borrow site assessment sampling and analysis planpassaic.sharepointspace.com/public...
Post on 21-May-2020
5 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River
Operable Unit 2, Diamond Alkali Superfund Site
Essex, Hudson, Bergen, and Passaic
Counties, New Jersey
July 2019
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 BORROW SOURCE SAP_FINAL_REV 2_07-10-19
VERSION CONTROL Issue Revision No Date Issued Page No Description Reviewed by
0 0 11/30/2018 NA Draft version Nancy Gensky
1 1 4/4/2019 NA Revised version Nancy Gensky
2 2 7/10/2019 NA Revised version Nancy Gensky
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 BORROW SOURCE SAP_FINAL_REV 2_07-10-19 i
CONTENTS
Acronyms and Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................ iv
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Site Description and Background ................................................................................................... 2
1.2 Remedial Design Considerations ................................................................................................... 3
1.2.1 Backfill ................................................................................................................................. 3
1.2.2 Chemical Isolation ............................................................................................................... 3
1.2.3 Armor ................................................................................................................................... 3
1.2.4 Habitat Restoration .............................................................................................................. 4
1.3 Borrow Site Assessment Objectives and Approach ....................................................................... 4
1.4 Plan Organization ........................................................................................................................... 4
2 Borrow Material Characteristics .............................................................................................................. 5
2.1 Preliminary Material Characteristics ............................................................................................... 5
2.1.1 Engineered Cap and Backfill ............................................................................................... 5
2.1.2 Armor Layer ......................................................................................................................... 5
2.1.3 Habitat Restoration Layer .................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Preliminary Material Quantities ....................................................................................................... 5
3 Borrow Source Identification ................................................................................................................... 7
3.1 Borrow Source Identified Through Previous Work and NJDOT Database ..................................... 7
3.1.1 Potential Borrow Source Identification Process .................................................................. 7
3.1.1.1 Previous Borrow Source Identification....................................................................... 7
3.1.1.2 Phase I and River Mile 10.9 Removal Action ............................................................ 8
3.1.1.3 New Jersey Department of Transportation Materials Database ............................... 8
3.2 Licensed Quarries or Mines Identified as Potential Sources .......................................................... 9
3.3 Other Potential Sources .................................................................................................................. 9
3.3.1 Treatment or Recycling Facilities ...................................................................................... 10
3.3.2 Offshore Sand Mining ........................................................................................................ 10
3.3.3 Large-Scale Dredging Projects ......................................................................................... 10
3.3.4 Confined Disposal Facility Reuse ...................................................................................... 11
3.4 Screening and Ranking Criteria .................................................................................................... 11
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 BORROW SOURCE SAP_FINAL_REV 2_07-10-19 ii
3.4.1 Primary Criteria .................................................................................................................. 12
3.4.1.1 Proximity to Operable Unit 2 .................................................................................... 12
3.4.1.2 Types of Materials Produced ................................................................................... 12
3.4.1.3 Chemical and Environmental Properties ................................................................. 12
3.4.1.4 Production Capability and Available Quantities ....................................................... 12
3.4.1.5 Material Transport and Handling ............................................................................. 13
3.4.2 Secondary Criteria ............................................................................................................. 13
3.4.2.1 Seasonal or Daily Operational Limits ...................................................................... 13
3.4.2.2 Other Contractual Obligations ................................................................................. 14
3.4.2.3 Onsite and Offsite Quality Control Capabilities ....................................................... 14
3.4.2.4 Health and Safety Record ....................................................................................... 14
4 Borrow Source Sampling and Analysis Plan ........................................................................................ 15
4.1 Material Sampling, Testing, and Evaluation Criteria ..................................................................... 15
4.1.1 Sampling Methodology and Frequency ............................................................................. 15
4.1.2 Analytical Testing .............................................................................................................. 16
4.1.2.1 Physical Parameters ................................................................................................ 16
4.1.2.2 Chemical Parameters .............................................................................................. 16
4.1.3 Quality Control and Data Management ............................................................................. 20
4.2 Records Management and Retention ........................................................................................... 21
4.3 Reporting ...................................................................................................................................... 21
5 Health and Safety ................................................................................................................................. 22
6 References ............................................................................................................................................ 23
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 BORROW SOURCE SAP_FINAL_REV 2_07-10-19 iii
TABLES
Table 2-1 Preliminary Material Quantities
Table 3-1A NJDOT Standard Soil Aggregate Gradations (attached)
Table 3-1B ASTM and AASHTO Standard Soil Aggregate Gradations (attached)
Table 3-2 Initial Screened Potential Borrow Sites (attached)
Table 4-1 Material Acceptance Criteria for Group 1
Table 4-2 Material Acceptance Criteria for Group 2
Table 4-3 Material Acceptance Concentrations
FIGURES
Figure 1-1 Site Location Map
Figure 3-1 Potential Borrow Source Locations
APPENDICES
Appendix A Borrow Material Facility List
Appendix B SOP No. 17 – Soil Stockpile Sampling
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 BORROW SOURCE SAP_FINAL_REV 2_07-10-19 iv
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
2,3,7,8-TCDD 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
60PD 60 Percent Design
AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
ASTM ASTM International
Arcadis Arcadis U.S., Inc.
CDF confined disposal facility
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COC constituent of concern
cy cubic yard
EDD electronic data deliverable
FFS Focused Feasibility Study
GRO gasoline range organics
GSH Glenn Springs Holdings, Inc.
HASP Health and Safety Plan
HMW high-molecular weight
LMW low-molecular weight
LPRSA Lower Passaic River Study Area
NJDEP New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
NJDOT New Jersey Department of Transportation
OCC Occidental Chemical Corporation
OSHA Occupation Safety and Health Administration
OU1 Operable Unit 1
OU2 Operable Unit 2
PAC powdered-activated carbon
PAH polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
PCB polychlorinated biphenyl
PDI WP Pre-Design Investigation Work Plan
QA quality assurance
QC quality control
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 BORROW SOURCE SAP_FINAL_REV 2_07-10-19 v
RD Remedial Design
RM River Mile
ROD Record of Decision
SAP Sampling and Analysis Plan
Settlement Agreement Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent for Remedial Design
Site Diamond Alkali Superfund Site
SOP Standard Operating Procedure
SVOC semivolatile organic compound
TAL Target Analyte List
TCL Target Compound List
Tilcon Tilcon New York, Inc
TPH total petroleum hydrocarbon
TSWP Treatability Study Work Plan
UFP-QAPP Uniform Federal Policy Quality Assurance Project Plan
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
VOC volatile organic compound
v/v volume/volume
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 1
1 INTRODUCTION
This Borrow Site Assessment Sampling and Analysis Plan (Borrow Site SAP) has been prepared
pursuant to the requirements set forth in the Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent
for Remedial Design (Settlement Agreement) between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) and Occidental Chemical Corporation (OCC) (USEPA 2016a) for the lower 8.3 miles of the
Lower Passaic River (Operable Unit 2 [OU2]) of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site (Site) located in and
about Essex, Hudson, Bergen, and Passaic Counties, New Jersey (Figure 1-1).
The Settling Party, as defined in the Settlement Agreement (USEPA 2016a), is OCC. Communications
associated with, and execution of, the Settlement Agreement are being led by Glenn Springs Holdings,
Inc. (GSH) on behalf of OCC. The Settlement Agreement provides that the Settling Party shall undertake
a Remedial Design (RD), including various procedures and technical analyses, to produce a detailed set
of plans and specifications for implementation of the Remedial Action selected in USEPA's March 3, 2016
Record of Decision (ROD) (USEPA 2016b). RD activities include the completion of all pre-design and
design activities and deliverables associated with implementation of the RD for the remedy selected in the
ROD. The selected alternative was chosen by USEPA in accordance with the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended; 42 United States Code
§§9601-9675; and, to the extent practicable, the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan.
Borrow materials are needed to construct the engineered cap, backfill, armor, and habitat restoration
components of the OU2 remedy. The borrow materials will be imported to OU2 from suitable sources that
meet the final RD specifications. In accordance with the Appendix K of the Pre-Design Investigation Work
Plan (PDI WP; Tetra Tech 2018a), this Borrow Site SAP has been developed to identify and evaluate
potential borrow sources and prepare a framework to characterize potential borrow sources proposed for
the OU2 remedy. This Borrow Site SAP was developed separately from the PDI WP because the
sampling schedule depends on determination of borrow material needs; therefore, it will be implemented
when the engineered cap, backfill, armor, and habitat restoration material needs have been specified in
the 60 Percent Design (60PD). This Borrow Site SAP satisfies the Borrow Site PDI WP reporting
requirement, as all assessment and data reporting will be associated with future design documents.
Samples from candidate borrow source sites will be collected and analyzed to provide a screening check
of the potential source-provided information after submittal of the 60PD.
After the borrow source sample collection and analyses have been completed, the results and the
selection of borrow sources for use in remedy construction planning will be included in the Construction
Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan. If any of those sources ultimately cannot be used, or a more
suitable source is found, the Borrow Site SAP procedures will be replicated for any new sources
identified.
The information summarized in this Borrow Site SAP includes:
• Estimated type and quantities of borrow materials required
• Candidate borrow site sources
• SAP to characterize potential borrow source material
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 2
1.1 Site Description and Background
The Passaic River spans more than 80 miles from headwaters in Morristown, New Jersey, to Newark
Bay. The watershed includes 935 square miles located in New York and New Jersey and has been
subject to industrial and urban development from the 1800s through present. Industries and municipalities
often discharged wastewater directly to the river. This history ultimately led USEPA to list the Site on the
National Priorities List in 1984, initiating the Superfund cleanup process, which was subsequently
expanded to include the entire Lower Passaic River Study Area (LPRSA).
USEPA currently has divided the Site into four Operable Units. Operable Unit 1 (OU1) consists of the
upland facility known as the Diamond Alkali facility, located at 80-120 Lister Avenue in Newark, New
Jersey. OU2 includes the lower 8.3 miles of the LPRSA (Figure 1-1). Operable Unit 3 is the Newark Bay
Study Area. Operable Unit 4 comprises 17 miles of the LPRSA inclusive of OU2.
OU2 consists of approximately 650 acres extending from the confluence of the LPRSA with Newark Bay
at River Mile (RM) 0 to RM 8.3. It is in a highly developed urban area, with Essex County to the west and
Hudson County to the east (Figure 1-1).
Two sediment Removal Actions were previously implemented; one within and one upstream of OU2, and
they provided useful information, including types and sources for capping material for this Borrow Site
SAP. The Phase I Removal Action was implemented in 2012 in an area adjacent to OU1 (Diamond Alkali
facility located at 80-120 Lister Avenue) at approximately RM 3.4 and consisted of dredging
approximately 40,000 cubic yards (cy) of sediments with the highest 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
(2,3,7,8-TCDD) concentrations within OU2, followed by placement of approximately 47,850 cy of backfill
(Arcadis U.S., Inc. [Arcadis] 2013). The sediment was mechanically dredged, hydraulically off-loaded,
dewatered with filter presses, and the water was treated onsite and discharged to the Passaic River. The
sand backfill material for the Phase I Removal Action was obtained from the Tilcon Clinton Point Quarry in
New Hamburg, New York (Arcadis 2013). The backfill below 2 feet was a sand and silt, while above 2
feet, a coarser sand was used to resist erosion. The RM 10.9 Removal Action was implemented in 2013
and consisted of mechanical dredging of approximately 16,000 cy of sediments, followed by placement of
a reactive cap over 5.5 acres. The capping consisted of a mixture of 25% (volume/volume [v/v]) of
AquaGate® and powdered-activated carbon (PAC), with 10% PAC and 75% (v/v) of sand with a
thickness of 10 inches and 12 inches of armoring layer (CH2MHill 2013). Sand and stone capping
material for the RM 10.9 Removal Action was obtained from Amboy Aggregates in South Amboy, New
Jersey (CH2MHill 2018).
An engineered cap will be constructed over the river bottom of the lower 8.3 miles, except in areas where
backfill may be placed because all contaminated fine-grained sediments have been removed. Dredging
will also be conducted to allow for the continued commercial use of a federally authorized navigation
channel in the 1.7 miles of the Passaic River closest to Newark Bay, and to accommodate reasonably
anticipated future use of a recreational channel to remain above RM 1.7. Mudflats dredged during remedy
implementation will be covered with an engineered cap and will include a habitat restoration layer. For the
ROD (USEPA 2016b), it was assumed that this will consist of 1 foot of sand and up to 1 foot of mudflat
habitat substrate. The actual thickness and composition of this layer will be determined as part of the cap
design. The specific design of caps for chemical isolation and base material for habitat substrates will be
developed as part of the 60PD. Where needed, the cap will be armored to protect against flood-induced
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 3
and propeller scour, as well as localized scour protection around structures. These and other scour force
protection needs, such as potential for ice scour, are being evaluated during the 60PD.
The Focused Feasibility Study (FFS; USEPA 2014) assumed a 2-foot-thick engineered sand cap, with 6
inches of armor stone in some areas for cost estimation purposes; however, the ROD (USEPA 2016b)
indicated that USEPA would evaluate thin-layer and reactive capping technologies during the RD where
conditions are conducive to such approaches, and armor design would be completed during the RD as
well. More details on the elements of the selected alternative described in the ROD for OU2 can be found
in the ROD (USEPA 2016b).
1.2 Remedial Design Considerations
The following sections discuss the basic components of the borrow materials that are expected to include
backfill, chemical isolation, armor, and habitat restoration materials.
1.2.1 Backfill
Backfill may be placed in areas where no or limited residual impacts remain in sediment following
dredging. The conceptual approach for backfilling is to place a layer of material, such as sand, directly
over the remaining sediment, potentially allowed to be supplemented by natural infill of deposited
sediment. The final thickness of the backfill may vary based on local conditions and the potential for
complete or partial backfilling through natural deposition. Backfill fill placement methods will be by
mechanical or hydraulic methods.
1.2.2 Chemical Isolation
Chemical isolation will consist of varying designs across OU2. The chemical isolation layer is expected to
be constructed from a range of materials, including sand, sand with topsoil, or reactive amendments or a
reactive layer, such as a thin reactive sorptive mat. The chemical isolation layer will vary based on the
material used and is anticipated to range from thin-layer caps than can be less than 6 inches up to a 2-
foot-thick sand layer. Thinner layers will be used where sediment bed conditions, contamination levels,
and groundwater flux rates are supportive of thinner caps. The potential use of reactive amendments is
being evaluated through the Treatability Study Work Plan (TSWP; Arcadis 2018). Armor stone will be
included where needed to protect the cap as discussed below. Chemical isolation placement methods will
be by mechanical or hydraulic methods for granular materials.
1.2.3 Armor
Cap armor will likely be crushed stone, and the stone dimension will be determined through design
analysis. Armor stone sizes will range from small to large stone, with large stone in areas needed to
protect the cap from higher scour forces where needed, such as in locations of significant vessel usage
and high-flow velocity around bridges or other structures. Armor stone placement will likely be completed
by mechanical methods, although smaller stone could be hydraulically placed.
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 4
1.2.4 Habitat Restoration
In mudflat areas, restoration will include a habitat restoration layer. The restoration layer is anticipated to
ultimately have comparable organic carbon content to the existing mudflat sediments following integration
and mixing of naturally deposited sediment. Initially, habitat layers placed in mudflats will be
predominantly sand. Habitat restoration layer placement methods will be by mechanical or hydraulic
methods.
1.3 Borrow Site Assessment Objectives and Approach
The objectives of this Borrow Site SAP are as follows:
• Review and compile data from previous studies and RAs within OU2 for potential borrow materials
used and their associated sources
• Identify the types and quantities of borrow materials needed for engineered capping, backfill, armor,
and habitat restoration
• Identify and pre-screen candidate potential borrow sources to support the OU2 remedy based on their
location, availability of material, and logistical considerations with delivery to OU2
• Develop a SAP to obtain representative data (i.e., physical and chemical testing data) from potential
borrow material sources
The information and data generated during the implementation of this Borrow Site SAP will be used to
identify the technically appropriate and logistically viable borrow material sources to meet RA needs. The
source selection process will also include consideration of material staging sites and onsite storage
capacity prior to placement.
1.4 Plan Organization
The remainder of this Borrow Site SAP is organized as follows:
• Section 2 – Borrow Material Characteristics
• Section 3 – Borrow Source Identification
• Section 4 – Borrow Source Sampling and Analysis Plan
• Section 5 – Health and Safety
• Section 7 – References
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 5
2 BORROW MATERIAL CHARACTERISTICS
This section discusses the preliminary types and quantities of material anticipated to be required for the
OU2 remedy based on available information and current understanding of the RD.
2.1 Preliminary Material Characteristics
2.1.1 Engineered Cap and Backfill
The primary material anticipated for backfill and the chemical isolation layer in the engineered cap is a
well-graded sand. Preliminary modeling conducted during the FFS (USEPA 2014) and information in the
ROD (USEPA 2016b) indicate that sand meeting New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT)
Specification I-7 would remain stable under normal flow conditions. Soil aggregate material meeting
NJDOT Specification I-7 consists of clean, free-draining sand, gravel, or stone that is free of organic
matter, garbage, metal, debris, lumps of clay, or other deleterious matter and conforms to the size
gradation specified (NJDOT 2007; Table 4.1). It is anticipated that the cap and backfill materials will be
from licensed quarry/mine materials, with contaminant levels not exceeding the material acceptance
criteria established in the Borrow Site Assessment Work Plan (Appendix K to the PDI WP). Similar coarse
sand material was used as backfill for the Phase I Removal Action and RM 10.9 Removal Action. This
Borrow Site SAP is focused on identifying sources of NJDOT Specification I-7 (details in Section 3.1.1)
and similar materials for the primary cap material.
2.1.2 Armor Layer
The armor layer will consist of a larger-diameter material than the cap material to resist scouring and
erosion. Over time, deposition of fine-grained material on top of the armor layer will cause the sediment
surface to become similar in composition and bed roughness to the existing river bottom over much of
OU2. During subsequent scour events, the armor layer may be re-exposed. Stone diameters will be
further established during the 60PD once scour and erosion analyses are completed. This Borrow Site
SAP identifies sources capable of providing the needed quantities of crushed stone.
2.1.3 Habitat Restoration Layer
The habitat restoration layer will be placed in the mudflats and will consist principally of sand. USEPA
anticipates that re-deposition of fine-grained material over capped and armored areas will occur over
time, making these areas similar in grain size to non-capped areas (USEPA 2016b).
Alternative habitat layer cap designs are being considered to minimize disturbance of mudflats, including
thin-layer amendments. Cap amendment materials are considered as part of the TSWP (Arcadis 2018).
2.2 Preliminary Material Quantities
The engineered capping, backfilling, armoring, and habitat restoration will include multiple configurations
and construction approaches throughout OU2. The configurations will be evaluated and selected during
the RD to accommodate diverse shoreline conditions, bridges and other structures, water depth and
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 6
bathymetry, river uses, and/or varying nature and extent of constituents of concern (COCs) and
groundwater fluxes. The material quantities required for the OU2 remedy will be determined during the
60PD. The following preliminary estimates are used for the purpose of developing this Borrow Site SAP:
Table 2-1. Preliminary Material Quantities
Material Preliminary Estimate
(approximate range) Note
Sand for Cap/Backfill 1 to 2.5 million cy All quantities and material types are
preliminary estimates for purposes of
developing this Borrow Site SAP and
will change during design.
Stone for Armor 50,000 to 100,000 cy
Sand for Habitat Restoration 100,000 to 200,000 cy
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 7
3 BORROW SOURCE IDENTIFICATION
This section discusses the previous borrow source assessments and the process used to identify
potential borrow sources, presents the initial screening criteria to evaluate borrow sources, and provides
the potential borrow sources identified and primary and additional criteria that will be used to further
screen and rank the borrow sources. The focus of this assessment is on commercial licensed
quarries/mines with additional evaluation conducted for clean fills and alternative fills (e.g., material from
treatment facilities, recycling facilities offshore sand mining).
As discussed in Section 2.2, for the OU2 remedy, backfill and engineered capping materials (primarily
clean sand), as well as armoring and habitat restoration material, will be needed. Due to the quantities
required, several borrow sources were evaluated as part of this source identification.
3.1 Borrow Source Identified Through Previous Work and NJDOT
Database
3.1.1 Potential Borrow Source Identification Process
The following information and references were used to identify and screen potential sources to supply the
required material for the OU2 remedy:
• The previous borrow source identification conducted as part of the FFS (USEPA 2014) and by Tetra
Tech as part of the PDI WP (Tetra Tech 2018a)
• Previous borrow source identification conducted as part of the Phase I Removal Action (Arcadis
2011) and the RM 10.9 Removal Action (CH2MHill 2018)
• The NJDOT Qualified Materials Database
(https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/eng/materials/qualified/QPLDB.shtm)
The following sections briefly describe information available and obtained from the above references.
Each of the references were reviewed and additional research was conducted to compile information from
the various references, sources were contacted to obtain relevant information, and grouped to identify
potential borrow sources. The evaluation focused on commercial licensed quarries/mines but also
considered clean fill and alternative fill sources. The initial list of potential sources is included as
Appendix A.
3.1.1.1 Previous Borrow Source Identification
As part of the evaluation of dredging and capping as a remedial option for OU2, the FFS (USEPA 2014)
identified that an NJDOT Specification I-7 or similar sand would remain stable under normal flow
conditions. Evaluation of borrow sources was conducted assuming an NJDOT Specification I-7 sand or
similar material would be used for the engineered cap and backfill material. Several potential borrow
sources for this type of material were identified within 50 miles of the FFS study area, but no details were
provided in the FFS on the identified sources or what additional criteria were used for the evaluation.
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 8
As part of pre-design investigation planning activities, Tetra Tech developed a Borrow Site Assessment
Work Plan (Appendix K to the PDI WP; Tetra Tech 2018a). Commercial quarries for use as potential
borrow sites were evaluated based on various screening criteria, including proximity to OU2. Commercial
maintenance dredging in regional waterways outside of OU2 was considered as a borrow source but was
considered less viable due to the variety, volume, and quantity of required materials, as well as logistical
problems with planning and coordination with those dredging projects. Ten potential borrow sources were
identified for native and recycled fine aggregate products and 28 potential sources for coarse aggregate
products. Appendix A provides these and other identified potential borrow sources.
3.1.1.2 Phase I and River Mile 10.9 Removal Action
For the Phase I Removal Action, the backfill consisted of 20 to 90% sand and 10 to 80% silt. For the top
layer scour protection layer, a 2-foot layer of a coarser sand with a D50 of 2 to 4 millimeters was placed
over the backfill.
Five local borrow sources were initially identified for the backfill material and included the following:
• Amboy Aggregates, South Amboy, New Jersey
• Belvidere Sand & Gravel (H & K Group), Belvidere, New Jersey
• Cedar Hill Landscaping, Somerset, New Jersey
• Clayton Concrete, Jackson, New Jersey
• Eastern Concrete Materials, Inc, Bloomfield, New Jersey
Amboy Aggregates was selected as the preferred material source; however, when they could not provide
material to meet design specifications for the scour protection layer, an alternate source, Tilcon New
York, Inc (Tilcon) was selected and used. Tilcon was able to barge materials from their Clinton Point
Quarry in Hamburg, New York and supplied all backfill and scour protection materials (Arcadis 2013).
For the RM 10.9 Removal Action, the cap was composed of four layers starting with an active layer of
blended sand and AquaGate + PACTM amendment followed by a geotextile layer, armor stone layer, and
habitat layer. The sand used for the cap was a modified ASTM International (ASTM) C33 aggregate with
a reduced percentage of material passing through a No. 200 sieve. Material for the RM 10.9 Removal
Action was obtained from Amboy Aggregates in South Amboy, New Jersey (CH2MHill 2018). The list of
backfill sources considered for the RM 10.9 Removal Action is not available.
3.1.1.3 New Jersey Department of Transportation Materials Database
NJDOT maintains a database that contains available producers and corresponding sizes of aggregate
materials that have been approved according to the NJDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge
Construction (NJDOT 2007). These materials are to be used for the construction or maintenance of any
NJDOT projects. The NJDOT I-7 sand specification was used as a starting point to identify potential
borrow sources within close proximity to the OU2 area.
Outlined within the NJDOT Standard Specifications (NJDOT 2007) are specifications for soil aggregates.
The soil aggregates must be made of natural or prepared mixtures consisting of predominantly hard,
durable particles of stone, gravel, or sand. There are approved gradations for 15 different product
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 9
designations (I-1 through I-15). Some product designations contain some silt, clay, or stone dust. The
majority of the product designations are optimized for upland fill or structural fill applications.
Table 3-1A (attached) summarizes the gradations (including NJDOT I-7 gradation) of each of the
available product designations approved by the NJDOT and contain varying sand and silt contents. ASTM
and American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standard aggregate
gradations are also presented in Table 3-1B (attached).
The NJDOT database was reviewed to identify local and NJDOT-approved sources of material, including
sand, aggregates, and topsoil.
3.2 Licensed Quarries or Mines Identified as Potential Sources
Potential sources throughout New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania were considered as part of the
preliminary source identification considering the proximity of these three states to the OU2 area –
focusing on licensed quarries and mines. A licensed quarry/mine is a facility permitted or authorized to
operate as a commercial quarry/mine by the New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce
Development, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Protection, and other state authorities. Commercial quarries produce sand, gravel, and
other materials for construction, concrete manufacturing, and other uses primarily by excavating natural
deposits and/or crushing, screening, and washing the materials. Both rock and sand and gravel quarries
are used to develop man-made materials, while sand and gravel quarries can also provide bank run
materials. For the purposes of this evaluation, only quarries providing man-made materials were identified
as potential sources. Depending on the location of the quarry, multiple transportation methods may be
available, including trucking, rail, and/or barging of the material.
Following development of the initial list of potential sources (49 identified initially including those provided
in the PDI WP [Tetra Tech 2018a]; Appendix A), a screening review resulted in several potential sources
being removed from further evaluation because either they were not operational, declined consideration,
only focused on specific industries (e.g., concrete), were not capable of producing the required materials
and quantities, provided only recycled materials (not native materials), or were potentially under
regulatory enforcement actions. Several sources were identified under a single common parent company,
in which case, they were consolidated into a single source under the parent company. The narrowed list
of potential borrow sources for capping and backfill materials that were retained for additional evaluation
is presented in Table 3-2 (attached).
A map of the locations of the potential sources retained for further consideration is presented on Figure 3-
1. Additional sources may be contacted if no source or combination of sources can meet the
requirements of the project.
Additional criteria to further screen and evaluate commercial quarries is discussed further in Section 3.4.
3.3 Other Potential Sources
In addition to licensed quarries or mines, other kinds of borrow sources were evaluated, including:
• Material from treatment or recycling facilities
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 10
• Offshore sand mining
• Large-scale dredging projects
• Confined disposal facility (CDF) material reuse
• Development of a new borrow source
3.3.1 Treatment or Recycling Facilities
Treatment or recycling facilities accept excavated material and construction debris and process it to
remove residual impacts. There are a few facilities identified within approximately 100 miles of OU2 that
use thermal desorption, bioremediation, and/or physical treatment to process material for reuse that can
be used for landfill cover, commercial/industrial fill, and/or structural fill. Overall, this type of source is not
considered a preferred source of sediment backfill due to the potential for residual impacts above
applicable criteria (e.g., Section 4.1.2.2 [Chemical Parameters], per Appendix K of the PDI WP [Tetra
Tech 2018a]) requiring additional processing and screening and the potential additional sorting required
to ensure the material meets the physical parameters required by the project. This option is not being
retained as a potential source.
3.3.2 Offshore Sand Mining
Offshore sand mining projects operate through leases provided by the Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management in coordination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), NJDEP, and New Jersey
Geological and Water Survey. Material obtained through this method must be used for shore protection,
beach restoration, or coastal wetlands restoration by a federal, state, or local government agency, or in a
construction project either authorized by or funded by the federal government. There are designated and
additional delimited sand resource areas in Monmouth and northern Ocean Counties in New Jersey that
contain an estimated volume of 157.4 million cy (New Jersey Geological and Water Survey 2015). Due to
permitting requirements and unknown material characterization at this time, this source was not
considered a preferred source, but is being retained as a potential source.
3.3.3 Large-Scale Dredging Projects
Large-scale dredging projects for navigation or other purposes may be able to generate sufficient
volumes of clean material to meet the needs of this project. The material would need to be transferred
from the dredging location to OU2. Dredge materials from navigation dredging projects through the
Engineering Division of the New York District USACE were considered as a potential material source. The
New York District has one of the largest active coastal programs, including beach fill placement, borrow
area determination, sand bypassing, and many other coastal-related analyses. There are many examples
of the beneficial reuse of sand from large dredging projects that address navigation issues (e.g., severe
shoaling) through removal and shoreline erosion through replacement.
This source is not considered a preferred source due to logistical issues associated with identifying an
appropriate dredging project being conducted concurrent with the OU2 dredging, sampling to confirm
physical and chemical parameters of the dredged material are suitable for the needs of the OU2 remedy,
permitting, and coordination of transport and staging of the material based on timing of the dredging
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 11
operations and RA construction for OU2. The primary limitation is the availability of a temporary storage
site for the material, as it is unlikely that the timing of the OU2 RA and other dredging projects could be
sequenced close enough to allow immediate placement of materials arriving onsite from other projects.
Furthermore, post-Hurricane Sandy, there are other needs for dredged materials that could make these
materials less available. However, depending on the timing of the various maintenance dredging projects
in the New York/New Jersey estuary or nearby coastal locations, it is possible that these challenges could
be solved to allow use of this type of material. This option is being retained as a potential source.
3.3.4 Confined Disposal Facility Reuse
CDFs built to retain dredged sediment could be a source of material for the OU2 remedy. There are CDFs
in proximity to OU2 where dredged materials have been reused primarily for upland applications, such as
engineered fill, landfill cover materials, and other uses. In addition, CDF materials have been reused for
restoration, creation, and enhancement of intertidal marshes and mudflats. Overall, this type of source is
not considered a preferred source of sediment backfill due to the potential for residual impacts above
applicable criteria (Section 4.1.2.2 [Chemical Parameters], per Appendix K of the PDI WP [Tetra Tech
2018a]). This option is not being retained as a potential source.
3.4 Screening and Ranking Criteria
Screening and ranking criteria were used to select and rank potential sources of capping and backfill
material. Primary criteria are used to evaluate if they meet the project requirements. If they do, then the
secondary criteria support ranking the potential facilities. The narrowed list of potential sources resulting
from the screening process is included as Table 3-2 (attached).
Primary criteria:
• Proximity to OU2
• Types of materials produced
• Chemical and environmental properties
• Production capability and available quantities
• Material transport and handling
Secondary criteria:
• Seasonal or daily operational limits
• Other contractual obligations
• Onsite and offsite quality control (QC) capabilities
• Health and safety record
A description of each of the primary and additional criteria is provided below.
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 12
3.4.1 Primary Criteria
As set forth in Section 3.2, only licensed quarry/mine sources producing man-made materials were
retained for screening. The following criteria will be used to evaluate and determine the suitability of these
potential sources to provide material for the OU2 remedy. Potential borrow sources were grouped into
tiers based on their proximity to OU2.
3.4.1.1 Proximity to Operable Unit 2
The initial evaluation focused on potential sources within 150 miles, with priority given to sources within
50 miles of OU2. Table 3-2 (attached) presents the initial list of screened sources, where sources under
Tier 1 sources are located within 50 miles of OU2 and sources under Tier 2 are located between 50 and
100 miles of OU2.
3.4.1.2 Types of Materials Produced
Sources supplying materials meeting NJDOT Specification I-7 or similar sand and can also produce
armor stone of various sizes were retained.
3.4.1.3 Chemical and Environmental Properties
Licensed quarry/mine material in New Jersey must meet NJDEP standards, including being excavated
from undisturbed geologic formations, obtained from a licensed quarry/mine, not located on or impacted
by other contaminant sources, not comingled with any other material, not known or suspected of being
contaminated, not adversely impacted by discharges of hazardous materials or chemical application, not
affected by conditions or processes that would result in the introduction of contaminants into the licensed
quarry/mine material in concentrations above regulatory concern, and not affected by conditions or
processes that would increase the concentrations of contaminants already present in the licensed
quarry/mine material to concentrations above regulatory concern (NJDEP 2015).
Potential sources contacted were requested to provide information on the environmental quality of the
borrow material, including any documentation of the site/source history and geology of the formation to
show that the borrow source is not located or impacted by other contaminant sources, and to provide
analytical data from any previous characterization of the source material used to evaluate compliance
with the acceptance criteria (see Section 4.1.2.2).
3.4.1.4 Production Capability and Available Quantities
Borrow sources with high production capabilities and ability to maintain large stockpiles of available
suitable materials will be preferred over sources with limited supply or production capability. Sources with
high production, multiple locations and quarries, and large available quantities of material will help buffer
against delays caused by shortfalls in daily production of required materials. The initial screening only
selected high-capacity sources or multiple sources under one parent company.
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 13
3.4.1.5 Material Transport and Handling
The transportation and handling of the material is dependent on the source location and the
transportation options, including:
• Trucking the material to a staging site along or nearby OU2 for transfer to a barge (providing a
staging site would be the responsibility of the OU2 contractor and would be addressed within the
OU2 RD)
• Barging the material to the OU2 area from a loading point away from OU2, for direct placement
(providing barge loading site would be responsibility of the supplier)
• Rail transport to a staging site along or nearby OU2, for transfer to a barge (providing a staging site
would be responsibility of the OU2 contractor, and would be addressed within the OU2 RD)
Trucking is the most commonly available transportation method. Most of the sources contacted have their
own fleet of trucks or contracts with trucking vendors to transport material. Using trucking as the primary
transportation method would have limitations, including transport through communities surrounding the
OU2 area, additional handling steps to unload and load material for placement, and requiring a large fleet
of trucks and multiple trips to deliver the large quantities of material required for the project.
Barging material to OU2 would allow efficient transportation of large quantities, require no trucking
material through communities surrounding OU2, and may allow direct transfer of material from the
transport barges to placement locations (at least downstream of bridges with clearance height limitations),
eliminating and/or reducing the need for shoreline staging sites. Most sources contacted indicated that
they are open to barging options to deliver material to OU2. The Tilcon facility located along the Hudson
River in New York (Table 3-2 [attached]) has a large fleet of barges available and are considered as a
viable borrow source for the project.
Rail transport is available for some potential sources. Rail transport would allow transportation of large
volumes efficiently and avoid trucking through neighboring communities. Use of rail for transportation
would require either having a rail spur and associated off-loading equipment available at the staging sites,
or a transloading facility with trucks or conveyors transporting the material from this source to the staging
sites.
3.4.2 Secondary Criteria
The following criteria will be used to further rank and screen the sources that meet the primary criteria for
use as borrow source.
3.4.2.1 Seasonal or Daily Operational Limits
It is estimated that to sustain capping operations, approximately 2,000 to 3,000 cy of material per day
may be needed. For screening purposes, the selected source(s) need to produce at this rate to be
considered viable. If seasonal or daily limits prevent an individual source from meeting the project
requirements, multiple sources may be required.
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 14
3.4.2.2 Other Contractual Obligations
The sources with existing contractual obligations may not have as much flexibility to meet the project
material requirements compared to other sources without comparable obligations. The source(s) with
fewer existing or anticipated obligations will be preferred over sources with high volume commitments to
minimize the risk of disruptions during remedy implementation.
3.4.2.3 Onsite and Offsite Quality Control Capabilities
Potential borrow material sources will be further evaluated based on available testing (physical and
analytical data) and onsite QC capabilities. It is expected that sources should have onsite QC capabilities
for material testing and certification for the material and source. Procedures to document or confirm the
QC and certification of the material and procedures at the facility to maintain quality assurance (QA)/QC
will be requested. If offsite QC laboratories are used, the facility must be able to provide documentation
that the laboratory will be able to provide the required QC for the project.
3.4.2.4 Health and Safety Record
Potential sources will be preferred to have an Occupational Health and Safety Administration- (OSHA-) or
Mine Safety and Health Administration compliant health and safety program. Current health and safety
information about their health and safety program will be requested from each potential source. Any
source lacking a compliant program, unwilling or unable to provide current health and safety statistics, or
that provides statistics that do not demonstrate a sufficient commitment to health and safety, will not be
considered for use as a borrow source during this project.
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 15
4 BORROW SOURCE SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
This section describes sampling and analytical testing of the borrow material to be conducted at the top
three potential material sources. Sampling and analytical testing processes outlined in this section are
only applicable to licensed certified, quarry/mine sources. Based on the borrow source screening, enough
materials are available from licensed quarries/mines; therefore, other clean and alternate fill sources are
not needed at this time. If other materials are needed or become available, this Borrow Site SAP will be
amended. Sampling is intended to further screen the borrow source materials and check the information
provided by the potential sources as part of the pre-screening process (Section 3.4.1.3). Verification of
material during construction, including borrow material sampling procedures and analytical methods, are
not part of this Borrow Site SAP and will be included in the RD. Sampling will be conducted in accordance
with Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) No. 17 – Soil Stockpile Sampling (Appendix B) and the site-
specific Uniform Federal Policy Quality Assurance Project Plan (UFP-QAPP; Tetra Tech 2018b). Other
sources may be added, depending on testing results and/or updated information on design needs during
development of the 60PD. USEPA will be notified in advance of any other sources to be sampled in
accordance with this Borrow Site SAP.
4.1 Material Sampling, Testing, and Evaluation Criteria
Samples from the top three potential borrow sources will be collected and analyzed for contaminants and
geotechnical properties listed in Section 4.1.2 in accordance with SOP No. 17 – Soil Stockpile Sampling
(Appendix B) and the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech 2018b). Samples will be collected from stockpiles, and no
in-situ sampling will be conducted as borrow sources are licensed quarry/mine sources producing man-
made materials.
Analytical data will be compared to project-specific remediation goals, New Jersey ambient levels
(median and 90th percentile), and the background concentrations for specific chemicals specified in the
ROD [USEPA 2016b]). Grain size test results and stone or rock geological classification will be reported
for evaluation for cap material suitability during the 60PD. Bulk samples of sand (approximately 50
pounds) and stone (approximately 100 pounds) will be obtained from each source and stored for potential
additional design testing or evaluation later in the design process.
4.1.1 Sampling Methodology and Frequency
One composite sample will be collected from a representative stockpile of each potential material type
from each of the top three potential borrow sources for that material type. A front-end loader will be used
to dig into each stockpile and form a sampling pad. The sampling pad will then be divided into four
quadrants, and one sample from each of the four quadrants will be collected to form a composite sample
from each sampling pad (ASTM D75/D75M – 14). Composite samples collected from each sampling pad
(except for volatile organic compound [VOC] analysis where one representative discrete sample will be
collected) will then represent each stockpile. There is potential for VOC losses during homogenization;
therefore, composite samples are generally not acceptable for VOC characterization. If visual differences
in material appearance (e.g., color, texture) are observed between locations within a stockpile, then the
discrete samples from such locations will be composited separately instead of compositing samples from
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 16
all locations into a single sample. Sample volume will be consistent with volume requirements outlined in
the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech 2018b) for the list of selected analytes outlined in Section 4.1.2.
Dimensioned plot plans will be provided by each potential source to aid in the selection of stockpile
locations to sample. The exact sampling location, appropriate sampling equipment, and procedures will
be determined based on available stockpile material and accessibility at each potential source. Sampling
protocols will be consistent with procedures outlined in SOP No. 17 – Soil Stockpile Sampling (Appendix
B) for soil stockpile sampling.
4.1.2 Analytical Testing
4.1.2.1 Physical Parameters
Physical and geotechnical testing will be performed for each type of potential source material (e.g., sand,
stone). The acceptance criteria for physical parameters will be developed during the 60PD and will be
documented in the Construction Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan. The following physical
parameters will be analyzed in accordance with the site-specific UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech 2018b):
• Absorption (AASHTO T84 for fine aggregates; AASHTO T85 for coarse aggregates)
• Atterberg limits (ASTM D4318) (applicable to materials with 5% fines content or more by weight)
• Specific gravity (ASTM D854)
• Grain size distribution (ASTM D6913 – Standard Test Methods for Particle-Size Distribution
[Gradation] of Soils Using Sieve Analysis)
• Grain size finer than #200 sieve (ASTM D7928 – Standard Test Methods for Particle Size Distribution
[Gradation] of Fine-Grained Soils Using the Sedimentation [Hydrometer] Analysis) (applicable to
materials with 5% fines content or more by weight)
• Percent organic matter (ASTM D2974) (applicable for materials to be used for the habitat restoration) layer
• Angularity (ASTM D5821)
• Soundness test for aggregates (AASHTO T104)
• Los Angeles abrasion test for aggregates (AASHTO T96; rock/stone size to be determined during
evaluation of borrow sources).
4.1.2.2 Chemical Parameters
Chemical testing will be used to evaluate whether the borrow source materials contain COCs identified
within OU2 or other contaminants (e.g., pH, chlorides, sulfate) that would not be acceptable or may
impact the long-term effectiveness of the cap and remedy. Chemical testing will be consistent with the
requirements of the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech 2018b).
Testing will be conducted for select organic compounds and metals to develop chemical characterization
of the potential borrow sources and to determine how the data compares to ranges of corresponding
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 17
criteria. The following chemical testing parameters will be analyzed in accordance with the site-specific
UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech 2018b):
• Target Analyte List (TAL) metals by SW-846 Method 6010C/7471B
• Target Compound List (TCL) VOCs by SW-846 Method 8260D (collected from an undisturbed
stockpile)
• TCL semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by SW-846 Method 8270D
• Polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) congeners by USEPA Method 1668A
• TCL pesticides by USEPA Method 1699 Modified, except toxaphene by Low Level (LL) Method 8081
• Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), including gasoline range organics (GRO), diesel range
organics, and oil range organics, by SW-846 Method 8015D (TPH GRO will be collected from an
undisturbed stockpile)
• Dioxins/furans reported as congeners and homologues by USEPA Method 1613B
• Total organic carbon by the Lloyd Kahn method
• pH (ASTM D4972-13), chlorides (AASHTO T291), sulfate (ASTM C1580-15)
Multiple levels of screening and data comparison have been established for both organics and metals and
will include the criteria available to evaluate the capping, backfill, armor, and habitat restoration material.
Per the PDI WP (Tetra Tech 2018b), the test results for metals and organics are expected to be
compared to material acceptance criteria developed during the Phase I Removal Action (Arcadis 2011) to
group the potential borrow sources. The groupings and associated criteria that are anticipated are
summarized below:
Table 4-1. Material Acceptance Criteria for Group 1
Parameter Group 1
TAL Metals Less than median ambient concentrations (NJDEP 2003)
TCL VOCs Consistent with UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech 2018b) detection limits (as
applicable) TCL SVOCs
PCB Congeners
TCL Pesticides
TPH
2,3,7,8-TCDD
Dioxins/Furansa
Notes: a Dioxin/Furans includes all dioxin congeners, including 2,3,7,8-TCDD.
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 18
Table 4-2. Material Acceptance Criteria for Group 2
Parameter Group 2
TAL Metals Less than 90th percentile ambient concentrations (NJDEP 2003)
2,3,7,8-TCDD Less than remediation goals or less than ROD background
concentrations (as applicable)b VOCsa
PCBs
Total DDxc
Dieldrin
Copper
Lead
Mercury
LMW PAHs
HMW PAHs
TPHa
Notes:
HMW = high-molecular weight
LMW = low-molecular weight
PAH = polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons a Remediation goals and ROD background concentrations for VOCs and TPH are not specified. As part of the Group 1 evaluation,
VOCs and TPH will be compared to the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech 2018b) detection limits (i.e., determination of detection or no
detection). b Consistent with previously conducted investigations along the Lower Passaic River, for calculating total concentrations for a
particular chemical group, only detected values will be included. A constituent that was reported as non-detect are considered to
have a “zero” value for the calculation. c Total DDx represents Total (4,4’) DDx (the sum of 4,4’-dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane, 4,4’-dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene, and
4,4’-dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)
Material acceptance concentrations are summarized below:
Table 4-3 Material Acceptance Concentrations
Analyte Median Ambient
Concentration
(mg/kg)a
90th Percentile
Ambient
Concentration
(mg/kg)a
Overall
PRGs
(mg/kg)b
Background
(mg/kg)b
Aluminum 10,500 14,400 N/A N/A
Antimony <DL 3.48 N/A N/A
Arsenic 5.2 24.2 N/A N/A
Barium 80.6 168 N/A N/A
Beryllium 0.51 0.82 N/A N/A
Cadmium <DL 0.67 N/A N/A
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 19
Analyte Median Ambient
Concentration
(mg/kg)a
90th Percentile
Ambient
Concentration
(mg/kg)a
Overall
PRGs
(mg/kg)b
Background
(mg/kg)b
Calcium 1,425 3,010 N/A N/A
Chromium 18.5 29.9 N/A N/A
Cobalt 6.3 10.4 N/A N/A
Copper 29.5 75.5 N/A 63
Iron 14,600 20,000 N/A N/A
Lead 111 297 N/A 130
Magnesium 2,190 4,614 N/A N/A
Manganese 311 859 N/A N/A
Mercury 0.18 0.63 0.074 0.72
Nickel 12.4 24.6 N/A N/A
Potassium 693 1,524 N/A N/A
Selenium 0.41 0.71 N/A N/A
Silver <DL 0.86 N/A N/A
Sodium 90.1 141 N/A N/A
Thallium <DL 0.25 N/A N/A
Vanadium 29.6 41.7 N/A N/A
Zinc 75.3 162 N/A N/A
Total PCBs N/A N/A 0.05 0.46
Total DDT N/A N/A 0.0003 0.03
2,3,7,8-TCDD N/A N/A 8.30E-06 2.00E-06
Dieldrin N/A N/A N/A 0.005
LMW PAHs N/A N/A N/A 7.9
HMW PAHs N/A N/A N/A 53
Notes: a Adapted from Table 1-1 from the NJDEP, Ambient Levels of Metals in New Jersey Soils (NJDEP 2003). Metal concentrations in
the urban Piedmont region of New Jersey reported. b Risk-based sediment PRGs and Background concentration reported in the ROD (USEPA 2016b).
DDT = dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane
N/A = not analyzed
PRG = Preliminary Remediation Goal
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 20
Borrow sources identified as Group 1 would be preferred potential borrow sources, while Group 2 would
be acceptable for consideration based on the criteria listed above. Any potential borrow sources that do
not meet acceptance criteria for Groups 1 and 2 will fall into Group 3 and will be reserved for possible
future re-evaluation if needed, using additional criteria that may be developed during later stages of the
design and prior to remedy implementation, if reliable sources considered Group 1 or Group 2 are not
available.
If at the end of this sampling and analysis program, a minimum of two Group 1 borrow sources are not
identified within the initial search radius established as described in Section 3.1.1, additional sites will be
identified, pre-screened, and sampled by expanding the search radius in 50-mile increments until two
Group 1 borrow sources are identified.
4.1.3 Quality Control and Data Management
To maintain QC and collection of reliable data to meet project objectives, sampling and analytical testing
will be performed in accordance with the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech 2018b).
At a minimum, samples will be collected as described in Sections 4.1.1 and 4.1.2 and in accordance with
SOP No. 17 – Soil Stockpile Sampling (Appendix B). Sample collection and analysis data will include the
following:
• Field notes documented in a bound notebook(s) and sample collection and processing logs
• Photographs of the source locations, stockpiles, and samples
• Chain of custody
• Laboratory analytical reports
• Electronic data deliverables (EDDs) from the laboratory
• Data QA/QC review reports prepared according to the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech 2018b)
• Documentation generated by the laboratories conducting the treatability studies
Samples will be submitted for laboratory analysis for the testing parameters listed in Sections 4.1.2.1 and
4.1.2.2 in accordance with the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech 2018b). QC samples, including field and
equipment rinsate blanks and laboratory QC samples, will be collected at the frequency described in the
UFP-QAPP.
As outlined in Worksheets #26 and #27 of the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech 2018b), to improve data
access/usability and data ownership/transferability, GSH has contracted with GHD to serve as the Data
Management and Laboratory Program Contractor for the project. Data deliverables for sampling and
analysis data will consist of laboratory EDDs, database update files, and raw data processed into
electronic format. Data will be managed as described below, by task and overall based on the type
collected, and will be shared with the project team. The Data Management and Laboratory Program
Coordinator for the project will perform the following:
• Oversee contracted laboratory services.
• Select appropriate laboratories upon analytical request.
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 21
• Coordinate directly with assigned laboratories, interfacing with GSH and its Contractor, and other
subcontractors as needed.
• Resolve any quality issues, with input from GSH and its Contractor.
• Perform data verification/validation of laboratory data packages in accordance with Worksheet #36 of
the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech 2018b), including validation levels of S1VM, S2bVEM, and S4VEM, as
required.
• Perform data quality review/reporting.
• Consolidate project data into a centralized database, including field and laboratory data.
• Provide options for the project team to access data, including tables, figures, graphs, and electronic
deliverables.
GSH will work closely with the Data Management and Laboratory Program Coordinator during sampling
events to facilitate requests for, and shipment of, samples, as well as management of field data and
access to laboratory results.
The data collected will be presented in tables and/or graphically and evaluated in subsequent reports, as
described in Section 4.3. Data will be submitted in USEPA Region 2 standardized EDD format in
accordance with Worksheets #26 and #27 of the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech 2018b).
4.2 Records Management and Retention
Documentation collected for each potential source during the focused verification assessment, including
information received from the potential source, dimensioned plot plans, boring logs, and data collection
field notes will be retained and submitted with the Borrow Site Assessment Memo, which will be an
attachment of the Construction Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan with associated geotechnical and
analytical data.
Bulk samples obtained for potential additional RD testing or evaluation will be discarded after the final
design is submitted to USEPA.
4.3 Reporting
The Borrow Site Assessment Memo will describe the borrow sources tested; present the sampling and
analytical data collected; provide a list of material sources to be considered for the OU2 remedy
implementation, including types of materials available, production capacity, transportation options to OU2,
and other pertinent information; and include communication records with borrow suppliers related to
material availability during the anticipated remedy implementation period and a borrow source ranking
table. This document will be an attachment to design deliverables in the Construction Quality
Assurance/Quality Control Plan and will be removed from the PDI Evaluation Reporting sequence.
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 22
5 HEALTH AND SAFETY
A Health and Safety Plan (HASP) was developed as one of the supporting deliverables of the RD (Tetra
Tech 2018a). The HASP addresses the health and safety practices that will be employed for the project
and has been prepared pursuant to the requirements set forth in the Settlement Agreement between
USEPA and the Settling Party, effective September 30, 2016, for the project. If needed, an updated
HASP will be prepared to support the treatability study activities.
Activities performed under the HASP will comply with applicable parts of OSHA regulations, primarily 29
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 1910 and 1926. In addition, because some of the site activities
are being performed on or adjacent to water, the HASP must also comply with 29 CFR 1917 Marine
Terminals and the U.S. Coast Guard regulations. The health and safety practices detailed in the HASP
will be followed during all studies conducted as part of the TSWP (Arcadis 2018).
Before starting field activities, field personnel will become familiar with the HASP, and respective activity
hazard analyses included in the HASP, as well as the Emergency Response Plan (Appendix A to the
Remedial Design Work Plan; Tetra Tech 2017). Task leads and/or field leads will conduct a mandatory
health and safety tailgate meeting before each day’s field events. The Site Safety Officer will document
the topics covered and personnel in attendance. All personnel (including subcontractors) who will be
working onsite will receive site-specific safety training from the Health and Safety Lead and/or Site Safety
Officer.
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
arcadis.com OU2 Borrow Source SAP_Final_Rev 2_07-10-19 23
6 REFERENCES
Arcadis. 2011. Backfill Design Analysis Memorandum, Phase I Removal Action, CERCLA Non-Time-
Critical Removal Action, Lower Passaic River Study Area. July 12.
Arcadis. 2013. Final Construction Report, Lower Passaic River Study Area, Phase I Removal Action.
March.
Arcadis. 2018. Treatability Study Work Plan, Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River, Operable Unit
2, Diamond Alkali Superfund Site, Essex, Hudson, Bergen, and Passaic Counties, New Jersey.
CH2MHill. 2013. River Mile 10.9 Removal Action Final Design Report, Lower Passaic River Study Area
CH2MHill 2018. River Mile 10.9 Removal Action Final Construction Report, Lower Passaic River Study
Area. April 26.
New Jersey Geological and Water Survey. 2015. Significant Sand Resource Areas in State and Federal
Waters Offshore Monmouth County, New Jersey. Michael V. Castelli et.al. 2015.
NJDEP. 2003. Ambient Levels of Metals in New Jersey Soils. May.
NJDEP. 2015. Fill Material Guidance for Site Remediation Program Sites. Version 3.0. April.
NJDOT. 2007. Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction. 2007.
Tetra Tech. 2017. Remedial Design Work Plan. Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River, Operable
Unit Two of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site, In and About Essex, Hudson, Bergen, and Passaic
Counties – New Jersey.
Tetra Tech. 2018a. Pre-Design Investigation Work Plan, Remedial Design – Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower
Passaic River, Operable Unit Two of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site, In and About Essex,
Hudson, Bergen, and Passaic Counties – New Jersey. Revision 3, January 2018.
Tetra Tech. 2018b. Uniform Federal Policy – Quality Assurance Project Plan (UFP-QAPP) [Field
Sampling Plan (FSP) and Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)]. Remedial Design – Lower 8.3
Miles of the Lower Passaic River, Operable Unit Two of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site, In and
About Essex, Hudson, Bergen and Passaic Counties – New Jersey. Parsippany, New Jersey.
Revision 13, November 2018.
USEPA. 2014. Focused Feasibility Study Report for the Lower Eight Miles of the Lower Passaic River.
Prepared by The Louis Berger Group, Inc. in conjunction with Battelle HDR|HydroQual. 2014.
USEPA. 2016a. Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent for Remedial Design,
Operable Unit Two of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site. USEPA Region 2, CERCLA Docket No.
2016-2021.
USEPA. 2016b. Record of Decision. Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River Part of the Diamond
Alkali Superfund Site Essex and Hudson Counties, New Jersey. March 3.
TABLES
Table 3-1ANJDOT Standard Soil Aggregate GradationsBorrow Site Assessment Sampling and Analysis PlanDiamond Alkali Superfund SiteNewark, New Jersey
6" 4" 2" 1.5" 1" 3/4" 1/2" No.4 No.8 No.16 No.50 No.100 No.200I-1 100 70-100 50-95 30-60 5-25 0-7I-2 100 65-100 40-75 5-30 0-7I-3 100 60-90 40-80 10-35 0-8I-4 100 60-100 40-100 25-100 20-100 15-85 8-45 5-10I-5 100 70-100 30-80 10-35 5-12I-6 100 80-100 45-100 30-90 0-20 0-3I-7 100 80-100 35-100 25-90 5-50 0-8 0-2I-8 100 95-100 45-70 5-25 0-5I-9 100 80-100 60-100 40-100 20-70 5-35 0-20 0-8I-10 100 80-100 60-100 40-100 20-70 5-35 0-30 0-20I-11 100 80-100 60-100 40-100 0-75 0-9I-12 100 70-100 0-75 0-9I-13 100 30-100 0-12I-14I-15 100 80-100 30-80 0-25 0-10
Notes:
References:NJDOT. 2007. Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction. 2007.
Gradation Designations (Percentage by weight passing square mesh sieves)
See Notes
Adapted from Table 901.11-1 from the New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT) Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction (NJDOT 2007).For NJDOT I-14 soil aggregate, the portion of material passing the 4-inch sieve contains no more than 35% percent by weight of material passing the No. 200 sieve.
Table 3-1A_NJDOT Soil Aggregates Specification 1/1
Table 3-1BASTM and AASHTO Standard Soil Aggregate GradationsBorrow Site Assessment Sampling and Analysis PlanDiamond Alkali Superfund SiteNewark, New Jersey
Size 4" 3.5" 3" 2.5" 2" 1.5" 1" 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" No.4 No.8 No. 16 No.30 No.50 No. 100 No. 2001 100 90-100 25-60 0-15 0-52 100 90-100 35-75 0-15 0-53 100 90-100 35-70 0-15 0-5357 100 95-100 35-70 10-30 0-54 100 90-100 20-55 0-15 0-5467 100 95-100 35-70 10-30 0-55 100 90-100 20-55 0-10 0-556 100 90-100 40-85 10-40 0-15 0-557 100 95-100 25-60 0-10 0-56 100 90-100 20-55 0-15 0-567 100 90-100 20-55 0-10 0-57 100 90-100 40-70 0-15 0-58 100 85-100 10-30 0-10 0-589 100 90-100 20-55 5-30 0-10 0-59 100 85-100 10-40 0-10 0-5Fine Aggregate 100 95-100 80-100 50-85 25-60 5-30 0-10 0-3
Notes:
References:ASTM C33 - Standard Specification for Concrete AggregatesAASHTO M 80 - Standard Specification for Coarse AggregateAASHTO M 6 - Standard Specification for Fine Aggregate
Gradation Designations (Percentage by weight passing square mesh sieves)
AASHTO grading limits for 300 mm (No. 50) and 150 mm (No. 100) vary slightly from the ASTM C33 limits at 10-30 and 2-10, respectively
Table 3-1B_ASTM Soil Aggregates Specification 1/1
Table 3-2Initial Screened Potential Borrow SitesBorrow Site Assessment Sampling and Analysis PlanDiamond Alkali Superfund SiteNewark, New Jersey
Parent Company Associated Facilities1,2 Facility AddressFacility Location(s)
(City, State)3 WebsiteApproximate Distance
from OU2 (miles)4 Available Material Type(s) Analytical/Geotechnical Data Transportation Options Transportation Cost Available QuantityProduction Rate
(tons/day)5 Material Cost ($/ton)
Sand- $12/tonSmall gabion stone - $12/ton
Sand - 100,000 tonsGabion stone - 200,000 tons
Quantity from two facilities combined
TBDSand- $15/ton
Small gabion stone - $18/ton
I-7 and C-33 sands, topsoil, washed and crushed gravels, quarry process
materials, boulders
Recommended stone be sourced more locally
Virgin Source of Sand
Trucking
Potential for Rail in the Future (Installation of Rail Spur would
be Required)
Sand - $9.92/tonSand - meet majority of
quantity required TBD I-7 Sand - $19/ton
Hanson Aggregates BMC, Inc. Hanson Aggregates BMC, Inc. PO Box 231Easton, PA 18044
Newtown, PABerlin, NJ
Ottsville, PANewtownville, NJ
https://www.lehighhanson.com/products/aggregates 70-100 Concrete sand
Analytical available from approximately 3 years ago
Can provide a virgin source certification letter
Some geotechnical (gradation) performed on a daily basis
Trucking
Potential for Barging in the Future
Indicated current freight charges would make total
cost too high to be competetive.
Revisit costs when barging becomes an option.
Unable to meet full capacity 25-30 loads per day
Indicated current freight charges would make total
cost too high to be competetive.
Revisit costs when barging becomes an
option.
U.S. Concrete Eastern Concrete Materials, Inc. 3620 Rt. 23 NorthHamburg, NJ 07419
Hamburg, NJGlen Gardner, NJBarnegat, NJ
https://eastern-concrete.com/ 55-90 Sand and gravel of various gradations TBD
Trucking
Barging from Queens and Brooklyn (New York Sand and
Stone)
Combined Materials and Transportation costs:
ASTM #10 - $30/ton (barge), $20/ton (truck)
DOT light stone or DOT fine stone (3-10") - $45/ton (barge), $35/ton(truck)
3-14" stone - $40/ton (barge), $35/ton (truck)
Based on notice and timing, sufficient material is
available for the project
Estimated volumes are within U.S. Concrete's
capacity.
Barged material would be one large barge (3,000
tons) or two small barges (1,500 tons each)
Combined Materials and Transportation costs:
ASTM #10 - $30/ton (barge), $20/ton (truck)DOT light stone or DOT
fine stone (3-10") - $45/ton (barge), $35/ton(truck)
3-14" stone - $40/ton (barge), $35/ton (truck)
Notes:1. Facilities identified as potential borrow sources based on initial pre-screening (Appendix B). Additional screening to be conducted to evaluate these facilities in subsequent phases of design.2. Several facilities were identified to be part of a common parent company, in which case, the facilities were consolidated into a single vendor under the parent company3. Preliminary borrow source identification limited to New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania (150 miles from project area)4. Approximate distance from facility to Newark, New Jersey or Newark Bay5. Based on anticipated ork schedule of 6 days per week, 32 weeks per year, approximately 3,000 cy of material per day may be required.
NJ = New JerseyNJDOT = New Jersey Department of TransportationNY = New YorkNYDOT = New York Department of TransportationOU2 = Operable Unit 2RCA = recycled concrete aggregatePA = PennsylvaniaTBD = to be determined
35-60http://www.stavola.com/Lafeyette, NJ
Bound Brook, NJLebanon, NJ
Wharton, NJOxford, NJ
Pompton Lakes, NJRiverdale, NJ
New Hamburg, NYGoshen, NY
Haverstraw, NYWest Nyack, NY
http://tilconny.com/ 35-85
162 Old Mill RoadWest Nyack, NY 10994
Trucking is most commonly used
Rail is available at some locations
Barging from locations along the Hudson River
recommended - 100+ barge fleet available depending on
weather
$10-15 per ton anticipated depending on facilities and transportation method(s)
used
Loads range from 25 tons per truck to 1,500 tons per barge
Sample fines on a yearly basis (provided latest results)
Can provide a virgin source certification letter
Some geotechnical (gradation) performed on a daily basis
Based on notice and timing, sufficient material is
available for the project
Estimated volumes are well within Tilcon's capacity.
Tilcon is currently providing 10,000,000+ tons per year
to the tristate area
$16/ton for I-7 material. Likely lower if ASTM #10
is used instead
~$40/ton for Gabion Stone
Tilcon
Tilcon New Jersey
New York Trap Rock 162 Old Mill RoadWest Nyack, NY 10994
625 Mount Hope RoadWharton, NJ 07885
Tilcon Quarries New York, Inc.
I-7, C-33 and ASTM#10 sand
3-6 inch "Gabion Stone"
Oldwick Materials, L.L.C.
Routine analytical not collected
Can provide a virgin source analytical letter
Some geotechnical (gradation) performed on a daily basis
Anticipate being able to meet stone demand
30 Rockaway RoadPO Box 126
Oldwick, NJ 08833
Stavola Beaver Run Quarry, LLC 10 Wagaraw RoadHawthorne, NJ 07506
810 Thompson RoadBound Brook, NJ 08805
Concrete sand, clean and blended stone, recycled materials including
NJDOT RCA
Declined to Source Sand
Stone (6-12") - $19.50/tonStone (3-5") - $19/ton
Stone (6-12") - $7.50/tonStone (3-5") - $7/tonStavola Construction Materials
Stavola Construction Materials
PO Box 576Stanhope, NJ 07874 Stanhope, NJ 50Saxton Falls Sand & Gravel Saxton Falls Sand & Gravel http://saxtonfalls.com/
NJDOT and NYDOT approved crushed stone including riprap stone
C-33 and C-144 sand. Can produce manufactured sand to meet
specifications
Trap rock, granite, gneiss, and limestone available depending on
quarry
30-60271 Limecrest RoadLafayette, NJ 07848 Sparta, NJ Trucking
NJ Certification available indicating material from virgin source. Sampling
can be done upon request. Braen Stone of Sparta https://www.braenstone.com/sparta/Braen Aggregates, LLC
Trucking
Tier 1 (Facilities within 50 miles of OU2)
Tier 2 (Facilities between 50 and 100 miles from OU2)
Table 3-2_Narrowed List of Potential Facilities 1/1
FIGURES
PASSAIC RIVERFRANK CREEK
SECOND RIVER
NEWARK BAY
HACKENSACK RIVER
§̈¦280
§̈¦95
NEWARK LIBERTYINTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
§̈¦I-9
§̈¦78
KEARNY POINT
PULASKI SKYWAY
US RT. 1 TRUCK BRIDGE
NJ TURNPIKE EASTERN SPUR
NJ TURNPIKE WESTERN SPUR
POINT-NO-POINT RR BRIDGE
CENTRAL RR BRIDGE(ABANDONED)
NJ TRANSIT RR BRIDGE
RT. 280/STICKEL BRIDGE
AMTRAK DOCK STREET BRIDGE
CLAY STREET BRIDGE
JACKSON STREET BRIDGE
BRIDGE STREET BRIDGE
ERIE RR BRIDGE(ABANDONED)
FOURTH AVENUE CONRAIL BRIDGE(ABANDONED)
RM 0
RM 1.0
RM 8.3
RM 8.0
RM 0.5
RM 7.5
RM 4.0
RM 7.0
RM 6.5
RM 1.5
RM 3.0
RM 5.5
RM 4.5
RM 2.
5
RM 6.0
RM 3 .5
RM 2.0
RM 5.0
NOTE:
1. WORLD LIGHT GRAY CANVAS BASEMAP PROVIDED BY ESRI ARCGIS ONLINE MAPPING.
SITE LOCATION MAP
FIGURE
City: Citrix Div/Group: IM Created By: K. SINSABAUGH Last Saved By: ksinsabaugh GSH (B0009980.3006.00301)Z:\GISProjects\_ENV\GSH\GIS\Task\LPRSA\BorrowSAP\mxd\Fig1-1_SiteLocationMap.mxd 3/28/2019 10:47:16 AM
1-1
DIAMOND ALKALI SUPERFUND SITELOWER 8.3 MILES OF THE LOWER PASSAIC RIVER (OU2)
NEW YORK
NEW JERSEY
FOCUSAREA
NEW YORKCITY
STATENISLAND
LEGEND:
FEDERAL NAVIGATION CHANNEL
BRIDGE LOCATION
RIVER MILE (RM)
OPERABLE UNIT 2
0 3,500 7,000
FeetGRAPHIC SCALE
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENT SAMPLINGAND ANALYSIS PLAN
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
_̂
!(
!(
!(
!(
OU2 LOCATION
(60)
(30)
(45)
(90)
(55)
(60)
(50)
(50)
(35)
(45)
(65)
(40)
(35)(40)
(45)
(50)
(85)
(60)
(57)
(55)
(78)
(90)
PENNSYLVANIA
NEW JERSEY
NEW YORK
E
NEW YORK
NEW YORK
NEW JERSEY
NEW JERSEY
FIGURE
City: Citrix Div/Group: IM Created By: K. SINSABAUGH Last Saved By: ksinsabaugh GSH (B0009980.0002.00003)Z:\GISProjects\_ENV\GSH\GIS\Task\LPRSA\PrelimBorrowSite\mxd\3-1 Borrow Source Locations.mxd 11/27/2018 12:24:39 PM
3-1
DIAMOND ALKALI SUPERFUND SITENEWARK, NEW JERSEYLEGEND:
!( BRAEN STONE (4 QUARRIES)
!( HANSON (4 QUARRIES)
!( SAXTON FALLS SAND & GRAVEL (1 QUARRY)
!( STAVOLA (3 QUARRIES)
!( TILCON (8 QUARRIES)
!( US CONCRETE (4 QUARRIES)
_̂ OU2 LOCATION
0 10 20
Miles
GRAPHIC SCALE
NOTE:
1. LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. SOME FACILITIES/ BORROW SOURCES MAY HAVE ADDITIONAL QUARRIES NOT IDENTIFIED HERE
2. (50) APPROXIMATE TRUCKING DISTANCE TO OU2 (NEWARK BAY) IN MILES
POTENTIALBORROW SOURCE LOCATIONS
BORROW SITE ASSESSMENTSAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
APPENDIX A
Borrow Material Facility List
Appendix ABorrow Material Facility ListBorrow Site Assessment Sampling and Analysis PlanDiamond Alkali Superfund SiteNewark, New Jersey
FacilityFacility
Identification1,2 Facility AddressApproximate Distance
from OU23 (miles)Material Type(s) 4
Fine/Coarse Material
Website Notes
Carbonate - #57Carbonate #67Carbonate #8Carbonate #7
Carbonate DGABCConcrete Sand
RC DGABCGneiss #3
Gneiss #57Gneiss #8
Amboy Aggregates Tierra Phase I 175 Main St.South Amboy, NJ 08879 N/A N/A N/A
Profile at https://www.manta.com/c/mmlqq77/
amboy-aggregates, but linked website is for a dredging operation
in Illinois
No web presence, based on results it may not exist anymore (articles about acquisitions and
property sales in 2014), looks like it was part of Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co based out of
Illinois
Quartzite #57Quartzite #8
Quartzite stone sand
Aztec Materials, LLC NJDOT Database 7324 Bluberry RdHammonton, NJ 08037 95 Concrete sand N/A
Only facebook page found (https://www.facebook.com/pages/A
ztec-Materials-Aztec/1653372244958087)
Database has not to test gradation before useaddress in database doesn't quite match online
address
Barletta Materials & Construction Co NJDOT Database PO Box 10Hazelton, PA 18201 N/A Gravel #57, 67, 8 N/A N/A May be part of Glasgow, Inc
Bayshore Recycling Internal75 Crows Mill Road
PO Box 290Keasbey, NJ 08832
25 RCA DGA N/A http://www.bayshorerecycling.com/
Not in NJ Database but they say they are NJDEP approved and can do NJDOT DGA
Spec
Thermal treatment of contaminants in non-haz recycled soil
Bedrock Quarries, Inc. (Part of H&K Group) NJDOT Database SR 10003
Damascus, PA 18415 125 Quartzite #57 and *8 N/A https://www.hkgroup.com/companies/bedrock-quarries/
Concrete Sand
HMA sand (washed)
Birdsboro Materials (Part of H&K Group) NJDOT Database 1267 Haycreek Road
Birdsboro, PA 19508 130 Trap rock #57, #8, *5, *7 N/A https://www.hkgroup.com/companies/birdsboro-materials
http://www.allanmyers.com/
https://www.hkgroup.com/companies/atkinson-materials
No website found, profile at https://www.dexknows.com/business_profiles/bennett_f_w_and_son_in
c-b66299website linked from profile not in english (www.bennetsandnj.com)
Bennett, F.W. & Son, Inc.P.O. Box 724
403 Newton-Sparta RoadLafayette, NJ 07848
TT BSAWP Quartzite stone sand40
70A.B.E. Materials (H&K Group)
A.E. Stone Inc TT BSAWP Prices available on website
5137 Lower Mud Run RoadEaston, PA 18040NJDOT Database
Fine
Coarse https://www.hkgroup.com/companies/abe-materials
http://aestone.com/
Allan Myers NJDOT Database Also have other products from MD, Paradise PA, Talmage, PA
638 Lancaster AveMalvern, PA 19355 100 Coarse
1435 Doughty RoadEgg Harbor Township, NJ 120
NJDOT DatabaseAtkinson Materials (Part of H&K Group) 100HC1, Box 15, Owego TpkHawley, PA 18428
App A_Borrow Material Facility List 1/10
Appendix ABorrow Material Facility ListBorrow Site Assessment Sampling and Analysis PlanDiamond Alkali Superfund SiteNewark, New Jersey
FacilityFacility
Identification1,2 Facility AddressApproximate Distance
from OU23 (miles)Material Type(s) 4
Fine/Coarse Material
Website Notes
Gneiss - DGABCGneiss - #67Gneiss - #57Gneiss - *8
Concrete SandConcrete sand (white)Carbonate - DGABC
Carbonate - stone sandCarbonate - #57Carbonate - *8Carbonate - *9
271 Limecrest RoadLafayette, NJ 07848 40 Gneiss - Stone sand Coarse
Washed concrete sand
Bank Run HMA surface course
Callanan Industries NJDOT Database PO Box 15097Albany, NY 110 Carbonate #57 and *67 N/A https://www.callanan.com/ Also has quartzite #57 at Cropseyville, NY
Cedar Hill Landscaping Tierra Phase I Removal Action
127 Cedar Grove LnSomerset, NJ 08873 N/A NJDEP Topsoil N/A http://www.cedarhilllandscaping.co
m/ Produce NJDEP clean topsoil
Clean Earth Internal 24 Middlesex AveCarteret, NJ 07008 20 N/A N/A https://cleanearthinc.com/locations/
carteret
Not in NJ Database
bioremediation for soil treatment
Clayton Concrete (Clayton Sand Co.) Tierra Phase I Removal Action
530 N County Line RoadJackson, NJ 08527 50 Concrete sand N/A http://www.claytonco.com/ Also have HMA sand
33 Concrete sand FineGravel #57Gravel #8Gravel *9
Cranesville Aggregates NJDOT Database 427 Sacandaga RoadScotia, NY 12302 175 Concrete sand N/A http://www.cranesville.com/ May be good for armor stone
Concrete sand
Washed HMA sand
Durable Recycling, LLC. TT BSAWP160 East 22nd Street
PO Box 1009Bayonne, NJ 07002
<10 RCA DGABC CoarseProfile at
http://www.usbizs.com/NJ/Bayonne/Durable_Recycling_UtE.html
Dyer Quarry (The Anderson Companies) NJDOT DatabasePO Box 188
Rock Hollow RoadBirdsboro, PA 19508
130 Trap rock #57, #67, *7, *8, DGABC, stone sand N/A http://www.dyerquarry.com/
Braen Aggregates, LLC(See also Braen Stone of Sparta, Stone Industries)
https://www.braenstone.com/sparta/
https://www.braenstone.com/
http://www.thehessecompanies.com/company/brickwall/N/A
Braen Stone of Sparta(part of Braen Aggregates, LLC) TT BSAWP
80NJDOT Database
45
Dun-Rite Sand & Gravel Co NJDOT Database Appears to be dredge based573 E. Grant AvenueVineland, NJ 08360 120 http://dunritesand.com/
https://www.countyconcretenj.com/
NJ and PA DOT certified sand from barge mounted dredging
has approved Bank run for HMA Surface Course
35
40
Coarse
PO Box 8310Haledon, NJ 07538
Coarse
N/A
Fine
Coarse31County Concrete Corp. 50 Railroad AvenueKenvil, NJ 07847
Brick-Wall Corp (Hesse Companies) 2215 West Lacey RoadForked River, NJ 08731
271 Limecrest RoadLafayette, NJ 07848
TT BSAWP
TT BSAWP
Website lists NJDOT approved concrete sand
Limecrest address not in NJ database
App A_Borrow Material Facility List 2/10
Appendix ABorrow Material Facility ListBorrow Site Assessment Sampling and Analysis PlanDiamond Alkali Superfund SiteNewark, New Jersey
FacilityFacility
Identification1,2 Facility AddressApproximate Distance
from OU23 (miles)Material Type(s) 4
Fine/Coarse Material
Website Notes
East Coast Materials Tierra Phase I Removal Action
36 Broad StBloomfield, NJ 07003 N/A N/A N/A
Profile at https://businessfinder.nj.com/east-coast-materials-bloomfield-nj.html
Concrete sand FineGneiss #57Gneiss #8
Gneiss DGABCGneiss - stone sand
Gneiss #57Gneiss #8Gneiss *9
Gneiss DGABCGneiss stone sand
Tierra Phase I Removal Action
475 Market StElmwood Park, NJ 07407 N/A N/A N/A Market St. Address not in NJ database
E. Tetz & Sons, Inc. NJDOT Database 298 Winterton RdBloomingburg, NY 90 Concrete sand, Gravel *57, *8 N/A https://etetz-sons.com/
E.R. Linde Construction Corp NJDOT Database N/A N/A N/A N/A http://www.leewardconstruction.com/ Appears to be a construction company
Eureka Stone Quarry (part of James D Morrissey Inc) NJDOT Database N/A N/A N/A N/A http://jdm-inc.com/
RCA DGABCTrap rock #57Trap rock #67Trap Rock #8
Trap Rock DGABCTrap Rock stone Sand
Trap Rock #4
Fort Miller Co, Inc. NJDOT Database 688 Wilbur AvenueGreenwich, NY 12834 >200 Concrete sand Fine https://www.fortmiller.com/ Also coarse
F.S. Lopke Contracting NJDOT Database 3430 State Route 434Apalachin, NY 13732 200 Gravel #57, #7 Coarse http://www.lopke.net/ Address doesn't match database
Trap rock #2Trap rock #57
Trap Rock DGABCTrap Rock stone Sand
Trap Rock #8
Glasgow, Inc. NJDOT Database 104 Willow Grove AveGlenside, PA 100 Carbonate #57, #8, *9,
DGABC, stone sand, *8 N/A http://www.glasgowinc.com/ Multiple possible subsidiariesalso other locations/materials
Hanson Aggregates BMC, Inc. TT BSAWP PO Box 231Easton, PA 18044 13 Concrete sand Fine N/A
Lehigh Hanson/Heidelberg Cement Group?Appears to be a large outfit, but not easy to find
info on their website
3620 Rt. 23 NorthHamburg, NJ 07419
Coarse
https://eastern-concrete.com/
http://www.weldonmaterials.com/
http://www.silvi.com/material_category/stone-products/
TT BSAWP
TT BSAWP
Coarse
47
48
355 Newbold RoadFairless Hills, PA 19030
141 Central Ave.Westfield, NJ 07090 20
website lists Saddle Brook address, not the ones here
TT BSAWP 43 Coarse
Coarse
Eastern Concrete Materials, Inc.
Gibraltar Rock, Inc.(Same address as Sahara Sand Co., appears to be part of Silvi Concrete)
Fanwood Crushed Stone(appears to be part of Weldon Materials)
App A_Borrow Material Facility List 3/10
Appendix ABorrow Material Facility ListBorrow Site Assessment Sampling and Analysis PlanDiamond Alkali Superfund SiteNewark, New Jersey
FacilityFacility
Identification1,2 Facility AddressApproximate Distance
from OU23 (miles)Material Type(s) 4
Fine/Coarse Material
Website Notes
Harleysville Materials, LLC (Part of moun NJDOT Database N/A N/A N/A N/Ahttps://www.mountconstruction.com/
strategic-partners/harleysville-materials/
7070
Harms, George Construction Co., Inc. TT BSAWP PO Box 817Farmingdale, NJ 07727 0 RCA DGABC Coarse https://ghcci.com/
Based on their website this is just a construction company, not a quarry/major aggregate
distributor
Highway Materials, Inc. NJDOT Database 409 Stenton AveFlourtown, PA 19031 100 Argillite #57, #67, #7, #8, stone
sand N/A http://www.highwaymaterials.com/ Address in database is differentalso have a Plymouth Meeting location
H&K Group (multiple facilities/quarries; primary Belvidere Sand & Gravel)
Tierra Phase I Removal Action
PO Box 418Belvidere, NJ 07823 70 N/A N/A https://www.hkgroup.com/ Lots of subsidiaries, some in NJ database
James D. Morrissey Inc. (includes. Tri-borough Sand & Stone, Ward Sand & Materials, Eureka Stone Quarry)
NJDOT Database N/A 85 Concrete sand Fine http://jdm-inc.com/service/sand-gravel/
Keystone Aggregate Products Co NJDOT Database PO Box ABath, PA 80 Carbonate #8, stone sand N/A Not found Other quarries and materials also listed
Keystone Lime Co., Inc NJDOT Database 1120 Zehner RoadFort Hill, PA 15540 >300 Quartzite #57 N/A Not found
Keystone Quarry, Inc. NJDOT Database 249 Dunham DriveDunmore, PA 120 Quartzite #57, #8, washed
stone sand N/A Not found
Lehigh Asphalt Paving & Construction Co NJDOT Database PO Box 549Tamaqua, PA N/A Concrete sand Fine
profile at https://www.manta.com/c/mmbqjwh/lehigh-asphalt-paving-construction
May be part of Glasgow, Inc
Locust Ridge Quarry (part of H&K Group) NJDOT Database 2699 Locust Ridge Road
Pocono Lake, PA 18347 100 Quartzite #10, #57, #8, *9 coarse https://www.hkgroup.com/companies/locust-ridge-quarry
Martin Stone Quarries NJDOT Database 1355 North Reading AveBechtelsville, PA 19505 100 Gneiss #3, #5, #57, #67, #7,
#8, *9, DGABC, stone sand coarse http://www.martinstone.com/ Address doesn't match database
Miller Quarries (Miller Materials, part of HK Group) NJDOT Database 887 Mill Creek Road
Rushland, PA 18956 80 Argillite #57, #8, *57, DGABC, stone sand coarse https://www.hkgroup.com/companie
s/miller-materialsNaceville Materials (Miller Materials, part of HK Group) NJDOT Database 2001 Ridge Road
Sellersville, PA 18960 85 Argillite #57, #67, #8, *7, DGABC, stone sand coarse https://www.hkgroup.com/companie
s/naceville-materials>250 Concrete sand100 White concrete sand
>250 Concrete sand130 Concrete sand150 Carbonate *9 Coarse
PO Box 277Belvidere, NJ 07823
3912 Brumbaugh RoadNew Enterprise, PA 16664 https://www.nesl.com/
http://harmonysandgravel.com/FineConcrete sand
NJDOT Database
NJDOT DatabaseHarmony Sand & Gravel
New Enterprise Stone & Lime Co., Inc Fine
App A_Borrow Material Facility List 4/10
Appendix ABorrow Material Facility ListBorrow Site Assessment Sampling and Analysis PlanDiamond Alkali Superfund SiteNewark, New Jersey
FacilityFacility
Identification1,2 Facility AddressApproximate Distance
from OU23 (miles)Material Type(s) 4
Fine/Coarse Material
Website Notes
New Hope Crushed stone NJDOT Database 6970 Phillips Mill RoadNew Hope, PA 18938 65 Carbonate #57, *8, stone sand coarse
only found facebook profile; https://www.facebook.com/NewHop
eCrushedStone/
Article found about 2017 PADEP Compliance order
https://www.dep.pa.gov/About/Regional/SoutheastRegion/Community%20Information/Pages/Ne
w-Hope-Crushed-Stone.aspx
Carbonate #57Carbonate #8
Carbonate DGABCCarbonate stone sand
Trap rock #57Trap rock *67Trap rock *7Trap rock *8
Trap rock stone sand (u)Trap rock stone sand (w)
North American Aggregates NJDOT Database 4 Commerce DriveCranford, NJ 07016 25 Concrete sand Fine http://northamericanaggregate.com/
Also have HMA sanddatabase indicates concrete sand blended with
screenings from another facilityWebsite not useful - minimal info
35 HMA sand (washed) FineI-7 Aggregate
Gravel DGABCGravel #57 round
Gravel #57 crushedTrap rock #57Trap rock #8
Trap rock DGABCTrap rock stone sand
Pebble Lane Associates TT BSAWP 5700 47th StreetMaspteh, NY 11378 30 RCA DGABC Coarse
Profile at http://www.buzzfile.com/business/Pebble-Lane-Associates,-Inc.-718-
456-8636. No other info found
No website found, unable to get reliable info
Peckham Materials Inc. NJDOT Database 438 Vaughn RdHudson Falls, NY 12389 125 Carbonate #67 coarse http://www.peckham.com/
Pennsy Supply NJDOT Database 1001 Paxton StreetHarrisburg PA 17105 200
Concrete sand, Carbonate #3, #57, #67, #8, *9, DGABC,
stone sandhttp://www.pennsysupply.com/
Largest supplier in central PA according to website
also east Petersburg, Annville locations
Phoenix Pinelands Corp NJDOT Database 9401 Route 539Warren Grove, NJ 08005 90 Concrete sand Fine http://phoenixpinelandscorp.wixsite.
com/phoenixpinelands
Plumstead Materials (part of HK Group) NJDOT Database 5031 Point Pleasant PikeDoylestown, PA 18902 70 Argillite #2, #57, *8, stone
sand coarse https://www.hkgroup.com/companies/plumstead-materials
Pottstown Trap Rock Quarries (part of HK NJDOT Database 394 N Sanatoga RoadPottstown, PA 19464 110 Argillite #57, *8, *9, stone sand coarse
https://www.hkgroup.com/companies/pottstown-trap-rock-sanatoga-
quarry
44
TT BSAWP
36
216 North Church RoadFranklin, NJ 07416
Have I-7 aggregate, claim to be largest remaining natural single source sand deposit in
north NJ
36
45www.northchurchgravel.com
http://www.stavola.com/
North Church GravelCoarse
Coarse
Coarse
162 Old Mill RoadWest Nyack, NY 10994
30 Rockaway RoadPO Box 126
Oldwick, NJ 08833TT BSAWP
TT BSAWP
Oldwick Materials, L.L.C.(part of Stavola)
New York Trap Rock(same address as Tilcon Quarries NY - appears to be part of Tilcon)
Coarse
App A_Borrow Material Facility List 5/10
Appendix ABorrow Material Facility ListBorrow Site Assessment Sampling and Analysis PlanDiamond Alkali Superfund SiteNewark, New Jersey
FacilityFacility
Identification1,2 Facility AddressApproximate Distance
from OU23 (miles)Material Type(s) 4
Fine/Coarse Material
Website Notes
Rahway Recycling & Materials, Inc. TT BSAWP PO Box 28Colonia, NJ 07067 16 RCA DGABC Coarse Not found online - only various recycling centers
Rebco Contracting Corp. Tierra Phase I Removal Action
121 Avondale AveClifton, NJ 07012 N/A N/A N/A http://rebcocontracting.com/
Not in NJ DatabaseSeem to be more of a transporter than a
supplier
R.E. Pierson Materials Co NJDOT Database N/A N/A N/A N/A https://www.repierson.com/Can only find info for R.E. Pierson Construction,
Appears to be construction focused, not a supplier
Ricci Bros Sand Co NJDOT Database 2099 Dragston RdPort Norris, NJ 140 Quartz gravel *67 Coarse http://www.riccisand.com/
Rockcrete Recycling Corp. TT BSAWP 925 Doremus AvenueNewark, NJ 07114 <10 RCA DGABC Coarse Not found online
Rohrers Quarry Inc NJDOT Database 70 Lititz RoadLititz, PA 17543 150 Carbonate #57, #67, #8 Coarse http://www.rohrers.com/crushed-
stone/
Route 209 Enterprises (part of HK Group NJDOT Database Route 209Marshalls Creek, PA 18335 80 Argillite #57, #67, #8, *7,
DGABC, Stone sand Coarse https://www.hkgroup.com/companies/rt-209-enterprise
Route 82 Sand & Gravel (now Blacktop Maintenance Corporation) NJDOT Database 9401 Route 539
Warren Grove, NJ 08005 100 Concrete sand Fine
http://blacktopmaintenance.com/content/search.php?search_for=sand+gravel&search_type=all&from404=Ye
s&orig_url=%2Fsandgravel.htm
Looks like a small supplier, mainly a construction/transportation co.
Concrete Sand
HMA sand (washed)Concrete sand Fine
Gravel #57Gravel #8
Shepherd Materials NJDOT Database N/A N/A N/A N/A http://www.shepmaterials.com/ Focus on stabilization/drying agents
Silver Hill Quarries (part of HK Group) NJDOT Database 470 Yellow Hill Road, R.D. #1Narvon, PA 17555 135 Trap rock #57, *8, *9 Coarse https://www.hkgroup.com/companie
s/silver-hill-quarry
Silvi Concrete(see also Gibraltar rock and Sahara Sand)
Online search for Gibraltar Rock and
Sahara SandN/A N/A N/A N/A http://www.silvi.com/ Website not very informative
South State, Inc. NJDOT Database 9401 Route 539Warren Grove, NJ 08005 100 Concrete sand Fine https://southstateinc.com/services/
materials/Looks like a small supplier, mainly a
construction co.
Sparta Sand & Gravel (Sparta RediMix, part of Diamond Sand & Gravel) TT BSAWP 33 Demarest Rd
Sparta, NJ 07871 50 Concrete sand Fine http://www.spartaredimix.com/
42 http://saxtonfalls.com/
http://www.silvi.com/material_category/sand-gravel-products/40
Coarse
Fine
TT BSAWP Address from website is 66 Waterloo Valley Road
Sahara Sand Co.(same address as Gibraltar Rock, appears to be part of Slivi Concrete)
TT BSAWP 355 Newbold RoadFairless Hills, PA 19030
PO Box 576Stanhope, NJ 07874Saxton Falls Sand & Gravel
App A_Borrow Material Facility List 6/10
Appendix ABorrow Material Facility ListBorrow Site Assessment Sampling and Analysis PlanDiamond Alkali Superfund SiteNewark, New Jersey
FacilityFacility
Identification1,2 Facility AddressApproximate Distance
from OU23 (miles)Material Type(s) 4
Fine/Coarse Material
Website Notes
Trap rock stone sand (w)Trap rock *9Trap rock #3
Trap rock #57Trap rock #67Trap rock #8
Trap rock DGABCTrap rock stone sand
RCA DGABC40 RCA DGABC Coarse30 RCA DGABC Coarse
Carbonate #8Carbonate *57
Carbonate stone sandTrap Rock *5Trap rock #2Trap rock #4Trap rock *57Trap rock *67Trap rock *8Trap rock *9
Trap Rock DGABCTrap rock stone sand
Tarheel Quarry NJDOT Database N/A 100 Quartzite #8, *57, *9, stone sand Coarse https://tarheelquarry.com/ Very little info on website
http://www.stavola.com/
https://www.braenstone.com/haledon/
Stone Industries(Same address as Van Orden Sand & Gravel, appears to be part of Braen Aggregates as the Haledon Quarry)
TT BSAWP400-402 Central Avenue
PO Box 8310Haledon, NJ 07538
Stavola Beaver Run Quarry, LLC(See Stavola Construction Materials) TT BSAWP 10 Wagaraw Road
Hawthorne, NJ 07506 42
Coarse
Coarse
Coarse
810 Thompson RoadBound Brook, NJ 08805 30
17
1 Hamilton Road,Tinton Falls, NJ 07724
Multiple locationsAsphalt/stone but also recycled materials,
contracting, and real estateTT BSAWP
Stavola Construction Materials(see also: Oldwick Materials and Stavola Beaver Run Quarry)
App A_Borrow Material Facility List 7/10
Appendix ABorrow Material Facility ListBorrow Site Assessment Sampling and Analysis PlanDiamond Alkali Superfund SiteNewark, New Jersey
FacilityFacility
Identification1,2 Facility AddressApproximate Distance
from OU23 (miles)Material Type(s) 4
Fine/Coarse Material
Website Notes
Gneiss *5Gneiss #57Gneiss #8Gneiss *9
Gneiss DGABCGneiss stone sand (u)
RCA DGABCGneiss stone sand (w)
Gneiss #4Gneiss *67Gneiss #57Gneiss *8Gneiss *9
Gneiss DGABCGneiss stone sand (u)Gneiss stone sand (w)
Gneiss #2Gneiss #5
Gneiss #57Gneiss *67Gneiss *8Gneiss *9
Gneiss DGABCGneiss stone sand
RCA DGABCGneiss #3Gneiss #4
Trap rock #4Trap rock #57Trap rock #67Trap rock *8Trap rock *9
Trap Rock DGABCTrap rock stone sand (u)Trap rock stone sand (w)
Carbonate #57Carbonate #67Carbonate #8Carbonate *9
Carbonate stone sand (u)Carbonate stone sand (w)
625 Mount Hope RoadWharton, NJ 07885 <5 RCA DGABC Coarse
http://tilconny.com/new-jersey.htm
45
30
Coarse
Coarse
Coarse
48
625 Mount Hope RoadWharton, NJ 07885
30
http://tilconny.com/TT BSAWP and Tierra Phase I
Removal Action
162 Old Mill RoadWest Nyack, NY 10994
TT BSAWP and Tierra Phase I
Removal Action
30
Coarse
Coarse
Tilcon Quarries New York, Inc.(Same address as New York Trap Rock or Tilcon New Jersey, See Tilcon New Jersey)
Tilcon New Jersey(see also Tilcon New York)
App A_Borrow Material Facility List 8/10
Appendix ABorrow Material Facility ListBorrow Site Assessment Sampling and Analysis PlanDiamond Alkali Superfund SiteNewark, New Jersey
FacilityFacility
Identification1,2 Facility AddressApproximate Distance
from OU23 (miles)Material Type(s) 4
Fine/Coarse Material
Website Notes
RCA DGABCTrap rock #3Trap rock #4
Trap rock #57Trap rock #8
Trap Rock DGABCTrap rock stone sand
Trap rock *7Trap rock *9
Tri-Borough Sand & Stone (James D. Morrissey Inc.?) NJDOT Database N/A 85 Concrete sand Fine http://jdm-inc.com/service/sand-
gravel/
Tube City IMS(now TMS International?) TT BSAWP PO Box 355
Parkesburg, PA 19365 26 Steel slag *8 Coarse http://www.tmsinternational.com/ Metal recovery and steelmaker support - does not look like a good source for our needs
Tuckahoe Sand & Gravel NJDOT Database 100 Sharp RoadTuckahoe, NH 08270 130 Concrete sand Fine http://tuckahoesand-gravel.com/ They own two plants
US Army Corps of Engineers Tierra Phase I Removal Action
26 Federal PlazaRoom 2109
New York, NY 10278N/A N/A N/A https://www.usace.army.mil/
Concrete sand FineGneiss *57Gneiss *8Gneiss *9
Gneiss stone sand
Vollers Excavating & Construction Co. TT BSAWP3311 US Highway 22
PO Box 5297North Branch, NJ
37 RCA DGABC Coarse http://vollerscompany.com/
Vulcan Materials Co NJDOT Database 875 Oxford AveHanover, PA 17331 >350 Concrete sand Fine https://www.vulcanmaterials.com/
Website says they are the nations largest producer of construction aggregates
Quarry in VA according to NJ Database but might be worth checking if local sources
insufficient
Ward Sand & Materials Co. (James D. Morrissey Inc.?) NJDOT Database N/A 85 Concrete sand Fine http://jdm-inc.com/service/sand-
gravel/180175
Gneiss *67Gneiss #67Gneiss #4
Gneiss #57Gneiss #8Gneiss *9
Gneiss DGABCGneiss stone sand
RCA DGABC
Van Orden Sand & Gravel(same address as Stone Industries, appears to be part of Braen Aggregates)
TT BSAWP PO Box 419Kingston, NJ 08528 40
38TT BSAWP
http://www.traprock.com/Trap Rock Industries
Weldon Quarry Co.(Part of Weldon Materials, see also Fanwood Crushed Stone)
TT BSAWP 181 Route 181Lake Hopatcong, NJ 07849
400-402 Central AvenuePO Box 8310
Haledon, NJ 07538
Coarse
Concrete sand62 Leversee RoadTroy, NY 12182 http://www.wwfane.com/
Coarse
Coarse
40 http://www.weldonmaterials.com/
FineWarren Fane Inc NJDOT Database
App A_Borrow Material Facility List 9/10
Appendix ABorrow Material Facility ListBorrow Site Assessment Sampling and Analysis PlanDiamond Alkali Superfund SiteNewark, New Jersey
FacilityFacility
Identification1,2 Facility AddressApproximate Distance
from OU23 (miles)Material Type(s) 4
Fine/Coarse Material
Website Notes
York Building Products NJDOT Database 1070 Roosevelt AvenueYork, PA 17404 180 Carbonate #57, *8 Coarse http://www.yorkbuilding.com/
Notes:Can provide NJDOT I-7 materialCan provide washed concrete sand or #9 materialNot found in the New Jersey database tablesNot able to provide material quantity, or did not want to participate in screening process. Subsidiary/member of one of the other locations already in the list Does not appear to be a good source based on initial research without contactCannot find information online
1. NJDOT Qualified Materials Database https://www.state.nj.us/transportation/eng/materials/qualified/QPLDB.shtm, Accessed in October 2018. 2. Only vendors in New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania reviewed to date.3. Approximate distance from facility to Newark, New Jersey or Newark Bay.4. Sizes for coarse stone from Table 901.1 of the New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT) 2001 Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction.
* = Material similar to a standard size but not meeting the gradation requirement.DGABC = Dense Graded Aggregate Base Course (Formerly Quarry Process stone)N/A = Not Applicable or Not Available RCA = recycled concrete aggregateTT BSAWP = Tetra Tech Borrow Site Assessment Work Plan(u) = unwashed coarse aggregate(w) = washed coarse aggregate
N/AN/A N/A http://www.weldonmaterials.com/Weldon Materials(Incl. Weldon Quarry Co. and Fanwood Crushed Stone)
NJDOT Database 141 Central Ave.Westfield, NJ 07090
App A_Borrow Material Facility List 10/10
APPENDIX B
SOP No. 17 – Soil Stockpile Sampling
,
SOIL STOCKPILE SAMPLING
SOP#: 17
Rev #: 2
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE #17 SOIL STOCKPILE SAMPLING
arcadis.com 1
SOP VERSION CONTROL Revision No Revision Date Page No(s) Description Reviewed by
0 11/21/2018 Initial version Nancy Gensky
1 4/4/2019 Revised version Nancy Gensky
2 7/10/2019 Revised version Nancy Gensky
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE #17
SOIL STOCKPILE SAMPLING
arcadis.com 2
APPROVAL SIGNATURES
Prepared by: Date: 7/02/2019
Reviewed by: Date: 7/02/2019
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE #17
SOIL STOCKPILE SAMPLING
arcadis.com 3
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
ASTM ASTM International
GRO gasoline range organics
PPE personal protective equipment
QA quality assurance
SOP Standard Operating Procedure
TPH total petroleum hydrocarbons
UFP-QAPP Uniform Federal Policy – Quality Assurance Project Plan
VOC volatile organic compound
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE #17
SOIL STOCKPILE SAMPLING
arcadis.com 4
1 PURPOSE
The purpose of this Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) is to provide all Arcadis U.S., Inc. employees
and subcontractors with the procedures and safety and health requirements applicable to perform
aggregate stockpile sampling. The procedures described below are to be utilized when collecting soil
aggregate samples from a borrow source stockpile material. One composite sample will be collected from
a representative stockpile of each potential material type from each of the top three potential borrow
sources for that material type unless specific observations are noted during sampling (see Section 4).
These procedures are applicable to preliminary assessments of the geotechnical and chemical
characteristics of potential borrow materials; additional sampling, testing, and quality assurance
(QA)/quality control procedures are required for material procurement and construction QA. These
procedures follow the Standard Practice for Sampling Aggregates, ASTM International (ASTM D75/D75M
(ASTM 2014).
2 PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS
The following personal protective equipment (PPE) will be utilized during stockpile sampling:
• Safety glasses meeting American National Standards Institute Z87.1 rating
• Hard hat
• Long pants/long-sleeve shirts
• Safety footwear regular meeting ASTM F2413-05 standard with chemical/oil resistant soles
• High-visibility Class 2 or 3 vest or appropriate high-visibility clothing
• Gloves (gloves of the appropriate type to be worn at all times)
• Other PPE required by the borrow source facility
3 EQUIPMENT
• Front-end loader (provided by borrow source facility)
• Shovel
• Measuring bucket
• Stainless steel bowl
• Sample containers (supplied by laboratory)
• Decontamination equipment
• Tape measure
• Camera
• Field logbook
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE #17
SOIL STOCKPILE SAMPLING
arcadis.com 5
4 PROCEDURES
Prior to sampling potential borrow source materials, coordinate with the facility regarding:
• Sampling objectives
• Potential borrow materials to be sampled
• Dimensional plot plans of available stockpiles
• Number and volume of samples required
• Personnel and equipment needed from facility
• Modifications to the sampling procedures (if needed)
• Facility health and safety requirements
When at the borrow source material facility, use the following steps to obtain coarse aggregate samples
for geotechnical and chemical analyses, as well as archive samples:
1. Visually inspect the stockpile and note any variation of the material. Note the location of the stockpile
and record in field logbook. Photograph the stockpile and the sampling process.
2. Collect discrete (grab) samples directly from an undisturbed stockpile for chemical analysis of volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) gasoline range organics (GRO).
If non-homogenous visual differences in material appearance (e.g., color, texture) are observed on the
surface of the stockpile, then an additional set of samples will be collected to evaluate the non-
homogenous material.
3. When ready to obtain a composite sample from the stockpile, have the facility loader enter next to (but
not on) the stockpile with the bucket approximately 6 inches above ground level.
4. Instruct the loader operator to re-blend the stockpile (to remove potentially segregated material on the
stockpile face) by loading the bucket from the stockpile bottom to top and rolling the material back
onto the stockpile. Repeat this process to mix material several times. Note any material with
discernible variations. If visual differences in material appearance (e.g., color, texture) are observed
between locations within a stockpile, then the blending operations will be suspended temporarily.
Discrete samples will be collected from the visually different material, in accordance with Step 2, and
then the operator will be instructed to use the front loader to separate out the material that is visually
different to allow for composite sampling, in accordance with Steps 3 through 15.
5. After re-blending, instruct the loader operator to obtain a full bucket of the re-blended material and to
roll the material out of the bucket to form a small sampling pad at the base of the stockpile. Repeat
this process by instructing the loader operator to draw material from various locations and levels within
the re-blended stockpile to obtain the volume required for the sampling pad, by stacking multiple
buckets on top of each other. The volume required for the sampling pad will be calculated using the
volume required for the chemical and geotechnical analysis, and the archive requirement of 100
pounds per coarse aggregate. The minimum volume to be segregated for sampling will be more than
approximately 100 pounds for fine aggregates and more than approximately 600 pounds for coarse
aggregates.
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE #17
SOIL STOCKPILE SAMPLING
arcadis.com 6
6. When the required volume for the sampling pad has been collected, instruct the loader operator to
create a flat surface across the top of the sampling pad by back dragging the pile.
7. Once a flat surface has been created, measure the stockpile dimensions using the tape and calculate
its approximate volume in cubic yards.
8. Visually divide the sample pad into four quadrants and sample equal amounts of materials evenly
across each quadrant by using a shovel. The sample shall be obtained across the entire flat area but
not near the sample pad edge.
9. Obtain samples by inserting the shovel as near vertical as possible then rolling the shovel back and lift
slowly to avoid coarse material rolling off the sides of the shovel. Repeat shovel samples as needed to
obtain the required volume by multiple shovel holes with equal volumes for each quadrant. Measure
volume using known volume bucket.
10. After the required number of samples and volumes are collected from each of the four quadrants, mix
contents in stainless steel bowl and fill appropriate sample containers supplied by the laboratory. One
composite sample representing the stockpile will be obtained for all analytes, except VOC and TPH
GRO. One discrete sample from one of the stockpiles will be obtained for VOC analyses and TPH
GRO as per Step 2.
11. Label sample container(s) and record pertinent information on a chain of custody form.
12. Submit samples in accordance with procedures outlined in the Uniform Federal Policy – Quality
Assurance Project Plan (UFP-QAPP) (Tetra Tech 2018).
13. Contain required volume for archives (not for analytical testing) in labeled 5-gallon buckets with Teflon
liner bag and cover with lids. Multiple buckets will be used as required to containerize the required
amount of archive material.
14. Decontaminate all equipment according to SOP No. 25 (Tetra Tech 2018) prior to sample collection
between different stockpiles. For heavy equipment used in sample collection (i.e., front-end loader), a
power washer or rinsing with ambient water should be performed.
15. Repeat this process for other required potential borrow material stockpiles.
Use the following procedure when sampling fine aggregate from a stockpile:
1. Visually inspect the stockpile and note any variation of the material. Note the location of the stockpile
and record in the field logbook. Photograph the stockpile and the sampling process.
2. Collect discrete (grab) samples directly from an undisturbed stockpile for chemical analysis of VOCs
and TPH GRO. If non-homogenous visual differences in material appearance (e.g., color, texture) are
observed on the surface of the stockpile, then an additional set of samples will be collected to
evaluate the non-homogenous material.
3. When ready to obtain a sample from the stockpile, instruct the front-loader operator to blend the
stockpile prior to removing a portion for sampling. The amount to be removed is contingent on the
size, shape, and type of stockpile material, and visual observation of the stockpile.
4. Instruct the front-loader operator to blend the stockpile (to remove potentially segregated material on
the stockpile face) by loading the bucket from the stockpile bottom to top and rolling the material back
onto the stockpile. Repeat this process to mix material several times. Note any material with
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE #17
SOIL STOCKPILE SAMPLING
arcadis.com 7
discernible variations. If visual differences in material appearance (e.g., color, texture) are observed
between locations within a stockpile, then the blending operations will be suspended temporarily.
Discrete samples will be collected from the visually different material, in accordance with Step 2, and
then the operator will be instructed to use the front-loader to separate out the material that is visually
different to allow for composite sampling, in accordance with Steps 3 through 13.
5. Collect composite samples using the sampling tube. Insert a sampling tube measuring 1.25 inches by
6 feet in length (including the portion to hold) and constructed of aluminum, polyvinyl chloride, or other
sturdy material into the shipping face of the stockpile horizontally at random location. The sampling
tube will be inserted as deep as possible, with a minimum penetration of 3 feet, and acceptable
recoveries of greater than 50%. If penetration is less than 3 feet, additional equipment, such as a slide
hammer, will be used to advance the sampling tube to 3 feet.
6. Collect samples at a minimum height of 3 feet from the surrounding grade. Samples should be
collected from at least three increments in the stockpile, representing the lower third, mid-point, and
top third of the stockpile.
7. Repeat steps and collect a minimum of five tubes to form a single field sample. The volume required
for the sampling pad will be calculated using the volume required for the chemical and geotechnical
analysis, and the archive requirement of 50 pounds per fine aggregate.
8. After the required number of samples and volume are collected, mix contents in stainless steel bowl
and fill appropriate sample containers supplied by the laboratory. One composite sample representing
the stockpile will be obtained for all analytes, except VOCs and TPH GRO. One discrete sample from
one of the stockpiles will be obtained for VOC analyses and TPH-GRO as per Step 2.
9. Label sample container(s) and record pertinent information on a chain of custody form.
10. Submit samples in accordance with the procedures outlined in the UFP-QAPP (Tetra Tech 2018).
11. Contain required volume for archives (not for analytical testing) in labeled 5-gallon buckets with Teflon
liner bags and cover with lids. Multiple buckets will be used as required to containerize the required
amount of archive material.
12. Decontaminate all equipment according to SOP No. 25 (Tetra Tech 2018) prior to sample collection
between different stockpiles. For heavy equipment used in sample collection, a power washer or
rinsing with ambient water should be performed.
13. Repeat this process for other required potential borrow material stockpiles.
5 REFERENCES
ASTM International. 2014. Standard Practice for Sampling Aggregates. D75/D75M – 14, American
Association State Highway and Transportation Officials Standard No.: T2
Tetra Tech. 2018. Uniform Federal Policy – Quality Assurance Project Plan (UFP-QAPP) [Field Sampling
Plan (FSP) and Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)]. Remedial Design – Lower 8.3 Miles of the
Lower Passaic River, Operable Unit Two of the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site, In and About Essex,
Hudson, Bergen and Passaic Counties – New Jersey. Parsippany, New Jersey. Revision 13,
November 2018.
Arcadis U.S., Inc.
50 Millstone Road
Building 200
Suite 220
East Windsor, New Jersey 08520
Tel 609 860 0590
Fax 609 448 0890
www.arcadis.com
top related