FINAL REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

Havertown POP SiteHaverford Township

Delaware County, Pennsylvania

Volume 2, Chapters 5-10

DER Agreement Number ME - 86110REWAI Project Number 86021

By

R. E. WRIGHT ASSOCIATES, INC.3240 Schoolhouse RoadMiddletown, PA 17057

-. s »»•*• - ' "_'. ' _ . _ ' . .

u "x

September 1988

FINAL REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

Havertown PCP SiteHaverford Township

Delaware County, Pennsylvania

Volume 2, Chapters 5-10

DER Agreement Number ME-86110REWAI Project Number 86021

Prepared by

R. E. WRIGHT ASSOCIATES, INC,3240 Schoolhouse RoadMiddletown, PA 17057

September 1988

SOD

6021TP

TABLE OF CONTENTS (VOLUME 2)

Page

5.0 HYDROGEOLOGIC INVESTIGATION*.......................... 5-1

5.1 Site Geology..................................... 5-1

5.1.1 Geologic Cross Sections................... 5-65.1.2 Geologic Fence Diagram.................... 5-9

5.2 Soil Investigation.....*......................... 5-10

5.2.1 Introduction.............................. 5-105.2.2 Collection of Soil Samples................ 5-115.2.3 Results of Soil Sampling.................. 5-14

5.2.3.1 Metals........... 4............... 5-145.2.3.2 Volatile Organic Aromatics....... 5-195.2.3.3 Base Neutral/Acid Extractables... 5-195.2.3.4 Pesticides and PCBs.............. 5-315.2.3.5 Cyanide and Oil and Grease....... 5-315.2.3.6 Dioxin and Dibenzofurans......... 5-36

5.2.4 Soil Sampling Results..................... 5-44

5.3 Groundwater Investigation........................ 5-46

5.3.1 Purpose for Groundwater Investigation..... 5-465.3.2 Groundwater Monitoring System Procedures.. 5-47

5.3.2.1 Monitoring Well Construction..... 5-47

5.3.2.1.1 Deep Exploratory Wells 5-485.3.2.1*2 Shallow and

Intermediate Wells.... 5-535.3.2.1.3 Well Construction

Requirements andDecontamination....... 5-56

5.3.2.2 Supervision, Sample Collection,and Record Keeping............... 5-57

5.3.2.3 Ambient Temperature HeadspaceAnalysis......................... 5-59

5.3.3 Groundwater Sampling Procedures........... 5-63

5.3.3.1 Introduction..................... 5-635.3.3.2 Well Development and Sampling .

of Existing Monitoring Wells -Preliminary Round (Round #1) *rVft"ff *>

6021TP

5.3.3.2.1 Wells NW-2-81,NW-3-81, NW-6-81...... 5-65

5.3.3.2.2 Well R-2.............. 5-655.3.3.2.3 Well R-4.............. 5-665,3.3.2,4 Wells HAV-02, HAV-07,

HAV-08, HAV-10, andNW-1-81............... 5-66

5.3.3.3 Well Purging and Sampling ofExisting Monitoring Wells(Round #2)....................... 5-66

5.3.3.4 Well Development and Sampling ofNewly Installed Monitoring Wells. 5-67

5.3.3.5 Field Parameters*................ 5-685.3.3.6 Chemical Analyses................ 5-69

5.3.3.6.1 HSL Plus Oil andGrease................ 5-69

5.3.3.6.2 Dioxin and Dibenzo-furan................. 5-70

5.3.4 Hydrogeologic Testing..................... 5-72

5.3.4.1 Purpose*......................... 5-725.3.4.2 Groundwater Level Monitoring..... 5-725.3.4.3 Aquifer Testing.................. 5-73

5.3.4.3*1 Slug Tests............ 5-735.3.4.3.2 Packer Tests.......... 5-755.3.4.3.3 Summary of Findings... 5-76

5.3.4.4 Groundwater Hydrology............ 5-76

5.3.4.4.1 Water Table ContourMap................... 5-76

5.3.4.4.2 Vertical GroundwaterGradient.............. 5-78

5.3.4.4.3 HydraulicConductivity.......... 5-78

5.3.4.4.4 Calculation of Ground-water Velocity........ 5-84

5.3.4.4.5 Calculation of Ground-water Discharge. ...... 5-87

5.3.5 Groundwater Sampling Results.............. 5-88

5.3.5.1 Round #1 Preliminary SamplingRound............................ 5-89

5.3.5.1.1 Metals..............;-. 5-895.3.5.1.2 Volatile Organic

Aromatics............. 5-895.3.5.1.3 Base Neutrals/Acidfi P3QQ

Extractables......?"'. 5- 96 -5.3.5.1.4 Pesticides/PCBs....... 5-101

6021TP

5.3.5.1.5 Cyanide and Oil andGrease................ 5-105

5.3.5.1.6 Dioxins and Dibenzo-furans................ 5-105

5.3.5.2 Sampling Round $2................ 5-114

5.3.5.2.1 Metals................ 5-1145.3.5.2.2 Volatile Organic

Aromatics............. 5-1215.3.5.2.3 Base Neutrals/Acid

Extractables.......... 5-1295.3.5.2.4 Pesticides/PCBs....... 5-1305.3.5.2.5 Cyanide and Oil and

Grease.......*.....*•* 5-1425.3.5.2.6 Dioxin and Dibenzo-

furan................. 5-148

5.3.6 Affected Area............................. 5-163

5.3.6.1 Immiscible Hydrocarbon Plume..... 5-1635.3.6.2 Dissolved Hydrocarbon Plume...... 5-1715.3.6.3 Summary of Findings.............. 5-178

6.0 SURFACE WATER INVESTIGATION........................... 6-1

6.1 Surface Water Drainage........................... 6-1

6.2 Surface Water Sampling of Naylors Run............ 6-3

6.2.1 Sampling Procedures and Locations......... 6-36.2.2 Field Measurement of Chemical Parameters.. 6-46.2.3 Chemical Results.......................... 6-66.2.4 Summary of Findings....................... 6-23

6.3 Sediment Sampling of Naylors Run................. 6-26

6.3,1 Sediment Sampling Locations............... 6-2 66.3.2 Sediment Sampling Procedures.............. 6-276.3.3 Chemical Results.......................... 6-276.3.4 Summary of Findings......**.*..........*.. 6-43

7.0 AIR QUALITY MONITORING INVESTIGATION.................. 7-1

7.1 Air Sampling Locations........................... 7-17.2 Air Sampling Procedures.......................... 7-27.3 Chemical Results................................. 7-5

8.0 OTHER INVESTIGATIONS.................................. 8-1

8.1 Previous Biota Investigations..................... 8-18.2 Microbe investigations..................... . n.rt rl ,

6021TP

9.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS.........*...........*...„......... 9-1

9.1 General*...*...*..«.*..*................*....**.. 9-19.2 Air.............................................. 9-29.3 Hydrogeology....... .*....... *. .1.................. 9-29.4 Soil............................................. 9-69.5 Groundwater...................................... 9-89.6 Subsurface Oil*....*..............*.............. 9-99.7 Surface Water.................................... 9-109.8 Sediment......................................... 9-12

10.0 REFERENCES............................................ 10-1

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 5-1, Generalized Stratigraphic Column..*............ 5-2

Figure 5-2, Soil Sampling Location Map..................... 5-7

Figure 5-3, Soils - Total Selected Metals.................. 5-12

Figure 5-4, Soils - Total Base Neutral/Acid Extractable.... 5-18

Figure 5-5, Soils Samples Total Pesticides................. 5-30

Figure 5-6, Soils Sample Oil and Grease.................... 5-35

Figure 5-7, Soils - Total Dioxin Isomers................... 5-37

Figure 5-8, Soils - Total Dibenzofuran Isomers............. 5-42

Figure 5-9, Deep Well Construction......................... 5-43

Figure 5-10, Shallow and Intermediate Depth WellConstruction.................................. 5-49

Figure 5-11, Total Volatile Organic Aromatics.............. .5-54

Figure 5-12, Total BNAs.................................... 5-95

Figure 5-13, Total Pesticides.......*...........*.......... 5-102

Figure 5-14, Oil and Grease.................*.....*........ 5-106

Figure 5-15, Total Dioxin Isomers-......................... 5-107

Figure 5-16, Total Dibenzofuran Isomers..................... 5-111

Figure 5-17, Total Selected Metals......................... 5-11.5Hi 5

r?If o

6021TP

Figure 5-18, Total Volatile Organic Aromatics.............. 5-122

Figure 5-19, Total Base Neutrals/Acid Extractables......... 5-128

Figure 5-20, Oil and Grease........*..........*............ 5-141Figure 5-21, Total Dioxin Isomers........................** 5-149

Figure 5-22, Estimated Dioxin Contamination in Groundwater. 5-160Figure 5-23, Total Dibenzofuran Isomers.................... 5-162Figure 5-24, Oil Movement Into Monitoring Well............. 5-164Figure 5-25, Estimated Oil Thickness....................... 5-167Figure 5-26, Estimated Immiscible Hydrocarbon Affected

Area Map...................................... 5-168

Figure 5-27, Pentachlorophenol Concentration Map,Saprolite Units............................... 5-170

Figure 5-28, Pentachlorophenol Concentration Map, Bedrock.. 5-172Figure 5-29, Trichloroethene in the Saprolite Units........ 5-174Figure 5-30, Trichloroethene in the Bedrock................ 5-176

Figure 5-31, .............................. 5-177Figure 6-1, Surface Water Total Selected Metals........... 6-10Figure 6-2, Surface Water Total Volatile Organic.......... 6-13Figure 6-3, Surface Water Pentachlorophenol............... 6-17Figure 6-4, Total Selected Metals............................ 6-28Figure 6*5, Sediment Pentachlorophenol..*................. 6-37Figure 6-6, Sediments Total Base Neutrals/Acid

Extractables.................................. 6-38Figure 6-7, Sediments Oil and Grease...................... 6-40Figure 7-1, Air Quality Sampling Station Location Map...... 7-3

6O21TP

LIST OF TABLES

Table 5-1, Soil Metals Results............................. 5-13

Table 5-2, Soil Volatile Organic Results................... 5-20

Table 5-3, Soil Base Neutral/Acid Extractable Results...... 5-24

Table 5-4, Soil Pesticide/PCB and Oil & Grease and CyanideResults......................................... 5-32

Table 5-5, Soil Dioxin Results............................. 5-38

Table 5-6, Soil Dibenzofuran Results....................... 5-40

Table 5-7, Ambient Temperature Headspace Analysis Results.. 5-61

Table 5-8, Groundwater Sampling Glassware.................. 5-71

Table 5-9, Static Water Level Elevations................... 5-74

Table 5-10, Vertical Gradients and Direction of Flow....... 5-79

Table 5-11A, Saturated Unconsolidated Materials Slug TestResults....................................... 5-81

Table 5-11B, Bedrock Slug Test Results..................... 5-82

Table 5-12, Representative Values of Porosity.............. 5-86

Table 5-13, Groundwater Round #1 Metals Results............ 5-90

Table 5-14, Groundwater Round #1 Volatile Organic Results.. 5-93

Table 5-15, Groundwater Round #1 Base Neutral/AcidExtractable Results............................ 5-97

Table 5-16, Groundwater Round $1 Pesticide/PCB andOil ft Grease and Cyanide Results............... 5-103

Table 5-17, Groundwater Round $1 Dioxin Results............ 5-109

Table 5-18, Groundwater Round #1 Dibenzofuran Results...... 5-112

Table 5-19, Groundwater Round #2 Metals Results............ 5-116

Table 5-20, Groundwater Round #2 Volatile Organic Results.. 5-123

Table 5-21, Groundwater Round #2 Base Neutral/AcidExtractable Results............................ 5-13.1

6021TP

Table 5-22, Groundwater Round #2 Pesticide/PCB and Oil& Grease and Cyanide Results................... 5-143

Table 5-23, Groundwater Round #2 Dioxin Results............ 5-150

Table 5-24, Grpundwater Round #2 Dibenzofuran Results...... 5-155

.Table 6-1, Surface Water Parameters ....................... 6-5

Table 6-2, Surface Water Metals Results.................... 6-7

Table 6-3, Surface Water Volatile Organic Results.......... 6-11

Table 6-4, Surface Water Base Neutral andAcid Extractable Results........................ 6-15

Table 6-5, Surface Water Pesticides/PCB andCyanide Results................................. 6-18

Table 6-6, Surface Water Dioxin Results.................... 6-21

Table 6-7, Surface Water Dibenzofuran Results...*.***...... 6-24

Table 6-8, Sediment Metals Results......................... 6-30

Table 6-9, Sediment Volatile Organic Results............... 6-32

Table 6-10, Sediment Base Neutral/Acid Extractable Results. 6-34

Table 6-11, Sediment Pesticide/PCB, Cyanide, andOil and Grease Results......................... 6-41

Table 6-12, Sediment Dioxin Results........................ €-44

Table 6-13, Sediment Dibenzofuran Results.................. 6-46

LIST OF PLATES

Plate 1, Project Base Maps....................... In Back Pocket

Plate 2, Geologic Cross Sections................. In Back PocketPlate 3, Fence Diagram........................... In Back Pocket

Plate 4, Water Table Contour Map(3/17/88 Data).......................... In Back Pocket

T03983-6021

CONTRACT LABORATORY PROGRAM (CLP)DATA QUALIFIERS

i

For reporting results in the accompanying chemical result tables,the following contract-specific qualifiers are used. Thequalifiers defined below are not subject to modification by thelaboratory.

The EPA-defined qualifiers to be used are as follows:

U - Indicates compound was analyzed for but not detected. Thesample quantitation limit must be corrected for dilution andfor percent moisture.

J - Indicates an estimated value. This flag is used either whenestimating a concentration for tentatively identifiedcompounds where a 1:1 response is assumed, or when the massspectral data indicate the presence of a compound that meetsthe identification criteria, but the result is less than thesample quantitation limit but greater than zero.

C - This flag applies to pesticide results where theidentification has been confirmed by GC/MS.

B - This flag is used when the analysis is found in theassociated blank as well as in the sample. It indicatespossible/probable blank contamination and warns the data userto take appropriate action.

E - This flag identifies compounds whose concentrations exceedthe calibration range of the instrument for that specificanalysis. If one or more compounds have a response greaterthan full scale, the sample or extract must be diluted andreanalyzed according to the specifications.

D - This flag identifies all compounds identified in an analysisat a secondary dilution factor.

A - This flag indicates that a TIC is a suspected .aldol-condensation product.

X - Other specific flags and footnotes may be requiresproperly define the results.

o

5.0 HYDROGEOLOGIC INVESTIGATION

T03440-6021

5.0 HYDROGEOLOGIC INVESTIGATION

5.1 Site Geolocyy

The Havertown PCP site is underlain by a relatively thin(2 to 28 feet) sequence of unconsolidated materials consisting offill, micaceous saprolite, and biotite-schist saprolite overlyinga biotite-quartz-feldspar schist and biotite-quartz-feldspargneiss bedrock. Lithologic and well construction logs describingthe different materials encountered during drilling are includedin Appendix 1. Well locations are shown on Plate 1.

The typical lithologic sequence listed above appears fairlycontinuous from National Wood Preservers (NWP) property throughPhiladelphia Chewing Gum (PCG) property. However, at some pointbetween PCG property and the rear of the properties ofRittenhouse Circle, the micaceous saprolite apparently thins out,resulting in fill overlying the biotite-schist saprolite andbiotite-guartz-feldspar gneiss bedrock near Rittenhouse Circle.In addition, it appears that a limited amount of Pleistocene sandand gravel terrace deposits may be present in the vicinity ofHAV-07. These deposits may have eroded into or have beendeposited upon the biotite-schist saprolite, which overlies thebedrock, prior to being covered by fill. Figure 5-1 summarizesthe stratigraphic column for the geologic units encountered atthe Havertown PCP site.

The surficial layer of fill material consists of varyingpercentages of very fine- to coarse-grained sand, silt, andgravel, with lesser amounts of cinders, wood, and metal debrisand railroad ties (on NWP property) . The depth of the fillappears to be fairly consistent (approximately five feet) underthe NWP plant; however, along the west 3&&€2n>{G {Eagle Road,

5-2

FORMATION

UnconformityPleistoceneTerraceDepositsUnconformity?

Gradational?

WissahickonFormation

Gradational?

STRATIGRAPHICSECTION

-'.3'--"'-'?*'l'\*

i y. •/.-'.•**•'':• "-• rr pV.'.jV:?-1:'

Mj:.:'::/tx':•! '"-r^Vi" ••' V

*>3K$&W$£$'••&&'*&',*'s'SS/'//,/

S/S//Z//

THICKNESSIN

FEET +/-

0.05

2-18

6?VARIES

<5-13

4-18

UNKNOWN

DESCRIPTION

Macadam; parking lots, road surface.

Fill; varying percentages of very fine to coarsegrained sand, silt, and gravel. Lesser amounts ofcinders, wood, and metal debris.

Sand and gravel deposit; not encountered duringthe Rl.

Micaceous Saprolite; dark yellowish -orange tomoderate yellowish -brown highly micaceous, veryfine to medium -grained 'sand, with some silt.Remnant foliation dipping 35 to 40 degrees.

Biotite-Schist Saprolite; brownish -black and darkgray, highly micaceous fine to medium-grainedsMty sand. Remnant foliation dipping approximately40 degrees.

Biotlte-Quartz-Feldspar Schist/ Gneiss; very lightgray and dark gray, highly foliated, (dipping 30degrees) moderately fractured. Conformablepegmatite pods and stringers.

FIGURE 5-1

• A R 3 0 0 I 5HAVERTOWN PCP SITE

> HAVERTOWN, PA

"GENERALIZED STRATIGRAPHICCOLUMN

"""££5""*" JS7-

fa r.etp»"v«4 ,

<TA)tJ*'"S-2S--SB

tfuwfflf n».

86021-033-AAB wtrWhitt ®®s©etate®,lliTO.•«rth r**ourc«* consultant!

5-3T03440-6021

approximately 5 to 15 feet of fill are present under the SupportZone, Swiss Farm Market, and Young's Produce. On the east sideof Eagle Road, the fill thickens toward the northeast and rangesbetween 4 and 18 feet thick. The amount of fill then thinseastward and ranges between 0 and 4 feet thick in theRittenhouse Circle area.

Directly underlying the fill is a saprolite unit which, basedupon field examination, has been segregated into two divisionsusing the apparent mineralogies and interpreted parent materials.The upper saprolite division consists of a dark yellowish-orangeto moderate yellowish-brown highly micaceous, very fine tomedium-grained sand, with some silt (SP and SM) . Remnantfoliation from the parent bedrock is occasionally present anddips approximately 35 to 40 degrees from the horizontal with someunknown strike. Highly weathered muscovite schist fragments arepresent throughout the interval. The basal saprolite divisionappears to directly underlie the upper saprolite divisionthroughout the study area, with the exception of the RittenhouseCircle area just east of PCG. Here, the basal saprolite directlyunderlies the fill layer. The basal saprolite consists of abrownish-black and dark gray highly micaceous fine- tomedium-grained silty sand (SP-SM). Remnant foliation from theparent bedrock is fairly common and dips approximately 40 degreesfrom the horizontal with an unknown strike. Highly weatheredbiotite schist/gneiss fragments are present throughout thedivision.

Directly underlying the basal saprolite throughout the study areais a very light gray and dark gray biotite-quartz-feldsparschist/gneiss bedrock. The contact separating the overlyingsaprolites from the bedrock appears to be

5-4T03440-6021

probably a result of variations in weathering. Observations madeduring the drilling program indicate that the bedrock appearshighly foliated under the NWP plant and seems to become lessfoliated eastward under the PCG plant. Throughout the area ofinvestigation, the bedrock is moderately fractured, with numerousweathered zones separated by more competent rock. Most fractureswere observed to form along the planes of foliation, which dip atapproximately 30 degrees from the horizontal. Because rockcores obtained during the drilling program could not be orientedto an azimuth line without expensive drilling techniques, thestrike and direction of dip could not be ascertained. Inaddition, infrequent minor shallow and high-angle fractures werepresent within the bedrock. In the deep exploratory wells on theeast side of Eagle Road on the PCG property, the bedrock wasobserved to contain small (approximately one foot in thickness)pegmatite pods consisting of quartz, oligoclase feldspar,muscovite, and a trace of biotite. These pods appeared to beconformable with the foliation and contained minor intra- andintergranular fractures. In the deep monitoring well at CW-4,these fractures in the pegmatite pods were highly solutioned andappeared to provide a good pathway for water to move.

A reconnaissance of the area around the site was performed toidentify bedrock outcrop exposures and to measure the orientationof any fractures which were found. Only two outcrop exposureswere located in the vicinity of the site. The first was a ratherpoor bedrock exposure in an embankment along the east-westtrending abandoned railroad bed which essentially parallels thenorthern fence line of NWP. The outcrop is located on the southside of the abandoned bed, approximately 2,500 feet west of NWP.Bedrock here consisted of soft to moderately hard, heavily

m r\ f\ f\ f* I " I

weathered schist, which possessed a well-developedRBoiwatlom

5-5T03440-6021

(laminated appearance) and prominent joints (fractures in rock).Foliation was found to be oriented north 50 to 64 degrees eastand dipping 83 degrees northwest, while joints were orientednorth 68 degrees west dipping 39 degrees south-southwest andnorth 72 degrees west dipping 84 degrees south-southwest*

The second outcrop investigated was located in an old quarrylocated approximately 7,500 feet southeast of the site, near theintersection of Route 1 and Route 3. Here, the bedrock consistedof a hard, quartz and muscovite schist, with well-developedfoliation and joint patterns. Foliation was measured as north64 degrees east dipping 42 degrees north-northwest, while jointswere observed with orientations of north 61 degrees east dipping82 degrees north? north 68 degrees east dipping 83 degrees south;and south 61 degrees west dipping 79 degrees south-southeast.

To further attempt to identify bedrock fracturing, a fracturetrace analysis was performed for the site. Fracture traceanalysis employs studying aerial photographs for natural linearfeatures which may consist of tonal variations in soils,alignment of vegetation, valleys, ridges, etc., that exhibit somelinear orientation. Fracture traces frequently are zones whichare less resistant to erosion than the surrounding materials,thereby affording an increased permeability. In addition, thesezones may also be areas of groundwater drainage.

A review of available historical aerial photographs from 1958until 1973 yielded no additional fracture information, as thearea consisted primarily of densely populated urban land.

5-6T03440-6021 .

5.1.1 Geologic Cross-Sections

Using the combined geologic information from previousinvestigations and the current RI studies, two geologic cross-sections labeled A-A' and B-B', as shown on Figure 5-2, have beenconstructed. As shown on Plate 2, cross-section A-A' depicts theinterpretation of the subsurface geology from west to east acrossthe site, while cross-section B-B' provides a subsurface viewfrom the northwest to the southeast.

On cross-section A-A', there are three units which comprise thegeologic materials found under the site. Listed in increasingdepth below the ground surface, these are fill; a saproliteunit, which has been separated into two divisions; and theschist/gneiss bedrock.

The fill unit is of a fairly uniform depth across the NWPproperty and becomes somewhat thicker in the vicinity of thesupport zone. The thickness of the fill is not known under EagleRoad; however, it significantly thickens eastward towardmonitoring well series CW-6. The water table apparently does notextend into the fill unit in this cross section; however, it doescome very close to its base between monitoring well series CW-3and CW-6.

The saprolite unit has been separated into two divisions, anupper micaceous saprolite and a basal biotite-schist saprolite,based upon the unit ' s field-estimated mineral composition andinferred parent rock origin. The micaceous saprolite division isa highly weathered layer which is thickest on the west side ofEagle Road, while thinning abruptly and slightly increasindip east of the road. From the west toward the east, the

t/M

5-7

oow

ILU CM

UJccou!

uico

UJ

io *wQ Z

o

U. COOcoSoO??

roC

00

^

©?e@€§•: o6:S**->:s

oUJCOCO

§ Ss gS sO °-J O

ri £ 85 5 "

Q O co o2 1 ^ «• 2UJ fe = Q ^o s R 2 - <§U aj co f- SI

2< s

AR300if7i" """" "" si

i

5-8T03440-6021

goes from mostly saturated to slightly saturated under Eagle Roadand then becomes almost fully saturated eastward.

The biotite-schist saprolite division follows approximately thesame thickness pattern as the micaceous saprolite layer in thatit is thick vest of Eagle Road and abruptly thins and remainsthin east of Eagle Road. It appears that the biotite-schistsaprolite division is fully saturated across this cross-section(A-A').

The biotite-guartz-feldspar schist/gneiss (bedrock) seems topossess a minor mound-like shape under Eagle Road, which isexaggerated three times because of the cross-section scales. Theorigin of this mound is not known; however, its presence may playa significant role in the groundwater hydrology at the site. Tothe west of the mound, the bedrock gently slopes downward towardEagle Road, while east of the mound, the bedrock surface has aslightly greater eastward dip. The bedrock is completelysaturated across the site and there are no apparent confininglayers.

Cross-section B-B' provides a view of the geology of the sitelooking northeast. The geologic units are the same as thosedescribed previously in cross-section A-A'; however, because ofuncertainties in or the lack of geologic information onpreviously installed monitoring wells, the cross-section (B-B')is highly interpretive between monitoring well series CW-2 andCW-4. As interpreted, a bedrock high occurs in the vicinity ofwell R-2, in a fashion similar to that presented in cross-sectionA-A'.

5-9T03440-6021

Above the bedrock lies the saprolite unit as discussedpreviously; however, between CW-2 and CW-4 series monitoringwells, the division contacts are uncertain. This uncertaintyfactor will become important when dealing with contaminantmigration, covered in Section 5.3.6. As depicted though, thebiotite-schist saprolite is almost completely saturated acrossthis area, except in the vicinity of well R-2. The overlyingmicaceous saprolite division is only slightly saturated. Itappears then that the surficial fill unit is completelyunsaturated (by the water table) at this location, exceptpossibly near storm sewer inlet 12 where a higher water tablecould intersect the base of the fill. Accordingly, the stormsewer inlets (#1 and #2) do not appear to influence groundwateror contaminant flow at this location.

Hydraulic potential and generalized groundwater flow lines arepresented on these figures. Discussion concerning them will bepresented in Section 5.3.4.

5.1.2 geologic Fence Diagram

To organize and effectively present the hydrogeologic informationobtained by previous investigations, as well as the data from thecurrent RI, REWAI has compiled an interpretation of thesubsurface at the Havertown PCP site as shown by Plate 3. Thisdrawing, known as a fence diagram, combines the geologic datafrom available sources and depicts the interpretation in athree-dimensional perspective. The diagram is verticallyexaggerated three times and the NWP and PCG buildings areoverlain to provide an orientation from which observers may studythe site.

a ^ ri n ^ ^ ^ ^ . o ji

5-10T03440-6021

There are five different stratigraphic units which are presentedon the fence diagram, namely: macadam, fill, sand and gravel,saprolite, and biotite-guartz-feldspar schist/gneiss (bedrock).The interrelationships between the various units, as describedpreviously in Section 5.2, may be observed on the fence diagram.Portions of the diagram at the NWP plant (NW-2-81 and NW-3-81)and along Eagle Road (R-2, R-3, R-4, and R-5) are either blank orheavily question marked as a result of lack of geologic and wellconstruction data from previous investigator's well logs. Thisresults in large uncertainties in providing a correlation withnewly acquired data. The net result is a lack of informationneeded to ascertain the migration pathways for immiscible anddissolved contaminants in the groundwater system.

Overall, the fence diagram provides the viewer with informationconcerning the spatial orientations of the geologic units, themonitoring wells constructed in them, and the man-made factorswhich may influence groundwater flow. It is suggested that the.reader refer to the fence diagram while reading appropriatereport sections which follow.

5.2 Soil Investigation

5.2.1 Introduction

The purpose of the soil sampling program was to determineestimates of the presence, extent, and degree of soilcontamination at the NWP plant and to establish or modify levelsof personnel protection required for future invasive activities.

5-11T03440-6021

At each of eight locations shown on Figure 5-3, an attempt wasmade to collect soil samples from four depths: surface, onefoot, two feet, and three feet. Based upon the results of afield OVA scan of the samples, 16 samples and 1 duplicate samplewere chosen for analysis from the anticipated 32 samples to beobtained. In addition, two background samples which werecollected off-site (at REWAI's office in Middletown,Pennsylvania) and one performance evaluation sample were includedas part of the dioxin/dibenzofuran analysis. Soil samples wereanalyzed for dioxin and chlorinated dibenzofuran isomers, thecomplete Hazardous Substance List (HSL), and oil and grease.

Soil sampling began on July 16, 1987, by utilizing a 3 1/2-inchdiameter hand auger in which to collect samples from thespecified depths. It was immediately apparent that due to thenature of the fill material at the NWP plant—consisting largelyof tightly compacted sand, gravel, slag, and railroad ties—handaugering would not succeed in providing the necessary samples. Abackhoe was then obtained to assist with sampling. Samplecollection resumed on July 20, 1987, and continued throughJuly 22, 1987. Even with the use of the backhoe, only 14 of theanticipated 32 soils samples were collected from the 8 samplepoints because of refusal of the backhoe caused by fillmaterials.

5.2.2 Collection of Soil Samples

At each soil sampling location, samples were collected at eachconsecutive depth interval required, unless backhoe refusal wasattained first. Prior to mobilizing on to the next samplinglocation, the backhoe, sampling equipment, and the sampler'souter gloves were decontaminated with a h ^ r s e t f i e steam

5-12

5-13T03440-6021

cleaner. This procedure was used to reduce the potential forcross contamination.

Upon mobilizing to the next sampling point, the sampler wouldobtain two samples of the surface (zero to two inches) intervalusing a clean stainless steel trowel. One sample was placed intoa laboratory pre-cleaned 1000 milliliter (ml) clear glass,widemouth sample bottle, provided by the U. S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA), for dioxin and chlorinated dibenzofurananalysis, while the second sample was placed into a1 liter, widemouth, amber glass bottle for HSL and oil and greaseanalysis by CompuChem Laboratories.

Successive depth intervals were attained, one at a time, by useof the backhoe. At each depth interval, the vertical wall of theexcavation was first scraped off to expose a fresh soil surface.Samples were then collected from the vertical wall and placedinto the appropriate glassware as previously described. Allsample bottles were appropriately labeled as directed by the SiteOperations Plan (SOP). The HSL soil samples were placed intosample shuttles with cold packs and shipped by Federal Express toREWAI's laboratory subcontractor, CompuChem Laboratories. Thedioxin/dibenzofuran soil samples were wrapped in aluminum foil toreduce their exposure to light and packaged on ice in 48-quartcoolers. As per EPA's instructions, the dioxin/dibenzofuran soilsamples were shipped to California Analytical Laboratory (CAL)for analysis under the direction of EPA as Case I3150C.

5-14T03440-6021

5.2.3 Results of Soil Sampling

5.2.3.1 Metals - Soil samples were collected at various depthsbetween the surface and three feet at eight locations on the NWPplant site. The results of the analysis, for total metals in thesoil samples are shown in Table 5-1. The metals whichexhibited the highest concentrations in soil samples at NWP werecalcium, magnesium, iron, aluminum, sodium, and potassium.Lesser amounts, although still elevated, of arsenic, cadmium,chromium, copper, lead, mercury, and zinc were also found.

These last metals listed are the primary metals of concern at theHavertown PCP site because most of these metals are constituentsof wood treating solutions presently used on a routine basis atNWP. Reviewing the data for the metals of concern in Table 5-1indicates that elevated quantities of arsenic, chromium, copper,lead, and zinc are present in the soils. Arsenic has reportedconcentrations ranging between 1.4 and 6850 ug/kg, while chromiumwas found between 56 and 22,300 ug/kg. Copper was detected atlevels between 43 and 9,790 ug/kg, and lead at 12 to 108 ug/kg.Zinc was present at levels from 183 to 13,000 ug/kg.

Figure 5-4 depicts the total concentrations of arsenic, cadmium,chromium, copper, lead, and zinc, in ug/kg in NWP soils. Becausethis was a preliminary soil investigation, designed more todetect the presence of contaminants and the concentrations atwhich they are present, and due to the small sample base, inwhich 14 samples were analyzed from 8 locations, it would beinappropriate to contour contaminant concentrations. It isapparent from the map, that the area around the storage tanks hassignificantly higher concentrations of metals than otne,rD ![*$£?•

•M *ffl G>

5-15

ts ta IB uj i0 IB <& to t& to to IB «0 tp co UJ ts to us ta ts caj^^aic^j*^£c3gMM;gc^*ei«{c*ciea£hei«M:£e

*e «& »« i> V <S3

Igggggggggg^ggg!| x u. 9. •« fcrt ». ;

cBc8iBtauBtsta<aietct0ie*0<au><0<0iDtataieSj£^j£^jejKatf^a^SM:Sjicj£g«»&»cjK^

jj-) — — » • . - - Irt fcTJ ^ UJ[fl "~ O »r» — •

£=3

en t

trs S K to

5-16

f co «« §3 *» r»> GO $• v? cs< >$

t*> X •"• OD *A «e UJ

Kn c& —•ii

O 01U PS

T 3 S -l l r t ^f3.^n P

0) E

(^ — — ee — <f>

5-17

lSU»«SC43tt3Uai9U3LO«0lSCAt9 CSba<J3b9tacj9U3tSlfl^:j<»«>g£a^geaei**«£:icSM:i* « j* x: S J£ *e

£=,

5-18

5-19T03440-6021

5.2.3.2 Volatile Organic Aromatics - Volatile organic aromatic(VGA) chemical analysis was performed on soil samples collectedfrom the NWP site. The results of this analysis, presented onTable 5-2, indicate that methylene chloride, acetone, 2-butanone,and total xylenes were the most frequently identified VOAs in thesoil. However, because methylene chloride and acetone arefrequent laboratory contaminants, their presence in the soilsamples may be questionable. Accordingly, total xylenes was themost frequently identified VOA specie in the soil samples, withdetected concentrations ranging from 5.1 to 2800 ug/kg. Alsofound in elevated concentrations were ethylbenzene (3.8 to490 ug/kg), and toluene (6.1 to 390 ug/kg). Lesser amounts,listed in decreasing order, of benzene, 4-methyl-2-pentanone,chloromethane, tetrachloroethene, bromomethane, and trichloro-ethene were also identified.

Based upon this soil sampling, it appears that the primarycontaminants in the soil are associated with petroleumhydrocarbons, probably from fuel oil. Secondary contamination inthe soil from solvent-related VOAs was also found in relativelysmall amounts. The results of this VOA analysis should beconsidered questionable, as the soil sample jars were not septumsealed. As such, a map depicting the VOA compounds in the soilwas not produced in this report*

5.2*3.3 Base Neutral and Acid Extractables - Base neutral andacid extractable analysis (BNA) was performed on soil samplescollected from the NWP plant site during the preliminary sampling

5-20

^•^C^C^*.XdC.Ji(^C S -H S *t*. S -*« J« .»« S S J*JW-»«-M,«:j1lJ«J«J«J«JB^J«J«^«J« .5*' • • • • •• • - ' ^ ^ ^ • • • • • • • • •'"•. " . •"."v. .= = i = i 3 = i = > = j = = :3S's=i=3=>3 S s* a = 3=:3™3=i3s»:3;e=«™ ^ » laaaooaooDaorsJCNiCDODCDaDecoDffi C<M m • eo »> eeeeaoeDCMme&m eg «^ CMin «n »r» *n w» «n in in in wt vi

_ _j . t-> - »S S *** S£ *"* ^ ii _ j_j€ 5> r>> S n^&^e^^^^^^^e^

tn in in t

5? •*• £; !C !!^^;^^Z)i5i2i^;KQa^siisX2lxrJX£''^X:^j«i£;;*;X»i2^a3B>;c!zic3

_«i* m ae *r»

..

§*

j_~ ^

gQJ

M D)OBi3al>Dlioil7>|9>doiO>OtOi^ Ck o> Bt Oi o> B> O) S O (91 el" W B* Oi e> 3i O> ^ en Bi

in 21 gS~~^"~*^

Id "~0,&,«,o)^*e,*a,e,0,«e,B,CTlolo,o,ol^B.»^

™ ™ >

•• >n in tn in «n in in u"> >n tn «n in >n to irt wn m in >/>

~j tL S *~^^^feS ~~^ ™^WJ s iS * —*

5-21

in »n w> in m m «^

tst&WtSmsiS**! s s a asa&a^*3^^aW&i»*£a&a£3S*3i

tf> ift in «n *n

:£ * =: 2 s £ *'w4J

A•Hc» 4J

tH pjn ^S O

^

" S™

_

a ii^i

— uj32^*njg itjO^j . -

5-22

* « * *

scou•~r

(N1in0}«-<*§

| f |p!~sa ^>w T S

V•HCOpi uJ *— U* UJ >«*"• tz S af S ET SO *° g s K s<y w> SP-I

rO

rvi*r

-o«

€^<_>o

!If!IB;!JIl!=i!!!!!!!f!!IB!I!Bi!!!in*n*n^u-> *o.n.nin»n.nin ^.^*ninur.inm ^»»n ^.

ggggggg^g°gggsgg^;-^g^MSiiMM^ = ^MMS

W a ^

siE^^^fe.^! ujS 51s 1 H

t fi®-: <0

Su « _

SR300I72

5-23T03440-6Q21

round. The results shown in Table 5-3 indicate substantialcontamination by BNA chemicals. The BNA compounds detected mostfrequently and in the highest concentrations were (in decreasingorder) pentachlorophenol, 2-methylnaphthalene, naphthalene,phenanthrene, and fluorene. Other BNA compounds frequentlyfound, however, in somewhat lower concentrations, were acena-phthene, pyrene, fluoranthene, and bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate.

Soil sample location S-5 had the greatest total concentration ofBNA compounds with 6,195,100 ug/kg (see Figure 5-5). Theconcentration of PCP at this location was 4,500,000 ug/kg andconstituted the greatest portion of this total BNA concentration.Soil sample location S-4 also had a significant totalconcentration of BNA compounds with 713,800 ug/kg detected at the3-foot depth interval. These elevated concentrations occurred inand around the chemical storage tank area and reflect thecontamination present in this area. Concentrations of BNAcompounds at other soil sample locations on the site, althoughnot as elevated as those previously mentioned, are significantand reflect the widespread contamination of soil on NWP property.Concentrations of BNA compounds at those soil sample locationsnot located in the area of the chemical storage tanks could bedue in part to the saturation of soils from treated lumber storedin those areas.

Generalizations concerning the BNA analysis include a trendtoward increased concentrations with depth, as was evident atthose locations in which incremental samples were able to beobtained. PCP concentrations constituted the largest portion ofthe total BNA concentrations in all of the samples except S-l,

*8300J73

5-24

.aaaasssstasa o s a s a =i 5 3 s = =» s s s as

«>* **j c«3 <si K «si }>J tsi *M fsi CNJ o«i OJ «si R* ^ *« *si rs» esi es< isi

23 s <3 S3 3 -j 3 S» 3 SJ ~3 21 SI £3 a & S .s

CM Ow CM CM CM <S1 CM CM •» IM K CM CM CM CM

0 3 ™ ™ ^ ™ _. _

' l ' ' E 1 * '

W* O —— •»

03 <*

,$j SS"~^~ f^MS&SSoS^S^^^Sa^S^^S^a^^Xz^^^^^^^ *=a

<6

ro ^in ^

u<

•*•*

<=> C3

(JJ ,

S 3 ^ 3 a 3 3 S 3 3 3 a » = 3 = l S = S = > E 3 3 S £ S = 3 = =3=

3 9 9 ± > a ± a s a & 3 & ^ = i 9 9 a a a 3 s s s S s s s s s a a

—i—i—» -J o e> —i o _i _' -J e -;<^='^e=J^J-t'-^'«l—'-P*=' w -='O^ ^ O J c r ' f T > ^

O

w> <=>

W

e@

5-25

en en Q« en en«ften»e«»»e»e»»«»»e»i»c»>*9t»«e»S>o>»enolio*B»oio»Btiaie>etO'-W .fcB dtt .&> .be £* dB J« ( J«d«^BAJlCdB^B^«.Jl **J*^*Ji*'J*Jtl.-*f

* >

CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CM

f t tOt Jit S -B" - J* -A -S S 4B JH S ft JB A -*» S K 4MJf*^*+mjMJ*Ji*****^* .£ <M .M •*>.!« dB .M

*M CM CM «M <M CM <M CM C"5 *M CM CM CM *M CM <SJ <M CM «M K CM CV S CM CM CM CM^— — J - f*. - « ~" — *— —— .

~" "~ «M ——

i

>ai 9 & a" » a" » * s» i? a* a" 3 » D H* 3 s s a

10 S?^9WW»^aW«Sta»*§ •S'aS'asl'al'ii'sS'aa'w'lp'S&aSss

_ 0i6n9>erieni7l>B>enenener>en&ieps> eri*-* JJ *.Sl-S(.a.aBdl:.St.ai,fi-IBJ« *-*>.*( l JB

- (0 aal^a^^3»^»i^^5a^=* a*ti H ^ ^ & c> «t ^ e> o <=i e» o e> O"t> r<S^K*«^ . t-~ . ^ «'en «-» c->

__ •en -4i bIT) <Hi _j

-

I fM O& GB i

|_| *'*'Sl'r»,>!'1es 'e3,"S;' 'oi'eiife'en'e5i'B\ ^ % % ^ 'e>>'c%'e)Ic%'o\'a 'en'n*Di'B%'af'e« SB

—, _j - r— - gj — — — —, _ — ™ — pj

'^ ^ ^ - - - - - ^ = S » a S s a &

siis.

' SsMS<Mi^3Evjj*Ouj Cui«JKQc%*->~>»SS3cSS^y.9cn!»..Sgagi6_fii^e5Ssg j..^^*----- — *• M( IM

5-26

:3 ss s^^^a'a'as a Sa 3 5» =? = S a a a* a 3 a

i*: 21 & S S S S

_

S"* *** «o 5» <£ CM m * r.. §5 £i '

a a a a a a s a a a a a a a ^ a a a a a ^ & n a a a i i s a

JM j- - -— ' " •*• •» j™ •*• •*• «••^ ' ' 1

C •*•* —. _j - r - Q *"* *"* *"w>«^.m _.. _ _ .-"._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ &

*°^ C n S , 9 . 0 . O . O . O . S . ^®QJ ,_( S ^B B B S JM S dB dB dB J* S * dB dB dB -** JM JB B 2^ JB~ -IB -M S ^* dB 1——-j

*i g B g ^ ^ O O < ^ O O ' - » '

g; CM(MCM CM CM CMCMCM «MCMCM«M CMCMCMCM^r<MCMCMCMCM«M (53~~ —— I- s I- S! f ~*

= = 3=i=i^ = =i = =3 = =3=> = S'3saa>=:i53 v a a a a s j ^S

WX

ftft300I76

5-27

r ~. ~ ~~~ ^ *^& SSlPSglS^Sp^^^PP

/^3 iiiSSiiiiSiSiid^sss^cic; R»"55^ C M r * . 5S *** §

— • •<*•.•« ^-«r^ " » ^ r x r

* 3 °* S S S S 2 33* & "^ 332 et S3ie»'Si^^ie»^igie»e™^>epi^.e>&>oi&>e£igi ene>i a i i a a a a a a a a ^ a a a a a a & a a

-

^~*^i • *^*^"a>"'&i^H^iai'B»*e»'Ht^'eB^"^^^^s'^^i^»'aii a 9 a a a a a a 9 a a a ^ ^ a 9 = t ^ s a 3 a 3 ^ a~*? gg-^pgSS^SSSgSS^SgSgSS

- * a » w 3 3 = s t a i a a a a a

>g__ _j — f*> — & •"• ~™ ~™ "~* *•

S |ia3;| lij- *^SM-i, _ - a .-S^j c^oie*e»ei»w»e»e» w e> en cy en ^^H1 ^ o* w> e»* B» en » S3 3 S S &> S &l 3 2 33 3 B>

^ ' ^ ' ' ' ' '

J(M CM ff>J CM «M «M CM *M CM IM CM CM CM CM CM CM (M CM CM fM CM CM (M K K *M S CM CM *M CM i

§ |

lisil? ;£g,^«

— — CMCMCMCM

5-28

** en B» gt BtenB>enBtB*B>GnoiB'iGna>eno> B* en 9 e» B* cj w ^g> gt

^— -JO-f^-o ee ©sJecaeooow O <5 ='<SC«'«'-«'3-e*J=;-'StnE3^ CM * n ^ e M § r * . c M C M * M ^ ^ ™ > S 2 Z a3OJ CM evi ^ « . _ _ «a

13 U«

C 4JO XCJ W

•a

or-4

Irei

O

Oto

m•— . UJ UJ _J— tf

*J K «:« uj UJ i

So :—' !

UJ UJ 3E 3C •; X 1 171 W I

Ai300!78

5-29

>3 -** Jif f J* -ft .JM J* -** .& -SI -IB JSt .M .M -*• JB S S J* Jit ** dB IB A B dB .SI JB j? B f f J* j* _IK f

W . ^ *%""*'' *"Bn"v''en' "'Bn'e5.'Bn'en i ^i^ni^'oiei'Qi^i"fe"^"^""^''e»'lv'^i^"^i^''1>"S^"^*>' ^a

4J IH */» ' l£yS +* --v

I *S ^w -om -H «irtS '^"Styi^SS j

2:(U

5-30

5-31T03440-6G21

S-6, and S-7. Also, PCP concentrations increased with depth aswas evident at soil sample locations S-4, S-7, and S-8.

5.2.3.4 Pesticides and PCBs - Pesticide and polychlorinatedbiphenyl analyses were performed on soil samples collectedfrom eight locations at NWP during the preliminary samplinground. The results shown in Table 5-4 indicate that PCB-1260 wasdetected at a depth of one foot in soil sample S-2 at aconcentration of 1600 ug/kg. This sampling point was located onth© northern building face of the wood-preserving plant and wasthe only sample in which PCBs were found above detection limits.

Beta-BHC and chlordane were the only pesticides which weredetected in soil samples at NWP. Beta-BHC was detected at soilsample location S-3 at depths of 1 foot and 1.5 feet, atconcentrations of 660 ug/kg and 1300 ug/kg respectively.Chlordane was detected at soil sample location S-8 at depths of17 inches and 2 feet at concentrations of 1000 ug/kg and1200 ug/kg. The approximate locations of these soil samples areshown on Figure 5-6.

5.2*3.5 Cyanide and Oil and Grease - Soil samples were analyzedfor cyanide and oil and grease. The results of these analysesare provided in Table 5-4. Cyanide was not detected in any ofthe samples.

Concentrations of oil and grease were detected in every soilsample, with the highest concentration, 560,000 mg/kg, detectedin soil sample S-5. Soil sample S-5 was collected in the storagetank area situated on the west side of the wood-preserving plant.This area was highly saturated with oily fluids, which either areor were stored in the tanks. As would.b., « . - - • - - . . . . A n

5-32

i -H da 3 3S S3 B S ««B .*B j>* JB S j» B .M 3 j* .M 32 S 22 2' ""** ****** '**'*• L *«• " L "*• : "•*• 'i: t 'SL " **" "7a L i*"" 1" "**" '*1*'"*

•000000 09500000^99900000000

^»^Q»Di'ta' *** * i " > i^^i^ •* t S S S ':5t *-.

"™ — CM^-— — *M — CM —CO ™ * — * ~" ~ « "~

'"' — mir O _i — i ™i «J _i _l — J — J

Si ^ in «~ ps -^ CM n — • Js* ii 9 fv i oy

OJ *" °

— — _ « . . — — — — . . - «,_ - —— - - - «M *•• CM « —— «• CM —— CM «•

* S J^:i o ^^:•o

ID tHO2^7*5 5lij " » = » «> Sjeooaca

«/»•%. — n-g 503 atu.ntcn pio^

"^ "~i~I~t~T~JS^"— — — — *^ — — — Z;ZJ^S^^^ — *" — ***"

3 ~ 5 § 2 !i| s

is?1"eo o —

— STgS D£

^:

5-33

^B dB dB _K dB B 2 3 S 3 J* B. J* M dB 3 ,** dB 3 3 -»f 3 * 3 JK .M

. a a a a s a & a a s a a a a a a a a a s ^ ^ a a a a a

55 so « 5 " "~tfi **. •» iir«.O

^ B Je JB B JB: -*B JB •& jm BI^BI^B^B dB^B^>^B.w^B^*dB _A j* j* jm

S*

1 « (3 £f " —— CM II S CM II R II

a a a a a a s a s a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a & a 5*

0)

.•* .*• JIB .M .*« 2 2 f 3 ** .IB .M 22 3 -m S3** .».»>.••.•* 2 ** 2 2"*** "*"• """ **"• """• "** *" ""*" "*"* ""*" "** **• ; **"• """* "*"• tji ~ """• "S """-

S*a a a a a a a a a a a a a a s a a ar>*£'1:££)£*£*:9:£o.fiOio.ofi££&€2^ r fn r*. »*• r *>» *o •& &» -a »g gi •*» j s

Oj ce *" ' CM -» »t __ v !t — £» i! •» !ift O

03 -j JJ O g* en cf> BI en o> gi gi B> g» 01 o> B> g> g> B» g> ot (7i0>Bi0»t7t@>cn0>a en LD•9>n ^'*1>*"ai^~"**^"*%"**'^^t'>'"5v^'^"~lfcai'~1"^*ai^^%«'*'^'^'^i * ^

CQ — — — — ^ —> K— S*-"^—«eM^Ki^ O

C*9 FM It

.«* J3* .**-•« .S J« * B B .5" .fa* . B JS" » -W 5" J« JB B B .M .JM f

— _t - 5^ - oCM —— .—— O» «— w?

»n c*>

5-34 1

S" ^ " ""(D

JO |

1 8

*S ^ i

£

•HW

Ag300l8.li

5-36T03440-6021

concentrations of oil and grease were greater in samplescollected near ground surface and decreased in samples collectedat increasing depths. The results from the oil and greaseanalysis indicate that an oil product was introduced to the soilson NWP property. The approximate sample locations and oil andgrease concentrations are shown in Figure 5-7. Due to thenature of the sampling and the small number of samplinglocations , interpretations regarding zones of contaminantconcentration could not be made with any reliability.

5*2.3*6 £i AH_ H ._ S,i b e n^ o f u r a n s - Soil s a mp 1 e s werecollected at eight locations on the NWP property and analyzed fordioxin and chlorinated dibenzofuran isomers by CaliforniaAnalytical Lab, under the direction of EPA. Soil samples were tobe collected at the surface, one foot, two feet, and three feet;however, due to the nature of the fill at NWP, it was notpossible to collect soil samples at the desired depths at everysoil sample location.

Tetra- through octa-isomers of dioxin and dibenzofuran weredetected at various concentrations at each of the soil samplelocations, with the results shown in Tables 5-5 and 5-6.Figure 5-8 shows soil sample locations and total concentrationsof dioxin isomers, and Figure 5-9 shows the total concentrationof dibenzofuran isomers. As shown by Figure 5-8, soil sample S-5had the highest relative concentration of dioxin isomers, with39,318 ppb detected at a depth of one foot. Soil sample S-5 wascollected in the area of the storage tanks, where an oily fluidwas readily obvious after penetrating the soil. The octa-dioxinisomer was detected in the highest concentration and made up themajority of the total dioxin concentration found at S-5, with alevel of 30,579 ppb. By referring to Figure 5-JpD 4&£§rhb& seen

5-37

5-38

• P^ CM •

—— CM*f ~*

. -

-_I®

™ Ss ' u-i S? "**

**•

fl sOw

- W

CM g —— '

AR300I88

5-39

as

• C«~* 9- •«•— CM .

—— *M

CM c>- — —

-O I C3 I ——•s> < > m e-i*j »— v» UJ 3: x— o -f a. oetn cs i— = uj *—

«• 3 «-> cj S (_> w

CM CM—— CM <M CM m

AB300I89

5-40

S£SS££££&££££CM 1 "~* <•» CMg. fNj • « . .

I 4g —— —— __ __ ,

££££££££££££££

^w „ ^ T"4~* CM c*> ~ — >n e>

{9HI

vo ctO M(J) tu

"rt °

tn fe —

—— - -- irt — CM—M^»«inr«^

£=>

W fcJi->*^§'^t~J"CJ^"§.W^X UJ/

5-41

CM o CM •

CM f— £ CM -

<J> WS «M **&

s

.g S - CM?— ^ ,0 - (O*—1 CMf>».e£ —— -ED ^ e>- CMCMtj ^ i m —— —— JB OO ^«3"^ — t ^ w* e • — • s • •

CM »• CM -

& o oe o

—— CM CM CM CM fO. CO C*»—• —— •- CM CM CM

A8300I9.I

5-42

5-43

5-44T03440-6021

that soil sample S-5 also contained the greatest concentration ofdibenzofuran isomers, with the octa-isomer comprising a largeportion of the total concentration of 15,620.9 ppb.

Previous dioxin investigations conducted at other sites (such asRappe et al, 1987} reported identifying a portion of dioxin/dibenzofuran isomer concentrations in relationship with depth.If these two variables were to be graphically illustrated, abell-shaped curve would result indicating lower concentrationsimmediately above and below the higher concentrations of dioxincontamination in the soil column. Due to the sampling program,soil samples were not able to be collected as a complete seriesof samples from each location. Therefore, the data obtained fromthis sampling cannot confirm or refute this postulation.

5.2.4 Soil Sampling Results

Chemical results from the soils investigation conducted at NWPindicate that elevated levels of metals of concern such asarsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, and zinc arepresent in the first 0 to 4 feet of soil. The presence of thesemetals may be the result of present NWP operations involving thecurrent wood-treating solutions. No information on the use orpresence of heavy metals in past wood-treating operations isknown.

Volatile organic chemical analysis was performed on the soilsamples, revealing elevated levels of total xylenes and methylenechloride and acetone. Lesser amounts of benzene andtrichloroethene were also found.

WOO 19!,

5-45T03440-6021

Base neutral and acid extractable compounds such as PCP,2-methylnaphthalene, naphthalene, phenanthrene and fluorene werefound most frequently and in the highest concentrations. Soilsampling location S-5 (tank area) had the greatest concentrationof BNAs. Other soil sampling locations contained elevatedconcentrations of BNAs, although not as high as at S-5, and aresignificant and reflect the widespread contamination of soil onthe NWP property.

Pesticide and PCS analysis indicated that beta-BHC and chlordanewere detected in only four of the soil samples. PCB (1260) wasfound in only one soil sample, S-2 (one foot), at a concentrationof 1600 ug/kg.

Cyanide and oil & grease analysis revealed that no cyanide wasfound above detection limits in the soil and that oil & greaselevels were significantly elevated throughout the soil samplestaken. This again indicates the widespread introduction of anoil product to the soils at NWP.

Soil samples were also analyzed for dioxin and chlorinateddibenzofuran isomers. Soil sample S-5 (tank area) had thehighest total dioxin isomer concentration, 39,318 ppb. Theocta-dioxin isomer made up the majority of the total dioxinisomer concentration at S-5 and the other soil samples taken.The same pattern was true for the chlorinated dibenzofurans aswell.

In summary, the soil sampling at the NWP plant site revealed thatthe soils contain significant concentrations of fuel oil and woodpreservative (PCP) components which are widely distributed acrossthe site. Concentrations of metals, possibly the fttfte§ilf|l}

- ' . - . _ - - . " rt 4» W \f W

5-46T03440-6021

present NWP operations, dioxin/dibenzofuran, and one locationcontaining PCB (1260) were also identified in the soils. Due tothe small sampling base, in which only eight locations weresampled, the extent of contaminant distribution both horizontallyand vertically, as well as the maximum contaminant concentrationrange in the soils, is not clearly defined.

5.3 Groundwater Investigation

5.3.1 Purpose for Groundwater Investigation

The groundwater investigation was undertaken to provide site-specific hydrogeologic information on the characteristics of theunconsolidated deposits, weathered and fresh bedrock, andgroundwater conditions at the site.

The groundwater investigation began with a preliminary samplingof 10 existing monitoring wells to determine appropriatelocations for the installation of six cluster well stations.Each cluster well station consists of a shallow well screened tomonitor the water table surface, an intermediate well screened inthe saprolite near the top of bedrock, and a deep well screenedin the bedrock. This monitoring well network provided thefollowing:

o Description of the depths, thicknesses, and types ofunconsolidated materials.

o Determination of the thickness of saturated materials.

o

5-47T03440-6021

o Testing of the saturated aquifer to determine itshydraulic characteristics.

o Assessment of the potentiometric head differentialbetween the unconsolidated and bedrock materials.

o Determination of the levels of dissolved contaminantswithin the network area.

o Determination of the apparent location of the subsurfaceoil plume, and the associated dissolved contaminationplume.

Subcontracted drilling was conducted by Empire SoilsInvestigations, Inc. (Empire) under the supervision of REWAI.All work associated with the installation of wells, welldevelopment, collection of water quality samples, and hydraulictesting was completed as specified by the approved SOP.

5.3.2 Groundwater Monitoring System Procedures

Geologists and staff scientists from REWAI and drilling crewsfrom Empire were on-site from January 18, 1988, to February 26,1988, to conduct work associated with the installation of thecluster well network at the Havertown PCP site in Havertown,Pennsylvania. A total of 18 groundwater monitoring wells wereinstalled at the site in 6 locations, as shown on Plate 1.

5.3.2.1 Monitoring Well Construction - The hydrogeologicinvestigation required the drilling of 18 wells. The wellsconsisted of 6 deep exploratory wells and 12 shallower monitoringwells. The wells were installed such that two wel

5-48T03440-6021

and one intermediate depth, were drilled adjacent to each deepexploratory well, thus providing a nest of three wells at each ofthe six locations. The deep exploratory wells were used toascertain the water quality in the bedrock aquifer and to provideinformation on the geology of the site as it relates to thenature of contaminant migration. The intermediate wells wereused to obtain information on the water quality at thebedrocfc/ aprolite interface, while the shallow wells provideddata about the surface of the water table, which was thought tocontain a floating oil lens. All wells have been used togetherto assess the horizontal and vertical migration potential for thecontaminants.

5.3.2.1.1 Deep Exploratory Wells - The exact locations ofthe six exploratory wells were determined following a sitesurvey, mapping, and a preliminary sampling of selected existingwells. Prior to drilling, DER approved the cluster welllocations. The deep exploratory wells served as bedrock wellsfor the subsequent well nests. The DER-approved criteria fordeep monitoring well construction (Figure 5-10) are presented insummary below.

Deep well construction steps can be summarized as follows:

o Using six-inch ID hollow-stem augers, drilling wasadvanced through the unconsolidated overburden sectionuntil bedrock was encountered, obtaining continuoussplit-spoon samples throughout this interval. Soilsamples collected from the split spoons were collectedin standard soil jars, labeled, and placed in the heatedon-site storage trailer. Subsequent to the samplesattaining room temperature, each jar R> PPf<9ed and a

U I

IT.

5-49

locking Cap

6" I.D. Steel J i l l /"Cement anti-percolation collarProtector Casing-

Soil

Bentonite/Cement Slurry—*- B 1 Saprolite

10" Borehole——:——————.JB ,^f———————2" I-D- pvc Sch- 40 threadedflush joint riser pipe

Bottom o£ screenBottom o£ core hole

2'

it

nip ———— fc!

II

-

-;

I'

" \~ i"~

Ii

fi -• " — iop 01 eeuiuch*iL— — —————— Bentonite seal

101 minimum

!*-' Top of saiid pack. ————————— Top Of weu screen

* — ——— - —— 4" diameter core hole^ —— ————— 2" I.D. PVC Sch. 40 threaded 0.020"

slot flush joint well screen

___^— — ——— Grade 1 M orie sand pack•— ~ r - "•"" " " '

^ — • —— Sand pad*~

Vertical Scale 1 inch = 10 feetFIGURE 5-10

HAVERTOWN PCP SITEDEEP WELL CONSTRUCTION

AR300I99

5-50T03440-6021

heated headspace analysis performed with a field organicvapor analyzer (OVA) and the results recorded. Theoverburden/bedrock interface was identified as the depthat which the split-spoon sampler did not progress atleast 6 inches as a result of 100 blows and followed byrefusal of the augers to advance. The resultingborehole had an approximate diameter of 10 inches.

The REWAI site geologists prepared a written descriptionand classification of the soil samples using the UnifiedSoil Classification System (USCS). Soil samples wereplaced into standard glass soil j ars, appropriatelylabeled, and boxed for storage at the Command Post.

Upon refusal, the augers were raised approximately twofeet above the overburden/bedrock interface, followed bythe installation of at least a two-foot thick bentonitepellet seal below the bottom of the augers. Thebentonite pellets were given time to set and swellbefore continuing with the drilling. After swelling ofthe bentonite, the augers were pushed back down throughthe bentonite seal without rotation until once againencountering the top of bedrock. Although a plug wasused to prevent the bentonite from entering the augers,some had inevitably forced its way into the hollow stem.Therefore, after the auger flight was seated into thebentonite seal, the plug was removed from the augers andthe interior was cleaned of bentonite by using severalShelby tubes.

AR300

5-51T03440-6021 *. -,

Drilling proceeded using a four-inch core barrel. Coreswere collected in five-foot sections and the lithologicdescription was recorded by REWAI geologists. Rockcoring was completed to a depth of at least 20 to3 0 feet below the overburden/bedrock interface. Thedeep exploratory wells did not exceed 70 feet below theground surface. All rock cores collected wereappropriately labeled and stored in wooden boxes at theCommand Post. At the completion of the field investiga-tion, the cores and soil samples were relinquished toDER's custody for long-term storage or disposal inaccordance with the provisions of the "ContaminatedMaterials Handling Plan," Section 5.0, of the approvedSOP.

After coring a 10-foot interval in each of the6 exploratory wells, constant-head packer tests werecompleted to measure the bedrock's approximatepermeability in each cored interval. Some intervalswere too fractured, resulting in substantial leakagearound the packer seal, which precluded a proper test.Packer testing was continued in approximately 10-footintervals until the final well depth was attained.

Subsequent to completion of the packer tests, a 2-inchID Schedule 40 threaded flush-joint PVC 0.020-inchslotted well screen was installed into the core hole,with the bottom of the well resting on the bottom of thecore hole and with the top of the screen at least10 feet below the overburden/bedrock interface.Two-inch ID Schedule 40 threaded flush-joint PVC riser

5-52T03440-6021

pipe then extended from the top of the well screen up toat least one foot above the ground surface.

o A Grade 1 Morie sand pack was then placed from thebottom of the core hole up to at least one foot abovethe top of the well screen. The annular space betweenthe core hole and the PVC riser pipe was then filledwith a thick bentonite slurry from the overburden/bedrock interface down to the top of the sand pack. Atthis point, the augers were slowly pulled out of theground while a four percent bentonite/cement slurry waspumped, under pressure into the annulus, effectivelysealing the annulus.

o The well was then fitted with a six-inch ID steelprotector pipe extending from at least one foot abovethe ground surface downward to a depth of at least twofeet below grade. If the well was located in a heavytraffic area, a locking, watertight driveover wasinstalled in place of the steel protector pipe. Acement anti-percolation collar was installed around theprotector pipes and an upper cement seal around thedriveovers to preclude surface water infiltration andfrost heave. A locking cap and #3303 Master lock wasplaced on each well, with a duplicate set of keysfurnished to the DER site representative. All lockswere keyed alike.

o Final well locations were visibly marked withfluorescent orange-colored paint and flagging on the NWPsite. Wells on the PCG property were e i j xjstalledas flush-mount driveovers or with

5-53T03440-6021 .

extending aboveground, which was painted a dark brown soas not to attract attention. Wells have been located bya registered Pennsylvania surveyor, under subcontract toREWAI, and tied into the project base map.

5.3.2.1.2 Shallow and Intermediate Wells - Twelve addi-tional wells were constructed to complement the six deepexploratory wells. Two wells were constructed adjacent to eachdeep exploratory well, thus providing a nest of three wells ateach cluster well station. Each shallow well was set to screenthe surface of the water table to intercept any pentachlorophenol(PCP)/oil layer on top of the groundwater table. Theintermediate depth well was screened in the saprolite layer orhighly weathered bedrock zone near the saprolite/bedrockinterface. Prior to the installation of the shallow andintermediate-depth wells, the DER site coordinator conferred withthe REWAI geologist(s) and approved the location and constructionof each well. The depths of these wells ranged between 15 1/2and 55 1/2 feet below ground surface. The shallow andintermediate monitoring well construction specifications(Figure 5-11} are summarized as follows:

o Using the deep exploratory well log as a guide, thescreened intervals were determined for the shallow andintermediate depth wells based upon the objectives ofthe monitoring program described in Section 5.3.1. Theshallow- and intermediate-depth wells were theninstalled in the proximity of the deep exploratory well.

o Using six-inch ID hollow-stem augers, the borehole wasdrilled through the unconsolidated overburden sectionuntil the desired depth was reached. A

5-54

SHALLOW DEPTH WELL INTERMEDIATE DEPTH WELL

Locking Cap6" I.D. Steel ProtectorCasingAnti-Percolation Collar

Benton1te/CementSlurry6" minimum BentonitePellet Seal

Top ot" Sand Pack2f Top -of screen

I.D. PVC Sch. 40threaded flush joint ^ — jVr ,_„ . , -, . J .-*;' — i~; —10" borehole «» ^Hriser pipe ^ _ - H •— Bentonite/Cement Slurry

water level

Grade 1 Morie2" I.D. PVC Sch. 40 /"•;• — i r sand packthreaded 0.020" slot " — '{f: H rH' 2" I-D- pvc Sch- 40 threadedflush joint well __ tr "S: E ^^1 flush joint riser pipescreen .".,". '."_

-sand paa-bottom of borehole

6" minimum bentonite pellet seal

2" I.D. PVC

21

Sch. 40threaded flush joint0.020" slot well

- screen

j V

'*.'• •

=.;•',;

i -r

-

,

—t?~L

'• '•''.

'#.• V1'

;j:.'Sjf&Q

! — Top or sana pac*

Top of screen

— Grade 1Morie sand pack

__— bottom of screen— sand pad

/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / /// / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /////////////

-Top of BedrockVertical Scale 1 inch = 10 feet

FIGURE 5-11

HAVERTOWN PCP SITE

SHALLOW AND INTERMEDIATE DEPTH WELL

o

5-55T03440-6021

inside of the augers reducing the need to clean out theinside of the augers upon reaching the desired welldepth. No soil samples were obtained from either theshallow- or intermediate-depth wells as they wereinstalled close to the deep wells where this informationwas already obtained. The resulting borehole had anapproximate diameter of 10 inches.

Two-inch Schedule 40 threaded flush-joint PVC riser pipeand 0.020-inch slotted well screen was then installed atthe predetermined depth interval.

The annulus between the borehole and the well screen wassand packed with Grade 1 Morie sand to a height ofapproximately two feet above the top of the wellscreen* This was accomplished by retracting the augersas the sand was poured into the augers. Continuousmeasurements by REWAI and Empire ensured the properinstallation of the sand pack.

A bentonite pellet seal at least six inches thick wasplaced immediately above the sand-packed intervals withclean water added, if necessary, to allow the pellets toswell and seal. Above this seal, the annular space wasfilled under pressure with a four percentbentonite/cement slurry to a depth of approximately twofeet below ground surface. Both the bentonite pelletseal and the bentonite/cement slurry were installed asthe augers were retracted, in a fashion similar to thesand pack installation. Continuous inspection duringthese procedures yielded a properly constructed well.

5-56T03440-6021

o A six-inch ID steel protective casing or driveovermanhole cover was then placed into the borehole anda anti-percolation collar was installed in the remainingannulus up to surface, using Class B cement concrete.The collar was mounded at the surface approximatelysix inches for wells with stickup and two inches fordriveovers, to promote drainage away from the casing.The outer edge of the cement collar for wells withstickup has vertical walls to preclude heaving fromfreezing and thawing.

o The six-inch ID steel protector casing on stickup wellsand the two-inch PVC riser pipe on driveover wells wereequipped with locking well caps. The inner two-inchdiameter PVC casing was also equipped with a vent toallow proper pressure equalization during changes inwater level. All locks were keyed alike using #3303Master locks, with one set of keys presented to DER'ssite representative.

5.3.2.1.3 Well Construction Requirements and Decontamina-tion - Care was taken to assure that plumbness and alignment ofthe wells were within the generally accepted tolerance formonitoring wells so as to allow the performance of all testingand sampling.

Groundwater effluent, derived from the well drilling, wasdiverted to steel 55-gallon drums near the well and transferredby suction pump to the on-site storage tank or stored on-site inthe drum storage area as described in the "Contaminated Materials

irec

5-57T03440-6021

Handling Plan" (Section 9.0) of the approved SOP. Coring waterwas recirculated to minimize the volume of drill water generated*

Upon mobilizing to a cluster well station, clean plastic sheetingwas first laid down around the well site; on top of this, freshplywood sheets were placed. The drilling rig was then backedonto the plywood. Additional plastic sheeting was then placedaround portions of the drilling rig in an effort to reducedecontamination procedures. Drilling then proceeded through ahole in the plywood. The use of the plywood sheets and theunderlying plastic sheeting minimized the potential for surfacecontamination at the drilling sites.

Prior to mobilization of the rig to another cluster wellstation, the just completed site was decontaminated by removingand drumming the plastic sheeting on it, after which the drillrig was moved to the decontamination area where it was thoroughlysteamed cleaned with a steam/detergent mix, followed by asteam/high pressure hot water rinse. Drilling tools andmiscellaneous equipment used in the construction of the well weredecontaminated in a similar manner.

Specific sample collection implements such as split-spoons andaugers were also subjected to the high-pressure steam/detergentwash, followed by a high-pressure steam/hot water rinse. Plasticsheeting and plywood boards used during drilling were eitherdrummed or stored on-site in the drum storage area*

5.3.2.2 Supervision, Sample Collection, and Record Keeping -All drilling and well construction activities were supervised byREWAI's on-site project geologists in coordination with DER'sproject officer and REWAI's project director. Lithologic £ 20?

5-58T03440-6021

were collected continuously in the six deep exploratory wellsusing two-inch ID split-spoon samples for the unconsolidateddeposits and a four-inch diameter by five-foot-long core barrelfor sampling the bedrock. Unconsolidated samples were placedinto clean glass soil jars; clearly labeled with the job number,well number, sample depth interval, date, and blow counts; andstored on-site for future reference. Core samples were placedinto appropriate wooden core boxes, clearly labeled with the jobnumber, well number, sample depth intervals, date, recovery, RQD,and stored on-site for future reference. All observations madeby REWAI's project geologists are included on the lithologic andwell construction logs in Appendix 1.

REWAI geologists coordinated the drilling and construction ofeach of the wells and have prepared well logs which accuratelydepict the history of well construction from split-spoon samplingthrough well completion. Each final well log contains at aminimum:

o Project name and REWAI job number, well number, locationof well, total depth of well, time/date of starting,time/date of completion.

o Results of field FID or PID real-time air monitoringvolatile organic (VOA) analyses.

o Visual classification of all continuous split-spoonsamples using a Munsell Rock Color Chart, grain sizeindicator, and the Unified Soil Classification System.

ellsfti

5-59T03440-6021

o Visual classification of all cores recovered from theinitial deep exploration well, including presence offractured and/or weathered bedrock zones.

o Record of the number of blows necessary to drive thesplit-spoon sampler for each of four consecutivesix-inch intervals, during continuous soil sampling.

o Depth of the top of firm or fresh rock and all othercontacts between dissimilar materials and bottom of thehole.

o Depths at which water is encountered and the depth ofwater upon completion of the well.

All drilling operations were performed in accordance with thesite-specific "Health and Safety Plan," Section 7.0, and the"Contaminated Materials Handling Plan," Section 9.0, of theapproved SOP.

5.3.2.3 Ambient Temperature Headspace Analysis - The purposeof the ambient temperature headspace (ATH) was to allow for moreaccurate organic vapor readings in a controlled environmentwithout disparities caused by temperature, moisture, wind, anddrill rig exhaust in the field. The ATH was used in order toobtain a qualitative indication of volatiles in the soils at thesite and to make general relationships from the ATH results andthe water chemistry results. It should be noted that soilsamples were not collected specifically for the purpose ofconducting a headspace analysis and that the results are notexact because of the length of time between sample collection and

5-60T03440-6021

measurement and further because the samples were not collected inseptum-sealed jars.

Soil samples were logged and collected from the deep well of eachnewly installed monitoring well series. Soil samples werecollected continuously at two-foot intervals down to bedrock bymeans of a two-inch split-spoon sampler. A clean split-spoon wasused to sample each interval and a sample from each interval wascollected in a clean 1,000 milliliter (ml) glass soil jar. The©ample jars were partially filled leaving a headspace ofapproximately equal volume in each container. The sample jarswere then placed in a heated storage trailer at a temperature ofapproximately 70°F for a minimum of 24 hours. As the sampleswere warmed to room temperature, volatiles were released from thesoil and collected in the headspace of each sample jar. Allheadspace measurements were made using a flame ionizing organicvapor analyzer (OVA) and are recorded in Table 5-7.

According to the table, well CW-1D at the NWP plant containedelevated soil gas levels just above the groundwater table, whichwas at 8.2 feet below the ground surface on March 17, 1988. Aminor amount of soil gas was detected just above thesaprolite/bedrock interface in the 26- to 28-foot sampleintervals. Well CW-2D, also on the NWP plant, contained elevatedsoil gas levels throughout the unconsolidated units sampled, withslightly more elevated levels found above the water table.

On the PCG property, well CW-3D contained significantly elevatedsoil gas levels at the 12- to 14-foot and 16- to 20-foot sampleintervals. These intervals correspond approximately with thegroundwater table and the saprolite/bedrock interfacerespectively. Well CW-4D has moderately elevairgd ftcrib ££te levels*"*w&rw

5-61T03486-6021

Table 5-7

Ambient Temperature Headspace Analysis Results

TotalVolatileOrganic

Sample Sample Analysis Vapors USCSWell Depth Date Date (ppm) Symbol

CW-1D 0- 2' 2/3/88 2/4/88 28.0 SP2- 4' 2/3/88 2/4/88 92.0 SP4- 6' 2/3/88 2/4/88 100.0 ML6- 8' 2/3/88 2/4/88 17.0 SM8-10' 2/3/88 2/4/88 23.0 SM10-12' 2/3/88 2/4/88 9.0 ML12-14' 2/3/88 2/4/88 7.0 SM14-16' 2/3/88 2/4/88 9.0 CL16-17'2" 2/3/88 2/4/88 3.0 SM18-18'9» 2/3/88 2/4/88 6.5 SM20-22' 2/3/88 2/4/88 6.5 SM22-24' 2/3/88 2/4/88 6.0 SP24-26' 2/3/88 2/4/88 2.5 SM26-28' 2/3/88 2/4/88 10.0 SM28-30' 2/3/88 2/4/88 1.5 SM

CW-2D 0- 1' 1/20/88 1/22/88 0.4 SM1- 2' 1/20/88 1/22/88 32.0 SM

2' 1/20/88 1/22/88 0.2 SM2- 3' 1/20/88 1/22/88 46.0 SP3" 4' 1/20/88 1/22/88 24.0 SM4- 6' 1/20/88 1/22/88 10.0 SM6- 8' 1/20/88 1/22/88 6.4 SM8-10' 1/20/88 1/22/88 51.0 SM10-12' 1/20/88 1/22/88 21.0 SM12-14' 1/20/88 1/22/88 25.5 SP14-15.9' 1/20/88 1/22/88 24.0 SP16-17.5' 1/20/88 1/22/88 4.2 SP18-20.0' 1/21/88 1/22/88 6.0 SM20-22.0' 1/21/88 1/22/88 10.0 SM22-23.75' 1/21/88 1/22/88 11.0 SM24-24.9' 1/21/88 1/22/88 12.0 SM26-28.0' 1/21/88 1/22/88 26.0 SM28-29.5' 1/21/88 1/22/88 22.4 SM30-31*0' 1/21/88 1/22/88 10.0 SM32-32.33' 1/21/88 1/22/88 5.2 SM

flH3002II

5-62Table 5-7 (cont'd)

TotalVolatileOrganic

Sample Sample Analysis Vapors USCSWell Depth Date Date (ppm) Symbol

CW-3D 0- 2' 2/9/88 2/19/88 6.0 SM2- 4' 2/9/88 2/19/88 1.0 SM4- 6' 2/9/88 2/19/88 1.6 SM6- 8' 2/9/99 2/19/88 1.0 SP8-10' 2/9/88 2/19/88 — SP10-12' 2/9/88 2/19/88 1.6 SP12-14' 2/9/88 2/19/88 140 SP14-16' 2/9/88 2/19/88 — SP16-18' 2/9/88 2/19/88 90 SP18-20' 2/9/88 2/19/88 100 SP

CW-4D 0- 2' 2/22/88 2/23/88 — SP2- 4' 2/22/88 2/23/88 3.0 SP4- 6' 2/22/88 2/23/88 — ' SP6- 8' 2/22/88 2/23/88 — SP8-10' 2/22/88 2/23/88 — SP10-12' 2/22/88 2/23/88 — SP12-14' 2/22/88 2/23/88 — SP14-16' 2/22/88 2/23/88 2.0 SP16-18' 2/22/88 2/23/88 10.0 SP18-20' 2/22/88 2/23/88 5.5 SP20-22' 2/22/88 2/23/88 60 SP22-24' 2/22/88 2/23/88 75 SP24-26' 2/22/88 2/23/88 9 SP26-28' 2/22/88 2/23/88 20 SP

CW-5D 0- 2' 2/15/88 2/19/88 1.0 SP2- 4' 2/15/88 2/19/88 — SP4- 6' 2/15/88 2/19/88 — SP6- 8' 2/15/88 2/19/88 — SP8-10' 2/15/88 2/19/88 — SP10-12' 2/15/88 2/19/88 300 SM12-14' 2/15/88 2/19/88 >1000 SM14-16' 2/15/88 2/19/88 150 SM .16-18' 2/15/88 2/19/88 25 SM18-20' 2/15/88 2/19/88 30 SM

CW-6D 1- 3' 2/17/88 2/19/88 >1000 SW3- 5' 2/17/88 2/19/88 120 SW5- 7' 2/17/88 2/19/88 100 SM7- 9' 2/17/88 2/19/88 400 SM9-11' 2/17/88 2/19/88 300 SM11-13' 2/17/88 2/19/88 800 SM13-15' 2/17/88 2/19/88 45 SM15-17' 2/17/88 2/19/88 90 SP

^ .r 17-19' 2/17/88 2/19/88 90 ft R 3 Q §& 1 219-21' 2/17/88 2/19/88 100 - - ' - SM ~

5-63T03440-6021

between 20 and 24 feet below the ground surface, which is locatedin the saprolite. In well CW-5D, a substantial level of soil gaswas detected between the 10-foot and 16-foot sample intervals.These intervals are near the groundwater table surface. WellCW-6D showed the highest soil gas concentrations detected in allof the newly installed deep exploratory wells. Soil gas wassignificantly elevated in every sample interval, with thegreatest concentrations found at the 1- to 3-foot and 11- to13-foot intervals. These intervals approximately correspond tothe surface and the water table, respectively. As the OVAinstrument is sensitive to methane and because no soil sampleswere run for VOA analysis, the positive soil gas responsesindicated cannot be wholly attributed to volatile organiccontaminants even though, no visible organic matter was observedin the soil samples.

5.3.3 Groundwater Sampling Procedures

5.3.3.1 Introduction - Two rounds of groundwater samplinghave been conducted by REWAI at the Havertown PCP site during theRemedial Investigation (RI). The first, or preliminary, samplinground was completed during the week of July 28, 1987, on10 selected existing monitoring wells. This sampling providedthe necessary information to locate and establish proper wellspecifications for the future installation of the cluster wells.The wells sampled during the preliminary round included:NW-1-81, NW-2-81, NH-3-81, NW-6-81, HAV-02, HAV-07, HAV-08,HAV-10, R-2, and R-4.

A second round of groundwater sampling was performed during theweeks of March 7, 1988, and March 14, 1988, and included 10 ofthe existing monitoring wells and the 18 newly construcJbeA * nt J

wo®

5-64T03440-6021

cluster wells. Monitoring wells utilized during the secondgroundwater sampling round consisted of existing wells NW-1-81,NW-2-81, NW-3-81, NW-6-81, HAV-02, HAV-05, HAV-07, HAV-08, R-2,R-4, and the newly constructed monitoring wells CW-1 SID throughCW-6 SID. The existing monitoring well HAV-10 was replaced byHAV-05 during the second groundwater sampling round since theHAV-10 well barely yielded enough water for sampling and becausewell HAV-05 was considered to provide a better groundwatersampling point to intercept any groundwater contamination.

Development of all wells was performed by REWAI prior to samplingin order to remove fine sediments and particles, which may haveaccumulated in the well and sand pack following its constructionand to ensure that water samples obtained were representative ofgroundwater in the vicinity of the well screens.

The following sections provide a brief description of welldevelopment and sampling procedures for both sampling rounds.Both the existing and newly installed monitored wells arediscussed. Greater detail on these topics may be found inChapter 5.0 of the approved Havertown PCP SOP. The results ofthe chemical analyses are presented and discussed in laterportions of this section.

5.3.3.2 Well Development and Sampling of Existing MonitoringWells - Preliminary Round (Round #1) - As a part of welldevelopment and during each groundwater sampling round, fieldmeasurements were taken for the groundwater parameters, includingspecific conductance, pH, and temperature. These parameters wereused to indicate when sufficient well development had occurred.

5-65T03440-6021

Details concerning these measurements are found in Section5.3.3.5.

5.3.3.2.1 Wells NW-2-81, NW-3-81, and NW-6-81 - WellsNW-2-81, NW-3-81, and NW-6-81 are located on NWP property andwere developed and purged using a one-horsepower centrifugal pumpfitted with a dedicated one-inch ID, 100 psi, black polyethylenecoil pipe and check valve assembly. All purged water wasinitially collected in a truck mounted water tank and transferredlater to the on-site storage facility. The water purged fromthese wells was chocolate-brown in color and extremely turbid.Greater than three well volumes were purged from each of thesewells; however, the water still remained turbid. The wells weregenerally low yielding (estimated less than 5 gpm), with theexception of NW-2-81, which had a slightly higher sustainedyield. After sampling by dedicated stainless steel bailer wascompleted, the dedicated coil pipe assemblies were placed backinto the wells for future use.

5.3.3.2.2 Well R-2 - It was necessary to develop and purgethis well with a one-horsepower submersible pump and dedicatedcoil pipe, as the standing water column was too far below theground surface for the centrifugal pump to lift. The wellmaintained a sufficient yield; however, even after developing andpurging approximately seven well volumes, the water was stillturbid and colored a light brown. Samples for this well werecollected from the pumped discharge. Following sampling, theentire pump assembly was removed from the well, the coil pipe andelectric wire were cut up and drummed, and the submersible pumpwas cleaned to the extent possible and stored on-site.

L.

5-66T03440-6021

Approximately two feet of free-floating oil was measured inwell R-2, using a sonic interface probe.

5.3.3.2.3 Well R-4 - The standing water column in well R-4was also too far below ground surface for a centrifugal pump tobe used. As a result, the well was purged by hand using adedicated one-inch coil pipe and check valve assembly, as theavailable submersible pump could not be decontaminated. A traceof free-floating product was indicated by the sonic probe;however, there was no evidence of product in the sampling bailerafter at least three well volumes were removed. After samplingby a dedicated stainless steel bailer, the coil pipe assembly wasreinserted and left in the well for future use.

5.3.3.2.4 Wells HAV-02, HAV-07, HAV-08, HAV-10, andNW-1-81 - Due to low well yields (estimated less than 1 gpm) andpoor well construction which allowed fine sand and silt to enterthe well, centrifugal pumps could not be used in these wells.Therefore, the wells were developed and purged using clean,dedicated stainless steel bailers fitted with clean, dedicatednylon rope. Approximately one foot of free-floating oil wasfound in well HAV-02, while HAV-07, HAV-08, HAV-10 and NW-1-81contained no free-floating product. Purge water from all of thewells had low turbidity and was essentially colorless. Threewell volumes were removed prior to sampling with a new dedicatedstainless steel bailer. The oil in well HAV-02 was bailed offand placed into the on-site waste storage tanks before this wellwas sampled.

5.3.3.3 Well Purging and Sampling of Existing Monitoring Wells(Round #2) - After reviewing the sampling methods and chemical

aresults from the preliminary groundwater sampling of A5

o

5-67T03440-6021

monitoring wells, it was decided that a more consistent purgingand sampling system was required. In addition, existingmonitoring well HAV-10 was dropped from this sampling round andreplaced with HAV-05 since it was believed that HAV-05 provided amore representative groundwater sample than HAV-l 0, which wasextremely low yielding during the preliminary sampling round.

To provide a more consistent purging and sampling system for theexisting wells during sampling round #2, all wells were purgedand sampled using a peristaltic pump and dedicated polyflo andsilicon tubing assemblies. All tubing was replaced with newtubing between wells. Used tubing was then placed into sealedand labeled 55-gallon steel drums and stored at NWP when samplingwas completed.

A minimum of three well volumes was removed from each wellduring purging to ensure that the water within the well wasrepresentative of the surrounding aquifer. The purged water wascollected in a truck-mounted 450-gallon tank prior to beingtransferred into a 2,500-gallon bulk storage tank on-site.Groundwater parameters consisting of specific conductance, pH,and temperature were obtained during well purging and sampling.Details concerning these measurements are included inSection 5.3.3.5.

5.3.3.4 Well Development and Sampling of Newly InstalledMonitoring Wells - The 18 monitoring wells that were installed byREWAI in January and February of 1988 were all equipped withdedicated Well Wizard pumps. These are bladder pumps which areoperated by compressed air, which is able to be varied to controlthe flow rate of the pump according to the yield of the well.

ft p n A L i *?Well Wizard pumps were chosen for these«<fell/aLJff$iy various

5-68T03440-6021

reasons—namely, the pumps can fit into a two-inch well casing;water can be pumped from wells of varying depths; the pumps canbe dedicated to wells (which eliminates the chances ofcross-contamination); and the pump controller is easily mobilizedfrom one well to another.

The Well Wizard pumps were used for both development andsampling. Development and sampling followed the same criteriaand parameters as used for the existing wells which are outlinedin Section 5.3.3. The new monitoring wells responded positivelyto development with Well Wizards, by yielding water with goodclarity and consistent parameters. The clarity and consistencyof the water obtained and the use of dedicated pumps ensured thequality of the samples and the validity of the chemical results.

5.3.3.5 Field Parameters - Field measurements of groundwaterparameters were obtained during both well development and wellsampling for each sampling round. These parameters includedspecific conductance, pH, and temperature. Parameters were takenafter a minimum of three well volumes was purged from the wellor after the purge water had sufficiently cleared. Samples werecollected in a clean, quart-size mason jar after the jar had beenrinsed three times with the water to be sampled.

Specific conductance was measured with a YSI Model 33 SCT metercalibrated against a standard solution at 25°C. Because thismeter does not correct the specific conductance measured at thefield water temperature to its equivalent at 25°C, an immersionthermometer was used to obtain the groundwater temperature sothat the specific conductance readings could be corrected totheir equivalent temperatures at 25°C. A Beckman pH meter with a

5-69T03440-6021

two-buffer (4.0 and 7.0) calibration was used to measure the pHof the groundwater.

Field parameters were measured at five-minute intervals until thespecific conductance values expressed less than a five percentvariance and pH varied less than 0.1 vaits for three consecutivereadings.

Well development and well purging were considered to be completedwhen this criteria was met. The monitoring wells were then readyfor sampling. In some cases, three well volumes could not bepurged from a well because of low yield. In this situation, thewell was evacuated twice and allowed to recover to at least75 percent of its original water level without allowing more than24 hours to pass before obtaining samples.

All purged water was considered contaminated and was collectedand transferred to a 2,500-gallon bulk storage tank on-site.

5.3*3.6 Chemical Analysis

5.3.3.6.1 HSL Plus Oil and Grease - REWAI's laboratorysubcontractor, CompuChem Laboratories (CompuChem), an EPA-certified laboratory located in Research Triangle Park, NorthCarolina, provided the analytical services for the HSL plus oiland grease analyses for both groundwater sampling rounds atHavertown.

5-70T03440-6021

Glassware and preservatives for sampling were provided byCompuChem in "sample saver" shuttles. Table 5-8 indicates thetype of analysis, type and quantity of glassware, type ofpreservative required (if any), and special preparation necessaryfor each sample type. After acquisition of samples, theappropriate preservation was performed. All samples were thenpackaged with cold packs in CompuChem shuttles and shipped with achain-of-custody via Federal Express Priority one overnightdelivery to CompuChem.

Following analysis and QA/QC by CompuChem, data was transferredto REWAI by Federal Express and via computer. Because of thevoluminous nature of the data and the associated QA/QC, theoriginal data reports for both sampling rounds were sent to DERfor filing and storage. Appendix 2 summarizes the resultsobtained from both sampling rounds.

5.3.3.6.2 Dioxin and Dibenzofuran - The analysis for dioxinand dibenzofuran during the preliminary sampling round wasperformed by the EPA, under the contract laboratory program(CLP), by California Analytical Laboratory (CAL) of WestSacramento, California. The groundwater samples analyzed by CALwere part of Case #3151C, which also included the surface watersamples from Naylors Run. Copies of the data results wereobtained by REWAI through DER. A tabulation of thedioxin/dibenzofuran results of the preliminary sampling round isincluded in Appendix 2.

The dioxin and dibenzofuran analysis for sampling round #2 wasperformed for REWAI by ChemWest of Sacramento, California.

1 AR30I

PU

<0•HOa)a

O•H

MH -HCM WO >.

I

5-71

in M^ h torH • Q) C1C O -P -H-H rH g> J3-H -H

-P *W rHC -H (I)-H £ Q) ^

. a a<u ^ roO 0) M 0)CU iH f=W -HO

rH-O(0 fH CI0) 0) O.c uo <a-H55 tt S W

•H

^ W ton o o cO CO 1C 10

Cffi

O ( O M l OM 1 3 M 4 J G )O O < D 4 J ^ ^

(0

(0a) •c • *d *CJ

W ^ f M * ^ C M ^ r H ^ * Ctt Q) i - i V r H r H V iH A r-1 r-f <Do o o o o o

C U O f f i O O f f i O f f i O O - H•H o ao o ftu a o u -o

O-H

n H i - i w r » T 3Q).a-P

co c o aI -H Q)lO rH M r-tp < ( D 4 J0) g ,0 4->»H ra g oJ3 w 3 CQ* . fe^ ^

0} M.p ._ . oRJ . M M h Vl ^1 • <Hs M ( 0 ( 0 « 5 ( 0 r tT( (0 *r> -m •?-* i-» •!-» *O£ rH -o 0)S ( 0 W W M W W I DO - H O W W W M W DJ - t > - H i c « J ( C i O R J

4J rH rH rH rH i-H Mw w c n t r t n O ^ t P * 0M m >( d r H ^ ^ ^ ^ V jrH a QJ O <U <D QJ D1^ ^ • S ' S ' S ' 3 3t-H g 10 (0 (0 (0 (0e ' *-f

O rH rH rH rH i-H O0 0 4 J^ r i n H H H H H - H

rHIn

(Q Uo m a) ca-H rH iH (0C 1C XI W H*o -P (C M (Q tr»

O Cd < ( 0 O\ M I H M0 ) ' 3 0)

(0-H.4J (fl O *« -H -H -H C rHo ( e e w ' c o c . p x a > , f t

• * r H O W " H W r H ( O W O 4 a 0 ) ^C O O M - H O f l - H > i a ) - H - H C 1 0O _ > < D r t l f f l O O ^ Q Q O W

5-72T03440-6021

In order to maintain consistency between sampling rounds,ChemWest utilized the same analytical procedures and requirementsas specified by EFA in their original Special Analytical Services(SAS) Regional Request performed by CAL during the preliminary(round fl) sampling round. A copy of the SAS request fordioxin/dibenzofuran analysis is included in Appendix 3.

5.3.4 Hydrogeologic Testing

5.3.4.1 Purpose - Measurement of groundwater levels in as manywells as possible on two separate occasions and slug testing ofall newly installed monitoring wells were conducted at theHavertown PCP site for the purpose of:

o Determination of the hydraulic properties of theunconsolidated and bedrock materials.

o Assessment of the interrelationship of theunconsolidated and bedrock aquifers*

o Determination of the direction and rate of groundwaterflow at the site.

5.3.4.2 Groundwater Level Monitoring - During the course offieldwork at the Havertown PCP site, static water levelmeasurements were made in all existing monitoring wells whichcould be relocated and in all of the newly installed monitoringwells. These wells include the SMC Martin wells, theJames Humphreville wells, and the newly installed REWAI wells.All water levels were measured on the same day and in as short atime as possible to allow comparison of all wells. Two

o

5-73T03440-6021

rounds of water levels were measured and are included here onTable 5-9.

Groundwater levels were measured by a REWAI field crew onMarch 17, 1988, and April 11, 1988. Measurements were made to asurveyed reference point (top of casing) at each well using anelectric water level indicator or a sonic interface probe. Thewater level instruments were decontaminated between wells byrinsing several times with distilled water. The well number,date and time measured, depth to water, depth to fluid (oil), andany corresponding notes are included in the field notes. Waterlevel elevations are referenced to mean sea level (msl) through arecent survey by a registered Pennsylvania surveyor, undercontract to REWAI. _

5.3.4.3 Acfuifer Testing

5*3.4.3.1 Slug Tests - In-situ hydraulic conductivity(permeability) of the saturated unconsolidated materials andbedrock were determined by means of the rising-head andfalling-head conductivity or "slug test" method. A data loggerrecorder coupled with a pressure transducer was utilized tocontinuously record changes in water levels in response to slugimmersion and withdrawal. A minimum of two tests in eachdirection was performed.

Slug tests were conducted on the 18 newly installed deep,intermediate, and shallow monitoring wells. Each run of the slugtest lasted between three and four minutes. The data logger wastypically set to record changes in head at the rate of 5 readingsper second for the first 60 seconds and at 1 reading per5 seconds thereafter. A computer program #@i&3Debora B*

wiroeilniti S@@©©D@I

T03647 5-74

Table 5-9

Static Water Level Elevations

Monitoring PVC Casing Ground Surface Static Water Level Elevation (ft MSL)Well Elevation (ft) Elevation (ft> March 17, 1988 April 11. 1988

CW-1D 308.80 307.2 299.03 299.59

CW-1I 308.82 307.3 299.05 299.23

CW-1S 309.39 307.4 299.48 300.18

CW-2D 307.81 305.8 294.00 294.10

CW-2I 307.59 305.9 293.95 294.15

CW-2S 307.35 305.9 294.04 294.16

CW-30 Driveover 305.13 292.78 292.83

CW-3I Driveover 305.06 292.81 NA

CW-3S Driveover 304.99 292.70 292.76

CH-4D Driveover 305.66 292.74 292.80

CW-4J Driveover 305.77 292.59 292.69

CW-4S Driveover 305.90 292.55 292.63

CW-5D 304.65 302.9 292.31 292.59

CW-5I 304.43 303.0 292.41 292.37

CW-5S 304.61 303.3 292.58 292.49

CW-6D Driveover 301.34 286.20 286.24

CW-6I Driveover 301.20 284.83 285.87

CW-6S Driveover 301.10 285.46 285.56

HAV-02 307.35 307.0 291.95/292.85 292.02/292.98

HAV-05 294.66 294.3 291.08 291.30

HAV-07 283.84 283.0 282.09 282.28

HAV-08 286.75 286.1 283.09 283.41

HAV-10 299.71 299.0 292.11 292.38

R-2 314.24 312.70 289.72/293.82 289.95/293.89

R-4 315.60 316.0 295.81 295.46

NW-1 307.48 307.1 294.63 295.06

NW-2 306.45 306.6 294.43 294.45

«W-3 307.61 307.6 299.49 300.07

NW-6 306.42 306.3 296.53 296.70

"NOTE: 291:95/292.85 * Water Elevation/Oil Elevation In Well

oe

AR3GQ22**

5-75T034£0-6021

Thompson (Groundwater March-April 1987, pp. 212-218) and adaptedfor use on REWAI's in-house computers was used to calculate andnormalize drawdowns by dividing each by the initial (maximum)drawdown. A graph of the normalized drawdowns versus time wasmade on semilogarithmic paper with the drawdowns plotted on thelogarithmic axis and time plotted on the arithmetic axis. A"best fit" line was then statistically interpreted from theanalyst's chosen section of the graph by the least-squaresmethod. The appropriate equation to solve for hydraulicconductivity was then selected based upon the well construction,and values for the hydraulic conductivity and regressioncoefficients were calculated. Data obtained from the slug testsand the results of the hydraulic conductivity calculations areincluded in Appendix 4.

5.3.4.3.2 Packer Tests - Pressure permeability (packer)tests were run during drilling to determine the permeability ofthe bedrock zone being tested as an aid to establish wellconstruction. As discussed in Section 5.3.2.1.1, a 10-footinterval was cored into bedrock and the drilling tools removed,an inflatable packer was then seated above the bottom of thehole, and water (from the Philadelphia Suburban Water Company)under pressure was pumped into the test section. Readings ofwater volume (gallons) were recorded every minute for fiveconsecutive minutes for each of at least three pressure settings.The data and the results of the calculations are included inAppendix 4.

The resulting packer test data were reduced to a correspondinghydraulic conductivity value using the pressure permeability testreduction method presented in the Ground Water Manual, U. S.

AR300225

wirBsiIhifi s®i©(goife

5-76T03440-6021

Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, 1985,pp. 249-264.

5.3.4.3.3 Summary of Findings - A direct comparison of theresults obtained from the two aquifer test methods reveals a poorcorrelation between the bedrock hydraulic conductivitiescalculated by the slug test and packer test methods. This is notunexpected and the comparison should be avoided as the twomethods are utilized for different purposes and because ofinherent differences associated with each test method. The slugtests were performed to provide an estimate of the hydraulicconductivity of the aquifer materials in the vicinity of thesaturated screened intervals. The packer tests, however, wereused to provide a field estimate of the bedrock aquifer'shydraulic conductivity at the time of drilling. The packerpermeability estimates allowed REWAI geologists to betterdetermine the well construction specifications as each deepexploratory well was drilled. Section 5.3*4.4.3 discusses thehydraulic conductivity of saturated unconsolidated and bedrockmaterials in greater detail.

5.3.4.4 Groundwater Hydrology

5.3.4.4.1 Water Table Contour Map - Water level and oilthickness were measured at the Havertown PCP site on March 17,1988, and again on April 11, 1988. Because of the presence ofoil in some of the wells, a sample of the oil was collected fromwell R-2 on April 11, 1988, and analyzed by Wright Lab Services,Inc. (WLSI) of Middletown, Pennsylvania, for specific gravity.As shown in Appendix 2, WLSI reports that the specific gravityfor the oil collected from well R-2 was 0.897. Using thisspecific gravity and the thickness of oil found in eacwSaltf,Q2r26

5-77T03440-6021

equivalent height'of water was calculated for each well with oilin it. This equivalent height of water was then subtracted fromthe water/air interface elevation to arrive at the hydraulic headof the water table for each respective well. The followingformula was used to calculate the hydraulic head of the watertable in monitoring wells which contained measurable amounts ofoil in them:

Hydraulic Head « E - [f - (f * 0.897)]

Where:

E «= oil/air interface elevation (feet)f *= oil thickness (feet)

0.897 = specific gravity of the oil

(Adapted from discussion of hydraulic head in Freeze and Cherry,1979, Chapter 2.2.)

The hydraulic heads for the water table were then plotted next totheir respective well location and contoured to produce watertable contour maps for each measurement date. An interpretationof each water table contour map yielded the determination that nosignificant differences existed between the two measurementdates; therefore, only one water table contour map,March 17, 1988, is included here as Plate 4. An inspection ofthis map indicates that the groundwater has a higher horizontalhydraulic gradient under the NWP and Rittenhouse Circle areas(0.021 and 0.030 respectively), while a lower hydraulic gradientexists under the Swiss Farm Market and the PCG building (0.007).This change in gradient is probably expressed as a change inpermeability of subsurface materials. It folLpw^ fcl>en hat the

5-78T03440-6021

aquifer is heterogeneous and that anisotropic (preferred flowdirection) conditions exist in the subsurface. At this time, itis not known how this change in hydraulic gradient affects themigration of the subsurface oil plume. More information isnecessary to properly address this question.

The flow of groundwater is apparently southeast to east-southeastacross the study area, as indicated by the flow arrows.

5.3.4*4.2 Vertical Groundwater Gradient - An analysis ofthe water level elevations in the newly installed cluster wellswas performed to determine if a vertical gradient exists in theflow of groundwater at the site. Using the March 17, 1988, waterlevel elevation data, the vertical gradients for each clusterwell series were calculated by dividing the change in water levelelevations by the vertical separation distance between therespective sand-packed intervals * Appendix 5 provides thecalculation details.

Table 5-10 lists the vertical gradients calculated for eachcluster well series. Overall, the vertical gradients found atthe site were small, ranging from 0.001 to 0.028. Comparing thevertical gradient to the average horizontal gradient (0.019)calculated in Section 5.3.4.4.1, the ability of the verticalpotential to modify groundwater flow can be considerable at somelocations, namely wells CW-l, CW-5, and CW-6.

5.3.4.4.3 Hydraulic Conductivity - As discussed in Section5.3.4.3.1., slug tests were conducted in the newly installedmonitoring wells to provide an estimate of the permeability ofthe saturated unconsolidated and bedrock materials.

AR300228

5-79

T03485-6021

Table 5-10

Vertical Gradients and Direction of Flow

Respective VerticalFrom Well/ Water Levels Separation Vertical Directionto Well (ft) (ft) Gradient of Flow

CW-1S/CW-1D 299.48/299.03 34 0.013 Downward

CW-2S/CW-2D 299.04/299.00 40 0.001 Downward

CW-3S/CW-3D 292.70/292.78 28 -0.003 'Upward

CW-4S/CW-4D 292.59/292.74 30 -0.005 Upward

CW-5S/CW-5D 292.58/292.31 28 0.01 Downward

CW-6S/CW-6D 285*46/286.20 26 -0.028 Upward

AR3Q0229

5-80T03440-6021

Tables 5-11A and B provide a list of the average hydraulicconductivities calculated from all of the slug tests in each ofthe wells for the saturated unconsolidated and bedrock wells. OnTable 5-11A, it is shown that the unconsolidated aquifer has ahydraulic conductivity range from 1 gpd/ft2 to 103 gpd/ft2,while on Table 5-11B, the bedrock aquifer ranges between 6gpd/ft2 and 182 gpd/ft2. Although the permeability ranges aresimilar, the three-dimensional distribution of the hydraulicconductivity data are of greater importance.

As previously shown on the water table contour map, Plate 4, thegeneral flow of groundwater is towards the east, or in aneast-southeast direction. However, this description refers onlyto the horizontal plane. To gain a better understanding ofgroundwater flow dynamics and direction, the vertical componentmust also be considered. Although the magnitude of variation ofgroundwater vertical gradients overall was not shown to be large(Section 5.3.4.4.2), it is believed that groundwater flowdirections are significantly modified by these variations invertical gradient. The variations in the vertical gradient ofgroundwater are believed to be the result of changes in thepermeability (hydraulic conductivity) of aquifer materials. Theeffect that the variation of hydraulic conductivity has on thegroundwater contaminant flow will be addressed in Section 5.3.6,Affected Area.

To obtain a better perspective of the spatial variance ofpermeability of the aquifer materials, the hydraulic conductivityvalues from Table 5-11 have been plotted next to theirrespective wells on the geologic fence diagram, Plate 3. Fromthe data presented on the fence diagram, it appears that a trendexists in the permeability of the unconsolidated a

irn@o wires]

5-81T03598-6021

Table 5-11A

Saturated Unconsolidated Materials Slug Test ResultsAverage Calculated Hydraulic Conductivities

Hydraulic ConductivityMonitoring Well ______(gpd/ft2)_____

CW-1S 48

CW-1I 103

CW-2S *

CW-2I 72

CW-3S 8

CW-3I 27

CW-4S 8

CW-5S *

CW-6S 1

* Test results did not meet analysis validity requirement ofinstantaneous water level change.

AR3Q023

5-82T03598-6021

Table 5-11B

Bedrock Slug Test ResultsAverage Calculated Hydraulic Conductivities

Hydraulic ConductivityMonitoring Well (gpd/ft2)_____

CW-1D 56

CW-2D 70

CW-3D 9

CW-4I 6

CW-4D 139

CW-5I *

CW-5D 182

CW-6I 7

CW-6D 6

* Test results did not meet analysis validity requirement ofinstantaneous water level change.

AR300232

DuTK

5-83T03440-6021

aquifer materials. Beneath NWP, the saturated unconsolidatedmaterials tend to have a moderate to moderately high hydraulicconductivity (48 - 103 gpd/ft2), while under PCG the saturatedunconsolidated aquifer materials become less permeable, withhydraulic conductivities being moderately low (1*4 - 27 gpd/ft2).This trend is different in the bedrock aquifer, where thematerials under NWP and under the southern portion of PCGproperty are of moderately high to high permeability(56 - 182 gpd/ft2), while along the northern portion of PCGproperty, the bedrock hydraulic conductivity becomes moderatelylow (6-9 gpd/ft2). From this information, along with anunderstanding of the vertical gradients at the site, it appearsthat a significant change in hydraulic conductivity exists inthe subsurface between NWP and PCG.

Accordingly, the groundwater flow is believed to be modified bythese characteristics, such that the groundwater flows slightlydownward in the unconsolidated materials under NWP and into thebedrock in the vicinity of Eagle Road. From there, thegroundwater in the bedrock is believed to continue its slightlydownward flow until reaching an area under PCG property, where itbegins to rise. This pattern is shown on the geologic crosssection, Plate 2, by the equipotential lines and generalizedgroundwater flow lines*

The equipotential lines represent lines of equal hydraulic headpotential, in feet above mean sea level. These were establishedby placing the hydraulic head potential at each of the clusterwells near the approximate center of the saturated well screeninterval in each well. Using the cluster wells in this mannerenabled a determination of the groundwater flow in -the verticaldimension to be made by contouring between the hydraulic head

" " AH300233

OTK

5-84T0344C-6021

values. The generalized groundwater flow directions were thenestimated by inferring lines perpendicular to the equipotentiallines from areas of higher hydraulic head toward areas of lowerhydraulic head. The generalized groundwater flow directions werethen adjusted as discussed in Section 5.1 of Freeze and Cherry(1979) for refraction caused by flow through formations ofdiffering hydraulic conductivity as shown previously on Plate 2.

5.3.4.4.4 Calculation of Groundwater Velocity - Based uponthe water table contour map, Plate 4, and the results of aquifertests, the average groundwater velocity can be calculated. Validslug test results from the newly installed monitoring wells wereused to estimate hydraulic conductivity and to calculate theaverage groundwater velocity, as these wells are mostrepresentative of the properties of the saprolite water-bearingzone in the study area.

Like many geological variables, the hydraulic conductivity datado not follow a normal distribution; rather, they exhibit apronouncely skewed distribution. Therefore, to counter theeffects that the relatively few number of large values ofhydraulic conductivity would have on the mean, the geometric meanof the data was employed to normalize the values.

Calculating the geometric mean for the valid slug test hydraulicconductivity (K) values results in a value of 22 gpd/ft2. Thisvalue is converted to ft/day by dividing by 7.48 yielding2.94 ft/day as the geometric mean of hydraulic conductivity.Horizontal hydraulic gradients (I) were calculated using thewater table contour map dated March 17, 1988 (Plate 4) bydividing the change in hydraulic head by the effective distance(dh/L or 0.019). This date was chosen as both static

5-85T03440-6021

measurement dates were taken during the same season. Although.field measurements of porosity (n) were not performed, anestimate of 21 percent for the fine sand (saprolite) has beendetermined from representative values of effective porosity,included here as Table 5-12, and the general textural propertiesof the unconsolidated deposits examined during the drillingprogram.

The average groundwater velocity may then be calculated byinserting the aforementioned components into the followingformula:

Where:

V » estimated average groundwater flow velocity, ft/dayK = geometric mean of hydraulic conductivity, ft/dayI « average hydraulic gradient, dimensionlessHe «• assumed effective porosity value (%)

Solving the equation yields an average groundwater velocity (V)of 0.27 ft/ day. It is important to point out that this velocityis an estimated average velocity and is representative only for anonreactive solute under ideal conditions. This value wouldnot be applicable to the movement of the oil fraction whichdiffers from water in its density and viscosity, confining it tothe water table surface. However, the value is helpful inproviding an indication as to the rate of movement of thecontaminants dissolved in groundwater.

AR300235

WDTDSI

T03542-6021 5~86

Table 5-12

Representative Values of Porosity(After Morris and Johnson, 1967, reference of total porosity,and PettyJohn et al, 1982, estimate of effective porosity)

Total EffectivePorosity Porosity

Material Percent Percent

Gravel, coarse 28* 22

Gravel, medium 32* 23

Gravel, fine 34* 25

Sand, coarse 39 27

Sand, medium 39 26

Sand, fine 43 21

Silt 46 8

* Values are for repacked samples; all others areundisturbed.

AR3GQ236

5-87T03440-6021

5.3.4.4.5 Calculation of Groundwater Discharge - In orderto determine the approximate quantity of groundwater leaving thepresent area of investigation, a calculation based upon Darcy'sLaw was performed which estimates the discharge, in gallons perSay (gpd), of groundwater from a given cross-sectional area ofthe aquifer. The location chosen for the trace of the cross-sectional area began at the sanitary sewer manhole situatedapproximately 145 feet east of the series CW-3 monitoring wells(refer to base maps, Plate 1) and extends southeastward roughly325 feet to monitoring well HAV-06. This location providesrepresentative estimates of groundwater exiting the present studyarea perpendicular to the groundwater flow direction.

Q - KIA (Darcy's Law)

Where:

Q = The discharge through the cross-sectional area of theaquifer per unit time and expressed as ft/day.

K » The hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer materialsexpressed as ft/day.

I = The change in hydraulic head in the aquifer across thesite, in this case, parallel to groundwater flow. Thisis known as the hydraulic gradient and is expresseddimensionless.

A = The cross-sectional area of the site through which thegroundwater is flowing. The orientation was establishedperpendicular to groundwater flow. The length of thecross-sectional area has been estimated at 325 feet,

AR300237

5-88T03440-6021

while based upon chemical data and allowing some marginof error, a saturated thickness of 100 feet has been usedin the calculation.

The equation assumes:

o The aquifer materials are homogeneous and isotropic.

o The viscosity is constant and equals that of water.

o The groundwater is flowing at very slow velocities so asto avoid non-laminar flow conditions.

Inserting the results of calculations from previous sections, theequation becomes:

Q = (2.94 ft/day)(0.019)(325 ft * 100 ft),Q = 1815 ft3/day, orQ = 13,580 gpd

Therefore, the anticipated volume of groundwater estimated topass through the given cross-section of the aquifer would beapproximately 13,600 gpd. It is important to realize that thisvalue is based upon assumptions which may be questionable or eveninvalid; thus, discretion should be used when utilizing thiscalculated value.

5.3.5 Groundwater Sampling Results

Groundwater samples from both sampling rounds were analyzed forthe complete Hazardous Substance List, cyanide, oil and grease,and dioxin/dibenzofuran parameters. The

5-89T03440-6021

performed in accordance with the contract required QA/QCprocedures delineated in the SOP for the Havertown PCP site*Sampling procedures have been previously addressed inSection 5.3.3, "Groundwater Sampling Procedures," which alsostates that the original data and QA/QC have been transferred toDER for filing and storage owing to the voluminous nature of thedata. Chemical result spread sheets have been provided as tablesand in Appendix 2 of this report to summarize the results andease the readers review of data.

5.3.5.1 Round #1 Preliminary Sampling Round

5.3.5.1.1 Metals - Groundwater samples from 10 selectedexisting monitoring wells were analyzed for dissolved metals.Significant quantities of iron, manganese, magnesium, calcium,sodium and potassium were present in the water. Heavy metals,including arsenic, chromium, copper, cobalt, and zinc, were alsoidentified in some of the wells sampled. Arsenic was found inthree groundwater samples NW-6-81, R-2, and R-2 Dup, atconcentrations of 7.9, 4.1, and 7.4 ug/1 respectively. Chromiumwas detected at a concentration of 161 ug/1 at only one location,NW-3-81. Zinc was found at concentrations ranging from 18 ug/1at HAV-07 to 581 ug/1 at HAV-08. Cobalt ranged from 13 ug/1 atR-4 to 539 ug/1 at NW-2-81. Copper was detected at 2.9 ug/1 atNW-1-81 and 14 ug/1 in R-2 Dup. Table 5-13 contains the resultsof Round #1 metals analysis.

5.3.5.1.2 Volatile Organic Aromatics - Groundwater analysisfor VOAs was completed on water samples from the 10 selectedexisting monitoring wells. The results of this analysis, shown

AR300239

m

*

5-90

3 a s li a* is We 'i s a §" a" s § £» 3* a

- •.

"""*"**' "fe " "Si "** "e> i > i "St "" "Si^i'6»^t^>^i^i^i^i"

w o tft — •

' ' '

iS£ =8!

i » » "» i 's a a S as --s

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . ! = _" § I^-s ^ i i g l l ^ ^ i s - ^ - ' ^ g jQf l g l * g s 5 ! j K ? j g ? : « •B « S3 "" €§)ij

cj _ — — __ — — _—,—. — _--_ — ___._--_-- — — €®S _ sas'sas'sasj'ssa'aa' » =" a a a 3 s a g3•5 r*-e^ — ^^tt*s<^wi/»»-^uj ^ uj 'X w> • w> _ . en • • »r»§ CM K e» *^ — _Jo ?vj *vt r*~ *~ c**"^X^X^u^"^^^~JX!Sr^'SS'^^KSSSS *• '

"*"" " " " * ' 0 *

<s> m o «—3 £

* ;:

— - _i i ••— 3

5-91

*"l^t'^ei2!i'""ts!"^£5§«EHe^^ — SSSS"""

s- ee C; *—

1 ™ *

nio

5-92T03440-6021

on Table 5-14, indicate the presence of ten (10) chemicalsusually associated with solvent and gasoline/fuel oilcontamination, namely benzene; 1,2-dichloroethane; 1,2-dichloro-propane? ethylbenzene; toluene; trans-l,2-dichloroethene; 1,1,1-trichloroethane; trichloroethene; vinyl chloride; and xylene. Inaddition, two contaminants, methylene chloride and acetone, werealso found; however, these are common laboratory contaminants.Accordingly, it is helpful to consider the possibility that theformer service station at Young's Produce, the automotive repairshops west of the site, and/or the operations of NWP may havecontributed to this contamination in addition to the PCP-ladenfuel oil plume.

To examine the areal distribution of these chemicals, a totalvalue for the VOA concentration was calculated for each well bysumming the results of VOAs identified above the detectionlimits. The total VOA results ranged from 1.3 to 3,227 ug/1.The purpose for examining the total VOA concentrations is that itallows for easy characterization of the general VOA distributionon the site, without the need to review individual species.Figure 5-12 presents the total VOAs, in ug/1, for the groundwatersamples taken during the preliminary sampling round.

The map contains a number of important features. First, asignificantly elevated level of total VOAs was found to bepresent in the groundwater between NWP and PCG, with respect tothe other wells sampled. Because groundwater flowseast-southeast across the site, the contamination present in thewells sampled along the western portion of the site may indicateadditional contaminant sources other than the fuel oil. On theeastern portion of the study area, the total VOAs are lower;however, it is apparent that the contamination extends

S

5-93

i ""* . *"" "* ' " Si i "Si > ""* fe " i^ira^i's>^>^aa^a a ^ a a a a a a a a ^ a ^ a a a a a a

•3 ^i^imiiiii'&simiH'msn^ii^tm ®®01 r-t*ntntf**n&&*ntntn n->tf*tf*tr>&&*+mu-t*r> «n«n «^«nwi^^m^e^tn fl*.(« — — — — —__ — .» ^jj

-

^H -«-t ^»trtu^i«trtesirtu^tr»i«»«'^*«irt^^-^ kntn*ntntn«n*-*emw^^^t^^e^<^IJJ — — — — — — _ — — _irj td __

^*> "

•

31 I

i|

—

5-94

(m

***** -mfl5l*J>

— I!ffia»fiBS*»§mSaSSS«>ffiSSr^ aeBat^SEraBaa. oB JBo *~J

t-i0)4J

*s

..,

i » — •» — u

5-95

QO|CM!

f-11!ILL)

CO

MT~IID

UJCC p I

OCC

u.1

oz5Oo a:

Z

< H ft.-I < IOScc>• OHJ

K

It N;nr o1 J-

CMO«eCD

QZUJUJ-J

OTZ

oo

UJCD co

i Sx Stil CO

5-96T03440-6021

existing monitoring well network (well HAV-07). As shown onFigure 5-12, the area around the PCG property lacked monitoringpoints to further define the extent of contamination. For thisreason, four of the six cluster well sites were drilled on thePCG property so as to better establish the extent of groundwatercontamination.

For two reasons, the data presented on the total VOA map were notcontoured. First, it is believed that the total VOA valuespresented on the map may vary significantly as a result of thevariety of sampling methods employed during the preliminary(Round #1) groundwater sampling round. Second, because geologyin the vicinity of some of the existing wells is either uncertainor unknown, it is unclear whether or not the groundwater samplesobtained were composite water-bearing zone samples or not.Therefore, because either or both of these points would alter anydelineation of a contaminant plume, an interpretation is made inSection 2.3.5.2 using Hound #2 groundwater chemistry data fromboth the existing and new monitoring wells.

5.3.5.1.3 Base Keutrals/Acid Extractables - Groundwatersamples from the 10 selected existing monitoring wells wereanalyzed for base neutral and acid extractable (BNA) compounds.The results of this analysis, shown in Table 5-15, indicatesubstantial groundwater contamination by BNA compounds. The mostelevated BNA compounds identified in these samples are,naphthalene, phenanthrene, 2-methylnaphthalene, and pentachloro-phenol .

s 5$ «^ fl>

5-97

g»

S* i

ll

•St>

K :: s,——— II «NI (

•o

lt »

O — f-. »—

* ?!! u; UJ^SSS^i*i^*tjj it u £ * uJ u* " LJ *•"~ * si tf Hi*» if aE 5t Sc »— *** i £ •— w x MUUU^

EK if w ^l-tji*i2*r^s£^^** S * * ••*'« « =s-»^fflt^~^-^>-^ff SyJ.t"*-J&'

g §

¥

t-j * at at «— •—S>-Eu SWSkfSWXiS** ', ijj S *wz^-ffisSs^si K —J »i< K 5 — S ae _j •! ,— __ ,_. _

ILfcli-lAl^*-——!_-——J^——|Si-l^l^*S ^i *E 3: BE 3£ . ^ O^zSE»M%Ljj«

««oat&>*ii<_iujfflLSJ«acae*_.(_»OQ — -J£;3>»: SW: i -, _,._. . ._.• *sj (N* i i K Ot> e C3 UJ J ^ •— £3 >- 3: S «—• ^ €?: W S^ S S @< >t-«(r>jS-j—iwiSae^^^i^—-i^ ea _j_: " »-J f—' *-J 1" - - r* —«- --T- QC *~ ffi * >~ y=" > < I » ^ I W X I '_ WE• 3E x at x a* KvS iK K S^-DuSMr-jn^enujEi^' *c i

^i^l2li£i9i^(^^caaBscs^^<xi*.>wca»»—cneao^rC <C83

^eeeBeaee^ea^eEie&aD^aBODaaflB^e^aB^'SsSS^^ — — — " — — — . — S«NJ t J C-4 CVJ INI rst <NJ R^I02U7

5-98

1 1 11 11 11 mi 11 11

a a a a a a a §* a W la !* a

^ ^ ^ ^ lfcl:fc ^ e% ^ ^ ^ 1»'5i'Si'&'o»'5i'5.'& ,'e>'en'Si'fe1'&e.'S.s a a E a a a a & i i s t a a a a a a s a a a s a s ^ a a a a s s a s a ^ & a a"*-»SSgSgS 8gS "*SSS- SSggSggSSgS gSSSSS

W

^ x! w! €£ v?

11111111111,11111111111111111111111111 »t> _^^.^ SSSSgSSgSS£SSS8KS8SS§S88S§S5SS3SggSSSS " €2)

« « » « =, ^.a

*O *di -a

-«©

a a 3 a a s = a a a a a 9 a a s a a @ a a s a a a a a s = a " s 3 = « a a a 3g^SSSSSg gSS-SSSS-' S S S 3 3 g g g g S S^gRgS

ffi •^^^iroEDaa^rsi^M^ iaSBa-4rs«i

__- — — — _ — ——— — — — — __ — _.__- — _—B a a = 3 = > a a a a a s a a a 3 a ^ a s a a = 9 a a sO oooo«.oooo^oci oeo ^0090g K^exiK?5rw(Nj r>4 rw ?5 csi^^ S55rM<o S . — —, ^

OJ UJ UJ

—ii w i i . g i i * I i

02U8

5-99

"

• *H — n» r*. •- — — - - - - -

in oJr-i £)

IT) ^

??^^?P^P^»?^P^O9?oi»oooo3p <P !P s=aR^fsi^^A^ARfu^Rc^^Mrsi^^jtsirvr^^cS^rMr^™™ - (Jra

O

£

-ffi S St it

AB3002U9

5-100

xKt

rjkS

«-t »i a;m s;

a'^£*a1aaqafa1»anaafa1S>a>aaa>aaaat

e M

~

.11 1111 1111 11 111 111 111 111 1111 lilllill

* ;: i *s :i * Z 2S :: * w "

5-101T03440-6021

A total BNA map was produced in the same fashion as the VOA mapdescribed in the previous section, and is presented here asFigure 5-13.

The pattern of total BNA contamination in groundwater appears tobe similar to that for total VOA contamination. The groundwaterbetween NWP and PCG has significantly higher total BNAconcentrations than other wells sampled. The BNA compounds arelikewise not controlled and extend outside of the monitoring wellnetwork. The moderately elevated BNA concentrations along thenorthern part of NWP also indicate that the extent of BNAcontamination cannot be entirely determined by the presentmonitoring network, although it appears to extend beyond the NWPproperty in this direction. The PCG property also lacked themonitoring wells to delineate the dissolved contaminant plumefurther. In addition, the lower BNA value in HAV-07, withrespect to well HAV-08, downgradient of the storm sewer may bethe result of well placement rather than reflective of anyinfluence of the storm sewer on the contaminated groundwaterflow. This topic is addressed in later sections. For reasonspresented in the previous section, the total BNA data were notcontoured.

5.3.5.1.4 Pesticides/PCBs - Pesticide and polychlorinatedbiphenyl analyses were performed on water samples takenfrom the 10 selected existing monitoring wells during thepreliminary sampling round. The results, shown in Table 5-16,indicate that PCBs were not detected in any of the groundwatersamples taken. Three pesticides, aldrin, beta-BHC, and dieldrin,were detected in five of the 10 wells sampled. Two of the wells,R-2 and HAV-02, had pesticide concentrations significantly higher

"AR30025I

5-102

oO|CM I

zUJ

g«CM

T-Iu>UlocOE °

fco i p* gafeegQZ

Ooc

oit-.c oc

< uz ocai

t* T-«oI

«£>CO

to

OZUlaUJ

COzooo

UJ UJ

* 5O to2 5S Ix pUJ CO

Aj?3fl0252

,3 -«

fH i M *

•§•HU

I

5-103

3 I!

5 ii § =

St e> "5t s> ^ 13: "S3; "** "** " "* "** " * 15; *« * * "** "* "** "S. " "S; "« "V O t H v a fS^^^fat^^^aga^a^si^a^aag

m **s . . . s « . . . . . .

« iiE§i Ell^I^MM^^^^^^^M^^^^M^^^^^^^^ g ::-

Mujs£

I i«" -HV

W

5-104

•— o oi si ;3

» a 5 =" a'aaaaa^a^S'a^^aasaa^^a^a^aaa1 *So » o * *" * — o"". — ™ o o • — «• • ™" « — • *"Coo ooooeaoeoc*eoooe » e « o oo

S ___... ________„_.„.„,„.___.__..„ „ €§

C -r.^^ ooooc;00o0«o«00oe(3 £y i 09 4, n 'j n 2 l! S m S S S S S ™ S m ' " ) S M a S ffi S S m ^ ffl *"* " S Sf § «*3 S !' ( D ^ a > ^ as «B «•» . |i

C .O J"j

1111

_ , *-•a *« nc So

mi;

K !! • " • - * = § £ S ° " t^< _ > ^3^^™; S e 5 3 M J

j^ * -wv^roaaujuJ o. *.a.uj o «

AH30025U

5-105T03440-6021

than other wells. Figure 5-14 depicts the total pesticideconcentration in the 10 selected monitoring wells during thepreliminary sampling round. A contour map was not produced forreasons stated previously*

5.3.5.1.5 Cyanide and Oil and Grease - Cyanide and oil andgrease analyses were performed on groundwater samples from thepreliminary sampling round. The results of the cyanide analysisare also provided in Table 5-16. The cyanide levels were belowthe 10 ug/1 detection limit in all of the samples except for theduplicate sample taken at well R-2. At R-2, the duplicate samplecontained cyanide at a concentration of 14 ug/1. It is uncertainwhy this occurred.

The oil and grease results are also presented in Table 5-16. Aplot of the results is shown on Figure 5-15. Of the five samplesin which oil & grease were detected, concentrations are againhighest in groundwater between NWP and PCG. Owing to the limiteddata and the reasons previously mentioned, the data for cyanideand oil and grease were not contoured.

5.3.5.1.6 Dioxins and Dibenzofurans - Groundwater samplesfrom nine existing monitoring wells and one oil sample from R-2were analyzed for dioxin and chlorinated dibenzofuran isomers byCalifornia Analytical Lab, under the direction of the EPA. Twogroundwater samples, HAV-07 and NW-1-81, were broken in transitto the analytical lab and could not be analyzed.

The primary isomers of dioxin found in groundwater samples wereocta-, hepta-, and some hexa-, chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin.Only one well, NW-2-81, had the tetra-dioxin group identified ata concentration of 0.11 parts per triatjbten n(ftS£$. The 2,3,7,8H r* w u u c."v w

5-106

^107_

O i —uJ

K CL ft E 5uj r*< C "•» ZLUu.z

Ift< T"0 I|w in

UJCC

a.

» ce. ,

5 a.Q °=

CMOtoCD

CO2

O

Oz111oUJ

300257

§1

O. w Q

I 1 Ir; w — JX h- UJUJ CO CD

QQ

5-108T03440-6021

isomer was below the detection limit at this site. It wasobserved from the results of this analysis, Table 5-17, thatwells with oil in them contained greater amounts of thehexa-dioxin isomers, well HAV-02 in particular. Furthercomparison of the results from HAV-02 and that of the oil sampleindicate that it is likely that the groundwater sample taken atHAV-02 contained substantial amounts of emulsified oil. It isbelieved that the groundwater sample at HAV-02 containedsuspended amounts of oil because the sampling method was bailing.To ensure that this would not recur in the following samplinground (round #2), a more uniform and consistent samplingprocedure was employed using peristaltic pumps and Well Wizards.

The total concentrations of dioxin isomers were plotted onFigure 5-16. Eliminating the value at HAV-02 because of oilcontamination in the sample, the highest dioxin concentration wasfound at well R-2 (1844.94 ppt). Well NW-2-81 also contained asubstantially higher amount of total dioxin isomers (696.71 ppt)than other sampled wells. Because of the variety of samplingmethods which were necessary during the preliminary samplinground, some variation in analytical results is anticipated.However, no quantification of this variance is possible.

The majority of the dibenzofuran isomers were identified in thegroundwater samples taken during the preliminary sampling round.No sample results were obtained again on wells HAV-07 and NW-1-81because the bottles were broken in transit. Table 5-18 containsthe results of this analysis. Wells with oil in them, R-2 andHAV-02, contained the greatest amounts of dibenzofurans. NW-2-81also had relatively high values; however, no product was observed

88300258

5-109

-o »- «t -^ — s*

S- S- B- B-a. S. S. S.

• a

in r-4

o

*~1~o.e.3iEa=3=a=£'3;'

*- CNI *SJ Cs*

AR300259

5-110

all I

a a5S2S ss

»o

w £~ g»

wAc

sS S^ss asaaaaaaaa_—

^w^^tn^m^r>v.t/>

•g R^^ aaaaaaaaasa§ — «^§ ^^e^kn o; ^

• <a * oe

c_) S u

8300260

5-111

il

UJUlUL

CDIinuioc

III

o>cUl

5 "• If b

UJS Eo Hz ft-X DCO UJo

ooi-CCc

ow

OZUJ

U)-I

CO2O H5 i3 -1o z ze iiUJ UJ 03 s;* g H |§O co Q w2 ^ 1 U J•P •* LJ .

UJ^CO 5 Q eo!

R30026I

x p uj <UJ CO CD COCO

jS *I Q

si

140)

5-112

g- a- a- s- 9-s. & &. Sk &

en u->

£&£ a a a••»•« n <M <^>

""i **"

4! f*. Ill 1 11f_. — • flB «P " ^ cy C? OJ ^ »rt*O &*•"•*-« rgc^-w — »;" r*.

^H _

\ ? AH300262

;rl^s> ee « as

B

5-113

all I II<NJ tvi tn as

lllllllllfllal

l l a

•» Irt «•> i

4R300263

5-114T03440-6021

in this well. Well NW-2-81 was also the only well in which thetetrafuran group was identified, at a concentration of 0.11 ppt.

Figure 5-17 depicts the total dibenzofuran results. Eliminatingthe results of HAV-02, the total dibenzofurans were highest atwell R-2. The results of well HAV-02 were ignored because it isbelieved that the sampling method introduced oil into the sample.Like the previously mentioned total dioxin concentrations, wellNW-2-81 also contained a relatively high value for totaldibenzofurans .

5.3.5.2.1 Metals - Groundwater samples from 10 selectedexisting and 18 newly installed monitoring wells were analyzedfor dissolved metals. The results of this analysis, shown onTable 5-19 , indicate that groundwater contains relatively highdissolved concentrations of calcium, sodium, magnesium, iron,manganese, and potassium. Lower concentrations of arsenic,cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, and zinc were also found.

The most frequently identified dissolved metal of interest waszinc, with reported values ranging from 8.1 ug/1 (CW-1S) to253 ug/1 (R-2). Chromium was reported in two wells, NW-3-81 andHAV-02, at concentrations of 124 ug/1 and 6.3 ug/1 respectively.Cadmium was found in two wells, CW-3I and CW-6I, at a level of5.6 ug/1 in each well. Copper was not found above the detectionlimits. Arsenic was identified in nine monitoring wells, rangingin concentration from 2.2 ug/1 to 23 ug/1. Lead was present inthree wells, CW-5I, CW-5D, and HAV-05, at concentrations of 5.7,8.5 and 3.3 ug/1 respectively. Other dissolved metals were also

WDTKSI

5-115

bcvl

r

|LUUJ=luj N

fIU)

UJCC

offl

UlZ oD. 2tt 3i §Ul >_

o <2 i< JtC UJ3 rc

Z UJtu HS £00

NM

O(OID

05

^Q

UJoUl-I

OS 22^2n si i_ UJ XO UJCD CO '- Q2 r*lU* a ..

02S5

UJ CO CDCO CD

§

5-116

—.«-••— *••» •1MJ^»;a^M^a^ai!3rfa^j^a^^^g*5ga^^»'l~gSS i ^ S g " f^ ^S

to <x.o — e^ —l—I «•* o «@ >— frn^wWW^W^WW^^WrS^13 rv ' ga * e*> M iS o B O • S S S S JB JB Q *" cxt >

_, —•*««•— ^"w-^^^www—iwww—IS29-OO—>^<^9SSe.. trj *^'»^r *- it s S *oSSSS§ese"f*>'^*Su^^^s5"

'So

^;:*^^^^i^i^i^tf^^§S^^^Sggs

a ;

i —- ae - •£! K w _j S

5-117

*2 i*. — M->u->oKr4|£m»«w€h.a.a.a. a. <*» a. & a. 1*1 a.

— • e e» «— £ " **i^^^^"'1^^^^^2"~ESkr!^"eSSS^™

«•» a. a. 1*1 a."

-

<= s • 5 s 5 ^ = s iRts> — w»uioir>«Ni»hr>«ersia.a.&o.a.n**.a.a.uja.^ • • « « • — ^^ ^^u. «M o ^ cm _~ *— a,—

'

a

c £ *j —-to — !! —«—o *•* ***u o

Xi o>I -^>o 5

s IItn ii^ :i-i i;

ervArirtr"/""?

5 J2c ^O £S „

5-118

S"* ** S _; « S • 5- • @ "> 'CNI K B <•> ffi S -^ S S s i

ra*j-i—

•3^5 aj; w*-^

=

"" sis*

O O O O '

*

5-119

*•> """ SS • «in « « —» "»CM o —. rst "-

2 g « o > r t S ^ t t t*i^ i

*""*

CM —— CM •

C tp

o> SS = SS^ = ^8^S = S = S =.Q q «irt — m*i-»^>r^^coaD*Njo.a.ia.a.e*»(3*J — CM o — <N* -EH (d

'

IE9 •— 3 eg

i 5-120i

"

I 3irt o

1

1MS _ gli Iffi£3<

S«55533es5i£ls3£Si*bc«.*£ae t_ —• m — - —- _ —@^-_iS«oe S|^Sae~~ ^•^.UJ^^Otilot^j^S^—!L) ——— "= — — ~56St_j_i__*2*«

i *N> *s* ro m

AR300270

5-121T03440-6021

identified in the groundwater including barium, beryllium,mercury, and selenium.

Figure 5-18 depicts the distribution of total selected metals inthe groundwater. Arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, andzinc were selected as the metals of concern based upon theirhealth risks and/or their association with NWP operations. Fromthe data presented, it does not appear that any correlationexists between monitoring wells with oil in them, such as R-2 andHAV-02, and elevated concentrations of dissolved metals, whencompared to wells containing no oil.

5.3.5.2.2 Volatile Organic Aromatics - Groundwater sampleswere obtained from 10 selected existing monitoring wells and the18 newly installed monitoring wells for VOA analysis. The VOAsidentified in the groundwater, as shown in Table 5-20, areconsistent with those usually associated with solvent andgasoline/fuel oil contamination. The primary chemicals found inthe groundwater sampling include benzene, ethylbenzene,trichloroethene, vinyl chloride, total xylenes, and 1,2-dichloroethene (total)„ Lower concentrations of 1,2-dichloro-ethane, methylene chloride, toluene, 1,1,2-trichloroethane,acetone, and 1,1-dichloroethene were also found.

A total VOA map was produced by summing the VOA results of eachsampling point. Figure 5-19 depicts the results. Upon reviewingthe map, an increasing VOA concentration with depth trend isapparent at CW-1, CW-5, and CW-6 series wells. In addition, adecreasing VOA concentration with depth trend is present at theCW-2 series wells. The wells of the CW-3 series indicate thatthe saprolite units are significantly higher in VOA contaminationthan the bedrock, .while the CW-4 series wells show fad S^

5- 122

Iinui

F oiT"wotoCO

CO2O

oQ

_UJ UJ^ s

O O co

UJ fe ia R RUJ LU CO-I

AR300272

4J

•oc3O

5-123

—— ep »-

°* * ~"

t » o> »

"

s^aaa^v^a i£ m a m 2 S S* a a a a^^^aa^Waa as"

S 1 5 s;;

=sw* 5ZS

03 ™ "* **

B>O5e*oio«oi^oio>o>S 01a a a a s a a s £ 3 £ 3 3 a a a

c>^9f*i'^«nu^^^ tnw^t^^tno^

r»

- -S ** «j «> a o&> u u B. u C f i b . u *•_— I i tt it K f -K S -S-2 & sTs 3 -~l|s§ *J I SK^ ° ^ i _l—— u ^ JS -e O - ir. 6 O O V •— ~O w •— -^^ X • M ** r £Z o o o <C fc- & S *i -^ •—• e: — **w^S o v v « A. — • ^ — ** •- OQV'OO «^- •>«•*•>S £ £: v i ~ 5 o o o j K V « S u c b . v — — •<= — •=• •= S. *rf •- Sh. V O £ o^.i^t-tf-'^SnitJ—— B *C^**kO e i < « O k -_*-=— ™*^— B a o o — *>-i^ « t w w v e i t » v t^* — ; — 5

Ctfg-g^fe-5^SSS?S£'Eg'Tl ~r£S^ 1»1-S"*S^ e-§ I 8*5 =5 .S ^ JS « gjM-g SWJ!WT*S i e i£*E.Si— - —. - - ^.. csi — .CM w-c 5 «- ,> — M— — «.-• B M *K «j S* - » •— — I- j; «j • *j o " - »- — . fc. *- S t— — • — — u uj te <_i )E — »— «.-. »-:>Mixi.«<M

u•H

a sr-4

Q 5cS >

Vr-4

i

5-124

1 3 2s * 2 !!

M «•» ,

S" -*WW^-«':B>v>^«'^-B>^^^^Wvlvl^f>-*d3d»'*rf*£*4j4vf<• e SP S (•9ssSS@S@ s S s6s*~99^fiS€SS55JKCM i* ™ S • aS BE S S S S a S m S m • B (£ m ™ » » «o BD i

3 !

" . "B "© *" "fcZ.SSJ?S*7* «5"T i - »•." ^— VM.M-* — >— *—iy>*<-j<-5osi-«r&»« —» »»»»»»»3»»9=>-»»»»»

i r . - o*f¥.^SfMCMCM CMCMCMOMf^i

fy

5-125

t 0> 01 » 01

• 000

* °* -» --«

g

£"i *

— •••* - 4? ** ••" -

S B J S 5 C 5 5 S ' ' t ~ i »- * o .£• - »; 3 - i « j » f c f e £ : - 5 s ^ « » j * . * > te S •£: « .S _ —, S—CM — CM wf 55-s — — **•— — •—— «= *• *. «j * w±f e — CM££3£S£££---- «£££*-£•£--£":£ K^cMSr^Sft-

"" .«:

5-126

01 pi 0i 0i 0t 0» S 0\ at et 01 01 o>> a> 0i 0> o> 01

ir _i —J CM

-0\0\0\0^0\0\0t0\^^0^0\^^^0N^0'o^^0^0\0\0;0^^0\0;0\''&'0>'^'0>0i

3! a*;

i «*» —i —

&t 01 0> BI 01 0> 01

O CM ©*o oO J O

a a a a a a a a a s&i 0101 0>^t0I9BI^010lS<^0^ C?> 0) 01 01 » O> gl

g

^_0> e?> o>

Bi0ie>@t0>0t0i^i0k0>0i0ie>0iDi0> 0> 0» i 0> 01 » 0i BI 0i0i0iei0i^enoi0>a a a a a a a i B a a a s a a s a S B a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a•-tmtntntn^mkniAw^uttntntn o-^tn*«w-i*«trtu-totrtir»e>oirtg.22*r'irt

«»» » ts« eo as m «B as =>

m — !?R"

Oe3 C3 «- —- O ^- »». CM <* v —— CM> < i i ».£<=>.c: -^.3 - -r» — CM a.6 S--«— « — — —•- - - »~ «rf w v » « > e - -— — — M u eetj*—•—•—>— —

O CM t»i *fttsjrsjrMrNjfs.ojCMCMCMCMCMrM (Sl-CM-CM

t- r

5-127

•*. *B Bs -

jj Q) —— CM O> »•»

O O7 >in <N<y «o

o — iK *" i f -

| I | ||U|| ||| flj^l | | |

AR300277

5-128

m

'5 Tco w

UlOC

aLU

u

°-so*:*i

OF1 i— r . f- "OO1CM

CC03 CMO

CO

<S) feS nm

CO2O

oQ

UJ

* co

UJ fe aca x RUl UJ CO-J

Afi30G278•*•

5-129T03440-6021 .

uniform, moderately high VOA contamination throughout theunconsolidated and bedrock aquifers* It is believed that thevertical gradients found at these wells may influence thedistribution of contaminants; however, further sampling and waterlevel measurements would be necessary to substantiate this.

There does not appear to be any correlation between the presenceof oil in a well and elevated VOA levels, as no trace of oil hasbeen found in wells CW-1I and D; CW-3S and I; CW-4S, I, and D;CW-5S, I, and D; or HAV-05, which have substantially elevated VOAlevels. Therefore, sources of VOAs other than the immiscible oillayer are believed to cause increased VOA concentrations in someof the wells. For example, the CW-1 series wells west of NWP arebelieved to be upgradient of the site, yet their total VOA levelsare among the highest measured during this sampling round.Accordingly, it is reasonable that some (unknown) portion of theVOA contamination shown in these wells may be attributed tosources located further upgradient. Based upon the VOAdistribution in groundwater around the CW-3 and CW-5 wells, itappears that these are near a source for VOAs.

The elevated levels of VOAs at wells HAV-05, CW-1, CW-3, and CW-5series also suggest that the dissolved VOA contamination in thegroundwater extends beyond the present monitoring well network.

5.3.5.2.3 Base Neutral/Acid Extractables - Groundwatersamples were obtained for base neutral and acid extractable (BNA)analysis from 10 selected existing and 18 newly installed

AR300279

5-130T03440-6021

monitoring wells. As shown on Table 5-21, relatively few BNAcompounds were found in the groundwater samples. The chemicalsfound in the highest concentrations and with the most regularitywere pentachlorophenol (PCP), naphthalene, 2-methylnaphthalene,and phenanthrene, with lower amounts of approximately 15 otherBNA compounds*

To assess the distribution of BNAs in groundwater, a total BNAmap, Figure 5-20, was produced by summing the concentrations ofBNA species above the detection limits for each samplinglocation. As shown by the map, the groundwater at the sitecontains substantial quantities of BNA compounds. At monitoringwell series CW-1, the concentration of BNAs appears to decreasewith depth, as does series CW-2. However, on the PCG property,monitoring well series CW-3, 5, and 6 exhibit the reverse trendwhere total BNA concentration increases with depth. The presenceof elevated concentrations of total BNAs at monitoring wellsHAV-05, HAV-08, and series CW-6 indicates that BNA contaminantsextend beyond the present monitoring well network. Figure 5-20also shows that the groundwater in the bedrock is almost ascontaminated with dissolved BNAs as the groundwater in thesaprolite units.

The most frequently occurring BNA species was PCP, which rangedin concentration from below the detection limit to 4100 ug/1during this sampling round. A complete discussion on thepresence of PCP in the groundwater and its relationship to thegroundwater plume is discussed further in Section 5.3.6.2.

5.3.5.2.4 ££M£i£i<|es/PCBs " Groundwater from the10 selected existing and 18 newly installed monitoring wells wasanalyzed for pesticides and polychlorinated

5-131

i in as «—11 P * *Jill B

' ' ' ' ' '___

=* §" 3 a a a , a a a" a s =" sa a a £§ a S*

W — a- m i-SWa^^^^ada^ad'SmmiSSSfflS'

Ot-t

•So2 ~<•U 5

2o — J

""^ '

§O S3 T S «

*H 6J 55 KMo S =!;10a

P

£ -«a<c ir^i s "^ - «• - = Bi .

a ::

^^ -, — . .

Q ft **§ O O i-L O If"|. HW^*;*/"»'"F *

•oe1o

5-132

9 «— 5 ^ •• * eOevsesv&S S^ S >-• si • wSAaKABSflgSS C§ ss

S 8 «

i » - » - » ™ « ™ a » M - » « « » « « « » « » « ™ ™ _j-» 3 i — 8 * " * S S S S O S *• O 9 O 9595 ^SoSSo&ooosoSoZSS — O *$*•x 3" S ,J * » B IE as as as sss SSJES asSKMsMaiagses-wSaass m sj)

s ss " "•*•• .3s ^§, «ij — ««.? I lia!in z *•* '

(u ,__„ -._ ,__ —_ ,****

S 5 si_.

S £- 1^ S 5"? g -ts «# »-.—•> «• —

E "S *i -* rn 4! -=? "S. fc ^ 5 — JE — —> — 28"—^©."o'gJE'E. ^=-e -S u * * vK^-s* -f? <=> •— *•&.— — — *>*-^oe>t£S^~& ^=^^sscM^vEvj.^*; s*we^$.~-^._.^o^k>wvv<*>^ «ju^S^J*^-^ 5 —

i«»«Bnaecea«iBB«MaB«BeBaB»

C ^u -5—

Oi-l

S

5-133

*

0» 0i pi » 0> o> o* 9n a a a a a-

h £308 £"> me6matm3macitt& SS^mmSSmSmSssSSm flft*~ c -•> 2 tt a SP

9 2 - S 3

c — — « «.

h g S !! jojj)ojj • MJ" ' .

5 ___-._______-——— ——— ___ ——— ——.———___———_________———___——— ,___^.___—— . ——— ———___——.——— ""^•**. * ' » * - ^ *•- "*• - **»"»« " **• "*> * . "*• **» * - *»» <i " >* *»• " - " 1* <

§

m SI*O — • tt

s; § 2 s - ::S a g , : :

I

g *«Ss35'5>'5» "& *" ' ^

C ! ••£•&^ ! S e?,

Is&

*D

5-134

*" "§ ;j s S s s S S S 5j 9 S ™" s s 5 5 S s S K S K 5 }c s s s 5?

s

^

~ jj 3 2 I il7

r 01 en 01 en 9 01 o 0> 0> &> 0> 9 0> ot 0> 0\ 9 0> 0t 9 0> 9> »

©

IX" ||

1!|i i c^;

S-s •=• a s 2 « * - . ^ s IE^ »> e <s e E « -— s ^ u ust - s " ~*

fl>.;30bV8l»

w

5-135

O g J; :31 3C « :

§'

* > '

' ^ '

£? L ? S »• » —J —' rf W •S *? » S S " S S ffi S'

-«."Si5?Ci2ai5lzi2s2iC»^Z>Si^Xs>X^siX2>H>Si***^2!i^ ©3)o -e

2s " " - """" S" "-4-> y a a a a a a a a a a a a£3

(X * 3 § « « j;

U bk> U M

S *?* m S £ " S S S S o S o S o S S D o S B s S S " «^ :• o aK S it .3 s

tf ::

•s

IDt-l

2C

5-136

*

1 • 5 _ „ . — — —1 3 S I!s -»

• v> s? "

i s=|&

a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a s a a a a a a a

_ a » w ^

I« ~&, "fe '

fl!)^

*

fe. fc. O •—

• CM C-? ^ '

5-137

a^a^aa^a^aaa^aaa'aaet a •

a s a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a s a a @ a a

*- « c-

a a* 5 a & I? S a

m S <ij J; g g *s'i^'^^^X^al^^^^XXzlXXXXXXXXXXXe*X§ "*8 stoV

•S & s ^RRRSRSSRRgRS^-RRRRSRSRRcMRji «• =5 B r»tj S g s S 5 _ H M r f , ^ „•S f s i ii

5 2*? ^

(4Q)

e

a B a a a a a' a

3. £* «.u u c u M — ea.c<«E

2 — J= S> fe- •- — -*>—•»

ii ^f o i» *• J3 0> J" i i u i*j o fe •: »B c _ w u u — — S?aceu• Q. sa. •• —• •—r -™- -—• ~—- CM CM i T^ • oo u -,.-.._— e, = dB — — 02 2 *~ * S ' CM r*t o — — — S e o <s i = — • OATK «^ = S 5- F, = '?! " ™-5'VV fc-S<il<il^<*»? ¥ ?^A?

SS = :

5-138

il' 'iM sli Hr l 'm IRRRRRRRR RRR^RRRRR Sfg— —

*'0 *0\0 '0\'0\'c&0 '0\*0\0 '0>0\0N'eiI0Se '0>Br a a a a * a a a a a a : x i a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a ~

a a a a a a a a a a a a s a a ; a a a a s a s » a a a £ » a s a s x a a a £ jRRRRRR^RRS RRR *• 8 S g R S R S g S S R 3 S R c- R S

= " ""0ta 0l0l6i0V0l0>OI0l0l0l0l0l0>0l0l0l0l0V0>0l0I^Ol0IO10l0l0l0l0(n0>0l0l

_W_^i 0t 0i0ioi0>oi0ioi0i0i0>ai &i

* rais » « « « » »

3 £ BI CSt 01 0\ 90l0t0IM0IBI01 & 0t 01 0« pt 0i0>0l0>OI0lO>0>E»10l » 0|»0|010^0>0>DI __O a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a s a a a a a a a a a s a s a a a a a a ^,

--

* ail— g S *S. 2

.

5-139

R R R R R R R R R R R g R R R R R R R R R S R R R R R R

•8IDumh£ -•3s rvW S'

A

I - .»-c»-Stfc«S-— «;—. .e — *. e -£ -§ — -«2 — o o JT. oj o - © s: fc e fe- &- = ss * e ^ o w 2 — ,&? « - o,*- fc- = -— B 3 O fe —•• C •-• &. y "g- »- ftfc OJS.^ ^ O O

H300289

5-140

01 0i i 01 01 II ®*i\ ££*&££££*£M£g£gg££M£gg&£££££££££*£*££ «=

^5 M*. U

5 i g s~i"M £.3 ^* i•a u

»-.•—' •» —- «a oSS E g — — Jt -I. £i- — V « o o tS — -—. _S* -i ^§ &

—• o CM

5-141

oOf(Ml

ffio«5

SI CO

^_ _. j tj ._*• 2 _I

I•inUJtr

nixffi-I

fco

oeI* KCOoMO(D00

z

oQ

QZUJoUl

CO

*— ^P: OUJ Jjjj

W

a:

AB30029I

O -1X (- UJUJ CO CO

-JQ(Q

5-142T03440-6021

The results of these analyses, shown on Table 5-22, indicate thatno PCBs were found in the groundwater above procedural detectionlimits. In addition, pesticides were only detected in threewells, NW-3-81, R-4, and CW-2D. Well NW-3-81 contained 0.33 ug/1of gamma-BHC, while CW-2D contained 0.73 ug/1 of gamma- anddelta-BHC. A duplicate sample taken from CW-2D had no pesticidesabove detection limits. Well R-4 contained 0.22 ug/1 ofdieldrin. The remaining monitoring well samples did not havepesticide concentrations above detection limits.

5.3.5.2.5 Cyanide and Oil and Grease - Cyanide and oil andgrease analyses were performed on groundwater samples taken fromthe 10 selected existing and 18 newly installed monitoring wells.The results of these analyses are presented in Table 5-22.

Cyanide was only detected in one of the sampled wells, CW-5D, ata concentration of 27 ug/1. There is no indication of the sourceof cyanide in this bedrock monitoring well.

Oil and grease (O & G) results are also shown on Table 5-22, andreveal that 12 of the 28 wells sampled contained concentrationsgreater than the detection limits. Well NW-1-81 had the highestO fc G value, 12 mg/1, although it contained no noticeablefloating oil. Wells with floating oil in them, R-2 and HAV-02,were found to have O & G levels (BDL and 5.4 mg/1 respectively)lower than well NW-1-81. Wells of the CW-2 series show a minordecrease in O & G levels with depth. This trend is apparentlylocalized since the CW-3, CW-4, CW-5, and CW-6 series wells showa slight increase in O & G concentration with depth.

AB30Q292

WFD<Sl

5-143

*•* g a B s u

S «oodo^*****o^^^oe^ « o O O o O O o

o i?Sl - :£ti£££Si;S ^Sg s(o 25

10 o o oXXX9>XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX fi " ~ X

»— 'i ^ Ki!*"1w C -- 3 • « OD u8 -" ~"

<£ _^ _«*- — -.«._« — _——.—.—*-

Sooo«^^^^S"^^^ss^™" 2!9) (D S "™ 2 — i!sssMs@sMM»^e^SSeB@^n@mB»Mm^ CM!!§ £ 'S'o CD c_> "^- 2 <•> ii oo ii ACV•i y s "M ~" «®

-j*; «-;o"ooo0000o000ooe «»<=»e e oooo

OS

fll

I— S^ 5 S — ;;^ I 5 2* u ii

5. it - «— S » S i= * -3 -tse K K a e g e E •— o fe *-g «y M-K«- JJ=5 sScM^-cM«o^*2ass «*

=| f 12??f Ii s -liSESSS^si^*" 1 S

A»

1

5-144

2 —"

W

5 2

5? ** 3 3 ]Ej«SS§l<^£SjEssS@SSS&£@S&S£SSsB&S o '!

•a ts4J rH ^ TT :a •*•* E s & g.00 * * * .*

"

ft SS SS-:-:-:-:g-:-:-:Sg' ""t 1 " "** "' * "" 2*0 KJ^J ^o'o-^d^^^^^^^Oo'o® eoo o oooo

D

£=3

Si

sS**oiSs' —

SB B. oT S. »— • IM * 2 S {_}

S a* cj

5-145

O O O O O « • • . O • » . O ir-r K» S *= ooooo <3^«^°*seJ,

s 1 ii I ii

» • •» *• *- i. *• ••> L •• a * * » a. a » •^a?=?aa^i?W9a*a»va0iiaa m

O'OOO'^O «3 O O O OOOC9 'IB O O ,

**

*

S Q o•o S « ii SI!

5"S

S "I3 & 3 **" " ari 9J 9^ ad X at arf J at? a^ »" M? a»* aej ••' 31* a^ agj »* W JK* vj »rf 2P " a>f

*~* "

0000

OI.e

2 2 2 * °" » °* 2 » °* « © 2 °* e" °* « ** » °" » °"H ^ ... -

»8 'Q£-< U

^^SgSSij*1*1™^^•ocg — — — — — — — — — — — __ — ___ — — _ — — _— — — — ^r _

*O g TO It OD IIi

« h- - M«: K w ac oc ^ *— O *•uuu 3 * S o ^ £ uj — — *alMlIs*S = --S ^i^35^ft5S±Ss**«t5 -aa t ' S t i S H S a F S s S a j S w C M C M C M ^ C M r M O g K m g2«S*—-»-'S§oStK*ST"TTi , T i * • tt .S aQ, •— K ..j MT ^ uj -Q *e Q ^ CL< B- CQ GB eDCB^BQ6P$«&iB Cfc •! "* —

^ tsi <n i« i

1 AR300295

&

cc

5-146

"B* 5P 0" !? 0> 0l0lBFI0l0l0t0l0>0)0l0)0l0l0l010>0)0>0>0> 3l 01£ 3 a 9 a a a a @ a a a i a a : v a a a a a i 3 a a a a * S

O O 0000

±5* ill

^ >r~ ™a a S -3*

id*o »H

•H en 0« 01! S" 01 0> di m t* _._._._._._._._._._.a a a a a a a a a a

ii

oooo

"^ ^^^S^^^ocs^ooo^^o ooo o oooo*e ^ * C *

•§ -3

£=3

sill =s ^:!

S(2;

K

!?

5-147

S g I §*

O O 0»W0I^W0>»0JO»0I0IO>010101 S g> 0101 01 0) 01 01 01 01 D> 01

S S S

5-148T03440-6021

The O & G data from Table 5-22 are presented in Figure 5-21 todepict the distribution of O & G. A minor trend towardO & G concentrations increasing in the bedrock, while decreasingin the saprolite units, is shown as one moves from west to eastdowngradient across the site.

5.3.5.2.6 Dioxins and Dibenzofurans - Groundwater samplesfrom sampling round #2 were analyzed for dioxin and chlorinateddibenzofuran isomers by CompuChem7s sister laboratory, ChemWest.The results of this analysis are shown on Tables 5-23 and 5-24.The primary dioxin isomers identified in the groundwater sampleswere hepta-, 1234678-hepta-, and octa-chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin species.

To batter evaluate the spatial relationship of the data, thedioxin isomer groups identified were summed and plotted onFigure 5-22 in parts per trillion (ppt). The anticipatedupgradient cluster well series CW-1, shows that dioxin was foundin a relatively small amount (1.6 ppt) in only the shallowmonitoring well (CW-1S). The presence of dioxin in only theshallow well may be the result of vertical migration, orleaching, of dioxin from potentially contaminated surface soils.This may also be the case for the existing well NW-3-81(2.4 ppt). The highest concentration of dioxin found in thissampling round was at the existing well NW-1-81 (5331 ppt).Judging from the wells sampled around NW-1-81, it would appearthat the dioxin is most concentrated near this well. The reasonfor the dioxin concentration at NW-1-81 is undetermined, as thewell does not contain the free-floating contaminated oil in it asdo wells R-2 and HAV-02. Therefore, it would seem that

AW

B .-.i IT—. !\ x*-v ."». _ *~\ 5 s~~. f\ v-v r

5-149

0*23 *"< w

IIIOC

o

CO

o1HI UJ UJ

. UJ UJO co Op * *CO c O— O -JX P- ujUJ co m

.20.

5-150

1 i £» ~™ BB " * —— " " * —— " . '13 — -i- — n — — — — — — — — (

i CM CM en — *#I i 66 T ri 5>o— •» CM —

_C cw (si *•— co S «• f>.^«K0.r^f^f^»^ '*, 1_j w t *£? "• " •* "* *n !*• t . * * * •T1 "* •. t CM —— • » . • C9 X S3 — » CM — ^ooo gaQ _J_j—J_j—»—j—i—jf-e»f-- W

a a a s & a a a a a

r » i £i

AR3003

5-151

.tfSTtA? SSKSSSSaSSi oa i MI ••» CM CM

as as aaaa aaal^c"§r?'"" "S^"^.^*^*^ — " p";3 £ -i- :£ ZT 0*000000000

aaaaaaaaaaa

•o -H sss^-fiS

8

So_ss^T aaasaaaaaaai co i CM— ..rMCM — — — — — —CM

e s ass sS3 53 S^ft 5

«— f*4 <SI CM C*— ••— — CM

AR30030

S

5-152

1allaaaaall

lllallllt'

lasllaaalsl "^^^«55W^*r^^mrviCMCfl Ok* c>s «B oc> w^ w o« j » »• *efoooooooo"" */5lxyt'

rq _•*• — —

a Kr-4 |UA ~ $'fl j

a a a«* *T-.ooooo

.O Siu^«V — — oeooooooooo

oooooooeoooZ^ i 2^ El = i X X 2g X

ro «grsi g»n J-, **<

5-153

i^c* laallaalaaliff — .* f .

agaasaaaaaaO ^ O O

5£ CM CM <*)

S _ = §?».* aaaaaa&aala^5 -r* *° — •"» — — — — cw — — -- — ^

31 ""•0

-rg « a a a a a a aJ" CO * S *

O g O g Q O O O Ol^St-J^Jb^b^bJOt^

S ~'-££:£:E££Slft. *O g *O JO g CB

S J3 CM ScSfc «- . C M C M C M C ' )—-

5-154

aaaaaaaaaaa »— — ""? ""i ®^ **? ™J . *J €©""" ooooooootftirfgtfggtftf£4 ®

t n o SlSraSffiBttiSo-u^-eV f "* ^)ID SS t i i ^ i i . ^ . w " ^£-< W != x *— K ••

g S g SSS g53

• S_96

5-155

lallllaalllall

aaaa&aaaaaaaaaCM £5 MBS T OB —

»g« lllllllalllall§ i *e i »»CMCM*s(CMC>»C3C5rsenM1»4r»»rtg5 *»> — Mf CMCM^^^mMr-ic^cS^e-^w^2 ™ S2 •" ooooeooooooefo

a as s a as a aa

Q S(Biil5SCMiiieB0&<— CM S CMN — «w

rs] QJi .ain -HO

- - s? - alllsalllllalloK

•oSe lllllalllallla

o 5~E^sIfe I S ~" m ^*

aaaaaa&asaaaaa— t%i <^ e-», w»i u-i — •• -5SB oa i OM —-

A g? « S S S IE SOB<s* CM - — - —

AB300305

tn4J

•»J Oe r?

•f Q(N

5-156

11alia11a11111

llllllllllllal

_s m aaaaaaaaaaaaaa

©

ooooo

"

a

s n a&aaaaasaaaaaa

AR300306

fi

5-157

aa aa aa sstaa aa aaoooooooo o o o o o

11aII1111a11aa

llllllllllllal' *•» i O I ^irtQmQf"*.^.^.r^f^«NiCi* CM CM-o CM » — •Mw>(*>M«n^^^^^r.*>*aoa i o — ooooooooo

iK -«s - lallllllllllll

— "7* — i SB *T in m <NJ CM cw — -. . — — — 4S. m to <u•

aaaaaaaaaaasaa^

-SJ P S 3 S ' — = ooooo•9 (§ -j— j— j— j_j—j-_j_j-

&a&a jft&aaaaaaaa

^^^^^x^xx^xxxx

a

o « —

S '"'~££££.£££££:

. ..— .*->>—.-• CM CM AR300307

o siO SJ*_. -O

5-158

aa sa sa aa a a aa &,* 3. 3 a a s * s ". ••- •; •

tf> —

aaaaaaaaaaaa&a— — * — — — — — *^

s Wiss - iiiiiiiiaiiiiie w Ce «•»— > __. —— 1 »» 1 C*> •*» CM CM CM •-<»-« -43 <« Mr• . .-

04 *N) CM

* ^ *° —

"

1 _» _ lllallllllllaaU ^ S —— T «B —— OOOOOO

d ?SX H

11111111111111 B

^ BB *« i

u.S'

•» IN* c** «sj FM CM p> t >

fc,C.I I(0

5-159*

§ g llllllllllllal

11111111111111 (Qv£» ift vn trt « > f** e»» ft <••> r CM "OS'

oe>oooooooe ~~ ^^)

AR300309

5-160

poey

CO

a 5K sg gti ** ^ «c 1C ^7U- A W S *? ^

COa? o — w i-CMCMimUJ UI* > S * IK

« (51o|| =^5 g o -

i

DZUJoUl

AB30G3IQ

ocw Pz to t-zg IIo -J9 z *._J O UJ

5 ^ «-LU W

O w Q

X P W OU4 CO CO -J

CQ

5-161T03440-6021

groundwater derived from wells with contaminated oil in them donot necessarily have the highest dissolved dioxin concentrations.

Dioxin data from the newly installed monitoring wells indicatedthat dioxin was not detected in the bedrock wells at theselocations. Based upon the data at this time, the dioxincontamination appears to be present only in the shallow and someintermediate-depth cluster wells, which are geologically situatedin the saprolite units. From this sampling round (round #2) andthe preliminary sampling round (round #1) data, an estimation ofthe groundwater contaminated by dioxin has been made. The shadedarea of Figure 5-23 represents the estimated shallow groundwaterarea affected by contamination from dioxin. Note that thecontamination appears to extend beyond the present monitoringwell network. For example, relatively elevated quantities ofdioxin exist in the groundwater at NW-1-81* Additionally, wellsHAV-05, HAV-07, and HAV-10 indicate that dioxin contamination inthe groundwater extends downgradient of the storm sewer and pastthe present monitoring well network.

It was originally believed that the presence of dioxin in thegroundwater samples was the result of dioxin adhering to finesediments in the water samples which were analyzed. As dioxinhas a very low solubility, this would seem to account for itspresence in the water. However, this does not appear to be thecase as no correlation between dioxin concentration and observedturbidity could be found. Therefore, the dioxin detected by theanalysis appears to be the result of small amounts of dissolvedoil which may be present in the water samples, which wentundetected because of the detection levels of the other analytes.

AR3G03.J I

5-162

oO|wl

.UJ

ILJJ

COCMIinui

o <"1z zX =>?S5?

trtUJ

inoesie

<j

o

s I1 1o o2 On: ze lt S'z 2O DsUJ <

„ Z UJCC ttUJ "- <

** UJ yO 2 « gUJo

000 z ' Ul

z_z ^ E? ^E. n: <• •52 o w pX P O COUJ W -J UJ

^3003/2

5-163T03440-6021

Dibenzofuran isomers were identified in the groundwater samplesfrom round #2 and consisted primarily of octa-, hepta-, and someamounts of hexa-chlorinated dibenzofurans. Figure 5-24 depictsthe distribution of total dibenzofuran isomers in the groundwatersamples from round #2. Levels of total dibenzofuran wereelevated in wells R-2 and HAV-02 (22.6 and 69.6 ppt,respectively), with a significant level of dibenzofuran presentin NW-1-81 (4184 ppt). This pattern is similar to the totaldioxin concentrations discussed previously. Small amounts ofdibenzofuran were identified in NW-2-81 (9.8 ppt) and in CW-5S(2.33 ppt). With the exception of one location, NW-1-81, andpossibly at HAV-10 (not sampled), it would appear that thepresence of dibenzofuran is within the confines of the presentmonitoring well network. Although not certain, it would appearthat the dibenzofurans are present in the saprolite units as arethe dioxins. The presence of dioxin and dibenzofuran isomers wasnot identified in known bedrock monitoring wells.

No correlation appears to exist between the presence of oil in awell and high dibenzofuran levels. Likewise, no correlationexists between observed turbidity and dibenzofuran contamination.

5.3.6 Affected Area

5.3.6.1 Immiscible Hydrocarbon Plume - Beginning as early as1953 with the initial reports of pollution in Naylors Run, thefocus of contamination at the Havertown PCP site has been on asubsurface oil plume. Using measurements of oil thicknesses intheir wells, previous investigators constructed an oil thicknessmap for the Havertown PCP site. The oil plume was identified ashaving an elliptical shape whose major axis was parallel to theeasterly groundwater flow direction. By estimating J?DPffi

5-164

PNl __

' CO

CM

103 J>

111P- «CM O

a

e £M

_ OZ< c:cc u3 tL_ <S *N OZ zSi =>£ o5 5

o

00

ri

ZUJ

UJ«-= JOQQ

AR3003fii

CO-JUJ

CDZ(T

03 O2 tZo t- zo -J «Q z S-j o uj

g | 1 s• UJ UJ 2O W O §

fe fi o ^E p _i ox H iy QUJ CO CD -J

ta o

5-165T03440-6021

(15 to 25 percent) and calculating an approximate area(4.5 acres), the volume of oil in the subsurface was projected torange between 350,000 to 600,000 gallons.

Since these initial investigations at the Havertown PCP site, newmethods of using oil thickness measurements in monitoring wellsto estimate the quantity of oil on the water table surface havebeen developed. According to Blake and Hall (1984), thethickness of oil which is measured in a monitoring well does notrepresent the amount of oil present in the surrounding aquifer.Rather, the measured oil thickness in the monitoring well will besubstantially greater than the actual oil thickness in theformation.

In unconsolidated water table aquifers, the well thickness errorcan be explained by the method of oil migration in the aquifer.Because of the difference in the specific gravities and theinterfacial forces between the two immiscible fluids (oil andwater), the oil will eventually position itself along the uppercontact of the capillary fringe. When a monitoring well entersthe groundwater table, the capillary fringe, formed by themolecular attraction between soil particles and water, isremoved. The water surface which then forms, and is measured, ina monitoring well is the level in the soil where the water(fluid) pressure equals atmospheric pressure (i.e. the watertable). Therefore, when the oil positions itself on top of thecapillary fringe, it attains a more elevated position in theformation, with respect to the water level in the monitoring welland will enter the well until the thickness of oil in the wellcreates pressure great enough to overcome the entry pressure ofthe oil. In addition, the oil will depress the water surface in

AB.3QQ3I5

5-166T03440-6021

the well until the buoyant force counters the weight of thehydrocarbon, as shown by Figure 5-25.

Based on experiments by Blake and Hall (1984), an estimate of thetrue oil thickness on the aquifer may be obtained by measuringthe apparent thickness of oil in the well (AT) and subtractingfrom it the calculated thickness of oil in the well below thewater table and the height of the capillary fringe.

This procedure was used to estimate the oil thickness on theaquifer in the vicinity of monitoring well R-2. From REWAI'swater and oil level measurements taken on March 17, 1988, theelevations for the oil/air interface and the oil/water interfacewere determined. Using the specific gravity of the oil, thecorrected water table elevation was calculated as described inSection 5.3.4.4.1. Referring to Figure 5-26, the apparentthickness of oil in the well (AT) was calculated by determiningthe difference between the elevations of the oil/air interfaceand the oil/water interface (4.1 feet). The thickness of oilbelow the corrected water table (Twt) was then determined(3.68 feet) and subtracted from the AT yielding the thickness ofthe capillary fringe plus the mobile and immobile oil(0.42 feet) . In order to provide an estimate of the oilthickness present on the aquifer in the vicinity of R-2, acapillary fringe thickness was estimated based on fine sand soiltexture from Fetter, 1980 (0.25 feet). Subtracting the estimatedcapillary fringe height (0.25 feet) from the capillary fringeplus the mobile and immobile oil thickness (0.42 feet) yields anestimate of the oil present on the aquifer at R-2 of 0.17 feet or2 inches. It must be stressed that this result is only an

AR30Q3I6

5-167

MOBILE OIL ^ - ^ ^ ^ ^ „ t__ __ P<atm

IMMOBILE OIL

CAPILLARY FRINGE/ V7 r-? \

P-atm

\y x ^ ^ ^ xW V W-TTvsr' W'l wSH

OIL/AIR INTERFACE

I— __ _ JZWATER TABLE

P>atm

JNOT TO SCALE

LEGEND

P PRESSURE, GREATER, EQUAL TO.OR LESS THAN ATMOSPHERIC

Po FLUID DENSITY, OIL

Pw FLUID DENSITY, WATER

PI FLUID PRESSURE OF OIL * AFTER BLAKE AND HALL»

P2 FLUID PRESSURE OF WATER

P1*rP2 FLUID PRESSURE EQUILIBRIUM FlttllRF R-NOT ESTABLISHED TIVjUMt 5-

WATER TABLE AR3003I7 HAVERTOWN PCP SITEHAVERTOWN, PA

OIL MOVEMENT INTOMONITORING WELL

86021-019- AAji| IT. ®W varth'Tssourcas consultant!

5-168

MONITORING WELLR-2314.24

4'ID PVC ——— *•

TOP OF SCRSLOTS 30

P<atm .

P-atm

AT-

P>atm

>

0.42*

I_ -i.z_izr -:. 1

4.f ^ T :-

;7IL :" 3

^fiLV'-W

'/ /- •. « *«»fwt

EENA 13* ——————— •"-• V

293.40' V. . .

. .. , ,

293,82n: K,i

I ,P2

XJ

312.70'

> ——— OIL/ AIR INTERFACE/ ———— MOBILE AND IMW^ ^_ ^^ (Q

>-CAPILLARY FRINGE.H,^ ^ ESTIMATED AT 0.25'

; ; , *^ WAtER TABLE

s— fPo-O.B97:\ ; .

'_>•!•.-£';> «^ ''- — — nDM /WATFR INTFPFAPr

^ • " • : . ' - ' : '

' wnr Trt C^AI c

LEGENDAT APPARENT OIL THICKNESS IN MONITORING WELL (FEET)

atm ATMOSPHERIC

H HiiQHT O.E CAPILLARY FRINGE (FEET)ESTIMATED BASED ON SOIL TEXTURE (FETTER.1980)

TWT THICKNESS OF OIL BELOW WATER TABLE

Taw THICKNESS OF OIL ABOVE WATER TABLETAW-ATC1-Po)

Po FLUID DENS1TY.OIL

Pw FLUID DENSITY.WATER <

P1 PRESSURE.OIL / fl R O H A O 1H Ii v U i/ \J i

Pa PRESSURE,WATER

Patm PRESSURE, ATMOSPHERIC

(AFTER BLAKE AND HALL, 1984)

FIGURE 5-26HAVERTOWN PCP SITEQ HAVERTOWN, PA. —3 ESTIMATED OIL THICKNE^BCALCULATION (3/17/88 DATA)fl£3& 3TM&J a «» A A -i A .i M * «

ll) tarth rviourceB consultants

5-169T03440-6021

approximation. Without knowing the height of the capillaryfringe, a refined estimate of oil thickness cannot be made.

It is important to note that the measured thickness of oil in awell at the Havertown PCP site does not in itself reflect theextent of oil contamination on the water table. Therefore, bycorrecting for the actual thickness of oil in the aquifer, it isclear that the potential for free-floating immiscible oil whichmay be present in the subsurface is significantly less than the350,000- to 600,000-gallon estimate from previous investigations.

To demonstrate this, the amount of free-floating immiscible oilhas been estimated using Figure 5-27, which is a plot of theestimated boundary of the immiscible hydrocarbon plume andcalculated aquifer oil thicknesses at spot locations. Theaffected area in this figure has been estimated to beapproximately 45,000 square feet, or about 1.03 acres. If anaverage oil thickness of 0.083 feet (1 inch) is assumed to bepresent over the affected area, and an estimated porosity of21 percent, previously presented in Table 5-12, the estimatedamount of free-floating immiscible oil would be approximately6,000 gallons. Because the highly irregular capillary fringewould tend to alter the thickness of the oil plume significantly,making an "average" value difficult to arrive at, the reliabilityof the 6,000-gallon estimate is undetermined. However, thisassessment clearly indicates that substantially lessfree-floating immiscible oil is present at Havertown thanpreviously believed.

As no determination of the amount of oil which has adhered to thesoil grains within the zone of water table fluctuation has beenmade, no estimate of the oil immobilized in this ar<

5-170

5-171T03440-6021

made. The amount could be considerable based upon past REWAIexperience and should be addressed during site remediationplanning.

5.3.6.2 £A£S£ived_Hxdrocarbon_jPl^ume - As described inSection 5.3.5, water-soluble chemical contaminants have beenidentified in the groundwater at the Havertown PCP site. Thecontaminants apparently originate from sources of gasoline/fueloil and solvents/degreasers.

A review of the gasoline/fuel oil component concentrations in thegroundwater indicates that the most probable contaminant sourceis from the subsurface waste fuel oil residing on the surface ofthe water table. Since the fuel oil was originally used at NWPprior to its disposal, the presence of pentachlorophenol (PCP) inthe oil, as a preservative, would allow it to be used to tracethe extent of groundwater contamination from dissolved chemicals.The use of PCP as a positive indicator of the dissolvedcontaminant plume, however, would yield a conservative depictionof the affected area because of, among others, the relatively lowsolubility of PCP in water (14 mg/1) and the relatively high PCPdetection limit (50 ug/1), compared to other compounds reported.

Figure 5-28 depicts the dissolved PCP concentration in thegroundwater in the saprolite units. As shown by the figure, 500and 2000 ug/1 PCP concentration lines were drawn to provide arough approximation of the shape of the dissolved plume. Itappears that the higher concentrations of dissolved PCP in thesaprolite units occur between the NWP and PCG buildings and thatthe concentration of this species apparently rapidly decreaseslaterally with distance from this area. It is important to notethat the reported concentration of PCP at well R-2 ft 0 k3 3 lwas

5-172

oC>iCM

"oIILULUU.

IIOUJ

'

UJH-35

DCUl

C3 ___ __I1

O"- T - O M-JFsStr g"" fc £zm=»5g2fc!S-oo

CM

o

1O)

o2 CO

8

»« ^ r^ / ._,« f Q o 03

m

I II IsZUJoUJ

flR300322101

co iiJo m CD s

5-173T03440-6021

diluted 80 times and analyzed 37 days after extraction, which iswithin the EPA requirement of 40 days for analysis. Smallerdilutions, completed earlier, reported substantially higher PCPconcentrations—namely, 5800+, 3400+, and 2700+ ug/1. Because ofthe high concentrations of PCP found, the interference of otherchemicals, the number of dilutions required, and the instabilityof PCP, it is believed that this reported number (860 ug/1) isunderstated and not representative of the PCP concentration inthe groundwater at R-2, even though proper QA/QC procedures hadbeen used. Consequently, the 2,000 ug/1 PCP isocon enshroudswell R-2.

It is apparent that dissolved PCP extends beyond the presentmonitoring well network, as evidenced at monitoring well HAV-05.The shape of the dissolved plume, as indicated by PCP, iselongated in the direction of groundwater flow, east-southeast.In addition, highest groundwater concentrations of dissolved PCPappear to be related to the location of the subsurface fuel oilplume, as shown previously in Figure 5-27.

A similar dissolved PCP map was produced for groundwater in thebedrock. As shown by Figure 5-29, the six CW-series bedrockmonitoring wells indicate that dissolved PCP levels aresignificantly elevated at the NWP and PCG sites. Because of thelimited number of data points, no approximation of the extent ofthe dissolved PCP plume in bedrock was made by contouring.However, it appears that the PCP dissolved in the bedrockgroundwater also extends beyond the present monitoring wellnetwork, as evidenced by well CW-6D, the furthest downgradientdeep monitoring well.

AR300323

5-174

oo.CM]

t-UJLUU.

ojOMIinw

u.

UJI-s;o":

Ulrr — *•*

I

4 O

oOlo(D60

j i

COzo1oUJ UJ

« •* SQ O co2 S 2UJ fe cco x em uj co

5-175T03440-6021

Chemical contaminants associated with solvents and degreaserswere also identified in the groundwater. These chemicals are notconstituents of fuel oil, nor were they reported in use in anypast or present wood-treating operation at NWP. To assess thedistribution of solvent constituents in the groundwater at thesite, the chemical trichloroethene (TCE) was chosen as anindicator species because of its frequency of occurrence in thegroundwater chemical results. The presence of solvents in thesaprolite units was assessed by plotting the reportedconcentrations of TCE next to their appropriate well locations,as shown by Figure 5-30. From this plot, it is apparent thatsolvent constituents, as represented by TCE, are presentthroughout the area of investigation and apparently extend beyondthe present monitoring well network. The highest concentrationsappear to be located in the vicinity of one of the moreupgradient wells, CW-1 series. As the general groundwater flowdirection is toward the east-southeast, it appears that little,if any, solvent constituents are entering the site from thenorth, as illustrated by Figure 5-30. To refine estimates ofsource areas for the solvent and degreaser constituentsidentified in the groundwater of the saprolite units wouldrequire additional investigation. However, it appears that oneor more source areas for solvent and degreaser constituents mayexist west (upgradient) of the study area.

The distribution of solvents and degreasers, as represented byTCE, was also assessed for groundwater in the bedrock.Figure 5-31 depicts the concentrations of TCE in the bedrockmonitoring wells at the site and is similar to the previouslypresented saprolite unit figure. The highest TCE levels wereidentified at CW-1, which implies a source located furtherupgradient from the study area. Figure 5-31 also

5-176

UJUJu.

QZUloUJ

coS t! s3 §d F SUJ UJ UJ

<2 § rix p tiiUJ CO CD

CQ

5-177

LJJLJJ

Su

QZUJoUJ

cozgSoo_i D:UJ LJJ

O

UJ CO

AB300327

5-178T03440-6021

solvent and degreaser constituents are present beyond the presentmonitoring well network, as evidenced by CW-6D, which is the mostdowngradient deep monitoring well. In general, the groundwaterin the bedrock at the study area contains elevated quantities ofsolvent/degreaser components.

5.3.6.3 Summary of Findings - Based upon the groundwaterchemical results and the measurement and calculation of oilthickness at the Havertown PCP site, two areas of groundwatercontamination were identified.

First, the existence of the subsurface floating oil plume wasverified as being present beneath the site. Using fluid levelsmeasured on April 11, 1988, calculations were performed toestablish that the thickness of oil on the water table surfaceshould be substantially less than the oil thicknesses measured intha monitoring wells. Accordingly, the volume of potentiallyrecoverable floating oil is much less than previousinvestigators' estimates. A map of the estimated area affectedby the floating immiscible oil has been produced, which basedupon available data, indicates that the floating oil is presentbetween NWP and PCG buildings.

Second, chemical results indicate that dissolved metals,hydrocarbons, pesticides, and isomers of dioxin and dibenzofuranexist in the groundwater at the site. Dissolved metals whichwar© found in relatively high concentrations consisted primarilyof copper, sodium, magnesium, iron, manganese, and potassium,while lower amounts of chromium, cadmium, lead, and zinc werealso reported.

AR300328

5-179T03440-6021

VOAs consisting primarily of benzene, ethylbenzene,1,1,1-trichloroethane, vinyl chloride, xylene, and total 1,2-dichloroethane were identified in the groundwater, along withlower concentrations of 1,2-dichloroethane, methylene chloride,toluene, 1,1,2-trichloroethane, acetone, and 1,1-dichloroethene.VOAs generally increased in concentration with depth at the CW-1,CW-5, and CW-6 series monitoring wells, while decreasing inconcentration with depth at the CW-2 series wells. In addition,there was no apparent correlation between the presence of oil inthe monitoring wells and increased VOA concentrations ingroundwater. In addition, VOAs have migrated past the presentmonitoring well network.

Relatively few species of BNAs were found in the groundwater;however, the concentrations of those BNAs that were presentindicate that the groundwater is substantially contaminated, withbedrock being nearly as contaminated as the saprolite. Theidentified BNAs overwhelmingly consisted of PCP, with loweramounts of naphthalene, 2-methyInaphthalene, phenanthrene, andapproximately 15 other BNA compounds. BNA contaminationapparently extends beyond the present monitoring well network.

Pesticides were found in three monitoring wells—NW-3-81, R-4,and CW-2D—consisting of delta-BHC, gamma-BHC, and/or dieldrin.There were no PCBs found above detection limits in thegroundwater samples.

Oil and grease was detected in 12 of the 28 wells sampled, andresults indicate a minor trend of increasing oil and grease con-centrations in the bedrock, while decreasing in concentration in

AH30Q329

5-180T03440-6021

the saprolite as one moves downgradient with the flow ofgroundwater.

Primary dioxin isomers found include hepta-, 1234678-hepta-, andocta-dibenzo-p-dioxins, with the highest total dioxin concentra-tion occurring in well NW-1-81. It was also determined thatwells with oil in them did not necessarily have the greatestdioxin concentrations and that dioxin was not identified in anyof the known bedrock monitoring wells. The distribution ofdioxin in the monitoring wells indicates that dioxin has migratedbeyond the present monitoring well network.

Dibenzofuran isomers such as hepta-, octa-, and some hexa-chlorinated dibenzofurans were identified in the groundwater,with the greatest concentrations also found in well NW-1-81.There appears to be no correlation between the presence of oil inthe monitoring wells and the respective dibenzofuran con-centration.

As dissolved PCP was detected in the groundwater in significantamounts, an affected area map has been produced using PCP as atracer for the dissolved contaminant plume originating from NWP.The plume delineated by the PCP should be considered aconservative estimate of the entire plume, as other contaminants,such as VOAs, are more hydrophilic than PCP and, with their loweranalyte detection levels, may enlarge the dimensions of thedissolved plume.

Apparently, both the saprolite and the bedrock units containsignificantly elevated quantities of dissolved gasoline/fuel oilconstituents in the groundwater. In addition, solvents anddegreasers, which are not constituents of fweJU Pil*. nWre

n

5-181T03440-6021

detected in the groundwater at the site. Their existenceindicates that other contaminant sources exist in addition to thesubsurface fuel oil. Such sources may include the nearbyautomotive repair and service stations which probably use orformerly used solvents and degreasers such as those identified inthe groundwater. Both the saprolite and bedrock units areaffected by the presence of elevated levels of solvent anddegreaser constituents.

From the data generated by this investigation, it is clear that asubstantial quantity of PCP-contaminated fuel oil is present onthe water table; however, because of monitoring well spacing andslow oil migration rates, the actual extent of the oil plume isuncertain. In addition, a substantial dissolved groundwatercontamination plume has been shown to exist and extend past thepresent monitoring well network.

6.0 SURFACE WATER INVESTIGATION

flf.300332

IToC

T03481-6021

6.0 SURFACE WATER INVESTIGATION

6.1 Surface Water Drainage

The Havertown PCP site is drained by Naylors Run which is atributary to the Delaware River. Naylors Run flows in asoutheasterly direction from the site through sections of naturalstreambed, concrete-lined man-made channels, and various drainagepipes before entering Cobbs Creek near Lansdowne, Pennsylvania,'approximately four miles southeast of the site. Cobbs Creekempties into Darby Creek which flows through the TiniciumWildlife Preserve before entering the Delaware River.

The drainage area of concern consists of the properties of NWP,PCG, and the residential homes along Rittenhouse Circle. Surfacewater from these areas enters Naylors Run through a system ofnatural and artificial routes.

Surface drainage from NWP flows predominantly in a northeasterlydirection and is assisted by an 18-inch corrugated metal, stormsewer pipe which borders the eastern and southeastern side of theNWP property. Water enters the storm sewer pipe at inletslocated near the pedestrian gate in the vicinity of ContinentalMotors and behind the Swiss Farm Market.

A significant amount of water has been observed to collect onnumerous depressions across the NWP property, especially in thearea of the main gate near Eagle Road. There, the surface watersubsequently evaporates or percolates into the ground. Whenprecipitation is significant, it was observed that a substantialamount of overland flow occurs, most of which exists on theproperty through the NWP main gate. This water, along with the

AR3QQ333

6-2T03481-6021

water from the storm sewer, flows into a drainage ditch north ofNWP which runs parallel to the abandoned railroad bed.

This drainage ditch routes water under Eagle Road and PCG'sparking lot through a 24-inch, corrugated metal pipe (CMP). Thispipe receives drainage from three inlets located in the PCGparking lot and joins with a 48-inch pipe carrying water fromNaylors Run above the headwall of the abandoned railroad bed justnorth of the PCG property. This water then travels through a60-inch CMP before emptying into Naylors Run.

A 36-inch CMP runs from Lawrence Road, behind PCG, in anortheasterly direction before emptying into Naylors Run. Thispipe handles surface drainage from Lawrence Road, as well aspicking up drainage from two inlets located at the southwestcorner of the PCG building.

Drainage from Rittenhouse Circle occurs primarily as overlandflow across the grass areas, road, sidewalks, and macadamdriveways. This water is caught by storm sewers and transportedto Naylors Run. Runoff from the grassy areas either percolatesinto the ground, evaporates, moves by overland flow to Naylorsrun, or is removed by subsurface drainage tiles installed by someRittenhouse Circle residents to control the high water table.Drainage in the backyards of the homes bordering Naylors Run ispoor as evident by the soft and wet ground surface, whichpredominates during a majority of the year.

Plate 1, the site base map, depicts the storm water and sanitarysewer system which were preliminarily investigated by REWAI

Afl30033i.

°fl \r\\fUulK

6-3T03481-6021

during the RI. No information is available at this time.concerning the subsurface drainage tiles installed by someRittenhouse Circle residents*

6.2 Surface Water Sampling of Naylors Run

Surface water sampling was included as part of the RI at theHavertown PCP site. The purpose of the surface water samplingwas to assess the extent of contamination in the water of NaylorsRun as a result of groundwater influent and surface water runoff.Surface water sampling was conducted on July 24, 1987. Tensurface water locations were sampled, and in addition, aduplicate sample was taken at surface water location 9 (SW-9) forQA/QC procedures.

6.2.1 Sampling Procedures and Locations

The surface water sampling began with the downstream samplinglocations and continued progressively upstream to avoid stirringup sediments and consequently degrading the quality of thesamples. Each sampling location was marked with a wooden stakeon the stream bank and flagged. A description of the locationwas recorded in the field notes and the position plotted on theproject base map.

Samples were collected in an area of the stream where there was asteady but nonturbulent flow of water, by immersing a samplecontainer and filling it without disturbing any sediments. AnOVA meter was used throughout the sampling to monitor for organicvapors emanating from the samples, as well as in the working zone

SR30Q335

Li o WFDSl

6-4T03481-6021

of the samplers. The results of these readings were included inthe field notes.

6.2.2 Field Measurement of Chemical Parameters

Field parameters were taken at each surface water samplinglocation and are included herein as Table 6-1. These parametersincluded dissolved oxygen, pH, specific conductance, andtemperature. Field pH measurements were made utilizing abattery-operated pH meter with a two-buffer (4.0 and 7.0)calibration. Specific conductance was measured using a YellowSprings Instrument (YSI) Model 33 SCT meter calibrated with astandard solution at 25°C. The immersion thermometer on the SCTmeter was used for making water temperature measurements tocorrect measured specific conductance measurements to theirequivalents at 25°C. This was completed by utilizing theformula:

LR = LT/[! + 0.019 (T - R)]

where :

= conductivity at 25°C (reference temperature)^ conductivity at sampled temperature

R = reference temperatureT = sample temperature

(Dackombe and Gardiner, 1983, p. 154)

Dissolved oxygen was measured utilizing a YSI Model 51D.O. -meter. This instrument provides measurement of dissolved

AR300336

0".

T03482-60216-5

Table 6-1

Surface Water Parameters

Dissolved SpecificOxygen Conductance Temperature

Location (mg/1) pH (umhos/cm r25°C1) °(C)

SW-1 5.1 6.53 431 25

SW-2 5.5 6.45 437 25

SW-3 5.5 6.30 433 25.5

SW»4 5.85 6.40 440 26

SW-5 3.7 6.10 583 22

SW-6 6.6 6.98 431 33

SW-7 7.05 6.70 432 32

SW-8 6.9 7.30 418 33.5

SW-9 7.5 7.2 428 32

SW-10 6.6 6.80 445 28

6-6T03481-6021

oxygen calibrated to the oxygen in the air with regards tobarometric pressure and elevation.

It is apparent from the field-measured surface water parametersthat location SW-5 (storm sewer outlet) was unique among thesurface water sampling locations. SW-5 had the lowest dissolvedoxygen (3.7 mg/1) and pH (6.10) of the samples of surface watertested. In addition, SW-5 also had the highest specificconductance (583 umhos/cm £ 25°C) of the surface water samples.The storm sewer pipe (SW-5) apparently influences the quality ofthe surface water in Naylors Run by providing effluent waterswhich at least affect the surface water parameters tested here.

6.2.3 Chemical Results

Samples were collected and analyzed for the Hazardous SubstanceList (HSL) parameters, oil and grease, and dioxin and dibenzo-furan. Results of these analyses are also included inAppendix 2.

Several HSL metals were detected in the water chemistry resultsincluded as Table 6-2 from surface water samples SW-1 to SW-10.Heavy metals such as cobalt, copper, lead, silver, and thalliumwere detected in samples at lower concentrations than zinc,calcium, sodium, potassium, and iron. The presence of metalssuch as zinc and copper may be associated with NWP due to thefact that these metals are used in the wood treatment process atthe site. The detection of lead could be due in part to gasolinecomponents being washed off of parking lots, road surfaces,and/or from automotive service stations in the area. Metalswhich were detected at higher concentrations, such as calcium,

A8300338

6-7

CM m o r«. «

3. •* ^ II ~~

e cq — e tk CM CM tn »• rsc-: - «d^- -xx^^x^-x^^xx;

K • •& • c»j •04 ^ **.

—• "- tn r^ @ 4e r*- » _j _i _i _j _i ** cv _j -_j *r> o a *• Q o o o - « > a » m Ckii. SSSMS • -ssffis.».i^ss — P-. s as ss

._.:> rv u-> e* LU »- uj uj

M

S M S^^^S^S^S^^^^^S^SSS^S^-

.g S -i S S S S S i S s S 5§O —— «» 4-.<MfMt»^ik. ***_• — _ _• m *

<*» — •-» e t.. <v» ry krt e- -» uj-" _ • ft • •

•

6-8

.

«•» — ^ e» i^

PS

_ u-> — ir»

I®

S

* ' » 3 S " S S a & » *** H fia S sC H *" *** "™* eC iX §

1 £ 5= *=• £ a 3 ::w. £ _> <iLT> I*

3* t!

* E S S? <J

AfiSO