D 51,700 D 12,400 2,120PCB-181 pg/L 267 UD 1,570 D 46.9 G 54.1 UPCB-182/187 pg/L 19,100 BD 11,000 BD 6,560 B 1,140 BPCB-183 pg/L 8,350 D 8,220 D 2,630 463PCB-184 pg/L 284 D 1,010 DG 62.5 54.1 UPCB-185 pg/L 2,110 D 7,430 D 557 101PCB-186 pg/L 267 UD 211 DG 53.3 U 54.1 U






PCB-188 pg/L 54.0 DG 477 DG 19.0 G 54.1 UPCB-189 pg/L 1,460 D 17,600 D 190 39.0 GPCB-190 pg/L 4,580 D 24,000 D 1,000 180PCB-191 pg/L 764 D 3,270 D 210 35.5 GPCB-192 pg/L 267 UD 747 DG 53.3 U 54.1 UPCB-193 pg/L 1,930 D 2,450 D 639 107PCB-194 pg/L 9,260 D 35,900 D 2,800 552PCB-195 pg/L 3,640 D 9,040 D 1,070 197PCB-196/203 pg/L 11,900 D 37,900 D 4,000 880PCB-197 pg/L 428 D 1,680 D 134 25.6 GPCB-198 pg/L 639 D 4,220 D 173 45.5 GPCB-199 pg/L 10,600 D 20,500 D 4,070 1,030PCB-200 pg/L 1,390 D 3,010 D 475 86.7PCB-201 pg/L 1,410 D 2,850 D 521 110PCB-202 pg/L 2,380 D 6,680 D 1,030 380PCB-204 pg/L 400 UD 543 DG 7.04 G 81.2 UPCB-205 pg/L 1,600 UDI 19,300 UDI 145 36.2 GPCB-206 pg/L 9,670 D 105,000 D 2,230 1,080PCB-207 pg/L 1,140 D 11,200 D 232 74.5 GPCB-208 pg/L 1,720 D 12,800 D 675 400PCB-209 pg/L 276,000 D 1,040,000 D 1,880 1,120Total PCBs (209 Congeners) (Max DL) pg/L 2,130,000 8,730,000 509,000 108,000Dioxins1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD pg/L 2,260 1,950 D 215 59.71,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD pg/L 213 364 D 6.41 U 3.86 U1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD pg/L 714 741 D 14.0 G 4.75 G1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD pg/L 351 349 D 7.09 EMPC 3.68 U1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF pg/L 71,600 EI 154,000 DI 333 3101,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF pg/L 3,130 7,100 D 12.9 G 11.9 G1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF pg/L 25,500 EI 59,600 D 64.5 81.71,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF pg/L 4,320 11,000 D 18.5 G 24.4 G1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF pg/L 95.3 U 50.5 UD 4.75 U 5.02 U2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF pg/L 1,930 4,320 D 11.6 G 9.24 G1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD pg/L 464 589 D 4.19 EMPC 3.07 U1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF pg/L 736 1,610 D 6.65 G 5.63 G2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF pg/L 3,120 8,010 D 19.0 G 12.5 G2,3,7,8-TCDD pg/L 103,000 E 80,400 DE 470 2932,3,7,8-TCDF pg/L 482 896 D 7.84 5.19 GOCDD pg/L 123,000 E 75,400 D 2,470 1,060OCDF pg/L 431,000 DE 403,000 D 614 751Total HpCDD pg/L 4,420 5,210 D 432 119Total HxCDD pg/L 5,210 8,500 D 89.5 44.3Total HpCDF pg/L 84,900 I 181,000 DI 468 381Total HxCDF pg/L 55,600 I 122,000 D 278 242Total PeCDD pg/L 4,940 11,700 D 40.0 18.8Total PeCDF pg/L 65,500 I 87,800 D 317 191Total TCDD pg/L 111,000 118,000 D 775 356Total TCDF pg/L 97,400 I 112,000 D 359 209Herbicides2,4,5-T µg/L 1,200 D 2,000 DG 0.43 G 0.39 G2,4-D µg/L 4,800 DB 22,000 DB 2.5 B 3.2 B






MetalsArsenic mg/L 0.014 B 0.016 B 0.011 B 0.034Cadmium mg/L 0.0059 0.0031 B 0.0020 B 0.0019 BChromium mg/L 0.16 0.078 0.030 0.063Copper mg/L 0.14 0.11 0.040 0.096Cyanide mg/L 0.0027 U 0.0027 U 0.0027 U 0.0053 BIron mg/L 9.3 8.8 1.8 4.3Lead mg/L 0.19 0.14 0.058 0.20Mercury mg/L 0.00018 BN 0.0016 N 0.00055 N 0.0012 NNickel mg/L 0.031 B 0.018 B 0.011 B 0.027 BSelenium mg/L 0.0042 U 0.0042 U 0.0042 U 0.0042 USilver mg/L 0.0021 B 0.00052 U 0.00052 U 0.00096 BZinc mg/L 0.42 0.33 0.12 0.25MiscellaneousTotal Organic Carbon mg/L 21 D 82 D 11 D 5.3Total Suspended Solids mg/L 340 93.0 104 108Pesticides2,4'-DDD µg/L 2.0 D 250 D 0.66 0.099 G2,4'-DDE µg/L 0.26 P 50 DP 0.10 GP 0.018 G2,4'-DDT µg/L 5.9 D 420 D 0.11 P 0.028 GP4,4'-DDD µg/L 5.4 D 570 D 1.4 0.144,4'-DDE µg/L 0.58 D 100 D 1.5 0.10 U4,4'-DDT µg/L 23 D 1,500 D 2.0 D 0.21Aldrin µg/L 0.083 DG 49 DU 0.067 0.052 Ualpha-BHC µg/L 0.11 DGP 49 DU 0.011 G 0.052 Ualpha-Chlordane µg/L 0.57 DP 32 DGP 0.053 U 0.052 Ubeta-BHC µg/L 0.79 DP 20 DGP 0.020 GP 0.033 GPdelta-BHC µg/L 2.8 DP 20 DGP 0.053 U 0.052 UDieldrin µg/L 0.34 DU 98 DU 0.11 U 0.10 UEndosulfan I µg/L 0.053 DGP 49 DU 0.012 GP 0.052 UEndosulfan II µg/L 0.20 DGP 98 DU 0.11 U 0.10 UEndosulfan sulfate µg/L 0.34 DU 98 DU 0.11 U 0.10 UEndrin µg/L 0.12 DGP 98 DU 0.070 GP 0.10 UEndrin aldehyde µg/L 0.31 DGP 98 DU 0.11 U 0.10 UEndrin ketone µg/L 0.13 DGP 98 DU 0.11 U 0.10 Ugamma-BHC (Lindane) µg/L 0.68 DP 49 DU 0.038 G 0.016 Ggamma-Chlordane µg/L 0.11 DGP 49 DU 0.053 U 0.037 GPHeptachlor µg/L 10 D 290 D 0.022 GP 0.026 GHeptachlor epoxide µg/L 0.25 DP 23 DGP 0.053 U 0.052 UMethoxychlor µg/L 1.2 DG 490 DU 0.53 U 0.52 UToxaphene µg/L 17 DU 4,900 DU 5.3 U 5.2 UTotal Alpha + Gamma Chlordane (Max DL) µg/L 0.68 32 0.053 U 0.037Total DDT (2,4) (Max DL) µg/L 8.2 720 0.87 0.15Total DDT (4,4) (Max DL) µg/L 29 2,200 4.9 0.35Total DDT (2,4 & 4,4) (Max DL) µg/L 37 2,900 5.8 0.50SVOCs1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 5.1 U2,4,5-Trichlorophenol µg/L 2,000 DB 12,000 DB 1.9 GB 2.1 GB2,4,6-Trichlorophenol µg/L 1,500 D 67,000 D 13 2.4 G2,4-Dichlorophenol µg/L 4,200 D 48,000 D 8.9 3.8 G2,4-Dimethylphenol µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 5.1 U2,4-Dinitrophenol µg/L 38 DU 480 DU 11 U 10 U2,4-Dinitrotoluene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 5.1 U






2,6-Dinitrotoluene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 5.1 U2-Chlorophenol µg/L 21 D 260 D 5.7 U 5.1 U2-Methylnaphthalene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 1.4 G2-Nitrophenol µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 5.1 U3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 5.1 U4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol µg/L 38 DU 480 DU 11 U 10 U4-Nitrophenol µg/L 38 DU 480 DU 11 U 10 UAcenaphthene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 2.0 GAcenaphthylene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 5.1 UAnthracene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 1.3 GBenzo(a)anthracene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 2.7 GBenzo(a)pyrene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 2.9 GBenzo(b)fluoranthene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 1.6 GBenzo(g,h,i)perylene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 1.0 GBenzo(k)fluoranthene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 1.7 GBis(2-chloroethyl)ether µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 5.1 UBis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate µg/L 150 D 240 DU 13 4.9 GButylbenzylphthalate µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 5.1 UChrysene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 3.3 GDibenzo(a,h)anthracene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 5.1 UDiethylphthalate µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 5.1 UDimethylphthalate µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 5.1 UDi-n-butylphthalate µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 5.1 UFluoranthene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 2.3 GFluorene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 0.84 GHexachlorobenzene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 5.1 UHexachlorobutadiene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 5.1 UHexachlorocyclopentadiene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 5.1 UHexachloroethane µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 5.1 UIndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 0.80 GIsophorone µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 5.1 UNaphthalene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 1.6 GNitrobenzene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 5.1 UN-Nitrosodiphenylamine µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 5.1 UPentachlorophenol µg/L 38 DU 480 DU 11 U 10 UPhenanthrene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 2.3 GPhenol µg/L 30 D 61 DG 5.7 U 5.1 UPyrene µg/L 19 DU 240 DU 5.7 U 3.8 GPyridine µg/L 19 DU 270 DU 5.7 U 5.4 UTotal HMW PAHs (Max DL) µg/L 19 U 240 U 5.7 U 20Total LMW PAHs (Max DL) µg/L 19 U 240 U 5.7 U 9.4Total PAHs (Max DL) µg/L 19 U 240 U 5.7 U 30TEPHTPH mg/L 13 D 61 D 0.86 G 1.2VOCs1,1-Dichloroethene µg/L 5.0 U 10 DU 5.0 U 5.0 U1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene µg/L 5.0 U 5.7 DG 5.0 U 5.0 U1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene µg/L 3.6 G 24 D 5.0 U 5.0 U1,2-Dichlorobenzene µg/L 3.5 G 87 D 5.0 U 5.0 U1,2-Dichloroethane µg/L 5.0 U 10 DU 5.0 U 5.0 U1,3-Dichlorobenzene µg/L 5.0 U 10 DU 5.0 U 5.0 U1,4-Dichlorobenzene µg/L 4.7 G 110 D 5.0 U 5.0 U2-Butanone µg/L 34 48 D 10 U 10 U






Benzene µg/L 5.0 U 150 D 2.5 G 5.0 UCarbon tetrachloride µg/L 5.0 U 10 DU 5.0 U 5.0 UChlorobenzene µg/L 12 2,900 D 41 3.8 GChloroform µg/L 5.0 U 9.2 DG 5.0 U 5.0 UEthylbenzene µg/L 5.0 U 10 DU 5.0 U 5.0 UMethylene chloride µg/L 5.4 5.9 DG 3.8 G 3.3 GTetrachloroethene µg/L 5.0 U 1.9 DG 5.0 U 5.0 UToluene µg/L 1.1 G 200 D 5.0 U 5.0 UTrichloroethene µg/L 5.0 U 10 DU 5.0 U 5.0 UVinyl chloride µg/L 5.0 U 10 DU 5.0 U 5.0 U

Notes:BHC = benzene hexachlorideDDD = dichlorodiphenyldichloroethaneDDE = dichlorodiphenyldichloroethyleneDDT = dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethaneDL = detection limitHMW = high molecular weightHpCDD = heptachlorodibenzo-p -dioxinHpCDF = heptachlorodibenzofuranHxCDD = hexachlorodibenzo-p -dioxinHxCDF = hexachlorodibenzofuranLMW = low molecular weightmg/L = milligrams per literPCB = polychlorinated biphenylPeCDD = pentachlorodibenzo-p -dioxinPeCDF = pentachlorodibenzofuranpg/L = picrograms per literOCDD = octachlorodibenzo-p -dioxinOCDF = octachlorodibenzofuranSVOC = semivolatile organic compoundTCDD = tetrachlorodibenzo-p -dioxinTCDF = tetrachlorodibenzofuranTEPH = total extractable petroleum hydrocarbonTPH = total petroleum hydrocarbonµg/L = micrograms per literVOC = volatile organic compound

B = Inorganics - The reported value was obtained from an instrument reading that was less than the Project Quantitation Limit (PQL). Organics - The associated analyte was also detected in the method blank.D = The organic analyte was quantitated from a diluted analysis.E = Inorganics - The reported value is estimated because of the presence of an interference. Organics - The associated compound concentration exceeded the calibration range of the instrument.EMPC = estimated maximum possible concentration.G = Organic data indicated the presence of a compound that meets the identification criteria; the result is below the PQL but above the Method Detection Limit.I = The laboratory indicated the presence of an interference during the sample analysis.N = The inorganic analysis is associated with a spike sample not within control limits.P = The percent difference between the primary and confirmation column for pesticide/Aroclor analyses is greather than 25 percent.U = The analyte was analyzed for, but was not detected above the reported sample quantitation limit.


!.

"/"/"/"/"/

"/"/"/"/"/"/

!.!.!.!.

!.!.!.!.

#*!#*!#*!#*!

#*!

#*!#*!#*!

#*!

#*!#*!

#*!

#*! #*!

#*!

XW!XW!XW!XW!

XW!

XW!XW!PRR1SEDV16PRR1SEDV15

PRR1SEDV14

PRR1SEDV13

PRR1SEDVUSFWS-11

CITY: SYR DIV/GROUP: 40 DB: KEW LD: PIC: PM: TM: TR: Passaic (B0009961.0001.00094)

PHASE I LOWER PASSAIC RIVER STUDY AREA

FIELD SAMPLE LOCATIONS

FIGURE

1-1

DATA REPORT ON QUALITY ASSURANCEPROJECT PLAN 4 (QAPP 4 – TREATABILITY

STUDIES PLAN) INVESTIGATION

LEGEND:QAPP4 CORE LOCATION

"/ PRR1SEDV13!. PRR1SEDV14#*! PRR1SEDV15XW! PRR1SEDV16!. PRR1SEDVUSFWS-11

PHASE I WORK AREA

W:\GIS\Passaic\PR_Dredging\Phase1\DataReportQAPP4\mxd\QAPP4Corelocations.mxd - 6/2/2010 @ 4:30:11 PM

0 150 300Feet

GRAPHIC SCALE

NOTES:

1. SEDIMENT COMPOSITE 01 (PRR1SEDBC-01) CONSISTS OF: PRR1SEDV15 AND PRR1SEDV16 FROM ZERO TO 6 FT BELOW SEDIMENT SURFACE (BSS)

2. SEDIMENT COMPOSITE 02 (PRR1SEDBC-02) CONSISTS OF: PRR1SEDV15 AND PRR1SEDV16 FROM 6 TO 12 FT BSS

3. SEDIMENT COMPOSITE 03 (PRR1SEDBC-03) CONSISTS OF: PRR1SEDV13 AND PRR1SEDV14 FROM ZERO TO 6 FT BSS

4. SEDIMENT COMPOSITE 04 (PRR1SEDBC-04) CONSISTS OF: PRR1SEDV13 AND PRR1SEDV14 FROM 6 TO 12 FT BSS

5. THE SURFACE WATER SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED WITHIN THE PHASE I WORK AREA.

APRIL 2010, REVISION 0



Attachment B—Dredging Elutriate Test (DRET) Procedure

ERD

C/EL

TR

-08

-29

Technical Guidelines for Environmental Dredging of Contaminated Sediments

Michael R. Palermo, Paul R. Schroeder, Trudy J. Estes, and Norman R. Francingues

September 2008

Env

iron

men

tal L

abor

ator

y

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

ERDC/EL TR-08-29 278

Appendix A: Dredging Elutriate Test Procedure

Introduction

This appendix provides detailed step-by-step procedures for conducting tests for evaluation of contaminant release at the point of dredging. The background, rationale, and tiered framework for application of these procedures are discussed in Chapter 7 of the main text. Two test procedures are included in this appendix:

1. Dredging Elutriate Test (DRET) for water quality evaluations. 2. DRET for water column toxicity evaluations.

The detailed test procedures described here are patterned after those for the effluent elutriate test (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 2003).

Dredging elutriate tests for water quality evaluation

DRET test procedures were developed by USACE as a predictive tool for estimating the degree of contaminant release from sediments due to resuspension at the point of dredging (DiGiano et al. 1993, 1995). The DRET test consists of mixing sediment and site water at a total suspended solids concentration of typically 1 to 10 g/l (considered representative of resuspended sediment as generated at the dredgehead source; see Section 7.3.4), aerating the slurry for 1 hr, allowing the slurry to settle for a period of 1 hr, and analyzing the elutriate for TSS and both dissolved and total concentrations of contaminants. DRET results only apply to releases due to dredging-induced resuspension, and would not be necessarily representative of releases resulting from debris removal activities, propeller wash, spudding/anchoring activities, and other potential resuspended and dissolved contaminant loss sources. However, the DRET results provide information on the potential for contaminant release from dispersal of sediment in the water column.

DRET is designed to simulate the quality of water resulting from sediment resuspension at the point of dredging. The aeration step in the test accounts for geochemical changes occurring in the water column during


resuspension. Test procedures allow for estimates of dissolved contaminant concentrations in milligrams per liter and particulate-associated contaminant concentrations in milligrams per kilogram suspended solids (SS). The test consists of mixing a sediment sample with dredging site water to form a slurry, allowing the slurry to settle, then extracting a dredging elutriate sample for chemical analysis. Field verification studies have shown that the DRET is a conservative predictor of contaminant release at the point of dredging (DiGiano et al. 1993, 1995).

The DRET should be conducted, and appropriate chemical analyses should be performed, as soon as possible after sample collection. If DRETs for both water quality and toxicity evaluations are to be conducted, sufficient elutriate should be prepared for both purposes. The volume of elutriate needed for water quality evaluations will vary depending upon the number and types of chemical analyses to be conducted. Both dissolved and total concentrations of contaminants may be determined. The volume required for each analysis, the number of variables measured, and the desired analytical replication will influence the total elutriate sample volume required. A 4-L cylinder is normally used to prepare the elutriate, and the supernatant volume available for sample extraction will vary from approximately 1,500 to 2,000 mL, depending on the sediment properties, settling times, and initial concentration of the slurry. It may be necessary to composite several extracted sample volumes or to use large diameter cylinders to obtain the total required volume.

Apparatus

The following items are required:

• Laboratory mixer, preferably with Teflon shaft and blades. • Several 4-L graduated cylinders. Larger cylinders may be used if large

sample volumes are required for analytical purposes. Nalgene cylinders are acceptable for testing involving analysis of inorganic compounds such as metals and nutrients. Glass cylinders are required for testing involving analysis of organic compounds.

• Assorted glassware for sample extraction and handling. • Compressed air source with deionized water trap and tubing for bubble

aeration of slurry. • Vacuum or pressure filtration equipment, including vacuum pump or

compressed air source and an appropriate filter holder capable of accommodating 47-, 105-, or 155-mm-diameter filters.


• Presoaked filters with a 0.45-um pore-size diameter. • Plastic sample bottles, 500-mL capacity for storage of water and liquid

phase samples for metal and nutrient analyses. • Wide-mouth, 1-gal-capacity glass jars with Teflon-lined screw-type lids

for sample mixing. These jars should also be used for sample containers when samples are to be analyzed for organic COC.

Prior to use, all glassware, filtration equipment, and filters should be thoroughly cleaned. Wash all glassware with detergent, rinse five times with tap water, place in a clean 10-percent (or stronger) HCl acid bath for a minimum of 4 hr, rinse five times with tap water, and then rinse five times with distilled or deionized water. Soak filters for a minimum of 2 hr in 5 molar HCl bath, and then rinse 10 times with distilled water. It is also a good practice to discard the first 50 mL of filtrate.

Dredging elutriate test procedure

The step-by-step procedure for conducting the DRET is outlined below and is illustrated in Figure A1.

Step 1 – Slurry preparation. The sediment and water from the proposed dredging site should be mixed to the target concentration (1 to 10 g/L, typically 5 to 10 g/L dry weight basis, see Section 7.3.4). Predetermine the concentration of the well-mixed sediment in grams per liter (dry weight basis) by oven drying a small subsample of known volume. Each 4-L cylinder to be filled will require a mixed slurry volume of 3-3/4 L. The volumes of sediment and water to be mixed for a 3-3/4-L slurry volume may be calculated using the following expressions:

slurrysediment

sediment

3.75C

VC

= (A1)

and

water sediment3.75V V= − (A2)


Figure A1. Schematic of the Dredging Elutriate Test (DRET).

where:

Vsediment = volume of sediment (liters) 3.75 = volume of slurry for 4-L cylinder (liters) Cslurry = desired concentration of slurry (typically 5 to 10 g/L dry

weight basis, see Section 7.3.4) Csediment = predetermined concentration of sediment (g/L dry weight

basis) Vwater = volume of disposal site water (liters)

Step 2 – Mixing. Mix the 3-3/4 L of slurry by placing appropriate vol-umes of sediment and water from the proposed dredging site in a 1-gal


glass jar and mixing for 5 min with the laboratory mixer. The slurry should be mixed to a uniform consistency, with no unmixed clumps of sediment.

Step 3 – Aeration. The prepared slurry must be aerated to ensure that oxidizing conditions will be present in the supernatant water during the subsequent settling phase. Bubble aeration is therefore used as a method of sample agitation. Pour the mixed slurry into a 4-L graduated cylinder. Attach glass tubing to the aeration source and insert the tubing to the bottom of the cylinder. The tubing can be held in place by insertion through a predrilled No. 4 stopper placed in the top of the cylinder. Compressed air should be passed through a deionized water trap, through the tubing, and bubbled through the slurry. The flow rate should be adjusted to agitate the mixture vigorously for 1 hr.

Step 4 – Settling. Remove the tubing, and allow the aerated slurry to undergo quiescent settling for 1 hr.

Step 5 – Sample Extraction. After the period of quiescent settling, an interface will usually be evident between the supernatant water with a low concentration of suspended solids and the more concentrated settled material below the interface. Samples of the supernatant water should be extracted from the cylinder at a point about 2 in. above the interface using a syringe and tubing. Care should be taken not to resuspend the settled material.

Step 6 – Sample Preservation and Analyses. The sample should be analyzed as soon as possible after extraction. The elutriate samples should be split and analyzed for both dissolved and total concentrations of COC and TOC and for total suspended solids in milligrams per liter. This will allow the calculation of the fraction of analytes in the total suspended solids in milligrams per kilogram SS. Filtration using 0.45-um filters should be used to obtain subsamples for analysis of dissolved concentrations. Samples to be analyzed for dissolved pesticides or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) must be free of particles but should not be filtered because of the tendency for these materials to adsorb on the filter. However, particulate matter can be removed before analysis by high-speed centrifugation at 10,000 times gravity using Teflon, glass, or aluminum centrifuge tubes (Fulk et al. 1975). The total suspended solids concentration can also be determined by filtration (0.45 um).


Chemical analyses

Chemical analyses of the elutriate samples should be performed according to the guidance in Chapter 9 of the ITM (USEPA/USACE 1998).

Released contaminant concentrations

Dissolved Concentrations. The measured dissolved contaminant concentrations are indicative of the dissolved contaminant concentrations that would be expected to build up in the vicinity of the dredge if no transport and dispersion were to occur. It is comparable to an equilibrium dissolved concentration that would result from dredge-induced resuspension where the TSS concentrations remaining in suspension would be less than 1 g/L. In circumstances where transport and dispersion occur, the dissolved contaminant concentrations and the TSS concentration will be diluted and contaminant repartitioning between the TSS and the water column will occur. The dissolved concentrations downstream of the dredge would have to be predicted using short-, mid- and possibly long-term (near-, mid- and possibly far-field) fate and transport models that, at a minimum, consider advection, dispersion, settling, partitioning, and potentially erosion.

Calculation of Particulate-Associated Concentrations. Measured total and dissolved contaminant concentrations and measured TSS and TOC concentrations are used to characterize the partitioning of the contaminants between the particulate and dissolved phases. The particulate –associated concentration of a COC may be calculated in terms of milligrams of contaminant per kilogram SS as follows:

( )61 10 total dissSS

C CFSS−

= × (A3)

where

FSS = particulate-associated concentration (mg analyte/kg of suspended solids)

Ctotal = total concentration (mg analyte/L of sample) Cdiss = dissolved concentration (mg analyte/L of sample) SS = total suspended solids concentration (mg solids/L of samples)


Calculating Total Concentrations. Calculating total concentration of COCs at the dredging-induced resuspension source is based on the DRET results and an estimate of the TSS at the source under the anticipated operating conditions at the site (in the dredge zone). The total COC concentration in milligrams per liter in the water column may be estimated as:

( )61 10

SS oo diss

F SSC C= +×

(A4)

where

Co = estimated initial total concentration in water column at the source (mg analyte/L of water)

Cdiss = dissolved concentration determined by DRET tests (mg analyte/L of sample)

FSS = fraction of analyte in the total suspended solids calculated from DRET results (mg analyte/kg of suspended solids)

SSo = suspended solids concentration in the water column at the resuspension source (dredge zone), estimated from evaluation of sediment resuspension and/or modeling (mg/L)

(1 × 106) = conversion factor, mg/mg to mg/kg

Calculating total concentration of COCs in the water column at the point of compliance is based on initial total contaminant concentration, plume dispersion, and settling. The total concentrations downstream of the dredge would have to be predicted using short-, mid- and possibly long-term (near-, mid- and possibly far-field) fate and transport models that, at a minimum, consider advection, dispersion, settling, partitioning, and potentially erosion. The total concentration in the plume is updated continuously as suspended solids and associated contaminant concentration settle out of the plume and as the plume is diluted by dispersion (turbulent diffusion).

Calculating Partitioning Coefficient. A short-term partitioning coefficient can be computed from the measured dissolved contaminant concentrations and the computed particulate-associated contaminant concentration. The partitioning coefficient Kd, in L/kg, is computed as follows:


SSd

diss

FKC

= (A5)

The partitioning coefficient is used in a fate and transport model along with an estimate of the resuspension source strength to predict the contaminant concentration downstream of the dredging. Procedures to estimate the resuspension source strength are given in Chapter 7.

Calculating Dissolved Concentrations at Point of Compliance. Predicting dissolved concentration at the point of compliance is primarily a function of the initial total contaminant concentration, dilution, and settling. The total concentration is approximated as:

( )61 10

SS SS oo

t

R F SSC

CD

⎡ ⎤−⎢ ⎥

×⎢ ⎥⎣ ⎦= (A6)

where

Ct = estimated total concentration in water column at the point of compliance (mg analyte/L of water)

RSS = fraction of resuspended solids that settled before reaching the point of compliance

D = dilution ratio between source and point of compliance (volume of water column mixed with one volume of source)

The dissolved concentration at the point of compliance can be estimated by equilibrium partitioning. The dissolved concentration is computed by multiplying the total concentration by the fraction dissolved in the water column. The fraction of the total contaminant that is dissolved is a function of the TSS concentration and the partitioning coefficient as follows:

6

6

1010d

d

FK SS

=+

(A7)


where

Fd = fraction dissolved in water column at the point of compliance SS = suspended solids concentration at the point of compliance

( )1 SS oR SS

SSD

−= (A8)

The dissolved contaminant concentration at the point of compliance can be estimated as:

d dC F Ct= (A9)

where

Cd = dissolved concentration at the point of compliance (mg analyte/L of water)

Dredging elutriate for water column toxicity

For water column toxicity evaluations, a dredging elutriate for the suspended phase is prepared and used as a test medium for water column toxicity tests. This procedure is essentially the same as that for water quality evaluations, except that the elutriate sample is handled differently following extraction. The volume of effluent elutriate required for toxicity testing will be influenced by the number of species to be tested, their size, and requirements for water change during the test. A 4-L cylinder is normally used to prepare the effluent elutriate, and the resulting supernatant volume will vary from approximately 1,500 to 2,000 mL, depending on the sediment properties, settling times, and initial concentration of the slurry. It may be necessary to composite several extracted sample volumes or to use large-diameter cylinders to obtain the total required volume.

Elutriate apparatus

The apparatus necessary for preparation of dredging elutriate is described earlier in the “Apparatus” section on page 279. However, for biological testing the elutriate is not filtered, so only items a through d are required to prepare dredging elutriate for toxicity testing.


Prior to use, all glassware should be thoroughly cleaned. Wash all glassware with detergent, rinse five times with tap water, place in a clean bath for a minimum of 4 hr, rinse five times with tap water, and then rinse five times with distilled or deionized water.

Dredging elutriate procedure

The step-by-step procedure for preparing the dredging elutriate for use in toxicity tests is outlined below.

• Step 1 - Slurry preparation. Given earlier for the DRET procedure. • Step 2 - Mixing. Given earlier for the DRET procedure. • Step 3 - Aeration. Given earlier for the DRET procedure. • Step 4 - Settling. Given earlier for the DRET procedure. • Step 5 - Sample extraction. After the appropriate period of

quiescent settling, an interface will usually be evident between the supernatant water, with a low concentration of suspended solids above, and the more concentrated settled material below the interface. The liquid plus the material remaining in suspension after the settling period represents the 100 percent dredging elutriate for toxicity testing. Carefully siphon the supernatant, without disturbing the settled material, and immediately use it for toxicity testing. The suspension should be clear enough at the first observation time for the organisms to be visible. With some very fine-grained dredged materi-als, it may be necessary to centrifuge the supernatant for a short time to achieve this.

Toxicity tests should be performed according to the guidance in Chapter 11 of the ITM (USEPA/USACE 1998), using the elutriate prepared as described in this section as the test medium. Results should be evaluated in light of mixing considerations.

Dredging elutriate toxicity evaluation

The end result of this evaluation is the 96-hr LC50 or 96-hr EC50 expressed as a percentage of the suspended dredged material concentration (or 100 percent elutriate). The LC50 is the dilution of the elutriate that would be expected to produce 50 percent mortality, and the EC50 is the dilution of the elutriate that would be expected to produce an effect of concern other than mortality (such as infertility) in 50 percent of the organisms. To provide protection from chronic toxicity, a toxicity


criteria of 1 percent of the LC50 is often used. The toxicity test can also be used to determine other endpoints that might be needed for the evaluation; these are the NOEL (no observable effects level) and the LOEL (lowest observable effects levels). These values are important when less than 50 percent mortality is observed in the toxicity test. The toxicity test endpoints determine the magnitude of the dilution required to render the contaminant releases from dredge-induced resuspension acceptable. The dilution available between the release source and the point of compliance can be estimated using fate and transport models. This result is then compared with the dilution required at the point of compliance.

References

DiGiano, F. A., C. T. Miller, and J. Yoon. 1993. Predicting release of PCBs at the point of dredging. Journal of Environmental Engineering 119(l):72-89, American Society of Civil Engineers.

__________. 1995. Dredging Elutriate Test (DRET) development. Contract Report D-95-1. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/publications.

Fulk, R., D. Gruber, and R. Wullschleger. 1975. Laboratory study of the release of pesticide and PCB materials to the water column during dredging and disposal operations. Contract Report D-75-6. Prepared by Envirex, Inc. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/publications.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2003. Evaluation of dredged material proposed for disposal at island, nearshore, or upland confined disposal facilities - testing manual. Technical Report ERDC/EL TR-03-1. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/dots/pdfs/trel03-1.pdf.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/United Sates Army Corps of Engineers (USEPA/USACE). 1998. Evaluation of dredged material proposed for discharge in waters of the U.S. – Testing manual. EPA-823-B-98-004. Washington, DC: EPA Office of Water and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/itm/ITM/inland.pdf.

http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/publications.cfm?Topic=TechReport&Code=eedp

http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/publications.cfm?Topic=TechReport&Code=eedp

http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/dots/pdfs/trel03-1.pdf

http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/itm/ITM/inland.pdf



Attachment C—Column Settling Test (CST) and Effluent Elutriate Test Procedures

ER

DC

/EL

TR

-03-

1

Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Disposal at Island, Nearshore, or Upland Confined Disposal Facilities — Testing Manual U.S. Army Corps of Engineers January 2003

En

viro

nm

enta

l L

abo

rato

ry

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

Appendix B Column Settling Test and Effluent Elutriate Procedures B1

Appendix B Column Settling Test and Effluent Elutriate Procedures

B.1 Introduction

This appendix provides detailed step-by-step procedures for conducting tests for evaluation of confined disposal facility (CDF) effluent. The background, rationale, and tiered framework for application of these procedures are discussed in Chapter 4 of the main text of the Upland Testing Manual (UTM). Three test procedures are included in this appendix:

a. Effluent elutriate tests for water quality evaluations.

b. Effluent elutriate tests for water column toxicity evaluations.

c. Long-tube column settling tests used to evaluate effluent total suspended solids (TSS) concentrations and total concentrations of contaminants of concern (COC) in effluent.

B.2 Effluent Elutriate Tests for Water Quality Evaluation

The effluent elutriate test1 is designed to simulate the quality of water discharged as effluent from a CDF and accounts for geochemical changes occurring in the CDF during active disposal operations. Test procedures allow for estimates of dissolved contaminant concentrations in milligrams per liter and fractions of contaminants in the TSS in milligrams per kilogram suspended solids

1 The effuent elutriate is also called the “modified elutriate” in the literature to distinguish the procedure from the “standard elutriate” test, which is applicable to open water discharges. To avoid confusion, the term “effluent elutriate” is used in this manual and the Inland Testing Manual (ITM), and the term “open water elutriate” has been adopted for open water evaluations described in the ITM.

B2 Appendix B Column Settling Test and Effluent Elutriate Procedures

(SS) under quiescent settling conditions. The test consists of mixing a sediment sample with dredging site water to form a slurry, allowing the slurry to settle under conditions equivalent to those in a CDF, then extracting an effluent elutriate sample for chemical analysis. Field verification studies have shown that the effluent elutriate test is a conservative predictor of CDF effluent quality (Palermo 1985a-d; Palermo and Thackston 1988a and b).

The effluent elutriate tests should be conducted, and appropriate chemical analyses should be performed as soon as possible after sample collection. If effluent elutriate tests for both water quality and toxicity evaluations are to be conducted, sufficient effluent elutriate should be prepared for both purposes. The volume of effluent elutriate needed for water quality evaluations will vary depend-ing upon the number and types of chemical analyses to be conducted. Both dissolved and total concentrations of contaminants may be determined. The volume required for each analysis, the number of variables measured, and the desired analytical replication will influence the total elutriate sample volume required. A 4-L cylinder is normally used to prepare the elutriate, and the super-natant volume available for sample extraction will vary from approximately 500 to 1,000 mL, depending on the sediment properties, settling times, and initial concentration of the slurry. It may be necessary to composite several extracted sample volumes or to use large diameter cylinders to obtain the total required volume.

B.2.1 Apparatus

The following items are required:

a. Laboratory mixer, preferably with Teflon shaft and blades.

b. Several 4-L graduated cylinders. Larger cylinders may be used if large sample volumes are required for analytical purposes. Nalgene cylinders are acceptable for testing involving analysis of inorganic compounds such as metals and nutrients. Glass cylinders are required for testing involving analysis of organic compounds.

c. Assorted glassware for sample extraction and handling.

d. Compressed air source with deionized water trap and tubing for bubble aeration of slurry.

e. Vacuum or pressure filtration equipment, including vacuum pump or compressed air source and an appropriate filter holder capable of accommodating 47-, 105-, or 155-mm-diam filters.

f. Presoaked filters with a 0.45-um pore-size diameter.

g. Plastic sample bottles, 500-mL capacity for storage of water and liquid phase samples for metal and nutrient analyses.


h. Wide-mouth, 1-gal capacity glass jars with Teflon-lined screw-type lids for sample mixing. These jars should also be used for sample containers when samples are to be analyzed for organic COC.

Prior to use, all glassware, filtration equipment, and filters should be thoroughly cleaned. Wash all glassware with detergent, rinse five times with tap water, place in a clean 10-percent (or stronger) HC1 acid bath for a minimum of 4 hr, rinse five times with tap water, and then rinse five times with distilled or deionized water. Soak filters for a minimum of 2 hr in 5 mular HCR bath, and then rinse 10 times with distilled water. It is also a good practice to discard the first 50 mL of filtrate.

B.2.2 Effluent elutriate test procedure

The step-by-step procedure for conducting the effluent elutriate test (Fig-ure B-1) is outlined below.

Step 1 - Slurry preparation. The sediment and water from the proposed dredging site should be mixed to a concentration approximately equal to the expected average field inflow concentration. If estimates of the average field inflow concentration cannot be made based on past data, a slurry concentration of 150 g/L (dry weight basis) should be used. Predetermine the concentration of the well-mixed sediment in grams per liter (dry weight basis) by oven drying a small subsample of known volume. Each 4-L cylinder to be filled will require a mixed slurry volume of 3-3/4 L. The volumes of sediment and water to be mixed for a 3-3/4-L slurry volume may be calculated using the following expressions:

CC 3.75 = V

sediment

slurrysediment (B-1)

and

V - 3.75 = V sedimentwater (B-2)

where

Vsediment = volume of sediment, in L

3.75 = volume of slurry for 4-L cylinder, L

Cslurry = desired concentration of slurry, g/L (dry weight basis)

Csediment = predetermined concentration of sediment, g/L (dry weight basis)

Vwater = volume of disposal site water, in L

Step 2 - Mixing. Mix the 3-3/4 L of slurry by placing appropriate volumes of sediment and water from the proposed dredging site in a 1-gal glass jar and


mixing for 5 min with the laboratory mixer. The slurry should be mixed to a uniform consistency, with no unmixed agglomerations of sediment.

Figure B-1. Schematic of Effluent Elutriate Test

Table B-1 Recommended Resuspension Factors for Various Ponded Areas and Depths

Resuspension Factor for Anticipated Average Ponded Depth

Anticipated Ponded Area Less than 2 ft 2 ft or Greater Less than 100 acres 2.0 1.5 Greater than 100 acres 2.5 2.0


Step 3 - Aeration. The prepared slurry must be aerated to ensure that oxidizing conditions will be present in the supernatant water during the subsequent settling phase. Bubble aeration is therefore used as a method of sample agitation. Pour the mixed slurry into a 4-L graduated cylinder. Attach glass tubing to the aeration source and insert the tubing to the bottom of the cylinder. The tubing can be held in place by insertion through a predrilled No. 4 stopper placed in the top of the cylinder. Compressed air should be passed through a deionized water trap, through the tubing, and bubbled through the slurry. The flow rate should be adjusted to agitate the mixture vigorously for 1 hr.

Step 4 - Settling. Remove the tubing, and allow the aerated slurry to undergo quiescent settling for a time equal to the anticipated field mean retention time, up to a maximum of 24 hr. If the field mean retention time is not known, allow settling for 24 hr.

Field mean retention time Td can be estimated for a given flow rate and ponding conditions by applying a hydraulic efficiency correction factor (HECF) to the theoretical detention time as follows:

(HECF)T

= T d (B-3)

where

Td = mean detention time, hr

T = theoretical detention time, hr

HECF = hydraulic efficiency correction factor (HECF > 1.0) defined as the inverse of the hydraulic efficiency

The theoretical detention time is calculated as follows:

(12.1) Q

DA = (12.1) QV = T

i

pp

i

p (B-4)

where

Vp = volume ponded, acre-ft

Qi = average inflow rate, cfs

Ap = area ponded, acres

Dp = average depth of ponding, ft

12.1 = conversion factor, acre-ft/cfs to hr

The hydraulic efficiency correction factor HECF can be estimated by several methods. The most accurate estimate is that made from dye tracer studies to


determine Td at the actual site under operational conditions at a previous time, with the conditions similar to those for the operation under consideration. This approach can be used only for existing sites.

Alternatively, the ratio Td/T = 1/HECF can be estimated from the equation:

WL

0.3- - 1 0.9 = TT d exp (B-5)

where L/W is the length-to-width ratio of the proposed basin.

The L/W ratio can be increased greatly by the use of internal spur dikes, resulting in a higher hydraulic efficiency and a lower required total area. In the absence of dye tracer data or values obtained from other theoretical approaches, a value for HECF of 2.25 may be used based on field studies conducted at several sites (Montgomery, Thackston, and Parker 1983).

Step 5 - Sample extraction. After the appropriate period of quiescent settling, an interface will usually be evident between the supernatant water, with a low concentration of suspended solids above, and the more concentrated settled material below the interface. Samples of the supernatant water should be extracted from the cylinder at a point midway between the water surface and interface using syringe and tubing. Care should be taken not to resuspend the settled material.

Step 6 - Sample preservation and analyses. The sample should be analyzed as soon as possible after extraction. If applicable water quality standards are in terms of dissolved concentrations, the elutriate samples should be analysed for dissolved concentrations of COC. If applicable water quality standards are in terms of total or whole water concentrations, the elutriate samples should be split and analysed for both dissolved and total concentrations of COC, and for total suspended solids in milligrams per liter. This will allow the calculation of the fraction of analytes in the total suspended solids in milligrams per kilogram SS. Filtration using 0.45-um filters should be used to obtain subsamples for analysis of dissolved concentrations. Samples to be analyzed for dissolved pesticides or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) must be free of particles but should not be filtered because of the tendency for these materials to adsorb on the filter. However, particulate matter can be removed before analysis by high-speed centrifugation at 10,000 times gravity using Teflon, glass, or aluminum centrifuge tubes (Fulk, Gruber, and Wullschleger 1975). The total suspended solids concentration can also be determined by filtration (0.45 um).

B.2.3 Chemical analyses

Chemical analyses of the effluent elutriate samples should be performed according to the guidance in Chapter 9 of the ITM (USEPA/USACE 1998).


B.2.4 Effluent contaminant concentrations

Dissolved concentrations. If applicable water quality standards are defined in terms of dissolved concentrations, the dissolved concentrations of COC in the effluent elutriate (determined directly from the test) and may be compared with the standards after consideration of mixing.

Calculation of total concentrations. If applicable water quality standards are defined in terms of total or whole water concentrations, calculations of the fractions of contaminants in the total suspended solids and the total concentrations in the effluent are required. The fraction of COCs in the total suspended solids may be calculated in terms of milligrams per kilogram SS as follows:

SSC - C )10 (1 = F disstotal6

SS × (B-6)

where

FSS = fraction of analyte in the total suspended solids, mg analyte/kg of suspended solids

Ctotal = total concentration, mg analyte/L of sample

Cdiss = dissolved concentration mg, analyte/L of sample

SS = total suspended solids concentration, mg solids/L of samples

The calculation of total concentration of COCs in the effluent is based on results of both the elutriate test and an estimate of effluent TSS under the anticipated operating conditions for the CDF. The total COC concentration in milligrams per liter in the effluent may be estimated as:

)10 (1S F

C = C 6

effssdisstotal ×

(B-7)

where

Ctotal = estimated total concentration in effluent, mg analyte/L of water

Cdiss = dissolved concentration determined by effluent elutriate tests, mg analyte/L of sample

FSS = fraction of analyte in the total suspended solids calculated from effluent elutriate results, mg analyte/kg of suspended solids

SSeff = suspended solids concentration of effluent estimated from evaluation of sedimentation performance, mg suspended solids/L of water (this may be determined by a long column settling test as described in Section B.3).

(1 H 106) = conversion factor, mg/mg to mg/kg


B.3 Effluent Elutriate for Water Column Toxicity For effluent toxicity evaluations, an effluent elutriate for the suspended phase

is prepared and used as a test medium for water column toxicity tests. This procedure is essentially the same as that for water quality evaluations, except that the elutriate sample is handled differently following extraction. The volume of effluent elutriate required for toxicity testing will be influenced by the number of species to be tested, their size, and requirements for water change during the test. A 4-L cylinder is normally used to prepare the effluent elutriate, and the resulting supernatant volume will vary from approximately 500 to 1,000 mL, depending on the sediment properties, settling times, and initial concentration of the slurry. It may be necessary to composite several extracted sample volumes or to use large diameter cylinders to obtain the total required volume.

B.3.1 Effluent elutriate apparatus

The apparatus necessary for preparation of effluent elutriate is described in Section B.2.1. However, for biological testing the effluent elutriate is not filtered, so only items a through d are required to prepare effluent elutriate for toxicity testing.

Prior to use, all glassware should be thoroughly cleaned. Wash all glassware with detergent, rinse five times with tap water, place in a clean bath for a minimum of 4 hr, rinse five times with tap water, and then rinse five times with distilled or deionized water.

B.3.2 Effluent elutriate procedure

The step-by-step procedure for preparing the effluent elutriate for use in toxicity tests is outlined below.

Step 1 - Slurry preparation. Same as Section B.2.2.

Step 2 - Mixing. Same as Section B.2.2.

Step 3 - Aeration. Same as Section B.2.2.

Step 4 - Settling. Same as Section B.2.2.

Step 5 - Sample extraction. After the appropriate period of quiescent settling, an interface will usually be evident between the supernatant water, with a low concentration of suspended solids above, and the more concentrated settled material below the interface. The liquid plus the material remaining in suspension after the settling period represents the 100 percent effluent for toxicity testing. Carefully siphon the supernatant, without disturbing the settled material, and immediately use it for toxicity testing. The suspension should be clear enough at the first observation time for the organisms to be visible. With some very fine-grained dredged materials, it may be necessary to centrifuge the supernatant for a short time to achieve this.

Effluent toxicity tests should be performed according to the guidance in Chapter 11 of the ITM (USEPA/USACE 1998), using the effluent elutriate prepared as described in this section as the test medium. Results should be evaluated in light of mixing considerations, as discussed in Chapter 4 of the UTM.


B.3.3 Effluent Elutriate Toxicity Evaluation

The end result of this evaluation is the 96-hr LC50 or 96-hr EC50 expressed as a percentage of the suspended dredged material concentration (or 100 percent elutriate). This result is then compared with the concentration of the suspended dredged material at the boundary of the allowable mixing zone.

B.4 Column Settling Tests for Effluent TSS/ Turbidity

If turbidity or SS are identified as COCs, or if water quality standards (WQS) are specifically defined in terms of whole water (total) concentrations of COCs, settling tests are necessary to provide data for design or evaluation of disposal areas for retention of suspended solids and to compare to WQS (Figure B-2). These tests are designed to define the settling behavior of a particular sediment and to provide information concerning the volumes occupied by newly placed layers of dredged material. If WQS exist for turbidity, a sediment-specific correlation of suspended solids and turbidity must be developed (Thackston and Palermo 2000).

Sedimentation of freshwater slurries (mixtures of sediment and water) of concentration less than 100 g/L can generally be characterized as flocculent settling. As slurry concentrations are increased, the sedimentation process may be characterized as a zone settling process, in which a clearly defined interface is formed between the clarified supernatant water and the more concentrated settled material. Zone settling also occurs when the sediment/water salinity is approximately 3 parts per thousand (ppt) or greater. Flocculent settling also describes the behavior of residual suspended solids in the clarified supernatant water above the sediment/water interface for slurries exhibiting an interface. The procedures described below define the sedimentation of suspended solids under flocculent settling conditions or above the settled material/water interface under zone setting conditions. The settling test procedures consist of withdrawing samples from the settling column at various depths and times and measuring the concentrations of suspended solids. Additional data should be collected from the column settling test for purposes of CDF design for initial storage and minimum surface area for a given inflow rate. These procedures are provided in Engineer Manual 1110-2-5027 (USACE 1987).

B.4.1 Column settling test apparatus

An 8-in.-diam settling column such as shown in Figure B-3 is used. The test column depth should approximate the effective settling depth of the proposed disposal area. A practical limit on the depth of the test is 6 ft. The column should be at least 8 in. in diameter with interchangeable sections and with sample ports at 1/2-ft or closer intervals.


Figure B-2. Schematic of the Long Tube Column Settling Test


Figure B-3a. Specifications and plan for Long Tube Settling Column


Figu

re B

-3b.

Pla

ns fo

r top

and

bot

tom

sec

tions

of

Long

Tub

e S

ettli

ng C

olum

n


B.4.2 Column settling test procedure

The following test procedure should be used:

Step 1. Mix the sediment slurry to a suspended solids concentration C equal to the expected concentration of the dredged material influent Ci. The slurry should be mixed in a container with sufficient volume to fill the test column. Field studies indicate that for maintenance dredging of fine-grained material, the disposal concentration will average about 150 g/L. This concentration should be used in the test if better data are not available.

Step 2. Pump or pour the slurry into the test column using compressed air or mechanical agitation to maintain a uniform concentration during the filling period.

Step 3. When the slurry is completely mixed in the column, stop the compressed air or mechanical agitation and immediately draw off samples at each sample port and determine their suspended solids concentration. Use the average of these values as the initial slurry concentration at the start of the test. The test is initiated with the drawing of the first samples.

Step 4a. If an interface has not formed during the first day, flocculent settling is occurring in the entire slurry mass. Allow the slurry to settle and withdraw samples from each sampling port at regular time intervals to determine the suspended solids concentrations. Record the water surface height and time at the start of the sampling period. Analyze each sample for total suspended solids. Substantial reductions of suspended solids will occur during the early part of the test, but reductions will decrease with longer retention times. Therefore, the intervals can be extended as the test progresses. Recommended sampling intervals are 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 24, 48 hr, etc., until the end of the test. As a rule, a 50-m/L sample should be taken from each port. Continue the test until either an interface can be seen near the bottom of the column and the suspended solids concentration in the fluid above the interface is less than 1 g/L, or until the suspended solids concentrations in extracted samples shows no decrease.

Step 4b. If an interface forms the first day, zone settling is occurring in the slurry below the interface, and flocculent settling is occurring in the supernatant water. In this case, samples should be extracted from all side ports above the falling interface. The first of these samples should be extracted immediately after (a) the interface has fallen sufficiently below the uppermost port to allow extraction, or (b) a sufficient sample can be withdrawn from the surface without disturbing the interface. This sample can usually be extracted within a few hours after the beginning of the test. Record the time of extraction, water surface height, and port height for each port sample taken and analyze each sample for suspended solids. As the interface continues to fall, extract samples from all ports above the interface at regular time intervals. As before, a suggested sequence of sampling intervals would be 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 24, 48, 96 hr, etc. The samples should continue to be taken until either the suspended solids concentration of the extracted samples shows no decrease or for a maximum time of 15 days. For this case, the suspended solids in the samples should be less than 1 g/L, and filtration will be required to determine the concentrations. The data should be expressed in milligrams per liter


for these samples. In reducing the data for this case, the concentration of the first port sample taken above the falling interface is considered the initial concentration.

B.5 References

Averett, D. E., Palermo, M. R., and Wade, R. (1988). “Verification of proce-dures for design of dredged material containment areas for solids retention,” Technical Report D-88-2, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.

Brandon, D. L, Schroeder, P. R., and Lee, C. R. (1997). “Computerization of the decision-making framework effluent toxicity bioassay test results (LAT-E Program),” Technical Note EEDP-04-27, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.

Fulk, R., Gruber, D., and Wullschleger, R. (1975). “Laboratory study of the release of pesticide and PCB materials to the water column during dredging and disposal operations,” Contract Report D-75-6, Envirex, Inc., under con-tract to the U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.

Hayes, D. L., and Schroeder, P. R. (1992). “Documentation of the SETTLE module for ADDAMS: Design of confined disposal facilities for solids retention and initial storage,” Technical Note EEDP-06-18, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.

Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1987). “Confined disposal material,” Engineer Manual 1110-2-5027, Washington, DC.

Kriezk, R. K., FitzPatrick, J. A., and Atmatzidis, D. K. (1976). “Investigation of effluent filtering systems for dredged material containment facilities,” Technical Report D-76-8, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.

Montgomery, R. L., Thackston, E. L., and Parker, F. L. (1983). “Dredged material sedimentation basin design,” Journal of Environmental Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers 109(2).

Palermo, M. R. (1985a-d). “Interim guidance for predicting quality of effluent discharged from confined dredged material disposal areas,” EEDP-04-01 through 04-4, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Environmental Laboratory, Vicksburg, MS.

Palermo, M. R., and Schroeder, P. R. (1991). “Documentation of the EFQUAL module for ADDAMS: Comparison of predicted effluent quality with standards,” Technical Note EEDP-06-13, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.


Palermo, M. R., and Thackston, E. L. (1988a). “Test for dredged material effluent quality,” Journal of Environmental Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers 114(6).

__________. (1988b). “Verification of predictions of dredged material effluent quality,” Journal of Environmental Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers 114(6).

__________. (1988c). “Flocculent settling above the zone settling interface,” Journal of Environmental Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers 114(4).

Schroeder, P. R., and Palermo, M. R. 2000. “The automated dredging and disposal alternatives management system (ADDAMS),” Environmental Effects of Dredging Technical Note EEDP-06-12 (Revision of 1990), U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.

Schroeder, P. R., Palermo, M. R., and Olin-Estes, T. J. “Screening evaluations for confined disposal facility effluent quality,” Environmental Effects of Dredging Technical Note EEDP (in preparation), U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS.

Thackston, E. L., and Palermo, M. R. (2000). “Improved ,ethods for correlating turbidity and suspended solids for monitoring,” DOER Technical Notes Collection, ERDC TN-DOER-E8, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS. www.wes.army.mil/el/dots/doer

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers/U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (1992). “Evaluating environmental effects of dredged material management alternatives - A technical framework,” EPA842-B-92-008, Washington, DC.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (1995). “QA/QC guidance for sampling and analysis of sediments, water, and tissues for dredged material evaluations - chemical evaluations,” EPA-823-B-95-001, Washington, DC.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1998). “Evaluation of dredged material proposed for discharge in waters of the U.S. – testing manual,” EPA-823-B-98-004 Office of Water (4305), Washington, DC.



Attachment D—Project-Specific DRET Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)

This is a Controlled Document. When Printed it becomes Uncontrolled.

Pittsburgh SOP No. PT-OP-008, Rev. 5

Effective Date: 10/27/2015 Page No.: 1 of 10

Controlled Source: Intranet

Company Confidential & Proprietary

Title: Dredging Elutriate Test (DRET)

Approvals (Signature/Date):

____________________ _ 10/27/2015 _______________________10/8/2015 Larry Matko Date Steve Jackson Date Technical Manager Regional Safety Coordinator

_______________________10/7/2015 ______________________10/12/2015 Virginia Zusman Date Deborah L. Lowe Date Quality Assurance Manager Laboratory Director

Copyright Information:

This documentation has been prepared by TestAmerica Laboratories, Inc. and its affiliates (“TestAmerica”), solely for their own use and the use of their customers in evaluating their qualifications and capabilities in connection with a particular project. The user of this document agrees by its acceptance to return it to TestAmerica upon request and not to reproduce, copy, lend, or otherwise disclose its contents, directly or indirectly, and not to use it for any other purpose other than that for which it was specifically provided. The user also agrees that where consultants or other outside parties are involved in the evaluation process, access to these documents shall not be given to said parties unless those parties also specifically agree to these conditions.

THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS VALUABLE CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. DISCLOSURE, USE OR REPRODUCTION OF THESE MATERIALS WITHOUT THE WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION OF TESTAMERICA IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. THIS UNPUBLISHED WORK BY TESTAMERICA IS PROTECTED BY

STATE AND FEDERAL LAW OF THE UNITED STATES. IF PUBLICATION OF THIS WORK SHOULD OCCUR THE FOLLOWING NOTICE SHALL APPLY:

©COPYRIGHT 2015 TESTAMERICA LABORATORIES, INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.






1.0 Scope and Application 1.1 The Dredging Elutriate Test Procedure is used to predict the effects of solids

concentration, aeration time, and settling time on contaminant concentrations (soluble and particulate) in the water.

1.2 The resultant elutriate prepared by this procedure is analyzed for project specified total and dissolved parameters following appropriate preparation and/or determinative procedures.

1.3 On occasion clients may request slight modifications to this SOP. These modifications are handled as indicated in PT-QA-M-001, the Quality Assurance Manual.

2.0 Summary of Method 2.1 The dredged material and unfiltered water from the dredging site (site water) are

combined in a sediment-to-water ratio of 10 grams dry solids/L of site water (ie: Total Solids of 50% would yield 20 grams of wet sediment/L of site water).

2.2 The mixture is aerated for 1 hour and allowed to settle for 1 hour. 2.3 The supernatant (liquid phase) is siphoned off and half is used for total analysis.

The other half is filtered and becomes the elutriate for analysis of dissolved constituents.

2.4 The types of parameters that these samples are analyzed for is defined by the project.

3.0 Definitions 3.1 Refer to the glossary in the Laboratory Quality Assurance Management (PT-QA-M-

001).

4.0 Interferences 4.1 Method interferences may be caused by contaminants in glassware, and other

processing apparatus that lead to discrete artifacts.

5.0 Safety 5.1 Employees must abide by the policies and procedures in the Corporate

Environmental Health and Safety Manual (CW-E-M-001), the Pittsburgh Facility Addendum EH&S Manual (PT-HS-001) and this document. This procedure may involve hazardous material, operations and equipment. This SOP does not purport to address all of the safety problems associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of the method to follow appropriate safety, waste disposal and health practices under the assumption that all samples and reagents are potentially hazardous. Safety glasses, gloves, lab coats and closed-toe, nonabsorbent shoes are a minimum.

5.2 There are no materials used in this method that have a serious or significant hazard






rating. Care should be taken to avoid exposure to the sample matrix since all environmental samples are potentially hazardous.

5.3 Eye protection that protects against splash, laboratory coat and appropriate gloves must be worn while samples, standards, solvents and reagents are being handled. Cut resistant gloves must be worn doing any other task that presents a strong possibility of getting cut. Disposable gloves that have become contaminated will be removed and discarded, other gloves will be cleaned immediately.

5.4 All work must be stopped in the event of a known or potential compromise to the health and safety of a TestAmerica associate. The situation must be reported immediately to a laboratory supervisor and/or the EHSC.

6.0 Equipment and Supplies 6.1 The following items are recommended for performing this procedure. Equivalent

items should only be used when they result in an improvement in quality, efficiency, productivity, or cost. An item can be considered equivalent if with its use, the analytical and QA/QC requirements in this SOP can be met.

6.2 Glass Cylinders: 4 liter capacity, graduated to 3.75 liters 6.3 Peristaltic pump and tubing 6.4 Vaccum flasks, Class A, 1 liter capacity 6.5 Compressed Air: Zero grade 6.6 Glass tubing 6.7 Graduated Cylinders, Class A

7.0 Reagents and Standards 7.1 Reagents – Not applicable 7.2 Standards – Not applicable

8.0 Sample Collection, Preservation, Shipment and Storage 8.1 The sediment samples and site waters are stored at >0.0°C but ≤ 6.0°C. 8.2 The dredging elutriate test must be performed within 14 days of the sediment

sample collection. 8.3 For preservation and holding time requirements for tests performed on the

supernatants/elutriates, see the analytical method SOPs.

9.0 Quality Control

9.1 One Method Blank (MB) of 2L of laboratory reagent water is prepared along with each batch of 20 or fewer samples.

9.2 See analytical method SOPs for MB acceptance criteria and corrective actions. 9.3 Any deviations from QC procedures must be documented as a nonconformance,

with applicable cause and corrective action approved by the QA Manager.






10.0 Procedure 10.1 Calibration and Standardization – Not Applicable 10.2 Procedure

10.2.1 For each sample, determine the volume of elutriate needed for chemical analysis. For example, if 6.6 liters of sample is needed for chemical analysis the laboratory would round up and generate 10 liters of DRET volume.

10.2.2 To determine the appropriate amount of wet sediment to be used, take the default value of 10 g/L multiplied by the total DRET volume needed for analysis and adjust for total solids. For example, the DRET generated volume from section 10.2.1 would be used in conjunction with the % solids (ie 50%) to determine the amount of wet sediment to be used. Therefore 10g dry solids/L would equal 100g dry solids per 10L therefore add 200g of wet sediment (based on 50% solids) and fill to 10L with site water would yield 10g dry solids/L.

10.2.3 Carefully add sediment to the cylinder (do not splash site water out of the cylinder) until the total volume of the mixture reaches the final volume, determined in 10.2.1, of 10 liters.

10.2.4 Mix the sediment and site water slurry for 30 seconds using the mechanical mixer.

10.2.5 Insert glass tubing to just above the bottom of the cylinder. This tubing can be held in place using predrilled stoppers, or other devices that would hold it secure.

10.2.6 Attach flexible tubing from the compressed air cylinder to the top of the glass tubing. A deionized water trap must be between the compressed air cylinder and the glass tubing.

10.2.7 Turn on the compressed air and adjust flow so the slurry is vigorously mixed. Continue to mix for 1 hour.

10.2.8 Turn off the compressed air and remove the glass tubing from the glass cylinder containing the slurry. Record start and ending time for aeration in the DRET log.

10.2.9 Allow the slurry to settle for 1 hour. Record start and ending time for settling






period in the DRET log.

10.2.10 After the settling period, the supernatant (liquid phase) is drawn out of the cylinder at a point midway between the water surface and the interface between the supernatant and the settled sediment. Care must be taken not to resuspend any of the settled sediment.

10.2.11 Half of the supernatant is divided into the appropriate containers and the appropriate preservatives are added (nitric acid for metals, sodium hydroxide for cyanide, etc.). This is the Total Fraction of the supernatant. All parameters determined on this fraction represent Total contaminants.

10.2.12 The other half of the supernatant is centrifuged and filtered using 0.45 micron filters for conventional analysis of dissolved concentrations. Samples to be analyzed for dissolved organics, such as pesticides or polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) materials must be free of particles but should not be filtered, due to the tendency for these materials to adsorb on the filter. The supernatant is then divided into the appropriate containers and the appropriate preservatives are added (nitric acid for metals, sodium hydroxide for cyanide, etc.). this is the Dissolved fraction of the supernatant. All parameters determined on this fraction represent Dissolved contaminants.

10.2.13 Depending on the number and type of parameters to be determined on the elutriate, multiple replicates of the DRET test may be necessary to generate enough supernatant to perform the required tests. Also, smaller volumes may be used, as long as the 10 g (dry)/L sediment-to-site water ratio is maintained, if less elutriate volume is needed.

11.0 Calculations / Data Reduction 11.1 Not Applicable

12.0 Method Performance 12.1 The supervisor has responsibility to ensure that an analyst who performs this

procedure is properly trained in its use and has the required experience. Performance is monitored through internal QC and outside performance evaluation samples. Please refer to the QA Manual for additional information concerning Precision and Accuracy.

13.0 Pollution Control 13.1 It is TestAmerica’s policy to evaluate each method and look for opportunities to

minimize waste generated (i.e., examine recycling options, ordering chemicals based on quantity needed, preparation of reagents based on anticipated usage and reagent stability). Employees must abide by the policies in Section 13 of the






Corporate Environmental Health and Safety Manual (CW-E-M-001) for “Waste Management and Pollution Prevention” and the Pittsburgh Facility Addendum EH&S Manual (PT-HS-001)

13.2 This method does not contain any specific modifications that serve to minimize or prevent pollution.

14.0 Waste Management 14.1 Waste management practices are conducted consistent with all applicable rules and

regulations. Excess reagents, samples and method process wastes are disposed of in accordance with all federal and state laws and regulations. Waste description rules and land disposal restrictions are followed. Waste disposal procedures are incorporated by reference to PT-HS-001. The following waste stream is produced when this method is carried out:

14.1.1 Sample following elutriate procedure. This waste is collected in a waste container identified as “River Sediment Waste”, Waste #12. The solids settle to the bottom of the container and the aqueous layer is decanted into a lab sink.

15.0 References 15.1 USACE Dredging Elutriate Test (DRET) Development, CR-D-95-1, August 1995 15.2 TestAmerica Laboratory Quality Assurance Management (PT-QA-M-001) 15.3 PT-HS-001, Pittsburgh Facility Addendum EH&S Manual to the Corporate

Environmental Health and Safety Manual (CW-E-M-001) for “Waste Management and Pollution Prevention”.

15.4 SOP PT-QA-016, Noncnoformance & Corrective Action System 15.5 PT-QA-031, Internal Chain of Custody

16.0 Method Modifications 16.1 None

17.0 Attachments 17.1 Figure 1 - Example of TALS DRET Preparation Worksheets

18.0 Revision History 18.1 Revision 2, 5/8/2009 18.2 Revision 3, 8/9/2011 18.3 Revision 4, 9/23/2013






18.4 Changes to Current Revision

SOP section Change from Change to Reason Cover QAM – Violet Fanning QAM –Virginia Zusman Change in personnel

1.2 Added “total and dissolved” before “parameters”

Clarification

1.3 Added text to match SOP Checklist on method modifications

SOP Checklist Format

5.1 , 13.1 and 15.3

Added reference to PT-HS-001 Pittsburgh’s Facility Addendum

Correction

5.2 Removed “This list does not include all materials ….” And reference to MSDSs.

Added “Care should be taken to avoid exposure to sample matrices….”

Compliance with industry standard terminology

8.1 ≤6.0°C ≥0.0˚C but ≤6.0°C Clarification

8.3 Added see analytical method SOPs for preservation and holding time requirements

Clarification

10.2.2 and 10.2.3

Section reference 10.4.1 Changed to section 10.2.1 Correction

10.2.11 Updated text to reflect “Total” portion of the supernatant

Clarification

10.2.12 Added text to reflect the “Dissolved” portion of the supernatant

Clarification

10.3.1 Removed section Documentation done in TALS

12.1 Removed ‘Training Qualifications:” title

Made section 12.1.1 into section 12.1

SOP Checklist Format

14.1 Updated text in section 14.1 to match SOP Checklist text

SOP Checklist update

15.3 through 15.5

Added reference to the following SOP’s: PT-HS-001, PT-QA-031 and PT-QA-016

Clarification






ATTACHMENTS

This is a Controlled Document. When Printed it becomes Uncontrolled .





Figure 1 - Example of TALS DRET Preparation Worksheets

This is a Controlled Document. When Printed it becomes Uncontrolled .





Figure 1 - Example of TALS DRET Preparation Worksheets (cont.)

Project Specific Procedural Note

Date: September 28, 2017

To: Keir Craigie

From: Larry Matko, TestAmerica Pittsburgh, Technical Director

Subject: Modifications to DRET SOP for Passaic project

Overview: Beginning October 2017 approximately 35 samples will be collected for elutriate generation via the dredging elutriate test (DRET) procedure. The analytical methods required on the elutriates are listed in Table 1. The procedural note will describe the agreed upon changes or recommendations to the method.

SAMPLE STORAGE:

The samples will be stored in a secure refrigerator at 4 degrees C +/- 2 degrees C under internal chain-of-custody (coc) until the sample preparation procedures are initiated.

DRET:

1. The DRET analysis will not begin until the long tube column settling test has been completed. 2. The laboratory requires 2- 32 ounce jars of sediment and 16 gallons of site water in order to

perform the DRET elutriate. 3. The laboratory’s standard procedure for DRET is to aerate the sample at a 10g/L slurry

concentration for 1 hour then let the sample settle for 1 hour. The supernatant is then syphoned off. Sample bottles for the constituents of concern are filled. This is considered the total fraction. The remaining supernatant is centrifuged at 4200 RPM at 4 degrees C for 30 minutes. The centrifuged sample is poured off into sample bottles and this fraction is considered the dissolved fraction for organic parameters. For the inorganic parameters, the sample will be filtered thru a 0.45 micron glass filter.

4. Analytical testing includes; total and dissolved metals (PP metals), total organic carbon (TOC), dissolved organic carbon (DOC), total suspended solids (TSS - total fraction only), total and dissolved SVOC/PAH, total and dissolved pesticides, total and dissolved PCB congeners, total and dissolved PCB Aroclors, and total and dissolved dioxin/furans.

5. Using 1 gallon disposable jars, 4 set ups per sample will be utilized in order to generate therequired volume. The supernatant from all four set ups will be composited and then aliquotedfor total analysis. The remaining sample will be centrifuged or filtered for dissolved analysis. Ifthe samples are not highly impacted with NAPL product, the laboratory will utilize 20 Liter glasscarboys to perform the DRET. Therefore only 1 setup will be required.

6. The standard DRET procedure will also be followed for 5 g/L and 1 g/L slurry concentrations.7. An additional sample at 10 g/L slurry concentration will be aerated for 6 hours and then let

settle for one hour.8. An additional 1 liter of volume will be generated and stored in a 1 liter amber glass bottle. This

will be a contingency sample if breakage occurs during shipping.9. Hold time prior to initiation of the DRET tests is 6 months for this project.

TABLE 1

Analysis Bottle Size Preservative Minimum Volume

Required

Laboratory for Analysis

Metals- 6020A (PP metals)

250 mL Plastic Nitric Acid 50 mL Pittsburgh

Mercury- 7470A 250 mL Plastic Nitric Acid 50 mL Pittsburgh TOC- SM5310C 40 mL Amber Voa

Vial Sulfuric Acid 80 mL Pittsburgh

DOC - SM5310C 40 mL Amber Voa Vial

Sulfuric Acid 80 mL Pittsburgh

TSS- SM2540D 1L Plastic None 1000 mL Pittsburgh SVOC/PAH- 8270D 250 mL Amber

glass None 250 mL Pittsburgh

Hi-res Pests* 1L Amber glass None 1000 mL SGS Hi-res PCB

Congeners* 1L Amber glass None 1000 mL SGS

PCB Aroclors 1L Amber glass None 1000 mL Pittsburgh Dioxin/Furans* 1L Amber glass None 1000 mL SGS

*It will need to be determined if the laboratory performing these tests will send TestAmerica bottles fortheir analysis or if the bottles utilized by TestAmerica meet their QA/QC requirements. It should also be noted that the laboratory who performs the tests will supply coolers and their FedEX number for return shipping of the sample containers.

DredgingElutriate Test and Column Settling Test …passaic.sharepointspace.com/Public...

Documents

Transcript of DredgingElutriate Test and Column Settling Test …passaic.sharepointspace.com/Public...