DSHW-2018-003582 - 0901a068807fad13

Blake Downey, P.G.
Project Hydrogeologist
Div of Waste Manag rrient
and Radation Control
APR 2 0 2018
-W -2,00-003562
41IWASATCH Ner
Mr. Scott Anderson
Executive Director, Utah Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control
195 North 1950 West, 2nd Floor
P.O. Box 144880
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-4880
ENVIRONMENTAL.
April 20, 2018
Project No.: 1673-011G
SUBJECT: Response to Comments
Pepper River Project
3333 West 9000 South
West Jordan, Utah
Mr. Anderson,
On behalf of our client, Aligned Energy, Wasatch Environmental, Inc., is submitting the attached
Response to Comments regarding comments received in an email from the Division of Waste
Management and Radiation Control (DWMRC) personnel on March 22, 2018, and from the March 28,
2018, meeting with DWMRC personnel and Wasatch for the Pepper River property (site).
Please feel free to contact us with any questions, comments, or concerns you may have regarding site.
Best regards,
C.C.: Mr. David Larsen,
2410 WEST CALIFORNIA AVENUE •SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84104
PHONE [phone] • FAX [phone]
Website: www.wasatch-environmentatcom • e-Mail wei@wasatch-environmental com
DEQ - DWMRC Comments
PEPPER RIVER PROJECT RESPONSE TO DWMRC COMMENTS
lWasatch Environmental, Inc., Response
This final response to comments are to be considered an addendum to the "Investigation Activities Report" for the former Fairchild Semiconductor property completed by Wasatch Environmental Inc , dated December 15, 2017
GENERAL COMMENTS
1 Please address groundwater protection by comparing soil sample results to EPA dilution attenuation factor (DAF-20)
values If needed, site specific DAF values can be used
2 Take out the term de minims in the report There are no de minimus quantities for spills and releases under RCRA
For example, in section 1, page 2 change the last paragraph to "Detailed discussion of waste streams and waste
management controls, historical spills and releases and recognized environmental conditions on the subject property are
discussed in Section 4 of this report and in Section 10, Findings and Opinions "
3 Text indicates sludge was identified in the acid waste tank This sludge needs to be removed before submittal of an
environmental covenant (EC) Text also indicates waste was removed from all piping, tanks etc , but this should be verified
4 Please provide a map showing the area(s) that will be included in the environmental covenant
5 At a meeting on April 15, 2017 at the facility it was indicated the solvent vault will be filled with concrete This work will
need to be addressed in a site management plan and before approval of an EC Please modify the document as needed to
include this information
SPECIFIC COMMENTS
1 Please provide searchable Excel files with all the soil vapor and soil data for the solvent tank vault area
2 Please provide a either a map showing sample locations, depth and contaminant concentrations or a cross section with
the same information for the solvent tank vault area and the diesel spill area
DAF-20 values assume a continued source is present, no contaminant reduction occurs in the vadose zone, and that impacts are adjacent to groundwater DAF-20
assumptions are not applicable to the our site given site-specific conditions See additional rationale discussed in the Specific Comments Section, Comment #8 No action
required
De minims is a defined Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) term Additionally Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) documents also use the term de
minims for spills No Action required
As discussed the sludge is really just a thin residue crust of material which contains mostly oil and grease The tanks and residue are scheduled to be removed by and
disposed of off-site by E T Technology witin the next few weeks No Additional Action Required
Please see Attachement 1 for the proposed Environmental Covenant boundary No Additional Action Required
As discussed at the March 28, 2018, meeting with DWMRC personnel, the waste solvent tank pit will be filled with soil and capped with concrete DWMRC requested that the
plans to fill and cap the pit be submited for approval via email prior to the work being completed. DWMRC requested that this work be completed prior to the final approval of
the Environmetal Covenant This work will be included in the Site Management Plan Wasatch will submit the plans to fill and cap the pit for approval prior to completing the
work, and will supervise the completion of this work to verify it would be completed as approved by DWMRC No Additional Action Required
See Attachment 2 for the analytical laboratory supplied Excell files of the soil vapor and soil data collected near the waste solvent tank pit An electronic version of the files will
also be delivered to DWMRC with the electronic copy of this response No Additional Action Required
See Attachement 3 for post maps that depict the diesel spill area and the waste solvent tank pit area No Additional Action Required
8 A significant amount of work including soil excavation, soil venting and sampling was conducted in the diesel spill area
since 1987, and it has been proposed that this area be identified in an environmental covenant Text also indicates the
presence of perched groundwater at the facility, but the proximity of the perched water to the diesel spill area is not indicated
in the report, and groundwater samples have not been collected in the immediate area of the spill Naphthalene was detected
in subsurface soil samples collected in 2016 in the diesel area, with a maximum concentration 10 9 mg/kg This
concentration is between the residential (3 8 mg/kg) and industrial (17 mg/kg) RSLs, but exceeds the DAF-20 groundwater
protection value of 0 01 mg/kg by more than two orders of magnitude Please modify Section 4 8, page 14 and address the
depths of contamination and the soil to groundwater pathway It appears a well may be needed in the immediate area of
diesel spill to determine if a release to groundwater has occurred
9 Based on soil gas results, text indicates a release of PCE under the solvent tank vault area and recommends including
this area in the EC Text also indicates soil samples could not be collected under the tank vault due tank vault location, but
soil vapor samples were collected in the area near the tank to a depth of 82 feet PCE was detected in soil gas at a maximum
concentration of 1,400 pg/m3 at 40 feet below ground surface (bgs) and approximately 80 pg/m3 at 82 feet bgs This data
clearly indicates migration of PCE vapors in the subsurface
Groundwater data has not been collected from the on-site monitoring wells within the last 10 years No Action Required
See Attachement 4 for well boring logs, completion logs, and well development logs for groundwater monitoring wells MW-1, MW-2, and MW-3 See the appropriate logs for
the observed water elevations No Additional Action Required
The Utah Division of Natural Resources (DNR) has classified the area the encompasses the site as Class II drinking water Given this classification, TDS concentrations can range from 501 to 1,000 mg/L See Attachement 5 for a map of the DNR classifications for the Salt Lake Valley Area No Additional Action Required
Several waste piping diagrams and drawings are presented in Attachment 6 However, due to print quality, the overall piping diagram of the facility will be provided in the
electronic version of this response as a CADD file No Additional Action Required
As discussed in the March 28, 2018, meeting with DWMRC personnel, Wasatch concurs with this comment As discussed, Wasatch's concurrence with this statement within
this response is sufficient and the original Investigation Activities Report dated December 15, 2017, will not be edited No Action Required
1 DAF-20 values do not represent the site-specific conditions for reasons stated above
2 As discussed in the March 28, 2018, meeting with DWMRC personnel, perched water was referenced in the several of the past environmental reports provided in the
Phase I ESA The perched water references apply to discussions of water below the building within the fill material located above the native silty soils (not wide spread), and
general discussions regarding the regional geology of the area, not site-specific observations of perched water at the site No perched water was observed in any of the soil
borings completed by Wasatch or documented in the boring logs of the on-site groundwater monitoring wells Therefore, it it Wastach's opinion that perched water is not
present at the site
3 As discussed in the March 28, 2018, meeting with DWMRC perssonnel, Wasatch and DWMRC concurred that impacts to groundwater from the diesel release were
unlikely due to the following reasons in addition to to comments 1 and 2 1 Wasatch obtained soil samples that exhibited SVOC and VOC concentrations in soil below U S
EPA RSL for Industrial and Residential Soil below the remaining impacted soils 2 Wasatch's soil sampling efforts demostrate that within a depth 20 to 30 feet below the
most impacted soils, the soil impacts reduce to concentrations below U S EPA RSLs for Residential Soil This indicates that the impacts are attenuating with depth 3
Depth to groundwater from the deepest soil impacts that exceed regularoty screening levels is approximatley 100 feet, therefore it is unlikely groundwater has been impacted
4 Based on Henry's Law, it is unlikely that vapors that could migrate to the groundwater surface would be at sufficient concentrations to impact groundwater above applicable
regularoty screening levels 4 There are no current documented exposure pathways to the groundwater in the release area No Additional Action Required
As discussed in the March 28, 2018, meeting with DWMRC personnel, Wasatch calculated the required PCE soil gas concentration required to impact soil pore water above
the applicable EPA Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 5 0 ug/L for PCE using the Henries Law Constant See Attachment 7 for the applicable equation used and values
utilized It was calculated that a PCE soil gas concentration of 72,400 ug/m3w0u1d be required to impact soil pore water concentrations to the PCE MCL, which was similar to
the concentration calculated by DWMRC personnel The source area soil gas sample exhibited the highest PCE concentration of 11,000 ug/m3 and the deepest vapor
monitoring well sample exhibited a concentration of 80 ug/m3 at 82 feet bgs Both concentrations are well below required concentration to impact soil pore water above the
PCE MCL, and soil gas concentrations appear to significantly decrease with depth Wasatch and DWMRC personnel agreed that a groundwater monitoring well would not be
required No Additional Action Required
3 Please provide a table showing all groundwater data for the last ten years
4 Please provide groundwater well completion logs What was the depth to first water during drilling and were the wells
screened across first water'? Please also provide logs showing well development data
5 What is the TDS value/quality of the groundwater in this area (Class I, II, III, IV etc )9 The Division acknowledges the
groundwater has been impacted by sulfate from Kennecott operations.
6 ls there a waste piping diagram that shows waste flow and accumulation? Modify Section 4 1 as needed
7 Add a "Section 4 2 1 — Waste Management Conclusions" by adding "Though thousands of gallons of waste acids,
solvents and other chemicals were used at the facility over its 40-year history, these chemicals were managed in tanks and
other containers and properly treated on-site or sent off-site for disposal Based on employee interviews and review of
records it appears that with the exception of occasional spills as described in Section 4 2 and a 2,000 to 4,000-gallon release
from a diesel tank, all acid, solvent and other waste spills and environmental impacts were relatively small compared with the
large amounts of waste managed "
9 a It has been the experience of the Division that downward migration of dense solvent vapors can be a source of
groundwater contamination Dense vapor solvent plumes have been documented at depths over 100 feet at several sites in
Utah Based on the concentration of PCE in soil gas it appears a well is needed as close as possible to the solvent tank vault
to determine if dense vapors have caused groundwater contamination The Division also notes the information in the text
about perched groundwater
10 The current groundwater well system at Fairchild does not appear adequate to determine if releases have occurred in
the area of the solvent tank vault or the diesel spill area The system includes three wells, one upgradient, one cross gradient
and one downgradient The single downgradient well appears to be at least 750 feet from the diesel and solvent release
areas and is currently dry lf it is determined that additional wells are needed as discussed in comments above, the document
should be revised to include long term groundwater monitoring
See the above response
As it has been demonstrated, impacts to groundwater above applicable screening levels are unlikely Therefore, in the March 28, 2018, meeting with DWMRC personnel,
DWMRC requested that the on-site groundwater monitoring wells MW-1, MW-2, and MW-3 be properly abandoned as part of the SMP, but prior to DWMRC approval of the
EC Wasatch will provide oversight of the proper well abandonment activities of the on-site groundwater monitoring wells and all bio-venting wells that remain at the site No
Acditional Action Required
Attachment 1
Proposed Environmental Covenant and Site Management Plan Boundary
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Pepper River Property wE11s13--011G
·~· Detailed Facility and Proposed Environmental Covenant and Site Management Plan Area Map Figure 1
WASATCH
• fNVIRONHENTAL
The use or reuse of this information is restricted to the referenced document unless otherwise authort;,:ed, Wasatch Environmental Copyright 2006
Attachment 2
Requested Native Excel Data Files
****" See Attached CD for a Copy of the Native Excel
Files ******
Attachment 3
Requested Data Post Maps
N
• .
W E .
s 0
0 Boring Location
• Hand-auger Sample Location
Approximate Scale (ft)
25 50 75
***All concentrations are in micrograms per kilogram
100
GP-10
Naphthalene Depth
<2.23 14
<2.34 24
<2.67 39
0
Naphthalene Depth
Naphthalene Depth
4,080 14
5,270 14-Dup
340 23.5
<2.24 47 ~
~WASATCH
• ENVIRONMENTAL
Environmental Science and Engineering
3,400 12
68.0 29
<3.40 35
<3.15 35-Dup
GP-5
Naphthalene Depth
4,450 23
3,490 29
4,100 29-Dup
<2.41 40
GP-9
Naphthalene Depth
55.1 12
10,900 21.5
23.9 34
GP-11
Naphthalene Depth
<2.06 14
<2.23 24
<2.43 39
GP-4
Naphthalene Depth
<2.34 23
<2.95 36
<2.97 36-Dup
<2.04 48
Boring/Hand-auger Location &
Naphthalene in Soil Concentration Ma
Former Fairchild Semiconductor
3333 West 9000 South
West Jordan, Utah
PROJECT NO. DRAWING DATE FIGURE
1673-011A April 4, 2018 1A
-------------------
VMW-5
PCE Ethylbenzene Depth
120 3.1 15 +
Soil Gas Monitoring Well/ODEX Boring Location
Former Fairchild Semiconductor PropertywE11s13.0110
Ethylbenzene Depth
6.2 15
27 40
21 64
11 82
PCE Ethylbenzene Depth
11,000 500 15
Former Waste
Solvent Tank.Pit
+ VMW-2
PCE Ethylbenzene Depth
25 3.7 15
I
,.,.,.._,..., ............,,.,
+ VMW-3
PCE Ethylbenzene Depth
71 3.8 15
~trations are in micrograms per cubic meter Scale: 1 • equals
approximately 17'
2016 Investigation Sub-Surface Soil Gas Sample Location
ODEX BoringNapor Monitoring Well Location & PCE/ I F' 4A
Ethylbenzene Subsurface Soil Gas Concentration Map igure
The use or reuse of this information is restricted to the referenced document unless otherwise authorized. --WASATCH ~ £NVIAONMl:NTAL
Wasatch Environmental Copyright 2006
-------------------Former Fairchild Semiconductor PropertywE11s13.0110
•
•. ....-...-~.,
N MW-2~
VMW-1
Ethylbenzene Acetone Depth +
IVMW-51 +
2016 Investigation Sub-Surface Soil Gas Sample Location
.A.WASATCH ~ EMVIAONME'NTAL
<1.93 <9.66 24
<2.76 61.4 39
<1.79 <8.94 53
<1.91 14.1 68
<1.70 59.3 83
Former Waste
Solvent Tank.Pit
IVMW-31 +
~~trations are in micrograms per kilogram
ODEX BoringNapor Monitoring Well Location &
Subsurface Soil Concentration Map
Scale: 1· equals
approximately 17'
Figure 4B
The use or reuse of this information is restricted to the referenced document unless otherwise authorized.
Wasatch Environmental Copyright 2006
Attachment 4
On-Site Groundwater Monitoring Well Logs
Ii
I (
I
I I
11
I
Attachment 2
Soil Boring Logs
I (
I
1
1
PROJECT NUMBER
115411.C2.ZZ
BORING NUMBER
MW-1 SHEET 1 OF 2
SOIL BORING LOG ChM HILL
PROJECT : Fairchild Semiconductor Monitoring Well Installation LOCATION : 3300 West 9000 South, West Jordan, UT
ELEVATION : 4552.93 feet DRILLING CONTRACTOR : RC Exploration Drilling
DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT USED: BKX-66 Rig with 8-inch OD Hollow Stem Augers
WATER LEVELS : =127 feet below ground surface START : 3-11-97 0830 END : 3-11-97 1500 LOGGER : J. Goddard
DEPTH BELOW SURFACE (FT) STANDARD CORE DESCRIPTION COMMENTS
INTERVAL (FT) PENETRATION
NUMB R & TYPE TEST SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL COLOR, DEPTH OF CASING, DRILUNG RATE,
RECOVERY RESULTS MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE DENSITY, DRILLING FLUID LOSS,
(IN) 6-6'-6.' OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL. STRUCTURE. TESTS, AND INSTRUMENTATION.
(N) MINERALOGY.
Silt (ML), 10YR514 yellowish brown, Dry, firm.
_ Minor rootlets. low plastic, <10 clay, < 5% fine sand _ _ Sandy Silt (ML), yellow tan, dry, firm
_ _ OVM = 0 ppm _ Silty Sand (SM), tan brown, dry, medium dense
— fine grained, subrounded _ _
Sandy Gravel (GP), brown, dry, r minus subround
— Silty Sand with Minor Pea Gravel (SM), tan brown _ dry OVM = 0 ppm _
20 _ — _
_ _ _ Sandy Silt (ML), brown, moist, firm OVM = 0 ppm
Sand and Gravel (SP-GP), brown, dry
_ _ OVM = 0 ppm _
ao _ — ...._ Sandy Silt (ML), brown to olive, dry, stiff OVM = 0 ppm
— — _
_
Gravelly Silt (ML), brown, moist
_
OVM = 0 ppm
_ Silt Sandy Gravel with interbedded silt stringers (GP) Very Hard Drilling, Cuttings Steaming _ yellow brown, dry — _
—
so —
—
Same as above
_
OVM = 0 ppm _
80 _
_
Sandy Silt (ML), brown, dry, stiff _
_ Gravel with alternating zones of silty sand
OVM = 0 ppm _
OVM = 0 ppm _ Very Hard Drilling, Cuttings Steaming _ — ay be cemente zones M d _
100 _ Same as above — OVM = 0 ppm _
— Sandy silt (ML), brown, slightly moist, very stiff _ OVM = 0 ppm _
— _
_ _ _
Same as above
—
P: \ 115411\C2 \ SbIrnwl 4/17/97
PROJECT NUMBER
1 1541 1.C2.ZZ
BORING NUMBER
MW-1 SHEET 2 OF 2
SOIL BORING LOG CKM HILL
PROJECT : Fairchild Semiconductor Monitoring Well Installation LOCATION : 3300 West 9000 South, West Jordan, UT
ELEVATION : 4552.93 feet DRILLING CONTRACTOR : RC Exploration Drilling
DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT USED: BKX-66 Rg with 8-inch OD Hollow Stem Augers
WATER LEVELS : -127 feet below ground surface START : 3-11-97 0830 END : 3-11-97 1500 LOGGER : J. Goddard
DEPTH BELOW SURFACE (FT) STANDARD CORE DESCRIPTION COMMENTS
INTERVAL (FT) PENETRATION
TEST
RESULTS
SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COLOR,
MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE DENSITY,
OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL STRUCTURE,
MINERALOGY.
DEPTH OF CASING, DRILLING RATE,
DRILUNG FLUID LOSS,
TESTS, AND INSTRUMENTATION.
NUMB R & TYPE
RECOVERY
(IN) 6*-6•-6
(N)
_
-
_
140
-
_
180 _
180 _
-
200_
220
-
Same as above w/ - 2-5% rounded pea gravel _
Gravel with silty sand matrix (GP), brown, dry, dense _
_
_
Sand with gravel (SW), brown, wet, med. dense
_
END BORING AT 145 FEET
_
—
--
-
—
—
_
OVM = 0 ppm
Very Hard Drilling, Cuttings Steaming
May be cemented zones
Groundwater encountered at approx. 138'
_
_
_
_
_
7
_
—
_
—
—
_
P: 115411 C2 \ Stotmwl 4/17/97
1
1
1
1
1
PROJECT NUMBER
115411.C222
BORING NUMBER
MW-2 SHEET I OF 2
SOIL BORING LOG CHMHILL
PROJECT : Fairchild Semiconductor Monitoring Well Installation LOCATION : 3300 West 9000 South, West Jordan, UT
ELEVATION : 4532.29 DRILLING CONTRACTOR : RC Exploration Drilling
DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT USED: BKX-66 Rig with 8-inch OD Hollow Stem Augers
WATER LEVELS : =110 feet below ground surface START : 3-12-97 0930 END : 3-14-97 1535 LOGGER : J. Kraus
DEPTH BELOW SURFACE (FT) STANDAFID CORE DESCRIPTION COMMENTS
INTERVAL (FT) PENETRATION
NUMB R & TYPE TEST SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COLOR, DEPTH OF CASING, DRILLING RATE,
RECOVERY RESULTS MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE DENSITY, DRILLING FLUID LOSS,
(IN) 8r-8'-6' OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL STRUCTURE, TESTS, AND INSTRUMENTATION.
(N) MINERALOGY.
Topsoil Organic Clay
_
Sandy Silt (ML), yellow tan, dry, firm
-
OVM = 0 ppm
Encountered large boulder at 9'
- _
_ _ OVM = 0 ppm
20
-
Same as above —
_
_
A few rocks at 23'
_ _
OVM = 0 ppm gravel and cobble at 26'-29'
- Same as above _
_ _ OVM = 0 ppm
40 _
-
Same as above with some gravel becoming
darker, mottled _
OVM = 0 ppm
OVM = 0 ppm
_ - Very Hard Drilling, Cuttings Steaming
_ _ Rocks at 50 getting larger and thicker
- Clayey Silt (ML) with sand and gravel, brown, soft _
Very hard drilling through cobble
60 _ _ OVM = 0 ppm _
- Silty Clay interbedded with sand, gravel, and cobble _ Removed rods, plug wom in half
_ - Very hard drilling through cobble
-
ao _ Same as above
_
__ OVM = 0 ppm _
_ - Very hard drilling through cobble
- _
_ Sandy Clay, brown, moist, soft _ OVM = 0 ppm
Very Hard Drilling, Cuttings Steaming
_ - May be cemented zones
100 _ Same as above _ OVM = 0 ppm _
_ _ Very hard drilling through cobble
- Sand and Gravel _ OVM = 0 ppm
_ - Very hard drilling through cobble
_ _ Same as above, wet OVM -0 ppm _
P: \ 115411 \ C2 \ Sblmw2 4/17/97
1
PROJECT NUMBER
115411.C2.ZZ
BORING NUMBER
MW-2 SHEET 2 OF 2
SOIL BORING LOG CHMHILL
PROJECT : Fairchild Semiconductor Monitoring Well Installation LOCATION : 3300 West 9000 South, West Jordan, UT
ELEVATION : 4532.29
EQUIPMENT
DRILLING CONTRACTOR : RC Exploration Drilling
DRILLING METHOD AND USED: BKX-66 Rig with 8-inch OD Hollow Stem Augers
WATER LEVELS : =110 feet below ground surface START : 3-12-97 0930 END : 3-14-97 1535 LOGGER : J. Kraus
DEPTH BELOW SURFACE (FT) STANDARD CORE DESCRIPTION COMMENTS
INTERVAL (FT) PENETRATION
TEST
RESULTS
SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COLOR,
MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE DENSITY,
OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL STRUCTURE,
MINERALOGY.
DEPTH OF CASING, DRILLING RATE,
DRILUNG FLUID LOSS,
TESTS, AND INSTRUMENTATION.
NUMB R & TYPE
RECOVERY
(IN) 6°-6°-6
(N)
—
—
_
140
—
_
—
160
—
_
—
180 _
—
_
—
200._
—
—
—
220_
—
—
—
END OF BORING AT 125.5 FEET _
—
—
—
_
—
—
—
_
—
_
—
_
—
_
—
_
_
_
—
_
—
_
—
Very Hard Drilling, Cuttings Steaming May be cemented zones
_
1154111C2 SbIrnw2 4/17/97
PROJECT NUMBER
115411.C2.ZZ -..
BORING NUMBER
MW-3 SHEET 1 OF 2
SOIL BORING LOG CHMHILL
PROJECT : Fairchild Semiconductor Monitoring Well Installation LOCATION : 3300 West 9000 South, West Jordan, UT
ELEVATION : 4531.28 DRILLING CONTRACTOR : RC Exploration Drilling
DRILLING METHOD AND EQUIPMENT USED: BKX-66 Rig with 8-inch OD Hollow Stem Augers
WATER LEVELS : =110 feet below ground surface START : 3-17-97 0821 END : 3-17-97 1300 LOGGER : J. Goddard
DEPTH BELOW SURFACE (FT) STANDARD CORE DESCRIPTION COMMENTS
INTERVAL (F1) PENETRATION
NUMB R & TYPE TEST SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COLOR, DEPTH OF CASING. DRILLING RATE,
RECOVERY RESULTS MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE DENSITY, DRILLING FLUID LOSS,
(IN) 8'-6*-6 OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL STRUCTURE. TESTS, AND INSTRUMENTATION.
(N) MINERALOGY.
Asphalt and Road Base
- _ _
Sandy Silt (ML) with clay, yellow tan, dry, firm OVM = 0 ppm
_ _ 1' gravel zone at 13 _
20 — Same as above — OVM = 0 ppm —
Gravelly Silt (ML), brown, dry, dense OVM = 0 ppm
_ - Gravelly from 27 to 30, large cobble at 28' _
_ Clayey Silt (ML), light yellow brown, moist, stiff _ OVM = 0 ppm _
As above with gravel OVM = 0 ppm 40 — — Gravelly from 38' —
Very Hard Drilling, Cuttings Steaming
_ Same as above - Rocks at 50 getting larger and thicker _ '
OVM = 0 ppm
60 __ OVM = 0 ppm _
_ _ _
Clayey Silt with interbedded sand and gravel
_ _ _
Very hard drilling through cobble
80 _ Same as above — OVM = 0 ppm _
Very hard drilling through cobble
_ Sandy Clay, brown, moist, soft _ OVM = 0 ppm _
Very Hard Drilling, Cuttings Steaming
_ _ May be cemented zones _
100 Same as above _ OVM = 0 ppm _
- _ Very hard drilling through cobble _ Soft at 115, may be water
- _ OVM = 0 ppm _
Same as above, wet OVM = 0 ppm
_
P: 116411 \ C2 \ Sblmw3 4/17/97
PROJECT NUMBER
115411.C2.ZZ
BORING NUMBER
MW-3 SHEET 2 OF 2
SOIL BORING LOG Cia 1 HILL
PROJECT : Fairchild Semiconductor Monitoring Well Installation LOCATION : 3300 West 9000 South, West Jordan, UT
ELEVATION : 4531.28
EQUIPMENT
DRILLING CONTRACTOR : RC Exploration Drilling
DRILLING METHOD AND USED: BKX-66 Rig with 8-inch OD Hollow Stem Augers
WATER LEVELS : =110 feet below ground surface START : 3-17-97 0821 END : 3-17-97 1300 LOGGER : J. Goddard
DEPTH BELOW SURFACE (FT) STANDARD CORE DESCRIPTION COMMENTS
INTERVAL (Fr) PENETRATION
TEST
RESULTS
SOIL NAME, USCS GROUP SYMBOL, COLOR,
MOISTURE CONTENT, RELATIVE DENSITY,
OR CONSISTENCY, SOIL STRUCTURE,
MINERALOGY.
DEPTH OF CASING, DRILLING RATE,
DRILLING FLUID LOSS,
TESTS, AND INSTRUMENTATION.
NUMB R & TYPE
RECOVERY
(IN) 6*-6*-6-
(N)
—
—
140
—
—
160 _
—
180
—
—
200
—
_
—
_
220_
—
—
—
Sand with Gravel, yellow brown, wet, dense
END OF BORING AT 122 FEET —
—
_
—
—
--
—
—
_
_
--
-,
—
_
—
--
_
_
—
Very Hard Drilling, Cuttings Steaming
May be cemented zones at 122 feet _
_
_
_
_
—
_
_
_
_
_
PA115411 \ C2 \ Sblmw3 4/17/97
1 I
lf
1
dunent 3
Well Completion
WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
BER BORING NU
MW-1
LOGGER : J. Goddard START : 3/11/97 END : 3/18/97
3- Wellhead protection cover type
a) concrete pad dimensions
b) posts
4" steel protective casing w/locking cap
3.x3'x6" slope away from well
(4) 3" steel comer posts
PROJECT NUMBER
115411.C2.ZZ
WELL NAME
MW-1
PROJECT : Fairchild Semiconductor Monitoring Well Installation
DRILLING CONTRACTOR. RC Exploration Drilling
WATER LEVELS 131 88' below top of casing
LOCATION : 9000 South 3300 West, West Jordan, Utah
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACTOR : RC Exploration Dnlling
3b
119'
122
142'
NOT TO SCALE
1- Ground elevation at well
same as TOC
2" sch 40 PVC, 10 lengths, flush
threaded joints w/ rubber 0-ring seals
2" sch 40 PVC 0.01-inch slot flush threaded
w/ 0-ring seals & 6 long threaded PVC end cap
16-30 clean washed CSSI
(11) 50# bags, 550#s
Pure Gold Medium Bentonite
(51) 50# bags
Surge/Bail 16 gallons (10 well volumes)
2 hrs
16 gallons
Comments See Soil Boring Log for MW-1 for lithologic information.
See Sampling Log for MW-1 for development and sampling information.
2- Top of casing elevation
a) measuring point elevation
0014HILL
4552.93
4555.54
4- Diameter/type of well casing
5- Type/slot size of screen
6- Type screen filter
a) Quantity used
7- Type of seal
a) Quantity used
Development method
Development time
Estimated purge volume
P: \ 115411 \ C2 \ Wcdrnwl 4/17/97
LOCATION : 9000 South 3300 West, West Jordan, Utah
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACTOR • RC Exploration Drilling
START : 3/14/97 END : 3/18/97 LOGGER : J. Goddard
PROJECT : Fairchild Semiconductor Monitoring Well Installation
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: RC Exploration Drilling
WATER LEVELS : 112,26 below top of casing
P: 115411 \ C21%/cdmw2 4/17/97
WELL NAME
MW-2
PROJECT NUMBER
115411.C222
BORING NUMBER
MW-2
WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM
NM=
CHM HILL
1- Ground elevation at well
2- Top of casing elevation
a} measuring point elevation
4- Diameter/type of well casing
5- Type/slot size of screen
6- Type screen filter
a) Quantity used
7- Type of seal
a) Quantity used
Development method
Development time
Estimated purge volume
4532.29
4534.89
same as TOC
4" steel protective casing w/locking cap
3)(3'W slope away from well
(2) 3" steel corner posts
2" sch 40 PVC, 10 lengths, flush
threaded joints w/ rubber 0-ring seals
2" sch 40 PVC 0.01-inch slot flush threaded
w/ 0-nng seals & 6" long threaded PVC end cap
16-30 clean washed CSSI
(10) 50# bags, 500#s
Pure Gold Medium Bentonite
(50) 50# bags
Surge/Bail 27 gallons (12 well volumes)
3 hrs
27 gallons
3- Wellhead protection cover type
a) concrete pad dimensions
b) posts
NOT TO SCALE
3b
103.5
124'
20'
8"
100
Comments See Soil Boring Log for MW-2 for lithologic information.
See Sampling Log for MW-2 for development and sampling information.
PROJECT : Fairchild Semiconductor Monitoring Well Installation
DRILLING CONTRACTOR RC Exploration Drilling
WATER LEVELS : 112.06 below top of casing START . 3/17/97 END : 3/18/97 LOGGER : J. Goddard
LOCATION 9000 South 3300 West, West Jordan, Utah
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACTOR : RC Exploration DiiIhng
WELL NAME
MW-3
PROJECT NUMBER
115411.C2.ZZ
BORING NUMBER
MW-3
WELL COMPLETION DIAGRAM CHMHILL
7- Type of seal
a) Quantity used
Development method
Development time
Estimated purge volume
Pure Gold Medium Bentonite
(52) 50# bags
Surge/Bail 18 gallons (11 well volumes)
3 hrs
18 gallons
1- Ground elevation at well
same as TOC
3- Wellhead protection cover type 4" steel protective casing w/locking cap
a) concrete pad dimensions 1'x1'x6" slope away from well into asphalt
b) posts (2) 3" steel corner posts
2" sch 40 PVC, 10' lengths, flush
threaded joints w/ rubber 0-ring seals
2" sch 40 PVC 0.01-inch slot flush threaded
w/ 0-ring seals & long threaded PVC end cap
16-30 clean washed CSSI
(9) 50# bags, 450#s
Comments See Soil Boring Log for MW-3 for lithologic information.
See Sampling Log for MW-3 for development and sampling information.
2- Top of casing elevation
a) measuring point elevation
4- Diameter/type of well casing
5- Type/slot size of screen
6- Type screen filter
a) Quantity used
NOT TO SCALE
3b
99 5
120'
95 5
4531 28
4533.75
P: \ 115411 \ C2 \ Wcdmw3 4/17/97
Attachment 4
Well Development/Sampling Logs
1 ':ICOÑUoR DSAPL1NGI - • 1,
Organic Vapor (OV) OV OV
Well ID: ki1/43 Background O Cover Casing
Water Level (WL) Data:
Total Depth of Well /tic
Measured
Date 3-U1 6i1 Time i WL i3l igg Point Used -rot
Observations: Calculated Purge Volume: Pita 5-0 cuum..
Purge Data:
Volume Purged Ito Stop Time /7 Og Date 5-(-7-11 Start Time 1 13
6-tzetti
i 1 - i_re
C1A-E
N, ' .
i G.L L t ; .iltt.:4; 1
t ' ., .._ :: ..;
miu s .. . .
15-13 0 CLIIL 13,12. goo uAQ ly1.0j._
13-3 -2- 2 13i 53.,,--- loo i i If
I ,r,5-- LI gig 12-c.V 1 ( / I
it,20,--t 13, Li gig6 L-2- CO f t 1 t
itvig '5) t3t3 iteV`I ( 2_00 i ll (J1: Gliro
ito 2-1 P ( 4 g,gi (-2-60 it ff _
11 1 -;, 1. g,e2- 1-2--w d, --1-,..LL610 ,4
1(0s-14 ILI ( -3,3 2, go (7-0e9 , 1 „
I -709 1(0 13, `i ii, 71 i -2-to it
Sample Data:
Sample ID' Mu-) - Sample Time 17 2-0 Sample Date 3 H --ct
Sample Analysis 30-2-1 T P ?J-L-,TÍ4 bbLi j ciacja, AV414.142
QA/QC samples QA/QC Analysis —
Final Parameters: Temp 1-;) Y pH 77 SC 2--au
Appearance (Color, Turbidity, Odor, etc.) .51- Jjß ittotAiNA-
Comments/Observations --A-*
SLCAWFORM
Previous WL Date Measured
Purge Method Purge Water Container(s)
Stop Time // / Volume Purged 6...--11 j
rp--L (rox-A Purge Water Container(s)
OV OV
Well ID: ill (0 Background Cover Casing
Water Level (WL) Data:
Previous WL Date Measured Total Depth of Well l 2- (a -7-7 12.3e7a,
Measured
Date T_me 20L WI- 82,ZL Point Used TD L
Observations: Calculated Pqrge Volume: / tie-1 5 t. 51, otmoto
Purge Data:
Date 3-ig --ell Start Time 0 g/3
Purge Method KL-4.11A-
t t t • H, , (Pin- usxill ' t ,4-:, omen , - ,
0 12, 6 0,90 13ov u -1AII:4,4 lAixtrk 0/ twei
0 g2-g Z t2.15" c,9 I 1 3 e„ it st
Og -57 t__I 12- i .6 8,q0 1 -3 co 1 ,
0 5.C5- IZ, (0 2, 07 •1 '-b.) At )1
01("2 g (2- t g S, 79 /(100 ft ft
07 3 / /0 izig g,73 /.,--,,, t I I I
nqq(0 I a (S i 0 8,7'1 plot, it li
015'1 114 l2 _11 -17,IP-1 1'150 It )1
tOt6k 1(7 r3g 0 g. 1,6
// I I -a.-.1 1$,k, q/5-Z /GOD , i
Sample Data:
Sample ID - Sample Time Iízo Sample Date 3
Sample Analysis g°2-t Pi4) šÛ , 10 ,qte-1° C kieu:k kk•
QA/QC samples A) Á QAJQC Analysis /OA-
Final Parameters: Temp f 3 pH SC /Goo
Appearance (Color, Turbidity, Odor, etc.) t. I 4)-Abit9 irtotavt
Comments/Observations iala Attulg/14 tA/NtA46'14/10"
SILIGYMW
Organic Vapor (0V)
DO
Organic Vapor (OV) OV OV
Well ID: IA k133 Background D Cover 0 Casing
Water Level (WL) Data:
Previous WL ,__ Date Measured Total Depth of Well :42...Z. + 5-
Measured
Date 3-- t 8 -c‘ 7 Time (-2-3 I WI- ( I L,0(., Point Used
Observations: Calculated Purge Volume: g .
Purge Data:
Date 'g k2S q Start Time 12 LI c
Purge Method Purge Water Container(s) et tue---Ls-t5 . -
Stop Time / -2- 1 Volume Purged /034
. __.,
ti :,,
•
'.. - - -1
il" 1LE?::'6C5
,, ;
, , ' ,
',, - .1,-
41,
-, , , -'! r -. ... .
. • .' - ?... . o en ;-, :.. ' ....., . :
12-11c- 0 riz;',,-f ei(Liz ft,03 r JJU sLi4,04,2
9 , 6-1 z..703 A. tk
1.39,14 1 Li , G., g,g5- -3 (co ,( 0
i 3 Liti ci i LA t 2 gs --o ---2_01.
I 2._ ici f6" g,i/Li c.-fico ,i, --rw4,6 Gt.,
/1-1 ( -b i 5— IN 1--S 9',32 3 ,..„-?),(7? 0
(92.6t 1 g P-i , -1 .gf La 3 5.---1 i I I I
_
Sample Data:
Sample ID' MAJ.) - 3 Sample Time / Sample Date _1 (-1-1 7
Sample Analysis 3 ‘') 2 k 14). ptt, Ckl OAS j
QA/QC samples
Final Parameters: Temp / pH gs (12- SC 3S1,C) DO
Appearance (Color, Turbidity, Odor, etc.) 94, '6),A Cct9
Comments/Observations_rfit LAQ
SLC/GWFORM
QA/QC Analysis
Attachment 5
DNR Groundwater Classification (TDS) Map
~
~
L.oc.ltlcliolSl...:,Ylvea
UI'.UIOXlLOCICALJtlll','1:V ·-· l'-U.,0,,-olNOI __ _
0
0
C
;,,
:<I
:c
~
0
C
:z
-l
,.
~,~·\J\ . ,,
--d'"
~
-'""M•i
"'
> -:z ~h -~??",
l"l<lj9dion:~T,..._~c,r Claum:Nartll-1983
V,
S9f,etOld;ci.tl11M Geog,aj,IICINl..,.fnlmUW.~~c.n..200I Olgllal~t,y~E.......,_Sm!Hom
,~,_'IIERSE
+·
SOllel:75,000
.!'"-.r r
.. r. __
,;
"10 v 1-r
-1 " 1,
.,-
PLATE 1
TOTAL-DISSOLVED-SOLIDS-CONCENTRATION MAP FOR THE BASIN-FILL
AQUIFER, SALT LAKE VALLEY, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH
by
Janae Wallace and Mike L<FMI
-· ~r ....... s...,,o,..,11o..,..,.w
~ .. -d --.... -_ ... __ .. ...,.,.
'r
·o"C•"'!o"
'i,~,'11""
,..
(F>
}/ >
-....\
(>
,;:
>
~
ca"'!t ___ J:il!I•-Q,tton"l.ood ..,--
Explanation
Total-Otuolvecl-Solconcentrallon
mg/I.
-Olo250
-251to500
\0011112000
0 20011o3000
-l0011o10,000
->10,000
-e.dn)(ll;(nol-lynd)
-U..olaqiat~oldisKW9d.olid1
--.-U.S. EmoironnwnleJ PnMdoon Agency STORET data --.ouse
--u.S.G"'*'gocal~
• Populelioncanter
-W11'8rboay
'rtumberndlcetHTOSaonewitN!lonlnll'QI\..
Attachment 6
Waste Piping Diagrams
·-.,:,:.·'.·.:~ .. ~~.-~. ·--·
oo,i-'sss <io9) 9L05l! VNOZl~V 'XIN3~Hd ·ovo~.)!0V813V'IVO .lSV3 0~6i
. Sl:BNNv"'ld . Stl33Nl9N3 5.D31.IH:ltl\f ;;,
S3.LV1J9ssv Vllm:ION31 :v -~3.L3d ~,
" t!-~ .. ,_., > : ~ .j ~ ! -:..,l >
.ii \--b.. ~ l ·-> \-~ ~,~ ... I:.
~ X'f' !;" l ~ ~ i:i .. ~ 1~ I
J~;i ~ ., 1 I" j .. ,t r> l i :,({
L-_1_
. :,[_
·,
~-!
t 1 1~ ... . ... '2 ~ ~ -l;;t . Ill I" ' l ._. I
* ~~
"' ..
,•ii.· ,.. .
·.··· .. ·.
. ·I
HVJ.O . NYOUcir .lS3M; ·'. . . HJ.ri·os : 0006 'M cccc ·.·. I • • • ' '
NOIJ.Vl:IOdl:IOO 1:10.I.OOONOOIW3S 1VNOI.I.VN . ·. ·)!I sow
. ,-
!
·,\,
.> •• ·r-..
··r -·
\' ..
I ,.
I 1·. ,)
11 ,.
f.
I'
!. :,
I•
}
1 · ., r :1 . [·,.,: ..
!
t ·
i
. -~.
·:·., .. :·.·
,\..,
\..
·.~.-.' :~_.:,. .-····"·"
.,. '!•
"L: .
' ·.,
. ·.
.. :~•.Ott ::~ ....
** See Attached CD for a Copy of the Waste Piping
CADD Files **
Attachment 7
Soil Vapor Impacts to Soil Pore Water Calculations
Potential for Chemicals to Migrate to Groundwater
Compounds in the vadose zone partition between soil pore water, soil gas, and soil or rock.
Chemicals in the vadose zone can migrate downwards, and potentially affect groundwater quality.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has developed a screening methodology for evaluating
this concern (EPA, 1996). The approach is to estimate the concentration of compounds in soil
pore water. It is then assumed that there is no attenuation or dilution as chemicals migrate
downwards through the vadose zone (this constitutes a worst-case assumption for this site).
Compound concentrations are assumed to be reduced by a factor of 20 within the aquifer
because of dilution and attenuation; given the nature of the aquifer, this is also a highly
conservative estimate.
The relationship between soil gas and soil pore water concentrations can be estimated using the
Henry's Law Constant:
H' = (Ca x 0.001 m3/0/Cw
where:
H' = Unitless Henry's Law Constant
Ca = Concentration in soil gas (pg/m3)
Cw = Concentration in soil pore water (pg/l)
This equation is the same as in EPA's Soil Screening Guidance Equation 18 in Part 2 (EPA,
1996), with a units conversion factor included to account for different units in the soil gas and
pore water terms.1 This equation can be rearranged, and with the addition of a
dilution/attenuation factor (DAF), yields a target soil gas concentration:
Ca-t = Cw-t X 1,000 l/m3 x H' x DAF
where:
Ca-t = Target soil gas concentration (pg/m3)
Cw-t = Target concentration in soil pore water (pg/l)
The target soil pore water concentration was set equal to the compound's primary maximum
contaminant level (MCL) where available. The MCL is a compound's drinking water standard. In
the absence of an MCL (EPA, 2013a).
Therefore: Ca_t = Cw_t (5.0 pg/l) x 1,000 l/m3 x H' (0.724) x DAF (20)
Ca-t = 72,400 pg/m3
The traditional formulation for evaluating effects to goundwater in the Soil Screening Guidance relies on
bulk soil data. However, identifying and sampling the location of the highest remaining soil concentrations
at depth following corrective action is cost prohibitive. This is necessary for confirmation sampling. Use
of soil gas data is both theoretically rigorous and practical.