The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDERR-2024-010977FIELD SAMPLING WORK PLAN Reilly Tar Provo, Utah UTD009087644 September, 2021 i FIELD SAMPLING WORK PLAN Reilly Tar Provo, Utah UTD009087644 Utah Department of Environmental Quality Division of Environmental Response and Remediation September, 2021 Approved: _______________________________________ Date: ______ Michael Swistak, UDEQ Project Manager Approved: _______________________________________ Date: ______ Tom Daniels, UDEQ Site Assessment Section Manager Approved: _______________________________________ Date: ______ Martin McComb, Federal On-Scene Coordinator, EPA Region 8 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 OBJECTIVES 1 3.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1 3.1 SITE LOCATION 1 3.2 SITE HISTORY 1 3.3 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS 2 3.4 PHYSICAL CONDITIONS 2 3.4.1 Hydrogeology 3 3.4.2 Hydrology 4 3.4.3 Geology 4 3.4.4 Meteorology 4 3.5 PRELIMINARY PATHWAY ANALYSIS 5 3.5.1 Waste Source Characterization 5 3.5.2 Soil Exposure Pathway Analysis 5 3.5.3 Soil Vapor Intrusion Pathway 5 3.5.4 Groundwater Exposure Pathway Analysis 6 3.5.5 Surface Water Pathway Analysis 6 3.5.6 Air Exposure Pathway Analysis 6 5.0 FIELD PROCEDURES 6 5.1 CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS 7 5.1.1 Schedule 7 5.1.2 Safety 7 5.1.3 Site Access and Logistics 7 5.2 SAMPLE LOCATIONS 8 5.3 SAMPLING METHODS 8 5.3.1 Soil Sample Collection 8 5.3.2 Mobile Field Laboratory and Field XRF analysis 8 5.3.3 Sub-sampling 9 5.4 INVESTIGATION DERIVED WASTE 9 6.0 FIELD QUALITY CONTROL AND ASSURANCE PROCEDURE 9 7.0 CHAIN OF CUSTODY 9 8.0 DATA REDUCTION, VALIDATION, AND REPORTING 9 9.0 REFERENCES 9 iii LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES AND APPENDICES FIGURES: Figure 1: Site Location Map Figure 2: Site Map Figure 3: Proposed Sample Location Map TABLES: Table 1: Site Conceptual Model Table 2: Data Quality Objectives Table 3: Sample Locations, Descriptions, and Rationale Table 4: Sample Analysis Checklist Table 5: Required Bottles and Containers APPENDICES: Appendix A: Site Health and Safety Plan Appendix B: Consent for Access to Property Form 1 Field Sampling Work Plan Reilly Tar- UTD009087644 Under authority of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986, and in accordance with the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), the Utah Department of Environmental Quality (UDEQ), Division of Environmental Response and Remediation (DERR) has prepared this work plan as part of a Site Investigation (SI) of the Reilly Tar (SEMS EPA ID number UTD009087644) (herein referred to as the “Site”) in Provo, Utah County, Utah. This SI will be conducted under a cooperative agreement between the DERR and the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8 (EPA). This work plan describes sampling procedures that will be used to identify Site contaminants and potential impacts to the surrounding community. The objectives of this work plan are as follows: ●Characterize the location and spread of contamination originating at the site, specifically in the southern portion of the property. ●Determine concentrations of contamination at the site. ●Evaluate human health and environmental targets associated with the soil and groundwater exposure pathways, and determine if these targets are being exposed. The Site is a former coal tar processing facility located on the lot at 2555 South Industrial Parkway in Provo, Utah County, Utah (Figure 1). All buildings and structures have been removed from the Site with some foundations remaining. The site covers approximately 31.84 acres. The northern portion of the Site is dry, and bounded by the Ironton Canal which eventually drains into Utah Lake to the west. The southern portion of the Site is a seasonal wetland. The eastern, western, and southern bounds of the Site are other industrial properties. The facility was in operation from 1924 to 2002. Former structures at the site included two pole barns, separation, condenser, storage tanks, wastewater biotreatment system, and an evaporation pond. As a result of these operations, soil, sediment, groundwater, and surface water on-site has been contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), and metals. Products produced at the Site include creosote oil, electrode binder pitch and various other oil and tar products. Waste products generated at the Site include polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH’s), phenols, benzene, cyanides, and sulfides (McComb, 2017). From 1982 to 1985 spills cleanup waste material was buried on Site in windrows. Much of this material remains in place on the Site (August Mack, 2003). The Resource Conservation and 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 OBJECTIVES 3.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 3.1 SITE LOCATION 3.2 SITE HISTORY 2 Field Sampling Work Plan Reilly Tar- UTD009087644 Recovery Act (RCRA) program administered by the Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control (DWMRC) has regulated the site since the early 1990’s. The property owner was preparing to do a risk assessment at the site when the owners of the property went bankrupt in May 2016. The Site was a coal tar distillery from 1924 to 2002. The Site was initially developed by the Republic Creosote Company in 1924 (ERM, 2009). The Republic Creosote Company changed their name to Reilly Tar and Chemical in 1961, which became Reilly Industries in 1989. A Preliminary Assessment Plus completed by EPA for the Site in 1993 identified 10 solid wasate management units (SWMUs) at the Site (Morrison Knudsen, 1993). Reilly entered into a Stipulation and Consent Agreement (Consent Agreement) with the DSHW on November 13, 1996 that required Reilly to investigate and perform correct action, as necessary, for the 10 SWMUs identified at the Site. Reilly discontinued production operation at the Site until early 2001 and decommissioned the facility during 2002. In September of 2005, Arsenal Capital Partners acquired Reilly Industries and in July of 2006, Arsenal merged Reilly with another company to form Vertellus. Vertellus removed all existing structures from the Site during 2006. Currently only concrete foundations remain at the Site. A phase II RFI Supplemental Work Plan was completed by August Mack Environmental on March 6, 2007. A follow up Phase II Groundwater and Surface Water Monitoring Report was completed by August Mack on April 28, 2010. A Revised Risk Assessment Work Plan was completed by URS Corporation in December, 2012. On July 18, 2011 a Risk Assessment Workplan was submitted by URS Corporation to the Utah Division of Solid & Hazardous Waste. A follow up Risk Assessment was submitted by URS Corporation in June of 2013. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was completed by Enviro Assessment P.C. on March 24, 2014. Findings of these reports all indicate the presence of contamination in the soil and groundwater. However, no remedial work has been done at the site at this point. In June of 2017 a Superfund Technical Assessment and Response Team (START) and Emergency and Rapid Response Services (ERRS) conducted a removal site inspection with UDEQ. Sitewide contamination including PAH's and volatile organic compounds (VOC's) was observed, in some places reaching deeper than 13 feet. These contaminants were solid in the eastern portion of the Site, but aqueous and mobile in the western portion of the Site, leading to concern that these contaminants could flow into the Ironton canal and discharge into Provo Bay. Numerous asbestos containing tiles were also found at the site (McComb, 2017). In November of 2017 EPA personnel oversaw a limited removal action at the site. A flood resistant liner between the Site and Ironton canal was installed to prevent Site contamination from flowing into the canal. Approximately 2,000 cubic yards of soil was removed from the northern corner of the site, and transferred to an in-situ landfarm on the eastern perimeter of the site. Runoff controls were established around the transported soil. Additionally, 1,780 pounds of asbestos containing tiles were removed and properly disposed of off-site. Lastly the entire area 3.3 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS 3 Field Sampling Work Plan Reilly Tar- UTD009087644 was graded to ensure that it drains southward, erosion control features were installed across the Site, and the entire area was re-seeded (Giggleman, 2018). Continuing monitoring of the landfarm and established groundwater wells was planned to assess the effectiveness of the landfarm, and ensure that contamination is remaining on the property. Six samples were collected from the soil that was placed in an in-situ landfarm. RT-SS-003 and RT-SS-006 were analyzed for metals. RT-SS-001 and RT-SS-004 were analyzed for VOA's. RT- SS-002 and RT-SS-005 were analyzed for Semi-VOA's and PAH's. Landfarm samples exceeded the EPA's Industrial Soil RSL for Arsenic, Nickel, Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Benzo(b)fluoranthene), Benzo(g,h,i)perylene, Benzo(k)fluoranthene, Chrysene, Bibenzo(a,h)anthracene, Dibenzofuran, Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene, N-nitrosodiphenylamine, and Naphthalene. Additionally, 66 other non-volatile compounds were detected at fairly high concentrations. Additional sampling was scheduled annually, but was not able to be completed as planned. 31 monitoring wells were installed around, across, and adjacent to the site by Vertellus Specialties Inc. in 2009 (URS, 2011). Twelve of those wells were sampled in November of 2017 to assess the quantities of contamination in the groundwater at the site (Figure 2). Samples were analyzed for metals, VOA's, semi-VOA's, PAH's, and non-volatile contaminants. Monitoring well samples exceeded the 2020 SCDM Benchmark Values for Arsenic, Cobalt, Thallium, Benzene, Ethylbenzene, 2-Methylnapthalene, 2,4-Dimethylphenol, 4-Methylphenol, Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Dibenzofuran, Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene, Naphthalene, Phenanthrene and Phenol. 96 other non-volatile compounds were detected in the monitoring well samples as well. Thirteen of the monitoring wells around and across the property were sampled in May of 2018. The same analytes were assessed for. In 2018 the following analytes were present at concentrations that exceed 2020 SCDM benchmarks: Arsenic, Thallium, Benzene, Ethylbenzene, Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Benzo(k)fluoranthene, Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene, Naphthalene, 4-Methylnaphthalene, 2,4-Dimethylphenol, 4- Methylphenol and Dibenzofuran. Additionally, nearly 200 non-volatile compounds were detected in monitoring well samples in 2018. In April of 2018 the indoor air at a guard room across the road from the Site was tested to determine if chlorinated solvents from the contaminated groundwater at the site were traveling and volatilizing into structures located on the adjacent property. A Summa canister was used to collect a 24-hour air sample from a location inside the guard station (Figure 2). No contaminants were detected in concentrations above the EPA's 2018 Regional Screening Levels for Industrial Air. According to information obtained from the US EPA, three confined aquifers are believed to be present beneath the Ironton site located near the Reilly Site. A shallow and middle artesian 3.4 PHYSICAL CONDITIONS 3.4.1 HYDROGEOLOGY 4 Field Sampling Work Plan Reilly Tar- UTD009087644 aquifer of Pleistocene age, and a deep artesian aquifer of Quaternary or Tertiary age (August Mack, 2000). Confining layers ranging in thickness from 20 to 600 feet separate these three aquifers (August Mack, 2000). Unconfined groundwater is present in the basin fill material locally in floodplain deposits along stream channels, in perched water table aquifers, and in valley lowlands within a few feet of the ground surface (August Mack, 2000). At the Reilly Site, this unconfined groundwater may be as shallow as one foot below grade. The shallow artesian aquifer in the unconsolidated Pleistocene deposits underlies a clay layer and ranges in thickness from 10 to 150 feet (August Mack, 2000). The aquifer is generally thickest near the Wasatch Range and thins towards Utah Lake. The middle artesian aquifer in the Pleistocene deposits is separated from the shallow aquifer by a confining layer ranging in thickness from 20 to 200 feet (August Mack, 2000). The middle artesian aquifer rangers in thickness from 50 to 200 feet and consists of several water bearing zones interbedded within confining layers (August Mack, 2000). The deep artesian aquifer found in the consolidated Quaternary and Tertiary age deposits is comprised of several water bearing zones interbedded with confining layers and is estimated to be 600 feet thick (August Mack, 2000). These three aquifers compose the principal groundwater reservoir in the northern Utah Valley. The surface water drainage of the Site is towards the southwestern portion of the property. Drainage into the Ironton Canal to the north used to occur at the northwest corner of the property, however, this portion of the site has been graded so that surface water will drain to the southern portion of the property. There is a seasonal marsh that occurs in the southern portion of the site where water is stagnant. The Reilly Tar Site is located near the base of the Wasatch Mountains, on lake bottom and near shore deposits of Late Pleistocene Lake Bonneville and Holocene age alluvium and colluvium (Montgomery Watson, 1995). According to stratigraphic records for production wells drilled on the Ironton site east of Reilly Tar, the area is underlain by more than 500 feet of unconsolidated gravel, silt, and clay (Montgomery Watson, 1995). These unconsolidated materials are of lacustrine, alluvial fan, and fluvial deposit origin. The lithology of the upper soil observed during investigations conducted previously at the Ironton site immediately to the east and at the Reilly Site, consists of mixed fill (e.g., slag, gravel, sandy silt), in the upper several feet, underlain by interbedded silt, sand, and clay units of varying thickness (August Mack, 2000). Boring logs from monitoring wells constructed at the Ironton site, as well as boring logs from ERM’s Phase II of the Reilly Tar site, indicate that the dominant soil types in the upper 10-20 feet at the site are clayey silt and silty sand (ERM, 2009). 3.4.2 HYDROLOGY 3.4.3 GEOLOGY 3.4.4 METEOROLOGY 5 Field Sampling Work Plan Reilly Tar- UTD009087644 This region is semiarid with an average annual precipitation of 20.15 inches for the town of Provo (WRCC, 2021). January high and low average temperatures are 40. 4º F and 22.5º F respectively, while July values are 93. 7º F and 60.3º F (WRCC, 2021). Winter and spring are considered wet seasons, and summer and fall are the dry seasons. Previous reports indicate the clear presence of hazardous chemicals in the soil and groundwater at concentrations exceeding appropriate benchmark values. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH’s), phenols, benzene, cyanides, and sulfides are the main constituents of concern at the Site (McComb, 2017). Based on previous reports, contamination at the Site, both in soil and groundwater, is located in the northern portion of the site. Most of the contamination is directly correlated to the location of the former SWMUs. However, contamination may possibly be migrating through the groundwater downgradient to the southwest. Air, soil vapor intrusion, and surface water are not likely exposure pathways to these contaminations. Data from previous reports indicate extensive soil contamination on Site, most notably in the northern portion of the property at SWMU locations. Approximately 2,000 cubic yards of soil was removed from the northern portion of the property in 2017. During excavation activities, the bottom of the contamination was not found; it is currently unknown the vertical extent of contamination. It is also unknown if the southern portion of the property contains soil contamination. The entire Site was re-seeded after excavation activities. Direct exposure via inhalation and incidental ingestion of contaminated soil is the most likely pathway of concern. The nearest residential area is located 0.5 miles to the northeast. Public access to the Site is blocked off by a locked fence. Based on analytical results of previous sampling events on Site, there exists a threat to human health at areas on and downwind of the Site but it is unclear what the lateral extent of contamination is. Soil vapor and subsurface intrusion occurs when contamination in soils or groundwater vaporizes into the interstitial space between soil particles and seeps into basements, sewer lines, and other openings and gathers there, potentially causing human health impacts. This is most commonly found in sites that are contaminated by volatile organic compounds (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2017). Soil vapor intrusion was sampled at the adjacent site, McWane Ductile, in 2018. Results show that there is no evidence of soil vapor intrusion. While results indicate there is no soil vapor 3.5 PRELIMINARY PATHWAY ANALYSIS 3.5.1 WASTE SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION 3.5.2 SOIL EXPOSURE PATHWAY ANALYSIS 3.5.3 SOIL VAPOR INTRUSION PATHWAY 6 Field Sampling Work Plan Reilly Tar- UTD009087644 intrusion, it is still possible to be occurring in other areas. No soil vapor intrusion samples will be collected during this sampling event. The nearest drinking water well is located up gradient approximately 2 miles north of the Site and is owned and operated by Provo City. The well serves a user population of 116,288 people. There are 11 drinking water wells within a four-mile radius of the site. One is owned by the Utah State Hospital, four owned by Provo City, and 6 owned by Springville City. There are no drinking water wells down gradient of the Site. Currently available data definitively indicates the presence of groundwater contamination and suggests the transport of contaminants through groundwater. However, it is unknown if groundwater contamination is migrating off site. There are no drinking water sources of PODs downgradient of the Site. It is not likely that groundwater contamination will come into contact with drinking water wells or PODs. In order to accurately delineate the groundwater plume, groundwater samples will be taken from various monitoring wells around the Site, as well as from the parking lot of McWane Ductile. There are no surface water drinking water intakes downstream of the site. Surface water from the Site flows to the southwest and will make its way into the Provo Bay, and ultimately into Utah Lake five miles away. There are no recreational fisheries located downstream of Reilly Tar. The Ironton Canal runs east to west directly north of the property. A protective embankment and liner have been installed to prevent contamination from entering the canal. None of the surface water samples collected during the 2009 sampling event contained VOCs above Utah water quality standards (ERM, 2009). While exposure via the surface water pathway is possible, analytical data indicates this is not an exposure pathway and as such no surface waster samples will be collected during this sampling event. There are approximately 0 people living within one-quarter mile and 140,769 people living within four miles of the Site (U.S. Census Bureau 2019). The nearest home is located 0.5 miles to the northeast of the Site. The area around the Site is covered in a mix of soil, vegetation, and industrial activity with little opportunity for site wastes to expose persons through the air. Exposure through outdoor air is not probable; therefore, outdoor air samples will not be collected. This section identifies the Site sampling concept of operations, schedule, safety, and Site access issues. 3.5.4 GROUNDWATER EXPOSURE PATHWAY ANALYSIS 3.5.5 SURFACE WATER PATHWAY ANALYSIS 3.5.6 AIR EXPOSURE PATHWAY ANALYSIS 5.0 FIELD PROCEDURES 7 Field Sampling Work Plan Reilly Tar- UTD009087644 Site sampling activities will comply with the Data Quality Objectives (Table 2) as described in the DERR Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) (DERR, 2020) and environmental sampling collection procedures as outlined in the EPA’s Contract Laboratory Program Guidance for Field Samplers (EPA, 2014). A Site Conceptual Model (SCM)(Table 1) has been completed to evaluate the potential pathways for contaminant migration and to assist in the selection of appropriate sampling locations. The scope of the investigation includes the collection of 8 groundwater samples, and an undetermined number of opportunity soil samples collected from soil borings in the southern portion of the Site (Figure 3). There are currently twenty soil borings planned to be advanced; however, the number of borings may be adjusted in the field as sub surface conditions are observed. All groundwater samples will be analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs, and total metals using EPA approved methods SW-846 8260C, SW-846 8270D, and SW-846 6010D respectively. Dissolved metals readings will also be collected in the field during the groundwater sampling event. Soil samples will be analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs, and total metals using EPA approved methods SW-846 8260C, SW-846 8270D, and SW-846 6010D. For purposes of quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC), an additional blind field duplicate sample will be collected as an external check on laboratory procedures for soil and groundwater. Two laboratory duplicate samples will also be collected for internal laboratory QA/QC purposes. Preliminary Site sampling is tentatively scheduled for the fall of 2021. Additional sampling may be completed as needed in winter of 2021. Sampling is contingent on the EPA’s approval of this work plan. Field activities are expected to last up to four days depending on conditions at the Site. Coordination with the landowners, lessees, laboratories, and the local health department is on-going and concurrent with this Work Plan. All logistical functions will be arranged by the Project Manager in advance of field sampling. On-site personnel will avoid direct dermal contact, inhalation, and ingestion with potentially contaminated materials. Sampling will be conducted in Level D personal protective equipment unless the Site Health and Safety Officer, upon evaluation of Site conditions, deems an upgrade necessary. A detailed health and Safety Plan (HASP) will be prepared and reviewed with field personnel prior to the beginning of any fieldwork (Appendix A). A Tailgate Safety Meeting will be conducted by all personnel prior to the start of activities on each field day. Site access and logistics will be coordinated by the UDEQ project manager with assistance from the EPA as needed prior to the start of sampling. All property owners will be asked to sign a “Consent for Access to Property” form prior to sampling (Appendix B). Any additional logistical functions will be arranged by the project manager. 5.1 CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS 5.1.1 SCHEDULE 5.1.2 SAFETY 5.1.3 SITE ACCESS AND LOGISTICS 8 Field Sampling Work Plan Reilly Tar- UTD009087644 All monitoring well and soil sample locations have been pre-identified on Figure 3. UDEQ staff will locate sampling locations in accordance with project documents. If the designated location cannot be sampled, the reason will be noted in the field notes log book. In the event that a soil boring location needs to be moved, staff will coordinate with the section manager to discuss new possible sample locations. Sampling will proceed according to methods outlined in the DERR CERCLA Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) of January 2020 and other relevant EPA guidance documents. All sampling events will be recorded in a field log book. All sample collection will proceed following strict chain-of-custody procedures. Sampling procedures are described in the sections below. 5.3.1 SOIL SAMPLE COLLECTION An EPA START contractor will be utilized to advance twenty soil borings in the southern portion of the property to collect soil samples and delineate soil contamination. The boring locations can can be seen on Figure 3. The borings will be advanced to a maximum depth of 40 feet below ground surface; however, the depth of borings may change as sub surface conditions are observed. A PID will be utilized to screen soil samples as soil comes up from soil borings. Screening intervals with high PID detections will be placed into plastic bags and saved for potential sample collection. Soil samples will be collected, placed into their respective jars, and placed on ice. Soil samples will be sent to the selected Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) and analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs, and total metals using EPA approved methods SW-846 8260C, SW-846 8270D, and SW-846 6010D for total metals. Samples will be shipped as environmental samples via chain-of-custody EPA to an EPA registered CLP laboratory and analyzed under Routine Analytical Servicers (RAS) for target compound list and target analyte list constituents. Field notes will be recorded to describe every major event that occurs during sampling. Each sample will be photographed and described in the field book. 5.3.2 GROUNDWATER SAMPLE COLLECTION Groundwater sampling will be performed at wells and piezometers utilizing low-flow sampling and purging methods and using a peristaltic pump and dedicated, disposable tubing at each sampling location. Wells will be purged to three times the well volume prior to low-flow sampling. One field duplicate will be collected for each analytical method for QA/QC purposes. An adequate quantity of disposable equipment will be supplied in order to minimize the need for field decontamination. Groundwater sample locations are located on Figure 3. Groundwater samples will be sent to the selected Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) and analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs, and total metals using EPA approved methods SW-846 8260C, SW-846 8270D, and SW-846 6010D respectively. VOC water samples will be preserved with 5.2 SAMPLE LOCATIONS 5.3 SAMPLING METHODS 9 Field Sampling Work Plan Reilly Tar- UTD009087644 HCl and metal water samples will be preserved with HNO3, all water samples will be cooled with ice to 4 degrees Celsius (4°C) after collection. Samples will be shipped as environmental samples via chain-of-custody to an EPA registered CLP laboratory and analyzed under Routine Analytical Services (RAS) for target compound list and target analyte list constituents. Field notes will be recorded to describe every major event that occurs during sampling. Each sample will be photographed and described in the field book. The sample count includes one field duplicate for each analytical method. Investigation derived waste (IDW) is not anticipated at this time. Should any IDW be collected, it will be disposed of in accordance with appropriate local, state, and federal regulations. Disposable sampling equipment will be removed from the Site and disposed of as a non- hazardous waste. Samples will be handled and preserved as per the criteria of the QAPP revised January 2020 (DERR 2020). At least three samples, two groundwater and one soil sample, going for laboratory analysis will be selected as laboratory duplicate samples. Two samples, one groundwater and one soil, will be selected as field duplicates (Table 3). Chain-of-Custody forms will be prepared with the EPA approved “Scribe” software. All samples will be collected using strict chain-of-custody procedures and submitted to an EPA Region 8 Contract Laboratory. Data validation will be performed by an EPA contractor. At the completion of sampling, a Field Activities Summary Report will be drafted within 14 days of sampling completion, outlining and documenting the procedures following the sampling event. The Field Activities Summary Report will be included in the draft Site Investigation Analytical Results Report which will be prepared following receipt of validated data from the contract laboratory and submitted to EPA Region 8 for review and approval. 5.4 INVESTIGATION DERIVED WASTE 6.0 FIELD QUALITY CONTROL AND ASSURANCE PROCEDURE 7.0 CHAIN OF CUSTODY 8.0 DATA REDUCTION, VALIDATION, AND REPORTING 10 Field Sampling Work Plan Reilly Tar- UTD009087644 August Mack. November 2000. Phase I RFI Report. August Mack Environmental Inc. August Mack. July 2003. Revised Phase II RCRA Facility Investigation Work Plan Reilly Industries, Inc. August Mack Environmental Inc. Environmental Resource Management. 2009. Phase II Supplemental Investigation Report. Facility No. UTD009087644. https://enviro.deq.utah.gov/ Giggleman, Craig. January 2018. Pollution/Situation Report Reilly Coal Tar- Removal Polrep. United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 8. McComb, Martin. November 2017. Action Memorandum: Approval and funding for a time critical removal action at the Reilly Coal Tar and Chemical Site in Utah County, Utah. United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 8. Montgomoery Watson Americas, Inc., November 1995. Site Investigation Plan, Ironton Site, Provo, Utah. Morrison Knudsen Corporation. 1993. Preliminary Assessment Plus, ReUly hidustties, EPA ID # UTD009087644. Prepared for U.S. EPA Region VII. August 20. U.S. Census Bureau. “Census Profile: Provo, UT.” Census Reporter, 2019. http://censusreporter.org/profiles/16000US4962470-provo-ut/. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Notice of the Final Rule- Addition of a Subsurface Intrusion Component to the HRS". Federal Register Vol. 82, No. 5. 2760-2807. 2017 WRCC. Western Regional Climate Center. Accessed 3.1.2021 9.0 REFERENCES 11 Field Sampling Work Plan Reilly Tar- UTD009087644 FIGURES Figure 1Site Location MapReilly Tar2555 South Industrail ParkwayProvo, UT Prepared By: Michael Swistak Date: Reference Scale:Map Scale: 3/31/2021 $) UTD009087644 1:48,000 1 inch = 4,000 feet01,750 3,500 5,250 7,000875Feet Subject Property Property Boundary @A@A @A@A @A @A @A @A @A@A @A@A @A @A!P @A @A ED @A EDED ED @A @A @A @A @A @A @A @A ED @A @A@A@A @A ED EDED@A @A @A @A Ironton Canal Mountain Springs Pkwy E 1800 S St MW-10 MW-14 MW-12MW-13 MW-32 MW-9 MW-30 MW-29 MW-2 MW-31 MW-3 MW-5 MW-28 MW-27 Unknown MW-26 MW-16 PZ-7 MW-36 PZ-6PZ-5 PZ-4 MW-17 MW-11 MW-21 MW-18 MW-33 MW-22 MW-20 MW-19 PZ-9 MW-39 MW-34 TW-3 TW-2 MW-8 PZ-3 PZ-2 PZ-1 TW-1 MW-1 MW-6 MW-15 Figure 2Site MapReilly Tar2555 South Industrial ParkwayProvo, UT Prepared By: Michael Swistak Date: Reference Scale:Map Scale: 3/31/2021 $UTD009087644 1:3600 1 inch = 300 feet012525037550062.5 Feet Legend @A Monitoring W ell ED Piezometer !P Unknow n W ell Railroad Property Boundary @A@A @A@A @A @A @A @A @A@A @A@A @A @A @A @A ED @A EDED ED @A @A @A @A @A @A @A @A ED @A @A@A@A @A ED EDED@A @A @A @A Ironton Canal Mountain Springs Pkwy E 1800 S St MW-10 MW-14 MW-12MW-13 MW-32 MW-9 MW-30 MW-29 MW-2 MW-31 MW-3 MW-5 MW-28 MW-27 MW-26 MW-16 PZ-7 MW-36 PZ-6PZ-5 PZ-4 MW-17 MW-11 MW-21 MW-18 MW-33 MW-22 MW-20 MW-19 PZ-9 MW-39 MW-34 TW-3 TW-2 MW-8 PZ-3 PZ-2 PZ-1 TW-1 MW-1 MW-6 MW-15 Figure 3Proposed Sampling Location MapReilly Tar2555 South Industrial ParkwayProvo, UT Prepared By: Michael Swistak Date: Reference Scale:Map Scale: 8/17/2021 $UTD009087644 1:3600 1 inch = 300 feet012525037550062.5 Feet Legend Proposed Soi l Boring Locations ED Propposed Pi ezometer Sample Location @A Proposed Moni toring Well Sample Location @A Monitoring W ell ED Piezometer Water Railroad Property Boundary 12 Field Sampling Work Plan Reilly Tar- UTD009087644 TABLES Table 1. Reilly Tar Site Conceptual Model Reilly Tar Sediment Surface Water Air Complete Exposure Pathway X ● = Incomplete pathway Possible complete pathway Complete pathway = X Soil Groundwater Potentially Impacted Media Notes Contaminant Source = Discharge Leaching Wind Blown Dusts There are no residences near the site, however windblown contaminated dust is of concern. Surface soil samples will be collected to determine if contamination is spreading toward areas where people work. Groundwater samples previously collected from the Site have shown there are numerous contaminants of concern within the groundwater. Soil samples previously collected from the Site have shown there are numerous contaminants of concern within the soil. Soil samples will be collected from the unsampled southern portion of the property to see if contaminants are located in this area. = The site has been graded, as well as a concrete barrier installed, so that surface water will not run into the Ironton Canal, the closest surface water body. However, while it is unlikely to be exposed via this pathway it is possible. Table 2 Data Quality Objectives Reilly Tar Problem Statement Identifying the Decisions Decision Inputs Study Boundaries Decision Rules Tolerance Limits on Errors Optimization of Sample Design The questions to be resolved by this Site Investigation (SI) is to determine if contamination is migrating off site via the groundwater pathway, what is the current concentrations of on-site contaminants, and what is the nature of contamination in the southern area of the property. The contamination is a result of historic tar distilling operations. Team Members: DERR Project Manager – Michael Swistak Site Assessment Section Manager – Tom Daniels Environmental Toxicologist – Scott Everett EPA Site Assessment Manager –Ryan Dunham There are three principal study questions for the site: (1) Has groundwater migrated offsite via the groundwater pathway. (2) What are the current concentrations of on-site contaminants. (3) What is the nature of contamination in the southern portion of the property. Laboratory analytical data for groundwater, sediment, and soil samples will be collected to determine the potential extent of impacts to the site and if contaminants are migrating off- site. Comparison of analytical results against the EPA Superfund Chemical Data Matrix (SCDM) Benchmarks (Reference Dose and Cancer Risk) will be used when available (Regional Screening Levels (RSLs). The site is located in Provo City, Utah, in a heavily industrialized area. Potential environmental targets that may be impacted from the site include the Ironton Canal and aquatic environments downstream of the site which flows west into the wetlands along Mill Race. Mill Race flows westward for approximately 0.6 miles to Provo Bay of Utah Lake Grab soil samples will be collected from portions of the southern section of the property is contamination is suspected. The endpoint of the sampling event will be dependent on sample results. Judgmental sampling will be used to bias samples toward more potentially contaminated areas or areas that require further characterization. Detection limits utilized by the laboratory are the EPA Method Detection Limit (MDL) procedures found in Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 403.12 and136. Groundwater, sediment , and soil sample locations will be determined prior to the start of field work. Proposed sample locations may be changed in the field due to utility locations, on-Site debris, construction activities, and remaining structures. Table 3. Sample Locations, Descriptions, and Rationale Sample ID Matrix Location Rationale SB-01 Soil Opportunity sample. Delineate extent of soil contamination. SB-02 Soil Opportunity sample. Delineate extent of soil contamination. SB-03 Soil Opportunity sample. Delineate extent of soil contamination. SB-04 Soil Opportunity sample. Delineate extent of soil contamination. SB-05 Soil Opportunity sample. Delineate extent of soil contamination. SB-06 Soil Opportunity sample. Delineate extent of soil contamination. SB-07 Soil Opportunity sample. Delineate extent of soil contamination. SB-08 Soil Opportunity sample. Delineate extent of soil contamination. SB-09 Soil Opportunity sample. Delineate extent of soil contamination. SB-10 Soil Opportunity sample. Delineate extent of soil contamination. SB-10_DUP Soil Opportunity sample. Field Duplicate. MW-18 Groundwater Collected from the adjacent property, McWane Ductile, at MW-18. Delineate groundwater plume. MW-18_Dup Groundwater Collected from the adjacent property, McWane Ductile, at MW-18. Field Duplicate. MW-19 Groundwater Collected from existing well network on site at MW-19. Delineate groundwater plume. MW-22 Groundwater Collected from the adjacent property, McWane Ductile, at MW-22. Delineate groundwater plume. MW-33 Groundwater Collected from the adjacent property, McWane Ductile, at MW-33. Delineate groundwater plume. PZ-4 Groundwater Collected from existing well network on site at PZ-4. Delineate groundwater plume. PZ-5 Groundwater Collected from existing well network on site at PZ-5. Delineate groundwater plume. PZ-6 Groundwater Collected from existing well network on site at PZ-6. Delineate groundwater plume. Table 4. Sample Analyses Checklist SITE NAME:Reilly Tar SITE ID NUMBER:UTD009087644 LOCATION:2555 South Industrial Parkway PROJECT LEADER:Michael Swistak CITY:Provo SAMPLING DATE:Summer 2021 Sample Location Media Vo l a t i l e s 8 2 6 0 Se m i - V o l s 8 2 7 0 Pe s t i c i d e s To t . M e t a l s 6 0 1 0 PC B Cy a n i d e Su l f i d e Am m o n i a NO 3 - N O 2 An i o n s As b e s t o s Sp e c . O r g . BT E X N TP H O& G Ex p l o s i v e s Fi e l d D u p La b D u p Sp l i t Sp i k e Bl a n k Op p o r t u n i t y Ba c k g r o u n d SB-01 Soil X X XSB-02 Soil X X XSB-03 Soil X X X XSB-04 Soil X X XSB-05 Soil X X XSB-06 Soil X X XSB-07 Soil X X XSB-08 Soil X X XSB-09 Soil X X XSB-10 Soil X X XSB-10_DUP Soil X X X X Laboratory Analyses QA/QC Other Table 4. Sample Analyses Checklist (cont'd) SITE NAME:Reilly Tar SITE ID NUMBER:UTD009087644LOCATION:2555 South Industrial Parkway PROJECT LEADER:Michael SwistakCITY:Provo SAMPLING DATE:Summer 2021 Sample Location Media Vo l a t i l e s 8 2 6 0 Se m i - V o l s 8 2 7 0 Pe s t i c i d e s To t . M e t a l s 6 0 1 0 PC B Cy a n i d e Su l f i d e Am m o n i a NO 3 - N O 2 An i o n s As b e s t o s Sp e c . O r g . BT E X N TP H O& G Ex p l o s i v e s Fi e l d D u p La b D u p Sp l i t Sp i k e Bl a n k Op p o r t u n i t y Ba c k g r o u n d MW-18 Groundwater X X XMW-18_DUP Groundwater X X X XMW-19 Groundwater X X X XMW-22 Groundwater X X XMW-33 Groundwater X X XPZ-4 Groundwater X X XPZ-5 Groundwater X X XPZ-6 Groundwater X X X Laboratory Analyses QA/QC Other Table 5. Required Bottles and Containers Sample ID Matrix Quantity of Container Type 40 mL Amber Glass/Teflon Vials 400 mL Plastic/Glass Container 2oz Glass Jar SB-01 Soil 0 0 2 SB-02 Soil 0 0 2 SB-03 Soil 0 0 2 SB-04 Soil 0 0 2 SB-05 Soil 0 0 2 SB-06 Soil 0 0 2 SB-07 Soil 0 0 2 SB-08 Soil 0 0 2 SB-09 Soil 0 0 2 SB-10 Soil 0 0 2 SB-10_DUP Soil 0 0 2 MW-18 Groundwater 6 1 0 MW-18_Dup Groundwater 6 1 0 MW-19 Groundwater 6 1 0 MW-22 Groundwater 6 1 0 MW-33 Groundwater 6 1 0 PZ-4 Groundwater 6 1 0 PZ-5 Groundwater 6 1 0 PZ-6 Groundwater 6 1 0 Total 48 8 22