Results of Ground-Water Investigation f Strasburg …iP L L L L L I Results of Ground-Water...

i

P

L

LLLLI

Results of Ground-Water Investigation

f Strasburg LandfillI. Newlin Township, Chester County

f July 23, 1984

Thomas A. Earl> Ph.D.

»— A

L| MEISER 8c EARL "/^ hydrogeologists A R 3 0 0 1 60

1? W COLLEGE AVENUE STATE CO' I (=r:P PPNN^Yl VANIA i

INTRODUCTION

The Strasburg Landfill began operation in the spring of 1979 and acceptedmunicipal and approved industrial wastes until it reached capacity on the then-permitted area in the spring of 1983. It centers on a pre-existing valleywhich drained to the east toward Briar Run, a tributary to Brandywine Creekto the south. The entire site is lined, mostly with a PVC membrane, but asmall area at the center of the site used an asphalt liner. The entire siteis underlain by a network of perforated PVC pipes set in a "witness zone"below the primary liner. The base of this witness zone is a sprayed asphaltzone of MC-30, which is a bituminous prime coat applied at the rate of about1/3 gallon per square yard. Beneath -this MC-30 layer in certain areas ofthe site is a ground-water underdrain system of PVC pipes to depress thewater table.

»The original ground-water monitoring system consisted of two wells, Ml

and M2, which had been drilled as part of the original site study around 1972.

We began sampling these wells in 1978 and this sampling is still continuing.Well Ml is located in an area which was excavated for cover soil and the

entire area around the well has been disturbed. This has reduced the infil-tration in the area to the point where there is only a few inches of waterin the well, making it nearly useless as a monitoring point. The office wellis now used as the new Ml, and we began sampling this well accordingly onFebruary 7, 1984.

The question of possible organic chemical contamination of the ground-water

system first arose, to our knowledge, in early 1980, when sampling of M2 byDER revealed around 1 part per billion (ppb) of 1,1,1 Trichloroethane. Webegan having a volatile organic scan done routinely after this, and began tofind slowly increasing numbers and concentrations of organic compounds withthe quarterly sampling of M2. In early 1982 we sampled the seepage from thewitness zone pipe outlet, and found significant (245 ppb) levels of 1,1,1Trichloroethane, followed by appearance and increases of other compounds.

In April of 1983 there was a toe seepage of several gallons per minute

(gpm) from the southeast portion of the landfill; this leachate flowed into afracture in the bedrock for a day or two, and shortly afterward, landfillstaff noticed a discoloration in a seep near Briar Run, directly downhill from

AR300I6I

•

I

I

LL

the leachate spill area. This seep had eight organic compounds in it, mostof which were present in the leachate in a sample taken several months earlier.

From this point onward there was increased interest by DER in having Stras-burg do a ground-water investigation to better define the extent of any con-

tamination; in September of 1983 this interest was formalized in an Orderfrom the Department to evaluate the situation using additional wells, andto propose remedial measures as might be appropriate.

The situation became further complicated in late 1983 when the Zarzyckihouse well west of the landfill began to show organic compounds in DER watersamples. This raised the possibility that ground-water contamination was

flowing from the landfill area to the west, and DER requested that Strasburgdrill the proposed MS monitoring well between the Zarzycki well and the

landfill.The three new monitoring wells near well M2, and new well M5 were drilled

in February 1984 and we collected an initial set of water samples. Problemsarose with wells M2A and M2B when concrete grout got into the lower portionof the wells and plugged the slotted well casing. These two wells were re-drilled and grouted correctly i n April and we were then able to again collect

representative samples in early June. Because the water levels in wells M2Band M2C are about 24 feet below ground, below suction-lift pump range, and thecasings are a tight fit for an electric submersible pump, we installednitrogen-driven sampling devices in these wells to allow easier sample recoverywithout disturbing the water chemistry.

VVAR300I62

rPOSSIBLE SOURCES OF CONTAMINATIONr

Evaluating the water-quality situation at the Strasburg Landfill isa supreme test of the scientific method, in that there are several possiblesources of the organic and inorganic chemical species that deviate fromthe background water quality, and there are several possible mechanisms bywhich those sources could have entered the ground-water system.

In any lined landfill with a perceived contamination problem, thetendency has been to immediately assume a failure in the liner system,however at this site I believe we must consider the following possibilities:

1. Liner Leakage - The presence of any liquid discharge from the witnesszone at first glance would suggest a leak in the primary liner, however thechemical signature of the witness zone water is significantly different fromthe leachate, in both organic and inorganic compounds. The latest samplingof both flows shows an extensive list of stable alcohols in the leachate,yet none of these appear in the underdrain. The BOD, COD, TOC, chloride,iron, sulfate, alkalinity and total solids are all many times higher in theleachate than in the underdrain, which strongly implies a different source

or very strong dilution within the witness zone. The inorganic compounds inthe witness zone are for the most part quite comparable to the water qualityin well M2, suggesting possible ground-water infiltration as the source ofthe water.

A final consideration in liner performance must be the recognition that-12even membranes, with their extremely low permeability of around 1 x 10

cm/sec, will pass some liquid, and that by having the required unsaturatedwitness zone immediately below the membrane, an accumulation of even a fewinches of leachate above the liner will cause a significant hydraulic gradient

across the relatively thin membrane. This could easily result in seepage.2. Spills from Tanks and Ponds - The present water-quality problems on

the east and west sides of the landfill, as seen in the M2 - series wellsand in M5, are both below sediment ponds which at various times have servedto contain leachate seeps from the landfill. These ponds are not lined and

so allowed some dilute leachate seepage into the ground-water system. Inaddition, there was an incident in April 1983 in which the leachate tanksoverflowed into the tank-holding pit, and much of the leachate then escaped

—3— flR300i63

into the surrounding fractured bedrock. The effects of these spills and

r p o n d seepage events would be to degrade the ground-water quality in the

immediate area. This effect would be quite slow to dissipate due to theslow rate of ground-water movement. This source of ground-water degradation

I has been essentially eliminated by the recently-completed corrective actionstaken by the landowners.

I 3. Toe Seepage - At various times of wet weather in the past, therehave been "hot spots" on the faces and at the toe of the slopes where

| leachate emerged through the intermediate cover soil .and flowed out over

the liner toe drain onto the ground surface. These seeps were mostly very( m i n o r , however on a weekend in April 1983 there was a significant flow of

several gpm as described above; this conceivably could have caused severalthousand gallons of probably-dilute leachate to enter the bedrock upgradient

| from wells M2, M2A and M2B. This was a contributor to the water quality we

now see in these wells. The liner extension and additional toe drains shouldI eliminate this source of contamination.•4. Liner Materials and Construction - A critical and largely-overlooked

influence on ground-water and witness zone water quality is the composition ofthe construction materials used in a lined landfill built according to

| Chapter 75 requirements. The Strasburg Landfill contains thousands of feet of* PVC pipe with glued joints, and is underlain mostly by a PVC membrane liner{ w i t h glued seams. Probably of much more significance is the MC-30 asphalt,

which was applied at the rate of about 1600 gallons per acre to much of thesite. Although the MC-30 was probably covered by the primary liner quitequickly over most or all of the site, the possible effects of hydrocarbon

gases and the weathering of the MC-30 should be considered, especially ifthere were any areas where the ground-water underdrain system did not completelykeep the water table from contacting the MC-30 layer. The severe reducingconditions which would result below the 25-acre liner may have acceleratedthe weathering and bacterial alteration of the MC-30 petroleum compounds,and this could have caused some of the organic compounds we now see in theground water.

5. Off-Site Sources - A complete list of potential causes for the ground-water quality changes at the Strasburg Landfill must include any non-landfill

activities near the site which are upgradient in the ground-water system. The

I

LIL

fiR3QOJ6U

extensive measurements of water levels that we have taken over the pastseveral years have allowed us to map the water table quite accurately and

it is clear that there are no activities in an upgradient position that couldaffect the water quality in the Strasburg monitoring wells.

6. Underdrain and Witness Zone - As discussed above, the leachate doesnot have the same chemical signature as the witness zone discharge, howeverthe witness zone water does have a strong similarity to the water qualityin wells M2 and M2A, possibly suggesting a problem caused by rises in thewater table contacting the MC-30, and mobilizing the components of orweathering products from the MC-30. Another mechanism which probably

operated as a source of underdrain water until the recent landfill correctiveactions was the entrance of surface runoff from the face of the landfill

into the upper exposed edges of the witness zone along the northwest andsouthwest sides of the landfill. There had been areas where runoff becameponded between the haul road and the toe of the landfill in the past, andthese occurrences seemed to correlate with increases in flow from the witness

zone.

-5-

SR300I65

1ILL

DISCUSSION OF DATA

•Monitoring Well M2 - The water-quality record for this well (see attachedtable) began in November 1978 and we have sampled it as the downgradientmonitoring point on approximately a quarterly basis since then. Theorganic chemicals have been evaluated since March 1980, when Ijljl Trichloro-ethane first appeared as 3-8 parts per billion (ppb). Since that time four

or five more volatile organic compounds appeared into the fall of 1982,and then in the December 1982 sample five new fluoroethane compounds appearedin levels of up to 60 ppb. Four of these five have not been detected again.In September of 1983, 1,1,1 Trichloroethane had increased to 50 ppb, and

there were six other organic compounds present to give a total concentrationof 113 ppb. Since then the three samples taken during the first half of

1984 have shown the same five compounds (1,1,1-Trichloroethane; 1,1-Dichloro-

ethane; Tetrachloroethylene; 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene and Dichlorofluoro-methane), in concentrations which have slowly and steadily increased to

44,39,22,13 and 30 ppb, respectively (see Figure 1).The inorganic chemical species show no obvious trend suggestive of

landfill leachate contamination. The total solids have remained rather

constant, the nitrogen series are all less than 1 part per million (ppm),the chloride has varied from 2 to 25 ppm since 1978 and has lately been lessthan 3 ppm, the COD has dropped from a previous high of 61 ppm (1980), andhave varied from 7 to 79 ppm; in June 1984 it was 49 ppm. Alkalinity, however,

has shown an obvious increase, from a range of 25 to 40 ppm (1978-1981) upto a recent range of 80-100 ppm since April 1983. Figure 2 shows the trends

in several key species.In summary, the organic chemicals detected in M2 provide the only

evidence of contamination, and the suite of organics has varied since 1,1,1Trichloroethane was first detected in March 1980. Recent testing'suggestsa slow increase in the concentrations of the five compounds which have per-

sisted through the spring sampling.

Monitoring Well M2A - Well M2A was sampled twice; February 8 and June 5, 1984.

The well was not sampled in March 1984 because it was inadvertently pluggedwith concrete grout after the February sampling, and therefore had to be

~6~ flRSOOISS

redrilled. Organic compounds (1,1-Dichloroethane, Tetrachloroethylene,Trichloroethylene, Benzene, Vinyl Chloride and Dichlorofluoromethane) were

detected in both samples in concentrations which remained fairly constant.The concentration of 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene increased slightly from 43to 57 ppb, while the concentration of 1,1,1-Trichloroethane decreased from34 to 9 ppb.

This well is probably the most directly downgradient landfill monitoringpoint, and was located to be immediately above one of the contaminated seepssampled in May 1983, and downhill from a leachate face breakout that hadoccurred on the hill directly above in April 1983. I suspect that thisexplains much or all of the water quality seen at well M2A.

Monitoring Well M2B - The water quality record for well M2B began in February1984. The high values of pH, alkalinity, total solids and specific conduct-ance for February 23 are due to the presence of cement, grout which wasaccidently introduced into the well after drilling in early February. Thewell remained affected by grout .in March so we did not take any samples forinorganic analysis, but we did collect an organic sample. In order to correctthe grout contamination problem we had the driller construct a new well afew feet from the original well. This new well was sampled on June 5.

The chemical oxygen demand has decreased and the biological oxygen demand,which should be considered a poor indicator, has increased since then. Fourorganic compounds (1,1-Dichloroethane, Acetone, 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene

and Vinyl Chloride) have steadily increased in concentration, although Acetonewas absent from the last sample. Methylethyl Ketone, 2-Butanone, Tetrachloro-

ethylene and Dichlorofluoromethane have been detected only once on February 2,March 26, and June 5, respectively.

There is evidence of landfill-related contamination in this well, asevidenced by both the organic and inorganic chemicals. This well is locatedat the toe of the landfill in an area where some seeps have escaped over theedge of the liner. It is also adjacent to the sediment pond which may havereceived some of the leachate breakouts, and then allowed infiltration intothe ground-water system.

-7-

AR300S67

Monitoring Well M2C - The water-quality record for well M2C began in February1984. There are only two observable changes in the water quality noted for

I such a short time period of monitoring. The concentration of chloride hasslightly increased from 6.5 to 13 ppb and only one organic compound (1,1,1-

I Trichloroethane) has been detected in the sample taken on March 26, 1984.

This well shows no apparent evidence of landfill contamination otherI than the one-time appearance of one organic compound.

€ Monitoring Well MS - Water-quality monitoring for well M5 began in February1984. These data show slight decreases in the concentrations of chloride

r and sulfate, 7.00 to 1.2 ppm and 55 to 13 ppm, respectively. The presence

v of organic chemicals (1,1-Dichloroethane, Tetrachloroethylene, Trichloro-ethylene, Benzene and 1,2-Tfans-dichloroethylene) has been noted at concen-

1^ trations ranging from 6 to 13 ppb. The concentration of 1,1-Dichloroethanehas slightly increased from 8 to 13 ppb. Benzene was detected in only one

fI sample, taken March 26, 1984.

• T h i s well is 320 feet closer to the landfill than the Zarzycki home well,in which seven organic compounds were detected on October 13, 1983, by DER.

"" A second DER sample taken at Zarzycki's on November 2, 1983 contained 10 organic

I compounds at levels up to 11 ppb. Four of the six organic compounds that we*~ found during our three 1984 samples also were found in the DER samples.

I The most likely source of these organic compounds is the unlined sedi-

ment pond at the upper end of the valley in which both above wells are

located. This pond at times received runoff from the landfill which con-tained leachate seeps from the face and toe of the fill. This pond is onlyabout 400 feet from well M5.

LLLI

-8-

flR3QOI68

iFI

RECENT CORRECTIVE ACTIONS

During the past several months the landowners have been engaged inconstruction activities at the landfill to correct the operational problems

discussed above and to hydraulically isolate the waste from the surroundingenvironment. These corrective actions include the following:

1. Liner extension - The PVC membrane was extended about 25-30 feetout from the existing liner toe along approximately 1500 linear feet of the

east side of the landfill. This was done for about 500 feet along the south-east side and about 1000 feet along the northwest and northeast sides ofthe landfill. The purpose of this was to catch the toe seeps which had

previously escaped over the edge of the fill, thereby capturing all leachate.

2. Toe drains - New leachate collector drains were installed alongsome 1000 linear feet of the extended liner; 500 feet were along the north-

west side and this was tied into the existing drain on the northeast side

of the fill. The remaining 500 feet were installed along the southeast sideof the fill.

3. Membrane cap - Over some eight acres on the top and the slope abovethe uppermost bench on the sides of the fill, a 15-mil PVC membrane cap is

being installed to prevent any further infiltration into the fill. This capis being covered with 12-18 inches of soil which will provide protection ofthe membrane. Gas vents are being installed through the membrane to preventbuild-up of methane and other gases.

4. Regrading and additional cover soil - Where the landfill slopes weretoo steep, excavation and regrading was done to flatten the slopes, to attain2*2:1 or 3:1 final outslopes. In the areas where the liner was extended,flattening was achieved by filling of additional cover soil on the lowerslope, so that now there are several feet of final cover soil over some of

the eastern side of the landfill, In areas where excavation was done to

flatten the slopes on the upper part of the landfill, cover soil was placed

to a depth of at least two feet, and in some areas it was deeper. This will

all have the beneficial effect of slowing infiltration and allowing moreuptake by the vegetation.

flR300!69

ILI

j

5. Revegetation - The sides of the landfill were hydro-seeded in June,

and once the top of the landfill has been completed, a second seeding willbe done this fall to establish a vegetative cover sufficient to bothstabilize the soil and also consume much of the rainfall recharge to the site.

6. Surface-water diversion - The areas where surface water had pre-viously been able to stand near the landfill have been regraded and now all

surface water is directed away from the fill. The sedimentation pond above

monitoirng well M5 has been eliminated and runoff to this area is now con-veyed around the south end of the fill into the sedimentation pond near

well M2. This should eliminate the problem of organic contaminants seen inwell M5.

-10-

fiR30Q170

if

CONCLUSIONS

1. Sources of Contamination - The recent history of organic con-taminants in the ground water at the Strasburg Landfill is complex in originand difficult to understand.

The problem on the west side of the site could be from the leaky sedi-

mentation pond which in the past had received some leachate seeps. This

situation has been corrected, thus leaving a residual problem which will.decrease with time as the now-unaffected ground water moves slowly down-gradient .

On the east side of the landfill the situation is much more complexbecause there have been toe seeps from the fill and spills from the collectionsystem, and there also is some unknown source of water to the witness system,which is then discharging water with a peculiar mix of organic chemicalsinto the leachate collection system. The witness system discharge does notresemble leachate, so we have no basis to conclude this discharge is due to

a failure in the landfill liner.The most likely source of organic contamination in the wells on the

east side of the site seems to be a combination of leachate seeps from thetoe of the fill, possibly combined with ground water in contact with the under-side of the liner and witness system. The former has been largely, if notcompletely, eliminated as a source by the recent corrective measures, andthe latter situation, if true, should lessen as the water table drops dueto decreased recharge beneath the site.

2. Potential for Spreading - Ground-water flow on the east side of thesite tends to converge on the area around well M2, and well M2C shows littleeffect from any contamination, so we expect the plume of organic contaminantsto pass through an area localized between M2 and M2A, perhaps extending

slightly south of M2A. Briar Run has not shown any evidence of landfillcontamination in any of our samples, so the area affected seems so far to be

quite small. If, as we expect, toe seeps that have occurred in the past are

prevented by the new toe drains, the only remaining potential source seemsto be the witness zone water, which is not yet fully understood, bothchemically and hydraulically.

-11-

3. Remedial Alternatives - Since the purposes of this study were firstspelled out by us and the Department in the fall of 1983, many of the most

logical remedial actions designed to minimize and collect leachate have beenalready taken, as described above. If the water quality in the.wells M2,M2A and M2B continues to maintain the same levels of organic materials, then

corrective action could be considered. Such a program should only be imple-mented after it becomes obvious that there is no improving trend in water

quality resulting from the recent improvements at the site.

I

LLL

flR3QO.I72

RECOMMENDATIONS

Because the data base on which much of this investigation rests is onlyabout four months long (since the new wells were installed), it seems

advisable to continue the present monitoring program for at least one more

year to allow a fair appraisal of the expected changes which should result

from the recent landfill improvements.

Detailed recommendations are as follows:

1. Continue sampling the same network of wells, the leachate andunderdrain flows, and Briar Run on a quarterly basis.

2. Have landfill personnel measure underdrain and leachate flowsperiodically and also have a rain gauge installed at the site to allow

this relationship to be checked.

3. Survey the new wells for elevation to allow an accurate water

table map to be made on the east side of the site.

-13- AR300I73

i•

LLLL

APPENDIX I - TABULATED WATER QUALITY RESULTS

NOTE: All inorganics are expressed in ppmAll organics are expressed in ppbSpecific conductance is expressed as umhos/cm

rSTRflSBURG LflNDFILL BRIflR RUN UP 2/7/84 3/26/84 S/5/B4

pH 7. 00 S. 40 6. 60r Phenolphthalein ftlkalinityI Methyl Orange ftlkalinity* Alkalinity, Total to pH 4 19.00 19.00 £2.00

Total Solids 108.00 85.00 127.00f Total Suspended Solids 10.00I - Settleable Solids 0.10

ftmmonia/Nitrogen 0.10f Nitrate/Nitrogen 2.90I Nitrite/Nitrogen 0.01

ftlbuminoid Nitrogen 0.10.r Kjeldahl NitrogenI Chloride 14.00 10.00 9.204 Sulfate 22.00 24.00

Phosphorus, soluble ortho 0.01f ' Specific Conductance 180.00 140.00 150.00i • Chemical Oxygen Demand 5.00 5.00 5.00

Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 Day 1.00 1.50 1.00i • Iron 0.07 0.04 0.07I Manganese 0.01

flluminurn . 0. 1» Fluoride 0.I Total Organic Carbon 4.1 1,1, 1, Trichloroethane£ Toluene

!3 . 1,1—Dichloroethane,4 Methylene chloride5 Tetrachloroethylene

f 6 Trichloroethylene1^7 fleet one8 Benzene

r 9 ChloroethaneI 0 ChloroformS.1 1,2 Dichloropropane12 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene| 3 Trichlorofluoromethane1,4 Vinyl chloride15 1,2 dichloroethaneLS Chlorodifluoromethane7 Dichlorodifluoromethane18 Dichlorofluoromethaner" 3 1,2 dichloro—1, 1, 2 trif luoroethaneM2 ljl»2 trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethaneb:l methyl ethyl ketone22 xylenes3 1,2-dichloroethylene

-y 4-methyl-2-pentanone2, Tetrachloroethene

ChlorobenzeneEthy.l benzene

Ch lorof 1 uorornethane

flR300!75

STRASBURG LANDFILL BRIAR RUN DOWN 2/7/84 3/26/84 6/5/84

pH 6. 90 6. 60 . 6. 70Phenolphthalein alkalinity

Methyl Orange AlkalinityPUkalinity, Total to pH 4 £4.00 19.00 ££.00

Total Solids 108.00 B&.00 154.80Total Suspended Solids 10.00

Settleable Solids 0.10i Ammonia/Nitrogen . 0. 10

' Nitrate/Nitrogen 3.60Nitrite/Nitrogen 0.01

f Albuminoid Nitrogen 0.IdKjeldahl Nitrogen

Chloride 14.00 9.70 2.40Sulfate £8.00 £0.00

Phosphorus, soluble ortho 0.01Specific Conductance 190.00 130.03 160.00

Chemical Oxygen Demand 5.00 5.00 5.00Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 Day 1.00 l.£O 1.0®

Iron 0. IS 0.08 0.09Manganese 0.07

I Aluminum 0.10Fluoride 0.10

- Total Organic Carbon . 5.60' 1, 1,1, Trichloroethane

Toluene3 1,1—Dichloroethane4 Methylene chloride

I 5 TetrachloroethyleneLG Trichioroethylene7 Acetone

L8 Benzene3 Chloroethane10 Chloroforml" 1 1,£ DichloropropaneI £ 1,£-Trans-dichloroethylenei3 Trichlorofluoromethane14 Vinyl chlorideL5 1,2 dichloroethane6 Ch1orodifluoromethane17 DichlorodifluoromethaneL8 Dichlorofluoromethaneg 1,2 dichloro-1,1,£ trifluoroethane£0 1,1,2 trichloro—1,£,£-trifluoroethaneL-l methyl ethyl ketone£ xylenes

c.3 1, £-dichloroethylene4-methyl-£-pentanone

Tet rach1oroet heneChlorobenzeneEthyl benzene

Chlorof luoromethane£~Butanone

B R 3 n n i if.

I Page 1 of 21

f STRflSBURG LflNDFILL UNDERDRflIN 2/11/8S 7/14/82 9/27/82

pH 5. 90 6. 00r Phenolphthalein fllkalinityI Methyl Orange fllkalinity

fllkalinity, Total to pH 4 140.00 208.00Total Solids 205.00 319.00

{r Total Suspended Solids <1.00Settleable Solids <1.00flmmonia/Nitrogen <0.10

f Nitrate/Nitrogen 0.23Nitrite/Nitrogen <0.01

fllbuminoid Nitrogen <0.10r Kjeldahl NitrogenI Chloride 4.20 4.50S Sulfate 47.00 11.00

Phosphorus, soluble ortho 0.02I Specific Conductance 315.00 425.001 Chemical Oxygen Demand 10.00 <5.00

Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 Day 2. 10 2..40f Iron 0. 14 0.32|_ Manganese 0.24

flluminurn 0. 10I - Fluoride <0. 10I " Total Organic Carbon 53.00___213.00__________1 1, 1, 1, Trichloroethane 245.00 140.00

_ P Toluene " 2.00?v 1,1-Dichloroethane 100.00?-4 Methylene chloride 260.00 10.05 . . Tetrachloroethylene 52.00

IS Trichloroethylene 17.00\ 7 fleet one8 Benzene 2.00

19 *" Chloroethane 28.000 Chloroform 2.001 1,2 Dichloropropane 4.0|Zi

C2 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene 4.003 Trichlorofluoromethane4 Vinyl chloride15 1,2 dichloroethane"LG Ch1orod i f1uoromet h ane7 Dichlorodifluoromethane18 Dichlorofluoromethane19 1,2 dichloro—1, 1, 2 trifluoroethane0 1,1,2 trichloro—1,2,2-trifluoroethane1 o—xylene

j22 xylenesI 3 1,£-dichloroethyleneT=4 4-methyl— 2-pentanone£5 Tetrachloroethene|6 • Chlorobensenel_7 Ethylbensene£. Chlorof luoromethanep9 Ethyl Ether

&R3QOt77

1 Strasburg Landfill Underdrain Page 2 of 2

4/13/83 9/6/83 3/S6/84

5. 80 7. 00 6. 00Fk

Oftlk1 fllk -160.00 ££00.00 170.00

•TS 36.00 4£90.00 £76. 00f" TSSJ S

NH3W N03I N02iM-fllbN-KJ

I - C 1 <£. 00 5.70 £8.00SQ4 17.00 <4.00 14.00P04

I EC 400.00 6400.00 4£0.00I COD 19.00 650.00 <5. 00

BOD 14.00' 3£.O0 19.00j -Fe 0. 63 £0.00 0. 321 Mna fll

Fj TOG___________________________1 1 .180.00 100.00

12.00 86.00 50.00170.00 190.00££0.00 110.00

5 8£. 00 53.006 £4.00 £3.0078 13.00 36.0,0 £8.009 49.00 51.0010111£ 15.00 65.001314 39.00 110.00 81.0015 14.00161718 ' 100.0019£0£1 47. 00 45. 00££ 15.00 30.00£3 95.00 £30.00£4 35.00£5 4. 00£6 .4. 0017 14.00 16.00

10.00£0. 00

LILL

flR300178

STRASBURG LANDFILL LEACHATE 9/£7/S£ £/7/84

pH 6.10 6.00Alkalinity, Total to pH 4 1480.00 3500.00

Total Solids 7850.00 9790.00Total Suspended Solids £87.00

Settleable Solids 0.30Ammonia/Nitrogen 50.00Nitrate/Nitrogen 1. 10Nitrite/Nitrogen 0. 0£

Albuminoid Nitrogen 1. 18Chloride 7£9.00 640.00Sulfate 790.00

Phosphorus, soluble ortho <0.0£Specific Conductance 5400.00 7000.00

Chemical Oxygen Demand 7450.00 14000.00Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 Day 6000.00 15000.00

Iron 180.00 510.00Manganese 1£.00Aluminum 0. £0Fluoride 0.75Cadmium 0.01Chromium 0.0£Copper 0. 0£Lead <0. 03

Mercury <0.01Zinc 0.06

Total Organic Carbon 3140.00Toluene 840.00 1£0.00

1,1-Dichloroethane 100.00 130.00Methylene chloride £00.00 ££0.00Tetrachloroethylene 1£.00Trichloroethylene 15.00

Acetone 1000.00 3800.00Benzene £0.00

Chloroethane 43.001,£ Dichloropropane 5.00

1, £-Trans-dichloroethylene 310.00 ££0.00Vinyl chloride 1£.00

1,£ dichloroethane 8.00Dichlorofluoromethane 70.00

Xylenes £90.00Chlorobenzene 6.00Ethylbenzene 110.00

Methylethylketone 3000.00£-butanone 11000.00

Vinyl acetate 60. 004-met hy1-£-pent anone 180.00

£-hexanone 990.00Ethanol 100.00

£—propanol ££0.00£-butanol 1000.001-butanol £00.00

3-methyl-£-butanone 900.001-pentanol 60.00£-pentanol £00.00

4—methyl—£-pentanol , 70.00£—heptanone 800.00

1-hexanol 100.02£-heptanol £00.0r

Thiobis—methane 100.0,

of 4

STRflSBURG LflNDFILL Ml 11/10/78 5/17/79 9/15/79

pH 6.79 6.30 6.501 Phenolphthalein Rlkalinity 0

Methyl Orange fllkalinity <£0.00ftlkalinity, Total to pH 4 16.00 £3.00

I Total Solids 660.00 498.00 94.003 Total Suspended Solids 568.00

Settleable Solids 0.80r f t m m o n i a / N i t r o g e n <0.50

Nitrate/Nitrogen 0.40Nitrite/Nitrogen <0.31

r f t l b u m i n o i d NitrogenKjeldahl Nitrogen 4.00

Chloride 2.00 2.50 £0.00Sulfate £8.00 £3.00 48.00

1 Phosphorus, soluble ortho 0.06* Specific Conductance 90.00 90.00 91.00

Chemical Oxygen Demand 1£.00 £3.00 ' £0.001 Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 Day 4.00 1.20 <1.0OI . Iron 9.80 4.18 4.47

Manganese 0.18I - Aluminum 6.30

Fluoride <0. 10Total Organic Carbon

_ 1, 1, 1, Trichloroethane• Toluene

1,1—Dichloroethane4 Methylene chloride

15 Tetrachloroethylene6 Trichloroethylene7 fleetoneLS Benzene9 Chloroethane10 ChloroformJ 1 1,2 DichloropropaneI 2 1,2-Trans—d ich1oroet hy1ene»r3 Trichlorof luoromethane14 Vinyl chlorideL5 1,2 diChloroethane6 Chlorodifluoromethane17 DichlorodifluoromethaneL8 Dichlorofluoromethane9 1,2 dichloro-1,1,2 trifluoroethane£0 1,1,2 trichloro—1,2,2—trifluoroethanePI o-xyleneI 2 xylenes

ftR300i80

LLLLLL

10

1213

1516171819202122

STRASBURG LANDFILL M1Page 2 of 4

1/21/80 3/13/80 5/29/80 9/15/80 12/9/80 4/6/81 8/3/81

pH 6.40 5.80 5.50 5.80 6.90 6.70 6.20>lk

MOfllkrfllk 17.00 15.00 5.00 12.00 26.00 41.00 11.00

TS 222.00 5670.00 105.00 76.00 194.00 183.00 77.00TSS 2.00 <1.00S <0.10 <0.10

| NH3 0. 15 0.021 ND3 0.26 1.40

N02 ' <0.01 <0. 01|'-fllb 0.21 0.11I M-KJ

Cl 2.10 2.10 5.20 5.60 21.00 2.60 2.10I SO4 30.00 22.00 24.00 36.00 46.00 29.00 16.00I P04 0.02 0.03

EC 94.00 90.00 73.00 80. 00 125. 00 167. 00 82.00COD 11.50 761.00 3.90 26.00 <1.00 <1.00 3.80

I BOD 1.00 1.00 1.80 1.40 3.00 <1.00 <1.001 Fe 0.39 11.60 0.10 0.96 2.56 0.63 <0. 01

Mn 0.01 0.011 fil • <0. 10 <0. 101 F <0. 10 <0. 10TOC 2.80 12.20 6.56 6.19

I 1I £ 15.00* 3

l :7

6R300I8I

ff

LLLLLL

STRASBURG LANDFILL M1Page 3 Of 4

2/11/82 7/14/82 9/27/82 12/29/82 4/19/83 7/7/83 9/6/83

6.10 6.70 6.60 6.30 5.90 6.30 6.80

7.00 11.00 £0.00 65.00 6.00 8.00 18.00101.00 98.00 121.00 102.00 24.00 119.00 108.00r-i.00 8.00

<1.00 <0. 2®<0. 10 <0. 100.18 0.96

<0.01 0.04<0. 10 0. 17

£.60 3.10 3.10 6.60 <2.00 <2.00 5.2058.00 17.00 38.00 24.00 34.00 22.00 26.00

0.01 0.02

92.00 104.00 123.00 222.00 95.00 70.00 120.007. 00 9. 00 12. 00 28. 00 20.00 74. 00 17.003.60 <1.0<3 <1.00 2.90 2.10 <1.00 2.70

<0.01 0.06 0.07 <0. 01 <0. 01 0.03 0.23

0.01 0.21-<0. 10 <0. 10<0. 10 . 0. 16

6.80 10.20 - 5.73

345678910111213141516171819202122

fiR300i82

I Strasburg Landfill M1* Page 4 of 4

I" 6/5/84

p 7. 00Pfllk 'C., . -A iTiiTi NOTE: This June 5, 1984 sample was taken from the

" _ office well, which we feel is more represen-4" iTlia tative of actual upgradient conditions at the0" IK Strasburg Landfill. We have discussed this change_" j „. of location for M1 with Phil Rotstein, and he@> 10 , . ., ., .0< 10 agreed with the change.0.01

N-fllb 0.10r-KJ

1 £. 10S04P04 0.01|C 150.00i-OD 5.00BOD 1.00§ e 0. 01f-.n 0.05fll 0. 101 0 . 1 0 -DC 31.10

1

^300183

of 4

STRRSBURG LflNDFILL M£ 11/10/78 5/17/79 9/15/79

pH 7.12 6.30 S. 60Phenolphthalein fllkalinity 0

Methyl Orange fllkalinity £0.00fllkalinity, Total to pH 4 40.00 £7.00

Total Solids 19£.00 1944.00 !££.00Total Suspended Solids 44.00

Settleable Solids <0. 50flmmo'nia/Nitrogen <0.50Nitrate/Nitrogen 0.20,Nitrite/Nitrogen <0.01

fllbuminoid NitrogenKjeldahl Nitrogen 4.00

Chloride £.00 £.50 £5.00Sulfate 1£.00 £1.00 40.00

Phosphorus, soluble ortho 0.04Specific Conductance 80.00 70.00 91.00

Chemical Oxygen Demand <1£.00 £9.00 59.00Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 Day <4.00 1.00 <1.00

Iron 8.80 5. 80 3.45Manganese 0.29flluminum 7.20Fluoride <0. 10

Total Organic Carbon1, 1,1, Trichloroethane

'£ Toluene3 1,1—Dichloroethane

I '+ Methylene chloride*-5 Tetrachloroethylene6 Trichloroethylene

17 fleetone3 " Benzene9 Chloroethane* 3 Chloroform|l 1,2 DichloropropaneTH 1,£—Trans-dichloroethylene13 Trichlorofluoromethane1 k Vinyl chloridelo 1,2 dichloroethane16 ChlorodifluoromethaneL7 ' Dichlorodifluoromethane3 Dichlorofluoromethane

19 1,2 dichloro—1,1,£ trifluoroethanejp3 1,1, £ trichloro-1, £, £-trif luoroethaneI i o—xylene£~£ xylenes

Carbon tetrachloride

^

r S t r a s b u r g Landfill M2 Page 2 Of 4

1/21/80 3/13/80 4/10/80 5/29/80 9/15/842 12/9/80 4/6/81

{ pH 6.80 6.30 5.70 6.30 6.30 6.00Pfllkrfilk

filk 33.00 £5.00 31.00 40.00 39.00 36.00TS 169.00 1876.00 175.00 116.00 158.00 126.00TSS 15.00

fS 0. £0NH3 0.11N03 0. 19

fNO£ 0.01-fllb 0.05N-KJ, Cl 4.70 3.60 11.00 13.00 £1.00 7.80I SQ4 £5.00 17.00 £3.00 83.00 £6.00 £1.001 P04 0. 0£

EC 116.00 85.00 131.00 110.00 155.00 157.00I COD £7.00 61.00 3.90 19.00 53.00 19.00I BOD <1.00 6.00 2.80 £.00 <1.00 <1.00

Fe . 0.52 4. ££ 0.13 0.04 0.05 0.18I Mn - 0.41I fil <0. 10

F <0. 10f TDC 6.90 ' 38.70 16.10I '1 3.80 3.20*• £ £.90

3I «1 5

6

I \9

L 1 0111£

I 13I 14i- 15

16

i 17L 1819

I 20L £1*~ 2£. 23

A R 3 G Q I 8 5

I

I

I

LLLL

Strasburg Landfill M2 Page 3 of 4

a/3/81 2/11/82 7/14/82 9/£7/8£ 12/29/82 4/19/83 7/7/83

pH 6.70 6. 40 6.40 6. 60 6.50 6.00 5. 30IkIkIk 42.00 48.00 63.00 60.00 10.00 30.00 90.00TS 134.00 123.00 158.00 £05.00 54.00 60.00 154.00SS <1.00 <1.00 11.00S <0. 10 0 <0.20H3 0.0£ <0. 10 0. 1603 0.84 0.32 <0. 100£ 0.01 <0. 01 0.01

lb 0. 19 <0. 10 <0. 10KJCl 7.30 6.20 6.30 6.60 £.30 6.70 6.8004 13.00 30.00 13.00 £5.00 £8.00 £5.00 16.0004 0.03 <0. 01 0.0£EC 122.00 163.00 200.00 £00.00 100.00 260.00 270.00OD 15.00 10.00 <5.00 10.00 11.00 £8.00 35.00OD <1.00 8.30 3.00 <1.00 4.10 1.80 <1.0i3Fe <0.01 0.06 0.03 0.13 0.03 0. 04-. ' 0.03Mn 0.12 - 0.36 1.06fll 0. 10 0. 10 0. 10

<I3. 10 , <0. 10 . 0. 13

15.00 15.00 55.40 78.8015.00 £3.00 17.00 19.00 4£. 00

£ 13.003 3.00 5.004 £. 00 3.0iZ)5 5.00 5.00 14.006 1.00 1.007 5. 008910 13.00111£13 7.00 £5.00141516 35.0017 ' 60.00IB 40.0019 7.0©£0 15.00£1££23

AR3001

fStrasburg Landfill M2 Paje 4 Of 4

9/6/83 2/7/84 3/26/84 6/5/84

pH ' 5.90 6. 00 6.60 6. 20PR Ik

filk 93.00 88.00 89.00 100.00TS 183.00 214.00 181.00 268.00fSS 14.00

0. 10NH3 0. 10fJ03 0. 10Ji02 0.01N-filb 0.10N-KJ11 7.30 6.50 <8. 00 2.904,04 17.00 19.00 21.00P04 0.01JC 270.00 260.00 230.00 290.00I'OD 6.00 8.40 <5. 00 - 6.80BOD 3.90 <1.00 2.00 5.10|~e 0.39 .0.47 0.11 0.06In 2.07SI 0. 10( 0 . 1 0

49. 3050. 00 37. 00 36. 00 44. 0®

2I 27.00 24.00 24.00 39. 00

5 13.00 15.00 15.00 22.001 3 . 0 0

5.00

fc12 9.00 6.00 13.00

18 10.00 20.00 30.00

6. 00

AR300187

2

«1-1I-HU.Q2<Z1 EG

iCD£TIDCQO5<rceh-O)

-**-!

mjT'

•Uiii******

Cl ^ r

^

>,A,-v,WVV V5

''i-Vj- V|

1'.'. •.'.'. '. V..'. • 1.

f f jf f jf Jf

VVY:

>'•'•»'*•*•"

rs*s?.-K-:-"

5 5"" "*

[7///f

f* * * * '

VL.-'.''".'f''.''".''' •"-"

W1" j*?" jf -f :.,.,,._

ooUTJCO

COCO

4:0

§8

£3

CO

h- H3 vr ^ » - csjco

COCO

COCO

cx> CD

G

UH-

CD

-J.-,LL.

O.CLS:

fl R 3 n n I Q Q

STRASBURG

LAND

FILL M2

CJ_C_J

iw,Y/s/t'&%.

cn

c-a••Nisss

LU

'%£H k

n

mr>

i

t_3

f f //rci f i i-ij'i c c rj|w«r;M.!;Cr> j?

i-r r * '**' -'?*-

fSf*f!SS*S.:

Cw-

1

("j i JS?j5SS55gJSfSii :

P" j "'.SMi-'SW fftMilf.;

• vXXV'-.X"v" "vV*

i V\\\

iTiff tff if^ s j i>a

-g-ffjfjf

L« E B H Sj

nf jTivff

'••X'-.X'--X'-.XVV

=..\ WvV V W* '••

ES

ES

[2292

41983

7733

9683

2784

32684

6584

loroethane

PCE=Tetrachloroethylene

oroethylene

DCFM= Dichlorofluoromethane

JATES

(MO./DAY/YR.)

313S0

41880

71432

92782

Loroethane

1,1, DCE= 1,1-Dich

1 , 2-Trans= 1

, 2-Trans-dichl

SAMP

LING

E

_eCH3

M «____ f fun

CLQ.CO•

STRflSBURG LflNDFILL M£fl 2/8/84 6/5/84

pH G. 30 6. 40Phenolphthalein fllkalinity

Methyl Orange fllkalinityfllkalinity, Total to pH 4 130.00 £30.00

Total Solids £99.00 409.00Total Suspended Solids £8.00

Settleable Solids 0.10f Ammonia/Nitrogen 0. 1®

Nitrate/Nitrogen 0. 10Nitrite/Nitrogen 0.01

fllbuminoid Nitrogen 0. 10Kjeldahl Nitrogen

Chloride 12.00 9.40Sulfate 12.00

{ P h o s p h o r u s , soluble ortho 0.01Specific Conductance 330.00 480.00

Chemical Oxygen Demand 6.70 5.30Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 Day £.00 £.90

Iron 10.70 0. S£Manganese 4. 10Aluminum 0. 10

" Fluoride 0.11Total Organic Carbon 58.20

1,1,1, Trichloroethane 34.00 9.00To 1 uene

1, 1-Dichloroethane 47.00 48.004 Methylene chloride

L5 Tetrachloroethylene £0.00 IS. 006 Trichlbroethylene 9.00 11.007 fleetone8 Benzene 14.00 13.00

I 9 Ch1oroethane*s0 Chloroform11 1,2 DichloropropaneL£ 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene 43.00 57.003 Trichlorof luorornethane14 % Vinyl chloride 35.00 £3.00I" 5 1,£ dichloroethane6 Chlorodif luorornethane7 Dichlorodifluoromethane18 Dichlorofluoromethane £0.00 £0.001 9 1,£ dichloro—1, 1,£ trifluoroethanet0 lili£ trichloro-1,2,£-trifluoroethane£1 o-xyleneL.£ xylenes3 1, £-dichloroethylene£4 4-methyl-£-pentanone

Tet rach1oroet heneChlorobenzeneEthyl benzene

,—— ChlorofluoromethaneI :9 Ethyl Ether

r

flR30019C

STRASBURG LANDFILL MEB £/£3/S4 3/E6/8A 6/5/84

pH 12.50 6.40f P h e n o l p h t h a l e i n Alkalinity

Methyl Orange AlkalinityAlkalinity, Total to pH 4 3500.00

Total Solids 3610.00Total Suspended Solids

Settleable SolidsAmmonia/NitrogenNitrate/NitrogenNitrite/Nitrogen

Albuminoid Nitrogenf K j e l d a h l Nitrogen

Chloride 16.00 ££. 00Sulfate 160.00

f Phosphorus, soluble ortho 0.01Specific Conductance 1100.00 380.00

Chemical Oxygen Demand 120.00 8.80Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 Day 1.00 19.00

Iron 0.01 3.06• Manganese 7. 50

Aluminum 0. 10Fluoride • 0. 10

Total Organic Carbon ' 88.00I 1, 1, 1, Trichloroethane 8.00 14.00 . ' 8.00£ • Toluene3 1, 1-Dichloroethane 15.00 £5.00 48.004 Methylene chloride' Tetrachloroethy lene ^ 5.00i_ ' Trichloroethylene

• 7 Acetone 100.00 150.008 . Benzene 5. 00 8. 00 6. 00S • Chloroethane*0 Chloroform11 1,2 Dichloropropane

1, £-Trans-dichloroethylene 11.00 16.00 32.00Trichlorof luoromethane

14 Vinyl chloride 10.00 13.00 £7.00" 1,2 dichloroethane

Chlorodif luoromethaneDi chlorodif luoromethaneDichlorof luoromethane 30.00

1,2 dichloro— 1, 1, 2 trif luoroethane1,1,2 trichloro— 1, 2, 2-trif luoroethane

methyl ethyl ketone £1.00xylenes

1, 2-dichloroethylene4-methyl-2-pentanone

TetrachloroetheneChlorobenzeneEthyl benzene

Chlorof luoromethane2-Butanone 14. 00

flR300i9

s STRftSBURG LfiNDFILL M2C . 2/23/84 3/26/84 6/5/84

f pH 7. 50 6.60 7. 00Phenolphthalein fllkalinity

Methyl Orange ftlkalinityRlkalinity, Total to pH 4 72.00 46.00 57.00

Total Solids 333.00 £11.00 £38.00Total Suspended Solids 41.00

Settleable Solids 0.10Ammonia/Nitrogen 0. 10Nitrate/Nitrogen 0.38Nitrite/Nitrogen 0.01

fllbuminoid Nitrogen 0. 10Kjeldahl Nitrogen

Chloride 6.50 8.00 13.00Sulfate £2.00 34.00

Phosphorus, soluble ortho 0.01Specific Conductance £10.00 130.00 170.00

Chemical Oxygen Demand 5.00 5.00 5.00Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 Day 1.00 £.40 1.00

Iron 0.01 0.01 0.01Manganese 0.07Aluminum 0. 10Fluoride 0. 1C

Total Organic Carbon 10.90' 1, 1, 1, Trichloroethane 7.00

Toluene* 1 , 1 — D i c h l o r o e t h a n e

Methylene chlorideTetrachloroethyleneTrichloroethylene

fleetoneBenzene

Chloroethane' Chloroform .

1,2 Dichloropropane1, 2~Trans-dichloroethylene

. TrichlorofluoromethaneVinyl chloride

1,2 dichloroethaneChlorodifluoromethane

DichlorodifluoromethaneDichlorofluoromethane

1,2 dichloro-1, 1, £ trif luoroethane1,1*2 trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane

methyl ethyl ketone. xylenes

1,2-dichloroethylene4-methyl-2-pentanone


Ch 1 or o f 1 uorornet hane2-Butanone

QR300192

) STRftSBURG LftNDFILL M5 2/23/84 3/26/84 6/5/8.

r pH 7.90 6.90 6.I Phenolphthalein Alkalinity

Methyl Orange ftlkalinityr fllkalinity, Total to pH 4 72.00 59.00 73.00I Total Solids 1370.00 130.00 511.00* Total Suspended Solids 333.00

Settleable Solids 0.70jf Rmmonia/Nitrogen . 0. 10I Nitrate/Nitrogen 0. £8

Nitrite/Nitrogen 0.01X fllbuminoid Nitrogen 0. 101 Kjeldahl Nitrogen

Chloride 7.00 4.00 l.£0f Sulfate 55.00 13.00I Phosphorus, soluble ortho* Specific Conductance 220.00 140.00

Chemical Oxygen Demand 5.00 5.00f Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 Day 1.00 1.001 Iron 0.01 0.38

ManganeseI - flluminurnI Fluoride

Total Organic Carbon, * 1, 1, 1, TrichloroethaneI ». - Toluene3 1, 1—Dichloroethane 8.00 11.004 Methylene chloride

J5 Tetrachloroethylene 8.00,6 Trichloroethylene 6.007 flcetone

t 8 Benzene 6.00[ 9 Chloroethane10 . Chloroformj1 1 1,2 DichloropropaneI £ 1,£-Trans-dichloroethylene 7.00 8.00 8.00T.3 Trichlorof luorornethane

:- Vinyl chloridelf£ dichloroethane

Ch 1 orod i f 1 uorornet haneDichlorodifluoromethaneDichlorofluoromethane

1,2 dichloro—1,1,£ trifluoroethane1,1, £ trichloro—1, £, £-trif luoroethane

methyl ethyl ketonexylenes

1,£-dichloroethylene4—met hy1—2—pent anone


Ch 1 or o f 1 uorornet h ane2—Butanone

flR300i93

I

^ APPENDIX II - LABORATORY SHEETS - 1984 INVESTIGATION

I

LLLL

\- . flR300i9li

REMIT TO:Laboratory Services Division Park West Two5350 Campbells Run Road Cliff Mine RoadPittsburgh. PA 15205 Pittsburgh, PA 15275

CORPDRAnON 412-788-1080NUS

I L_AB ANALYSIS R E R O R T

' CLIENT NAME: MEISER I EARL/HYDROGEOLOSISTS NUS PROJECT NO: 7003MAI ADDRESS: 1512 UEST COLLEGE AVENUE. . NUS CLIENT NO: 8924013 STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801 NUS SAMPLE NO: 14020405

- REPORT. DATE: 02/29/84,f ATTENTION: DR. THOHAS EARL DATE RECEIVED: 02/09/84

SAHPLE IDENTIFICATION: STRASBURG LANDFILL N-2 02/07•f •| TEST DETERMINATION . RESULTS ' UNITS

L

L

L

COMMENTS:

«190 Iron,tol«l (Fe) 0.47OV90 Volatile Organic Scan . See below11022 Alkalinity, Total (CaC03) 88 ig/1U050 BODr 5-day (02) < t - - *g/l -11120 COD (02) 8.4 »g/lU130 Chloride-(CD . .-6.5 ig/l..U490 pH 6.0U620 Solids, totaL at 103 C . ... 214 »g/lU700 Specific.Conductance,25C (KC1) 260 uihos/ci«730 Sulfate, turbidiietric (S04) 19 ig/l

Compound1,1-dichloroethane 24 ug/11,1,1-trichloroethane 37 ug/1tetrachloroethylene 15 ug/1

Tentatively Identified Compound Estimated Result

dichlorofluoromethane 10 ug/1

Reviewed and Approved by: JMC a p O {") H I Q C

. ••,.!••. _»__ /^_____.. , Cl ITMT

IMUSCXDRPORATON

REMIT TO:Laboratory Services Division Park West Two5350 Campbells Run Road Cliff Mine RoadPittsburgh, PA 15205 Pittsburgh. PA 15275

412-788-1080

I

I

LLL

L_AB ANALYSIS RERORT

CLIENT NAME: MEISER 4 EARL/HYDROCEOLOGISTS - HUS PROJECT NO: 7003MAADDRESS:- . 1512 WEST COLLEGE. AVENUE . . . . . NUS CLIENT NO: 872401

STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801 NUS SAMPLE NO: 14020408REPORT. DATE: 02/29/84 ..

ATTENTION: DR. THOMAS EARL DATE RECEIVED: 02/09/84

SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION: STRASBUR& LANDFILL M2A 02/08

TEST DETERMINATION RESULTS UNITS

KENTS:

8V90 Volatile Organic Scon See belowW430 LANDFILL - QUARTERLY ANALYSIS

H190 Iron,tot«l (Fe) 10.7 tg/1W022 Alkalinity, Total(CaCQ3> 130 »g/l8050 " BOD, 5-datf (02) < 2 ig/1«120 COD (02) . 4.7 tg/1V130 Chloride (CD 12 • »g/l»490 > i ' . . . . . d . 3V62U Solids,.total at 103 C . 299 tg/1W700 Specific Conductance,25C.(KC1). . ..330 ,. . . uthos/c*U730 Salfaie, turbidiieiric (S04) 12 «g/l

Compoundvinyl chloride 35 ug/1

- T,l-dichloroethane 47 ug/1T,2-transdichloroethylene 43 ug/1

- 1,1,1-trichloroethane 34 ug/1trichloroethylene 9 ug/1benzene 14 ug/1tetrachloroethylene 20 ug/1


dichlorofluoronethane 20 ug/1

Reviewed and Approved by: JMC fl R 3 0 0 I 9 6

MAR 1 4 1984Laboratory Services Division Park West Twa5350 Campbells Run Road Cliff Mine RoadPittsburgh, PA 15205 Pittsburgh, PA 15275

CORPORATION 412-788-1080

I_AEI *=»NIAL_YSXS RELF-ORT

CLIENT NAME: HEISER 4 EARL/HYBROGEOLOGISTS HUS.PROJECT HO: 7003HAADDRESS:... 1512 UEST COLLEGE. AVEHUE1 NUS CLIEHT NO:., ,892401. ...

STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801 ... . HUS SAW>LE HO: 14021136. ... - ---—REPORT- DATEt-03/12/84- . . . . _ ...... ..,_

ATTEHTIOH: IS. THO«AS EARL DATE RECEIVED: 02/24/84

SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION: STRASBIRG LAHDF1LL-H2B-QUARTERLY 02/23

TEST DETERHHATIOH RESULTS IWITS

COWEHTSs

1V90 volatile Organic Scan See belowU43Q LANDFILL - QUARTERLY. AHALYSIS

K190 Irat,total (Fe) < 0.01 »g/lH022 . - - - . - Alkalinity Total, (CaC03) 3500 ig/1 .11050 BOD, 5-day (02) < 1 ig/1U120 COD (02) 120. kg/11130 Chloride (CD 16 ' tg/1U490 . . . . . . . . . 12.58620 Solids,.total aV 103 C .3610 tg/1«700 SpecificConductance,25C,(KCl) -1100-- - uihos/c*-8730 Sulfate, turbidiwtric <S04) 160 eg/1

Vfnyl chloride 10 ug/1^1,1 Dichloroethane 15 ug/11,2 Trans-dtchloroethylene 11 ug/1Acetone 1QO ug/11,1,1-Trichloroethane 8 ug/1Benzene 5 ug/12-Butanone 14 ug/1

Reviewed and Approved by: PM

MAR 14 7984 REMIT TO:Laboratory Services Division Park West Two5350 Campbells Run Road Cliff Mine RoadPittsburgh, PA 15205 Pittsburgh, PA 15275.


iILILII

L_AB ANAL-YSIS RERORT

CLIENT HAHE: HEISER I EARL/HYDROGEOLOGISTS HUS PROJECT NO: 7003HAADDRESS: 1512 HEST COLLEGE AVENUE NUS CLIENT HO: 892401 -

STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801 . XUS SAMPLE NO: 14021137-REPORT-BATEL. 03/12/84,. .. .. , ... ...........


SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION: STRASBURfi LANDFILL-H2C-QUARTERLY 02/23


lOHHENTS:

f BWO Volatile Organic Scan NOME DetectedI «430 LANDFILL- QUARTERLY ANALYSIS

M190 Iron,total (Fe) < 0.01 *g/lJ U 0 2 2 • Alkalinity, Total (CaC03) 72 ig/1

BOSO BOD, 5-day (02) - < 1 ig/1W120 COD (02) < 5.0 *g/L8130 Chloride < CD 6.5 kg/1U490 pH 7.51W20 Solids, total at 103 C 393 »g/lU700 Specific Conductance,25C-(KCl) 210 uihos/Ck.1730 Sulfate, turbidiwtric <S04) 22 ig/1

(' Reviewed and Approved by: PH 5 R 3 0 0 {r,\ IFMT

MAR 14 1984 REM,TTO:Laboratory Services Division Park West Two5350 Campbells Run Road Cliff Mine Road

_ Pittsburgh. PA 15205 Pittsburgh, PA 15275CORPORATION 412-788-1080

L.AB ANALYSIS R ET R O R T

CLIENT NAME: MEISER I EARL/HYDROGEOLOCISTS HUS PROJECT Mb 7003NAADDRESS:. 1512 BEST COLLEGE AVENUE NUS-CLIENT..NO:.,-872401 -

STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801 HUS SAMPLE NO: 14021138-. REPORT-DATE:-, 03/12/84


SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION: STRASBURG LANDFILL-MS-flUARTERLY 02/23


COMMENTS:

BV90 Volatile Organic Scan See belowK430 LANDFILL - QUARTERLY ANALYSIS

M190 Iron,total (Fe) < 0.01 ig/1«022 - Alkalinity, TotaL<CoC03) 72 §g/l1WM BOD, 5-day (02) < 1 ig/1U120 COD (02) < 5.0 kg/1.8130 Chloride (CD 7.0 ' »g/lU490 ptt . . 7.9B620 Solids, total at 103 C 1370 ig/1U700 Specific Conductance,25C.(KC1) .220 uihos/c»8730 , Sulfate, turbiditetric (S04) 55 tg/1

1,1 Dtchloroethane 8 ug/11,Z Trans-dicWoroethylene ,7 ug/1

Reviewed and Approved by: JMC fl R 3 0 0 ! 9 9^ r.i

*J

I

I.

LIL

IMUSREMIT TO:

Laboratory Services Division Park West Two5350 Campbells Run Road Cliff Mine RoadPittsburgh, PA 15205 Pittsburgh, PA 15275

f __I___D CORPORATION 412-788-1080

l_AB ANALYSIS R E R O R T

CLIENT MAKE: NEISER I EARL/HYDROGEOLOGISTS NUS PROJECT NO: 7003HAADDRESS-.- 1512 UEST COLLEGEAVENUE. - - .... NUS CLIENT NOi., 8?240L.-_ _.-

STATE" COLLEGE, PA 16801 NUS SAMPLE NO: 14020404. .. ..REPORT. DATE:.02/27/84. ,....,— .

ATTENTION: DR. THOMAS EARL - DATE RECEIVED; 02/09/84

SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION! BRIAR RUN-UP 02/07

TEST DETERMINATION RESULTS UNITS ' ~r

OV90 Volatile Organic Scan No volatile organic compounds detected.| «430 .LANDFILL -QUARTERLY.. ANALYSIS. ' ....———i M190 Iron,total (Fe) 0.07 ig/1

U022 Alkalinity, Total (CaC03)- ... 1? - - ...ig/1 . . ... .. .......| 8050 - BOD, 5-dag (02) < 1 *g/l

H120 COD (02) . .. < 5.0 ig/11130 Chloride (CD 14 . ig/1U490 pH . . . 7.0 . .V620 Solids, total at 103 C 108 k /1«700 Specific Conductance ,25C.(KC1) 180 u»hos/c».1J730 Sulfate, iurbidiietric (S041 22 tg/1

Reviewed and Approved b«: J«C ft R 3 0 0 2 0 0

A Hnllihurton Comoanv - CLIENT


CORPORATON 412-788-1080

LAB ANALYSIS REIRORT

CLIENT NAHE: HEISER 4 EARUHYBROGEOLOGISTS NUS PROJECT NO: 7003HAADDRESS:.. 1512 UEST COLLEGE AVENUE NUS CLIENT NO: 892401

STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801 NUS SAHPLE NO: 14020403REPORT. DATE:- 02/27/84.......... . ... .. ...

ATTENTION: DR. THOMAS EARL - DATE RECEIVED: 02/09/84

SAHPLE IDENTIFICATION: BRIAR RUN - DOUN 02/07


DV9Q Volatile Organic Scan No volatile organic compounds detected.«430 - LANDFILL - QUARTERLY ANALYSIS

H190 Iron,total (Fe) 0.12 »g/lU022 Alkalinity, Total CCaC03) 24 . »g/l11050 ~ BOD, 5-day (02) < 1 tg/1W120 COD (02) < 5.0 «g/lyi30 Chloride (CD . 14 ig/1«490, TpH 6.98620 - Solidsr. total at 103 C 108 ig/1U700 Specific Conductancef25C-(KCl). 190 . uihos/c*. .U730 . Sulfate, turbidi»etric (S04) 28 ig/1

COHMEHTS:

Reviewed and Approved by: JMC

^^ A ui-n:u.. « o ^ o ,, . CLIENT

CORFORATON


412-788-1080

2 I. 1 fc» 1 P*4 I—k L.. TT fe> J_ tri 1"! cz. F* UJ 1 1 ~f~

CLIENT NAME: MEISER 4 EARL/HYDROGEOLOGISTS NUS PROJECT NO: 7003NAI ADDRESS: 1512 WEST COLLEGE AVENUE . NUS CLIENT NO: 872401I STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801 NUS SAMPLE NO: 14020407

- REPORT DATEr 02/27/84r ATTENTION: DR. THOMAS EARL DATE RECEIVED: 02/07/84

SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION: STRASBURG LANDFILL OFFICE «ELL 02/07

I TEST DETERMINATION RESULTS UNITS

BV70 Volatile Organic Scon No volatile organic compounds detected.I y430 LANDFILL-QUARTERLY ANALYSISS M170 Iron,total (Fe) < 0.01 ig/1

W22 Alkalinity, Total (CaC03) 48- - . . *g/l .1 yOSO ' BOD, 5-day (02) < 1 ig/1| «120 COD (02) < 5.0 . kg/1 .

U130 Chloride (CD 2.5 . «g/l«4?0 pH 7.5 . . . .....1)620 ^ Solids, total at 103 C 126 »g/l«700 Specific Conductance,25C(KCD 180 ... -.ushos/cfc-„.,_... . _. ..._._U730 Sulfate, turbidiutric (S04) 33 ig/1

t

LLLLL

10MHENTS:

flR300202Reviewed and Approved by: JMC. . . . - - . . . .A Halliburton Comoanv . CLIENT

REMIT TO:Laboratory Services Division Park West Two5350 Campbells Run Road Cliff Mine RoadPittsburgh, PA 15205 Pittsburgh, PA 15275

CORPORATION 412-788-iosoIMUS

l_ A B ANALYSIS RERORT

NAME: MEISER I EARL/HYDROGEOLOGISTS WJS PROJECT NO: 7003MAADDRESS:- 1512 VEST COLLEGE,AVENUE . . . NUS CLIENT NO: 872401

STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801 NIB SAMPLE NO: 14020406.. REPORT DATE: 02/27/84


SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION: STRASBURG LANDFILL LEACHATE 02/07


H170 Iron,total <Ft) 510OV90 volatile Organic Scan . . See belowB022 Alkalinity, Total <CaC03) 3500 w/1

. U050 BOD, 5-day <02) 15000 »g/lH120 COD < 02) 14000 *g/lyi30 Chloride < CD - ,, 640 tg/18490 pH 6.0U620 Solids, total at 103 C 7770 ig/111700 Specific Cooductance,25C <KC1) 7000 ukho5/c»U730 Sulfate, turbidiietric (S04) 770 ig/1 -

Compoundv-me thy! ene chloride 220 ug/11,1 dichloroethane .130 ug/1;l,2-transdichloroethylene • 220 ug/1 *acetone 3800 ug/1

' 2-butanone 11000 ug/1 **vinyl acetate ' 60 ug/14~methyl-2-pentanone 180 ug/1toluene 120 ug/12-hexanone 990 ug/1

Tentatively Identified Compound Estimated Resultethanol TOO ug/12-propanol 220 ' ug/12-butanol 1000 ug/1dichlorofluorome thane 70 ug/1'1-butanol 200 ug/13-methyl-2-butanone 9bO ug/11-pentanol 60 ug/12-pentanol 200 ug/14-methyl-2-pentanol 70 ug/12-heptanone 800 ug/11-hexanol 100 ug/1

COWENTS: 2-heptanol 200 ug/1thiobis-methane 100 ug/1

Reviewed and Approved by: JMC /\ R O H pi O r> o

A Mflllihiirton Cnmnanv , (11IFNT

rAPR101S84 REM.TTO:rjus Laboratory Services Division Park West Two

5350 Campbells Run Road Cliff Mine RoadPittsburgh, PA 15205 Pittsburgh, PA. 15275

CORPORATION 412-788-i080

iLL

I_AE< ANAL.YS X S R JET R O R T

CLIEHT NAHEs HEISER 4 EARL/HYDROGEOLOGISTS NUS PROJECT NO: 7003HA-ADDRESS: 1512 UEST COLLEGE AVENUE NUS CLIENT NO: 892401

STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801 NUS SAMPLE NO: 14031201. REPORT-DATE:., 04/06/84

ATTENTION: 3JR. THOMAS EARL DATE RECEIVED: 03/27/84

SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION: STRASBURG LANDFILL M2 - QUARTERLY 03/26


8V90 Volatile Organic Scanf W430 LANDFILL - QUARTERLY ANALYSIS1 H190 Iron,total (Fe) 0.11 ig/1

W022 Alkalinity, TotaUCaC03> 89 - . »g/l. .* 1050 - BOD, 5-daij (02) 2.0 tg/1I «120 COD (02) < 5 ... »g/l

5130 Chloride < CD <8 »g/lH490 pH ...... ......4.4 . ......1620 Solids,.total at 103 C 181 ig/1«700 Specific Conductance,25C-(KC1) .230- u*hos/c»-8730 Sulfate, turbidiietric (S04) 21 >g/l

*l,l-dichloroethane 24 ug/11,2-trans-dichloroethylene 6 ug/11,1,1- trichlo roe thane 36 .ug/1tetrachloroethylene 15 ug/1


dichlorofluorome thane 20 ug/1

Reviewed and Approved tty: JMC

•h. /"I ICNT

1 0 te&HIMUS REMIT TO:Laboratory Services Division Park West Two5350 Campbells Run Road Cliff Mine RoadPittsburgh, PA 15205 Pittsburgh, PA 15275


I_ A B AMAL-YSXS RETRORT

CLIENT NAME: MEISER 4 EARL/HYDROGEQLOGISTS MUS PROJECT NO: 7003MAADDRESS: 1512 UEST COU.E6E AVENUE HUS aiENT NO: 892401

STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801 HUS SAMPLE NO: 14031205REPORT DATEl 04/06/84


SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION: STRASBURG LANDFILL-H2B-QUARTERLY 03/26


COMMENTS:

IV90 Volatile Organic Scan

vinyl chloride 13 ug/11,1-dichloroethane 25 ug/11,2-trans-dichloroethylene 16 ug/1acetone 150 ug/1methyl ethyl ketone 21 - ug/11,1,1-trichloroethane 14 ug/1benzene 8 ug/1tetrachloroethylene 5 ug/1

Reviewed and Approved by: JHC _ _, _flft300205^ . «._.._.. . CLIENTA I I „ IITL. ,

ApR 111984Laboratory Services Division Park West Two5350 Campbells Run Road Cliff Mine Road

__ ___ __ Pittsburgh, PA 15205 Pittsburgh, PA 15275CORPORATION 412-788-1080IMUS

iILLL

i_ A E« ANALYSIS RIERORT

CLIENT NAME: HEISER 4 EARL/HYDROGEOLQDISTS NUS PROJECT NO: 7003MAADDRESS: 1512 «EST COLLEGE AVENUE NUS CLIENT NO: 872401

STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801 NUS SAMPLE NO: 14031199.REPORT DATE: 04/06/84


SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION: STRASBURG LANDFILL-M2C-QUARTERLY 03/26


8V90 Volatile Organic Scan *U430 LANDFILL - QUARTERLY ANALYSIS

R190 Iron,total (Fe) 0.01 ig/1W022 Alkalinity, Total.(CaC03) 46 tq/l8050 • BOD, 5-daij (02) 2.4 »g/lK120 COD (02) < 5 _ *g/l__.1130 Chloride <C1) <8 . »g/l«490 pH 6.6 . ...8620 Solids,-tetal at 103 C . 211 tg/1U700 -Specific Conductance,25C <KC1) 130—- u»hos/c»_8730 Sulfate, turbiditetric (S04) 34 ig/1

*1,1,1-trichloroethane 7 ' ug/1

LRENTS'.


ICMT

APR 10 1984NUS Laboratory Services Division Park West Two

5350 Campbells Run Road Cliff Mine RoadPittsburgh, PA 15205 Pittsburgh, PA 15275.


L_ A 3B ANALYSTS RERORT

CLIENT HAKE: MEISER 4 EARL/HYDRQGEOLOGISTS NUS PROJECT NO: 7003MAADDRESS: 1512 WEST COLLEGE AVENUE NUS CLIENT HO: 892401

STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801 NUS SAMPLE NO: 14031200... REPORT.. DATEi 04/06/84


SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION: STRASBURG LANDFILL-MS-QUARTERLY 03/26


COMMENTS:

IV90 Volatile Organic Scan *«430 LANDFILL - QUARTERLY ANALYSIS

8190 Iron,total (Fe) 0.38 ig/1U022 Alkalinity, Total (CaCQ3) 59 ig/18050 - BOD, 5-day <02) < 1 ig/1H120 COD (02) < 5 . ig/1,1130 Chloride < CD <4 . «g/l«490 pH '6.91620 Solids, total at 103 C 130 ig/1U700 Specif ic-Conductance,25C-(KCl) 140 uihos/ck1730 Sulfate, turMdiietric (S04) 1J ig/1

*l,l-dichloroethane 11 ug/11,2-trans-dichloroethylene 8 ug/1trichloroethylene 6 ug/1benzene _ 6 ug/1tetrachloroethylene 8 ug/1

Reviewed ond Approved by: JMC ^ $ 3 Q Q 2 0 7

f L •-'--, -> '."!••*. REMIT TO:

IMUS Laboratory Services Division Park West Two5350 Campbells Run Road Cliff Mine RoadPittsburgh, PA 15205 Pittsburgh, PA 15275.


!_ A E< A N-A L.YSIE5 REF'ORT

CLIENT NAME: MEISER I EARL/HYDROGEOLOGISTS HUS PROJECT NO: 7003HA-..-ADDRESS: 1512 UEST COLLEGE AVENUE NUS CLIENT HOt 892401 . _..

STATE COLLEGE, PA U801 NUS SAMPLE NO: 14031203- .REPORT.DATE: 04/06/84.

ATTENTION: DR. THOMAS EARL DATE RECEIVED'. 03/27/84

SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION: BRIAR RUN-UP 03/26


5V90 Volatile Organic Scan No volatile organic compounds detected1 H 4 3 0 LANDFILL - QUARTERLY ANALYSIS

«190 Iron,total (Fe> 0.04 *g/lU022 Alkalinity, Total (CaC03) 19 ig/18050 . BOD, 5-day (02) 1.5 »§/!W120 COD (02) < 5 ig/1 . .8130 Chloride (CD 10 ig/1U490 pH - . . 6,41620 Solids, total, at 103 C 85 •§/!»700 - Specific Conductance,25C-(KC1) 140 u»hos/ci.8730 Sulfate, turbidiietric (S04) 24 *g/l

ILILL{ •COMMENTS:

Reviewed and Approved by: JMCV~

^^ A Hallihortnn rir»mnan\/

101S84_ mm • •^ Laboratory Services Division Park West Two•m|| I Z 5350 Campbells Run Road Cliff Mine RoadI | V H? Pittsburgh, PA 15205 Pittsburgh, PA 15275CORPORATION 412-788-1080

l_ *=» 3B AMAL-YSSIS RERORX

CLIENT NAHE: MEISER 4 EARL/HYDROGEOLOGISTS NUS PROJECT NO: 7003HAADDRESS: 1512 WEST COLLEGE.AVENUE, . HUS CLIENT NO: 892401

STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801 NUS SAMPLE NO: 14031202... REPORT.. DATE:.. 04/06/84

ATTENTION: BR. THOMAS EARL DATE RECEIVED: 03/27/84

SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION: BRIAR RUN - DOWN 03/26


8V90 Volatile Organic Scan No volatile organic compounds detected.W430 LANDFILL - QUARTERLY-ANALYSIS - . ...

8190 Iror.,total (Fe) 0.08 *g/lH022 Alkalinity, Total-(CaC03) 19 tg/18550 - BOD, 5-day (02) 1.2 ig/1W120 COD (02) «5 ig/1D130 Chloride (CD 9.7 *g/lW490 pH . . .6.6_ . .8620 Solids, total at 103 C 86 »g/.W700 -. Specific Conductance,25C (KC1) 130 unhos/c*8730 Sulfate, turbidiietric (S04) 20 »g/l

I

L

L

L

Reviewed and Approved by: JMC fl R *1 fl fl J3CLIENT

fAPR 10 1984 reH1Tra* i——r—i—i —— — — — ^^ Laboratory Services Division Park West Two

5350 Campbells Run Road Cliff Mine RoadPittsburgh, PA 15205 Pittsburgh, PA 15275

412-788-1080

1

I

I

LLL

LL

CORPORATION

l_ A X3 ANAL-YSIS RERORX

CLIENT NAME: MEISER I EARL/HYDROGEQLOGISTS HUS PROJECT HO: 7003NAADDRESS: 1512 UEST COLLEGE AVENUE -s HUS CLIENT NO: 892401

STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801 NUS SAMPLE NO: 14031204REPORT DATE: 04/06/84


SAMPLE. IDENTIFICATION: STRASBURG LANDFILL WITNESS MANHOLE 03/26


8V90 Volatile Organic Scan •• *U430 LANDFILL - QUARTERLY ANALYSIS

«190 Iron,total (Fe) 0.32 ig/1U022 Alkalinity, Total (CaC03) 170. ig/18050 • BOD, 5-day (02) 19 ig/1U120 COD (02) <5... «g/l1130 Chloride (CD 28 *g/l«490 pH 6.0., - . .1620 Solids, total at 103 C 276 *g/lU700 Specific Conductance,25C (KC1) 420 . uthos/c»8730 Sulfate, turbidiietric (S04) 14 ig/1

*vinyl chloride 81 ug/1-chloroe thane 51 ug/1xmethylene chloride 110 ug/1.1,1-dichloroethylene 230 ug/1T,2-trans-dichloroethylene 65 . ug/1

« 1,1,1-tri chloroe thane 100 ug/1>tri chloroe thy! ene 23 ug/1benzene 28 ug/1-.'tetra chloroe thy lene 53 ug/1"'toluene 50 ug/1ethylbenzene 16 ug/1o-xylene 45 ug/1

. m/p-xylene 30 ug/1


chlorofluorome thane 10 ug/1dichlorofluoromethane 100 ug/1ethyl ether 20 ug/1

COMMENTS:


A UoMiHiirtnn Hnmnanv

REMIT TO:Laboratory Services Division Park West Two5350 Campbells Run Road Cliff Mine RoadPittsburgh. PA 15205 Pittsburgh. PA 15275

CORPORATION 412-788-1080ISIUS

LLIL

LAEt ANALYSIS RERORT

CLIENT NAME: HEISER 4 EARL/HYDRQGEOLOGISfS NUS PROJECT NO: 7003HAMSBRESS: 1512 WEST COLLEGE AVENUE NUS aiEHT HO: 872401

STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801 NUS SAMPLE HO: 1406023?REPORT DATE: 06/21/84

ATTENTION: DR. THQflAS EARL DATE RECEIVED: 06/06/84

SAHPLE IDENTIFICATION: STRASDURG LANDFILL - ANNUAL 06/05 Ml


8V90 Volatile Organic Scan No volatile organic compounds detectedU420 LANDFILL - ANNUAL ANALYSIS

X010 Aluainus(Al) < O.I §g/lR190 Iror>,total (Fe) < 0.01 ig/111240 tonganese (Hn) 0.05 tg/1W22 • Alkalinity, Total (CaC03) 38 ig/11032 AMonia as N (distillation) < 0.1 ig/1U050 BOD, 5-day (02) < 1 ig/11100 Carbon, organic. (C) 31.1 »g/lU120 COD (02) < 5 ig/11130 Chloride (CD 2.1 ig/1U300 . Fluoride, soluble (F) < 0.1 ig/11390 ' Nitrate (N) < 0.1 »g/l«410 Nitrite (N) < 0.01 ig/11425 Nitrogen, albuunoid (N) < 0.1 ' ig/1U490 pH 7.01520 Phosphorus, soluble ortho (P) < 0.01 ig/1U610 Solids, suspended at.103 C 4 tg/11620 Solids, total at 103 C 147 »g/lU640 Solids,. voluMtric settleable < 0.1 il/l9700 Specific Conductance,25C (KC1) 150 u»hos/ci

Reviewed and Approved by: JKC

fREMIT TO:

Laboratory Services Division Park West Two5350 Campbells Run Road Cliff Mine Road

_ __ __ Pittsburgh. PA 15205 Pittsburgh, PA 15275CORPORATION 412-788-1080

I\

LLiILL

1_A& ANALYSIS RERORT

CLIENT NAME: MEISER 4 EARL/HYDRQGEOL05ISTS HUS PROJECT NO: 7003HAWP-RESS: 1512 WEST COLLEGE AVENUE HUS CLIENT HO: 892401

STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801 HUS SAMPLE HO: 14060237REPORT BATE:- 06/21/84

ATTENTIQH: BR. THOMAS EARL DATE RECEIVES: W

SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION: STRASBURG LANDFILL - AHNUAL 06/05 H2


5V90 Volatile Organic Scon *W20 LANDFILL - ANNUAL ANALYSIS

MIO Aluiinut (AD < 0.1 ig/1H190 Iron,total (Fe) 0.06 *g/l1240 Manganese (Mn) 2.07 ig/1W022 " Alkalinity, Total (CaC03) 100 »g/l1032 AMonia as N (distillation) < 0.1 tg/1U050 BOD, 5-day (02) 5.1 - »g/l1100 Carbon, organic (C) 49.3 *g/lU120 COD (02) 6.8 ig/11130 Chloride (CD 2.9 ig/1

' U300 . Fluoride, soluble (F) < 0.1 «g/l1390 Hitrat* (H) < 0.1 ig/1H410 Nitrite (N) < 0.01 ig/11425. Nitrogen, albuiinoid (N) < 0.1 ig/1'J4M pH 6.2B520 Phosphorus, soluble ortho (P) < 0.01 §g/lU610 Solids, suspended at.103 C 14 ig/11620 Solids, total at 103 C 268 ig/1U640 Solids, voluietric settleable < 0.1 »1/11700 Specific Conductance,25C (KCD 290 u»hos/ck

* Compound

1,1-dichloroethane 39 ug/11,2-trans-dichloroethylene 13 ug/11,1,1-trichloroethane 44 ug/1tetrachloroethylene 22 ug/1

Tentatively Identified Compound Estimated ResultCOMMENTS: dichlorofluorome thane 30 ug/1

Reviewed arid Approved by: JMC

flR3002l2CLIENT

REMIT TO:Laboratory Services Division Park West Two5350 Campbells Run Road Cliff Mine RoadPittsburgh, PA 15205 Pittsburgh, PA 15275

CORPORATION 412-788-1080IMUS

r- L. A B ANALYSIS REPORT

* CLIENT NAME: MEISER 4 EARL/HYDR08EQLOGISTS HUS PROJECT NO: 7003MAADDRESS:.. 1512 «EST COLLEGE- AVENUE NUS CLIENT HO: 892401

f STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801 NUS SAMPLE NO: 140*02351 REPORT DATE:.06/21/84


I SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION: STRASBURG LANDFILL - ANNUAL 06/05 M2A

« TEST DETERMINATION RESULTS UNITS

LiiL

JV90 Volatile Organic Scan *«42Q LANDFILL - ANNUAL ANALYSIS

W010 Aluiinu»(Al) < 0.1 ig/1M170 Iron,total. (Fe) 0.62 *g/l1240 Manganese (Mn) 4.1 «g/lW022 * Alkalinity, Total (CaC03) 230 tg/13032 Awonia as N (distillation) < 0.1 ag/1«050 BOD, 5-doa (02) 2.9 . ig/11100 Carbon, organic (C) 58.2 ig/1W120 COD (02) < 5 ig/11130 Chloride (CD 9.4 tg/1U300 Fluoride,, soluble.(F) 0.11 *g/l1390 Nitrate (N) < 0.1 »g/lU410 Nitrite (N) < 0.01 ig/i8425 Nitrogen, albuainoid (N) < 0.1 »g/lW490 pH &.41520 Phosphorus, soluble ortho (P) < 0.01 ig/1U610 Solids, suspended at 103 C 28 ig/11420 Solids, total at 103 C 409 tg/1U640 Solids, voluietric settleable 0.1 »1/18700 Specific Conductance,25C (KC1) 480 uthos/c*

* Compoundvinyl chloride 23 ug/11,1-dichloroethane 48 ug/1

•-1,2-trans-dichloroethylene 57 ug/11,1,1-trichloroe thane • 9 ug/1trichloroethylene 11 ug/1benzene 13 ug/1tetrachloroethylene • 16 ug/1


: dichlorofluoromethane 20 ug/1

Reviewed and Approved by: JMC A R 3 0 0 2 1 3

r IMUSREMIT TO:

Laboratory Services Division Park West Two5350 Campbells Run Road Cliff Mine RoadPittsburgh. PA 15205 Pittsburgh, PA 15275


I_AB ANALYSIS R E R O R T

CLIENT NAME: HEISER 4 EA!?L/HYDROGEOLQGISTS NUS PROJECT NO: 7003KAADDRESS: 1512 UEST COLLEGE AVENUE NUS CLIENT NO: 892401

STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801 NUS SAMPLE NO: 14060236. REPORT DATE: 06/21/84

ATTENTION: UK. THOHAS EARL DATE REC£IV!'«*. s.Vsi.'*,

SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION: STRAS6URG LANDFILL - ANNUAL 06/05 H2B

TEST DETERMINATION RESULTS tfNtfS

COMMENTS:

1990 Volatile Organic Scan *U420 LANDFILL - ANNUAL ANALYSIS

H010 Aluiinui(Al) < 0.1 ig/1H190 Iron,total (Fe) 3.06 ig/18240 Hanganese (ffo) 7.5 ig/1V022 - Alkalinity, Total (CaC03> 170 ig/11032 AMonia as N (distillation) < 0.1 ig/1H050 BOD, 5-day (02) 19 , ig/11100 Carbon, organic (C) 88.0 ig/1U120 COB (02) 8.8 ig/18130 Chloride (CD 22 ig/1H300 Fluoride, soluble (F) < 0.1 kg/11390 Nitrate (N) 0.16 ig/1«410 Nitrite.(N) < 0.01 ig/11425 Nitrogen, albuiinoid (N) < 0.1 ig/1U490 pH 6.41520 Phosphorus, soluble ortho (P) < 0.01 ig/1U610 Solids, suspended at. 103 C 30 tg/11420 Solids, total at 103 C 427 ig/1U640 Solids, voluietric settleable < 0.1 »1/11700 Specific Conductance,25C (KC1) 380 uihos/ci

* Compoundvinyl chloride 27 ug/11,1-dichloroethane 48 ug/11,2-trans-dichloroethylene 32 ug/11,1,1-trichloroethane 8 ug/1benzene 6 ug/1

TEntatively Identified Compound Estimated Result

dichlorofluoromethane 30 ug/1

Reviewed arid Approved by: JHCBR3QQ21UCLIENT

REMIT TO:Laboratory Services Division Park West Two5350 Campbells Run Road Cliff Mine Road

__ ___ Pittsburgh, PA 15205 Pittsburgh, PA 15275CCDRPORATON 412-788-1080I>JUS

ILLL

1_AB ANALYSIS RERORT

CLIENT NAME: HEISER I EARL/HYDROGEQLOGISTS NUS PROJECT NO: 7003MAfiSWSS: 1512 WEST COLLEGE AVENUE NUS CLIENT NO: 892401

STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801 NUS SAMPLE NO: 14040240REPORT, DATE: 06/21/84


SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION: STRASBURG LANDFILL - ANNUAL 06/05 H2C


3V90 Volatile Organic Scon No volatile organic compounds detected.W420 LANDFILL - ANNUAL ANALYSIS

riOlO AluBinu (Al) < 0.1 tg/1Mt90 Irort,total (Fe) < 0.01 *g/l1240 Manganese (Mn) 0.0? ig/1W022 " Alkalinity,. Total. (CoC03) 57 ig/11032 Auonia as N (distillation) < 0.1 ig/1W050 - BOD, 5-day (02) < 1 ig/11100 Carbon, organic (C) 10.9 ig/1M120 COD (02) < 5 *g/l1130 Chloride (CD 13 ig/1M300 Fluoride, soluble.(F) - < 0.1 ig/11390 Nitrate (N) 0.38 §g/lH410 Nitrite (N) < 0,01 ig/11425 Nitrogen, albuiinoid (N) < 0.1 »g/lH490 pH 7.01520 Phosphorus, soluble ortho (P) < 0.01 §g/lU610 Solids, suspended at 103 C 41 ig/11620 Solids, total at 103 C 238 ig/1U640 Solids, voluMtric settleable < 0.1 il/l1700 Specific Conductance,25C (KC1) 170 unhos/cm

l OMMEHTS:

Reviewed arid Approved by: JMC AR3002I5y* ;

UoltiKnH-^^ nomnortv/ . CLIENT


_ __ Pittsburgh, PA 15205 Pittsburgh. PA 1527&CXDRPCDRATON 412-788-1080NUS

LAB ANALYOIS RERORT

CLIENT NAME: MEISER I EARL/HYDR06EOLQGISTS NUS PROJECT NO: 7003MAADDRESS: 1512 WEST COLLEGE AVENUE NUS- CLIENT HO: 892401


ATTENTION: Dft. THOMAS EARL DATE RECEIVED: 06/06/84

SftHPLE IDENTIFICATION: STRASBURG LANDFILL - ANNUAL 06/05 H5


i- COMMENTS:

5V90 Volatile Organic, Scan *W420 LANDFILL - ANNUAL ANALYSIS

r!010 Aluiinui (AD < 0.1 ig/1M190 Iron,total (Fe) < 0.01 *g/l8240 Manganese (Mn) 0.14 ig/1W22 " Alkalinity, Total (CaC03) 73 ig/11032 Awwnia as N (distillation) < 0.1 ig/1«050 BOD, 5-day (02) 2.2 - ig/1K100 Carbon, organic.(C) 27.2 ig/1U120 COD. (02) < 5 ig/l1130 Chloride (CD 1.2 »g/lU300 Fluoride, soluble (F) < 0.1 kg/11390 Nitrate (N) 0.29 ig/1U410 Nitrite (N) < 0.01 ig/19425 Nitrogen, albuiinoid (N) < 0.1 ig/1U490 pH 6.51520 Phosphorus, soluble ortho (P) < 0.01 ig/1H610 Solids, suspended at 103 C 333 ig/11620 Solids, total at 103 C 511 ig/1U640 Solids, volumetric settleable 0.7 il/11700 Specific Conductance,25C (KC1) 180 Uihos/ci

Compound* methylene chloride 7 ug/11,1-dichloroethane 13 ug/11,2-trans-dichloroethylene 8 ug/1trichloroethylene 6 ug/1tetrachloroethylene 9 ug/1

Reviewed and Approved by: JMC ft R 3 0 0 2 1 6

n IPNT


__ __ Pittsburgh. PA 15205 Pittsburgh, PA 15275CORPORATION . 412-780-1080IMUS

\

LAB ANAL.YBIS RETPORT

CLIENT NAME: HEISER I EARL/HYDROGEOLOGISTS MUS PROJECT MO: 7003MAASBRESS: 1512 UEST COLLEGE AVENUE NUS CLIENT NO: 892401

STATE COLLEGE, PA 16801 NUS SAHPLE NO: 14060241REPORT BATE: 06/21/84

ATTENTION: DR. THQHAS EARL DATE RECEIVED: 06/06/84

SAHPLE IDENTIFICATIONS STRASBURG LANDFILL - ANNUAL - BRIAR RUM 06/05 UP


I

I

LILLL OMMENTS

IV90 Volatile Organic Scon No volatile organic compounds detected,U420 LANDFILL - ANNUAL ANALYSIS

MIO Alutinui(Al) < 0.1 ag/1M190 Iron,total (Fe) 0.07 ig/L1240 tanganese (Hn) 0.01 ig/1M022 ' Alkalinity, TotoL(CaC03) 22 ig/19032 Anonia as N (distillation) < Ct.l ig/1U050 BOD, 5-dag (02) < 1 . *g/l1100 Carbon, organic (C) 4.3 «g/lU120 COD (02) <5 ig/11130 Chloride (CD 9.2 »g/lW300 Fluoride, soluble (F) < 0.1 ig/11390 Nitrate (N) 2.9 ig/1W10 Nitrite (H) < 0,01 »g/l9425 Nitrogen, albuiinoid (N) < 0.1 ig/1U490 pH 6.61520 Phosphorus, soluble ortho (P) < 0.01 ig/1U610 Solids,.suspended at 103 C 10 ig/11620 Solids, total at 103 C 127 ig/1U640 Solids, volutetric settleable < 0.1 *1/11700 Specific Conductance,25C (KC1) 150 uihos/ci

Reviewed and Approved by: JHC

AR3002I7f* A Lj.,,,1.... __,_.. . CLIENT


_ __ ___ ___ Pittsburgh, PA 15205 Pittsburgh. PA 15275CORPORATION . 412-788-ioaoIMUS

I_AE« ANALYSIS R E R O R T

CLIENT NAME: MEISER I EARL/HYDROGEOID8ISTS NUS PROJECT NO: 7003HAADDRESS: 1512 «EST COLLEGE AVENUE. NUS CLIENT NO: 892401



SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION: STRASBURG LANDFILL - ANNUAL - BRIAR RUN 06/05 DOUN


COMMENTS:

JV90 Volatile Organic Scon No volatile organic compounds detectecU420 LANDFILL - ANNUAL ANALYSIS

K010 Aluiinu*(Al) < 0.1 §g/lU170 Iron,total (Fe) 0.09 ig/111240 Manganese (Mn) 0.07 ig/1W022 ' Alkalinity, Total,(DiC03) 22 ig/11032 Awonia as N (distillation) < 0.1 kg/1W050 BOB, 5-day (02) < 1 . ig/18100 Carbon, organic (C) 5.6 §g/lH120 COD (02) <5 »g/l1130 Chloride (CD 2.4 ig/1«300 Fluoride, soluble.(F) < 0.1 tg/1 .1390 Nitrate (N) . 3.6 ig/1«410 Nitrite (N) < 0.01 ig/11425 Nitrogen, albutinoid (H) < 0.1 tg/1U490 pH 6.71520 Phosphorus, soluble ortho (P) < 0.01 »g/lU610 Solids, susperided at 103 C 10 >g/l1620 Solids, total at 103 C 154 ig/1W640 Solids, volutetric settleable < 0.1 »1/11700 Specific Conductance,25C (KC1) 160 u»hos/c»


flR3002U^^ • . ,, n:u.._*-^ rtmnoo>, CLIENT

ILLL

t

APPENDIX III - MONITORING WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAMS

QR3Q0219

STRASBURG LANDFILLMONITORING WELL 2A

m

<<<; S

v Water Table at 5' :s

1st Yield at 9' :5 GPM

tN

s

"»

\

2nd Yield at 23'

^

zz

—

••M

1

1

,,, ,XW™

—.

=

J

[[•-Locked Cap*-6" Sch, 40 Steel Casing (2' aboveground level)

j "Concrete -Grout; 6V' Ooen Hole;— Packer

s

-Bottom of 6" "Casing at 18'

•

4" Sch. 40 PVC Casing -""Slotted from 18-25'

Tnp nf RPdpn///>.\x/yv\\///\v\/X/r\\\ g+- 23'

Total Deoth 25'

Note: Not to scale, 3/7/84 - JRC

MEISER & EARL ">\ hydrogeologists AR 3 00220

STRASBUR& LANDFILLMONITORING WELL M2B

111I

\1

*,k -<<\

s«

*

ss

ss

• «// N s/ XN/// x\ // \\\/

1 Packer at 24' — -,

1st Yield at 33'

2nd Yield at 43'10 GPM

_

•~—

^

t •i

'

M

i

^

_

=

I~

1

[|*— Lxked tep

• — 5" Sch, 40 Steel Casing (0.8' 'abovex ^ ground)

\ Concrete Grout

;•— &5" Ooen Hole

LS — Bottom of 6" Casing at 19'/AA yyvvwyxvviyyyy Top of Competent//> /\XWXNXV*X/V Bedrock at 255'

Water Table at 24'

W Srh. 40 PVC Casino -Slotted from 28-48'

Total Depth 48'

NOTE: Drawing not to scale. 3/7/84 - JRC

AR30022MEISER & EARL ~^^ hydrogeologists

STRASBURG LANDFILLMONITORING kELL M2C

^

^

s

Packer at 23' —— "-L

Bottom of 6" Casing at 24'-""

1st Yield at 30'\ GPM

2nd Yield at 46'14GPM

— —

—

wm

\—

§

Locked Cao

—6" Sen. -40 Steel Casing (15' above~ > ^ ground)

—Concrete Grout*-6V Open Hole

at {_/,

' Water Table 'at 24'- -2 |

4" Sch. 40 PVC Casing -Slotted from 30-50'

Total Depth 50' »

NOTE: Not to scale. 3/7/84 - JRC

MEISER & EARL y^ hydrogeologists flR300222

STRASBURG LANDFILLMONITORING VELL M5

•6" Sch, 40 Steel Casing (1.0' "above_ , ground)

Jdfe_______ ti__________Top of Bedrock

at 2'

[[•—Locked Cap

/\\\///\\\///\\\/y/

-Concrete Grout

1

"• — narton or o" tasin

Water Table at 33'

« — 6" Open Hole

Total Depth 100'

NOTE: Not to scale. 3/7/9) - JRC

?f* r%Opif"\OOO

MEISER & EARL ^^ hydrogeologists V

APPENDIX IV - MONITORING WELL LOCATION MAP

AR300225

Results of Ground-Water Investigation f Strasburg …iP L L L L L I Results of Ground-Water...

Documents

Transcript of Results of Ground-Water Investigation f Strasburg …iP L L L L L I Results of Ground-Water...