DSHW-1994-006017

I
RCRA FACILITY INVESTIGATION REPORT
FOR THE
CHEVRON SALT LAKE REFINERY
CHEVRON U.S.A . PRODUCTS COMPANY
Salt Lake Refinery
Salt Lake City, Utah
Prepared by
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Midvale, Utah
December 1994
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .•...................................... xv
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................ 1-1
1 . 1 Regulatory History and Consent Order 91010011 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1
1.2 Summary of Investigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-3
1 .3 RCRA Closure Units . . . . . . . • • . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-6
1 .4 Solid Waste Management Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-6
1. 5 Report Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-8
2.0 CURRENT CONDITIONS AND PHYSICAL SETTING .................... 2-1
2. 1 Facility Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1
2 .1. 1 Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • 2-1
2.1.2 Operations History ................................. 2-1
2.2 Physiography .......................................... 2-1
2.3 Regional and Local Geology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . 2-2
2.3. 1 Regional Geology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-2
2.3.2 Local Geology and Stratigraphy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 -3
2.4 Hydrology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-4
2.4.1 Surface Water . • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-4
2.4. 1 .1
2.4.1 .2
2.4.1.3
2.4.1.4
2.4.1.5
Jordan River . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-4
Great Salt Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . 2-5
Oil Drain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-5
Bonneville Canal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 -7
Becks Hot Spring . . . . . . . . • . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . 2 -8
2 .4.2 Groundwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . 2-8
2.5 Current and Projected Land Use and Impacts on Water Resources .... 2-10
2.5.1 Current Land Use ................................. 2-10
Fin•I Doe. 19, 1994 ii EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT.)
Chapter .Efilm
2.5.2 Impacts Due to Future Changes in Land Use .............. 2-1 O
2.5 .3 Summary of Potential Impacts ........................ 2-11
3.0 BACKGROUND SOILS INVESTIGATION ............................ 3-1
3.1 Introduction ........................................... 3-1
3 .2 Sample Collection ...................................... 3-1
3.3 Analytical Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 -2
4.0 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES ................................... 4-1
4.1 Data Quality Objectives .................................. 4-1
4 .2 Data Management ...................................... 4-1
4.3 Data Validation ........................................ 4-3
4.3. 1 Historical Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-3
4.3.2 RFI Data ........................................ 4-4
4.3.3 Laboratory Quality Assurance ......................... 4-5
4 .3.4 Field Quality Assurance ............................. 4-7
4.4 Rationale and Methodology for Risk-Based Screening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 -9
5 .0 RFI INVESTIGATION RESULTS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .. 5 -1
5 . 1 Landfill Area .......................................... 5-1
5.1.1 SWMU Description ................................. 5 -1
5.1.2 Investigation and Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-2
5.1.3 Results of Risk Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-9
5 .1.4 Recommendations and Proposed Action ................. 5-10
5.2 Oily Dump ........................................... 5-11
5. 2.1 SWMU Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-11
5.2.2 Investigation and Results ........................... 5-11
5.2.3 Results of Risk Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-15
5.2.4 Recommendations and Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-15
5 .3 Alky Channel .....................................•... 5 -16
5.3.1 SWMU Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-16
Final Dec. 19 , 1994 iii EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Chapter
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT.)
Page
5 .3 .2 Investigation and Results ........................... 5-17
5 .3.3 Results of Risk Screen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-20
5.3.4 Recommendations and Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-20
5.4 Spent Caustic Evaporation Site ............................ 5-21
5.4.1 SWMU Description ................................ 5-21
5.4.2 Investigation and Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-22
5.4.3 Recommendations and Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-22
5.5 Alky Site ............................................ 5-22
5.5.1 SWMU Description .....................•.......... 5-22
5.5 .2 Investigation and Results ........................... 5-23
5.5.3 Results of Risk Screen ............................. 5 -27
5.5.4 Recommendations and Proposed Action ...•............. 5-27
5. 6 Northeast Landfill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-28
5 .6.1 SWMU Descripti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-28
5 .6.2 Investigation and Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-28
5 .6.3 Recommendations and Proposed Action ................. 5 -29
5 . 7 Leaded Tank Sludge Disposal Sites ......................... 5-29
5.7.1 SWMU Description ................................ 5-29
5. 7 .2 Recommendations and Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5··30
5 . 8 Conveyance Ditches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-30
5.8.1 SWMU Description ..............................•. 5-30
5.8.2 Recommendations and Proposed Action ................. 5-30
5 .9 Standing Water Site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-31
5.9.1 SWMU Description ........................•....... 5 -31
5.9.2 Recommendations and Proposed Action ................. 5-31
5. 10 Wastewater Treatment System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-32
5.10. 1 SWMU Description 5-32
Final D ec. 19, 1994 iv EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Chapter
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT.)
Page
5.10.2 Investigation and Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-33
5.10.3 Results of Risk Screen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-39
5. 10.4 Recommendations and Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-40
5 .11 HF Acid Neutralization Tanks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-41
5. 11. 1 SWMU Description . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-41
5 . 11.2 Investigation and Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-42
5.11.3 Recommendations and Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-44
5.12 Spent Caustic Tanks ................................... 5-44
5.12. 1 SWMU Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-44
5 .12.2 Recommendations and Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-45
5.13 lime Settling Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-45
5.13.1 SWMU Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5--45
5.13.2 Investigation and Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-46
5 .13.3 Recommendations and Proposed Action ................ 5-46
5.14 Coke Fines Dewatering lmpoundment and Waste Pile .......••.... 5-47
5 .14.1 SWMU Description .........................•..... 5-47
5.14.2 Verification of Past Closure Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-48
5 .15 Hazardous Waste Interim Storage Pad . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-48
5. 1 5.1 SWMU Description • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-48
5 . 15.2 Recommendations and Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-49
5. 1 6 Shale Oil Semi-Works Storm Water Retention Pond . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-49
5 .16.1 SWMU Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-49
5.16.2 Recommendations and Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-50
5. 17 Shale Oil Semi -Works Spent Shale Pile . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . 5-50
Final Doc. 19, 1994
5.17 .1 SWMU Description • . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-50
5.17 .2 Groundwater Quality Data Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-51
V EarthFax Engineering, Inc,
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT.)
Chapter Page
5. 18 No. 2 Outfall Channel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-51
5.18 .1 SWMU Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-51
5.18.2 Investigation and Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-52
5.18.3 Results of Risk Screen ............................ 5-54
5.18.4 Recommendations and Proposed Action ................ 5-54
5 .19 Experimental Farm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-55
5.19.1 SWMU Description ............................... 5-55
5.19.2 Investigation and Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-55
5. 19.3 Results of Risk Screen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-57
5.19.4 Recommendations and Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 -57
5.20 Bonneville Canal . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-57
5 .20 .1 SWMU Description ............................... 5-57
5.20.2 Investigation and Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-58
5 .20 .3 Results of Risk Screen . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-62
5.20.4 Description of Interim Corrective Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 -62
5.20.5 Recommendations and Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-62
5.21 Baffle Board Pond Conveyance Ditch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-63
5.21 . 1 SWMU Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-63
5.21.2 Investigation and Results ........................... 5 -63
5.21.3 Results of Risk Screen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-65
5.21 .4 Recommendations and Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-66
5.22 Abandoned Lime Settling Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-66
5.22.1 SWMU Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-66
5.22.2 Investigation and Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-66
5.22.3 Results of Risk Screen . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-68
5 .22.4 Recommendations and Proposed Action ................ 5 -69
5.23 Lime Settling Basin Dewatering lmpoundment .................. 5-69
Final Dec. 19, 1994
5 .23.1 SWMU Description ...........................•... 5 -69
5.23.2 Investigation and Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-69
vi EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT.)
Chapter Page
5 .24 Fire Training Area Surface lmpoundment ...................... 5-70
5.24.1 SWMU Description •.............................• 5-70
5 .24.2 Investigation and Results ........................... 5-71
5.24.3 Results of Risk Screen ............................ 5-72
5.24.4 Recommendations and Proposed Action ................ 5-73
5.25 Railcar Loading Area .................................... 5-73
5 .25 .1 SWMU Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-73
5.25.2 Results of Design Adequacy Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-75
5.26 Bio-Disc Sump ........................................ 5-75
5.26.1 SWMU Description .............................•. 5-75
5.26.2 Investigation and Results ........................... 5-75
5.26.3 Results of Risk Screen ............................ 5-77
5.26.4 Description of Interim Corrective Measures .............. 5-78
5.26.5 Recommendations and Proposed Action ................ 5-79
5.27 North Tank Farm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . 5-79
5 .27.1 SWMU Description ......•........................ 5 .. 79
5.27.2 Investigation and Results ........................... 5-80
5.27 .3 Results of Risk Screen .•...............•.......... 5 -80
5 .27 .4 Description of Interim Corrective Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-81
5 .27. 5 Recommendations and Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-81
5.28 Miscellaneous Investigations . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . 5-82
6.0 REFINERY WIDE HYDROGEOLOGIC INVESTIGATION ......•........... 6-1
6. 1 Overview of Regional Groundwater Hydrologic Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-1
6.2 North Tank Farm Groundwater Plume ......•......•........... 6-1
6 .3 West Field Plume . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-3
6.3. 1 Plume Delineation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . 6-3
6 .3 .2 Monitor Wells . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-5
6.3.3 Planned Corrective Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-6
Final Doc, 19, 1994 vii EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Chapter
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT.)
7.0 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL CORRECTIVE MEASURES 7-1
7.1 Solid Waste Management Units ............................. 7-1
7. 1 . 1 Structure of Proposed Corrective Action Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-1
7 .2 Groundwater as a Separate SWMU . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-2
8.0 REFERENCES ................•.............................. 8-1
Final Dec. 19, 1994 viii EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Table
ES-1
ES-2
1.4-1
4.4-1
4.4-2
5. 1-1
5.1-2
5.2-1
5.2-2
5 .3-1
5.3-2
5.5-1
5 .5 -2
5. 10-1
5 .10-2
5.11 -1
5. 11-2
5 . 18-1
5.18-2
final Dec. 1 9, 1994
LIST OF TABLES
Result Summary of RCRA Facility Investigation
Projected Corrective Measures Compliance Schedule
Solid Waste Management Use Summary
EPA Regions Ill Risk-Based Concentrations for Chevron Consent Order
Parameters
Background Soil Analytical Results for Metals
Detected Indicator Parameters for the Landfill Area
Detected Composite Parameters for the Landfill Area
Detected Indicator Parameters for the Oily Dump
Detected Composite Parameters for the Oily Dump
Detected Indicator Parameters for the Alky Channel
Detected Composite Parameters for the Afky Channel
Detected Indicator Parameters for the Alky Site
Detected Composite Parameters for the Alky Site
Detected Indicator Parameters for the Wastewater Treatment System
Detected Composite Parameters for the Wastewater Treatment System
Detected Indicator Parameters for the HF Neutralization Tanks
Detected Composite Parameters for the HF Neutralization Tanks
Detected Indicator Parameters for the No. 2 Outfall Channel
Detected Indicator Parameters for the No . 2 Outfall Channel
ix EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Table
5 .19-1
5 .19-2
5 .20-1
5 .20-2
5 .21-1
5.21-2
5.22-2
5.22-2
5.24-1
5.24-2
5.26-1
5 .26-2
5.27-1
5 .27-2
Finol De c . 19, 1994
LIST OF TABLES (CONT.)
Detected Indicator Sample for the Experimental Farm
Detected Composite Parameters for the Experimental Farm
Detected Indicator Parameters for the Bonneville Canal
Detected Composite Parameters for the Bonneville Canal
Detected Indicator Parameters for t he Baffle Board Pond Conveyance Ditch
Detected Indicator Parameters for the Baffle Boar d Pond Conveyance Ditch
Detected Indi cator Parameters for the Abandoned Limes Settling Basin
Detected Composite Parameters for the Abandoned Lime Settli ng basi n
Detected Indicator Parameters for the Fire Training Area
Detected Composite Parameters for the Fire Training Area
Detected Indicator Parameters for the Bio-Disc Sump
Detected Composit e Parameters for the Bi o-Disc Sump
Detected Indicator Parameters for the North Tank Farm
Detec ted Composite Parameters for the North Tank Farm
X EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Figure
1.4-1
2 .1-1
2 .1-2
2 .3-1
2.4-1
3 .1-1
5.1-1
5.1-2
5 .1-3
5.2-1
5.2-2
5.3-1
5.3-2
5.5-1
5 .5-2
5 .5-3
5.10-1
5.18-1
5. 19-1
Final Dec. 1 9 , 1994
LIST OF FIGURES
(Note : All figures in numerical order following text}
Solid Waste Management Units
Vicinity Map
Salt Lake Refinery Facility Map
Geologic Map
Surface Water Features
Background Soil Sample Locations
Sample Locations for the Landfill
Oily Dump and Landfill Cross Section A-A'
Oily Dump and Landfill Cross Section 8 -8'
Sample Locations for the Oily Dump
Oily Dump and Landfill Cross Section C-C' and Composite Sample Locations
Sample Locations for the Alky Channel
Alky Channel Cross S ection and Composite Sample Locations
Sample Locations for the Alky Site
Alky Site Cross Section A-A' and Composite Sample Locations
Alky Site Cross Section 8-8' and Composite Sample Locations
Sample Locations for the Wastewater Treatment System
Sample Locations for the No. 2 Outfall System
Sample Locations for the Experimental Farm
xi EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facili ty Investigation Report
December 1994
Figure
5 .20-1
5.21-1
5 .22-1
5.22-2
5 .24-1
5 .26-1
6.3-1
6.3-2
6.3-3
6.3-4
6.3-5
7 .1-1
Anal 0cc. 1 9, 1 9 9 4
LIST OF FIGURES (CONT.}
Sample Locations for the Bonneville Canal
Sample Locations for the Baffle Board Pond Conveyance Ditch
Sample Locations for the Abandoned Lime Settling Basin
Abandoned Lime Settling Basin Cross Section A-A' and Composite Sample
Locations
Sample Locations for the Fire Training Area
Sample Locations for the Bio-Disc Sump
Location of Groundwater Monitor Points
West Fi eld Groundwater Plume -Spring 1994 Benzene Concentrati ons
West Field Groundwater Plume -Fall 1994 Benzene Concentrations
West Field Groundwater Plume -Spring 1994 Toluene Concentrations
West Field Groundwater Plume -Fall 1994 Toluene Concentrations
Decision Chart for Determining Proposed Action on Solid Waste Management
Units
x i i EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX 8
APPENDIX C
APPENDIX D
APPENDIX E
APPENDIX F
APPENDIX G
APPENDIX H
APPENDIX I
APPENDIX J
APPENDIX K
APPENDIX L
APPENDIX M
Final Dec. 19, 1994
LIST OF APPENDICES
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Solids Data Collection Quality Assurance Plan for the
Salt Lake Refinery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volume II
Water Data Collection Quality Assurance Plan for the
Salt Lake Refinery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volume II
Approved Interim Corrective Measures Construction Plans
and As-Constructed Drawings ..................... Volume 11
Hydrofluoric Acid Mitigation Project Sump (Bio-Disc Sump)
North Tank Farm and Bonneville Canal Remediation
Background Soils Investigation Analytical Results ....... Volume II
Field Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volume Ill
RFI Analytical Laboratory Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volume IV
Tabulated Analytical Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volume VI
Data Validation Results .................. , ...... Volume VII
Miscellaneous UDSHW and EPA Correspondence
and Information Referenced in Text ................ Volume VII
Oily Dump Waste Management Study Area Risk-Based
Assessment ................................ Volume VII
SWMU Characterization Work Plans Approved by
UDSHW ................................... Volume VII
Oily Dump
Bonneville Canal
Wastewater Treatment System
Drainage Plans for the Northeast Landfill and Standing
Water Site .................................. Volume VII
North Tank Farm Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volume VIII
xiii EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
APPENDIX N
APPENDIX 0
APPENDIX P
Fi n al Dec. 1 9 , 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Miscellaneous Field Investigations and Reports . . . . . . . Volume VIII
Groundwater Characterization Report for the Chevron
U.S .A. Salt Lake Refinery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volume VIII
Steady State Groundwater Flow Model for the Chevron
U .S.A. Salt Lake Refinery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Volume VIII
xiv EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents the results of a RCRA Facility Investigation ("RFI") which was
conducted at the Chevron U .S.A. Products Company Salt Lake Refinery ("Chevron"). The RFI
was performed pursuant to Corrective Action Order 91010011 (the "Order") which was
entered into by Chevron and the State of Utah in 1991. Chevron submitted their RFI Work
Plan ("Work Plan") to the Utah Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste ("UDSHW") in October
1991 and received approval to conduct the RFI in accordance with that Work Plan in February
1993. The RFl was conducted to systematically evaluate the physical and chemical
characteristics of 28 Solid Waste Management Units ("SWMUs") at Chevron. On the basis
of SWMU characteri zation, recommendations for future actions are made (Table ES-1 ). With
the exception of the North Tank Farm, Bio-Disc Sump, Oily Dump and Bonneville Canal , which
were characterized under a separate authorizati on and pri or to approval of the Work Plan , all
units discussed i n the Work Plan were characterized between February 1993 and August
1994.
The RFI is considered to be the first part of the RCRA Corrective Action Plan process .
Under this process , SWMUs which require further action, as detailed in the RFI report, will be
addressed in a Corrective Measures Study ("CMS"). Those SWMUs requiring corrective action
will be further addressed through Corrective Measures Implementation ("CMI") to fulfill the
Corrective Action Plan .
To aid waste generators with decisions regarding corrective measures, UDSHW
established Rule 315.101 entitl ed "Cleanup Action and Risk-Based Closure Standards" in April
1994. This rule allows facilities to establish corrective measures on risk-based criteria. It is
Chevron's intent to pursue corrective measures or no further action , if appropriate, in
Fine/ D oc. 1 9, 1994 xv EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
accordance with risk-based alternatives which will be developed during the CMS for many of
the SWMUs.
Twenty-eight SWMUs were evaluated during this RFI. Groundwater has been proposed
as a separate SWMU, which proposal is currently under review by the UDSHW. The
accompanying text, figures, tables and appendices present in detail the methods and results
of the field investigations and data validation. A discussion of risk screening efforts and
proposed action alternatives for each unit is also provided . The actions which have been
proposed in this report are summarized in Table ES-1 which is attached to this Executive
Summary. Table ES-2 presents the projected compliance schedule for each SWMU. Two
schedules are presented on this table, the first schedule addresses each unit separately where
the second one presents a combined waste landfill alternative which, if approved, would
combine non-hazardous solid waste from several units as detailed on the table.
Many SWMUs were found to pose no risk to health or the environment and are,
therefore, subject to a petition for no further action. However, evaluation of the long term,
cumulative effects of leachate from some SWMUs on the groundwater is considered essential
to responsible remediation. As a separate SWMU, groundwater can be most effectively
treated if the contributing sources of groundwater contamination are removed . Therefore,
recommendations for some units include development of a CMS and CMI to remediate the
solid waste at the surface solely to reduce the threat it may pose to the groundwater. Solid
Waste Management Units for which a CMS and CMI are recommended are:
o Landfill Area,
o Oi ly Dump,
o Alky Channel ,
o Alky Site,
o Wastewater Treatment System ,
o No. 2 Outfall Channel ,
Final Dec. 19, 1994 xvi EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
o Baffle Board Pond conveyance Ditch,
o Abandoned Lime Settling Basin,
o Fire Training Area.
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Under approval from the UDSHW, and in compliance with Rule 315.101, Chevron
conducted a risk assessment of the Landfill Area and Oily Dump SWMUs. This risk
assessment determined that risks at both units are below the standards for the Industrial
Scenario specified in Rule 315.101. Consequently, neither unit requires remedial activity for
the solid wastes. However, there is potential for leachate from the hydrocarbon materials
identified at the Oily Dump to impact groundwater. Under the policy of non-degradation in
Utah Rule 315.101, remedial action will be required to protect groundwater affected by the
Oily Dump. Only the Oily Dump requires remediation of hydrocarbons to protect groundwater.
The Landfill SWMU will be petitioned for no further action based on the criteria in Rule
31 5.101 . Development of a CMS for the Oily Dump is currently underway in accordance with
the recommendations of the Risk Assessment.
Through the course of completing this RFI, a groundwater plume containing elevated
concentrations of benzene and toluene was identified in the area north of the Bonneville Canal
and west of the Oil Drain referred to herein as the west field. The source of this plume
appears to be the Oily Dump area. Intrinsic bioremediation, wherein the naturally occurring
degradation of hydrocarbons is enhanced by the application of biological technologies, was
proposed as an Interim Corrective Measure (August 1994) for this plume. Data generated
from the investigative efforts in the west field will be evaluated and recommendations will be
made regarding the applicability of intrinsic bioremediation. If successful, this method may
be proposed as final corrective measures on a larger scale for facility wide groundwater
remediation.
Chevron commits to, and intends to pursue, the recommendations stated in this report.
Estimated schedules and the proposed order of compliance are detailed in the document and
Fine! Dec. 19, 1 994 xvii EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
summarized on Table ES-2. The schedules are subject to variation depending on facility
operating schedules, regulatory review schedules and their effect on the Corrective Action
Time Line.
Final Dec. 1 e. 1994 xviii EarthFax Engineering~ Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
TABLE ES-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
CHEVRON U .S.A. Salt Lake Refinery
1991 Consent Order Solid Waste Management Units & Groundwater
Summary of RCRA Facility Investigation
Solid Waste Unit Recommended Action Status of Corrective Action
Landfill Area Solids pose no risk, Risk-Based Assessment
remediate to protect Complete (Appendix J),
groundwater RFI Complete.
Oily Dump Solids pose no risk, Risk-Based Assessment
remediate to protect Complete (Appendix J),
groundwater RFI Complete. CMS to be
submitted February 1995
Alky Channel Conduct Risk-Based RFI Complete, CMS
Assessment and/or CMS planned for 1995
Spent Caustic Evaporation No Further Action Awaiting ruling on formal
Site status
Alky Site Develop CMS for RFI Complete, CMS
Groundwater Protection planned for 1995
Northeast Landfill No Further Action -RFI Complete, Drainage
Improve Drainage as Plans Complete
required (Appendix K)
Leaded Tank Disposal Sites No Further Action Rf A• Complete, waste
disposed off-site in 1 983
Conveyance Ditches No Further Action RFA• Complete , wastes
disposed off-site in 1983
Standing Water Site No Further Action -RFI Complete, Drainage
Improve Drainage as Plans Complete
required (Appendix K)
Wastewater Treatment Conduct Risk Assessment RFI Complete, WWTS
System and/or CMS . Protect Upgrade in progress. Risk
groundwater through CMS Assessment and CMS
scheduled for late 1995
Final Dec. 19, 1994 x ix EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A .
Salt Lake Refinery
Solid Waste Unit
HF Acid Neutralization
Tanks
Spent Caustic Tanks
Lime Settling Basin
Coke Fines Dewatering
lmpoundment
Hazardous Waste Interim
Storage Pad
Shale Oil Semi-Works
Retention Pond
Shale Oil Semi-Works
Spent Shale Pile
No. 2 Outfall Channel
Experimental Farm
Bonneville Canal
Baffle Board Pond
Conveyance Ditch
Abandoned Lime Settling
Basin
Final Doc, 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Table ES-1 (Continued)
Recommended Action Status of Corrective Action
No Further Action as long RFI Complete
as unit is operational
No Further Action as long RFI Complete
as unit is operational
No Further Action RFI Complete. Cleaned and
backfilled October 1994
No Further Action RFI Complete, waste
removed off-site in 1987
No Further Action as long RFI Complete
as unit is operational
No Further Action Wastes moved to Spent
Shale Pile and unit closed
under Corrective Action in
1985
No Further Action Closed under Corrective
Action in 1985 with slurry
wall. (Appendix K ) 2-
Develop CMS to protect RFI Complete, CMS
groundwater scheduled for 1995 -6
No Further Action RFI Complete
Closed to protect Closed in 1993 as Interim
groundwater. Petition for Corrective Measures with
final Corrective Action in Wastes removed off-site.
1995 (Appendix C)
Remove Wastes Off-Site or RFI Complete, CMS &
Stabilize Wastes On-Site Corrective Action
scheduled for 1995-6
Remove Wastes Off-Site or RFI Complete, CMS &
Stabilize Wastes On-Site Corrective Action
scheduled for 1995-6
xx EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Solid Waste Unit
Lime Settling Basin
Dewatering lmpoundment
Fire Training Area
Railcar Loading Area
Bio-Disc Sump
North Tank Farm
Groundwater
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Table ES-1 (Continued)
Recommended Action Status of Corrective Action
No Further Action as long a RFI Complete
unit is operational due to
non-hazardous rating of
Lime Settling Basin De-
Watering lmpoundment
Develop CMS to protect RFI Complete, CMS
groundwater scheduled for 1996-7
No Further Action RFI Complete
Current design adequate for
operational spills and leaks.
No Further Action, monitor RFI Complete, affected
downgradient monitor well area excavated and
S-1. Petition for final removed, HFM Sump
Corrective Action in 1995 constructed at this unit.
(Appendix C)
No Further Action as long RFl Complete, unit under
as unit is operational. Interim Corrective
Petition for final Corrective Measures with operating
Action in 1995 Groundwater Intercept
System.
Declare groundwater as a Request from UDSHW
separate SWMU and classification of
conduct Pilot Test using groundwater as separate
West Field Plume-Intrinsic SWMU and treat
Bio-Remediation. Conduct groundwater on a facility
Risk-Based Assessment. wide basis .
• USEPA RCRA Facility Assessment
Fin•I Dec. 19, I 994 xxi EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Fa c ility Investigation Report
December 1994
10
2
3
4
s
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
TABLE ES-2
CHEVRON U.S.A . Salt Lake Refinery
Projected Corrective Measures Compliance Schedule
1995 1996 1997
Name
Lendrill & Oily Dum p SWMUs
CMS
---------------t : .... 1 ........... ····················•·················· .......••........•.. ::"'.' •...•..........••...... w~ ., .......................................................... .
Engineering. Oesign & Bidding
···-·-··••·······•············ ... ····••·· ................................................ . ............................................................................................ ___ .......
Construction .................................................................................................
All<y Ct>e nnel • • Risk Assessment/ CMS
-------------t .................................................................................................. .
t-r·4Atl Corrective Measures
Alky Sito ....
Risk. Assessment / CMS
............................................................... -.......................... .
Corrective Measures "'tft#A"""'"""'""""'
Wastewater Treatment System
-------------t············ ·········•····•·••-············-····••··•······· ......................................... .
....
Risk Assessment/ CMS
Corrective Measures
No. 2 Outfall Channel
Risk Assessment / CMS
--------------t·······················•··-······• ··························
-----t···········I···················••·········•·~·············--··············--·················•···•·· ~
_______ ::··::::::r::::::::::::::::::::::::::·:· ,,~-~-.~-·-::::::·:~::-:::::-:::::-:::::-i::::-:::::·-.:::-:::::-:::::-: :~-·::::-::::::-:::::-:::::iiiii:::.:"• ...... -..... -.. -, .. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::·::::: .. -...... -...... -...... -...... -................... .
.... _ ........................................... ·-------·· ............................ .
Corroctive Measures
Baffle BoBrd Pond Conveyance Ditch .. ... ........................ ...................... ............. •~----··•·····•-·•· ······•······································· .. ·•···••·······•····•·· •··•······------··· .. ··• ............... .
CMS / Offsite Disposal
Abendoned lime Settling Basin
CMS / 0£1s,te Dispose!
Fire Training Area
~
................................... -... .,, .. ____ _
........................ ' .
. :.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::.::::::::::::::::::::::: ... :::·:::::::::::::::::!:::::::::::~:::::::::.:::: .. : .... _ • •
Risk Assessment / CMS
Corrective Action
...................... ., ......... ·-····"·· ............................................................... -..... . ........................................ ·•·-·•·-• .. •·--·· ························-----I
Groundwater
West Field Plume Characterization ............................. -----
Facility Wide Characterization
Project: Chevron Sei t Lake Refinery I
Dato: 1 2/20194
Critic el ~~--
Noncr itical
Progress
M i lestone ♦
Summery $
Rolled Up ♦ •
Final Dae. 19, 1994 xxii EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Nome
Combined Waste lendfi11
Engi neering. Design & Bidding
Construction
Wastewater Treatme nt System
Groundwater
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE ES-2 (Continued)
ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
CHEVRON U.S.A. Salt Lake Refinery
Projected Corrective Measures Compliance Schedule
199S 1996
D JIFIMIAIMI J IJ IA l slo lNl o JIF IMIAIM I JIJIA ISI OIN ID •1 :···-j • ------~-. --···-···----~~.-4!
. -------_..,_,_ ------
~&PP&PP#.'~~A -----.,. ·-·------~ ----·--.
.., T ...
1997
JIF IMIAIMI J I J
··-----··
··--·-··-·--.
-
Wost Filed Plume Charactenzat,on W'P~~,#~
--····---·--------Facili ty Wide Charecteri:zetion l'iiif@'@'~dl%t1
Project: Corrbctive Action
I
Critical Wf~ Progtess Summary • • Doto: 12121 194 Noncr itical Milestone ♦ Rollod Up ♦
Note: Combined Waste Landfill includes Oily Dump, Alky Channel, Alky Site , No. 2 Outfall Channel,
Baffle Board Pond Conveyance Ditch , Abandoned Lime Settling Bas i n and Fire T r aining Area SWMUs
combined into one landfill cell at the Landfill Area SWMU. This alternative would require special
approval by the UDSHW
Final Dec. 19, 1 994 xxiii EarthFax Engineering, Inc,
Chevron U.S.A
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
RCRA FACILITY INVESTIGATION REPORT
FOR THE
CHEVRON SALT LAKE REFINERY
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 REGULATORY HISTORY AND CONSENT ORDER 91010011
Chevron U.S.A. Products company ("Chevron") submitted a notification and permit
application for hazardous-waste activities to the Utah Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste
(now the Utah Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste ["UDSHW"]) and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency ("EPA") on November 12, 1980 for their Salt Lake Refinery. This action
qualified Chevron for interim status as a hazardous-waste management facility. Chevron also
notified the EPA on April 20, 1981, pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response
Compensation and Liability Act, of the possible existence of hazardous substances at portions
of its refinery.
As a result of a site review performed by the UDSHW in 1983, Chevron and the Utah
Solid and Hazardous Waste Committee entered into a Consent Order in May 1984. The
Consent Order identified 16 waste-management units. The Consent Order required that
Chevron complete the following tasks:
o Close several waste-management units;
o Conduct a waste-site characterization investigation;
o Conduct a groundwater-quality assessment;
o Establish groundwater protection standards;
Fin•I D ec. 19, 1994 1-1 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
o Develop conceptual closure plans for the hazardous-waste
management units.
To comply with the 1984 Consent Order, Chevron conducted extensive investigation
and closure-plan activities. The results of these activities have been reported to the UDSHW.
The following documents were prepared in compliance with the above:
Groundwater Quality Assessment Report (Dames & Moore, 1985a), referred to herein
as the "GWOAR", presented the results of groundwater investigations performed at the
refinery.
Waste-Site Characterization Report (Dames & Moore, 1985b), referred to herein as the
"WSCR", presented the results of sampling and analysis of the waste materials at the
refinery.
Between 1985 and 1991, Chevron conducted semi-annual sampling of groundwater
monitor wells and a surface drain immediately west of the refinery facilities referred to as the
Oil Drain in accordance with the 1984 Consent Order. Reports of the sampling results have
been submitted to the UDSHW following each semi-annual sampling event.
During August and September 1986, the EPA and the UDSHW conducted a
Comprehensive Ground Water Monitoring Evaluation at the refinery. More recently, the
UDSHW conducted an Operation and Maintenance Inspection during the April 1990 semi-
annual sampling event. In April of 1994, the EPA conducted another Comprehensive
Monitoring Evaluation at the site to verify that all groundwater sampling activities were in
compliance with established protocols.
In April 1991, Chevron entered into a new Consent Order with the Utah Solid and
Hazardous Waste Committee. This 1991 Consent Order superseded the 1984 Consent Order
and added several Solid Waste Management Units ("SWMUs") to the 1984 list. Under the
1991 Consent Order ("Order"), Chevron is required to:
Fin.111 Dec. 19, 1994 1-2 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A
Salt Lake Refinery
1 . Investigate the SWMUs listed in the Order;
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
2 . Close 6 RCRA units (Hazardous-Waste Landfill, TEL Weathering Area, API
Separator Sludge Pit, Reservoir, Storm Surge Pond, and Baffle Board Pond);
3. Close the Landfarm and Landfarm Storage Area;
4 . Conduct an RFI;
5. Prepare a Corrective Action Plan for remediation of environmental concerns
identified in the RFI;
6. Conduct appropriate interim corrective measures; and
7. Continue groundwater monitoring.
Data collection efforts required for the completion of Tasks 2 and 3 were outlined in
a sampling plan and presented in a data summary report that were submitted previously to the
UDSHW (EarthFax Engineering, 1991 a and 1992a). An RFI Work Plan was prepared (EarthFax
Engineering, 1991 b) to provide the data necessary to complete the remaining Consent Order
tasks identified above. Semi-annual groundwater sampling has continued since the Order was
signed (EarthFax 1991 c & d, 1992 b & c, 1993 a & band 1994).
1.2 SUMMARY OF INVESTIGATION
This RCRA Facility Investigation ("RFI") was completed pursuant to the RFI Work Plan
for the Chevron Salt Lake Refinery ("Work Plan"), prepared by EarthFax Engineering in 1991
and approved by the UDSHW in February 1993. Details of the characterization requirements
for each SWMU performed as part of this RFI are provided in the Work Plan . Reference to
that document is recommended to clarify the purpose of each sampling event and to note unit
details and drawings which are not reproduced herein .
Finel Dec, 111, 1994 1-3 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
For the most part, each SWMU was sampled in accordance with the Work Plan, with
the exception of changes noted in the discussion of each unit in Chapter 5. All sampling was
completed in compliance with the quality assurance and quality control procedures detailed
in Appendices D and E of the Work Plan for the collection of solids and water data,
respectively. These two plans are attached to this report as Appendices A and B.
Where indicated in the Work Plan, investigations at some SWMUs required a review
of past operations at that unit. In these cases, past operating practices and
sampling/reporting activities were documented based on a review of Chevron files and
discussion with Chevron personnel. In some cases time sequence aerial photographs were
reviewed to locate portions of a given unit that were not easily discernable at the time of the
RFI. Such instances are referenced in Chapter 5 with the description of activities at each
SWMU.
Sampling activities at the SWMU's identified in Table 3-4 of the Work Plan were
followed in a logical sequence. Those units requiring the use of motorized drill rigs were
sampled sequentially so that the same drilling contractors could remain on site throughout that
phase of the campaign . The units best sampled in dry weather were sampled during non-
winter months to minimize difficulties in sampling and quality control. Those units that were
best sampled while ground surfaces were frozen were sampled during the winter months
when access was easier on the frozen ground. In addition, those sites where health and
safety issues would be compounded by either warm or cold weather conditions, were sampled
at the most appropriate time of year.
All RFI activities were completed in compliance with the Health and Safety Plan for
Environmental Projects (Geraghty & Miller, 1991 a). This plan was submitted with the Work
Plan and approved by the UDSHW at the same time as the Work Plan.
Finol Ooc. 19, 1994 1-4 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Once all field sampling events were completed and analytical results were returned
from the laboratory, each site underwent a preliminary characterization summary. The purpose
of this effort was to verify accurate sampling locations, proper sampling analytes, and proper
implementation of the Quality Control/Quality Assurance procedures. In some cases,
additional field efforts were required to provide adequate information to characterize the site
and make recommendations for future action. These activities are also referenced in the
discussion of each unit in Chapter 5 .
Once Data Quality Objectives were confirmed, all data were reviewed, graphs and
tables of collected information were developed and the general recommendations for future
action were formulated . In addition, all quality control issues were resolved to assure
compliance with the QA/QC plans. Control Standards for laboratory evaluation were plotted
and evaluated . Correlations of blind duplicate samples, with their respective field samples,
were made for relative percent error determinations.
All data were tabulated in a data base established for the Chevron Refinery. A risk
screen was conducted for all soil samples collected. The risk screen methodologies are
described in Section 4 .4 . The risk screening for each SWMU is presented in Chapter 5 . The
results of the risk screen, together with long term plans for some of the units established by
Chevron were used to develop the final recommendations provided in Chapter 5 .
Recommendations for No Further Action, future performance of Risk Assessments or
development of Corrective Measures Studies are based on results from field and analytical
data, historical information, where pertinent, and interpretation of State and Federal
environmental regulations.
Final Dec.19.1994 1-5 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A
Salt Lake Refinery
1.3 RCRA CLOSURE UNITS
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Since submittal of the Work Plan to the UDSHW, and under approval of the UDSHW,
Closure Plans for all of the Closure Units identified in the Order and the Landfarm and
Landfarm Storage Area were prepared and submitted to the UDSHW (Geraghty & Miller,
1991 b, c, d & e). Pursuant to one of those plans, the Reservoir, Storm Surge Pond, Baffle
Board Pond and the API Separator sludge pit were combined into the Reservoir Waste
Management Area (RWMA). Plans and specifications were developed and approved, and in
June 1993, construction activities to close the RWMA were begun. Completion of the RWMA
Closure with installation of post closure monitor wells was in November 1994. Issuance of
a Post Closure Permit from the UDSHW is scheduled for early 1995.
Activities detailed in the remaining closure plans for the TEL Weathering Area, the
Hazardous Waste Landfill and the Landfarm and Landfarm Storage Area are being implemented
through approved technologies or approval for continued treatment. Pre-closure sampling was
conducted at each of these units. The results of this sampling were submitted to the UDHSW
in 1992 (EarthFax Engineering, 1992a}.
1.4 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT UNITS
The following SWMUs are identified in the April 5, 1991 Consent Order (Figure 1.4-1 ).
Those units requiring closure are addressed in Section 1 .3 above:
Final Dec. 18, 1884
Landfill Area
Oily Dump
Alky Channel
Spent Caustic Evaporation Site
Alky Site
Northeast Landfill
Leaded Tank Disposal Sites
Conveyance Ditches
Standing Water Site
1-6 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A
Salt Lake Refinery
Wastewater Treatment System
HF Acid Neutralization Tanks
Spent Caustic Tanks
Lime Settling Basin
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Coke Fines Dewatering lmpoundment & Waste Pile Area
Hazardous Waste Interim Storage Pad
Shale Oil Semi-Works Retention Pond
Shale Oil Semi-Works Spent Shale Pile
No. 2 Outfall Channel
Experimental Farm
Bonneville Canal
Baffle Board Pond Conveyance Ditch
Abandoned lime Settling basin
Lime Settling Basin De-watering lmpoundment
Fire Training Area
Railcar Loading Area
Bio-Disc Sump
North Tank Farm
A summary of each unit and its operating history is provided on Table 1.4-1.
As part of the operating plan for the refinery, the Bio-Disc Sump, Bonneville Canal, and
the North Tank Farm were petitioned to the UDSHW for Interim Corrective Measures. Detailed
construction and remediation plans were prepared and, under approval of the UDSHW as
Interim Corrective Measures, these three SWMUs were remediated as detailed below.
Bio-Disc Sump
As part of the Hydrofluoric Acid Mitigation (HFM) project required to be installed at the
facility by Federal regulations, the soils at the Bio-Disc Sump were characterized prior to
approval of the Work Plan . These soils were found to be free of major contaminants and were
excavated and removed from the site. Currently, the concrete HFM Sump which was built
to collect HF Acid laden water from the HFM system, occupies the site of the old Bio-Disc and
Bio-Disc Sump. Excavation for this project went well below the soil affected by the sump.
A description and drawings of this project are provided in Appendix C.
Final Dee. 19, 1994 1-7 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A
Salt Lake Refinery
Bonneville Canal and North Tank Farm
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Because of the need to remediate groundwater in the shallow aquifer beneath the North
Tank Farm SWMU, and a desire to clean up the Bonneville Canal , the UDSHW approved as
Interim Corrective Measures, construction of a groundwater intercept system along the
western limits of the North Tank Farm and the northern boundary of the Bonneville Canal. As
part of this effort, solid waste and contaminated soils were excavated from the Bonneville
Canal to or slightly below the groundwater level. The east-west leg of the intercept system
was constructed in the canal and the canal was backfilled with clean engineered fill. The
Bonneville Canal area now serves as a catchment basin for storm water runoff. The
Bonneville Canal only exists as a canal on the extreme eastern side of the refinery. This area
was determined to be free of any solid waste and is known to be the source of the Bonneville
Spring. Consequently, this portion of the canal remains an open water channel fed by the
spring with a seasonally maximum flow of approximately 50 gallons per minute being directed
into the facility wastewater treatment system. Specifications and "As-Constructed" drawings
for this project are provided in Appendix C.
1.5 REPORT ORGANIZATION
This RFI Report is divided into eight chapters, including this Introduction. Chapter 2
is a description of current conditions and the physical setting of the refinery. Chapter 3
discusses the background sampling campaign and results. Chapter 4 discusses the Data
Quality Objectives, Data Validation and the methodology used for the preliminary risk
screening which was conducted to develop the recommendations for future action at each
unit ..
The main body of this document is presented in Chapter 5. Detailed discussions of
sampling, sampling results , waste and soil profil es, results of the risk screeni ng and
recommendations for each SWMU are addressed in this section. Chapter 6 addresses the
Final Dae. 19, 1994 1-8 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
facility hydrogeologic conditions and details area-specific groundwater studies as well as a
steady state groundwater flow model which was developed for the refinery area. Chapter 7
summarizes the potential corrective measures which might be implemented at the site and
Chapter 8 provides a list of references cited in this report. Tables and figures follow the text.
Appendices are provided in separate volumes.
Final Doc. 1 e. 1994 1-9 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
CHAPTER 2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
CURRENT CONDITIONS AND PHYSICAL SETTING
2.1 FACILITY BACKGROUND
2.1.1 Location
Chevron operates the Salt Lake Refinery near Salt Lake City, Utah immediately north
of the boundary between Davis and Salt Lake Counties (Figure 2.1-1 ). Chevron owns
approximately 600 acres in the area of the Salt Lake Refinery. However, only about 200
acres are occupied by refinery facilities with this area being referred to as the Operating Area.
Land contiguous to the refinery is zoned for industrial, agricultural and commercial use
(EarthFax Engineering, 1991 b). The property contiguous to the refinery is owned by both
private and corporate entities.
2.1.2 Operations History
Production of gasoline, stove oil, diesel, furnace oil, and a light residual fuel oil began
at the Salt Lake Refinery on December 1, 1948. The production capabilities of the refinery
have expanded since that time, with products currently manufactured at the refinery including
jet fuel, aviation gas, gasoline, stove oil, diesel fuel, industrial fuel oil, propane, coke, and log
wax. The present layout of the facility is shown on Figure 2. 1-2.
2.2 PHYSIOGRAPHY
The Salt Lake Refinery is located at the eastern perimeter of the Salt Lake Valley near
the edge of a westward extension of the Wasatch Mountains referred to as the Salt Lake
Final Oec. 19, 1994 2-1 EarthFsx Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Salient. Surface elevations at the Refinery slope gently from a maximum of 4,244 feet at the
eastern edge of the property to a minimum elevation of about 4,208 feet near the western
perimeter of the site.
Prior to farming and construction activities, the area occupied by the refinery was a
low-lying marsh and shallow lake bed associated with a natural impoundment known as Hot
Spring Lake (Van Horn, 1982). Anciently, the area was exposed to cyclic variations as the
shoreline of Lake Bonneville transgressed and regressed. Several shoreline features of the lake
are visible near the Refinery and in the subsurface deposits.
2.3 REGIONAL AND LOCAL GEOLOGY
2.3.1 Regional Geology
The geology of the region surrounding the Chevron refinery has been described and
documented in numerous publications (e.g., Stokes, 1988; Eardley et al., 1973; Currey et al.,
1984). The refinery lies approximately five miles north-northwest of Salt Lake City and about
1,500 feet west of the Wasatch Fault, which marks the boundary between the Middle Rocky
Mountain Physiographic Province on the east and the Basin and Range Physiographic Province
on the west. The Wasatch Mountains, located immediately east of the Wasatch Fault, are the
product of regional uplift and block-faulting initiated approximately 20 million years ago
(Hintze, 1988). The basins of the Basin and Range Province typically contain thick sections
of unconsolidated and semi-consolidated Quaternary-age (2 million years ago to the present)
sediments. The Chevron refinery lies in the Jordan Valley, the eastern most basin of the Basin
and Range Province.
Sedimentation in Lake Bonneville (the ancient lake that formerly occupied the Jordan
valley) resulted primarily in deposition of gravel, sand, silt, and clay as the lake level rose
(shoreline transgression) and fell (shoreline regression) in response to climatic changes. In
Fin.I Dec. 19, 1984 2-2 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
general, the coarse-grained sediments (gravels and sands) were deposited in high-energy near-
shore environments associated with river, beach, proximal deltaic, and alluvial fan
environments. The fine-grained sediments (silts and clays) were deposited in deep-water and
distal deltaic environments. The transgressions resulted in deposition of fine-grained
sediments in former near-shore settings where coarse-grained sediments previously were
deposited. Regressions resulted in deposition of coarse-grained sediments in areas where fine-
grained lake sediments formerly were deposited. These cycles produced a vertical stacking
of fine-and coarse-grained sediments.
2.3.2 Local Geology and Stratigraphy
The unconsolidated sediments which underlie the Chevron refinery reach thicknesses
of approximately 4,000 feet (Mattick, 1970). The surficial materials at the refinery consist
of construction fill and Holocene-age (8,000 years ago to present) sediments that were
deposited in and adjacent to the Hot Spring Lake (Van Horn, 1982). This lake (Figure 2.3-1)
was supplied by spring flow associated with the Warm Springs Fault, located just west of the
Wasatch Fault, and extended north into much of the area presently occupied by the Chevron
refinery. The Hot Spring Lake deposits are about 10 feet thick (Van Horn, 1982).
The materials which underlie the fill and Holocene-age sediments at the refinery were
deposited in Lake Bonneville during the late Pleistocene, approximately 8 ,000 to 30,000 years
ago (Stokes, 1988). The shallow aquifer beneath the refinery appears to be composed of both
Hot Spring Lake and Lake Bonneville sediments. Lake Bonneville sediments comprise the deep
aquifer (see Section 2.4.2).
The characteristic Lake Bonneville stacking of coarse-and fine-grained sediments is
present beneath the Chevron refinery. At the eastern edge of the refinery, coarse-grained
sediments predominate, primarily consisting of gravels and sands. The amount of gravels
present at the eastern end of the refinery progressively decreases toward the north. The
Fin.I Dec. 19, 1994 2-3 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
coarse-grained sediments thin to the west, where Lake Bonneville water depths were greater
and environmental energy levels were lower.
2.4 HYDROLOGY
2.4.1 Surface Water
Several naturally-occurring and man-made surface-water bodies are located within or
near the Salt Lake Refinery. These include the Jordan River, the Great Salt Lake, the Oil
Drain, Bonneville Canal, and Beck's Hot Spring . These surface water features are referenced
on Figure 2.4-1 and are discussed in detail below .
2.4. 1 .1 Jordan River
The Jordan River is the primary drainage for the Salt Lake Valley and flows adjacent
to Chevron's western property boundary. Its eventual discharge point is the Great Salt Lake,
located approximately 5 miles downstream from the refinery. The Jordan River also serves
as the eventual discharge point for groundwater flowing beneath the Salt Lake Valley (see
Seiler and Waddell (1984] and Hely et al. [1971]).
According to Hely et al. (1971), the Total Dissolved Solids ("TDS") concentration of
the Jordan River near the refinery i s approximately 1,100 milligrams per litre ("mg/I"). The
average flow at this point is 154 cubic feet per second (approximately 69,000 gpm).
The Utah Wastewater Disposal Regulations classify the Jordan River as Class 28, 3C,
30, and 4 water near the refinery. These classifications provide protection for the following
uses:
28 -Boating, water-skiing, and similar uses, excluding swimming.
Final Dee. 19, 1994 2-4 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
3C -Non-game fish, including the necessary aquatic organisms in their food chain.
3D -Waterfowl and shore birds, including the necessary aquatic organisms in their
food chain.
4 -Agricultural uses, including irrigation of crops and stock watering.
2.4. 1.2 Great Salt Lake
The Great Salt Lake is a saline, shallow, closed-basin lake occupying about 1,500
square miles in northern Utah. This lake serves as the final receiving body for all surface
waters in the Salt Lake Valley and much of the remainder of northern Utah. Although the
distance to the shoreline of the lake from the refinery fluctuates with changing climatic
conditions, the lake is normally located approximately 5 miles downstream from the refinery.
The Great Salt Lake reached a peak historic elevation of 4211 .85 feet in 1986. The
resulting flood waters inundated large portions of Chevron's undeveloped property west of the
refinery facilities and large areas along the Jordan River downstream from the refinery. At the
Salt Lake Refinery, this record level was reflected by peak water-table elevations which
occurred during the spring of 1986.
2.4. 1 .3 Oil Drain
The Oil Drain was constructed in the 1920s and 1930s for the dual purpose of
transporting i ndustrial-waste effluent from Salt Lake City to the Great Salt Lake and to drain
areas adjacent to the channel. Large quantities of oily wastes were discharged to the Oil Drain
from refineries and railroads until the mid 1960s. The Oil Drain has typically contained high
concentrations of dissolved oil and grease, oil slicks and scum , and black, oily mud (Salt Lake
Council of Governments, 1976).
Final Dec. 19, 1994 2-5 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Although in the past it extended farther to the south and east, flow in the Oil Drain
now begins approximately 1 .5 miles upstream from the Salt Lake Refinery. Along its course,
the Oil Drain flows through or receives (or formerly received) discharges from the Rose Park
and Capitol Hill storm-water sewers, the Amoco Oil Company remote tank farm and hazardous
waste-management facility, the existing Salt Lake City Sewage Treatment Plant, Beck's Hot
Spring, Concrete Products Company, the Chevron refinery, and the former Salt Lake City
Sewage Treatment Plant. The Oil Drain discharges to the Jordan River.
According to the GWOAR, the TDS concentration of water in the Oil Drain varies from
approximately 5,000 mg/I near its head to about 2,100 mg/I at the refinery. The primary
cause of this decrease in the TDS concentration is dilution caused by inflow from the Salt
Lake City Sewage Treatment Plant. No appreciable differences in inorganic or organic
constituent concentrations have been detected in the Oil Drain between the sampling stations
upstream and downstream from the refinery .
Part II of the Utah Wastewater Disposal Regulations (Standards of Quality for Waters
of the State} indicates that water in the Oil Drain is Class 6 water. Water of this classification
is considered by the regulations to be generally unsuitable for domestic water systems, in-
stream recreational use, aquatic wildlife, irrigation, stock watering, and industrial use. Class
6 waters are protected for limited beneficial use on a case-by-case basis. The records of the
Utah Division of Water Rights indicate that there are no certificated water rights for the Oil
Drain.
The water in the Oil Drain cannot be considered a current or viable future source of
drinking water primarily on the basis of its salt content which is sufficiently high to render it
unacceptable. The Utah Safe Drinking Water Committee does not allow the use of water
serving either community or non-community water supply systems which has a TDS content
in excess of 1,000 mg/I unless it can be demonstrated that no better water is available.
Sufficient higher-quality water is available for the region.
Final D ec. 18., 1 994 2 -6 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Future changes in use of the Oil Drain water are not considered likely because it is
neither practical nor economically feasible to treat the high salt content waters of the Oil Drain
in more than limited amounts. Even this limited treatment would require non-standard
treatment methods such as reverse osmosis, membrane separation, evaporation/distillation,
ion exchange, etc.
There are no known recreational uses (e.g., swimming, boating, fishing, etc.) of the
Oil Drain. The water may be contacted during its diversion from the Jordan River for
irrigation, but such contact is likely to be minimal because of the objectionable aesthetic
qualities of the water. Ingestion of the water is similarly considered unlikely.
Although waterfowl, muskrats, and livestock have been occasionally observed along
the Oil Drain and/or the Sewage Canal, adverse impacts to these species as a result of refinery
operations are considered minimal since the quality of water in the Oil Drain has not been
adversely influenced by the refinery (based on the results of analyses presented in the
GWOAR and routine semi-annual sampling). Similarly, adverse impacts to fish that are present
where the Jordan River discharges into the Great Salt Lake are precluded by the lack of
adverse impacts to the Oil Drain.
Emergent aquatic vegetation present in the Oil Drain consists of cattail (Typha sp.) and
bulrush (Scirpus sp.). Sporadic stands of these two species are generally more frequent
downstream of the refinery than upstream. Duckweed (Lemna minor), pondweed
(Potomogeton}, and green filamentous algae are also present. Adverse impacts to these
species as a result of refinery operations are not apparent.
2.4. 1 .4 Bonneville Canal
The Bonneville Canal was constructed as an unlined excavation in the early 1 900s as
part of an irrigation system for farms north of the present refinery. The canal is listed in the
Final Dec. 19, 1994 2 -7 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
~CRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
1991 Consent Order as a SWMU. Accordingly, under approval from the UDSHW as an Interim
Corrective Measure, the Bonneville Canal was closed and backfilled. Installation of a
groundwater intercept system within the canal backfill was completed in 1993. This system
is currently treating groundwater within its zone of influence through the refinery wastewater
treatment system. As part of the closure project, the Bonneville Spring is collected into the
intercept system and treated with the water intercepted from the new system.
2.4.1.5 Beck's Hot Spring
Beck's Hot Spring, located about one-half mile southeast of the Chevron property, is
a significant source of water for the Oil Drain. This spring has a discharge of approximately
1,000 gallons per minute which flows through a series of ditches prior to being discharged
into the Oil Drain. The spring was the major source of Hot Springs Lake which formerly
covered much of the Chevron property (Murphy and Gwynn, 1979). The spring water is hot
(typically 125 to 130 °F) and saline (with a typical TDS concentration of 11,000 mg/I).
2.4.2 Groundwater
The regional and site-specific hydrogeology have been discussed in detail by Dames &
Moore (1985a) and EarthFax Engineering (1990 and 1991 e). The hydrogeology underlying
the Salt Lake Refinery differs from the characterization presented by Hely et al. (1971) due
to the presence of the Salt Lake Salient described in Section 2.2. The salient has inhibited
the deposition of coarse alluvial-fan materials at the refinery and created a depositional
condition more closely associated with beach and coastal environments.
A shallow unconfined groundwater system underlies the refinery. This shallow aquifer
consists predominantly of horizontally-bedded fine-grained sediments (fine-to very-fine sand,
silt, and clay). The depth to the water table in this system is typically a few feet. A fine-
grained aquitard (consisting predominantly of silt and clay) underlies the shall groundwater
Final Dec. 19, 1994 2-8 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
system, with the aquitard overlying a deep confined aquifer. This deep aquifer consists of
stratified medium-to fine-grained sediments.
Groundwater-level monitoring at the refinery has indicated that artesian pressures
increase in the deep aquifer at a consistent rate of approximately 1 0 feet per 100 feet of
depth (Dames & Moore, 1985a). All existing deep monitor wells at Salt Lake Refinery show
artesian pressure, with most of the existing deep monitor wells typically flowing at the land
surface.
Groundwater in the deep aquifer flows generally westward beneath the refinery toward
the Jordan River (see, for example, EarthFax Engineering, 1994). As expected, the shape of
the potentiometric surface in the deep aquifer is generally consistent throughout the year. In
the shallow groundwater system, groundwater also flows generally to the west beneath the
refinery. However, minor variations in the shape of the potentiometric surface of this aquifer
occur both locally and seasonally.
The average horizontal hydraulic conductivity of the shallow aquifer is substantially
greater than its vertical hydraulic conductivity and even greater than the vertical hydraulic
conductivity of the aquitard that separates the shallow aquifer from the deep aquifer (EarthFax
Engineering, 1992d). Since groundwater follows the path of least resistance and the
sediments that comprise the uppermost aquifer are essentially horizontally stratified, the large
contrast between the horizontal and vertical hydraulic conductivities favors horizontal flow.
These hydraulic conductivity contrasts and the upward flow gradient from the deep aquifer
noted previously minimize the potential for groundwater to flow vertically from the shallow
aquifer to the deep aquifer beneath the refinery.
Final Dee.19, 1994 2-9 EarthFax Engineeringl Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
2 .5 CURRENT AND PROJECTED LAND USE AND IMPACTS ON WATER RESOURCES
2.5.1 Current Land Use
Chevron operates the refinery within the property defined as the Operating Area and
maintains the adjacent Chevron-owned property as a buffer to adjacent land use and possible
future expansion . The land surrounding the property is considered committed to its current
land use by the type of activity presently in place. The west, east and north property
boundaries are defined by Redwood Road, Interstate 15 and Interstate 215 and miscellaneous
railroad tracks, respectively. The Salt Lake City sewage t reatment plant is located to the
south , with predominantly industrial zoned ground outside of the roadway easements. The
operating area of the facility is separated from the Chevron-owned western fields by the Oil
Drain . This drain has been previously described in Section 2.4. 1.3. The quali ty of water in
this drain clearly delineates it as an industrial drain , with the water not suitable for potable or
irrigation uses. The Jordan River and Jordan River State Parkway are located west of
Redwood Road.
2.5.2 Impacts Due to Future Changes in Land Use
No land use changes are expected south of the refinery whi ch may effect changes in
the flow to the Oil Drain. The Salt Lake City sewage treatment plant is expected to conti nue
to provide a constant source of base flow to the Oil Drain into the foreseeable future. This
plant became operational in 1965 and more recently completed an expansive upgrading of its
treatment efficiency. Significant changes to the other major contributors of flow to the Oil
Drain (i.e., storm-water discharge, Beck's Hot Spring, other upstream wastewater discharges,
etc.) are also not anticipated in the foreseeable future.
A review of land-use plans and regulatory restrictions prepared by cities and counties
in the immediate vicinity of the refinery indicate that the area downstream from the re finery
Fin al Dec , l 9 . 1994 2-10 EarthFax Engineeringl Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
is all classified as either within a 100-year flood plain or is a zone of high airport-noise impact.
These classifications preclude significant future changes in land use . This conclusion is
supported by the land -use element of the Salt Lake County Master Plan for the area (Salt Lake
County Planning Commission, 1977) which does not project development in the area
downstream from the refinery .
2.5.3 Summary of Potential Impacts
Adverse impacts to groundwater from refinery operations have not been detected in
monitor wells completed in the deep aquifer beneath the refinery. Although the quality of
water in the shallow groundwater system beneath the site has been influenced by refinery
operations, the water in this aquifer is naturally of sufficiently poor quality that it has no
identifiable beneficial use. No adverse impacts have been detected in local surface waters to
as a result of refinery operations.
Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that refinery operations have not and will not have
an adverse impact on current or projected land use outside of the facility boundary.
Final Doc. 19, 1994 2-11 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
3. 1 INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 3
BACKGROUND SOILS INVESTIGATION
Background soil samples for the soil types present at the Chevron Salt Lake Refinery
were collected and analyzed to determine background concentrations of volatile and semi-
volatile organic compounds, as well as major metals. Native soil types present within the
refinery, as described by Woodward, et al. (1972), include:
o Cudahy Silt Loam (CdA), 0 to 3 percent slopes;
o Decker Silt Loam (OKA), Oto 1 percent slopes;
o Decker Silty clay Loam (DWA), 0 to 1 percent slopes with high water table;
o Timpanogos Loam (TmB), 1 to 3 percent slopes;
o Winn Silt Loam (WnA), 0 to 1 percent slopes; and
o Made Land (MA), fill material general greater than four feet deep .
Soil types and sample collection locations are shown on Figure 3.1-1. Specific sample
sites were carefully chosen to allow the collection of samples from soils which had apparently
not been impacted by refinery operations, thereby enabling accurate identification of
background soil chemistries .
3.2 SAMPLE COLLECTION
The initial 14 sample locations noted on Figure 3.1-1 were selected as outlined in the
RFI Work Plan. Samples were collected from each of these locations from the A , B (where
present) and C horizons. The depths of these horizons varied; however, the A horizon is
typically the top 6 inches, B is from 6 to 8 inches and C is 8 inches to 1 foot. These initial
Final Dec. 19, 1994 3-1 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
samples were collected in 1992.
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Subsequently, in August 1994, additional samples were
collected from the 3.5 to 4 .0 foot range at each location.
Three additional background sample locations (SO 15 through SO 17) were also sampled
in August 1994. Samples at these locations were collected at the 0 .0 to 0.5 foot depth and
the 3.5 to 4.5 foot depth.-
Four composite samples of four soil types, and a blind duplicate sample were analyzed
for major metals, volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds. A composite sample of the
Timpanogos Loam (TmB) was not made or analyzed since the Timpanogos Loam is present
in only a limited spatial extent (Figure 3.1-1 ).
All background samples were collected with stainless steel spoons and a hand-auger.
All sampling methods were in compliance with the Quality Assurance Plan for the Collection
of Solids Data (Appendix A). Sampling equipment was cleaned with non-phosphate laboratory
detergent and double-rinsed with distilled water between each sample collection.
3.3 ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Results of analyses of background soil samples are summarized on Table 4.4-2 and
presented in Appendix D. The volatile organic compounds were analyzed using EPA method
8240/8260. The semi-volatile organic compounds were analyzed using EPA method 8270 .
lnorganics were analyzed using EPA method 6010 for all analytes, except mercury where EPA
method 7471 was used.
No volatiles or semi-volatiles were detected in the background soil samples. For
comparative purposes only, concentrations of inorganics found in background soils at the
refinery were compared to typical concentrations found in the Western U.S. soils as reported
by Shacklette and Boerngen (1984). All inorganics measured were found to be below the
Rnai Dec. 19, 1994 3-2 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
typical range of background concentrations with the exception of cadmium , which is not listed
in Shacklette and Boerngen (1994).
Cadmium concentrations typical in background soils varied greatly depending on the
reference researched. However, the values used for comparison on Table 4.4-2 (Fitchko,
1989) appear to be typical of United States background levels.
Finel Dec. 19, 1994 3 -3 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
CHAPTER 4
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES
4. 1 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES
The data quality objective for the RFI investigation was to collect valid field and
analytical data to adequately characterize each SWMU. This objective was met by the
successful performance of the following tasks:
1 . Collection of data during the RFI that were representative of the unit or
condition being sampled;
2. Organization of data in a manner that facilitated retrieval, use, and presentation
in project reports;
3. Performance of data validation procedures and quality assurance reviews for the
collected data; and
4. Establishment of a management system that was sufficiently flexible to meet
changing project needs .
The data collection process is presented in Chapter 5 of this report. Data management
and validation procedures will be discussed in this chapter.
4.2 DATA MANAGEMENT
Upon completion of a sampling task, all field logs were reviewed for completeness,
accuracy, and legibility. Deficiencies in the log books were noted, and correcti ons were made
as required. Additional field efforts were conducted when necessary. All field records were
stored in a dedicated project file. Copies of the field logs are contained in Appendix E.
final Dec. 19, 1994 4-1 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
All laboratory analyses were performed by Chemtech Analytical Laboratory in Murray,
Utah. All laboratory methods were in accordance with EPA procedures. As results were
obtained from the laboratory, they were reviewed for completeness and accuracy. Sample
dates and sample identification were verified with the field logs. Amendments to the
laboratory reports were made by Chemtech, when required . Copies of the Chemtech
laboratory data are presented in Appendix F.
A computer database was constructed using RBASE 4.5 Plus (Microrim, 1994) to
organize and store the field and analytical data collected for each unit. The information stored
in this database includes:
o Type of sample (e .g ., soil, water, sludge)
o Sample location (survey coordinates)
o Sample identification
o Sample date
o Sample depth
o Field parameters
o Results of laboratory analysis
This database was used to sort and print the results of all sampling efforts . These
tabulated analytical results are contained in Appendix G. In addition, the database was used
to identify, sort, and list the sample locations and concentrations for the analytes which were
detected at each unit. This information is summarized in tables referenced in Chapter 5.
The information stored in the database was also accessed as needed for use with
various graphical software packages. These data were displayed as necessary using bar
graphs, line graphs, isopleth plots, or cross-sectional plots.
Final Dec. 19, 1994 4-2 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
4.3 DATA VALIDATION
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1 9 94
All sampling campaigns were conducted in accordance with the Solids and Water Data
Collection Quality Assurance Plans for the Salt Lake Refinery, provided in Appendices A and
B of this document, respectively. The data validation process verifies that the defined
protocols were met during the sampling program .
Data validation was performed using the following tiered approach:
1. For any individual sampling campaign, all data elements were reviewed for 10
percent of the samples .
2. The remaining 90 percent of the samples from the same sampling campaign
were reviewed for acceptable field procedures , holding times, blank
contamination, spike recovery, and detection limits.
3. For every tenth data package, all data elements were reviewed for all samples
in each parameter category (e.g., volatiles, metals, etc.).
Results of the data validation analyses are provided in Appendix H.
4.3. 1 Historical Data
Previous investigations at the Salt Lake Refinery resulted in a significant quantity of
water and solids chemical data. These existing data were closely examined to ensure that
they met the data-quality objectives outlined in Section 4. 1 . The historical data were entered
into the computer database designed for data management purposes, as described in Section
4.2 . Data from the North Tank Farm, Old Bio Disk Sump, Oily Dump, and Bonneville Canal
were collected prior to the approval of the RFI Work Plan. These data have been reviewed and
are also included in the RFI document.
Flnal Dec:. 19. 1894 4-3 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
The validity of the historical chemical data was evaluated from the general
characteristics of the data and the adequacy and appropriateness of the procedures employed
during the collection, handling, and analysis of the samples. Specifically, this included an
evaluation of:
o Sample collection methods,
o Chain-of-custody documentation,
o Sample preservati on techniques,
o Sample shipment methods,
o Certification of the analytical laboratory,
o Sample holding times prior to analysis,
o Laboratory analytical methods (i.e., EPA analytical method number),
o Detection limits of the analyti cal methods,
o Results of the field and laboratory quality assurance/quality control analyses and
the accompanying documentation .
Upon review of the historical data , most of the criteria defined above were met. There
w ere no major deficiencies detected in the historical data set; therefore, all historical data are
considered valid.
4 .3.2 RFI Data
All analytical and field data generated during the RFI were chec ked for the factors
outlined in Section 4 .3 .1 . This check was performed as soon as practical following
completion of a task (e.g., field data collection or laboratory analysis). Data deficiencies were
c orrected soon after they were detected.
Final Dec. 19, 1994 4-4 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
All of the data collected as part of the RFI Work Plan are considered adequate with the
exception of three background samples. These samples, as explained in Section 4.4, were
removed from the data set due to their proximity to an abandoned industrial drain.
4.3.3 Laboratory Quality Assurance
Chemtech Analytical Laboratory was responsible for their own internal Quality
Assurance Quality/Control (QA/QC) program. A copy of Chemtech's QA/QC plan is contained
in Appendix H. Chemtech's QA/QC plan was used during the review of the analytical results
to confirm that the data and analytical proc edures were in conformance with internal
laboratory standards.
Documentation for all of the laboratory QA/QC measures and checks are contained in
Appendix H. This documentation includes the following QA/QC elements:
0 Surrogate recoveries
0 Replicate samples
0 Spikes
0 Calibration checks
The analytical results were reviewed shortly after receipt of the original laboratory
certificates of analysis. All of the QA/QC require m ents defined in the laboratory QA/QC plan
were met.
Control standards were submitted to Chemtech at a frequency equal to 1 0 percent of
the cumulative composite samples. This submittal criteria was modified from the original RFI
Work Plan and approved by the Division as an addendum to the RFI Work Plan. The control
standards were Priority PollutnT™/CLP standards obtained from Environmental Resource
Final De c. 1 9 , 199 4 4 -5 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Saft Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Associates {ERA) of Arvada, Colorado . The Chemtech results and ERA certificates for the
seven control standards submitted during the RFI are contained in Appendix H .
The control standards contained certified percentages of selected parameters.
Chemtech conducted the analysis on the standards following the same EPA methods used for
the RFI samples. Completed analyses were compared by Earth Fax against the advisory ranges
published on the ERA certificate for each parameter. Tables 1 through 7 in Appendix H
compare the Chemtech results with the ERA advisory range and note in the right column if the
correlation is "High", "Low" or "OK".
The relative percent error was also calculated to compare the result certified by ERA
and Chemtech's result for each analyte. The relative percent error {RPE) is determined from
the equation:
RPE
Where
c = Concentration of either measurement
x = Mean of the two measurements
Tabulated summaries of the APE comparisons for each set of control standards are also
contained in Appendix H. Less than three percent of the Chemtech values were outside of
the accepted tolerance defined by ERA. No more than two occurrences were reported for any
one analyte; therefore, no laboratory error trend could be established. Based on this review,
the results of the control standards can be accepted as valid.
Final Dec. 19. 1994 4-6 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
4.3.4 Field Quality Assurance
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
The field QA/QC program for the RFI was performed in compliance with the Water and
Solids Data Collection Quality Assurance Plans for the Salt Lake Refinery, provided in
Appendices A and B of this document, respectively. Field QA/QC data are provided in
Appendix E. Analytical results of equipment blanks , field blanks, and trip blanks were
evaluated based on the following procedure:
1 . If an analyte was detected in the equipment blank and the associated field
blank, the contamination was attributed to the distilled water used to
decontaminate the sampling equipment. In this case, a correction would be
applied to the results of the collected samples to account for the measured
value in the distilled water. However, If the concentration of the analyte
measured in the blank was small compared to the value measured in the
collected samples, the sampled values were not corrected.
2. If an analyte was detected in the equipment blank and not in the field blank, the
measured value was attributed to incomplete decontamination of the sampling
equipment. The results of the samples collected prior to the equipment blank
were checked. If measured values in the equipment blank were close to the
detection limits for the analyte, and they were quite small in comparison to the
measured values in the previous sample, the error was considered insignificant,
and no corrections were made. Otherwise, the error was deemed accurate and
investigation into the sample collected prior to and after the equipment blank
were checked to see if that constituent was a concern.
3 . If an analyte was detected in the field blank and not the equipment blank, the
error was not attributed to the sampling methods. A possible error may have
been introduced during the laboratory analysis. If the measured value in the
field blank was near the detection limit of that analyte, the error was considered
insignificant. If the error was significantly greater, comparison of all results
collected within the percentage range of that particular field blank were
checked.
4 . If an analyte was detected in the trip blank, a check was made with the internal
QA/QC data from Chemtech. If the measured value in the trip blank was near
the detection limit of that analyte, the error was considered insignificant.
Otherwise, comparisons of the value detected in the trip blank were made with
all samples collected at the same time. The detected values for that
final De c. 1 9 , 19 94 4 -7 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
constituent were then compared to similar sites where there was no problem
with the trip blank.
Several QA/QC samples (field blanks, equipment blanks, or trip blanks) reported
measurable values of barium, chromium, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, or zinc. All of the
measured concentrations were very low (close to the detection limit for that constituent}. The
chromium and lead constituents were of primary concern since they are part of the indicator
parameters most critical to the refinery . The other metals were not as critical to the
characterization process.
The blind duplicate samples consist of duplicate samples that are provided with
arbitrary sample numbers and are, therefore, submitted "blind" to the laboratory without their
knowledge of which station the sample was obtained from . Each blind duplicate was
compared to the matching sample using relative percent error.
Most of the parameters compare closely and have relative errors much less than 20%.
A summary of these comparisons can be found in Appendix H. Those cases where errors
were greater than 20% typically occurred when measured concentrations were very close to
the detection limit. Using a general guideline of one-half of the detection limit for the non-
detected sample, the relative error calculations resulted in very high percent errors. The
smaller the reported values , the greater the allowable error. Therefore, with the low values ,
t he greater percentages are not considered substantial.
Errors in blind duplicate analyses may also result from the process of splitting the
sample in the field , particularly in the case of solid samples . The volatile organic analytes may
especially be affected by the handling of the split sample in a non-controlled environment
instead of the laboratory. The inherent heterogeneity of solid samples also makes
representative sample splitting difficult. Samples split in the sampling spoon may also be non-
uniform since they are not mixed to provide a homogeneous sample prior to splitting.
Final De c. 1 9 , 1994 4-8 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
4.4 RATIONALE AND METHODOLOGY FOR RISK-BASED SCREENING
A risk based screening method was employed to assess the potential health impacts
from the chemical constituents detected during the RFI. The method compares concentrations
of chemical constituents found in soil samples for the RFI study areas at Chevron with a
generic Risk Based Concentration (RBC) Table (Appendix l) developed by Dr. Roy Smith, U.S.
EPA Toxicologist, Region Ill (1994). The RBCs represent human ingestion levels that are
unlikely to result in adverse health effects during long term (30 year) residential or worker
exposure. All soil samples with exceedances of these RBCs are highlighted and discussed in
Chapter 5.
The Region Ill RBC Table lists nearly 600 chemicals for which there are sufficient
toxicity data to develop health based guidance levels or RBCs for ingestion of soils, water, fish
tissue and air. All toxicity data (reference doses and carcinogenic slope factors) were derived
from U .S. EPA's Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables (HEAST) and Integrated Risk
Information System (IRIS) and combined with "standard" exposure scenarios to calculate the
RBCs. The RBCs are designed to limit to one in one million ( 1 o·6 ) the excess cancer risk level
for carcinogenic compounds and to protect against toxic doses of systemic toxicants (Hazard
Quotient of 1 ).
A summary table of chemical constituents tested for at Chevron and the corresponding
RBC for soils from the Region Ill table is provided as Table 4.4-1. Of the 54 chemicals
analyzed for during the Chevron RFI, only 7 chemicals did not have RBCs. They are Dibenz
(a,h,) anthracene, lndene, Methyl Chrysene, Methyl Naphthalene, Phenanthrene, Total
Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) and Lead .
Lead is an inorganic compound with known toxicity, but without a verifiable Risk
Reference Dose (Rfd) to generate a RBC . Instead, an Integrated Exposure Uptake Biokinetic
Model (IEUBK) was used to generate a soil cleanup level protecting children from exposures
4 -9 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
that will cause adverse blood lead levels. The value of 400 ppm used in Table 4.4-1 is from
the U.S. EPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) Revised Interim Soil
Lead Guidance for CERCLA Sites and RCRA Corrective Action Facilities (U.S EPA, OSWER
Directive 9355.4-12, July 14, 1994).
Dibenz(a,h,) anthracene, lndene, Methyl Chrysene, Methyl Naphthalene, and
Phenanthrene are part of a class of compounds known as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs). Although the toxicity data are not yet complete, they are not considered to be
carcinogenic and probably have RBC's similar to the other non-carcinogenic compounds in this
class. Because they were detected infrequently and in low concentrations, they are unlikely
to change the results of the risk based screen.
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons ("TPH") is a variable mixture of chemicals having
different toxicities. Several of the chemicals composing TPH have RBCs and were evaluated
independently during the risk based screen.
The risk based screen was used on all soil samples generated from the following areas
of the Chevron RFI: Wastewater Treatment System; Baffle Board Pond Conveyance Ditch;
Standing Water Surface lmpoundment; Abandoned Lime Settling Basin; Alky Channel; Alky
Site; Bonneville Canal; Experimental Farm; Fire Training Area; Bio-Disc Sump; North Tank Farm
and the Number 2 Outfall Channel. A risk based screen was not used for soil samples from
the Oily Dump and Landfill Solid Waste Management Units because a site specific risk
assessment (Appendix J) on these areas has been prepared (Radian Corp., 1994).
The risk based screening process examined all available soil data generated from the
Chevron RFI. All sample depths were included in the process. When sample concentrations
of chemical constituents exceeded the RBCs, the samples were noted and discussed. The
inorganic compounds arsenic and beryllium, suspected human carcinogens, frequently
exceeded their low RBCs. It was necessary to determine if these compounds and other
Final Dec. 19, 1994 4-10 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
inorganic compounds were naturally occurring and not the result of site activities. Fifty-one
soil samples (Section 3.2) collected to characterize background levels of inorganic compounds r
1'.lc-\-~ ~h.o--\-' -\-h~ "°'°'"'':!,.e o ~
were reviewed and statistically summarized in Table 4.4-2. The sample population was \ _
e..o.c;;h. 4 °'"'Q''(~~ '1-s x-c.~~n<eJ-..c:1"' -',-v\.~ ~ ... ~~1 Y"\O!.;-CO\."(.,_Q.{'""\--hQ ~\-\-t/ e .... ~h+sc.i.-cn.~\.-1(__
reduced to 48 so il Samples because three samples were found to contain high level'S of lead
and zinc compared to the other samples. It is believed that these samples (S010A, S011A
& SO 1 2A) have been influenced by the old Salt Lake Sewer Drain and are not, therefore ,
representative of background conditi ons at the site.
4-4-\ 4,4-2..
A comparison of tables 3.3-1 and 4.44 suggests that many of the inorganic
compounds naturally exceed the RBCs . When concentrations i n the refinery solids samples
were found to exceed the RBCs, they were next compared to the background soil arithmetic
means in Table 4.4-2 and discussed .
True exceedances of the RBCs from the risk based screen due to site activities
identifies areas on the site where more information from a site specific risk assessment may
be useful to quantify the risk. When site concentr ations are below the RBCs it is generally
believed, because of the conservati ve nature of the RBC , that no further action is needed to
address the s i te as long as there are no groundwater or ecological threats.
Fln1I De c . 1 9, 1 994 4 -11 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
CHAPTER 5
RFI INVESTIGATION RESULTS, CONCLUSIONS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter summarizes the results of activities performed at each SWMU during the
RFI. This summary is presented according to the following format, as appropriate:
0
0
Q
0
Unit Description -A brief description of the location, size and operational history
of the unit is provided.
Results of Investigation -Results of sampling activities, file reviews, etc.
associated with the unit are presented.
Risk Assessment -Where performed, results of risk assessment analyses and
risk screens are provided.
Recommendations -Recommendations for future actions associated with the
unit are presented .
5. 1 LANDFILL AREA
5 . 1 .1 SWMU Description
The Landfill waste-management unit is located immediately north of the TEL
Weathering Area and borders the east and north sides of the Oily Dump {Figure 1.4-1 ). A dike
and access road separate the Landfill from the Oily Dump.
Final Dec. 1 9 , 1 994 5-1 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
The Landfill waste-management unit consists of four subunits (Figure 5.1-1 ). These
subunits include a) the Solid-Waste Landfill, b) the Hazardous-Waste Landfill (a Federal RCRA
unit already identified in the Consent Order as requiring closure), c) the Old Barrel Storage
Area, and d) the Standing Water/Surface lmpoundment Area south of the Hazardous-Waste
Landfill. Additional sampling activities at the Hazardous-Waste Landfill were presented by
Earthfax Engineering as part of the Pre-Closure Sampling Plan (Earth Fax Engineering, 1991 a)
for this unit and are, therefore, not discussed further herein. In addition, an Interim Closure
Plan for the Hazardous Waste Landfill was submitted to the UDSHW in 1991 (Geraghty &
Miller, 1991 d).
The Solid-Waste Landfill occupies most of the Landfill waste-management unit and,
according to the WSCR, contains refuse depths of between 2 and 9 feet. This subunit
received assorted solids wastes, including non-hazardous spent catalysts and construction
debris beginning in the late 1960s. Spent catalysts were disposed of in the Solid-Waste
Landfill until the summer of 1988 .
The Old Barrel Storage Area is located in the northeast portion of the Landfill waste-
management unit and covers an area of about 0.5 acres. This area is fenced and was used
between 1980 and 1984 for temporary (less than 90 day) storage of barrels containing
hazardous waste.
Dikes were constructed between 1981 and 1982 in the southern portion of the Landfill
waste-management unit to contain surface water runoff from the area. These dikes created
the Standing Water Surface lmpoundment Area south of the Hazardous-Waste Landfill.
5.1.2 Investigation and Results
RFI Samples were collected from the Landfill subunits at the locations indicated in
Figure 5.1-1 . According to the RFI Work Plan, samples in the Old Barrel Storage Area and the
Final Dec. 18, 1894 5-2 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Standing Water/Surface lmpoundment Area were to be collected using a soil-recovery probe
while the remaining locations in the Solid-Waste Landfill were to be sampled using a split-
spoon sampler in conjunction with a hollow-stem auger. Easy access by the drill rig permitted
the Old Barrel Storage Area to be sampled with a split spoon/hollow-stem auger along with
the Solid-Waste Landfill. Each hollow-stem auger hole was drilled at least 5 feet below the
bottom of the field-identified fill and/or hydrocarbon contaminated soils based on visual
observations and headspace measurements (Figures 5.1-2 and 5.1-3).
Because a soil-recovery probe could not provide the volume of soil required by the
laboratory, a bucket auger was used to collect the soil samples at the Standing Water/Surface
lmpoundment Area after stratigraphy samples were collected using the soil-recovery probe.
Samples collected using the bucket auger were obtained to a depth of 5 feet. Upon
completion, al! Landfill sampling locations were backfilled to the surface with granular
bentonite.
Excessive winter precipitation and snow melt caused the proposed sample locations
in the Standing Water/Surface lmpoundment Area to become submerged during initial
sampling efforts at the Landfill in February 1993. Therefore, sampling of the Standing
Water/Surface lmpoundment was postponed until September 1993, when the surface water
had receded to a more representative level. Because of the irregular pattern and depths of
surface water in the Standing Water/Surface lmpoundment, a composite sample was created
of water collected from the three locations depicted in Figure 5.1-1 rather than from the four
corners and center of the pond as proposed in the Work Plan. The detected values are
summarized and compared to background in Tables 5.1-1 and 5.1-2.
In general, the Quality Assurance Plan for the Collection of Solids data was followed
during sampling of this unit. The only exception was that the bucket augers used to collect
soil samples at the Standing Water/Surface lmpoundment Area were not steam cleaned
Final Dec. 19, 1994 5 -3 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
between samples. Rather , the bucket augers were decontaminated prior to, and between use
with a Liquinox detergent wash followed by a deionized water rinse.
One set of control standards was submitted to the laboratory during the Landfill
sampling campaign. Details regarding the handling, composition and validation of the control
standards are presented in Chapter 4 of this document.
Solid-Waste Landfill -Results
Approximately 3 to 7 feet of fill was encountered at sample locations LF-4, LF-5, LF-6 ,
LF-7, and LF-9 . With the exception of the fill sample from LF-5, the individual fill samples
submitted for indicator-parameter analyses contained elevated concentrations of TPH (ranging
from 4,620 to 70,400 mg/kg). Detectable levels of toluene and xylenes were found in the
fill sample from LF-6 ; and benzene, toluene , and xylenes were detected in the fill sample from
LF-9.
Analyses for TCLP metals indicated that no metals exceeded TCLP-regulatory levels.
However, concentrations of TCLP cobalt, TCLP nickel, and TCLP zinc were detected in the
composite fill sample. No TCLP-regulatory levels have been established for these metals. No
TCLP-volatile organics or TCLP-BNA organics were detected in the composite-fill sample.
However, the fill composite did contain detectable levels of total BTEX and eight BNA
organics.
Field observations indicated hydrocarbon constituents existed beneath the fill at sample
locations LF-5, LF-6, LF-7, and LF-9, and at intermediate depths at LF-8. Individual samples
were submitted for analyses from 6 to 7 .5 feet (LF-5 and LF-7), 7.5 to 9 .0 feet (LF-6), and
from 9 to 10.5 feet (LF-8 and LF-9). TPH concentrations in excess of 1,000 mg/kg were
detected in the LF-6 and LF-8 samples. TPH concentrations in the LF-5, LF-7 and LF-9
Final Dec. 19, 1994 5-4 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
J!)\~~\ei
\jJ ~
samples were less thaGmg/k:. Toluene was detected in the LF-5 and LF-7 sample; and
toluene and ethylbenzene were detected in the LF-8 sample.
No TCLP metals were detected above TCLP-regulatory levels; however, TCLP cobalt
and TCLP zinc were detected in the composite sample . Five BNA organics and the same five
TCLP-BNA organics were detected in the intermediate-depth sample composite. No volatile
organics or TCLP-volatile organics were detected in the composite sample.
Field observations indicated that sample stations LF-1, LF-2, LF-3, and LF-10 had no
fill or evidence of hydrocarbon compounds. The upper 6.5 feet of sample station LF -8 also
appeared free of hydrocarbon compounds . Individual samples of the upper layer were
submitted for analyses from 3 to 4 .5 feet (LF-1 and LF-3) and 4.5 to 6 feet (LF-2, LF-8 , and
LF-10). No BTEX or TPH were detected in any of these samples.
Although no TCLP metals in the composite sample exceeded TCLP-regulatory levels,
TCLP cobalt, TCLP nickel, and TCLP zinc (which do not have established regulatory levels)
were detected. No volatile organics, TCLP-volatile organics, BNA organics, or TCLP-BNA
organics were detected in the composite sample.
Individual samples of the middle layer (7 .5 to 9 feet} were submitted for analyses from
the borings determined in the field to have no evidence of hydrocarbon compounds (i.e., LF-1,
LF-2 , LF-3, and LF-10). The LF-10 sample, however, contained detectable concentrations of
toluene, ethylbenzene, and TPH . No BTEX or TPH were detected in the middle-layer samples
submitted from LF-1 through LF-3.
TCLP-metal analyses indicated that no metals exceeded established TCLP-regulatory
levels. However, detectable concentrations of TCLP cobalt and TCLP zinc were found in the
composite sample. No volatile organics, TCLP-volatile organics , BNA organics, or TCLP-BNA
organics were detected in the composite sample.
Final Dec, 1 e , 1994 5-5 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A .
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Individual samples were submitted from the lowest layer from each of the borings
installed at the Solid-Waste Landfill. Detectable concentrations of toluene, ethylbenzene, and
TPH were found in the lower-layer samples from LF-1 , LF-2 , LF -3, LF-7 , and LF-10 . TPH was
also detected in the LF-9 sample.
No TCLP metals were detected at concentrations ex ceeding the TCLP-regulatory levels .
However, TCLP cobalt and TCLP zinc were detected at low levels in the lower-composite
sample . Five BNA organics, and four of the same five TCLP-BNA organics were detected in
the composite sample . No volatile organics or TCLP-volatile organics were detected in the
lower-sample composite.
Additional indicator-parameter analyses were performed on individual samples that did
not conform to the sample groups discussed above. These samples include LF-4 (6 to 7 .5
f eet), LF-5 and LF-6 (10 to 12.5 feet), and LF-7 (15 to 16.5 feet). Toluene and ethylbenzene
were detected in the LF -4 sample; and TPH was detected in the LF-6 sample. No composite-
parameter analyses were performed on these samples.
Solid -Waste Landfill -Waste Characterization
Fill encountered at the Solid-Waste Landfill consisted primarily of gravely sands with
spent catalyst and various construction debris. With the ex ception of the fill sampled at LF-5
(which was approximately 98-percent spent catalyst), the fill -samples contained high
concentrati ons of TPH . Hydrocarbon compounds were also detected in the borings that did
not encounter fill. BTEX and TPH analyses indicate hydrocar bons have migrated at depth to
LF-1, LF-2 , LF-3 , LF-8, and LF-10.
No samples analyzed from the Solid-Waste Landfill exceeded established TCLP-
regulatory l evels . TCLP-BNA organics were detected in the fill composite, the middle-depth
RN! Doe, 19, 19 94 5-6 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Faci li ty Investigation Report
December 1994
composite from LF-5 through LF-9, and the lower-layer composite from LF-1 through LF-1 O.
No TCLP-volatile organics were detected in any of the composite samples.
Old Barrel Storage Area -Results
Solid samples from O to 1.5 feet, 4 .5 to 6 feet, and 12 to 13.5 feet were submitted
for chemical analyses from sample stati on LF-11 . Since only one location at the Old Barrel
Storage Area was sampled, each layer sample was analyzed for both indicator and composite
parameters.
No refinery-related fill was encountered in the boring (LF-11) placed within the Old
Barrel Storage Area . Field observations indicated hydrocarbon compounds were not present
in any of the samples collected from LF-11. No TPH, volatile organics , TCLP-volatile organics,
BNA organics, or TCLP-BNA organics were detected in any of the samples submitted to the
laboratory from LF -11 .
TCLP -metals analyses indicated that no metals ex ceeded TCLP-r egulatory levels.
However, concentrations of TCLP zinc (at all three depths), TCLP nickel (at 4 .5 to 6 feet and
12 to 13.5 feet), and TCLP cobalt (at 4.5 to 6 feet) were detected in the LF-11 samples. No
TCLP-regulatory levels have been established for these metals.
Old Barrel Storage Area -Waste Characterization
Results of RFI sampling i ndicate that refinery operati ons have not impacted the Old
Barrel Storage Area.
Final Dec . 19 , 199 4 5-7 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Standing Water/Surface lmpoundment Area -Results
Solid samples from O to 1 foot, 2 to 3 feet, and 4 to 5 feet were collected for
laboratory analyses from three locations (Sl-1, Sl-2, and Sl -3) from the Standing
Water/Surface lmpoundment Area . TPH in excess of 1 ,000 mg/kg and low concentrations
of xylene were detected in the 2 -to 3-foot and 4-to 5-foot samples collected from Sl-1. TPH
concentration of 8. 78 and 102 mg/kg were detected in the 0-to 1-foot samples collected
from S1 -1 and Sl-2, respectively . No TPH or BTEX constituents were detected in any of the
other samples collected from Sl-2 or S1-3.
Field observations indicating the presence of hydrocarbons prompted compositing each
sample layer from Sl-1 and S1 -2. Because S1-3 lacked any observable hydrocarbons, samples
from S1 -3 were not included in the composites. Xylenes were detected in th€to 3-foot and
4 -to 5-foot composites. No volatile organics were found in the 0-to 1-foot composite.
Several BNA organics were detected in each of the three Sl-1 /Sl-2 composites. Only one
TCLP -BNA organic was detected in the 4-to 5-foot composite. No TCLP-volatile organic
compounds were detected in any of the three Sl-1 /Sl-2 composites.
No TCLP-metals were detected above established TCLP-regulatory levels. However,
TCLP antimony, TCLP nickel, and TCLP zinc were detected in the 0-to 1-foot and 2-to 3-foot
composites; and TCLP zinc was detected in the 4 -to 5-foot composite. No TCLP-regulatory
levels have been established for these metals.
A composite of the surface water sampled from the Standing Water/Surface
lmpoundment Area was analyzed for the parameters listed in Table 3 -1 of the Work Plan . No
volatile organics or BNA organics were detected in the composite water sample .
Fin1f Dec. 19, 1994 5-8 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Standing Water/Surface lrnpoundment Area -Waste Characterization
No fill was encountered at the Standing Water/Surface lmpoundment Area. No solid-
samples analyzed from the Standing Water/Surface lmpoundment Area exceeded established
TCLP-regulatory levels.
Concentrations of TPH indicated hydrocarbons exist at sample location Sl-1 and, to a
lesser extent, at Sl-2. The lack of volatile or BNA organics in the surface-water composite
indicated the surface water had not been impacted by the migrating hydrocarbons.
5.1.3 Results of Risk Assessment
In December 1994, a risk assessment of the area including the Landfill SWMU was
submitted by Radian Corporation to Chevron for review. The purpose of this assessment was
to evaluate the Landfill and Oily Dump SWMUs to develop risk .based cleanup levels. The
assessment was prepared in accordance with guidance outlined in the April 1994, Final Rule
for Cleanup Action and Risk-Based Closure Standards, Utah Division of Solid and Hazardous
Waste, Rule 315 .101.
It is intended that this risk assessment will be used to establish cleanup standards for
the Landfill and Oily Dump which are consistent with planned land use. The desired result of
evaluating the two areas together was to determine, either by areal distribution of
contaminants, or by redefinition of unit boundaries based on waste characterization, any areas
that would require remediation. The areas requiring remediation would be the subject of a
Corrective Measures Study (CMS) which would yield a preferred alternative for closure.
Subsequently, a Corrective Measures Implementation plan (CMI) would be prepared pursuant
to the CMS and final corrective action Landfill SWMU would be constructed.
Finol Oo c , 19, 1984 5 -9 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
The risk assessment for the Oily Dump Waste Management Study Area is included as
Appendix J of this report. In summary, both the Landfill Area and Oily Dump fall below the
risk criteria for the industrial scenario outlined in Rule 315.101 and does not require
remediation.
It is noted in the risk assessment that no consideration is made for impacts of these
units on the groundwater. Groundwater is treated as a separate SWMU and must be
evaluated at a later time in accordance with the Consent Order.
5. 1.4 Recommendations and Proposed Action
Pursuant to the results of this RFI and the above-referenced risk assessment, Chevron
is currently preparing a Corrective Measures Study which is evaluating alternatives for
responsible corrective action at the Landfill and Oily Dump to protect groundwater. Although
the risk assessment indicates there are no risks associated with these SWMUs, considerations
for contamination of groundwater along the western margin of the operating area by the
Landfill and Oily Dump SWMUs must be considered under the non-degradation requirements
in Utah Rule 315.101. Present plans for the Landfill & Oily Dump SWMUs include evaluating
areas containing elevated hydrocarbons which may be a source of groundwater contamination
(Section 6.3).
Further discussion of proposed remediation alternatives is outside the scope of the RFI
and will be submitted to the UDSHW as part of the CMS study. However, it is important to
clarify that overall cumulative effects of each SWMU on the groundwater will likely drive
remediation efforts at the unit. This effort may be much more cost effective and involve less
complex engineering applications than methods required to remediate groundwater at the
designated compliance points without upgradient source remediation.
Final Doc. 19, 1 994 5-10 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A .
Salt Lake Refinery
5.2 OILY DUMP
5.2. 1 SWMU Description
RCRA Faci lity Investigati on Report
December 1994
The Oily Dump is l ocated west of and separated from the Landfill unit by a road and
dike (F i gure 1.4-1 ). The Oily Dump is adjacent to and east of the Oil Drain. The unit has a
surface area of slightly less than 3 acres.
The Oily Dump received assorted solid wastes (e.g., construction debris} from 1953
to 1980. From 1953 to 1960, the Oily Dump also recei v ed sludge from a sulfuric acid gas
oil treating plant.
An estimated 22,200 c.y. of sludge and debris is contained in the Oily Dump. Wastes
are present to a depth of about 14 feet, with oil staining evident in the soil several feet
deeper. Previous investigations indicated that the waste material displays low pH values , with
elevated concentrations of cadmium , chromium, and mercury relative to background soils.
The oil content of waste samples reported i n the WSCR was approximately 23 percent .
Samples of standing water on the surface of the Oily Dump indicate detectable concentrations
of anthracene, aniline, 2-methylnaphthalene, and quinoline (see the WSCR).
5.2.2 Investigation and Results
In addition to the five sa m pling locations proposed in the Work Plan (shown as OD-1
through OD-5 on Figure 5.2-1 ), five borings (OD-6 through OD-10) were installed in the
northern sludge pond of the Oily Dump . Borings OD-1 through 0D-5 were installed using split-
spoon samplers in conjunction with a hollow-stem auger drill rig. Bori ngs OD-6 through 00-1 O
were installed using bucket augers from a boat.
Fino! De c. 1 9, 1 9 94 5-11 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Prior to initiating the RFI sampling at the Oily Dump, 12 preliminary borings (B-1
through B-12) were drilled to better define the limits of subsurface impacts that might be
associated with the Oily Dump. The B-1 through 8-12 borings were installed using split-spoon
samplers in conjunction with a hollow-stem auger drill rig. Although the 12 preliminary
borings (Figure 5.2-1) were not within the scope of the Work Plan and were sampled in
variance with some of the Work Plan QA/QC protocols, the methods and results are presented
herein to more completely characterize the waste-management area . Borings B-1 through B-
12 and OD-1 through OD-5 were completed prior to final approval of the RFI Work Plan and
were, therefore, completed under a unit specific work plan submitted to and approved by the
UDHSW (Appendix K).
In general, the Quality Assurance Plan for the Collection of Solids data was followed
during sampling of this unit. The only.excepti on was that the bucket augers were not steam
cleaned between samples . Due to the oily nature of sample locations OD-6 through OD-1 O,
the bucket augers were decontaminated in the field by washing with a Liquinox det ergent
solution followed by an ·acetone wash, a hexane wash, and a final deionized water rinse.
Blind duplicate samples from bori ngs OD-1 through OD-5 were created in the field using
the compositing technique outlined in Appendix A. Blind duplicate samples from borings OD-6
through OD-10 were created in the field by bri efly, yet thoroughly mixing the sample in a clean
stainless-steel bowl prior to filling two sets of laboratory supplied jars. In each case, one set
was labeled as the interval sampled and the other as a blind duplicate. One set of control
standards was submitted to the laboratory during the Oily Dump sampling campaign. No
QA/QC samples were collected while sampling prel iminary borings 8-1 through 8-1 2 .
Results
Results of analyses of solids samples collected at the Oily Dump SWMU are presented
in Table 5.2-1 (indicator parameters) and 5.2 -2 (composite parameters). Samples were
Final Dec. 1 9, 19 94 5-12 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
collected from borings 00-1 through 00-5 to depths ranging from 22 feet (at 00-1) to 46.5
feet at (00-2 and 00-3). TPH concentrations in excess of 1,000 mg/kg were detected to
depths of 13.5 feet at 00-1 and OD-5 , 11.5 feet at 00-2, 15.5 feet at OD-3, and 7 .5 feet
at OD-4. There was no detection of TPH below 31 feet at OD-2, 21 feet at OD-3, and 26 feet
at 00-4 and OD-5. The was no detection of TPH in the deepest sample collected at 00-1 at
22 feet. Cross sections through the Oily Dump SWMU are provided on Figures 5 .1-2 and 5.1-
3 and on 5.2 -2.
Four horizontally composited samples were submitted for laboratory analyses from
locations OD-1 through 00-5. The composite samples were created from 3 to 4 feet
(Composite Al, 13 to 13.5 (Composite 8), 21 to 27 feet (Composite Cl, and 31 to 32.5 feet
(Composite D). Organics which were detected in the Oily Dump composites include BTEX
constituents in Composite A and xylenes in Composite 8. Composite A contained two TCLP-
volatile organics, five BNA organics , and two TCLP-BNA organics. Composite B contained
three BNA organics and three TCLP-8NA organics, and Composite C contained three 8NA
organics. The concentration of total :selenium was also above normal concentration ranges
in sample Composites B, C and D. Comparison to facility background results are al so provided
on the tables.
No TCLP metals were detected in concentrations exceeding established TCLP-
regulatory standards in any of the composite samples from 00-1 through OD -5. However,
TCLP cobalt, nickel, and zinc were detected in Composite A, Composite Band Composite D;
TCLP nickel and zinc were detected in Composite C; and TCLP vanadium was detected in
Composite D. No TCLP-regulatory levels have been established for these metals.
Individual samples were collected from the uppermost sludges and from the soils
underlying the sludges at sample locati ons OD -6 through 00-10. Each sludge sample
contained detectable BTEX, and had TPH levels in excess of 100,000 mg/kg. With the
exception of the sludge collected from OD-10 , each sludge sample had a field measured pH
Final Do e. 19, 1994 5 -13 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
below 2 .0. Of the samples collected from the soils underlying the sludge, only the 4-to 4 .5
foot sample from OD-6 had a pH less than 2.0 . Soils immediately underlying the sludge had
TPH values greater than 1,000 mg/kg at OD-7 and OD-10, and greater than 10,000 mg/kg
at OD-6, OD-8, and OD-9. Benzene, toluene, and xylenes were detected in the underlying
soils collected from OD-8. Ethylbenzene and xylenes were detected in the underlying soils
collected from OD-10, and xylenes were detected in the underlying soils collected from OD-6
and OD-9 . No BTEX components were detected in the underlying soils collected from OD-7.
The detected values for individual samples are summarized on Table 5.2-1
Composite samples were created from the sludges and from the underlying soils at
sample locations OD-6 through OD-10. Both the sludge and the underlying-soils composite
samples contained detectable BTEX. The underlying-soils composite sample also contained
detectable chloroform and methyl ethyl ketone. No TCLP volatile organic compounds were
detected in either the sludge-or underlying-soil composi te samples. The sludge composite
contained seven BNA organics, and the underlying-soi ls composite contained nine BNA
organics. The sludge composite and the underlying-soils composite contained the same two
TCLP-BNA organic compounds. No TCLP metals were detected in concentrations exceeding
TCLP-regulatory levels. However, TCLP cobalt, and nickel were detected in both the sludge-
and underlyi ng-soils-composite samples. No TCLP-regulatory levels have been established for
these metals. Composite samples are summari zed and compared to background on Table 5.2-
2.
Waste Character ization
Refinery wastes were observed in hollow-stem auger borings OD-1 through OD-5 to
depths ranging from 2 .5 feet at OD-3 to 12.5 feet at 0D-4 and OD-5 {Figure 5 .1-3 and 5.2-2).
TPH concentrati ons in excess of 1,000 mg /kg were encountered to depths ranging from 7.5
at OD-4 to 15.5 feet at OD-3 . Mercury was detected below the EPA Region Ill Risk Based
Concentrations (RBCs) in all four composites from 0D-1 through OD-5. No TCLP constituents
Final Dec, 19, 1994 5-14 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
were detected in concentrations above established TCLP-regulatory levels in any of the
samples from OD-1 through OD-5.
Four of the five sludge samples from the north pond at the Oily Dump (i.e ., from
sample locations 0D-6 through OD-9) had pH levels below 2.0 and are, therefore,
characteristically hazardous. The soil sample from below the sludge at sample location OD-6
also had a pH level below 2.0. Both the sludge samples and the underlying soil samples
collected from locations 00-6 through OD-10 contained TPH concentrations in excess of
28,000 mg/kg . The concentration of total cadmium in the underlying-soils composite from
OD-6 through 00-10 was less than the EPA Region Ill RSC. Mercury was detected above the
background concentration range in the sludge composite but did not exceed the EPA Region
Ill RSC. No TCLP constituents were detected in concentrations above established TCLP-
regulatory levels in any of the samples from OD-6 through 00-10.
5.2.3 Results of Risk Assessment
As described in Section 5.1 .3, the Oily Dump does not pose any risk under the
Industrial Scenario detailed in Utah Rule 315.101. Results of a risk assessment of the Landfill
and Oily Dump SWMUs are presented in Appendix J and summarized in Section 5. 1.3. The
principal constituents of concern at the Oily Dump site are hydrocarbons and the impact they
may have on groundwater.
5.2.4 Recommendations and Proposed Action
Reference is made to Section 5 . 1 .4 for the Landfill area and its subunits for corrective
action being considered. New boundaries for the Oily Dump and Landfill area are defined in
this document based on the results of the RFI characterization . The unit boundaries previously
defined in the RFA and other documents appear to be somewhat arbitrary based on straight
lines which coincide with existing roadways, embankments etc. In addition, wastes identified
Final Doc. 19, 1994 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
during the RFI are s imilar throughout the area within the new boundary. The new boundaries
provided on Figure 5 .1-1 and 5.2-1 are based on the results of this RFI. Through the CMS,
a remediation plan for the Oily Dump will be proposed to the UDSHW pursuant to the risk
assessment referenced above and in consideration of the potenti al impact to groundwater.
Characteristically hazardous pH values ( < 2.0) in the hydrocarbon sludges necessi tate
co r rective measures of these materials. In addition, the cumulative effect of hydrocarbons on
the groundwater will be considered during the CMS planning.
5.3 ALKY CHANNEL
5.3. 1 SWMU Description
The Alky Channel is an unlined surface impoundment located immediately southeast
of Wastewater Treatment Pond No. 1 B, (Figure 1 .4-1 ). The channel was used from the late
1960s until 1984 to convey lime slurry waste from the HF alkylation plant to the Baffle Board
Pond. The channel may have been used to convey final treated effluent associated with the
Wastewater Treatment System. The Alky Channel covers approximately 0 .6 acre.
The channel contains a lime sludge which settled during the conveyance of lime slurry
waste. The WSCR estimated that the channel contained 8,000 c.y. of s ludge at a thickness
of 5 to 9 feet that is submerged beneath 0.4 to 2.9 feet of water. According to the WSCR ,
the sludge is not characteristically hazardous, but does contain elevated cadmium, chromium ,
nickel, pH (12.4), and oil contents (to 23 percent) relative to background. Prior to the RFI,
the sludge has not been previously analyzed for specific organics. A surface-water sample
reported in the WSCR contained elevated concentrations of several inorganics, refinery
organics, and solvents.
Fino! Doc . 1 9, 1994 5-16 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
5.3.2 Investigation and Results
RCRA Facility Investi gation Report
December 1994
RF I samples were collected from the five locations within the Al ky Channel indicated
in Figure 5.3-1. New 10-foot sect ions of 4-inch diameter Schedule-40 PVC pipe were driven
through the surface water to the base of the sludge prior to sampling to prevent infiltration
of the surface water and caving of the sludge during sampling. Upon bailing the surface water
from the PVC pipe, a sludge sampler was used to sample and remove sludge from the hole.
No liners were used in conjunction with the sludge samplers . Upon removing the sludge, the
inside of the PVC casing was swabbed clean with a rag mop and tap water while leaving the
pipe in place. The purpose of this cleaning was to prevent contamination of the sampling
equipment that was subsequently lowered through the pipe for the collection of samples
below the sludge. The wash water was then bailed from the PVC pipe into the Alky Channel.
Samples were continuously collected from the soils underlying the sludge at each
location using a hand-driven split-spoon sampler. Flowing sands precluded sampling to a
depth of 5 feet below the sludge/soil interface (as proposed in the Work Plan) at sample
locations AC-3, AC-4, and AC-5.
All Alky Channel sampling equipment was decontaminated prior to, and between use
w ith a Liquinox detergent wash followed by a deionized water rinse . Due to a persistent oily
residue, the sludge samplers used in AC-4 w are decontaminated with a Liquinox detergent
wash followed by an acetone wash, a hexane wash, and a final deionized water rinse. Upon
completion, all five sampling locations were backfilled with granular bentonite with the PVC
pipes left in place.
One set of control standards was submitted to the laboratory during the Alky Channel
sampling campaign. Details regarding the handling, composition and validation of the control
standards are presented in Chapter 4 of this d oc ument.
Fin.I Deo. 19, 1994 5 -17 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A .
Salt Lake Refinery
Results
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1 994
Sludge, ranging from 4.5 to 6 . 7 feet thick, was encountered at each of the five Alky-
Channel sample stations (Figure 5 .3 -2). The uppermost sludges encountered at stations AC-4
and AC-5 differed somewhat in color and consistency from the deeper sludges encountered
at these two locations, and from the sludges found at AC-1, AC-2, and AC-3. Individual
samples were retained for indicator-parameter analyses from the uppermost sludges (0 to 1
foot) at locations AC-4 and AC-5. With the exception of benzene not being detected in the
0-to 1-foot sample from AC-5, the uppermost sludge samples contained detected
concentrations of BTEX and TPH. The concentration of TCLP benzene in the 0-to 1-foot
sludge indicator sample from AC-4 (1.01 mg/I) exceeded the TCLP-regulatory level of 0.5
mg/l. This location was re -sampled according to the QA plan and found to contain
approximately the same TCLP benzene level. Detected values for indicator samples are
reported on Table 5.3-1.
The concentration of TCLP benzene in the composite of the 0-to 1-foot samples from
AC-4 and AC-5 was below the TCLP-regulatory level. Toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes ,
tested under TCLP were also detected in the 0-to 1-foot sludge composite. No TCLP-
regulatory levels have been established for these compounds. Four BNA organics, BTEX and
one TCLP-BNA organic were also detected in the 0-to 1-foot composite. No TCLP metals
were detected above established TCLP-regulatory levels in the 0-to 1-foot sludge composite.
However, TCLP nickel and zinc were detected . No TCLP-regulatory standards have been
established for these metals.
Individual samples of the sludges common to all five sample locations were submitted
for indicator-parameter analyses . The 2.5-to 3 foot sludge sample from each location
contained detected concentrations of BTEX and TPH.
Final Dee. 19, 1994 5-18 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
The composite of the 2.5-to 3 foot sludge samples contained detectable BTEX, TCLP
BTEX , seven BNA organics, and one TCLP-BNA organic. No TCLP metals were detected in
concentrati ons exceeding established TCLP-regulatory levels. However, TCLP antimony,
cobalt, nickel , and z i nc were detected in the 2. 5 -to 3 foot sludge composite. No TCLP-
regulatory levels have been established for these metals. Concentrations detected in the
composite samples are summarized on Table 5 .3-2.
Indicator-parameter analyses indicate that no BTEX constituents were detected in any
of the individual samples submitted from below the sludge. With the exception of the 6 .5-
to 7 foot sample from AC-2 (which had a TPH concentrati on of 404 mg/kg), no sample from
below the sludge had TPH concentrations above 100 mg/kg.
Composite samples were created from two horizons below the sludge at AC-1 through
AC-3, and from two horizons below the sludge at AC-4 and AC-5 (Figure 5 .3-2). The upper-
soil composite from AC-1 through AC-3 contained detectable concentrations of BTEX and
three BNA organics. The lower-soil composite from AC-1 through AC-3 contained low
concentrations of benzene and xylenes. The upper-soil composite from AC-4/AC-5 contained
detectable concentrations of x ylenes. The lower-soil composite from AC-4/AC-5 contained
detectable concentrations of ethyl benzene, x ylenes, and two BNA organics. No TCLP metals
were detected in concentrati ons exceeding TCLP-regulatory levels. However, TCLP zinc was
detected in every composite sample from below the sludge, TCLP antimony and n ickel were
detected in the two lower-soil composites, and TCLP cobalt was detected in the lower-soil
composite from AC-4/AC-5. No TCLP-regulatory levels have been established for these
metals.
Waste Characterization
The sludges encountered at the Alky Channel contained detected BTEX and TPH. One
sludge sample from 0-to 1-foot from AC-4 ex ceeded the established TCLP-regulatory level
Fin•I De c . 19, 1994 5-19 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A .
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
for benzene during initial sampling but not during re-sampling. No other sample submitted
from the Alky Channel exceeded any established TCLP-regulatory level. Analyses of soils
collected from the Alky Channel indicate that low concentrations of hydrocarbon compounds
do exist below the sludge.
5.3.3 Results of Risk Screen
Results of the risk screening for the Alky Channel suggest development of a full scale
Risk Assessment and/or proceeding directly with a Corrective Measures Study. This
recommendation is based on elevated benzene in samples collected during the RFI. Sample
AL-RF-4A detected 22 mg/kg benzene which is less than the industrial RBC value of 99 mg/kg
for benzene. No samples exceeded industrial scenario RBCs or the arithmetic mean for
background sample results. One sample, as discussed above, exceeded the TCLP regulatory
level for benzene and, although a second sample at the same sampling point was collected ,
it too exceeded the TCLP regulatory level tor benzene. Thus, there remains some concern for
benzene .
5.3.4 Recommendations and Proposed Action
Due to the proximity of the Alky flare, and safety regulations requiring no buildings
within 600 feet of a flare, corrective action based on risk based criteria is likely to be the
ultimate action at this SWMU. Development of a CMS which addresses the potential for
impact of the Alky Channel sludges on groundwater will likely be completed and submitted
to the UDSHW for review. As with all other units, proper evaluation will include an
assessment of the cumulative effect on groundwater at the compliance point remediation
locations.
The Alky Channel runs parallel to the buried drain line from the new HFM project to the
HFM sump located south of the wastewater treatment ponds. Results of this RFI indicate that
Firuil Doc. 19, 1894 5 -20 EarthFax Engineering, Inc,
Chevron U .S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 4
'('\ e, \
G'<'(f.""
approximately 5,000 c .y. of sludge and contami nated soil occupy the cha
8,000 c.y. estimated in previous investigations. The open, exposed lky Channel poses
surface traffic safety issues and contains elevated concentrations of
proposed action at this SWMU includes removing the water, and remed ating the sludges by
either stabilization or off-site disposal followed by backfilling the pon with clean fill.
Constructing the closed Alky Channel as a shallow ( < 2 .0 feet) retention basin is an option
for drainage control in the southwest porti on of the facility. Proximity of this channel to the
closed Baffle Board Pond and Storm Surge Pond make incorporating it into localized drainage
a favorable option.
Through preparation of a CMS for the Alky Channel , plans for corrective action will be
submitted to the UDSHW for their review.
5.4 SPENT CAUSTIC EVAPORATION SITE
5 .4.1 SWMU Description
The Spent Caustic Evaporation Site is located in the northern portion of the refinery,
between the Standing Water Site and the Landfill, (Figure 1.4 -1 ). This area was a disposal
site for spent caustic waste (Na0H) solutions from light hydrocarbon treatment processes
between t he early 1970s and 1980.
The site consisted of two, triangular-shaped, unlined and un-bermed ponded ar eas,
covering an area of 5 to 6 acres. Solution was spread over the area in a thin layer to promote
evaporation.
Soil samples collected from the site in 1 988 exhibited elevated levels (relative to
background) of barium, cadmium , chromium , zinc, pH, and oil to depths of 5 to 10 feet . None
of the soil samples exhibited hazardous characteri stics (see the WSCR).
Final Doc, 19, 1994 5-2 1 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Surface-water sample analyses reported by the WSCR showed elevated levels of
common ions. The WSCR concluded that this was due to the presence of the historic saline,
Hot Spring Lake at the site. Trace metals and oil were present in low concentrations in the
surface water.
5.4.2 Investigation and Results
Information generated during previous evaluations of the Spent Caustic Evaporation
Site are currently awaiting regulatory review. Consequently, no additional evaluations were
performed during the RFI.
5.4.3 Recommendations and Proposed Action
Chevron is currently using the southeastern portion of this unit for tankage. However,
all surface material was removed from below the affected areas and remains within the unit
boundary. Portions of the eastern boundary of this SWMU serve as emergency storage of
Oil Group I spills under the Worst Case Discharge scenarios for both the Facility Specific
Response Plan (Oil Pollution Act of 1990) and the Spill Prevention Control and
Countermeasure Plan (40CFR 112) for the Salt Lake Refinery. Consequently, no additional
·_:_:;::.-,.::,..-.,..;~:::.: _!e<-,._.._.._t,he near future. N~urther Action will be taken at this SWMU
as Ion as it is operational. -l ' ·~---:;.~
~ ~
5.5 ALKY SITE
• .._ (!,
f\ ()-_ .r-<1) 0~
.? ........... :1-
(r ,.D (l
... Lf
5.5.1 SWMU Description
The Alky Site is located in the south-central portion of the refinery, east of the Alky
Channel and wastewater treatment ponds (Figure 1 .4-1). The site received assorted solid
waste (e.g., construction debris) over an area of approximately 6 acres beginning in the mid
Final Dec, 18, 1884 5 -22 EarthFax Engineering~ Inc.
Chevron U.S.A .
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
1950s. In the mid to late 1960s, an evaporation pond was constructed on a portion of the
site (about 1.8 acres) to hold neutralized HF Acid effluent from the Alkylation Plant. The site
was operated until 1980.
According to the WSCR, refuse was expected at the site to a depth of about 9 feet
below the current ground surface . Sludges associated with the evaporation pond are present
. to a depth of approximately 5 feet . The WSCR estimated that approximately 9,700 c .y. of
waste are present at the Alky Site.
The WSCR indicated that waste materials at the site exhibited elevated cadmium,
chromium, mercury, zinc, pH, and oil relative to background. Organics that have been
detected in the waste include ethylbenzene, toluene, xylenes, and 2 -butanone. The wastes
were not found to exhibit hazardous characteristics . A surface-water sample from within the
site contained elevated dissolved solids and other major constituents, but no organics were
detected in the water.
5.5.2 Investigation and Results
RFI samples were collected from nine locations within the Alky Site (Figures 5.5-1 ).
Locations AS-1 through AS-8 were sampled using a split-spoon sampler in conjunction with
a hollow-stem auger. Because of frozen surface water overlying soft sludge across a large
area of the Alky Site at the time of sampling a gravel road base was placed over the frozen
surface water and sludge to facilitate access by the hollow-stem auger drill rig at sample
locations AS-4, AS-6, AS-7, and AS-8. This road base was obtained from the adjacent
evaporation pond berm. Sample location AS-9 was sampled through the ice and surface
water using bucket augers. No liners were used in conjunction with the bucket augers. A
new section of 4-inch diameter Schedule-40 PVC pipe was driven through the ice and surface
water to the base of the sludge to facilitate sampling the underlying sediments. Upon
completion, all sampling locations were backfilled to the surface with granular bentonite.
Fillal De c. 19, 1994 5-23 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
•
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
In general, the Quality Assurance Plan for the Collection of Solids data was followed
during sampling for this unit. The only exception was the bucket augers used to collect
samples at location AS-9 were not steam cleaned but, instead, were decontaminated prior to,
and between use with a Liquinox detergent wash followed by a deionized water rinse.
Results
Cross sections through the Alky Site generated using RFI data are presented in Figure
5.5-2 and 5.5-3. Approximately 0.5 to 5 feet of gravel fill was encountered at each Alky-Site
sample station with the exception of AS-9. The gravel-fill encountered at sample stations AS-
4, AS-6, AS-7, and AS-8 was the road base placed at the site to facilitate drill rig access as
noted above. Approximately 1.5 to 3.5 feet of spent catalyst was encountered beneath the
gravel fill at sample stations AS-2 through AS-5.
Individual samples representative of the upper gravel fill were submitted for indicator-
parameter analyses from AS-3 through AS-5 (1.5 to 3 feet) and from AS-8 (0 to 1.5 feet).
The fill samples from AS-4 and AS-8 contained elevated concentrations of TPH (20,700 and
1,520 mg/kg, respectively). The fill sample from AS-4 also contained 3.72 mg/kg xylenes.
The detected values for the individual samples are summarized on Table 5.5-1.
The composite of the fill samples from AS-3, AS-4, AS-5, and AS-8 also contained a
detectable concentration of xylenes. No BNA organics, TCLP-BNA organics, or TCLP-volatile
organics were detected in the composite-fill sample. No TCLP metals were detected in
concentrations that exceed established TCLP-regulatory levels. However, TCLP zinc (which
does not have a TCLP-regulatory level) was detected in the composite-fill sample. Detected
values for the composite samples are summarized on Table 5.5-2.
Individual samples from the interval having the highest field-headspace reading were
submitted for indicator-parameter analyses. Samples thus submitted were obtained from 6
Final Dec. 19, 1984 5-24 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
to 7.5 feet at AS-1 through AS-7 and 10.5 to 12 feet at AS -8 (Figure 5.5-2 and 3). Although
field conditions precluded heads pace analyses on the samples collected from AS-9, field
observations (olfactory and visual) suggested that the 4.2-foot sample from AS-9 had elevated
organic vapors. Detectable concentrations of TPH in excess of 1,000 mg/kg were also noted
in the 6-to 7.5 foot samples from AS-2 through AS-5 and in the 4.2-foot sample from AS-9.
Concentrations of TPH were detected in the 6-to 7 .5 foot samples from AS-1 and AS-7,
respectively. No TPH was detected in the 6-to 7.5 foot sample from AS-6 or in the 10-to
12.5 foot sample from AS-8. Toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes were detected in the AS-2
and AS-4 samples; toluene and xylenes were detected in the AS-1 sample; ethylbenzene and
xylenes were detected in the AS-3 sample; and xylenes were detected in the AS-7 and AS-9
samples .
Composite-parameter analyses were conducted on the composite of the samples having
the highest field-headspace readings, including the 4.2-foot sample from AS-9. The composite
sample contained low concentrations of toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes. No TCLP-volatile
organics were detected in the composite sample. One BNA organic (phenanthrene) and one
TCLP-BNA organic (naphthalene) was detected in the composite sample. No TCLP metals
were detected in excess of established TCLP-regulatory levels. However, the composite
sample contained detectable levels of TCLP cobalt, nickel, and zinc. No TCLP-regulatory levels
have been established for these metals.
Individual samples collected below the interval having the highest headspace
measurement were submitted from three horizons from sample stations AS-1 through AS-7
and from two horizons from stations AS-8 and AS-9. Of these samples, only the 8-foot
sample from AS-9, the 13.5 to 15 foot sample from AS-2, and the 18-to 19.5 foot sample
from AS-4 contained detectable TPH values of 1.25, 2.58, and 2,960 mg/kg, respectively.
No volatile organics, TCLP-volatile organics, BNA organics, or TCLP-BNA organics were
detected in any of the composites from below the peak-headspace interval. No TCLP metals
Fin.I Dec, 19, 1994 5-25 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
were detected in concentrati ons exceeding established TCLP-regulatory standards. However,
TCLP cobalt and zinc were detected in the first-horizon composite from below the peak-
headspace interval; and TCLP cobalt, nickel, and zinc were detected in the two deepest
composites . No TCLP-regulatory levels have been established for these metals.
Waste Characterization
With the exception of the evaporation pond area, gravel fill and spent catalyst was
encountered at the Alky Site to depths of 4 to 7 feet. Detected concentrations of TPH were
contained in the fill-material collected from sample stations AS-4 and AS-8. The fill sample
from AS-4 also contained detectable xylenes.
Sludges, ranging from 1.6-to 5 .75 feet thick, were encount ered in the evaporation
pond at sample stations AS-4 , AS-6, AS-7, and AS-9. Analyses of individual sludge samples
from AS-4 and AS-9 indicate that the sludges contain .detectable concentrations of TPH and
detectable concentrations of toluene, xylenes , and (in the sludge analyzed from AS-4),
ethyl benzene.
Hydrocarbon compounds were also detected below the fill and/or sludge at every
sample station except AS-6 and AS-8 . No hydrocarbon compounds were detected in any
sample analyzed from AS-6. With the exception of an anomalous TPH value of 2,960 mg/kg
in the 13.5 to 15 foot sample from AS-4, no significant concentration of hydrocarbons were
detected below 8 feet at any sample location. Using 8 feet as the depth of hydrocarbon
contamination, there are an estimated 28 ,000 cubic yards of waste and stained soils at the
site.
No samples analyzed from the Alky Site exceeded established TCLP-regulatory levels.
One TCLP-BNA organic was detected in the AS -1 through AS-7 (6 to 7 .5 foot) and AS-9 (8
Final Dec, 19, 1994 5 -26 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A .
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
foot) composite. No TCLP-volatile organics were detected in any of the composite samples.
5 .5.3 Results of Risk Screen
Risk screening for this unit suggest No Further Action would be required purely from
a health risk viewpoint because, with one exception , no soil samples exceeded RBCs . The one
sample, RF -COM PE, contained beryllium at 0. 7 mg/kg. This concentration is above the RBC
and the arithmetic mean for background sample results of 0.43 ppm, but within the range of
Background values found at the site (See Table 4.4-2).
As with the Alky Channel, the proximity to the Alky flare precludes development or
utilization of this ground for worker occupied buildings. In additi on, the HF neutralized sludges
in the pond may present a risk to groundwater. Therefore, corrective action may be required
only at the sludge pond portion of the Alky Site. The remaining portions of this SWMU will
likely be proposed for No Further Action based on the results of this RFI and risk screen.
5.5.4 Recommendations and Proposed Action
Preliminary bench scale stabilization tests have been conducted on the sludges from
the Alky Site HF Acid Neutralization Pond. The preliminary data suggest that the sludge can
be adequately stabilized using 18 to 20 percent (by weight) cement kiln tust. Approximately
21,000 cubic yards of sludge and contaminated soil occupy the neutralization ponds at the
Alky Site. Since these materials are already contained within an engineered earthen
embankment, a remediation technology under consideration is construction of a landfill cell
wherein the sludges are elevated above the potential high groundwater on a section of
engineered fill, stabilized to a bulking density which allows transfer to, and compaction within
the cell, and covered with a low permeability vegetated cover. Because the risk screen
suggests the only potential impact is to the groundwater once the worker exposure risks are
removed, the cover need only provide adequate drainage, thus limiting infiltration, rather than
Finol Dec, 19, 1994 5-27 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
a specified permeability as for a RCRA cap. This approach will allow construction of a cap
with natural material and a vegetated cover designed to accommodate storm runoff. Storm
runoff from this site could be incorporated into the master drainage plan for the southwest
portion of the refinery.
After submittal of this RFI report, Chevron will proceed with development of a CMS
for the pond portion of the Alky Site which will include a petition for No Further Action for the
remaining portions of the un it. Upon completion, the CMS will be submitted the UDSHW for
review.
5.6 NORTHEAST LANDFILL
5.6.1 SWMU Description
The Northeast Landfill is located northeast of the Crude Storage tank farm, as shown
on Figure 1 .4-1 . The landfill received assorted solid waste, including spent catalysts and
construction debris, from the 1960s until 1980. This unit occupies an area of slightly more
than 2 acres.
According to the WSCR, the fill depth at the Northeast Landfill is 7 to 11 feet, and the
estimated volume of fill is 19,000 c .y. Relative to background, elevated concentrations of
arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, and zinc have been detected at the site.
However, none of the samples exhibit hazardous characteristics. Oil contents to 10 percent
were measured at the site during performance of the WSCR.
5.6.2 Investigation and Results
The Northeast Landfill and its surrounding areas were monitored for seepage that could
be associated with the waste-management unit. A visual inspection of the Northeast Landfill
Final Dec. 19, 1994 5-28 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facil ity Investigation Report
December 1994
environs was performed during the spring (i.e., during high groundwater) of 1993. Because
no seepage was observed during this inspection, samples were not collected from the
Northeast Landfill for the RFI.
5.6.3 Recommendations and Proposed Action
As part of the proposed action for this site, a drainage plan was developed in June
1 994 . The purpose of the drainage plan was to assure that water from this SWMU would
flow across it uniformally without creating any adverse conditions at adjoining tank farms or
at Chevron Pipe Line, located to the north of this unit. The drainage plan drawing is provided
in Appendix L of this report. Chevron will implement this drainage plan if it becomes evident
that better control of the surface runoff is required. However, at the present time there is no
evidence that such drainage measures are necessary and No Further Action is planned.
5. 7 LEADED TANK SLUDGE DISPOSAL SITES
5.7.1 SWMU Description
The Leaded Tank Sludge Disposal Sites were located in a product storage tank field
east of the Reservoir. Leaded tank sludges from adjacent tanks were disposed of at six
locations within the tank farm (Figure 1 .4-1) from 1950 to 1975. The sludge was scraped
from the tanks, spread on the ground in local depressions , allowed to weather, and covered
with soil and large cobbles.
According to the WSCR, the leaded tank sludges were excavated from the disposal
sites in 1983. Approximately 300 tons of leaded tank sludge and contaminated soil was
excavated and disposed of at a permitted off-site hazardous-waste disposal facility.
Final Dec. 18, 1884 5-29 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Samples collected for the WSCR following removal of the sludge show no hazardous
characteristics. The WSCR indicated that all total metals concentrations at the sites are
within the range common for soils.
5. 7 .2 Recommendations and Proposed Action
As indicated in the RFA and the Work Plan, the leaded tank sludges were excavated
and removed from the refinery in 1983. No additional evaluation was performed at the Leaded
Tank Disposal Sites during the RFI. No Further Action is planned for this SWMU.
5.8 CONVEYANCE DITCHES
5.8.1 SWMU Description
The Conveyance Ditches consisted of open, unlined ditches that provided drainage for
tank farm areas in the refinery. The ditches conveyed storm water to the Wastewater
Treatment System. They were constructed in 1948 and operated until 1983.
In 1983, Chevron excavated in excess of 240 tons of sludge and contaminated soil
from the Conveyance Ditches and replaced the ditches with an enclosed piping system. The
contaminated material was disposed of at an off-site permitted hazardous-waste disposal
facility.
5.8.2 Recommendations and Proposed Action
As indicated in the RFA and the Work Plan, the contaminated soils and sludges in the
vicinity of the conveyance ditches were excavated and removed from the refinery in 1 983.
Therefore, no additional evaluation of the Conveyance Ditches was performed during the RFI.
No Further Action is planned for this SWMU.
Final Dee, 19. 1994 5-30 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
5.9 STANDING WATER SITE
5.9. 1 SWMU Description
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
The Standing Water Site is located in the northern portion of the refinery, immediately
west of the Landfarm. This site occupies approximately 4.1 acres and has accumulated storm
water since the early 1950s from the northern area of the refinery, including the Landfarm.
Berms were constructed around the Landfarm in 1983, precluding runoff from the Landfarm
to the Standing Water Site .
No waste has been placed in the Standing Water Site. Soil samples collected from the
site for the WSCR indicated that concentrations of inorganic analytes are not elevated with
respect to background. A composite soil sample from the site contained 5 .5 percent oil. No
refinery-related organics were detected in the water at the site.
5.9.2 Recommendations and Proposed Action
As indicated in the RFA and the Work Plan, previously collected data indicate that
refinery-related organics are not present in the water at the Standing Water Site; nor do soils
at the site contain concentrations of inorganics that exceed background range . Thus, no
additional evaluation was performed at the Standing Water Site for the RFI. No Further Action
is planned for this SWMU.
Interim Corrective Measures constructed for the North Tank Farm SWMU resulted in
placement of a portion of a groundwater intercept trench into the Standing Water Site.
Consequently, in a effort to control runoff from the site, a drainage plan was developed for
this unit. The drainage plan drawings as proposed, are presented in Appendix L of this report.
final Doc. 19, 1984 5-31 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
5.10 WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
5.10.1 SWMU Description
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
The Wastewater Treatment System {"WWTS") covers approximately 25 acres and is
located in the south-central portion of the refinery. The current WWTS consists of the
following subunits {Figure 1.4-1 ):
Storm Water Segregation Sump,
Storm Surge Tanks,
Equalization Tanks,
Two API Separators,
Induced Air Flotation Unit,
Biological Oxidation Pond,
Bio-Disc Unit,
Three Retention Ponds,
Sand Filter,
Sand Filter Backwash Pond, and
Final Retention Pond.
Initially, the WWTS consisted of an API Separator and a ditch system that carried
effluent from the separator through the area of the current Baffle Board Pond and Alky
Channel to the Oil Drain. The various components of the treatment system were added during
the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s to permit further treatment of the wat er. A summary of the
treatment system operation is presented in the RFA {Jacobs Engineering Group, 1989).
New treatment units are being added as part of current 1994 WWTS upgrade
construction. This new upgrade will result in elimination of the pond network used in the
current system. Consequently, there will be major changes to the operation of the system in
the future. As a result of these changes and the pending removal of the ponds, the ponds
were characterized under this RFI. Therefore, a revised Work Plan (Appendix K) for this
characterization was submitted to and approved by the UDSHW.
Fino! Doc. 19, 1994 5-32 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Previous sediment samples collected from the retention ponds (Roadcap and Torres,
1984) contained elevated levels (relative to background) of arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead,
selenium, and silver. None of these early samples exhibited the characteristic of EP Toxicity
or other hazardous characteristics at that time. Trace metals and phenols were found at low
concentrations in the water of the middle retention pond (Pond 3).
The Bonneville Canal was characterized prior to final approval of the RFI Work Plan.
Characterization was completed under a separate UDSHW approved Work Plan prepared
specifically for the Bonneville Canal (Appendix K).
5.10.2 Investigation and Results
Samples of three horizons (one sampl e of the uppermost sludges and two samples of
the underlying soils) were collected from Ponds 1 A, 18, 2, and the Dewatering Pond during
the RFI. Samples collected from these ponds were characterized separately using the indicator
and composite sampling procedure outlined in the Work Plan. Because the pond system is
designed to result in improved water quality (and , therefore, sediment quality), in the
downstream direction only samples of the uppermost sediments were collected from Ponds
3, 4, 5, and the Sand Filter Backwash Pond.
Samples were collected from the Wastewater Treatment System ponds from the
locations indicated in Figure 5 .10-1. In Ponds 1 A, 1 B, 2, and the Dewatering Pond, new 10-
foot sections of 4-inch diameter schedule-40 PVC pipe were driven through the surface water
to the base of the sludge at each sampling location to prevent infiltration of the surface water
and caving of the sludge during sampling. Upon bailing the surface water from the PVC pipe,
a sludge sampler was used to sample and remove sludge from the hole. Soils underlying the
sludge were sampled through the PVC pipe using a bucket auger. No liners were used in
conjunction with the sludge samplers or the bucket augers. Upon completion, each sampling
location was backfilled with granular bentonite with the PVC pipes left in place.
Final Dec, 19, 1994 5-33 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A .
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Because only the uppermost sediments were sampled from Ponds 3, 4, 5, and the
Sand Filter Backwash Pond, it was not necessary to isolate the uppermost sediments from the
surface water; therefore, PVC pipe was not used in the sampling process. A bucket auger
was used to directly sample the uppermost sediments in these downstream ponds.
Solid samples were collected from three horizons from Ponds 1 A, 1 B, 2, and the
Dewatering Pond; and from the uppermost sediments from Ponds 3, 4, 5, and the Sand Filter
Backwash Pond (Figure 5.10-1 ). A discussion of the sampling results for each pond is
presented below, followed by a waste characterization for the WWTS as a whole. Detected
values are summarized and compared to background on Tables 5.10-1 and 5.10-2.
Dewatering Pond
Approximately 2 and 1.4 feet of sludge was encountered at .sample locations DP-1 and
DP-2 , respectively . Based on these results an estimated 1,900 cubic yards of sludge and
contaminated soil exists in this pond. The individual sludge samples from DP-1 and DP -2
contained BTEX and TPH concentrations in excess of 10,000 mg/kg.
No TCLP-metals were detected in concentrations exceeding established TCLP-
regulatory levels. However, TCLP nickel, cobalt, and zinc were detected in the composite-
sludge sample . No TCLP-regulatory levels have been established for these metals. The
composite-sludge sample also contained detectable concentrations of BTEX and six BNA-
organic compounds. No TCLP-volatile organics or TCLP-BNA organics were detected in the
Dewatering Pond sludge composite.
Individual samples were collected from two horizons below the sludge at DP-2. Auger
refusal precluded collecting samples from more than one horizon below the sludge at DP-1 .
Indicator-parameter analyses were conducted on the 3-to 3.5 foot sample from DP-1 , and the
Fi.,_.I Do c . 18, 1804 5-34 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
2 .5-to 3 and 4-to 4.5 foot samples from DP-2. Xylenes were detected in both DP-2
samples; TPH was detected in the DP-1 sample.
The upper-soil composite consisted of the 3-to 3.5-foot sample from DP-1 and the 2 .5-
to 3-foot sample from DP-2. Because samples could not be obtained below 3.5 feet at DP-1,
the individual 4-to 4.5-foot sample from DP-2 was analyzed for composite parameters. Both
the upper-soil composite sample and the 4-to 4.5-foot sample from DP-2 contained detectable
xylenes. No TCLP-volatile organics, BNA-organics, or TCLP-BNA organics were detected in
the upper-soil composite or in the 4-to 4 .5-foot sample from DP-2. No TCLP metals were
detected in concentrations exceeding established TCLP-regulatory levels. However, TCLP
nickel, cobalt, and zinc were detected in the upper-soil composite; and TCLP antimony,
nickel, and zinc were detected in the 4-to 4.5-foot sample from DP-2. No TCLP-regulatory
levels have been established for these metals.
Pond 1A
Solid samples were submitted from two locations (P1 A-1 and P1 A-2) from Pond 1 A.
Approximately 1.3 and 1.1 feet of sludge was encountered at locations P1 A-1 and P1 A-2,
respectively. Based on these data, an estimated 7,000 cubic yards of sludge and
contaminated soil is present in Pond 1 A. Individual samples of the sludge from Pond 1 A
contained detectable BTEX and TPH concentrations in excess of 10,000 mg/kg.
No TCLP-metals were detected in concentrations exceeding established TCLP-
regulatory levels. However, TCLP nickel, vanadium, and zinc were detected in the composite-
sludge sample. No TCLP-regulatory levels have been established for these metals. The
composite-sludge sample also contained detectable concentrations of BTEX and six BNA-
organic compounds. No TCLP-volatile organics or TCLP-BNA organics were detected in the
Pond 1 A sludge composite.
Final Dec, 1 9, 1984 5-35 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A .
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Indiv idual sampl es were collected from two horizons below the sludge (from 2.3 to 3 .0
feet and 4 to 5 feet) at both P1 A -1 and P1 A-2 . Only the 2 .3-t o 3.0-foot sample from P1 A-1
contained detectable TPH.
No volatile organics, TC LP-volatile organics, BNA organics, or TCLP-BNA organics were
detected in the two soil composites from below the sludge in Pond 1 A . No TCLP-meta ls
concentrations exceeded established TC LP-regulatory levels. However, TCLP vanadium and
zinc were detected in the both soil composites; and TCLP nickel and cobalt were detected in
the lower soil composite. No TCLP-regulatory levels have been established for these metals.
Pond 1 B
Solid samples wer e submitted from three locations (P18-1 through P1 B-3) from Pond
1 B. Approxi mately 0.2 to 1.2 feet of sludge was encountered in Pond 1 B. Based on these
data , an estimated 7,500 yards of sludge and contaminated soil exist in Pond 1 B. Individua l
samples of the sludge from Pond 1 8 contained detectable BTEX and TPH concentrations
ranging from 1,400 to 36,600 mg/kg.
The composite sludge sample from Pond 1 B contained detectable concentrat ions of
total chromium, total cadmium, total mercury, total selenium , and total zinc. No TCLP-metals
were detected in concentrations exceeding established TCLP-regulatory levels. However,
TCLP nickel and zinc, for which no regulatory standards have been established, were detected
in the composite-sludge sample . The composite-sludge sample also contained detectable
concentrations of BTEX and six BNA-organic compounds. No TCLP-volatile organics or TCLP-
BNA organics wer e detected in the Pond 1 B sludge composite.
Ind ividual soil samples were collected from two horizons below the sludge at the three
Pond 1 B sample stati ons. Of these samples, only the 1.5-to 2 -foot sample from P1 B-1
contained detectable TPH.
Finol Dec. 19, 19 94 5-36 EarthFax Engineering, Inc,
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Samples from 1.5 to 2 feet (P18-1 ), 5 to 6 feet (P18-2). and 1.2 to 2.2 feet (P18-3)
comprised the upper-soil composite from Pond 18. The upper-soil composite contained a low
concentration of xylenes and four BNA organics. No TCLP-volatile organics or TCLP-8NA
organics were detected in the upper-soil composite. No TCLP metals were detected in
concentrations exceeding established TCLP-regulatory limits. However, TCLP cobalt and TCLP
zinc (which are not regulated) were detected in the upper-soil composite.
Samples from 3.5 to 4 feet (P18-1 and P18-3) and 7 to 8 feet (P18-2) comprised the
lower-soil composite from Pond 1 B. No volatile organics, TCLP-volatile organics, BNA
organics, or TCLP-BNA organics were detected in the lower-soil composite. No TCLP metals
were detected in concentrations exceeding established TCLP-regulatory limits. However,
TCLP nickel and zinc (which are not regulated) were detected in the lower-soil composite
Pond 2
No sludge was encountered at any of the four sample stations in Pond 2 . The
individual 0-to 0.5-foot samples from P2-3 and P2-4 contained detectable concentrations of
xylenes and TPH concentrations in excess of 1,000 mg/kg. The 0-to 0 .5-foot samples from
P2-1 and P2-2, and the 6-to 6.5-foot sample from P2-1 also contained detectable
concentrations of TPH. This upper 0 .5 feet of soils is estimated to account for approximately
4,500 yards of material.
The upper-horizon (0-to 0.5-foot} composite sample from Pond 2 contained xylenes
and five BNA organics. No TCLP-volatile organics or TCLP-BNA organics were detected in the
0-to 0.5-foot composite sample. No volatile organics, TCLP-volatile organics, BNA organics ,
or TCLP-BNA organics were detected in the middle-or lower-horizon composite samples. No
TCLP metals were detected in concentrations exceeding TCLP-regulatory levels. However,
TCLP vanadium and zinc were detected in the upper-horizon composite sample; TCLP
antimony was detected in the upper-and lower-horizon composite samples; and TCLP nickel
Final Do c. 1 9 , 1994 5-37 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A .
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
and cobalt was detected in the lower-hori zon composite sample. No TCLP-regulatory levels
have been established for these metals.
Pond 3/Pond 4/Pond 5/Sand Filter Backwash Pond
Samples from O to 0.5 feet were submitted from Pond 3, Pond 4 , Pond 5, and the
Sand Filter Backwash Pond. With the ex ception of the Sand -Filter-Backwash Pond sample,
TPH was detected in each of the pond samples. No composite-parameter analyses were
conducted on these samples. Pond 3 i s estimated to contain approximately 9,500 yards of
contaminated material, while Pond 4 is estimated to contain 1,200 yards and Pond 5 contains
approximately 2,500 yards of solid material which contain concentrati ons above the naturally
occurring sediments which ex isted prior to construction of the ponds.
Waste Characterization
Sludges were encountered in the Dewatering Pond, Pond 1 A , and Pond 1 B. Every
sludge sample collected during the RFI contained detectable BTEX and concentrations of TPH .
Only chromium and benzenethiol were detected above the EPA Region Ill RBCs. As detailed
in Section 5.10 .3, speciation of chromium into trivalent and hexavalent forms may eliminate
it from concern using the RBCs . Each sludge-compos ite sample contained detectable BTEX
and the same six BNA-organic compounds. No TCLP metals, TCLP-volatile organic s, or TCLP-
BNA organics were detected in concentrati ons exceeding established TCLP-regulatory levels
in any of the individual sludge samples or any of the sludge composites.
No sludges were encountered in Ponds 2 , 3 , 4, 5 , or the Sand Filter Backwash Pond.
Two of the four samples of the uppermost sediments from Pond 2 contained detectable
concentrations of xylenes and TPH concentrations in excess of 1 ,000 mg/kg. Concentrations
of TPH below 1,000 mg/kg were detected in the two remaining upper-sediment samples from
Pond 2, and in the uppermost sediments collected from Ponds 3, 4, and 5 . Consistent with
Final De e. 10, 1994 5-38 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
the design of the pond system (i.e., i mproving water quality in the downstream direction), TPH
concentrations decreased from 597 mg/kg in the upper sediments of Pond 3 to 40.5 mg/kg
in the upper sediments of Pond 5 . No TPH was detected in the Sand Filter Backwash Pond .
Samples collected below the uppermost sediments from Ponds 1 A, 18, 2, and the
Dewatering Pond indicate that hydrocarbon compounds are generally limited to the sludges
or uppermost sediments of the Wastewater Treatment System ponds. Auger refusal in the
Dewatering Pond precluded sampling to depths of non-detectable hydrocarbon compounds.
However, concentrations of hydrocarbon compounds in the samples collected below the
sludges in the Dewatering Pond are not considered excessive.
No hydrocarbon constituents were detected below the middle-layer composites in
Ponds 1 A or 18. With the exception of an anomalous TPH concentration in the 6 -to 6.5-foot
P2-1 sample (808 mg/kg), no hydrocarbons were found below the uppermost sediments in
Pond 2. The trend of declining hydrocarbon concentrations with depth in the upstream ponds
indicate that the relatively low TPH concentrations found in downstream ponds 3 , 4, and 5
are limited to the uppermost sediments.
5.10.3 Results of Risk Screen
Risk screening results indicate that risk-based cleanup action is feasible for the pond
network of the WWTS. Chromium was detected in all soil samples at concentrations ranging
from a low of 4.5 ppm (sample WT-RF-P18-2) to a high of 2,120 ppm (sample WT-P1 B-3A).
Previous sampling conducted as part of the RFI for the Oily Dump Waste Management Area
confirmed that the chromium exists only in its trivalent form at the refinery. This is less toxic
than hexavalent chromium . None of the soil samples exceeded the RSC for trivalent chromium
of 7800 ppm for a Industrial ex posure.
Fin ol Oe c. 1 9 , 1994 5-39 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
A full scan of composited samples WT-RF-P1A-1A, P1A-2A and P18-1A, 2A, 3A
detected benzenethiol ranging from 56 to 138 mg/kg . These values exceed industrial RSC of
10 ppm. The elevated levels of benzenethiol in the composites require that the sludges and
contaminated soils be evaluated for remediation of this constituent.
Detected levels of total chromium in the sludge warrant concern if any portion of the
total is the hexavalent form. Sample analysis did not differentiate between hexavalent or
trivalent chromium. Because Chevron is planning on eliminating the pond network of the
WWTS when the new plant goes on line in 1995, a ris k assessment of chromium containing
materials will be evaluated . This evaluati on will account for the potenti al impact to
groundwater after the ponds are closed.
5.10.4 Recommendations and Proposed Action
As described in Section 5 .10 .1, Chevron is presently constructing an upgrade to the
WWTS which will result in elimination of the pond network in late 1995 . At that time, as part
of a risk evaluation of the pond bottom materials, chrom ium will be speciated and the
associated risks for chromium will be clarified . -1(1-1 l,~ \
'oe '(l':f'fl ~
If trivalent chromium is the only form present, the anticipated closure scenario will be
treatment or disposal of the sludges containing benze,iol. One option under review is the
creation of a waste cell in what is now Pond 18 (Figure 1.4-1 ). This pond could then become
the final disposal cell for all other stabilized WWTS pond sludges and soils subject to
remediation as defined in the risk assessment.
As part of the WWTS upgrade, the eastern half of Pond 1 A was analytically clean
I
closed with the sludges and contaminated soils remaining within the downsized pond. In
addition, as part of the same efforts, a sacrificial berm is being constructed through the
northern end of Pond 2. This berm will create an alignment for the construction of the new
Final Dec . 19, 19 8 4 5-40 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A .
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
outfall line from the upgraded WWTS. The soil beneath the affected area is being analytically
cleaned closed with the materials remaining in Pond 2 south of the new sacrificial berms. In
both of the above cases, the sacrificial berm will be removed and the material from it and
below it will be remediated as part of the selected action at the WWTS. The activities
described above were approved by the UDSHW through preparation and submittal of a letter
work plan. Final as constructed drawings will be provided to UDSHW upon completion .
Formal submittal of a risk assessment and/or CMS will be made to the UDSHW for the
pond network of the WWTS once the ponds are taken out of service. The ponds will remain
an integral portion of the current treatment process until the new plant goes on line in 1995.
5.11 HF ACID NEUTRALIZATION TANKS
5. 11.1 SWMU Description
The HF Acid Neutralization Tanks are located northeast of the Alky Site (Figure 1.4-1 }.
The unit consists of two below-grade, open-topped, steel-reinforced concrete elementary
neutralization cells, each measuring approximately 20 feet by 10 feet by 13 feet deep. The
west cell was retro-fitted with a steel liner in 198 6 due to general deterioration of the tank.
This cell receives spent hydrofluoric acid from the al kylation process and neutralizes that
waste stream with potassium hydroxide. A small amount of oil is contained in the acid and
accumulates on the surface in the west cell. This oil is removed via a skim box and
subsequently incinerated in the Alkylation Plant furnace.
The effluent from the west cell is periodically drained to the east cell. Spent solutions
in the east cell are periodically regenerated to recover potassium hydroxide. The recovered
potassium hydroxide is re-used in the west cell. Un-regenerable potassium hydroxide solution
from the east cell is disposed of in the Lime Settling Basin (Section 5.13).
Final Dao. 19, 1994 5 -41 EarthFax Engineering., Inc.
Chevron U.S.A .
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
The sludge that accumulates in the tanks contains elevated concentrations (relative to
background) of arsenic, cadmium, and chromium (Jacobs Engineering Group, 1989).
However, during previous sampling the material was not EP Toxic or otherwise character-
istically hazardous. Elevated fluoride concentrations in the form of potassium fluoride have
been detected in liquid samples collected from the tank.
5.11.2 Investigation and Results
The Work Plan proposed that samples be collected from the three phases (solid ,
aqueous, and polymer) that could exist in the two HF Acid Neutralization Tanks . At the time
of sampling, all three phases were present in the west tank while only the sol id and aqueous
phase were present in the east tank. All HF Acid Neutralizati on Tank samples were analyzed
for hazardous characteristics, including ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, and toxicity under
TCLP.
A composite sample of the aqueous mater ial in the east tank was collected w ith a new
disposable PVC bailer . Individual portions of the aqueous composite were collected from the
southeast, northeast, and northwest corner of the east tank and composited in a g lass jar as
outlined in Appendix 8 of this document. Two sets of laboratory-supplied bottles were filled
with the composited aqueous sample; one set labeled as the east tank aqueous composite and
the other as a blind duplicate.
A composite sample of the soli d material (sludge) on the bottom of the east tank was
collected with a bucket auger. Individual portions of the sludge composite were c ollected
from the northwest, northeast, and southeast corners of the east tank. Each individual sludge
sample was transferred to laboratory-supplied jars and submitted such that the laboratory
could create the solid -sample composite.
Final De c. 19, 19 94 5 -42 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
A sample of the floating polymer in the west tank was collected with a stainless-steel
ladle . The polymer was transferred directly from the stainless-steel ladle to laboratory-supplied
bottles.
An aqueous sample was collected from a single location in the west tank. In order to
isolate the aqueous phase from the floating polymer phase, a new section of 4-inch diameter
schedule-40 PVC pipe with a slip cap on the lower end was inserted through the floating
polymer phase. Upon removing the cap from the lowered end of the PVC pipe, a new
disposable PVC bailer was lowered though the PVC pipe to collect the aqueous-phase sample.
A sample of the solid material (sludge) from the bottom of the west tank was collected
with a sludge sampler. The sludge samples were collected through the same PVC pipe used
to isolate the floating polymer when collecting the aqueous-phase sample from the west tank.
No liner was used in conjunction w ith the sludge sampler.
Results
RFI samples were collected from the solid, aqueous, and polymer phases from the west
HF Acid Neutralization Tank; and from the solid and aqueous phases from the east HF Acid
Neutralization Tank. The aqueous-phase sample and the solid-phase (sludge) sample from the
east tank had pH levels greater than 12.5. No other samples from the HF Acid Neutralization
Tanks had pH values greater than 12.5 or less than 2 . No samples from the HF Acid
Neutralization Tanks contained any TCLP-volatile organics or TCLP semi-volatile organics.
Both the polymer-phase sample from the east tank and the aqueous-phase sample from the
west tank contained one TCLP purgeable F-solvent .
Final Dec. 1 e, 1994 5-43 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Waste Characterization
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1 994
Both the aqueous and solid phase in the east HF Acid Neutralization Tank exceeded the
characteristic of corrosivity by having pH levels greater than 12.5. The polymer phase in the
east tank and the aqueous phase in the west tank contained one TCLP purgeable F-solvent
(methyl isobutyl ketone and acetone, respectively). However, no TCLP-regulatory levels exist
for these compounds. No other HF Acid Neutralization Tank sample exhibited hazardous
characteristics.
5. 11.3 Recommendations and Proposed Action
Since this is an operating unit, activities will be monitored during all operations of the
tanks. These tanks are open-topped, steel-reinforced concrete structures and as long as the
tanks are competent they pose no risk to groundwater or health other than to workers.
However, all employees who work in this unit are trained in the operation of the tanks and the
risk associated with HF Acid. Therefore,·No Further Action is· recommended for this unit until
it is taken out of service.
5.12 SPENT CAUSTIC TANKS
5.12. 'i SWMU Description
The Spent Caustic Tanks consist of two tanks withi n one of the refinery tank farms
that contain spent caustic primarily from liquified petroleum gas and gasoline treating
processes. The tanks are located within the east-central portion of the refinery (Figure 1 .4-1)
and have a combined capacity of approximately 100,000 gallons. One tank is constructed
on a foundation of compacted fill and asphalt and the other tank is constructed on a concrete
pad. The tanks are surrounded either by individual or tank-farm berms to contain potential
releases as detailed in the SPCC Plan .
Final Do c. 19, 1994 5-44 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
The tanks have stored spent caustic since the early 1950s. Prior to 1980, the spent
caustic was disposed of at the Spent Caustic Evaporation Site (Section 5.4). From 1980 to
1985, the accumulated spent caustic was disposed of in the refinery Wastewater Treatment
System (Jacobs Engineering Group, 1989). The tanks were drained and cleaned in 1985 and
returned to service. The spent caustic is now periodically removed from the tanks for off-site
recycling.
According to the RFA, the caustic stored in each of the tanks is sodium hydroxide. The
RFA further indicates that the spent caustic is hazardous due to its corrosivity (high pH) and
reactivity (high pH and sulfide content)
5.12.2 Recommendations and Proposed Action
As indicated in the Work Plan, no evidence of leakage or spillage has been observed
around the Spent Caustic Tanks . Thus, no additional evaluation was performed at the Spent
Caustic Tanks during the RFl and No Further Action is planned.
5.13 LIME SETTLING BASIN
5 .13.1 SWMU Description
The Lime Settling Basin is an unlined, below-grade impoundment located east of the
Alky site along the southern boundary of the refinery (Figure 1.4-1 ). The basin receives
effluent from the refinery's Boiler Plant and from the east cell of the HF Acid Neutralization
Tank. The Lime Settling Basin measures approximately 250 feet by 1 50 feet by 8 feet deep.
The basin was constructed in 1980 and originally discharged effluent to the Oil Drain
via the No. 2 Outfall system. Since 1984, the water phase from the basin has been pumped
Fin.! Dec. 19, 1994 5-45 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
to Wastewater Treatment Pond No. 1 (1 A after 1991 and 1 B after 1994) and sludges have
been excavated, dried, and disposed off-site.
The sludge in the Lime Settling Basin contains elevated concentrations (relative to
background) of cadmium and silver. The pH of the sludge is typically 9 to 1 O (Jacobs
Engineering Group , 1989). Detectable or suspected concentrations of various volatile and
semi-volatile organics were also reported in the RFA . The sludge does not exhi bit hazardous
characteristi c s (Jacobs Engineeri ng Group, 1989).
5, 13.2 Investigation and Results
A composite sludge sample was collected from the Lime Settling Basi n and analyzed
for pH. Indivi dual portions that would comprise the composite were obtained from the
approxi mate corners and center of the ba_sin using a sludge sampler and were transferred into
laboratory supplied jars. No liner was used in conjunction with the sludge sampler.
When all four c orners and center of the basin were sampled, the individual samples
were transferred from the jars to a stainless-steel bowl and thoroughly mixed to create the
composite. The composited sample was then transferred back into two sets of clean,
laboratory-supplied jars and submitted for analysi s; one set was labeled as the Lime Settling
Basin composite sample and one set was labeled as a blind duplicate.
The composite-sludge sample collected from the Lime Settling Basin had a pH o f 9 . 77.
This is below the level defined as being a characteristic hazardous waste on corrosivity,
5. 13.3 Recommendations and Proposed Action
Because this is an operating unit and the sludges are maintained within the boundaries
of thi s operating unit, and since the pH of the sludge does not characterize the material as
Final Do c. 1 8, 18 8 4 5-46 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
corrosively hazardous, No Further Action is recommended at this SWMU. If future use of this
unit changes, the lime sludge and limey soi ls will be removed and the unit will be backfilled
to grade with engineered fill.
5.14 COKE FINES DEWATERING IMPOUNDMENT AND WASTE PILE
5.14.1 SWMU Description
The Coke-Fines Dewatering lmpoundment and Waste Pile Area were located between
the Reservoir and the process area (Figure 1.4-1 ). The impoundment portion of the area
measured about 100 feet by 50 feet, with an unknown depth. The waste pile was
approximately 200 feet in diameter.
The impoundment was utilized to settle coke fines from water used during drilling and
crumbling of solid coke pri or to loading on railroad cars. Prior to the late 1970s, the
impoundment was unlined. Settled fines were periodically dredged out of the impoundment
and deposited in the Waste Pile since they contained d irt and could not be sold. A concrete
pad and maze were constructed in the late 1970s which now allows coke fines to be collected
and sold off site for formation of carbon anodes.
The former (unlined) impoundment and the waste pile were closed in 1987 by
excavating coke fines and soil for off-site disposal. The site was subsequently regraded . No
visible evidence of the former impoundment or waste pile exist at the site (Jacobs Engineering
Group , 1989).
The coke fines are high-grade carbon. Impurities must be minimi zed to meet
specifications for manufacturing of carbon anodes. Analyses of the Chevron cok e fines
indicate that they are not a RCRA characteristic waste (Jacobs Eng ineering Group, 1989).
Fin•I Dec. 19, 1994 5-47 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
5.14.2 Verification of Past Closure Activities and Intentions
As indicated in the Work Plan, there is no evidence suggesting a release from the Coke-
Fines Dewatering lmpoundment and Waste Pile Area. Documentation of past closure activities
is provided in Appendix I. Because past closure activities are completed No Further Action is
planned at this unit.
5.15 HAZARDOUS WASTE INTERIM STORAGE PAD
5.15.1 SWMU Description
The Hazardous-Waste Interim Storage Pad is located east of the Standing Water Site
and south of the Landfarm (Figure 1.4-1 ). It was constructed in 1983 and is still in use. The
pad is used to store wastes generated at the refinery for less than 90 days, during which time
testing and off-site disposal of the material occurs. The pad is constructed of an 8-inch thick
reinforced concrete slab with a 1-foot tall curb that encircles the pad to prevent run-on or
runoff. The site is completely fenced, with entry controlled through a locked gate.
The pad measures 1 00 feet by 100 feet. The majority of the pad is used for storage
of bins and containers. A 50-foot by 40-foot section of the pad is sloped to a depth of 3 feet
and used for storage of sludges and other bulk wastes that contain free liquids. There is a gate
at the bottom of this sump which drains to the facility wastewater treatment system.
A variety of wastes are stored on the pad. All storage is for a period of less than 90
days. As indicated above, both containerized and bulk wastes are stored on the pad, with the
bulk wastes ranging in consistency from oily soil to sludges that contain up to 50 percent
water .
Final Dec. 19, 1994 5-48 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
5.15.2 Recommendations and Proposed Action
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1 994
As noted in the Work Plan, and verified by several observations and inspections of the
operation of this unit during the RFI, there is no evidence of spillage, overtopping, or releases
to surrounding soil from the Hazardous-Waste Interim Storage Pad. Thus, no additional
evaluation of this SWMU was conducted during the RFI and No Further Action is planned as
long as the unit is operational.
5.16 SHALE OIL SEMI-WORKS STORM WATER RETENTION POND
5.16.1 SWMU Description
The Shale Oil Semi-Works Storm Water Retention Pond was located south of the Spent
Caustic Evaporation Site and north of the Reservoir (Figure 1.4-1). This unit was used to
collect runoff water from the Shale Oil Semi-Works facility. The pond was constructed in the
early 198Os and shut down in 1985.
The pond had a surface area of approximately 3.4 acres and was constructed by
excavating the area below grade. Upon closure of the Shale Oil Semi-Works facility, the pond
water was drained to the Wastewater Treatment System and the shallow soil within the pond
was excavated. Excavated soil was disposed in the Shal,e Oil Semi-Works Spent Shale Pile
(see Section 5 .17).
The pond was used only for storage of runoff water. No analyses of the water or soil
exist.
Fin•I Doc. 19, 1994 5-49 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
5.16.2 Recommendations and Proposed Action
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
As indicated in the Work Plan, soil from within the Shale Oil Semi-Works Storm Water
Retention Pond was excavated and disposed of on-site w ith the spent shale from the Semi-
Works. No additional evaluation of this SWMU was required or performed during the RFI.
Therefore, No Further Action is planned at this SWMU .
5.17 SHALE OIL SEMI-WORKS SPENT SHALE PILE
5.17. 1 SWMU Description
The Shale Oil Semi-Works Spent Shale Pile is located in the north-central portion of the
refinery {Figure 1 .4-1). The pile was used from 1984 to 1985 to store spent shale from the
former Shale Oil Semi-Works operation. The unit covers a surface area of approximately 14.5
acres.
The Shale Oil Semi-Works Spent Shale Pile was closed in 1985 as two cells. One cell
contained fresh and spent shale. The second cell cont ained material excavated from the Shale
Oil Semi-Works Storm Water Retention Pond (Section 5.16). During closure, both pi les were
encapsulated and the area was surrounded by a below-grade slurry wall constructed to
prevent post-closure releases from the unit {Appendix I). The surface area is currently
protected by a locked fence.
Groundwater samples collected from downgradient monitor wells {S -6 and S-7) indicate
that the Shale Oil Semi-Works Spent Shale Pile has not impacted groundwater.
Final Do c. 19, 1994 5 -50 EarthFax Engineering, Inc,
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
5. 17 .2 Groundwater Quality Data Summary
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1 9 94
Groundwater quality summaries are on file at the offices of Chevron Research and
Technology Corporation (11CRTC") in Richmond, California and at the offices of the UDSHW.
A letter from CRTC dated August 1991 to Mr. Allan Moore of the UDSHW provided a
summary of all water quality data for this unit and requested a release from any future
sampling based on a history of no detected release from the closed cell. Pursuant to that
letter, and the subsequent approval of the UDSHW to discontinue sampling , no groundwater
quality samples were collected from monitor wells S-6 or S-7 for monitoring of the Spent
Shale Pile cell after that date. No Further Action is anticipated at this SWMU. Copies of the
appropriate letters are provided in Appendix I.
5 .18 NO. 2 OUTFALL CHANNEL
5 .18.1 SWMU Description
The No . 2 Outfall System Channel is located along the south side of the Alky Site
(Figure 1.4-1 ). The channel was used between 1980 and 1984 to convey effluent from the
Lime Settling Basin to the No. 2 Outfall. The channel is approximately 10 feet wide and was
originally about 800 feet long.
The west end of the channel was once part of the Wastewater Treatment System
discharge channel for API separator effluent. That portion of the channel is now covered by
the HFM Sump.
According to the RFA, sediment and/or soil collected from the channel contains
elevated concentrations (with respect to background) of arsenic, barium, chromium,
manganese, nickel, and sodium. The pH values are also elevated relative to background.
Several volatile and semi -volatile organics have also been detected in the soils . Surface-water
FiNI Dec, 19, 1994 5-51 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
samples have in the past contained elevated metals concentrations relative to drinking-water
standards.
Evidence of sediment and water contamination at the site were reported in the RFA.
Monitor wells are not adequately located to assess the effects of the No. 2 Outfall System
Channel on groundwater quality.
5.18.2 Investigation and Results
RFI samples were collected from four locations within the No. 2 Outfall Channel and
from three locations south of the channel as indicated in Figure 5.18-1 . New 4-inch diameter
Schedule-40 PVC pipe was driven through the surface water and into the uppermost
sediments at each of the four sampling locations within the channel to prevent infiltration of
surface water and caving of the uppermost sediments during sampling. Surface water was
bailed from each PVC pipe with a disposable PVC bailer prior to sampling .
All No. 2 Outfall Channel samples were collected using a bucket auger. No liners were
used in conjunction with the bucket augers. The sampling equipment was generally
decontaminated in accordance with the QA Plan in Appendix A. Exceptions to this procedure
include the sampling equipment used at location OF-2 and OF -3, which was steam cleaned
followed by a Liquinox wash and a deionized water rinse. Upon completion, all sampling
locations were backfilled with granular bentonite, with the PVC pipes left in place at the four
sample locations within the channel.
Results
Samples were collected from four locations within the No. 2 Outfall Channel (OF-4
through OF-7) and from three locations south of the channel (OF-1 through OF-3) as indicated
in Figure 5.18-1 . Of the individual samples collected from OF-1 through OF-3 in the south end
Finol Dec. 19, 1994 5-52 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A .
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
of the channel , only the 1-to 1 .5 foot sample from OF-2 contai ned detectable TPH. A
summary of detected values and comparisons to background is presented on Tables 5 .18-1
and 5.18-2.
Composite samp les from OF-1 through OF-3 were created from Oto 0.5 foot (upper-
layer composite), 1 to 1 .5 feet (middle-layer composite), and from 2 .5 to 3 feet (lower-layer
composite). No TC LP metals were detected in concentrations exceeding established
regulatory standards. However, TCLP nickel and zinc were detected in all three composites;
and TCLP vanadium was detected in the upper-and middle-layer composites. No TCLP-
regulatory levels have been established for these metals. No volatile organics, TCLP-volatile
organics, BNA organics, or TCLP-BNA organics were detected in any of the composite samples
from south of the No. 2 Outfall System Channel.
Individual samples were collected from four sample locations within the outfall channel
(OF-4 through OF-7). Concentrations of TPH in excess of 1 ,000 mg/kg were detected in the
0-to 0.5-foot samples from OF -5 and OF-7 . A TPH concentration of 12 mg /kg was detected
in the 0-to 0.5-foot sample from OF-6 . The 0 -to 0.5-and 1-to 1 .5-foot samples from OF-5
contained detectable concentrations of xylenes .
Composite samples from OF-4 through OF-7 were created from O to 0.5 foot (upper-
layer composite), 1 to 1 .5 feet (middle-la yer composite), and from 2.5 to 3 feet (lower-layer
composite). Xylenes were detected in all three composite samples from within the outfall
channel. One BNA-organic compound was detected in the upper-layer composite sample. No
TCLP -volatile organics or TCLP-BNA organics were det ected in any of the composite samples
from within the outfall channel. No TCLP metals were detected in concentrations above
established TCLP -regulatory levels in any of the composite samples. However, TCLP zinc, for
which no TCLP-regulatory level has been established, was detected i n all three composite
samples from within the No. 2 Outfall System Channel.
Fina l Dec, 19, 1994 5-53 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Waste Characterization
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
With the exception of a thin layer of "limey ooze " at sample station OF -7 (near where
the Lime Settling Basin drains to the outfall channel), no sludges were encountered at the No.
2 Outfall Channel. Elevated concentrations of hydrocarbons were limited to the upper
sediments (0 to 0.5 foot) of sample stations OF-5 and OF-7. No TCLP-volatile organics or
TCLP-BNA organics were detected in any of the composite samples from the waste-
management unit which exceeded established regulatory standards .
5.18.3 Results of Risk Screen
The risk screen suggests that No Further Action is required at this site from a dermal
contact/ingestion viewpoint. No soil samples exceeded RBCs or the arithmetic mean for
background sample results. Only limited TPH and BTEX components were detected which
appear to pose no risk to human health or the environment.
5.18.4 Recommendations and Proposed Action
Although the risk screen indicates that No Further Action could be recommended, the
potential for this SWMU to impact groundwater should be further evaluated . Cumulative
effects of potential leachate from this unit must be considered, particularly this far west
towards the compliance point for groundwater treatment.
If corrective action is required, this action may involve removal of water from the
channel to the WWTS and excavation of the top foot of sludge material, estimated to be
2 ,000 yards, for remediation. Off-site disposal or possible incorporation with the Alky Site
neutralization ponds may be considered . The channel may be backfilled with common fill to
accommodate the master drainage plan developed for the southwestern portion of the
refinery.
Final Dae. 19, 1994 5 -54 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Chevron will submit under separate cover a CMS with a selected technology
accompanied by a request to remediate this site as a potential source of groundwater
contamination, or petition No Further Action.
5. 19 EXPERIMENTAL FARM
5. 19.1 SWMU Description
The Experimental Farm is located west of the Oil Drain, (Figure 1.4-1). This area was
cultivated and irrigated with refinery waste water, but the period of application , the total area
irrigated, and the volume of wastewater that was applied are uncertain. The RFA suggests
that operation may have been as early as 1973 and as late as 1985.
Water that was applied to the area originated at the outfall from the Wastewater
Treatment System. Analytical results pertaining to this water are presented in the RFA . This
water has not·been classified as a RCRA characteristic waste.
5.19.2 Investigation and Results
Historical aerial photographs were reviewed to better define the boundaries of the
Experimental Farm. Based on this review, the experimental farm was divided into four areas
and gridded to provide 1 5 grid points within each area. Using a random number table, three
points within each area of the Experimental Farm were selected for sampling as indicated in
Figure 5.19-1. All sampling at the Experimental Farm was conducted using a bucket auger.
No liners were used in conjunction w ith the bucket augers. Upon completion, each sampling
location was backfilled to the surface with granular bentonite.
Fin.I Dec. 19, 1994 5-55 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Two sets of control standards were submitted to the laboratory during the Experimental
Farm sampling campaign. Details regarding the validation of the control standards are
presented in Chapter 4 of this document.
Three points within each of the four areas of the Experimental Farm were selected for
sampling. Samples were collected from Oto 0 .5 foot, 1 to 1.5 feet, and 2.5 to 3 feet at each
sample station. Each individual sample was analyzed for total and TCLP cadmium as well as
total and TCLP lead. Within each of the four areas, composites were created from the
samples collected from each layer. A summary of detected values and comparisons to
background is provided on Tables 5.19-1 and 5 .19-2.
Results
The concentrations of total cadmium and lead in all samples were below the EPA
Region Ill RBCs. No TCLP metals were detected in concentrations exceeding established
TCLP-regulatory standards in any of the composite samples. However, concentrations of
TCLP metals for which there are no established regulatory levels (including TCLP antimony,
TCLP vanadium, TCLP nickel, TCLP cobalt, and TCLP zinc) were detected in some or all of the
composite samples. No volatile organics, TCLP-volatile organics , BNA organics, or TCLP-BNA
organics were detected in any of the composite samples from the Experimental Farm.
Waste Characterization
None of the inorganic concentrati ons in samples collected at the Ex perimental Farm
SWMU classify the soils as solid waste. No sludges or stained soils were encountered and
all detected inorganics were below EPA Region Ill RBCs. No organics were found in any of
the soils.
Final Doc. 18, 1884 5-56 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
5.19.3 Results of Risk Screen
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Risk screening for metals indicates that No Further Action is required in this area with
regard to the surface soils. No soil samples exceeded either an ABC value or the arithmetic
mean for background sample results.
A groundwater plume has been defined within the shallow aquifer beneath a portion
of the Experimental Farm SWMU primarily north of the old Bonneville Canal section. As
detailed in Section 6 .0, the source of this plume appears to be east of the Oil Drain . There
are no indications that soils from the Experimental Farm are contributing to this plume.
Samples collected from just above the groundwater in soils within the Experimental Farm
show no detected organics, thus supporting this concept.
5.19.4 Recommendations and Proposed Action
No Further Action is recommended on this SWMU at this time. The unit is accessed
quarterly during routine Consent Order sampling campaigns. During the course of collecting
water levels and well samples in this area, observations will be made as to conditions which
may warrant changing the status of this unit.
5.20 BONNEVILLE CANAL
5.20. 1 SWMU Description
The Bonneville Canal runs east to west through the central portion of the refinery
(Figure 1.4-1 ). The canal was constructed in the early 1900s as part of an irrigation system
for farms north of the present refinery. Under its initial use, the canal diverted water from the
Jordan River west of the refinery and carried the water east through the land now occupied
Fin al Dec, 19, 1994 5-57 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
by the refinery and thence north to the ir rigated farmland. The supply to this canal was cut
off during construction of the Oil Drain.
Within the refinery operating area, the western 40 percent of the canal is now utilized
as Pond 5, the final retention pond of the Wastewater Treatment System. The central 50
percent has been closed and the eastern 10 percent of the canal drains springs originating at
the canal's present eastern terminus . This spring water flows from the Bonneville Canal
through the Wastewater Treatment System to the Oil Drain .
5 .20.2 Investigation and Results
Solid samples were initially collected from the bottom of the Bonneville Canal from the
eight locations (S-1 through S-8) indicated on Figure 5.20 -1. New sections of 4-inch diameter
Schedule-40 PVC pipe were driven through the surface water to the base of the uppermost
sludge/sediment to prevent infiltration of the surface water and caving of the uppermost
·sediments ·during sampling. -All initial sampling was .conducted through the PVC pipe.
Supplemental samples were collected to better delineate the areal extent of elevated
TPH concentrations and the associated sludges found in the uppermost sample horizon at
sample locations S-3, S-4 and S-5 . Field observations and headspace readings of the
uppermost sediments/sludges east of S-3 and west of S-5 were used to delineate the area of
elevated TPH. Two sludge samples from within the field delineated boundaries (approximately
115 feet west of sample location S-5, and approximately 61 feet east of sample location S-3)
were collected, composited in the field, and submitted for RFI composite parameter analyses .
The two supplemental samples were composited in the field by briefly, yet thoroughly mixing
the samples in a clean stainless-steel bowl prior to filling the laboratory-supplied jars. All other
Bonneville Canal composites were created by the laboratory. Because these supplemental
samples were only collected from the uppermost sediments, it was not necessary to isolate
the sample locations with PVC pipe.
Final Dec.19.1994 5-58 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
In addition to the samples collected from the bottom of the Bonneville Canal, solid
samples were collected from five seep areas along the northern bank of the canal as shown
in Figure 5.20-1. All Bonneville Canal samples were collected using a bucket auger. No liners
were used in conjunction with the bucket augers. Upon completion, all sample locations were
backfilled with granular bentonite, with the PVC pipe left in place at the eight initial sample
locations within the canal.
Individual samples were collected from three horizons (SS-1, SS-2 and SS-3) from each
of eight locations (BCA-S1 through BCA-S8} in the Bonneville Canal. The sample horizons
ranged from 0 to 3 .5 feet (SS-1 ), 0.1 to 4. 7 feet (SS-2), and 1 to 6 feet (SS-3). Sample
horizons were based on field observations of stratigraphy and/or evidence of hydrocarbon
seepage. Flowing sands precluded sampling the SS-3 horizon at sample station BCA-S 1. A
summary of detected values and comparisons to background is provided on Table 5.20-1 and
5.20-2.
Results
Indicator-parameter analyses indicated the upper-horizon (SS-1} samples from BCA-S4
and BCA-S5 contained TPH concentrations in excess of 10,000 mg/kg. The SS-1 sample
from BCA-S3 contained a TPH concentration of 1,470 mg/kg. Lower TPH concentrations
(< 1,000 mg/kg) were detected in the SS-1 samples from BCA-S6, BCA-S7, and BCA-S8; and
in the middle-horizon (SS-2) samples from BCA-S3, BCA-S4, BCA-S5, and BCA-S8.
A composite sample was created from the SS -1 samples from sample locations BCA-S3
through BCA-S8. The SS-1 composite contained detectable BTEX, TCLP xylenes, and two
BNA organic compounds. No TCLP metals were detected in concentrations exceeding
established TCLP-regulatory standards. However, TCLP nickel, vanadium, and zinc were
detected in the SS-1 composite . No TCLP-regulatory levels have been established for these
metals.
Final Deo. 19, 1994 5-59 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Re f inery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
No volatile organics, TCLP -volatile organics , BNA organics, or TCLP-BNA organics were
detected i n either the SS-2 or SS-3 composite samples. Neither the SS-2 nor the SS-3
composites contained TCLP metals in concentrations exceed ing established TCLP-regulatory
l evels. However, TCLP nickel and zinc (which ha v e regulatory level) were detected in both
the SS-2 and SS -3 composite samples .
Supplemental samples were collected and composited to better del ineate the areal
extent of elevated TPH concentrations and the associated sludges found in the uppermost
sample horizon·at sample locations BCA-S3 , BCA-S4, and BCA-S5 . The canal composite also
contained de t ectable xyl enes. No TCLP metals were detected in concentrations exceeding
TCLP-regulatory levels. However, TCLP cobalt, nickel, vanadium , and zinc wer e detected in
the canal-composite sample. No TCLP-regulatory levels have been established for these
metals.
Individual sampl es were collected from three horizons (SS-1 , SS-2, and SS-3) from five
seep areas (Seep 1 through Seep 5) along the north bank of the Bonneville Canal. Samples
were generally collected from Oto 0.5 foot (SS-1), 1 .5 to 2 feet (SS -2), and 3 .5 to 4 feet (SS-
3). Auger refusal precluded sampling t h e SS -3 horizon at Seep 4 . In an effort to s ample to
a depth free of observable hydrocarbons, the SS-3 horizon from Seep 3 and Seep 5 were
collected at 5. 7 to 6.2 feet and 4 .8 to 5 .2 feet, respectively.
Concentrations of TPH in excess of 10,000 mg /kg were detected in the SS-1 sample
from Seep 3, and i n the SS-1 and SS-2 samples from Seep 4 . Concentrations of TPH greater
than 1,000 mg/kg were detected i n the SS-1 samples from Seep 2 and Seep 5 , and i n the SS-
2 samples from Seep 3 and Seep 5. The SS-1 and SS-2 samples from Seep 1 and the SS-3
sample from Seep 3 contained TPH concentrations greater t han 100 mg /kg . No TPH was
detected in the remaini ng samples, SS-2 sample from Seep 2 and the SS-3 samples from Seep
1, Seep 2 , and Seep 5 .
Fin al Doc . 1 9, 1984 5-60 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A .
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Composite samples were created from the individual samples collected from each
sample horizon from the seep areas . The SS-1 seep composite contained detectable toluene,
TCLP toluene, ethylbenzene, TCLP ethylbenzene, xylenes, and TCLP xylenes. The SS-1 seep
composite also contained seven BNA organics and two TCLP-BNA organics. The SS-2
composite contained detectable BTEX, five BNA organics, and two TCLP-BNA organics. No
volatile organics , TCLP-volatile organics, BNA organics, or TCLP-BNA organics were detected
in the SS-3 composite sample. No TCLP metals were detected in concentrations exceeding
established TCLP-regulatory levels. However, concentrations of TCLP nickel and zinc were
detected in the SS-1 composite; TCLP vanadium and TCLP zinc were detected in the SS-2
composite; and TCLP nickel, vanadium , and zinc were detected in the SS-3 composite. No
TCLP-Regulatory levels have been established for these metals
Waste Characterization
Concentrations of TPH in excess of 1,000 mg/kg were detected in the uppermost
sediments of the Bonneville Canal at sample stations BCA-S3, BCA-S4, and BCA-S5.
Additional sampling in the vicinity of these sample locations indicated that sludges containing
the high TPH concentrations were within the area approximately 78 feet east of BCA-S3 and
140 feet west of BCA-S5 . Based on the average sludge th icknesses within this area of the
canal, the calculated volume of sludge containing elevated hydrocarbons was 2,300 cubic
yards. Elevated TPH was also detected in the upper horizon (SS-1) sampled at Seep 2 through
Seep 5, and in the middle horizon (SS-2) sampled at Seep 3 through Seep 5.
Composite-parameter analyses of the three layers sampled from the Bonneville Canal
indicate hydrocarbon compounds are limited to the upper-sample horizon (i.e., the SS-1
horizon). Hydrocarbon compounds were detected in the SS-1 and SS-2 composite samples
from the seep areas.
Fin•I Doc. 19. 1994 5 -61 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
5.20.3 Result of Risk Screen
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
No soil samples contained concentrations of analyzed constituents which exceeded any
ABC's. Thus, sludges and soils within the Bonneville Canal, above the groundwater, pose no
threat to human health or the environment and would be subject to No Further Action.
Composite samples BC-RF-3A-8A, 18-68, 2C-8C, S 1 A-5A and S18-58 contained arsenic in
concentrations ranging from 31 mg/kg to 39 mg/kg. These values are above the arithmetic
mean (25 mg/kg) but within the range (12-37 mg/kg) of values detected in background
samples. However, as detailed in Section 5.20.4, the Bonneville Canal was closed and
backfilled as part of remediation of both the North Tank Farm SWMU and groundwater within
the shallow aquifer below the North Tank Farm.
5 .20 .4 Description of Interim Corrective Measures
As detailed in Appendix K of this report, the Bonneville Canal was closed as part of a
Interim Corrective Measure construction project. In an effort to intercept and treat
groundwater flowing beneath the North Tank Farm SWMU which contains elevated volatile
organics, an intercept trench was constructed on the northern side of the Bonneville Canal.
As part of this effort, all sludges and contaminated soils in the Canal from Third West street
east to the weir located approximately 300 feet east of Standard Avenue (Figure 1 .4-1) were
excavated and removed for off-site disposal. This stretch of the Canal was then backfilled
with engineered fill and graded as a retention basin . Storm water which collects in the basin
is drained to the WWTS through collection vaults spaced along the Canal.
5 .20.5 Recommendations and Proposed Action
The above referenced construction has resulted in closure of the Bonneville Canal with
the exception of the eastern-most 500 feet. This area was free of contamination and is the
primary source of the natural Bonneville Spring. Under these conditions, the Interim Corrective
Finol Dec. 19, 1994 5-62 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Measures taken at the Bonneville canal between Third West and the weir east of Standard
Avenue will be formally submitted to the UDSHW as final Corrective Action, thus satisfying
the condition of the Consent Order for the Bonneville Canal SWMU . Water quality will
continue to be monitored within the remaining portion of the canal with any unusual deviations
reported to the UDSHW as stipulated in the Consent Order .
5.21 BAFFLE BOARD POND CONVEYANCE DITCH
5.21.1 SWMU Description
The Baffle Board Pond Conveyance Ditch is an unlined, open channel located between
the north end of the Baffle Board Pond and the storm-water segregation sump that is part of
the Wastewater Treatment System (Figure 1.4-1). The channel conveyed overflow from the
Baffle Board Pond back to the API Separator from the 1950s to 1991. The ditch, which is
no longer in use, is approximately 100 feet long, 8 feet wide, and 3 feet deep.
No chemical analyses were previously performed on soils or water contained in the
ditch.
5 .21.2 Investigation and Results
RFI samples were collected from two locations within the Baffle Board Pond
Conveyance Ditch as indicated in Figure 5.21-1. At sample location CD-2, a new 10-foot
section of 4-inch diameter Schedule-40 PVC pipe was driven through the surface water and
as far as possible into the sludge to prevent infiltration of the surface water and caving of the
sludge during sampling. Upon bailing the surface water from the PVC pipe, a sludge sampler
was used to sample and remove the sludge from the hole. Upon removing the sludge, the
underlying soils were sampled using a bucket auger. Extremely loose soils compromi sed the
integrity of the boring and precluded sampling below 8 feet at CD -2.
Final Doc. 19, 1994 5-63 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
The lack of surface water and relative competence of the uppermost sediments allowed
sampling at location CD-1 to be conducted without using PVC casing. All samples at CD-1
were collected with a bucket auger . No liners were used in conjunction with the sludge
samplers or bucket augers used at the Baffle Board Pond Conveyance Ditch .
One set of control standards was submitted to the laboratory during the Baffle Board
Pond Conveyance Ditch sampling campaign. Details regarding validation of the control
standards are presented in Chapter 4 of this document.
Results
Concentrations of TPH in excess of 10,000 mg/kg were detected in the 0-to 0.5-and
1 .5-to 2-foot samples collected from sample station CD-1. Concentrations in excess of
100,000 mg/kg TPH were detected in the 0 -to 1-foot sample from CD-2. The 0-to 0.5-, 1.5-
to 2-, and 3-to 3.5-foot samples from CD-1 contained BTEX components as did the 0-to 1-
foot sample from CD-2. Detected values are summarized and compared to background on
Tables 5.21-1 and 5.21-2.
Because of the dissimilarity of stratigraphy between sample stations CD-1 and CD-2,
individual samples were not composited. Instead, the individual 3-to 3.5-and 6.5-to 7 .5-
foot samples from CD-1 and the individual 0-to 1-foot sample from CD-2 were analyzed
separately for both indicator and composite parameters . Xylenes were detected under TCLP
in the 3-to 3 .5-foot sample from CD-1 and TCLP benzene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes were
detected in the 0-to 1 -foot sample from CD -2. The same eight BNA organic compounds were
detected in both the 3-to 3.5-foot sample from CD-1 and the 0-to 1-foot sample from CD-2.
One BNA organic compound was detected in the 6.5-to 7.5-foot sample from CD-1 .
One TCLP-BNA organic was detected in the 3-t o 3 .5-foot sample from CD-1 and two
TCLP-BNA organics were detected in the 0-to 1-foot sample from CD-2. The concentration
Fin al De c. 18 , 1994 5 -64 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
of total mercury in the 0-to 1-foot sample from CD-2 also exceed the concentration range
typical of natural soils. No TCLP metals were detected in concentrations exceeding
established TCLP-regulatory levels. However, TCLP cobalt, nickel, and zinc were detected in
one, two, or all three samples analyzed for composite parameters. No TCLP-regulatory levels
have been established for these metals.
Waste Characterization
Approximately 0 .5 foot of sludge in a silty-sand matrix was encountered at sample
station CD-1. TPH concentrations in excess of 10,000 mg/kg were detected at CD-1 to a
depth of 2 feet. The concentration of TPH at CD-1 declined to less than 1 00 mg/kg at a
depth of 3.5 feet, and to less than 10 mg/kg at a depth of 4 .5 feet.
Approximately 6 feet of sludge and gravelly sludge was encountered at sample station
CD-2. The uppermost sludge contained TPH concentrations in excess of 100,000 mg/kg.
However, the sample from 1 to 2 feet below the sludge at CD-2 did not contain detectable
TPH or BTEX.
No samples collected from the Baffle Board Pond Conveyance Ditch contained
concentrations of TCLP-volatile organics , TCLP-BNA organics, or TCLP-metals in excess of
established TCLP-regulatory levels.
5.21.3 Result of Risk Screen
Results of the risk screen indicate that benzene and other hydrocarbons pose a
marginal risk at the Baffle Board Pond Conveyance Ditch. Indicator parameter sample CD-RF-
1 A detected benzene at 24 mg/kg. The industri al RBC for benzene is 99 mg/kg.
Final Dec. 19, 1994 5 -65 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Sample CD-RF-2A detected chrysene at 155 ppm. This concentration does not exceed
the RBC value of 390 ppm . The materials containing the elevated chrysene are within the
upper 1 foot of the surface the ditch.
5.21.4 Recommendations and Proposed Action
Because some of the volatile organics pose a potential health risk, it is recommended
that a CMS be developed for this unit and that corrective measures be pursued. Alternatives
for corrective measures at this SWMU include on-site stabilization and off-site disposal for the
estimated 300 cubic yards of material requiring remediation. The most cost effective
alternative will be pursued. A formal recommendation will be submitted to UDSHW following
submittal of this RFI Report.
5.22 ABANDONED LIME SETTLING BASIN
5.22.1 SWMU Description
The Abandoned Lime Settling Basin is located at the north end of the Alky Channel
(Figure 1 .4-1 ). This basin was first used in the late 1950s to contain boiler treatment water.
Its use was discontinued in 1980 with the construction of the new Lime Settling Basin.
The wastes managed in the Abandoned Lime Settling Basin were the same as those
currently managed in the existing Lime Settling Basin. No samples were collected from the
abandoned basin for analyses prior to the RF!.
5 .22.2 Investigation and Resu lts
The historic location of the Abandoned Lime Settling Basin was delineated through a
review of refinery aerial photographs. The delineated area was gridded into 15 grid points.
Final Dec. 19, 1994 5-66 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Using a random number table, three of the 15 grid points were selected as sample locations
(Figure 5.22-1 ).
Gravel road base serving as an entrance ramp to the WWTS Bio-Disc pad covers much
of the Abandoned Lime Settling Basin. The presence of this road base precluded the use of
a soil-recovery probe as proposed in the Work Plan to log the stratigraphy of the SWMU. An
attempt was made to collect samples through 4-inch diameter PVC casing with a sludge
sampler and a bucket auger where the north end of the Alky Channel overlaps the Abandoned
Lime Settling Basin (sample location ALB-1). However, flowing sands precluded sampling
deeper than the uppermost sludges associated with the Alky Channel (approximately 6. 7 feet).
Sample location ALB-1 was, therefore, backfilled with granular bentonite and abandoned.
Sample locations ALB-1 A, ALB-2, and ALB-3 were sampled using split-spoon samplers in
conjunction with a hollow-stem auger drill rig.
Results
Approximately 3 to 9 feet of gravel-road base fill was encountered at the three sample
stations at the Abandoned Lime Settling Basin (Figure 5.22-2) Approximately 2 feet of limey
sludge was encountered just below the fill at sample stations ALB-2 and ALB-3. Poor split-
spoon recovery precluded retaining a sample of the sludge from ALB-3 for chemical analyses.
The 9-to 11-foot sludge sample from ALB-2 contained detectabie concentrations of TPH,
toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes. The 3-to 5-foot sample (from just below the fill) at
location ALB-1 A contained detectable concentrations of ethyl benzene and xylenes. Xylene
was also detected in the 7-to 9-foot sample from location ALB-3. No other samples from the
Abandoned Lime Settling Basin contained detectable BTEX components or TPH. A summary
of detected values compared to background is provided on Tables 5.22-1 and 5.22-2.
Due to the dissimilar stratigraphy of the upper horizons of the three sample stations,
the individual upper-horizon samples were not composited . Instead the 3-to 5-foot sample
Final Doc, 19, 1994 5 -67 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
from ALB-1A, the 9-to 11 -foot sample from ALB -2, and the 7 -to 9 foot sample from ALB-3
were analyzed separately for both indicator and composite parameters. The 3-to 5-foot
sample from ALB-1 A contained one BNA organic compound . The 9-to 11-foot sludge sample
from ALB-2 contained seven BNA organics and one TCLP-BNA organic. No TCLP metals were
detected in concentrations exceeding established TCLP-regulatory standards. However, TCLP
cobalt (in the upper-horizon samples from ALB-1 A and ALB-2) and TCLP zinc (in all three
upper-horizon samples) were detected. No TCLP-regulatory levels have been established for
these metals.
Composites were created from the middle-horizon samples (11 to 13 feet from ALB-1 A,
ALB-2, and ALB-3), and from the lower-horizon samples (17 to 19 feet from ALB-1 A, and 15
to 17 feet from ALB-2 and ALB-3). No TCLP metals were detected in concentrations
exceeding TCLP-regulatory standards. However, TCLP zinc was detected in the middle-
horizon composite; and TCLP zinc, cobalt, and nickel (for which there are no established TCLP-
regulatory levels) were detected in the lower-horizon composite.
Waste Characterization
Approximately 2 feet of sludge was encountered just below the gravel fill at sample
stations ALB-2 and ALB-3 . None of the samples collected from the Abandoned Lime Settling
Basin exhibit hazardous characteristics. Hydrocarbon compounds were detected just below
the gravel fill at ALB-1 A, in the sludge at ALB-2 , and just below the sludge at ALB-3 . No
hydrocarbons were detected in the middle-(11 to 13 feet} or lower-horizons (15 to 19 feet)
sampled .
5.22.3 Results of Risk Screen
Benzenethiol was detected in one sample, AL-RF-1 A, at 1.2 mg/kg . The industrial RBC
for Benzenethiol is 10 mg/kg. No other soil sample exceeded any other ABC or the arithmetic
Fi MI De c, 19, 1994 5 -68 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
mean of background soil sample results. Metals are below risk screen values and are not
considered for further action .
5.22.4 Recommendations and Proposed Action
Because of the potential risks associated with benzenethiol, the Abandoned lime
Settling Basin will be stabilized on-site or excavated to remove the affected soil to an
approved off-site disposal facility. Remediation will follow preparation of a CMS to evaluate
the most effective alternative. Offsite disposal of the estimated 1500 cubic yards of material
may be more feasible due the very limited quantity of affected soil at the unit. Formal
recommendations will be made to the UDSHW after submittal of this RFI Report.
5.23 LIME SETTLING BASIN DEWATERING IMPOUNDMENT
5.23.1 SWMU Description
The lime Settling Basin Dewatering lmpoundment was located west of the Lime
Settling Basin (Figure 1.4-1 ). The impoundment was used to dewater s ludges dredged from
the lime Settling Basin . Once dried, the sludges were periodically removed for off-site
disposal. The area is bermed and measures 1 00 by . 50 feet and 2 feet deep and was
excavated and backfilled in the fall of 1994. All material previously stored in the unit was
disposed of off-site.
No previous chemical data are available for the dewatering impoundment.
5.23.2 Investigation and Results
Evaluations of the Lime Settling Basin Dewatering lmpoundment were contingent on
the Lime Settling Basin RFl -sampling results (Section 5 .13). These results indicated no further
Final Dec . 19, 199-4 5-69 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
evaluations of the dewatering impoundment were required. Thus, further evaluation of the
Lime Settling Basin Dewatering lmpoundment was not performed. No Further Action is
recommended at this SWMU since it was taken out of service.
5.24 FIRE TRAINING AREA SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT
5.24.1 SWMU Description
The Fire Training Area Surface lmpoundment is a small impoundment located in the Fire
Training Area between the Alky Site and the Lime Settling Basin (Figure 1 .4-1 ). The
impoundment was noted on aerial photographs dating between 1973 and 1985. The area is
now covered by a gravel pad for the facility's fire training area.
The impoundment was created when fire-suppression water used in the training area
drained to the west and accumulated against a berm. Following performance of training
exercises, excess hydrocarbons on the surface of the water were burned and the water was
subsequently discharged through the berm via a valved pipe. The water was delivered to the
refinery Wastewater Treatment System for treatment.
The Fire Training Area was modified in 1985, During this time, stained soils in the
impoundment area were removed from the site and disposed of at an off-site permitted
facility. The training area was then covered with a gravel surface and regraded.
No samples have been previously collected for analyses from the Fire Training Area
Surface lmpoundment.
Finel Dec. 19, 1994 5-70 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
•
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
5.24.2 Investigation and Results
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Based on the review of aerial photographs, the delineated area was gridded into 1 5 grid
points. A random number table was used to select three RFI sample locations (Section 5.24-
1 ) .
Due to the dense road base fill covering the Fire Training Area Surface lmpoundment,
a backhoe was used to excavate down to the desired sampling depth prior to collecting the
soi l samples with a bucket auger. No liners were used in conjunction with the bucket augers.
Previous soil sampling conducted during the Alky Site sampling campaign, adjacent to
the Fire Training Area Surface lmpoundment, indicated the fill material was thicker than
originally anticipated in the Work Plan. Actual sample depths were, therefore, somewhat
deeper than those proposed in the Work Plan.
Due to infiltrating groundwater at the bottom of the .excavations, samples from the
lowest horizon at locations FT-2 and FT-3 were collected directly from the backhoe bucket.
Soil samples from the backhoe were selected from the center of cohesive-soil clumps in an
effort to retain a representative and relatively undisturbed sample.
A blind duplicate sample was created from the 1.9-to 2.9-foot sample colle cted at
location FT-3. The sample was removed from the bucket auger and split laterally such that
two sets of laboratory-supplied bottles could be filled . One set was labeled as the interval
sampled and the other was labeled as the blind duplicate.
Results
RFI samples were collected from the three locations shown in Figure 5 .24-1 .
Increasing TPH concentrations w ith depth were detected at all three sample stations. The
Fin al Doc. 19, 1994 5-71 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Saft Lake Refinery
RCRA Facif ity Investigation Report
December 1994
2.2-to 2. 7-and 5.8-to 6.8-foot samples from location FT-1, and the 5-to 6-foot sample from
FT-3 contained TPH concentrations in excess of 1,000 mg/kg . The 2.2-to 2.9-foot sample
and the 5-to 6-foot sample from location FT-2 contained TPH concentrations in excess of
10,000 mg/kg. The 5 -to 6-foot sample from location FT-2 also contained detectable
ethylbenzene and xylenes. A summary of detected values compared to background is
presented on Tables 5.24-1 and 5.24-2.
The composite samples also contained increasing hydrocarbon concentrations with
depth. Two BNA organics and two TCLP-BNA organics were detected in the middle-layer
composite. Four BNA organics and two TCLP-BNA organics were detected in the lower-layer
composite. The lower-layer composite also contained detectable toluene, ethylbenzene, and
xylenes. No hydrocarbon compounds were detected in the upper-layer composite. No TCLP
metals were detected in concentratiqns exceeding established TCLP-regulatory levels .
However, TCLP cobalt and zinc were detected in the upper-layer composite, and TCLP nickel
and zinc were detected in the middle-and lower-layer composites. No TCLP-regulatory levels
have been established for these metals.
Waste Characterization
Both the individual and composite samples from the Fire Training Area had increasing
hydrocarbon concentrations with depth. However, no samples exhibited any hazardous
characteristics.
5.24.3 Results of Risk Screen
Results of the risk screen indicate that the Fire Training Area poses no risk to human
health or the environment. No soil samples exceeded RBC values or the arithmetic mean for
background metal sample results.
Final Dec. 19, 1884 5-72 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
5.24.4 Recommendations and Proposed Action
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1 994
Although the site poses no health risk, there are concerns for the cumulative effect of
detected hydrocarbons, primarily in the form of TPH, on the groundwater this close to the
western margin (compliance point) of the operating area. Therefore, as part of the facility
wide hydrogeologic evaluation or risk assessment for groundwater remediation, consideration
will be given to on-site stabilization or excavation with removal of the estimated 1 200 cubic
yards of Fire Training Area soils which contain elevated hydrocarbon concentrations.
Formal recommendations for action at the Fire Training Area will be submitted to the
UDSHW under separate cover after submittal of this RFl report.
5.25 RAILCAR LOADING AREA
5.25.1 SWMU Description
The Railcar Loading Area is located north of the Chevron Salt Lake City Marketing
Terminal along the eastern facility boundary (Figure 1.4-1 ). This area consists of nine rail
spurs, designated as lines numbers 45 through 53. Refined petroleum products including
Altamont crude (log wax precursor) and LPG (liquified petroleum gas) may be loaded into
railcars at this location.
Several types of drainage and spill collection systems already exist in this area. The
existing system for rail lines 46 and 4 7 consists of individual 1 0 foot by 20 foot catchments
(12 per line) connected to a concrete-lined ditch. The ditch conveys any spilled product and
surface water to a heated, concrete sump. Any water collected in the sump is pumped to the
Wastewater Treatment System . Spilled product is pumped from the sump to an adjacent
above ground storage tank before being sent back to the refinery for reprocessing . Any
Final Dec. 19, 1994 5-73 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A .
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
stormwater not collected by the catchments becomes surface runoff across the surrounding
native ground.
The surface of the loading area for rail lines 48 through 51 is covered with concrete
pavement. The pavement slopes to depressed areas ( 10 per line) with individual floor drains.
These drains connect directly into the refinery industrial sewer system . Any water or spilled
product is conveyed to the API Separator for processing. All stormwater runoff is directed
into the industrial sewer.
The remaining rail lines, numbers 45, 52, and 53, are used for tank car storage. These
areas do not have a spill collection system and all stormwater becomes surface runoff across
the surrounding native ground.
Waste Characterization
Waste that occurs at the site ·consists of spilled product and potentially-contaminated
runoff water. No samples have been collected from the site for chemical analyses.
Release Characterization
The RFA noted that log wax precu(sor had overflowed the tank and flowed into an
adjacent drainage ditch. Due to the high viscosity of this product, the potential for extensive
soil and groundwater contamination is minimal. However, use of the loading facility for the
loading of refined petroleum products creates the potential for soil and groundwater
contamination. No monitor wells exist sufficiently close to evaluate releases to groundwater
from the Railcar Loading Area.
Fin.I Dec. 19, 1 994 5 -74 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A .
Salt Lake Refinery
5.25.2 Results of Design Adequacy Review
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
The design and as-constructed drawings (Appendix I) for the Railcar Loading Area spill
collection systems were evaluated for this RFI and found to be adequate to handle normal
spills which occur during the loading process. Proper maintenance to assure that floor drains
and catchments are operational and free draining must continue. As this is the purpose for
which the facility was designed, no design modifications are required and No Further Action
is planned.
5.26 BIO-DISC SUMP
5.26.1 SWMU Description
The Bio-Disc Sump is a depression located south of the current Wastewater Treatment
System ponds (Figure 1.4-1 ). The sump is located in the former channel which conveyed
waste water to the Oil Drain prior to construction of the Wastewater Treatment System.
The Bio-Disc Sump was used to collect overflow from the Bio Discs. Water was
pumped from the sump into the Wastewater Treatment System. Use of the sump was
discontinued in 1990.
Sediment samples obtained from the sump as part of the RFA contained elevated
concentrations (relative to background) of barium, chromium, manganese, and zinc. Benzene
was also detected in the sediments.
5.26.2 Investigation and Results
A soil sampling program was conducted at the Bi o-Disc sump in June 1991 in
conjunction with the planned construction of the HF Mitigation Project catch basin. The sump
Final Dec. 19, 1994 5-75 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A .
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
area has since been used as part of the new HF Mitigation catch basin. The data generated
from this sampling effort are considered part of the RFI program and are presented herein.
Samples were collected from two locations in the Bio-Disc Sump as indicated i n Figure
5 .26-1. These samples were collected using a split-spoon sampler in conjunction with a
hollow-stem auger. Because of difficulty retaining samples in the split-spoon samplers due
to the gravelly nature of the fill material, no brass liners were used in the split-spoon samplers .
Samples were transferred directly from the split-spoon sampler to laboratory supplied jars.
One blind duplicate sample and four composite samples were created i n the field using the
compositing technique outlined in the QA/QC Plan (Appendix A).
Because the Bio-Disc Sump sampling was conducted prior to submittal of the final
Work Plan (under approval of' the UDSHW), Bio-Disc Sump samples were analyzed for the
existing consent-order parameters. The consent order indicator parameter list did not include
BTEX. Although the composite parameter list included TCLP constituents, those constituents
were not analyzed for unless the total levels indicated additional TCLP analyses was
warranted. None of the composite samples analyzed had total concentrations 20 times the
TCLP-regulatory level (i .e . TCLP dilution factor for a solid sample). Thus, no samples from the
Bio-Disc Sump were analyzed for TCLP parameters .
Individual samples were submitted for laboratory analyses from five horizons from
sample stations C-3 and C-5. The individual samples from C-3 were analyzed for indicator
parameters, and the individual samples from C-5 were analyzed for composite parameters.
Four horizons from both C-3 and C-5 were composited and analyzed for composite
parameters. The four horizons composited were, generally, not the same horizons from which
the i ndividual samples were taken .
Firl•I Doc. 18, 18 94 5-76 EarthFax Engineering, Inc,
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Results
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
The individual 2-to 4-foot sample from C-3 contained 14,500 mg/kg TPH. No other
individual sample collected from C-3 contained detectable TPH. The 2-to 4-foot sample from
C-5 did not contain detectable volatile-organic compounds. However, the 2-to 4-foot C-5
sample contained the two semi-volatile compounds fluoranthene and pyrene. The 7-to 9-foot
sample from C-5 contained detectable ethylbenzene, 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, and xylenes.
No other sample from C-5 contained detectable volatile-or semi-volatile organic compounds.
A total of eight, six, and four volatile-organic compounds were detected in the 4-to
5-foot, 9-to 10-foot, and 12-to 14-foot composites, respectively. No volatile-organic
compounds were detected in the 17-to 19-foot composite sample. Six semi-volatile organic
compounds were detected in the 4-to 5 -foot composite. No semi-volatile organic compounds
were detected in any of the other composites. Detected values are summarized and compared
to background on Tables 5.26-1 and 5.26-2.
Waste Characterization
Hydrocarbon compounds were detected in the uppermost individual sample from C-3
and in the composite samples to a depth of 14 feet. No total-metals concentrations exceeded
the risk screen RBCs .
5.26.3 Results of Risk Screen
Results of the risk screen conducted on the RFI data for the Bio-Disc sump indicate that
no corrective action is necessary to protect human health. No soil samples exceeded RBCs.
Sample BD-RF-C5E detected 36 mg /kg arsenic and 0.53 mg/kg beryllium. These values are
above the arithmetic mean background concentration of 25 and 0.44 for arsenic and
Final Doc , 19, 188 4 5-77 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
beryllium, respectively. However, they are w ithin the range of concentrations noted for these
compounds for background soils. All levels of organics are below the risk screen criteria.
5.26.4 Description of Interim Corrective Measures
In May 1991 , Chevron began design of the Hydrofluoric Acid Mitigation system
pursuant to new federal regulations regarding the use of HF Acid in the refining process. A
required feature of the HFM project was a sump which could collect HF laden water capable
of gravity drainage. Topographically and logistically, the Old Bio-Disc sump area provided the
i deal location for the new HFM sump. Construction at this site was required to be completed
prior to the review of the Work Plan by the UDSHW (which was submitted the UDSHW in
December 1991). Therefore, under approval from the UDSHW, a separate authorization was
issued to conduct the RFI investigation at the unit. This drilling was completed in June and
July 1991 and analyses were conducted for indicator and composite parameters as described
above in Section 5 .26.2. The analytical results were summarized and presented to the
UDSHW with a request for approval to excavate all affected soils and construct the new HFM
sump.
Excavati on for the HFM sump was greater than 22 feet i n depth to accommodate the
leak detection system incorporated into the sump design. Consequently, all soils tested during
the course of the RFI sampling were excavated and removed from the unit. The excavated
soils were tested and found to be free of significant metals and hydrocarbon concentrations.
Consequently, they were moved to temporary storage north of the operating area of the
facility near the old Shale Oil Semi-Works facility. The clean soils were later used as fill for
the Bonneville Canal project w ith some being used to construct an access ramp into the
Reservoir Waste Management Area (Section 1.3) for performance of a stabilization pilot test.
Drawings and notes of the construction of the HFM Sump are provided in Append ix C.
Final Dec, 1 9 , 1994 5-78 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt La ke Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
An area considerably larger than the original Bio-Disc Sump SWMU was excavated and
used for the HFM drain sump. Consequently, the original SWMU no longer exists. All records
for these activities are on file at the Chev ron Salt Lake Refinery and the UDSHW.
5.26.5 Recommendations and Proposed Action
Since all potentially affected soils from the Bio-Disc Sump SWMU were removed under
approval of the UDSHW, and because the risk screen suggests no risk concerns would have
existed had the soils remained in place, this unit i s consi dered closed with No Further Action
planned . A formal petition will be made to the UDSHW in the near future. Routine operation
and maintenance of the new HFM Sump will result i n continual observation of the area. In
addition, monitor well S-1, which is sampled semi-annually under the Consent Order, is
located south and downgradient of the HFM sump . Continued monitoring and review of data
collected from this well serve as informal post-remediation monitoring of this unit. If any
unusual conditions are observed , they will be brought to the attention of the UDSHW for
necessary action.
5.27 NORTH TANK FARM
5 .27 .1 SWMU Description
The North Tank Farm ("NTF "} i s located in the northeast portion of the refinery as
i nd icated in Figure 1.4-1 . Tanks in this area are used for the storage of refined products.
These tanks vary in their s i zes and construction.
No waste products are stored in the NTF. Contamination in this area of the refinery
is a result of leaks and spills from within and adjacent to the tank farm .
Final Doc. 1 8, 18 8 4 5-79 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
5.27 .2 Investigation and Results
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Separate investigations for the NTF were conducted on 1989, 1990 and 1991
(EarthFax Engineering, 1989, 1990, 1991e, and 1991f). These investigations and the
accompanying reports were submitted to the UDSHW under separate cover and are provided
in this report as Appendix M. The results of the first and second investigations, a
comprehensive soil gas survey and shallow aquifer groundwater study, respectively, were
used by the UDSHW to incorporate the NTF into the 1991 Consent Order as a SWMU. As
a result of this listing, the third and fourth reports report was prepared following an
investigation into both solid material on the NTF surface and water in the shallow aquifer
flowing beneath the NTF.
Based on the recommendations of the 1991 Phase II North Tank Farm Report, and the
intent of Chevron to remediate the problems in this operating tank farm immediately, plans
and specifications to construct a groundwater intercept were submitted to the UDSHW in April
1993 as an Interim Corrective Measure. These measures were approved and constructed in
1993 as detailed below in Section 5.27.4.
5.27 .3 Results of Risk Screen
Risk screening indicated th_at soils within the NTF presented no risk from organics or
metals. No soil samples exceeded ABC values or the arithmetic mean for background sample
metal results. Concentrations of benzene within groundwater samples collected during the
investigations referenced in Section 5.27 .2 suggested that the primary issue at the NTF was
associated with shallow groundwater, not the solids.
Final Dec. 19, 1964 5-80 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
5.27 .4 Description of Interim Corrective Measures
The Interim Corrective Measures implemented at the NTF was a groundwater intercept
trench placed along the north side of the Bonneville Canal (see Section 5 .20.4} and along the
western margin of detected groundwater contamination in the Northwest Tank Farm. The
intercept trench along the western margin was outside of the defined boundary of the NTF but
was placed to coincide with the southwesterly flow direction of the groundwater, with the
intent of intercepting groundwater flowing through the northernmost corner of the NTF. The
trench was constructed just west of Tanks 40072, 40076 and 50079. The northern limit of
the trench extended into the Standing Water Site SWMU (Section 5 .9}.
The trench is designed to intercept shallow groundwater flowing beneath the NTF on
both the southern and western boundaries. As a precaution , and in the interest of responsible
remediation, the southern (east-west) trench alignment was extended to the east to collect
groundwater flowing beneath the Crude Storage Tank Farm.
All water intercepted by both the north-south trench on the western margin , and the
east-west trench north of the Bonneville Canal is collected by a series of pumps and pumped
to the WWTS. Surface water which infiltrates through granular fill soils on the tank farm
surface into the very shallow groundwater ( < 1 .0 feet} is intercepted by the trench system.
5.27.5 Recommendation and Proposed Action
Since the intercept trench construction is designed to remediate the shallow
groundwater, the system is considered to be an operable remediation system which can be
considered as final corrective action as long as Chevron operates this tank farm. Therefore,
after submittal of this RFI Report , a formal request to change the Interim Corrective Measure
status to completed Corrective Action at the NTF and Bonneville Canal SWMUs will be
submitted to the UDSHW.
Fin•I Ooc, 19, 1994 5-81 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
5.28 MISCELLANEOUS INVESTIGATIONS
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Through the course of completing the RFI, evidence of soil staining was discovered in
the southern portion of the Southwest Tank Farm (Figure 1.4-1 ). Chevron conducted an
investigation of the area and found the staining to be related to a reported release of a very
small amount of Jet Fuel in January 1991 . The areas affected were found to drain by design
into the facility wastewater treatment system. The affected area was characterized and
tested for hydrocarbon contamination. The results of the investigation are presented in
Appendix N of this report. The final report and associated action was provided to the UDSHW
upon completion. In coordination with the UDSHW, no additional activity other than regular
observation of the area was required.
final Doc, 19, 1994 5-82 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
CHAPTER 6
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
REFINERY WIDE HYDROGEOLOGIC INVESTIGATION
6.1 OVERVIEW OF REGIONAL GROUNDWATER HYDROLOGIC SETTING
The regional hydrogeologic setting in the northern end of the Jordan Valley is discussed
in detail in several reports which have been developed for the Chevron Salt Lake Refinery.
Those documents which are most pertinent to this RFI Report are the groundwater
investigation report which was prepared for the North Tank Farm, a listed SWMU in the 1991
Consent Order, and the Steady State Groundwater Flow Model which was prepared for the
entire Chevron facility. Reference is made to Appendices M, 0 and P which contain copies
of the North Tank Farm Investigations, the 1991 Groundwater Characterization Report, and
the Steady State Groundwater Flow Model for the Chevron Salt Lake Refinery, respectively.
These documents are contained in their entirety in these appendices.
With closure of the RCRA units and remediation of several SWMUs, Chevron i s
anticipating recalibration of the groundwater flow model to represent these new conditions.
Once calibrated, the model will be run to evaluate the effect of these actions on the flow
beneath the refinery. The model will also assist in evaluating the effectiveness of future
groundwater remediation alternatives at the refinery. The results of this work will be presented
to UDSHW upon completion.
6.2 NORTH TANK FARM GROUNDWATER PLUME
Soil gas surveys conducted in 1989 and 1990 indicated the presence of elevated
organic vapors in the vadose zone above the shallow aquifer beneath the North Tank Farm .
Three monitor wells were installed into the aquifer to collect samples for analysis. These wells
penetrated only the shallow aquifer. During placement of the monitor wells, soil samples were
Fin al D ec. 1 9, 1994 6-1 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
collected for laboratory analyses for later comparison to the groundwater samples to be
collected. Both the soils and groundwater in this area contained elevated concentrations of
BTEX and TPH, particularly benzene as compared to primary drinking water standards (40
CFR 141.62). Soil samples collected during the drilling also contained detected BTEX and TPH,
thus confirming the findings of the soil gas surveys. The results of these analyses were
summarized and submitted in August 1990 to the UDSHW in the North Tank Farm
Hydrogeologic Investigation Report (Appendix M}. Based on the results of this report, the
UDSHW declared the North Tank Farm as a SWMU and included it as such in the April 1991
Consent Order.
In support of RFI characterization, a more extensive hydrogeologic investigation was
performed at the NTF in 1991 to better delineate the affected soils and to more accurately
define the hydrogeology of the underlying shallow aquifer. As part of this investigation, six
more monitor wells were installed farther to the north, south and west of the tank farm. Data
from these wells indicated that a plume within the groundwater consisting primarily of BTEX
and TPH was migrating through the North Tank Farm in a southwesterly directi on. Monitor
well EF-2D , adjacent to shallow well EF-2, drilled into the deeper aquifer was determined to
be free of any hydrocarbon constituents and was under artesian head. Therefore, the extent
of hydrocarbon migration was confirmed as being isolated to the shallow aquifer.
Isa-concentration maps generated using the potentiometric and analytical data
suggested that the Bonneville Canal was acting as a receptor of the contaminants through the
depth of its penetration into the shallow aquifer. Only limited migration of hydrocarbons
appeared to extend south of the Bonneville Canal.
From the North Tank Farm hydrogeologic reports, RFI characterization of the Bonneville
Canal (Section 5.20) and supporting information generated through Consent Order Semi-
Annual Sampling campaigns, it became apparent that an intercept trench excavated along the
southern and western margins of the North Tank Farm would intercept a substantial amount
Finai Dec. 19, 1994 6-2 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
of the hydrocarbons contained within the shallow aquifer. Consequently, approval was
granted by the UDSHW for implementation of the Interim Corrective Measures described in
Section 5.27.4.
6.3 WEST FIELD PLUME
Detection of BTEX and TPH in monitor well samples within and west of the Landfill and
Oily Dump SWMUs lead to a more comprehensive evaluation of groundwater within the field
west of the Oil Drain. lso-concentration maps were developed based on the detected BTEX
concentrations. Jn an effort to determine the sources of contamination, sampling was initially
conducted within soils at the groundwater interface from random locations within the plume
boundaries defined by the iso-concentration maps. All BTEX and TPH components were non-
detect in these soil samples. Based on the lack of detected hydrocarbons in the soils above
the groundwater and on elevated levels of benzene and toluene in the groundwater from
monitor well S-30, west of the Landfill/Oily Dump (Figure 6.3-1), Chevron decided to evaluate
the potential that a groundwater plume existed in the fields west of the Landfill/Oily Dump.
As detailed below, benzene and toluene plumes were delineated in this area with the
Landfill/Oily Dump SWMUs as the suspected source.
6.3.1 Plume Delineation
Upon evaluating BTEX data generated from existing monitor wells S-2, S-30, S-31, EF-
12, S-29 and S-28 (Figure 6.3-1), it became apparent that a plume, originating somewhere
east of the Oil Drain, had migrated beneath the drain into the west fields. The investigation
to delineate the boundaries began in April 1 994 with the installation of several well points
designed to collect groundwater levels and samples for BTEX analyses .
Each well point was installed using either a Geoprobe sampler or with a hand operated
electric auger drill. Each hole was drilled with 3-inch diameter hollow stem augers to a depth
Final Dee. 19, 1984 6-3 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility I nvestigati on Report
December 1994
of approximately 12 feet below the ground surface. Upon removal of the auger, a 1-1 /2 -inch
diameter factory sterile PVC well point was installed with 10 feet of 0.010 i nch slotted screen
at the bottom. An un-slotted 5-foot section of casing was threaded onto the slotted casing
to extend approximately 2 to 3 feet above the ground surface. The well point was completed
by placing 1 0 -to 40-silica sand into the annular space and sealing the boring above the filter
pack to the surface with granular bentonite. The bentonite was hydrated with water and the
well was capped for later sampling.
Each well point was sampled after first purging it of the equivalent of three casing
volumes of groundwater, or until pumped dry. Purging was conducted using a peristaltic
pump. After purging, each well point was allowed to stabilize and was then sampled using
a Teflon bailer. The bailer was lowered and recovered very slowly to prevent volatilization of
aromatics. Once the samples were collected, the sampling, transfer, handling and labeli ng
procedures outlined in the QA Plan (Appendix B) were followed .
The data collected from each well point were evaluated for adequacy in defining the
extent of the plume. Based on this initial evaluation, additional sample points were installed.
This process was continued until the data were considered adequate for plume deli neation.
This process resulted in four separate phases of well point installation and sampling , with the
final phase completed in August 1994 with a total of 64 well points installed and sampled.
During each phase of th e investi gation, contour plots were generated for benzene and
toluene using all of the data. The plume boundari es were defined with a fair degree of
confidence and reported to the UDSHW. However, the plots were generated using data
spanning six months and contained considerable variability in water levels. W ith the need for
accurate plume boundaries to develop remediation plans , and due to the difficulty of
accounting for the seasonal effect of groundwater levels on benzene and toluene
concentrations, it was deemed prudent to collec t a new baseline data s et . Therefore,
beginning on September 6, 1994, a complete set of water-level data and groundwater
Fi ne! Doc. 19, 1994 6-4 EarthFax Engineering, Inc,
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
samples was collected with the final samples taken on September 19, 1994. The iso-
concentration maps presented as Figures 6.3-2, 6.3-3, 6.3-4 and 6.3-5 represent the final
plume definitions.
As is apparent on the maps, the benzene plume changed very little between the two
sampling events. The toluene plume changed very little in the eastern half where the higher
concentrations appear . However, between the March/August sampling and the September
sampling, the apparent downgradient edge of the toluene plume changed substantially, moving
well to the east using the September data. This difference may be due to seasonal variations
in groundwater and their effect on toluene concentrations. Note that the toluene
concentrations used to delineate the western boundaries are very low and close to the
detection limits. These low values, coupled with variations in plume characteristics due to
natural bioremediation, and variations in the stratigraphy affected , may create the changes in
the downgradient limit of the toluene plume. 0 ne of the targets of the corrective measures
study for the plume will be a detailed chemical and statistical evaluation over a period of time
to better delineate the benzene and toluene concentrations.
6.3.2 Monitor Wells
Based on the boundaries defined from the well point data , the need to monitor the
benzene and toluene plume boundaries, and to conduct geochemical and hydrogeologic trend
analyses at the core of the each plume west of the Oil Drain, permanent monitor wells were
located. The monitor well locations were submitted to and approved by the UDSHW and were
installed in October 1994. These wells were installed in compliance with both the U.S. EPA
Technical Enforcement Guidance Document and the quality control plan provided in Appendix
B. The first sampling event for these wells is scheduled to coincide with the quarterly
sampling for other RCRA unit monitor wells installed pursuant to the Consent Order and the
Semi-Annual Sampling campaigns. Well locations are provided on Figure 6 .3-2, 6.3-3 , 6 .3-4
and 6 .3-5. Geologic and completion details are provided in Appendix E.
Final Dec. 1 9, 1994 6-5 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
6.3.3 Planned Corrective Measures
~CRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Chevron is considering the use of Intrinsic Bioremediation as a corrective measure for
the West Field Plume. Intrinsic bioremediation has been defined by the USEPA (Personal
Communication with Dr. John Wilson, May 1994, USEPA Research Laboratory, Oklahoma}
as transformation of organic compounds into nontoxic substances by microbes indigenous
to the environment without artificial enhancement. Intrinsic bioremediation has been shown
to be an acceptable means of remediation at numerous sites across the country (Buscheck,
1993). If certain indicator parameters are known, such as dissolved oxygen (DO}, redox
potential (Eh}, and metabolic breakdown products of specific organic compounds, the potential
effectiveness of intrinsic bioremediation as an active means of groundwater remediation.
Compounds that are targeted for intrinsic bioremediation in the West Field Plume are
benzene and toluene as referenced on Figures 6.3-2 through 5. The highest concentrations
of benzene, approximately 1 50 parts micrograms per litre (ug/1}, are found within 100 feet
west of the Oil Drain. As a point of comparison only, the drinking water standard for benzene
is 5 ug/1. The highest concentrations of toluene found in the West Field Plume are
approximately 200 ug/1. The drinking water standard for toluene is 1,000 ug/1. On the basis
of the data collected and reviewed thus far, benzene is the single compound of primary
concern that will be the focus for intrinsic bioremediation.
There are various methods used to provide evidence of intrinsic bioremediation in an
aquifer. A simple method for measuring indications of intrinsic bioremediation is to pl ot the
concentration of the target compounds (in this case, benzene and toluene} over time and/or
distance. Over a period of years, enough data would exist to perform a statistical analysis
with an acceptable level of confidence. A series of wells installed within and outside of the
plume would have to be monitored. The wells would need to be placed along the direction
of groundwater flow that transects the contaminant plume.
Final Dec. 19. 1994 6-6 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Since it would take several years to provide sufficient data to perform a satisfactory
statistical analysis, other indicators of intrinsic bioremediation will be analyzed to support the
hypothesis that intrinsic bior emediation is occurring in the West Field Plume. These additional
indicators include changes in DO , Eh, concentrations of metabolic by-products, and
concentrations of various inorganic parameters called electron acceptors that serve as part of
the respiration process and are necessary for intrinsic bioremediation to occur. Indicators for
intrinsic bioremediation under aerobic and anaerobic aquifer conditions at the Chevron Salt
Lake Refinery are discussed below.
Under aerobic conditions (that is, when oxygen is present in sufficient quantities to
serve as an electron acceptor), the DO can be monitored in the groundwater. The metabolic
by-products from degradation of benzene in the presence of oxygen are : phenol , catechol,
2-hydroxymuconic semialdehyde, acetate, acetaldehyde, pyruvate, and/or succinate (Rittmann,
et.al., 1992). The specific products listed vary depend ing on whether the micro-organisms
are catabolizing catechol by what is described as an ortho-or a meta-biochemical pathway.
The metabolic by-products of aerobic degradation of toluene are benzyl alcohol, benzaldehyde,
benzoate, benzene carboxyhydrodiol , catechol and the same catechol degradation products
listed for benzene .
Under anaerobic (oxygen-limiting) conditions, inorganic electron acceptors are utilized
in the degradation process. These include one or several of the following: nitrate
(denitrification), iron (Fe(ll1)-reduction), sulfate (sulfate-reduction) and /or carbon dioxide
(methanogenesis). Usually, sulfate-reduction and methanogenesis are mutually exclusive,
although within a site both processes can occur if segregated and different microbial
populations exist. At low oxygen concentrations, the ratios of sulfate/sulfite, nitrate/nitrite,
and ferric/ferrous species of iron, or the production of methane should change as a result of
intrinsic bioremediation.
Final De c . 19, 1884 6 -7 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
With the relatively high amount of sulfur in crude oil refined at the Chevron Salt Lake
Refinery, it is anticipated that sulfate may be a major electron acceptor in the groundwater
at the refinery. The metabolic by-products from anaerobic degradation of benzene and/or
toluene are (Rittmann, et. al., 1992}: phenol, benzoate, benzyl alcohol, methylcyclohexane,
4-methylcyclohexanol, cyclohexane, catechol, and volatile organic acids (which may include
acetate, pyruvate, formate, acetone, iso-propanol, ethanol, butyrate, 4-methylbutyric acid,
and/or butanol}.
It is helpful to demonstrate microbial activity in the aquifer by collecting samples tor
microbial enumeration. However, microbial enumeration merely demonstrates the presence
of specific petroleum-utilizing microbes, and cannot be used as a sole parameter tor
determination of intrinsic bioremediation. To demonstrate the potential tor intrinsic
bioremediation, the microbial activity of aquifer microorganisms must be measured using
benzene and toluene as metabolic carbon sources and inorganic parameters as electron
acceptors. This can be performed easily in simple laboratory studies using groundwater from
the site as a source of microorganisms and contaminants. Without measuring the microbial
activity directly, one only can postulate that a viable microbial population capable of degrading
benzene and toluene exists in the plume .
To evaluate the potential effectiveness of intrinsic bioremediation, background samples
will be collected and analyzed to serve as a baseline for comparison to the portion of the
aquifer that is being monitored for intrinsic bioremediation. Direct measurements of intrinsic
bioremediation are made through analyses of metabolic by-products that are generated as
microbes metabolize benzene and toluene.
On the basis of the above discussion, the major indicators of biological activity that
should be measured in the West Field Plume will probably include DO, Eh, concentrations of
methane, sulfate/sulfite, nitrate/nitrite, ferric/ferrous species of iron, catechol, benzyl alcohol ,
cyclohexane, selected volatile organic acids (such as acetate, pyruvate, formate, acetone,
Final Dec. 19, 1984 6-8 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
CHAPTER 7
SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL CORRECTIVE MEASURES
7 .1 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT UNITS
As part of this RFI report, general recommendations are being made for each SWMU
regarding proposed action. The recommendations occur at the end of each section for a given
unit described in Chapter 5 . With the exception of those units where approved Interim
Corrective Measures have already been applied, these recommendations are the result of a
series of evaluations and screening methods using the flow chart presented on Figure 7. 1-1 .
These alternatives and the associated methodologies are summarized below.
7 .1 . 1 Structure of Proposed Corrective Action Plans
This RFI Report provides and summarizes all information generated as part of the RFI
plus any other incidental or miscellaneous reporting which may pertain to a listed SWMU. In
addition to the summary, general recommendations for each unit are provided as alternatives
under consideration for corrective measures. Chevron considers the actual planning, design
and implementation of corrective measures to be the next step of the Corrective Action Plan
(USEPA, 1988}. During review of the RFI Report, Chevron will pursue one or a combination
of the following alternatives for each SWMU:
0
0
Fina l Doc, 19, 1 994
No Further Action: This is appropriate where results of the RFA or new work
conducted as part of the RFI suggest that there are no adverse affects
associated with leaving this unit under its current conditions. In the event of
changes in refinery operations , or closure of the facility, additional evaluations
may be required.
Risk Assessment: Pursuant to Utah Rule 315.101 "Cleanup Action and Risk-
Based Closure Standards", a risk assessment may be conducted at a unit to
better define what action is most appropriate based on potential human
7-1 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
iso-propanol, ethanol, butyrate, 4-methylbutyric acid, and butanol), and total and benzene/to-
luene-degrading microbes. Not all of the above-listed compounds need to be monitored at the
same frequency and selection of specific compounds may be based on analytical method cost.
The ability to track the occurrence of intrinsic bioremediation in the aquifer affected by
the West Field Plume was accounted for when selecting the number and location of monitor
wells which were recently placed into the plume area. The actual wells selected for
background sampling will be specified prior to the monitoring process. The UDSHW has
already been appraised of this concept and its application to the Chevron Refinery. Detailed
methodologies to be used will be forwarded to the UDSHW as part of a formal work plan to
conduct intrinsic bioremediation in the West Field Plume as a corrective measure for this unit.
It is Chevron's intent that this proposed remedial activity for the West Field Plume will
serve not only as corrective measures implementation {CMI) for the plume, but also as a pilot
test for possible application as a corrective measure for groundwater contamination elsewhere
at the refinery. The CMI for the West Field Plume will be monitored as a pilot test with
supplemental analyses and respirometry experiments being conducted to obtain sufficient
scientific and statistical data to accurately evaluate the potential for application of intrinsic
bioremediation to facility-wide groundwater remediation.
Final Dec. 1 9 , 1904 6 -9 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1 994
0
exposure pathways. These evaluations are dependant on the current and
proposed use of the SWMU and its location within the facility. All detected
constituents are compared to background levels in evaluating overall risk . In
addition, comparison of risk to projected land use is made . Some units may
only pose a risk in the event remediation efforts are taken. In such cases the
risks may only be a concern when the soils at depth are exposed through
excavation or some other remediation technology.
Units within the operating area of the refinery will likely be evaluated using an
industrial exposure scenario. Units outside the operating area may be evaluated
using both the industrial and residential exposure scenarios.
Corrective Measures Study -Corrective Measures Implementation: Where
appropriate, a Corrective Measures Study (CMS) will be prepared. The CMS
considers all feasible alternatives and presents the best alternatives in the CMS
Report. Upon acceptance of the CMS by the UDSHW, the Corrective Measures
Implementation (CMI) is started. The CMI involves final design and construction
of the alternatives recommended in the CMS.
7.2 GROUNDWATER AS A SEPARATE SWMU
lt is the intent of Chevron to treat groundwater as a separate SWMU. This approach
is used to segregate action at each SWMU from the underlying groundwater. Treatment
technologies for solid waste are rarely appropriate for treatment of groundwater. Chevron has
successfully structured their remediation plans at four of the RCRA closure cells using this
concept.
Declaring groundwater as a separate unit assures more efficient treatment of
groundwater. Where required, corrective action at a given SWMU results in treatment or
removal of the solid wastes at that unit just to the elevation of the groundwater. Once the
source areas are remediated, their contribution to the facility groundwater contaminati on is
eliminated and groundwater treatment need only address contaminants that are sti ll in the
groundwater.
F>nel Dec. 19, 1994 7 -2 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facil i ty Investigation Report
December 1994
Much more specialized groundwater treatment technologies which will expedite
treatment of groundwater can be considered at the downgradient compliance point. This
approach also allows for more uniform treatment of solid wastes preventing further
contamination of the groundwater. Perhaps the most important benefit is that unit boundaries
do not become the controlling factor for groundwater treatments associated with remediation
of solid wastes, an approach which may otherwise leave untreated gaps between listed
SWMUs.
Classification of groundwater as a separate SWMU allows Chevron to pursue the same
rating criteria described for solid waste units. Facility-wide groundwater will be subjected to
a risk-based cleanup evaluation and the subsequent development of treatment and remediation
technologies consistent with the associated risk.
Fin,l De c. 19, 1994 7-3 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
CHAPTER 8
REFERENCES
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Buscheck, T.E. et. al. 1993 Evaluation of Intrinsic Bioremediation at filed Sites. in Proceedings
of the Conference on Petroleum Hydrocarbons & Chemicals in Ground Water. National
Groundwater Association/American Petroleum Institute. Houston, Texas. pp. 367-381 .
Currey, D.R., Oviatt, C.G., and Czarnomsld, J.E. 1984. Late Quaternary Geology of Lake
Bonneville and Lake Waring. Utah Geological Association Publication Number 13.
Geology of Northwest Utah. Southern Idaho and Northeast Nevada .
Dames & Moore. 1985a. Ground Water Quality Assessment Report, Chevron Salt Lake
Refinery. Project report submitted to Chevron U .S.A. Inc. Salt Lake City, Utah.
Dames & Moore. 198 5 b. Waste Site Characterization Report, Chevron Salt Lake Refinery.
Project report submitted to Chevron U.S.A. Inc. Salt Lake City, Utah.
Eardley, A.J., and others. 1973. Lake Cycles in the Bonneville Basin , Utah. Geological
Society of America Bulletin. v. 84, no. 1.
EarthFax Engineering , Inc. 1989. Chevron Salt Lake Refinery North Tank Farm Soil Gas
Survey. Project report submitted to Chevron U .S .A. Inc. Salt Lake City, Utah.
EarthFax Engineering , Inc. 1990. Chevron Salt Lake Refinery North Tank Farm Hydrogeologic
Reconnaissance. Project report submitted to Chevron U.S.A. Inc. Salt Lake City,
Utah.
EarthFax Engineering, Inc. 1991 a. Pre-Closure Sampling Plan for the Chevron Salt Lake
Refinery. Project report submitted to Chevron U.S.A. Inc. Salt Lake City, Utah.
EarthFax Engineering , Inc. 1991 b. RCRA Facility Investigation Work Plan for the Chevron Salt
Lake Refinery.
EarthFax Engineering, Inc. 1991 c. Chevron U.S.A. Salt Lake Refinery. Spring 1991 Semi-
Annual sampling Report. Report submitted in compliance with the 1991 Consent Order
EarthFax Engineering, Inc. 1991d. Chevron U .S .A. Salt Lake Refinery. Fall 991 Semi-
Annual sampling Report. Report submitted in compliance with the 1991 Consent Order.
Earth Fax Engineering, Inc. 1991 e. Chevron U.S.A. Salt Lake Refinery North Tank Farm Phase
II Investigation. Project report submitted to Chevron U.S.A. Inc. Salt Lake City, Utah.
Final Da e. 18, 1894 8-1 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt La ke Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
EarthFax Engineering , Inc. 1991 f. Chevron U.S.A. Salt Lake Refinery North Tank Farm Phas e
II Investigati on. Recommendations and Alternative Design Methods. Project report
submitted to Chevron U.S.A. Inc. Salt Lake City, Utah.
EarthFax Engineering, Inc. 1992a. Pre-Closure Sampling Data Summary Report for RCRA and
Non-RCRA Closure Units at the Chevron U.S .A . Salt Lake Refinery.
EarthFax Engineering, Inc. 1992b. Chevron U.S.A . Salt Lake Refinery. Spring 1992 Semi-
Annual sampling Report . Report submitted in compliance with the 1991 Consent Order
EarthFax Engineering, Inc. 1992c. Chevron U.S.A. Salt Lake Refinery. Fall 1992 Semi-
Annual sampling Report. Report submitted in compliance with the 1991 Consent Order.
EarthFax Engineering, Inc. 1992d. Steady-State Groundwater Flow Model for the Chevron
U.S.A. Salt Lake Refinery.
EarthFax Engineering, Inc. 1993a. Chevron U.S.A. Salt Lake Refinery. Spring 1993 Sem i-
Annual sampling Report. Report submitted i n compliance with the 1991 Consent Order .
EarthFax Engineering , Inc. 1993b. Chevron U.S.A. Salt Lake Refinery. Fall 1993 Semi-
Annual sampling Report . Report submitted in compliance with the 1991 Consent Order.
EarthFax Engineering, Inc. 1994. Chevron U.S.A. Salt Lake Refinery. Spring 1994 Semi-
Annual sampling Report. Report submitted in compliance with the 1991 Consent Order.
Fitchk o, J. 1989. Criteria for Contaminated Soil/Sedi ment Cleanup . Pudvan Publishing Co.
Northbrook, Illinois
Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1 991 a. Chevron Salt Lake Refinery Environmental Projects Health and
Safety Plan. Project report submitted to Chevron U .S.A. Inc. Salt Lake City, Utah.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1991 b. Chevron Salt Lake Refinery. Closure Plan for the TEL
Weathering Area .
Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1991 c . Chevron Salt Lake Refinery. Closure Plan for the Reservoir
Waste Management Area.
Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1991 d. Chevron Salt Lake Refinery. Interim Closure Pl an for the
Hazardous Waste Land fi ll .
Geraghty & Miller, Inc. 1991e. Chevron Salt Lake Refinery. Closure Plan for the Landfarm
and Landfarm Storage Area.
Final De c . 19 , 1994 8 -2 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Hely, A.G., R.W. Mower, A.C. Harr, and T. Arnow. 1971. Water Resources of Salt Lake
County, Utah. Technical Publication No. 31. Utah Department of Natural Resources.
Salt Lake City, Utah.
Hintze, L.F. 1988. Geologic History of Utah: Brigham Young University Geology Studies
Special Publication 7. Provo, Utah.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1989. Final RCRA Facility Assessment Report, Chevron
Refinery, Salt Lake City, Utah. Project report submitted to the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region VIII. Denver, Utah.
Mattick, R.E. 1970. Thickness of Unconsolidated to Semi-consolidated Sediments in the
Jordan River Valley, Utah. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 700-C. Reston,
Virginia.
Murphy, P. and J. Gwynn. 1979. Geochemical Investigation of the Warm Springs Fault
Geothermal System, Salt Lake City, Utah. Report of Investigation No. 140. Utah
Geological and Mineral Survey. Salt Lake City, Utah.
Radian Corporation. 1994. Risk-Based Closure Assessment for the Oily Dump Waste
Management Study Area. Chevron U.S.A. Salt Lake Refinery. Salt Lake City, Utah
Rittmann, 8. E. et. al. 1992. A Critical Review of In Situ Bioremediation . Gas Research
Institute. Chicago, Illinois
Roadcap, S .J. and K.K. Torres. 1984. Report Regarding Salt Lake Refinery Waste-Water
Pond Sampling and Characterization. Chevron Research Company. Submitted to the
U .S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII.
Salt Lake Council of Governments. 1976. Field Sampling and Analysis of Water Quality in
the Sewage Canal System (for Salt Lake County 208 Study). Salt Lake City, Utah.
Salt Lake County Planning Commission. 1977. Salt Lake County Master Plan, Land Use
Element. Salt Lake City, Utah.
Seiler, R.L. and K.M. Waddell. 1984. Reconnaissance of the Shallow-Unconfined Aquifer in
Salt Lake Valley, Utah. Water-Resources Investigations Report 83-4272. U .S.
Geological Survey. Salt Lake City, Utah .
Shacklette and Boerngen . 1984. Elemental Concentrations in Soils and Other Surficial
Materials of the Conterminous United States. U.S. Geological Survey. Professional
paper 1270. Washington, D.C.
Fin al Doc. 19, 1994 8-3 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
Smith, R. L., 1993, "Risk-Based Concentration Table," United States Environmental
Protection Agency, Region Ill, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 22 pp.
Stokes, W .L. 1988. Geology of Utah. Utah Museum of Natural History. Occasional Paper
Number 6 .
United States EPA. 1994. OSWER Directive 9355.4-12. Washington D.C.
United States EPA. 1988. RCRA Corrective Action Plan, Interim Final Rule. Office of Solid
Waste. Washington D.C .
Utah Solid & Hazardous Waste Committee. 1984. Chevron USA Inc. Salt lake City Refinery .
Compliance Order on Consent Between Chevron U.S .A. INC. and the State of Utah.
Utah Solid & Hazardous Waste Committee. 1991. Chevron USA Inc. Salt lake City Refinery.
Corrective Action Order .
Van Horn, R. 1 981 . Geologic Map of Pre-quaternary Rocks of the Salt Lake City North
Quadrangle . Davis and Salt Lake Counties , Utah. Miscellaneous Investigations Series,
Map 1-1330. Department of the Interior, United States Geological Survey.
Van Horn, R. 1982. Surficial Geologic Map of the Salt Lake City North Quadrangle. Davis
and Salt Lake Counties. Miscellaneous Investigations Series, Map 1-1404. Department
of the Interior, United States Geologic Survey.
Woodward et. al. 1974. Soil Survey of the Salt Lake Area . United States Department of
Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. Washington, D.C.
Final Doc . 19, 1994 8 -4 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
Decmber 1994
TABLE 1.4-1
SWMU USE SUMMARY1•1
Use Summary
Solid-Waste Management Unit Prior to After
11 /19/80 11 /19/80 Use Period
Landfill
Solid-Waste Landfill Yes Yes 1960s -1988
Barrel Storage Yes Yes 1980 -1984
Surface lmpoundment Yes Yes Early 1980s -Present
Oily Dump Yes YeslbJ 1953 -1980
Alky Channel Yes Yes Late 1960s -1984
Spent Caustic Evaporation Site Yes No Early 1970s -Mid
1980s
Alky Site Yes No Mid 1950s -Mid
1980s
Northeast Landfill Yes No 1960s -1980
Leaded Tank Sludge Disp . Sites Yes No 1950-1975
Conveyance Ditches Yes Yes 1948 -1983
Standing Water Site Yes Yes 1950s -Present
Wastewater Treatment System
API Separator Yes Yes 1 948 -Present
Induced Air Floatation Yes Yes Mid 70s -Present
St orm-Water Segregation Sump No Yes 1983 -Present
Storm Surge Tanks No Yes 199 2 -Present
Equalization Tanks No Yes 1992 -Present
Pond No. 1A Yes Yes 1965 -1994
Pond No. 18 Yes Yes 1965 -Present
Pond No. 2 Yes Yes 1965 -Present
Pond No. 3 Yes Yes 1965 -Present
Pond No. 4 Yes Yes 1965 -Present
Pond No. 5 Yes Yes Mid 70s -Present
Bio Discs Yes Yes Mid 70s -Present
Sand Filter Backwash Pond
Final D ec. 1 9, 1994 T -1 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
Decmber 1994
TABLE 1.4-1 (Continued)
SWMU USE SUMMARY1•1
Solid -Waste Management Unit
Prior to
11/19/80
HF Acid Neutralization Tank Yes
Spent Caustic Tanks Yes
Coke Fines Dewatering Impound-
ment and Waste Pile Area Yes
Haz.-Waste Interim Storage Pad No
Shale Oil Semi-Works
Storm-Water Retention Pond No
Spent Shale Pile No
No. 2 Outfall System Yes
Experimental Farm Yes
Bonneville Canal Yes
Baffle Board Pond Conv. Ditch Yes
Abandoned Lime Settling Basin Yes
Lime Settling Basin Dewatering
lmpoundment Unknown
Railcar Loading Area Yes
Fire Training Area Surf. Imp. Unknown
Bio-Disc Sump Yes
North Tank Farm Yes
faJ 11 /19/80 represents the effective date of RCRA
fbJ Used for disposal of scrap only
f ina l Dec . 19, 1994 T-2
Use Summary
After
11 /19/80 Use Period
Yes 1967 -Present
Yes Early 50s -Present
Yes Early 70s -1987
Yes 1983 -Present
Yes 1981 -1985
Yes 1984 -1985
Yes 1950 -1984
Unknown 1973 -Unknown
Yes 1950 -1993
Yes 1950s-1991
No 1959 -1980
Yes 1980 -1994
Yes 1973 -1984
Yes Unknown -Present
Yes Unknown -1990
Yes 1950s -Present
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
TABLE 4 .4-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
EPA REGION Ill RISK BASED CONCENTRATIONS
FOR CHEVRON CONSENT ORDER PARAMETERS
Residential Industrial
Analyte (mg/kg) (mg/kg)
Antimony 31 NA
Arsenic 0.37 23
Barium 5,500 72,000
Beryllium 0 .15 0.67
Cadmium 39 510
Chromium Ill 7,800 1,000,000
Cobalt 4,700 61,000
Lead fa l 400 NA
Mercury 23 310
Nickel 1,600 20,000
Selenium 390 5 ,1 00
Vanadium 550 7,200
Zinc 23,000 310 ,000
Benzene 22 99
Carbon Disulfide 7,800 100,000
Chlorobenzene 1 ,600 20,000
Chloroform 100 470
1 ,2 -Dibromoethane 0.0075 0 .034
1 ,2 -Dichloroethane 7 31
Final 0cc. 19, 1994 T-3 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 4.4-1 (Continued)
EPA REGION Ill RISK BASED CONCENTRATIONS
FOR CHEVRON CONSENT ORDER PARAMETERS
Residential Industrial
Analyte (mg/kg) (mg /kg)
1,4 Dioxane 58 260
Methyl Ethyl Ketone 47 ,000 610,000
Styrene 16,000 200,000
Ethyl benzene 7,800 100,000
Toluene 16,000 200,000
Xylene 160,000 1 ,000,000
Anthracene 23,000 310,000
Benz(a)anthracene 0 .88 3 .9
Benz(b)flouranthene 0.88 3 .9
Benzo(k)flouranthene 8.8 39
Benzo(a)pyrene 0 .088 0.39
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 46 200
Butyl benxyl phthalate 16,000 200,000
Chrysene 88 390
Dibenz(a,h) acridine NA NA
Dibenz(a,h) anthracene 0 .088 0.39
Di-n-butyl phthalate 7 ,800 100,000
1,2 Dichlorobenzene 7 ,000 91 ,000
1 ,3 Dichlorobenzene 7 ,000 91,000
1 ,4 Dichlorobenzene 27 120
Finel Dec . 18, 1994 T-4 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 4.4-1 (Continued)
EPA REGION Ill RISK BASED CONCENTRATIONS
FOR CHEVRON CONSENT ORDER PARAMETERS
Residential
Analyte (mg/kg)
Diethyl phthalate 63,000
Di-n-octyl phthalate 1,600
Flouranthrene 3,100
lndene NA
Methyl Chrysene NA
Methyl Naphthalene NA
Naphthalene 3,100
Phenanthrene NA
Pyrene 2,300
Pyridine 78
Ouinoline 0.053
Benzenethiol 0.78
p-Cresol 390
o,m Cresol 3,900
2,4-Dimethylphenol 1,600
2,4-Nitrophenol 160
<•1 = Value in U.S. EPA OSWER Directive for soil lead cleanup
NA = Not Available
Industrial
(mg/kg)
820,000
20,000
41,000
NA
NA
NA
41,000
NA
31,000
1,000
0.24
10
5,100
51,000
20,000
2,000
Final Dec. 1 9, 1994 T -5 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
-I
I
0)
~ s
~
><
gt
(Q s·
lb
lb
:'.'-. 5·
~
::i'
f)
(al
!bl
!cl
Arithmetic
M ean
Analyte (mg/kg)
Antimony NDl•l
Arsenic 26.8
Barium 90.3
Beryllium 0.44
Cadmium 1.54
Chromium 7.45
Cobalt 3.37
Lead 10.54
Mercury 0 .106
Nickel 8.15
S elenium 1.43
Vanadium 18.0
Zinc 75.1
TABLE 4.4-2
BACKGROUND SOIL ANALYTICAL RES UL TS
FOR METALS
Range
lmc 'ka) Standard
0 .0' -1.5' 3.5' -5 .0' Deviation
---------
4.9 -50.5 0.251"1 -57.2 14.9
53.9 -198 3 .03 -106 36.3
0.11 -1.11 NA 0.22
0 .1 1•1 -14.6 0.1 1•1 -4.43 2.35
0.22 -15.4 0.5 1"1 -18.3 4 .50
0.83 -7 .64 NA 1.64
0. 1 (•I -9 8. 1 0.025 -19 .2 17 .86
0.025 -0. 739 0.0251"1 0.154
1 .61 -15.1 NA 4 .29
2 -2.86 21•1 0.57
3.42 -1 74 NA 29.06
12.0 -524 NA 125.6
Mean in Western
U .S. Soils(bJ
(mg/kg)
0.47
5.5
580
0.68
7 .0lcl
4 .1
7.1
17
0 .046
15
0.23
55
70
Laboratory certificate indicated not detected . Value shown is one-half of dete ction limit.
From Shacklette & Boerngen (1984) except as noted.
Fitchko, 1989
Range in Western
U.S. Soils
(mg/kg)
< 1 -2 .6
<0.10-97
70 -5,000
< 1 -15
3 -2,000
<3 -50
< 10 -700
< 0 .01 -4.6
< 5 -700
<0.1 -4.3
10 -2,100
7 -500
NA = NotAnalyzoo
(/) n
0l :r
;::::; (1)
r~
Ql 0 ;,,.::,
(1)
::x:, !=
(1) (/) ...... s· )>
(1) • ..,
-<
::x:, n ::x:,
)> ,,
Ql
()
;::.·
-<
::,
< (1)
0 en
(1) !:!.
C"l co
(0 0l 3 !:!.
o-0
(0 ::,
.., ::x:,
_. Cl)
co 'C
CO 0
.i:,.~
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Final Dee. 19, l 994
RCRA Facility Investi gation Repor t
December 1994
TABLE 5.1 -1
LANDFILL AREA
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (Feet)
Total· Metals (rrig/kg)
LF-RF-1 B 3 -4 .5
LF-RF-1 C 7.5 -9
LF-RF-1 E 13.5 -15
LF-RF-28 4 .5 -6
LF-RF-2C 7.5 -9
LF -RF-2E 13.5 -15
LF-RF-38 3 -4 .5
LF-RF-3C 7.5 -9
LF-RF -3E 13.5-15
LF -RF-4A 1.5 -3
LF-RF-4C 6 -7 .5
LF-RF -4 E 13.5 -15
LF-RF-58 3 -4.5
LF-RF-5C 6 -7.5
LF-RF-5D 10.5 -1 2
LF-RF-5F 16.5 -1 8
LF -RF -68 3 -4 .5
LF -RF-6C 7 .5 -9
T -7
Sample Background
Concentration Range
20.70 ND -18 .3
22.60 NT
18.60 NT
15.40 ND -18.3
19.00 NT
18.30 NT
23.20 ND -18.3
23.40 NT
23.90 NT
41.40 NT
26.60 NT
17 .60 NT
6.64 ND -18.3
23.80 NT
1 9 .70 NT
20.00 NT
114 ND -18.3
14.40 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A .
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Final Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.1-1
LANDFILL AREA
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (Feet)
Total Metals (mg/kg)
LF-RF-6D 10.5 -12
LF-RF-6G 18-19.5
LF-RF-7A 1.5 -3
LF-RF-7C 6 -7 .5
LF-RF-7F 15 -16.5
LF-RF-7G 24 -25.5
LF-RF-88 4.5 -6
LF-RF-8D 9 -10.5
LF-RF-8F 16.5-18
LF-RF-9A 0 -1.5
LF-RF-9D 9 -10.5
LF-R F-9F 15 -16.5
LF-RF-1 OB 4.5 -6
LF-RF-1 OC 7 .5 -9
LF-RF-1 OE 13.5 -15
LF-RF-11A 0 -1.5
LF-RF-11 B 4.5 -6
LF-RF-11 E 12-13.5
T-8
Sample Background
Concentration Range
18 .20 NT
16.40 NT
41.80 NT
19 .70 NT
17.80 NT
27.20 NT
12.80 ND -18.3
22.00 NT
16.00 NT
43.80 2.1-15.4
21 .40 NT
16.90 NT
18.00 ND -18 .3
15.00 NT
19.20 NT
21.70 1.79 -15.4
16.00 ND -18.3
15.60 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Lead
Final Dec. 19, 1 994
RCRA Facili ty Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.1-1
LANDFILL AREA
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (Feet)
Total_ Meta1s (mg/kg)
LF-RF-BDS1 16.5 -18
LF-RF-BDS2 16.5 -18
LF-RF-1 B 3 -4 .5
LF-RF-1 C 7 .5 -9
LF-RF-1 E 13.5-15
LF-RF-2B 4.5 -6
LF-RF-2C 7.5 -9
LF-RF-2E 13.5 -15
LF-RF-3B 3 -4.5
LF-RF-3C 7.5 -9
LF-RF-3E 13.5 -15
LF-RF-4A 1.5 -3
LF -RF-4C 6 -7.5
T -9
Sample Background
Concentration Range
..
19.10 NT
20.20 NT
17.50 NT
6 .80 NT
6.16 NT
9.14 NT
12.30 NT
8 .75 NT
2.00 NT
4 .33 NT
8.77 NT
4.13 NT
12.70 NT
EarthFax Engineering; Inc.
Chevron U.S.A .
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
. '.
Lead
Finel Dec. 19, l 994
TABLE 5 .1-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
LAND Fl LL AREA
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (Feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (n,g/kg)
LF-RF-4E 13.5 -1 5 6 .82 NT
LF -RF-5B 3 -4 .5 7 .02 ND -19.2
LF-RF-5C 6 -7 .5 7.88 NT
LF-RF-50 10.5 -12 10.80 NT
LF-RF-5F 16.5 -18 7.73 NT
LF-RF-68 3 -4.5 22.80 ND -19.2
LF-RF-6C 7.5 -9 10.80 NT
LF-RF-60 10.5-12 7.61 NT
LF-RF-6G 18-19.5 11.20 NT
LF-RF-7A 1.5 -3 58 .90 NT
LF-RF-7C 6 -7 .5 10.80 NT
LF-R F-7F 15 -16.5 4 .28 NT
LF-RF-7G 24 -25.5 8 .02 NT
LF -RF-8B 4.5 -6 4.98 NT
LF-RF-8D 9 -10.5 7.98 NT
LF-RF-8F 1 6.5 -1 8 9.10 NT
LF-RF-9D 9 -10.5 13.90 NT
LF-RF-9F 1 5 -16.5 6.86 NT
T-10 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
TCLP Chromium
Final 0cc. 1 9, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.1-1
LANDFILL AREA
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number {Feet)
Total :Metals.(mg/kg)
LF-RF-1 OB 4.5 -6
LF-RF-1 0C 7.5 -9
LF-RF-1 OE 13.5 -1 5
LF-RF-11 A 0 -1 .5
LF-RF-11 B 4.5 -6
LF-RF-11 E 12-13.5
LF-RF-BDS1 16.5 -18
LF-RF-BDS2 1 6.5 -1 8
TCLP Metals (mg/I)
LF-RF-2C 7.5 -9
LF-RF-3B 3 -4.5
LF-RF-3C 7.5 -9
LF-RF-4A 1.5 -3
LF-RF-58 3 -4.5
T-11
Sample Background
Concentration Range
8.54 NT
9.38 NT
6.51 NT
8.09 ND -3250
19.50 NT
11.20 NT
6.35 NT
8 .01 NT
0 .016 NT
0.014 NT
0.019 NT
0.015 NT
0 .014 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refiner y
Parameter
TCLP Chromium
TCLP Lead
..
Benzene
Toluene
Fin al D•c . 19, 1994
RCRA Fa c ility Investigat ion Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.1-1
LANDFILL AREA
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (Feet)
TCLP _Metals (mg /I} ..
LF-RF-6B 3 -4 .5
LF-RF-6D 10.5 -1 2
LF -RF-7A 1 .5 -3
LF-RF-7F 15 -16.5
LF-RF-1 OB 4.5 -6
LF -RF -BDS2 1 6.5 -18
LF-RF-2C 7 .5 -9
LF -RF-11 E 12-13.5
Organics {mg/kg)
LF-RF-9A 0 -1.5
LF-RF-1 E 13.5 -15
LF-RF-2E 13 .5 -15
LF -RF -3E 13.5 -15
LF-RF-4C 6 -7.5
LF -RF-5C 6 -7.5
T -1 2
Sample Background
Concentration Range
' ...... -
0 .014 NT
0.012 NT
0.027 NT
0 .011 NT
0 .011 NT
0 .011 NT
0 .036 NT
0.025 NT
2 .20 NT
5 .56 NT
1 .36 NT
6.64 NT
0.77 NT
0 .48 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Toluene
Ethyl benzene
Xylene
F1nel Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1 994
TABLE 5.1-1
LANDFILL AREA
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (Feet)
Organ1c5 .(mg/kg)
LF-RF-68 3 -4.5
LF-RF-7C 6 -7.5
LF-RF-7G 24 -25.5
LF-RF-8D 9 -10.5
LF-RF-9A 0 -1.5
LF-RF-1 0C 7.5 -9
LF-RF-1 OE 13.5 -1 5
LF-RF-BDS2 16.5-18
LF-RF-1 E 13.5 -15
LF-RF-2E 13.5-15
LF-RF-3E 13.5-1 5
LF-RF-4C 6 -7.5
LF-RF-7G 24 -25.5
LF -RF-8D 9 -10.5
LF -RF-1 QC 7.5 -9
LF -RF-1 OE 13.5 -15
LF-RF-BDS2 16.5 -18
LF-RF-68 3 -4.5
LF-RF-9A 0 -1 .5
T-13
Sample Background
Concentration Range
5 .90 NT
2 .20 NT
5.97 NT
25.00 NT
7.40 NT
2.34 NT
3.45 NT
2.23 NT
0.220 NT
0.220 NT
0.240 NT
0.210 NT
0 .210 NT
0.230 NT
0.210 NT
0.230 NT
0.25 NT
4.80 NT
12.30 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TPH
Final Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.1-1
LANDFILL AREA
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (Feet)
Organics. (mg/kg}
LF-RF-1 E 13.5 -15
LF-RF-2E 13.5 -15
LF-RF-3E 13.5 -15
LF-RF-4A 1.5 -3
LF-RF-5C 6 -7.5
LF-RF-68 3 -4 .5
LF-RF-6C 7.5 -9
LF-RF-6D 10.5 -12
LF-RF-7A 1.5 -3
LF-RF-7C 6 -7.5
LF-RF-7G 24 -25.5
LF-RF-8D 9 -10.5
LF-RF-9A 0 -1.5
LF-RF-90 9 -10.5
LF-RF-9F 1 5 -1 6.5
LF-RF-1 0C 7.5 -9
LF-RF-1 OE 13.5 -15
LF -RF-BDS2 16.5 -18
T -14
Sample Background
Concentration Range
5 .80 NT
1.60 NT
6.90 NT
5830 NT
36.40 NT
70400 NT
3150 NT
382 NT
4870 NT
2.20 NT
6.20 NT
1220 NT
4620 NT
1 1 .00 NT
109 NT
2.60 NT
3.70 NT
2.50 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Lead
Fi nal Dec. 1 9, 1984
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.1-1
LANDFILL AREA
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
ToJal Metals (mg/kg)
SI-RF-1 A 0 -1
SI-RF-1 B 2-3
SI-RF-1 C 4-5
SI-RF-2A 0 -1
SI-RF-2B 2 -3
SI-RF-2C 4-5
SI-RF-3A 0 -1
SI-RF-3B 2-3
Sl-RF-3C 4-5
SI-RF-BDS1 2-3
SI-RF-1 A 0 -1
Sl-RF-1 B 2 -3
SI-RF-1 C 4-5
Sl-RF-2A 0 -1
SI-RF-28 2-3
SI-RF-2C 4-5
SI-RF-3A 0 -1
Sl-RF-38 2-3
T -15
Sample Background
Concentration Range
77.00 1.79-15.4
16.20 NT
16.00 ND -18.3
41.00 1.79 -15.4
12.70 NT
15.80 ND -18.3
9.24 1.79 -15.4
14.50 NT
12.70 ND -18.3
11.40 NT
27.60 ND -3250
15.30 NT
12.10 ND -19.2
34.20 ND -3250
14.00 NT
13.20 ND -19.2
38.20 ND -3250
13.80 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
..
Lead
TCLP Chromium
TCLP Lead
Xylene
TPH
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.1-1
LANDFILL AREA
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
To.tar Metals (mg/kg)
Sl-RF-3C 4-5
SI -RF-BDS1 2-3
TCLP Metals {mg/I)
Sl-RF-1 A 0 -1
SI-RF-1 C 4-5
SI-RF-28 2-3
SI-RF-1 A 0 -1
SI-RF-1 B 2-3
SI -RF-2A 0 -1
SI-RF-3C 4 -5
Organics (ll)g/kgl
Sl-RF-1 B 2-3
SI-RF-1 C 4-5
SI-RF-1 A 0 -1
SI -RF-1 B 2-3
SI-RF-1 C 4 -5
SI -RF -2A 0 -1
Sample Background
Concentration Range
14.60 ND -19.2
12.10 NT
0 .013 NT
0.019 NT
0.015 NT
0.067 NT
0.052 NT
0.062 NT
0.051 NT
0.136 NT
0.207 NT
8 .78 NT
8640 NT
11100 NT
102 NT
SI = Standing Water Surface lmpoundment
Final Dec. 19, 1994 T -16 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Arsenic111
Fma!Oec. 19, 1994
RCRA Fa c ility Investigation Report
D ecember 1994
TABLE 5.1-2
LANDFILL AREA
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total . Metals (llJg/kg)
LF-RF-1 B 3 -4 .5 21 .10 NT
LF-RF -1 C 7 .5 -9 24.80 NT
LF-RF-1E 13.5 -1 5 12.80 NT
LF-RF-2E 13.5 -1 5 7.75 NT
LF-RF-3B 3 -4 .5 8.75 NT
LF-RF-3C 7 .5 -9 24.10 NT
LF-RF-3E 13.5 -15 17.30 NT
LF -RF-4A 1 .5 -3 5.04 NT
LF-RF-4C 6 -7.5 14.50 NT
LF-RF-4E 1 3 .5 -1 5 12.50 NT
LF -RF -5D 10 .5 -12 3.44 NT
LF-RF-5F 16.5 -1 8 12.30 NT
LF-RF-6D 10.5 -12 16.20 NT
LF -RF-6G 18-19.5 18 .00 NT
LF-R F-7A 1.5 -3 5. 71 NT
LF-RF-7F 15 -16.5 11. 10 NT
T-17 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Arsenic111
Final Dec. 1 9 , 1994
TABLE 5.1-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
LAND Fl LL AREA
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals ·rrng/kg)
LF-RF-7G 24 -25.5 12 .00 NT
LF-RF-88 4 .5 -6 12.20 NT
LF-RF-8F 1 6.5 -1 8 8.53 NT
LF -RF-9A 0 -1 .5 44.00 12. 1 -37 .2
LF-RF-9F 15 -16.5 9.94 NT
LF-RF-1 OB 4.5 -6 8.00 NT
LF-RF-1 OC 7.5 -9 5 .68 NT
LF-RF-1 OE 13.5 -1 5 8.06 NT
LF-RF-11A 0 -1.5 12.40 12.1 -37.2
LF-RF-11 B 4.5 -6 10.90 NT
LF-RF-11 E 12-13.5 8.05 NT
LF-RF-BDS1 16.5 -18 6.29 NT
LF-RF-BDS2 16.5 -18 6 .99 NT
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5 35.90 NT
LF-RF-COMPB 3-6 11.40 NT
LF-RF-COMPC 6 -10.5 13.60 NT
T -18 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Arsenic
Bariumn 1
Beryllium
Final Dec. 19, 1 994
RCRA Facility Investigati on Repo rt
December 1994
TABLE 5.1-2
LANDFILL AREA
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (feet)
T otal . Metais . (mg /kg)
LF-RF-COMPD 7.5 -9
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25.5
LF-RF-11 A 0 -1 .5
LF-RF -11 B 4.5 -6
LF-RF-11E 12-13.5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
LF -RF-COMPB 3-6
LF-RF-COMPC 6 -10.5
LF-RF-COMPD 7.5 -9
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25 .5
LF-RF-TBS1 11)
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
LF -RF-COMPB 3 -6
LF-RF-COMPC 6 -10.5
LF -RF -COMPD 7.5 -9
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25 .5
T-19
Sample Background
Concentration Range
16.50 NT
12.20 NT
117 53 .9 -198
88 .00 NT
128 NT
67.20 NT
78.90 NT
89.40 NT
82.90 NT
122 NT
0 .072 NT
0.47 NT
0.60 NT
0.42 NT
0.526 NT
0 .596 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Cadmium!''
Chromium
Final Dec. 19, 1994
. --
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.1-2
LANDFILL AREA
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (feet}
TotalMetals (mg/kg)
LF-RF-11A 0 -1.5
LF-RF-11 B 4.5 -6
LF-RF-11 E 12-13.5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPB 3-6
LF-RF-COMPC 6 -10.5
LF-RF-COMPD 7.5 -9
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25.5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPB 3-6
LF-RF-COMPC 6 -10.5
LF-RF-COMPD 7.5 -9
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25.5
Sl-RF-COMPA 0 -1
SI -RF -COMPS 2-3
LF -RF-COMPC 4-5
T-20
Sample Background
Concentration Range
7.42 ND -14.6
6.21 NT
4.80 NT
2.81 NT
5.97 NT
2.94 NT
6.22 NT
6.06 NT
147 NT
18.90 NT
12.10 NT
20.90 NT
17 .80 NT
69.50 1 .79 -15.4
13 .80 NT
18.00 ND -18 .3
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Cobalt111
Lead
Final Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.1-2
LANDFILL AREA
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (feet)
Total Metals (mg/kg)
LF-RF-11A 0 -1.5
LF-RF-11 B 4.5 -6
LF-RF-11 E 12 -13.5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPB 3-6
LF-RF-COMPC 6 -10.5
LF-RF-COMPD 7.5 -9
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25.5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
i.F-RF-COMPB 3 -6
LF-RF-COMPC 6 -10.5
LF-RF-COMPD 7.5 -9
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25.5
SI-RF-COM PA 0 -1
S1-RF -COMPB 2 -3
S1-RF-COMPC 4-5
T -21
Sample Background
C oncentra ti on Range
6.40 0.83 -7 .64
6.05 NT
6.29 NT
2.71 NT
5 .08 NT
4.62 NT
5.00 NT
4.72 NT
1.08 NT
8.76 NT
12.80 NT
6.16 NT
8.39 NT
21.50 ND -3250
4.29 NT
6.30 ND -19.2
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Mercury
Nickel(1 1
Vanadium 111
Final Dee. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.1-2
LANDFILL AREA
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (feet)
Total Metals (mg/kg)
LF -RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPD 7.5 -9
LF-RF-11 A 0 -1 .5
LF-RF-11 B 4.5 -6
LF-RF -11E 12-13.5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4 .5
LF-RF-COMPB 3 -6
LF-RF-COMPC 6 -10.5
LF-RF-COMPD 7 .5 -9
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25.5
LF -R F-11 A 0 -1 .5
LF -RF-11 B 4 .5 -6
LF -R F-11 E 12-13.5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPB 3 -6
LF-RF-COMPC 6 -10.5
LF-RF-COMPD 7 .5 -9
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25.5
T-22
Sample Background
Concentration Range
1.45 NT
0.478 NT
15.00 1.61 -15.1
12.90 NT
11 .60 NT
13.50 NT
14.10 NT
5.48 NT
·13.50 NT
10.80 NT
25.60 3.42 -174
22.40 NT
23.6C NT
24.20 NT
22.20 NT
16.00 NT
24.30 NT
24.80 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Zinc111
TCLP Arsenic <11
TCLP Barium111
f;o.i Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1 994
TABLE5.1-2
LANDFILL AREA
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (feet)
Total Metals (mg/kg)
LF-RF-11 A 0 -1.5
LF-RF-11 8 4.5 -6
LF-RF-11 E 12-13.5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPB 3 -6
LF-RF-COMPC 6 -10.5
LF-RF-COMPD 7.5 -9
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25.5
TCLP Metals (mg/I)
LF-RF-11A 0 -1.5
LF-RF-118 4.5 -6
LF-RF -COMPB 3 -6
LF -RF -11 A 0 -1.5
LF-RF-11 B 4.5 -6
LF-RF-11 E 12-13.5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPB 3-6
LF-RF-COMPC 6 -10.5
LF -RF -COMPD 7 .5 -9
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25 .5
T -23
Sample Background
Concentration Range
75.70 12.0 -524
63.60 NT
45.20 NT
93.30 NT
51 .20 NT
39.60 NT
52.70 NT
51.40 NT
0.114 NT
0.05 NT
0.105 NT
1 .13 NT
0.894 NT
3 .26 NT
0.171 NT
0.436 NT
0 .373 NT
0.463 NT
2.25 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
:
TCLP Cobalt11 >
TCLP Lead
TCLP Mercury'11
TCLP Nickel111
TCLP Sel e nium111
Final Dec. 1 9. 1994
·RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.1 -2
LANDFILL AREA
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (feet)
TCLP Metals (mg/I)
LF-RF-11 B 4.5 -6
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPC 6 -10.5
LF-RF-COMPD 7.5 -9
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25.5
LF-RF-COMPB 3-6
LF-RF-COMPC 6 -10.5
LF-RF-COMPD 7.5 -9
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25.5
SI-RF-COMPC 4-5
LF-RF-11 B 4.5 -6
LF-RF-11A 0 -1.5
LF-RF-11 B 4.5 -6
LF-RF-11 E 12-13.5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPB 3-6
LF-RF-COMPC 6 -10.5
LF-RF-COMPD 7.5 -9
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25.5
LF-RF-11 E 12-13.5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25.5
T-24
Sample Background
Concentration Range
0.013 NT
0.013 NT
0.017 NT
0.013 NT
0.01 NT
0 .041 NT
0 .027 NT
0.037 NT
0 .041 NT
0.04 NT
0.00071 NT
0.01 NT
0 .014 NT
0 .032 NT
0.014 NT
0.01 NT
0 .01 NT
0 .01 NT
0.01 NT
0 .07 1 NT
0.087 NT
0 .09 1 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Vanadium
TCLP Zinc11 l
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl benzene
Xylene
Final Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.1-2
LANDFILL AREA
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (feet)
. TCLP Metals (mg/I)
LF-RF-COMPB 3-6
LF-RF -11 A 0 -1.5
LF-RF-11 B 4 .5 -6
LF-RF-11 E 12 -13.5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPB 3-6
LF-RF-COMPC 6 -10.5
LF-RF-COMPD 7 .5 -9
LF-RF-COMPE 13 .5 -25 .5
Organics (mg /kg)
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4 .5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4 .5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4 .5
SI-RF-COMPC 4-5
,< ~
I -~
T-25
Sample Background
Concentration Range
0.012 NT
0 .32 NT
0.39 NT
0.45 NT
0.353 NT
0.117 NT
0.126 NT
0.112 NT
0 .054 NT
0.026 NT
0.138 NT
0 .056 NT
0 .227 NT
0.078 NT
~~
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
·.
Methyl ethyl ketone
,.
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Chrysene
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
2,4-Dimethylphenol
2-Methylphenol
Fin al Dec. 19. 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5 .1-2
LANDFILL AREA
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (feet)
V9latile Organics(mg/kg) __
LF-RF-TBS1
(2)
BNA·Organics (mg/kg}
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4 .5
LF -RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPC 6 -10.5
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25.5
LF-RF-COMPC 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25.5
T -26
Sample Background
Concentration Range
0.218 NT
9.70 NT
6.40 NT
7.00 NT
27.60 NT
5 .00 NT
9 .00 NT
1.02 NT
21.20 NT
2.46 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Saft Lake Refinery
Parameter
'
3-Methylphenol
4 -Methylphenol
Naphthalene
Phenol
Pyrene
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
TCLP 2,4-
Dimethyfphen ol
TCLP 2-Methylphenol
TCLP 3-Methylpheno l
TCLP 4-Methylphenol
TCLP Phenol
Fi n.al Dec:. 1 9, 1994
RCRA Fac il ity Investigatio n Report
December 1994
TABLES.1-2
LANDFILL AREA
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (feet)
BNA Organics • (mg /kg}
LF-RF-COMPC 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25.5
LF-RF-COMPC 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25.5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPC 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25 .5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
LF-RF-COMPA 0 -4.5
T _CLP BNA Organics (mg/I)
LF-RF-C OMPC 6 -10.5
LF-RF-COMPC 6 -10.5
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25.5
LF-RF-COMPC 6 -10.5
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25 .5
LF-RF -COMPC 6 -10.5
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25.5
LF-RF-COMPC 6 -1 0 .5
LF-RF-COMPE 13.5 -25.5
T-27
Sample Ba c kground
Concentration Range
48.40 NT
5.75 NT
48 .40 NT
5.75 NT
3.60 NT
63.40 NT
7.46 NT
20.00 NT
5.00 NT
0.266 NT
0.716 NT
0 .07 NT
1 .60 NT
0.157 NT
1 .60 NT
0 .157 NT
1.28 NT
0.129 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Arsenic11 >
Barium
Cadmium
C o balt
Fin~I Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Fac ility Investigati on Report
December 1994
TABLE 5 .1-2
LANDFILL AREA
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metafs ·(mg/kg)
SI-RF-1A 0 -1 14.90 12.1 -37.2
SI-RF-1 B 2-3 4.25 NT
SI-RF-2A 0 -1 21.60 12.1 -37.2
SI-RF-3A 0 -1 5 .90 12.1 -37 .2
S1-RF-COMPA 0 -1 21.50 12.1-37.2
SI-RF-COMPB 2-3 4.31 NT
SI-RF-GW1
(2)
0.299 NT
Sl -RF -SW1
(2)
0.304 NT
S1-RF -COMPA 0 -1 134 53 .9 -198
SI-RF-COMPB 2-3 109 NT
SI-RF-COMPC 4-5 73.90 3.03 -106
SI-RF-GW1
(2)
0.142 NT
SI-RF-SW1 {21 0.141 NT
S1 -RF-COMPA 0 -1 3 .63 ND -14.6
SI-RF-COMPS 2-3 3 .74 NT
SI-RF-COMPC 4-5 5.72 ND -4.43
S1 -RF-COMPA 0 -1 6 .10 0.83 -7 .64
SI-RF-COMPS 2-3 4.11 NT
S1-RF-COMPC 4-5 6.61 NT
T-28 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Mercury
Nickel
Vanadium
Zinc
Fm•! Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.1-2
LANDFILL AREA
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet} Concentration Range
totals Metals-{mg/kg)
SI-RF-COMPA 0 -1 0.145 ND -0 .739
SI-RF-GW1 (21 0.00021 NT
SI-RF-SW1
(21 0.00023 NT
SI-RF-COMPA 0 -1 24.30 1.61 -15.1
SI-RF-COMPB 2-3 9.82 NT
SI-RF-COMPC 4-5 14.60 NT
SI-RF-GW1
(21 0 .017 NT
SI-RF-SW1 (21 0 .027 NT
SI-RF-COMPA 0 -12 26.50 NT
SI-RF-COMPB 2-3 18.30 NT
SI -RF -COMPC 4 -5 26.20 NT
SI-RF-COM PA 0 -1 72.30 12.0 -524
SI-RF-COMPB 2-3 38.20 NT
SI-RF-COMPC 4 -5 56.60 NT
SI-RF-EB1
(21 0.012 NT
T -29 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Antimony
TCLP Barium
TCLP Cadmium
TCLP Nickel
TCLP Zinc
Anthracene
Senzo(a)anthracen e
Chrys ene
Final Dae. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5 .1-2
LANDFILL AREA
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
TCLP :Metals (mg/I)
Sl-RF-COMPA 0 -1 0.067 NT
SI-RF-COMPS 2 -3 0.051 NT
SI-RF-COMPA 0 -1 0.611 NT
SI-RF-COMPS 2-3 0 .697 NT
SI-RF-COMPC 4-5 0.01 NT
SI-RF-COMPA 0 -1 0.038 NT
SI-RF-COMPB 2-3 0.039 NT
SI -RF -COMPC 4-5 0.01 NT
S1 -RF-COMPA 0 -1 0.256 NT
SI-RF-COMPS 2-3 0.191 NT
SI-RF-COMPC 4-5 0.198 NT
SNA Organics (mg /kg)
SI-RF-COMPS 2-3 5470 NT
SI-RF-COM PC 4-5 1 7 00 NT
SI -RF-COMPA 0 -1 560 NT
SI -RF-COMPA 0 -1 1180 NT
SI -RF-COMPS 2-3 840 NT
T-30 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Fluoranthene
1-Methylnaphthalene
Naphthalene
Pyrene
TCLP 1-
Methylnaphthalene
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.1-2
LANDFILL AREA
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (feet)
BNAOrgariics {mg/kg)
SI-RF-COMPS 2-3
SI-RF-COMPC 4-5
SI-RF-COMPS 2-3
SI-RF-COMPC 4-5
SI-RF-COMPS 2-3
SI -RF -COMPC 4 -5
SI-RF-COMPA 0 -1
SI-RF-COM PB 2-3
SI-RF-COMPC 4-5
TGLP BNA Organics (mg/I)
SI-RF-COMPC 4 -5
Sample Background
Concentration Range
920 NT
530 NT
12500 NT
17000 NT
750 NT
2800 NT
1080 NT
2010 NT
1200 NT
0.115 NT
11 l = Unit Specific Indicator Parameter, when not designated COMP.
12 ) = Water (mg/I)
SI = Standing Water Surface lmpoundment
Finl!! Dec. 19, 1994 T-31 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
-.
Chromium
Final Dec. 19, 1994
TABLE 5.2-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
OILY DUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
· Number (feet) Concentration Range
-,
Total Metals (rtrg/kg)
OD-RF-1 A 0 -2 9 .56 1. 79 -1 5.4
OD-RF-1 B 3 -3.5 34 .40 NT
OD -RF-1 C 4.5 -5 67 .50 ND -18.3
OD-RF-1 D 7.5 -8 28 .80 NT
OD-RF-1 E 9 -9.5 31 .20 NT
OD-RF-1 F 11-11.5 18.70 NT
OD-RF-1 G 13 -13.5 10.20 NT
OD-RF-1 H 15 -15.5 12.40 NT
OD-RF-1 K 20 -22 14.00 NT
OD-RF-1 N 26.5 -27 12.60 NT
OD-RF-1 P 31 -31.5 7.96 NT
OD-RF-2A 0-2 107 1.79-15.4
OD-RF-28 3 .5 -4 185 ND -18.3
OD-RF-2C 5 -5.5 20.70 NT
0D-RF-2D 7 -7.5 19.40 NT
OD-RF-2E 9 -9.5 17.70 NT
OO-RF-2F 11 -11.5 53.50 NT
OD -RF-2G 13 -13.5 14.80 NT
T -32 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Fmel Dec. 19, 1994
TABLE 5.2-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
OILY DUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
Totat Metals (mg/kg)
OD-RF-2H 15-15.5 13.70 NT
OD-RF-21 17.5-18 16.80 NT
0D-RF-2J 18 -20 12.60 NT
OD-RF-2M 24 -26 14.30 NT
OD-RF-2N 27 -27.5 13.90 NT
OD-RF-20 28 -30 12.80 NT
OD-RF-2P 31-31.5 9.34 NT
OD-RF-2R 35 -35.5 7.17 NT
OD-RF-2S 40 -40.5 5.73 NT
OD-RF-2U 45 -46.5 7 .96 NT
OD-RF-3A 1.5 -2 95.80 NT
OD-RF-3B 3 -3.5 16.70 NT
OD-RF-3C 5 -5.5 10.90 NT
OD-RF-3D 7 -7 .5 12.40 NT
OD-RF-3E 9 -9.5 5 .04 NT
0D-RF-3F 11 -11.5 16.80 NT
OD-RF-3G 1 3 -13.5 16.50 NT
OD-RF -3H 15 -15.5 11. 10 NT
T-33 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Final Dec. 19, 1994
TABLE 5 .2-1
RCRA Facility Investi gation Report
December 1994
OILY DUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Ba c kground
Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals(mg/kg)
OD-RF-3I 17-17.5 14.20 NT
OD-RF-3J 19 -19.5 3 7.40 NT
OD-RF-3L 21 -21.5 11 .50 NT
OD-RF-3M 23 -23 .5 11. 1 0 NT
OD-RF-30 28 -28 .5 10.60 NT
OD-RF-3P 32 -32.5 11.20 NT
OD-RF-3R 36 -36 .5 10.50 NT
OD-RF-3S 40 -40.5 8 .95 NT
OD-RF-3T 42 -42.5 4.29 NT
OD-RF-3U 46 -46.5 12.60 NT
OD-RF-48 3 .5 -4 138 ND -18.3
0D-RF-4D 7 -7 .5 24.10 NT
OD-RF-4F 11-11 .5 59.20 NT
0D-RF-4H 15-15.5 9 .51 NT
OD -RF-4I 16 -18 13.7 0 NT
OD-RF-4J 19 -19 .5 1 5.00 NT
0D-RF-4N 2 6 -26.5 12.60 NT
OD-RF-4P 31 -3 1.5 9.04 NT
T-34 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
.. ..
Chromium
F1nat Dec. 1 9 , 1994
TABLE 5 .2-1
RCRA Facility Investigati on Report
December 1994
OILY DUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
T o~al_' Metals _· (mg/kg) . .
OD-RF-SA 0.5 -1 193 1 .79 -15.4
OD-RF-58 3 -3 .5 86.20 NT
OD-RF-5C 5 -5 .5 9 .8 1 NT
OD-RF-5D 7 -7.5 5.24 NT
OD-RF-5E 9 -9.5 1 1 .40 NT
OD-RF-5F 11 -11 .5 30.90 NT
OD-RF-5G 13 -13.5 11 .90 NT
OD-RF-5H 15 -15.5 9 .19 NT
0D-RF-51 17 -17 .5 17.20 NT
0D-RF-5J 19.5 -20 19.20 NT
OD-RF-SK 20 -22 22.30 NT
OD-RF-5L 21.5 -22 10.00 NT
OD -RF -5N 26 -2 6.5 14.60 NT
OD -RF -5P 31 -31.5 10.40 NT
OD -RF-6A 0 .5 -1 5.70 1.79-15.4
OD-RF-68 4 -4.5 6.90 ND -1 8.3
T-35 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Lead
Final Dec. 19, 1994
TABLE 5.2-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
OILY DUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number {feet) Concentration Range
. T:otafMetals(nig/kgl
OD-RF-7A 0.5 -1 4.50 1.79 -15.4
OD-RF-7D 7-8 29.60 NT
OD-RF-8A 1 -1. 5 12.30 1.79-15.4
OD-RF-8C 6 -6.5 6.10 NT
OD-RF-9A 1 -2 40.40 1. 79 -15.4
OD-RF-9C 6-7 22.80 NT
OD-RF-108 2 -2.5 392 NT
OD-RF-1 OC 4.5 -5 44.90 ND -18.3
OD-RF-80S1 18 -20 12.60 NT
OD-RF-BDS2 16 -18 14.20 NT
OD-RF-BDS3 20 -22 22.40 NT
0D-RF-BDS4 0.5 -1 10.40 1 .79-15.4
OD-RF-1 A 0-2 8.98 ND -3250
0D-RF-1 B 3 -3.5 33.70 NT
OD-RF-1 C 4.5 -5 89.80 ND -19.2
T -36 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
Final Dec . 1 9 , 1 994
RCRA Facility Investi gation Report
December 1 994
TABLE 5.2-1
OILY DUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (feet)
Total. Metals . (mg/kg)
OD-RF-1 D 7.5 -8
OD-RF-1 E 9 -9.5
OD-RF-1 F 11 -11 .5
OD-RF-1 G 13 -13.5
OD-RF-1 H 15 -15.5
0D-RF-1 K 20 -22
0D-RF-1 N 26.5 -27
OD-RF-1 P 31-31.5
OD-RF-2A 0-2
OD-RF-28 3 .5 -4
OD-RF-2C 5 -5.5
OD-RF -20 7 -7.5
OD-RF-2E 9 -9.5
OD-RF-2F 11 -11 .5
OD-RF-2G 13-13.5
T-37
Sample Background
Concentration Range
.. . .
12.80 NT
15.20 NT
9 .96 NT
23.50 NT
21.80 NT
12.20 NT
6.43 NT
8.80 NT
71.10 ND -3250
80.70 ND -19.2
19.30 NT
9.98 NT
17.30 NT
32.30 NT
18.90 NT
EarthFax Engineering,. Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
Final Dec. 19, 1994
TABLE 5.2-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
OILY DUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
_Total'"Metals (mg/kg)_
OD-RF-2H 15 -15.5 15 .30 NT
OD-RF-21 17.5-18 9 .65 NT
OD-RF-2J 18 -20 13.80 NT
OD-RF-2M 24 -26 23.80 NT
OD-RF-2N 27 -27.5 30.80 NT
OD-RF-20 28 -30 20.10 NT
OD-RF-2P 31-31 .5 24.70 NT
OD-RF-20 33 -33.5 26.70 NT
OD-RF-2R 35 -35.5 10.90 NT
00-RF-2S 40 -40.5 13.90 NT
OD-RF-2U 45 -46.5 14.60 NT
OD-RF-3A 1.5 -2 56.20 NT
OD-RF-3B 3 -3 .5 22.80 NT
OD-RF-3C 5 -5.5 14.70 NT
OD-RF-3D 7 -7.5 19.90 NT
OD-RF-3E 9 -9.5 7.89 NT
OD-RF-3F 11 -11.5 20.50 NT
OD-RF-3G 13-13.5 19 .20 NT
OD-RF-3H 15-15.5 27.60 NT
T-38 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
Fin•I Dec. 19, 1994
TABLE 5 .2-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
OILY DUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total . Metals• {mg/kg)
OD-RF-3I 17 -17.5 17.70 NT
OD-RF-3J 19-19.5 19.70 NT
OD-RF-3L 21-21.5 14.00 NT
OD-RF-3M 23 -23.5 17.40 NT
OD-RF-30 28 -28.5 18.50 NT
OD-RF-3P 32 -32.5 15 .50 NT
OD-RF-3R 36 -36.5 34.40 NT
OD-RF-3S 40 -40.5 23.90 NT
OD-RF-3T 42 -42.5 7 .83 NT
OD-RF-3U 46 -46.5 32.80 NT
OD-RF-4B 3 .5 -4 47.10 ND -19 .2
OD -RF-4D 7 -7.5 10.70 NT
OD-RF-4F 11 -1 1 .5 16.40 NT
OD-RF-4H 15 -15.5 17.60 NT
0D-RF-4I 16 -18 9.47 NT
OD-RF -4J 19-19.5 8.14 NT
OD-RF-4N 26 -26.5 13.60 NT
OD-RF-4P 31-31.5 21.20 NT
T-39 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
final Dec. 19, 1 994
TABLE 5.2-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
OILY DUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet} Concentration Range
Total Metals ,(mg/kg}
0D-RF-5A 0 .5 -1 295 ND -3250
OD-RF-58 3 -3 .5 51.80 NT
OD-RF-5C 5 -5 .5 11 .40 NT
OD-RF-5D 7 -7.5 106 NT
OD-RF-5E 9 -9.5 8.20 NT
OD-RF-5F 11-11.5 20.00 NT
OD-RF-5G 13-13.5 17.20 NT
OD-RF-5H 15 -15.5 18.40 NT
OD-RF-51 17-17.5 13 .70 NT
OD-RF-5J 19.5 -20 8 .23 NT
OD-RF-5K 20 -22 10.00 NT
OD-RF-5L 21.5-22 13.90 NT
OD-RF-5N 26 -26.5 13.30 NT
OD -RF-5P 31 -31.5 16.70 NT
OD-RF-6A 0 .5 -1 15.50 ND -3250
OD-RF-68 4 -4 .5 14.20 ND -19.2
OD -RF -7A 0.5 -1 16 .60 ND -3250
T-40 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
TCLP Chromium
F1n•I Dec, 19, 1994
TABLE 5.2-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
OILY DUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (mg/kg)
OD-RF-7D 7-8 8.40 NT
OD-RF-8A 1 -1. 5 7.70 ND -3250
OD-RF-8C 6 -6.5 5.10 NT
OD-RF-9A 1 -2 13.80 ND -3250
OD-RF-9C 6-7 4.10 NT
OD-RF-10 2 -2.5 183 NT
OD-RF-10C 4.5 -5 10.40 ND -19.2
OD-RF-BDS1 18 -20 13.40 NT
OD-RF-BDS2 16 -18 11.40 NT
OD-RF-BDS3 20 -22 9.60 NT
OD-RF-80S4 0.5 -1 9 .02 ND -3250
TCLP. Meta rs (mg /I).
OD-RF-1A 0 -2 0.06 NT
OD-RF-1 B 3 -3.5 1.51 NT
OD-RF-1 C 4.5 -5 2.20 NT
OD-RF-1 D 7 .5 -8 1.09 NT
T-41 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Chromium
Fmal Dec, 19, i 994
TABLE 5.2-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
OILY DUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
TCLP Metals (mg/I)
OD-RF-1E 9 -9.5 1.42 NT
OD-RF-1 F 11-11 .5 0.960 NT
OD-RF-1 G 13-13.5 0.025 NT
OD-RF-1 K 20 -22 0 .015 NT
OD-RF-2A 0-2 0.06 NT
OD-RF-2B 3.5 -4 0 .068 NT
OD-RF-2C 5 -5 .5 0 .115 NT
OD-RF-2E 9 -9.5 0 .011 NT
OD-RF-2F 11 -11 .5 0.480 NT
OD-RF-21 17.5-18 0 .015 NT
OD-RF-2U 45 -46 .5 0.034 NT
OD-RF-3A 1.5 -2 0.011 NT
OD-RF-38 3 -3 .5 0 .011 NT
OD-RF-3H 15 -15.5 0.02 NT
OD-RF -58 3 -3.5 0 .063 NT
OD-RF-5F 11-11.5 0.564 NT
T-42 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Chromium
TCLP Lead
F,nal Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.2-1
OILY DUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (feet)
' .
TCLP Metals: (mg/I)
OD-RF-6A 0.5 -1
OF-RF-6B 4 -4.5
OD-RF-7A 0.5 -1
0D-RF-7D 7 -8
0D-RF -8A 1 -1 .5
OD-RF-8C 6 -6 .5
OF-RF-9A 1 -2
OD-RF-1 OB 2 -2 .5
0D-RF-1 OC 4 .5 -5
OD-RF-1 B 3 -3.5
0D-RF-1 C 4.5 -5
OD-RF-1 D 7 .5 -8
OD-RF-1 E 9 -9.5
OD-RF-1 F 11-11.5
T -43
Sample Background
Concentration Range
0.154 NT
0.032 NT
0.154 NT
0 .121 NT
0 .305 NT
0.061 NT
0 .300 NT
0.419 NT
0 .037 NT
1.02 NT
0.77 NT
0 .52 NT
0 .58 NT
0 .21 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Lead
Final D ec, 19, 19 94
TABLE 5.2-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
OILY DUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
TCLP Metals fmg/I}
00-RF-1 G 13-13.5 0.031 NT
OD-RF-2F 11-11.5 0.055 NT
0D-RF-20 33 -33.5 0.101 NT
OD-RF-2R 35 -35.5 0.031 NT
00-RF-2$ 40 -40.5 0.039 NT
OD-RF-2U 45 -45.5 0 .077 NT
OD-RF-3A 1 .5 -2 0.023 NT
OD-RF-3G 13 -13.5 0.053 NT
OD-RF-3H 15 -15 .5 0.031 NT
OD-RF-3J 19-19 .5 0.016 NT
OD-RF-3P 32 -32.5 0.058 NT
OD-RF-3R 36 -36 .5 0 .082 NT
OD-RF-3S 40 -40 .5 0.062 NT
0D-RF-3T 42 -42 .5 0.081 NT
OD-RF-3U 46 -46 .5 0 .057 NT
OD-RF-48 3.5 -4 0.379 NT
00-RF-4D 7 -7.5 0 .241 NT
T-44 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Lead
Final Oec. 1 9, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5 .2-1
OILY DUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (feet)
TCLP Metals (mg/I)
OD-RF-4J 19 -19 .5
OD-RF-5A 0.5 -1
OD-RF-5B 3 -3.5
OD-RF-5E 9 -9 .5
OD-RF-5F 11-11 .5
OD-RF -5G 13-13.5
OD-RF-6A 0 .5 -1
OD-RF-6B 4 -4 .5
OD -RF-7A 0 .5 -1
OD-RF-SA 1 -1 . 5
OD-RF -9A 1 -2
0D-RF-1 OB 2 -2.5
OD -RF-B0S3 20 -22
T-45
Sample Background
Concentration Range
0 .03 NT
0.017 NT
0.08 NT
0.062 NT
0.105 NT
0.016 NT
0.089 NT
0 .041 NT
0 .076 NT
0.06 NT
0 .051 NT
0.051 NT
0 .019 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Benzene
Toluene
Final Dec. 1 9, 1994
TABLE 5 .2-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
OILY DUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number {feet) Concentration Range
Organics' (mg/kg)
OD-RF-6A 0.5 -1 0.25 NT
OD-RF-7A 0.5 -1 0.34 NT
OD-RF-SA 1 -1 .5 0 .36 NT
OD-RF-9A 1 -2 0.46 NT
OF-RF-1 OB 2 -2.5 1.42 NT
OD-RF-BDS4 0.5 -1 0.48 NT
OD-RF-6A 0.5 -1 1 .38 NT
OD-RF-7A 0 .5 -1 1.89 NT
OD-RF-SA 1 -1.5 2.22 NT
OD-RF-SC 6 -6.5 0.61 NT
OD-RF-9A 1 -2 3 .04 NT
OD-RF-1 OB 2 -2.5 16 .10 NT
OD -RF-BDS4 0 .5 -1 2.71 NT
T -46 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
'
Ethyl benzene
Xylene
Fin al Dec. 19 , 1994
TABLE 5.2-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1 994
OILY DUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
Organics (mg/kg)
0D-RF-6A 0.5 -1 0 .84 NT
OD-RF-7A 0 .5 -1 0.96 NT
OD-RF-8A 1 -1.5 1 .11 7 NT
OD-RF-9A 1 -2 1. 71 NT
OD-RF-1 OB 2 -2.5 10.20 NT
OD-RF-1 OC 4.5 -5 0 .28 NT
OD-RF-BDS4 0 .5 -1 1 .25 NT
OD-RF-6A 0.5 -1 4.60 NT
OD-RF-68 4 -4.5 1.2 6 NT
OD-RF-7A 0 .5 -1 6 .67 NT
OD-RF-8A 1 -1.5 8 .79 NT
OD-RF-8C 6 -6 .5 1.09 NT
OD-RF-9A 1 -2 11.80 NT
0D-RF -9C 6 -7 0.29 NT
OD-RF-1 OB 2 -2.5 74.20 NT
OD-RF-1 OC 4.5 -5 1 .80 NT
T -47 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Xylene
TPH
Fin al De c. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investi gation Report
D e cember 1994
TABLE 5.2-1
OILY DUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Number Depth
(feet)
Organi cs (mg/kg} ..
OD-RF-BDS4 0 .5 -1
0D-RF-1 A 0-2
0D-RF-1 B 3 -3 .5
OD-RF-1 C 4.5 -5
0D-RF-1 D 7.5 -8
OD-RF-1 E 9 -9.5
OD-RF-1 F 11 -11.5
00-RF-1 G 13 -13.5
0D-RF-1 K 20 -22
0D-RF-1 N 26.5 -27
0D-RF-2A 0-2
OD -RF -28 3 .5 -4
0D-RF-2C 5 -5 .5
OD-RF-2D 7 -7 .5
OD-RF-2E 9 -9.5
0D-RF-2F 11-11 .5
OD -RF -2G 13 -13.5
OD -RF -2H 15 -15.5
0D-RF-2I 17.5 -18
T-48
Sample Background
Concentration Range
9 .51 NT
119000 NT
87700 NT
22900 NT
13500 NT
4170 NT
4100 NT
3440 NT
280 NT
34.60 NT
8710 NT
13300 NT
31700 NT
13800 NT
12800 NT
9310 NT
905 NT
96.30 NT
646 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TPH
Final Dec. 19 . 1994
TABLE 5.2-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
OILY DUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
. Organlcs: (mg/kg}
0D-RF-2J 18 -20 77.20 NT
0D-RF-2N 27 -27 .5 59.10 NT
0D-RF-3A 1.5 -2 6330 NT
0D-RF-3F 11-11.5 6670 NT
OD-RF-3G 13-13.5 8900 NT
0D-RF-3H 15 -15 .5 2750 NT
0D-RF -31 17-17.5 46.6 NT
OD-RF-3J 19 -19.5 144 NT
0D-RF-4B 3.5 -4 23500 NT
0D-RF-4D 7 -7.5 3530 NT
OD-RF-4F 11-11.5 1680 NT
0D-RF-4H 15 -15.5 13.80 NT
0D-RF-4J 19-19.5 27.50 NT
OD -RF-5A 0 .5 -1 71100 NT
0D-RF-5B 3 -3 .5 6050 NT
OD-RF-5C 5 -5.5 45400 NT
0D-RF-5D 7 -7 .5 9430 NT
T-49 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
...
TPH
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
111 = Water (mg/ll
Fon•I 0 c c. 19. 1994
TABLE 5.2-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
OILY DUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Number Depth Sample Background
(feet) Concentration Range
Organics (mg/kg)
OD-RF-5E 9 -9.5 10300 NT
OD-RF-5F 11-11.5 2300 NT
OD-RF-5G 13 -1 3.5 7970 NT
OD-RF-5H 15 -15.5 185 NT
OD-RF-5K 20 -22 71.80 NT
OD-RF-6A 0.5 -1 335000 NT
OD-RF-6B 4 -4.5 42400 NT
OD-RF-7A 0.5 -1 295000 NT
OD-RF-7D 7-8 2770 NT
OD-RF-SA 1 -1. 5 33800 NT
OD-RF-8C 6 -6.5 28900 NT
OD-RF-9A 1 -2 358000 NT
OD-RF-9C 6-7 207000 NT
OD-RF-1 OB 2 -2.5 285000 NT
OD-RF-1 OC 4 .5 -5 4130 NT
OD-RF-BDS1 18 -20 45.20 NT
OD-RF-BDS3 20 -22 80.50 NT
OD-RF-BDS4 0.5 -1 1.37 NT
T -50 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Final Dec. 19, 1994
TABLE 5.2-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
OILY DUMP
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Totar Metals (mg/kg)
OD-RF-COMPS 3-4 0 .86 NT
OD-RF-CO MPG 13-13.5 0 .72 NT
OD-RF-COMPL 21 -27 0.38 NT
OD-RF-COMPS 3-4 18.70 NT
OD-RF-CO MPG 13-13.5 16.20 NT
OO-RF-COMPL 21 -27 11.80 NT
OD-RF-COMPP 31-32.5 11.80 NT
OD-RF-COMPS 3-4 45.30 NT
OD-RF-CO MPG 13 -13.5 81.80 NT
OD-RF-COMPL 21 -27 96.00 NT
OD-RF-COMPP 31 -32.5 96 .80 NT
OD -RF-COMPS 3-4 0.17 NT
OD-RF-CO MPG 13 -13.5 0 .59 NT
OD-RF-COMPL 21 -27 0 .35 NT
OD-RF-COMPP 31 -32.5 0.36 NT
T -51 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Cadmium
Chromium
Cobalt
Final Dec. 1 B, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.2-2
OILY DUMP
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
Total Metals (mg/kg)
OD-RF-COMPS 3-4
OD-RF-CO MPG 13-13.5
00-RF-COMPL 21 -27
00-RF-COMPP 31 -32.5
OD-RF-COMPA2 0.5 -2 .5
0 D-R F-CO MPC2 4-8
OD-RF-COMPS 3 -4
OD-RF-CO MPG 13-13.5
00-RF-COMPL 21 -27
0D-RF-COMPP 31 -32.5
OD-RF-COMPS 3 -4
OD-RF-CO MPG 13-13.5
OD-RF-COMPL 21 -27
00-RF-COMPP 31 -32.5
T -52
Sample Background
Concentration Range
2 .76 NT
8.05 NT
5.59 NT
5 .04 NT
162 NT
23.20 NT
175 NT
17.00 NT
13.60 NT
11.40 NT
2 .36 NT
7.88 NT
4 .82 NT
4 .64 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Final De e. 19. 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1 994
TABLE 5.2-2
OILY DUMP
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
TotaU\.1etais (mg/kg)
OD -RF-COMPA2 0.5 -2.5
OD-RF-COMPC2 4-8
OD-RF-COMPB 3-4
OD-RF-CO MPG 13-13.5
OD-RF-COMPL 21 -27
OD-RF-COMPP 31 -32.5
OD-RF-COMPB 3-4
OD-RF-COMPG 13 -13.5
00-RF-COMPL 21 -27
OD-RF-COMPP 31-32.5
OD-RF-COMPS 3-4
OD-RF-CO MPG 13-13.5
0D-RF -COMPL 21 -27
00-RF-COMPP 31 -32.5
T-53
Sample Background
Concentration Range
74.00 NT
3.85 NT
73 .00 NT
16.40 NT
13.50 NT
14.20 NT
18.50 NT
0.496 NT
0.52 NT
0.496 NT
16.50 NT
21 .80 NT
12.20 NT
11 .90 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Selenium
Vanadium
Zinc
Final Dec. 19, 1994
. . .
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1 994
TABLE 5.2-2
OILY DUMP
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
.•
TotalMetals '(mg/kg) .
OD-RF-COMPB 3-4
OD-RF-COMPG 13-13.5
OD-RF-COMPL 21 -27
OD-RF-COMPP 31 -32.5
OD-RF-COMPS 3-4
OD-RF-CO MPG 13-13.5
OD-RF-COM PL 21 -27
OD-RF-COM PP 31 -32.5
OD-RF-COMPS 3-4
OD-RF-COMPG 13-13.5
OD-RF-COMPL 21 -27
OD-RF-COMPP 31 -32.5
0D-RF-EBS1 11)
OD-RF-EBS3 11 )
T -54
Sample Background
Concentration Range
1 .41 NT
2.63 NT
2.57 NT
2 .02 NT
12.80 NT
21.20 NT
17.70 NT
16.00 NT
176 NT
97.00 NT
67.60 NT
55.80 NT
0.015 NT
0.226 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Barium
TCLP Cadmium
TCLP Cobalt
TCLP Chromium
TCLP Lead
TCLP Nickel
Final Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5 .2-2
OILY DUMP
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
•'
TCLp Metals (mg/I}
OD-RF-COMPS 3 -4
OD-RF-CO MPG 13 -13.5
00-RF-COMPL 21 -27
OD-RF-COMPP 31 -32.5
OD-RF-COMPS 3-4
OD-RF-CO MPG 13-13.5
OD-RF-COMPL 21 -27
OD-RF-COMPP 31 -32.5
OD-RF-COMPS 3-4
OD-RF-CO MPG 13-13.5
OD-RF-COMPP 31 -32.5
OD-RF-COMPA2 0.5 -2.5
OD-RF-COMPS 3 -4
OD-RF-COMPC2 4-8
OD-RF-COMPA2 0.5 -2.5
OD-RF-COMPS 3-4
OD-RF-COMPC2 4-8
OD-RF-COMPS 3-4
OD-RF-CO MPG 13-13.5
00-RF-COMPL 21 -27
OD-RF-COMPP 31 -32.5
T -55
Sample Background
Concentration Range
0.16 NT
0 .12 NT
0.74 NT
0.92 NT
0 .021 NT
0 .015 NT
0.016 NT
0.011 NT
0.016 NT
0.011 NT
0.017 NT
0 .227 NT
0.23 NT
0.02 NT
0.039 NT
0.106 NT
0.037 NT
0.106 NT
0.088 NT
0 .021 NT
0 .029 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Selenium
TCLP Vanadium
TCLP Zinc
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl benzene
final Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.2-2
OILY DUMP
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
.. . ~ .
TCLP •Metals (mgll)
OD-RF-COMPS 3-4
OD-RF-CO MPG 1 3 -13.5
OD-RF-COMPL 21 -27
OD-RF-COMPP 31 -32.5
OD-RF-COMPP 31 -32.5
OD-RF-COMPS 3-4
OD-RF-CO MPG 13-13.5
OD-RF-COMPL 21 -27
0D-RF-COMPP 31 -32.5
Organics (mg/kg)
OD-RF-COMPA2 0.5 -2 .5
OD-RF-COMPS 3 -4
OD-RF-COMPC2 4-8
OD-RF-COMPA2 0.5 -2.5
OD -RF -COMPS 3-4
OD-RF-COMPC2 4-8
OD-RF-COMPA2 0 .5 -2.5
OD-R F-COMPS 3-4
OD-RF-CO MPC2 4-8
T-56
Sample Background
Concentration Range
0 .022 NT
0 .022 NT
0 .006 NT
0 .025 NT
0.014 NT
1.43 NT
0.49 NT
0.26 NT
0 .21 NT
0 .6 NT
0.22 NT
0.093 NT
5 .51 NT
0.84 NT
0.32 NT
3.01 NT
0.97 NT
0.085 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Xylene
TCLP Xylene
Anthracene
Chrysene
2 -Methylphenol
4-Methylphenol
3 &4-Methyl phenol
Final 0cc. 19, 1994
TABLE 5.2-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
OILY DUMP
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Organics ·(mg/kg) ..
OD-RF-COMPA2 0.5 -2.5 24.60 NT
OD-RF-COMPS 3-4 6.14 NT
OD-RF-COMPC2 4-8 0.736 NT
OD-RF-CO MPG 13-13.5 0.0062 NT
TCLP Volatiie Organics (mg/I) . ' ' .
OD-RF-COMPS 3-4 0.044 NT
BNA Organics (mg/kg)
OD-RF-COMPS 3-4 106 NT
0D-RF-COMPL 21 -27 0.099 NT
OD-RF-COMPS 3-4 42.00 NT
OD-RF-CO MPG 13-13.5 1.50 NT
0D-RF-COMPP 31 -32.5 0.10 NT
OD-RF-CO MPG 13-13.5 5.90 NT
0D-RF-COMPL 21 -27 0.12 NT
T-57 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Naphthalene
Phenol
Pyrene
TCLP 2-Methylphenol
TCLP 3&4-
Methyl phenol
TCLP Naphthalene
TCLP Phenol
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
111 = Water (mg /I)
Final Dec. 19, 1994
.. ,,
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.2-2
OILY DUMP
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
BN.A.:Organics (tng/kgl
OD-RF-COMPS 3-4
00-RF-COMPG 13 -13.5
OD-RF-COMPL 21 -27
OD-RF-CO MPG 1 3 -13.5
OD-RF-COMPS 3-4
. . .
TCLP SNA Organics (mg/I)
OD-RF-CO MPG 13-13.5
OD-RF-COM PB 3-4
OD-RF-CO MPG 13-13.5
OD-RF-COMPS 3-4
OD-RF-CO MPG 13-13.5
OD-RF-CO MPG 13-13.5
T-58
Sample Background
Concentration Range
316 NT
0.82 NT
0.056 NT
11.20 NT
73.00 NT
0.105 NT
0.062 NT
0.109 NT
0.101 NT
0.023 NT
0.555 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Finol Dee. 19, 199 4
TABLE 5.3-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
ALKY CHANNEL
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total· Metals (mg/kg).
AC-RF-1 B 2.5 -3 146 NT
AC-RF-1 C 6-7 23.20 NT
AC -RF-1 E 8-9 22 .30 NT
AC-RF-28 2.5 -3 247 NT
AC-RF-2C 6.5-7.5 18.10 NT
AC-RF-2D 7 .5 -8 .5 20.30 NT
AC-RF-3B 2 .5 -3 159 NT
AC-RF-3E 8 -9 19.80 NT
AC-RF-3F 1 0 -11 26.60 NT
AC-RF-4A 0 -1 50.80 1.79-15 .4
AC-RF-48 2.5 -3 38 .30 NT
AC-RF-4D 7-8 19.60 NT
AC-RF-4E 8-9 20.50 NT
AC-RF-5A 0 -1 40 .10 1 .79 -15.4
AC-RF-5B 2 .5 -3 61 .30 NT
AC-RF-5 C 6-7 18.80 NT
AC-RF-5D 7 -8 20.10 NT
AC-RF-BDS1 2.5 -3 294 NT
T-59 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
TCLP Chromium
TCLP Lead
F,n el Dec. 19, 1 994
TABLE 5.3-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
ALKY CHANNEL
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) C once ntrati on Range
Total Metals (mg/kg)
AC-RF-1 E 8-9 2.09 NT
AC-RF-28 2 .5 -3 7.09 NT
AC-RF-2C 6.5 -7.5 7.53 NT
AC-RF-20 7.5 -8.5 4.62 NT
AC-RF-38 2 .5 -3 4.33 NT
AC-RF-3E 8 -9 7.16 NT
AC-RF-40 7-8 3 .62 NT
AC-RF-4E 8 -9 4 .03 NT
AC-RF-5C 6-7 2.58 NT
AC-RF-50 7-8 5.01 NT
AC-RF-BDS1 2.5 -3 5.80 NT
TCLP Metals. (mg /I)
AC-RF-2B 2.5 -3 0.056 NT
AC-RF-38 2.5 -3 0 .131 NT
AC-RF-3F 10 -11 0.01 NT
AC-RF-48 2.5 -3 0.011 NT
AC-RF-5A 0 -1 0.027 NT
AC-RF-5B 2.5 -3 0.011 NT
AC-RF -50 7 -8 0.014 NT
AC-RF -BDS1 2.5 -3 0.082 NT
AC-RF-40 7-8 0 .05 NT
T -60 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Benzene
Toluene
Final Dec, 19, 1984
TABLE 5.3-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
ALKY CHANNEL
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
Organics (mg\kg)
AC-RF-1 B 2.5 -3 0 .44 NT
AC-RF-28 2.5 -3 3.17 NT
AC-RF-38 2.5 -3 2.06 NT
AC-RF-4A 0 -1 21.90 NT
AC-RF-48 2.5 -3 3.05 NT
AC-RF-58 2.5 -3 1.47 NT
AC-RF-1 B 2.5 -3 15.50 NT
AC-RF-28 2.5 -3 91 .60 NT
AC-RF-38 2 .5 -3 141 NT
AC-RF-4A 0 -1 315 NT
AC-RF-48 2.5 -3 30 .10 NT
AC-RF-5A 0 -1 31.20 NT
AC-RF-5B 2.5 -3 161 NT
AC-RF-BDS1 2.5 -3 84.50 NT
T-61 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A .
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Ethyl benzene
Xylene
TPH
Final Dec:. 19, 1984
TABLE 5.3·1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
ALKY CHANNEL
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
Organics .·(mg\kg)
AC-RF-1 B 2.5 -3 7.69 NT
AC-RF-28 2.5 -3 51.50 NT
AC-RF-38 2.5 -3 65.50 NT
AC-RF-4A 0 -1 93.30 NT
AC -RF-48 2.5 -3 20.90 NT
AC-RF-5A 0 -1 53.70 NT
AC-RF-58 2.5 -3 84.70 NT
AC-RF-BDS1 2.5 -3 45.00 NT
AC-RF-1 B 2.5 -3 51.80 NT
AC-RF-28 2.5 -3 366 NT
AC-RF-38 2.5 -3 538 NT
AC-RF -4A 0 -1 617 NT
AC-RF-48 2.5 -3 139 NT
AC-RF-5A 0 -1 250 NT
AC-RF-58 2.5 -3 719 NT
AC-RF-BDS1 2.5 -3 262 NT
AC-RF-1 B 2.5 -3 16400 NT
AC-RF-1 C 6-7 9 .20 NT
AC-RF-1 E 8-9 28.80 NT
AC-RF-2B 2.5 -3 84100 NT
T -62 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TPH
TCLP Benzene
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
01 = Water (mg/I)
Fina l Dec. 19 , 1884
TABLE 5.3-1
RCRA Facility Investigati on Report
December 1 994
ALKY CHANNEL
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
Organks :(mg\kg)
AC-RF-2C 6.5-7.5 404 NT
AC-RF-2D 7.5 -8.5 1.01 NT
AC-RF-3B 2.5 -3 74700 NT
AC-RF-4A 0 -1 46600 NT
AC-RF-4B 2.5 -3 35800 NT
AC-RF-4E 8 -9 2.29 NT
AC-RF-5A 0 -1 95000 NT
AC-RF-5B 2.5 -3 74500 NT
AC-RF-5C 6 -7 88 .70 NT
AC-RF-5D 7-8 40.40 NT
AC-RF-BDS1 2.5 -3 59100 NT
.. ,
TCLP Organics (mg/I)
AC-RF-3B 2 .5 -3 0.12 NT
AC-RF-4A 0 -1 1.01 NT
AC-RF-4B 2 .5 -3 0 .14 NT
AC-RF-5A 0 -1 0 .12 NT
AC-RF-5B 2 .5 -3 0 .095 NT
T-63 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Antimony
Barium
Cadmium
Cobalt
Final Dec. 19 , 1994
TABLE 5.3-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
ALKY CHANNEL
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
TotatMeta·Is. (mg/kg)
AC-RF-COMPO 6 -8 1 .22 NT
AC-RF-COMPA 0 -1 17.30 53 .9 -198
AC-RF-COMPB 2.5 -3 41.70 53 .9 -198
AC-RF-COMPC 6 -9 114 NT
AC-RF-COMPO 6 -8 85.3 NT
AC-RF-COMPE 7-9 121 NT
AC-RF-COMPF 8 -11 105 NT
AC-RF-COM PA 0 -1 2.20 ND -14.6
AC-RF-COMPB 2.5 -3 1.68 ND-14.6
AC-RF-COMPC 6 -9 5 .99 NT
AC-RF-COMPO 6-8 6.00 NT
AC-RF-COMPE 7-9 8.14 NT
AC-RF-COMPF 8 -11 5.66 NT
AC-RF-COMPA 0 -1 7 .36 0.83 -7.64
AC-RF -COMPB 2 .5 -3 4.42 NT
AC-RF-COMPC 6-9 5.40 NT
AC-RF -COMPO 6-8 6.65 NT
AC-RF-COMPE 7-9 7 .68 NT
AC-RF-COMPF 8 -11 7.60 NT
T-64 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Lead
Mercury
Final Oec. 19 , 1 9 94
TABLE 5.3-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
ALKY CHANNEL
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (mg/kg)
AC-RF-COM PA 0 -1 32.30 1.79-15.4
AC-RF-COMPS 2.5 -3 159 NT
AC-RF-COMPC 6 -9 19.50 NT
AC-RF-COMPO 6-8 17.90 NT
AC-RF-COMPE 7-9 30.80 NT
AC-RF-COMPF 8 -11 24.40 NT
AC-RF-COMPS 2 .5 -3 4.32 NT
AC-RF-COMPC 6-9 5.68 NT
AC-RF-COMPE 7-9 3.39 NT
AC-RF-COMPA 0 -1 0 .378 ND -0 .739
AC-RF-COMPS 2.5 -3 0.674 NT
AC-RF-COMPC 6-9 0.119 NT
AC-RF-COMPO 6-8 0.094 NT
T -65 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
-• .. -.
Nickel
Vanadium
Zinc
final Dec. 19 , 1994
TABLE 5.3-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
ALKY CHANNEL
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total.Metals (mg/J<g)
AC-RF-COMPA 0 -1 59.10 1 .61 -15.1
AC-RF-COMPS 2.5 -3 37.20 NT
AC-RF-COMPC 6 -9 12.40 NT
AC-RF-COMPO 6 -8 12.60 NT
AC-RF-COMPE 7-9 12.30 NT
AC-RF-COMPF 8 -11 16 .00 NT
AC-RF -COMPA 0 -1 55 .80 3.42 -174
AC-RF-COMPS 2.5 -3 25 .70 NT
AC-RF-COMPC 6 -9 24.00 NT
AC-RF-COMPE 7-9 36.70 NT
AC-RF-COMPF 8 -11 26.50 NT
AC-RF-COM PA 0 -1 19.70 12.0 -524
AC-RF-COMPS 2.5 -3 67 .30 NT
AC-RF-COMPC 6 -9 50.00 NT
AC-RF-COMPE 7 -9 58.30 NT
AC-RF-COMPF 8 -11 42.30 NT
T-66 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A .
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Antimony
TCLP Barium
TCLP Cadmi um
TCLP Coba lt
TCLP Chromium
Final Dec. 1 9 , 199 4
TABLE 5 .3-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
ALKY CHANNEL
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) C once ntrati on Range
' , -
_ TCLP Metals (rr1g/l)
AC-RF-COMPS 2.5 -3 0 .04 NT
AC-RF-COMPE 7-9 0 .067 NT
AC-RF-COMPF 8 -11 0.042 NT
AC-RF-COMPA 0 -1 0.507 NT
AC-RF-COMPS 2 .5 -3 1.08 NT
AC-RF -COMPC 6-9 1.97 NT
AC-RF-COMPO 6-8 2.10 NT
AC-RF-COMPE 7-9 2.02 NT
AC-RF-COMPF 8 -11 2.41 NT
AC-RF-COMPS 2 .5 -3 0 .019 NT
AC-RF-COMPE 7 -9 0.011 NT
AC-RF-COMPS 2.5 -3 0.019 NT
AC-RF-COMPE 7-9 0 .012 NT
AC-RF-COMPA 0 -1 0.014 NT
AC-RF-COMPS 2 .5 -3 0 .055 NT
AC-RF-COMPC 6 -9 0 .024 NT
AC-RF -COMPO 6 -8 0.01 3 NT
AC-RF-CO MPF 8 -1 1 0.016 NT
T -6 7 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Mercury
TCLP N i ckel
TCLP Selenium
TCLP Z inc
Final Dec, 19, 1994
TABLE 5.3-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
ALKY CHANNEL
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
..
TC.LP Metafs ;'{rl)_g /1)
AC-RF-COMPA 0 -1 0.00026 NT
AC-RF-COMPC 6-9 0.00034 NT
AC-RF -COMPF 8 -1 1 0.00059 NT
AC-RF-COMPA 0 -1 0.044 NT
AC-RF -COMPS 2.5 -3 0 .529 NT
AC-RF-COM PC 6 -9 0 .01 NT
AC-RF-COMPO 6 -8 0 .01 NT
AC-RF-COMPE 7 -9 0 .013 NT
AC-RF-COMPF 8 -1 1 0 .025 NT
AC-RF-COMPC 6-9 0.064 NT
AC-RF-COMPO 6-8 0.052 NT
AC-RF-COMPF 8 -11 0 .049 NT
AC-RF -COMPA 0 -1 0 .225 NT
AC-RF-COMPS 2.5 -3 1.08 NT
AC-RF-COMPC 6-9 0.344 NT
AC-RF-COMPO 6 -8 0.192 NT
AC-RF-COMPE 7 -9 0.346 NT
AC-RF-COM PF 8 -11 0.388 NT
T -68 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A .
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl benzene
Xylene
TCLP Benzene
Final Oee. 19 , 1994
TABLE 5.3-2
RCRA Fa c ility Investigati o n Report
December 1 994
ALKY CHANNEL
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
Organics (mg \kg)
AC-RF-COMPA 0 -1 4.18 NT
AC-RF-COMPS 2.5 -3 1 .16 NT
AC-RF-COMPC 6 -9 0.099 NT
AC-RF-COMPF 6 -8 0 .043 NT
AC-RF-COMPA 0 -1 53 .50 NT
AC-RF-COMPS 2 .5 -3 20 .10 NT
AC -RF-COMPC 6 -9 0 .61 NT
AC -RF -COMPA 0 -1 13 .20 NT
AC-RF-COMPS 2 .5 -3 9.35 NT
AC-RF-COMPC 6 -9 0 .275 NT
AC -RF-COMPE 7 -9 0.07 NT
AC-RF -COMPF 8 -11 0.05 NT
AC-RF -COMPA 0 -1 96 .80 NT
AC-RF -COMPS 2 .5 -3 6 7.2 NT
AC-RF-COMPC 6 -9 2 .12 NT
AC-RF-COMPO 6 -8 0 .239 NT
AC-RF-COMPE 7-9 0 .40 NT
AC-RF-COMPF 8 -11 0 .132 NT
TCLP Org anic s {mg/I)
A C-RF-COMPA 0 -1 0 .317 NT
AC -RF -COMPS 2.5 -3 0.112 NT
T -69 EarthFax Engineering, In c .
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Ethyl benzene
TCLP Toluene
TCLP Xylene
Anthracene
Chrysene
Fluoranthene
1-Methyl Naphthalene
Naphthalene
Fine! De c . 19, 1894
TABLE 5.3-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
ALKY CHANNEL
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
T~LP Volatile Organics (mg/I)
AC-RF-COMPA 0 -1 0 .283 NT
AC -RF-COMPS 2.5 -3 0.242 NT
AC-RF-COMPA 0 -1 2.31 NT
AC-RF-COMPS 2.5 -3 1.12 NT
AC-RF-COMPA 0 -1 2 .15 NT
AC-RF-COM PB 2.5 -3 1 .92 NT
AC-RF-COMPO 6-8 0.244 NT
AC-RF-COMPE 7-9 0.226 NT
BNA Organics (mg/kg)
AC-RF-COMPS 2.5 -3 3.00 NT
AC-RF-COMPB 2.5 -3 3.90 NT
AC-RF-COMPS 2.5 -3 2 .30 NT
AC-RF-COMPA 0 -1 11 .30 NT
AC-RF-COMPS 2.5 -3 42.90 NT
AC-RF-COMPC 6-9 0.95 NT
AC-RF-COMPE 7-9 0.67 NT
AC-RF-COMPA 0 -1 12.50 NT
AC-RF-COMPB 2.5 -3 19.80 NT
AC-RF-COM PC 6-9 0.30 NT
T -70 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
....
Pyrene
TCLP Naphthalene
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
!ll = Water (mg/I)
Flnal Dec. 19, 1994
TABLE 5.3-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
ALKY CHANNEL
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number {feet) Concentration Range
BNAOrganics (mg/kg)
I
AC-RF-COMPA 0 -1 3.00 NT
AC-RF-COMPS 2.5 -3 6.10 NT
TCLP BNA Organics (111911)
AC-RF-COMPA 0 -1 0.028 NT
AC-RF-COMPS 2.5 -3 0.069 NT
T-71 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Fine! De c .19.1994
-
RCRA Faci lity Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.5-1
ALKY SITE
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (feet)
Total Metals (mg /kg)
AS-RF-1 B 7 -7.5
AS-RF-1 C 10-10.5
AS-RF-1 D 13 -13.5
AS-RF-1 E 1 6-16.5
AS-RF-28 6 -7.5
AS-RF-2E 13.5 -15
AS-RF-2G 21 -22.5
AS -RF -2H 25 .5 -27
AS-RF-3A 1 .5 -3
AS-RF-38 6 -7 .5
AS-RF-3C 10.5 -12
AS-RF-3E 15 -1 6.5
AS-RF-3F 19.5-21
AS-RF-4A 1.5 -3
AS-RF-48 6 -7.5
AS-RF-4C 9 -10.5
AS -RF-4D 12-13.5
AS-RF-4F 18 -19 .5
T-7 2
Sample Background
Concentration Range
11.20 NT
20.20 NT
19.70 NT
21.80 NT
17 .10 NT
24.00 NT
18.80 NT
16.80 NT
2 1.70 NT
3.30 NT
26.20 NT
18.10 NT
17.90 NT
21.30 NT
16.20 NT
24.80 NT
23.30 NT
24.60 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Finel Dec. 19, 1 994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.5-1
ALKY SITE
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (feet)
Totcil Metals' (mg/kg)
AS-RF-5A 1.5 -3
AS-RF-58 6 -7.5
AS-RF-5D 12-13.5
AS-RF-5F 18-19.5
AS-RF-5G 21 -22.5
AS-RF-68 7 -7 .5
AS-RF-6D 13 -13.5
AS-RF-6F 19 -19.5
AS-RF-6G 22 -22.5
AS-RF-7B 7 -7 .5
AS-RF-7E 14.5 -15
AS-RF-7G 22 -22.5
AS-RF-7H 26 .5 -27
AS-RF-SA 1 -1 .5
AS -RF-8B 7 -7.5
AS-RF-8C 11.5-12
AS-RF-B E 1 6 -1 6.5
AS-RF-8F 20.5 -21
T-73
Sample Background
Concentration Range
7 .84 NT
15.70 NT
22.70 NT
18.60 NT
16.10 NT
16.00 NT
26.30 NT
21.10 NT
18.00 NT
18.10 NT
23.80 NT
21.30 NT
17.30 NT
11.50 1 . 79 -15.4
21 .00 NT
22.90 NT
22.40 NT
15.60 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Lead
Final Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Fa cility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.5-1
ALKY SITE
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth
Number (feet)
Tota!Meta'ls {mg/kg) . . . ' .
AS-RF-9A 0 -1
AS-RF-98 4 .2
AS-RF-9C 8.0
AS-RF-9D 10.0
AS-RF -BDS1 19 -19 .5
AS-RF-BDS2 18 -19.5
AS-RF-1 B 7 -7 .5
AS-RF-1 C 10 -105
AS-RF-1 D 13 -13.5
AS-RF-1 E 1 6 -1 6.5
AS-RF-2E 13.5 -1 5
AS-RF-2 G 21 -22.5
AS-RF-2H 25 .5 -27
AS -RF-3 A 1.5 -3
AS-RF-3C 1 0.5 -12
AS-RF-3E 15 -16.5
AS-RF-3 F 19.5-21
AS-RF-4A 1 .5 -3
AS-RF-4C 9 -10.5
AS-RF-4F 1 8-19.5
T-74
Sample Background
Concentration Range
2 .33 1 . 79 -15.4
37.40 NT
32.50 NT
20.40 NT
19.00 NT
24.20 NT
5.47 NT
2 .38 NT
5.81 NT
6 .70 NT
2 .02 NT
7 .20 NT
18.00 NT
10.90 NT
4.24 NT
5.11 NT
4.17 NT
2 .17 NT
4.38 NT
4.8 7 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
Fi n•I Dec, 19, 1984
TABLE 5.5-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
ALKY SITE
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals _ (mg/kg)
AS-RF-5A 1 .5 -3 2.38 NT
AS-RF-58 6 -7.5 5.39 NT
AS-RF-5D 12-13.5 5.11 NT
AS-RF-5F 18-19.5 4.64 NT
AS-RF-5G 21 -22.5 11.30 NT
AS-RF-68 7 -7 .5 4 .52 NT
AS-RF-60 13-13.5 5.19 NT
AS-RF-6F 19-19.5 4.84 NT
AS-RF-6G 22 -22.5 6.28 NT
AS-RF-7E 14.5-15 4 .17 NT
AS-RF-7G 22 -22.5 7.42 NT
AS-RF -7H 26.5 -27 10.00 NT
AS-RF-BA 1 -1 .5 14.10 ND -3250
AS-RF-88 7 -7.5 9 .00 NT
AS-RF-BF 20 .5 -21 10.00 NT
AS-RF-9C 8.0 9.44 NT
AS-RF-90 10.0 9.37 NT
AS-RF-80S1 19 -19.5 5 .99 NT
AS-RF-80S2 18 -19.5 7.08 NT
T -75 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Chromium
TCLP Lead
Toluene
Ethyl benzene
Xylene
Fi nal Dec. 19, 1994
TABLE 5.5-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
ALKY SITE
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
... JCLP Metals -{mg/I)
AS-RF-4A 1.5 -3 0.01 NT
AS-RF-8C 11.5 -12 0.012 NT
AS-RF-1 B 7 -7.5 0.026 NT
AS-RF-1 D 13 -13.5 0.027 NT
AS-RF-2G 21 -22.5 0.036 NT
AS-RF-2H 25.5 -27 0.041 NT
AS-RF-3C 10.5 -12 0.052 NT
AS-RF-4C 9 -10.5 0.036 NT
AS-RF-5A 1.5 -3 0.026 NT
AS-RF-5F 18-19.5 0.021 NT
AS-RF-BA 1 -1 .5 0.029 NT
Organics (mg/kg)
AS-RF-1 B 7 -7.5 0.56 NT
AS-RF-2B 6 -7.5 4.68 NT
AS-RF-48 6 -7.5 0.81 NT
AS-RF-9A 0 -1 47 .30 NT
AS-RF-28 6 -7.5 7 .11 NT
AS-RF -38 6 -7.5 0.41 NT
AS-RF -48 6 -7.5 0.82 NT
AS-RF-1 B 7 -7 .5 3 .07 NT
AS-RF-2B 6 -7 .5 32.00 NT
AS-RF-3B 6 -7 .5 1.74 NT
T -76 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Xylene
TPH
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
Final Dec. 19, 1 994
..
TABLE 5 .5-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1 994
ALKY SITE
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample (feet) Concentration Range
Number
.. Organics (mg/k'g),
AS-RF-4A 1 .5 -3 3 .72 NT
AS-RF-4B 6 -7 .5 7.55 NT
AS-RF-78 7 -7.5 1 .1 5 NT
AS-RF-9A 0 -1 35.30 NT
AS -RF-98 4.2 35.60 NT
AS-RF-18 7 -7 .5 456 NT
AS-RF-28 6 -7.5 7080 NT
AS-RF-2E 13.5 -15 2 .58 NT
AS-RF-3A 1.5 -3 113 NT
AS-RF-38 6 -7.5 4720 NT
AS-RF-4A 1 .5 -3 20700 NT
AS-RF-48 6 -7 .5 1820 NT
AS-RF-4F 18 -19.5 2960 NT
AS-RF -58 6 -7.5 2010 NT
AS-RF-7B 7 -7.5 439 NT
AS-RF-SA 1 -1.5 1520 NT
AS-RF-9A 0 -1 302000 NT
AS-RF-98 4.2 49200 NT
AS -RF -9C 8 1.25 NT
T -77 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
'
...
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Final Dec:. 19, 199 4
TABLE 5.5-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
ALKY SITE
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
. ..... ... Total Metals (mg/kg)
AS-RF-COMPA 1 -3 7.85 NT
AS-RF-COM PB 6 -7.5 11.00 NT
AS-RF-COMPC 9 -15 11.00 NT
AS-RF-COMPO 12 -22.5 11.80 NT
AS-RF-COM PE 16 -27 14.50 NT
AS-RF-COM PA 1 -3 65 .90 NT
AS-RF-COM PB 6 -7.75 11 2 NT
AS-RF-COMPC 9 -15 164 NT
AS-RF-COMPO 12 -22.5 109 NT
AS-RF-COMPE 16 -27 156 NT
AS-RF-COMPE 16 -27 0 .693 NT
AS-RF-COMPA 1 -3 2.65 NT
AS-RF -COMPB 6 -7 .75 4 .8 3 NT
AS -RF -COM PC 9 -15 7 .31 NT
AS-RF-COMPO 12 -22.5 7 .17 NT
AS-RF-COMPE 16 -27 6.98 NT
T-78 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
-.
Chromium
Cobalt
Lead
Mercury
Fmaf Dec. 19. 1984
TABLE 5.5-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
ALKY SITE
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
°f;(}!a(Metals (mg/kg) _ ..
AS-RF-COM PA 1 -3 58 .10 NT
AS-RF-COMPS 6-7.75 21.60 NT
AS-RF-COMPC 9 -15 29.10 NT
AS-RF-COMPO 12-22.5 26.30 NT
AS-RF-COM PE 16 -27 23.80 NT
AS-RF-COM PA 1 -3 2.54 NT
AS -RF-COM PB 6-7.75 4.29 NT
AS-RF-COMPC 9 -15 6.63 NT
AS-RF-COMPO 12 -22.5 6.71 NT
AS-RF-COMPE 16 -27 5 .80 NT
AS -RF-COMPA 1 -3 9.27 NT
AS-RF-COMPS 6 -7.5 1.96 NT
AS-RF-COMPC 9 -15 2.90 NT
AS-RF-COMPO 12-22.5 5 .28 NT
AS-RF-COMPE 16 -27 6 .90 NT
AS -RF-COMPA 1 -3 0.346 NT
AS -RF -COMPS 6 -7.75 0 .139 NT
AS-RF-EBS4
11)
0.00023 NT
AS-RF-FBS4
11)
0.00035 NT
T -79 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Nickel
Vanadium
Zinc
TCLP Arsenic
TCLP Barium
Fin a l De c . 19, 1 994
TABLE 5.5-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
ALKY SITE
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
TotalMetals (ing/kg)
AS-RF-COMPA 1 -3 5.54 NT
AS-RF-COMPS 6-7.75 8.72 NT
AS-RF-COMPC 9 -15 13.00 NT
AS-RF-COMPO 12 -22.5 10.90 NT
AS-RF-COMPE 16 -27 13.30 NT
AS-RF-COMPA 1 -3 13.80 NT
AS-RF-COMPS 6-7.75 26.40 NT
AS-RF-COMPC 9 -15 32.20 NT
AS-RF-COMPO 12-22.5 32 .30 NT
AS-RF-COMPE 16 -27 29.80 NT
AS-RF-COMPA 1 -3 58.90 NT
AS-RF-COMPS 6-7.75 37.90 NT
AS-RF-COMPC 9 -15 47.90 NT
AS-RF-COMPO 12 -22.5 46.10 NT
AS-RF-COMPE 16 -27 52.80 NT
AS-RF-EBS4 (1 )
0.015 NT
TCLP Metals (mg/I)
AS-RF-COMPC 9 -15 0.053 NT
AS-RF-COM PA 1 -3 1.08 NT
AS-RF-COM PB 6-7.75 0 .977 NT
AS-RF-COMPC 9 -15 1 .19 NT
AS-RF-COMPO 12-22.5 2.10 NT
T-80 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Barium
TCLP Cadmium
TCLP Cobalt
TCLP Lead
TCLP Mercury
TCLP Nickel
TCLP Zinc
Finel Dec. 19, 1994
TABLE 5.5-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
ALKY SITE
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Sample Depth Sample Background
Number (feet) Concentration Range
.. T~LP fy'letars (rrJg/J)
AS-RF-COM PE 16 -27 1.94 NT
AS-RF-COMPO 12 -22.5 0.011 NT
AS-RF-COMPS 6-7.75 0 .01 NT
AS-RF-COMPC 9 -15 0 .018 NT
AS-RF-COMPO 12 -22.5 0 .0 27 NT
AS-RF-COMPE 16 -27 0 .04 NT
AS-RF-COMPS 6 -7 .5 0.037 NT
AS-RF-COMPO 12 -22.5 0.024 NT
AS-RF-COMPS 6-7.75 0.0006 NT
AS-RF-COMPA 1 -3 0 .01 NT
AS-RF-COMPS 6 -7.75 0.02 NT
AS-RF-COMPC 9 -15 0.01 NT
AS-RF-COMPO 12 -22.5 0 .034 NT
AS-RF-COMPE 16 -27 0 .073 NT
AS-RF-C OM PA 1 -3 0.228 NT
AS-RF-COMPS 6-7.75 0.144 NT
AS-RF-COMPC 9 -15 0.141 NT
AS-RF -COMPO 12 -22.5 0.426 NT
AS-RF -COMPE 16 -27 0.301 NT
T -81 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Toluene
Ethyl benzene
Xylene
TCLP Napthalene
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
111 = Water (mg/I)
Final Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.5-2
ALKY SITE
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
Orgah1cs {mg/kg)
AS-RF-COMPS 6 -7.5
AS-RF-COMPB 6 -7.5
AS-RF-COMPA 1 -3
AS-RF-COMPS 6 -7 .5
TCLP BN.A Organics (mg/I)
AS-RF-COM PB 6 -7 .75
T -82
Sample Background
Concentra Range
tion
0.074 NT
0.217 NT
0 .075 NT
2 .25 NT
0.022 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
...
Chromium
Final Dec. 1 9 . 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1 994
TABLE 5.10-1
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
..
Total :Metals (mg/kg)
WT-RF-DP-1A Sludge 1460 NT
WT-RF-DP-1B 3 -3.5 22.00 NT
WT-RF-DP-2A Sludge 1810 NT
WT-RF-DP-2B 2.5 -3 114 NT
WT-RF-DP-2C 4 -4 .5 25.90 ND -18.3
WT-RF-P1 A-1 A Sludge 1960 NT
WT-RF-P1 A-1 B 2.3 -2.8 28 .80 NT
WT-RF-P1A-1C 4 -4.5 18.90 ND -18.3
WT-RF-P1 A -2A Sludge 2170 NT
WT-RF-P1 A-2B 2.5 -3 18.60 NT
WT-RF-P1 A-2C 4.5 -5 19.80 ND -18.3
WT-RF-P1 B-1 A Sludge 918 NT
WT-RF-P1 8-1 B 1.5 -2 92.20 NT
WT-RF-P1 B-1 C 3.5 -4 34.90 ND -18.3
WT-RF-P18-2A Sludge 1600 NT
WT-RF-P18-2B 5 -6 4.52 NT
WT-RF -P1 B-2C 7-8 15.30 NT
WT-RF-P1 B-3A Sludge 2780 NT
WT-RF-P1 B-3B 1 .2 -2.2 45.20 NT
WT-RF-P1 B-3C 3.5 -4 22.00 NT
WT-RF-P2-1 A 0 -0.5 65.40 1.79-15.4
WT-RF-P2-18 4.5 -5 13.00 ND -18.3
T-83 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Lead
Fina l De c . 19, 1994
RCRA Facility I nvestigation Report
December 1 994
TABLE 5.10-1
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
. Tq~.3f . Metals (mg/kg)
WT-RF-P2-1 C 6 -6.5 18.30 NT
WT-RF-P2-2A 0 -0.5 83.50 1.79-15.4
WT-RF-P2-28 3 -3.5 17.00 NT
WT-RF-P2-2C 7 -7.5 17.50 NT
WT-RF-P2-3A 0 -0.5 37.10 1.79-15.4
WT-RF-P2-38 2 -2 .5 10.20 NT
WT-RF-P2-3C 4 -4.5 13.60 ND -18.3
WT-RF-P2-4A 0 -0.5 108 1.79-15.4
WT-RF-P2-4B 2 -2 .5 29.30 NT
WT-RF-P2-4C 3.5 -4 15.90 ND -18.3
WT-RF-P3-1 A 0 -0 .5 59.00 1.79 -15.4
WT-RF -P4-1 A 0 -0.5 34.80 1 .79-15.4
WT-RF-P5-1 A 0 -0 .5 62.30 1 . 79 -15.4
WT-RF-SP-1A 0 -0.5 19.70 1.79 -15.4
WT-RF-BDS1 Sludge 2050 NT
WT-RF-BDS2 Sludge 2350 NT
WT-RF-FBS2 (1)
0.015 NT
WT-RF -DP -1 A Sludge 22.50 NT
WT-RF -DP-1 B 3 -3 .5 5 .64 NT
WT-RF-DP-2A Sludge 23.20 NT
WT-RF-DP-28 2.5 -3 5.08 NT
WT-RF-DP-2C 4 -4.5 3 .89 ND -19.2
T-84 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Final Dec . 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.10-1
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Totar Metals (mg/kg)
WT-RF-DP-1A Sludge 22.50 NT
WT-RF-DP-18 3 -3.5 5.64 NT
WT-RF-DP-2A Sludge 23.20 NT
WT-RF-DP-28 2.5 -3 5.08 NT
WT-RF -DP-2C 4 -4.5 3.89 ND-19.2
WT-RF-P1A-1 A Sludge 29 .60 NT
WT-RF-P1A-18 2.3 -2.8 6.1 6 NT
WT-RF-P1 A-1 C 4 -4.5 7.21 ND -19.2
WT-RF-P1 A-2A Sludge 29.30 NT
T-85 EarthFax Engineering, Inc,
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
Final Dec. 19. 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1 994
TABLE 5.10-1
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total .Metals {mg/kgt
WT-RF-P1 A -1 A Sludge 29.60 NT
WT-RF-P1A-1B 2.3 -2.8 6 .1 6 NT
WT-RF-P1A-1C 4 -4.5 7 .2 1 ND -1 9 .2
WT-RF-P1 A-2A Sludge 29.30 NT
WT-RF-P1 A-28 2 .5 -3 8 .50 NT
WT-RF-P1 A-2C 4.5 -5 11 .20 ND-19.2
WT-RF -P1 B-1A Sludge 58.20 NT
WT-RF-P18-1 B 1.5 -2 4 .80 NT
WT-RF-P18-1 C 3.5 -4 9 .66 ND -19.2
WT-RF-P1 B-2A Sludge 21 .10 NT
WT-RF-P18-28 5 -6 1.99 NT
WT-RF-P1 B-2C 7-8 10.10 NT
WT-RF-P1 B-3A Sludge 40 .10 NT
WT-RF-P18-38 1.2 -2.2 6.47 NT
WT-RF-P1 B-3C 3.5 -4 11.20 ND -19.2
WT-RF-P2-1A 0 -0 .5 16.80 ND -3250
WT-RF-P2-18 4.5 -5 9 .31 ND -19.2
WT-RF-P2 -1 C 6 -6.5 14.30 NT
WT-RF-P2-2A 0 -0 .5 46.60 ND -3250
WT-RF-P2-28 3 -3 .5 10.50 NT
T-86 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
TCLP Chromium
Finet D ec. 1 9 , 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.10-1
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (mg/kg) ..
WT-RF-P2-2C 7 -7 .5 8.77 NT
WT-RF-P2-3A 0 -0 .5 12.80 ND -3250
WT-RF-P2-38 2 -2.5 6.86 NT
WT-RF-P2-3C 4-4.5 11 .50 ND -19.2
WT-RF-P2-4A 0 -0.5 74.70 ND -3250
WT-RF-P2-4B 2 -2 .5 10.70 NT
WT-RF-P2-4C 3.5 -4 10.20 ND -19.2
WT-RF-P3-1 A 0 -0 .5 8.00 ND -3250
WT-RF-P4-1 A 0 -0.5 5 .30 ND -3250
WT-RF-P5-1 A 0 -0.5 11 .80 ND -3250
WT-RF-SP-1 A 0 -0.5 44.40 ND -3250
WT-RF-BDS1 Sludge 29 .30 NT
WT-RF-BDS2 Sludge 38 .30 NT
TCLP Metals (mg /I)
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 0.98 NT
WT-RF-C-DPB 2 .5 -3.5 0.039 NT
WT-R F-C-P 1 AA Sludge 1.00 NT
WT-RF-C -P1 BA Sludge 0.292 NT
WT-RF-DP-1 A Sludge 1.09 NT
WT-RF-DP-1 B 3 -3.5 0 .011 NT
T -87 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Chromium
Final Dec. 19. 1994
RCRA Fa cility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.10-1
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
TCLP Metals (f'!'g/f)
WT-RF-DP-2A Sludge 0.511 NT
WT-RF-DP-28 2.5 -3 0.051 NT
WT-RF-P1A-1A Sludge 1.58 NT
WT-RF-P1A-1B 2 .3 -2.8 0.013 NT
WT-RF-P1 A-2A Sludge 0.844 NT
WT-RF-P18-1 A Sludge 0.350 NT
WT-RF-P18-18 1.5 -2 0.013 NT
WT-RF-P1 B-2A Sludge 0.178 NT
WT-RF-P18-28 5-6 0 .019 NT
WT-RF-P1 B-3A Sludge 1. 1 2 NT
WT-RF-P2-1A 0 -0.5 0.041 NT
WT-RF-P2-1 B 4 .5 -5 0.021 NT
WT-RF-P2-2A 0 -0.5 0 .027 NT
WT-RF-P2-38 2 -2.5 0 .015 NT
WT-RF-P2-4A 0 -0 .5 0 .014 NT
WT-RF-P3-1 A 0 -0 .5 0 .147 NT
WT-RF-P4-1 A 0 -0 .5 0.065 NT
WT-RF -B0S1 Sludge 1.08 NT
WT-RF-BDS2 Sludge 0.608 NT
T -88 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Lead
Final Dec. 19, 1 9 9 4
RCRA Fa ci li t y Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5 .10-1
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
TCLP Metars (mg/lJ
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 0 .025 NT
WT-RF-C -P1 BC 3 .5 -8 0.034 NT
WT-RF-C-P2C 3.5 -7 .5 0 .057 NT
WT-RF-DP-1 A Sludge 0 .034 NT
WT-RF-DP-1 B 3 -3 .5 0 .057 NT
WT-RF-DP-2A Sludge 0 .022 NT
WT-RF-DP-2B 2.5 -3 0 .04 NT
WT-RF-P1A-1A Sludge 0.031 NT
WT-RF-P1 A-1 B 2 .3 -2 .8 0 .019 NT
WT-RF-P1 A -2A Sludge 0 .046 NT
WT-RF-P1 A-2B 2 .5 -3 0 .07 NT
WT-RF-P1 B-3C 3.5 -4 0.035 NT
WT-RF-P2-1A 0 -0 .5 0.04 NT
WT-RF-P2-1 B 4 .5 -5 0 .07 NT
WT-RF-P2 -1 C 6 -6.5 0 .063 NT
WT-RF-P2-2A 0 -0 .5 0 .056 NT
WT-RF-P2-2C 7 -7 .5 0 .042 NT
WT-RF-P2-3B 2 -2 .5 0.02 NT
T-89 EarthFax Engi neering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Lead
Benzene
Final De c . 1 9 . 199 4
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.10-1
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
TCLP Metals (mg/I}
WT-RF-P2-3C 4 -4.5 0 .06 NT
WT-RF-P2-4A 0 -0.5 0.055 NT
WT-RF-P2-4C 3.5 -4 0.047 NT
WT-RF-BDS1 Sludge 0.042 NT
WT-RF-BDS2 Sludge 0.067 NT
Organics (mg/kg)
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 0.37 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 0.50 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 0.24 NT
WT-RF-DP-1 A Sludge 0.32 NT
WT-RF-DP-2A Sludge 0.40 NT
WT-RF-P1 A-1 A Sludge 0.58 NT
WT-RF -P1 A -2A Sludge 0.73 NT
WT-RF-P1 B-1 A Sludge 0.20 NT
WT-RF-P1 B-2A Sludge 0.33 NT
WT-RF-P18-3A Sludge 0 .39 NT
WT-RF-BDS1 Sludge 0 .55 NT
WT-RF-BDS2 Sludge 0.57 NT
T-90 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
...
Toluene
Ethyl benzene
Final Dec. 1 9, 1 994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.10-1
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
. Orga_nics (mg/kg)
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 1.37 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 1.20 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 1 .18 NT
WT-RF-DP-1A Sludge 1.10 NT
WT-RF-DP-2A Sludge 1.50 NT
WT-RF-P1A-1A Sludge 2.90 NT
WT-RF-P1A-2A Sludge 2.10 NT
WT-RF-P1 8 -1 A Sludge 0 .76 NT
WT-RF-P1 B-2A Sludge 1 .41 NT
WT-RF-P1 B-3A Sludge 1.16 NT
WT-RF-BDS1 Sludge 1.60 NT
WT-RF-BDS2 Sludge 1 .90 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 0 .97 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 0.63 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 0.69 NT
WT-RF-DP-1 A Sludge 1 .01 NT
WT-RF-DP-2A Sludge 0.80 NT
WT-RF-P1 A -1 A Sludge 1.64 NT
T -91 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Ethyl benzene
Xylene
Final Dec. 1 9 , 1994
RCRA Fa ci lity Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.10-1
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Organics •(nig/kg)
WT-RF-P1 A-2A Sludge 1.41 NT
WT-RF-P18-1A Sludge 0 .3 6 NT
WT-RF-P18-2A Sludge 0 .35 NT
WT-RF-P1 B-3A Sludge 0.48 NT
WT-RF-BDS1 Sludge 0.68 NT
WT-RF-BDS2 Sludge 1 .22 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 15.00 NT
WT-RF-C-DPB 2.5 -3.5 0.202 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 8 .67 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 8 .39 NT
WT-RF-P1 BB 1.2 -6 0.115 NT
WT-RF-C-P2A 0 -0 .5 0 .246 NT
WT-RF-DP-1 A Sludge 16.90 NT
WT-RF-DP-2A Sludge 8 .71 NT
WT-RF-DP-28 2.5 -3 0.28 NT
WT-RF-DP-2C 4 -4.5 0.082 NT
WT-RF-P1 A-1 A Sludge 24.70 NT
WT-RF-P1 A-2A Sludge 22.20 NT
T-92 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Xylene
TPH
Fi nal Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.10-1
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Orgi:i°nics (mg/kg) .. ..
WT-RF-P18-1 A Sludge 7.46 NT
WT-RF-P1 B-2A Sludge 9 .59 NT
WT-RF-P1 B-3A Sludge 6.60 NT
WT-RF-P2-3A Sludge 1.90 NT
WT-RF-P2-4A Sludge 0.62 NT
WT-RF-BDS1 Sludge 8 .95 NT
WT-RF-BDS2 Sludge 18 .30 NT
WT-RF-DP-1 A Sludge 40200 NT
WT-RF-DP-1 B 3 -3.5 465 NT
WT-RF-DP-2A Sludge 52000 NT
WT-RF-P1A-1A Sludge 18500 NT
WT-RF-P1A-1 B 2.3 -2.8 63.80 NT
WT-RF-P1 A -2A Sludge 61100 NT
WT-RF-P18-1 A Sludge 28000 NT
WT-RF-P1 B-1 B 1.5 -2 1240 NT
WT-RF-P1 B-2A Sludge 36600 NT
WT-RF-P1 B-3A Sludge 1400 NT
WT-RF-P2-1 A 0 -0.5 436 NT
WT-RF-P2-1 C 6 -6.5 808 NT
T-93 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
..
TPH
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
<1i = Water (mg/I)
Final Dec. 19. 1994
RCRA Fa cility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLES.10-1
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Organics (mg/kg)_ ,......_.___
WT-RF-P2 -2A 0 -0.5 /24.50 ~~,
WT-RF-P2-3A 0 -0.5 41000 r-hl
WT-RF-P2-4A 0 -0.5 \ 2180 ~T
WT-RF-P3-1 A 0 -0.5 ';--r;§1 NT
WT-RF-P4-1 A 0 -0.5 1 55 NT
WT-RF-P5-1 A 0 -0.5 40.50 NT
WT-RF-80S1 Sludge 39000 NT
WT-RF-BDS2 Sludge 49200 NT
~.., -'3~
ii.'~ 0 \l':5?
q, -~., ?'l--3
( \ o."° \ i ~ ~
A'\P
I}, ~'i6't
~ P<JO u
\
~-
T -94 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Antimony
Arsenic 11 >
Barium
Final De c . 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.10-2
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total •Metals (mg/kg).
WT-RF-C-P1 BB 1.2 -6 5.98 NT
WT-RF-C-DP-2C 4 -4 .5 4.30 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 15.50 NT
WT-RF-C-DPB 2.5 -3 .5 4.22 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 17.20 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AC 4-5 7 .60 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 10.20 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BC 3.5 -8 4.50 NT
WT-RF-C-P2C 3.5 -7 .5 5.80 NT
WT-RF-DP-2C 4 -4 .5 4 .69 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 147 NT
WT-RF-C-DPB 2.5 -3.5 86.20 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 155 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AB 2 .3 -3 83.90 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AC 4-5 92.40 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 114 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BB 1 .2 -6 77.90 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BC 3 .5 -8 82.40 NT
WT-RF-C-P2A 0 -0.5 86.40 NT
T-95 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Barium111
Cadmium 111
Final Dec. 19. 1994
RCRA Facility Inv e st i gation Report
De c ember 1994
TABLE 5.10-2
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (mg/kg)
WT-RF-C-P2B 2 -5 84.30 NT
WT-RF-C-P2C 3 .5 -7 .5 94.60 NT
WT-RF-DP-2C 4 -4.5 60.50 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 3.47 NT
WT-RF-C-DPB 2 .5 -3.5 4.87 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 4 .01 NT
WT-RF-C-P1AB 2 .3 -3 6.87 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AC 4-5 8 .5 7 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 3 .39 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BB 1 .2 -6 4.43 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BC 3 .5 -8 6 .7 1 NT
WT-RF-C-P2A 0 -0.5 5 .26 NT
WT-RF-C-P2B 2-5 6 .5 2 NT
WT-RF-C-P2 C 3.5 -7 .5 8 .11 NT
WT-RF -DP-2C 4-4 .5 4 .34 ND -4.43
T -96 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Final Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facil ity Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.10-2
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) C oncentra ti on Range
. Totat ,Meta.ls'jrng/~g)
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 1643 NT
WT-RF-C-DPB 2.5 -3.5 54.70 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 2236 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AB 2.3 -3 19.80 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AC 4-5 20.90 ND -18.3
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 1670 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BB 1.2 -6 51 .50 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BC 3.5 -8 25.90 NT
WT-RF-C-P2A 0 -0.5 84.00 1.79-15.4
WT-RF-C-P2B 2-5 21.60 NT
WT-RF-C-P2C 3.5-7.5 19.30 NT
T-97 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Cobalt111
Lead
Final Dec. 1 9 , 19 9 4
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5. 10-2
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals·(mg/kg)
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 3.84 NT
WT-RF-C-DPB 2.5 -3.5 5.46 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 2.20 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AB 2.3 -3 3.90 NT
WT-RF-C-P1AC 4-5 4.70 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 2.21 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BB 1.2 -6 4.30 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BC 3.5 -8 6.08 NT
WT-RF-C-P2B 2 -5 3.90 NT
WT-RF-C-P2C 3 .5 -7.5 5.10 NT
WT-RF-DP-2C 4 -4.5 6.42 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 30.50 NT
WT-RF-C-DPB 2.5 -3.5 9 .29 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 31.20 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AB 2.3 -3 7 .50 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AC 4-5 3.60 ND -19.2
WT-RF -C-P1 BA Sludge 37.70 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BB 1.2 -6 4.45 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BC 3.5 -8 9.42 NT
T -98 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
MercuryP1
N ickel
Final Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Fa c ility Investigation Report
December 1 994
TABLE 5. 10-2
WASTEWATER TREATMEN T SYSTEM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (mg/_kg)
WT-RF-C-P2A 0 -0.5 32.80 NT
WT-RF-C-P2B 2-5 11 .00 NT
WT-RF-C -P2C 3 .5 -7 .5 5 .90 NT
WT-RF -C-DPA Sludge 2.69 NT
WT-RF-C-DPB 2.5 -3.5 0.124 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 3 .33 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 2 .30 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BB 1.2 -6 0.131 NT
WT-RF-C-P2A 0 -0.5 0.291 NT
WT-RF-DP-2C 4 -4 .5 0.0879 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 18.00 NT
WT-RF-C-DPB 2.5 -3.5 12.1 0 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 18.90 NT
T -9 9 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
-·
Nickel111
Selenium
Vanadium
Final Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5. 10-2
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (mg/kg)
WT-RF-C-P1 AB 2.3 -3 10.40 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AC 4-5 11.80 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 19.40 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BB 1.2 -6 9.12 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BC 3.5 -8 14.50 NT
WT-RF-C-P2A 0 -0.5 5.60 NT
WT-RF-C-P2B 2 -5 10.80 NT
WT-RF-C-P2C 3.5 -7.5 10.20 NT
WT-RF-DP-2C 4 -4.5 10.90 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 4 .74 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 10.50 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 6 .80 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 7 .76 NT
WT-RF-C-DPB 2.5 -3.5 18.00 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 8.50 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AB 2.3 -3 24.10 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AC 4-5 23.70 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 9.39 NT
T-100 EarthFax Engineering; Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Vanadium111
Zinc111
Final Dec. 19, 19 94
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.10-2
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (mg/kg)
WT-RF-C-P1 BB 1.2 -6 17.80 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BC 3.5 -8 24.10 NT
WT-RF-C-P2A 0 -0.5 15.30 NT
WT-RF-C-P2B 2-5 19 .10 NT
WT-RF-C-P2C 3.5 -7.5 23.40 NT
WT-RF-DP-2C 4 -4 .5 18.60 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 781 NT
WT-RF -C-DPB 2 .5 -3.5 56.10 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 877 NT
WT-RF-C-P1AB 2.3 -3 45.70 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AC 4-5 46.50 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 658 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BB 1.2 -6 46.20 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BC 3.5 -8 49.70 NT
WT-RF-C-P2A 0 -0.5 68.20 NT
WT-RF-C-P2B 2-5 39.70 NT
WT-RF-C-P2C 3.5-7.5 49.20 NT
WT-RF-DP-2C 4 -4 .5 32.80 NT
T-101 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
''.
TCLP Antimony<11
TCLP Arsenic
TCLP Barium111
Final Dec. 19, 1 .994
RCRA Facility Inv est igation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.10-2
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
TCLP Metals (mg/I}
WT-RF-C-P2A 0 -0.5 0.065 NT
WT-RF-C-P2C 3.5 -7.5 0.056 NT
WT-RF-DP-2C 4 -4 .5 0 .062 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 0 .16 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 0 .13 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 0.054 NT
WT-RF-C-P2C 3.5 -7.5 0.054 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 3 .10 NT
WT-RF-C-DPB 2.5 -3.5 0 .823 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 2.92 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AB 2.3 -3 1.24 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AC 4 -5 0.78 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 2.33 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BB 1 .2 -6 1 .0 7 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BC 3.5 -8 1.49 NT
WT-RF-C-P2A 0 -0.5 6.48 NT
WT-RF-C-P2B 2-5 6.77 NT
WT-RF-C-P2C 3 .5 -7 .5 1.49 NT
WT-RF-DP-2C 4 -4.5 0.891 NT
T-10 2 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
:
TCLP Cadmium 11 1
TCLP Cobalt
TCLP Chromium
Final Dec:. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.10-2
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
TCLP Metals (mg/I) . ,. .
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 0.045 NT
WT-RF-C-DPB 2.5 -3.5 0.015 NT
WT-RF-C-P1AA Sludge 0 .042 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AB 2.3 -3 0.014 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AC 4-5 0.022 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 0.024 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BC 3.5 -8 0.018 NT
WT-RF-C-P2C 3.5 -7 .5 0.02 NT
WT-RF-DP-2C 4 -4.5 0.012 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 0.018 NT
WT-RF-C-DPB 2.5 -3.5 0.022 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AC 4-5 0 .0 1 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BB 1.2 -6 0 .013 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 0.98 NT
WT-RF-C-DPB 2 .5 -3.5 0.039 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 1.00 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 0.292 NT
T-103 EarthFax Engineering; Inc,
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Cobalt
TCLP Lead
TCLP Mercury
TCLP Nickel
Final Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.10-2
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
TCLP Metals (mg/I)
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 0 .018 NT
WT-RF-C-DPB 2.5 -3.5 0 .022 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AC 4-5 0.01 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BB 1.2 -6 0.013 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 0.025 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BC 3 .5 -8 0.034 NT
WT-RF-C-P2C 3.5 -7 .5 0.057 NT
WT-RF-C-P2B 2-5 0.00061 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 0.128 NT
WT-RF-C-DPB 2.5 -3.5 0.023 NT
WT-RF -C-P1 AA Sludge 0.093 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AC 4-5 0.011 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 0.045 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BC 3 .5 -8 0 .013 NT
T-104 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Nicke1'1
>
TCLP Vanadium
TCLP Zinc 11
>
Final Dec. 1 9, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5 .10-2
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number {feet) Concentration Range
TCLP Metals (mg/I)
WT-RF-C-P2C 3.5-7.5 0.025 NT
WT-RF-DP-2C 4 -4.5 0 .025 NT
WT-RF-C-P1AA Sludge 0 .023 NT
WT-RF -C-P1 AB 2.3 -3 0.021 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AC 4-5 0.018 NT
WT-RF-C-P2A 0 -0 .5 0.014 NT
WT-RF-C-P2B 2-5 0 .018 NT
WT-RF-C-P2C 3.5 -7 .5 0.016 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 3.94 NT
WT-RF-C -DPB 2.5 -3.5 0 .282 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 6.13 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AB 2.3 -3 0.29 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AC 4-5 0.49 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 4 .85 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BB 1.2 -6 0.119 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BC 3.5 -8 0.224 NT
WT-RF-C-P2A 0 -0.5 5.04 NT
WT-RF-C-P28 2-5 5.18 NT
WT-RF -C-P2C 3.5 -7.5 0.025 NT
WT-RF-DP-2C 4 -4 .5 0 .328 NT
T-105 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl benzene
Xylene
Final Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5. 10-2
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Organics (mg/kg).
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 0 .37 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 0 .50 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 0.24 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 1.37 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 1.20 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 1 .18 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 0.97 NT
WT-RF-C-P 1 AA Sludge 0.63 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 0 .69 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 15 .00 NT
WT-RF-C-DPB 2 .5 -3 .5 0 .202 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 AA Sludge 8.67 NT
WT-RF -C-P1 BA Sludge 8.39 NT
WT-RF-C-P2A 0 -0 .5 0.246 NT
T-106 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
:
Benzenethiol
Chrysene
Fluoranthene
1-Methylnaphthalene
Final De c . 1 9 , 199 4
RCRA Facility Inv estigation Repor t
December 1994
TABLE 5. 10-2
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
BNA.Organics '(il1g/kg)
" -..
WT-RF -C-P1 AA Sludge 138 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 56.20 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 52.50 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 30 .60 NT
WT-RF-C-P 1 AA Sludge 51.70 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 22.30 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BB 1 .2 -6 1.31 NT
WT-RF-C-P2A 0 -0.5 1.18 NT
WT-RF-C -DPA Sludge 13.70 NT
WT-RF-C-P1AA Sludge 23.90 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 6.40 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BB 1 .2 -6 0 .67 NT
WT-RF-C-P2A 0 -0 .5 0 .62 NT
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 17.00 NT
WT-RF-C -P1 AA Sludge 25 .10 NT
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 13.40 NT
WT-RF-C-P2A 0 -0.5 5.18 NT
T-1 07 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
i
Pyrene
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.10-2
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample
Sample Number (feet) Concentration
BNA Organics {mg/kg)
WT-RF-C-DPA Sludge 50.50
WT-RF-C-P1AA Sludge 86.00
WT-RF-C-P1 BA Sludge 24.30
WT-RF-C-P1 BB 1.2 -6 2 .36
WT-RF-C-P2A 0 -0.5 1.51
Background
Range
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
111 = Unit Specific Indicator Parameter when not designated WT-RF-C.
Final Dec . 19, I 994 T-108 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Chromium
TCLP Lead
NT = Not Tested
Fin al Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.11-1
HF NEUTRALIZATION TANKS
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Sample
Sample Number Concentration
TCLP.Metars (mg/I}
HF-RF-EP-AQ 0.012
HF-RF-WP-AO 0.041
HF-RF-WP-SL 0.017
HF-RF-EBS 1 0 .028
HF-RF-EP-SL 0.021
HF-RF-WP-OP 0.027
T-109
Flashpoint Background
(Deg. F) Range
200 NT
200 NT
200 NT
200 NT
2 00 NT
200 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
,._,,. -
TCLP Arsenic
TCLP Barium
TCLP Mercury
NT = Not Tested
Fi nal Dec. 19 , 1994
..
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE5.11-2
HF NEUTRALIZATION TANKS
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Sample
Sample Number Concentration
}CLP MetaJs (lllg/ll
HF-RF-WP-OP 0 .082
HF-RF-WP-SL 0.051
HF-RF-EP-AQ 1.33
HF-RF-EP-SL 0 .767
HF-RF-WP-AO 3.15
HF-RF-WP-OP 0 .122
HF-RF-WP-SL 0 .848
HF-RF-BDS1 1.19
HF-RF-EBS1 0 .04
HF-RF-TBS1 0 .015
HF-RF-EP-AQ 0.00073
HF-RF-BDS1 0.00074
T-110
Flashpoint Background
(Deg. F) Range
200 NT
200 NT
200 NT
200 NT
200 NT
200 NT
200 NT
200 NT
200 NT
200 NT
200 NT
200 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Fin.al Dec. 1 9, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.18-1
NO . 2 OUTFALL SYSTEM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
Total Metais (mg/kg)
OF-RF-1A 0 -0 .5
OF-RF-1 B 1 -1 .5
OF-RF-1 C 2.5 -3
OF-RF-2A 0 -0.5
OF-RF-2B 1 -1 .5
OF-RF-2C 2.5 -3
OF-RF-3A 0 -0.5
OF-RF-38 1 -1 .5
OF-RF-3C 2.5 -3
OF-RF-4A 0 -0.5
OF-RF-48 1 -1.5
OF-RF-4C 2 .5 -3
OF-RF-5A 0 -0 .5
OF-RF-58 1 -1 .5
OF-RF-SC 2.5 -3
OF-RF-6A 0 -0 .5
OF-RF-68 1 -1.5
OF-RF-6C 2.5 -3
T-111
Sample Background
Concentrati on Range
50.50 1 .79 -15.4
10.00 1.79-15.4
13.40 NT
367 1.79-15.4
7.09 1. 79 -15.4
14.40 NT
31.20 1.79-15.4
4 .18 1 .79 -15.4
15.50 NT
31 .20 1 .79-15.4
20.50 1.79 -15.4
20.50 NT
26.70 1.79 -15.4
28.60 1 . 79 -15 .4
24.60 NT
21.00 1.79-15.4
21.70 1. 79 -15.4
26 .60 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Lead
Final Dee. 19, 1994
TABLE 5.18-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
NO. 2 OUTFALL SYSTEM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (mg/l(g)
OF-RF-7A 0 -0 .5 15.40 1 .79-15.4
OF -RF-78 1 -1 .5 17.90 1.79-15.4
OF-RF-7C 2 .5 -3 19 .20 NT
OF -RF-BDS1 0 -0.5 29.80 1.79 -15.4
OF-RF-BDS2 0 -0.5 28.50 1 .79-15.4
OF-RF-TBS2 (1)
0.01 1.79-15.4
OF-RF-1 A 0 -0 .5 79 .1 0 ND -3250
OF-RF-18 1 -1 .5 3 .79 ND -3250
OF-RF-1 C 2 .5 -3 4.03 NT
OF-RF-2A 0 -0 .5 143 ND -3250
OF-RF-28 1 -1 .5 5.16 ND -3250
OF-RF-2C 2 .5 -3 8.60 NT
OF-RF-3A 0 -0 .5 22.30 ND -3250
T -1 12 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
Finl!! D~c. 1 8 , 199 4
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.18-1
NO. 2 OUTFALL SYSTEM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
Total M~tals (mg/kg),
OF-RF-38 1 -1.5
OF-RF-3C 2.5 -3
OF-RF-4A 0 -0.5
OF-RF-48 1 -1 .5
OF-RF-4C 2.5 -3
OF-RF-5A 0 -0 .5
OF-RF-58 1 -1.5
OF-RF-5C 2 .5 -3
OF-RF-6A 0 -0.5
OF-RF-68 1 -1 .5
OF-RF-6C 2.5 -3
OF-RF-7A 0 -0.5
OF-RF -78 1 -1.5
OF-RF-7C 2.5 -3
OF -RF -80S1 0 -0.5
OF-RF -BDS2 0 -0.5
T -113
Sample Background
Concentration Range
..
15.10 ND -3250
8 .28 NT
11 .40 ND -3250
11 .60 ND -3250
15.00 NT
12.70 ND -3250
17.30 ND -3250
14.60 NT
8 .16 ND -3250
8 .17 ND -3250
8.27 NT
6 .37 ND -3250
8.05 ND -3250
12.40 NT
17.50 ND -3250
16.20 ND -3250
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Chromium
TCLP Lead
Final De c. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.18-1
NO . 2 OUTFALL SYSTEM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
TCLP Metals :(1119/I)
OF-RF-1 C 2.5 -3
OF-RF-2A 0 -0.5
OF-RF-3A 0 -0 .5
OF-RF-48 1 -1 .5
OF-RF-5A 0 -0 .5
OF-RF-6A 0 -0.5
OF-RF-78 1 -1.5
OF-RF-1 A 0 -0.5
OF-RF-1 B 1 -1.5
OF-RF-1 C 2.5 -3
OF-RF-2A 0 -0.5
OF-RF-3A 0 -0.5
OF-RF-3C 2 .5 -3
OF-RF-4A 0 -0.5
OF -RF -48 1 -1 .5
OF-RF-4C 2.5 -3
OF-RF-5A 0 -0 .5
OF-RF-58 1 -1. 5
T-114
Sample Background
Concentration Range
0 .014 NT
0.014 NT
0.021 NT
0.011 NT
0 .02 NT
0.01 NT
0.015 NT
0.039 NT
0 .054 NT
0 .032 NT
0.048 NT
0.024 NT
0 .041 NT
0.057 NT
0.049 NT
0.054 NT
0.064 NT
0.042 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Lead
Xylene
TPH
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
r,i = Water (mg/I)
Final Dec. 1 9 , 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.18-1
N0.20UTFALLSYSTEM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet}
TCLP Metals (ing/I) •
OF-RF-5C 2 .5 -3
OF-RF-6A 0 -0.5
OF -RF-6B 1 -1 .5
OF-RF-6C 2.5 -3
OF-RF-7 A 0 -0.5
OF-RF-7B 1 -1 .5
OF-RF-BDS1 0 -0.5
OF-RF-BDS2 0 -0.5
Organics (mg/kg)
OF-RF-5A 0 -0.5
OF-RF-5B 1 -1 .5
OF-RF-2B 1 -1 .5
OF-RF-5A 0 -0.5
OF-RF-6A 0 -0.5
OF-RF-7A 0 -0.5
OF-RF-BDS1 0 -0 .5
T-115
Sample Background
Concentration Range
0.044 NT
0.041 NT
0.025 NT
0 .043 NT
0.032 NT
0.051 NT
0 .021 NT
0.04 NT
1.14 NT
0.42 NT
4 .50 NT
3480 NT
12.00 NT
1120 NT
1.80 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Finaf Dec. 1 9 ., 1994
TABLE 5.18-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
NO. 2 OUTFALL SYSTEM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals(rng/kg)
OF-RF-COMPA 1 0 -0.5 6.65 ND -0.25
OF-RF-COMPA2 0 -0.5 4 .92 ND -0 .25
OF-RF-COMPA 1 0 -0 .5 12.70 12.1 -37 .2
OF-RF-COMPA2 0 -0 .5 7 .51 12.1 -37 .2
OF-RF-COMPB2 1 -1 .5 7.18 12.1 -37 .2
OF-RF-COMPC2 2 .5 -3 9 .02 NT
OF-RF-COMPA 1 0 -0.5 59 .20 53.9 -198
OF-RF-COMPA2 0 -0.5 84 .90 53.9 -198
OF-RF-COMPB1 1 -1 . 5 95 .10 53.9 -198
OF-RF-COMP82 1 -1.5 131 53.9 -198
OF-RF-COMPC1 2.5 -3 81.4 NT
OF-RF-COMPC2 2.5 -3 88.8 NT
OF-RF-COMPA 1 0 -0 .5 1.08 ND -14.6
OF -RF-COMPA2 0 -0 .5 5 .66 ND-14.6
OF-RF-COMPB1 1 -1 .5 1.68 ND -14.6
OF-RF-COMP82 1 -1.5 6.75 ND -1 4 .6
OF -RF -COMPC1 2 .5 -3 4.85 NT
OF-RF-COMPC2 2 .5 -3 5.55 NT
OF-RF-COMPA2 0 -0.5 28.40 1.79-15.4
OF-RF-COMPB1 1 -1 .5 9.15 1.79 -15.4
OF-RF-COMPB2 1 -1 .5 20.50 1.79-15.4
T-116 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Cobalt
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Vanad ium
Fine) 0 cc. 19, 1994
TABLE 5. 18-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
NO. 2 OUTFALL SYSTEM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (mg/kg)
OF-RF-COMPC1 2.5 -3 11.60 NT
OF-RF-COMPC2 2.5 -3 20.50 NT
OF-RF-COMPA 1 0 -0 .5 4 .61 0.83 -7.64
OF-RF-COMPB2 1 -1.5 5.70 0 .83 -7.64
OF-RF-COMPC1 2 .5 -3 3 .06 NT
OF-RF-COMPC2 2 .5 -3 7.53 NT
OF-RF-COMPA 1 0 -0.5 32.8 0 ND -3250
OF-RF-COMPA2 0 -0.5 7 .49 ND -3250
OF-RF-COMPB1 1 -1.5 2 .71 ND -3250
OF -RF-COMPA 1 0 -0.5 0.364 ND -0 .739
OF-RF-COMPA 1 0 -0.5 6.19 1 .61 -15.1
OF-RF-COMPA2 0 -0.5 11.20 1.61 -15 .1
OF-RF-COMPB1 1 -1.5 6 .78 1.61 -15 .1
OF-RF-COMPB2 1 -1 .5 13.20 1.61-15.1
OF -RF-COMPC1 2.5 -3 7.50 NT
OF-RF-COMPC2 2 .5 -3 12.90 NT
OF-RF-COMPA 1 0 -0.5 9.46 3.42-174
OF-RF-COMPA2 0 -0 .5 24.80 3.42 -174
OF-RF-COMPB1 1 -1 .5 10.50 3.42 -174
OF-RF-COMPB2 1 -1 .5 30 .20 3.42 -174
OF-RF-COMPC1 2.5 -3 16.30 NT
OF-RF-COMPC2 2.5 -3 25.20 NT
T -117 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Zinc
TCLP Arsenic
TCLP Barium
TCLP Cadmium
TCLP Chromium
Final Dec. 19, 1994
TABLE 5.18-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
NO. 2 OUTFALL SYSTEM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (rpg/kg)
OF-RF-COMPA 1 0 -0.5 27.10 12.0 -524
OF-RF-COMPA2 0 -0.5 41 .30 12.0 -524
OF-RF-COMPB1 1 -1.5 20.70 12.0 -524
OF-RF-COMPB2 1 -1.5 51 .40 12.0 -524
OF-RF-COMPC1 2.5 -3 35.30 NT
OF-RF-COMPC2 2.5 -3 42.10 NT
TCLP Metals (mg/I}
OF-RF-COMPA 1 0 -0.5 0.051 NT
OF-RF-COMPB1 1 -1.5 0.033 NT
OF-RF-COMPC1 2.5 -3 0.063 NT
OF-RF-COMPC2 2.5 -3 0.049 NT
OF-RF-COMPA 1 0 -0 .5 0.513 NT
OF-RF-COMPA2 0 -0.5 1.31 NT
OF-RF-COMPS 1 1 -1 .5 1.47 NT
OF-RF-COMPB2 1 -1. 5 2.48 NT
OF-RF-COMPC1 2.5 -3 0 .678 NT
OF-RF-COMPC2 2.5 -3 1 .13 NT
OF-RF-COMPA2 0 -0.5 0.016 NT
OF-RF-COMPB2 1 -1 .5 0.011 NT
OF-RF-COMPA 1 0 -0 .5 0.011 NT
OF-RF-COMPA2 0 -0.5 0.012 NT
T-118 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
,:
TCLP Nickel
TCLP Selenium
TCLP Vanadium
TCLP Zinc
Xylene
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
Fino! Dec. 19, 1994
TABLE 5. 18-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
NO. 2 OUTFALL SYSTEM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
TCLP Metals_ ·(mg/I} :
OF-RF-COMPA 1 0 -0.5 0.015 NT
OF-RF-COMPA2 0 -0 .5 0.01 NT
OF-RF-COMPB1 1 -1 .5 0.019 NT
OF-RF-COMPB2 1 -1.5 0.01 NT
OF-RF-COMPC1 2.5 -3 0 .011 NT
OF-RF-COMPC2 2.5 -3 0.01 NT
OF-RF-COMPB2 1 -1 .5 0.046 NT
OF-RF-COMPA 1 0 -0.5 0.02 NT
OF-RF-COMPB1 1 -1.5 0 .012 NT
OF-RF-COMPC1 2.5 -3 0.01 NT
OF-RF -COMPA 1 0 -0.5 0.151 NT
OF-RF-COMPA2 0 -0.5 0.441 NT
OF-RF-COMPB1 1 -1 .5 0.349 NT
OF-RF -COMPB2 1 -1.5 0 .957 NT
OF-RF-COMPC1 2.5 -3 0.09 NT
OF-RF-COMPC2 2.5 -3 0.579 NT
Organics (mg/kg)
OF-RF-COMPA2 0 -0.5 0.247 NT
OF-RF-COMPB2 1 -1.5 0.11 NT
OF-RF-COMPC2 2 .5 -3 0.061 NT
T -119 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
Fino! Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.19-1
EXPERIMENTAL FARM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
Total Metals (mg/kg)
EF-RF-A 1 0A 0 -0 .5
EF-RF-A 1 OB 1 -1. 5
EF-RF-A 1 0C 2 .5 -3
EF-RF-A7A 0 -0.5
EF-RF-A78 1 -1.5
EF-RF-A8A 0 -0.5
EF-RF-A88 1 -1.5
EF -RF-A8C 2.5 -3
EF-RF-811 A 0 -0.5
EF -RF -811 B 1 -1.5
EF-RF-B15A 0 -0.5
EF-RF-8158 1 -1.5
EF-RF-81A 0 -0 .5
EF-RF-81 C 2.5 -3
EF -RF -C12A 0 -0 .5
EF-RF-C1 28 1 -1.5
EF-RF-C12C 2.5 -3
EF-RF-C13A 0 -0 .5
EF-RF-C138 1 -1.5
T-120
Sample Background
Concentration Range
70.60 ND -3250
8.39 ND -3250
8.71 NT
33.00 ND -3250
2.23 ND -3250
49.60 ND -3250
2 .32 ND -3250
6.79 NT
98.70 ND -3250
6 .04 ND -3250
203 ND -3250
6.60 ND -3250
221 ND -3250
17.70 NT
99.80 ND -3250
50.50 ND -3250
3.34 NT
172 ND -3250
3 .85 ND -3250
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
TCLP Lead
ND = Not Detec ted
NT = Not T ested
Fin.el D ec. 18, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5 .19-1
EXPERIMENTAL FARM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
·Metals·(mg/kg)
EF-RF-C15A 0 -0.5
EF-RF-D1 A 0 -0 .5
EF-RF-D4A 0 -0.5
EF-RF-D4B 1 -1 .5
EF-RF-B8A 0 -0 .5
EF-RF-D8B 1 -1 .5
EF-RF-BDS1 2.5 -3
EF-RF-BDS2 2.5 -3
TCLP ·Metals (rngll)
EF-RF-A7A 0 -0.5
EF -RF -A8A 0 -0.5
EF-RF-811 A 0 -0 .. 5
EF-RF-815A 0 -0.5
EF-RF-B1 A 0 -0.5
EF-RF-C12A 0 -0 .5
EF-RF-C13A 0 -0.5
EF -RF-C15A 0 -0 .5
EF -RF-D1 A 0 -0 .5
EF-RF-D4A 0 -0.5
EF-RF-D8A 0 -0 .5
T -121
Sample Background
Concentration Range
182 ND -3250
58.20 ND -3250
232 ND -3250
2.54 ND -3250
275 ND -3250
3.20 ND -3250
5 .4 1 NT
4.94 NT
0.028 NT
0 .021 NT
0.127 NT
0.175 NT
0 .5 62 NT
0.109 NT
0.11 7 NT
0.127 NT
0.095 NT
0 .153 NT
0 .121 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Fmal Dec. 19, 1994
..
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.19-2
EXPERIMENT AL FARM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
..
Total Metal~ ,(mg/kg) . ..
EF-RF-COMPAA 0 -0.5 4.86 ND -0.25
EF-RF-COMPAB 1 -1 .5 5.60 ND -0.25
EF-RF-COMPBA 0 -0.5 4.18 ND -0.25
EF-RF -COMPBB 1 -1 .5 5.19 ND -0.25
EF-RF-COMPDA 0 -0.5 6.48 ND -0 .25
EF-RF-COMPAC 0 -0.5 7 .08 12.1 -37.2
EF-RF-COMPBA 0 -0.5 18.70 12.1 -37.2
EF-RF-COMPCA 0 -0.5 10.20 12.1 -37 .2
EF-RF-COMPDA 0 -0 .5 21.70 12.1-37.2
EF-RF-COMPAA 0 -0 .5 106 53 .9 -198
EF-RF-COMPAB 1 -1 .5 80.00 53 .9 -198
EF-RF-COMPAC 2.5 -3 82.60 NT
EF-RF-COMPBA 0 -0 .5 115 53 .9 -198
EF-RF -COMPBB 1 -1 .5 101 53.9 -198
EF-RF-COMPBC 2 .5 -3 80.50 NT
EF-RF-COMPCA 0 -0.5 95.00 53.9 -198
EF-RF -COMPCB 1 -1 .5 80.00 53.9 -198
EF-RF -COMPCC 2 .5 -3 69.30 NT
EF-RF-COMPDA 0 -0.5 104 53 .9 -198
EF-RF-COMPDB 1 -1 .5 93.20 53.9 -198
EF-RF-COMPDC 2.5 -3 82.10 NT
T -122 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Cadmium 111
Fin e! De c. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investi gation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.19-2
EXPERIMENTAL FARM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (mg/kg)
EF-RF-A7A 0 -0.5 3 .07 ND -14.6
EF-RF-A7B 1 -1.5 1.39 ND -14.6
EF -RF-A7C 2.5 -3 1.06 NT
EF-RF-A8A 0 -0.5 3.57 ND-14.6
EF-RF-A8B 1 -1. 5 3 .13 ND -14.6
EF-RF-A8C 2.5 -3 2.99 NT
EF-RF-A 1 OA 0 -0.5 2.50 ND-14.6
EF-RF-A 108 1 -1 .5 1.29 ND -14.6
EF-RF-A 1 OC 2.5 -3 3.05 NT
EF-RF-B1 A 0 -0.5 12.30 ND -14.6
EF-RF-81 C 2.5 -3 2 .93 NT
EF-RF-811 A 0 -0.5 5.30 ND-14.6
EF-RF-811 B 1 -1 .5 1.36 ND -14.6
EF-RF-811 C 2.5 -3 1.39 NT
EF-RF-815A 0 -0 .5 3.92 ND-14.6
EF-RF-8158 1 -1.5 1.09 ND-14.6
EF-RF-C12A 0 -0.5 1 .41 ND-14.6
T -123 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S .A .
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Cadmium(,,
Rnel Dee. 19, 1994
RCR A Facility Inv estigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.19-2
EXPERIMENTAL FARM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (mg/kg)
EF-RF-C12C 2.5 -3 2.11 NT
EF-RF-C13A 0 -0.5 3.05 ND -14.6
EF-RF -C15A 0 -0 .5 3.67 ND -14.6
EF -RF-C158 1 -1. 5 1.12 ND -14.6
EF-RF-C15C 1 -1.5 1.76 ND -14.6
EF-RF-D1 A 0 -0 .5 2.37 ND -14.6
EF-RF-D1 B 1 -1.5 1 .61 ND -14.6
EF-RF-D1 C 2.5 -3 1.04 NT
EF-RF-D4A 0 -0 .5 3.22 ND-14.6
EF-RF-D8A 1 -1.5 7.67 ND-14.6
EF-RF-COMPAA 0 -0 .5 5.18 ND -14.6
EF -RF -COMPAB 1 -1 .5 2.78 ND -14.6
EF-RF-COMPAC 2.5 -3 5.24 NT
EF -RF-COMPBA 0 -0 .5 11.90 ND -1 4 .6
T-1 24 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Cadmium 111
Chromium
Final Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.19-2
EXPERIMENT AL FARM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (mg/kg)
EF-RF-COMPBB 1 -1.5 3.20 ND -14.6
EF-RF-COMPBC 2.5 -3 3.08 NT
EF-RF-COMPCA 0 -0.5 4 .06 ND -14.6
EF-RF-COMPCB 1 -1 .5 1.24 ND -14.6
EF-RF-COMPCC 2.5 -3 2.20 NT
EF-RF-COMPDA 0 -0.5 7.19 ND -14.6
EF-RF-COMPDB 1 -1.5 2.26 ND -14.6
EF-RF-COMPDC 2.5 -3 1.82 NT
EF-RF-COMPAA 0 -0.5 19.70 1.79-15.4
EF-RF-COMPAB 1 -1 .5 8.93 1 .79-15.4
EF-RF-COMPAC 2.5 -3 14.50 NT
EF-RF-COMPBA 0 -0.5 19.10 1.79 -15.4
EF-RF-COMPBB 1 -1.5 8 .66 1.79-15.4
EF -RF-COMPBC 2.5 -3 10.60 NT
EF-RF-COMPCA 0 -0 .5 11.90 1.79 -15.4
EF-RF-COMPCB 1 -1.5 6.72 1.79-15.4
EF-RF-COMPCC 2.5 -3 7.98 NT
EF-RF-COMPDA 0 -0.5 14.50 1 .79-15.4
EF-RF-COMPDB 1 -1 .5 7.81 1.79-15.4
EF-RF-COMPDC 2 .5 -3 3.35 NT
T-125 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Cobalt
Lead
Final Dec. 19, 1 9 9 4
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.19-2
EXPERIMENT AL FARM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Tota.I Metals {mg/kg')
EF-RF -COMPAA 0 -0 .5 3 .59 0 .83 -7.64
EF-RF-COMPAB 1 -1 . 5 3.49 0 .83 -7 .64
EF-RF-COMPAC 2 .5 -3 5 .38 NT
EF-RF-COMPBA 0 -0 .5 3 .37 0.83 -7.64
EF-RF-COMPBB 1 -1 . 5 1.47 0 .83 -7 .64
EF-RF-COMPBC 2 .5 -3 2.61 NT
EF-RF-COMPCA 0 -0 .5 4 .04 0 .83 -7 .64
EF-RF-COMPCB 1 -1 .5 1.26 0 .83 -7.64
EF-RF-COMPCC 2.5 -3 2.10 NT
EF-RF-COMPDA 0 -0.5 4 .05 0.83 -7 .64
EF-RF-COMPDB 1 -1. 5 2 .1 1 0.83 -7 .64
EF-RF-COMPDC 2.5 -3 1 .61 NT
EF -RF-COMPAA 0 -0.5 50 .70 ND -3 2 50
EF-RF-COMPAB 1 -1 .5 11 .40 ND -3250
EF -RF-COMPAC 2.5 -3 16.20 NT
EF-RF-COMPBA 0 -0.5 232 ND -3250
EF -RF-COMPBB 1 -1 .5 8.66 ND -3250
EF -RF -COMPBC 2 .5 -3 11.80 NT
T -126 EarthFax Engine ering, Inc,
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Final D ec. 19, 1 89 4
RCRA Facility Inv estigati on Report
December 1994
TABLE 5 .19-2
EXPERIMENTAL FARM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number {feet) Concentration Range
Totai Metals {mg/kg)
EF-RF-COMPCA 0 -0.5 124 ND -3250
EF-RF-COMPCB 1 -1 .5 9 .36 ND -3250
EF-RF-COMPCC 2.5 -3 6 .68 NT
EF-RF-COMPDA 0 -0.5 262 ND -3250
EF -RF-COMPDB 1 -1 .5 8.32 ND -3250
EF-RF-COMPDC 2.5 -3 6.29 NT
EF-RF -COMPAB 1 -1 .5 0.15 ND -0 .739
EF-RF-COMPBA 0 -0.5 0.247 ND -0.739
EF-RF-COMPBB 1 -1.5 0 .155 ND -0 .739
EF-RF-COMPCC 2 .5 -3 0 .60 NT
EF-RF-COMPDA 0 -0.5 0 .281 ND -0.739
EF-RF-COMPAA 0 -0.5 5.73 1.61-15 .1
EF-RF-COMPAB 1 -1 .5 3.28 1.61-15.1
EF -RF -COMPAC 2.5 -3 8.77 NT
T -127 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Nickel
Vanadium
Fi nal Dec. 19, 1 994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1 994
TABLE 5.19-2
EXPERIMENTAL FARM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (mg/kg)
EF-RF-COMPBA 0 -0.5 6.67 1.61 -15 .1
EF-RF-COMPBB 1 -1 .5 1.67 1.61 -15.1
EF-RF-COMPBC 2.5 -3 1.90 NT
EF-RF-COMPCA 0 -0.5 1.42 1.61 -15.1
EF-RF-COMPCB 1 -1.5 5.99 1.61 -15.1
EF-RF-COMPCC 2.5 -3 1. 70 NT
EF-RF-COMPAA 0 -0.5 25.00 3.42 -174
EF-RF-COMPAB 1 -1.5 13.70 3.42 -174
EF-RF-COMPAC 2 .5 -3 20.20 NT
EF-RF-COMPBA 0 -0.5 24.00 3.42-174
EF-RF-COMPBB 1 -1. 5 10.70 3.42 -174
EF-RF-COMPBC 2 .5 -3 15.50 NT
EF-RF-COMPCA 0 -0 .5 14.30 3.42 -174
EF-RF-COMPCB 1 -1.5 8.48 3.42 -174
EF-RF-COMPCC 2.5 -3 8 .91 NT
EF-RF-COMPDA 0 -0 .5 19.40 3.42-174
EF-RF-COMPDB 1 -1 .5 11.50 3 .42 -174
EF-RF-COMPDC 2.5 -3 6 .74 NT
T -128 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Zinc
TCLP Antimony
TCLP Arsenic
Fi nal Dec. t 9 . 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5. 19-2
EXPERIMENT AL FARM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet} Concentration Range
Total Metals (mg/kg)_
EF-RF-COMPAA 0 -0.5 56.90 12.0 -524
EF -RF-COMPAB 1 -1 .5 26.60 12.0 -524
EF-RF-COMPAC 2.5 -3 45.20 NT
EF-RF-COMPBA 0 -0.5 186 12.0 -524
EF-RF-COMPBB 1 -1. 5 21.10 12.0 -524
EF-RF-COMPBC 2.5 -3 29.90 NT
EF-RF -COMPCA 0 -0.5 53 .40 12.0 -524
EF-RF-COMPCB 1 -1 .5 18.60 12.0 -524
EF-RF-COMPCC 2.5 -3 16.00 NT
EF -RF-COMPDA 0 -0.5 106 12.0 -524
EF-RF-COMPDB 1 -1 .5 20.30 12.0 -524
EF-RF-COMPDC 2 .5 -3 12.40 NT
TCLP Metals (mg/I)
EF-RF -COMPDC 2.5 -3 0.04 NT
EF-RF -COMPAB 1 -1.5 0.086 NT
EF-RF-COMPAC 2 .5 -3 0.08 NT
EF-RF -COMPBA 0 -0 .5 0.068 NT
EF-RF-COMPBC 2.5 -3 0.057 NT
EF-RF -COMPDA 0 -0 .5 0.055 NT
T -129 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
:
TCLP Barium
TCLP Cadmium 11 1
Final De c . 19, 1994
RCRA Facil ity Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5 .19-2
EXPERIMENT AL FARM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
TCLP.Metals (mg/I)
EF-RF-COMPAA 0 -0.5 1.42 NT
EF-RF-COMPAB 1 -1. 5 1.58 NT
EF-RF-COMPAC 2.5 -3 1 .1 2 NT
EF-RF-COMPBA 0 -0.5 1 .20 NT
EF-RF-COMPBB 1 -1 .5 1.52 NT
EF-RF-COMPBC 2.5 -3 1 .37 NT
EF-RF-COMPCA 0 -0.5 1.39 NT
EF-RF-COMPCB 1 -1.5 1.63 NT
EF-RF-COMPCC 2 .5 -3 0 .655 NT
EF-RF-COMPDA 0 -0.5 1.41 NT
EF-RF-COMPDB 1 -1.5 1.54 NT
EF-RF-COMPDC 2 .5 -3 1 .01 NT
EF -RF -A 10A 0 -0.5 0.016 NT
EF-RF-B1 A 0 -0.5 0.262 NT
EF-RF -B 11 A 0 -0.5 0 .043 NT
EF-RF-B15A 0 -0.5 0 .028 NT
EF-RF-C13A 0 -0 .5 0 .011 NT
EF -RF -COMPAA 0 -0 .5 0.011 NT
T -130 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Cadmium 111
TCLP Chromium
TCLP Cobalt
TCLP Lead
Final D ec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.19-2
EXPERIMENTAL FARM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
TCLPMetals .(mg/1)
EF-RF-COMPBA 0 -0.5 0.074 NT
EF-RF-COMPDA 0 -0.5 0.028 NT
EF-RF-D1A 0 -0 .5 0.016 NT
EF-RF-D4A 0 -0.5 0.019 NT
EF-RF-D8A 1 -1.5 0 .043 NT
EF-RF-COMPAA 0 -0.5 0.01 NT
EF-RF-COMPAB 1 -1 .5 0.02 NT
EF-RF-COMPBA 0 -0.5 0.01 NT
EF-RF-COMPCA 0 -0.5 0 .013 NT
EF-RF-COMPDA 0 -0.5 0.01 NT
EF-RF -COMPDB 1 -1 .5 0 .014 NT
EF-RF-COMPAA 0 -0 .5 0.014 NT
EF-RF-COMPBA 0 -0.5 0.011 NT
EF-RF-COMPCB 1 -1.5 0.02 NT
EF-RF-COMPAA 0 -0.5 0.02 NT
EF-RF-COMPBA 0 -0 .5 0 .106 NT
EF-RF-COMPCA 0 -0.5 0 .069 NT
EF-RF -COMPCC 2.5 -3 0.039 NT
EF-RF-COMPDA 0 -0.5 0.081 NT
T -131 EarthFax Engineeringl Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Mercury
TCLP Nickel
TCLP Vanadium
TCLP Zinc
final Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Faci lity Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.19-2
EXPERIMENT AL FARM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
TCLP .·Metals (mg/I)
EF -RF-COMPBA 0 -0.5 0 .00021 NT
EF-RF-COMPDA 0 -0 .5 0 .00025 NT
EF-RF-COMPAA 0 -0.5 0.01 NT
EF-RF-COMPAB 1 -1 .5 0.012 NT
EF-RF-COMPAC 2.5 -3 0.01 NT
EF-RF-COMPBA 0 -0 .5 0 .01 NT
EF-RF-COMPBB 1 -1 .5 0.01 NT
EF-RF-COMPBC 2.5 -3 0.01 NT
EF-RF-COMPCA 0 -0 .5 0 .01 NT
EF-RF-COMPCB 1 -1.5 0.01 NT
EF-RF-COMPCC 2 .5 -3 0 .01 NT
EF-RF -COMPDA 0 -0 .5 0.01 NT
EF-RF-COMPDB 1 -1.5 0.01 NT
EF-RF-COMPDC 2.5 -3 0 .01 NT
EF-R F-COMPAB 1 -1.5 0.024 NT
EF-RF-COMPAA 0 -0 .5 0.217 NT
EF-RF-COMPAB 1 -1 .5 0.564 NT
EF-RF-COMPAC 2.5 -3 0.312 NT
EF-RF-COMPBA 0 -0 .5 0 .367 NT
EF-RF-COMPBB 1 -1.5 0 .584 NT
T -132 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Zinc
RCRA Facility I nvestigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5 .19-2
EXPERIMENTAL FARM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample
Sample Number (feet) Concentration
TCLP Metat~; fmg/1)
EF-RF-COMPBC 2 .5 -3 0.528
EF-RF-COMPCA 0 -0.5 0.331
EF-RF-COMPCB 1 -1 .5 0.545
EF -RF-COMPCC 2.5 -3 0.248
EF-RF-COMPDA 0 -0.5 0.354
EF-RF-COMPDB 1 -1.5 0.323
EF-RF-COMPDC 2 .5 -3 0.349
Background
Range
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
11 ) = Unit Specific Indicator Parameter when not designated COMP.
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
Fmal Dec. 19, 1994 T-133 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Final Doe. 19 , 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5 .20-1
BONNEVILLE CANAL
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
"Total Metals {mg/kg)
BC-RF-1A Sludge
BC-RF-1 B Sludge
BC-RF-2A Sludge
BC-RF-2B 2.8 -3.8
BC-RF-2C 4.8 -5.8
BC-RF-3A Sludge
BC-RF-38 3.3 -4.3
BC-RF-3C 4.3 -5.3
BC-RF-4A Sludge
BC-RF-48 7.4 -8
BC-RF-4C 8 -8.8
BC-RF-5A Sludge
BC-RF-5B 8.65 -9.65
BC-RF-5C 10-10.5
BC-RF-5D 5 .5 -6
BC-RF-6A Sludge
BC-RF-6B 8.4 -9.4
BC -RF-6C 9.9-10.9
T-134
Sample Background
Concentration Range
8.86 NT
7 .73 NT
10.40 NT
11.50 NT
13.90 NT
8.67 NT
19.30 ND -18.3
15.90 ND -18.3
18.50 NT
12.90 NT
22.10 NT
26 .50 NT
20.10 NT
16.00 NT
18.90 NT
23.50 NT
20.50 NT
16.20 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
' .. ·•·.
Chromium
Final Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5 .20-1
BONNEVILLE CANAL
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
Total · Metals {mg/kg)
BC-RF-7A Sludge
BC-RF-7B 6.8 -7 .7
BC -RF-7C 7 .7-8 .7
BC-RF-8A Sludge
BC-RF-8B 6-7
BC-RF-SC 9.8 -10.8
BC-RF-BDS1 Sludge
BC-RF-BDS2 Sludge
BC-RF-BDS3 Sludge
BC-RF-S1A 0 -0.5
BC-RF-S1 B 1.5 -2
BC-RF-S1 C 3 .5 -4
BC-RF-S2A 0 -0.5
BC-RF-S2B 1.5 -2
BC-RF-S2C 3.5 -4
BC -RF-S3A 0 -0 .5
BC -RF -S3B 1.5 -2
T-135
Sample Background
Concentration Range
16.80 NT
12.8 0 NT
11. 70 NT
13.30 NT
23.60 NT
16.70 NT
26.80 NT
11.90 NT
1.80 NT
17.90 NT
13.20 NT
18.00 NT
19.00 NT
11. 70 NT
22.80 NT
8 .60 NT
14.80 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Lead
Final Dec. 1 9 , 1 994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.20-1
BONNEVILLE CANAL
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
Total Metals (mg/kg)
BC-RF-S3C 3.5 -4
BC-RF-S4A 0 -0 .5
BC-RF-S4B 1.5 -2
BC-RF-S5A 0 -0.5
BC-RF-S5B 1.5 -2
BC-RF-S5C 4.8 -5.2
BC-RF-1A Sludge
BC-RF-1 B Sludge
BC-RF-2A Sludge
BC-RF-28 2.8 -3.8
BC-RF-2C 4.8 -5.8
BC -RF -3A Sludge
BC-RF-38 3 .3 -4.3
BC-RF-3C 4 .3 -5.3
T-136
Sample Background
Concentration Range
21.40 NT
4.00 NT
7.90 NT
1.20 NT
2 .60 NT
6 .20 NT
16.20 NT
10.40 NT
29.20 NT
39.70 NT
18.40 NT
31 .60 NT
263 ND -3250
25.40 ND-19.2
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
Final Dec. 19. 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.20-1
BONNEVILLE CANAL
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
TotafMetals (ing/kg)
BC-RF-4A Sludge
BC-RF-48 7.4 -8
BC-RF-4C 8 -8.8
BC-RF-5A Sludge
BC-RF-5B 8.65 -9.65
BC-RF-5C 10-10.5
BC-RF-5D 5.5 -6
BC-RF-6A Sludge
BC-RF-6B 8.4 -9.4
BC-RF-6C 9.9 -10.9
BC-RF-7A Sludge
BC-RF-7B 6.8-7.7
BC-RF-7C 7.7 -8 .7
BC-RF-SA Sludge
BC -RF -8B 6-7
BC -RF-SC 9.8 -10.8
T -137
Sample Background
Concentration Range
53.80 NT
66.20 NT
23.60 NT
95.40 NT
22.80 NT
32 .80 NT
17.60 NT
262 NT
16.40 NT
19.60 NT
73.20 NT
13.80 NT
12.60 NT
20.90 NT
42.20 NT
19.00 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
Fine! Dec. 1 9, 1 994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.20-1
BONNEVILLE CANAL
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
Totar Metals (mg/kg)
BC-RF-80S1 Sludge
BC-RF-BDS2 Sludge
BC-RF-BDS3 Sludge
BC-RF-S1 A 0 -0 .5
BC-RF-S1 B 1.5 -2
BC-RF-S1 C 3.5 -4
BC-RF-S2A 0 -0.5
BC-RF-S28 1.5 -2
BC-RF-S2C 3.5 -4
BC-RF-S3A 0 -0.5
BC-RF-S3B 1 .5 -2
BC-RF-S3C 3.5 -4
8C-RF-S4A 0 -0.5
8C-RF-S4B 1.5 -2
8C-RF-S5A 0 -0.5
BC-RF-S5B 1.5 -2
BC-RF-S5C 4.8 -5.2
T -138
Sample Background
Concentration Range
136 NT
18.40 NT
5.20 NT
23.00 NT
18.10 NT
24.00 NT
71.40 NT
14.80 NT
25.90 NT
32.40 NT
19.90 NT
18.10 NT
9.20 NT
13.80 NT
3 .20 NT
10.80 NT
5.90 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
:
TCLP Lead
Finel Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.20-1
BONNEVILLE CANAL
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
TCLP Metals (mg/I)
BC-RF-1 B Sludge
BC-RF-2B 2.8 -3.8
BC-RF-2C 4 .8 -5.8
BC-RF-38 3 .3 -4.3
BC-RF-4A Sludge
BC-RF-4B 7.4 -8
BC-RF-5A Sludge
BC-RF-5B 8.65 -9.65
BC-RF-5C 10-10.5
BC-RF-5D 5.5 -6
BC-RF-6A Sludge
BC-RF-68 8.4 -9.4
BC-RF-7A Sludge
BC-RF-7C 7.7-8.7
BC-RF-BDS1 Sludge
BC-RF-S3A 0 -0.5
BC-RF-S3B 1.5 -2
BC -RF-S3C 3.5 -4
BC -RF -S5B 1.5 -2
T -139
Sample Background
Concentration Range
0.022 NT
0.036 NT
0 .045 NT
0 .706 NT
0.011 NT
0.16 NT
0.062 NT
0.081 NT
0 .243 NT
0 .019 NT
0.368 NT
0 .043 NT
0.18 NT
0.02 NT
0.048 NT
0.025 NT
0 .02 NT
0.027 NT
0 .035 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TPH
Finel Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Faci lity Investigation Report
December 1 994
TABLE 5.20-1
BONNEVILLE CANAL
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
. Organics · (mg/kg)
BC-RF-3A Sludge
BC-RF-3B 3 .3 -4.3
BC-RF-4A Sludge
BC-RF-48 7.4 -8
BC-RF-SA Sludge
BC-RF-58 8.65 -9 .65
BC-RF-6A Sludge
BC-RF-7A Sludge
BC-RF-8A Sludge
BC-RF-88 6-7
BC-RF-S1A 0 -0.5
BC-RF-S1 B 1.5 -2
BC-RF-S2A 0 -0 .5
BC-RF-S3A 0 -o. 5
BC-RF-S38 1.5 -2
BC-RF-S3C 3.5 -4
BC -RF-S4A 0 -0 .5
BC-RF-S4B 1.5 -2
BC-RF-S5A 0 -0.5
T -140
Sample Background
Concentration Range
1470 NT
536 NT
12000 NT
550 NT
40100 NT
61.8 NT
23.90 NT
111 NT
313 NT
3700 NT
207 NT
270 NT
2140 NT
25200 NT
2530 NT
111 NT
25400 NT
26800 NT
7360 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TPH
TCLP Benzene
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
Final Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility In vestigati on Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.20-1
BONNEVILLE CANAL
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
Organics (mg/kg)
BC-RF-S5B 1.5 -2
BC-RF-BDS1 Sludge
BC-RF-BDS2 Sludge
BC-RF-BDS3 Sludge
Tl:LP Organics (mg/ll
BC-RF-S3A 0 -0.5
BC-RF-S4A 0 -0.5
BC-RF-S4B 1.5 -2
T-141
Sample Background
Concentra Range
tion
8510 NT
33400 NT
408 NT
6807 NT
0.088 NT
0.137 NT
0.037 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Final Dec:. 19, 1994
RCRA Fa c ility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5 .20-2
BONNEVILLE CANAL
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
. Total Metals Jmg/kg)
BC-RF-COMPA 0 -3.7 1.20 NT
BC-RF-COMPA2 0-4 1 .30 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0.5 2.33 NT
BC-RF-COMPSC 3.5 -5 .2 0.99 NT
BC-RF-COMPA 0 -3 .7 25.10 NT
BC -RF-COMPA2 0-4 31.70 NT
BC -RF-COM PB 1.8 -4. 7 25.40 NT
BC-RF-COMPC 1 -6 25.90 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0.5 30.50 NT
BC-RF-COMPSB 1.5 -2 31.60 NT
BC-RF-COMPSC 3.5 -5 .2 38.50 NT
BC-RF-COMPA 0 -3.7 70.70 NT
BC -RF-COMPA2 0 -4 95.10 NT
BC -RF-COM PB 1 .8 -4. 7 69 .70 NT
BC-RF-COMPC 1 -6 84.30 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0 .5 102 NT
BC-RF-COMPSB 1.5 -2 129 NT
BC-RF-COMPSC 3 .5 -5.2 115 NT
BC-RF-EBS3 11) 0.012 NT
BC-RF-EBS4 II l 0.01 NT
BC -RF-COMPSC 3 .5 -5 .2 0 .52 NT
T-1 42 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Cadmium
Chromium
Cobalt
Fine{ De c . 1 9 , 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1 994
TABLE 5.20-2
BONNEVILLE CANAL
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
i'qtaf Metals (mg/kg)
BC-RF-COMPA 0 -3 .7 3.06 NT
BC-RF-COMPA2 0-4 2.67 NT
BC-RF-COM PB 1.8 -4.7 3 .27 NT
BC-RF-COMPC 1 -6 2.81 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0 .5 1.08 NT
BC-RF-COMPSB 1.5 -2 1.01 NT
BC-RF-COMPSC 3.5 -5 .2 1.84 NT
BC-RF-COMPA 0 -3 .7 14.70 NT
BC-RF-COMPA2 0-4 17.40 NT
BC-RF-COMPS 1.8 -4 .7 11.80 NT
BC-RF-COM PC 1 -6 14.10 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0.5 9.54 NT
BC-RF-COMPSB 1.5 -2 9 .66 NT
BC-RF-COMPSC 3.5 -5.2 17.20 NT
BC-RF-COMPA 0 -3 .7 2.36 NT
BC-RF-COMPA2 0-4 2.76 NT
BC -RF -COMPS 1.8-4.7 3.35 NT
BC-RF-COMPC 1 -6 4.90 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0.5 3.10 NT
BC-RF-COMPSB 1.5 -2 2 .81 NT
BC-RF-COMPSC 3.5 -5 .2 7.42 NT
T-143 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
Mercury
Final D ec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.20-2
BONNEVILLE CANAL
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (mg/kg)
BC-RF-COMPA 0 -3.7 81.70 NT
BC-RF-COMPA2 0-4 72.60 NT
BC-RF-COMPS 1.8-4.7 52.60 NT
BC-RF-COMPC 1 -6 15.30 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0.5 23.50 NT
BC-RF-COMPSB 1 .5 -2 15.40 NT
BC-RF-COMPSC 3.5 -5.2 20.20 NT
BC-RF-COM PA 0 -3.7 0.575 NT
BC-RF-COMPA2 0-4 1.28 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0.5 0.40 NT
BC-RF-COMPSB 1.5 -2 0.36 NT
BC-RF-COMPSC 3.5 -5.2 1.01 NT
T-144 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Nickel
Selenium
Vanadium
Final Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5 .20-2
BONNEVILLE CANAL
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total. Metals. (mg/kg)
BC-RF-COMPA 0 -3 .7 8.42 NT
BC-RF-COMPA2 0-4 9.12 NT
BC-RF-COMPS 1.8 -4 .7 8 .55 NT
BC -RF-COMPC 1 -6 13.00 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0 .5 7.73 NT
BC-RF-COMPSB 1.5 -2 7.32 NT
BC-RF-COMPSC 3.5 -5.2 13.80 NT
BC-RF-FBS3
{1)
0.016 NT
BC-RF-COMPA2 0-4 0 .94 NT
BC-RF-COMPS A 0 -0 .5 0.59 NT
BC-RF-COMPA 0 -3.7 11 .40 NT
BC-RF-COMPA2 0-4 18.10 NT
BC-RF-COMPS 1.8 -4 .7 14.1 0 NT
BC-RF-COMPC 1 -6 18.20 NT
T-145 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Vanadium
Zinc
TCLP Arsenic
TCLP Ba r ium
Final Dec. 19~ 1 994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5 .20-2
BONNEVILLE CANAL
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total _fy'letals (mg/kg) ..
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0.5 14.20 NT
BC-RF-COMPSB 1.5 -2 14.40 NT
BC-RF-CO MSC 3.5 -5.2 24.30 NT
BC-RF-COM PA 0 -3.7 95.60 NT
BC-RF -COMPA2 0-4 94.90 NT
BC-RF-COMPS 1 .8 -4 . 7 67 .20 NT
BC-RF-COM PC 1 -6 36.20 NT
BC -RF-COMPSA 0 -0.5 26.70 NT
BC-RF-COMPSB 1.5 -2 27 .00 NT
BC-RF-COMPSC 3 .5 -5 .2 34.60 NT
BC -RF-EBS3
11)
0 .028 NT
BC -RF-EBS4
(1)
0 .018 NT
_ TCLP Metals (mg/I)
BC-RF-COMPSB 1 .5 -2 0.056 NT
BC-RF-COMPSC 3.5 -5 .2 0.106 NT
BC -RF-COMPA 0 -3.7 1 .64 NT
BC-RF-COMPA2 0 -4 3.43 NT
BC-RF-COMPS 1.8 -4.7 0 .96 NT
T -146 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
.... -...
TCLP Barium
TCLP Cobalt
TCLP Lead
TCLP Nickel
TCLP Selenium
Final De c . 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.20-2
BONNEVILLE CANAL
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
' ..
TCLP Metals ·(111911) . .. . .
BC-RF-COMPC 1 -6 1 .09 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0.5 1.46 NT
BC-RF-COMPSB 1.5 -2 1.91 NT
BC-RF-COMPSC 3.5 -5 .2 1 .84 NT
BC-RF-EBS3
(1)
0.012 NT
BC-RF-COMPA2 0-4 0 .012 NT
BC-RF-COMPA2 0-4 0.038 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0 .5 0 .02 NT
BC-RF-COMPSB 1 .5 -2 0 .01 NT
BC-RF-COMP A 0 -3.7 0 .032 NT
BC-RF-COMPA2 0-4 0.052 NT
BC-RF-COMPS 1.8 -4 . 7 0.016 NT
BC-RF-COMPC 1 -6 0 .04 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0 .5 0.027 NT
BC-RF -COMPSB 1.5 -2 0 .01 NT
BC-RF-COMPSC 3.5 -5.2 0 .056 NT
BC-RF-EBS3 (1 1
0.01 NT
BC-RF-FBS3 (11
0.016 NT
BC -RF-TBS3
(11
0.01 NT
BC -RF-COMPA2 0-4 0.128 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0.5 0.07 NT
T -147 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
-·
TCLP Selenium
TCLP Vanadium
TCLP Zinc
Benzene
Toluene
Fin al D e c, 1 9, 1 994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5 .20-2
BONNEVILLE CANAL
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
TCLP Metals (mg/I)
BC-RF-COMPSB 1 .5 -2 0 .069 NT
BC-RF-COMPSC 3 .5 -5.2 0.04 NT
BC-RF-COMPA 0 -3.7 0.01 NT
BC-RF-COMPA2 0 -4 0.038 NT
BC-RF-COMPSB 1 .5 -2 0 .01 NT
BC-RF-COMPSC 3.5 -5.2 0.017 NT
BC-RF-COMPA 0 -3.7 0.234 NT
BC-RF-COMPA2 0-4 0.299 NT
BC -RF-COM PB 1.8 -4 .7 0 .091 NT
BC-RF-COMPC 1 -6 0 .151 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0.5 0 .063 NT
BC-RF-COMPSB 1 .5 -2 0.105 NT
BC-RF-COMPSC 3 .5 -5.2 0 .07 NT
BC-RF-EBS3 (1 1
0.028 NT
Organics-(mg /kg)
BC-RF-COMPA 0 -3.7 0 .097 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0 .5 0 .062 NT
BC-RF-COM PA 0 -3.7 0.16 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0.5 11 .00 NT
T -148 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Ethyl benzene
Xylene
TCLP Ethyl benzene
TCLP Toluene
TCLP Xylene
Anthracene
Chrysene
Fluoranthene
M ethylchrys ene
1-Methylnaphthalene
Final Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facil ity Inv estigati on Report
December 1994
TABLE 5 .20-2
BONNEVILLE CANAL
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Organics (mg/kgl
BC-RF-COM PA 0 -3 .7 0 .194 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0.5 10.70 NT
BC -RF -COMPSB 1 .5 -2 5.10 NT
BC-RF-COMPA 0 -3 .7 4 .54 NT
BC -RF-COMPSA 0 -0 .5 68.40 NT
BC-RF-COMPSB 1.5 -2 11 .80 NT
TCLP -Volatile Organics (mg /I)
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0 .5 0 .322 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0 .5 0.20 NT
BC -RF-COMPA 0 -3 .7 0.054 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0.5 1.79 NT
BNA Organic s (mg/kg)
BC-RF-COMPA 0 -3.7 3 .80 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0 .5 0.27 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0.5 0.24 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0.5 0.50 NT
BC -RF -COMPSB 1 .5 -2 0.30 NT
BC -RF -COMPSA 0 -0 .5 9.00 NT
BC-RF-COMPSB 1 .5 -2 10.00 NT
T-149 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Naphthalene
Pyrene
TCLP 1-
Methylna phthalene
TCLP Naphthalene
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
111 = Water (mg/I)
Fin al Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility In vestigati on Report
Decembe r 1994
TABLE 5 .20-2
BONNEVILLE CANAL
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Ba c kground
Sample Number {feet) Concentration Range
BNA Organics (mg/kg} -.
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0 .5 6 .87 NT
BC -RF-COMPSB 1.5 -2 5 .53 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0.5 0.41 NT
BC-RF-COMPSB 1 .5 -2 0.22 NT
TCLP BNAOrganics {mg/I)
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0 .5 0 .16 NT
BC -RF-COMPSB 1 .5 -2 0 .18 NT
BC-RF-COMPSA 0 -0 .5 0.235 NT
BC-RF-COMPSB 1.5 -2 0.249 NT
T-1 50 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Lead
Final Dec. 19, 1994
TABLE 5.21-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
BAFFLE BOARD POND CONVEYANCE DITCH
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Tota[Metals (mg/kg)
CD-RF-1A 0 -0.5 229 1 .79 -15.4
CD-RF-18 1.5 -2 75.40 1.79 -15.4
CD-RF-1 C 3 -3 .5 21.90 NT
CD-RF-1 D 3.5 -4.5 20.40 ND -18.3
CD-RF-1 E 4.5 -5.5 24.30 ND -18.3
CD-RF-1 F 6 .5-7.5 19.80 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 1800 1.79-15.4
CD-RF-2F 7-8 24.30 NT
CD-RF-BDS1 7-8 1590 NT
CD-RF-1 A 0 -0.5 20.60 ND -3250
CD-RF-18 1 .5 -2 12.20 ND -3250
CD-RF-1 C 3 -3.5 3 .62 NT
CD-RF-1 D 3.5 -4.5 2 .16 ND -19.2
CD-RF-1 E 4.5 -5 .5 4.83 ND -19.2
CD-RF-1 F 6.5-7.5 5.98 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 82.80 ND -3250
CD-RF-2F 7 -8 5 .73 NT
CD-RF-BDS1 7 -8 69 .60 NT
T-151 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP Chromium
TCLP Lead
1,
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl benzene
Xylene
Ftn,il Dec. 19, 1994
TABLE 5.21-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
BAFFLE BOARD POND CONVEYANCE DITCH
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
TCLP Metals.(mg /I}
CD-RF-1A 0 -0.5 0 .033 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 0 .08 NT
CD-RF-2F 7 -8 0.011 NT
CD-RF-BDS1 7 -8 0 .057 NT
CD-RF-1 D 3.5 -4.5 0.023 NT
Organics (mg/kg)
CD-RF-1A 0 -0.5 24.10 NT
CD-RF-1 B 1 .5 -2 2.98 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 6.40 NT
CD-RF-1 A 0 -0.5 73.80 NT
CD-RF-1 B 1.5 -2 3 .58 NT
CD -RF-1 A 0 -0 .5 104 NT
CD-RF-1 B 1 .5 -2 4 .3 5 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 41.40 NT
CD-RF-1A 0 -1 61.50 NT
CD-RF-1 B 0 -0.5 21.10 NT
CD-RF-1 C 3 -3.5 0.264 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 544 NT
CD-RF-BDS1 7 -8 1210 NT
T -152 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TPH
TCLP Benzene
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
Final D ec. t 9, 1 994
TABLE 5.21-1
RCRA Facil ity Investigation Report
December 1994
BAFFLE BOARD POND CONVEYANCE DITCH
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
_ Organics (mg/kg) ...
CD-RF-1A 0 -0 .5 69200 NT
CD-RF-18 1.5 -2 1 4300 NT
CD -RF-1 C 3 -3 .5 467 NT
CD-RF-1 D 3 .5 -4 .5 71.40 NT
CD -RF-1 E 4 .5 -5.5 7 .82 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 195000 NT
CD-RF-80S1 7-8 146000 NT
TCLP Organics (mg /I )
CD-RF-1A 0 -0.5 0.05 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 0.197 NT
CD-RF-8DS1 7-8 0.21 NT
T-153 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Antimony
Barium
Cadmium
Cobalt
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Vanadium
Fin al Dec. 19, 1994
TABLE 5.21-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
BAFFLE BOARD POND CONVEYANCE DITCH
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals . (mg/kg)
CD-RF-1 F 6.5 -7.5 5 .1 7 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 3.24 ND -0.25
CD-RF-1 C 3 -3.5 91.20 NT
CD-RF-1 F 6.5 -7.5 149 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 456 53.9 -198
CD-RF-1 C 3 -3.5 4.69 NT
CD-RF-1 F 6.5 -7.5 4.73 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 3.61 ND -14.6
CD-RF-1 C 3 -3.5 5.02 NT
CD-RF-1 F 6.5 -7.5 4.56 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 7.75 0.83 -7.64
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 11 .90 ND -0.739
CD-RF-1 C 3 -3.5 13.60 NT
CD-RF-1 F 6.5 -7.5 11 .20 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 39 .90 1 .61 -15.1
CD -RF -2A 0 -1 1.98 ND -2.86
CD-RF-1 C 3 -3.5 18.60 NT
CD-RF-1 F 6.5 -7 .5 26.30 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 10.30 3.42 -174
T -154 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Zinc
TCLP Barium
TCLP Cobalt
TCLP Mercury
TCLP Nickel
TCLP Zinc
F1naf Dec. 19. 1 994
..
TABLE 5.21-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
BAFFLE BOARD POND CONVEYANCE DITCH
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Totar Metals (mg/kg)
CD-RF-1 C 3 -3.5 40.10 NT
CD-RF-1 F 6.5 -7 .5 49 .90 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 894 12 .0 -524
TCLP· Metals (mg/lJ
CD-RF-1 C 3 -3.5 1.41 NT
CD-RF-1 F 6.5 -7.5 1.06 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 3.90 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 0.019 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 0.00026 NT
CD-RF-1 C 3 -3.5 0.032 NT
CD-RF-1 F 6 .5 -7 .5 0 .02 NT
CD -RF -2A 0 -1 0.155 NT
CD-RF-1 C 3 -3.5 0 .248 NT
CD-RF-1 F 6 .5 -7 .5 0.175 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 1.63 NT
T-155 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
'
..
TCLP Ethyl benzene
TCLP Xylene
Anthracene
Chrysene
Fluoranthene
Methylchrysene
1-Methylnaphthalene
Naphthalene
Pyrene
Final Dec. 19. 1894
TABLE 5.21-2
RCRA Facility I nvestigation Report
December 1994
BAFFLE BOARD POND CONVEYANCE DITCH
COMPOS ITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Volatile_ Organics ' (rng/kg}
..
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 0.126 NT
CD-RF-1 C 3 -3 .5 0 .066 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 0.29 NT
BNA Organics {mg/kg)
CD-RF-1 C 3 -3.5 1 .20 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 53.00 NT
CD -RF-1 C 3 -3.5 0 .54 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 155 NT
CD-RF-1 C 3 -3.5 0.28 NT
CD -RF-2A 0 -1 53.00 NT
CD-RF-1 C 3 -3 .5 1.05 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 276 NT
CD-RF-1 C 3 -3 .5 7 .00 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 519 NT
CD-RF-1 C 3 -3.5 0.29 NT
CD-RF-1 F 6 .5-7 .5 1 .57 NT
CD-RF -2A 0 -1 302 NT
CD-RF-1 C 3 -3 .5 0.58 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 152 NT
T-156 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TCLP 1-
Meth yin a phthalene
TCLP Naphthalene
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
Fina l Dec. 1 9, 1994
TABLE 5.21-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
BAFFLE BOARD POND CONVEYANCE DITCH
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
TCLP'.BNA Organics (mg/I) ..
CD-RF-1 C 3 -3.5 0.117 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 0.165 NT
CD-RF-2A 0 -1 0 .233 NT
T-157 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Lead
Finol Dee. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.22-1
ABANDONED LIME SETTLING BASIN
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (mg/kg)
AL-RF-1A 3-5 20.40 NT
AL-RF-10 11 -13 21.80 NT
AL-RF-1 E 17 -19 10.60 NT
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 79.00 NT
AL-RF-2D 11 -13 23.20 NT
AL-RF-2E 15 -17 23.20 NT
AL-RF-3B 7-9 28.70 NT
AL-RF-3D 11 -13 21 .30 NT
AL-RF-3E 15 -17 20.50 NT
AL-RF-BDS1 9 -11 37.10 NT
AL-RF-1 A 3-5 12.80 NT
AL-RF-1 E 17 -19 2.71 NT
AL-RF-3B 7-9 3 .89 NT
AL-RF-3 E 15 -17 4 .85 NT
AL-RF-BDS1 9 -11 4.00 NT
T -158 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
. •-
TCLP Chromium
TCLP Lead
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl benzene
Final Dec. 19. 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.22-1
ABANDONED LIME SETTLING BASIN
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
TCLP 'MetaJs (mg/lJ
AL-RF-1 D 11 -13 0.012 NT
AL-RF-1 E 17 -19 0.01 NT
AL-RF-38 7-9 0.01 NT
AL-RF-3D 11 -13 0.011 NT
AL-RF-BDS1 9 -11 0 .095 NT
AL-RF-1 D 11 -13 0.026 NT
AL-RF-1 E 17 -19 0.024 NT
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 0.044 NT
AL-RF-2D 11 -13 0.027 NT
AL-RF-2E 15 -17 0 .041 NT
AL-RF-3E 15 -17 0.013 NT
Organics (mg /kg) ·
AL-RF-BDS1 9 -11 0.025 NT
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 0.25 NT
AL-RF-BDS1 9 -11 0.35 NT
AL-RF-1 A 3-5 0 .094 NT
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 0.245 NT
AL-RF-BDS1 9 -11 0 .327 NT
T -159 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
I
Xylene
TPH
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
Fi n al Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facil ity Inv estigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5 .22-1
ABANDONED LIME SETTLING BASIN
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Organics (mg/kg)
AL-RF-1 A 3 -5 1 .65 NT
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 2.11 NT
AL-RF-3B 7-9 0 .31 NT
AL-RF-BDS1 9 -11 2 .81 NT
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 153 NT
AL-RF-BDS1 9 -11 14.9 NT
T -160 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Cobalt
Final D ec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.22-2
ABANDONED LIME SETTLING BASIN
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
..
Totaf' Metals (rrig/kgl
AL-RF-COMPO 11 -13 7 .05 NT
AL-RF-COMPO 11 -13 12.80 NT
AL-RF-1 A 3-5 101 NT
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 61 .00 NT
AL-RF-38 7-9 101 NT
AL-RF-BOS1 9 -11 65.40 NT
AL-RF-COMPO 11 -13 187 NT
AL-RF-COMPE 15 -19 139 NT
AL-RF-1 A 3-5 5.08 NT
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 1.40 NT
AL-RF-3B 7-9 5.09 NT
AL-RF-BOS1 9 -11 1.60 NT
AL-RF-COMPO 11 -13 6 .98 NT
AL-RF -COMPE 15 -19 6 .04 NT
AL-RF-COMPO 11 -1 3 22.70 NT
AL-RF-COMPE 15 -19 16.80 NT
AL-RF-1A 3-5 4 .65 NT
AL-RF-38 7 -9 5.53 NT
AL-RF-BOS1 9 -11 1.71 NT
AL-RF-COMPO 11 -1 3 7.54 NT
AL-RF-COMPE 15 -19 5 .14 NT
T -161 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Vanadium
Zinc
Final Dec. 19, 1994
..
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.22-2
ABANDONED LIME SETTLING BASIN
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total :Metals (mg/kg)
AL-RF-COMPE 15 -19 2.58 NT
AL-RF-1 A 3-5 0 .292 NT
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 0.213 NT
AL-RF-38 7-9 0.095 NT
AL-RF-80S1 9 -11 0.227 NT
AL-RF-COMPO 11 -13 0.485 NT
AL-RF-1A 3 -5 9.50 NT
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 4.01 NT
AL-RF-38 7-9 11 .40 NT
AL-RF-BDS1 9 -11 4.55 NT
AL-RF-COMPO 11 -13 14.40 NT
AL-RF-COMPE 15 -19 9.78 NT
AL-RF-1A 3-5 23.7 NT
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 6.24 NT
AL-RF -80S1 9 -11 8 .23 NT
AL-RF-COMPO 11 -13 27.70 NT
AL-RF-COMPE 15 -19 22.60 NT
AL-RF-1 A 3-5 45.10 NT
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 61.70 NT
AL-RF-3B 7 -9 43.90 NT
T-162 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Zinc
TCLP Antimony
TCLP Arsenic
TCLP Barium
TCLP Cobalt
TCLP Chromium
TCLP Lead
Fi nal Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.22-2
ABANDONED LIME SETTLING BASIN
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total .Metals (mg/kg)
AL-RF-BDS1 9 -11 49.80 NT
AL-RF-COMPO 11 -13 37.40 NT
AL-RF-COMPE 15 -19 42.90 NT
TCLP Metars (mg/1)
AL-RF-1 A 3-5 0.042 NT
AL-RF-3B 7-9 0.065 NT
AL-RF-COM PD 11 -13 0.09 NT
AL-RF-1 A 3-5 1.21 NT
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 0.939 NT
AL-RF -3B 7-9 1.58 NT
AL-RF-BDS1 9 -11 1.47 NT
AL-RF-COM PD 11 -13 2.15 NT
AL-RF-COMPE 15 -19 4.48 NT
AL-RF-1 A 3-5 0.011 NT
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 0 .015 NT
AL-RF -COM PE 15 -19 0.017 NT
AL-RF-COMPE 15 -19 0.011 NT
AL-RF-COM PD 11 -13 0 .043 NT
T -163 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
...
TCLP Mercury
TCLP Nickel
TCLP Zinc
Final Dec. 19 , 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.22-2
ABANDONED LIME SETTLING BASIN
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
TCLP Metals {mg/I)
-
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 0 .0012 NT
AL-RF-38 7-9 0.00022 NT
AL-RF-BDS1 9 -11 0.00054 NT
AL-RF-1A 3 -5 0.01 NT
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 0.01 NT
AL-RF-3B 7-9 0.01 NT
AL-RF-80S1 9 -11 0.01 NT
AL-RF-COMPO 11 -13 0 .01 NT
AL-RF-COMPE 15 -19 0 .041 NT
AL-RF-1A 3 -5 0.037 NT
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 0.381 NT
AL-RF-38 7-9 0.424 NT
AL-RF-BDS1 9 -11 0.804 NT
AL-RF -COM PD 11 -13 0.551 NT
AL-RF-COMPE 15 -19 0 .392 NT
T-164 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Anthracene
Benzenethiol
Chrysene
Fluoranthene
1-Methylnaphthalene
Naphthalene
Pyrene
TCLP Napthalene
TCLP Phenol
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
Final D ec . 19 , 1 994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5 .22-2
ABANDONED LIME SETTLING BASIN
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample
Sample Number (feet) Concentration
BNAOrganics . (mg/kg)
AL-RF -2C 9 -11 0.23
AL-RF-BDS1 9 -11 0.31
AL-RF-1 A 3 -5 1.19
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 0 .42
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 0.33
AL-RF-BDS1 9 -11 0.27
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 1.61
AL-RF-BDS1 9 -11 0.86
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 1.39
AL-RF-BDS1 9 -11 1.09
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 0 .89
AL-RF-BDS1 9 -11 0.63
TCLP BNA Organics · (mg/I)
AL-RF-2C 9 -11 0.022
AL-RF-BDS1 9 -11 0.022
AL-RF-BDS1 9 -11 0 .06
Background
Range
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
T-165 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
--
Chromium
Lead
final Dec. 19, 1994
TABLE 5.24-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
FIRE TRAINING AREA
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Jotal Metals (mg/kg)
FT -RF-1A 0.6-1.1 27.20 1.79 -15.4
FT-RF-1B 2.2-2.7 16.60 NT
FT-RF-1 C 5.8 -6.8 22.70 NT
FT-RF-2A 0.5 -1 34.20 1 .79-15.4
FT-RF-28 2.2 -2.9 40.90 NT
FT-RF-2C Cuttings 104 NT
FT-RF-3A 0.5 -0.9 32.10 1.79 -15.4
FT-RF-38 1.9 -2.9 16.00 NT
FT-RF-3C Cuttings 75.80 NT
FT-RF-BDS1 1.9 -2.9 15.40 NT
FT-RF-1 A 0.6-1.1 14.20 ND -3250
FT-RF-1 B 2.2 -2.7 6.68 NT
FT-RF-1 C 5.8 -6.8 4.42 NT
FT-RF-2A 0.5 -1 14.10 ND -3250
FT-RF-28 2.2 -2.9 11.70 NT
FT-RF-2C Cuttings 35.50 NT
FT-RF-3A 0 .5 -0.9 11.00 ND -3250
FT-RF-38 1.9 -2.9 7.02 NT
T-166 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
...
Lead
TCLP Chromium
TCLP Lead
Final De c. 19, 1994
TABLE 5.24-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
FIRE TRAINING AREA
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (mg/kg)
FT-RF-3C Cuttings 13.60 NT
FT-RF-BDS1 1.9 -2 .9 11. 70 NT
TCLP Metals (mg/I)
FT-RF-1 B 2.2 -2 .7 0.01 NT
FT-RF-1 C 5 .8 -6 .8 0.012 NT
FT-RF-2A 0.5 -1 0 .012 NT
FT-RF-2C Cuttings 0.023 NT
FT-RF-3A 0.5 -0 .9 0.011 NT
FT-RF-3B 1 .9 -2.9 0.013 NT
FT-RF-3C Cuttings 0.023 NT
FT-RF-80S1 1.9 -2 .9 0.012 NT
FT-RF-1 A 0 .6 -1.1 0.034 NT
FT-RF-1 C 5.8 -6.8 0.022 NT
FT-RF-2C Cuttings 0.033 NT
FT-RF-3A 0.5 -0 .9 0 .021 NT
FT-RF-3C Cuttings 0.083 NT
T-167 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Ethyl benzene
Xylene
TPH
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
f mal Dec. 19, 1994
TABLE 5.24-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
FIRE TRAINING AREA
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number {feet) Concentration Range
0-rgan'ics ·(mg/kg).
FT-RF-2C Cuttings 0.37 NT
FT-RF-2C Cuttings 1.71 NT
FT-RF-18 2 .2 -2.7 4280 NT
FT-RF-1 C 5.8 -6.8 4530 NT
FT-RF-2A 0.5 -1 1.33 NT
FT-RF-28 2.2 -2.9 17500 NT
FT-RF-2C Cuttings 42600 NT
FT-RF-3C Cuttings 2680 NT
T-168 EarthFax Engineering; Inc.
Chevron U.S .A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Antimony
Arseni c
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Cobalt
Final Dec. 19, 1994
TABLE 5.24-2
RCRA Fa ci lity Investigation Report
December 1994
FIRE TRAINING AREA
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet} C once ntrati on Range
T dtal Metals (mg /kg}
FT-RF-COM PA 0 .5 -1 3.70 ND -0.25
FT-RF -COMPA 0 .5 -1 6 .94 12.1 -37 .2
FT-RF-COMPS 1.9 -2.9 2.45 NT
FT-RF -COM PC 5 .8 -6 .8 & 1.88 NT
Cuttings
FT-RF-COMPA 0.5 -1 95.20 53.9 -198
FT-RF-COMPS 1.9 -2 .9 60.80 NT
FT-RF-COM PC 5 .8 -6 .8 & 69 .90 NT
Cuttings
FT-RF-COM PA 0.5 -1 3.27 ND -14.6
FT-RF-COMPS 1 .9 -2.9 2 .74 NT
FT-RF-COMPC 5.8 -6.8 & 1.44 NT
Cuttings
FT-RF-COMPA 0.5 -1 26 .90 NT
FT-RF-COMPS 1 .9 -2 .9 2 5.50 NT
FT-RF-COM PC 5 .8 -6.8 & 104 NT
Cuttings
FT-RF-COMPA 0.5 -1 4 .52 0.83 -7.64
FT-RF-COM PB 1.9 -2.9 3.22 NT
FT -RF-COMPC 5 .8 -6 .8 & 1.75 NT
Cutti ngs
T -169 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Vanadium
Zinc
TCLP Arsenic
Fin al De c . 1 9 . 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.24-2
FIRE TRAINING AREA
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
Total Metals (mg/kg)
FT-RF-COMPA 0.5 -1
FT-RF-COMPB 1 .9 -2.9
FT-RF-COM PC 5 .8 -6.8 &
Cuttings
FT-RF-COMPA 0.5 -1
FT-RF-COM PB 1.9 -2.9
FT-RF-COMPC 5.8 -6.8
Cuttings
FT-RF-COMPA 0.5 -1
FT-RF-COM PB 1.9 -2 .9
FT-RF-COMPC 5.8 -6 .8 &
Cuttings
FT-RF-COMPA 0 .5 -1
FT-RF-COMPS 1 .9 -2.9
FT-RF-COM PC 5.8 -6.8 &
Cuttings
FT-RF-COMPA 0 .5 -1
FT-RF-COMPS 1.9 -2 .9
FT-RF-COMPC 5.8 -6.8 &
Cuttings
TCLP Metals (mg/ll
FT-RF-COM PA 0 .5 -1
T-170
Sample Background
Concentration Range
15.40 ND -3250
6.88 NT
15.50 NT
3.29 ND -0.739
0.319 NT
1.95 NT
9.31 1.61 -15 .1
8.66 NT
8.91 NT
17.90 3.42-174
14.40 NT
9.12 NT
45 .30 12.0-524
32.60 NT
24.20 NT
0 .036 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
. . . .
TCLP Barium
TCLP Chromium
TCLP Cobalt
TCLP Nickel
TCLP Zinc
Toluene
Ethyl benzene
Xylene
Final Dec. 19. 1994
..
TABLE 5 .24-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
FIRE TRAINING AREA
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
.
TCLP Metals .(mg/I)
FT-RF-COMPA 0 .5 -1 0.703 NT
FT-RF-COMPS 1.9 -2.9 0.861 NT
FT-RF-COMPC 5.8 -6.8 & 0.709 NT
Cuttings
FT -RF-COMPS 1 .9 -2.9 0.012 NT
FT-RF-COM PC 5.8 -6 .8 & 0.01 NT
Cuttings
FT-RF-COM PA 0.5 -1 0.013 NT
FT-RF-COM PA 0 .5 -1 0.01 NT
FT-RF-COMPS 1.9 -2.9 0.039 NT
FT-RF-COM PC 5.8 -6.8 & 0.064 NT
Cuttings
FT-RF-COM PA 0.5 -1 0.066 NT
FT-RF-COMPS 1 .9-2.9 0.079 NT
FT-RF-COM PC 5 .8 -6.8 & 0 .12 NT
Cuttings
. Organics (mg/kg)
FT-RF-COM PC 5.8 -6.8 & 0 .101 NT
Cuttings
FT-RF-COMPC 5.8 -6.8 & 0 .193 NT
Cuttings
FT-RF-COM PC 5.8 -6.8 & 1.82 NT
Cuttings
T -171 EarthFax Engineering; Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
1-Methylnaphthalene
Naphthalene
Pyrene
TCLP 1 -
Methylnaphthalene
TCLP Naphthalene
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
Final Dec. 19. 1994
TABLE 5.24-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1 994
FIRE TRAINING AREA
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number {feet) Concentration Range
BNAOrganics {mg/kg}
FT-RF-COMPS 1.9 -2.9 9.90 NT
FT-RF-COMPC 5.8 -6.8 & 49.00 NT
Cuttings
FT-RF-COMPC 5.8 -6.8 & 1 2.60 NT
Cuttings
FT-RF-COMPC 5.8 -6.8 & 2.80 NT
Cuttings
TCLP BNA · Organics .(rrig/1)
FT-RF-COMPS 1.9 -2 .9 0.087 NT
FT-RF-COM PC 5.8 -6.8 & 0 .178 NT
Cuttings
FT-RF-COMPS 1.9 -2.9 0 .03 NT
FT-RF-COM PC 5.8 -6.8 & 0.139 NT
Cuttings
T-172 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Lead
Fir.al Dec. T 9 , 1 994
TABLE 5.26-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
OLD BIO DISK SUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sam pie Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (mg/kg)
BD-RF-B4B 5 -10 37.80 NT
BD-RF-C3A 2 -4 12.30 NT
BD-RF-C3B 5-7 20.10 NT
BD-RF-C3C 10 -12 15.70 NT
BD-RF-C3D 14 -15 12.40 NT
BD-RF-C3E 17 -19 11.00 NT
BD-RF-C5A 2-4 27.40 NT
BD-RF-C5B 7-9 14.60 NT
BD-RF-C5C 12 -14 15 .10 NT
BD-RF-C5D 15 -17 12.10 NT
BD-RF-C5E 19 -20 14.40 NT
BD-RF-B4B 5 -10 20.80 NT
BD-RF-C3A 2-4 10.80 NT
BD-RF-C3B 5 -7 12.60 NT
BD-RF-C3C 10 -12 6.70 NT
BD-RF-C3D 14 -15 11.10 NT
BD-RF-C3E 17 -19 10.50 NT
BD-RF-C5A 2 -4 4.18 NT
BD-RF-C5B 7-9 8.14 NT
T -173 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Lead
Ethyl benzene
Xylene
TPH
TCLP Benzene
NT = Not Tested
ND = Not Detected
Fine! Dec. 19. 1994
TABLE 5.26-1
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
OLD 810 DISK SUMP
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (mg/kg)
8D-RF-C5C 9 -10 6.39 NT
BD-RF-C5D 12 -14 10.20 NT
BD-RF-C5E 19 -20 11 . 70 NT
Organics (mg/kg)
BD-RF-C58 12 -14 0.0023 NT
BD-RF-BDS1 17 -19 0.002 NT
8D -RF-C58 12 -14 0.0103 NT
8D-RF-80S1 17 -19 0.007 NT
8D-RF-C3A 2-4 14500 NT
TCLP Organics (mg/I)
BD-RF-C3A 2-4 0.011 NT
BD-RF-C38 5-7 0.0129 NT
BD-RF-C3C 10 -12 0.0117 NT
BD-RF-C3D 14 -15 0.0124 NT
BD-RF-C3E 17 -19 0.0125 NT
T-174 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A .
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Arsenic
Barium
Final Dec. 19, 1994
..
TABLE 5 .26-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
OLD BIO DISK SUMP
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals {mg/kg)
8D-RF-C5A 2-4 6.28 NT
BD-RF-CSB 7 -9 25.90 NT
BD-RF-CSC 12 -14 25.50 NT
BD-RF-C50 15 -17 33.50 NT
BO-RF-CSE 19 -20 36.00 NT
BD-RF-COMPA 4-5 21.60 ND -57.2
8D-RF-COMPB 9 -10 31.80 NT
BD-RF-COMPC 12 -14 29 .10 NT
BD-RF-CQMPD 17 -19 35.60 NT
BO-RF-CSA 2-4 21 .10 NT
80-RF -CSB 7 -9 65.40 NT
80-RF-CSC 12 -14 53.90 NT
8D-RF-C50 15 -17 128 NT
BO-RF-CSE 19 -20 143 NT
80-RF-COMPA 4-5 57.80 3.03 -106
BO-RF-COMPS 9 -10 98.80 NT
8D-RF-COMPC 12 -14 64.90 NT
BO-RF-COMPO 17 -19 124 NT
T -175 EarthFax Engineering, Inc,
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Final Dec. 1 9 , 1 994
TABLE 5.26-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1 994
OLD BIO DISK SUMP
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Total Metals (mg/kg)
8D-RF-C5A 2-4 0.13 NT
BD-RF-C58 7-9 0.44 NT
BD-RF-C5C 12 -14 0.30 NT
BD-RF-C5D 15 -17 0.42 NT
BD-RF-C5E 19 -20 0.53 NT
8D-RF-COMPA 4-5 0 .38 NT
SD-RF-COMPS 9 -10 0.53 NT
BD-RF-COMPC 12 -14 0.42 NT
BO-RF-COMPO 17 -19 0.45 NT
8D-RF-C5A 2-4 0.20 NT
BD-RF-C5C 12 -14 0.27 NT
BD-RF-C5D 15 -17 0.70 NT
BD-RF-C5E 19 -20 0 .26 NT
80-RF-COMPA 4-5 0 .32 ND -4.43
BD-RF-COMPB 9 -10 0.41 NT
BD-RF-COMPC 12 -14 0 .35 NT
SD-RF-COMPO 17 -19 0.42 NT
BD-RF-COMPA 4 -5 14.80 NT
BO-RF-COMPS 9 -10 14.20 NT
T -176 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Chromium
Cobalt
Lead
Nickel
Final De c. 19, 1 994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.26-2
OLD BIO DISK SUMP
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
TotaJ .··Metals·{mg/kg)
BD-RF-COMPC 12 -14
BO -RF-COMPO 17 -19
8D-RF-C5A 2-4
BD-RF-C5B 7-9
BD-RF-C5C 12 -14
BD-RF-C5D 15 -17
8D -RF-C5E 19 -20
80-RF-COMPA 4-5
80-RF-C OMPB 9 -10
BD -RF-COMPC 12 -14
8D -RF-COMPD 17 -19
8D-RF-COMPA 4-5
BD-RF-COMPB 9 -10
BD-RF-COMPC 12 -14
BO-RF-COMPO 17 -19
BD-RF-C5A 2-4
8D-RF-C58 7 -9
BD-RF-C5C 12 -14
BD-RF-C5D 15 -17
T-177
Sample Background
Concentra Range
tion
13 .20 NT
12.90 NT
0.21 NT
0.34 NT
0.11 NT
0.18 NT
0.19 NT
0 .18 NT
0 .2 2 NT
0.13 NT
0 .24 NT
8.62 ND -19.2
13.90 NT
11.40 NT
10.90 NT
6.18 NT
9.08 NT
0. 11 NT
0.18 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Nickel
Selenium
Vanadium
Final 0 c c . 1 9. 1 884
TABLE 5.26-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1 994
OLD BIO DISK SUMP
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
T _otal Metals (mg/kg)
8D-RF-C5E 19 -20 11.60 NT
BD-RF-COMPA 4-5 9.28 NT
8D-RF-COMPB 9 -10 11.00 NT
BD-RF-COMPC 12 -14 10.90 NT
BO-RF-COMPO 17 -19 10.50 NT
BD-RF-C5A 2-4 0.42 NT
BD-RF-C5B 7 -9 1.14 NT
BD-RF-C5C 12 -14 1 .32 NT
BD-RF-C5D 15 -17 1.46 NT
BD-RF-C5E 19 -20 1.86 NT
BD-RF-COMPA 4-5 1.11 NT
BO-RF-COMPS 9 -10 1.40 NT
BD-RF-COMPC 12 -14 1.67 NT
BO-RF-COMPO 17 -19 1.68 NT
BD-RF-C5A 2-4 4.08 NT
BD-RF-C5B 7-9 11.60 NT
8D-RF-C5C 12 -14 15.00 NT
BD-RF-C5D 15 -17 16.60 NT
BD-RF -C5E 19 -20 18.90 NT
BD-RF-COMPA 4 -5 12.90 NT
T -178 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U .S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
''.
Vanadium
Zinc
Benzene
Ethyl benzene
Fina l Dec. 19, 1 994
TABLE 5.26-2
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
OLD BIO DISK SUMP
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
.· . '
Totaf Metals (mg/kg)
BO-RF-COMPS 9 -10 14.90 NT
BD-RF-COMPC 12 -14 14.60 NT
BD-RF-COMPD 17 -19 16.70 NT
BD-RF-C5A 2-4 22.60 NT
BD-RF-C5B 7-9 32.40 NT
BD-RF-C5C 12 -14 27.50 NT
BD-RF-C5D 15 -17 35.90 NT
8D-RF-C5E 19 -20 40.40 NT
BD -RF -COMPA 4-5 32.80 NT
BD-RF-COMPB 9 -10 45.20 NT
BD -RF-COMPC 12 -14 38.70 NT
SD-RF-COMPO 17 -19 38.40 NT
. '
Organics (mg/kg)
BO -RF-COMPS 9 -10 0 .002 NT
80-RF -COMPC 12 -14 0.002 NT
BD-RF-COMPA 4 -5 0 .127 NT
BO-RF-COMPS 9 -10 0.0074 NT
80-RF-COMPC 12 -14 0 .0048 NT
T -1 79 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S .A .
Saft Lake Refinery
Parameter
Xylene
Anthracene
Chrysene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
ND = Not Detecte d
NT = Not Tested
Fin al 0cc. 19, 1 9 94
TABLE 5.26-2
RCRA Facility Inv estigation Repo rt
December 1994
OLD BIO DISK SUMP
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) Concentration Range
Organics (mg/kg)
BD-RF-COMPA 4-5 0 .201 NT
BD-RF-COMPB 9 -10 0.0226 NT
BD-RF-COMPC 12 -14 0.0176 NT
BNAOrganics (mg /kg)
BD-RF-COMPA 4-5 0.044 NT
BD-RF-COMPA 4-5 0.052 NT
BD-RF-COMPA 4-5 0.066 NT
BD -RF-C5A 2-4 0.049 NT
BD-RF-COMPA 4-5 0.058 NT
T-180 EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl benzene
Fine ! De c. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.27-1
NORTH TANK FARM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
Organics (mg/kg)
NT-RF-1
(1 )
NT-RF-2 11)
NT-RF-2DA 0 .5 -2
NT-RF-2DC 4 -6
NT-RF-3
(1)
NT-RF-98 2-4
NT-RF-9C 4-6
NT-RF-1 (11
NT-RF-2 11 )
NT-RF-2DA 0.5 -2
NT-RF-2DC 4-6
NT-RF -4C 3 -5
NT-RF-9B 2-4
NT-RF-9C 4-6
NT-RF-2
(1)
NT-RF-2DA 0 .5 -2
NT-RF-2DC 4-6
NT-RF-4C 3 -5
T -181
Sample Background
Concentration Range
0.295 NT
4.62 NT
0.45 NT
3.80 NT
0.142 NT
1.91 NT
1.10 NT
0.037 NT
0.079 NT
0.66 NT
0.59 NT
1 .23 NT
0.39 NT
0.34 NT
0.147 NT
0.510 NT
26.30 NT
0 .93 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
Ethyl benzene
Xylene
TPH
Final Dec. 18, 1 9 94
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.27-1
NORTH TANK FARM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
Organics (mg/kg')
NT-RF-6C 3-5
NT-RF-98 2-4
NT-RF-9C 4-6
NT-RF-1
(1)
NT-RF-2
(1 J
NT-RF-2DA 0.5 -2
NT-RF-2DC 4-6
NT-RF-4C 3-5
NT-RF-6C 3 -5
NT-RF-88 2-4
NT-RF -98 2 -4
NT-RF-9C 4 -6
NT-RF-2
(1 )
NT-RF-2DA 0.5 -2
NT-RF-2DC 4-6
NT-RF-3
(1 )
NT-RF-4
(1)
NT-RF-4C 3 -5
T-182
Sample Background
Concentration Range
0.520 NT
12.70 NT
4.54 NT
0 .128 NT
0 .426 NT
4.05 NT
22.30 NT
3.72 NT
1.85 NT
0.34 NT
17.3 NT
9.73 NT
13.50 NT
17 .50 NT
4690 NT
1.95 NT
0.60 NT
2370 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc,
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
TPH
ND = Not Detected
NT = Not Tested
,,, = Water (mg/I)
Fino ! Dec. 19, 1994
RCRA Facility Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.27-1
NORTH TANK FARM
INDICATOR PARAMETERS
Depth
Sample Number (feet)
.. Organics (mg/kg)
NT-RF-5C 3-5
NT-RF-6C 3-5
NT-RF-BB 2-4
NT-RF-98 2-4
NT-RF-9C 4 -6
T-183
Sample Background
Concentration Range
235 NT
912 NT
125 NT
3180 NT
967 NT
EarthFax Engineering, Inc.
Chevron U.S.A.
Salt Lake Refinery
Parameter
-
Selenium
NT = Not Tested
111 = Water (mg/I)
F,nol De c . 19, 1994
RCRA Facil ity Investigation Report
December 1994
TABLE 5.27-2
NORTH TANK FARM
COMPOSITE PARAMETERS
Depth Sample Background
Sample Number (feet) C oncentra ti on Range
Total Metals {mg/kg)
NT-RF-TBS1
(1 ) 0.009 NT
T -184 EarthFa x Engineering, Inc.
-~
Ii
I/
I
Al.SO IHCWOED:
• CONVEYANCE DITCHES
• PIPEWAYS AHO MANIFOLD PADS
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SALT LAKE REFINERY
RFI REPORT
.. ,,......,.,
-W.J~--
OOo
0 0 0 0 O
O O O [£2.j
-r i ; ;i::::::::::::::..'.::'.~rlm:oc::':==-:::!.
'
I
-~
UM ~ SETTUHG BASIN
AHO DE-WATERING
IWPOUNDWEHT
I I
0
0
Et
LJ
OD
00
@ o
D
RFl -4-1 UC0293.00-18 11-0 4-;•
LEGEND
RCRA CLOSURE UNITS
19 91 CONSENT ORDER [3]
~ SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT UNITS
1991 CONSENT ORDER
500'
'
FIGURE 1.4-1
SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT UNI TS
~ ... ,. '' ■ • l'-11 ~-.......
EarthFax
GREAT SALT
Farmington
i
LAKE !
Bay
Eleualion 1280 March 1973
I --(1,r ~) t !~
ed\<:;
--. ,___.__
: -!
,fl .r~ I
1·
dY
con . .'il t;:l:J=·~=---~R ~~U:h:l=ftlttl
--
.!.. '-·· ....
·sa1i' La eJ' Woo
Skyp k
. '
-~!: ~::
''
I '
---~
' .
i
I
I I ' tV
~· ~ H
-:--v--J~.~I
I-, l ·-i'1..~J . 1'5"' l,~x -·· -~ \. ~, ➔~~~~~~d::f---+__J~~+t-:1---f===4++-=-+h~?4~~~l-:--w:JW__5_,~-I ,c_>&\m<l,,,
-\ i lad,o l"./ort S /-£ \ ' 1"
') J
' j' ~w. e r ~I , <, .S µrmg~ .... J '--Ca : -\i·~-~--~ ._l Pevf;'-'
6 ~ .. ,., \!J . ;·"J,'Vo~J'~ ,_,
ON u.s.X: ,,.-~-<r -a¥ l \,;e--,;~~o~"-
KE REFINERY -=;-_--~~~far.,:.~_-.\
B_9 UNDAR , ~~----. ! '-->~ ~
--1--. ~-'-\_ ·--~~
t>.n I .. -\ 1· ~-~ ✓-~--
VR . >~ ',;;,,, " ..
~:!I I \ ., -';,( \S' ~\. -~v-J' (\"-~I
-i-----+
'
in J
v
. .I
. I
\ -M~ &',
'-,,;t . s:'-\'i'J
BASE MAP: USGS 30 X 60 MIN. QUADRANGLE
"SALT I.AKE · 1980 ANO TOOELE -1979•
0 1 MILE
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SALT LAKE REFINERY
RFI REPORT
I I
FIGURE 2.1-1 VICINITY MAP .
---------r.--., ,. '' ■ • ~'-1..4
---------EarthFax
o· 500·
~-I
--I
CHEVRON U.S.A .
SAL T LAKE REFI NERY
RFI REPORT FI GURE 2 .1-2
ooo 0
.::c. 0 0
f 0 0 00 0 0
00 0 0
00 0 00
00
oo 0 0 ►
0 oo 0 o=i
o!l 0 0 0 o1 0
0 0 0 0
SA L T LAKE REFIN ERY FAC ILI TY MA P
§Sc::o
0
0 0
"
0
0
r-a••---
.
D
@o
D
!
I
I
!
---------r~,. , .... , • • ~'-#J ......-~
EarthFax
SOURCE: USGS MAP 1-1404
SURACIAL GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE
SALT LAKE CITY NORTH QUADRANGLE
VAN HORN 1982
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SALT LAKE REFINERY
RFI REPORT
0
FIGURE 2.3-1 GEOLOGIC MAP.
1 MILE ---------............ ,, ,,
• ■ l~J ..__-......
EarthFax
I
-1-: ..
I.
I •2 12
......
BASE MAP: USGS 7.6 MIN. QUAORANGlE
"SALT LAKE CITY NORTH, UTAH · 1983"
PHOTOREVI SEO 1888 ANO 1976
Radi o Towers
, (KL!TA) ,
RO S E
PARK
I
J
o· 2000'
I I
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SALT LAKE REFINERY
RFI REPORT FIGURE 2.4-1 SURFACE WATER FEATURES.
"., :·; <:.::
,l ., ;-;~
.. i )f]{·
~1·_ •• ,.. ... ~
;;:_ ....... ,/'\\ .
•• ·,,·: / 'i--::.-· { (
~
KE REFINERY (
TY BOUNDARY ~
I "~
-~~
EVILLE I 'I'._
-----------r_.....,. , .... , • ■ l'-1'~ ...... -.......
EarthFax
I
I ~
/0
I
L --
CHEVRON U.S.A.
S010
®
S011
®
SALT LAKE REF INER Y
RFI REPORT
OKA
S015
®
DAVIS COUNTY
SALT LAKE COUNTY
-----T ----
APPROXIMATE PROPERTY BOUNDARY
OKA
0
....
Vl 0 0 ~
0
"' i 00
0 ()
0 0
0 0
RESERVOIR 0
----------7
sos
®
0
0
0
0
0
TmB
iol 0
WnA OD
DO
@o
0
ATh~fL E1%~ M
L] D □
S01
Q;
°' lJ
aj
CdA
OKA
OWA
TmB
WnA
MA
LEGEND
CUDAHY SILT LOAM, 0 TO 3 PERCENT
SLOPES
DECK ER SILT LOAM, 0 TO 1 PERCENT
SLOPES
DECKER SIL TY CLAY LOAM, 0 TO 1
PERCENT SLOPES, HIGH WATER TABLE
TIMPANOGOS LOAM, 1 TO 3 PERCENT
SLOPES
WINN SILT LOAM, 0 TO 1 PERCENT
SLOPES
MADE LANO -FILL MATERIAL
GENERALLY GREATER THAN FOUR FEET
DEEP, NO ATTEMPT WAS MADE TO
DETERMINE CLASSIFICATION OF
UNDERLYING SOIL
LOCA TlON OF BAC KGROUND
SOIL SAMPLE
o' 5001
6---!
----------r--. ..
FIGURE 3.1 -1
BACKGROUND SO IL
SAMPLE LOCATIONS
r, ,., • • ~'-1.4 ..... -......
EarthFax
CHEV RON U.S.A.
SALT LAKE REFI NERY
RFI REPORT
LF-7
OIL Y DUM P
00-1
®
00-5
B
FIGURE 5 .1-1
SOLID
WASTE
LANDFILL LF-11
®
OLD BARREL
STOR AGE AREA
HAZARDOU S
WASTE
LANDFILL
®
LF-3
LF-2
®
RfS-1 -1 UC02 93.00--,2 -13-94
LEGEND
® HOLL OW-S TEM A UG ER HO LE
-$-SOI L PR OB E/BU CKET A UG ER
e SURF ACE WA TER SAMPLE POIN T
CROS S SEC TIO N RE FERE NCES
CROSS SEC TION A-A' FI GU RE 5.1-2
CROSS SECTION 8-B' FIGU RE 5 .1 -3
!
o·
L--..-.
150'
l
t.:il/\'
STANDING WATER
SURFACE IMPOUNDM ENT
LF-1
®
----------r~-. ,., .. , • • ~"-#J
..... -....All
SAMPLE LOCATIONS FOR THE LANDFILL EarthFax
A
4220
0D-2
.
4210
...
GRANULAR •• •
FILL ,•
LF -6
.
..
, '
GRANULAR ' •
FILL
OD-3
-. -. -SILTY
· -• -· -SAND
RF5-1-2 UC029J.0v-18 11-04-9 4
A'
LF-5 LF-4
,._ I ,• ·• f ill
GRANULAR.-.,.,.
--. ---SILT'f
--·-·-·-S~D ----
~-----•~---------·-----~ ----·----·---·-·-
4200 ~{j{,,tjg'i;':C;~:--.,:~><[ ....... ·.'St: -_:_-:--=-1_:_ "s':t-· • _ • SANDY SIL L-.
TD=18.0' TD=18.0' ·----~---:-J-:-.:_-:-.:_-:-.:_-:-.:_-:-.:_-:-.:_;;;,?'_-_ -_-_-_ -_-_.-_-_CLAY _-_
4190
4 1 8 0 i----_...:,;:
4170 CLAYEY SIU:-
TD=46.0 '
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SALT LAKE REFINERY
RFI REPORT
TD=19.5'
TD=47 .0'
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1 "= 75'
VERT ICAL SCALE: 1"=10'
FIGURE 5.1-2 OILY DUMP AND LANDFILL CROSS SEC TION A -A'
---------r.-..--. ,. ,,
• ■ ~'1,#J ..._-__..
EarthFax
4220
4210
4200
4190
4180
4170
B
LF-7
. -. -1--. -. -. -. -. ---. --'-.
------~ -~ = : =-:----:-.:_--:-.:_--:-·-~-. ..:. . :_ . .:_ ' __: SILTY -• -. -.
SILT--:-.:..--:-;; ___ ~~~ J ~-~~SANO .. -. -. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -.L . --~---·-·-·-·-· --
,. -. ~ -1-._. --·-. -. -. -: -. -. ·-_,_. ~. -. -:
J ·-r :,,~•;! ==cf ~~~·.~~~~t·-·~ = = Sl~T . ~ -. -• -= .:_ = .:_ ~--:-.:_--:-_ . _ : ·= ~ . -. -. . . -· -SANO SILT -. _ · · -
TD=32 .5' TD=32.5' ~~E!iS{~ . .:..--:-.:.. :=.:.. :::.:..::: ~
TD=25.5'
.'.: ~i I: SANO~.::";
TD=42.5'
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1''=150'
VERTICA L SCALE: 1"=150'
CHEVRON U.S.A.
Rf5-1 -3 UC029.l 11-04 -94
B'
TD=18.0'
----------r~-. ,., ... ,
• ■ l'-1.i ...... -~ SALT LAKE REFINERY
RFI REPORT FIGURE 5.1-3 OILY DUMP AND LANDFI LL CROSS SECTION 8-8' EarthFax
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SALT LAKE REFINERY
RFI REPORT
OILY DUMP
OD-3
®
OD-5
®
SOLI D
WA STE
LANDFILL
R,5-2-1 UC0293 . ,8 12-U-94
LEG END
® HO LLOW-STEM AUGER HOLE
-$-SOIL PROBE/BUC KET AUGER
CROSS SECTION RE FERENCE
CROSS SEC TION c -c· FIGURE 5.2 -2
OLD BARREL
STORAGE AREA
HA ZARDOUS
WASTE
LANDFILL
STANDING WATER
SURFACE IMPOUNDME NT
o· 1so·
L-....-I
---------.. ~, , .... , • • ~'-#J ....... -~
FIGURE 5 .2-1 SAMPLE LOCATIONS FOR THE OILY DUMP EarthFax
RF5-2-2 UC0293 .> 11 -04-94
C C'
4215
4 210
4205
SA NDY -
SILT
TD =32.0'
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SA LT LAKE REF IN ERY
RFI REPORT
HORI ZONTAL SCA LE: 1''=75'
VER TIC AL SCALE : 1"=2 5 LEGEND
TD=46.0 ' ~ COM POS I TE S
TD=52 .0'
FIGURE 5.2-2 OILY DUMP AND LAND F ILL
CROSS SECTION c-c' AND COMPOSITE SAMPLE LOCATIONS
---------r---. ... , .... ,
■ • ~'-'j ..._-_..
EarlhFax
POND
NO . 18
ALKY
CHANNEL
AC.
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SALT LAKE REFlNERY
RFI REPORT
DEWATERING
POND
FLARE
ALKY SITE
SECOND NORTH
I J
[l
>-
<(
3: w
Q. a:
AU<Y Pl.ANT
NO. 2 OUTFALL SYS TE M
FIRE
TRAINI NG
AREA
f-
Vl
;¥
a
Cl:
5:
>-
FIRST NORTH
AREA MA INT.
BUILDING
FIGURE 5.3-1 SAMPLE LOCATIO NS FOR TH E ALKY CHANNEL
Rf5-3-1 UC0293 .cu-18 11 -04-94
LEGEND
® SL UDGE SAMP LER
ANO SP LI T SPOON
SAMPLER HO LE
o· 100·
L---.:::i -. j
!NITROGEN
!HYDROGE N
STORAGE
---------r......._,. , ..... , • • ~~
EarthFax
AC-1 AC-2
0
5
10
, ·· ·. 'I h'·· ·, '.,c ........ _.:Z.,:~~~ ·, ·. ·.• ... , :.,_., .. '· .-.... ,._. · -., ·•, ·., -···-··: •.: .. ,. TD-11 5 ·
•::••~~•--."•,•· •.•·,•: ·• ••" ~•• • •::.::;,,.~ c:-,.,.'.._ •
15
LEGEND
~ COMPOSITES
AC-3
TD ==1 4.0'
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1''=50'
VER TIC AL SCA LE : 1''=5'
AC-4
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SALT L AKE RE FINERY
RF! REPORT
FIGURE 5.3-2 ALKY CHANNEL CROSS SECTION
AND COMPOSITE SAMPLE LOCATIONS
RF5-J-2 UC0293 .. , 11 -0 4 -94
AC-5
----------r...,..-. , .... ,
■ • ~:'-1.i -.._-......
EarthFax
POND
NO. 18
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SALT LAKE REFINERY
RFI REPORT
DEWATERING
POND
ALKY SITE
SECOND NORTH
c===:J
AS-5 □
>-
~ w
0.
6':
ALl<Y PLANT
NO. 2 OUTFALL SYSTEM
FIRE
TRAINING
AREA
RF5-5-1 uco29:, •• -18 11 -04-94
LEG EN D
HOLLOW-STEM AUGER
HOLE
CROSS SE CT ION REFERENCES
CROSS SEC TION A -A' FIGURE 5 .5-2
CROSS SEC TION 8 -B' FIGURE 5 .5 -5
I-
C/)
;fi
D
ll'.
I
I-
FIRST NOR TH
IN T.
o·
L---
B'
1 oo·
I
NITROGEN
HYDROG EN
STORA GE
---------r~ .. ,. ,.,
■ ■ l'-'J ......-........
FIGURE 5 .5-1 SAMPLE LOCATI ONS FOR THE ALKY SITE EarthFax
A
4220
4210
4200
4 190
TD=28.5'
4180
LEGEND
COMPOSITES
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SALT LAKE REF INER Y
RFI RE PORT
AS-4
HORI ZONTAL SC ALE: 1"=50'
VER TI CAL SCA LE: 1"=1 0 '
SAND
TD=3 4.5'
FIGURE 5 .5-2 ALK Y SITE CROSS SECTION A-A '
AND CO MPOSITE SAMPL E LOCA TIONS
RF5 -5 -2 UC0 2 93.~-_J 11 -04-94
---------........... ,., ,.,
■ • ~-:~J ...... -~
EarthFax
8
4220
4210
4200
4190
4180
LEGEND
~ CO MPOSITES
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SALT LAKE REFlNERY
RFI REPORT
. . -. -. -.-.
TD =3 1.5'
AS -3
AS-7
-·----------:-:...:...=-~~-:-:...:...=-:-:...:...=-:--~-=-: --·--·--·--·--· -·--·--·-----·-
·-·-·---------~------· . . :....-,~-·:an·-·~·-·-·0 ·-~-~-
• • -, -, --SANO -· -• -· °", ~ -· .:_ --.
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1"=100'
VER TI CAL SCALE: 1"=10'
FI GURE 5.5 -3 ALKY SITE CROSS SECTION
LOCA TION S AND COMPOSITE SAMPLE
AS-2
8-B'
Rf5-5-3 UC029J.0~ ,d 11-04-9<
B'
AS -1
---------.. .--.. , .... , • ■ ~'-1.4 ..... -~
EarthFax
11
POtlO NO. 3
P3-1
-$
P2-1
-$
PONO NO. 2
300'
I
P2-3
-$
LE GEND
-$ SOIL PROBE/BUCKET AUGER
PS-1
RESERVOIR
POND
NO. 1A
P1A-2
-$
OEWA1£RIN G
POND
0 z
~
-0 0
SP-1
z
0
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SALT LAKE REF INERY
RFI REPORT
FIGURE 5 .10-1 S AMP LE LOCATIONS FO R THE
WASTE WATER TREATM ENT SYSTE M
--Q4
BO NN EVILLE CAHAL
0
0
0
0
0
□o c:=::::J
---------r..-...-. '"' ... , ■ • l,...,_.,..4 ...... -~
STOIU.C[
EarthFax
POND
NO. 18
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SALT LAKE REFINERY
RFI REPOR T
DEWATERING
POND
ALKY SITE
SECOND NOR TH
I J
□
>-
<(
3: w
Cl.
0..
ALKY PLANT
FIRE
TRAIN IN G
AR EA
DF-2 NO . 2 OUTFALL SYSTEM OF-3
1-
(/)
;:'
0
(}'.
:i:
I-
FIRST NORTH
RFs -,s-1 uco29_, __ .,a 11-04-94
L EGEND
e BUCl<E T A UGER HOLE
IN T
o·
~w~ -~· i:::lllC:)
100·
I
NITROGEN
HYDROGE N
STORAGE
---------r~,i , .... , • • l'-1..4 ~-.....
FIGURE 5.18-1 SAMPLE LOCA TIONS FOR THE NO . 2 OUTFALL SYSTEM EarthFax
4 5
EFA
® 9 @
12 13 14
2 3 4
EXP ERIMENTAL FARM
5 6 7
POND 3
EFB
10 12
14 @ 2 3
2 .3
5 6
6 7 EFC
7 8 o· 300' EFD
6----'
10 11
11
14 15
LEGEND
(D BUCKET AUGER HOLE
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SALT L AKE REFINERY
R FI REPORT
FIGURE 5.19 -1 SAMPLE LOCATIONS
FOR THE EXPERIMENTAL FARM
RFS-19-1 UC0293.00-18 11 -04 -94
CLOSED RWMA
RCRA CEL L
POND 2
---------r~-. , .... , • • l'-#J ..... -~
EarHlfax
[7
/
SHALE OIL
SPENT Cs==:
EVAPORATION SITE
STANDING WATER
SITE
1H NORlll
0 0 0
I
7
HAZARDOUS
WASTE
I J
~ STUAO
rfffU
0
u
0
\
NORTH T~NK FARM
>-
~ w a. a:
0
0
0
~ Iv lrnr 0
0
RF S-20-1 UC0293.00-18 11-04-94
NORTHEAST
LANDFILL
0 1-,::;c1 ~ o O II o O 11 o ~i 0 CRUDE STORAGE D 00 11 ~ aSEEP-1 ------= ~~ __.._____...__ ~ 0 O O O O 0
Ar.A-~,
POND NO. 5 --.-
7= BCA-S8 I '""' "-• ~ "" nurn ~-,, I BACKWASH POND
0
RESERVOIR
~
0
! 0
LEGEND
e BUCKET AUGER HOLE
CHEVRON U.S.A.
BCA-S7. [ escA-S6 • ,: ;/sEEP-4 • • BCA -S4
0
SEEP-2 1 BCA-S5 i i
~~,:~ FOURlH NORlH
0 0 0 CJ
oc:::i
-1--,
0 _OD I I
LEADED TANK Jo
BfgU\11 0
0 011\0
o § I
0 0
0
>-
~ w a. a:
:, ./
z
~
□ ;
lfl9 ! [] //
0 BCA-S1
, ' BONNEVILLE
BCA-S2 CANAL
o ~m i 0
0
0 ~
I
---------r...-..-. r, ,., • • ~'-'J ...... -...... SALT LAKE REFINERY
RFI REPORT FIGURE 5.20-1 SAMPLE LOCATIONS FO R THE BONNEVILLE CANAL EarthFax
~
c:i z
0 z
0 a.
e?
c:i z
0 z
0
0..
RESERVOIR
o· 100'
Lw w -I
D 0
WASTEWATER
TREA TMENT
FACILITY
DEWATERING POND
0
LEGEND
SLUDGE SAMPLER AND
BUCKE T AUG ER HOLE
[Dl
STORM
SURGE
POND
RFS-21-1 UC029J.00-18 11-04-9•
'------------------I
AP I SEPARA TO UDGE
PIT, API RA TOR,
IAF. AN D TORMWATER
/ SEGREGA ION PUMP
COOLING TOWER
1001
THIRD NORTH
,-
V,
Lu
3:
0
0::
'i: ,-
PIPEWAY
C0 -1
BAF FLE
BOARD
POND
CON VEYANCE
DITCH
P IPEWAY
SECOND NORTH
.___:J
ALKY SITE
CHEVRON U .S .A .
SALT LAKE REFINERY
RFI REPORT
FIGURE 5 . 21-1 SAMPLE LOCATI ONS FOR THE
BAFFLE BOARD POND CONVEYANCE DI TCH
POND
NO . 1B
oo
0
WASTEWATER
TREATMENT
FACILITY
DEWATERING
POND
ABANDONED LIME
SETTLING BASIN
0 z
.:::0 0 a:: 0...
8 w
Vl c;) c::: :::,
Vl t-
Vl w
3:
Cl c:::
:r:
)-
RF5-22-1 UC0293 "· ,a 11 -04-94
LEGEND
0 HOLLOW-STEM AUGER HO LE
CROSS SECT ION REFERENCE
[QQ] I]~ SECTION A-A' FIGURE 0 .22 2
A
SECOND NORTH I
I :J
>-
<{
3: w
Q_
a::
>-
"' w
:?:
0
DC
5: >-
o· 100·
L-w I -
----------.. ~ .. "' .. , ■ •
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SAL T LAKE REFINERY
RF I REPORT
FIGURE 5.22-1 SAMPLE LOCATIONS FOR THE ~'-,Ii ...___-~
ABANDONED LIME SETTLING BASIN EarthFax
4215
4210
4205
4200
4195
4190
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SA L T L AKE REFINERY
R FI REPORT
RF S -22-2 UC 029~ d 11-04-94
A A'
ALB-1A . . . ' : ' '1 '. .. . . . . . . . . •,' _. •·. ' ._. . ; ~ .. . . ~""'"--.. .... .;. . . , ,. • • , Flll ,
, ~-, . . •' ·.· ,••
. . " . .. , . : •. . •. ~' ,•. ,• ,,· _,
4 ~ • ,4 .·. ,' .. · .· ... · ;' •. . .
. ~-· .: .,_: __ ,_\_~·.-1 ,:...._, ______ ·:.• •.· . .: :,. .• •. · •..
-• ]' -• -• -. -• --• ~~~ ,; •• ,, I' ~~ ~: ~: ~ _:_.-:-.. ~ _:_: ~ =-:-~ ~:-:-: ~:-:-= _:_ _:_ . ~ ... ,• .
~----:--~-· -. -. -
✓
ALB-2 ALB-3 ..
;• ,,t .. t ;
,.,. 4 -:
.·.
,-~ -;-
I•
,•• .. -~
••' GRANULAR,•
,f lll •
,
...
i
...
. ~ I .
.. ·'
. _. -SILTY.:..._._._._.~
·, .-•. _, .:..·_. ·,--_. _ : 7 -1-. _ . _SA~. _ . _ . _. _ . ___ ,
,--·---·-----_,
_:_ ~-_:_-:-_:_-:-_:_-:--B· _:_-:-_:_ -:-_:_-:-_:_-:-_:_ ~ _:_-:-_:_ -:-· . ~ . ~-_:_-:-_:_-:-_:_ ---:-_:_ ~ -lol· ~ _:_-:-_:_ -_:_-:---_:_ -_:_-:-J~~ ~ _:_ ---:--~ _:_ ---_:_-:-lo,
·-·-·-·-·-·---·-·-·
-=-<:: ---: ~;:.: =: = ~i .:_ =.: ~ ~: = ==1= = = == = ~ = ~ =IEt ~ =.: =.: =.: =.: =.: =.: = ~ = .:_~L
SILT:. ~L ~ .:_ ~.: ~
TD=21.0'
TD=17 .0'
HOR I ZON TAL SCAL E: 1 "= 20'
VERTI CAL SCALE 1 "= 5'
FIGURE 5.22-2 ABANDONED LIME SETTLING BASIN
CROSS SECTION A-A' AND COMPOSITE SAMPLE LOCATIONS
.:_~.:_I E
TD=17 .0 '
LEGEND
~ COMPOSI TES
----------r....,,
,. ,1 • • ~'-'-' ...... -......
EarthFax
ALKY SITE
HF NEUTRA LIZ ATION POND
ALKY SITE
HF NEU TRALIZATION POND
o· ..... 50' I I I
6= -I \ ) I -
NO. 2 OUTF AL L CHANNEL
LEGEND
@ GRAB SA MP LE CO LLECTED
FROM BACKHOE EXCAVATION
CHEVRON U.S.A.
I I
I I
FIRE
TRA IN ING
ARE A
1
<;
9
13
@I J 4
..L.J 7 8
@ 11 12
14 @ 16
SALT LAKE REFINER Y
RFI REPORT FIGURE 5.24-1 SAMPL E LOCATIONS FOR THE FIRE TRAINING AREA
RFS-24 -1 UC029>.---18 11-04-9 4
FIRST NORTH
AREA MA INT
BUILDING
---------.-~ .. , .... , • • l '-#J ~-........
EarthFax
100'
I
DAVIS COUNTY
SALT LAKE COUNTY
LEGEND
POND NO . 2
C-3
®
C-5
®
BIO -DISC SUMP
® HOLLOW-STEM AUGER HOLE
POND
N O. 1A
POND
NO. 18
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SALT LAK E REFINER Y
RFI REPORT
FIGURE 5 .26-1 SAMPLE LOCATIONS FOR
THE BI O-DISC SUMP
RF5-26-1 UC0293 .00-18 11-04-94
DEWATERING
POND
ALKY SITE
NO. 2 OU TFALL SYSTEM
---------r~, , .... , • ■ l'-#.J -....-~
EarthFax
Ii
I
~,
11
S-33
0
S-32
0
WP-25 •
WP-26 •
WP-28 •
WfP-7
0
WP-29 •
Er-11
0
• WP-62
rr-12
0 e WP-11
WP-12 •
WP -60 •
WP-9
WP-13 •
WP -1 ◄ e WfP-1 0
WP -59 •
• WP-7. WP-1'
WP-8 ••
wr P-◄ 0 WP-1 5 • wr-2•
WP -16 • WP -1 7 WP-5 e •
WP-18 •
WP-30 •
S-36
0
• WP -19
WP-37 •
Os-31 • WP-21
• WP-20 WP-22
e O WfP-3
WP-32
WP-31 • •
S-29 0
WP-36
•
WP-58 •
WfP-90'-.:_ H~
...--'ll~-63 •
eWP-45 ~
PONO "40, J.
• WP-◄2
IWP-55 •
OS-13
0 S-9
:t-53
POHO NO. $
RC5UVOIR
O'
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SALT LA KE REFINERY
RF I REPORT
LEGEND
0 EXIS TING MONITOR WELL
• EXISTING WE LL POINT
• 400'
L----==i ~· l
SCALE
LOCATION OF GROUNDWATER
MONITOR POIN TS
FIGURE 6.3-1
----------r-...--. ,. ,1 • • ~'-#j ...... -.......
EarthFax
i
I ~
!j
I
ff-13
(HW) Q
S-33 <••>o
S-32 o<••i
WP-2S
• (HO)
WP-26
e(Ho)
WFP-7
WP-28
e(MO)
0
WP-29
• (MO)
rr-11
Q (""l
WP-1B
• (HO)
WP-30
• (HO)
5-36
(HO) Q
• WP-19
(NO)
Os-31
{HW) •·
WP-21
(HO)
WP-62
• (HO)
• WP-20 WP-22
• (HO) Q WFP-3 (NO)
WP-37
e{HD)
WP-31
• (HO)
WP-36
e (HD)
POJ,41) HO. l
WFP-9 Q'-_____ _,sc~
•IWP-63
(HO)
• WP-◄2 <•oJ
WP-55
• (HO)
S-13 Q (MO)
Q S -9
wr-53
• (•OJ
PO~D WO. 5
RCS(i:t\'Olfl
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SALT LAKE REFI NER Y
RF ! REPORT
LEGEND
0 EXISTING MONITOR WELL
• EX ISTING WELL POIN T
(HO) NOT DET ECTED
(WW) NOT MEASURED
crri FREE PROD UCT IN WELL
O' 400'
L--a-I
SCALE
BENZE NE CONCE NTR ATIONS
IN UG/L
WEST FI ELD
GROUNDWATER PLUME
SPRING 1994
BENZEN E CONCENTRAT IONS
FIGURE 6.3-2
---------.. .--. .. ,., ,., • • ~:'-#.4 ...... -......
EarthFax
1g
I
'1 '
1:1
I
S-32
0
WP-25 •
wrP-6
WP-26 •
WP-28 •
[f-12 e
Q WP -12
WP-I ◄ •
Er-11
0
WP-18 •
• WP-19
Os-31 • WP-2 1
e WP -62
WFP-9 0' S[~Nftt ~OBfli I
• WP -◄2
lwP-55 •
0 s-13
O S-9
wr -53 • •
b===~f=========:Jr=========·===O=wr=P=-=3=7 k ________ , -WP-20 WP-22 POND NO. S I
S-33
0
wrP-7
0
WP -29 •
WP-30 •
S-36
0
WP-3 7 •
WP-32
WP -3 1 • •
5-29 0
WP -36
•
P'OHO NO . l
Rt SCRVOIR
O'
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SAL T LAKE RE FINERY
RF I REPOR T
LEGEND
0 EXIS TING MON ITO R WELL
• EX ISTING WELL POINT
400'
L----~· c-=i !
SCALE
BENZE NE CONCENTRATI ONS
I N UG/L
WEST FIELD
GROUNDWATER PLUME
FALL 1994
BENZEN E CONC ENT RAT IONS
FIGURE 6.3-3
---------.. ~ ... , .... ,
■ •
l'-'.J .._-__....
EarthFax
i
i s:
I
S-32
Q (NW)
WP-25
• (HD)
S -33
QCM•>
EF-11
0 (H•)
• WP -62
(M O)
PONO HO . J
CHEVRON U.S .A.
SALT LAKE RE FINERY
RFI REPOR T
wrP-9 o'---~ SCll[till! l!081H 1 LEGEND
WP-55
S-13 Q (HO)
Q S-9
WP -53 •I (••>
POND NO . 5
~nc.wo1,i-
0 EXIST I NG MO NITOR WE LL
• EX ISTING WE LL PO INT
<"~ NOT DETEC TED
<••> NOT MEASURED
("I FREE PRODUCT IN WE LL
O' 400'
..=i J
SCALE
TOLUENE CONCE NTR ATIONS
IN UG/L
WES T FIELD
GROUNDWATER PLUME
SPR I NG 1994
TOL UENE CONCENTRA TIONS
---------.......... ~ ,. ,,
■ • l'-#j ...... -.....
FIG UR E 6.3-4 EarthFax
If/
I 11
i
I ~, II
S-33
0
S-32
0
WP-25 •
WFP-5
I
I
I
I
WP-26 • \
WP-28 •
WfP-7
0
WP-29 •
WP-1 6
\
Er-11
0
\~ 5 p7~
WP-;f/_ WP-5 •
O s-31 • • WP-18 WP-19 WP-21 •
WP-20 • Q WfP-3
WP-30 \" WP-31 •
S-36
\\ 0
• WP -62
WP-22
WP-58 •
\~
S-29 0
-\\
WP-36
WP-37 • •
WfP-9Q'--sc~
-\ll~-63
POHO HO. l
•
• WP-42
lwP-55 •
OS-13
0 S-9
:r-53
POND NO. S
RCSCRVOlR
O'
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SAL T LAKE REF INERY
RFI RE POR T
LEGEND
0 EXIST IN G MON I TOR WE LL
• EX ISTING WE LL PO IN T
400' L-___ __ ..----..-. !
SCALE
TOLUENE CONCENTRATIONS
IN UG/L
WEST FIELD
GROUNDWATER PLUME
FAL L 1994
TOLUENE CONCENTRATIONS
FIGURE 6.3 -5
---------r~..,. , .... ,
■ •
~'-#j ...... -......
EarthFax
CHEVRON U.S.A.
SALT LAKE REFlNERY
RFI RE PORT
Chevron Salt Lake Refinery
,..,. I Statistical Back ground
I ◄ I HEAL TH-BASED RISK ASSES SME NT
FIGURE 7.1-1 DEC ISION CHART FOR DE TERMINING PROPOS ED
ACTION ON SOLID WASTE MAN AGEM EN T UN I TS
RF7-_1_-l UC0293.0u-,o 11-04-94
---------.. ~ .. ,., ,.,
■ • ~'--'-' ...... -.......
EarthFax