DSHW-2022-021917 - 0901a068810bb9f4

Deq submit <[e-mail]>
Additional Site Characterization Work Plan for SLC Station Center/former WRR
Industries Inc. site (DWMRC Facility ID No. UTCA-0023)
1 message
Dean, Daniel <[e-mail]>Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 12:52 PM
To: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Cc: "Brad M. Lauchnor" <[e-mail]>, Alan Jenkins <[e-mail]>, Michael Brehm
<[e-mail]>, Joel Sim <[e-mail]>
The University of Utah and Terracon have prepared the attached Additional Site Characterization Work Plan for the SLC
Station Center/former WRR Industries Inc. site (DWMRC Facility ID No. UTCA-0023). The Work Plan detail plans for
additional site characterization work at the site that will be used to evaluate the data gaps identified in the initial
Conceptual Site Model.
As noted in Section 1.0 and Section 2.5.5 of the Work Plan, the site characterization activities described in the Work Plan
are being conducted in coordination with additional site characterization work that will be completed under the purview of
the Salt Lake Brownfields Coalition Grant project (Brownfields). A Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) prepared for the
Brownfields investigation is currently under review by EPA and the Division of Environmental Response and Remediation.
Daniel Dean, PG
Senior Project Manager I Environmental
6949 S High Tech Dr #100 I Midvale, Ut 84047
D 385.337.5971 I M
[e-mail] I Terracon.com
Terracon provides environmental, facilities, geotechnical, and materials consulting engineering services delivered with
responsiveness, resourcefulness, and reliability.
Private and confidential as detailed here (www.terracon.com/disclaimer). If you cannot access the hyperlink, please e-mail
sender.
61217142 Additional Site Characterization Work Plan FINAL Signed.pdf
3944K
State of Utah Mail - Additional Site Characterization Work Plan for SLC Station Center/former WRR Industries Inc. site (DWMRC F…
DSHW-2022-021917
Add itional Site Characterization
Work Plan
SLC Station Center
550 and 570 West 400 South
Salt Lake City, Salt Lake Gounty, Utah
July 21,2022
Terracon Project No. 61217142
Prepared for:
University of Utah and the
University of Utah Research Foundation
Salt Lake City, UT
Prepared by:
Terracon Consultants, lnc.
Midvale, Utah
frerftrcon
July 21,2022
Utah Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control
P.O. Box 144880
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4880
Attn: Doug Hansen
Division Director
E: [e-mail]
P: [phone]
Re:Additional Site Characterization Work Plan
SLC Station Center
550 & 570 West 400 South
Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah
Terracon Project No. 61217 I 42
Dear Mr. Hansen:
On behalf of the University of Utah Research Foundation, Terracon is pleased to provide this
Additional Site Characterization Work Plan (Work Plan) for the above-referenced site. The Work
Plan provides a summary of the previous investigations and remedialactions (performed by others)
at the site, an initial Conceptual Site Model (CSM) detailing the current understanding of the spatial
and phase distribution of the contamination at the site, a description of the data gaps identified
during development of the CSM, and the investigatory activities proposed to characterize the data
gaps.
DWMRC's timely review of the Work Plan is requested and appreciated. The proposed high
resolution site characterization survey has been tentatively scheduled for September 13-15.
Please let us know as soon as possible if you anticipate that approval of the Work Plan may not
occur before that time so that we may reschedule accordingly. lf needed, please contact our office
at [phone] regarding this submittal.
Sincerely,
Terracon Consultants, I nc.
DanielDean
Senior Project Manager
Erik Gessert
Authorized Prolect Reviewer
Cc: Brad Maulding, Alan Jenkins, Michael Brehm, Joel Sim
Explore with us
1.0
2.0
frerracon
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TNTRODUCTTON ............ ............ 1
1.1 Site Description.............. ................ 1
1.2 Standard of Care....... ..................... 1
f NtTfAL CONCEPTUAL S|TE MODEL....... ......................2
2.1 Purpose...... ...............2
2.2 Site History and Summary of Previous Assessment and Corrective Actions ...........2
2.3 Geologic and Hydrogeologic Information and Setting ...........................4
2.4 Chlorinated Solvent Properties and Phased Spatial Distribution ..........5
2.4.1 Chlorinated Solvent Physicaland Chemical Properties.. .................5
2.4.2 Sorbed-Phase Contaminants of Concern and Spatial Distribution.......................6
2.4.3 Dissolved-Phase Chemicals of Concern and Spatial Distribution ........................6
2.4.4 Vapor-Phase Contaminants of Concern and Spatial Distribution.. .......................7
2.4.5 DNAPL Spatial Distribution.. ...................7
2.5 Environmental Concerns Verification................. ................. 8
2.5.1 Chlorinated Solvent-lmpacted Soi|...... ........................8
2.5.2 Chlorinated Solvent-lmpacted Groundwater.......... ......................... I
2.5.3 Chlorinated Solvent-lmpacted Soil Gas............ .......... I
2.5.4 Remedial Goals .......... ...........................9
2.5.5 Informational Data Gaps ........................9
SITE CHARACTERIZATION TASKS AND PROCEDURES....... .........1O
3.1 Site Characterization Tasks .......11
3.1.1 High Resolution Site Characterization Survey.. ......... 11
3.1.2 Monitoring Well Installation and Groundwater Sampling ......... . ... 13
3.1.3 Soil Gas Assessment .......14
3.1.4 Passive Flux Meters. ........15
3.2 Procedures for Sampling, Data Generation and Analysis, and Reporting............... 15
3.2.1 Sample Handling and Custody . . ........15
3.2.2 Analytical Methods...... ......................... 15
3.2.3 Quality Control ................. 16
3.2.4 InstrumenUEquipment Testing, lnspection, and Maintenance ........................... 16
3.2.5 InstrumenUEquipment Calibration and Frequency............... ...... .. 16
3.2.6 Inspection/Acceptance for Supplies and Consumables........... ......17
3.2.7 Use of Existing Data............ .................17
3.2.8 Data Reporting and Management.................. ...........17
3.2.9 Data Review ..... ..............18
3.2.10 Contingency Plan............ ..................... 18
PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND SCHEDULE .................18
REFERENCES .............. ............ 18
3.0
4.0
5.0
Explore with us
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix G
frerracon
APPENDICES
Exhibits
Exhibit 1 Topographic Map
Exhibit 2 Site Map
Tables
Table 1A Screening Levels for Contaminants of Concern-VOCs In Groundwater
Table 1B EPA Vapor Intrusion Screening Levels (VISL)-VOCs in SoilVapor
Table 2 Analytical Method Summary
Terracon SOPs
Explore with us
1.0 INTRODUCTION
As further detailed in Section 2.5.5, the site characterization activities described in this Work Plan
are being conducted in coordination with additional site characterization work that will be
completed under the purview of the Salt Lake Brownfields Coalition Grant project (Brownfields).
The Brownfields and non-Brownfields site characterization activities are complementary to each
other and consistent with the Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Waste
Management and Radiation Control's (D\ /MRC) requirements for risk-based closure and the
University of Utah Research Foundation's goals for the site.
1.1 Site Description
The SLC Station Center site is comprised of 1.89-acres of land currently owned by the University
of . Utah Research Foundation (University). The site comprises seven parcels consisting of the
addresses, Salt Lake County Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs), and land uses listed below:
, Addqesg
,,550 W, 400 Sou.th
. 550 W 400 South
, 570 W. 400 South
570 W. 400 South
570 W. 400 South
570 W. 400 South
570 W. 400 South
15-01-302-01 1 0 14
15-01-302-007 0.63
Outdoor storage yard
: Former ZCMI Carriage House/Outdoor
--"-'-"-*'^-i- -" : 'APN Acres , Use
: 15-01-302-012 0.14 ; Storage Building/Outdoor storage yard :
.15.:o1.3,g:2.o1301e':ijf::iil'1","'.,",o
15-01-302-010 0.18 Former auto repair shop
: 15:01 302_ 009 : 0 16 . Office/warehouse building
15-01-302-008 0.48 , Office/warehouse building
Exhibit 1 (Appendix A) presents the site location on a portion of the USGS topographic map.
1.2 Standard of Gare
Terracon's services will be performed in a manner consistent with generally accepted practices
of the profession undertaken in similar studies in the same geographical area during the same
time period. Terracon makes no warranties, either express or implied, regarding the findings,
conclusions, or recommendations. Please note that Terracon does not warrant the work of
laboratories, regulatory agencies, or other third parties supplying information used in the
preparation of this report.
Additional Site Characterization Work Plan
SLC Station Center r Salt Lake City, UT
July 21 , 2022 : Terracon Project No. 61217142
2.0INITIAL CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL
frernacon
2.1 Purpose
The initial conceptual site model (CSM) presents the understanding of the release based on the
physicochemical properties of the contaminants of concern in combination with site-specific
information. The purpose of the initial CSM is to:
r ldentiff the contaminants of concem, their relative subsurface distribution, and related
environmental concerns associated with the release.
r Define the remedialgoals associated with the environmental concerns.
r ldentiff informationaldata gaps and appropriate next steps.
The subsections identified below are core components to the initial CSM.
2.2 Site History and Summary of Previous Assessment and Corrective Actions
The site has a long history of industrial uses including automobile repair, heating plants, a paint
shop, a landscaping and erosion control contractor, and other miscellaneous industrial-type
clients from the early 1900s through the present. The site was most recently occupied by WRR
Industries, Inc., a landscaping and erosion control contractor. The buildings on the property were
used for office space and dry storage of miscellaneous new and old stock materials such as auto
parts, landscaping equipment, vehicle storage, and dieseltruck repair bays.
Terracon Consultants, lnc. (Terracon) completed Phase I Environmental Site Assessments (ESA)
atthe site in 2018 and2021(Terracon 2018; Terracon2021). The Phase I ESAs identified multiple
Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) including a long history of industrial use and the
presence of sumps, staining, oil-water separators, and leaking drums, and adjacent sites (Quality
Plating) with known contamination.
To evaluate conditions associated with the identified RECs, Terracon performed a Limited Site
lnvestigation in 2017 (LSl; Terracon 2017). The 2017 LSI involved advancement of eight
boreholes to evaluate on-site soil and groundwater impacts from the historical industrial uses of
the site and adjacent properties (B-1 through B-8 on Exhibit 2). Four of the borings were
advanced within the existing warehouse structure to evaluate potential contamination in the
following areas:
Bay door on 400 South to evaluate potential off-site impacts and the interior
warehouse space (boring 8-6).
Floor drain and oil/water separator identified in the open warehouse space (borings
B-7 and B-8, respectively).
Oil/water separator in the northern part of the building (boring B-3).
Explore with us
Additional Site Characterization Work Plan
SLC Station Center r Salt Lake City, UT
July 21, 2022 t Terracon Project No. 61217 142 frerracon
The additionalfour borings were advanced within the yard to evaluate potential contamination
in the following areas:
r Two drum storage areas with visible staining (borings B-2 and B-4).
r Near the southeastern-adjoining Quality Plating property (boring B-5).
r The northeast corner of the building down-gradient of two interior sumps (boring
B-1).
The LSI results indicated that a portion of on-site groundwater was significantly impacted by the
presence of several dissolved-phase chlorinated volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including
tetrachloroethene (PCE), trichloroethene (TCE), cis-1,2-dichloroethene (DCE), trans-1,2-
dichloroethene (trans-1, 2 DCE), and vinyl chloride (VC). The highest concentration of PCE was
present at boring B-3 at a concentration of 34.1 mg/L which indicated the potential presence of
dense non-aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL). The source of the contaminants was not identified,
but the highest concentrations of PCE at boring B-3 were located near an oil-water separator in
the northeastern portion of the site. The LSI did not identify VOC impacts in site soils. The LSI
identified limited petroleum impacts in site soils and groundwater and did not identify any metals
impacts in site soils and groundwater (Terracon 2017).
Additional site investigation and soil and groundwater remediation work was subsequently
performed by Environmental Contractors Incorporated (ECl) from 2018 through 2021. ECI
installed seven additional soil borings (B-9 through B-15 on Exhibit 2) in March 2018 and August
2018 to further define the vertical and horizontal extent of groundwater VOC contamination. Five
monitoring wells (MW-1 through MW-s on Exhibit 2) and two recovery wells/trenches (RW-1 and
RW-2)were subsequently installed by ECl.
ECI engaged DWMRC to provide remediation oversight in September 2018. Multiple remedial
Work Plans and Corrective Action Plans were prepared by ECI and submitted to DWMRC. Soil
and groundwater remediation conducted by ECI at the site from 2018 to 2021 per the DWMRC-
approved plans included:
Soil removal and structural demolition:
o Demolition and removal of a leanto structure located south of the former
boiler room
o Removal of the concrete floor from the former boiler room, the oil/water
separator, and associated contaminated soil to a depth of approximately
12 feet bgs.
Groundwater remediation :
o Operation of a groundwater extraction trench and stacked-tray air stripper
in the northeast area of the site from April 2019 through November 2019.
o Eight injections of -4%o potassium permanganate (KMnO+) solution from
March 2020 to July 2O20 (ECl 2020). 97o/o remediation-grade crystalline
KMnO+ was added to extracted groundwater and re-injected via trenches
Explore with us
Additional Site Characterization Work Plan
SLC Station Center r Salt Lake City, UT
July 21, 2022 t Terracon Project No. 61217 142 fnrracon
mass of KMnO+ injected was approximately
KMnO+ solution from June 2021 to October
mass of KMnOa injected was approximately
and soil borings. The total
8,066 pounds.
o Fourteen injections of -4%
2021 (ECl 2022). The total
4,630 pounds.
ECI's groundwater remediation activities appear to have reduced VOC concentrations in site
groundwater. However, based on the most recent groundwater sampling completed in September
2021 (ECl2022) PCE, TCE, and VC remained elevated at the site. The most recent groundwater
monitoring conducted at the site in September 2021 (ECl 2022) documented the following
groundwater VOC impacts above EPA Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) at the site:
PCE is present at concentrations of 0.01 mg/L and 11.1 mg/L at MW-2 and MW-3,
respectively, which exceed the MCL of 0.005 mg/L.
TCE is present at a concentration of 0.0466 mg/L at MW-2, which exceed the MCL
of 0.005 mg/1.
VC is present at concentrations of 0.055 mg/L, 0.0162 mglL and 0.0079 mg/L at
MW-2, MW-3 and MW-4, respectively, which exceed the MCL of 0.002 mg/L.
ECI's September 2021 groundwater sampling results indicate that considerable PCE rebound
occurred at MW-3 which indicates an ongoing source of PCE contamination. PCE concentrations
at MW-3 were <0.001 mg/L in July 2021 , increased to 18.4 mg/L in August 2021 , then declined
to 11.1 mg/L in September 2021.f CE at MW-3 experienced considerable rebound from July 2021
to August 2021, rising from <0.001 mg/L to 5.75 mg/L. TCE concentrations at MW-3 then declined
to low levels (<0.001 mg/L) in September 2021 but may have rebounded again since that time.
VC concentrations rebounded at MW-2, MW-3, and MW-4 in August 2021 andlor September
2021.
Detectable concentrations of additional VOC compounds are present in MW-1, MW-2, MW-3,
MW-4, and MW-S. However, the VOC concentrations are below MCLs, and ECI monitoring results
indicate that concentrations are stable.
2.3 Geologic and Hydrogeologic Information and Sefting
Near-surface soils consist of sandy gravel fill material to a depth of approximately 1 to 3.5 feet
below ground surface (bgs), underlain by native silt and silty clay, interbedded with silty sand and
poorly-graded sand layers. Groundwater is present at a depth of approximately 10-1 1 feet across
the site (Terracon 2017; ECI 2022). The silt and clay layers range in thickness between 3 and 12
feet and appear to be laterally continuous across the site (ECl2022). The higher-permeability
sand layer also appears to be laterally continuous across the site (ECl2022). Site lithology has
not been established below 20 feet bgs.
Explore with us
Additional Site Characterization Work Plan
SLC Station Center r Salt Lake City, UT
July 21,2022 t Terracon Project No. 61217142 frerracon
Groundwater is largely sourced from within the sand layer below a silty clay layer (ECl2022).
Groundwater flow is in a southerly direction with a shallow hydraulic gradient of approximately
0.008 feeUfoot (ECl 2022).
Surficial geologic units are underlain by sediments deposited in Lake Bonneville which range from
sand and gravel to silt and clay. The silts and clays generally represent sediments deposited
during deep water conditions away from canyon mouths and the mountain front, while lake-
deposited sand and gravel generally represent near-shore sediments and deltaic deposits near
canyon mouths (UGS 2009). Fine-grained silt and clay deposits are expected to occur below
surficial deposits at the site as the nearest canyon mouth/mountain front depositional area is
located approximately two miles to the northeast at the mouth of City Creek Canyon.
Alluvial and lacustrine sediments of considerable thickness underlie the Lake Bonneville deposits.
Estimates of the total thickness of unconsolidated Quaternary deposits in Salt Lake Valley range
from approximately 130 feet to as much as 2,000 feet (Wong et al. 2002), depending on the
proximity to the deepest part of the basin. Below this, semi-consolidated and consolidated
sediments extend to a depth of up to 8,500 feet, below which bedrock is found (Wong et al. 2002).
The basin-fill aquifer system in the Salt Lake Valley includes a confined aquifer in the central and
northern parts of the basin (where the site is located), a deep unconfined aquifer between the
confined aquifer and the mountains, and a shallow unconfined aquifer overlying the artesian
confined aquifer (UGS 2009). The confining layer is between 40 and 100 feet thick, and the top
of the layer is between 50 and 150 feet below the land surface (UGS 2OOg). The shallow
unconfined aquifer overlies the confining layer and is composed primarily of fine-grained
sediments that are only slightly more permeable than the confining layer; in some areas it is
difficult to differentiate between the two (UGS 2009). The shallow unconfined aquifer yields little
water and the water is generally of low quality (UGS 2009).
2.4 Chlorinated Solvent Properties and Phased Spatial Distribution
2.4.1 Chlorinated Solvent Physical and Chemical Properties
PCE is a chlorinated ethene that is currently and has historically been used as a solvent in dry
cleaning, textile processing, and metal cleaning operations. Under ambient conditions PCE will
readily evaporate and generate PCE vapor. PCE is identified to be a probable human carcinogen
and shortterm exposure to high concentrations may affect the central nervous system. PCE has
a density of 1.622 grams per cubic centimeter (g/cm3), which is greater than the density of water,
indicating immiscible PCE will 'sink' below the groundwater surface, and is classified as a dense
non-aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL).
PCE has a chemical formula of CzClr and consists of double bonded carbon atoms saturated with
chlorines. Pure PCE released into the subsurface can exist in four distinct phases that present
Explore with us
Additional Site Characterization Work Plan
SLC Station Center r Salt Lake City, UT
July 21, 2022 : Terracon Project No. 61217 142 frerracon
unique risks to receptors: pure-phase (i.e., DNAPL), sorbed-phase, dissolved-phase, and vapor-
phase.
In the dissolved phase, the sequential replacement of chlorine atoms with hydrogen atoms may
occur under natural groundwater conditions and results in the formation of breakdown products
that themselves are environmental contaminants of concern and include TCE (C2HClg), DCE
(CzHzClz), and VC (CzHsCl). In the subsurface, PCE and related breakdown products are
considered recalcitrant contaminants because of their density, mobility in the aqueous phase,
high toxicity, and general lack of omnipresent natural degraders.
2.4.2 Sorbed-Phase Gontaminants of Concern and Spatial Distribution
Source area identification and an understanding of contaminant migration through the subsurface
and into the water bearing zone are critical components of the CSM as sorbed-phase or residual
DNAPL may result in persistent sources of dissolved- and vapor-phase impacts. Post-remediation
rebound of dissolved-phase PCE in site groundwater indicates that sorbed-phase or residual
DNAPL exists, likely in the vicinity of MW-3. Existing sampling data has not identified a definitive
location for the PCE source release and sorbed-phase contamination. The suspected source area
is the former oil-water separator that was removed by ECI (ECl2022). Approximate locations of
soil boring locations advanced by Terracon and ECI are depicted on Exhibit 2.
Based on the dissolved-phase PCE concentrations observed near the suspected source area
(monitoring well MW-3), it is possible that PCE DNAPL is present in the subsurface. PCE DNAPL
can impact soils as PCE partitions into the sorbed phase. Further, it is possible that DNAPL and/or
sorbed-phase PCE soil impacts exist below the depth intercepted by existing wells and previous
soil borings. DNAPL is discussed further in Section 2.4.3 and Section 2.4.5.
Remedial design characterization efforts are recommended to address the sorbed-phase and/or
residual DNAPL data gap that appears to be creating persistent sources of dissolved-phase
impacts. Confirmation of the distribution of sorbed-phase and/or residual DNAPL impacts is
critical to achieving the dissolved-phase remedial goals.
2.4.3 Dissolved-Phase Chemicals of Concern and Spatial Distribution
Dissolved-phase chemicals of concern identified during previous site assessment activities are
summarized in Section 2.2. The existing groundwater monitoring well network consists of five
monitoring wells (MW-1 through MW-S; Exhibit 2). Maximum dissolved-phase chlorinated solvent
impacts have consistently been present at MW-3, and concentrations have been observed to
decrease to the south. PCE-impacted groundwater primarily exists beneath the outdoor storage
yard on the eastern portion of the site.
Explore with us
Additional Site Characterization Work Plan
SLC Station Center r Salt Lake City, UT
July 21, 2022 t Terracon Project No. 61217 142 frerracon
The estimated plume dimensions are approximately 150 feet long and 100 feet wide at the widest
point, comprising an approximate area of up to 15,000 square feet. The areal extents of the
dissolved-phase PCE impacts are generally consistent with the potential age of the release and
the hydraulic gradient observed at the site. The areal extents of the dissolved-phase PCE impacts
up to 20 feet bgs appear to be well established by the existing data.
The vertical depth of dissolved-phase PCE impacts has not been established. As noted, PCE is
a DNAPL with a density greater than water; therefore, DNAPL will sink below the water table until
an aquitard is reached. Based on Terracon's experience at nearby sites, fine-grained low-
hydraulic conductivity Lake Bonneville sediments (Section 2.3) may exist below 20 feet bgs.
These fine-grained units may be acting as an aquitard and impeding the downward migration of
DNAPL and/or dissolved-phase PCE. However, this has not been definitively established and the
vertical extent of PCE contamination constitutes a significant data gap.
Additional site characterization is required to assess the vertical extent of dissolved-phase PCE
impacts. Confirmation of the vertical distribution of dissolved-phase impacts is critical to achieving
the dissolved-phase remedial goals.
2.4.4 Vapor-Phase Contaminants of Concern and Spatial Distribution
VOC concentrations in soil gas have not been assessed. ECI estimated potential indoor air PCE
concentrations using USEPA's Vapor Intrusion Screening Level (VISL) calculator based on the
PCE concentrations detected during ECI's September 2021 monitoring event. The predicted
indoor air concentration was 804 pg/m3, which is above the Target Indoor Air Concentration of
47.2 pglm3 (ECl2022).
It is important to note that the predicted indoor air concentration are estimations based on a model
that may not accurately represent site specific conditions like the local depth to groundwater or
the regional lithology that may contribute to soil gas migration attenuation. However, based on
predicted indoor air modeling completed by ECl, it is possible that PCE vapor could pose an
exposure threat to occupied indoor building spaces. Additional investigation is recommended and
is being conducted under a separate Sampling and Analysis Plan (Terracon 2022).
2.4.5 DNAPL Spatial Distribution
DNAPL has not been detected during assessment activities to date; however, the reported
dissolved-phase PCE concentrations suggest that DNAPL may be present or was previously present
in the subsurface. PCE has a solubility of 200,000 pg/L in groundwater at25 degrees centigrade
(though groundwater temperatures in the vicinity of the site are more likely to be in the range of 10-
15 degrees centigrade). DNAPL sources may be present at 1o/o of solubility or 2,000 pg/L. PCE
concentrations nearthe suspected source area have been reported at a maximum concentration
Explore with us
Additional Site Gharacterization Work Plan
SLC Station Center: Salt Lake City, UT
July 21,2022 t Terracon Project No.61217142 fnrracon
2.5
of 34,100 pg/L (B-3; Terracon2017) and were most recently reported at 1 1,100 pg/L in September
2021 (MW-3; ECI 2022), both of which exceed the 1% PCE solubility threshold.
Given the age of the release it is believed that the potential DNAPL distribution, if present, has
reached a static equilibrium. Several factors influence DNAPL distribution through the subsurface
including the volume and nature of the release (catastrophic verse long term) and the subsurface
geologic structure and permeability. Typically, DNAPL will preferentially travel through high-
permeability zones. An understanding of contaminant migration through the subsurface and into
the water-bearing zone are critical components of the CSM as DNAPL impacts may result in
persistent sources of dissolved and vapor-phase impacts. Additional site characterization is
required to address this data gap as the understanding of DNAPL in the subsurface is critical to
achieving the dissolved-phase remedial goals.
Envi ronmental Goncerns Verification
Chlorinated solvent-impacted groundwater has been identified at concentrations that are either
above applicable regulatory standards or at concentrations that require additional investigation or
action. Chlorinated-solvent impacted soil and soil gas are suspected or predicted to exist above
regulatory standards or at concentrations that require additional investigation or action. This
section of the initialCSM will:
r Describe the location where the concems exist.
: ldentiff points of exposure (POEs).
r Evaluate exposure pathways.
r ldentiff the remedial goals and targeted treatment areas to address the identified concerns.
2.5.1 Chlorinated Solvent-lmpacted Soil
PCE has not been detected above residential RSLs in soil samples collected from soil borings at
depths ranging from approximately 3.5 feet bgs to approximately 26 feet bgs (Terracon 2017;ECl
2018; ECI 2022). The compounds 1,1,2-trichloroethane and 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane were
detected in two composite soil samples collected near the suspected release area at
concentrations slightly above residential RSLs (ECl 2O22); the exceedances were less than five-
percent over the residential RSL (ECl 2022). Only one soil sample has been collected at depths
greater than 16 feet bgs (sampling location B-14; ECI 2018). Sample location B-14 is located near
the suspected PCE release area and PCE soil concentrations generally tend to decrease with
depth and distance from release areas, but the B-14 data still represents a very limited area of
the site.
Based on the elevated post-remediation dissolved-phase concentrations detected in groundwater
at monitoring well MW-3 (i.e., "rebound") and the associated potential for DNAPL presence, it is
possible that soil PCE impacts exist near MW-3 at approximate depths of 10-20 feet bgs (i.e.,
between the top of the water table and the bottom of the well screen). Potential PCE-impacted
Explore with us
Additional Site Characterization Work Plan
SLC Station Center r Salt Lake City, UT
July 21,2022: Terracon Project No. 61217142 frerracon
soils below 20 feet bgs have not been well characterized and, if present, may require future
remediation to diminish the persistence of dissolved-phase PCE concentrations.
2.5.2 Chlorinated Solvent-lmpacted Groundwater
PCE-impacted groundwater at or above RSLs and VISLs has been historically and recently
reported in soil borings and the five onsite groundwater monitoring wells (MW-1 through MW-s).
Terracon conducted a search of Utah Department of Environmental Quality (UDEO) records for
public water system facilities and did not identify domestic or municipal groundwater supply wells
within one mib downgradient of the site. Additionally, no Groundwater Permits or Water Rights
Points of Diversion were identified within one-half mib downgradient of the site. The PCE-impacted
groundwater does not appear to present a threat to downgradient groundwater users.
The nearest surface water body is the Jordan River, located approximately one mile to the west and
downgradient of the site. Based on distance from the site, the PCE-impacted groundwater does not
appear to present a threat to the identified surface water bodies.
2.5.3 Chlorinated Solvent-lmpacted Soil Gas
Soil gas has not been evaluated at the site. Dissolved-phase PCE groundwater concentrations
indicate that predicted indoor air PCE concentrations exceed VISL Target Indoor Air
Concentrations (Sectio n 2.4.4).
2.5.4 Remedial Goals
The University's remedial goal for the site is achievement of unrestricted use criteria (i.e.,
dissolved-phase concentrations of chlorinated solvents below MCLs). The feasibility of achieving
this remedial goal is contingent upon further evaluation of the release and the data gaps identified
herein.
2.5.5 Informational Data Gaps
Terracon's evaluation of the existing site data and remedial activities performed to date has
identified multiple data gaps that require further assessment in order to achieve both a risk-based
closure and the University's goals for the site.
ldentified informational data gaps include the following:
Current groundwater conditions-Concentrations of volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) in on-site groundwater have not been evaluated since September 2021.
Per ECI's CAP Summary Report, post-remediation concentrations of VOCs in on-
site groundwater have fluctuated considerably. Thus, the lack of groundwater
Explore with us
Additional Site Characterization Work Plan
SLC Station Center: Salt Lake City, UT
July 21 , 2022 : Terracon Prolect No. 61217142 frerracon
monitoring since September 2021 presents a significant data gap. Additional
groundwater monitoring should be conducted to determine current conditions in
groundwater at the site.
r lmpacts to soil gas-The VOC plume's impacts to soil gas have not been
evaluated. A comprehensive soil gas survey should be conducted to evaluate the
plume's impact on soil gas at the site.
r Ongoing source of contamination-Fluctuating post-remediation concentrations
of VOCs in on-site groundwater indicates that a persistent ongoing source of
contamination exists. Additional investigation should be conducted to identify and
characterize this ongoing source, which may include PCE DNAPL.
r Vertical extent of VOC plum+The available site data does not appear to have
delineated the verticalextent of the VOC plume. Additional investigation should be
conducted to delineate the vertical extent of the plume.
Addressing the above identified informational data gaps will work to further define the CSM and
the understanding of PCE impacts in the subsurface and maximize the value and efficiency of
future remedial efforts. This Work Plan details the means and methods for addressing the
identified informational data gaps.
Terracon has prepared a Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) for the investigation of the current
groundwater conditions and soil gas data gaps. The SAP was prepared under the purview of the
Salt Lake Brownfields Coalition Grant project. In addition to DWMRC review, the Brownfields SAP
will also be reviewed and approved by the United States Environmental Protection Agency and
the Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Environmental Response and
Remediation (DERR) per the requirements of the Salt Lake Brownfields Coalition Grant project.
This Work Plan details investigation of the ongoing source and vertical extent data gaps, which
will be conducted outside of the purview of the Salt Lake Brownfields Coalition Grant project.
Additionally, groundwater and soil gas sampling conducted under the Brownfields SAP will be
one-time sampling events. This Work Plan provides protocols for additional groundwater and soil
gas sampling that may need to be conducted outside of the purview of the Salt Lake Brownfields
Coalition Grant project.
3.0 SITE CHARACTERIZATION TASKS AND PROCEDURES
The following site characterization tasks and procedures are proposed to investigate the data
gaps identified in Section 2.5.5.
Explore with us
10
Additional Site Characterization Work Plan
SLC Station Center r Salt Lake City, UT
July 21,2022 t Terracon Project No.61217142 frerracon
3.1 Site Characterization Tasks
3.1.1 High Resolution Site Characterization Survey
A high-resolution site characterization (HRSC) survey will be performed using Membrane
Interface Hydraulic Profiling Tool (MIHPT) technology to assess the vertical extent of
contamination and identify ongoing source areas (i.e., sorbed-phase or residual DNAPL). A team
of HRSC specialists, direct-push drilling rig, and a command center vehicle which will house all
applicable technologies and equipment, will be deployed to perform the HRSC survey at the site.
The MIHPT probe is a logging tool that indicates volatile hydrocarbon and solvent contamination
in addition to soil electrical conductance and indicators of formation permeability. An inert carrier
gas is continually swept behind a heated membrane in the probe, delivering diffused VOCs to a
series of detectors at the surface. The detectors each respond to different analyte properties,
which allows for differentiation of contaminants (i.e., volatile petroleum hydrocarbons or
chlorinated solvents) and provides the ability to map out the contaminant plume from source to
extent.
The MIHPT system features multiple membrane interface detectors, sensors, and tools to assess
subsurface characteristics and VOC occurrence, including:
Electrical conductivity (EC) sensor-The EC sensor creates a log of EC versus
depth. The EC of soil varies with soil grain size and a correlation can be made to
soil type relative to the EC. Broadly, clay soils correlate to high EC values, while
silty soils correlate to lesser EC values than clay soils, and sandy soils correlate to
lesser EC values than silty soils.
Hydraulic profiling tool (HPT)-The HPT creates a log of the relative formation
permeability versus depth by injecting clean water at a constant flow rate through
the direct push rods and into adjacent soil via an injection port on the side of the
probe. Sensors record the flow rate and back pressure which are used to estimate
hydraulic conductivity relative to depth. The hydraulic conductivity values
estimated by the HPT are useful in understanding zones within the subsurface
exhibiting higher or lower relative permeabilities. Understanding soil permeability
can aid in the understanding of contaminant transport, storage, and flux.
Photoionization detector (PlD)-The PID responds to volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) (e.9., petroleum hydrocarbons and chlorinated solvents) and creates a log
verse depth. Response is measured in microvolts (UV) and can be used as a semi-
quantitative method to compare VOC intensity along both the vertical profile of an
individual boring and relative to other boring locations.
Flame ionization detector (FlD) - The FID responds to combustible VOCs only
(i.e., petroleum hydrocarbons). Response is measured in pV and can be used as
a semi-quantitative method to compare petroleum hydrocarbon intensity along
both the vertical profile of an individual boring and relative to other boring locations.
Explore with us
11
Additional Site Characterization Work Plan
SLC Station Center r Salt Lake City, UT
July 21 , 2022 : Terracon Project No. 61217142 frerracon
Correlation soil and groundwater sampling is recommended to evaluate the
presence and magnitude of individual petroleum hydrocarbons.
r Halogen specific detector (XSD) - The XSD responds only to halogenated
compounds (e.9., chlorinated solvents). This detector creates a log of halogenated
response verse depth. Response is measured in pV and can be used as a semi-
quantitative method to compare halogenated compound intensity along both the
vertical profile of an individual boring and relative to separate boring locations.
Correlation soil and groundwater sampling is recommended to evaluate the
presence and magnitude of halogenated compound COCs.
This dissolved-phase contamination, lithology, and hydraulic conductivity data is captured every
inch the tooling is advanced and can be instantly utilized by field personnelto determine the next
boring locations. This approach to HRSC investigations allows a high level of dynamic decision
making leading to the most efficient characterization of the site. This helps to rapidly delineate
contaminant extents and can greatly aid in monitoring well placement, vertical screening intervals,
and remedial design considerations.
Terracon anticipates advancing up to 15 MIHPT borings to assess for the presence of sorbed-
phase and/or dissolved-phase subsurface impacts. Terracon anticipates that each HRSC boring
will be advanced to approximately 30 feet bgs for the purpose of defining the vertical extent of
PCE contamination. Borings may be advanced deeper or shallower based on real-time data
analysis. Specific HRSC boring locations are not predetermined. HRSC borings will begin near
MW-3 where the highest dissolved-phase PCE concentrations were last known to exist.
Subsequent boring locations will be determined based on utility clearance and real-time data
evaluation.
Equipment will be decontaminated using a three-bucket approach once all rods and the probe are
removed from each borehole. Wet rods will be rinsed, washed with Alconox (if approved), then
rinsed again.
A daily HRSC field report will be generated by the contractor for review by Terracon. This report
will include all preliminary data, boring locations completed, and quality control results. The daily
reports will serve as the tool for Terracon to determine whether the objective of the work is being
achieved and what adjustments may be necessary to optimize subsequent testing locations.
Electronic data files will also be transmitted to Terracon daily for data management purposes.
After the field characterization is completed, the HRSC survey data deliverables will be used
further define the understanding of the location and distribution of impacted media, its relationship
to potential sources, its proximity to site features and boundaries, and to inform the additional site
investigation activities described in Section 3.1.2 through Section 3.1.4. HRSC data analysis
may include generation of a three-dimensional (3-D) model of the plume.
Explore with us
12
Additional Site Characterization Work Plan
SLC Station Center r Salt Lake City, UT
July 21 , 2022 : Terracon Project No. 61217142 frerracon
3.1.2 Monitoring Well lnstallation and Groundwater Sampling
Additional permanent groundwater monitoring wells may be installed if the HRSC survey results
indicate that the existing monitoring well network does not intercept a critical area of the PCE
plume. The locations of the monitoring wells will be approved by DWMRC prior to placement.
Further, additional groundwater sample collection from the existing monitoring wells may be
required beyond what will be conducted under the Brownfields SAP.
lf installed, monitoring well depths will be determined based on the results of the HRSC survey.
Monitoring wells will be installed per the procedures detailed in Terracon SOP 108, Monitoing
Well Design and lnstallation (using direct-push drilling) (Appendix C). Soil samples will be
collected during drilling to document lithology and for laboratory analysis of samples from the
depth interval(s) identified by the HRSC survey. Soilsamples will be field screened using sensory
methods and with a photoionization detector (PlD) equipped with a 10.6 electron volt ultraviolet
lamp source to evaluate for the presence of VOCs.
Monitoring wells will be 2-inch diameter polyvinyl chloride (PVC) casing, with ten feet of 0.010-
inch factory-slotted well screen from the bottom of the well and solid casing from the top of the
screen to the land surface. Well screen length may be modified if indicated by the results of the
HRSC survey. A 10120 graded silica sand filter pack will be placed from the bottom of the well to
approximately two feet above the top of well screen, followed by a hydrated bentonite chip annular
sealto approximately 1-foot bgs. The monitoring wellwill be fitted with locking J-plug well cap and
a flush-mount, traffic-rated surface completion. lf required by DWMRC, soil cuttings will be
containerized on site for subsequent characterization and disposal.
Following monitoring well installation, Terracon will return to the site to develop the wells.
Terracon personnelwill measure the static groundwater level in each wellto the nearest 0.01-foot
at the top of the well casing to assess if adequate groundwater is present for development. The
groundwater monitoring wells will be developed utilizing a polyethylene weighted bailer or a
dedicated purge pump until a minimum of three to five well casing volumes of groundwater have
been removed, or the groundwater monitoring wells have been purged dry. After development,
the groundwater monitoring wells will be allowed to reach equilibrium for a minimum of 24-hours
prior to groundwater sample collection.
Terracon will survey the top-of-casing elevations of the new monitoring wells following well
completion and tie in the elevations to the existing monitoring well network. The monitoring wells
will be surveyed for the purpose of developing a groundwater surface elevation map. The
monitoring well survey will be completed during the same mobilization as the monitoring well
development.
Groundwater samples from new and existing monitoring wells will be collected following the
procedures detailed in Terracon SOP 12, Groundwater Monitoring Well Sampling (Appendix C).
Groundwater samples will be dispensed directly into laboratory-supplied sample containers and
Explore with us
13
Additional Site Characterization Work Plan
SLC Station Center r Salt Lake City, UT
July 21,2022 t Terracon Project No. 61217142 frerracon
analyzed for VOCs via EPA Method 8260. lf required by DWMRC, purge water will be
contai nerized on-site for subsequent characterization and d isposal.
Additional groundwater samples may be collected from existing and/or new monitoring wells for
analysis of non-VOC parameters required for remedial design purposes. These additional
parameters are detailed in Table 2.
3.1.3 Soil Gas Assessment
Additional assessment of soil gas may be required beyond what will be conducted under the
Brownfields SAP. The number and locations of additional soil gas samples, if required, will be
approved by DWMRC prior to collection.
lf required, soil gas samples will be collected following the procedures detailed in Terracon SOP
9, Soil-gasNacuum Probe lnstallation, and Terracon SOP 9A, So/ Gas Sampling (Appendix C).
Soil gas sampling will be conducted by using a direct-push drill rig to advance borings to an
approximate depth of 5 feet bgs and install soil vapor implants. The implants will consist of a 6-
inch long stainless steel disposable screen anchored to a polyethylene tubing that extends to the
surface. A one-foot 10-20 silica sand packwill be placed around the implant and the remainder
of the anulus will be filled with hydrated bentonite chips. Care will be taken to ensure adequate
hydration of the chips to avoid air flow through the bentonite.
The soil vapor implants will be allowed to equilibrate for a minimum of one hour prior to sampling.
Prior to sample collection, Terracon will conduct leak detection tests at each sample location. The
first test is to evaluate the sample train for leaks by conducting a shut-in test on the sample train
after it is fully assembled. The shutin test will be conducted by closing the valve to the vapor point
and applying a vacuum to the closed sample train while monitoring the pressure on an inline
vacuum gauge for one minute. lf the sample train holds a constant vacuum pressure the sample
train will be deemed to be airtight. Following the shutin test, the air that was evacuated from the
sample train to generate the vacuum will be purged.
A second leak detection test will be conducted by introducing helium vapor at a concentration
between 15 and 20 percent into a sampling shroud placed over the probe. lf helium is measured
in the sampling train at a concentration of greaterthan 7,500 parts per million (ppm) it will indicate
there was potential breakthrough in the sampling train and all connections will be re-examined
and tightened where necessary and re-tested.
The soil gas samples will be collected in laboratory-supplied, batch-certified clean 1,000 mL or
400-mL Summa@ canisters, using new Teflon@ tubing and a flow regulator that restricts flow to
no more 200 mL per minute. Soil gas samples will be analyzed for VOCs via EPA Method TO-15.
Following the collection of the samples the soil vapor implants will be removed by pulling them
from the ground.
Explore with us
14
Additional Site Characterization Work Plan
SLC Station Center: Salt Lake City, UT
July 21, 2022 t Terracon Project No. 61217142 frerracon
3.1.4 Passive Flux Meters
Passive Flux Meters (PFM), e.g. FluxTraceP or equivalent, may be deployed in monitoring wells
to delineate contaminant mass flux and groundwater Darcy velocities to aid in site characterization
and remedial design. Each PFM consists of a permeable canister or tube filled with granular
activated carbon pre-loaded with biodegradable alcohol-based tracers that have specific
partitioning characteristics with the activated carbon. As groundwater passively flows through a
PFM over the deployment period the alcohol tracers are depleted from the activated carbon, with
the net loss of the tracers directly correlating to the groundwater speed. At the same time, any
contaminants present in the groundwater adsorb to the activated carbon during the deployment
period. The total mass of contaminants accumulated on the activated carbon is then quantified
and the contaminant mass flux is calculated.
PFMs are deployed into a well(s) across a predetermined vertical interval of the saturated zone.
The PFM unit is typically in the well for two weeks and then retrieved. Once removed from the
well, the PFM devices are returned to the manufacturer for analysis at one-foot intervals. From
those analyses, an accurate vertical profile of contaminant mass flux (mg/m2lday) and
groundwater Darcy flux (speed; cm/day) is generated, and the results are provided in a report.
The generated data provides remedial designers with important information on the flux zones
within the aquifer, which ultimately aids to improve the results of remediation efforts.
3.2 Procedures for Sampling, Data Generation and Analysis, and Reporting
3.2.1 Sample Handling and Custody
Samples will be identified, labeled, preserved, and handled following Terracon SOP 20
(Appendix C), which includes chain of custody and documentation procedures. Required sample
containers, sample volumes, sample holding times, and sample preservation methods are
summarized in Table 2.
Samples will be placed into the appropriate laboratory-provided container immediately after
collection. The container will remain in the sight of the sampler or will be locked in a secured area
until the samples are transported under chain of custody protocols for delivery to the laboratory.
3.2.2 Analytical Methods
Details for analytical method requirements are provided in Table 1A and Table 1B. All analytical
methods will follow standard EPA procedures as outlined in Test Methods for Evaluating Solid
Wastes - Physical/Chemical Methods (SW-846) as updated. Please refer to SW-846 for analytical
SOPs and information regarding analytical equipment, instrumentation, performance criteria,
corrective action procedures and documentation, sample disposal, and method validation
information and procedures for nonstandard methods. Laboratory turnaround times needed will
Explore with us
15
Additional Site Characterization Work Plan
SLC Station Center r Salt Lake City, UT
July 21, 2022 t Terracon Project No. 61217 142 frerracon
be specified on chain of custody records for each sample set but will typically be the standard
turnaround time of 7 working days
3.2.3 Quality Control
To ensure that high quality, reliable data are consistently collected, and that data are comparable
to previous investigations, QA procedures will be followed throughout the investigation. Quality
assurance procedures include investigation objectives outlined in this Work Plan, following SOPs,
and collecting and analyzing field and laboratory QC samples.
QC samples collected in the field will be preserved, handled, and transported in an identical
manner as the environmental samples. QC samples will include the following:
r Field duplicates (groundwater samples only, 10% of total sample load)
r Trip blanks (groundwater samples only)
r Matrix spikes and matrix spike duplicates (MS/MSDs)
r Laboratory method blanks
r Laboratory control samples and laboratory control sample duplicates
(LCS/LCSDS)
3.2.4 InstrumenUEquipment Testing, Inspection, and Maintenance
Testing, inspection, and maintenance of sampling equipment and field instrumentation will be
performed by Terracon field personnel prior to each day's field use and in accordance with the
procedures and schedules in the manufacturers' specifications. A supply of appropriate spare
parts and batteries will be maintained with each instrument in its transport case, along with
instrument calibration supplies. Any identified deficiencieswillbe documented in the field logbook,
along with any corrective actions (e.9., spare parts replacement and instrument re-testing) and
effectiveness of corrective actions.
3.2.5 InstrumenUEquipment Galibration and Frequency
Field instruments will be calibrated daily or in accordance with manufacturers' specifications by
Terracon field personnel and using National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
standards or equivalent. Calibration deficiencies, if any, will be documented in the field logbook
along with their resolution (e.9., spare parts replacement and re-calibration).
Laboratories utilized in this investigation will meet all State of Utah, The NELAC Institute, and
EPA method protocols necessary to produce legally and defensible analytical data, as indicated
in the Utah Environmental Laboratory Certification Program (ELCP) document. ln the event of a
negative audit finding or any other circumstance, which raises doubt concerning the laboratory's
competence or compliance with required procedures, the laboratory ensures that those areas of
concern are quickly investigated. A resolution of the situation is promptly sought and, where
Explore with us
16
Additional Site Gharacterization Work Plan
SLC Station Center r Salt Lake City, UT
July 21, 2022 : Terracon Prqect No. 61217 142 frerracon
necessary, recalibration and retesting are conducted. Records of events and corrective actions
taken by the laboratory to resolve issues and to prevent further occurrences are maintained.
3.2.6 lnspection/Acceptance for Supplies and Consumables
Sample containers and other dedicated consumables will meet EPA criteria for cleaning
procedures required for low-level chemical analysis. Sample containers will have Level ll
certification provided by the manufacturer, in accordance with pre-cleaning criteria established by
EPA in "Specifications and Guidelines for Obtaining Contaminant-Free Sample Containers." The
certificates of cleanliness are maintained by the container suppliers and can be obtained upon
request using the container batch and lot numbers. Sample containers and sample preservatives
(where applicable) will be provided by the laboratory. The containers shall be pre-preserved prior
to the sampling event, if required. New disposable nitrile sampling gloves will be used during
collection of samples and will be discarded after collection of each sample. New disposable
bailers and/or tubing will be used to collect groundwater samples and will be discarded after use.
Prior to use, the materials provided by the laboratory or other suppliers will be inspected visually
for signs of tampering, contamination, or damage. No evidence of tampering, contamination, or
damage will be acceptable. The field team leader will be responsible for the inspection. Reserves
of field supplies and consumables are stored and maintained in Terracon's secured storage
warehouse and used as needed by field personnel for each day's field activities, and the reserves
of consumables are re-ordered/replenished as needed by Terracon staff.
3.2.7 Use of Existing Data
All existing data collected under DWMRC-approved work plans (e.9., ECI's Corrective Action
Summary reports) will be considered definitive data acceptable for use. Data collected under
Terracon's 2017 LSlwill be considered non-definitive and used only for reference.
3.2.8 Data Reporting and Management
The results of the investigation will be compiled and detailed in a report that will be submitted to
DWMRC. Interim and/or supplementalfollow-up reports may also be prepared due to the phased
nature of the proposed investigation. The report(s) will summarize the data collected, document
the investigation procedures and results, update the Initial CSM and data gaps, and will include
supporting maps, figures, and data summary tables. Appendices will include complete laboratory
analytical reports, including laboratory QA/QC evaluation and chain of custody documentation.
The report will include an updated CSM, a Risk Evaluation, and recommendations for remedial
actions, if necessary. Data will be compared to the screening values presented in Table 1A and
Table 1B.
Data will be processed using commercially available word processing, spreadsheet, and/or
database programs. During transcription of field measurements, each entry will be double-
checked immediately after each transcription from field logbooks and forms. To minimize potential
Explore with us
17
Additional Site Characterization Work Plan
SLC Station Center r Salt Lake City, UT
July 21, 2022 t Terracon Project No. 61217 142 f|brracon
errors in laboratory data transcription, the use of electronic data deliverables (EDDs) will be
maximized during data entry to summary tables and databases. The control mechanism to detect
and correct possible errors in data transcription, reduction, reporting, and data entry to forms,
reports, and databases will be the senior peer review of documents by Terracon's Project
Manager and QfuQC Officer. Data will be stored electronically, both on a local server hard drive
(subject to daily backup on a separate file server) and on the laboratories' database system and
can be retrieved via the local server and via the laboratories' secured online data access system.
3.2.9 Data Review
Following receipt of the laboratory analytical results and initial review by Terracon's Project
Manager, the data will be forwarded to the Terracon QA/QC Officer for review which will include
evaluation of whether any of the data is flagged or if laboratory control limits were not met.
3.2.10 Conti ngency Plan
lf unforeseen issues arise before or during the sampling activities that have not been specifically
addressed in this Work Plan, DWMRC will be notified by telephone and email. The Work Plan will
be revised and amended as neressary to address the new issues or deviations to the plans
herein.
4.0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND SCHEDULE
Terracon's management team for this project includes the following personnel:
Project Manager: Daniel Dean
Environmental Department Manager: Benjamin Bowers
lnvestigation and Remediation Group Manager: Amy Austin
Authorized Project Reviewer: Erik Gessert
QfuQC Officer: Andrew Turner
Sampling activities described in this Work Plan are anticipated to begin within two weeks of
acceptance by DWMRC. DWMRC will be notified in advance of the planned sampling dates.
5.0 REFERENCES
Environmental Contractors Incorporated (ECl) 2018. Phase I Pilot Test Work Plan, W.R.R.
lndustries, lnc., 570 West 400 South, Salt Lake City, Utah, Salt Lake County, Utah, DWMRC
Facility ldentification No UTCA-0023. October 8.
T
I
T
I
I
Explore with us
18
Additional Site Characterization Work Plan
SLC Station Center: Salt Lake City, UT
July 21,2022 t Terracon Prolect No.61217142 frerracon
EnvironmentalContractors Incorporated (ECl) 2020. Corrective Action Summary Report, W.R.R.
lndustries, lnc., 570 West 400 Soufh, Salt Lake City, Utah, Salt Lake County, Utah, DWMRC
Facility ldentification No UTCA-0023. October 1.
EnvironmentalContractors Incorporated (ECl) 2022. Phase ll Conective Action Summary Repoft,
W.R.R. lndusties, lnc., 570 West 400 South, Salt Lake City, Utah, Salt Lake County, Utah,
DWMRC Facility ldentification No UTCA-0023. January 28.
Terracon 2017. Limited S,fe lnvestigation, 217 Development LC, 570 West 400 South, Salt Lake
City, Salt Lake County, Utah. December 15.
Terracon 2018. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, WRR lndustries, 570 West 400 South,
Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah. January 3.
Terracon 2021. Phase I Environmental Site Assessmenf, SLC Station Center, 550 and 570 West
400 South, Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County, Utah. June 24.
Utah Geological Survey (UGS). 2009. Ground-Water Quality Classification For The Principal
Basin-Fill Aquifer, Salt Lake Valley, Salt Lake County, Utah.
Wong, 1., Silva, W., Wright, D., Olig, S., Ashland, F., Gregor, N., Christenson, G., Pechmann, J.,
Thomas, P., Dober, M., and Gerth, R.2002. Ground-shaking map for a magnitude 7.0 eafthquake
on the Wasatch fault, Salt Lake City, Utah, metropolitan area. Utah Geological Survey
Miscellaneous Publication MP 02-05, 50 p., Utah Geological Survey Public Information Series 76.
Explore with us
19
APPENDIX A
Exhibits
Rose Park colf
Cours€
N
J
I4'6 :i?ai.A
A'Q:O
,
'pr,.
vs
ov
€
700 N
1000 N
33
oo
d,,
*.,?
;':"j''g<
: iro
"!-
J
Jd)
.J
1 0th Ave; 9rh Ave
: 7th Ave
q6h46<
OAUIY6
U
O
:U oo qon
N ---
300 s
500 s
700 5
800s 6
qonq -
o
Eu
/n^c A
B
o6
300 s
Salt Lake City
600 5
700 s
I 3th Ave
2nd Ave
South Temple St
r00 s
. 2005
300 s
500 s
600 s
700 s
800 s
900 s
1700 5
600 N
500 N
400 N
500 N
400 N
Cify Cteek
800 s
3 i:oo sO
€
2100 s
3
Oo
NN 3
oO
;
o
3 100s = g
200s x o6.4
3
o@ I'Bow wB Fury
Yale AveuuOO-
@*suu
'' 6 o
ru
u
oON
oa
=
O > YUU )
o3
h
OOr
3
N o
uF
A ,,Io*FO
6
ce'6n
=o a
6
!
!
a
?
5$
\a
6-;
:
!
c
\tt{,
& 1201 I
14
3ra
I
o
=>:a-.t
aF
a
=
1700 s
o+
.\c
O
o
Glendale Golf
Course
zzaj s
23ZO 5 "*
a @ south Salt ^tsotft
*$r
'd
,.: .,i'..!.1
Site Boundary
2,000 4,000
DATA SOURCES:
ESRI - Basemaps
SLC Station Center
550 and 570 West 400 South
Salt Lake City, Utah
Topographic Site Map
6949 South High Tech Dr,
Midvale, Uf 84047
[phone] terracon.com
Project No.:
6121749e
Jun 2022
Date:
SJH
Drawn By:
DMD
leviewed By
lll[el
''
B-9
:j,
t
plw-2
(t A!'&**.'.,;
ffi
,t e;
;A t:+
"J',1.*lr
i;l
n 1,4wit4
ll.rr i t.:J*--v,
.;
't:],:
J?
B-11 -s
W
W,,z
!a;B- 13
B-12
tt &4.
w,
B:14
f'l\ /-4
<0.0021
B.8l,rltsl '
,r-
,.:
J-xd
,,&
u-6 'l
r--"-:--:-:]l
I irrr'
I
| *rr.l l'r
I
ry
1L 0
^re -:-.-
t.: ?
W*
@a
@e.
&.t..*..,. ', ..1, t
t:,';v' &t'. *.;
.--1
i,
&
- l^-"j"
B-7
| '|,rr
1
I Lrrari. I
&
&;
x
B-5
:
plul-1
..:0,001
*
v' MIV-5
<0.005
,,.:..:W@,9
Site Bt.rundalV
i:r31, 611.r (iroittrdwafer anrJ Sorl Bor rrq.,
i:lsttnq lr'lonrtorrnq Vtr:ils,,.rrtl P[,F eciri.enti-ation f mqil) 5epl
i-_'-l S.,i'i Rei-r'r;:drairon Ai'e.:
B; lil nq l,)etrolrlior Ar.t.r.r
AL:!rr;xi nrate PL E Pli:rrrt:
lr rtr':'l.l r
i, t'
.t I'
,.;: itl
rl.l )
; ::L MeffiKrffiffiffiffi
Site Plarr
iil-L, i:ilatrcr, L+.rter'
i,5C ;rir j i7i-) ;1'--'si -l[]i, Souil
ljalf L irr:r: r-, iu. L.
jtair
Exlrrbrt
2
ffi
!i, ,
lf) .tii.il, \r,)r
TABLE IA
SCREENING LEVELS FOR CONTAIIINANTS OF CONCERN . VOCS IN GROUNDWATER
"*:;,*n *^i W\rv!W:waffiirys n,
t,
67€4-1 Acetone 14 0.01
't07-'13-1 Acrylonttnle 0.00005 444 186 0.00187
7143-2 Benzene 0.00046 0.005 0.00'159 0.00693 0.000331
108-8G1 tsromobenzene 0.062 0.62 0.000352
75-274 Bromodichlorcmethane 0.00013 0.08 0.000876 0.00382 0.00038
75-25-2 Bfomoform 0.0033 0.08 o.1'17 0.51 0.000469
74-83-9 HK)mOmetnane 0.0075 o.o174 0.073 0.000866
1 04-51-8 n-Butyl benzene 1 0.000361
1 35-98-8 sec-Butylbenzene 0.000201
9d-@{ten-Eutylbenzsne 0.69 0.000206
56-23-5 Carbon tetrachloride 0.00046 0.005 0.0004't5 0.00 181 0.000328
1 08-90-7 chlorobenzene 0.078 0.1 0.41 1.72 o.ooo212
12448-1 L;nloro0rDromomemane 0.00087 0.08 0.000373
75-O0-3 Chlomethane 21 o 10 38.6 0.000946
67€6-3 unlorolorm 0.00022 0.08 0.000814 0.00355 0.000229
7447-3 chloromethane 0.19 0.26 1.09 0.000375
95-49-8 2-Chlorotoluene 0.24 0.000301
106-434 4-Chlorotoluene 0.25 0.00024
96-12-8 3.3E47 0.0002 0.0000281 0.00034 0.00105
106-93-4 1,2-Dibromoethane 0.000m71 0.00005 0.000'176 0.000769 0.000343
74-95-3 Dibromomethane 0.0083 o.'t24 o.521 0.000382
95-50-1 1,2-DrchlorobenzOne 0.3 0.6 11.2 0.000305
106-4G7 'l.4-Dichlorob€nzene 0.00048 0.075 0.00259 0.0113 0.000226
75-71-A Drchlorcdf luoromsthane o_2 o.oo744 0.0312 0.000713
75-34-3 1.'l -Dichlorcethane 0.0028 0.00224 0.00978 0.000199
'lo7-06.2 1,2-lJrchlorcethane 0.00017 0.005 0.00764 0.0334 0.000265
75-354 1,1 -Dicfiloroethene 0.28 0.007 0.195 o.421 0.000303
156-59-2 crs-1,2-ulcnlorcemene 0.036 0.07 0.000235
'15660-5 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.36 0.1 0.000264
78$7-5 1,2-DrChlOrOpropane 0.00085 0.005 0.000358
't42-28-9 1 ,3-Dichloropropane 0.37 0.000207
108-20-3 urr$propyl etner 1.5 6.97 29.3 0.000248
100414 Ethylbenzene 0.0015 o.7 0.00349 0.0152 0.000297
87€8-3 Henchlorc-1,3-Duurrene 0.00014 0.000303 0.00132 0.000342
98-82-8 lsoprcpylbenzene (Cumene)0.45 0.887 0.000243
78-93-3 2-tsutanons (MEK)5.6 2240 94'10 0.00468
75-09-2 Methyl6ne Chloride 0.011 0.005 0.763 9.23 0.001
108-1G.1 4-MemyFz-pentanone (MtBK)OJ 555 2330 0.00188
't63+U4 Methyl tert-butyl ether 0.014 o.45 L97 o.ooo212
91-20-3 Napnmarene 0.00017 0.00459 0.0201 0.001
10365-1 n-Propylbenzene 0.66 2.43 10.2 0.000206
10042-5 styrene 1.2 0.1 9.28 39 0.000234
OJU-ZUT 0.00057 0.00371 0.0162 0.000264
79-U-5 1. 1,2.2-Tetrachloroethane 0.000076 0.00323 0.0141 0.000365
76-13-1 1, 1,2-Tnchlorotnf luoroethane 10 o.242 1.O2 0.000365
127-'184 Tekachloroethene 0.011 0.005 0.0149 0.0652 0.000276
108€8-3 Iolusne 1.1 19.2 80.7 0.000434
87€1S 1.2.3-Trichlorcbenzene 0.007 0.000306
't20-82-1 1.2.4- I ncnlorcbenzene 0.0012 0.07 0.0359 0.151 0.000388
71-55€1.1.1-Trichloroethane 8 o.2 7.42 31.1 0.000286
79-00-5 0.00028 0.005 0.00521 o_0224 o.ooo277
79-01€Trichloroethene 0.00049 0.005 0.001 19 0.00743 0.000279
75€9-4 I nchlorcfluoromethane 5.2 0.000382
96-184 1,2,3-Trichlorcpropane 7.5E47 0.0223 0.0937 0.000741
95€36 'l,2,4- I nmethylDenzene 0.056 0.248 1.O4 0.00021 1
526-73-8 1,2, 3-Tnmethylbenzene 0.351 1.47 0.000287
108€7-8 1,3,b- | nmemylDenzene 0.06 0.175 0.733 0.000266
75-O'14 Vinyl chlonde 0.000019 0.002 0.000147 0.00245 0.000291
1 330-20-7 xylenes, I otal 0.19 10 0.385 't.62 0.000698
CAs-Chemic€l Abstracls Seruice. NA-Not AoDli€ble.
EPA RSL-EPA Regional Screning Level (June 2022)
mg/L{illigEms per liter
MDL-Laboratory Nilethod Detection Limit. -Not Established
EPA MCL-EPA Maximum Contaminant Level (June 2022)
TABLE 18
EPA VAPOR INTRUSION SGREENING LEVELS (VISL) FOR VOCs lN SOIL VAPOR
CAS-Chemical Abstract Servie€. (pg/m3)-micrgrams per cubic meter. -Not Established.
EPA Vapor lntrusion Screening Level Targel Sub-Slab and Near-sour@ Soil Gas Concentralion
(TSSNSGC), assuming a target risk for c€rcinogens of 1 .00E-06 and a target hazard quotient for non-
carcinogens of 1
MDL-Method deteclion limit
cA8*ll,
W4 ''
@l,t@'.
TryT-,F
#",
.
iffir{ ',
71-55-6 1 . 1 -Trichloroethane 1 74.000 730.000 2.2
79-34-5 1, 1,2,2-Telrachloroethane 7 2.8
630-20-6 1. 1. 1.2-Tetrachloroethane tz.o 55.2 2.8
79-00,5 1.1.2-Trichloroethane 5.85 25.6 2.2
76-1 3-1 1. 1.2-Trichlorolrifl uoroethane (F1 1 3)174000 730000 3.'t
75-34-3 1.1-Dichloroethane 58.5 256 '1.6
75-35-4 1.1-Dichloroethene 6950 29200 1.6
120-82-1 1. 2.4-Trichlorobenzene 69.5 292 7.5
95-63-6 1 .2.4-Tri methvlbenzene 2090 8760 2
106-93-4 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)0.156 0.681 3.1
95-5$1 1.2-Dichlorobenzene 6950 29200 2.4
107-06-2 1.2-Dichloroelhane (EDC)4 to 1.6
78-87-5 'l .2-Dichloroorooane 25 110 1.9
108-67-8 1,3, 5-Tri methylbenzene 2090 8760 2
54't-73-1 1.3-Dichlorobenzene 2.4
106-46-7 1 .4-Dachlorobenzene q 37 2.4
78-93-3 2-Butanone (MEK)174000 730.000 2.4
591-78-6 2-Hexanone (MBK)1040 4.380 3.3
622-96-8 4-Ethvlloluene
1 08-10-1 4-Methyl-2-penianone (M IBK)104000 438000 ??
71-43-2 Benzene 12 52.4 0.6
75-274 Bromodichloromethane 3 '11 2.7
75-212 Bromoform 85.1 372 4.2
74-83-9 Bromomethane 174 730 l.o
75-1S0 Carbon disulfide 24300 102000 t?
56-2$5 Carbon tetrachloride 15 A 68.1 1a
1 08-90-7 Chlorobenzene 1,740 7.300 1.9
75-00-3 Chloroethane 348000 '1460000 1.1
67-6&3 Chloroform 4.07 17.8 1
74-87-3 Chloromethane 31 30 13100 0.8
15459-2 cis- 1.2-Dichloroethene 1.6
10061-01-5 cis-1.3-Dichloroorooene 1.8
124-48-1 Dibromochloromethane 3.5
75-71-8 Dichlorodifluoromethane (F1 2)3480 14600 4
76-14-2 G1 2.8
100-41-4 Ethvlbenzene 37.4 164 1.8
87-6&3 Hexachlorobutadiene 4 19 10.7
179601-2:}.1 m,p-Xylene 3,480 14,600 1.8
75-09-2 Methylene chloride (Dichloromethane)3,380 40,900 1.4
95-47-6 o-xvlene 3.480 14.600 1.8
00-42-5 Stvrene 34800 146.000 1.7
27-18-4 Tekachloroethene 360 1570 2.8
08-88-3 Toluene 174.000 730000 a1
56-60-5 trans- 1,2-Dichloroethene 1.6
10061-02-6 trans- 1, 3-Dichloropropene 1.8
79-01-6 Trichloroethene 15.9 99.7 2.2
75-69-4 Trichlorofl uoromethane (F1 1 2.3
75-01-4 Vinvl chloride 5.59
TABLE 2
ANALYTICAL METHOD SUMMARY
'n* l*'vl*l UuC,4,,,',,
VOCs Soil sw-846 82608 4 oz glass, none, <6'C 14 days 0.01 to 0.0004
TOC Soil EPA 9060 4 oz glass, none, <6'C 28 days J.JJ
Grain Size Soil ASTM C136
>500 g sample, poly
bottle/baq, none NA NA
pH/DO/ORP/
Conductivity/Temp Groundwater Field NA NA NA
VOCs Groundwater sw-846 82608 3x40 ml glass septa vial,
HCt. <6'C 14 days 0.01 to 0.0002'12
Hardness Groundwater sM 23408
125 mL Poly, HNO3, <6'C
180 days 0.5
Fe and Mn
(Total)Groundwater EPA 60208 180 days 0.018 and 0.000934
Fe and Mn
(Dissolved)Groundwater EPA 60208 125 mL Poly, HNO3, <6'C 180 days 0.018 and 0.000934
Sulfate Groundwater EPA 300.0/9056
500 mL Poly, none, <6'C
28 days 0.594
Nitrate Groundwater EPA 300.0/9056/353.2 48 hours 0.048
Alkalinity Groundwater SM 23208 7 days 8.45
coD Groundwater EPA.410.4 250 mL Poly, H2SO1, <6'C 28 days 11.7
BOD Groundwater sM 52108 500 mL Poly, none, <6'C 48 hours I
Methane/Ethane/Ethene Groundwater RSK175 2x40 ml glass septa vial,
HCl, <6"C 14 days
Methane: 0.00291
Ethane: 0.00407
Ethene: 0.00426
Carbon Dioxide Groundwater 4500c02 D-201 1 125mL Poly, none, <6"C 15 minutes b.b /
VOCs Soil Gas T0-15 1 x Summa, none 30 days (ppbv) .0287 to .154
1 - Dissilved metals to be filtered in the field using a 0.45 Fm filter.
APPENDIX C
Standard Operating Proced u res
SOP 9 Soil-gas/Vacuum Probe Installation
Introduction
Soil-gas/vacuum probes will be installed in boreholes to collect soil-gas samples for
laboratory analysis during site investigations and to monitor the remedial progress from in-
situ bioventing or soil-vapor extraction remediation systems. Depending on the vertical
extent of contamination, probes will be installed using geoprobe equipment or a hollow-stem
auger drill rig. Standard operating procedures for installation of soil-gas/vacuum probes are
described below.
Preliminaries
Probe locations for soil-gas surveys will be determined by the site-specific Work Plan. For
in-situ remedial systems, vadose zone intervals selected for probe installation will be based
on the vertical extent of vadose contamination determined by field photoionization detector
(PID) readings and available soil analytical data. Field headspace PID readings will be
evaluated to determine what interval or intervals of the borehole will be screened. To provide
adequate vertical coverage for monitoring the remediation of vadose zone contamination,
probe screens will be installed at the base, in the center, and at the top of the contaminant
plume.
Equipment
The following equipment will be required for soil-gas/vacuum probe installations:
o One-foot long, one-inch inside diameter 0.020-inch slot PVC probe screen capped
at both ends
o One roll of ll4-inch outside diameter polyethylene tubing
. 8ll2 sized silica sand
e Granular bentonite for shallow probe installations (<20 feet)
o Bentonite chips for deep probe installations (> 20 feet)
o Weighted tape measure
o Concrete mix
o Potable water
Procedures
If the probes are being installed using a hollow-stem auger rig, each probe will consist of a 1-
foot length of one-inch inner diameter 0.020-inch slotted Schedule 40 PVC well screen that
is capped at both ends. A l/4-inch inside diameter polyethylene sampling tube will be firmly
attached to the top of each screen with a femrle assembly to serve as a sampling port and to
allow positioning of the probe within the borehole. Approximately one foot of size 8/12 sand
will be added above and below each probe screen. Immediately after installing the probe
screen/tubing assembly, the probe identification will be labeled directly on the outer tubing
with a permanent marker for future reference. The top of each sand pack will be overlain by
Standard Operating Procedures
Soil-gas/Vacuum Probe Installation
IHI Environmental
SOP9
soP 9-l
at least a 2-foot thick bentonite seal. If multiple probes are installed in one borehole, each
probe sand pack will be separated above and below by a 2-foot thick bentonite seal. Each
probe location will be finished with a flush-mount surface completion.
If the probes are installed using geoprobe equipment, the following procedures will be used.
After determining the desired probe depth, a corresponding length of polyethylene tubing
will be measured. Several feet of extra tubing should be included at the surface for sampling
purposes. After cutting the appropriate tubing length, the screened interval will be made by
perforating the bottom twelve inches of polyethylene tubing using a drill. The tubing will be
installed to the appropriate depth and completed using the same procedures for hollow-stem
auger probe installation described above.
Standard Operating Procedures
Soil-gas/Vacuum Probe Installation
IHI Environmental
SOP9
soP 9-2
SOP 9A Soil Gas Sampling
Introduction
This SOP describes the equipment, criteria, and procedures that will be used to collect
samples from soil gas probes. Some deviations from this SOP may be necessary because of
site-specific conditions. This SOP applies to soil gas probes installed up to 5 feet below the
ground surface (bgs).
Equipment
Below is a checklist of equipment for conducting soil gas probe sampling:
o Direct Reading Instrument (e.g., PID and/or GasTech)
. Log Forms/Field Notebook
o Laboratory-supplied sampling container (Tedlar bag, Summa canister, etc.)
Procedures
Screenine with Field Instruments
Prior to initiating soil vapor screening, calibrate the field instruments following the
manufacturer's instructions and/or SOP 13. At a minimum, field instrument calibration
should be completed at the beginning of each sampling day.
Attach the field instrument to the soil probe using chemical-resistant tubing (e.g., silicon,
Teflon, etc.). Make sure the tubing connection is tight to minimize any potential ambient air
being pulled into the field instrument. The type of tubing selected will depend on the vapors
suspected in the subsurface and their affinity to adsorb (i.e., becoming incorporated into) or
absorb (i.e., adhering to) to different types of tubing and the objectives of the investigation
(e.g., to determine if significant vapors are present or to determine if any vapors are present).
Teflon tubing should be used when detection of low concentrations is required or if
significant adsorption or absorption is anticipated.
Note what time the field instrument was connected to the tubing, then allow the field
instrument's pump to operate while connected to the soil gas probe tubing for a minimum of
30 seconds to purge the air from the tubing and begin pulling vapor from subsurface soils.
Record the concentration at the end of the purging period. If the reading is not stable at the
end of the purging period, continue monitoring until the reading stabilizes. Record the
highest observed reading of the stable concentrations, as well as the time each of the readings
was observed.
Tedlar Bae Sampling
In order to ensure the soil vapors collected are representative ofsubsurface pore spaces, the
soil probe and attached tubing should be evacuated prior to sampling. To do this, connect a
personal pump (e.g., Escort ELF) to the soil gas probe tubing, adjust the pump's flow rate to
3.0 liters per minute, and purge the probe for approximately l5 seconds.
Standard Operating Procedures
Soil-gasAy'acuum Probe Installation
IHI Environmental
SOP9
soP 9-r
A pump and vacuum box should be used to collect samples in a 1.0-L Tedlar bag (e.g.,
Gillian pump and vacuum box, which are generally provided by the analytical laboratory).
Place the Tedlar bag inside the vacuum box and attach it to the sampling port, then attach the
sample probe to the soil gas probe tubing. The vacuum in the box will cause the bag to
inflate, drawing in the sample. Once the sample has been collected, break the vacuum by
disconnecting the pump tubing. Remove the Tedlar bag from the box and close the valve.
Mark the sample bag with the sample identification, date and time of collection, and the
sampler's initials. Document all of the sampling methodologies used in a field notebook.
Summa Canister Sampling
In order to ensure the soil vapors collected are representative ofsubsurface pore spaces, the
soil probe and attached tubing should be evacuated prior to sampling. To do this, connect a
personal pump (e.g., Escort ELF) to the soil gas probe tubing, adjust the pump's flow rate to
3.0 liters per minute, and purge the probe for approximately 15 seconds.
Attach a clean, evacuated, laboratory-supplied, evacuated Summa canister (e.g. 6-liter
capacity), fitted with a laboratory-supplied flow regulator, to the soil probe tubing. Open the
Summa canister valve. The flow rate for the Summa canister will vary, depending upon
desired results (e.g., for comparison to PELs or TLVs). The minimum sampling time
required is 30 minutes and the maximum sampling time should be limited to 24 hours.
Contact the analytical laboratory to have them pre-set the regulator based on the sample
collection requirements. Once sampling is complete, close the valve of the canister and
disconnect the tubing. Document the flow rate, the time the canister's regulator was opened,
and the time the canister's regulator was closed. Ensure the gauge on the regulator reads the
canister is full.
Mark the sample canister with the sample identification, date and time of collection, and the
sampler's initials. Document all of the sampling methodologies used in a field notebook.
Standard Operating Procedures
Soil-gasAy'acuum Probe Installation
IHI Environmental
SOP9
soP 9-2
SOP l0 Monitoring Well Design, Drilling, and Installation
Introduction
This SOP describes procedures for the drilling and installation of monitoring wells. The two
basic well types are water table wells and confined wells. Site-specific conditions may
warrant deviating from these standard designs. Field personnel should consult with the
project manager and the work plan before deviating from the basic design.
Well Design
The typical well design to be used is intended to provide water samples of the upper 10 feet
of the water-bearing zone. The well screens will be 10-feet to 15 feet long and generally set
across the soil/groundwater interface.
Conductor Casing (Optional)
At sites where there is a possibility of introducing impacted materials into the saturated zone,
the impacted zone may be isolated with a conductor casing. The conductor casing will be
1O-inch-diameter PVC. The conductor casing will be placed and cemented into place prior to
drilling the well. Dependent upon the job and at the Project Managers discretion, an
oversized auger may be used in some situations as a temporary conductor casing
Casine and Screen Materials
The well materials will be 2-inch-diameter, schedule 40, flush-threaded, PVC. All joints
will be flush-threaded. The perforated zone will be constructed from machine slotted 0.010-
inch or 0.020-inch slot screen. A six-inch long sump (silt trap) will be placed at the bottom of
the screen.
Centralizers
Centralizers will be specified in wells deeper than 80 feet, or when more than one casing
string is installed in a borehole. Centralizers should be placed at the top and base of the
screen, and every 50 feet ofriser.
Sand Pack
The sand pack material will be a commercially packaged, inerto non-carbonate, well rounded,
sieved, product of clean, silica sand. In general, a sand of l6-40 to l0-20 mesh should be
used with 0.020-inch slot well screen.
Bentonite Seal
A two-foot bentonite seal will be installed in the annulus above the sand pack to prevent
grout from infiltrating into the screen and sand pack zone. Bentonite chips may be used for
the seal if it is placed above the water table. Pellets should be used below the water table, as
they have a higher density than the chips and will settle through the water better.
Annular Seal
Standard Operating Procedures SOP l0-1
Monitoring Well Design, Drilling, and Installation
IHI Environmental
SOPIO
Shallow wells (less than 20 feet of annulus above the bentonite seal) can be sealed with
bentonite chips, which are hydrated in place with potable water. Wells which have a longer
annular space should be sealed with a cement grout mixed at a ratio of 6.5 to 7 gallons of
water to each sack of cement, with about 3 to 5 lbs. of bentonite powder.
Water-Table Wells
The top of the well screen will be set at least 2 feet above the static water level. Sand pack
material will extend from the bottom of the boring to at least 2 feet above the top of the well
screen. This may be reduced to I foot if the sand pack is close to the surface (less than 5
feet).
Confined Aquifer Wells
The well screen will be placed as specified in the work plan to detect the target
contaminant(s). For dense non-aqueous phase liquids (DNAPLs), this is at the base of the
water-bearing unit, and for light non-aqueous phase liquids (LNAPLs), this is the top of the
aquifer. Sand pack material for deep wells will extend between 3 and 5 feet above the top of
the well screen. Sand pack material will be added through a tremie pipe to avoid bridging.
Bentonite may be poured directly down the augers if it has ten feet or less to fall through
water. If greater than ten feet, the bentonite will be placed through a tremie pipe.
Drilling and Installation Methods
Drilline Equipment
Boreholes for monitoring wells will be drilled with hollow-stem auger equipment unless field
conditions dictate otherwise. The inside diameter of the augers should be at least 2 inches
larger than the outside diameter of the well casing to allow room for a filter pack and grout
seal to be installed through the augers.
Conductor Casine Installation (Optional)
The upper fill layer will be isolated from the saturated zoneby installation of a conductor
casing. The boring for the conductor casing will be drilled with a 14-inch outside diameter
(O.D.) hollow-stem auger to approximately one foot below the depth of the impacted fill.
The hole will be thoroughly reamed out to ensure no impacted material remains inside the
augers. After the augers are withdrawn, the conductor casing will be set in place through the
augers. The casing will be sealed with a cement-bentonite grout, which will be allowed to
cure for l2 hours before proceeding with well installation. The grout seal will be pressure
grouted from the bottom up.
Borehole Drilline
After the conductor casing has been set, and the seal cured, the borehole for the well casing
will be drilled using 8-l/4-inch O.D. augers. A center plug will be used to prevent liquefied
sands from entering the inside of the auger string as the borehole is advanced. No lubricants,
circulating fluid, drilling muds, or other additives will be used during auger drilling.
Howevero potable water may be used if necessary to control flowing sands. The borehole
will be over-drilled one foot to allow room for the screen and casing assembly to be
suspended from the drill rig without touching the bottom of the borehole.
Standard Operating Procedures SOP l0-2
Monitoring Well Design, Drilling, and Installation
IHI Environmental
SOPIO
During drilling, native soil samples will be retrieved in a split spoon sampler at three to five-
foot intervals to a depth below the water table. The collected samples will be logged
according to soil type (Unified Soil Classification), moisture, and color. Selected samples
will be submitted for chemical and physical analysis.
Once the borehole has been drilled to the desired depth, the subcontractor will prepare to
install the well. The hollow-stem augers will remain in the ground to ensure stability of the
borehole during well construction.
Well Casing Installation
Clean chemical-resistant gloves will be worn by drilling personnel while handling the well
screen and casing. All lengths of well casing and screen will be measured and recorded in
the field log book prior to well installation.
Filter Pack Installation
The filter sand pack will be installed by slowly pouring silica sand through the augers as the
augers are slowly removed from the borehole. By this procedure, the augers act as a tremie
pipe and will prevent sand from bridging inside the augers. The level of sand pack inside the
annular space will be continuously monitored using a weighted probe. As the augers are
pulled upward, the sand settles out through the bottom and additional sand pack will be
added at the surface so that a minimum one-foot thickness of sand pack continuously remains
in the bottom end of the augers. By adding sand pack this way, the borehole will remain
open and free from cave-ins, and the well casing will remain centered within the sand pack
and the borehole.
Bentonite Seal Installation
After the appropriate amount of sand pack has been added and its depth verified, the
remaining annulus will be sealed with bentonite. Once the desired thickness of bentonite is
in place, the bentonite will be allowed to seffle for approximately 30 minutes. The thickness
of the bentonite seal will be verified again using a weighted probe, and subsequently
hydrated using potable water.
Flush-Mount Completion
After the grout has cured, the PVC well casing will be cut so that it is approximately three
inches below the ground surface. The top of the PVC well casing will be sealed with a
locking expandable well cap and an 8-inch flush-mount well vault will be installed at the
surface with cement. The cement surface surrounding the vault cover will be slightly
mounded to cause surface water to drain awav from the well so that the well vault will not fill
with water.
Standard Operating Procedures SOP l0-3
Monitoring Well Design, Drilling, and Installation
IHI Environmental
soPl0
SOP 12 Groundwater Monitoring Well Sampling
Introduction
This SOP describes the equipment, criteria, and procedures that will be used to sample
groundwater monitoring wells. Some deviations from this SOP may be necessary because of
site-specific conditions.
Equipment
Below is a checklist of equipment for conducting groundwater sampling:
. Tools for opening well covers
o Keys to wells
o Water-levelindicators
- Dual-phase (if free product is suspected)
- Single phase
o Positive displacement pump
. pH, conductivity, and temperature meters
o Standards for pH calibration
o In-line filters for metals samples
o Chemical resistant gloves
o Laboratory-suppliedsamplecontainers
o Iced cooler
o Field Notebook
o Chain-of-custodyform
. Appropriate personal protection equipment according to HASP
r Photoionizationdetector(optional)
o Drum(s) for purge water containment
r Drum labels
o Permanent marker
Preliminaries
All equipment will be decontaminated as described in SOP I prior to mobilizing to the site.
All equipment requiring calibration will be calibrated at the equipment warehouse prior to
mobilizing to the field. The operating condition of pump will be checked prior to field
mobilization.
Procedures
Upon arriving at each groundwater monitoring well, the well vault cover will be removed
and the wellhead will be examined. Any signs of tampering will be recorded in the field
logbook. The lock and well cap will then be removed from the well casing and depth to
water and total depth will be measured.
Standard Operating Procedures
Groundwater Monitoring Well Sampling
IHI Environmental
SOPI2
soP 12-t
Well Evacuation
To obtain a groundwater sample representative of natural aquifer conditions, at least three
casing volumes will be evacuated from the well using a positive displacement pump. The
pump will be decontaminated prior to use as described in SOP 1. Evacuated groundwater
will be poured into a graduated 5-gallon bucket to keep track of the purge volume. When the
graduated bucket is full, the contents will be transferred into a 55-gallon drum. If the well
does not recharge fast enough to permit the removal of three casing volumes, the well will be
pumped dry and sampled as soon as it has sufTiciently recharged.
Casing Volume Calculation
The well casing volume will be calculated to determine the purge volume required to obtain a
groundwater sample representative of natural aquifer conditions. The following procedure
will be used to calculate the total purge volume. Using the top of the north side of the inner
well casing as a reference point, the depth to water (DTW) and total depth (TD) of the well
will be measured using a water-level probe. The height of the water column will then be
calculated by subtracting the depth to water from the total depth of the well (TD - DTW).
Equation (1) below is used to calculate volume constants for wells with various casing sizes.
Well Casing Volume : n (Casing Radius)2 (7.48 gaVft3) (l)
where Casing Radius : the radius of the well casing in feet
7.48 gal/ft3 : volume conversion constant
n: constant : 3.14
For a 2-inch diameter well casing: Casing Volume: (TD-DTW feet) (0.16 gallons/foot)
Total Purge Volume: Casing Volume x 3
For a 4-inch diameter well casing: Casing Volume: (TD-DTW fee| (0.65 gallons/foot)
Total Purge Volume = Casing Volume x 3
Stabilization Parameters
Groundwater stabilization parameters pH, temperature, and specific conductivity will be
monitored during well purging to verifu when the aquifer has stabilized and groundwater
sampling can commence. Stabilization parameters will be measured at least four times; once
every casing volume and immediately before sampling. All stabilization parameter
measurements will be recorded in the field log book. The following guidelines are
acceptable ranges for stabilization parameters :
. pH readings are consistently within 0.2 pH units;
o temperature is within 0.5"C of the last reading;
r conductivity is within 10 percent of the last reading.
Groundwater Sample Collection
Standard Operating Procedures
Groundwater Monitoring Well Sampling
IHI Environmental
SOPI2
soP l2-2
A complete set of laboratory-supplied sample containers will be prepared and labeled prior to
collecting groundwater samples. A disposable bailer will be used to obtain groundwater
samples by the following analyte order in the appropriate pre-preserved sample containers:
l) VOCs including BTEXN;
2) Semi-VOCs;
3) Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons;
4) Oil and Grease/TRPH;
5) Filtered metals,
All 4O-milliliter containers will be filled so that no headspace is present in the container after
the lid has been fastened. Groundwater samples collected for metals analysis will be filtered
using inline filters attached to the outlet tubing of a peristaltic pump or with a NalgenerM
hand-pump filter press. The labels for each groundwater sample will be double-checked and
immediately placed in an iced cooler to maintain a temperature of 4'C.
Purge Water Containment And Disposal
Purge water will be contained in labeled 55-gallon drums and stored onsite. At a minimum,
drum labels will contain the following information:
o Site Identification
o Monitoring Well Identification
o Volume (Gallons) of Purge Water
o IHI Environmental
o IHI Project Manager
o 640 East Wilmington Avenue
. Salt Lake City, UT 84106
r 801-466-2223
The final disposition of the purge water will depend on groundwater analytical results and
contract specifi cations.
I)econtamination
All sampling equipment will be decontaminated according to SOP I before mobilizing to the
site. If more than one well will be sampled, sampling equipment must be decontaminated
between wells.
Demobilization
After well sampling has been completed and all equipment has been decontaminated, each
well will be capped and secured. Damaged equipment will be noted in the field logbook and
labeled on the instrument.
Standard Operating Procedures
Groundwater Monitoring Well Sampling
IHI Environmental
SOPI2
soP l2-3
SOP 20 Sample Handling and Documentation
Introduction
This SOP describes procedures to follow once soil, sediment or water samples are collected
to ensure that the samples are handled properly and that appropriate documentation is
completed.
Sample Handling
All samples will be promptly placed in an iced cooler to maintain a temperature of 4_C.
Typically, samples selected for chemical analysis are delivered at the end of each day to the
analytical laboratory. If they are not submitted to the laboratory on the same day collected,
they will be stored in a refrigerator in a locked sample storage room at IHI's oflice until
delivery to the laboratory.
Documentation
Sample Identification and Labeling
Soil samples will be labeled in such a way as to identiff the area from which they were
collected and the depth. For example, the first sample collected from profile C from a depth
of 3 feet will be identified as "Ca@3.0-3.5'." Groundwater samples will be labeled with their
well designations, e.g., "MW-1." Duplicate samples should always be labeled so that the
laboratory cannot tell they are a duplicate (i.e., as a "blind duplicate"). For example, a
duplicate of well '6MW-1" could be labeled "MW-l1," if there are no actual wells with this
designation at the site.
Each sample sleeve or sample container will be immediately labeled with the following
information:
- Project name
- Project number
- Sample identification
- Sample depth
- Date and time collected
- Analyses requested
Standard Operating Procedures
Sample Handling and Documentation
IHI Environmental
SOP2O
soP 20-l
- Filtered or unfiltered (for water samples)
- Sampler's initials
This information will also be recorded in the field notebook.
Chain-of-Custody
Chain-of-custody documentation will begin in the field for each sample submitted to the
laboratory and will be maintained by laboratory personnel. Samples will remain in the
possession of the sampler at all times, or in a locked facility until delivery to the analytical
laboratory. An IHI chain-of-custody form will be completed and will accompany each
sample cooler to the analytical laboratory.
Field Book
IHI Environmental field personnel will maintain a field log book to record all field activities.
The field log book will be a weather-resistant bound survey-type field book. All data
generated during the project and any comments or other notes will be entered directly into
the field log book.
Sample Tracking
Samples will be logged in on a sample tracking form on a daily basis. The tracking form will
be used to maintain a record of the samples collected, which samples were submitted for
laboratory analysis, and the date the analysis was completed.
Standard Operating Procedures
Sample Handling and Documentation
IHI Environmental
SOP2O
soP 20-2