The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDSHW-2024-0049410r Bi I I I I I T I t I T I T t T I I t I I mpus Technical Services. lnc. ings, MTo Boise, ID o Havre, MTo Helena, MT SITE REMEDIATION PLAN LAUNDRY SUPPLY GOMPANY, ING. SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH Submitted to: Utah Department of Environmental Quality Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste 288 North1460 West Salt Lake City, Utah 84114 Prepared for: Laundry Supply Company 3785 West 1987 South Salt Lake City, Utah 84145 August 4, 2000 Olympus Work Order No. A7008 RECEIVED AUfi 'l n 2000 0C.CbtLq .a. Divisionlt Soti-O & Hazardous Waste Utah Department of Environmental 0uality 5409 Kendall Street o (208) 376-5006 o Fax (208) 37&5091 Boise, lD 83706o E-mail: olympusid@rmci.net I I Srfe Remdiation Plan Laundry Supply Company I I I T I I t t I t I I I I I I TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 TNTRODUCTTON ........................ 1 1.1 Purpose.............. .........,...1 1.2 Scope of Work.... ..............1 1.3 Summary of Previous Work ............. 1 1.3.1 Site Assessment Documents............ ....................2 2.0 slTE DESCR!PT!ON.......... .......2 2.1 Facility and Local Features ..............2 2.1.1 Area of lnvestigation............ ................2 2.1.2 Site History and Operations.......... ........................3 2.1.3 WaterWell lnventory... ........................3 2.2 Environmental Features... ................3 2.2.1 Site Topography and Surface Water Features... ...................3 2.2.2 Geo1o9y........... ..................3 2.2.3 Hydrogeology ....................4 3.0 srTE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY............ ......................4 3.1 Site Geology/Hydrogeology............... ................4 3.2 HVO Source..... ...............5 3.3 Presence of Dense Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid.... .............5 3.4 Extent of HVOs in Soil .....................5 3.5 Extent of HVOs in Ground Water....... ................5 3.6 Water Supplies At Risk ....................6 4.0 CONTAMINANT CHARACTERISTICS ........7 4.1 Characteristics of ldentified HVOs .....................7 4.2 Contaminant Toxicology ...................7 s.0 coRREcTME ACTTONS ...........8 5.1 HRC lnjection... ...............9 6.0 SITE MONITORING PLAN ........10 6.1 Aquifer Monitoring ...........10 6.2 Ground Water Monitoring. ................'t0 6.3 Additional Assessment......... ............. 10 7.0 REPORTTNG .............. 11 8.0 PROJECT C1OSURE............ ......................11 9.0 cAP TMPLEMENTATTON SCHEDULE .............. ............11 C : \MAB\Proiects\Al C,-LSC.A700AS RP 9.4-00. da Page i u{00I T I T T I T T T I I T T I I I t T I T 1 2 3 4 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) 10.0 LIM|TATIONS ...........12 11.0 REFERENCES .......13 FIGURES Facility Location Map Facility Map Ground Water Elevation Contour Map, Apr-00 Proposed HRC lnjection Grid Proposed Soil Probe Location Map TABLES Ground Water Sampling Field Parameters Sampling Analyses APPENDICES A HRC Design Spreadsheet 1 2 MTe Boise, lDo Hawe, MTr Helena MT C:trlAB\Prcriects\AlC'-LSC.A70O8[SRP 8-4-00.dm Page ii u4100 I I Sde Rernediation Plan Laundry Supply Company MTo Boise, lDr Havre, MTo Hebn4 MT I I I I I I I I I t I I I t I 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE Olympus Technical Services, lnc. (Olympus), on behalf of Laundry Suppty Company lnc. (LSC), prepared this Site Remediation Plan (SRP) for LSC's facility (Facility) located in Salt Lake County, Utah at 3785 West 1987 South in Salt Lake City. Figures 1 and 2 show a Facility Location Map and a Facility Map, respectively. The purpose of the SRP is to present a plan of remediation for subsurface halogenated volatile organic {HVO) compound impad resulting from a release of tetrachloroethene (perchloroethylene or PCE, an HVO compound) from a decommissioned underground storage tank (UST) system at the Facility. The UST system was decommissioned in April 1996. Analyses of soil and water samples collected following the decommissioning indicated that a release of an unknown quantity of PCE had likely occuned into the subsurface. Additionalassessment indicates that HVO impact extends at least to the Facility property boundary, and may extend down gradient of the Facility. This SRP presents remedial and monitoring plans as required under the Stipulation and Consent Agreement No. 9609031, issued by the Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Control Board. Since LSC is proposing site remediation, at this time LSC is not submitting a Site Management Plan (SMP). Should additional assessment (described in this report) indicate that subsurface HVO impact will remain after the proposed remedial ac'tions are implemented, LSC will prepare a SMP and its associated risk assessment. 1.2 SCOPE OF WORK The SRP outlines corrective actions LSC proposes to remediate ground water at the Facility. The proposed actions are designed to remove HVOs from ground water by enhanced biodegradation by reductive dechlorination. 1.3 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS WORK On April4, 1996, Westech Environmental(Westech) of Salt Lake City, Utah, removed two 10,000gallon steel UST's, associated piping, product dispensers, and containment equipment from the Facility. Following removal of the UST system, Westech collected soil and water samples from the UST Basin for PCE analysis, as per the Underyrcund Storage Tank Closure Plan (Westech, March 1996) for the Facility. The dosure plan had been submitted by Westech to the Utah Department of EnvironmentalQuality, Division of Environmental Response and Remediation (DEER) on March 6, 1996. Laboratory analyses of the samples collected by Westech from the UST Basin detected PCE in soiland ground water. Westech faxed laboratory reports of the soiland water sample analyses to DEER on April 18, 1996. An Undergrcund Sfomge TanR Closure Nofice for the Facility, documenting the UST removal and including laboratory analytical reports of the soil and water sample analyses, was delivered to DEER by Westech on June 4, 1996. ln a letterto LSC dated May 10, 1996, DSHW assumed regulatory jurisdiction of the release of I PCE at the Facility. On July 10, 1996, representatives of LSC and DSHW met to discussI I C:WAEI\PrcrjecIS\AIG,LSCA7OO8\SRP 8..4-O0.doc Page 1 I I Srfe Remdiation Plan Laundry Supply Company MTo Bclise, lDr l'lawe, MTo Helena MT I I I I I I I I I t I I I I t I I options in responding to the release. On June 4, 1997, LSC and the Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Control Board executed a Stipulation and Consent Agreement. ln the Stipulation and Consent Agreement, LSC agreed to complete site investigation tasks outlined in the agreement to determine the nature and eldent of the PCE release, and agreed to prepare a ROI docurnenting the results of site investigation activities. The ROlwas also to include a SRP, a SMP, or a recommendation of no further action. Olympus performed site investigation activities between May 12,1998 and January 20, 2000. Assessment activities included soitboring advancements and monitoring wellcompletions, soil sampling, soil probe advancement with ground water sampling and monitoring well completions, ground water elevation gauging, ground water monitoring, and waste disposal. The site investigation is summarized in the Report of lnvestigation, Laundry Supply Company, lnc., Salt Lake City, Ufah (ROl) submitted by Olympus to DSHW on May 2,2000. 1.3.1 Site Assessment Documents Site investigation activities were performed in accordance with the Utah Department of EnvironmentalQualig, Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste's (DSHW) work plans. A listing of site assessment documents includes: Srfe /nvestrgation Plan, Laundry Supply Company, prepared by JBR Consultants, lnc. (JBR), submitted on November 10, 1997, approved by DSHW on December 23, 1997; Revisions to the JBR Srte lnvestigation Plan, Laundry Supply Company submitted by Olympus on March 4, April3 and April21, 1998, approved by DSHW on May 6, 1998; Continuing Site lnvestigation, Laundry Supply Company, letter report submitted by Olympus on October 30, 1998, amended January 13, 1999, approved by DSHW by E-mail on January 21, 1999; Continuing Site lnvestigation, Laundry Supply Company, letter report submitted by Olympus on September 20, 1999, approved by DSHW by E-mail on October 8, 1999; and Repoft of lnvestigation, Laundry Supply Company, lnc., Saft Lake City, Ufah submitted by Olympus on May 2,2OOO 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 2.1 FACILITY AND LOCAL FEATURES 2.1.1 Area of lnvestigation LSC's Facility is located in Salt Lake County, Utah at 3785 West 1987 South in Salt Lake City. Fpure 1 shows the location of the Facility within the Salt Lake City area. U.S. Public Land C:WABFrqe*\AIGLSCATOOSISRP 8;.4n00.dc Page 2 I I Srfe Remediation Plan Laundry Supply Company Technical , MTt Boise, lD o Hawe, MTo Helena MT T I I I I t I I I I I I t I I I I Survey designation of the Facility location is: within the southwest 1/4, Section 17, Township 1 South, Range 1 East of the Salt Lake Meridian. Figure 2 shows the Facility and its immediate sunoundings. 2.1.2 Site History and Operations LSC built its Facility building at 3785 West 1987 South in 1979, and the Facility has been in operation as a storage and distribution facili$ for laundry and dry cleaning supplies since that date. Two 10,000gallon USTs and associated piping and distribution equipment used for PCE storage and distribution were installed in 1979. The UST system was decommissioned in April 1996. 2.1.3 Water Well lnventory Olympus performed a search of the Water Right Records lnternet database maintained by the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Rights (DWR) to identify waterwells reported to exist within a one-mile radius of the Facility. The wells were identified by a query of the Water Right Records for underground diversions of unapproved, approved, and perfected rights for water uses that included, but was not limited to: inigation, domestic, stock-water, municipal, mining, and power uses. The DWR records review identified 29 points of diversion from a totalof 17 wells located.within one mile of the Facility. Reported welldepths ranged trom 1741o 1,473 feet BGS. The Water Right Search Record is included in the ROl. 2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES 2.2.1 Site Topography and Surface Water Features The Facility lies in the Salt Lake Valley at an approximate etevation of 4,240 feet above mean sea level (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929). The Facility is bounded by west-facing slopes to the east (Salt Lake City area), and north- and northeast-facing slopes to the south. ln the Facility area, topography is relatively flat, with a generalnorthwest slope with an elevation drop of approximately five feet per mile. The Jordan River, located approximately three miles east of the Facility, is the major surface- water drainage feature in the area. Several canals, generally draining to the west and northwest, are present in the Facility area. Canals nearest the Facility include the Brighton Branch Extension Canal, located approximately onehatf mile north and northeast of the Facility, and the Ridgeland Canal, located south and southwest of the Facility. Figure 1 illustrates the localtopography and shows the surrounding surface water features. 2.2.2 Geology The Salt Lake Valley lies within the Lake Bonnevilkc Basin, which consists of approximately 40 largely interconnected smaller basins within the Basin and Range physiographic province (Hunt, 1987). The Great Salt Lake occupies the lowest part of the Lake Bonneville Basin. Q;\LlflS\prqecb\AlGLSCATmS\SRP &4^00.d6 Page 3 I I MTo Boise, lDo Havre, MTo Helena MT I I T I I I I I t T I I I t T 2.2.3 Hydrogeology According to Selier and Waddell (1984), ground water in the Salt Lake Valley occurs in: a confined aquifer; a deep unconfined aquifer between the confined aquifer and the mountains; a shallow unconfined aquifer overlying the confined aquifer; and locally in perched aquifers. The shallow unconfined aquifer is described by Selier and Waddell as consisting of mostly sand, silt, and clay, with a maximum thickness of approximately 50 feet, which b recharged by upward leakage from the confined aquifer and infiltration from precipitation, canals, inigated lands, and streams. The authors indicated that the ground water in this surfical aquifer is seldom used as a source of water for domestic or industrial purposes because of poorwater quality and slow yields. Selier and Waddell (1984) prepared a contour map of December 1982 ground water elevations. The map shows the general direction of ground water flow in the shallow unconfined surfical aquifer in the Salt Lake Valley is towards the Jordan River, with the exception of the area northwest of the Facility, where the flow direction is towards the Great Salt Lake. The elevation contours show ground water flow direction in the Facility area to be generally to the north and northeast. Ground water flow west of the Facility area is towards the northwest. 3.0 SITE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY 3. 1 SITE GEOLOGY/HYDROGEOLOGY Olympus'observations of samples collected during soil borings and soil probe advancement indicate the Facility is underlain by approximately 20 to 25 feet of interbedded layers of poorly graded, fine to mediumgrained sands and medium to high-plasticity clays; underlain by poorly graded fine to medium-grained sand from approximately 25 feet BGS to 30 feet BGS. Based upon the presence of heaving sands encountered during soilboring advancement, this sand unit likely extends to a depth of at least 55 feet BGS. Data and observations from the assessment suggest ground water at the Facility is contained in the shallow unconfined aquifer described above. Olympus gauges ground water elevations in the Facility monitoring wells on a quarterly basis. Table 1 presents a summary of the ground water elevation gauging at the Facility. Figure 3 shows a ground water contour map generated using data collected during ground water elevation gauging conducted in April2000. Based on the April 2000 ground water elevation gauging, Olympus calculated a genera! Facility ground waterflow direction to the north- norttwest. Generalground waterflow directions during the monitoring period have ranged from north-northwest to the northwest. C:\f,lABPrci*ts\AlCr-LSCATOOSISRP &4-00.dc Page 4 &4100t T t I Srfe Remediation Plan Laundry Supply Company , MTo Boise, lD o Havre, MTr Helena MT I I I I I I t I I I I I I I I 3.2 HVO SOURCE PCE and other HVOs detected in laboratory analyses of soil and ground water samples collected during the assessment, the locations of the samples, and the observed ground water flow direction, indicate the source of HVO impact at the Facility is likely from the decommissibned Facility UST system. Analyses of ground water samples collected from MW- 4 (Figure 2 - located upgradient of the UST basin) indicate a potential off-site sour@ of FIVOs contributing to HVO impact at the Facility 3.3 PRESENCE OF DENSE NON-AQUEOUS PHASE LIQUID Olympus did not detect DNAPL in Site monitoring wells completed in the vicinity of the decommissioned UST basin. We measured dense non-aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL) thicknesses in MW-1, MW-2, and MW-3 (Figure 2) during selected ground water monitoring events. 3.4 EXTENT OF HVOS IN SOIL The assessment of the Facility indicates HVO impacted soil is present within the boundaries of the UST basin. Laboratory analyses of soil samples collected above the soil/ground water interface during the advancement of soilborings in the UST basin detected PCE. TCE and cis-1,2-DCE were also detected in the soil sample collected at SB-3. PCE gas detector tube screening for PCE in soil samples collected in the vadose zone from soil borings outside the UST basin did not detect PCE. Based on an apparent single source of HVOs at the former location of the USTs, laboratory analyses of collected soil samples, and an observed shallow ground water table at approximately three to four feet BGS, the lateral extent of HVO impact to soil at the Facility is most likely limited to soil at or directly adjacent to the UST Basin. 3.5 EXTENT OF HVOS IN GROUND WATER The assessment identified HVO impacted groundwater both on- and off-site of the Facility- PCE was detected in the analyses of ground water samples collected within an arc bounded by bearings of approximately 45 degrees east of north (MW-6 and SP-12 - Figure 2) to approximately 60 degrees west of north (MW-S) from the UST Basin. The area of greatest I-IVO impact to ground water, with PCE concentrations exceeding 10,000 pg/|, was found at and extending north and northwest from the UST Basin to 1987 South Street. This area of impact follows the observed general down gradient ground water flow direction from the UST basin. C:\MAB\PrqecIs\AIGLSCATOOASRP 8'.4-00.da Page 5 8/4rO0! I t I nicalSrfe Remediation Plan Laundry Supply Company t I I I t I t T t I t t I I T I I Based on the analyses of ground water samples collected from soil probes and off-site monitoring wells, the lateral extent of HVO impact to ground water to the northeast, north, and northwest would appear to be on or direcfly adjacent to Facility property, with the following exceptions: . PCE was detected in analyses of ground water samples collected at 35 feet BGS at SP-16 (Figure 2\ ata concentratiori of 4,950 pg/|, and 25 and 35 feet BGS at SP-17 at concentrations of 5 pg/l and 43 pg/|, respectively. o PCE was detected in analyses of ground water samples collected at 15, 25, and 35 feet BGS at SP-8 at concentrations of 29 ygll,25 pg/l, and 16 yg/|, respectively. Depth of HVO impact to ground water would appear to extend from the upper surface of the unconfined aquifer to a depth of at least 35 feet BGS. Due to concems of breaching an assumed confining unit at the base of the unconfined aquifer, Olympus did not advance soil probes or soil borings at depths greater than 35 feet in areas of known HVO impact during the course of this site investigation. However, analyses of ground water samples collected at 45 and 55 feet BGS from SP-14, located approximately 180 feet north of the UST Basin, did not detect HVOs at laboratory reporting limits. Greatest PCE impact to ground water found during the soil probe assessments down gradient of the UST Basin was in water samples collected at approximately 15 feet BGS. PCE concentrations detecled in soil probe ground water samples collected at 25 and 35 feet BGS were generally an order of magnitude less than concentrations detected in the 15 foot BGS soil probe samples and UST Basin monitoring well ground water samples. 3.6 WATER SUPPLIES AT RISK The results of the site assessment suggest ground water in the shallow unconfined aquifer at the Facility has Iikely been impacted as a result of a PCE release at the Facilig's UST Basin. HVO impact to ground water appears to be limited to the UST Basin, and Facility proper$ and areas directly adjacent to Facility property in a down gradient ground water flow direction from the UST Basin. Ground water monitoring indicates that down gradient PCE impact does not extend beyond MW-8 located in 3850 West Street (Figure 2). Olympus' review of the Water Right Records lntemet database maintained by the DWR identified 29 points of diversion from a totalof 17 wells located within one mile of the Facility. The rccorded locations of the wells indicate four of the wells are located within a radius of one mile in a possible downgradient flow direction from the Facility. Locations forthe wells, based on information given in the database, range from 2,000 to 4,000 feet from the Facility at bearings between 10 degrees east of north and 65 west of north from the Facility. Allfour wells are listed as being owned by Union Pacific Land Resource Corporation, and allrecord the water use as stock watering. Three of the well had depths ranging between 200 and 500 feet deep. One of the wells did not have a recorded depth. These wells appear to be completed in the lower, confined aquifer. The welldepths and well locations, as recorded in C:\MAB\Prciects\AlC-tSCA7OO8\SRP 8-4-OO.da Page 6 I I , MTo Boise, lDr Havre, MTo Helena, MT t I I T I t I I t I I I I T I I I the DWR database, indicate HVO impact to ground water at the wells from the identified source at the Facility is unlikely. 4.0 CONTATINANT CHARACTERISTICS 4.1 CHARACTERISTICS OF IDENTIFIED HVOS The HVOs in ground water at the Facility are likely dense non-aqueous phase liquids (D}.|APL). DNAPL have a specific gravity of greater than 1.0; and as a result, DNAPL tend to sink in water when in the free-product phase. DNAPL are highly volatile compounds with high densities, low viscosities, low interfacial tension, low absolute solubilities, and high solubilities (relative to drinking water contaminant concentration limits). These compounds have a low partitioning to soil materials and low degradabilities. As a result, DNAPL can travel through soil quickly in either the liquid and/or the gaseous phases and readily contaminate ground water. (Pankow and Cherry, 1996) Once in ground water, DNAPL tend to migrate downward (resulting from their high density/low viscosity) as thin Tingers" that may form pools of product on top of less permeable layers. These DNAPL pools present a very low cross section to the aquiferflow, and as a result, absolute removal rates of dissolved product from such pools will usually be very low. The low degradation rates of DNAPL suggest that their subsurface lifetime can be very long. (Pankow and Cherry, 1996;Johnson and Pankow, 1992) The low interfacialtension and the low partitioning to soil material mean that DNAPL products will only bind weakly to soil and rock particles. This property allows rapid growth of dissofued DNAPL product plumes in ground water. (Pankow and Cherry, 1996) 4.2 CONTAMINANT TOXICOLOGY PCE is the major HVO ground water contaminant in soil and ground water at the Facility. The following toxicologicalsummary is intended to present general information regarding PCE affects on human health and the environment. The summary was prepared by the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, United States Envircnmental Protection Agency (EPA) (August 1994). Effects of PCE on human health and the environment depend on the amount of PCE present and the length and frequency of exposure. Effects also depend on the health of a person or the condition of the environment when exposure occurs. Breathing PCE for short periods can adversely affect the human nervous system. Effects range from dizziness, fatigue, headaches and sweating to incoordination and unconsciousness. Contact with PGE liquid or vapor initates the skin, the eyes, the nose, and the throat. These effects are not likely to occur at levels of PCE that are normally found in the environment. C:\MAB\Prc|ecG\AIGLSCATOOSNSTP 8*f{O.da Page 7 I I Srte Remdiation Plan Laundry Supply Company MTo Boise, lDt Hawe, MTo Hebna MT I t I I I I I I I I I I I I I t I Breathing PCE over longer periods can cause liver and kidney damage in hurnans. Workers erposed repeatedly to Iarge amounts of PCE in air can also experience memory loss and confusion. Laboratory studies show that PCE causes kidney and liver damage, and cancer in animals exposed repeatedly by inhalation and by mouth. Repeated exposure to large amounts of PCE in air likewise may cause cancer in humans. PCE can contribute to the formation of photochemical smog when it reacts with other volatile organic carbon substances irt air. These reactions tend to eliminate PCE before it reaches the upper atmosphere in amounts sufficient to damage the ozone layer. 5.0 GORRECTIVE ACTIONS LSC is committed to remediating ground water adversely impacted by HVOs for which it is responsible. Olympus evaluated several remediation technologies that may be applied at the Facility. These technologies included: o naturalattenuation;o grcurd water air sparging and soil vapor extraction;o groufld pumping and treatment; ando bioremediation. Given the elevated HVO concentrations identified at the Facility, natural attenuation was not considered a viable option. Ground water air sparging and soil vapor extraction was not considered due to the shallow (three feet) depth to water at the Facility. The shallow depth prevents the effective use of a vapor extraction system to collect gases generated during air sparging. Ground water pumping and treatment was also considered. Site hydrogeologic conditions are not ideal for ground water pumping. The Facility aquifer consists of interbedded sand, silt, and day. lf ground water pumping were implemented, it is expected that a large number of recovery wells would be required. Ground water pumping would initially remove HVO but would likely be stalled by its inability to remove HVOimpacted water held by capillary forces within individualsoil grains. Ground water pumping would require between five and ten years of treatment, if not more, to effectively remediate the Facility aquifer. Enhanced biodegradation by reductive dechlorination at the Facility may be accomplished by use of a benign polylactic ester manufactured by Regenesis Bioremediation Products (Regenesis) called HRC (Hydrogen Release Compound). HRC is formulated forthe slow rebase of lactic acid upon hydration. HRC, upon hydration after injection into the aquifer, separates from the glycerol background as a polylactic acid complex. The polylactic acid rebase results in a multi-step slow-release hydrogen release mechanism. lndigenous anaerobic microbes ferment the lactic acid. The fermentation converts the lactic acid into other Q;\ffi$pr*rcts\AIGLSCATOOS\Srue A'.4^00.doc Page 8 I I MTo Boise, lDo Havre, MTr Helena MT T I I I I I T T t I I I I I T organic acids and produces hydrogen. The hydrogen can then be used by reductive dehalogenating microorganisms to dechlorinateing HVOs (Koenigsberg, 2000). Olympus selected HRC as the recommended remedial option based upon the following assumptions: o HRC injection is expected to remedial HVOs inSitu without conoems for wastewater discharge; o biodegradation by reductive dechlorination is expec'ted to remove HVO held by capillary tension within the aquifer material, while pump and treat will require removal of several pore volumes (of water in the aquifer) for complete HVO removal; o HRC remediation time frames are estimated to be significantly less than pump and treat methods; and o HRC remediation can be accomplished with minimal site disturbance and no capital equipment costs. 5.1 HRC INJECTION HRC will be introduced to the aquifer by direct injection through GeoProbe advanced soil probes. The HRC injections will be on a grid spacing of approximately 12 feet to a depth of approximately 40 feet below the surface. An appropriate amount of HRC will be injected at five-foot intervals in accordance with the manufacture/s instructions. Olympus has estimated the HRC treatment area using existing data. Figure 4 shows the estimated treatment area and HRC injection points. Olympus calculated the HRC dosage and grid spacing based upon Regenesis' HRC Grid Design spreadsheet (version 1). Appendix A includes a copy of the Regenesis spreadsheet and supporting HRC design documentation. The exact HRC dosage will be calculated after the Third Quarter 2000 ground water monitoring event at the Facility and additional GeoProbe sampling to be conducted down gradient of the Facility (ROland Section 6.3). Additionaldata from these monitoring events willprovide design data to better ensure effective HVO remediation. Olympus will collect samples from selected monitoring wells for analyses of nitrate, manganese, fenous iron, and sulfate. These data will be used to replaced estimated values used in the HRC Grid Design spreadsheet. C:\I/IAEI\Prqods\AIGLSCATOOEISRI, 8F,4-00.dG Page 9 e#mI T I I , MTo Boise, lDo Havre, MTt Helena MT I I T I I I I I I T I I I I I I T 6.0 SITE MONffORING PI.AN LSC will continue to perform environmental monitoring at the Facility to gauge ground water elevations and monitor ground water HVO chemistry. This information will be reported to DSHW through quarterly project status reports. 6.1 AQUIFER MONITORING LSC will continue to gauge ground water elevations in the Facillty monitoring wells on a quarterly basis. DNAPL thickness in wells MW-1, MW-2, MW-3 willalso be measured on a quarterly basis. The ground water elevationgauging program will provide data to monitor ground water flow direction and gradient. Olympus wilt perform aquifer tests to collect data to calculate the hydraulic conductivity of the surficial aquifer at the Facility. We wil! perform rising-head slug tests and collect data using a pressure transducer and data logger in at least three Facility monitoring wells. The slug test data will be analyzed using methods developed by Bauer and Rice (1976) and Bauer (1989). The hydraulic conductivity, along with the ground water elevation gauging data and the known aquifer lithology, will be used to calculate ground water flow velocity in the aquifer at the Facility. 6.2 GROUND WATER MONITORING LSC proposes to continue the Facili$ ground water monitoring program on a quarterly basis. The ground water monitoring program willinclude: o grourd water sampling of monitoring wells MW-1, MW-2, or MW-3, and MW-4 through MW.8; o preparation of equipment and trip blanks, and collection of a duplicate sample for QA/QC purposes; and o laboratory analyses of ground water and QA/QC samples for HVO cornpounds using protocolestablished in SW-846 Method 8020. Water generated during the sampling and monitoring events will be stored at the Facility in 55- gallon drums pending disposal anangements. 6.3 ADDITIONAL ASSESSMENT Olympus will continue down gradient ground *.i", soil probing to assess the extent and magnitude of HVO impact to ground water at or adjacent to the locations of soil probes SP€, and SP-16 and SP-l7 (Figure 2). Pending DSHW approval of the investigation, LSC will advance two soil probes to depths of 35 feet BGS in the area of SP-8, and two soil probes to depths of 55 feet BGS in the SP-16 and SP-17 area. Figure 5 shows the proposed soil probe C:\ttABPrqccfs\AIGLSCATOOS\SRl, 8i4-00.dc Page 10 T t I T T T T t t I t t I T t I t I I locations. Ground water samples will be collected at 1O-foot intervals beginning at 15 feet BGS. Collected ground water samples will be delivered, using chain of custbdy procedures, to Enviropro for analyses. Enviropro will analyze the water samples for PCE and TCE using methodology established in SW-846 Method 8260. Following receipt and review of laboratory analyses of soil probe ground water samples, additiona! monitoring wells and/or soil probing may be proposed to complete the assessment. Results of the additional ground water assessment will be rcported in an addendum to this report. Wastes generated during the soil probing will be stored at the Facility in S5gallon drums pending disposal anangements. 7.0 REPORTING Olympus, on LSC's behalf, will prepare guarterly project status reports for submittalto DSHW. The reports will include: o groU[d water elevation gauging data;o DNAPL thickness measurements;o ground water monitoring sample analyses; ando a written description of project activity during the reporting period. LSC will submit the report to DSHW within 30 days following the quarterly reporting period. 8.0 PROJECT CLOSURE Project closure will be recommended after ground water monitoring indicates that HVO concentrations in ground water have been reduced to drinking water standards or background levels, whichever is greater. lf HVO concentrations have not been reduced to desired levels one year after the HRC injection, LSC will evaluate the additional remedial measures. Potential measures may include additional HRC injections or a risk based assessment to determine if closure is appropriate. A SMP will be prepared if a risk based closure is recommended. 9.0 CAP TMPLEiIENTATION SCHEDULE LSC proposes the following schedule to implement conective actions at the Facility: . July 2000 - Slug testing, ground water monitoring;. August 2000 - additionalGeoProbe assessment;. August 2000 - Specification, ordering, and injection of HRC; ando October 2000 and January, April, and June 2001 - ground water monitoring; , MTo Boise, lDo Hawe, MTo Hebna MT C:\ilA8\Pniects\AlCa-LSCATOOenSRP ErHn.doc Page 11 I I I I I T I t I I I t T I I I I 10.0 LtiilTATtoNs Otympus performed the services documented in this report in a manner consistent with generally accepted principles and practices for the nature of the work completed in the same or similar localities, at the time the work was performed. No other wananty, express or implied, is made. Opinions contained in this report apply to conditions existing when the services were performed. Allconclusions and recommendations are based on readily available and reasonably ascertainable information on site conditions at the time of the work and for the laws in effect at that time. We are not responsible for any changes in environmental standards, practices, or regulations subsequent to performance of services. This report is not meant to represent a legalopinion. We do not wanant the accuracy of information supplied by others, nor the use of segregated portions of this report. This report was prepared by: OLYHPUS TECHNIGAL SERVICES, INC. t*@ Michael Backe, P.G. Senior Hydrogeologist Date MTo Boise, lDe Hawe, MTo Helena MT C:\tlAB\Prciects\AIG,LSCATmAISRP &4-00.fl6s Page 12 u4tc0, M I t t I I I I I I I I Srfe Remediation Plan Laundry Supply Company Technical Servi , MTo Boise, lDo Havre, MTo nebna MT IT.O REFERENCES Hunt, C.8., 1987, Physbgnphy of Westem Utah, in Cenozoic Geology of Westem Ufah, Srtes for Precious Metal and Hydrocarbon Arcumulations: Utah GeologicalAssociation Publication 16, p. 1-29. JBR Consultants, lnc., Sffe lnvestigation Plan, Laundry Supply Company, November 10, 1997, Sandy, Utah, submitted to DSHW. Johnson, R. L. and Pankow, J. F., 1992. Dissolution of Dense Chlorinated Solvents into Grcundwater,2. Source functionsfor pools of solvents, Environmental Science Technology. Olympus Environmental, lnc., March 4, 1998, Site lnvestigation, Laundry Supply Company, Salt Lake City, Utah: Olympus Work Order# 7585, Boise, ldaho, submifted to DSHW. Olympus Environmental, lnc., April3, 1998, Site lnvestigation, Laundry Supply Company, Salt Lake City, Utah: Olympus Work Order# 7585, Boise, ldaho, submitted to DSHW. Olympus Environmental, lnc., April21, 1998, Site lnvestigation, Laundry Supply Company, Salt Lake City, Utah: Olympus Work Order # 7585, Boise, ldaho, submitted to DSHW. Olympus Environmental, lnc., June 19, 1998, Site lnvestigation, Laundry Supply Company, Salt Lake City, Utah: Olympus Work Order # 7585, Boise, ldaho, submitted to DSHW. Olympus Environmental, lnc., July 31, 1998, Site lnvestigation-SoilProbing, Laundry Supply Company, Salt Lake City, Utah: Olympus Work Order# 7585, Boise, ldaho, submitted to DSHW, Olympus Environmental, lnc., October 30, 1998, Continuing Site lnvestigation, Laundry Supply Company, Salt Lake City, Utah: Olympus Work Order# 7585, Boise, ldaho, submitted to DSHW. Otympus TechnicalServices, lnc., January 13, 1999, Continuing Site lnvestigation, Laundry Supply Company, Salt Lake City, Utah: Olympus Work Order No. A7008, Boise, ldaho, submltted to DSHW. Olympus TechnicalServices, lnc., May 14, 1999, Assessment Results, Laundry Supply Company, Salt Lake City, Utah: Olympus Work Order No. A7008, Boise, ldaho, submitted to DSHW. Olympus TechnicalServices, lnc., September 20, 1999, Continuing Site lnvestigation, Laundry Supply Company, Salt Lake City, Utah: Olympus Work Order No. A7008, Boise, ldaho, submited to DSHW. I I I I I t I I I I C:\MABU,roiecIs\AIGLSC.ATOOAISRP 8-4.o0.da Page 13 t I Srte Remediation Plan ln MTr Boise, lDr Hawe, MTo Helena, MT I I Laundrv Supplv Com Olympus Technical Services, lnc., May 2,2000, Repoft of lnvestigatlnn, Laundry Supply Company, Salt Lake City, Utah: Olympus Work Order No. A7008, Boise, ldaho, submitted to DSHW. Pankow, James F. and Cherry, John A., 1996. Dense Chloinated Soluenfs and other DNAPLs in Grcundwafer, Waterloo Press, Portland, Oregon. Seiler, R.L., and Waddell, K.M., 1984, Reconnaissance of the Shallow-unconfined aquiferin Salt Lake Valley, Ufah: U.S. GeologicalSurvey Water Resources lnvestigations Report 834272,13 p., 3 maps. United States Department of the lnterior, Geological Survey. Salt Lake City South Quadrangle, Utah-Salt Lake County, 7.5 Minute Series (Topographic), 1963 (photorevised 1968 and 1975), Reston Virginia. Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Control Board, Stipulation and Consent Agreement No. 9609031, executed on June 4, 1997. Westech Environmental, Underground Storage Tank Closure Plan, March 3, 1999, submitted to DEQ/DEER. Westech Environmental, Underground Storage Tank Closure Notice, June 4, 1996, submitted to DEQ/DEER. I t T t I I I I I I I I t I I C:\MABFrojects\NelLSCATmE\SRP 8!4-00.doc Page 14 u4t0p, Srfe Remediation Plan Laundry Supply Company Technical Servioes. I MTo Boise, lDr Hawe, MTo Helena MT FIGURES C :\}lAB\Prc'iects\Al C-LSC A7008lS RP &4-00. da 8v4/00 ITIIIIItTTIItTIITII zotrH, ' F-JoL troo.Eo(" )5o.e5oF!trJoJ 6ErFtLaao -aL oC'oFaaoz. -oo?c,clIo=INaao+oo tr'0-t rItoaagoC'a !3 rf - aa I'oJC'o-&(, -ooEaaEooLoo -ooEatE=ol-ct -ooEit tEsoocr f; .$e [$ ' EE r $t I ES r iI# H$E rq g r n f f i TtTIG' d.a$ ,&6 _ _o _ ra ' T fs = T:II-E cl . rf .& IC, . r'd i o. !. IiEht .f f i t\ !F ,da til ,DFd' ooil - I-3I iE ' Z ,l S to(,EO.oJIL Ef i o, g I- HI * E 'i l .E t*3 EgEB ITBtEEe ,G ,Cl .$e fi $ ' rl f Et i l iiE r * $f i H tt m G t 8 TETI IrN3 6--3I Eo(,to.oJtt 3r IIEES IIE 5E6 lr t = Hl $ JI E=?o= zIfi g * fr 5 * =E E E8 3otrc, e$*E} EH s ET $ [$ I II f, HF m o g e e .DF II:N'[ 5 si ) Fd.@* iot .s s I;Ir r f, tlil . ro rFd. ' otoil . F'i l il-g3 -' I' Z ' , r !! ( EIfo.od E Ai g Hl f g .i l .E z aO ll l l- 8f f i f i BZ E Eg r tIIIIITIIITIIIItITI f, .E$elf ' ET $ *3 { E5 H $ fl$E o' t| 8 m G I s 3fIffo. f , fio=' i l - = il I GI rFd_ fl=T6 .s i l rHhrB ,B I tl [[ tFI$. I}il ' oF*' t\ rF 'd . o I-3I , i3 . Z ,r | !( Eo(, E a! I HI I glo rF 1 '* o= BH E Ed E TITTItTIITTTTITttTI I Sfre Renredia tio, PlanI!r Laundry Supply Company TABLES I C:\f,lAB\Proiects\AICTLSCAT0OSSRI? 8'.4-00.d4 8v4/00 Eo-aao(,.-r--.JEo!,---o t t T I I I T I I T I I I t I I I I I TABLE 1 . GROUND WATER FIELD PARAMETERS Laundry Supply Company Salt Lake City, Utah .U-gliPj!!9,!Ug[-9gp!?g- - - - L - - - - - - Un r-1 4,?F€02 1+lrqbgs i 2.88 26-lur98 +Mar-99 i 3.30 $Mar-99 ! 3.30 ^4 Jun-99 2C&-99 i 3.49 2&Dec-99 ! 3.45 1sMry.98 i 3.41 1S[,Iaf98 2SJun-98 i 2.43 +trrtr-gg i 3.70 $Ma-99 i 3.70 2fiJur99 ! 3.78 2OOct-99 i 3.82 ?$Dec-99 i 3.71 17.ran{0 I 3.86 18rADr{O i 3.69 26-Jur98 i 2.60 +[rar-99 i 3.65 $lt tr-S i 3.71 Dudic#$tU{-99 i 3.71 24^Jur99 ! 3.81 2GOct-99 i 3.85 2$Dec-99 i 3.76 17.rfrO0 i 3.91 18rADr{0 I 3.6E {-f,fg'-$ i 2.70 $Mar-99 | 2.U ^ 1 Jun-99 2O0ct-g9 2$Dec-99 ! 2.& 18^Jan{0 i 2.82 1&Apr{0 i 2.57 in r-5 4A7.% +ttrter-S i 3.St $Ms-99 . 3.21 24-Jurr99 ! 3.34 Drrpli* Dup[c# 2GOd-99 &Dec-99 rn$FrriectsLsC.AT00S\ SPM t*les.ns-T$le 1 Conrmentsfoboervdons 0.6 !Sanplelight@ Sanple brorn/opque Sarple brown 1.0 ! Smrple broryn/brrglucent 2.3 i Sample ligm brwn/haslucent Ssnple ffight gray/brrsfent l#ttW€ Sanple ftaylbarrlucent 5.9 ! Ssnple ydlon/hrtshJcant Santple gra),rqqre Sanpb[ghtffi Sanplewhiffiashrcrlt l-$ddlrMr€ Srnple [ght brcrun/hrrslucent l$ded irTw-g Wdl nd *cessbtg ,-IoeY t-oa,o =oa,-5T CL E Page 1dz oTsi/47m8 U{00 I I I T I T I I I I TABLE 1. GROUND WATER F]ELD PARAi'ETERS Laundry Supply Company Salt Lake City, Utah ttltv€ 4,739.62 tr/tw-7 4,238.38 I I I Ndes: Elerdkms rederencod to Salt L.*e City Public Works Bench lUark Cz-n, with a published elardion of 4235.586 oQ = Degre Centigrde pStcrn = Micro.Siemens (micrumhc) per Centirnder mdl = Milligrmrs per Liter Terrperdure, Elecfical Cmdudivity, and Dissohrcd Oxygen rneasured insitu - = ltld luleaured or Reorded . go f,Io C' a-15,-IgoE I-o Eo--a(E otroE I oEottsO.-o.6ool-F oJ6o Ioob;oU6 =ov ,Eaact tro-{Jo otr LoTo =t,trr ,^rJIoo6E AooYoL-JTlEEoo. EoF- Ec3 tLo!,trgoY- CL ^oI6(, =EL3!,Y E CL I =TIJEnEv6kEOcr-EE E8 III]U -= y E-gt, Q-t, F-o(J^ IO8E.!r Ibr6E.o3trg JA-\r ED EY troo xo REoo!!o IIIII!?l-o!EDi x1aitY .a! Efii8eio 3i6g!CommemdObserya0ons MW-s 17-Jan{0 3.31 4,?9.67 9.3 7.74 7.77 4,800 4,7%5.2 S.0iSarple@ Dupllc& 17.,il{0 18rApr{0 9.2 7.98 7.80 4,900 4,7Xi 5.1 4.8 i L^*ded MW-g 3.24 4,7U.74 11.5 8.00 8.01 5,880 5,880 1.9 2.O !Sarrpb Duplic& 1&Apr{0 11.5 7.96 8.01 5,870 5,880 2.1 2.0 i L$ded IIW-9 20€ct-99 I 4.81 4,2y.91 $.2 7.35 7.42 7,1&6,320 2.1 2.1 Smple lbht brwn/barsltrcent 23&-99 4.81 4,2U.81 18-Jan{0 4.99 4,ru.63 10.8 7.31 7.31 12,1fi 12,090 3.7 3.7 Sample wh ite/has I ucent 1&Apr{O 4.80 4,ZU.g2 10.5 7.79 7.79 2626 2,629 2.1 2.O Sanpleffiparent 20€ct-99 i 4.12 4,2U.26 17.7 8.60 8.66 3,068 3,m8 1.6 1.8 i Sanple fight bruruntrilElucent 2&Dec-99 i 3.89 4,ru.49 II 17-ran{0 i 4.02 4,ru36 12.7 7.63 7.U 9,420 9,'140 2.3 2.1 i Saqleffiparent 1&Apr{0 i 3.86 4,7U.52 12.0 8.s6 8.56 4,520 4,519 2.1 20.0 Sarnple colorless/bansparent nl\ J€ 4,236.66 _20€ct-99 2$Dec-99 17.JamO 1&ADm 2.81 ?-55 4,233.95 18.9 8.30 8.3s 6,290 6,210 1.7 1.7 I Sarnple fight bromrtranslucent 4,2U.11 I 2.60 4,2U.6 13.2 7.73 7.73 9,000 9,010 2.4 2.6 i Ssnplewhitelhaslucerrt 2.57 4,ru.@ 13.0 8.66 8.66 3,817 3,815 2.3 2.4 t I I I I t m$Fr$eds\LSCA7008\ SPM t$lesrG-T$le 1 Page 2 of 2 oTsi/A7008 u4tm T t t TABLE?. GROUND WATER SAMPLING ANALYSES Laundry Supply Company Salt Lake City, Utah Fbld lnfqmdion sw{46 trleffiod 8260 a A E =.Lo E Ei!-I4 I--ooY ot-Lo--Lo- g o-aa(Eo.9 -hO, i: =trEE t I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . 9_SJ.ffi1TS? io.T ilg € o i I S.ampj h g.{ng[ffi Soutfrss .{"flpi-96i I - | i Est €S 4-Ap;-$$ NortirSS .{-fp1-96 West€W 1$ttlaf98 | ND<6.3 SB}2 SB3.Corrp 19May.98 I'' EESlec - - ztsF$i*i f -Ntfr i' SBs€ry 2**9giND<1 DW€P Drum4 Drum 9 D1G2G99 Westeh scil srnple Westeh scil srnple Westech scil iWestech scil ND<6. 3 I Compcite sanple 24 BGS ND<6.4!Cmrpcite ite sanpb IPCE/TCE scren @25 BGS PCE/TCE scrsr @ 35 BGS PCE/TCE scrsr@ 25 BGS PCETCE screen @ 35'BGS rcgTCEscren @-8 BGS scngr @ 35' PCE/TCE scrsr @ 25' BGS rcgrcEscrsr@35 rcgTCEscrsr GD2g BGS rcE/TCE ecrsr @ 35'BGS D8 D5 E)€ >17 SP2-25 ^6.Jun€8 SP2-35 26-Jun-98 SP}l5 SFr}25 SP3-36 SP}35 2EJun€8 26-lun-98 26-Jurr98 i SP+15 &.lun-98 SP+25 6^lun'98 SP+35 6-lum98 I . --a----------------ro)--a---aSP+15 2B..Jtm9E ! SPS25 26^Jun-9E SP$35 26-lum98 rn$tPrri*\LsCA7008\ SPM tabtss.ns-T$le 2 EDT CD3r3-\.E9t-YLutg Hg TD! -t CD =- .^llr -l\E9o-Ybutg(,8 t =ooY o-t-os-oobo--L ,^l E =froJ(Ei *ooV H F J.-ooIU 8t(\t -t-ooY ruI Iq rl. I =ooV UI C'otGt rl! I ooY llloo I6!. rF totr6L Westech ground vYder saryle 26..Ju1196 --l----t-------------------------- 3,(XlO ND<20 June98 GeoProbe decsr rrder SIUar-99 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 320 ND<1 ND<1 FeF99 GeoProbe decon uYder $ttla-9e ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 NEl<l ND<1 1"000 1J ND<1 Febgg G€oPrSe ffisnrpb wder 2GG-99 NBl ND<1 1J NB1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<l.2 I ND<1 illw€,-7,€ det/sanding uder 21Oct-90 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 3 ND<1 ND<1 S&S/SH a€er&n wder 21€ct-99 ND<5 ND<5 ND<5 ND<5 ND<5 ND<5 &I 1(U ND<5 SB.5 sdl 21&-99 ND<5 ND<5 ND<5 NE}<5 ND<5 ND<5 7J T(U ND<5 S&5 scil 21e-99i ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 u ND<1 ND<1 SgYgI{ auqer decon Y}der Pagelcf4 oTSi/A7008 94t00 TABLE?. GROUND WATER SAMPLING ANALYSES Laundry Supply Company Salt Lake City, t tah g o aa-fo(t-$-:3c,o!, sP6-15 SP&25 SPS35 SP&15I ::ri Fidd lnfqmdion sP7-15 sP7-25 sP7-3s tt €thod 8260 q F E i.o,,ents Jia-: ralE=i sE I eFebg9l iPCefiCE screen @19 BGS ircE/TCE scren @?5 BGS PCHTCE screen @ 35 BGS PCHTCE screen @ 15 BGS IPCETCE scren @29 BGS ircE/TCE scrsr @ 38 BGS iPCE/TCE screen @29 BGS |PCE/TCE scrur @ 35'BG.S IPCUTCE scrsr @28 BGS IrcETCE scresr @ 35'BGS IrcETCE scrcen @,%'BGS PCE/TCE screerr @ 35'BGS IPCHTCE screen @?,5'BGS |PCE/TCE scrsen @ 35'BGS PCFJTCE scren @ 15 BGS rcgTCE screen @28 BGS IPCBTCE scren @ 35 BGS - IPCE/TGE scran @ 15 BGS IPCE/TCE screen @-29 BGS IPCE/TCE screen @ 35'BGS !rcgTCE screen @29 BGS IPCHTCE scrsr @ 35'BGS PC9TCE scren @ 45 BGS IPCE/TGE screen @ 55 BGS rcEffCEscrsr@ 25'reS rcE/TCE scren @ 35'BGS IPCE/TCEscrsr @E BGS !rcE/TCE screen @ 35'BGS rcgTCE sseen @15'BGS rcE/TCE screen @29 BGS ircgTCE scren CD 35 BGS "3FU.15- SP925 SP935 "s'FiilG' SPlo25 SP1G35 SPii:i,5- SP1 1-E sP11€5 "sFii:G- sP1a15 sP12-25 sP12€5 SP13-15 SPl}|?5 sP1&36 NBs I ND<s ''siiia'G' - ?+i$bb' I''' :''' sP1+25 Z7-F*99 SP1+36 Z7feb99 sPl+45 27+*99 sP14-55 "siri5:is- sP1$25 SP1ffi sitiilf ---?H-uill"':'" sP1625 Z7#.gg t - SP1S35 27+€b99 sP17-?5_ sP17€5 m$Fniects\LsCA7008\ SPM tablesrds-Table 2 =o={98oaEb EEt-Lrr Pqe2d1 oTvA7008 8t4t@ TABLE?. GROUND N,ATER SATI,IPLING AN/AIYSES Laundry Supply Company Salt Lake Clty, Utah I I I I T T t t I T T t T t I I T I I G rou nd water- U ggtjlggg .tlv-ql $?U-:gg i/Ml-1 in^r-2 Dudice i,Tru-3 Duplic# tvl\ ,-4 irt\ ,-5 Duplic& Duplb# Duplicde Duplbe tvMl-7 m&\Prciects\LsCA7008\ SPM tables.ns-TSle 2 Fidd lnfunndion Voldile Orqarics (SW€46 irethod E26O or eoui\ralenl I Eo-5(loll -5,r .iL5-a =E,E€ o-Go =o=ILBOaEh €Eo-Eg6E €rB EE -26 8$r--.8rF 3. =\" CDJ,= EE;5B$ a-q.B rF= =ED -ta E*ur,8$r-iB F=. EE HqJOrI 8E =Eaurg 8bl3Gl(Edl hciE;F :r. 6T-CD:a^r=l---,=ED!Y-o-YLlu .g8g 6T CD =- A l--\.E9U0'-vLutEgE gal Fg i*,,ents 15F-nfaf98 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 4tt a a,69,0(X'190 25 $trlar-$ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 130 52 1J 80,0(x,8Ur 76! 1 '{0 ND<l0 NDl<s ND<5 xn r00 ND<5 861000 730 ND<10 1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 6 340 15 gl,(xn 290 ,J ----- 1$Mry.98 ND<10 ND<10 NE)<10 ND<10 390 I(U 79,(Xlo 2$)ND<10 labeled llrt 14 $'Mar-99 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 gn 45 17,(X)0 8(xl ND<1 20Oct-99 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 IJ 1100 47 10,0fl1 610 ND<1 iiifrri6FUb-l'iiD.1U ilD:1-d 210 ND<10 'i{666"1"'35b- - - $tvk-99 | ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 17 4m 31 17,(m 710 &Ji $Mar-99 ! ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 u 4{n 27 tg,(x)0 790 19 il-#ed nn r€ 24^Jur99 i ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 4:l 200 17 21,(Xl0 320 z2 17-Jan{0 | ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 69 r30 9.2 21,fi10 330 3s! ND<1 ND<1 t3 ND<1 24-Jun-99 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1.2 ND<1 ND<1 2[},Oct-99 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 NE}<1 NEFl.2 ND<1 ND<1 17-Jan{0 ND<1 ND<1 ND<T ND<1 Nt)<1 ND<1 u ND<1 ND<1 1 {0 ND<l0 ND<5 ND<5 ND<5 Nt)<5 ND<5 ND<s ND<5 ND<10 $tt ar-99 ------- ND<1 -Nii:i'-ft-ti:1''ir6:i'"306-'3s ---------960 l"'1i6''ifii.i' 24^Jutt-99 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 850 52 750 r90 ND<1 24^Jun-99 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 u 830 52 750 r90 NB1 Labded lvlt l€ 2GOct-g()ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 XJ 700 49 2r441p,340 NB1 200ct-99 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 3.J 700 49 ZM 340 ND<1 Labded inv-g 17-Jan{0 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 AJ 1,000 na 4800 520 ND<1 17-ran{0 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 lJ 1,100 fia 2'800 560 ND<1 l-$ded tuMr-g 1&Ar{0 ND<l0 ND<5 ND<5 ND<5 910 97 1/l{X,an ND<l0 1&Apr{0 ND<10 ND<5 ND<5 ND<5 7fi q,1r20,,210 NE)<10 tabded m r-9 'ilIii;t:t*i L-------i Noct 'N'd:i'-ft-d:i'-iid:i'-iifri'-itb.i';.,5:r','ili6:i- - ND<1 17-Jan{0 NE}<1 ND<1 NB1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 u ND<1 ND<1 1&Apr{O ND<10 ND<5 ND<5 ND<5 ND<5 NE}<5 ND<5 ND<10 'ririli--irili''ft-d:i-l'ND.i'-N'6.i''trb:i'x-ci:1-,------- ND<1 17{an{0 ! ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 u ND<1 ND<1 18rApr{0 i ND<10 ND<5 ND<5 ND<5 ND<5 ND<5 i0<5 ND'<s ND<10 tvTW€ 2GOd-99 1zJafrco IAAorfl 'ttb':i''frrili''irili''ir6ii''N'D.i''tifri-'5:i'2 iiD:T''Nt5.i- ND<1 ND<l NE}<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND,<Nf,Fl.2 ND<1 ND<1 ND<l0 ND<5 ND<5 ND<5 Ntxs ND<5 i0<5 ND<5 ND<10 9r-?l.i$Ascuran_q{-Q93!-ity-9-qtEB lSFMalbgB ! ND<1 I ttrol San"ft'#i'l ob Ana forr---a Nt)<1 I !igF--- ND<1 NE}<1 ND<1 iD<1 ND<1 ND<1 RE€P 26-Jum98 EB A-po* E-gg1a;irc2ffi 17-ram0 1&Aom' r{D<2-3 ND<1.6 BlankPCE/TCE screen -iD<s ND<5 Equipment Bhnk#CE/TCE scren ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 NE}<1 i1g<l.2 ND<1 ND<1 Blank ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 nD-f .2 ND<1 ND<1 Blank ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 x,,ND<1 u u Ntxl Equlprnert Blenk ND<1 t\iEm ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 l.D<1.2 ND<1 ND<1 Equiprnent Blank ND<5 ND<5 ND<5 ND<5 ND<5 r€<5 ND<5 ND<10 P4e3cf4 oTsi/A7m8 u4100 I TABLE 2. GROUND WATER SAMPLING AMLYSES I Laundry Supply Company I Salt Lake City, t tah Frrd lnfiormdion Vdatile Orqanics 15yy-${$ lUethod 8260 q auivaler I Eo o JGct =o3{sB O3 EE E5 Eg SE =ED.l.a EEr5 9t Eirfr-.8rF =. =-toJ= EE.i, o P6HVr- GI. B!F =L =ID.g3 E*lui} EeEBrF1 aa HqJCD-.! 8E .g E=urPItITGI IEJ} hEiE;F= da=,EDra-- .Al!--\=EDtY -o-vLrug8S 6T-oa-.-l--\.69o-vL ur .g(JEl-3 *i 8El tq irCD!>r .- iE> i Comments TB 2fiJur98 NE)<2.3 ND<1.6 iTrip Blank rcgTCE scrsr s{rar-99 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 NE'<12 ND<1 ND<1 lTrio Blank 24^Jun-99 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 Ntxl ND<1 ND<1.2 ND<1 NE)<1 lTrip Blank 20.oct-99 Ntxl ND<1 ND<1 ND<1 Ntxl ND<1 5,6 ND<1 ND<l iTrip Blank 18rADr{O ND<10 ND<5 ND<5 ND<5 Ntxs ND<5 ND<5 ND<5 ND<10 NGs: pyl = Micrograns per Kilogran udkg = Microg rs Per Liter ND = Nd Hected (d laboratory reporting limit) - = Not Anallzed or Reported J = Andfe deteded bdor practical quarilitdim limit 1,1OCA = 1, l-Dichloroefhane 1,1OCE = l,l0ichloroethene cis-1,2-DCE = Cis-1,2-Didllolrethene Trals-l,2-DCE = Trans-1,2-Dichlsoethene PCE = Teiraclrlaoeihene TCE = Trichloroe$ene BGS = Bdor Grcund Surfae ndtPrriectsUscAT0OS\ SPM tSle.ns.T$le2 I I T I I I I I I T I I I I I I T Page4cf4 oTvA7008 s4t00 Srfe Remediation Plan Laundry Supply Company APPENDIXA HRC GRID DESIGN SPREADSHEET C:\MABProjects\AlG.LSC.A7008\SRP 8=4{O.da El/4/00 ER B R N E E B o+. '6L.O, ^ rr . 0D 8: 6 pbL' Oo. } ' #E -l LE ts A I, E = g .f f . H .- \, A o6 x CL \- , L* , *J t P\ O o 6g cL EE E Pf ; E E - ri E cL G EE e 5 g €r B, E - H E == E Eg b E BE A € E E E Sg E E E E E GIE, Jc! t oo ts t d gs yIo oaaE rH ooxoL.orl . - :I\,xgoo6a Aov(o f- *tooxoL. .or} .Elt lfooo€Fc;oou,T oa,oEEaulxdFLo?(!P f, CLCL 0( ' @ V 3 D O - co S r t J - - t Gl-5oc:=l-I,EDc'F o , EEaE ta - Eogb6ee5 1l g , r- 7t 8. 9Ei l FE o, .t r l-E' l-ota - rOol -co:Io. 4\ l- r} . Jog rO - L- ii o=C L 9, o so L- ,r 9. 5 Xo66 9l -gEo' E r- oE- 3 66 3( JPo tr o o. -s t, E, oo +. , # ooEE # .r - oo tJ . l uJ j E€oo'at-o. LorFErt -o.( ,-t-o(U yo -o0) r} , (6eof.s:gott+E'o-,o.EEovEo()E=ilu.EocrE;() (Uof-ora -oED (U -a8TL lOF(Dc, i F $t (q t Fi - art F L.oeo,ool-o€Eyco(J .c I=6c.9yoo:E6-ol- .9t-l-E' Lol+ -YY(" ,ol-o l- O€€ j, cL cooo8P a, E CY ,9 qf {. , ' OEoa ': rl EA E: E €e so L- +. oo 1c , r- s8 oa o O(,-o=3oeE.gol-oouCo .J 5oEo()E' I .EE'=o.g .J oE (, IF N (t ) tF (a IF tfri F (\ l@t F(' , ro oGI od o$ ori orO- c,o@ oc. i t- @ lOc. i rt - f\ !F qFF (v ) lo(Y ) (od) !- )a6=cD=dt IIxxT9 ruEEoo '# ,H] Ttf i ieGEE ff iITII;g Ig .E g IEls ^g B g ;g c ee €e -9 E E ' o a E ;E f, FE E E E E B EE E EE E g i g E E E E i JCD J (o LPE i - y€ J - rr - lF rl - lt s y- y l} . rF ra - ff i * tx (U !,er5r; ' l 18 l L] ootco rsxoE,- a e$ E O, - . E t .q g E E Y( EtE E E EE i fi () E IJ r! EP ; : -8 6 € g E_ 5 t't r .eEE sEFE85 P E Co3'6dEf i q .l l E' 6 EE HE $ f JbEs3ooE-9 {JGL-troEoo qg JL{} gEE -= 3 o=t6 o. oPf r ,A t EE ts =g EH H H g @c. i f\, oci .Yo q(\ I .-o EJf !fqF st Fci oao ogo ooci ooci ooc, ooc; (r , (o6t ]\ot- oo loc, i oF!P s (Y , coF ot as- c,AIo qtl - 8c; Ici Icj Icj ICi I I$t (7 ' oG) +.o (oc; Foo st c. i !- oooooF I t I,^'ERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET Jast Revised: January 27,1998 MSDS -ection I - ilaterial ldentification !**-ffi*sffi*ffi*** upplien Applied Pouer Concepts, lnc. 411 East Julianna St. furaheim, CA 92801 Jr"rhone: (714) 502-1150Tacsimile: (714) 502-2450 hemicalName: Propanoicad,td,2l2l2{2+ydoxy-1-oxopropory)-1-oxoproporyl -1 -oxoproporyl-1,2,}propanetriyl ester Jnemical Family: Organic Chemical Trade Name: Glycerol tripolylactate *ffi Jot * za.n6z-22-o lQne should anticipate the potential for eye initation and skin initation with large scale ]nosure or in sensitive individuals. lection 3 - Physical Data Si ffi*ffi* Ilelting Point: NIA loiling Point: ND Flash Point ND fensitV: 1.YT g/cc lolubility: Acetone and DMSO frp"rrance: Pale white liquid {fdot: Not detectable faeor Pressure: None I**"**ffitffiffi*ffiffi l*,on 4 - Fire and Explosion Hazad Data Jtinguisfring Media: Carbon Dioxide, Dry Chemical PorderorAppropriate Foam. J*r mry be used to keep exposed containerscml. I Page 1 I I T I For large qmntities involved in a fire, one should uearfull protr{ive clothing and a NIOSH approved self cortained breathing apparatus with full face piece operated in the pressure demaM or positive pressure mode as for a situation vrfiere lack of orygen and excess heat are present. Section 5 - Toxicological Informatlon I Acute Effeds: T I RrEcB[Hlosoooo lnitation data: I t Toxicity data: T T t RTECSilT OD2800000 1,**":::o I roxicity data: T T t May be harmful by inhalation, ingestiolr, or skin absorption. May cause initation. To the best of our kno$dedge, the chemical, physical, and toxicological properties of the glycerol tripolylactate have not been investigated. Listed belor are the toxicological information for glycerol and lactic acid. t t Target Organ datia: Behavioral (headache), gastrointestinal (nausea or vomiting), Patema! effects (spermatogenesis, testes, epididymis, sperrn duct), effects of fertility (male fertility index, post- implantation mortality). SKN.RBT 5OO MGI?4H MLD EYE.RBT 126 MG MLD EYE-RBT 5OO MG/24H MLD ORL-MUS LD50:4090 MG/KG SCU-RBT LD50:100 MG/KG ORL-RAT LD50: 1 2600 MG/KG IHL-RAT LC50: >570 MG/M3I1H IPR-RAT LDSO: I I2O MG/KG IVN-RAT LD50:5566 MG/KG IPR-MUS LD50: 8700 MGIKG SCU-MUS LD50:91 MG/KG IVN-MUS LD50: 4250 MG/KG ORL-RBT LD50: 27 GMIKG SKN-RBT LDSO: > 1 OG]vUKG IVN-RBT LDSO: 53 GT',UKG ORL€PG LD50: T75A MG/KG SKN.RBT 5MGT24H SA/ EYE-RBT 750 UG SEV ORL-FUAT LD50:3543 MG/KG SKN-RBT LD5O:>ZGIIUKG ORL-MUS LD50: 4871MG/KG ORL-GPG LD50: 1810 MG/KG ORL QAL LD50:>2250 MG/KG SaJCAE-,^A7,1986 BIOFX.94t1970 85JCAE-,2A7,1986 FRZKAP (6),56,1977 NIIRDN 6,215,1982 FEPRAT 4,142,1915 BIOFp 9<;1920 RCOCB8 56,125,1997 AMNAD 26,1581 ,1976 AMf.lAD 26,1579,1978 NIIRDN 6,215,1992 JAPMAS 39,593,1950 DMDJAP 31 ,276,1959 BloFr 94t1970 NIIRDN 6,215,1982 JIHTAB 23,259, ffN1 SaJCAE -,656,96 A"JOPAA 29,1363,46 FMCHAz-,C252,91 FMCHA2-,C252,91 FAONAU 40, 14,67 JIHTAB 23,259,41 FMCHM-,C252,91 Page2 I I M.DS I Or, selected registry of toxic effects of chemical substances (RTECS) data is presented here. See actual entry in RTECS for complete information on lactic acid ard glycerol. T Secdon 6 - Health Hazad Data Handling: Avoid continued contactwith skin. I 'n "ro me or "", "rJ":ffiJ;,-", a prrysicianstroutd be oonsutted immediately. I ,,*Aid Procedures: I lnhalation: Removeto fresfr air. lf not breathing give artificial respiration. ln caser of labored breathing give orygen. Call a pirysician- I lngestion: No effects expected. Do not give anything to an unconscious person. I Calla physician immediately. I Skin Contact: Flush with plenty of water. Contaminated clothing mry bewashed or E dry cleaned normally. I Eye contact: Wash eyeswith plenty of uraterforat led 15 minutes lifting both upper I and lorver lids. Calla physician. Section7 - Reactivity Data Conditions to Avoid: Strong oxidizing agents, bases and acids I Ha.ardous Pdymerizati<None knolrr I Further lnformation: Hydrolyses in vyderto form Lactic Acid and Gtycerol. I ;;T g: spill,t?lf o,esglo:T lrog"dy,"s tAft erspi'aseorLeakasi:"ffiffi1,i""::,i,5:l's;J*",ffr#-HT#:lxg.T#:* I Disposal: Laursandregulationsfordisposalvarywidefybylocallty. ObserveE :i;'$;Tffii;1$:,f,ff;J#,"ffi,:1,ffi.5,ffiera,hours I No rcquirenrent for a reportable quantity (CERCIA) of a spill is knom. I I I t Page 3 I I t MSDS Section 9 - Special Protection or Handllng Should be snored in plastic lined $eel, pla$ic, glrc, aluminum, stainless $eel, or I reinforced ftberglass containers. Protective Gloves Mnylor Rubber I Eyes: Splash Croggle or Full Face Shield I Area should hane approred rneans of nvastring r Ventitation: 3ff;o,eNhaust. I Storage: Store in coo|, dry, ventilated area. Protect from imcompatible materials. Section {O - Other lnformationII This material will degrade in the environment by hydrolysisto lactic acid and glycerol. Materials containing reaetive chemicals should be used only by personnel with appropriate I chemicalhaining. T The infonnation contained in this document is the best available to the supplier as of the time of writing. I Some possible hazads have been determined by analogy to similar classes of material. I No separate tests have been performed on the toxicity of this material. The ilems in this document are subject to change and clarification m more information becones anaifable. I I I I I I I I t I Page 4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I NAMOHC BOREVIEDIATION USNG HRC ic bioremdiaim has been rcognized in recat yeanl iN ore of the primry at&nuatim isns blt uthich a rnlmher of onhmimns can be coAined adfu remdi4ed- Codamients e b anaercbic biaercdiation irchrde chlainated sdrrcne srch as PCE and TCE, meals as hexa\raleff chrcmiuq and pesticides nrch as chludane. C ders a passivg lour-cost apporch to in-sinr aaerobic bioremediatim- Applicatim is fast and cient ad gliminat€s visible siglrs of on-gciry rdiatio- The use of HRC significafly re&tcs ign oss md fte need fc capital md operation-inrensirrc rcchmical systec. is a prqrieary polylaaa;e ester specially famulated for &e slow release of lactic acid upm dratim. \ilhen HRC is introducd to fte sr$surface, varicus irxrigmw organism help urcorple rctic acidfromHRC Tben, ferrrsrtative maerobic microbes w&oliz.e tbe lactic acid, driviry an uifer amerobic and prodrcing hydrcgen in tb praess. lvficrcbes capable of bidqgical enation (in uifui&' halqgens, typrcally cHcine, are rerrD\red from fte pareil cotrmioant) can rr;e tb laydrogeo. Sirce most of the cmamination problems invdve &lorinatd y&ocarbons, refererce is usrnlly made to fte process d "rdrrtive dchlorinaticn" and i8 iationby redu<tive dschlorinr6s. In fte term of oxidaion/re&rction chemistry, bdrogenc m dectron donor md fte chlorinard hy&ocarbon serves as tbe eletron rccepc. eforg HRC shorfld be onsidered a tircreleas elatron dmor m*erial (sinc fudrcg€n is tbe Etrorr donor in the dechlsination reaction). is a moderdely flowatte rrwterizl ftat can be injeced ld€r presflne into an aquifer rciry rious direct-push techologies. It can maintein dedlorinaing onditions in tbe aryifer for six to one year or mae dependiry on sie cmditios. UIh marnrfactured as a thicker, fudgel, 1 crn !g applid tsrry a bllcn-stentt alger ils a slowly dissolving "irylant" This larer optbn may fer mauy years of cominrnus rdease, Aeeeoaing m sie codi6oc. In eifrer fcmulaiom, HRC ovi&s a time-released fudrcgen soure to aaelerate fte reductircn cf anrrcbically degndfule are a ntmber d advatages to tsiry time-release starcgies. Irylemetaion cf the appropriare rdease sysmcanelirninaE *1jor apitd, ard operatirn:l oss associaedwi& rcchznical , becarse it is delivercd into fte aquifer ody orce or trie a )'ear. The rlse d siryle, iquions push-poid idectiontechmlogyma&es apflicationfasg dircce4 ad uinimally disnrytive sie operatios. Project design is siryIified sire tbre is m need for fte design of abovegrouod process md equipt HRC wifl remaia urhere injeced ad slcmly g€nerafe hi&ly le organic aci& md hydrogen Since chlcrinated Sdrocaftcr scrc€s are difficult b lea,E, cudinrDus, higbly diffnsible series of cgmic subst*es rzn imease tb effectiveness d cmtact biod€radatim. HRC.{s lnfro to HRC I I I t I T t I I T t I T I I t I I T RC Design Software enesis has developed ad distribued the HRC Desrgn Softrvare b aid experienced emrironmenal rofessionals in tbe proper dcign of cceleraed natural temrationztioremediaion projects. One of e irryortmt faces of the software is &a it enables the user b perfom muldple iterations of th ie design with litle effut and to easily evaluaE a nrmber of "what if' scenarios. By aldng ltis roach, an HRc-based bioremedidion strdqy can be optimd.rnd. esigns for HRC-based biaemediation prdects are based on delivering IflC inb conaminted orndrvaEr plumes in a grid or brrier patern, or a combinatim of boft. The selection of the ropriate design depends pimarily on the siz of &e plum requiring remediatim, groundwder elocity, sie accessibility to injectbn equipnefr, and desired time frame for remediation. Grid- ased designs are typically recmmended for small- b mediutrr-sized contaminar plumc in which a elatively shct remediation period is desired. In comast, barrier-based desigu are rcommendcd sies with widely distribued high oncentation plumes, seyer€ acces limitations, or long-term, ume qrt-off remediation stcqies. The primary design issues are (1) amouut of HRC required o uppoil biodegradation of a given amoud of contaminant md (2) number of delivery locatims eeded O effectively distribue electm dppl wirhin the coduninantplume. Design approrhes and amples for bodr HRC grid and barrier approaches are described in the following sectims. ile we have designed the HRC Desigu Software b be user-friendly md self-explanabry, from b time &e user may have questions relating to softryare input paraneers or to the ppropriateress of the sie for the tse of this technology. These facb$ may have a direct bearing on e feasibility, performancg and cost of a rerrediation project Therefore, Regeaesis stotrgly eommends that fte user coffact us direcdy for assistance in &veloping an effective HRC-based ioremediation design for a specific site of concern. ume Area Treatment H RC Grid Design C cm be the most cct-effective alemative for treating a contaminad plume area. HRC is Ljeced ino tbe aquifer mmix in a grid pa&rn over lte areal exEnt and acros tte vertical zme of contaminant plurr. The shape of the area to be trcaed is deermined primarily by the shrye of e contaminent plume or tte accessible area wittin the plume. For exmple, long narrow HRC ids are constructed for long narrow @naminmt plumes. the event frat &e plume is very lrge and an HRC injection grid is not cost effective, tten m ErnaE approrch is b we a series of HRC bariers. These HRC barriers are installed perpendicular the groundwder flow directim at rqular inervals &rougtort the leng& of the plume. In fris ign approacb, a unit volume of codamiraEd watsr moving in &e plume is subjectto sequetrial of hydrogen to fuel the reductive dechlorination reirtions. pr*. cutoff Treatment: H RC Barrier D esign I I I I I I T I I I I I I I I I I I I ume CutO ff Treatment: H RC Barrier D esign C can be injeced in one or rmre rcms of, ddivery poins to form an HRC barrier, ttereby ating m maerobic treatrrEnt zone orientsd b inErcep tte dowagradient migration of taminanB. The HRC barrier eclnology can be considered a "permeable barrier" echnology; owever, with HRC there is no need for slurry walls or *gaEs," as required with cber more cosdy able barrier tahnolqgies . n aeas of high groundwaEr velocity or ontaminmt loading, it rnay be neessry to insall multiple s of application points. The locatioas of delivery poins in erh row are staggered with respct o oinr in other rows to minimize fte effective sprcing perpendicular b grqrndTvaEr flmr. Barriers y also be cmstructed in an iterative fashion so tht barrier arays ine installed over time o satisfy egulabry criteria, remediatim budget, and the overall enviromrenal sEaEgy for a given sie. t should be notd 6at HRC permeable barrier-bued designs are typically asscided wifr a onteminant cotrainment straEgy ard do not proride for souce area remdiation. If remediation of e cortaminant source area is not performd, then the HRC barrier will need to be mairaired over e via re-injection evenB. t I T I I I I I I T I I I I I I I I I lssolved-phaEo e roundwater G oncsntratlons nder this cdegory of input paramet€rs, reprcsentative cmtaminaut conceffrations are spcilied for e area where IIRC will be &Iivered. Specifically, disscflved-phase conceffrations that are ermined by groundwter well sampling and analysis are enered here. While it is imporant o nsider tte mostrec€nt daa available, fre inpu values should represetr the conentrdion frat the er judges b be indictive of acurd subsurfre conditions over the course of an entire hydrogeologic cle. geuesis has included input eaces for fte mct cornmonly ercountered dlorinatod solven6; owever, HRC will stimuliae the degradatim of a myriad of polluas. If the contaminad tte user erned with is notlised for inpuq pleae contact Regenesis direcdy. We will be glad b assist in rmining thc amount of HRC required b treat otter less commn coutanrinanB. orbed Phass C ontamlnant t 8Er or HRC grid designs, there is usually a multiple of the total dissolved contaminant mass that is uod to tte saoraEd soil zone matrix. This is called hy&ophdically sorbed coilanination and can visualized as a thin layer of conhminant that is reaird by clem aquifer maerials whcn they ome inb coftrt with a dissolved coil@inant flom. Thc mass of ontarninant ssbed to tbe aquifer trix is a functim of &e bulk density of tte aquifer marrix, the fraction of organic carbon in thc nput and O utput Parameters for H RC Dcxrign Software qnorEl Inf ormatlotr 0n Soltraro U so I ser inpu pdamet€rs are shwn inblue, whereas cells onaining the results of caloilations are hown inblaclc Red warnings or guiding co@ts may b€ generaed in resporee to the sprrea&hea ios. Dialog bores "nd point md click butore ae available to asist wift d*a emy ,nd b vigate the softnrare. rslo Slto (! harrotsrlrtlcs v ! asic site cbaracteristic pa'rmetenr are nee&d to specify tb physical site characgistics. The width deph of the cotrminant plume refer to the plamed treaiment area, ufiich can vary depending o ial goals aod clemup strategy. iof the Contaminaed Saturaed Zone specifies the vertical ifiickness ircross which HRC will delivered. Tb vertical thicloess is dictaedby the estimatd frickness of the onaminat flume. or instane, if a siE hac a cmtaminat plurc spannirg tb saftratrd ane abore an aquitard, the"r desrgn sbuld trea tbe aquifer dourn to fte aquiard. If th ontaminant plume is limied o a ealized depth iterval or lithdogic layer, ften HRC iqiection canbe limied to tbe onaminad intenral. HRC rmterial ost is proportional to th ftidrness specificatim. Therefore, it is impor"rrrt to ine the vertical @ntaminmt distibutim as acctrrately as possfrle. If only moderate tims of cpnta'minant ae present, md no vertical profile of the pluae hac ben dme, gresis suggeils &at tb urcr as$Ere a 6icbss of ryproximtely 2O feet. Porosity refers to the pacity of the aquifer soil matrix. Using the above inprt paa'rFErs, the oftwae will calculae treament zorE pore Yolume. idormdion rcgading aquifer tra$port properties are reqrcsEd. Tbe hy&aulic gradient errl ivity ae used to calculate the groundwater seepage vdaity, which cm be used b select ivery poitr spircing and evaluate flow dynamics \iliftin tb grid. ix (fJ, and fre contaminad-partitiming ccffrcient QQ). An estimaE of the mass of sorbed I I I I T I I I T I t T I I I I t I T x (fJ, and the conaminant-partitiming ccfficient (IGJ. An estimat of the mass of sorbed ontasrination is calculated in ftis setim by enrring the facbrs mentioned aborre. Input yalues ftr he soil, fre bulk density, and the fraction of organic carbon (fJ can be measured or estima,Ed based soil type. The Ko"valrc can be obained fu each contaminant frm any number of published efererrces.( dd ttlon al Il om ul d F act or Additional Demand Fror is usd to aocourt for uncertafury abort 6e potetial sinks for electrcn . This factor can be ftought d as a cotingency c safety factor, which is rsed b rccornt fcr many unertainties intrerrerrt in a subsurfaa investigaticn and in-sitr remediatim project. Poecial ources of additional HRC &marrl irlude highr thap eryeced @ntaminant mass (i1the form of esi&nl phase DNAPL ad/ot high onentraioahot spos), microbial demand in ercess of the timted 3x, and urnertainty abqrt the quantity of HRC regrired for 6e reduction of iron and ganere. The siryle rasurcmetrt of th onmtrtior of frese cmpeting electun acc€pbrs in orndraEr samples does not give an accuraE repres€natian d the iron 6fl manganes€ redrction sine these ryecies may be pres€d either as colloids or attrhed o the soil matrix Regenesis ecomm€nds an additional demand faorr of 2 to 3 fa a fnst appliction at a sie. lfe Span lor 0 ne A pplloe[on (lor barrler ilodgtrs) or IIRC ba:rier desigre, fte life spa fu one application shotild be input in this field. This value is flornr of contaminar urass into the barriered with the groundwder seep age velocity to estimate the ing this perid of time. B C Il eltvery Polnt SD eclng 8nt f, B G I! odng B ets or grid &signs, thercommendod spacing for HRC deliverS; points raqges from 5 feet-on-mffi b 15 feet-oa'cemer. Sprcing is a function of soil type, grfindrraEr velocity, and ncessay HRC ing. Gcrally, the lower tbe hy&adic eoductivity of the soil matrix, th dcer &e sprirg. or siEs wift silts and clay, delivery point spacing should be 5 b 8 feet-on-eng, while a site with and gravels may have a spaciqg up to 15 fet-m-center. The Delivery Poit Spacing section of Grid Desigo worlshee allows tb desig!€r to calorlae the required number of points and HRC rfre for a given plume siu nd sprcing. or barrier dgsigns, a series of staggered HRC injection point rows are typically constnrcrcd ihe 0rDotlrg BlooEol A GoeDtor C oncatrrtlou he conentrations of coryeting electo accepttrs (CEAs) such as dissdved orygen, niratg ferric on, and sulfaE have an dfect on the ammnt d HRC required for enhancing in-situ bicemediatim. ydrogen"from fre HRC is used to redua tkse CEAs b create redu oonditions frat are conducive re&rctive dedilorintim procsses. As a result, the CEA- demand for hydrogen (md conseqrendy RC) must be considered in fte specification of fte amount of HRC rquired fc a project undwaEr data indic*ing the actual siE values for these paramet€rs arc irrportmt in deermining accuraE final design fu HRC application However, in tte absence of ttese data, reasonable timaEs of these values cm be made to getrene a preliminary design and cct estimaE. lcroDld Demm0 Pactor addition to cotrryninant and CEA demand for HRC, subsurface microbes will rse some of the tic acid as a source of energy or strctural carbon. Thereforg in desigring an HRC applicatim, ese competing microbial p(ocesscr must be taken into accouff. Regenesis' experience indicaes t a value of 3 suffices under most cmditions. However, if sie-specifrc laboraory microcosm data arrailable, fre designer rzn input the appropriate value direcdy. bctive sprcing of delivery points perpendiqrlar to the grroundwaE flow should be rn Ex)re trzn l0 I I I I t I I I I I 'ective spacing of &livery points perpendicular to the goundwater flow shouldbe il) trxlre fra 10 -on-cent6. The Delivery Poir Spacing sctim d &e Brrier Design wortshet allows the igner to estimae tb required nunber d poits aod HRC dce rae fa a given barrier length ad inatr flow ratg. T T I I I I I E t roposod InC 0rtd Spclllcatlons this secion d the workshet, the desigg may adjust fre btal nrmber d injecioa points ad the C dosing ra& c leave it as calculaed. Tb softwae wiII then calculae the ost d HRC magial e*imae tte cost of shipping aod trxes fa th given scqe of the project (i.e., rumber of poinB, eatnent thickness, and HRC dmiry rate). v BG Ingtallatloh C ost Esttnate and Totat Profect C ost -- : tbugh Regenesis das not perfcm irtallation serrriceq our experience on may apflicaior has iven us an understmding d the costs assciared wift iratling the HRC. This secion offers tb igner ar opeortmity to estimde hcff rnuch the HRC gid a barrier apflication will cosl Tb ested iqutparameenr required are based o Rqerqis' eryerieoce. The result of this section is estimaed subcoffiacbr installatim cost This estim*e shorld be adjusted based on local cmtr . The Toal Project Cost prodded represenB tb sum of the IIRC Insallation Cost Estimate and HRC M*erial Costs. ft does not indude the costs associaed wift groundrrarr monitoriry, irg, or coiliulting oveffiight I I I t I I T I I I I I I t I I I RC Grid Dedgn Erample RC injection grids are cmrmonly eryloyed d siEs where a loolized area of a ontrminant phme be c6st-effecively remediated. The design process fc this treatuent sr.d;q.y is dccribed below r a hypofreticd sit as a two-sEp prccess, with fre compleed spreadsheetfollm,itrg. tep l; 0 athsr Belevutt Stts A srorsmmt Il ats wift any remediatioa design, fte first step is to gafrer the relcrant siE assesment data. For urple, consider tbe followirg sire: Y t Litholqgical data: Groundwaer is locaed 10 feetbelow tbe groirnd surface (bgs) and exends b a depth of 4(l feet bgs at which point a clay aquitard is encounEred. Aquifer sediments consist primaily of silty sands. Contaminant concentrations: PCE concentration ranges from 0. I @ 5 m;grt-. Daryhter products of the biological degradation of PCE are identified at the following cmcentrations: TCE at0.5 mgtl- and cis-I,2-DCE at 0.5 mgzl. Extent of impacted groudrvaer: . The areal extent of the conaminant plume is estimaed o be 50 feet wide by 100 feet long. . Most grormdwater monioring wells comain scre€[ inervals tbat extend to a depth of 20 feet bgs. Vertical profiling of tbe contamimnB is accornrplished by (1) insalling several groundwater wells with screened imervals locaed from 25 to 30 feet bgs and (2) by collecting groundwaEr samples rsing directpush equipmenr This result in tk cmclusion &t fte cofitaminenB are limied b the Wp€r 15 feet of the aquifer. Aquifer redox conditions: ORP = 100 mV, DO = 2 ^gL, nitraE = | mgtl-, dissolved iron = t0 mgtL, slfce = 50 mgtl- Additional aquifer paameters: The follcmiag parrmeErs were collected through soil and groundwatr investigatims or estimaEd or cdculaed using indutry standad procedures: fraction of uganic carbon (0.005), porosrty (0.3), hydraulic gradient (0.005 ftzfQ, hydraulic conductivity (10 ft/day u 3.5x10-3 cm./sec), groundwd€r velocity (60 ftlr). tep 2:Sveluate $lte Ilata atrd Spedfy E BC Ertd Il eCgn ard G ost he next sep is o deermine the scope of the remediatim. Afur evaluating healfr risks and oundwaEr quality thresholds, the desigrer sp*ifies a cleanup goal and the extem of the onrrminant plume requiring remediatim. Fc this example, assurrE ftattbe following decisions are conerniry the remediation design: Areal md vertical exEnt of aquifer requiring remedidion 50 fea x 100 feet x 15 feet Conservative estimae of cmtaminant cmceffiatios to be biuemdiaed: 5 myL PCE, 0.5 mgzl TCE, md 0.5 mgzl cis-I,2-DCE pres€nce of daugher prodrrs from the reductive dechlcination of PCE indicaEs that the iodegradation of PCE is ocorring to a limiEd ext€nt Geochcmical parameers (ORP, DO, ee.) dicate fratthe aquifer redox cmditions are not yet in the o6imrm range for th redrctive hlorination of chlorinaEd hy&ocarbons. As a resulg the remediatim designer decides that HRC m be used b drive the aqpifer more anaerobic and aceleraE tb redrrctive dechloination of PCE d its daugher products. I t he quantity of IIRC needed to firel the reductive dchlorination process is estimated wing the siE .rrFro.r.t.ryioaf Ia}rr .r*r,L,a.'rorl.tt ,far.i.=tr crtiJali.rc. TLa IJIDn a-iA iacirrr i.. .'it+rol if|a,l trt, rrr.i*t.= I I I I t I I I I I I I I I I t I t I r Irts qu4[u]y or rr (r- Itccucu u, r r.Et ute reuucuvc uec[rufrEtuu[ Proues$ r,s tsurllalcu utlllt ut€ $rll sessment daa and general design guiddines. The HRC grid design prccess is simptified by usitrg HRC Grid Design worksheet md consists of specifying lte following design variables: Site inforrratim: Plurre dircnsions, aquifer tansport paam€ters, ad cofaminant and CEA conccffiations are entered inb the wrksheet Demand factos: A microbial &mand fror of 3x is used, aod an additional demand factor of 3x is cbosen sine tte edire soure df thg g6ilt minantplume is targeed for remediation with one applic*ion of HRC. HRC delivery goid spring: A delivery poim spaciry of 10 feet on cenEr is sdected o provide a reasonable distribution of HRC iro &e conaminatr plum. This resule in an HRC grid of 10 rows of,S poim per row, for a tdal of 50 delivery poins. HRC injection amounf : The cotamimnt and competing eleqtron accpbr concentations, adsorberl phase concentratioro, md demad facbrs arc used b.estimde fre required arnouft of hy&ogen end orresponding HRC reqpired for the rcdrctive dechlcination reactions. For a 10 feet-m-center spacing (and 50 toal injection poins a determineil above), a vertical HRC applicCtion rde d 6.8 lbsft is calculaEd by fre softrrare. Therefore, a total of 5, 107 pounds of HRC ae required (50 poins wifr 15 feet of injection per point at 6.8 ponds of HRC per vertical foot). Coet estimae: The HRC maedal c6t is $6/b for a btal of approximatly $30,640. CosB fa shrpping md applicable taxes yary from site b sie and should be requesEd from Regenesis' sales or techdcal suppofi saff if a detailed ost estimaE is needed. HRC installaion ccts cm be ctimaEd rsing a daily rate for the injection subcomracbr ad an estimaE of the production raE for the sit. For ttis exmple, it is assumd tbat two injection point can be ompleed per hour md that a Geopr&e rig coss $2,000 per day and is mbilizdfor $1,000. The insallatim cost for 50 iqiectim pohiB to a dep6 of 25 feet is ften $9,000, resulting in a oal installation and HRC maerid cct of approximately $,10,700. o summarize, the following issrrcs should be onsidered during fte HRC grid design and cost stimatim procss: Injection point spacing typicdly ranges from 5 to 15 feet-on-ceffer, md its specificdion depends on groundwa&r velocity, sediment permeability, required HRC i4iection amoun6, md HRC grid size. The HRC injection rae for each poitr typically rrnge:r frorr 4 b l0 lb/ft, and is specification depends @ the aonaminant oncentations, coryeting electron accepbr concentratims, competing microbial demand, and soil type. It should be noed frat using fewer poiffs and higher 66ss might not provide suffrcient di*ribution of HRC and lactic acid frroughort tte coffarrinen plurre. For larger plums nd/ot large ranges of contaminant onentrations, tte HRC dose raE should be adjused as appropriae (i.e., tb plume can be divided itro high-, mdirmr-, and low- sonf,amin6f concentration areas, each with a specific HRC dose rae). Th nced for reapplication of HRC will depend on achbvable biodqradation raEs, remedial goals for lte site, prcximity of downgradient receptas, ad otter eeinical/regulaory issues. Some sies will require only one application d HRC, while otters may require multiple reapplications; however, &e reapplications qrpically will be done at lower HRC dses and in a smaller grid area. III o$ l 1( ) @N ( r , co c i $ NN (9 F (o (s ( U E' it r E' \\ \ yy u hl a - r. D $e e l- -r \ bE E t-.= o v6 t .E b- . # o- 7 (, Es / A = = El l -; - t -- f - + . E E. : : ! d 00 8 s eo o o o f , 5, . = E E E Y ee = = = t r 66 6 E 6 8 ozIFJ3(JJ(, IU=3JoJJIILToE o-Itr i-lr FoqF otooC; olr ) (r )ci cot-ci IU rOt\o) Fooc; -ooc; oo(r )c; FE)qo Foo) (E (L 1i l 1 H? E t- \ \bE E li l t I x IE CL I o( U f it r t, \\ r \ -- u l} - l+ - *- (, .I Lyo= oeE' . E iD E A =' = f i ' g eE o s gE EE E, t r - t E A s= g= EE E: E IE e E f l H E E F F fi E E f i E f i g E f i E lx o If r o. It ozo tt EH g ;$ s Eo l o= -.l - Fttc r ' ci @F(oci r( ) t\CDc; rfFc, CD IC ' (f ,ct -CD@c; AolOot \/\FC\ l o oA R EE q ze P olOF ooFF orO(\ l ot oorO(r , oo(Y ) (o oo1\$l -(o=- cn 3 -3 9 oqot (o r( ) r. i (r ) Fc. i ocq F ooc. i o(oc; I J: i33 oui (? |( , olt - ociN oC,oF qst I Br -JOE a) L L\ Loo : o\ / (aslqF r( l@aF (oFC\ l F $t@(\ { rO lO(\ l - FFCDc; J-t ot (c , o' l F Eo =K , E9 tfo?*F o) F f\N Fo) lO oo(\ t F(Y ) (v ) oo(0$l oNoG) Ao =t r .E E' I v (o@lc ) (o- CDGl FCY ) F tCDct CD $CDs tt (DdCD ol( ) cr i (o u)odN +, tr6trE(!+,Eo(, UJo(L lUoF tr looI-F TUId, a- o 1l lI,hcE o oco-c+JUJ IIIIT Foc, ) (E (L lE 5 IE Eg l3 E ls E €6U t lI E IE E Et r TE EE I=DE = l, E TE slu lE EE l= o. - tg E r= E Tf i oa.EoI !,olt E LJeg ?r o -r l_g t Y lL J .. g E +Eoo x. c r iE -( E (s = .c l 5 +Eoo x- o E- o 6x -! Y g€+Eoo x. c t E. e EplL .g E €E (D o x -c t E( u E'Elt - !l rF r Js 6 Ei r oI tl EE- o #E rt aHT ux bo#ot-o-o-oooo€E'oxiI E'6-LL tr t .- g -6 8 ot r t 5E H 66 E oo o -a - I CL CL EL EE E 66 ( U oo o .E E. \ EE : ft s ^ at J A b v( l , = ED C X PE 6 =F i { ?i u 8 g8 P oo Y ,t - b LJ C" = e .o e tF ( D bt '- F f t := ? .t - 8E : *- ^ a -o b. ; < ED E X .- L , o$ oPE i i 6u 8 *f r E -t - E LJ tr D = o ot . .E o EE el J trE iE : ba t E9 : Ed x = f- f i 6s E 59 ot o r+EE Eo Y I ta I Ea 3 =( D r - 8E o EE E a Lo' r 6E =o , i E- € ( . J o oA b EE F : O cL . . - A tL E r e rr OE , !' :. B: c. i =6 A c EB E + EE E E (5El-o€o=rt sorL - =oEE o' 6 ,A a- \J tt - Fd6o -o f r ooo6 b f (E= lr - oc ) {. o h E? 5 o q( o = Y CL O eb 8 3E b .! r . O C tlg 3E d. E 8 Ef r E fi r - - '- - : = - F E8 * r , -E = F i p T HF A ; E 8 b- a H 3> e I H J. B I- oo E; E gE _gt-o j 6=rt sor - JOFceg \- , ? FE6o -g E o( u OE , oo36#6o o .f -€t -o. 9 ?€ .= ( E EC bL. ?(t , E 6g ECe8EE .a E s68E 9E :$ E '- E o 8s E I- E CD -b . -b' ; E 5E E * FE F F T AE E l- (E () - O xuJF\ co 9 t- I- oo a= .- \, o6 iuooFE c" It s . - - ok o fJ .n ,{ _ _ X -c . E YO O LL .xE , cr = FB Jtr D ,t FVEE s- 9 EH +, FEE ooEE o! , +, I- o. - EB = 5s E Eo€oE. (DE' 6. 9 -c t ? ei DEg E5 E= fa - F s. E Ei 6 EF 6E Eo€o=RL.=co.= r* -oo+r , (u .9E'c o.c rOEb. g EE o' a EU f; E6e €. E ah !, * q5 g fi EE -' o . 9 h o o Ii $ H E E E Ee i E f; € s E f r gg i g E oE' .= oo o( E 3c l . b8 -oc D Et r $0 d -E -CE E 3t s b ge E 3E E !E E o _( , troLotroE\. !,ot--{ao= o(ost@=a o rl -8rhEoo EO I- =EH cD at EE o@(\ lo3a E.oIL g8 * t€ x - ?r J- gb € -. 48E = 8E E Ico 1' ru 9 EE g_ E 9E @$F@+tE' .o e 6E eG?-t- *oa (J I - tC , xo VC , o :l t fi EEE 6EE( ) ef bo)@o)-, 8HE ES Oa r a V gqo o Ef r ya =B+ 5s ,S o_ -g r - I 5s fE r!o-ar!tr .9E$e o5Eg - - .U F oo Co-of-(EC) .gE(t roLoA ,\ to X =( J tr c .9c$e o5 oo =o . .U t r - oo Eoo,xo (D€oL=z, N+oII .-co: ry Iooo.a - a (r rl -Ea oc(u?--oo E oo E. CE6 6E=E .=cov xa-LaJo- -oU' oU) L-o+,o3 L-o .J (r= L(D .J 6B L-o#ots L-o€o3 t-o f o3 f-oe-o= (oo)o) FlEoEE=ct ) tr==o-l$ lf i a ol-ooEoR=oocot-or-oE, oooEE xi ! !- L. lL o LT I o6EJ glL "' E'plJ . E'ETL EEa-lt E' tr lt ba E" e 8E (u t s gsEs x@Ei I aora , (t r f-o-c r (t r (Do(E -c l IE'o2! LL 5i E .B E t HE g o I Eo E IE - > -s o o E ot i O o = RE E d6 = Or u t r E; g EE E o= 6 o€ EE .C L 4Eb S E, gH - o tu s. l 3 rF - ( l ) ( E fi . = . E E gE g P o( E x = () } E. E o-.c I (Uo=o. CL€oz o e€ EE .C L Jt- LEO lo co cr t ( E d6 oo L -c gE. ; E -# eo( E = o3 6 .sf-go= t} .ob Jt r a- E( U e REE8 q) ( E EE , Oo o.=t-g(E - =qEUrt ' =oEC o' 6 o= -66ooqor E () E , oo36t,(Uo -oE'o bE 69E€ ra --=ae; c cD E . o EO E s gE =c c t : tJ o o 9E E !- - r iF. = - o oooooL.o.o-c reo(U ( D o=E9EB .9 + .^ -L !i o . bE rI ,troEo.o-ooE'o3 +.coEo.ooot,oB Eo f oEl-o-co? - be 6q J? IEEaE 69 ?: != O tL f / , . 5 () - oEs HE € e EE 8 3 l- - . - b =, () u, -c E E EE € E -e E gE P g EE € E JE ( a ( u o(, troLobotr\t,os€o= (Do@lr )N yoot- a-E' ?-f'= E (D ( l , .C I E oEEP E' E _ Y ooEE €oot- r-!,-c{- '= E (D o -c l = ob L- Fi o- E !, 8ooEE Eot-E'orc ) r- i L- gr CD t r Ae A. =TE 'I J E L c6 ,A.: i ? o -. 4 - a iE ( ) x b- - aa ' f b .L o, . = E 6- Eo E -: - a -EH E o(ooCD=ct ) l!oe(!tr o t-f o, . \ =( L qE , HO ev .9 8 EEE* o6 . -ICL 0, t-fy(E l-oo.EoF +. '=-t=E'Eoo oE' l--9 .Co oE(UEo5 E€ES x-L+,o= to+,o3 LoaJo3 Lo€(r= Lo ri a (E= t-o+,(s= aoaY(t r= II!IIItTlE o TI E l$IIIItTIt t I I I I I I I I Bulk Density & Porosity I I I I I I I I I t Aqulfer tatrb( Dry Butk Density Tohl Porosity Effective Porcsity llyd. Conducilvity(gm/cm3) (dimless) (dimless) (filderyl CIay 1.00 - 2.40 0.34 - 0.60 0.01 - 0.2 1t' - 1oo Peat 0.3 - 0.5 Glacial Sediments 1 .15 - 2j0 -0.05 - 0.2 10t - 1o' Sandy Clay -0.03 - 0.2 - sirt t -0.34 - 0.61 0.01 - 0.3 0.001 - 10 Loess 0.75 - 1.60 -0.15 - 0.35 0.001 - 10 Fine Sand 1.37 - 1.81 0.26 - 0.53 . 0.1 - 0.3 5 Medium Sand 1.37 - 1.81 -0.15 - 0.3 50 Coarse Sand 1.37 - 1.81 0.31 - 0.46 0.2 - 0.35 100 Gnavely Sand 1.37 - 1.81 0.2 - 0.35 250 Fine Gnavel 1.36 - 2.19 4.25 - 0.38 0.2 - 0.35 500 Medium Gravel 1.36 - 2.19 0.15 - 0.25 5,000 Coarse Gravel 1.36 - 2.19 0.24 - 0.36 0.1 - 0.25 10,000 Sandstone 1.60 - 2.68 0.05 - 0,30 0.1 - 0.4 Siltstone -0.21- 0.41 0.01 - 0.35 Shale 1.il -3.17 0.0 - 0,10 Limestone 1.74 - 2.79 0.0 - 50 0.01 - 0.24 Gnanite 2.24-2.# Basatt 2.OO - 2.70 0.03 - 0.35 Volcanic Tuff 0.02 - 0.35 Page 1 I T I T t I I I T I T I I I I I I T I a From Knox et al, 1993 b From Jeng et al, 1992; Temperature = 20"C c From Houard, 1990; Temperature = 25oC d From Horard, 1989; Temperature = 25"C e From Horard, 1989; Temperature = 20"C f ATSDR, 1990; Temperature = 20"C g From Houard, 19901 Temperature = 20"C Koc Values Gompound Solubility (mgrL)Koc (UKg) Tetrdrloroethene 150', 1503"263', 35f ,2H23gt Trichloroethene '1 100''t 10f,137-,97-150t l,l0ichloroethene 225A', 25000 e[.6t, 90.2b, 150tI cls -1,2-Dichloroethene 35(p"90.2D, 4gc tmns -1,2-Di ch I oroethene 63od''5g.9", 90./, 36" Mnyl Chloride 110f, 26730 2.45t, O.+56d 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane 1495c 1 93" 1,1,z-Trichloroethane't 4/i2a"7A" 1 ,1-Dichloroethane 5060d 40' 1 ,z-Dachloroethane 9520"33 to 152" Chloroeffiane 5710"33 to 1#1" Hexachlorobenzene 0.006t 1,z-Achloroberzene 1 56t 272to 1466c 1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene 111s 293 to 31 ,600s 1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene 74to 8t'273 to 1833o Chlorobenzene 4720,83 to 3890 Carbon Tetrachloride g05s 1 10s Chloroform 7950"< 34" llethtlerie Chloride-13000"4g' Page 1