DSHW-2023-001786 - 0901a0688119c2bc

Deq submit <[e-mail]>
Fwd: Work plan proposal?
1 message
Dale Urban <[e-mail]>Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 10:46 AM
To: Deq submit <[e-mail]>
Please log these documents into the Trinity Hwy / Stokes Stevenson project (fka Syro Steel).
Thanks
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Daryl Hancock <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 10:22 AM
Subject: Re: Work plan proposal?
To: Dale Urban <[e-mail]>
Cc: Jamie Russell <[e-mail]>
Hello Dale –
As we discussed, RMEC is providing you with a draft of the workplan for you to review and provide
feedback on. Also, I am providing the data on the arsenic background sampling that was performed as part
of the RFI.
Please review and get back us with questions and thoughts that you as it sits right now.
Thanks –
Daryl
Daryl Hancock, CHMM, CEM
RMEC Environmental, Inc.
476 West 325 South, Bountiful, UT 84010
Office: 801.467.3661 Cell:
www.rmec.net
From: Dale Urban <[e-mail]>
Date: Wednesday, February 22, 2023 at 2:03 PM
State of Utah Mail - Fwd: Work plan proposal?
DSHW-2023-001786
To: Daryl Hancock <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Work plan proposal?
Hi Daryl;
Sorry to hear about your wifes car accident, but at least she wasn't seriously injured.
I was just reaching out to make sure that the "ball" was in your court and out of mine (so to speak).
Thanks
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 12:34 PM Daryl Hancock <[e-mail]> wrote:
Hey Dale –
Sorry for not getting back to you after your email on Friday. My wife was in a car accident last week and
was in surgery on Friday for a broken wrist. I’m still playing catch up!
All is well and we will get working on the work plan for the additional site characterization.
Thanks –
Daryl
Daryl Hancock, CHMM, CEM
RMEC Environmental, Inc.
476 West 325 South, Bountiful, UT 84010
Office: 801.467.3661 Cell:
www.rmec.net
From: Dale Urban <[e-mail]>
Date: Wednesday, February 22, 2023 at 12:11 PM
To: Daryl Hancock <[e-mail]>
Subject: Work plan proposal?
Hi Daryl;
Did you have any questions prior to submitting the proposal to conduct the additional site characterization
work?
State of Utah Mail - Fwd: Work plan proposal?
Thanks
--
Dale T. Urban, P.G. | Environmental Scientist
Phone: [phone]
DISCLAIMER: Statements made in this e‑mail do not constitute the official position of the Director of the Division of Waste
Management and Radiation Control.
--
Dale T. Urban, P.G. | Environmental Scientist
Phone: [phone]
DISCLAIMER: Statements made in this e‑mail do not constitute the official position of the Director of the Division of Waste
Management and Radiation Control.
--
Dale T. Urban, P.G. | Environmental Scientist
Phone: [phone]
DISCLAIMER: Statements made in this e-mail do not constute the official posion of the Director of the Division of Waste Management and
Radiaon Control.
2 attachments
4403-22E_Stokes Stevenson_Centerville Flex_LSI Work Plan_Client Draft (02.27.2023).pdf
981K
Arsenic Background_Syro Steel SEMS 2104213 RCRA 34.pdf
273K
State of Utah Mail - Fwd: Work plan proposal?

RMEC ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. | 476 W 325 S, BOUNTIFUL UTAH 84010
TEL: [phone] | www.rmec.net | EMAIL: [e-mail]

RMEC PJ22E-4403

**DRAFT REPORT FOR REVIEW ONLY**
February 27, 2023

Dale Urban
Environmental Scientist
Utah Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control
PO Box 144880
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-4880

Transmitted via email to: [e-mail]

SUBJECT: LIMITED SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION WORKPLAN

Re: Trinity Highway Products Property
950 West 400 South
Centerville, Utah
Dear Mr. Urban
On behalf of Stokes Stevenson Centerville Flex, LLC (Stokes Stevenson), RMEC Environmental,
Inc. (RMEC) is hereby providing the Utah Department of Environmental Quality (UDEQ) Division
of Waste Management and Radiation Control (DWMRC) with a Limited Site Investigation (LSI)
Workplan for the above-referenced site.
The proposed work will be “limited” to the investigation of sources of soil contamination associated
with former Solid Waste Management Units (SWMUs) and potential vapor intrusion risks
associated with volatile constituents that may exist in the soil and groundwater at the site.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
As detailed in submittals and supplemental information provided as part of Stokes Stevenson’s
request for a Comfort Letter for the Site, SWMUs have either been partially or completely removed
from the site or covered and left in-situ at the Site.
Table 1 provided in Exhibit A, summarizes soil sampling data from the 1995 RCRA Facility
Investigation (RFI) in comparison to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) current
Commercial and Residential Risk-based Screening Levels (RSLs) using target Cancer Risk (CR)
value of 1.0 E-6 and Hazard Index (HI) of 1.0. Please note, in the case of arsenic, site data is
compared to a 95% Upper Threshold Limit (UTL) calculation using soil background data
(presented in Table 14 of the RFI) instead of the RSLs.
As indicated in Table 1, cadmium, lead and zinc were identified in soils in SWMUs 1, 2 and 4 at
concentrations that either exceeded the residential or commercial EPA RSLs. SWMU No. 3,
containing the clay pipe and sludge, was removed from the site and disposed of at a regulated
disposal facility. SWMU No. 5 was removed and closed based on treatment and off-site disposal
Mr. Urban / UDEQ-DWMRC RMEC PJ22E-4403
February 27, 2023 Page 2 of 4
**DRAFT REPORT FOR REVIEW ONLY**

RMEC ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. | 476 W 325 S, BOUNTIFUL UTAH 84010
TEL: [phone] | www.rmec.net | EMAIL: [e-mail]

of hazardous soils found in the unit. The remaining non-hazardous soils were removed and buried
within SWMU No. 4 (the RCRA impoundment). There were no exceedances of EPA RSLs found
in the native soil samples collected after removal of SWMU No. 5. As indicated in the table, arsenic
background concentrations in soil were established at 38.7 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). All
arsenic concentrations in soils were found below background concentrations with the exception of
one (1) sample in SWMU No. 1, which was slightly exceeded the background concentration at 41
mg/kg.
Based on our recent correspondence, the additional testing of soils at the site will focus on:
1. Determining the depth and lateral bounds of SWMU No.’s 1, 2 and 4 in relationship to the
planned buildings, utilities, infrastructure, and landscape features associated with future
development of the site.
2. Characterizing the overall concentrations of heavy metal contaminants of cadmium, lead
and zinc in the SWMUs to allow Stokes Stevenson to make determinations regarding
potential impacts on the development of the Site and options for removal.
Additionally, as stipulated in the Comfort Letter, RMEC will conduct shallow soil gas testing to
evaluate the potential vapor intrusion pathway within the footprints of planned future buildings at
the site. If unacceptable vapor intrusion risks are identified, the information obtained from the vapor
evaluation will be used to prescribe mitigation measures that will be incorporated into the SMP and
construction of buildings at the site.
The proposed work plan is being completed to outline the rationale and general approach for
additional investigative work to be completed at the site. Information obtained from the soil
investigation will be used by Stokes Stevenson’s to make final determinations regarding future
development and management of the site, which may include removal of all soil impacts to below
background and commercial or residential RSLs.
PROPOSED WORKPLAN
Soil Sampling
RMEC will use a Geoprobe 6620DT track rig to conduct soil explorations through the vertical
profile of remaining waste materials in SWMUs 1, 2 and 4. Based on the 1995 RFI subsurface
investigation work, sludges and other waste materials observed in these SWMUs were encountered
0 to 10.5 feet below grade surface (bgs) at the time of sampling. The 1998 Risk Assessment
indicated several feet of cover fill material were added to each respective SWMU at the site with
approximately 5 to 6 feet of fill material at SWMU No. 4. Therefore, sludges and waste material in
the SWMUs are estimated to be at 5 to 17.5 feet below current grade surface. At each boring
location, the lithology of soil borings will be recorded and screened for visual evidence of sludges
and other potential contamination. Identification of sludges and volatile contaminant sources will
be aided with the use of a hand-held x-ray fluorescence (XRF) analyzer and a photo-ionization
detector (PID). Borings will be advanced through the waste materials to the underlying native soils,
or a point of refusal at each location.
The exact location of the SWMU boundaries are not known so initial soil exploration efforts will
be focused on defining the general boundaries of each SWMU. Once the boundaries are established,
RMEC will create a grid over the surface area of each SWMU using 20-foot by 20-foot square
sections, or equivalent. Each 20-foot by 20-foot square section will be assigned a number and
Mr. Urban / UDEQ-DWMRC RMEC PJ22E-4403
February 27, 2023 Page 3 of 4
**DRAFT REPORT FOR REVIEW ONLY**

RMEC ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. | 476 W 325 S, BOUNTIFUL UTAH 84010
TEL: [phone] | www.rmec.net | EMAIL: [e-mail]

demarcated with a survey stake. RMEC will conduct one (1) soil boring at the center of each
section. Borings will be examined for evidence of sludges and waste materials through visual
observation and screening with an XRF and PID. RMEC will collect at least one (1) targeted soil
sample from soils exhibiting the highest degree of potential contamination based on screening
results.
Soil samples will be placed in laboratory-supplied, pre-labeled containers, placed in a cooler and
submitted to Pace Analytical Labs of Mount Juliet, Tennessee, for analysis of cadmium, lead and
zinc by EPA Method 6010.
Soil Vapor Sampling
The future location of building footprints will be delineated in the field and a shallow soil gas
sample will be collected at a rate of 1 sample per 2,500 square feet of floor space. A Geoprobe drill
rig will be used to open up a 2.25-inch diameter bore hole down to a depth of 5.5 feet bgs at various
locations throughout the future building footprints. Within each borehole, an expendable probe
connected to ¼-inch nylaflow™ tubing will be nested within a 6-inch lens of 100-grain silica sand.
The nylaflow tubing will be capped and extend 1-foot above the ground surface while the remainder
of the borehole will be filled to the surface with a hydrated bentonite clay slurry.
The probes will be marked and left undisturbed for a 24-hour period to allow vapors to accumulate
prior to sampling. After the waiting period, the sampling train will be purged, and the soil vapor
will be collected in 1-liter Tedlar bags using a vacuum box and a personal air sampling pump at an
approximate flow rate of 200-cc/minute.
Upon completion of the sample collection, all soil vapor samples will be hand-delivered and
submitted under chain of custody to ALS Laboratories of Salt Lake City, Utah. The samples will
be analyzed for VOCs in accordance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Method TO15.
The TO15 analytical method is the standard method used for the evaluation of VOCs in soil vapor
samples.
Upon receipt of the analytical reports from the respective laboratories, RMEC will prepare a report
summarizing the results of the soil and soil vapor sampling, provide sample location maps and an
interpretation of the data. Data from the analysis of soil and soil vapor samples will be compared
to the November 2022 Commercial and Residential RSLs (CR=1.0E-6 and HI = 1.0).
CLOSING
Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me directly with
any questions, comments, or concerns. You can reach me at 801.467.3661 or by email at
[e-mail].
Sincerely,

Daryl Hancock, CHMM, CEM
Principal Scientist
RMEC ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.

Mr. Urban / UDEQ-DWMRC RMEC PJ22E-4403
February 27, 2023 Page 4 of 4
**DRAFT REPORT FOR REVIEW ONLY**

RMEC ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. | 476 W 325 S, BOUNTIFUL UTAH 84010
TEL: [phone] | www.rmec.net | EMAIL: [e-mail]

Cc: Eric Baiden / UDEQ-DWMRC
Sam Nelson / Stokes Stevenson
Jamie Russell / RMEC

ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A – Table 1: 1995 RFI Summary of Sludge and Soil Analytical Results – Metals
Exhibit B – Figure 1: Site Figure with Proposed Soil Boring Locations

EXHIBIT A -
FIGURE 1: 1995 RFI SUMMARY OF SOIL ANALYTICAL RESULTS
- METALS

Sample Name Sample Depth Date Arsenic2 Barium Cadmium Chromium Lead Manganese Nickel Selenium Zinc
Residential RSLs 15,000 7.1 120,000 400 1,800 670 390 23,000
Industrial RSLs 220,000 100 1,800,000 800 26,000 8,100 5,800 350,000
SM1-DH1 5-5.5'6/3/1991 1.6 <0.05 5.6 180 49 <0.5 <0.1 1,500
SM1-DH2 5-6.3'6/3/1991 1.7 4.8 45 170 190 13 <0.1 6,500
SM1-DH3 4.3-4.8'6/3/1991 1.7 2.0 30 2,100 130 7.3 <0.1 3,000
SM1-DH4 4.8-7'6/3/1991 2.2 0.98 4.2 71 8.4 <0.05 <0.1 1,300
SM1-DH5 5-7'6/3/1991 1.4 0.44 11 3,600 22 <0.5 <0.1 810
SM1-DH6 3.5-5'6/3/1991 0.6 <0.05 1.8 59 12 0.61 <0.1 140
SM1-DH1 7'6/3/1991 41 60 5.7 60 73 180 32 <0.1 2,100
SM1-DH2 7'6/3/1991 9.3 85 6.9 80 100 250 48 <0.1 2,200
SM1-DH3 10'6/3/1991 7.5 28 7.0 54 90 120 25 <0.1 910
SM1-DH5 7'6/3/1991 25 250 7.4 46 120 380 34 <0.1 2,600
TP-SM1-1 Inside 5'6/3/1991 2.1 <0.05 3.6 100 8.4 <0.5 <0.1 310
TP-SM1-1 Outside 5'6/3/1991 5.0 4.5 100 47 110 14 <0.1 570
TP-SM1-2 Inside 5'6/4/1991 3.5 2.8 22 94 330 16 0.3 580
TP-SM1-2 Outside 5'6/4/1991 1.2 2.3 27 37 98 14 <0.1 85
TP-SM1-3 Inside 5'6/4/1991 1.3 6.4 31 250 1,400 19 <0.1 11,000
TP-SM1-3 Outside 5'6/4/1991 2.0 2.0 15 33 110 12 <0.1 560
TP-SM1-4 Inside 5'6/4/1991 1.8 <0.05 25 160 14 0.6 <0.1 250
TP-SM1-4 Outside 5'6/4/1991 3.0 5.4 130 76 230 21 0.1 3,700
SM2-DH1 5.4-7.9'6/4/1991 1.0 3.3 21 37 64 7.9 <0.1 1,600
SM2-DH2 6.5-8.5'6/3/1991 1.2 7.5 36 610 100 13 <0.1 14,000
SM2-DH3 7.6-8.6'6/4/1991 1.2 28 140 1,700 140 19 0.2 47,000
SM2-DH6 6.3-7'6/5/1991 0.8 3.3 20 1,100 36 3.3 0.2 6,900
SM2-DH2 10-10.5'6/3/1991 24 87 7.3 61 100 260 39 <0.1 2,400
SM2-DH3 9.5'6/4/1991 1.9 53 3.3 75 46 130 20 <0.1 860
SM2-DH4 9.6'6/4/1991 2.4 87 2.3 25 49 40 4.8 <0.1 450
SM2-DH6 9.5'6/5/1991 6.2 190 5.5 160 74 160 18 <0.1 1,100
TP-SM2-1 Inside 5'6/4/1991 2.1 6.7 20 130 120 11 <0.1 3,200
TP-SM2-1 Outside 5'6/4/1991 3.1 3.1 28 110 340 17 <0.1 1,200
TP-SM2-2 Inside 5'6/10/1991 1.5 4.3 92 210 22 7.8 <0.1 3,800
TP-SM2-2 Outside 5'6/10/1991 5.4 5.5 46 120 271 21 <0.1 2,000
TP-SM2-3 Inside 5'6/4/1991 2.9 31 86 7,800 79 7.7 0.2 7,500
TP-SM2-3 Outside 5'6/4/1991 3.7 3.0 25 54 380 19 <0.1 63
TP-SM2-4 Inside 5'6/10/1991 0.5 35 130 19,000 180 43 <0.1 41,000
TP-SM2-4 Outside 5'6/10/1991 <0.5 2.0 24 63 23 5.6 <0.1 300
TP-SM3-1 4.5'7/26/1991 3.6 9.5 42 350 220 96 <0.1 11,000
TP-SM3-5 3'4/19/1994 5.7 2.2 38 59 690 32 <0.1 66
TP-SM3-5 3'4/19/1994 1.5 1.8 37 18 300 26 <0.1 61
TP-SM3-6 3'4/19/1994 2.4 0.8 17 6.5 120 14 <0.1 69
TP-SM3-6 3'4/19/1994 2.7 1.1 20 10 200 16 <0.1 360
TP-SM3-7 2.8'4/19/1994 2.4 1.6 35 17 340 25 <0.1 470
TP-SM3-7 2.8'4/19/1994 1.9 1.8 36 15 200 25 <0.1 220
TP-SM3-6 Pipe Sludge 4/19/1994 5.4 1.5 50 18,000 46 5.7 0.7 720
RCI-1 0-1'6/7/1991 4.3 43 9.0 52 320 210 28 <0.1 17,000
RCI-2 0-1'6/7/1991 6.9 52 9.3 76 160 280 43 <0.1 25,000
RCI-3 0-1'6/7/1991 4.9 58 11 63 410 190 25 <0.1 10,000
RCI-4 0-1'6/7/1991 5.8 60 9.6 59 290 280 29 <0.1 19,000
RCI-5 0-1'6/7/1991 6.1 70 10 53 120 650 45 <0.1 43,000
RCI-6 0-1'6/7/1991 7.1 59 19 63 140 750 47 <0.1 39,000
RCI-7 0-1'6/7/1991 5.1 49 8.7 98 310 100 20 <0.1 21,000
RCI-8 0-1'6/7/1991 2.3 1.1 12 24 300 11 <0.1 960
RCI-9 0-1'6/7/1991 4.0 1.6 16 40 250 13 <0.1 910
RCI-10 0-1'6/11/1991 1.0 4.0 35 73 110 16 <0.1 210
RCI-11 2-3'6/11/1991 3.4 45 6.9 77 110 210 29 <0.1 10,000
RCI-12 2-3'6/11/1991 <0.5 67 2.0 26 61 52 5.9 <0.1 540
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF SLUDGE AND SOIL ANALYTICAL RESULTS - METALS
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT UNIT NO.'s 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5
Results in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg-dry)
Screening Levels 1
SWMU NO. 1
SWMU NO. 2
SWMU NO. 3 (REMOVED)
SWMU NO. 4
1995 RCRA FACILITY INVESTIGATION (RFI)
38.7
Sample Name Sample Depth Date Arsenic2 Barium Cadmium Chromium Lead Manganese Nickel Selenium Zinc
Residential RSLs 15,000 7.1 120,000 400 1,800 670 390 23,000
Industrial RSLs 220,000 100 1,800,000 800 26,000 8,100 5,800 350,000
Screening Levels 1 38.7
SM5-1 6/10/1991 3.6 82 4.8 39 65 380 29 <0.1 3,100
SM5-2 6/10/1991 3.3 90 3.4 23 53 120 17 <0.1 1,900
SM5-3 6/10/1991 4.7 110 4.0 22 64 160 17 <0.1 3,800
Indicates "SOILS REMOVED"
BOLD - exceeds the most conservative residential screening levels. BOLD exceeds the industrial screening levels.
1 - EPA Regional Screening Levels (November 2022) for residential and industrial properties (TR=1E-06, THQ=1.0) cited.
2 - Arsenic background concentration is based on 95% Upper Tolerance Limit (UTL) using background data presented in Table 14 of RFI, 1995.
SWMU NO. 5
Native soil samples collected after stockpile removal

EXHIBIT B -
SITE FIGURE WITH PROPOSED SOIL BORING LOCATIONS

Figure 1: Proposed Soil Boring Locations Map
Trinity Highway Products Property
950 West 400 South, Centerville, Utah
Prepared For:
Stokes Stevenson Centerville Flex
Modified From: Bingham Environmental Risk
Assessment, 1998
Scale: As Shown
20
-
f
t
20-ft
5 X 4 SAMPLE LOCATION GRID
BORING LOCATION
6 x 2 SAMPLE LOCATION GRID
7 X 3 SAMPLE LOCATION GRID
20-ft
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION 5
CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENT
5.1 GENERAL
Syro conducted the RFI for the purpose of characterizing the environmental setting, sources of
contaminant release, degree and extent of contamination and the identification of any real or
potential receptors. This investigation achieved the objective of collecting sufficient data of
adequate technical content to support the development and evaluation of corrective measure
alternatives during implementation of the Corrective Measures Study (CMS).
The RFI activities adhered to the tasks identified as Task II of the Work Plan. All sampling and
analyses were conducted in accordance with the QAPP, and were adequately documented throughout
the project. Personnel were properly trained in the implementation of site safety requirements and
procedures.
5.2 EVALUATION OF BACKGROUND VALUES FOR SOIL AND GROUNDWATER
5.2.1 Background Sail Sampling
Background soil samples were obtained during three separate sampling events, performed during
1983, 1984 and 1991. In the 1983 sampling event, twelve soil samples were collected from grids
H2 and H9; during the 1984 sampling event fifteen soil samples were collected at depths ranging
from near the surface to approximately two feet below ground surface in grid areas D2, E2, G9,
F2 and F9 (see Figure 10 fo r grid locations).
In an effort to establish a statistical correlation with previous results , additional soil sampling was
performed in 1991 which consisted of nine samples, six from grid Hl and three from grid H9.
Three of the samples obtained from grid Hl were collected from a one foot interval beginning at
depths ranging from 1.3 feet to 1.9 feet, and three samples were collected from a one foot interval
beginning at depths ranging from 2. 9 feet to 3 .5 feet. The three samples collected from grid H9
were collected from a one foot interval beginning at depths ranging from 0.5 feet to 1.2 feet.
Results are provided in Appendix C and summarized in Table 14.
All sample results were tested for statistical comparability and the results indicated that samples
taken from grid H2 during 1983 were not statistically reliable. The decision was jointly made by
Syro, EPA and UDEQ to utilize all background soil data with the exception of results obtained from
grid H2 during the 1983 sampling event. The resu lts of all the representative background
1104-0 11 -24-December 14, 1994
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
soil analyses are provided on Table 20.
5.2.2 Background Groundwater Sampling
One upgradient well bas been constructed and sampled at the Syro facility, designated as background
monitor well UG. Nine groundwater samples were obtained from this well during the period 21 Feb
84 through 22 Aug 88; constituents analyzed consisted of all or part of the EPA primary and
secondary drinking water standards plus the additional parameters of nickel , phenol, sodium, TOC
and TOX. One additional background sample was collected on December 4 , 1991 as part of the
RFI. Table 19 summarizes the parameters and analytical results of the background groundwater
sample taken during the RFI.
The groundwater in the shallow, unconfined aquifer is generally characterized as poor in water
quality with relatively high TDS and containing contaminants from industry and agriculture. The
water quality of the shallow, unconfined aquifer under the site appears to follow this general
characterization with TDS values ranging between 800 mg/1 and 1500 mg/I. The State of Utah
Ground Water Quality Protection Regulations classify the shallow, unconfined aquifer as Class II,
Drinking Water Quality Ground Water based on available groundwater quality data.
5.3 CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING SOIL AND GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION
5.3.1 General
Data analysis methods have been defined in Section 6 of the RFI Work Plan. These methods were
developed to establish baseline concentration levels for soil contamination and action levels for
groundwater contamination.
5.3.2 Sail Baseline Caocentrarian I evels
Background soil data was analyzed statistically to establish Upper Contamination Limits (UCL).
The UCL for each contaminant parameter was determined by c alculating the harmonic mean plus
three standard deviations.
1104-011 .25. December 14 , 1994
-------------------
Grid 1.D. No.
Sample Number Hl-1
Sample Depth (ft) 1.3 -2.3
Arsenic 5.5
Cadmium 5.2
C hro mium 36
Iron 16,000
Lead 200
Manganese 520
Nickel 13
Selen iu m <0.1
Zinc 110
pH (units) 8.0
Sulfate 110
All samples coll ected on April 16, 1991.
TABLE 14
BACKGROUND SOIL ANALYTICAL RESULTS
(mr/kg)
HI
Hl-2 Hl-3
2.9-3.9 1.6-2.6 3.1 -4.1 1.9-2.9
6.7 7.5 7.9 11
<0.05 6.0 <0.05 3.1 ~. -
30 41 29 20
13,000 18,000 11,000 21,000
8 0 310 61 110
420 610 330 230
48 18 41 24
<0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
89 130 220 62
8.3 8.3 8.2 7.9
120 160 80 120
All units in m illigra m per kil ogram (mg/kg), dry weight b asis, except as no ted .
Page 1 of 1
H9
H9-1 H9-2 H9-3
3.5-4.5 1.2-2.2 0.5 -1.5 1.0-2.0
5 .0 24 16 8.8
<0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
23 57 45 54
5,700 20,000 15,000 9,500
80 51 39 38
290 420 300 410
35 74 56 70
<0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
JOO 100 89 87
8.2 8.8 8.5 9.4
80 20 280 26
I
I
I
I
I
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0..
; -· .,! -:-..:·-
GIQ'E' --. --
~ 'l / \:--------/ ---
I UP&I.
) POWER SUBSTAnON
"' .,
., .,
10• CMP
Off BOILER
GALVANIZING
BUii.DiNG
·'
I P -------rP/.,.,-..,4'-,"-..-'+--------P --------l '--------------
H1-2
2 3
l
OOWN
SPOUT
;-------p
4
8~ rs s
., ..
RICKS DffCH
RCRASURFJCE/MPOUNDMENT
"' "'
I
~
e"
<t
..
L
=
YARD CRANE
=
440 V :,'"0
=
=
=
--+-----------i--------p
5
., .,
1111illlllilllllliilllllllllllillliiilllllllillllliliiiiilllilllillii llliillilll
DRAINAGE SWALE
10° CMP
I
lo
FIR[
HYDRAN T
(!)
~
s
(I) ..,
~
~ ....
~
7
-
A
B
C
D
E
LEGEND
__ p ___
POWER LINE
• -POWER POLE
FENCE
F --HPG---HIGH PRESSURE GAS UNE
-s ---SEWER LINE
--SS---SiORM SEWER LINE
--A AIRLINE
--w WolJcR U NE
--G GASUNE
--CTR---COMPUTER CABLE
--T ---laEPtiONE U NE
G -···---t FI.DN
fmij ~VEO SURFACE
~ BACl<GROUND SOIL
SAMPLING CELI.
WITH I..OCATION
0 BO 120
H Se a la In Feet
SYRO STEEL COMPANY
SOIL BACKGROUND
SAMPLING LOCATION MAP
DBINGHAM
------------------1&:IENVIRONMENTAL FIGURE 10
...._r L.AKJ: CTTY -(801) ~2-=
-JAN.1989 -• 11 ()4-()()4