FINAL REMEDIAL DESIGN TREATABILITY STUDY REPORT - …of Central Services (DCS) Construction and...

FINAL

REMEDIAL DESIGN TREATABILITY STUDY REPORT

TULSA FUEL AND MANUFACTURING COLLINSVILLE, OKLAHOMA

JANUARY 2013

Prepared for

Oklahoma

Department of Environmental Quality

DCS Project # 12069C / PO# 2929014842

Burns & McDonnell Project No. 64496 Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company

Engineers-Architects-Consultants Kansas City, Missouri

007640

Treatability Study Report Table of Contents Tulsa Fuel and Manufacturing - Collinsville, Oklahoma

Treatability Study Rpt_TOC.docx TC-1 1/15/2013

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................... TC-2 LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................. TC-2 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................. TC-3 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1-1

1.1 Report Organization ................................................................................................ 1-1 1.2 Site Background and Selected Remedy ................................................................... 1-1 1.3 Overview of the Treatability Study ......................................................................... 1-2 1.4 Remedial Technology Description .......................................................................... 1-3 1.5 Treatability Study Objectives .................................................................................. 1-4

2.0 BENCH TESTING ........................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Soil and Sediment Sample Collection ..................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Stabilization Reagents ............................................................................................. 2-1 2.3 Bench Test ............................................................................................................... 2-2

3.0 FIELD TESTING ............................................................................................................. 3-1

3.1 Field Test ................................................................................................................. 3-1 3.2 Soil ..................................................................................................................... 3-2 3.3 Sediment .................................................................................................................. 3-3

4.0 SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... 4-1

4.1 Bench Test ............................................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Field Test ................................................................................................................. 4-1 4.3 Full Scale Application and Estimated Cost ............................................................. 4-2

4.3.2 Full Scale Reagent Application ................................................................... 4-2 4.3.3 Full Scale Treatability Application Cost Estimate ...................................... 4-3

5.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 5-1

APPENDICES APPENDIX A - Field Log Book APPENDIX B - Analytical Laboratory Reports for Bench Testing APPENDIX C - Field Treatability Photographic Log APPENDIX D - Analytical Laboratory Data for Field Testing APPENDIX E - Preliminary Waste Volume Calculations

007641



LIST OF TABLES Table No. Title

1-1 Maximum Concentration of Contaminants for the Toxicity Characteristic (40 CFR 261.24)

2-1 RI/RD Soil/Sediment Results Exceeding 40 CFR 261.24 Criteria 2-2 Bench Scale Treatability Study Results

3-1 Field Test Treatability Study Results

LIST OF FIGURES Table No. Title 2-1 RI and RD Soil Results (0-0.5 BGS)

2-2 RI and RD Sediment Results (0-0.5 BGS)

007642



LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ALS ALS Laboratories of Houston, Texas bgs below ground surface BMcD Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc. CA Cooperative Agreement CFR Code of Federal Regulations DCS Oklahoma Department of Central Services FS feasibility study Ft feet IC institutional control lb pound LTM long-term monitoring mg/L milligrams per liter NCP National Contingency Plan ODEQ Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality O&M operation and maintenance RA remedial action RD remedial design RI remedial investigation ROD Record of Decision SPLP Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure SOW Consultant Statement of Work for the Remedial Design for the Tulsa Fuel &

Manufacturing Superfund Site TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure TFM Site Tulsa Fuel and Manufacturing site in Collinsville, Oklahoma USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency yd3 cubic yard

* * * * *

007643

Treatability Study Report Introduction Tulsa Fuel and Manufacturing - Collinsville, Oklahoma

Treatability Study Rpt_01.docx 1-1 1/15/2013

INTRODUCTION 1.0

Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc. (BMcD), under contract with the Oklahoma Department

of Central Services (DCS) Construction and Properties Division (DCS Project #12069C / PO#

2929014842) on behalf of the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ), is conducting a

remedial design (RD) for the Tulsa Fuel and Manufacturing site in Collinsville, Oklahoma (TFM Site).

The RD is 100 percent federally funded through a Cooperative Agreement (CA) between the ODEQ and

the United Stated Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).

This Remedial Design Treatability Study Report has been prepared by BMcD, as required in the

Consultant Statement of Work for the Remedial Design for the Tulsa Fuel & Manufacturing Superfund

Site ([SOW] ODEQ, 2011) Task 8.0, Treatability Study and Pilot Testing. The following presents a

description of the treatability study (i.e., bench test and field test) performed in conjunction with the RD

at the TFM Site.

REPORT ORGANIZATION 1.1

The Remedial Design Treatability Study Report is organized as follows:

• Section 1.0 – Introduction

• Section 2.0 – Bench Testing

• Section 3.0 – Field Testing

• Section 4.0 – Summary

• Section 5.0 – References

SITE BACKGROUND AND SELECTED REMEDY 1.2

A detailed summary of the TFM Site background is included in Sections 2.1 and 2.2 of the Remedial

Design Work Plan (BMcD, 2012).

A remedial investigation / feasibility study (RI/FS) was undertaken at the TFM Site from 2005 through

2007, and a Record of Decision (ROD) that describes the selected remedy for the TFM Site based on the

RI/FS was issued by the USEPA on November 24, 2008. The RD involves the design of a consolidation

cell and cap of TFM Site soil, sediment, and waste materials and waste materials present on properties

contiguous to the TFM Site that are contaminated with arsenic, cadmium, and/or lead.

007644



Based on data obtained during the RI, the soil, sediment, and waste materials to be consolidated may

exceed the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) regulatory level and may be a

characteristic hazardous waste under 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 261.24 (See Table 1-1 for

regulatory levels). Confirmation TCLP sampling was conducted on the soil, sediment, and waste material

during the RD field investigation.1 Since materials are being left on-site, long-term monitoring (LTM),

site inspections, operation and maintenance (O&M), institutional controls (ICs), and five-year reviews

will be required (USEPA, 2008) as part of the remedy.

A summary of each of the remedies for the on-Site materials, as outlined in the ROD, is provided in the

following paragraphs:

• On-Site Soil and Waste Materials: The selected remedy for on-Site soil and waste materials

includes the consolidation and capping of waste materials that exceed the cleanup levels for

residential or nonresidential arsenic, cadmium, and lead. Confirmation soil sampling will be

conducted in each area of excavation to ensure cleanup levels have been met and all contaminated

soil and waste material has been removed and placed within the consolidation cell (USEPA,

2008).

• Sediment and Surface Water: The selected remedy for the on-Site Ponds, Mid-Site Ravine, and

Strip Mine Pit includes on-site fixation or stabilization and on-site disposal of materials that

exceed the sediment cleanup levels. The areas will be dewatered; sediment will be excavated as

appropriate; and sediment will be consolidated and capped on site. Confirmation sampling will

be conducted in each area of excavation to ensure cleanup levels have been met and all

contaminated sediment has been removed and placed within the consolidation cell (USEPA,

2008).

OVERVIEW OF THE TREATABILITY STUDY 1.3

This Remedial Design Treatability Study Report has been prepared to summarize the sampling, laboratory

bench-scale analysis, and field treatability testing for soils and sediments associated with the TFM Site.

1 The majority of the TFM site consists of a mixture of fine and large waste material. During the RD field investigation, no separating, crushing, or sampling of the large waste material was performed. Only waste material that was sufficiently small enough to not require manipulation such as crushing, grinding, or sieving was submitted to the laboratory for TCLP analysis. Preparation steps that involve physically changing the particle size of the tested material creates samples that are not representative of site conditions and fundamentally alters the sample’s analytical performance. Therefore, only waste materials with small particle size, having the appearance of soil, were submitted for laboratory analysis of TCLP.

007645



The treatability study was performed to identify treatment amendments capable of stabilizing the metals

contaminated soil and sediment. Such amendments are available in a number of different formulations,

and blends including magnesia buffered phosphates, phosphate fertilizers, sulfur, and/or magnesium oxide

were selected for testing. Soil and sediment from sample locations that are hazardous by characteristic

(i.e., results that exceed TCLP criteria) were selected for the treatability study. Sample locations for

treatability analysis were selected based on the results presented in the Final Remedial Investigation

Report (BMcD, 2007) and results of samples collected during the RD field investigation (BMcD, 2013).

REMEDIAL TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION 1.4

Stabilization is an effective and well proven treatment for soil and sediment impacted by heavy metals

and is a widely used treatment technology to prevent migration of contamination from a contaminated

media. Stabilization refers to the process that involves a chemical reaction that reduces the leachability of

a waste, so it chemically immobilizes the waste and reduces its solubility, making the material less

harmful or less mobile (USEPA, 2009).

Stabilization treatment is identified in the National Contingency Plan (NCP) as a permanent remedial

alternative for treatment of waste material containing inorganics. Stabilization typically involves mixing

a binding agent into the contaminated media. This can be performed in-situ, by injecting the binding

agent into the contaminated media, or by excavating the materials and machine-mixing them with the

binding agent. Common inorganic binding reagents include cement, fly ash, lime, soluble silicates, or

phosphates (USEPA, 2009). In addition, proprietary reagents are also available to use as binding agents.

The ratio of binding agents to unstabilized material is typically determined by bench-scale treatability

studies, and field pilot testing is often performed to confirm bench-scale results and refine the

stabilization process. Binding reagents can be added in a dry state, with water added as necessary or in a

slurried state, with the goal to achieve a homogeneous mixture (USEPA, 2009).

Stabilization costs vary according to site, contaminants, and ex-situ or in-situ treatment. Average costs

for large-scale ex-situ treatment (approximately 50,000 cubic yards [yd3]) generally cost from $70 to $145

per yd3 (USEPA, 2009). The major cost drivers for ex-situ stabilization are: moisture content,

contaminant type, and system size. Higher percent moisture content increases the amount of reagent

required for treatment. Contaminant concentration and type determine the amount and type of reagents

added to achieve the treatment standards. The volume of binding reagent required for ex-situ treatment

can be as low as one percent for proprietary agents and as much as 30 percent per volume of soil treated.

Excessive addition of binding reagents can increase volume resulting in higher treatment and disposal

costs (USEPA, 2009).

007646



Full-scale treatment application for the TFM Site could include in-situ treatment where the soil and/or

sediment are treated in place and then consolidated within an area of contamination, or full-scale

application could include ex-situ treatment where the soil and/or sediment are removed and treated, and

then, upon stabilization, placed in the on-site consolidation cell.

TREATABILITY STUDY OBJECTIVES 1.5

The objective of the treatability study is to identify stabilization reagents which will improve the chemical

and physical characteristics of the soil and sediment. Stabilization treatment has historically been used to

reduce leachable concentrations of the contaminants of concern. While some reduction in total

concentrations may be observed, the primary function of stabilization is to reduce the leachability of

contaminants from the treated matrix and to improve physical characteristics for handling and final

placement.

* * * * *

007647

Treatability Study Report Bench Testing Tulsa Fuel and Manufacturing - Collinsville, Oklahoma


2.0 BENCH TESTING

2.1 SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLE COLLECTION

Soil and sediment materials for the bench test were collected from locations where RI data and RD data

indicated materials are hazardous by characteristic for arsenic, cadmium, and/or lead (Figure 2-1 and

Figure 2-2). A summary of the RI and RD soil and sediment samples that exhibited results in excess of

the TCLP criteria at any depth interval are provided on Table 2-1.

On May 31, 2012, a composite soil sample was collected from the 0 to 0.5 feet below ground surface (ft

bgs) interval on the western portion of the Site (TR-30, TR-50, and SP-36) and the area directly southwest

of Pond 2 (TR-05 and TR-24) where TCLP criteria exceedances of cadmium and lead were present

(Figure 2-1). The composite sample consisted of a soil and fine grain waste matrix passed through a ¼-

inch sieve. On May 31, 2012 a composite sediment sample was also collected from the 0 to 0.5 ft bgs

interval at four locations along the Mid-Site Ravine (MSR-04, MSR-05, MSR-07, and MSR-08) as

indicated on Figure 2-2. Each of the four sediment sample locations exceeded the TCLP criteria for

cadmium. The composite sample consisted of a fine grained sediment/waste mixture and was passed

through a ¼-inch sieve. The soil and sediment composite samples were sent to ALS Laboratories of

Houston, Texas (ALS) on May 31, 2012 for bench testing. A copy of the field logbook for the sample

collection is provided as Appendix A.

Samples were screened with a ¼-inch sieve prior to collection so that the waste material would be

sufficiently small enough not to require manipulation such at crushing, grinding, or sieving at the

laboratory as required for large-sized particles in USEPA Method SW-846 1311. Preparation steps that

involve physically changing the particle size of the tested waste material would have created samples that

were not representative of site conditions. Altering the sample’s physical size would have fundamentally

altered the samples analytical performance due to the increased surface area and would not have been an

accurate representation of the performance of larger pieces of waste material within the consolidation cell.

2.2 STABILIZATION REAGENTS

Based upon a review of literature and commercially available information, the following soil stabilization

reagents were used for the bench test:

• EnviroBlend 90/10® - The original patented EnviroBlend® chemistry is a magnesia buffered

phosphate that binds with the metals of concern, and stabilizes the pH of the environment to

ensure long-term treatment (i.e., reduced leachability).

007648



• Triple Super Phosphate® - Triple Super Phosphate® is a type of phosphate fertilizer that has been

used for immobilizing and stabilizing metals in contaminated soils and sediment. Triple Super

Phosphate® is produced by the action of phosphoric acid on ground phosphate rock, yielding an

active ingredient of monocalcium phosphate. The phosphorus content of Triple Super

Phosphate® is 17 to 23 percent phosphorus, or 44 to 52 percent measured as phosphorus

pentoxide.

• TerraBond® - TerraBond® is a proprietary sulfur blend used for stabilization of metals in

contaminated soil and other media. It is composed of 40 to 60 percent of a proprietary sulfur

blend, 30 to 40 percent calcium hydroxide, and lesser amounts of calcium carbonate, calcium

chloride, and other inert ingredients.

• FreeFlow 300® - FreeFlow 300® is a proprietary magnesium oxide blend used for stabilization of

metals in contaminated soil and other media. It is composed of 25 to 60 percent of a proprietary

magnesium oxide blend, 40 to 60 percent calcium oxide, 10 to 25 percent sulfur, and lesser

amounts of silicon dioxide, aluminum oxide, and iron oxide.

2.3 BENCH TEST

Preliminary Testing

Preliminary analyses were performed by ALS on the soil and sediment composites, to verify the

suitability of the soil and sediment for use in the bench test. The results of the untreated soil had TCLP

exceedances of cadmium (9.25 milligrams per liter [mg/L]) and lead (26.8 mg/L), and the untreated

sediment had a TCLP exceedance of cadmium (3.27 mg/L). Table 2-2 presents the results of the

untreated composite samples.

Bench Test Results

Appendix B presents all analytical laboratory reports completed for bench testing, and the bench scale

results after the addition of various stabilization reagents is also summarized on Table 2-2.

The initial bench test completed by ALS consisted of mixing three different commercially available soil

stabilization reagents (EnviroBlend®, Triple Super Phosphate®, and TerraBond®) at three different ratios

of soil (wet weight) and the stabilization reagent. The following reagent and percentages by weight were

initially mixed with the soil and sediment samples:

• EnviroBlend 90/10® 1%, 2%, and 3% by wet weight of soil

007649



• Triple Super Phosphate® 1%, 2%, and 3% by wet weight of soil

• TerraBond® 2%, 3%, and 4% by wet weight of soil

Each of the samples was analyzed for TCLP arsenic, cadmium, and lead after mixing with the above

mentioned reagent/percentage weight ratios had occurred.

All cadmium TCLP results in soil and sediment of the above mixtures were above the TCLP criteria (see

Table 2-2). In addition, lead TCLP results in soil were above the TCLP criteria for Enviroblend ® (1%),

Triple Super Phosphate® (1%), and TerraBond® (2%, 3%, and 4%).

Untreated soil was then mixed with an 8% and 10% by weight mixture of Triple Super Phosphate® in an

effort to achieve cadmium TCLP results below the 1 mg/L TCLP criteria. The additional percentages of

Triple Super Phosphate® did not yield cadmium TCLP results below the criteria, and it was deemed

impractical to continue any additional bench testing or field testing of Triple Super Phosphate®.

Untreated soil and sediment samples were sent from ALS to the EnviroBlend and TerraBond reagent

vendors for additional bench testing. An untreated soil sample was also sent to a reagent vendor of Free

Flow Technologies, Ltd. for bench testing of Free Flow 300® as an additional stabilization reagent option,

since Triple Super Phosphate® was deemed ineffective.

The additional bench testing provided by EnviroBlend included various reagent mixtures and percentages

by weight for both the soil and sediment samples as indicated on Table 2-2. Results from the

EnviroBlend bench test indicated that EnviroBlend CS® at 10% and 11% by weight were the lowest

effective reagent/soil mixture to yield cadmium and lead TCLP results below the TCLP criteria.

Sediment results indicated that EnviroBlend CS® at 7% and 8% by weight were the lowest effective

reagent/sediment mixture to yield cadmium and lead TCLP results below the TCLP criteria.

Soil and sediment samples were mixed with TerraBond-LA® at 6%, 7%, and 8% by weight during bench

testing performed by the TerraBond reagent vendor. Results from the TerraBond bench test indicate that

TerraBond-LA® at 7% and 8% by weight were the lowest effective soil and sediment/reagent mixture to

yield cadmium and lead results below the TCLP criteria.

Free Flow Technologies Ltd. utilized the reagent Free Flow 300® for a soil/reagent mixture of 5% and 8%

by weight. Both the Free Flow 300® at 5% and 8% were effective in producing TCLP results below the

criteria (Table 2-2) for soil. It was assumed that the Free Flow 300® at 5% and 8% would be as effective

in the sediment matrix as in the soil matrix during bench testing.

007650



Based upon the results of the bench test, the two lowest effective ratios of reagent to soil/sediment matrix

were selected for field testing for each reagent. Therefore, six batches of reagent mixtures were selected

for field testing for each matrix (i.e., three reagents X two dosage ratios per reagent). The soil/sediment

to reagent mixtures recommended for use during the field test were as follows:

• Soil

EnviroBlend CS® – 10% and 11% by wet weight of soil

TerraBond-LA® – 7% and 8% by wet weight of soil

Free Flow 300® – 5% and 8% by wet weight of soil

• Sediment

EnviroBlend CS® – 7% and 8% by wet weight of sediment

TerraBond-LA® – 7% and 8% by wet weight of sediment

Free Flow 300® – 5% and 8% by wet weight of sediment (assumed to be the same as soil)

* * * * *

007651

Treatability Study Report Field Testing Tulsa Fuel and Manufacturing - Collinsville, Oklahoma


3.0 FIELD TESTING

3.1 FIELD TEST

The full-scale field test was performed on both soil and sediment from September 19 through 20, 2012.

Based on the bench test results, the two lowest ratios of reagent to soil/sediment matrix were field tested

for each reagent. That is, six batches were field tested for each matrix (i.e., three reagents X two dosage

ratios per reagent). The soil/sediment to reagent mixtures used during the field test were as follows:

• Soil




• Sediment




The soil and sediment used in the full-scale field test were obtained from the same locations as the soil

and sediment that were used in the bench test and included all sizes of waste material present at the

selected locations. That is, no separation or physical alteration of waste materials was performed during

the field test. Soil and sediment were evaluated separately.

Approximately 10 cubic yards of soil/sediment was excavated and placed in a mixing container (sealed

roll-off container). The unit weight, as determined during the bench test, was used to calculate the weight

of the soil and sediment. Using the soil/sediment weight and treatment ratios developed in the bench test,

the appropriate amount of reagent was added, and the soil/sediment and reagent were mixed using a

hydraulic excavator equipped with a smooth edge bucket. After completion of mixing, a sample was

collected and submitted to ALS for analysis of TCLP arsenic, cadmium, and lead. Samples submitted for

TCLP analysis consisted of fine grained materials that did not have to be physically altered to be

analyzed. (A similar sampling approach will be used during the remedial action (RA) to ensure

007652



comparable results to the field test).1 The process was repeated for each of the stabilization reagents and

dosage ratios determined for soil and sediment.

After sample collection of each batch was completed the soil/reagent mixture was removed from the

mixing container and placed back in the excavation and restored to the original grade. Sediment/reagent

batches were removed from the mixing container after sample collection and placed on the ground surface

in the area of mixing. Once all sediment/reagent mixing batches were completed, and removed from the

mixing container, the treated sediment was graded to blend in with the existing grade.

The logbook and photographs of the field testing are provided in Appendices A and C, respectively.

Analytical laboratory results for field testing are presented in Appendix D.

3.2 SOIL

Soil used for the field test was excavated from 0 to 1.0 ft in the vicinity of TR-30. The soil excavation

location was selected since TR-30 exhibited the highest TCLP concentration for cadmium (12.6 mg/L),

exceeded the TCLP criteria for lead (10.2 mg/L), and included a representative mixture of media

(soil/waste/fine grained waste) that is present at the TFM Site. Table 3-1 presents the results of the

respective soil/reagent mixtures completed during the treatability field test.

EnviroBlend CS®

Soil was mixed with EnviroBlend CS® at 10% and 11% by weight of soil. The following quantities of

soil and EnviroBlend CS® were mixed to achieve the respective mixture percentages: 10% - 34,000

pounds (lbs) of soil mixed with 3,400 lbs of EnviroBlend CS® and 11% - 34,000 lbs of soil mixed with

3,740 lbs of EnviroBlend CS®. There were no TCLP exceedances noted for the EnviroBlend CS® 10%

mixture; however, an exceedance of TCLP cadmium was noted in the 11% mixture.

TerraBond LA®

Soil was mixed with TerraBond LA® at 7% and 8% by weight of soil. The following quantities of soil

1 Samples were screened with a ¼-inch sieve prior to collection so that the waste material would be sufficiently small enough not to require manipulation such at crushing, grinding, or sieving at the laboratory as required for large-sized particles in USEPA Method SW-846 1311. Preparation steps that involve physically changing the particle size of the tested waste material would have created samples that were not representative of site conditions. Altering the sample’s physical size would have fundamentally altered the samples analytical performance due to the increased surface area and would not have been an accurate representation of the performance of larger pieces of waste material within the consolidation cell.

007653



and TerraBond LA® were mixed to achieve the respective mixture percentages: 7% - 34,000 lbs of soil

mixed with 2,380 lbs of TerraBond LA® and 8% - 34,000 lbs of soil mixed with 2,720 lbs of TerraBond

LA®. The TerraBond LA® 7% mixture exceeded the TCLP criteria of cadmium and lead, and the

TerraBond LA® 8% mixture exceeded the TCLP criteria of cadmium. In particular, the TCLP cadmium

results were higher after treatment than prior to treatment.

Free Flow 300®

Soil was mixed with Free Flow 300® at 5% and 8% by weight of soil. The following quantities of soil

and Free Flow 300® were mixed to achieve the respective mixture percentages: 5% - 34,000 lbs of soil

mixed with 1,700 lbs of Free Flow 300® and 8% - 34,000 lbs of soil mixed with 2,720 lbs of Free Flow

300®. The Free Flow 300® 5% and 8% mixtures exceeded the TCLP criteria of cadmium; however,

results for TCLP cadmium were only slightly above criteria in the 8% mixture. The Free Flow 300® 5%

and 8% mixture ratios were utilized during the field test, based upon effective bench test results at the

respective percentages. However, the vendor has suggested that a 10% mixture of Free Flow 300® should

achieve acceptable stabilization criteria.

3.3 SEDIMENT

Sediment used for the field test was excavated from the Mid Site Ravine from locations that had

exceedances of the cadmium TCLP criteria, including between locations MSR-04 (5.1 mg/L) and MSR-

05 (1.45 mg/L), as well as between locations MSR-07 (3.51 mg/L) and MSR-08 (1.97 mg/L). These

areas were identified during the RD, and contained a representative mixture of sediment and fine grained

waste that is present at the TFM Site. Table 3-1 presents the results of the respective sediment/reagent

mixtures completed during the treatability field test.

EnviroBlend CS®

Sediment was mixed with EnviroBlend CS® at 7% and 8% by weight of sediment. The following

quantities of soil and EnviroBlend CS® were mixed to achieve the respective mixture percentages: 7% -

34,000 lbs of sediment mixed with 2,380 lbs of EnviroBlend CS® and 8% - 34,000 lbs of sediment with

2,720 lbs of EnviroBlend CS®. There were no TCLP exceedances noted for the EnviroBlend CS® at 7%

or 8% sediment/reagent mixtures.

TerraBond LA®

Sediment was mixed with TerraBond LA® at 7% and 8% by weight of sediment. The following

007654



quantities of soil and TerraBond LA® were mixed to achieve the respective mixture percentages: 7% -

34,000 lbs of sediment mixed with 2,380 lbs of TerraBond LA® and 8% - 34,000 lbs of sediment mixed

with 2,720 lbs of TerraBond LA®. The TerraBond LA® 7% mixture did not have any TCLP exceedences;

however, the TerraBond LA® 8% mixture exceeded the TCLP criteria of cadmium.

Free Flow 300®

Sediment was mixed with Free Flow 300® at 5% and 8% by weight of sediment. The following quantities

of sediment and Free Flow 300® were mixed to achieve the respective mixture percentages: 5% - 34,000

lbs of sediment mixed with 1,700 lbs of Free Flow 300® and 8% - 34,000 lbs of sediment mixed with

2,720 lbs of Free Flow 300®. The Free Flow 300® 5% mixture exceeded the TCLP criteria of cadmium

and lead. TCLP arsenic, cadmium, and lead were not detected in the Free Flow 300® 8% mixture.

* * * * *

007655

Treatability Study Report Summary Tulsa Fuel and Manufacturing - Collinsville, Oklahoma


SUMMARY 4.0

The objective of the treatability study was to identify reagents capable of stabilizing the metals

contaminated soil and sediment at the TFM Site that exceeded TCLP criteria outlined in 40 CFR 261.24.

The primary function of stabilization was to reduce the leachability of contaminants from the treated

matrix and to improve physical characteristics for handling and final placement. Soil and sediment from

sample locations that were identified during the RI and RD as hazardous by characteristic (i.e., results that

exceed TCLP criteria) were selected for the treatability study. Treatability study activities included soil

and sediment sampling, bench-scale testing, and full-scale field testing.

4.1 BENCH TEST

Soil and sediment samples were collected from locations where RI and RD data indicated that materials

were hazardous by characteristic for arsenic, cadmium, and/or lead. Samples were submitted to ALS for

bench-scale testing of EnviroBlend 90/10®, Triple Super Phosphate®, and TerraBond®. The initial bench-

scale tests evaluated the performance of three concentrations of each reagent in soil and sediment. None

of the initial tests, which evaluated reagent concentrations ranging from 1% to 4%, produced acceptable

results. Additional testing using higher concentrations of Triple Super Phosphate® was performed by

ALS; however, acceptable results were not achieved using concentrations of 8% or 10% Triple Super

Phosphate® . At this point, it was deemed impractical to continue bench testing or field testing of Triple

Super Phosphate®.

Untreated soil and sediment samples were submitted to reagent vendors EnviroBlend and TerraBond for

additional testing in their facilities. In addition, a soil sample was submitted to reagent vendor Free Flow

Technologies Ltd. for bench testing of Free Flow 300®. Results of the additional vendor bench testing

yielded sample results that were less than TCLP criteria. Based on this additional testing, the two lowest

effective ratios of reagent to soil/sediment matrix were recommended for full-scale field testing as

follows:

• Soil




• Sediment



007656




4.2 FIELD TEST

Based on recommendations from the bench tests, full-scale field testing was completed for the two lowest

effective ratios of reagent to soil/sediment matrix (soil – six batches, sediment – six batches) to evaluate

the effectiveness of the stabilization reagents for full-scale implementation during the RA. A summary

for each reagent is provided in the following paragraphs:

• EnviroBlend CS® – EnviroBlend CS® was effective at stabilizing sediment at both 7% and 8%

mixture ratios, and it was effective at stabilizing soil at a 10% mixture. The Enviroblend CS® at

an 11% mixture in soil did not meet the TCLP stabilization criteria for cadmium.

• TerraBond-LA® – TerraBond-LA® failed to adequately stabilize soil and sediment in a majority

of the reagent batches. In particular, TCLP cadmium results for TerraBond-LA® stabilized soils

appeared higher than non-stabilized soil. TerraBond-LA® was eliminated as a viable option for

full-scale implementation.

• Free Flow 300® – Free Flow 300® did not meet TCLP criteria for cadmium or lead in a 5%

mixture with sediment, but was effective at an 8% mixture with sediment. Both Free Flow 300®

mixtures at 5% and 8% with soil had TCLP exceedances of cadmium; however, the exceedance

for the 8% mixture was minimal. The Free Flow 300® 5% and 8% mixture ratios were utilized

during the field test, based upon effective bench test results at the respective percentages.

However, the reagent vendor recommended using a 10% mixture for soil to achieve acceptable

results.

4.3 FULL SCALE APPLICATION AND ESTIMATED COST

4.3.1 Full Scale Reagent Application

Multiple reagents were tested in bench-scale and/or field-scale treatability tests of soil and sediment from

the TFM Site, including EnviroBlend 90/10®, Triple Super Phosphate®, TerraBond® LA, EnviroMag

Coarse, EnviroBlend CS, and Free Flow 300®. Based upon the results of the field test in combination

with anticipated full scale application conditions, the following reagent to soil/sediment ratios are

anticipated to provide acceptable stabilization during full scale application:

007657



• Soil

EnviroBlend CS® – 10% to 11% by wet weight of soil

Free Flow 300® – 10% by wet weight of soil

• Sediment

EnviroBlend CS® – 7% to 8% by wet weight of sediment

Free Flow 300® – 8% by wet weight of sediment

It should be noted that both the bench-scale and field tests were performed such that fine-grained

materials were preferentially studied. These fine-grained materials represent the likely worst-case

conditions for the TFM Site. The soil and sediment used in the full-scale field test were obtained from the

same locations as the soil and sediment that was used in the bench test but included all sizes of waste

material present at the selected locations. That is, no separation or physical alteration of waste materials

was performed during reagent application in the field test. The application of reagents in the field test

included all waste materials (regardless of size) present at the selected field testing locations. However,

samples submitted for confirmation TCLP analysis after stabilization were screened through a ¼-inch

sieve to minimize sample preparation steps (i.e., sample crushing, grinding, and sieving) at the analytical

laboratory, and test the success of stabilization of fine-grained wastes at the TFM Site.

4.3.2 Full Scale Treatability Application Cost Estimate

The quantities of soil and sediment requiring stabilization that were used to estimate the cost of full scale

treatability application were obtained from the Final Remedial Design Data Evaluation Report (BMcD,

2013). The quantity of soil that will require stabilization was derived from the estimated depth of waste

present throughout the TFM Site. Since waste was correlated with exceedances of TCLP criteria during

the RI and RD investigation, this approach was used to estimate the volume of materials for treatment.

Appendix E presents a figure and table depicting the estimated depths of waste present throughout the

TFM Site that was used as the basis for estimated quantity of waste. Since various sizes of waste

materials are co-mingled throughout the TFM Site and the finer-grained materials (i.e., soil/waste mix,

fine grained waste/broken retort mix, etc.) have consistently exceeded TCLP criteria, it was assumed that

some form of stabilization would be required for the entirety of the waste area. That is, this cost estimate

does not include any attempt to separate larger chunks of waste material from the fine-grained materials.

The cost estimate for full scale treatability implementation utilizing the recommended reagent

soil/sediment ratios from the full scale field test is as follows:

007658



Reagent Dosage Estimated Volume

(cubic yard)

Estimated

Quantity

(Tons)1

Unit

Price/Ton2

Total Price

Soil

EnviroBlend CS® 11% 146,000 219,000 $56.59 $12,393,210

Free Flow 300®3 10% 146,000 219,000 $103.53 $22,673,070

Sediment

EnviroBlend CS® 8% 520 676 $43.91 $29,680

Free Flow 300® 8% 520 676 $88.00 $59,490 1 A conversion factor of 1.5 tons/cubic yard was utilized for soil due to waste density, and a conversion factor of 1.3 tons/cubic yard was utilized for sediment.

2 Unit price includes in-situ treatment and testing of impacted soil/sediment, as well as procurement, delivery, and application of reagent. An estimate of unit costs was obtained from Remediation Services, Inc., which was the treatability study subcontractor.

3 The Free Flow 300® 5% and 8% mixture ratios were utilized during the field test, based upon effective bench test results at the respective percentages. TCLP cadmium did not pass TCLP criteria during the field test, and the vendor has suggested that a 10% mixture of Free Flow 300® should achieve acceptable stabilization criteria. Therefore, a soil dosage of 10% was selected for purposes of developing the cost estimate.

* * * * *

007659

Treatability Study Report References Tulsa Fuel and Manufacturing - Collinsville, Oklahoma


5.0 REFERENCES

Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc. (BMcD), 2007. Final Remedial Investigation Report for

Tulsa Fuel and Manufacturing, Collinsville, Oklahoma. August.

Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc. (BMcD), 2012. Remedial Design Work Plan, Tulsa

Fuel and Manufacturing, Collinsville, Oklahoma. February 6. (RD Work Plan)

Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc. (BMcD), 2013. Final Remedial Design Data

Evaluation Report, Tulsa Fuel and Manufacturing, Collinsville, Oklahoma.

Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ), 2011, Consultant Statement of Work for the

Remedial Design for the Tulsa Fuel and Manufacturing Superfund Site, August.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 2008. Record of Decision. Tulsa Fuel &

Manufacturing Superfund Site, Collinsville, Tulsa County, Oklahoma. November.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 2009. Technology Performance Review:

Selecting and Using Solidification/Stabilization Treatment for Site Remediation, EPA/600/R-

09/148 . November.

* * * * *

007660

TABLES

007661

K:\ENV\OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY\Site\64496\Deliver\Treatability Study Report\Final\Tables\Table 1-1 TCLP Criteria.xlsxTable 1-1

Page 1 of 1

Table 1-1Maximum Concentration of Contaminants for the

Toxicity Characteristic (40 CFR 261.24)Tulsa Fuel and Manufacturing Superfund Site Remedial Design

Parameter UnitsTCLP Regulatory

LevelArsenic, TCLP mg/l 5.0Cadmium, TCLP mg/l 1.0Lead, TCLP mg/l 5.0

CFR - Code of Federal Regulationsmg/l - milligrams per literTCLP - toxicity characteristic leaching procedure

007662

K:\ENV\OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY\Site\64496\Deliver\Treatability Study Report\Final\Tables\Table 2-1 TCLP Results.xlsxTable 2-1

Page 1 of 1

RI/RD Soil/Sediment Results Exceeding 40 CFR 261.24 Criteria Tulsa Fuel and Manufacturing Superfund Site Remedial Design

Sample Point

Sample Designator

Depth Interval (ft bgs)

Date Collected Sample Media Description Units

SoilSP-36 SS01 0.0-0.5 08/01/05 Silt and Fine Sand mg/l 0.05 U 1.69 3.93SP-39 SS02 0.5-2.0 07/29/05 Slag and Fine to Medium Sand mg/l 0.058 1.64 18.5TR-01 SS02 2.5-3.0 07/26/05 Slag/Coarse to Fine Waste mg/l 0.05 U 2.87 72.6TR-05 SS01 0.0-0.5 07/26/05 Silt w/Slag Gravel mg/l 0.05 U 6.03 48.7TR-09 SS02 4.5-5.0 07/27/05 Slag/Coarse to Fine Waste mg/l 0.05 U 3.63 4.87

TR-1002 SS02 4.5-5.0 07/27/05 Field Duplicate of TR-09/SS02 mg/l 0.05 U 3.95 4.98TR-19 SS02 3.0-3.5 07/28/05 Slag/Coarse to Fine Waste mg/l 0.05 U 3.48 47.2TR-24 SS01 0.0-1.0 03/08/12 Fine Grained Waste mg/l 0.01 U 2.8 5.3TR-30 SS01 0.0-1.0 03/05/12 Silty Clay mg/l 0.626 12.6 10.2TR-50 SS01 0.0-0.5 03/08/12 Top Soil/Fine Waste mg/l 0.017 3.3 3.05

SedimentPD1-04 SD01 0.0-0.5 03/13/12 Sediment mg/l 0.01 U 1.07 0.648MSR-04 SD01 0.0-0.5 03/12/12 Sediment mg/l 0.01 U 5.1 1.21MSR-05 SD01 0.0-0.5 03/12/12 Sediment mg/l 0.01 U 1.45 0.424MSR-07 SD01 0.0-0.5 03/12/12 Sediment mg/l 0.01 U 3.51 0.662MSR-08 SD01 0.0-0.5 03/12/12 Fine Grained Waste/Sediment mg/l 0.01 U 1.97 3.73

SMPT-05-05 SD01 0.0-0.5 03/26/12 Fine Grained Waste/Sediment mg/l 0.0174 0.0438 9.46SMPT-10-05 SD01 0.0-0.5 03/26/12 Fine Grained Waste/Sediment mg/l 0.0256 2.04 0.296

Detection exceeded TCLP 40 CFR 261.24 CriteriaDetections are presented in Bold RI Remedial Investigation

bgs below ground surface RD Remedial DesignCFR Code of Federal Regulations TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure

ft feet U Compound was not detectedmg/l milligrams per liter

Table 2-1

40 CFR 261.24 CriteriaArsenic Cadmium Lead

5 1 5

007663

1/15/2013 K:\ENV\OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY\Site\64496\Deliver\Treatability Study Report\Final\Tables\Table 2-2 Bench Results Summary.xlsxTable 2-2

Page 1 of 1

ALS Global - Bench TestsTCLP Metals (mg/l) TCLP Metals (mg/l) TCLP Metals (mg/l) TCLP Metals (mg/l)

Arsenic Cadmium Lead Arsenic Cadmium Lead Arsenic Cadmium Lead Arsenic Cadmium LeadTCLP Criteria 5 1 5 TCLP Criteria 5 1 5 TCLP Criteria 5 1 5 TCLP Criteria 5 1 5Soil Soil Soil SoilUntreated 0.05 U 9.25 26.8 Untreated 0.03 U 7.06 29.6 Untreated 0.05 U 9.25 26.8 Free Flow 300 - 5% NA 0.002 0.002 UEnviroBlend 1% 0.05 U 6.79 13.8 EnviroMag Coarse 3% 0.03 U 3.32 2.95 TerraBond-LA 6% NA 2.73 0.362 Free Flow 300 - 8% NA 0.041 0.002 UEnviroBlend 2% 0.05 U 4.73 4.69 EnviroBlend CS 6% 0.03 U 4.47 7.24 TerraBond-LA 7% NA 0.112 0.2 UEnviroBlend 3% 0.05 U 3.5 1.77 EnviroBlend CS 7% 0.03 U 4.25 4.53 TerraBond-LA 8% NA 0.095 0.2 UTSP 1% 0.11 6.55 5.98 EnviroBlend CS 8% 0.03 U 3.46 3.46TSP 2% 0.193 5.8 3.05 EnviroBlend CS 10% 0.03 U 0.64 0.26TSP 3% 0.217 4.74 1.73 EnviroBlend CS 11% 0.03 U 0.041 0.11TSP 8% 0.254 1.65 0.354 EnviroBlend CS 12% 0.03 U 0.026 0.13TSP 10% 0.323 1.35 0.249TerraBond 2% 0.05 U 7.61 17.4TerraBond 3% 0.05 U 9.5 14.6TerraBond 4% 0.05 U 10.7 15.6Sediment Sediment SedimentUntreated 0.05 U 3.27 2.65 Untreated 0.03 U 2.79 2.2 Untreated 0.05 U 3.27 2.65EnviroBlend 1% 0.05 U 2.69 1.03 EnviroMag Coarse 3% 0.03 U 1.21 0.093 TerraBond-LA 6% NA 1.95 0.291EnviroBlend 2% 0.05 U 2.56 0.529 EnviroMag Coarse 4% 0.03 U 0.024 U 0.067 U TerraBond-LA 7% NA 0.165 0.2 UEnviroBlend 3% 0.05 U 1.51 0.0993 EnviroBlend CS 6% 0.03 U 2.3 0.31 TerraBond-LA 8% NA 0.05 U 0.2 UTSP 1% 0.141 3.82 0.803 EnviroBlend CS 7% 0.03 U 0.12 0.067 UTSP 2% 0.139 2.2 0.266 EnviroBlend CS 8% 0.03 U 0.027 0.067 UTSP 3% 0.194 2.56 0.208TerraBond 2% 0.05 U 4.09 3.89TerraBond 3% 0.05 U 5.33 3.94TerraBond 4% 0.05 U 5.03 3.49

Detections are presented in BoldDetection was above TCLP 40 CFR 261.24 Criteria

* Free Flow vendor utilized the untreated soil data provided by ALS Global.CFR Code of Federal Regulations

NA Not Analyzedmg/l milligram per Liter

TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching ProcedureTSP Triple Super Phosphate

U Compound was not detected

EnviroBlend - Bench Tests TerraBond - Bench Tests Free Flow - Bench Tests*

Table 2-2

Tulsa Fuel and Manufacturing Superfund Site Remedial DesignBench Scale Treatablity Study Results

007664

K:\ENV\OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY\Site\64496\Deliver\Treatability Study Report\Final\Tables\Table 3-1 Field Test Results.xlsxTable 3-1

Page 1 of 1

Field Test Treatability Study ResultsTulsa Fuel and Manufacturing Superfund Site Remedial Design

Sample Point

Depth Interval (ft bgs)

Date Collected Units

Soil1

EnviroBlend CS 10% 0-1.0 09/19/12 mg/l 0.05 U 0.0814 0.05 UEnviroBlend CS 11% 0-1.0 09/19/12 mg/l 0.05 U 4.22 0.125

TerraBond LA 7% 0-1.0 09/19/12 mg/l 0.126 17.1 6.88TerraBond LA 8% 0-1.0 09/19/12 mg/l 0.981 15.6 1.4Free Flow 300 5% 0-1.0 09/19/12 mg/l 0.05 U 4.23 0.15Free Flow 300 8% 0-1.0 09/19/12 mg/l 0.05 U 1.49 0.05 U

Sediment2

EnviroBlend CS 7% 0-1.0 09/20/12 mg/l 0.05 U 0.499 0.05 UEnviroBlend CS 8% 0-1.0 09/20/12 mg/l 0.05 U 0.02 U 0.05 UTerraBond LA 7% 0-1.0 09/20/12 mg/l 0.05 U 0.02 U 0.05 UTerraBond LA 8% 0-1.0 09/20/12 mg/l 0.05 U 2.08 0.935Free Flow 300 5% 0-1.0 09/20/12 mg/l 0.05 U 2.60 6.03Free Flow 300 8% 0-1.0 09/20/12 mg/l 0.05 U 0.02 U 0.05 U

Detections are presented in BoldDetection was above TCLP screening

1

2

bgs below ground surfaceCFR Code of Federal Regulations

ft footmg/l milligram per liter

TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching ProcedureU Compound was not detected

Soil utilized during the field testing was collected within close proximity to TR-30, which was collected during the RD. TCLP results at TR-30 were as follows: Arsenic - 0.626 mg/l, Cadmium - 12.6 mg/l, and Lead - 10.2 mg/l.Sediment utilized during field testing was collected from locations MSR-04, MSR-05, MSR-07 and MSR-08. TCLP exceedences at these locations were limited to cadmium, which ranged from 1.45 mg/l to 5.1 mg/l.

Table 3-1

40 CFR 261.24 CriteriaArsenic Cadmium Lead

5 1 5

007665

FIGURES

007666

FormerResidence

Former Strip Mining Area(Acme Brick Strip Mine)

"Old" U.S.Highway 169

Atchinson TopekaSanta Fe Railroad

FormerSmelter

OperationsArea

Pond 4

Pond 3

Access Road/Driveway

Intermitte

nt Drainage

Pond 1Pond 2

Pond 5

Strip Mine Pit

Mid-Site RavineIntermittent Drainage

SP-60

SP-59SP-58SP-57

SP-56

SP-55

SP-54

TR-12

TR-04

TR-16

TR-17

TR-15TR-14

TR-18

TR-20

TR-08TR-09

TR-10TR-13

TR-19

TR-21

TR-03TR-06

TR-07TR-11

TR-02

TR-05

TR-01

SP-08

SP-12SP-14

SP-15

SP-07

SP-06

SP-05SP-04

SP-02

SP-47

SP-40

SP-53

SP-50SP-51SP-52

SP-49

SP-48SP-46

SP-41

SP-42SP-43

SP-44

SP-38

SP-37SP-36SP-35

SP-34

SP-39

SP-25SP-26

SP-27

SP-28

SP-30SP-31SP-32SP-33

SP-24

SP-23SP-22SP-21SP-20SP-19SP-18SP-17SP-16


SP-03SP-01

SP-30

SP-45

SP-29

TR-37

TR-55TR-28

TR-29

TR-27 TR-26

TR-25

TR-54TR-41

TR-53

TR-31

TR-30

TR-32

TR-22

TR-33

TR-23 TR-24

TR-52

TR-40 TR-51TR-50 TR-49

TR-48

TR-46

TR-39

TR-45

TR-42

TR-43

TR-44

TR-34

TR-47 TR-38

TR-35

TR-36

U:\TulsaFuels\ARC\ArcDocs\2012\Fig2-1_RI_RD_Soil_Results_Tulsa_Collinsville_OK.mxd sos Jan 11, 2013

TULSA FUEL AND MANUFACTURING Collinsville, OK

RI AND RD SOIL RESULTS(0 - 0.5 BGS)

Figure 2-1

150 0 150

S C A L E I N F E E T

NORTH

LEGEND

Trenching/Test Pit Locations

Surface/Subsurface

Site Boundary

Water Bodies

Former Smelter Oper. Area

Hydrography

Roads

< Residential RAO

Sample result between residential &nonresidential RAO

> Non residential RAO

Waste present to at least 0 - 0.5 bgs.Samples for total metals were collectedat locations TR-01 through TR-21. Allsamples exceeded the nonresidential RAO

> TCLP criteria

Bench test composite soil samples were collectedfrom 0 - 0.5 feet below ground surface (bgs) atTR-05, TR-24, TR-30, TR-50, and SP-36.

Soil RAOs are as follows:Arsenic : Residential = 37 mg/Kg, Nonresidential = 200 mg/KgCadmium : Residential = 75 mg/Kg, Nonresidential = 60 mg/KgLead: Residential = 500 mg/Kg, Nonresidential = 1,000 mg/Kg

TCLP criteria are as follows:Arsenic = 5.0 mg/LCadmium = 1.0 mg/LLead = 5.0 mg/L

If any constituent exceeded the RAO & TCLP, then thelocation was highlighted as an exceedance.

mg/Kg = milligrams per kilogrammg/L = milligrams per literRAO = Remedial Action ObjectiveTCLP = Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procdure

NOTE:

007667

Strip MinePit


Pond 5

Pond 4

Pond 3

Pond 2

Pond 1

Intermitte

nt Drainage

FormerSmelter

OperationsArea

Atchinson Topeka Santa Fe Railroad

"Old" U.S. Highway 169


FormerResidence


SMPT

-09

SMPT

-06

SMPT

-07

SMPT-01

SMPT

-08

SMPT-11

SMPT-12

SMPT-10

SMP

T-04

SMPT

-05

SMP

T-03

SMPT-02

PD5-01

PD4-03PD4-02

PD4-01

PD3-06PD3-05

PD3-04

PD3-03

PD3-02

PD3-01

PD2-06PD2-05

PD2-04

PD2-03

PD2-02

PD2-01

PD1-08

PD1-07

PD1-06PD1-05

PD1-04

PD1-03

PD1-02

PD1-01

MSR-08MSR-07

MSR-06MSR-05

MSR-04

MSR-03MSR-02

MSR-01

SMPT-12-05

SMPT-11-50

SMPT-11-05

SMPT-10-05

SMPT-09-05

SMPT-08-50

SMPT-05-05

SMPT-03-05

SMPT-01-05

U:\TulsaFuels\ARC\ArcDocs\2012\Fig2-2_RI_RD_Sediment_Result_0_Half_Ft_Collinsville_OK.mxd sos Jan 11, 2013

150 0 150



RI AND RD SEDIMENT RESULTS(0 - 0.5 BGS)

Figure 2-2

NORTH

LEGEND

Site Boundary

Water Bodies

Hydrography

Strip Mine Pit Transect


Roads

> Residential/Nonresidential RAO

> TCLP criteria> Residential/Nonresidential RAOand TCLP criteriaSediment Sample collected during theRemedial Investigation (RI)Sediment Sample collected during theRemedial Design (RD)

PD4

MSR Mid Site RavinePD5 Pond 5

Pond 4PD3 Pond 3PD2 Pond 2PD1 Pond 1

SMPT Strip Mine Pit Transect

Bench test composite sediment samples were collectedfrom 0 - 0.5 feet below ground surface (bgs) at MSR-04,MSR-05, MSR-07, and MSR-08.

Sediment samples collected during the RI wereanalyzed for total metals only.

Sediment samples collected during the RDfrom Pond 1, Pond 2, Pond 3, Pond 4,and the Mid-Site Ravine were analyzed for TCLP only.

Sediment samples collected during the RD fromthe Strip Mine Pit were selected based uponvisual inspections of core samples and analyzedfor total metals and TCLP.

Sediment Residential/Nonresidential RAOs are asfollows:Arsenic = 181 mg/KgCadmium = 813 mg/KgLead = 500 mg/Kg

TCLP criteria are as follows:Arsenic = 5.0 mg/LCadmium = 1.0 mg/LLead = 5.0 mg/L

If any consituent exceeded the RAO and/or TCLP, thenthe location was highlighted as an exceedence.

mg/Kg = milligrams per kilogrammg/L = milligrams per literRAO = Remedial Action ObjectiveTCLP = Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure

NOTE:

007668

APPENDIX A

Field Logbook

007669

S·t5·•o. ''l'l~<o 1). t:llF1HA.~T

o~• Sl' E 11> G£t: ~ope

RePI.AU:: ~oo>~!tf 1'\TTAC.IIi:l> 10 "iH<; j)At>l , (..oc,.c,o;J>. ~

1"\ ..v. ~ w I l'bl'( fl.OP€. Ro>PE LG./1/<> 711 n. ""' . .,.,.~&~"".:; L.€N<.l" /\~ wtl!t·

D.t"~IIAA' oi"Fsrno.

1RIU:VG I'. T 1-(c. oo:-Ft<€".

l TU~~~MY j1AY "?.! :«.ta,

TAs>< c f:l€#C.H Sc.Al."E" s Flo< I)Y 5A"' P<.t C.oU.'"<.I'to»·

c .. H2..ctTtfE'A ~---- __ C::.LouP~ ~ ;A1~D 7D:\___ AI.N'W e.J.;:,..,__ t;) ,s-. _':_~ ___ ,.,_P b __

1 P€1\"<lrv"El '. D,-~NI'l:-L !CAR AAF1T

T

07<3.;}

jO'I~

(I••

JJ;2C

LOAVt

Pt<.w:.

Ail. Ill: liE"

!.AMPL8

i!.EGJ:.V

ICC. o_.C~&"c.ti

v.P Supf'l..l"t::].

<>N li'"IF. i'R(ifAfl€ 71> COllet r LO" I'O.SI:of"l!o'

~It 5€Dl"~AI'r A..Vb so __ ~-~.

C.ott,:C:r~,.t<. ~oo:Mo;JVT <..o"' Po• 7:.To ~

. fi:>M a- o.s' &.~ AT -"I~R- o~l -•·'"'"?. oS", ..... f\!11! :lif!'i, M~R·oS, COllEcT ::/ • 01 G.AllV' 8"U<~~.

liSS. (.ONPI.~ sE'o:t,..0:NY ~Po.snt 5AI'\P(~/III..

AND A!ltA otJ W~St~ Ntnr~ ol" Ttt€ ~F"fG. co<t,ttt"t>

_ Fli'lb C:.I!A~ .. w,o.~n; J"l!~"" AR€/'1 A~ ">O>"U. ;;J • ~ G~''"" ei!.<~<&T.S.

~~~· (.oMPl"'f ~o_r<- 6>1"\P'"l11:" _5A,.PLE,

l~<;o 1>. ~1\RIIAA"t" . oO:I' •J:i)£,

17•• ... 1;>. E~ltl,..._t 1!,}\C.k AL t<<. oFPI:c.e ·

I

007670

{,'1'1%

_ .{.Vti>.Uf~~y 1 S~;l'fcMB.... !9, .0!7 ,

"TA~ k: 'FlOob J1l.f"A~A~L%H tfST

utAT~t\ ·. P·~~A.e. _. -~:t-1) eu·"'--- -~ -s , _ ;>c~ ...,.,., • .._ ', _ DA.VIt?' L £'1\P. HA ;lT

_ O'loo 1:1.;'1\UE k<. 01~1':tU

___ A:~~~~-- 6W.H'Tt:' , R~t ,ALRSAb7' o,JSI'TI:." · R"lo.F"F 13€1'"""'"

iet.t.l:\ '\l.,JJ-b tELtvGP-€0 ~ "!_~!~ :s_:c __ ~_·

~dt(:c.:~ oJl:e~T.I\Tto.J ____ A.v_o -~-F-~Y T84_r..vrN(,_.

__ lp(.~ ___ (;YC4'f_~~~fl( ~~W\1 A~~_ "'t);:~_C:-I.ASJ 1'/fl!,ql"l"'\l!',.vr

_ ~!,.Alii_•__ ~0~~- ,a,eAJPII'\""e'NT Wl:\..L e.t.,~~lt. l=X«5'r.

_ 511~! \))ON .. «~ -Je. ])rSC-•S~ 1"C.€Ar>"\E:Aif A_Rf:n

____ ,tWC) ___ APPi01~:._!!· ~--~1\1 ~"\;:\>eo _"fH.t\r ~r!-._ '-'t'"''

_ _& (<JC.IB:I'eb FtD ""- _ .,.~.- A ~teA "" -rR. s,. <R. ~

8cri!>X'1(l" ?'H(i__ l>~<..~t 'l't,l~ \.IIO.li<S'S. ~4/1 <,AC>I'It""-

ANI> ~Ill> • A""' t•~""':f-"S A Re.-(lt 5~,vTAT zve- MI«Wi£

•r _ J<E'OrA. s~ I'RE5£.vr o.v S~'l€'. _S<>rl usa>_ ""'' T•c nel\'l',.,f?.oll' ..,:t•L BE' ~"'l<(AVAfEI> F~l't Q•_f•-' 1'1"

~..,s.

<ygJI Ji<Colo"'"'- ~ T Ti ·1> ,

___ -""i-____ II lDoJ!>

LooP.~ C)"'\QN_'::I '11(:. ~~1.. ~ 9..01.'-"'~ A'F~~ 1'\.~C.'tvt.

M'Jf'li1l. -~t>'- ~" '>" ,z~Q\,....,.. • .,.,

!il,:).:> l.,~~-'"1

<>"" ~\,r"' ''""'"'' 3 H• L;S\ oF e-N•:i:<o«L<.vt> A r 1i~

~r 11~> ~o~F~s~·r~'--------------~ ~"' ~<.t Gzt.- $M'~Gl§,v/;) (.~ II% L'F~i\ T't.tl~ A•,(-',PL

f_310 C:ot\Pi't 'lP.t?AltO s.n::c- e,~<.k Jb e.-cAVJlT.Ji:tN,

,11\ 'blre.:tal aou.NO __ ~ Wo\T~ --~~L !'W1S'--~-~ flo.e~rs ..

1'\:MC:

_t!>A\_

-.-.1~1.

---~

I'll.>·'& __ 11-~-,

-·""'·S' _ )IS'I>

l'lil j _fW'•IO <B.o~

_llH _ 1'\w·'l~ 1'1.17

13'\~

. -~~~,

l)~~

l?)~f

~~~{~--

\'161

f'llo). ~

f'lu. <I

""-"1-l

r-1!'· \

"'"'·I.

,o.lo

q ....

11:9'11

9-'3L IJ./g

__ 13.~.> Q.tS

-~-

-_ _lll·o'l.

~~.·~

1'-l:of_

"" -f't:'f" f't'- ...

\3 __ ·~-~--

t~.o~

/~ .... : 1':1.~)

1~.~·

{/.<.)

-r:. t~_o_~

-- -~ "'"~€- )_%_ €W'vr~--~ ~'"~~--- _HAR~&g.)!.f ____ _ _..,tll\~0 _

__ ----~- 'SQJ~~~, N~ _______ SAMPl.fF --~~~_l(:"'t'tEO· ~~~~0 SOT<-

----- ~~_]"%,, '"-" --- ~ ,1'\Nt:'-~---lc...~ __ p_ ~

'"T'q.~~'"'EN1" _.

~o __ l! ____ ser.z~G~r __ _

J'-\}Q_ j'=J;"f__ I,'T...,_LIU _ OF ___ ~~~"l;,lA£.1 "'./"''•""' lR~ ol'_ J,..:<. ___ _

007671

q-11·1> ~44,(.. b.fARI-lf\•1

O>U.ol<.T (s..rc. • FlEE:f'<.<IA> f'\(,0 S'%} R>R 'fU.q> As,l./.1/'1.·

OET ._.. . A1 ,....,. ~;. ..,L • U.SI EfNL 1)1.1' Ar 1\fll~ov l.o <.A""" ,.;.., &"T oJR N /Aw·••· "''' f;J.Dl. llA>'tliY AI" Art¥•r 1-~<AU•<t

16~) ~1 . ~,~0 Li.' 00: I"~~ i'\OlJ <.>/ 3'1""0 ~> of' SI>J'.<..

!='Of.. __ A_ ~RR~f=I..O~ R.Ati", __ oF_ '9~/tt,

~icT~otO.-Ff/.fi!J:<a.J /l~o 6'07.1 FoR iC<P As.O,f'(,.

R.:rwlct ~0 S41'<. .,., £'laAVDll'•~·

J~Js ,..,. ~f .6'<_/''" · L we Jl.l$ 'KA2C.. _txt ;p· ,_,.-<or. ~s Co<i<LoN<

1 ''S bET "'' liT """' · 7· ....._-. {~./ Q • hAJ(. piiY Ai' AM!o)r O· 'S' f..I"'.L'"'· il.~'i ~lAP 1\'T "'""'"· "''' 9./B. 31'17~ l)l!lAT M'f'~o)< ;;M <>I«~·

JJ~~q i""~ l:!>!,o !.6\ oF TOlRI'I6oA>O ""(!~coo L<!s •• :;:~TL l"o<'t A ~e;t4!A 11..,0 RA. '1'.1:-o

C.oLUoCI' I ;:5ort • T.;-R'!A e,,vil

oF ?tt/e.

J.A --~~l_---:~~~-~------~e --~s.Gt.P4.

~E\ -\19 1>,} fl'IU··· """· q.,~ \ii>~L-~ ALAI'Pfo> ~·;!' ""'-·

5E1 l,<P AT ..,...,,3,_\,IL' . \\·•1 6/lr'- QO' AT_}Ii'l'l!o) __ ~.o <.A<.

JIXY. d-ill) ~s_ ---~-'"-- ----~~a~\loJJD to:~/ :5,t.J"rW ~-~~-- C?_f_ --~ ______ F~~-

A 'TimAA s ... " tAt"J:D~~ o~ 0'io.

c.ou.~~ r;~,, -·~(~~...,. <A ~'ll' 1 f<L 'll:ll' ~- u.,,..

CoLltLT :su.~~~~--- t.....f\l't'f.. ~eAJ.~E"~i\.

s~~:t ~ I"'._,L_f~i_c_ o:~"

' '· ~· .

9 • II· 12

WI~ Po~<> ~ cDR' - --- -----------

IS ~o f•'-"' 'I c "J))tY

!& '" PDND \ ' l>l'l'

007672

(, ~·191..

THIA!WY-1 Y >.ll:l''r<:n&,~ -<&, :>ot)

IA&I<: f="IEtD "UfllT,M:t't:>>l" Tii'sT

p,;:R'»w«c · \>ArJ'l:'t~ tAIII<AI>T

D-€'AA.MIU•· Ofht.'tt'. ~\Z: e..A~Sf7l: .... _ -~f' __ ~e:-__ r>:: _ .('_~_¢'_~-'=!~. ~0.....v-: TRt:ll'rtr.> ~Cit<.... FRo"' ~ol,t..,.q: A,.. _fl;\GE," "'.v

eJI..cAV/J,TI'oJJ, (,~AQt '\1tt4101) "'"(,WV """"'""'T~, ,RJ;~~

e,(!Ac,<i' "'"~"' ........

i?'.Cc.AV4~ OF- S~,.,_..:;vt.

__ St;r uJ' 1\"tP..t...J-S, bd_:. 12.V8 K4,cc.. t>_Rl' ~,.. 9-'0l~GA'-t.c.us.

"'"'' .,_, _S~ "0 A1' A"'·~. W~' II·~S J3All p«Y Ar- o.S <,AU."'·

_51.!1 u.t-" A't ,...w- S. ~L. ... 11.15" "S-A:{;L 'DP.'t A1 dl .t C'oAlLri.N'S.

. S.."'t ~~ ~1" f\IJ. \. !vL , I~<!)~ 1!/l.~l. '1:1\Y AJ·o. \ G,f'I.L>"'

___ ~> ,;!3 go ~B'> "" re~P.\ )!>.>•1> "'/ 1"1,.,.. <6• •• ~<2'PL ... ,.,..-

>o.9. I< T~P~ f,o,tD IIA'U• •• 1'1~.

c..w.c:c..T GeDr"""'T·'TeflRI\i!<>AID 1-A ?•J Fott

o_'O~~ _-;IT u.~ All"'-":;_ ---~-~--~- 11:6 15<\'l( PR1 -. . .:> ~1---------~-lt~~~

·~'13> 5<"T u.f ~T' }'.Y·>. \.,JL~ r;.o~ ~\.. \llt "1.1./ Cl\<-'."'-' ':>tl i!.P JIT ,...., . ']. "'L' \~-11. ~t.l oAr A.~ ti-L~.>I\~.

q. 3D(I' ,;w9<. 'j). €i>I<IIAIU

o91S" ~ :J.720 <..<SS oF T<:"l!P~ l'>o~ ..,I 8fo<P <.6S oF :>o'i'<. r-ot<

A Tt"llOA i3o.110 RATr'"" O¥" B".4,

••"-t<T \SE"DV"'>.vr -Ttl!liA&/JO ~A B% l>oR ,<cl' A~4l,l'b fMPH 7lW!~ S~br'"'E:""' Flto"' i>O<L><<".

e 9'15' JI:ICJI ~7~· LBf oF (;Aiurtu !Jl.r;~ w r ~'IO<J" Lilt

OF ~ceo.;;.. Qt. 'I" ,:;..< ,1.1-1 .flvv.r~o (JLi!'A/.P II'At:no

,o~~ (§.J.Iicr r5C:(H'MM- §1\jv>::i!OBI.e.<IO cs: II o/., I ..-~ ... 1'<-LP ..... U..Ph- E,._,P?Y ~'E'ATE'Il ser..z-r<e>Vr ~".,;, e<>~\.oF"F;

n 10 I'>E<)M tAEi<JAJc,._ _ a =• ~r;, • ..- E"M<rR•&..<:"" c, 1 3e,;u• ~ ar

<=.F SGI)XM~-~ • .IT l='ot ArV E»W'tlo6U:~P R.A:nv ~F 7-=k.

\\'~0 (.~~'-~-"~---nG<f.or~b/r-E'JJv:tPu&6vt\ c..s 7 ;J f"Ott \C..\.1?

A-,. CJ.l'· Eri\l "IAEA"\€0 ~eor"~""l F~•-" ('lo<U>FP.

Fltt:"C FL;o,!.J 'RATre or:: .:) 0/.:,, I~ ':xJ Fol __ A_

(;;or,..~;.~ F'~H: FLa.> No S % 1 >oo

A,, c_,, Pt. "'"'"'1 ~effl"ep '""'""'•"" f"'" ~ou."' • . \'\'XI '""~ )( :;l._:_'l:?-_? ______ ~~- - ---~-!- __ f_~-~ _A.~ - \..)I 1,'-\ p~ L13!. 0~

s~~l~~N7r-~~~_$~~~~~~~~~

,.u.P ___ Ali.. (c.l._,_ft;,_. __

E.nri7 TR€ATeO ~E"Ol'netvT _F~_o_~ __ f5_;)~-~f~-~ _A--~--

lo,t.~'\€0 :SE'Dl:~liT ~;._,_s_ __ ~~_CQ"r_ct~---- A(-Y:-~$1___ __ ~"'-~:-~:~~L~~----

'"'"-<A<E :ttV ~~fA~ IleA~ 1''1" -oB AI"'> !"M'.-o<-\.

ec~u..vA'i'l;oM. VJ !"lt> ,:tTl: RA'If:.V€ "'"<.1!.1< <o,.., ... nE..P S<i

:pil{'J/(Ar.O "'""-'"' '••UM>E "" •t..,o A~_l'T "l>:<<> ~ho<'

007673

~oP 01'1' ;! CooLG:R> lit: f'E? E'< ill~ ilb""L~v~R:I' 11.>

AL'>-

'1>. E'A~~/IIl.'t __ oN'-"-"rG'· 'll~l: .. C,.."r:t""'t'c.. ,._, L.>M Ar'P __

y~ <"- - . <>:61'-'t.~~ ...

!>E't _ ... I ___ l<.t /'.W-'1>. LJ(., J)R_V_

DA:l' A l o, a, (:,A.Uo r<1 S , __

~i ~L. ill __ f'i.<J. 10 . ""- • t),l-5 _ _ D~f A r o. '' .,..,..,.~

~El oP AT "'"'·LI. 1.\L' !\.0~ ____ 13'11''-D~Y A~ 1.•.- GA"'"""----

5<n ... t ~· ~· v-• ~.,.

!"""- ). I.J\...': \\.'!,lo

~-~--:_? _____ . -~~ ~ 1'1-15'

5At\.. D~l' A' 0 ,,f ~lWJo')_~-

o«,Y AT -:l. OS <:oiY-'-""' .J 64t\.

I>UL

~n u.f A-t- ~~---=-! __ t,.J\.." n .. tt. ~': ___ t)Ar __ AT t9.\ l.o'\l..t..•-"'~

~ ~>t p.T I'W- \ ""-' I~.:>"- &AI<- PIIY At "-'" (,f\l.<o!S

'oeT" "-P ;o.."t" __ /"....,_-!. ~·- ~-~e ~\._Dlt'(A7 l.o <>AIVN~

~ ~ ~H_5Z"!f: .

1>-li.A~ M~ 1 o>"< SJ: ~ .

,~c~ovOfl~ a::tt>Befl 151 :1<!>1~

'fA> K · G.ltou.•~ IJ1<_1l:1t ~""·•

t-J2A~H<1'-'· C.L~_AR,_ UP,Ob'Q. 7u \

!)~Gil-~'"""'-'· Dl\rJ~ e-AP-1'11/Z.r

ocro • L>?"v" "><L_ .cef't:<t'

lO'If ,4#-PIIC O_tJ_~_f!'g'L _(!}pG_q LDt.K.. p.te~ ___ p'!_ _____ (D"TE. fJtrtJ ~~---~RD."l'

rs _ UNI<.V<IIoJrJ _:1) _ o.,Titf" IOATt". <AJ.J_.;'f:>_ .SA All- f>ol.JrJ~f? __ ~

_:.Hf:: __ L.J.&.S WJ~Af!£ ___ cF Arv'Y <--~~-----~-£:'!~.41C..EJ: :j:"T ~~~----~f¢DE"4)

'{O ~'\__ ~.

1.so OO'f~%'1£. "" wet" _j?>o_'-'t '"-Tt"<::-~!.

i\OS o~~<o"'!10, ?<J.T Oll'i" l.o<-\<-. __ Btb.W fZai' .. IJ_ oF VATI:-~ ~M1S,

{(:lJ..

__ w~LL

f'W{

{VI.!,J.,

~--··

~ .. :n

"-~' l/.11

9. ~~

ll· 'I'(

i'H~

e stt

TD -'"·at

'"·"-•

IS.S"~

I 'I,,)' __

11. :n

L~·•1 -

007674

APPENDIX B

Analytical Laboratory Reports for Bench Testing

007675

ALS Preliminary and Initial Bench Testing

007676

29-Jun-2012

Remediation Services, IncGrant Sherwwood

Dear Grant,

Re: Tulsa Fuels Work Order: 12051071

Fax: (620) 331-6216Tel: (620) 331-1200

2735 South 10th StreetIndependence, KS 67301

ALS Environmental received 25 samples on 23-May-2012 through 06-Jun-2012 for the analyses presented in the following report.

Project ManagerBethany AgarwalElectronically approved by: Kelsey N. Brown

Certificate No: KS: E-10352

The analytical data provided relates directly to the samples received by ALS Environmental and for only the analyses requested. Results are expressed as "as received" unless otherwise noted. QC sample results for this data met EPA or laboratory specifications except as noted in the Case Narrative or as noted with qualifiers in the QC batch information. Should this laboratory report need to be reproduced, it should be reproduced in full unless written approval has been obtained by ALS Environmental. Samples will be disposed in 30 days unless storage arrangements are made.

The total number of pages in this report is 16.

If you have any questions regarding this report, please feel free to call me.

Sincerely,

ADDRESS 10450 Stancliff Rd, Suite 210 Houston, Texas 77099-4338 | PHONE (281) 530-5656 | FAX (281) 530-5887ALS GROUP USA, CORP Part of the ALS Laboratory Group A Cam pbell Brothers Lim ited Com pany

007677

Date: 29-Jun-12ALS Environmental

Project: Tulsa FuelsClient: Remediation Services, Inc

Work Order: 12051071Work Order Sample Summary

Lab Samp ID Client Sample ID Collection DateTag Number Date ReceivedMatrix Hold12051071-01 Terra Bond SC Soil 5/22/2012 5/23/2012 08:4512051071-02 Enviro Blend 90/10 Coarse Dust 5/22/2012 5/31/2012 10:0012051071-03 Enviro Blend CS Dust 6/6/2012 6/6/2012 10:0012051071-04 Enviro Phos Coarse Dust 6/6/2012 6/6/2012 10:0012051071-05 Enviro Blend 90110 Coarse Dust 6/6/2012 6/6/2012 10:0012051071-06 TFM-Soil Soil 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:1512051071-07 TFM-Sediment Sediment 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:1512051071-08 Soil/EB/1% Soil 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:1512051071-09 Soil/EB/2% Soil 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:1512051071-10 Soil/EB/3% Soil 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:1512051071-11 Soil/TSP/1% Soil 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:1512051071-12 Soil/TSP/2% Soil 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:1512051071-13 Soil/TSP/3% Soil 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:1512051071-14 Soil/TB/2% Soil 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:1512051071-15 Soil/TB/3% Soil 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:1512051071-16 Soil/TB/4% Soil 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:1512051071-17 Sed/EB/1% Sediment 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:1512051071-18 Sed/EB/2% Sediment 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:1512051071-19 Sed/EB/3% Sediment 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:1512051071-20 Sed/TSP/1% Sediment 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:1512051071-21 Sed/TSP/2% Sediment 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:1512051071-22 Sed/TSP/3% Sediment 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:1512051071-23 Sed/TB/2% Sediment 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:1512051071-24 Sed/TB/3% Sediment 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:1512051071-25 Sed/TB/4% Sediment 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:15

SS Page 1 of 1

007678

Date: 03-Jul-12ALS Environmental


Work Order: 12051071Case Narrative

No Exceptions

CN Page 1 of 1

007679

Project: Tulsa FuelsClient: Remediation Services, Inc Work Order: 12051071

ALS Environmental Date: 29-Jun-12

Client Sample ID: TFM-SoilLab ID: 12051071-06A Collection Date: 5/31/2012

Matrix: SOIL

Analyses Result Qual Units Date AnalyzedReport Limit

Dilution Factor

TCLP METALS SW1311/6020 Analyst: SKSPrep Date: 6/14/2012Arsenic 6/15/2012 03:03 AM0.0500 mg/L 10NDCadmium 6/15/2012 04:34 PM0.200 mg/L 1009.25Lead 6/15/2012 04:34 PM0.500 mg/L 10026.8

Client Sample ID: TFM-SedimentLab ID: 12051071-07A Collection Date: 5/31/2012

Matrix: SEDIMENT


Dilution Factor

TCLP METALS SW1311/6020 Analyst: SKSPrep Date: 6/14/2012Arsenic 6/15/2012 03:12 AM0.0500 mg/L 10NDCadmium 6/15/2012 03:12 AM0.0200 mg/L 103.27Lead 6/15/2012 03:12 AM0.0500 mg/L 102.65

Client Sample ID: Soil/EB/1%Lab ID: 12051071-08A Collection Date: 5/31/2012

Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor

TCLP METALS SW1311/6020 Analyst: SKSPrep Date: 6/28/2012Arsenic 6/28/2012 06:44 PM0.0500 mg/L 10NDCadmium 6/28/2012 06:44 PM0.0200 mg/L 106.79Lead 6/28/2012 06:44 PM0.0500 mg/L 1013.8


Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor


AR Page 1 of 5

Note: See Qualifiers Page for a list of qualifiers and their explanation.

007680




Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor


Client Sample ID: Soil/TSP/1%Lab ID: 12051071-11A Collection Date: 5/31/2012

Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor

TCLP METALS SW1311/6020 Analyst: SKSPrep Date: 6/28/2012Arsenic 6/28/2012 07:09 PM0.0500 mg/L 100.110Cadmium 6/28/2012 07:09 PM0.0200 mg/L 106.55Lead 6/28/2012 07:09 PM0.0500 mg/L 105.98


Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor



Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor


AR Page 2 of 5


007681



Client Sample ID: Soil/TB/2%Lab ID: 12051071-14A Collection Date: 5/31/2012

Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor



Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor

TCLP METALS SW1311/6020 Analyst: SKSPrep Date: 6/28/2012Arsenic 6/28/2012 07:20 PM0.0500 mg/L 10NDCadmium 6/28/2012 07:20 PM0.0200 mg/L 109.50Lead 6/29/2012 11:45 AM0.500 mg/L 10014.6


Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor

TCLP METALS SW1311/6020 Analyst: SKSPrep Date: 6/28/2012Arsenic 6/28/2012 07:22 PM0.0500 mg/L 10NDCadmium 6/28/2012 07:22 PM0.0200 mg/L 1010.7Lead 6/29/2012 11:47 AM0.500 mg/L 10015.6

Client Sample ID: Sed/EB/1%Lab ID: 12051071-17A Collection Date: 5/31/2012

Matrix: SEDIMENT


Dilution Factor


AR Page 3 of 5


007682




Matrix: SEDIMENT


Dilution Factor



Matrix: SEDIMENT


Dilution Factor


Client Sample ID: Sed/TSP/1%Lab ID: 12051071-20A Collection Date: 5/31/2012

Matrix: SEDIMENT


Dilution Factor



Matrix: SEDIMENT


Dilution Factor


AR Page 4 of 5


007683




Matrix: SEDIMENT


Dilution Factor


Client Sample ID: Sed/TB/2%Lab ID: 12051071-23A Collection Date: 5/31/2012

Matrix: SEDIMENT


Dilution Factor



Matrix: SEDIMENT


Dilution Factor



Matrix: SEDIMENT


Dilution Factor


AR Page 5 of 5


007684

Date: 29-Jun-12ALS Environmental

Project: Tulsa Fuels

Client: Remediation Services, IncWork Order: 12051071

QC BATCH REPORT

Batch ID: 61876 Instrument ID ICPMS05 Method: SW1311/6020

QualRPD Limit

Analysis Date: 6/15/2012 02:16 AM

Prep Date: 6/14/2012

Analyte Result %REC %RPD

Units: mg/L

PQL

Client ID: SeqNo: 2821096

MBLK

Run ID: ICPMS05_120614A

SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10

Sample ID: MBLKT1-061312-61876

Arsenic 0.050NDCadmium 0.020NDLead 0.050ND

QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL


MBLK


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10

Sample ID: MBLKW4-061412-61876


QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL


LCS


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10

Sample ID: MLCSW4-061412-61876

000.5Arsenic 109 80-1200.0500.5457000.5Cadmium 107 80-1200.0200.5337000.5Lead 111 80-1200.0500.556

QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL


MS


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10

Sample ID: 1206365-02BMS

0-0.0002180.5Arsenic 101 75-1250.0500.505700.0016530.5Cadmium 99 75-1250.0200.496800.017520.5Lead 99.8 75-1250.0500.5163

QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL


MSD


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10

Sample ID: 1206365-02BMSD

0.5057-0.0002180.5Arsenic 107 75-125 250.050 5.870.53630.49680.0016530.5Cadmium 103 75-125 250.020 4.120.51770.51630.017520.5Lead 105 75-125 250.050 5.270.5442

QC Page: 1 of 4Note: See Qualifiers Page for a list of Qualifiers and their explanation.

007685



QC BATCH REPORT


QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL


DUP


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10

Sample ID: 1206365-02BDUP

-0.00021800Arsenic 0 0-0 250.050 0ND0.00165300Cadmium 0 0-0 250.020 0ND

J0.0175200Lead 0 0-0 250.050 00.0161

The following samples were analyzed in this batch: 12051071-06A 12051071-07A


007686



QC BATCH REPORT


QualRPD Limit

Analysis Date: 6/28/2012 06:36 PM



Units: mg/L

PQL


MBLK


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10



QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL


MBLK


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10



QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL


LCS


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10



QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL

Client ID: Soil/EB/3% SeqNo: 2840617

MS


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10

Sample ID: 12051071-10AMS

00.012390.5Arsenic 104 75-1250.0500.5317O03.4990.5Cadmium 121 75-1250.0204.106

01.7740.5Lead 114 75-1250.0502.345

QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL


MSD


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10

Sample ID: 12051071-10AMSD

00.012390.5Arsenic 102 75-1250.0500.5234O03.4990.5Cadmium 118 75-1250.0204.091

01.7740.5Lead 117 75-1250.0502.359


007687



QC BATCH REPORT


QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL


DUP


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10

Sample ID: 12051071-10ADUP

0.0123900Arsenic 0 0-0 250.050 0ND3.49900Cadmium 0 0-0 250.020 1.283.4541.77400Lead 0 0-0 250.050 0.4691.782

The following samples were analyzed in this batch: 12051071-08A 12051071-09A 12051071-10A12051071-11A 12051071-12A 12051071-13A12051071-14A 12051071-15A 12051071-16A12051071-17A 12051071-18A 12051071-19A12051071-20A 12051071-21A 12051071-22A12051071-23A 12051071-24A 12051071-25A


007688


QUALIFIERS, ACRONYMS, UNITS


WorkOrder: 12051071

Units Reported Description

Qualifier Description

Acronym Description

Milligrams per Litermg/L

Value exceeds Regulatory Limit*Not accreditedaAnalyte detected in the associated Method Blank above the Reporting LimitBValue above quantitation rangeEAnalyzed outside of Holding TimeHAnalyte detected below quantitation limitJManually integrated, see raw data for justificationMNot offered for accreditationnNot Detected at the Reporting LimitNDSample amount is > 4 times amount spikedODual Column results percent difference > 40%PRPD above laboratory control limitRSpike Recovery outside laboratory control limitsSAnalyzed but not detected above the MDLU

Detectability Check StudyDCS

Method DuplicateDUP

Laboratory Control SampleLCS

Laboratory Control Sample DuplicateLCSD

Method BlankMBLK

Method Detection LimitMDL

Method Quantitation LimitMQL

Matrix SpikeMS

Matrix Spike DuplicateMSD

Post Digestion SpikePDS

Practical Quantitation LimitPQL

Serial DilutionSD

Sample Detection LimitSDL

Texas Risk Reduction ProgramTRRP

QF Page 1 of 1

007689

• Request for Chemical Analysis and Chain of Custody Re REMEDIATION SERVICES, INC.-KS: Remediation SeTVices, Inc

12051071 Project: Tulsa Fuels Bench

Burns & McDonnell Engineering Laboratory: 1-\L S Dol

11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 --

9400 Ward Parkway

JO'jf:O :':>h"xJ;fF Roc,,\ Lat

Kansas City, Missouri 64114 Address:

"-·:._;. Phone: (816) 333-9400 Fax: (816) 822-3494 City/State/Zip: \-\cc<dM (X 770 ')19'

Attention: ShMo,, SheJ~o., Telephone: J.'l;l- ,SO:,O- 5G,S(,

Project Number: £2"11~-

Client Name: t;;_ l s" Fcv h Sample Number Sample Event sa0~1fe~t)pth cso~~~~~d

s;~o~~~~e s~~~;· o;!;~~~or l ~ c1l , 1 ~ Remarks

IT\',N\- 'S0:Z:: L () 0 s- IS-">i-1'1 - IX I [X ICo"'Pos•ie IT\"1"1- S£01 fN1(J'I\ 0 I) 5 I,;:-~·-', IX li l>< IC..o'"P'"'h

~ ~

1:-::::::: !----1------

~ v ~--~ 1---

V/§ -~ ___ v

//:--V£ r/----1/:::Jc v

-----~- ~- ?

,...,../",/

/~/-

----~ _./~-~--

~~-

~- h(///r:Z',,;,_( &r"'rr I V~"'P'0' '0'"' J Special Instructions:

/}

1ZZ?Z:Z 6 l~;~~;,~J Received ~•J• -Zcf2~~~:~ I ~:s l:~~nt in Co~~'n['J I Temperature Upon Receipt:

;_eHnquish8ci By I Date/Time I By Date/Time "Y

007690

ilf "if

" !I

~ ~

il ~ ~·

-

~I f

-

i -

I - -

El l': ~I fi 6E££

£9P0

08l

XJP

'J'OO

OBI

woo

·xap

aj

007691

ALS Environmental

Sample Receipt Checklist

Client Name: REMEDIATION SERVICES, INC.-

Work Order: 12051071

Date/Time Received: 06-Jun-12 09:15

Received by: RDH

Checklist completed byeSignature Date

Reviewed by:DateeSignature

Matrices: soilCarrier name: FedEx

Shipping container/cooler in good condition? Yes No Not Present

Custody seals intact on shipping container/cooler? Yes No Not Present

Custody seals intact on sample bottles? Yes No Not Present

Chain of custody present? Yes No

Chain of custody signed when relinquished and received? Yes No

Chain of custody agrees with sample labels? Yes No

Samples in proper container/bottle? Yes No

Sample containers intact? Yes No

Sufficient sample volume for indicated test? Yes No

All samples received within holding time? Yes No

Container/Temp Blank temperature in compliance? Yes No

Yes No No VOA vials submittedWater - VOA vials have zero headspace?

Water - pH acceptable upon receipt? Yes No N/A

Temperature(s)/Thermometer(s): Ambient

Login Notes:

N/A

Cooler(s)/Kit(s):

24-May-12 08-Jun-12 Robert D. Harris Bethany Agarwal

pH adjusted? Yes No N/ApH adjusted by:

Date/Time sample(s) sent to storage:

CorrectiveAction:

Comments:

Client Contacted: Date Contacted: Person Contacted:

Contacted By: Regarding:

SRC Page 1 of 1007692

ALS Supplemental Bench Testing

007693

19-Jul-2012


Dear Grant,

Re: Tulsa Fuels Work Order: 1207646

Fax: (620) 331-6216Tel: (620) 331-1200


ALS Environmental received 2 samples on 06-Jun-2012 09:15 AM for the analyses presented in the following report.

Project ManagerBethany AgarwalElectronically approved by: Kelsey N. Brown


The analytical data provided relates directly to the samples received by ALS Environmental and for only the analyses requested. Results are expressed as "as received" unless otherwise noted. QC sample results for this data met EPA or laboratory specifications except as noted in the Case Narrative or as noted with qualifiers in the QC batch information. Should this laboratory report need to be reproduced, it should be reproduced in full unless written approval has been obtained by ALS Environmental. Samples will be disposed in 30 days unless storage arrangements are made.

The total number of pages in this report is 10.

If you have any questions regarding this report, please feel free to call me.

Sincerely,


007694




Lab Samp ID Client Sample ID Collection DateTag Number Date ReceivedMatrix Hold1207646-01 Soil/TSP/8% 12051071-06

TSP/8%Soil 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:15

1207646-02 Soil/TSP/10% 12051071-06 TSP/10%

Soil 5/31/2012 6/6/2012 09:15

SS Page 1 of 1

007695




No Exceptions

CN Page 1 of 1

007696


ALS Environmental Date: 19-Jul-12


Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor



Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor


AR Page 1 of 1


007697




QC BATCH REPORT


QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL


MBLK


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10



QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL


MBLK


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10



QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL


LCS


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10



QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL


MS


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10

Sample ID: 1207566-11CMS

0-0.0016930.5Arsenic 101 75-1250.0500.505600.002580.5Cadmium 102 75-1250.0200.511100.0039060.5Lead 99.7 75-1250.0500.5023

QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL


MSD


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10

Sample ID: 1207566-11CMSD

0.5056-0.0016930.5Arsenic 101 75-125 250.050 0.1520.50480.51110.002580.5Cadmium 104 75-125 250.020 1.980.52130.50230.0039060.5Lead 101 75-125 250.050 1.350.5092


007698



QC BATCH REPORT


QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL


DUP


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10

Sample ID: 1207566-11CDUP

-0.00169300Arsenic 0 0-0 250.050 0ND0.0025800Cadmium 0 0-0 250.020 0ND

0.00390600Lead 0 0-0 250.050 0ND

The following samples were analyzed in this batch: 1207646-01A 1207646-02A


007699

ALS Environmental Date: 19-Jul-12



WorkOrder: 1207646



Acronym Description




Method DuplicateDUP



Method BlankMBLK



Matrix SpikeMS




Serial DilutionSD



QF Page 1 of 1

007700

ALS Environmental



Work Order: 12051071

Date/Time Received: 06-Jun-12 09:15

Received by: RDH

















Temperature(s)/Thermometer(s): Ambient

Login Notes:

N/A

Cooler(s)/Kit(s):

24-May-12 08-Jun-12 Robert D. Harris Bethany Agarwal


Date/Time sample(s) sent to storage:

CorrectiveAction:

Comments:



SRC Page 1 of 1007701

- Request for Chemical Analysis and Chain of Custody Re REMEDIATIO~ .

12051071 021706 FormWCD-KC1

Burns & McDonnell Engineering Laboratory: ;-\I . S Do(

IIIII --9400 Ward Parkway

/O'jf:O :':>h"xJ;fF Roc,,\ Lat

Kansas City, Missouri 64114 Address:

r--1 Phone: (816) 333·9400 Fax: (816) 822-3494 City/State/Zip: \-\cc<dM (X 770 'J'';}

Attention: ShMo., SheJ~o., Telephone: J.'l;l- ,;::,o. st.s(, ·% Project Number: C,'-/"I}C:, Sample Type ~ ~ --

~i .f Client Name: lv-ls" Fcceb Matrix ~

Sample Number Sample Event Sa(1~~f~~t)Pth cso~~~~~d ~ :!2

i~ i), Group or s~~~;· o;;;~~()' g ;jj ~

~ SWMU Name Date Time (!),

T\=i'\· Sc>I:L () 0 s- ls-"'>H'~ - IX I ICo"'Pos•ie ITrt"~· SED! i""ct~l 0 I) 5 I,;:.~._,, IX i lX !Co•"f''"'h

~

---------)...---!----' 1-

/0 J v ~-~ 1---+-

V/~ "(L: ------

v !A <I ~--/

I/~~~ ;:.----··

.------~-c;. p·

/ .. //-

-~----

--------~---___ ____..I-"

r~-

~ h(///~,,;,_{ &rlv.rl ~- I Special Instructions:

1 va•,~•c• '""""'"'"!·

/J

1ZZ.?Z:Z 6 l~:~/;,~J Received ~"!' c:-cf2~~·:im: I ~:s)::~r~in co~~in['j ,~,,~~•a<uoc vpu" • '"""'P

;_eHnquish8ci By I Date/Time Received By Date/Time .. ,

007702

~:~1li8766 5759 7075

! Your Internal Billing Reference

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll 876657597075

007703

Free Flow Vender Bench Testing

007704

~~~ First Environmental Laboratories, Inc. IL ELAP I NELAC Accreditation# 100292

- ---=· - 1600 Shore Road o Naperville, Illinois 60563 o Phone (630) 778-1200 • Fax (630) 778-1233 -~

August 07, 2012

Mr. John Renkes

FREE FLOW TECHNOLOGIES 9918 N. Alpine Rd.

McChesney Park, IL 61115

Project ID: 367.01 ALS Global

First Environmental File ID: 12-3711

Date Received: August 03, 2012

Dear Mr. John Renkes:

The above referenced project was analyzed as directed on the enclosed chain of custody record.

All Quality Control criteria as outlined in the methods and current IL ELAP/NELAP have been met unless otherwise noted. QA/QC documentation and raw data will remain on file for future reference. Our accreditation number is 100292 and our current certificate is number 002902: effective 03/08/2012 through 02/28/2013.

I thank you for the opportunity to be of service to you and look forward to working with you again in the future. Should you have any questions regarding any of the enclosed analytical data or need additional information, please contact me at (630) 778-1200.

Sincerely,

Bill Mottashed Project Manager

Page I of4

007705

First Environmental Laboratories, Inc. IL ELAP I NELAC Accreditation# 100292

Case Narrative

FREE FLOW TECHNOLOGIES

Project ID: 367.01 ALS Global First Environmental File ID: 12-3711 Date Received: August 03, 2012

I Flagl De cripfion < Analyte not detected at or above the reporting limit.

B Analyte detected in associated method blank.

C Identification confirmed by GC/MS.

0 Surrogates diluted out; recovery not available.

E Estimated result; concentration exceeds calibration range.

F Field measurement.

G Surrogate recovery outside control limits; matrix effect.

H .. I Analysis or extraction holding time exceeded.

J _ I Estimated result; concentration is less than calib range.

K 1 RPD outside control limits. r

I Routine Reporting Limit (Lowest amount that can be

RL detected when routine weights/volumes are used without dilution.)

I Flag I Descrlption I L+ LCS recovery outside control limits; high bias.

L· LCS recovery outside control limits; low bias.

/ M MS recovery outside control limits; LCS acceptable.

I M+ MS recovery outside control limits high bias; LCS acceptable.

M- MS recovery outside control limits low bias; LCS acceptable.

N Analyte is not part of our NELAC accreditation.

NO Analyte was not detected using a library search routine; No calibration standard was analyzed.

P Chemical preservation pH adjusted in lab.

Q The analyte was determined by a GC/MS database search.

S 1 Analyte was sub-contracted to another laboratory for analysis.

I T Sample temperature upon receipt exceeded 0-6°C

W Reporting limit elevated due to sample matrix.

All quality control criteria, as outlined in the methods, have been met except as noted below or on the following analytical report.

Sample Batch Comments:

Time of sample collection was not provided.

Page 2 of4

007706

First Environmental Laboratories, Inc. IL ELAP I NELAC Accreditation # 100292

Client:

Analytical Report FREE FLOW TECHNOLOGIES Date Collected: 08/01112

Time Collected: Project ID: 367.01 ALS Global

Sample ID: 5% MGO Pure Soil

Sample No: 12-3711-001

Analyte

TCLP Extraction Analysis Date: 08/03/12

TCLP Extraction

pH @ 25°C, TCLP Initial Analysis Date: 08/03/12

pH@ 25°C, TCLP Initial

pH @ 25°C, TCLP Final Analysis Date: 08/06/12

pH@ 25°C, TCLP Final

TCLP Metals Method 1311 Analysis Date: 08/06/12

Cadmium Lead

Date Received: 08/03/12

Date Reported: 08/07/12

Result R.L. Units

Method: 1311

Fluid #I

Method: 1311/9040B

2.46 Units

Method: 1311/9040B

9.94 Units

Method: 6010B Preparation Method 3010A Preparation Date: 08/06/12

0.002 0.001 mg/L < 0.002 0.002 mg/L

Flags

Page 3 of4

007707

First Environmental Laboratories, Inc. IL ELAP 1 NELAC Accreditation# 100292

-IIIII!!!_ !-~-!-!,_!.!! 1600 Shore Road • Naperville, Illinois 60563 • Phone (630) 778-1200 • Fax (630) 778-1233 -~

Client:

Analytical Report FREE FLOW TECHNOLOGIES Date Collected: 08/01/12

Time Collected: Project ID: 367.01 ALS Global

Sample ID: 8% MGO Pure Soil

Sample No: 12-3711-002

Analyte

TCLP Extraction Analysis Date: 08/03/12

TCLP Extraction

pH @ 25°C, TCLP Initial Analysis Date: 08/03/12

pH @ 25°C, TCLP Initial

pH @ 25°C, TCLP Final Analysis Date: 08/06/12

pH@ 25°C, TCLP Final

TCLP Metals Method 1311 Analysis Date: 08/06/12

Cadmium Lead

Date Received: 08/03/12

Date Reported: 08/07/12

Result R.L. Units

Method: 1311

Fluid #2

Method: 1311/9040B

5.01 Units

Method: 1311/9040B

9.24 Units

Method: 6010B Preparation Method 3010A Preparation Date: 08/06112

0.041 0.001 mg/L < 0.002 0.002 mg/L

Flags

Page 4 of4

007708

First Environmental Laboratories, Inc.

CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD Page_L of _\_ pgs

Company Name: -=: .......... 1::1 ........ T ....... "--1--~ ... .-I t CiG" I IV WW IIC't;.,j U iV•V'gH:;';:»

Street Address: 001 A 1\1 A I nino Qrl ._._ ~ - .-~ • · '- l FT.--.-~--.;;;;;Jf9 First Environmental Laboratories

1600 Shore Road, Suite D Citv: Machesney PeRk. I L 6~1t15 Zip: Naperville, lllinois 60563 Phone: (630) 778-1200 • Fax: (630) 778-1233 E-mail: [email protected] IEPA Certification #100292

Project l.D.: 3//J 1 , 0 I P.o.#.: 11-L _~ {;2/.tJ .6/-'I

Matrix Codes: S = Soil W = Water 0 = Other Datelfime Taken Sample Description

PJ/t/1 L. 5 r,... lt1 6-o K.t....-~ , .- ... SO) I ~

_..,

'till I fL- <Y /o _1?1 G-cJ f/v-e <;: o,· 1

Phone:

Send Re.pon To: Sampled By:

Matrix

s X..

5 ~

!:!Jf II /C.. / 0~ fJ1G-O ruve .s )(

So/1

FOR LAB USE ONLY:

Cooler Temperature: 0.1-62C Yes_ No._ 2C Sample Refrigerated: Yes_ No_ Received within 6 hrs. of collection:___ Refrigerator Temperature:___ 2C Ice Present: Yes_ No_ 5035 Vials Frozen: Yes_ No_

Freezer Temperature: ___ 2C

Fax: _!el f!.1 .~-~~~-~'!_~~mail : t-ax ~n o-0311r.~U 0

Analyses

. r11 v

G \)-31\ \ Comments Labi.D.

X.. ~ - ~. ~/ , f ()\[)\ .... --~ l (lJ -"' -LJ

' - fl

X ,_ 1/l)..._LH_ rt;J;J., '- .....

X .#" .J../0/d ~-..c:: .......

Containers Received Preserved: DYes D No

Need to meet: IL. TACO D IN. RISC D

Notes and Special Instructions: ---------- ---------------------------- --------------

2.-0Q Relinquished By: l 4-- r __ r ---.J.L ' Datc:!Iime ca\ ~\I 2.... I ~ Received By: ~cp-- Datelfime 8 \ a\ 11 Relinquished By:t/ 1!:2... Datelfime Received By: Datelfime ___ \ ___ \~------Rev. 9/08

007709

EnviroBlend Vendor Bench Testing

007710

Sample Name Ursus Lab ID Arsenic Cadmium Lead

TFM ‐ Soil 12‐06006 47.4 322 9,410 Ursus Lab ID Chemical Percentage Pretest pH Solution Final pH Arsenic mg/l Cadmium mg/L Lead mg/L

TFM ‐ Sediment 12‐06007 17.0 211 3,512 TFM ‐ Soil 12‐06006 Untreated ‐ 1.88 TCLP 1 5.54 <0.030 7.06 29.6

EnviroMag® Coarse 3.0% ‐ TCLP 1 7.03 <0.030 3.32 2.954.0% 5.07 TCLP 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐

EnviroBlend® CS 6.0% ‐ TCLP 2 6.55 <0.030 4.47 7.24

7.0% ‐ TCLP 2 6.70 <0.030 4.25 4.53

8.0% ‐ TCLP 2 6.90 <0.030 3.46 3.46

10.0% ‐ TCLP 2 7.97 <0.030 0.64 0.26

11.0% ‐ TCLP 2 9.18 <0.030 0.041 0.1112.0% ‐ TCLP 2 9.23 <0.030 0.026 0.13

TFM ‐ Sediment 12‐06007 Untreated ‐ 2.64 TCLP 1 4.94 <0.030 2.79 2.20

EnviroMag® Coarse 3.0% ‐ TCLP 1 7.34 <0.030 1.21 0.0934.0% 4.06 TCLP 1 9.37 <0.030 <0.024 <0.067

EnviroBlend® CS 6.0% ‐ TCLP 2 6.41 <0.030 2.30 0.31

7.0% ‐ TCLP 2 8.53 <0.030 0.12 <0.0678.0% ‐ TCLP 2 9.12 <0.030 0.027 <0.067

TREATABILITY STUDY RESULTSPremier: Burns & McDonnell ‐ Tulsa Fuels

June 11, 2012

NOTES:

1. The screening TCLP test is a modified, scaled‐down TCLP leaching test that gives results that are similar to those of a standard TCLP test on the waste material. The screening test is not suitable for regulatory submittals.

2. Premier Chemicals product EnviroBlend® in the ground form was used in the treatability study. Other products and particle sizes should be tested to ensure that they provide comparable results prior to using the other products.

3. The treatability results demonstrate the effect of the treatment on the samples tested. Extrapolation of the results to waste streams or contaminated sites depends on the representativeness of the samples collected.

Compositional Results (mg/kg)

Sample Name

EnviroBlend® Dosage Screening Leaching Test Results

Leaching Results

007711

Client Premier Magnesia, LLC West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2998 (PH):610-828-6929

Comments Comp and TCLP As, Cd, Pb. EB study.

Contact: Derek Pizarro Date Received: 6/6/2012Project Name: Burns & McDonnell - Tusla Fuels Ursus Batch ID: 12-055Project Type: Metals

Ursus Lab ID Sample Name Sample Date Sample Matrix Sample wt. (g) Sample Comments12-06006 TFM - Soil 5/31/2012 Soil 2 gal Untreated waste12-06007 TFM - Sediment 5/31/2012 Soil 2 gal Untreated waste

Sample Login Report

007712

TerraBond Vendor Bench Testing

007713

Tulsa Fuels

Sample Description TCLP As TCLP Cd TCLP Pb LAboratory ID

Untreated 0.05 U 9.25 26.8 ALS

6% TerraBond-LA na 2.73 0.362 12008940-1

7% TerraBond-LA na 0.112 <0.200 12008940-2

8% TerraBond-LA na 0.095 <0.200 12008940-3

Untreated 0.05 U 3.27 2.65 ALS

6% TerraBond-LA na 1.95 0.291 12008940-4

7% TerraBond-LA na 0.165 <0.200 12008940-5

8% TerraBond-LA na <0.050 <0.200 12008940-6

Soil

Sediment

007714

APPENDIX C

Field Treatability Photographic Log

007715

Adding reagent to soil. Mixing reagent and soil.

007716

Mixing reagent and soil. Treated soil placed back in excavataion.

007717

Sediment removed from the Mid Site Ravine Sediment removed from the Mid Site Ravine

007718

Sediment removed from the Mid Site Ravine

Mixing reagent and sediment.

007719

APPENDIX D

Analytical Laboratory Data for Field Testing

007720

01-Oct-2012


Dear Grant,

Re: Tulsa Fuels Bench Work Order: 1209748

Fax: (620) 331-6216Tel: (620) 331-1200


ALS Environmental received 12 samples on 21-Sep-2012 08:55 AM for the analyses presented in the following report.

Project ManagerBethany McDanielElectronically approved by: Luke F. Hernandez


This is a REVISED REPORT. Please see the Case Narrative for discussion concerning this revision.

The total number of pages in this revised report is 14.

Regards,


1 of 14007721

Date: 01-Oct-12ALS Environmental

Project: Tulsa Fuels BenchClient: Remediation Services, Inc


Lab Samp ID Client Sample ID Collection DateTag Number Date ReceivedMatrix Hold1209748-01 Soil-Enviroblend CS 10% Soil 9/19/2012 11:30 9/21/2012 08:551209748-02 Soil -Enviroblend CS 11% Soil 9/19/2012 13:06 9/21/2012 08:551209748-03 Sediment -Enviroblend CS 7% Soil 9/20/2012 11:30 9/21/2012 08:551209748-04 Sediment-Enviroblend CS 8% Soil 9/20/2012 10:25 9/21/2012 08:551209748-05 Soil -Terrabond LA 7% Soil 9/19/2012 17:05 9/21/2012 08:551209748-06 Soil -Terrabond LA 8% Soil 9/19/2012 17:55 9/21/2012 08:551209748-07 Sediment -Terrabond LA 7% Soil 9/20/2012 08:25 9/21/2012 08:551209748-08 Sediment -Terrabond LA 8% Soil 9/20/2012 09:35 9/21/2012 08:551209748-09 Soil -Free Flow MGO 5% Soil 9/19/2012 15:00 9/21/2012 08:551209748-10 Soil -Free Flow MGO 8% Soil 9/19/2012 16:00 9/21/2012 08:551209748-11 Sediment -Free Flow MGO 5% Soil 9/20/2012 12:30 9/21/2012 08:551209748-12 Sediment -Free Flow MGO 8% Soil 9/20/2012 13:20 9/21/2012 08:55

SS Page 1 of 12 of 14

007722




This report was revised on October 1, 2012 to correct client sample ID's for 1209748-07 and 1209748-08.

CN Page 1 of 1

3 of 14

007723

Project: Tulsa Fuels BenchClient: Remediation Services, Inc Work Order: 1209748

ALS Environmental Date: 01-Oct-12

Client Sample ID: Soil-Enviroblend CS 10%Lab ID: 1209748-01A Collection Date: 9/19/2012 11:30:00 AM

Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor

TCLP METALS SW1311/6020 Analyst: SKSPrep Date: 9/26/2012Arsenic 9/26/2012 04:47 PM0.0500 mg/L 10NDCadmium 9/26/2012 04:47 PM0.0200 mg/L 100.0814Lead 9/26/2012 04:47 PM0.0500 mg/L 10ND

Client Sample ID: Soil -Enviroblend CS 11%Lab ID: 1209748-02A Collection Date: 9/19/2012 1:06:00 PM

Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor


Client Sample ID: Sediment -Enviroblend CS 7%Lab ID: 1209748-03A Collection Date: 9/20/2012 11:30:00 AM

Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor


Client Sample ID: Sediment-Enviroblend CS 8%Lab ID: 1209748-04A Collection Date: 9/20/2012 10:25:00 AM

Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor

TCLP METALS SW1311/6020 Analyst: SKSPrep Date: 9/26/2012Arsenic 9/26/2012 04:54 PM0.0500 mg/L 10NDCadmium 9/26/2012 04:54 PM0.0200 mg/L 10NDLead 9/26/2012 04:54 PM0.0500 mg/L 10ND

AR Page 1 of 3


4 of 14

007724



Client Sample ID: Soil -Terrabond LA 7%Lab ID: 1209748-05A Collection Date: 9/19/2012 5:05:00 PM

Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor


Client Sample ID: Soil -Terrabond LA 8%Lab ID: 1209748-06A Collection Date: 9/19/2012 5:55:00 PM

Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor


Client Sample ID: Sediment -Terrabond LA 7%Lab ID: 1209748-07A Collection Date: 9/20/2012 8:25:00 AM

Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor


Client Sample ID: Sediment -Terrabond LA 8%Lab ID: 1209748-08A Collection Date: 9/20/2012 9:35:00 AM

Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor


AR Page 2 of 3


5 of 14

007725



Client Sample ID: Soil -Free Flow MGO 5%Lab ID: 1209748-09A Collection Date: 9/19/2012 3:00:00 PM

Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor


Client Sample ID: Soil -Free Flow MGO 8%Lab ID: 1209748-10A Collection Date: 9/19/2012 4:00:00 PM

Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor


Client Sample ID: Sediment -Free Flow MGO 5%Lab ID: 1209748-11A Collection Date: 9/20/2012 12:30:00 PM

Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor


Client Sample ID: Sediment -Free Flow MGO 8%Lab ID: 1209748-12A Collection Date: 9/20/2012 1:20:00 PM

Matrix: SOIL


Dilution Factor


AR Page 3 of 3


6 of 14

007726


Project: Tulsa Fuels Bench


QC BATCH REPORT


QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL


MBLK


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10


Arsenic 0.050NDCadmium 0.020ND

JLead 0.0500.007847

QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL


MBLK


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10



QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL


LCS


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10



QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL

Client ID: Sediment -Terrabond LA 7% SeqNo: 2957736

MS


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10

Sample ID: 1209748-07AMS

00.011070.5Arsenic 115 75-1250.0500.587200.0006150.5Cadmium 110 75-1250.0200.550300.041270.5Lead 109 75-1250.0500.5873

QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL


MSD


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10

Sample ID: 1209748-07AMSD

0.58720.011070.5Arsenic 104 75-125 250.050 10.30.52980.55030.0006150.5Cadmium 103 75-125 250.020 6.960.51330.58730.041270.5Lead 105 75-125 250.050 3.360.5679


7 of 14007727

Project: Tulsa Fuels Bench


QC BATCH REPORT


QualRPD Limit




Units: mg/L

PQL


DUP


SPK ValSPK Ref

ValueRPD Ref

ValueControl

Limit

DF: 10

Sample ID: 1209748-07ADUP

0.0110700Arsenic 0 0-0 250.050 0ND0.00061500Cadmium 0 0-0 250.020 0ND

J0.0412700Lead 0 0-0 250.050 00.04189

The following samples were analyzed in this batch: 1209748-01A 1209748-02A 1209748-03A1209748-04A 1209748-05A 1209748-06A1209748-07A 1209748-08A 1209748-09A1209748-10A 1209748-11A 1209748-12A


8 of 14007728




WorkOrder: 1209748



Acronym Description




Method DuplicateDUP



Method BlankMBLK



Matrix SpikeMS




Serial DilutionSD



QF Page 1 of 1

9 of 14

007729

ALS Environmental



Work Order: 1209748

Date/Time Received: 21-Sep-12 08:55

Received by: RDN

















Temperature(s)/Thermometer(s): 2.9 C,3.3 C/uc

Login Notes:

IR Gun

Cooler(s)/Kit(s): 3243/3722

21-Sep-12 24-Sep-12 Johnnie B. Allen Bethany McDaniel


Date/Time sample(s) sent to storage: 09/21/12 16:50

CorrectiveAction:

Comments:



SRC Page 1 of 110 of 14

007730

11 of 14

Enuironmrental

Cindnna\i, OH +1 513 733 5336

Everett, WA + 1 4Z5 356 Z600

For\ Collins, CO +1 9704901511

Holland, Ml +16163996070

-

Chain of Custody Form I Page _!_of .2__ I

coc 10:68408 ALS· Project Manager:

Customer Information Project Information

1209748 I • . . I

REMEDIATION SERVICES, INC.-KS: Remediation Services, Inc

Project: Tulsa Fuels Bench ~ :

I IIIII I IIIII IIIII IIIII IIIII 1111111111 1111 II II

PYrcha~:Order __ _:?..L~"j_:_~--------f=-~~:e:ctNafl1:c-LTuisa Fuels Be~J<h "'oi:"~------· / ~ -~LP Melals_~'W-846) Pb,Cd,As ··-:

~.,)~~~3~d•[c_ --------------.. --.. --G~r()j~t~~!Tl~~'- --- ,Zl_~3 d-.__ _____ .... ·'" ·--·-·-·· ·-------·---------------- -------~

I :~~;:;~~;: · _·_:_:~_~e_di .. :t_,~:_:~~-:;r __ v_c~s-. \-nc __________ -__ -_ j~~~~:~~~~ _ :::~:~:~::.:3ertices:l~--- _ c ____ ---===---.,_-----··---··--·~---------------------~------~------_-.: ---==-~-.. --f t • . . , I

Ad~\~~~·:,< 273!3 South 10th ~~tn•et I Address 27:35 South 10th Street ~ _____ __ __ -~

;'>·, .. :>:.~~-·: ... -'::_~ ------·-- _ __j________ ----------- - - ------------------------------

.... · .. Ph~re (620) 331-1:'00 Phone (620) 331-1200 H

[-7~-~ f#, (6;;;;~- ------ --~;~ ~;~-6-----------Pt P--e-·-Maii_A_. d-d(es~ --- e-Mail Address TJr ----· ------·--------------------No. ---·--~~e.scr_iPti~r oa·te Tirile Matrix Pres. ! .. # .. sottl_es A ~ p o E. ': F.~:-TJf--.1-. -~rffHOid~

~ Soil_- Enviroblend CS!O% ________ ~-"!_: IH::l_ t,Jl"!,_;) _____ s""_j ___ _,----L---j-+---j--~---~ -, -j- __ j ___ D !_ Sotl- Enviroblend CS1'1% __ -~..1.: .. tq-J-:J_ ___ j __ l~ob_ __ ~0~--- +---1---- __ --1--~--l----f------1-- __________ j i]

Sed1ment- Envtroblend c::· -- · - 1

r · ~oil _ Te,;~b:·~~~;,::'i~; cs /3% __ -·-···1 ,",:::· . I ',';;, ~~ : · ·----1 _ !__ - 1

__

1 J-j--1-1 1

: -F o-" __ 6 ____ ~~~~_t:::._~-------.. ~"~··1-t-:> ____ -~~~ __ _!.."ii_ _____ f _=:]j l. - !-. +-···· J ] __ _!_ ._J _____ _ _!__ Sedrment - Terrabond LA 7% ________ 1· ,.,_,, _ ___Lo·ps ___ _ Soil _ 1 f- : _ __ I ____ [-l ··• \ 0 __

I a _Sr)dir~_ent ~Terrabong LA 3'7~--------1 'i-~-"· o --~--cH5" ___ _j__ Soil ---,~--~~·--+- --+---l---,---+-~-1------;~~ ::;;; : :;;: :;;~~ ~~-~~ ::~------ -----t~~ ;~~ :: I_~~~- --~-:::: -----1-------1--·······1---+---·!--...... -- ____ jl_ :--!-) __ "~-----!-------

1 , , lo I

s. am.pler.{s).Pieasep_.r,.lnt&·~.U_._ /_.· ·/· .' Shipm_:ntMethod ResultsDue·-oate:

']) .. .,;.t ~1.,..1- ~ lP r: .. ~ f• - .. --

:~~~-_:_--:-1

T•mk , [ Aece.,ed by; · -- -··- -· ···----- -- No::~leitD 10 ~:~,:,::~p. QC Package: {Chiick One Box Below} I

' V\) .. &~ Level il Sld QC C) TRRP ClleckUs! logge~.by (Labo'rato!YJ.i i !.Time: [J i...evel :n s.td QCJRaw Dala C} TRRP L~ve! IV

~---"·: ____ .,, .. ~"---'-:---""'"'-j_: -,---··--·--· _"_J_ .. .:. __ .-L_...,~-·· ._ _ _;_[_ ___ . ·--~·-··--·-------- [J Leve-l N SW84G/CLP ' Preservative Key: ~1-HCI 2.-HN03 3-H,S04 4-NaOH 8-4oC 9·5035 _[]_ 01iwr IEDP

Note: 1. Any changes must be made in writing once samples and COC Form have been submitted to ALS Envir-onmental. Copyright 2011 by ALS El-tvironmental. 2. Unless otherwise agreed in a form~li contract, services provided by ALS Envinmmentat are expressly limited to the terms and conditions st01ted on the reverse. · 3. The Chain of Custody is a legal document. All information must be completed accurately.

007731

12 of 14

Cincinnati, OH +1 513 733 5336

Everett, WA + 1 425 356 2600

Fort Collins, CO +1 9704901511

Holland, Ml + 1 616 399 6070

Chain of Custody Form I Page ~~~.:2._ I

COC ID: 6 8 4 Q 7

Houston, TX +1 281 530 5656

Middletown, PA +1 717944 5541

Spring City, PA +16109484903

Salt Lake City, UT + 1 801 266 7700

South :charleston, WV +1 304 356 3168

York, PA +1 71'? 505 5280

Enuironmental I AI.S Project Manager:J i I AI.SWorkOrcler#:J (,J.() '117&/!if? t Customer Information Project Information Parameter/Method Request for Analysis

L_P_u_r_ch_a_se_o_rd_e_r --~-/_d-._~_3_::::2---____________ 1 ""~ '~' '""' '"'' •- ~>< Work Order Project Number 8

AI TCLP Metals (SW-846) Pb,Cd,As

t~.:·p·;·i;·y·.-P·:·;·· .. :·· .. ··:·.··.: .. ,:.~ .•. ".,: ... ~ .. ~.- ~=~~;;;;~~ ~-~------- '·~:; .• :.;·~· -- '' ~.~====-~-· · .• Ad~res~ Address, rF --------- I

, ____ ;-:-f~-·~::<·>·:::·:_·._ .. :~ --··-- G. ·r -~i9S~~~-~{~_i:~:·.~ Independence, KS 67301 ·-~~-.· -. !ndep~-~:!ence, KS 67301 ___ .. :--1 ---·-~·--- ...... -~---~-------1-·

tj ... •··.•.· .. ···.·.·~.P.: •. -.. h·o•.·.·.··.".·.e····.·.· .... -.-.\ (620)331::_12_1l_CJ______ ... --.P ...• h.one. (620)331-1200 H.·L· .. ·· ---·--~-~---~-~--~--ISJ~> • • Fax (620) 331-6216 Fax (620) 331-62'16 1

·:·· e~Mau Add~!9s~ -- I e-MaitAddr:ess J - J \

I e f Time I . ~atrix I Pres: I #Bottles} A I B II iC I D -~ E I F I 9. r 1;1 I I I ~ I Hold .i:

-1- ~~;; I :::: I I ~--1--J : --1-+ I nl i ~~ __J

!l.

I ----+- 11-------t-

-·1----~ I

3 1-:-':'+- --- 1-- . ----1--------t--

4

~ - -+-7

-+-I

i ~-

---j --- - ---r------ t' 1--~--- 4----~1-------t---r , --1---~-, -- 4 ----TI ---+---+--1· ---r-

1 --1--, 9

8

10

Sam .. · pler(.s}·Pie~.se Pr_int & Signij~A. ----------- -~-Shipment MethOd_____ I Required TurnaroundTime.--:--(C.lieck Box) . _ .;

U;,;.t ~ci- __$./ .!f& ,::;,) t:)r lviStdiOWKDavs il5WKDavs PI~~J~Days r124Hour

I Results Due Date: l f

107-.U:~-~;_ ITimj:<../30

I Received by: Notes: '!O Da.yTAT.

··-·~--TO --~ -----~1 Time: -~~=·- "TRCCeive-:- (La~atory): ··---~~---·---1--::C-oo-:t-.,-:,::D-t, "l'"'::c:-o-ot:-.-,.t:e:-m-p:-_-r-:Q:-:C~P::'a-c7k-ag-e-,-:(:::C:-he,.c":k":O::'n-e-:B::-o-x-:B:;e-:to"'w-:):-+--..-,----H

I 2 d{, : .. S ~ ! 'i;-...) ! LewH I! Std ClC 1·1 :1RRP Chock\. Logged by (Laboratory): j D_ j i Time: Level m S!d QC/Raw Data [J TRRP Love! IV

;-":~----·----·-- .. ·~------·-·-·-··----~·--1-L-----·-·-L .. __ ~ .. : --~--.-.. -........ " .... ---------;..__--.... -~--· ....... ~- Level iV SW34fl/CLP PreservativeKey: 1'HCI 2cHNO, 3cH2S04 4-NaOH 6'NaHS04 7-0ther 8-4°C 9-5035 OtheriEDD

' Note: l. Any changes must be made in writing once samples and COC Form have been submitted to ALS Environmental. 2. Unless otherwise agreed in a formal contract, services provided by ALS Environmental nrc expressly limited to the terms and conditions stated on the reverse. ~ Tlw C'h:1in nff'n.::tnrlv i.:: n lpo:1l ilm•mnPnt_ All infnrmntinn mlt<;t lw cnmnlefed ~lccuratelv.

Copyright 2011 by ALS' Environmental.

007732

13 of 14

007733

14 of 14

~·· ~~ ~. .. : .· .. ,.

Seat Broken By!

Pa.te-:

007734

APPENDIX E

Preliminary Waste Volume Calculations

007735

FormerResidence


"Old" U.S.Highway 169

C

Atchinson TopekaSanta Fe Railroad

FormerSmelter

OperationsArea

Pond 4

Pond 3


Intermitte

nt Drainage

Pond 1Pond 2

Pond 5

Strip Mine Pit


SP-60

SP-59SP-58SP-57

SP-56

SP-55

SP-54

TR-12

TR-04

TR-16

TR-17

TR-15TR-14

TR-18

TR-20

TR-08TR-09

TR-10TR-13

TR-19

TR-21

TR-03TR-06

TR-07TR-11

TR-02

TR-05

TR-01

SP-08

SP-12SP-14

SP-15

SP-07

SP-06

SP-05SP-04

SP-02

SP-47

SP-40

SP-53

SP-50SP-51SP-52

SP-49

SP-48SP-46

SP-41SP-42

SP-43SP-44

SP-38


SP-39

SP-25SP-26

SP-27

SP-28


SP-24

SP-23SP-22SP-21SP-20SP-19SP-18SP-17SP-16

SP-09SP-10

SP-11SP-13

SP-03SP-01

SP-30

SP-45

SP-29

TR-37

VP-69

VP-68

TP-07

TR-55TR-28 VP-55

TR-29

VP-70

VP-54

TR-27 TR-26

VP-50VP-51

VP-53

VP-52

TR-25

VP-67

TR-54TR-41

TR-53

TR-31

TR-30

TR-32

TR-22

TR-33

VP-42

VP-43VP-44

VP-45

VP-46

TR-23

VP-49

TR-24

VP-48TR-52

TR-40 TR-51TR-50

VP-66

TP-05VP-65 TR-49

VP-64

VP-63

TR-48

TR-46

TR-39

TR-45VP-62

TR-42

VP-56VP-57

VP-58

TR-43

VP-59VP-60

TR-44

TR-34

TR-47

TR-38

TR-35

TR-36

VP-47

TP-04

TP-01

TP-02

TP-03

TP-06

VP-61

U:\TulsaFuels\ARC\ArcDocs\2012\Renumber\Fig3-2_Estimated_Depth_of_Waste_Collinsville_OK.mxd sos Nov 2, 2012


ESTIMATED DEPTH OFWASTE MATERIALS

Figure 3-2

LEGEND

Visual Pits

Surface/Subsurface (RI)

Trenching/Test Pit Locations

Site Boundary

Water Bodies

Hydrography


Roads

150 0 150


Areas where smelter waste was visually observedduring the Remedial Investigation and RemedialDesign are shown.

The values presented on the figure indicate themaximum depth at which waste materials wereobserved.

The Access Road/Driveway is composed of wastematerials < 1 ft bgs.

FT BGS = Feet below ground surface

NORTH

NOTE:

< 1 FT BGS

1 -2 FT BGS

2 - 3 FT BGS

3 - 5 FT BGS

5 - 7 FT BGS

Estimated Depth of Waste VisuallObserved During RI and RD

007736

Oklahoma DEQ\64496\Treatability Rpt\Table E-1_Fig3-2_Estimated_Depth_of_Waste.xlsx Page 1 of 1

Table E-1Estimated Waste Volume1

Tulsa Fuel and Manufacturing Superfund Site Remedial Design

Depth Layer Perimeter Impacted Area in Sq Ft Cubic Ft Cubic Yards2

< 1 FT 766.36 19032.60< 1 FT 4557.99 14798.46< 1 FT 727.31 29841.69< 1 FT 327.76 7882.44< 1 FT 217.14 3729.52< 1 FT 817.29 38061.49< 1 FT 836.61 28340.49< 1 FT 680.07 32599.96Total 174286.66 174286.66 6455.06

1-2 FT 1008.98 12372.101-2 FT 224.82 3738.171-2 FT 588.20 13888.661-2 FT 2970.22 146398.021-2 FT 954.15 8287.021-2 FT 195.29 2363.741-2 FT 895.52 12095.73Total 199143.43 398286.86 14751.37

2-3 FT 1374.46 28721.602-3 FT 1869.07 84204.612-3 FT 3299.57 180974.64Total 293900.85 881702.54 32655.65

3-5 FT 418.24 11434.773-5 FT 922.31 14203.473-5 FT 1041.93 9599.963-5 FT 68.97 35.213-5 FT 3183.92 154188.593-5 FT 361.28 6458.833-5 FT 386.58 7888.87Total 203809.71 1019048.53 37742.54

5-7 FT 596.08 11500.535-7 FT 575.62 13622.945-7 FT 3003.01 183470.42Total 208593.88 1460157.16 54079.89

Total Waste Volume 145684.51

ft = feetsq ft = square feet

1Waste volumes were estimated using the waste areas and depth intervals identified on Figure 3-2 Estimated Depth of Waste Materials from the Remedial Design Data Evaluation Summary Report.

2Cubic yards were calculated assuming the lowest depth interval to the waste. For example, the volume calcualtion for the 1-2 ft depth layer = (sq ft of impacted area x 2 ft deep) / 27 cubic ft per cubic yard

007737

FINAL REMEDIAL DESIGN TREATABILITY STUDY REPORT - …of Central Services (DCS) Construction and...

Documents

Transcript of FINAL REMEDIAL DESIGN TREATABILITY STUDY REPORT - …of Central Services (DCS) Construction and...