ftT-MEDIAL m \ \ S I K . \ I I O \ s i \ i M \ m u i i ' O R T

Remedial InvestigationSummary ReportAvtex Fibers Superfund Site,Front Royal, Virginia

1 August 1994

Prepared For:

FMC Corporation1735 Market StreetPhiladelphia, PA 19103

Prepared By:

Environmental Resources Management, Inc.855 Springdale DriveExton, PA 19341

ERM

R E M E D I A L INVESTIGATION S U M M A R Y REPORT

Remedial InvestigationSummary ReportAvtex Fibers Superfund Site,front Royal, Virginia

1 August 1994

Prepared For:

FMC Corporation1735 Market StreetPhiladelphia, PA 19103

Prepared By:

Environmental Resources Management, Inc.855 Springdale DriveExton, PA 19341

f l R 3 0 0 0 0 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY iv

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 RI OBJECTIVES 2

1.2 AREAS OF INVESTIGATION 2

1.3 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 2

2.0 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION FINDINGS BY UNIT 6Data Quality Objectives 6Data Qualifiers 7

2.1 ON-SITE SOILS MANAGEMENT UNIT INVESTIGATION 82.1.1 Background Soil Sampling 82.1.2 West Carbon Disulfide Storage Area 92.1.3 Boneyard 102.1.4 Aboveground Storage Tank 102.1.5 Zinc Recovery Building 112.1.6 Lead Casting Shop 112.1.7 Underground Storage Tanks 122.1.8 Polypropylene PCS Spill Area 122.1.9 Acid Reclaim Building 132.1.10 East Carbon Disulfide Storage Area 132.1.11 Paint Shop 142.1.12 Chemical Storage 142.1.13 Coal Yard 152.1.14 Electrical Transformers 162.1.15 Acid Reclaim Cooling Tower 162.1.16 Spray Ponds 172.1.17 Seeps/Sediments and Surface Drainage Ditch 17

Seeps/Sediments 17Surface Drainage Ditch 18

2.2 SULFATE BASINS MANAGEMENT UNIT INVESTIGATION 18

2.3 VISCOSE BASINS MANAGEMENT UNIT INVESTIGATION 202.3.1 Viscose Basins 1 through 8 212.3.2 Viscose Basins 9,10, and 11 22

{ f lR300003 7/29/94

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)

2.4 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT LAGOONS AND RESIDUALSMANAGEMENT UNIT INVESTIGATION 242.4.1 Emergency Lagoons 242.4.2 Polishing Basins 25

2.5 FILL AREAS AND FLY ASH PILES MANAGEMENT UNITINVESTIGATION 262.5.1 Fly Ash Basins/Stockpile 262.5.2 Landfill 28

2.6 ON-SITE AND OFF-SITE GROUND WATER MANAGEMENT UNITINVESTIGATION 292.6.1 Site Ground Water Conditions 29

Site Geology 30Site Hydrogeology 31

2.6.2 Ground Water Quality Results 32Overburden Ground Water Quality 32Bedrock Ground Water Quality 33

2.6.3 On-site and Off-site Ground Water Data Analysis 34Potential Primary Sources Impacting Ground Water Quality 34Other Potential Sources Impacting Ground Water Quality 35Plume Extent and Migration 36

2.6.4 Suggested Data Gaps 39

3.0 CONCLUSIONS 40

REFERENCES 41

11 H D o n n n n i . 7/29/9*f lR30000l4

LIST OF FIGURES1-12-12-22-32-42-52-6

2-7

2-8

2-92-10

LIST OF TABLES2-12-22-3

2-4

2-5

2-6

2-7

2-8

2-9

LIST OF PLATES12345

FMC Remedial Investigation Management UnitsPotential Data Gaps Onsite Soils Management UnitIllustrative Cross Section for Sulfate Basins Management UnitIllustrative Cross Section for Viscose Basins 1 through 8Illustrative Cross Section for Viscose Basins 9,10, and 11Illustrative Cross Section for Fly Ash Basin 3 and StockpileGround Water Elevation Contours for the Overburden MonitoringWells (4/25/94)Ground Water Elevations Contours for the Shallow BedrockMonitoring Wells (4/25/94)Ground Water Elevation Contours for the Intermediate BedrockMonitoring Wells (4/25/94)Conceptual Contaminant Plume In Shallow BedrockConceptual Contaminant Plume In Intermediate Bedrock

Key findings for the On-site Soils Investigation Management UnitKey findings for the Sulfate Basins Management UnitKey findings for Viscose Basins 1 through 8 in the Viscose BasinsManagement UnitKey Findings for the Viscose Basins Seeps in the Viscose BasinsManagement UnitKey Findings for Viscose Basins 9,10, and 11 in the Viscose BasinsManagement UnitKey Findings for the Emergency Lagoon in the Waste-water TreatmentPlant Lagoons and Residuals Management UnitKey Findings for the Polishing Basins in the Wastewater TreatmentPlant Lagoons and Residuals Management UnitKey Findings for the Fly Ash Basins/Stockpile in the Fill Areas andFly Ash Piles Management UnitKey findings for the Landfill in the Fill Areas and Fly Ash PilesManagement Unit

Locations of Cross SectionsCross Section A-A' Soil/Ground 'Water QualityCross Section B-B' Soil/Ground Water QualityCross Section A-A' Ground Water Flow NetCross Section A-A' Conceptualized CSz Plume

mf l R 3 0 0 0 0 5

7/29/94

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

FMC Corporation (FMC) has substantially completed the RemedialInvestigation (RI) for the Avtex Fibers Superfund Site located in FrontRoyal, Virginia ("Site") pursuant to Section No. XIII of "AdministrativeOrder on Consent for the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study, AvtexFibers - Front Royal, Inc. Site, FMC Corporation, April 3,1993" (the"Order"), Docket No. III-93-14-DC. The scope of the RemedialInvestigation activities (RI) conducted by FMC complies with the FinalRemedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) Final Work Plan (WorkPlan) prepared by EPA, dated February 1993 (EPA Work AssignmentNumber 37-19-3LD1). FMC has prepared this RI Summary Report inresponse to the March 25,1994 request from EPA to: (1) present key dataand findings from the RI; and (2) summarize the data gaps FMC believesmay still exist.

RI field investigation activities, conducted pursuant to the Order, occurredfrom June 1993 through April 1994. Six areas of the site, identified asmanagement units in the Work Plan, were investigated by FMC. Thesemanagement units are described as:

• On-site Soils,

• Viscose Basins,

• Sulfate Basins,

• Wastewater Treatment Plant Lagoons and Residuals,

• Fill Areas and Fly Ash Piles, and

• On-site and Off-site Ground Water.

The overall objectives of the RI, as stated in the Work Plan, were todetermine: (1) the nature and extent of contamination associated with eachmanagement unit; and (2) the impact of contaminants from eachmanagement unit on other media.

Of the six management units investigated, only three units may stillcontain data gaps sufficient to warrant further investigation to satisfy RIobjectives.

• On-site and Off-site Ground Water. Additional investigation of the on-site and off-site ground water unit may be warranted to further definethe extent of contaminants in the bedrock ground water plume, in the

i v A R 3 0 0 0 0 6

vicinity of viscose basins 9,10, and 11. Analytical data from shallow,intermediate, and deep bedrock wells indicate that the chemicalconstituents defining the ground water plume include carbondisulfide, phenol, arsenic, zinc, and elevated pH.

• Viscose Basins. Additional investigation may be warranted to moreaccurately determine the hydraulic relationship between the viscosebasins 9,10, and 11 and the overburden and bedrock aquifers, and tofurther characterize the leachate in these basins.

• On-site Soils. Results indicate further investigation may be warrantedin only six of the sixteen on-site soil areas to further determine theextent of chemical constituents in soil or their potential to adverselyaffect shallow ground water quality.

The RI findings presented herein indicate that further investigation maybe warranted for the on-site soils, viscose basins, and on-site and off-siteground water management units at the Site.

f l R 3 Q 0 0 0 7V n II W V \J *J W I 7/29/94

1.0 INTRODUCTION

FMC Corporation (FMC) has substantially completed RemedialInvestigation (RI) activities at the Avtex Fibers Superfund Site located inFront Royal, Virginia ("Site") pursuant to Section No. XIII of"Administrative Order on Consent for the RemedialInvestigation/Feasibility Study, Avtex Fibers - Front Royal, Inc. Site, FMCCorporation, April 3,1993" (the "Order"), Docket No. HI-93-14-DC Thescope of the RI conducted by FMC complies with the RemedialInvestigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) Final Work Plan (Work Plan)prepared by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), datedFebruary 1993. The Work Plan identified six management units whichFMC was required to investigate during the RI.

In a March 21,1994 letter to EPA, FMC requested a 90 day extension of theRI completion date from July 22,1994, as specified in the February 1993EPA Final Work Plan, to October 20,1994 to provide additional timenecessary for adequate data compilation and document preparation. In aMarch 25,1994 letter, EPA accepted the extension request and furtherrequested an RI Summary Report be submitted by FMC on or before July22,1994 to:

1. Present key data and findings from the RI for each of the sixmanagement units; and

2. Summarize data gaps for management units which FMC believes maywarrant additional characterization.

FMC will continue to integrate and interpret the massive amount ofphysical and chemical data obtained during the RI effort, and prepare thedraft RI report for submittal in October 1994, or if more appropriate, uponcompletion of any additional RI activity in selected areas of the site.

The RI Summary Report is presented in three sections. Section 1 presentsthe RI objectives and a brief summary of key findings for each of the sixmanagement units. Section 2 presents a more detailed description of thekey findings for each unit. Section 3 summarizes the key conclusions ofthe RI effort to date. This RI Summary Report includes, by reference, all ofthe appropriate data and graphic information currently developed for theSite.

1 ,_. 7/29/94

A R 3 0 0 0 0 8

1.1 RI OBJECTIVES

The RI was conducted in accordance with the requirements of the EPAFinal Work Plan and supporting documents that included EPA's June 1993Final Project Operations Plan (POP) and Field Sampling Plan Supplements(FSPS) submitted by FMC and approved by EPA prior to initiating thefield investigation for each unit. The FSPS documents used during theinvestigation are listed in the references section at the end of this RISummary Report. The two overall RI objectives stated in the Final WorkPlan were to determine: (1) the nature and extent of contaminationassociated with each management unit; and (2) the impact ofcontaminants from each management unit on other media. As describedin this RI Summary Report, the findings meet the intent of these twoobjectives and indicate that further investigation activities in targetedareas of the site may be warranted.

3.2 AREAS OF INVESTIGATION

Six areas of the site, identified as management units in the Work Plan,were investigated by FMC during the RI. Each of the six managementunits are shown in Figure 1-1 and are listed below, along with theappropriate section of this report which addresses them:

• On-site Soils (16 areas and background) - Section 2.1

• Sulfate Basins (basins SB-1, 2, 3, 4, 4E, and 5) - Section 2.2

• Viscose Basins (basins VB-1 through VB-11) - Section 2.3

• Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Lagoon and Residuals(emergency lagoon and two polishing basins) - Section 2.4

• Fill Areas and Fly Ash Piles (fly ash stockpile, fly ash basins 1, 2, 3and 6, the new landfill, and the sodium sulfate pile) - Section 2.5

• On-site and Off-site Ground Water - Section 2.6

1.3 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

RI field investigation activities performed by FMC for each of the sixmanagement units listed above have been completed. The nature andextent of site contaminants and the potential to affect other media havebeen adequately characterized in three of the six management units(sulfate basins, WWTP lagoon and residuals, and fill areas and fly ash

A R 3 0 0 0 0 97/29/94

piles). FMC believes that data gaps may still exist for the three remainingmanagement units (on-site soils, viscose basins, and on-site and off-siteground water), which suggest that additional investigation may berequired to adequately characterize the nature and extent of sitecontamination in these units.

Key findings and data gaps for each management unit are summarizedbelow.

• On-site Soils (OSS). This management unit consists of 16 areas. Of thesixteen soil areas investigated, six areas (i.e., west carbon disulfidestorage area, boneyard, aboveground storage tank, undergroundstorage tanks, lead casting shop, and zinc recovery building) maywarrant further investigation to better understand the extent ofcontamination in soil or their potential to create a localized impact toground water quality.

• Sulfate Basins (SB). This management unit consists of six basinslabeled SB 1, 2,3, 4,4E, and 5. The nature and extent of sitecontaminants have been adequately characterized in the SBs. Zincand lead are the primary site contaminants associated with the SBs.Although there are detectable levels of lead and zinc in ground water,the concentrations in the overburden wells downgradient from theSBs are similar to those found in upgradient overburden wells. Thebasins are the primary source for sulfate and other total dissolvedsolids (TDS) to ground water. A few SB sludge samples containedPCBs at concentrations less than 1,000 micrograms per kilogram(fig/kg), but the detections were sporadic and not indicative of PCBcontamination within the basins. The RI activities conducted to dateare considered to have sufficiently characterized the nature andextent of contaminants associated with the SBs or their potentialimpact on ground water; therefore, it is anticipated that no furtherinvestigation is warranted.

• Viscose Basins (VB). This management unit consists of 11 basinslabeled VB1 through 11. The VBs have been divided into two groupsbased on physical site characteristics. Basins 1 through 8 areaddressed as one group, while basins 9,10, and 11 are addressed as aseparate group. Basins 1 through 8 overlie natural clayey silt soils,are not saturated with ground water, and have a soil cover. Basins 9,10, and 11 have little soil beneath the viscose sludge, are saturatedwith ground water, and do not have a soil cover. Carbon disulfideconcentrations in basins 1 through 8 are generally less than 500(ig/kg, while the concentrations in basins 9,10, and 11 typicallyexceed 50,000 |ig/kg. Due in part to these differences, basins 1

f l R 3 0 0 0 I O 7/29/94

through 8 appear to have had less impact on ground water qualitythan basins 9,10, and 11.

Viscose Basins 1 through 8. The nature and extent of sitecontaminants have been adequately characterized in VB 1through 8. Ground water quality in the vicinity anddowngradient from VB 1 through 8 does not appear to have beensubstantially impacted by carbon disulfide, arsenic, zinc, phenolor elevated pH, which are the primary VB sludge contaminants.The carbon disulfide concentration in the sludge from thesebasins ranges from none detected (ND) to 460 (ig/kg (with theexception of a limited number of samples from VB 5 and 7). Thecarbon disulfide concentrations in the basin sludges, combinedwith the native soil layer beneath the basins and a water tablebelow the bottom of the basins suggest that VB 1-8 have hadlimited impact on ground water. No further investigationappears to be warranted to characterize the nature and extent ofcontaminants associated with VB 1 through 8 or their potentialimpact on ground water.

Viscose basins 9,10, and 11. The nature and extent of sitecontaminants have been substantially characterized in VB 9,10,and 11. There is little soil beneath these basins, and the watertable is 10 to 20 feet above the bottom of each basin, resulting insaturation of the viscose sludge. Carbon disulfide concentrationsdetected in samples from these basins range from 720 to 3,600,000fig/kg. Phenol concentrations range from 280 to 290,000 (ig/kg.The elevated arsenic concentrations in ground water in thevicinity and downgradient of VB 9,10, and 11 is considered to beresult from the reaction of the elevated pH leachate with naturalsoils. Data gaps, which may warrant further investigation,include water levels and leachate quality in each of the threebasins, which may better define the degree to which these basinsmay be acting as an ongoing source to ground watercontamination.

WWTP Lagoons and Residuals. The WWTP lagoon and residualsinclude the emergency lagoon and two polishing basins. The natureand extent of site contaminants have been adequately characterized inthe emergency lagoon and two polishing basins. Furthermore, impactto ground water quality in the vicinity and downgradient from thesebasins has been adequately characterized. Carbon disulfide, zinc, andPCB Aroclor 1242 were detected in the emergency lagoon, but zincwas the only site contaminant detected in the two polishing basins.Ground water quality data for shallow wells downgradient of the

_ 4 7/29/94

f l R 3 0 0 0 l I

emergency lagoon show the presence of carbon disulfide atconcentrations less than 37 micrograms per liter (M-g/1). No furtherinvestigation of this management unit appears to be warranted.

• Fill Areas and Ply Ash Piles. This management unit consists of sevenareas labeled fly ash stockpile; fly ash basins (FAB) 1, 2,3, and 6; thelandfill, and the sodium sulfate pile. The nature and extent of sitecontaminants have been adequately characterized in thismanagement unit. The only constituent of concern identified in flyash samples is arsenic, which is elevated five to ten times abovebackground soil concentrations. However, monitoring wellsdowngradient of the FAB indicate that neither the fly ash basins northe stockpile are a direct source of arsenic to ground water. Also,ground water quality data from wells downgradient of the "new"landfill indicate that the landfill is not an apparent source of sitecontaminants to ground water. Therefore, no further investigation ofthe fly ash or landfill areas appears to be warranted to delineate thenature and extent of site contamination or the potential to impactother media.

• On-site and Off-site Ground Water. Ground water flow and qualityhave been adequately characterized in the overburden, shallow,intermediate, and deep bedrock. Lateral ground water flow in bothoverburden and bedrock is toward the South Fork of the ShenandoahRiver (River). Site contaminants detected in ground water includecarbon disulfide (maximum concentration of 1,400,000 M-g/1)/ phenol,arsenic, zinc, and elevated pH. The main body of the contaminantplume has been delineated; however, the edges of the plumeupgradient and cross gradient of the source area, as well as thedowngradient leading edge of the off-site plume, may warrant furtherdelineation.

In summary, of the six management units investigated, only three units(on-site soils, VB 9,10, and 11, and on-site and off-site ground water) maywarrant further investigation to complete the delineation of the nature andextent of site contaminants associated with each of these areas, and todetermine of the potential for these management units to affect groundwater quality.

Section 2 of this report further describes the key RI findings and data gapsfor each management unit, and assesses the potential need for furtherinvestigation, where appropriate.

5 S R 3 0 0 0 I 2

2.0 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION FINDINGS BY UNIT

This section summarizes the key data and findings for each of the sixmanagement units investigated by FMC during the RI field investigationconducted between June 1993 and April 1994. The investigation wasconducted in accordance with the specifications provided in the WorkPlan, POP, and FSPS documents. The FSPS were submitted by FMC andapproved by EPA prior to initiating the field investigation for each unit.Where appropriate, the following summary of each management unitincludes references to tables, figures, and complete data sets in otherdocuments previously submitted to EPA. Such documents include FSPSand Analytical Quality Assurance Review (QAR) Reports. The FSPS,Work Plan, and POP, collectively used to direct the field investigation, arelisted in the References section at the end of this RI Summary Report.

In addition to presenting the key findings for each management unit, thisreport also comments on whether additional field investigation iswarrented for any unit to comply with the objectives of the RI. Thedetermination of whether further investigation may be necessary is basedon the assessment of whether the RI objectives of characterizing the natureand extent of contamination, and evaluating potential impact to othermedia have been achieved, and not on the significance of the findingsrelative to a regulatory standard or risk-based concentration.

Data Quality Objectives

Analytical data for the on-site soils, VBs, SBs, WWTP lagoons andresiduals, and fill area and fly ash piles management units were generatedto satisfy three levels of data quality objectives (DQOs), as required by thePOP.• Level IIDQO. Level II DQO is characterized by the use of portable

analytical instruments that can be used onsite. Level II data providedreal-time data to guide field activities and support the determinationof the extent of contamination. ERM's Field Analytical ServicesTechnology (ERM-FAST®) served as the On-site Analytical Facility(OAF) to conduct the Target Compound List Organics and TargetAnalyte List Inorganics (TCL/TAL) analysis to satisfy the Level IIDQO as specified in the Work Plan and POP.

• Level III DQO. Level III DQO is characterized as laboratory analysisusing standard EPA-approved procedures other than CLP. EPA

6 7/29/94

f l R 3 0 0 0 ! 3

identified 18 site contaminants which required analysis to satisfyLevel III DQOs. These included:

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs); carbon disulfide, methylenechloride, 2-butanone, and tetrachloroethene,

Base neutral/acid extractables (BNAs); naphthalene, dimethylphthalate, pyrene, phenol, and 4-methylphenol,

Polychlorinted Biphenyls (PCBs); Aroclors 1242,1248,1254,1260,and

Metals; arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, and zinc.

ERM-FAST® conducted the analysis of the four VOCs after receivingcontingent approval for Level III DQO from EPA in correspondencedated July 16,1993. Lancaster Laboratories, Inc. (LLI) performed theremainder of the Level III analysis. LLI also performed analysis ofberyllium and cyanide to meet Level III DQOs.

• Level IV DQO. Level IV DQO is characterized as Contract LaboratoryProgram (CLP) protocols with rigorous quality assurance and qualitycontrol. Gulf States Analytical, Inc. (GSAI) and LLI served as theconfirmation laboratories to provide Level IV data, in accordancewith the Quality Assurance Plan Supplement (QAPjP) submitted byFMC and approved by EPA in May 1993. In addition, the datagenerated from the January and April 1994 ground water samplingevents were also analyzed by GSAI and LLI to satisfy Level IV DQOs.

Data Qualifiers

Data for each management unit were reviewed for adherence to thespecified analytical protocols in accordance with the QAPjP Supplementand the POP. The results of the analytical review are contained in eightQAR reports, which are listed in the References section. Data described inthis section are presented with appropriate qualifiers resulting from adetailed data review and validation process. Some data presented in thisRI Summary Report contains a "J" qualifier, which indicates that either: (1)the concentration reported is below the Contract Required Detection Limit(CRDL) but above the instrument detection limit (IDL), and is reported inaccordance with EPA CLP requirements; or (2) the constituent is present,but the quantification is estimated, usually due to matrix interference. In afew instances, the "L" qualifier is used. This qualifier indicates that thequantification is a biased low estimated value due to possible lowrecoveries of surrogates, calibration standards, or spikes as a result ofmatrix effects. The "N" and "B" qualifiers are also used occasionally. The

f l R S O O O U7/29/94

"N" qualifier indicates the result is considered a tentative identificationdue to minor inadequacies in the mass spectrum for this compound. The"B" qualifier indicates the result is considered qualitatively suspect due tothe presence of the constituent in a field or laboratory blank.

2.1 ON-SITE SOILS MANAGEMENT UNIT INVESTIGATION

The investigation of the On-site Soils Management Unit, described in theOn-Site Soils Management Unit FSPS listed in the References section,consisted of collecting samples from 17 designated areas of the siteidentified by EPA in the Work Plan. Sixteen areas were designated byEPA as areas that potentially contained site contaminants; samples werealso collected from undisturbed areas to define site backgroundconditions. The location of the on-site soil areas are identified in Figure 1-1 as the area in white. The on-site soils investigation included collection ofsurface and subsurface soil samples, seep/sediment samples, and liquidsamples from the contents of underground storage tanks.

Results indicate that of the 16 soil areas investigated, only six areas (i.e.,west carbon disulfide storage area, boneyard, aboveground storage tank,underground storage tanks, lead casting shop, and zinc recovery building)may warrant further investigation to fully understand the extent ofcontamination in soil or the potential to create a localized impact toground water quality.

This section and Table 2-1 summarize key findings for each of the 16 areasof the on-site soils investigation, and identifies potential data gaps for thesix areas. The general locations of these six areas are shown on Figure 2-1.The background soil sampling and the six units which may warrantfurther investigation are discussed first, followed by the ten units whereFMC believes adequate investigation has been achieved and no furtherinvestigation is considered necessary.

2.1.1 Background Soil Sampling

Eleven background surface (0-0.5 feet) and subsurface (0.5 - 2, 8-10,18-2020-22 and 22-24 feet) soil samples were collected from two borings (ON-BH-101 and ON-BH-102) located along the eastern boundary of the site,and at one surface location (ON-SS-18) in a wooded area north of fly ashbasin 6 (see Figure 3-8 in the June 1993 On-site Soils FSPS for samplinglocations). The purpose of these samples was to establish a baseline forthe chemical characteristics of native soils at the site. Background soil

8 7/29/94

f l R 3 0 0 0 ! 5

samples were analyzed for TCL, VOCs, BNA compounds, pesticides/PCBs, and TAL metals.

A trace concentration (2J fig/ kg) of trichloroethene was detected in twosubsurface background samples (ON-BH-101-10 and ON-BH-101-18).Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were detected in threebackground surface samples (ON-SS-BH101, ON-SS-BH102 and ON-SS-18), with concentrations of individual compounds ranging from 38J-240J(ig/kg. Phthalates were detected in eight samples at concentrations in therange of 21J-320J M-g/kg. The only PCB compound detected in thebackground samples was Aroclor 1260 at a concentration of 18J fig/kg inone surface sample (ON-SS-18). Trace concentrations (0.36J-18J fig/kg) ofthree pesticides (4,4'-DDE, 4,4'-DDT and endosulfan sulfate) weredetected in three surface samples (ON-SS-BH101, ON-SS-BH102, and ON-SS-18) and one subsurface sample (ON-BH-101-22). The concentrations ofthe 23 metals detected in the background samples are considered to beindicative of soils in areas of the site undisturbed by past site operations.

2.2.2 West Carbon Disulfide Storage Area

The concrete structure in the west carbon disulfide area formerlycontained tanks used to store carbon disulfide. Reportedly, watercontaining approximately 2 milligrams per liter (mg/1) of carbon disulfideoverflowed this impoundment onto surrounding soils. The concentrationsof carbon disulfide detected in several soil samples indicate that a carbondisulfide release to soils may have occurred in this area.

Six surface (0-0.5 feet) and eight subsurface (6-12 feet) soil samples(surface sampling locations ON-SS-08 and 09 and borings ON-BH05through 08 - see Figure 3-4 in the June 1993 On-site Soils FSPS forsampling locations) were collected and analyzed for TCL VOCs. Carbondisulfide was detected in five samples (ON-BH-07-07, ON-BH-07-09, ON-SS-BH08, ON-BH-08-07, and ON-BH-08-09) over a broad range ofconcentrations (5 - 77,000 micrograms per kilogram (|ig/kg)). Other VOCs(acetone and methylene chloride) were also detected in two samples (ON-BH-05-10 and ON-BH-08-09) at concentrations in the range of 4J-24J

Based on the concentrations of carbon disulfide detected, furtherinvestigation may be warranted for the west carbon disulfide storage areato determine whether the possible past release of carbon disulfide mayhave adversely impacted ground water quality.

9 7/29/94

f l R 3 0 0 0 ! 6

2.1.3 Boneyard

The boneyard was used to store equipment and various containers forsubsequent salvage. This area was specified in the Work Plan forinvestigation because releases of solvents, oils and particulate metals tosoils may have occurred. The presence of numerous BNAs and pesticidesas well as several metals identified as site contaminants (arsenic, lead andzinc) in soil samples from the boneyard indicates that releases of theseconstituents may have occurred to the soils in this area.

Twelve surface soil samples (0-0.5 feet) and eight subsurface soil samples(0.5-2 and 8-10 feet) were collected from 12 locations (surface samplinglocations ON-SS-10 through 17 and borings ON-BH-9 through 12 - seeFigure 3-5 in the June 1993 On-site Soils FSPS for sampling locations) andanalyzed for TCL VOCs, BNAs, pesticides/PCBs, and TAL metals.Analytical results are summarized in Table 2-1 of this document.

Several VOCs (benzene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, trichloroethene, toluene,and xylenes) were detected in 10 samples (ON-SS-15, ON-SS-16, ON-SS-BH09, ON-BH-09-0.5, ON-BH-10-0.5, ON-BH-10-8, ON-SS-BH11, ON-BH-11-0.5, ON-SS-BH12, and ON-BH-12-0.5) at concentrations in the range of1J-33J |ig/kg . Phenols, phthalates, carbazole and/or PAHs were detectedin 11 of the 12 soil samples at concentrations ranging from 30J-14,OOOJ(ig/kg. Eighteen pesticides were also detected in 13 of the samples;however, these pesticides were detected at concentrations of 0.15J - 46Ju.g/kg which are considered trace to low, respectively. PCB Aroclors 1242and 1260 were detected in seven samples, but at trace to lowconcentrations (36J - 250 ug/kg), Results of metals analyses indicated thepresence of arsenic (2 samples), lead (13 samples), cadmium (1 sample)and zinc (10 samples) at concentrations more than five times the meanconcentration detected for each of these metals in the background soilsamples.

Based on these results, further investigation of the boneyard may bewarranted to more fully assess the potential for contaminants to adverselyimpact shallow ground water quality in the vicinity of the boneyard.

2.1.4 Aboveground Storage Tank

Two subsurface (0-2 and 8-10 feet) soil samples were collected from oneboring (ON-BH-13 - see Figure 3-6 in the On-site Soils FSPS for the boringlocation) and analyzed for TCL VOCs and total petroleum hydrocarbons(TPH) in a location adjacent to the aboveground storage tank. No VOCs

A R 3 0 0 0 I 7

were detected; however, TPH results (430-5,000 milligrams per kilogram(mg/kg)) indicate the presence of petroleum hydrocarbons in surface andsubsurface soils.

Since the TPH results indicate the possible previous release of petroleumhydrocarbons to soils, further investigation may be warranted to identifythe type and extent of hydrocarbons in subsurface soils, and to determineif petroleum hydrocarbons have adversely impacted ground waterquality.

2.2.5 Zinc Recovery Building

Six surface (0-0.5 feet) and six shallow subsurface (2-2.5 feet) soil sampleswere collected at six locations (borings ON-BH 40 through 45 - see Figure3-14 in the On-site Soils FSPS for boring locations) and analyzed for zinc.Zinc was detected in 11 of 12 samples (in both the surface and subsurfacesamples from borings ON-BH-41 through 45, and the surface sample fromboring BH40), with concentrations ranging from 184J-49,600J milligramsper kilogram (mg/kg). These concentrations were approximately two to600 times the mean concentration of zinc detected in the background soilsamples.

The results of soil samples collected in the vicinity of the zinc recoverybuilding indicate that additional investigation of this area may bewarranted to further delineate the extent of zinc-impacted soils.

2.3.6 Lead Casting Shop

Six surface (0-0.5 feet) and six shallow subsurface (2-2.5 feet) soil sampleswere collected at six locations (borings ON-BH 46 through 51 - see Figure3-15 in the On-site Soils FSPS for boring locations) and analyzed for lead.Lead was detected in all the samples, with concentrations ranging from21.4J to 101,000 mg/kg. Ten of the samples contained lead atconcentrations of more than five times the mean concentration of 9.4mg/kg detected in the background surface and subsurface soil samples.

The results of soil samples collected in the vicinity of the lead casting shopindicate that additional investigation of this area may be warranted tofurther delineate the extent of lead-impacted soils.

11 A R 3 0 Q Q I 8 7/29/94

2.3.7 Underground Storage Tanks

EPA identified six underground storage tanks (USTs) at the site forinvestigation (see Figure 3-17 in the On-site Soils FSPS for UST locations).The Work Plan required only sampling and analysis of residual liquids, ifany, present in the USTs. The Work Plan did not specify sampling of soilsadjacent to the USTs. Liquids sampled from the USTs were analyzed forbenzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes (BTEX), TPH, PCBs, and carbondisulfide. The six USTs of interest included the following:• one gasoline UST (UST-1);

• one concrete off-spec sulfuric acid UST (UST-2).

• two diesel fuel USTs (UST-3 and UST-4); and

• two fuel oil USTs (UST-5 and UST-6).

Of these six USTs, only two could be sampled (UST-2 and UST-4). Thegasoline UST was in use at the time the on-site soils investigation wasconducted and therefore was not sampled. UST-3 was empty. The twofuel oil USTs (UST-5 and UST-6) appeared to be filled with solid materialand could not be sampled. Residual liquids in UST-2 and UST-4 weresampled and analyzed for the analyses listed above. Analytical results forthe samples of residual liquids in these two USTs showed the presence ofBTEX (total BTEX concentrations of 8J-436 micrograms per liter (fig/1) andTPH (23 - 4,800 mg/1). However, carbon disulfide and PCBs were notdetected in either UST sample.

The sampling and analytical results for the USTs do not confirm whetherthere has been a release to soils from any of the USTs. Furtherinvestigation of the USTs may be warranted to determine whether arelease to soils may have occurred.

2.3.8 Polypropylene PCB Spill Area

The concentrations of PCBs detected in the soil samples from thepolypropylene PCB spill area are relatively low (less than 6 mg/kg), andconfirm that the PCB-contaminated soils were removed during previoussoil excavation in this area. This area was identified by EPA forinvestigation due to the presence of free liquids observed in October 1991during excavation of soils at the location of a PCB spill adjacent to thepolypropylene building.

12 f l R 3 0 0 0 ! 9|7/29/94

Six surface (0-0.5 feet) and two subsurface (0.5-2 and 8-10 feet) samples(surface samples ON-SS-01 through 05 and boring ON-BH106 - see Figure3-2 in the On-site Soils FSPS for sampling locations) were collected fromwithin the excavated area and analyzed for PCBs. Aroclor 1248 wasdetected in four of the soil samples (240-5,800 |ig/kg).

Based on these results, it is anticipated that no further delineation of soilsin this area is warranted.

2.3.9 Acid Reclaim Building

The concentrations of VOCs, phenol, phthalates, and PAHs detected atshallow depths in soil samples near the acid reclaim building do notappear to be indicative of a source area to other media. The foundation ofthe acid reclaim building that formerly occupied this area has apparentlybeen undermined by discharges of acids. Six soil samples were collectedfrom two borings (BH-107 and BH-207 - see Figure 3-3 in the On-site SoilsFSPS for sampling locations) in the vicinity of the acid reclaim buildingand analyzed for TCL VOCs, BNAs, pesticides/PCBs, and TAL metals.

BNA compounds (phenol, phthalates and PAHs) were detected atconcentrations in the range of 41J (ig/kg - 2,200 M-g/kg. Two VOCs(acetone and methylene chloride) and one pesticide (heptachlor) were alsodetected at trace concentrations (2J-8J M-g/kg and 0.75J ug/kg,respectively). Arsenic (4.1L-23.9L mg/kg, the L qualifier indicates theresult is a biased low quantitative estimate), chromium (9.2J-23.7 mg/kg),and lead (24-69 mg/kg) were detected at concentrations that are similar tolevels of these metals detected in background soil samples. The zincconcentrations (51-561 mg/kg) detected range from levels consistent withbackground soil samples to levels approximately six times the meanconcentration of zinc in the background samples.

Even though zinc was detected at concentrations above background, theextent of zinc in soil is considered to be adequately defined; therefore, it isanticipated that no further investigation of soils in this area is warranted.

2.3.10 East Carbon Disulfide Storage Area

The concentrations and vertical distribution of carbon disulfide detectedin the soil samples for this area are not indicative of a primary source areaimpacting ground water quality. The concrete structure in the east carbondisulfide area formerly contained tanks used to store carbon disulfide.

S R 3 0 0 0 2 0

Reportedly, water containing approximately 2 mg/1 of carbon disulfideoverflowed this impoundment onto surrounding soils.

Six surface (0-0.5 feet) and eight subsurface (6-10 feet) soil samples(surface sampling locations ON-SS-06 through 07 and borings ON-BH-10through 04 - see Figure 3-4 of the On-site Soils FSPS for samplinglocations) were collected and analyzed for TCL VOCs. However, only lowconcentrations (2.9J - 110J fig/kg) of carbon disulfide were detected in fourof the soil samples (ON-SS-BH01, ON-BH-01-08, ON-BH-02-10.5 and ON-BH-04-06). Trace concentrations (less than 10 Hg/kg) of other VOCs(acetone, chloroform, and trichloroethene) were also detected in two of thesamples (ON-SS-BH01 and ON-BH-01-08). With the exception of onesample (110J fig/kg in the duplicate of ON-BH-01-08), the carbon disulfideconcentrations were less than or equal to 22 |ig/kg. Carbon disulfide wasdetected at a low concentration (22J Jig/kg) in only one (ON-BH-02-10.5)of the four deep (8-12 feet) subsurface soil samples collected.

Based on these results, it is anticipated that no further investigation ofsoils in this area is warranted.

2.1.11 Paint Shop

Two subsurface (0-2 and 8-10 feet) soil samples were collected from onesoil boring (ON-BH-14 - see Figure 3-7 in the On-site Soils FSPS for theboring location) adjacent to the paint shop. These samples were analyzedfor TCL VOCs, and no VOCs were detected.

Based on these results, it is anticipated that no further investigation of thisarea is warranted.

2.1.12 Chemical Storage

The concentrations and vertical distribution of VOCs, BNAs and metalsdetected in soil samples collected near the chemical storage area are notconsidered to be indicative of a primary source area to other media forthese contaminants. Even though zinc was detected at concentrationsabove background, the extent of zinc in soil is considered to be fullyinvestigated in terms of the RI objectives, and should not require anyadditional RI efforts.

Two subsurface soil samples (0-2 and 8-10 feet) were collected from oneboring (ON-BH-15 - see Figure 3-9 in the On-site Soils FSPS for the boringlocation) located adjacent to the chemical storage building and analyzed

14 A R 3 0 0 0 2 I

for TCL VOCs, BNAs, pesticides/PCBs and TAL metals. Traceconcentrations (16 |ig/kg or less) of several VOCs (methylene chloride,1,1,1-trichloroethane, and trichloroethene) were detected in the samples.Phthalates, PAHs and carbazole were detected in both soil samples (48N •2,100 |ig/kg, the N qualifier indicates the result should be considered atentative identification due to minor inadequacies of the mass spectrumfor the compound). The highest concentrations of the PAHs andphthalates detected were in the shallow (0-2 feet) soil sample. Nopesticides were detected. PCB Aroclors 1242 and 1260 were detected atconcentrations less than or equal to 72 Jig/kg in one sample (ON-BH-15-0). Arsenic, cadmium, and chromium were detected at concentrations(1.7-14.9} |ig/kg) similar to concentrations detected in background soilsamples. Zinc was detected at concentrations (130-1,540 (ig/kg) ofapproximately 1.5 to 18 times the mean concentration of zinc detected inthe background soil samples, with the highest concentration from the 0-2foot depth.

Even though zinc was detected at concentrations above background, theextent of zinc in soils is considered to be adequately defined; therefore, itis anticipated that no further investigation of soils in this area iswarranted.

2.1.13 Coal yard

The concentrations of PCBs detected in soil samples from the coal yard arenot considered indicative of a PCB source area to other media. The coalyard was identified by EPA as a potential source area for PCBs due to atransformer fire that occurred on the roof of a building adjacent to the coalyard, and the potential for deposition of PCBs in stormwater runoff fromthe building.

Six surface (0-0.5 feet) and six shallow subsurface (2-2.5 feet) soil samples(borings ON-BH 16 through 21 - see Figure 3-10 in the On-site Soils FSPSfor sampling locations) were collected and analyzed for PCBs. PCBAroclors 1242 and 1260 were detected in four of the samples (ON-SS-BH16through 19 at concentrations in the range of 140J to 500 [j,g/kg. PCBs werenot detected in any of the subsurface samples collected.

Based on these results, it is anticipated that no further investigation ofsoils in this area is warranted.

15 7/29/94

A R 3 0 0 0 2 2

2.1.14 Electrical Transformers

The concentrations of PCBs detected in some soil samples near electricaltransformers are not considered indicative of a PCB source area to othermedia. Sampling locations associated with electrical transformers wereidentified by EPA based on PCB releases from transformers 6,7, and 7 A,as well as from the transformers on the roof of the compressor building.

Six surface (0-0.5 feet) and six shallow subsurface (2-2.5 feet) soil sampleswere collected at six locations (borings ON-BH-22 through 27 - see Figure3-11 in the On-site Soils FSPS for sampling locations) and analyzed forPCBs. PCB Aroclors 1254 and 1260 were detected in four of the soilsamples (ON-SS-BH23, ON-SS-BH24, ON-BH-24-2 and ON-SS-BH26) atconcentrations ranging from 300 to 3,400 Jig/kg.

Based on these results, it is anticipated that no further investigation ofsoils in this area is warranted.

2.1.15 Acid Reclaim Cooling Tower

The concentrations of chromium detected in surface and shallowsubsurface soils in the vicinity of the acid reclaim cooling tower are notconsidered indicative of a source area to other media. Atmosphericdeposition of chromium was suspected by EPA in this area due to the useof chromium-based chemicals for treatment of cooling water.

Six surface (0-0.5 feet) and six shallow subsurface (2 feet) soil sampleswere collected at six locations (borings ON-BH-28 through 33 - see Figure3-12 in the On-site Soils FSPS for sampling locations) and analyzed forchromium only. Chromium was detected in 11 of 12 samples.Concentrations in ten samples containing chromium were in the range of9.3 to 39.3 mg/kg. These chromium concentrations are slightly greaterthan the range of concentrations detected in background samples (5.8 to18.7 mg/kg). The highest chromium concentration detected was 291mg/kg in one surface sample (ON-SS-BH30), which is about 25 timesgreater than the mean background concentration.

Based on these results, it is anticipated that no further investigation ofsoils in this area is warranted.

16 7/29/94

4R300023

2.1.16 Spray Ponds

The concentrations of chromium detected in surface and shallowsubsurface soils in the vicinity of the spray ponds are not consideredindicative of a source area to other media. The spray ponds weredesignated by EPA for investigation of chromium only due to suspecteddeposition of chromium from chemicals used to treat cooling water.

Six surface (0-0.5 feet) and six shallow subsurface (2-2.5 feet) soil sampleswere collected at six locations (borings ON-BH-34 through 39 - see Figure3-13 in the On-site Soils FSPS for boring locations) and analyzed forchromium. Chromium was detected in 11 of 12 samples at concentrationsin the range of 12.6-82.5 mg/kg.

Based on these results, it is anticipated that no further investigation ofsoils in this area is warranted.

2.1.17 Seeps/Sediments and Surface Drainage Ditch

Seeps/Sediments

The chemical composition of seeps and sediments associated with theviscose basins and landfill has been adequately characterized to evaluateimpact to other media. Ten sediment and seven liquid samples (seepsamples ON-SW-01 through 08 and sediment samples ON-SS-19 through24 and 28 through 30 - see Figure 3-16 in the On-site Soils FSPS) werecollected from seep locations throughout the western half of the siteassociated with viscose basins and the landfill. These samples wereanalyzed for TCL VOCs, BNAs, pesticides/PCBs and TAL metals. Oneseep location (ON-SW-04) at the landfill designated by the Work Plan forsampling was not sampled because it was dry during two attempts tocollect a liquid sample.

Trace to low concentrations (1J-210 (J.g/1) of VOCs were detected in all ofthe seep samples except one (ON-SW-08 from a seep at viscose basin 10),which had a carbon disulfide concentration of 18,000 (J-g/1. Phenols,carbazole, phthalates and PAHs were detected in seep samples over arange of concentrations (0.7 to 8,700 Jig/1); however, with the exception ofphenols and bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate in two samples (ON-SW-03 andON-SW-08), the concentrations of BNAs detected in seep samples wereless than 20 Jig/1. Pesticides were detected at concentrations of less than 1jig/1. With the exception of zinc in seep samples from viscose basins 4(58,500 ug/1), 6 (3,030 jig/1), and 10 (3,840 ng/1), concentrations of metals

17 A R 3 Q 0 0 2 1 *

of concern (i. e., arsenic, chromium, lead, and zinc) were not indicative ofsource areas for metals.

Based on these results, it is anticipated that no further investigation of theseeps is warranted.

In the sediment samples from the viscose basins and landfill, severalVOCs were detected at trace to low concentrations (21J -1,300 (ig/kg).Numerous BNAs (phenols, phthalates, and PAHs) were also detected atconcentrations of 36-1,900 (J-g/kg. Several pesticides were detected atconcentrations of 0.31L-50J (ig/kg (the L qualifier indicates the result is abias low quantitative estimate), and PCB Aroclor 1260 was also detected infour sediment samples (ON-SS-21, ON-SS-23, ON-SS-29 and ON-SS-31) atlow concentrations (11 - 350J p.g/kg). Of the four metals of concern(arsenic, chromium, lead and zinc), zinc was the only one detected atconcentrations (1,270 - 10,500J mg/kg) in six samples (ON-SS-20, ON-SS-21, ON-SS-23, ON-SS-29, ON-SS-30 and ON-SS-31) greater thanconcentrations detected in background samples (8.3-474 mg/kg).

Based on these results, it is anticipated that no further investigation of thesediments associated with the seeps is warranted.

Surface Drainage Ditch

The results for the sediment samples from the surface drainage ditch donot indicate that metals or PCBs are being transported across the site viathis pathway. Three surface sediment samples (ON-SS-25 through 27 - seeFigure 3-16 in the On-site Soils FSPS for sampling locations) were collectedfrom a drainage ditch that traverses a portion of the southern part of thesite between fly ash basins 1 and 6 and sulfate basins 4 and 5 to formerOutfall 001. The samples were analyzed for PCBs and TAL metals. NoPCBs were detected, and the concentrations of arsenic, chromium, leadand zinc were generally less than five times the mean concentration ofthese metals observed in the background soil samples.

Based on these results, it is anticipated that no further investigation of thesurface drainage ditch is warranted.

2.2 SULFATE BASINS MANAGEMENT UNIT INVESTIGATION

The Sulfate Basin Management Unit consists of six SBs (SB 1, 2, 3, 4, 4Eand 5) aligned in a predominantly north-south orientation bordering the

18 A R 3 0 0 0 2 5 7/29/94

South Fork of the Shenandoah River (River). The location of the six SBsare shown in Figure 1-1 in the area designated in green.

The nature and extent of site contaminants have been adequatelycharacterized for the SBs during RI activities conducted between June 1993and April 1994. Table 2-2 presents key findings for the SBs related tobasin depth and morphology, physical characteristics of the basin sludges,and key detections of organic compounds and metals. The location of allsampling points for the SBs are shown on Figure 3-1 in the June 1993Sulfate Basin FSPS previously submitted to EPA.

Based on the borings completed in each of the SBs, the sludge in the basinsranges in thickness from 1 to 13 feet. Other materials, such as fly ash orviscose, were not encountered in the borings completed in the berms andbasins. The depth of water in the basins has varied throughout the yeardepending on the amount of precipitation at the site and depending on thevolume of water from the basins being processed through the on-sitewastewater treatment plant. The maximum water depth for the deepestbasin (i.e., SB 5) is approximately 15 to 20 feet. Each SB is underlain bynatural clayey silt soils with a thickness of approximately 5 to 10 feet.Borings completed in the basin berms indicated that the berms areconstructed with native clayey silt soils.

The estimated total volume of sludge in all six SBs is approximately936,000 cubic yards. The particle size of the sludge is largely classified assilty sand based on laboratory sieve analysis using the United SoilClassification System. Laboratory testing indicates that the sludge has lowpermeability, on the order of 10'6 to 10'7 centimeters/second (cm/sec).

The primary chemical constituents identified in sludge samples from thebasins included zinc (generally between 200,000 and 400,000 mg/kg), lead(25-3,220 mg/kg), and cadmium (6.7-129 mg/kg). In general, the zinc andlead concentrations decreased by one to two orders of magnitude in thesoil zone immediately beneath the basin sludges. Organic compoundsdetected in the sulfate basins include carbon disulfide (3-1,700 (ig/kg),BTEX (2-45 M-g/kg), phenol (74-570 ug/kg), PAHs (54-3,000 jig/kg), bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (BEHP) (54-3,700 ug/kg), pesticides (0.11-27 fig/kg)and PCBs (140-1,000 (J.g/kg). Other metals of concern that were detectedinclude arsenic (2-14.3 mg/kg) and chromium (11.5-706 mg/kg).However, the concentrations of these constituents coupled with theirinfrequent detections and irregular spatial distribution indicates that thesedetections are not indicative of a major source of cross-mediacontamination.

19 f l R 3 0 0 0 2 6

The absence of dissolved zinc and lead in the ground water abovebackground concentrations indicates that these basins are not a source ofthese metals in ground water. Figure 2-2 and Plate 2 of this document arecross-sections through the sulfate basins (see Plate 1 for location of crosssections A-A' and S-S'), and are representative of the basin morphologyand chemical quality of all the sulfate basins. The cross-sections illustratethe marked difference between the chemistry of the zinc hydroxide sludgein the sulfate basins and ground water quality in overburden soils andshallow bedrock downgradient of the sulfate basins.

Eleven overburden monitoring wells located hydraulically downgradientof the sulfate basins contained dissolved zinc concentrations similar to the246 (ig/1 concentration detected in background well 008 (see Figure 3-1,July 1993 Overburden Well FSPS). The wells downgradient from thesulfate basins contain elevated concentrations of total dissolved solids(TDS) and sulfate at concentrations five to seven times greater thanbackground levels. This finding suggests that the sulfate basin sludgemay be a source of TDS, and that ions not easily attenuated migrate fromthe basins to ground water. The metals, however, apparently do not leachfrom the sludge, or if leached, are attenuated in the soils beneath thebasins.

Based on the findings for the sulfate basins management unit, no furtherinvestigation of the sulfate basin sludges or the soil zone immediatelybeneath the sludges is considered warranted.

2.3 VISCOSE BASINS MANAGEMENT UNIT INVESTIGATION

The Viscose Basins Management Unit consists of 11 VBs labeled VB 1through VB 11. For the purposes of this report, the eleven VBs have beendivided into two groups based on physical characteristics. Basins 1through 8 are addressed as one group, while basins 9,10, and 11 areaddressed as a separate group. Basins 1 through 8 are unlined basins thatoverlie natural clayey silt soils, are not saturated with ground water, andhave a soil cover. Basins 9,10, and 11 are also unlined basins but havelittle soil beneath the viscose sludge, are saturated with ground water, anddo not have a soil cover. The location of these eleven basins is shown inFigure 1-1 in the area designated in yellow.

20 f l R 3 0 0 0 2 7

2,3.1 Viscose Basins 1 through 8

The nature and extent of contamination in VB 1-8 have been adequatelycharacterized. The primary constituents present in sludge in VB 1-8 arecarbon disulfide, zinc, phenol and elevated pH. However, ground waterquality (see Section 2.6.2 of this document) in the vicinity anddowngradient from VB 1-8 does not appear to be degraded with theseconstituents. Table 2-3 presents key findings for VB 1 through 8 related tobasin depth and morphology, physical characteristics of the basin sludges,and key detections of chemical compounds and metals. The location of allsampling points for VB 1-8 are shown in Figure 2-1 of the July 1993Viscose Basin FSPS.

The physical configuration of VB 1-8 consists of viscose sludge overlying acontinuous layer of natural clayey silt soils, with soil berms surroundingsome basins and a layer of soil covering the viscose sludge. The thicknessof the viscose sludge in basins VB 1-8 ranges from approximately 5 to 27feet. Borings completed in the soils around the perimeter of each basinindicated that the basins are surrounded with clayey soil that containsome sand and silt. There are also soil covered landfilled waste whichoverly VB 4,5, and 6 and extend above grade. Leachate seeps are presentalong the toe of the berms on the north side of VB 4, 5, and 6. Table 2-4summarizes key chemical data for these seeps. A seep is also present onthe west side of VB 1 that indirectly discharges to the wastewatertreatment plant.

The estimated total volume of viscose sludge in VB 1-8 is approximately527,000 cubic yards. The viscose sludge in these eight basins consistsprimarily of fibrous rubber-like and gelatinous material. VB 4, 5, and 6 arealso reported to contain construction debris, which is supported by thefrequent auger and spoon refusal encountered during drilling in thesebasins. Seven geotechnical samples were collected from basins 3,4,6,7and 8. The Work Plan only required two samples to be collected from twoof the eleven basins. However, additional samples were collected todetermine soil permeability beneath the basins. Permeability values forthe sample from basins 3, 6, 7, and 8 in the range of 10~7 to 10'8 cm/secwere determined by laboratory testing of these samples. The permeabilityvalue determined for a sample from VB 4 was 10~5 cm/sec.

The primary site contaminants identified in the samples from VB 1through 8 include carbon disulfide, phenol, and pyrene (Table 2-3 of thisdocument). Other contaminants identified in VB 1-8 include PAHs andBTEX (in VB 4, 5 and 6). In the seeps along the north side of VB 4, 5, and 6

21 • - » — - . _ 7/19/94

f l R 3 0 0 0 2 8

(Table 2-4), carbon disulfide was detected at trace concentrations (11-19J(ig/1). Free phase petroleum hydrocarbons were also detected in boringBH-32 in VB 7 (boring location shown in Figure 2-1 of the Viscose BasinsFSPS). A fingerprint analysis indicated the product was a hydraulic-typeoil, and contained 60 (ig/1 of PCBs.

Based on ground water quality data from monitoring wells hydraulicallydowngradient of VB 1-8, there is no indication that the sludge in thesebasins (containing carbon disulfide, phenol, zinc and elevated pH) areacting as a primary source of contaminants to ground water. In addition,two other hydrogeologic conditions appear to minimize potential impacton ground water quality in the area of VB 1-8. First, the presence of a soillayer, of approximately 10 feet in thickness, between the viscose sludgeand underlying bedrock likely serves as a barrier to vertical contaminantmigration into the bedrock aquifer. Second, the water table remainsbeneath the bottom of these basins, and does not rise into the sludgeindicating that the sludge, is not saturated and does not have directhydraulic communication with ground water. The presence of the seepspresent on the north side of VB 4, 5 and 6 also tends to support thisconceptual model for the relationship between VB 1-8 and surroundingground water.

Figure 2-3 is a cross section (see Plate 1 for the location of cross sectionCV-CV) which illustrates the morphology of VB 1 through 8, and alsopresents chemical data for VB 5 (a representative basin in that cross-section) and ground water quality downgradient of the basin. Theanalytical data do not indicate impact to ground water from carbondisulfide in VB 5. Ground water quality data from wells downgradient ofVB 1-8 show negligible impact to ground water from inorganic andorganic constituents contained in the viscose sludge in these basins. Plate3 (cross-section B-B') illustrates the absence of carbon disulfide inoverburden wells MW-11 and MW-12 (see Plate 1 for location and planview) downgradient of VB 1 and 7, respectively.

Based on the RI results, it is anticipated that no further investigation of VB1-8 is considered to be necessary to characterize the chemical character ofthese basins or the potential of these basins to impact ground water.

2.3.2 Viscose Basins 9,10, and 11

The nature and extent of contamination in VB 9-11 have been adequatelycharacterized. The viscose sludge in these basins appears to contriubtecarbon disulfide, phenol, zinc and elevated pH to site ground water.

22 4 R 3 0 0 Q 2 9 7/29/94

Table 2-5 presents key findings for VB 9,10, and 11 related to basin depthand morphology, physical characteristics of the basin sludges, and keydetections of chemical compounds and metals. The location of allsampling points for VB 9-11 is shown in Figure 2-1 of the July 1993 ViscoseBasin FSPS.

Borings in each of VB 9,10, and 11 indicate that there is no significant soillayer separating the viscose sludge from bedrock. Each of these basins issurrounded by soil berms, but these basins are not capped with soil,leaving the sludge exposed and subject to weathering. The thickness ofviscose sludge in VB 9 and 11 is approximately 20 to 25 feet; the sludgethickness in VB 10 is approximately 15 feet. The water table isapproximately 10 to 20 feet above the bottom elevation of each of thesethree basins (see Figure 2-4) yielding saturation of the viscose sludge anddirect hydraulic communication with ground water.

There is a seep located at the northwest corner of viscose basin 10. Table2-4 summarizes key chemical data for the sample collected from this seep.

The estimated total volume of viscose in VB 9 through 11 is approximately251,000 cubic yards. The sludge in these three basins consists primarily ofgelatinous viscose sludge and a small percentage of rubber-like viscose.Laboratory testing of three samples, one each from VB 9,10 and 11,indicates the permeability of the viscose sludge is in the 10~7 cm/secrange.

In VB 9,10 and 11, the primary site contaminants detected include carbondisulfide (720 to 3,600,000 fig/kg), phenol (280 to 290,000 Hg/kg) and zinc(64 to 3,190 mg/kg). Other organic compounds detected in samples fromviscose basins 9,10, and 11 include PAHs (160-2,000 ^ig/kg), ketones (320-3,100 ng/kg), methylene chloride (67-1,800 ug/kg), 4-methylphenol (200-2,900 (ig/kg) and pesticides (44-560 (ig/kg). Other rnetals of concern atthe Site that were detected in viscose sludge from these basins includearsenic (3.1-12.1 mg/kg), chromium (17.6-53 mg/kg) and lead (nonedetected-228 mg/kg).

Figure 2-4 is a cross section (see Plate 1 for the location of cross section V-V) of the morphology of VB 9 and 10 and the relationship between the sitecontaminants detected in the basins and the contaminant plumedelineated in ground water. Leaching of chemical constituents from theviscose sludge into underlying ground water is evident based on theimpacted quality of ground water immediately beneath anddowngradient of these three basins. The saturation of a portion of the

23 7/29/94

A R 3 0 0 0 3 0

viscose sludge in the basins and absence of a significant soil layer beneaththese basins, coupled with concentrations of carbon disulfide, phenol andzinc in the sludge, appear to be key factors resulting in these basinscausing an adverse impact to ground water quality.

Further investigation of VB 9,10, and 11 may be warranted to fullyevaluate the impact of these basins on ground water quality, the extent ofthe ground water plume near the source area, and the hydraulicrelationship of the basins with overburden and bedrock aquifers.

2.4 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT LAGOONS AND RESIDUALSMANAGEMENT UNIT INVESTIGATION

The Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Lagoon and ResidualsManagement Unit consists of the emergency lagoon (EL) and twopolishing basins (PB). For the purposes of this report, these units areaddressed separately because of the differences in their current use. TheEL is currently used as an influent pumping basin for the active WWTPoperation. The polishing basins are essentially inactive, although theyhave been used on occasion in the WWTP operations. The location ofthese lagoons/basins is shown in Figure 1-1 in the area designated inorange.

2.4.1 Emergency Lagoons

The nature and extent of site contaminants have been adequatelycharacterized in the EL. Impact to ground water downgradient of the ELhas also been adequately characterized (see Section 2.6.2 of thisdocument). Table 2-6 presents key findings for the emergency lagoonrelated to basin depth and morphology, physical characteristics of thebasin sludges, and key detections of chemical compounds and metals.The location of all sampling points is shown in Figure 2-1 in the July 1993WWTP FSPS previously submitted to EPA.

The EL contains an average of 5 to 10 feet of supernatant and a sludgethickness of 5 to 11 feet. Underlying the lagoon sludge is 5 to 10 feet ofnatural clayey silt soil. The estimated total volume of sludge in the EL is12,000 cubic yards, and the primary component in the chemical makeup ofthe sludge is zinc hydroxide. Particle size analysis of the sludge using theUnified Soil Classification System shows that the sludge is predominantlysilty sand or silty clay. Laboratory testing of geotechnical samples showsthe permeability of the sludge ranges from 10'7 to 10~9 cm/sec.

24 7/29/94

f l R 3 0 0 0 3 l

Key chemical compounds and metals detected in the emergency lagoonsludge and underlying soil include carbon disulfide (620-54,000 fig/kg),phenol (47-7,100 |ig/kg), PCBs (470 to 7,100 ng/kg), lead (300-3,120mg/kg), and zinc (438-281,000 mg/kg). Other organics detected in theemergency lagoon include methylene chloride, BTEX, PAHs, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, ketones, 4-methylphenol, 2-methylnaphthalene, andpesticides (Table 2-6). Metals detected in the emergency lagoon includearsenic (3-9 mg/kg), cadmium (9-118 mg/kg), and chromium (16-255

Ground water quality data for wells downgradient of the emergencylagoon show trace concentrations (2J-37J fig/1) of carbon disulfide in wellsPZ-1 and PZ-2. Zinc was present in ground water at concentrationssimilar to the background concentration in well 008 (shown in Figure 3-1of the July 1993 Overburden Well FSPS). All other organic chemicalcompounds and metals detected in the EL sludge were not detected in thedowngradient wells. The ground water quality data for wellsdowngradient of the EL do not indicate that this basin is a primary sourceof contamination to ground water.

Adequate information has been obtained to adequately characterize thechemical quality of the sludge in the emergency lagoon and the soilsbeneath the sludge. Therefore, no further investigation of the emergencylagoon is considered warranted.

2.4.2 Polishing Basins

The nature and extent of site contaminants have been adequatelycharacterized in the two PBs. Impact to ground water downgradient ofthe PBs has also been adequately characterized. Table 2-7 presents keyfindings for the basins related to basin depth and morphology, physicalcharacteristics of the basin sludges, and key detections of chemicalcompounds and metals.

The average sludge thickness in the two PBs ranges from two to five feet.The estimated total volume of sludge in the PBs is approximately 16,500cubic yards. The primary component in the chemical make-up of thesludge in the basins is zinc hydroxide. Particle sieve analysis of the sludgein the polishing basins using the Unified Soil Classification Systemindicate the material is predominantly silty sand. Laboratory testing ofgeotechnical samples shows the permeability of the sludge has amagnitude of 10'8 cm/sec.

25 7/29/94

A R 3 0 0 0 3 2

Of the site contaminants detected in sludge and underlying soil from thePBs, zinc (1,580-310,000 mg/kg) was key constituent detected. Other sitecontaminants detected included PAHs (69-2,900 fig/kg), bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (1,200-2,800 ug/kg), methylene chloride (7,500Hg/kg) and 2-methylnaphthalene (73-930 ug/kg). Other metals detectedincluded arsenic (4-35 mg/kg), cadmium (48-71 mg/kg), chromium (12-234 mg/kg) and lead (39-400 mg/kg).

Ground water quality data for wells downgradient of the polishing basinsshow trace concentrations (2J-37J (ig/1) of carbon disulfide in wells PZ-1and PZ-2. Zinc in well 004 was present in ground water at concentrationssimilar to the background concentration in well 008 (For PZ 1, PZ 2 well004 and 008 locations see Figure 3-1, July 1993 Overburden Well FSPS).All other chemical compounds and metals detected in the PB sludge werenot detected in the downgradient wells.

Adequate information has been obtained to characterize the chemicalquality of the sludge in the PBs and the soils beneath the sludge, and tocharacterize the impact on ground water from these basins. Therefore, nofurther investigation of the polishing basins is considered warranted.

2.5 FILL AREAS AND FLY ASH PILES MANAGEMENT UNITINVESTIGATION

The Fill Areas and Fly Ash Piles Management Unit consists of the fly ashstockpile (a.k.a. "fly ash mountain"), four fly ash basins (FAB 1, 2, 3, and6), and the "new" landfill (Landfill) located north of the fly ash stockpile.The location of these units are shown in Figure 1-1 in the areas designatedin blue. The fly ash units and the landfill are addressed separately in thisdocument because of their different physical and chemical characteristics.

2.5.1 Fly Ash Basins/Stockpile

The nature and extent of site contaminants in the FABs and stockpile havebeen adequately characterized. Impact to ground water downgradient ofthe FABs and stockpile also has been adequately characterized (see Section2.6.2 of this document). Table 2-8 presents key findings for theFAB/stockpile in terms of morphology, physical characteristics of the flyash, and key chemical constituents detected. The location of all samplingpoints for these units is shown in Figure in 2-1 of the August 1993 Fly AshFSPS previously submitted to EPA.

26 7/29/94

3 R 3 0 0 0 3 3

The FABs contain 13 to 17 feet of fly ash, and the fly ash stockpile rangesin thickness from 35 to 75 feet. The basins and stockpile are underlain byapproximately 5 to 15 feet of clayey silt soil. The stockpile also containsmultiple lenzes of soil approximately six inches thick that were likelyplaced as cover material during historical placement of fly ash in the pile.It is assumed that these soil layers are limited in lateral extent and are notcontinuous across the stockpiled fly ash.

The estimated total volume of fly ash in the basins and stockpile isapproximately 1,300,000 cubic yards. An estimated 592,000 cubic yards islocated in the stockpile with the remaining 698,000 cubic yards present inthe FABs. The fly ash consists predominantly of silt size particles, and thematerial is fairly uniform throughout the basins and stockpile. Laboratorytesting indicates that the fly ash has permeability on the order of 10'5 to10"7 cm/sec. Sulfate basin sludge was identified in samples collected fromthe bottom of FAB 6 in all three borings based on the physical andchemical characteristics. The Work Plan states that this basin wasconverted from a sulfate basin to a fly ash basin. Sulfate sludge was alsoidentified in boring 22 in the stockpile.

The key chemical constituent detected in fly ash samples from the basinsand stockpile was arsenic (1.6-149 mg/kg). VOCs detected in fly ashsamples included carbon disulfide (2-120 ug/kg), BTEX (2-17 u.g/kg),chloroform (8-110 |ig/kg), and trichloroethene (4-14 (4,g/kg). BNAsdetected in fly ash samples include PAHs (42-790 ng/kg), bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (45 jig/kg), and 2-methylnaphthalene (62 ̂ ig/kg).Pesticides (1.2-17 jig/kg) were also detected in fly ash samples.

Figure 2-5 (cross-section F-F') and Plate 3 (cross-section B-B'), which arecross sections through the fly ash stockpile and FABs (see Plate 1 for thelocation of cross sections), illustrates the morphology of the basins andstockpile. These graphics also show the difference in chemical quality ofthe fly ash and ground water in shallow bedrock downgradient of theFABs and stockpile. Ground water quality data (see Section 2.6.2 of thisdocument) for wells downgradient of the basins indicate that the fly ash isnot leaching arsenic or other metals into overburden or bedrock groundwater. It is likely that the substantial soil layer beneath the FABs andstockpile attenuates concentrations of any metals that may be leachedfrom the fly ash. Two fly ash samples (FA-BH-07-12 and FA-BH-23-45,locations shown in Figure 2-1 in the August 1993 Fly Ash FSPS) analyzedby the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) indicate thatarsenic was not leached at a detectable concentration. Note that thearsenic concentration (0.948 mg/1) detected in well 014 (see Figure 3-1,

27 7/29/94

f lR30003l*

July 1993, Overburden Well FSPS for location) is representative of groundwater quality in FAB 3, not water quality in the overburden or bedrockaquifer downgradient of the basin. Shallow bedrock well 114 did notcontain arsenic, indicating that arsenic from FAB 3 has not migrated intothe bedrock aquifer.

The investigation of the FABs and stockpile has sufficiently characterizedthe materials in these areas of the management unit. Based on thesefindings, no further investigation of these areas is considered warranted.

2.5.2 Landfill

The nature and extent of site contaminants at the landfill and the potentialfor the landfill to affect ground water quality have been adequatelycharacterized. Table 2-9 presents key findings for the landfill in terms ofmorphology, physical characteristics of the landfill materials, and keychemical constituents detected. The location of all sampling points for thelandfill is shown in Figure in 2-1 of the August 1993 Fly Ash FSPS.

The landfill was constructed above grade as a "valley fill." The landfill isat grade on the west side, but is above grade and slopes to lowerelevations on the north, east and south sides of the fill area. The landfillhas a leachate collection system that conveys leachate to the wastewatertreatment plant. Material in the landfill includes solidified viscose, off-specification rayon yarn, and plant and construction debris. The totalestimated volume of material contained in the landfill is 54,000 cubicyards.

The key chemical constituents detected in surface samples collected fromthe landfill include PAHs (66-14,000 tig/kg), bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate(24,000 |ig/kg), phenols (54-4,400 Hg/kg), arsenic (5.9-37 mg/kg), lead (41-229 mg/kg), and zinc (58-1,500 mg/kg). Two sediment samples werecollected east of the landfill as part of the on-site soils investigation (ON-SS-21 and 29). Key constituents detected in these sediment samplesinclude PAHs (96-1,400 Ug/kg), PCBs (74-130 ^ig/kg), bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (8,100-19,000 Jig/kg), ketones (37-730 fig/kg),phenols (590-5,500 ^ig/kg), arsenic (9.9-39.9 mg/kg), cadmium (7.0-18mg/kg), chromium (67.6-216 mg/kg), lead (60.3-305 mg/kg) and zinc(8,040-10,500 mg/kg).

Although organics and metals were detected in surface and sedimentsamples from the landfill, analytical results for ground water samples inwells MW-7 and MW-8, (see Figure 3-1 in the November 1993 Ground

28 7/29/94

f l R 3 0 0 0 3 5

Water Sampling FSPS) downgradient of the landfill show only trace to lowconcentrations of carbon disulfide (5J |ig/l), arsenic (5.3-5.6 (ig/1) and zinc(50.8 (ig/1). The ground water quality results for wells MW-7 and MW-8suggest that chemical constituents detected in the landfill are not leachinginto ground water.

The investigation of the landfill has sufficiently characterized the materialsin this unit. Based on these findings, no further investigation of thelandfill is considered warranted.

2.6 ON-SITE AND OFF-SITE GROUND WATER MANAGEMENT UNITINVESTIGATION

The On-site and Off-site Ground Water Management Unit defined for theRI includes on-site ground water present beneath the other managementunits, and present primarily west of the railroad tracks, and off-siteground water. The location of all sampling points for the ground waterinvestigation are shown in Figure 3-1 of the November 1993 GroundWater Sampling FSPS previously submitted to EPA.

Ground water flow and quality have been adequately characterized in theoverburden, and shallow and intermediate bedrock. Site contaminantsdetected in ground water include carbon disulfide, phenol, arsenic, zinc,and elevated pH. The main body of the plume has been delineated;however, the edges of the plume upgradient and cross gradient of the VBsource area, as well as the downgradient leading edge of the off-siteplume may warrant further delineation.

This discussion of the ground water management unit is presented in foursubsections. First, ground water conditions, defined as site geology andsite hydrogeology, are discussed to summarize the physical existence ofground water beneath the study area. Then ground water quality isdiscussed to address the chemical characterization of the ground watermanagement unit. Third, the ground water data is evaluated to identifypotential sources of contamination to ground water and the nature andextent of contamination in the overburden and bedrock. Lastly, suggesteddata gaps are identified.

2.6.1 Site Ground Water Conditions

The RI ground water investigation confirms that ground water is presentin the overburden and bedrock units beneath the Site. There are four flow

29 7/39/94

"R300036

zones where ground water is present beneath the Site. The overburdenrepresents the first flow zone, with three flow zones also present inbedrock. The bedrock was divided into three flow zones based on thedepths of the monitoring wells for the purpose of determining lateralground water flow directions. These are; shallow bedrock (i.e., from topof rock to a depth of approximately 100 feet), intermediate bedrock (i.e.,depths of approximately 100 - 180 feet below the land surface), and deepbedrock (i.e., depths of approximately 250 - 300 feet below the landsurface). Lateral ground water flow in both overburden and bedrock istoward the River.

A brief description of the site geology and hydrogeology is providedbelow. The Baseline Geologic Studies Technical Memorandum, dated 9September 1993, provides a more complete description of the groundwater management unit.

Site Geology

Overburden materials consist predominantly of native soils derived fromweathering of underlying bedrock, weathered bedrock, undifferentiatedalluvium and alluvial terrace deposits, and fill. Most of the overburdensoils observed during drilling activities consisted predominantly of clayeysilt, with some sand and gravel observed in limited areas of the Site. Fillmaterials include sludges, fly ash, plant wastes and construction debrisdeposited in the various basins, fill areas and stockpiles locatedthroughout the west half of the Site. Weathered bedrock appears to createa transitional zone between the undisturbed overburden soils andcompetent unweathered bedrock.

A more permeable zone exists in the bedrock aquifer beneath the Sitewhich is related to a pair of fold axes and a depression in the bedrocksurface. This structural feature is further addressed in the conceptual sitemodel presented in the Baseline Geologic Studies Technical Memorandum(9 September 1993). The two fold axes mapped northeast of the Site, asshown by Rader and Biggs (1975), trend northeast to southwest and alignwith the long axis of the plume which appears to emanate from VB 9,10,and 11. The depression in the bedrock surface is evident at well 116 andshown in cross-section V-V in Figure 2-4 (located in plan view in Plate 1).The depression, which is indicative of a weathering or erosional featurerelated to fracturing in the bedrock, apparently extends from the areabetween VB 9,10, and 11 to the southwest toward the River. Thealignment of the long axis of the contaminant plume (discussed below inSection 2.6.3 ) in the same direction as the trend of these bedrock features

f l R 3 0 0 0 3 7

is the basis for the expectation that a zone of higher permeability exists inthe bedrock and influences the configuration of the contaminant plume.

Site Hydrogeology

As shown in Figure 2-6, ground water flow through the overburdenmaterials on the west side of the Site is generally westward toward theRiver, which acts as a ground water discharge boundary. The groundwater elevation contours in Figure 2-6 suggest possible mounding of thewater table near FAB 3 (well 014), between SBs 2 and 4 (well 005), andnear MW-9 at VB 9. The mounding is likely the result of the hydraulicpressure placed on the overburden from the saturated conditions in thebasins. The localized mounding effect does not alter the overall groundwater flow direction toward the River.

As illustrated in the cross section A-A' presented in Plate 4 (see Plate 1 forthe location of cross section A-A'), the ground water elevation in theoverburden is above the water level in shallow bedrock, indicating thatthe vertical gradient between the overburden and bedrock is downwardthroughout the Site. However, the degree of hydraulic communicationbetween ground water in overburden soils and shallow bedrock directlycorresponds with the thickness of overburden. Where little or no soil ispresent beneath the basins, there appears to be direct hydrauliccommunication between the overburden and the bedrock. An example ofthis occurs at VB 9,10, and 11. The concentration levels of carbondisulfide observed in both the sludges in these three basins and nearbyshallow ground water indicates direct hydraulic connection. Soil beneaththe fly ash and sulfate basins is thin, indicating that there is some directhydraulic communication between overburden and bedrock in these areasas well. In VB 1-8 there exists a greater amount of soil beneath the basinsreducing the hydraulic relationship between the sludge and ground water.

Data obtained during bedrock coring and geophysical borehole loggingindicate that ground water flow in the bedrock aquifer occurs alongfractures, joints and cleavage. As shown in Figures 2-7 and 2-8, groundwater flow in shallow and intermediate bedrock is toward the River. Asillustrated in the cross section presented in Plate 4, equipotential linesshow downward vertical gradients throughout the Site except in the areasimmediately adjacent to the River, where the vertical gradient is upwardtoward the River, which acts as a discharge boundary.

31 f lR300Q38

2,6.2 Ground Water Quality Results

Analytical results for site ground water indicate that overburden groundwater quality has been impacted by primary site contaminants (carbondisulfide, phenol, zinc, arsenic, and elevated pH) in the area delineated asthe plume. Overburden ground water quality throughout the rest of theSite shows little impact from these primary site contaminants. Groundwater quality data from the bedrock wells indicate that the same suite ofcontaminants are present in bedrock ground water in the vicinity anddowngradient of VB 9, 10, and 11. The location of monitoring wellssampled during the RI are shown in Figure 3-1 of the November 1993Ground Water Sampling FSPS.

Overburden Ground Water Quality

Analytical results for ground water samples from 22 overburden wellsthroughout the Site show that ground water in the overburden isimpacted by primary site contaminants only in the area delineated as theplume. The only ground water sample from an overburden well thatshowed elevated concentrations of both VOCs and metals was the samplefrom well MW-9, which is located immediately downgradient of VB 9.This well had a carbon disulfide concentration of 1,700,000 H-g/1, anarsenic concentration of 1,480 |ig/l, and zinc at a concentration of 8,430|ig/l. Well MW-10, located downgradient of VB 10, showed only a traceconcentration of carbon disulfide and arsenic (10} |ig/l and 22 (J.g/1,respectively).

Ground water quality data from downgradient overburden wells MW-11and MW-12 demonstrate that carbon disulfide, phenol and pyrene in thesebasins have not migrated into overburden ground water.

Carbon disulfide was detected at concentrations in the range of 1J-22 [ig/1in overburden wells outside the plume (wells 004, 005, 008, 009, 010, Oil,012, 013, 014, 017, 021, 022, 023, 024, 025, 026, and MW- 7, 8, 10, 11, and 12),Phenols, phthalates and several pesticides were also detected in numerousoverburden wells, but the concentrations were generally less than 14 (ig/1.Bis (2-ethlyhexyl)ph thai ate was the compound most frequently detected(detected in 16 out of 20 wells) at concentrations ranging from 1} to 17B

Ground water quality data from the overburden wells downgradient ofthe sulfate basins and WWTP basins demonstrate that zinc and leaddetected in the sludges in these basins are not leaching into overburden

f l R 3 0 0 0 3 9

ground water. None of the eleven overburden wells (wells 004, 005, 009,010, Oil, 017, 021, 022, 023, 024, and 025) downgradient of the sulfatebasins and WWTP basins had a dissolved zinc concentration higher thanthe 246 (ig/1 detected in the background overburden well (well 008). Nosite contaminants were detected above background concentrations in theoverburden wells downgradient of the wastewater treatment plant basins.However, wells downgradient of the sulfate and WWTP basins containedsulfate and TDS above the background concentration of 382 and 865 mg/1,respectively (detected in well 008).

Overburden wells downgradient of the fly ash basins and stockpile (012and 013) demonstrate that arsenic, the key site contaminant detected in flyash samples, is not leaching from the fly ash and migrating intooverburden ground water. The detection of arsenic (948 |ig/l) in well 014is not indicative of arsenic in ground water downgradient of the basinbecause well 014 is actually completed in the fly ash, not in theoverburden soils downgradient of the basin. Overburden wells 012 and013, located downgradient of fly ash basins 2 and 1, respectively, did notcontain dissolved arsenic above the detection limit.

Bedrock Ground Water Quality

Analytical results for ground water samples from the shallow,intermediate, and deep bedrock wells indicate that the key sitecontaminants present in ground water include carbon disulfide, phenol,arsenic, zinc and elevated pH. The detections of these contaminants ineach group of wells are summarized below. In total, carbon disulfide wasdetected in 45 of the 68 bedrock wells in the monitoring network duringthe January 1994 or April 1994 monitoring event. However, of the 45wells, only 19 contained carbon disulfide at concentrations greater than100 ng/1.

• Shallow Bedrock (ranges from top of rock to approximately 100 feet).Carbon disulfide was detected in 17 of the 34 shallow bedrock wellsat concentrations ranging from 1J to 1,400,000 |4.g/l (well 116). Phenolwas detected in 11 shallow wells at concentrations ranging from 1J to8,800 [ig/1 (well MW-3). Dissolved arsenic concentrations in 16shallow bedrock wells ranged from 1.7 to 1,230 jig/I (well 116), anddissolved zinc concentrations in 31 wells ranged from 12J to 8,880fig/1 (well 116). Values of pH ranged from 5.4 (well PZ8) to 12.3 (well116).

• Intermediate Bedrock (ranges from approximately 100 to 180 feet below landsurface). Carbon disulfide was detected in 21 of 27 intermediate

33

depth bedrock wells, at concentrations ranging from 1J to 330,000(ig/1 (well PW-2). Phenol was detected in 15 wells at concentrationsranging from 1J to 9,500 fig/1 (well 205). Dissolved arsenicconcentrations in 21 intermediate wells ranged from 1.2B to 690 (ig/1(well 205), and dissolved zinc concentrations in 27 wells ranged from6.6 to 557 jo.g/1 (well 205). The pH values for the intermediatebedrock wells ranged from 5.4 (well 133) to 11.4 (well 215).

• Deep Bedrock (ranges from approximately 180 feet to 300 feet below landsurface). Carbon disulfide was detected in all 7 deep bedrock wells.Concentrations in wells 301,302,303, and 304 were 1J or 2J ug/1. Theconcentration in well 315 was 31BJ |ig/l. The concentrations in wells305 and 316 were 240,000 and 360,000 ug/1, respectively.Concentrations of phenol in four deep wells ranged from 8J to 5,600|ig/l (well 316). Dissolved arsenic concentrations in four wells rangedfrom 2.9BF to 1,840 (ig/1 (well 305), and dissolved zinc concentrationsin six wells ranged from 4.0 to 483 ug/1 (well 316). In the deep wells,pH values ranged from 7.8 (well 301) to 13.0 (well 305).

Other minor constituents detected in ground water samples from shallow,intermediate, and deep bedrock wells throughout the Site include VOCs(acetone, methylene chloride, BTEX (less than 20 ug/1), and chloroform),BEHP (detected in most wells at concentrations less than 20 |ig/l), 2-methylphenol, 4-methylphenol, pesticides (almost always less than 0.1(ig/1), and metals. BEHP, chloroform, acetone, and methylene chloride arelikely artifacts of the laboratory analysis. The detections of 2-methylphenol and 4-methylphenol are attributed to detections of phenol.Metals concentrations likely reflect naturally occurring conditions. Theseminor constituents are not considered to be at levels of environmentalsignificance at the Site due to the infrequent detections, lowconcentrations, and probability that some are artifacts of the laboratoryanalysis.

2.6.3 On-site and Off-site Ground Water Data Analysis

Potential Primary Sources Impacting Ground Water Quality

The ground water quality data collected during the RI indicate that VB 9,10, and 11 substantially contribute ground water contaminants at the Site.For the reasons listed below, these three basins are believed to be a directsource for the carbon disulfide, phenol, zinc, and elevated pH, and anindirect source for arsenic.

A R 3 0 0 0 M

• The water levels in VB 9,10, and 11 and in the surroundingoverburden are approximately 5 to 10 feet below grade, indicatingthat the sludges in these basins are partially saturated. Consequently,there is water available to: (1) leach carbon disulfide from the viscose;and (2) create a vertical hydraulic head to facilitate the potentialmigration of leachate through the bottom of the basin.

• The pH of the leachate in VB 9 to 11 is greater than 10. The elevatedpH has the potential to leach zinc from the viscose sludge. Thepresence of zinc in the seep liquid discharging from VB 10 (3,880|ig/l), and in piezometers in viscose basins 9 and 11 (860 to 1,800(ig/1) (Geraghty and Miller, 1988), indicates that the viscose sludge isa likely source of zinc.

• There is a very thin layer of soil beneath VB 9,10, and II, whichallows for only limited physical and chemical attenuation to occur tomitigate the potential impact to ground water quality. (Cross sectionV-V (Figure 2-4) shows the thin soil layer and high water levelsassociated with VBs 9 and 10.)

Arsenic was detected in overburden and shallow bedrock ground wateraround VB 9,10, and 11 at concentrations above background levels.However, the viscose sludge in these basins does not appear to be thesource of arsenic in ground water. Arsenic is present in the viscose atconcentrations ranging from 3 mg/kg to 12 mg/kg. Arsenic was alsodetected in background soils at concentrations ranging from 1 mg/kg to10 mg/kg. The presence of dissolved arsenic in ground water may be theresult of the interaction of the highly basic (pH greater than 10) leachatewithin the viscose basins and surrounding soils. The absence of arsenic inthe seep liquid discharging from VB 10, and in samples from piezometersin VB 9 and 11, indicates that the viscose sludge is not a likely source ofarsenic. Arsenic is desorbed from clay minerals under basic conditions.Consequently, the presence of the arsenic in ground water is potentiallydue to the alkaline leachate emanating from the basins and leachingarsenic from the native soils, not from the viscose sludge.

Other Potential Sources Impacting Ground Water Quality

The ground water quality data collected from the other bedrock andoverburden wells across the Site indicate that VB 1-8, SBs, the landfill, flyash stockpile and FAB, and the plant soils do not substantially contributesite contaminants to ground water as summarized below.

• Viscose Basins 1 through 8. Shallow bedrock monitoring wellsdowngradient and cross-gradient from viscose basins 4, 5, and 6

35 7/29/94

showed non-detectable (< 1 |ig/l) to 3BJ (ig/1 levels of carbondisulfide. Overburden wells MW-11 and MW-12 locateddowngradient from viscose basins 1, 2,3, and 7 also showed non-detectable (< 1 (ig/1) to 4J ug/1 levels of carbon disulfide. In addition,little or no carbon disulfide was detected in the overburden andbedrock wells located downgradient of these basins along the River.

• Sulfate and WWTP Basins. Ground water data from the overburdenwells hydraulically downgradient of the SBs and WWTP basinsindicate that these basins may not have released zinc or lead toground water. However, these basins are a potential source ofdissolved sulfate and other total dissolved solids (TDS) to groundwater.

• fly Ash Stockpile and Basins. With the exception of the elevated arsenicconcentrations detected in well 014, previously described as beingcompleted in fly ash and not overburden, the fly ash stockpile andFABs do not appear to contribute arsenic to ground water.

• Landfill. Monitoring wells MW-7 and MW-8, located downgradientform the landfill, indicate that the landfill is not a primary source ofsite contaminants in ground water.

• Plant Area. Ground water quality data from wells 103, 203, 303,107,and 207, which are located hydraulically downgradient of the plant,indicate that the plant area soils or conduits, such as process andstorm sewers, did not contribute appreciable levels of sitecontaminants to ground water.

Plume Extent and Migration

The main body of the contaminant plume has been delineated; however,the edges of the plume upgradient and cross gradient of the source area,as well as the downgradient leading edge of the off-site plume maywarrant further delineation.

Figures 2-9 and 2-10 show the lateral extent of carbon disulfide, phenol,and arsenic in the shallow and intermediate bedrock ground water. Thesite contaminants migrate toward the southwest, along the strike of theMartinsburg Formation. The plume extends under the River, and beyondwell 215. The lateral extent of the plume in shallow bedrock is slightly lessthan the one depicted for deep bedrock, and does not extend to shallowwell 115. The extent of carbon disulfide in the overburden ground waterappears to be localized around VB 9,10, and 11 since carbon disulfide wasnot detected in the overburden wells located along the River.

36 7/29/94

f lR3000i,3

Cross-section A-A' on Plate 5 illustrates the conceptual vertical extent ofcarbon disulfide in ground water. The cross-section view of the plumeillustrates three key items. First, a portion of the plume is conceptualizedto discharge upward to the River, following the vertical hydraulicgradient in bedrock shown on Plate 4. As shown in Plate 5, theconcentrations discharging at the River are believed to be less than thosepresent in the core of the plume, as ground water with elevated carbondisulfide levels likely mixes with shallow ground water beneath the Riverthat contains lesser concentrations of carbon disulfide. Second, someportion of the plume underflows the River. The leading edge of thecarbon disulfide plume is believed to be a short distance beyond well 215.Third, the concentrations of carbon disulfide in samples from wells 305and 315 indicate that the plume is present at depth.

The plume appears to have vertical limits in the area directly across theRiver. The absence of carbon disulfide in well 115 indicates that shallowground water contains uncontaminated local recharge from the ridge westof Rivermont Acres. The trace amount of carbon disulfide (31BJ (ig/1) inwell 315 indicates that the carbon disulfide in the ground water directlyacross the River is limited to a depth of about 200 to 250 feet below theground surface.

The concentration of carbon disulfide in ground water exceeds 1,000 mg/1in several monitoring wells located around viscose basins 9,10, and 11.Relative to the carbon disulfide solubility concentration limit of 2,300mg/1 at 22°C in water, this could suggest the possibility of a separate non-aqueous phase in ground water. However, the carbon disulfide present inground water may not be indicative of a dense non-aqueous phase liquid(DNAPL) for three reasons.

• The mechanism for carbon disulfide release to ground water appearsto be leaching from viscose sludge. Leaching will result in a mixtureof water and dissolved carbon disulfide. Carbon disulfide is notlikely present in viscose sludge as a pure liquid to produce a DNAPLin ground water.

• Subsurface samples collected during the RI investigation did notprovide visible evidence of DNAPL in the overburden or bedrockunits. Specifically, samples collected from borings placed in the baseof the VBs, overburden wells, berm borings, and bedrock monitoringwells did not show visible evidence of a coating of DNAPL on soilsand bedrock.

• The ground water samples collected from the monitoring wells andthe packer intervals in corehole 305 did not show a trend of increasing

-

dissolved concentrations of carbon disulfide with depth, which iswhat typically occurs when a DNAPL is present. The plume cross-section shows that the highest concentrations of carbon disulfide werepresent in the overburden and shallow bedrock wells in the vicinityof VB 9,10, and 11, and concentrations decreased with depth in wells305 and 316 which is not indicative of DNAPL dispersion in groundwater.

The carbon disulfide plume is likely migrating beyond the southwestboundary of Rivermont Acres. However, no potable wells are believed tobe present within the defined plume boundary based on previous work(by others) which assembled a list of ground water users from VirginiaState Water Control Board (SWCB, now part of the Virginia Department ofEnvironmental Quality) files to identify existing water supply wells in thearea to the southwest of Rivermont Acres, along the strike of theMartinsburg Formation, to determine whether any well would have thepotential to intercept the carbon disulfide plume in ground water, if theplume were to extend further to the southwest beyond Rivermont Acres.

The survey indicated that the four closest wells were located 2,000 to 3,000feet southwest of the west bank of the River. Wells 144,146, and 147appear to serve residences, and well 192 is listed under the name of aconstruction company. The surface elevation and final elevation for eachof these wells are listed below.

SWCB Surface FinalWell No. Elevation (ft. msl) Depth (ft. msl)

193-144 620 520

193-146 700 575

193-147 680 Unknown

193-192 680 470

The carbon disulfide is present in well 215 at an elevation of between 300msl and 450 msl, using the absence of carbon disulfide in wells 115 and315 as a guide to placing vertical limits on the plume. Consequently, ifcontamination were to extend southwest beyond well 215 at this sameelevation, the contamination would be present 20 feet below the bottom ofwell 193-192. Therefore, if the carbon disulfide plume extends further

38 B R 3 0 0 0 I 4 5

beyond well 215, the plume should not intersect the portion of the aquiferwhere the potable wells may be completed.

2.6.4 Suggested Data Gaps

FMC has compared RI data findings against RI objectives for the On-siteand Off-site Ground Water Investigation Management Unit. The resultsof this comparison suggests that certain data gaps exist which maywarrant further investigative activities. A review of previously collecteddata and analysis does not adequately address these data gaps. Areas forfurther consideration are summarized below.

• Evaluate the effectiveness zone of influence and recovery rates forground water recovery from bedrock, especially from the highpermeability fractured fold axis essential to understand plumedynamics.

• Determine the upgradient and cross-gradient extent of the plume inshallow and intermediate bedrock in the vicinity of the anticipatedsource area (VB 9,10, and 11).

• Determine water quality and water levels in VB 9,10, and 11, and inthe overburden surrounding these basins, to further define the sourceof the plume in bedrock.

• Collect and analyze ground water samples for VOCs and dissolvedmetals in the existing and newly installed wells to confirm the RIfindings.

• Determine ground water quality conditions on the west side of theRiver southwest of well 215 to delineate the downgradient extent ofthe plume,

• Determine the impact of the ground water plume on surface waterquality consistent with EPA's effort to complete the investigation ofthe water and sediment quality in the River.

39 f t R 3 0 0 0 U 6 7/29/94

3.0 CONCLUSIONS

RI efforts undertaken by FMC to date have substantially met therequirements established under the EPA Work Plan. FMC has completedto date 159 borings, 91 surface samples, and 90 ground water monitoringwells, and has collected and analyzed in excess of 830 analytical samples.The RI findings indicate that of the twenty-three discrete areas of the Siteinvestigated by FMC (SB 1-4, 4E and 5, emergency lagoon, polishingbasins (2), landfill, fly ash stockpile/basins (4), VB 1-8, VB 9-11, and 16 on-site soil areas), the nature and extent of site contaminants and the potentialto affect other media have been adequately characterized in 16 of theseareas (ten on-site soil areas, VB 1-8, landfill, sulfate basins, fly ashstockpile/basins, emergency lagoon, and polishing basins).

RI findings have identified limited areas of the Site where additionalinvestigation may be warranted to fully satisfy the RI objectives; (1)delineate the nature and extent of contamination, and (2) evaluate thepotential to adversely affect other media. Of the six management unitsinvestigated, only three units (on-site soils, VBs 9,10 and 11, and on-site/off-site ground water) may warrant further investigation.

• On-site Soils. The remaining on-site soil areas which may requirefurther investigation include the west carbon disulfide impoundment,boneyard, lead casting shop, aboveground storage tank, undergroundstorage tanks, and zinc recovery building.

• Viscose basins 9,10, and 11. The nature and extent of site contaminantshave been, for the most part, adequately characterized in viscosebasins 9,10, and 11. Further investigation may be warranted todetermine the water levels degree of saturation in the sludge matrixleachability/mobility of primary contaminants and leachate quality ineach basin. These data will better define the degree to which thesebasins may be acting as an ongoing source of contaminants to groundwater.

• On-site and Off-site Ground Water. Ground water quality degradationis primarily characterized by a plume that apparently migratesbeyond the western boundary of the Site. Further investigation maybe warranted which focuses on delineating the upgradient and cross-gradient boundaries of the carbon disulfide plume and thedowngradient extent of the off-site carbon disulfide plume beyondthe River.

40 A R 3 0 0 0 t * 7 7/29/94

REFERENCES

ERM, 18 June 1993. On-Site Soils Investigation Field Sampling PlanSupplement (FSPS) for the Avtex Fibers Superfund Site. Front Royal.Virginia. Prepared by Environmental Resources Management, Inc., forFMC Corporation.

ERM, 18 June 1993. Sulfate Basins Investigation Field Sampling PlanSupplement CFSPS) for the Avtex Fibers Superfund Site. Front Royal.Virginia. Prepared by Environmental Resources Management, Inc., forFMC Corporation.

ERM, 24 June 1993. Quality Assurance Project Plan Supplement (QAPjP)for the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study for the Avtex Fibers Site.Prepared by Environmental Resources Management, Inc., for FMCCorporation.

ERM, 1 July 1993. Bedrock Coring and Testing Field Sampling PlanSupplement (FSPS) of the On-Site/Off-Site Ground Water Investigationfor the Avtex Fibers Superfund Site. Front Royal. Virginia. Prepared byEnvironmental Resources Management, Inc., for FMC Corporation.

ERM, 16 July 1993. Viscose Basins Investigation Field Sampling PlanSupplement (FSPS) for the Avtex Fibers Superfund Site. Front Royal.Virginia. Prepared by Environmental Resources Management, Inc., forFMC Corporation.

ERM, 23 July 1993. Wastewater Treatment Plant Basins Investigation FieldSampling Plan Supplement (FSPS) for the Avtex Fibers Superfund Site.Front Royal. Virginia. Prepared by Environmental ResourcesManagement, Inc., for FMC Corporation.

ERM, 29 July 1993. Overburden Monitoring Well Installation FieldSampling Plan Supplement fFSPS) to the On-Site/Off-Site Ground WaterInvestigation for the Avtex Fibers Superfund Site. Front Royal. Virginia.Prepared by Environmental Resources Management, Inc., for FMCCorporation.

ERM, 27 August 1993. Flyash Management Unit Investigation FieldSampling Plan Supplement CFSPS1 for the Avtex Fibers Superfund Site.

41 f l R 3 0 Q Q l * 8 7/29/94

Front Royal. Virginia. Prepared by Environmental ResourcesManagement Inc., for FMC Corporation.

ERM, 3 September 1993. Bedrock Monitoring Well Installation FieldSampling Plan Supplement (FSPS) to the On-Site/Off-Site Ground WaterInvestigation for the Avtex Fibers Superfund Site. Front Royal, Virginia.Prepared by Environmental Resources Management, Inc., for FMCCorporation.

ERM, 9 September 1993. Technical Memorandum Baseline GeologicStudies Avtex Fibers Superfund Site. Front Royal. Virginia. Prepared byEnvironmental Resources Management, Inc., for FMC Corporation.

ERM, 30 November 1993. Ground Water Sampling Field Sampling PlanSupplement (FSPS1 to the On-Site/Off-Site Ground Water Investigationfor the Avtex Fibers Superfund Site. Front Royal. Virginia. Prepared byEnvironmental Resources Management, Inc., for FMC Corporation.

ERM, 15 December 1993. Aquifer Testing Field Sampling PlanSupplement (FSPS) to the On-Site/Off-Site Ground Water Investigationfor the Avtex Fibers Superfund Site. Front Royal. Virginia. Prepared byEnvironmental Resources Management, Inc., for FMC Corporation.

ERM, 16 December 1993. Draft Analytical Quality Assurance ReviewReport for the Sulfate Basin Management Unit. Prepared byEnvironmental Resources Management, Inc., for FMC Corporation.

ERM, 17 January 1994. Draft Analytical Quality Assurance Review Reportfor the WWTP Basin Management Unit. Prepared by EnvironmentalResources Management, Inc., for FMC Corporation.

ERM, 26 January 1994. Draft Analytical Quality Assurance Review Reportfor the On-Site Soils Management Unit. Prepared by EnvironmentalResources Management, Inc., for FMC Corporation.

ERM, 10 February 1994. Draft Analytical Quality Assurance ReviewReport for the Viscose Basin Management Unit. Prepared byEnvironmental Resources Management, Inc., for FMC Corporation.

ERM, 21 February 1994. Draft Analytical Quality Assurance ReviewReport for the Flyash/Landfill Area Management Unit. Prepared byEnvironmental Resources Management, Inc., for FMC Corporation.

42 f l R 3 0 0 Q U 9 7/29/94

ERM, 16 May 1994. Draft Analytical Quality Assurance Review Report forthe Corehole Ground Water Sampling for the On-site /Off-site GroundWater Investigation Management Unit. Prepared by EnvironmentalResources Management, Inc., for FMC Corporation.

ERM, 16 May 1994. Draft Analytical Quality Assurance Review Report forthe January 1994 Ground Water Sampling for the On-site/Off-site GroundWater Investigation Management Unit. Prepared by EnvironmentalResources Management, Inc., for FMC Corporation.

ERM, 13 July 1994. Draft Analytical Quality Assurance Review Report forthe April 1994 Ground Water Sampling for the On-site/Off-site GroundWater Investigation Management Unit. Prepared by EnvironmentalResources Management, Inc., for FMC Corporation.

EPA, February 1993. Final Work Plan. Avtex Fibers Warren County.Virginia. Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study. EPA WorkAssignment Number 37-19-3LD1.

EPA, June 1993. Final Project Operations Plant. Avtex Fibers Site WarrenCounty. Virginia. Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study. Volumes 1through 6. EPA Work Assignment Number 37-19-3LD1.

Geraghty and Miller, 1988. Remedial Investigation Report. Avtex Fibers,Inc.. Front Royal. Virginia. Prepared by Geraghty and Miller, Inc. forAvtex Fibers, Inc.

Radar, E.K. and T.H. Biggs, 1975. The Geology of Front Royal VirginiaQuadrangle. Virginia Division of Mineral Resources, Report ofInvestigation No. 40., 91 p.

feoooso 7/29/94

f l R 3 0 0 0 5 l

!/N

x.X

X,

X

7s-

x.

XX \

/

XX,

X,X

x x, Xx x. x

'x x, "xx x, "x

x x, "xx x, \

X X, Xx x, xx x,

"x x,X^ x

X

o

O3Q.

O _

CD

oocDQ.

aa

C3

X

x

X,"X,

Xx, xx X,x, x.

¥xtl*§K JJ j J

•H.

**̂^s!̂I

X.

::~t

U.

Tl

2. oit

H. sf O — <" €2.3£• <'•* H ^d> •nilw »** £

« O3

<0<Q

JQ

IS3 5I E £

>*CO Ofe DC

c o £o <o u.

CO

THE ERM GROUP 4.94-MKB/07.19.94 MKB/II01

510 -

Intervo

Constituents

5B-

—— i-00: AsCdPb

- -— -~Zn

-BH-27 — —————

1.5-B — - •ND — — — —1 7 -J — - ——1 10 —————

Sample No.

Qualitatively SuspectNot DetectedQuantitative EstimateConcentration

490 —

470 —

430

SB-BH-27/P1EZOMETER SB-5

5505'

00: Pb (mg/kg) 129Zn (mq/kg) 60,300

02: Pb (mq/kg) 542Zn (mg/kg) 237,000

06- Pb (mg/kg) 8.5-JZn (mg/kg) 109

A3 (mg/L)Pb mg/LZn (mg/L

pHCS, (ug/L)As (mg/LPb (mg/LZn (mg/L

6.91-JND

Pb (mg/L) NDZn (mg/L) ND

CS, (ug/L)As (mg/L)As (rng/L) .005-B

Pb (mg/L) .00037Zn (mg/L) NO

011/111(Projected 365'SE Into Section)

Monitoring We

Open Borehole/Screened Interval

Projected Monitoring Well

SCALE IN FEETVertical Exaggeration = 5x

swFigure 2-2Illustrative Cross Section for s.

Sulfate Basins Management UnitAvtex Fibers Superfund Site

Front Royal, Virginia

450 —

Notes;1. Ground water chemical data obtained during

January-February 1994 sampling event.2. Sulfate basin chemical data obtained in August 1993,3. Ground water level elevations were taken on 25 April 1994.4. Soil analytical data are based on results for Level III

and IV analysis. For samples having both Level III andLevel IV data available, the Level IV doto is presented.

Projected Open Borehole/Screened Interval

Top of Weathered Bedrock(Dashed Where Inferred)

_J.42i',__ Over! bble Surface

Light Grey to Grey ZINC SLUDGE

Orange-Brown, Red-Brown, andTan-Brown SANDY SILT andCLAYEY SILT

Coarse SAND, GRAVEL and COBBLES,Poorly to Well Sorted

Dark Grey to Black CafcareousSHALE with Fine—Groined Sandstoneand Siltstone Interbeds

ERM, INC 10555.90.01/05.06.94- MKB/07.14.94-MKB./E10 1

_

C OoO 11

°IO c^B *** fe

^W o£i f f«53 ggo *wc 5 ? "e^^ ^R fcn ^J H^B

<oO J 5 t ?A c n)% a>

5 c a -53 5 O § co oO) ** O Jf QCEEl5Si

"« • **"^ A *•|^o

3 "O*o ^ Ec t w^^ ^B ^^

2Sl<5W cO

(E *

i.i i. ^

* *

o .^ * — --

t

THE ERM GROUP 90.01/05.14.94-HKB/07.14.94-MKB/A101-1

THE ERM GROUP 0.01/05.14.94--MKB/07.14.94--MKB/A101-2

THE ERM GROUP AR300060 555.90.01/05.14.94'MKB/07.14.94.-MKB/A101-3

r« —•am

oo«- ±2•O cd> DflQ*-

SI

3.2COc

o > ® S £ *^PV ^_ ^« •* ^^AiSp.jE -cw «3 *- 3 « O" £ 2 5 " =u.|os?

e • O* £ x it* ^s •** *- *<c x >O O <O v_- c« «5 O

)•

O OOO

THE ERM RROUP A R 3 0 0 0 6 I 10565.90.01/05.09.94-MKB/07.16.94 -MKH/1102 -2

oo•60> £

DQ c9

31•D E«> «C O> mE g£« « «** v a^!?1

O c * = 0»,s ** L ^S«l£ 5*^ e a —« S ? » £S7 3 « Oa>°- 2 i01

E^Ogtw « "• o£ K x £E S S25^§?o ««s3 <0*f C .2?

FM

OCoO

THE ERM GROUP [10555 QO.O!/06.09.fl4-UKB/07 15.94-MKR/l 1 02- I

A R 3 0 0 0 6 3

Table 2-1Key Findings for the

On-Site Soils Investigation Management Unit

A. Key Chemical Data (a)Subunit

Background

West Carbon DisulfideStorage Area

Key Chemical Data

ConstituentQrg^nics (i^g/kg)TrichloroethenePAHs2-Methy [naphthaleneDime thy IphthalateDiethylphthalateBEHPPesticidesPCBsMetals (mg/kg)ArsenicCadmiumChromiumLeadZincOrganics (ug/kg)CS2

Range of Concentrations

2J39-24041 J-82 J

21]48 L-430 J63J-320J0.36-1.3

18J

2.48J-25.4K0.40-0.78 J

5.8L-18.7L2.01 J-39.1 J8.3 K-119 J

5 J-77,000

Phase 2Investigation

Required?

NotApplicable

yes

(a) Table lists key data only. Analytical data based on samples submitted for Level IIIand IV analysis. Analytical data obtained from the Draft Analytical Quality AssuranceReview Report, Onsite Soils Investigation Management Unit, 26 January 1994.

BEHP- Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalateBTEX- Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Total XylenesCS2 - Carbon DisulfidePAHs- Polynuclear Aromatic HydrocarbonsPest/PCBs- Pesticides/Polychlorinated BiphenylsKetones- Acetone and 2-ButanoneJ- This result should be considered a quantitative estimate.K- This result should be considered a biased high quantitative estimate.L- This result should be considered a biased low quantitative estimate.

jig/kg- micrograms per kilogrammg/kg- milligrams per kilogram^ig/1- micrograms per litermg/1- milligrams per litercm/s- centimeters per secondND- Not Detected

f l R 3 0 0 0 6 l *

Table 2-1 (continued)Key Findings for the

On-Site Soils Investigation Management Unit

A. Key Chemical Data (a)Subunit

Boneyard

Aboveground StorageTankZinc Recovery Building

Lead Casting Shop

Underground StorageTanks

Key Chemical Data

ConstituentQrganics (jig /kg)Carbazole2-Methylphenol4-MethylphenolPAHs2-MethylnaphthaleneDime thy IphthalateDibenzofuranDi-n-butylphthalateButylbenzy IphthalateBEHPPesticidesPCBsMetals (mg/kg)ArsenicCadmiumChromiumLeadZincOrganics f^ig/kg}TPH

Metals (mg/kg)ZincMetals (mg/kg)LeadOrganics fug /kg)BTEXTPH

Range of Concentrations

38 J-65069J-110J72 J-98 J30-8,30050 J-4,50053J-1,20057 J-2,20045 J-290 J41 J-270 J

67J-1,700J0.22-4636-250

3.6 K-133 L0.65-2.4

7.4 L-22.2 L1.7L-502J16.3-1,550]

430-5,000

184 J-49,600 J

21.4 J-101,000

3.1-34023-4,800

Phase 2Investigation

Required?

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

(a) Table lists key data only. Analytical data based on samples submitted for Level IIIand IV analysis. Analytical data obtained from the Draft Analytical Quality AssuranceReview Report, Onsite Soils Investigation Management Unit, 26 January 1994.

BEHP- Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalateBTEX- Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Total XylenesCS2 - Carbon DisulfidePAHs- Polynuclear Aromatic HydrocarbonsPest/PCBs- Pesticides/Polychlorinated BiphenylsKetones- Acetone and 2-ButanoneJ- This result should be considered a quantitative estimate.K- This result should be considered a biased high quantitative estimate.L- This result should be considered a biased low quantitative estimate.

ug/kg- micrograms per kilogrammg/kg- milligrams per kilogramfig/1- micrograms per litermg/1- milligrams per litercm/s- centimeters per secondND- Not Detected

f l R 3 0 0 0 6 5

Table 2-1 (continued)Key Findings for the

On-Site Soils Investigation Management Unit

A. Key Chemical Data (a)Subunit

Polypropylene PCB SpillAreaAcid Reclaim Building

East Carbon DisulfideStorage AreaPaint ShopChemical Storage Area

Coal Yard

Electrical Transformers

Acid Reclaim CoolingTowerSpray Ponds

Key Chemical Data

ConstituentOrganics (ng/ kg)PCBs

Organics ^ig/kg}DimethylphthalateBEHPPAHsMetals (mg/kg)ArsenicChromiumLeadZincOrganics (jag /kg)CS2

TCL/VOCs fug/kg)Organics (|Ag/kg)BEHPPAHsPCBsMetals (mg/kg)ZincOrganics (Hg/kg)PCBsOrganics (ug/ kg)PCBsMetals (mg/kg)Chromium

Meials (mg/kg)Chromium

Range of Concentrations

240-5,800

130J-390J85 J-210 J44-2,200

4.1 L-23.9 L9.2 J-23.7

24-6951-561

2.9 j-110 J

ND

490-2,10048-1,100

56-72

130-1,540

130-500

300-2,800

3.3 L-291 L

12.6-82.5

Phase 2Investigation

Required?

no

no

no

nono

no

no

no

no

(a) Table lists key data only. Analytical data based on samples submitted for Level IIIand IV analysis. Analytical data obtained from the Draft Analytical Quality AssuranceReview Report, Onsite Soils Investigation Management Unit, 26 January 1994.

BEHP- Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalateBTEX- Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Total XylenesCS2 - Carbon DisulfidePAHs- Polynuclear Aromatic HydrocarbonsPest/PCBs- Pesticides/Polychlorinated BiphenylsKetones- Acetone and 2-ButanoneJ- This result should be considered a quantitative estimate.K- This result should be considered a biased high quantitative estimate.L- This result should be considered a biased low quantitative estimate.

ug/kg- micrograms per kilogrammg/kg- milligrams per kilogramp.g/1- micrograms per litermg/1- milligrams per litercm/s- centimeters per secondND- Not Detected

f lR300066

Table 2-1 (continued)Key Findings for the

On-Site Soils Investigation Management Unit

A. Key Chemical Data (a)Subunit

Seeps/Sediments andSurface Drainage Ditches

Key Chemical Data

Constituent

OrganicsKetonesCS2BTEXCarbazolePhenol4-Methylphenol2-MethylnaphthaleneDiethylphthalateDibenzofuranBEHPPAHsPesticidesPCBsMetalsArsenicCadmiumChromiumLeadZinc

Range of ConcentrationsSeeps(Jig/1)14-210

2 J-18,0001-8

1J-7J8,700 K

7 J-590 K2J-3J

0.7J-1J2J

220 J0.5-14

0.0050-0.38ND

(mg/1)7.5 L-87 L3.7 J-8.1 J35.6-2767.8 J-180 J

217-58,500

Sediment(Mg/kg)5-1,3003 J-480

5-3172 J-2,600

2,000-5,50067 J-2,200110L-780J

600J71 J-690

930-19,000 J1-1,4000.31-2011-350

(mg/kg)3.8 L-600.5-18

15.2 L-216 L15.6-305

22.9 J-10,500 J

Phase 2Investigation

Required?

no

(a) Table lists key data only. Analytical data based on samples submitted for Level IIIand IV analysis. Analytical data obtained from the Draft Analytical Quality AssuranceReview Report, Onsite Soils Investigation Management Unit, 26 January 1994.

BEHP- Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalateBTEX- Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Total XylenesCS2 - Carbon DisulfidePAHs- Polynuclear Aromatic HydrocarbonsPest/PCBs- Pesticides/Polychlorinated BiphenylsKetones- Acetone and 2-ButanoneJ- This result should be considered a quantitative estimate.K- This result should be considered a biased high quantitative estimate.L- This result should be considered a biased low quantitative estimate.

jig/kg- micrograms per kilogrammg/kg- milligrams per kilogramp.g/1- micrograms per litermg/1- milligrams per litercm/s- centimeters per secondND- Not Detected

A R 3 0 0 0 6 7

Table 2-2Key Findings for the

Sulfate Basins Management Unit

A. Sulfate Basins CharacteristicsConfiguration

Sludge VolumePhysical

Characteristics

water depth: 5-20 feetsludge thickness: 1-13 feetsilt and clay soil thickness: 5-10 feet936,000 yd3

Zinc hydroxide sludgepermeability: 10~6 - 10"7 cm/s

B. Key Chemical Data (a)Constituent

Organics (jig/kglPAHsBTEXPesticidesPCBsBEHPCS2

Phenol2-MethylnaphthaleneMetals (mg/kg)ArsenicCadmiumChromiumLeadZinc

Range ofConcentrations

54-3,0002-45

0.11-27140-1,000

54 J-3,700 J3 J-1,70074 J-570 ]79 J-590 J

2-14.36.7-12911.5-70625-3,220

71-400,000

Basins Found

SB-1, 2, 3, 4, 5SB-1, 3, 4

SB-1, 2, 3, 4, 5SB-1, 3, 4, 5

SB-1, 2, 3, 4, 5SB-1, 2, 3, 4, 5SB-1, 2, 3, 4, 5SB-1, 2, 3, 4

SB-1, 2, 3, 4, 5SB-1, 2, 3, 4

SB-1, 2, 3, 4, 5SB-1,2,3,4,5SB-1, 2, 3, 4, 5

(a) Table lists key data only. Organic data based on samples submitted for Level III and IV analysis;metals analytical data is based exclusively on Level III analysis. Analytical data obtained from theDraft Analytical Quality Assurance Review Report, Sulfate Basins Management Unit, 16 December1993.

BEHP- Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalateBTEX- Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Total XylenesCS2 - Carbon DisulfidePAHs- Polynuclear Aromatic HydrocarbonsPest/PCBs- Pesticides/Polychlorinated BiphenylsKetones- Acetone and 2-ButanoneJ- This result should be considered a quantitative estimate.K- This result should be considered a biased high quantitative estimate.L- This result should be considered a biased low quantitative estimate.

jig/kg- micrograms per kilogrammg/kg- milligrams per kilogramcm/s- centimeters per secondSB- Sulfate BasinND- Not Detected

& R 3 0 0 0 & 8

Table 2-3Key Findings for

Viscose Basins 1 through 8 in theViscose Basins Management Unit

A. Viscose Basins 1-8 CharacteristicsConfiguration

VolumePhysical

Characteristics

Viscose and other wastes placed on soilclayey silt soil thickness: 5-15 feet527,000 yd3

Viscose consisted of fibrous, rubber-likematerial and unused rayon fabric; VB-4, 5, 6reported to contain construction debrispermeability: 10'̂ - 10'̂ cm/s

B. Key Chemical Data (a)Constituent

Organic? (jig/kg)CS2

PhenolPyrenePAHsBTEXPesticidesPCBsBEHPKetonesMethylene Chloride4-MethylphenolMetajs (mg/kg)ArsenicCadmiumChromiumLeadZinc

Range ofConcentrations

2.9 J-56,000HOJ-19,00071 J-74,00048-200,000

1-3,0000.37-5491-400

570J-120,0007-2,100

8.1 J-1,OOOJ66 J-l 7,000

1.5-79.65.6-2609.6-74

29-7,07057-44,000

Basins Found

VB-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8VB-4, 5, 6, 7

VB-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8VB-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

VB-2, 5, 6VB-1, 2, 3, 4, 5,6

VB-3, 6VB-5, 6

VB-1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8VB-5, 6, 7, 8

VB-1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7

VB-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8VB-1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8

VB-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8VB-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8VB-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

(a) Table lists key data only. Organic data based on samples submitted for Level III and IVanalysis; metals analytical data is based exclusively on Level III analysis. Analytical dataobtained from the Draft Analytical Quality Assurance Review Report, Viscose BasinsManagement Unit, 10 February 1994.

BEHP- Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalateBTEX- Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Total XylenesCS2 - Carbon DisulfidePAHs- Polynuclear Aromatic HydrocarbonsPest/PCBs- Pesticides/Polychlorinated BiphenylsKetones- Acetone and 2-ButanoneJ- This result should be considered a quantitative estimate.K- This result should be considered a biased high quantitative estimate.L- This result should be considered a biased low quantitative estimate.

Mg/kg- micrograms per kilogrammg/kg- milligrams per kilogramcm/s- centimeters per secondVB- Viscose BasinND- Not Detected

A R 3 0 Q 0 6 9

Table 2-4Key Findings for the

Viscose Basins Seeps in theViscose Basins Management Unit

A. Key Chemical Data (a)

Constituent

Organics (jig/1)C$2

Phenol4-MethylphenolMetals (me/11ArsenicCadmiumChromiumLeadZinc

Viscose Basins 4, 5, 6Range of

Concentrations

2-11ND

7-540

0.049 L-0.087 L0.0037 J-0.0081 J

0.158-0.2760.0114 L-0.180J

0.111 J-58.5]

Seeps Found

ON-SW-01, 03

ON-SW-Q1, 02, 3

ON-SW-02, 03, 07ON-SW-01, 03

ON-SW-01, 02, 03, 07ON-SW-03, 07

ON-SW-01, 02, 03, 07

Viscose Basin 10Range of

Concentrations

18,0008,700590

NDND

0.03560.0086 L

3.84

Seep Found

ON-SW-08ON-SW-08ON-SW-08

ON-SW-08ON-SW-08ON-SW-08

(a) Table lists key data only. Organic data based on samples submitted for Level III and IVanalysis; metals analytical data is based exclusively on Level III analysis. Analytical dataobtained from the Draft Analytical Quality Assurance Review Report, Onsite Soils InvestigationManagement Unit, 26 January 1994.

BEHP- Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalateBTEX- Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Total XylenesCS2 - Carbon DisulfidePAHs- Polynuclear Aromatic HydrocarbonsPest/PCBs- Pesticides/Poly chlorinated BiphenylsKetones- Acetone and 2-ButanoneON-SW- Onsite surface water sampleJ- This result should be considered a quantitative estimate. K- This result should be considered abiased high quantitative estimate.L- This result should be considered a biased low quantitative estimate.

jig/kg- micrograms per kilogrammg/kg- milligrams per kilogram[ig/1- micrograms per litermg/1- milligrams per litercm/s- centimeters per secondND- Not Detected

A R 3 0 0 0 7 0

Table 2-5Key Findings for

Viscose Basins 9,10, and 11 in theViscose Basins Management Unit

A. Viscose Basins 9-11 CharacteristicsConfiguration

VolumePhysical

Characteristics

Viscose thickness in VB-9, 11: 20-25 feetViscose thickness in VB-10: -15 feetLittle to no soil cover beneath basins251,000 yd3

Viscose sludge, plastic-like and rubber-likemater ia lpermeability: lO'^cm/s

B. Key Chemical Data (a), (b)Constituent

Organics fug/kg)CS2

PhenolPAHsPesticidesKetonesMethylene Chloride4-MethylphenolMetals (mg/kg)ArsenicChromiumLeadZinc

Range ofConcentrations

720-3,600,000280 J-290,000

160-2,00044-560

320-3,10067-1,800 J

200 J-2,900

3.1-12.117.6-5329-228

64-3,190

Basins Found

VB-9, 10, 11VB-9, 10, 11

VB-9, 10VB-10

VB-9, 10VB-9, 10

VB-9, 10, 11

VB-9, 10VB-9, 10, 11

VB-9, 10VB-9, 10, 11

(a) Table lists key data only. Organic data based on samples submitted for Level III and IVanalysis; metals analytical data is based exclusively on Level III analysis. Analytical dataobtained from the Draft Analytical Quality Assurance Review Report, Viscose BasinsManagement Unit, 10 February 1994.

(b) Due to the high concentrations of organic compounds in VB-9,10, and 11, the detection limitsfor many of these constituents are higher than for VB-1-8.

BEHP- Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalateBTEX- Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Total XylenesCS2 - Carbon DisulfidePAHs- Polynuclear Aromatic HydrocarbonsPest/PCBs- Pesticides/Polychlorinated BiphenyisKetones- Acetone and 2-ButanoneJ- This result should be considered a quantitative estimate.K- This result should be considered a biased high quantitative estimate.L- This result should be considered a biased low quantitative estimate.

- micrograms per kilogrammg/kg- milligrams per kilogramcm/s- centimeters per secondVB- Viscose BasinND- Not Detected

f lR30007

Table 2-6Key Findings for the

Emergency Lagoon in theWastewater Treatment Plant Lagoons and Residuals Management Unit

A. Emergency Lagoon CharacteristicsConfiguration

Sludge VolumePhysical

Characteristics

water depth: 5-10 feetsludge thickness: 5-11 feetclayey silt soil thickness: 5-10 feet12,000yd3

Zinc hydroxide sludgepermeability: 10"7 - 10"9 cm/s

B. Key Chemical Data (a)Constituent

Qrganicg Oig/kg)CS2

PhenolPAHsBTEXPesticidesPCBsBEHPKetonesMethylene Chloride4-Methylphenol2-MethylnaphthaleneMeials (mg/kg)ArsenicCadmiumChromiumLeadZinc

Range ofConcentrations

620 J-54,00047J-7,100230-9,800

6-1401.6-27

470-7,1004,600]

1,100-150,0004,100 ]-16,000 J

83-27,000890J-3,100J

3-9.48.6-11815.9-255300-3,120

438-281,000

(a) Table lists key data only. Organic data based on samples submitted for Level III and IVanalysis; metals analytical data is based exclusively on Level III analysis. Analytical dataobtained from the Draft Analytical Quality Assurance Review Report, Wastewater TreatmentPlant Lagoons and Residuals Management Unit, 17 January 1994

BEHP- Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalateBTEX- Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Total XylenesC$2 - Carbon DisulfidePAHs- Polynuclear Aromatic HydrocarbonsPest/PCBs- Pesticides/Polychlohnated BiphenylsKetones- Acetone and 2-ButanoneJ- This result should be considered a quantitative estimate.K- This result should be considered a biased high quantitative estimate.L- This result should be considered a biased low quantitative estimate.

ug/kg- micrograms per kilogrammg/kg- milligrams per kilogramcm/s- centimeters per secondND- Not Detected

A R 3 0 0 0 7 2

Table 2-7Key Findings for the

Polishing Basins in theWastewater Treatment Plant Lagoons and Residuals Management Unit

A. Polishing Basins CharacteristicsConfiguration

Sludge VolumePhysical

Characteristics

water depth: 0-2 feetsludge thickness: 0.5-5 feetclayey silt soil thickness: 2-5 feet16,500 yd3

Zinc hydroxide sludgepermeability: 10"® cm/s

B. Key Chemical Data (a)Constituent

Organic? (MgAg)PAHsBTEXPesticidesBEHPMethylene Chloride2-MethylnaphthaleneMetals (me /kg)— T T n — ̂ - *• o tjf

ArsenicCadmiumChromiumLeadZinc

Range ofConcentrations

69-2,9004-21

1.3-251,200J-2,800

7,500 J73 J-930 J

4-3548-71

12.1-23439-400

1,580-310,000

Basins Found

PB-1, 2PB-1PB-1PB-1PB-2PB-1

PB-1, 2PB-1, 2PB-1, 2PB-1, 2PB-1, 2

(a) Table lists key data only. Organic data based on samples submitted for Level III and IVanalysis; metals analytical data is based exclusively on Level III analysis. Analytical dataobtained from the Draft Analytical Quality Assurance Review Report, Wastewater TreatmentPlant Lagoons and Residuals Management Unit, 17 January 1994

BEHP- Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalateBTEX- Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Total XylenesCS2 - Carbon DisulfidePAHs- Polynuclear Aromatic HydrocarbonsPest/PCBs- Pesticides/Polychlorinated BiphenylsKetones- Acetone and 2-ButanoneJ- This result should be considered a quantitative estimate.K- This result should be considered a biased high quantitative estimate.L- This result should be considered a biased low quantitative estimate.

jig/kg- micrograms per kilogrammg/kg- milligrams per kilogramcm/s- centimeters per secondPB- Polishing BasinND- Not Detected

A R 3 0 0 0 7 3

Table 2-8Key Findings for the

Fly Ash Basins/Stockpile in theFill Areas and Fly Ash Piles Management Unit

A. Fly Ash Basins/Stockpile CharacteristicsConfiguration

VolumePhysical

Characteristics

Stockpile height: 35-75 feetBasin thicknesses: 13-17 feetUnderlain by 5-15 feet of soil1,300,000yd3

Silt-size fly ash, physically uniform,six-inch soil lifts present in stockpile.Layer of sulfate basin sludge found at base offly ash basin 6, and in one boring in stockpile,permeability: 10*5 , jQ-7 cm/s

B. Key Chemical Data (a)Constituent

Organics (jag/kglPAHsBTEXPesticidesCS2

ChloroformTrichloroetheneMetals (mg/kg)ArsenicCadmiumChromiumLeadZinc

Range ofConcentrations

42-7902-17

1.2-172 L-120 L8J-110J4 1-14 L

1.6-14918.4-2311-12428-910

51-5,520

Basins Found

StockpileFA-1, Stockpile

FA-6FA-1, 3, 6, StockpileFA-1,2,3,6, Stockpile

FA-1, Stockpile

FA-1,2,3,6, StockpileFA-6, Stockpile

FA-1,2,3,6, StockpileFA-6, Stockpile

FA-1,2,3,6, Stockpile

(a) Table lists key data only. Organic data based on samples submitted for Level IV analysis,except for PAH results, which are based on Level III and IV analysis; metals analytical data isbased exclusively on Level III analysis. Analytical data obtained from the Draft AnalyticalQuality Assurance Review Report, Fill Areas and Fly Ash Piles Management Unit, 21 February1994.

BEHP- Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalateBTEX- Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Total XylenesCS2 - Carbon DisulfidePAHs- Polynuclear Aromatic HydrocarbonsPest/PCBs- Pesticides/Polychlorinated BiphenylsKetones- Acetone and 2-ButanoneJ- This result should be considered a quantitative estimate.K- This result should be considered a biased high quantitative estimate.L- This result should be considered a biased low quantitative estimate.

uvg/kg- micrograms per kilogrammg/kg- milligrams per kilogramcm/s- centimeters per secondFA- Fly Ash BasinND- Not Detected

' R 3 0 0 0 7 I +

Table 2-9Key Findings for the

Landfill in theFill Areas and Fly Ash Piles Management Unit

A. New Landfill CharacteristicsConfiguration

VolumePhysical

Characteristics

Fill placed above grade in "valley fill" typeconfiguration; leachate system tied to WWTP54,000 yd3

Solidified viscose, unused rayon fiber, plantand construction debris

B. Key Chemical Data (a)Constituent

Organicsfug/kglPAHsPesticidesPCBsBEHPKe tonesCS2

Phenol4-Methylphenol2-MethylnaphthaleneMetals (mg/kg)ArsenicCadmiumChromiumLeadZinc

Range of ConcentrationsSurface Samples

66-14,000NDND

24,000 JND

4.6J-6J12Q)-4,400J74J-4,OOOJ

2,700 J-4,900 J

5.9 L-37ND

11.2 K-3541-229

58-1,500

Sediments/Seeps

96-1,4001.6J-20J74-130

8,100-19,000 J37-730

1605,500590 J

400 J-780 J

9.9 L-39.97.0 L-18

67.6 J-216 L60.3-305

8,040-10,500 J

(a) Table lists key data only. Organic data based on samples submitted for Level III and IVanalysis; metals analytical data is based exclusively on Level HI analysis. Analytical dataobtained from the Draft Analytical Quality Assurance Review Report, Fill Areas and Fly AshPiles Management Unit, 21 February 1994.

BEHP- Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalateBTEX- Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Total XylenesCS2 - Carbon DisulfidePAHs- Polynuclear Aromatic HydrocarbonsPest/PCBs- Pesticides/Polychlorinated BiphenylsKetones- Acetone and 2-ButanoneJ- This result should be considered a quantitative estimate.K- This result should be considered a biased high quantitative estimate.L- This result should be considered a biased low quantitative estimate.

M-g/kg- micrograms per kilogrammg/kg- milligrams per kilogramcm/s- centimeters per secondFA- Fly Ash BasinND- Not DetectedWWTP- Wastewater Treatment Plant

H R 3 0 0 0 7 5

A R 3 0 0 0 7 6

EPA REGION HISUPERFUND DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

PAGE #

IMAGERY COVER SHEETUNSCANNABLE ITEM

Contact the CERCLA Records Center to view this document.

SITE NAME

OPERABLE UNIT__m

nREPORT OR DOCUMENT TITLE ££C nfy^

DATE OF DOCUMEN

DESCRIPTION OF IMAGERY

NUMBER AND TYPE OF IMAGERY ITEM(S) ___A

EPA REGION IIISUFERFUND DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

DOC ID #PAGE # '^000 1

IMAGERY COVER SHEETUNSCANNABLE ITEM

Contact the CERCLA Records Center to view this document.

SITE NAME AMOPERABLE UNIT \ O

SECTION/BOX/FOLDER

REPORT OR DOCUMENT TITLE . fc /nOfr d i g_ D 7Cf\\J ^

DATE OF DOCUMENT

DESCRIPTION OF IMAGERY

NUMBER AND TYPE OF IMAGERY ITEM(S)_

EPA REGION IIISUFERFUND DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

DOC ID #PAGE#

IMAGERY COVER SHEETUNSC ANN ABLE ITEM

Contact the CERCLA Records Center to view this document.

SITE NAME

OPERABLE UNIT

SECTION/BOX/FOLDER "3

REPORT OR DOCUMENT TITLE

DATE OF DOCUMENT

DESCRIPTION OF IMAGERY

NUMBER AND TYPE OF IMAGERY ITEM(S)

EPA REGION IIISUPERFUND DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

DOC ID #PAGE #

IMAGERY COVER SHEETUNSC ANN ABLE ITEM

Contact the CERCLA Records Center to view this document.

SITE NAME

OPERABLE UNIT 1 0

SECTION/ BOX/ FOLDER

REPORT OR DOCUMENT TITLE rtf/WC.! Q-1'

DATE OF DOCUMENT

DESCRIPTION OF IMAGERY _.._...

NUMBER AND TYPE OF IMAGERY ITEM(S) -^

EPA REGION III SUPERFUND DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

DOC ID # MUMb^-i^-l PAGE # 3 0 Q O ^ i

IMAGERY COVER SHEET UNSCANNABLE ITEM

Contact the CERCLA Records Center to view this document.

SITE NAME y - ^ i K x

OPERABLE UNIT I 0

SECTION/ BOX/ FOLDER ,"^ h

REPORT OR DOCUMENT TITLE .fpymOlJ./ G-̂ '' J ^ l O e . ' ^ / j n : / ) 6 } _

^'ntn'latu. f̂̂ p̂ ry't . DATE OF DOCUMENT Cj / ' /^/^-J

DESCRIPTION OF IMAGERY ^ Y

NUMBER AND TYPE OF IMAGERY ITEM(S) -^