fI

APPENDKA

SOIL INVESTIGATION REPORT, SOLVENTRELEASE-COURTYARD AREA" • " ' ' ' ' • • '

t

'•

AR300732\ -

':

SOIL INVESTIGATIONSOLVENT RELEASE - COURTYARD AREA

ELEVATOR PLANT SITEGETTYSBURG, PENNSYLVANIA

PROJECT No. 88-561DECEMBER 10,1993

PAUL C. Rizzo ASSOCIATES300 OXFORD DRIVE

MONROEVILLE, PENNSYLVANIA 15146TELEPHONE: (412) 856-9700TELEFAX: (412)856-9749

r24-37S/93 , \

AR300733

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

1.0 INTRODUCTICW..........,;.......l.l SHE HISTORY .„;....,....„;......>::............ ................:...,...:.......:......„. i1.2, PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS................................. :....................,... 2

2.0 FffiLD INVESTIGATION:;........................... ......... .1.. ,..,......„. f......... 62.1 SOLVENT STORAGE TANK SAMPLING... ........................................ ..6

, 2.2 SOLVENTlDENTIFICATION........... .......:.,........................................ 72.3 SOLVENT SPILL Row DIRECTION...... ............................................ 7

, 2.4 STORMDfUlNSAMPI..........................:.............;..............;.....:72.5 FORMER UNDERGROUND REMOTE FILL LINE INVESTIGATION.... .....82.6 SUBSURFACE SOIL INVESTIGATION..... .................... .....................8

: • . ' ' ' ' ' - • . , ' • ' • •' • ; • ,

3.0 ANALYnCALASSESSMENt............ .-...•.:.':.... .:.........,................;..,... 113.1 ANALYTICAL RESULTS ................................................................ n3.2 DATAVALIPAIIQN:....;.:............., ................I........................... 14

4.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS.. ......... ......... ....L. ................ ..16

TABLES ' - ; ' , ,_ _ •;.';' ';•... " • •' , . ~ • '.FIGURES .' .ATTACHMENT I - DATA FROM PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONSATTACHMENT - ANALYTICAL RESULTS • COURTYARD INVESTIGATIONATTACHMENT 3 - MSDS/ANALYTICAL DATA - CHLOROETHENE SMATTACHMENT 4 - CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY AND FIELD COLLECTION REPORTSATTACHMENTS. BORING LOGS

r2-too.37S/93 , 1 '

; fl'B30073li-

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE. NO. TITLE

1 SUMMARY OF COMPOUNDS OF INTERESTDETECTED IN SOIL AND ASSOCIATED QASAMPLES . '•

2 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTSSCfflNDLER SOIL SAMPLING

3 SUMMARY OF ANLYTICAL RESULTS USEPA SPLITSAMPLES

4 ORGANIC DATA VALIDATION SUMMARY

LIST OF FIGURES

.•'• :"•'•".•'' ' : "• •:• •••FIGURE.NO. ' TITLE

1 PLANLOCATION

2 LOCATION OF POTENTIAL SOURCE AREAS

3 PLAN VIEW

4 GEOLOGIC SECTION A-A1

5 GEOLOGIC SECTION B-B'

rt-too-375«3 ii

AR300735

\ j SOIL INVESTIGATIONb^ SOLVENT RELEASE-COURTYARD AREA

ELEVATOR PLANT SITEGETTYSBURG, PENNSYLVANIA

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Paul C. Rizzo Associates 'was retained by Westinghouse Electric Corporation (Westinghouse)to perform a supplemental soil investigation in the Courtyard Area of the former ,Westinghouse Elevator Plant (Elevator Plant Site) located in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania (Figure,1). This document details the performance of the investigation and describes the analyticalresults obtained. ; .

Site activities conducted by Paul C. Rizzo Associates personnel were performed inaccordance with a September 18, 1992 transmittal to the U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency (USEPA) titled Soil Investigations/Recommendations (Revision 1.0). Thisdocument outlined the proposed scope of work to be conducted for investigation of soilswithin the Courtyard Area of the Elevator Plant Site, and included comments by USEP A.USEPA approved protocols for performance of the RI/FS sampling and analysis programwere utilized.

. i • • / - ' .

1.1 SlTEHlSTORY

Investigation of alleged environmental problems possibly related to the Elevator Plant Sitewere initiated in 1983, based on reports from local residents to the Pennsylvania Departmentof Environmental Resources (PADER). These reports led to sampling by PADER,Westinghouse, and USEPA Region m. Based on the review of plant processes, there areseveral potential locations on site where chlorinated solvents were distributed and used.These areas included the former buried remote degreasing fluid fill line, the degreasing fluidstorage tank location, the pumphouse area, the railroad dock, and the old waste drumstorage area. Locations of these identified potential source areas are shown on Figure 2.

AR300736

This investigation focuses on two of these potential source areas: the former undergroundremote degreasing fluid fill line and the above ground degreasing fluid storage tank arealocated within an open area within the plant identified as'the Courtyard Area (Figure 3).Beginning in 1930, tank trucks containing degreasing fluid filled a storage tank in theinterior of the building (Courtyard Area) through this buried line. Prior to 1980,degreasing fluid was purchased and stored in 55-gallon drums. In 1985, Westinghousediscontinued use of the buried remote fill line and began filling the storage tank using anabove ground fill line. The underground remote fill line was tested twice by Westinghousefor structural integrity (once in September 1983 using air pressure and again in March1984 using water pressure). No leaks were reported from either test.

/ * ' • ' . ' -

On March 10,1937, Westinghouse entered into a. Consent Agreement with the USEPA toperform a remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) of the site. A work plan forperforming the study was prepared in 1937 and 1983. Phase I RI/FS activities wereinitiated at the Elevator Plant Site in late November 1983.

i , •-' •In 1939, Schindler Elevator Corporation (Schindler) began operating the formerWestinghouse Elevator Plant under a lease agreement with Westinghouse.

1.2 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS \ \ _ • •^ - '" • • •.- •

During Phase I of the RI at the Elevator Plant Site, a composite surface soil sample,identified as SS-2, was collected from the Courtyard Area by Paul C. Rizzo Associatespersonnel The composite soil sample, was collected by combining soil sampled from thethree locations depicted on Figure 3. The composite soil sample was collected December7, 1938 from a depth of less than 12 inches below ground surface. The soil was analyzedfor volatile organic compounds (VOCs) on the Target Compound List (TCL). Theanalytical results indicated that VOC concentrations for Sample SS-2 were below methoddetection limits.

During Phase n of the RI, Paul C. Rizzo Associates personnel performed a soil boring(PTB-12) in the Courtyard Area (Figure 3). Boring PTB-12 was advanced on August 7,1990 with soil samples collected at two to four, six to eight, and eight to ten feet below

AR300737

ground surface for laboratory analysis. PTB-12 soil samples were analyzed for VOCs ontheTCL. The analytical results indicate that VOC concentrations (excluding acetone,chloroform, and methylene chloride) were below method detection limits.

A solvent release occurred at the site during the filling of a 4,000-gallon above groundstorage tank by Schindler personnel. The spill reportedly occurred on May 3, 1991.However, a letter from Schindler to Westinghouse dated November 1, 1991, indicates thatthe spill occurred on May 20, 1991 (Attachment 1).

During the filling of the storage tank, a Schindler employee heard a "click" at the top ofthe tank which indicated that the tank was full and left the Courtyard Area to notify thetank truck operator to stop pumping the solvent. Upon the employee's return to theCourtyard Area, solvent was Overflowing from a five-gallon container placed under thevent dryer opening outside the secondary containment. The amount of solvent spilledaccording to Schindler personnel was 5 to 15 gallons. , .

The approximate spill area, as reported by Schindler personnel, is provided on Figure 3.Schindler's in-house hazardous materials team reportedly excavated soil immediately

. • ' • s • • -' ' • ' • ' . • . •- • . . •

surrounding the spill area. This area consisted of an excavation along the concrete pad(Figure 3) with approximate dimensions of 1.5 feet in width by 1 .5 feet in depth.

Schindler arranged for Gannett-FIeming, Inc. to sample soils from the excavated area andto determine if VOCs were present. The actual sample locations and methods were not .documented in data provided by Schindler to Paul C Rizzo Associates. The soil sampleswere collected on May 6, 1991. The analytical result j for the composite samples werereported as follows: s •

• y,y,;-Trichloroethane (7,7,7-TCA) • 3.350 pg/kg,• /,7-Dichloroethane(y,/-DCA)-62 Mg/kg, and• 7, y-Dichloroethehe (7, 7-DCE) - 3 3 5

The excavation was reportedly sampled again on May 22. 199 1 , and in July, August, andOctober of 1991. In addition, a background soil sample was collected. Specific sample

AR300738

locations were not documented in reports reviewed by Paul C. Rizzo Associates. Theanalytical results reported a general decrease in concentrations of these compounds inJuly, August, and October.

RMC Environmental Services (RMC), on behalf of Schindler, initiated field activities inNovember 1991 to reportedly determine the extent of contamination in shallow soilsassociated with the solvent spill. As part of the field investigation, RMC collected onecomposite soil sample, T-l, from the excavated area. This sample reportedly containedJ,7./-TCA and detectable levels of trichloroethene (TCE). The level of /, 1.7-TCA is notconsistent with the decreasing trend reported in the Gannett-Fleming data.

. , i • ' •

RMC also performed four soil borings in the Courtyard Area identified as SS-1 throughSS-4. RMC reported that VOCs detected in Borings SS-2 through SS-4 apparently relateto a slag "clinker" layer present in each of the aforementioned borings. The "clinker"layer, as it was classified by RMC, was present from 0.5 to 1.2 feet below ground surfaceaccording to RMC boring logs. Therefore, this material may have been encountered bythe excavation performed by Schindler. ' '

Soil samples collected and analyzed by RMC for their Boring S-l did not exhibitdetectable levels of VOCs. Sample S-2A (0-2') collected from RMC Boring S-2 exhibiteddetectable levels of 7,/,/-TCA (990 ug/kg) and TCE (61 ug/kg). Sample S-2B(2-4')collected from RMC Boring S-2 exhibited detectable levels of 7,7,7-TC A (450 Mg/kg) andTCE (29 ug/kg). Methylene chloride was detected in RMC samples S-1 A, S- IB, S-2 A,and S-2B, but was qualified by RMC as a laboratory induced contaminant. . •

RMC sample S-3A (Boring S-3,0-21) contained /,7,7-TCA (220 Mg/kg) and TCE (9Mg/kg). RMC sample S-3B (Boring S-3,2-4*) contained 1,1, /-TCA (89 ug/kg); /,7-DCE(2 ug/kg); and TCE (190 ug/kg). RMC sample S-4A (Boring S-4,0-2') contained7,/,7-TCA (20,000 ug/kg); 7.7-DCE (1,200 ug/kg); carbon tetrachloride (1,800 Mg/kg);TCE (2,700 mg/kg); and lesser concentrations of 1, /-DCA and tetrachloroethene. RMCsample S-4B (Boring S-4,2-41) contained 7,/,7-TCA (570 Mg/kg); 7,7-DCA (100 ug/kg);7,7-DCE (110 Mg/kg); TCE (980 Mg/kg); and lesser concentrations of /,7,2-TCA andtetrachloroethene. Methylene chloride was detected in RMC samples S-3 A, S-3B, S-4A,and S-4B, but was qualified by RMC as a laboratory-induced contaminant. '

rt.375/93

AR3QQ739

u

.Data associated with previous investigations of the Courtyard Area at the Elevator PlantSite are provided in Attachment 1.

r2-37J/93

fiR3007lfd

2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION

In order to better understand the current condition of shallow soils in the vicinity of theCourtyard Area, Paul C. Rizzo Associates performed the following activities:

• Sampled and analyzed the contents of the 4,000-gallonsolvent storage tank;

: • Obtained a copy of the Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS)for the solvent that was spilled and other documents thatwould establish the chemical constituents of the solvent;

, • Obtained the name of the solvent supplier and a contact; ,• * '

• Determined which direction material would flow if spilledon the concrete pad in the area of the solvent spill; . .

• Attempted to sample storm drain sediment from a culvertnorth (downslope) of the spill area and analyze the sampleforVOCsontheTCL; .

• Uncovered and verified the integrity of the formerunderground remote degreasing fluid fill line near theconcrete pad at the south end of the Courtyard Area; and' • ' ' ' ' " ,

• Performed eight soil borings (Figure 3 ) for classifyingstratigraphy and collection of soil samples for analysis ofVOCs.

Sampling, analysis, and reporting was performed using the applicable proceduresdescribed in the RI/FS Sampling and Analysis Plan for the Elevator Plant Site. Each of theabove tasks is described in detail in the following subsections <

2.1 SOLVENT STORAGE TANK SAMPLING

Paul C. Rizzo Associates personnel sampled the solvent contained in the 4,000-gallonabove ground solvent tank located in the Courtyard Area on September 28, 1992. The

'r2-375/93 ' • . - , • . ' - v • ' ,' ' '. '.

AR3007M

-• / sample was collected in two 40-miUiliter (ml) sample vials supplied by LancasterLaboratories at an in-line valve between the tank and the use area within the plant.Following collection, the sample was placed in a cooler with ice. The results for thesample identified as "solvent sample" are presented as Attachment 2 of this report.

The solvent sample was analyzed by Lancaster Laboratories using a solvent identificationmethod. Method detection limits were not reported because the actual quantitation ofsuch mixtures cannot be performed without knowing the exact distillate present and thenanalyzing appropriate standards.

2.2 SOLVENT IDENTIFICATION '

Paul C. Rizzo Associates personnel met with Schindler personnel and obtained the MSDSprovided by Ashland Chemical, Inc. for solvents contained in the storage tank at theElevator Plant Site (Attachment 3). Dow Chemical's certificate of analysis forCHLOROETHENE SM brand /,/, jf-TCA, a letter regarding the level of TCE in DowChemical's CHLOROETHENE SM solvent, and a previous analysis performed on asample collected by Schindler have also been obtained and are included as Attachment 3.

2.3 SOLVENT SPILL FLOW DIRECTION ,

On September 28,1992, Paul C. Rizzo Associates conducted a field test to determinewhich direction liquid would flow on the concrete pad in the area of the solvent spillidentified on Figure 3. Approximately five gallons of potable water contained in a five-gallon bucket was poured onto the concrete pad. Observations regarding flow directionand amount were documented. The majority of the water flowed north directly off theconcrete pad. A small amount of water flowed to the south, encountered a joint in theconcrete pad, and flowed west off the concrete pad along the joint. This information wasutilized to form the basis for locating a portion of the soil borings

2.4 STORM DRAIN SAMPLING

The excavation performed by Schindler exposed a 12-inch perforated, corrugated metalpipe (storm drain). This pipe was buried at a depth of approximately one foot below

rt-375/93 • " . - ' • • /•'• ' . . ' . ' : " • : • ' . ' • '

v AR3007tf2

ground surface and was oriented north to south.(Figure 3). As shown on Figure 3, thepipe drains into a shallow catch basin located north of the excavation.

On September 23,1992, Paul C. Rizzo Associates personnel removed the grate cover onthe catch basin located downslope from the spill area in an attempt to sample sedimentcollected in the catch basin. However, there was insufficient sediment accumulated in thecatch basin to obtain a sample for laboratory analysis, and therefore, no sample wascollected.

2.5 FORMER UNDERGROUND REMOTE FILL LINE INVESTIGATION

A Terramite Model T-5 backhoe operated by an employee from Eichelbergers, Inc. ofMechanicsburg, Pennsylvania was utilized to expose the former underground remotedegreasing fluid fill line in the vicinity of the concrete pad at the southern end of thevCourtyard Area. The remote fill line consisted of a 2.5-inch metal pipe buried less thanone foot below surface that was plugged at the end nearest the concrete pad. The sectionof the fill line uncovered was a 2.5-inch metal pipe with thread and couple joints. Paul C.Rizzo Associates personnel scanned the line using an HNU photoionization detector (PID)with a 10.2 eV lamp: Readings above background were not observed. The former remotefill line was visually intact, with no signs of failure. A hard layer of asphalt wasencountered a few inches below a portion of the remote degreasing fluid fill line.

Paul C. Rizzo Associates collected a soil sample (SS-1. remote fill) immediately belowthe coupled joint exposed during the excavation (Figure 3). The soil sample was collectedjust above the asphalt layer and placed in 125 ml sample bottles supplied by LancasterLaboratories. The sample was placed in a cooler with ice following collection and duringtransport to Lancaster Laboratories for analysis. A chain-of-custody record and sample-collection report were maintained for the sample and have been included as Attachment 4.The analytical results are provided in Attachment 2.

2.6 SUBSURFACE SOIL INVESTIGATION

Paul C Rizzo Associates retained Eichelbergers, Inc. to perform eight soil borings withinthe Courtyard Area. The purpose of the borings was to classify stratigraphy beneath the

r2-37S/93' V •

AR30.07I»3

v - . • ': ' .- • - - • • •. . . '.-' • •" '^ j . southern portion of the Courtyard Area, and to collect soil samples for laboratory analysis.x The borings are identified as RTB-1 through RTB-8 and are depicted on Figure 3. The

final boring locations were determined b the field through concurrence of USEPA,PADER, Paul C. Rizzo Associates, and Schindler personnel.

A CME Model 75 truck-mounted drill rig was utilized for drilh'ng and soil sampling. Drill.cuttings were collected in 55-gallon drums and staged on site until proper disposal bySchindler. Level D personal protection was employed for the activities. All personnelwere trained in accordance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (QSHA)requirements and were prepared to upgrade to Level C personal protection, if necessary.

. ' . • ' ! • , - . ' _ » , ' ' . • • ' • - ' • . , . ' ' ' •

The drill rig, augers, bits, sample rods, split-barrel samplers, and associated tools and, . equipment were decontaminated using a high-pressure steam cleaner prior to beginning

work, between borings, and upon completion of work prior to leaving the she.Decontamination activities were monitored by Paul C. Rizzo Associates personnel, andconducted on a temporary decontamination pad constructed within the Courtyard Area for

('" this purpose. Water generated during decontamination activities was collected and• ' ' ' '' ' ' •contained in an on-site temporary storage tank for proper disposal.

The borings were advanced in sequential order using 8-inch outer diameter and 4- 1/4-inchinner diameter hollow stem augers. Soil samples were collected using .two-inch outerdiameter split-barrel soil samplers driven with a 140-pound hammer. Soil samplesrecovered were placed in two separate glass containers First, a 125-ml jar supplied by .Lancaster Laboratories for analysis of VOCs was rlUed and the lid secured. A secondglass jar supplied by the drilling subcontractor was partially filled. The second containerwas covered tightly with aluminum foil and the lid secured After approximately threeminutes, the lid was removed and the foil was punctured with the probe of an HnU

-. - . V ' . . '. : t . ". - ' ... '

photoionization detector (PID) equipped with a 10 2 eV lamp, drawing the air in theheadspace of the jar through the PID. The test provided a means for screening soilsamples for laboratory analysis for VOCs on the TCL The remaining soil sample wasavailable to Schindler and USEP A representatives for the purpose of sample collection.Schindler and USEPA representatives each utilized two 40-ml vials for sample collection.

r2-375/93

10

Soil samples collected by Paul C. Rizzo Associates and selected for laboratory analysiswas analyzed for TCL VOCs by Lancaster Laboratories. In addition to the samplesselected for laboratory analysis, an aqueous trip blank accompanied each sample shipment.A duplicate sample from Boring RTB-7 (RTB-7, S-4D) was collected and analyzed. Atriple volume of sample was collected from Boring RTB-6, Sample S-5 (8-10'), for the-purpose of performing a matrix spike and a matrix spike duplicate. USEPA and Schindlerrepresentatives obtained split samples of various soil samples.

Paul C. Rizzo Associates personnel collected a field equipment blank (EQB-1) by pouringdeionized water provided by the laboratory over a decontaminated stainless steel spatulaused in sample collection, and into two 40-ml sample vials. Schindler representatives •collected a field blank utilizing the same deionized water used by Paul C. Rizzo Associatespersonnel. USEPA representatives did not utilize this deionized water for the collection ofa field blank. The trip blank and field equipment blank collected by Paul C. RizzoAssociates were analyzed for TCL VOCs.

Geologic cross sections based on results of the split-barrel soil samples collected from eachboring are provided on Figures 4 and 5. The detailed boring logs are provided inAttachment 5. As shown on Figures 4 and 5~ each boring conducted during thissupplemental investigation encountered bedrock at a depth ranging from 4.3 feet to 9.9 feetbelow ground surface. The unconsolidated material above bedrock consisted primarily ofdark red-brown clayey silt with some angular rock fragments. Portions of this materialappeared to have been placed as fill, consistent with findings of the remedial investigation.An asphalt layer and sub-base consisting of crushed rock was encountered at the southernportion of the courtyard area. This layer was approximately one foot in thickness and was •encountered approximately 0.5 feet below existing ground surface. Borings RTB-2 andRTB-3 encountered the asphalt material. Asphalt was also observed below the buriedformer remote degreasing fluid fill line, as discussed in Section 2.5.

JM7S/93 " • ' . ' . , ' : ' ' • ' • ' . ; . - • . • ' ' ' •

":AR3.007I»5

11

3.0 ANALYTICAL ASSESSMENT

Soil samples were collected by Paul C. Rizzo Associates personnel and analyzed byLancaster Laboratories for TCL VOCs. Detailed analytical results are contained inAttachment 2, and are summarized in Table 1. Analytical results of samples collected bySchindler personnel are summarized in Table 2. Analytical results for split soil samplescollected by Dynamac Corporation on behalf of the USEPA are summarized in Table 3and detailed results are included in Attachment 2. Information obtained from the samplingand analytical program was evaluated with respect to the physical site data and existinginformation to characterize the nature and extent of contamination.• .. ' ' ' ' • i ' '' ' ' ' •'

3.1 ANALYTICAL RESULTS

As mentioned in Section 2. 1, a sample of the solvent contained in the 4,000-gallon tank wascollected by Paul C. Rizzo Associates i personnel on September 28, 1992. According toSchindler personnel, the tank has been refilled since the release on May 3, 1991, andtherefore, the sample may not be representative of the spilled solvent. The solvent wasanalyzed using a solvent identification method to determine the various compounds present.The analytical results (Attachment 2) indicate that the solvent is comprised of 95 percent7,7,7-TCA. '.'.; . "•'•' ." '-. ' , ..":' '_• . ; . : '.. •..'.;'.• ' . . . . ' .

• . . ' ' i ' ' . . ' . ' • ' . ' - . ' • . • "Analytical results for soil samples collected as part of the Courtyard Area investigationshowed some concentrations above detectable limits for the following TCL VOCs: •

Acetone, ,2-Butanone,7,,2-Dichloroethane, , .7,2-Dichloroethene (total),Methylene Chloride,Tetrachloroethene,/, 1, 7-Trichloroethahe,7,7,2-Trichloroethane, andTrichloroethene. .

r2-375/93 . ' • . ' . . . / , ^ . . ' ' ' ' ' . " • . • '

fiR3007l*6

12

Paul C. Rizzo Associates sampled soil immediately below a coupled joint exposed duringexcavation of the former remote fill line. This sample was identified as SS-1, remote fill,and was below method detection limits for the VOCs on the TCL.

Boring RTB-1 was advanced approximately two feet southeast of existing Boring PTB-12(FigureS), which was completed during the remedial investigation in August 1990.Sample S-3 from Boring RTB-1 was selected for analysis of TCL VOCs based on thesample's slightly elevated field headspace reading. The analytical results of RTB-1, S-3indicate that 1,1,7-TCA (8 ug/kg), TCE (24 fig/kg), acetone (20 jig/kg), and 2-butanone(2 ug/kg) were present in the sample. These results differ from the analyticaT results forthree soil samples collected from Boring PTB-12, which detected acetone ranging from 22to 72 ug/kg, but did not detect 7,7,7-TCA or TCE above method detection limits.

Borings RTB-4, RTB-5, RTB-7, and RTB-8 (Figure 3) were located within the existingexcavation by Schindler. The excavation removed soil in response to the solvent spill.Both shallow and deep samples were collected from Borings RTB-4, RTB-7, and RTB-8,while only a deep sample was collected from Boring RTB-5 for laboratory analysis.Analytical results indicate that 7,7,7-TCA was detected in the shallow samples (3.5-5.5')from RTB-4, RTB-7, and RTB-8 ranging in concentration from 7 ug/kg to 44 ug/kg.TCE was also detected in the three shallow samples at concentrations ranging from5 ug/kg to 14 ug/kg. 2-Butanone was found in all these samples at up to 4 ug/kg.Sample RTB-4, S-2 (3.5-5.51) was located in the area where the majority of the solventapparently flowed off the concrete pad, based on the field test described in Section 2.3,and displayed the highest concentrations of 7,7,7-TC A and TCE of these samples. Thissample also contained 7,2-DCA at 2 ug/kg.

The deep soil samples for laboratory analysis from Borings RTB-4, RTB-5, RTB-7, andRTB-8 were collected at the soil/bedrock interface, approximately nine feet below groundsurface. 7,7,7-TCA was detected only in RTB-7 at a concentration of 1 ug/kg. TCE wasdetected in deep soil samples RTB-5, S-5 (3 ug/kg), and RTB-8, S-4 (2 ng/kg), andincreased in RTB-4 (82 ug/kg) and RTB-7 (40 and 42 ug/kg in duplicate samples), incomparison with shallow samples. Duplicate samples RTB-7, S-4 and RTB-7, S-4Dcontained 1 and 2 ug/kg of 7,7,2-TCA, respectively. Acetone concentrations ranging from

rt.375/93 , .

flR3007t*7

/'

13

• i ) 9 ug/kg to 25 ug/kg were reported for samples RTB-4, S-4; RTB-5, S-5; RTB-7, S-4;w=!" . RTB-7, S-4D; and RTB-8, S-4; 2-Butanone was found in three of these samples, at up to

11 Hg/kg. Sample RTB-8, S-4 contained lug/kg of methylene chloride

Boring RTB-3 was located approximately 5 feet west of the concrete pad where thesolvent spill occurred. Two samples from Boring RTB-3 were analyzed for TCL VOCs.Sample RTB-3, S-2 (2 - 41) contained the highest concentration of 1,1,7-TC A (13 0 ug/kg),TCE (190 ug/kg) and acetone; (35 ug/kg), of the eight borings conducted as part of thissupplemental investigation. This sample also contained 3 ug/kg of tetrachloroethene and1 ug/kg of methylene chloride. The analytical results for the deep sample (RTB-3, S-5)collected at the soil/bedrock interface were below method detection limits for/./,/-TCA;TCE was detected at 4 ug/kg; and acetone was detected at 22 ug/kg.

- , ' ' * ' - . " • . - • • . ' • ' ' . , • .• • ' , ' . ' • • - - . i ' • • ' . . . - . / . - . . • . - , . ' - , •

A shallow soil sample (RTB-2, S-2) was collected by Paul C Rizzo Associates from, - • ' Boring RTB-2, located approximately 15 feet southwest of the solvent spill area, and five

feet north of the former remote fill line (Figure 3) Sample RTB-2, S-2 was collected\ beneath the asphalt/sub-base layer at a depth of 2.0' to 40', and contained 7,7,7-TCA

' (20 ug/kg); TCE (21 ug/kg); and acetone (28 ug/kg)- • . •, • ' ' •• . ' • • ' • : - • • . • • . ' ' • ' '

Boring RTB-6 was located approximately 4 feet west of the concrete pad and two feet northof the former remote fill line. A deep soil sample {RTB-6. S-5) was collected at the soil/bedrock interface and analyzed for TCL VOCs Sample^ RTB-6, S-5 exhibited detectablelevels of TCE (37 ug/kg); 7,2-DCE (8 ug/kg); /. /.2-TCA. (2 ug/kg); acetone (.17 Mg/kg);2-butanone (4 ug/kg); and methylene chloride (2 jig/kg) Shallow soils from Boring RTB-6were not analyzed for TCL VOCs due to the proximity of Sample SS-l,remote fill .(Figure 3). Analytical results indicate that Sample SS-l, remote fill did not contain VOCs,on the TCL, above method-detection limits.

Analytical results for samples RTB-1 through RTB-8 with /./. /-TCA; TCE; and/or7,2-DCE detected below 6 ug/kg and acetone below 13 Mg/kg were qualified by thelaboratory as estimated value. These results are below the method detection limits.Therefore, the presence of these compounds in the samples is considered questionable.

12-375/93

14

As previously noted, RMC reported significantly dififerent concentrations and types of VOCfor Courtyard Area soil samples. The significant differences in concentration and type ofVOCs detected in the RMC borings as compared to analytical results of Paul C RizzoAssociates borings and Sample SS-1, remote fill may be related to the following:

• The time clasped between sampling dates relative to thesolvent spill;

• The relatively small size of the VOC sampling container(10 ml) used by RMC; and

• RMC samples were not preserved with ice, as indicatedon the RMC chain-of-custody. .

' • . " - - ' - »

3.2 DATA VALIDATION

Data collected during this supplemental investigation was formally validated by Paul C.Rizzo Associates following the guidelines documented in the following references:

• "USEPA Contract Laboratory Program-Statement ofWork for Organic Analysis," February 1988 (modifiedfor Region ffl, June 1988), and

• "USEPA Contract Laboratory Program • NationalFunctional Guidelines for Organic Data Review," June1991.

v - ; k - . - - . - • . . - • - . • • • . '

The information reviewed for data validation included:1 - i • ' " ' " - • " ' ' " • - '

Sample Holding Times;GC/MS Tuning (Instrument Performance Check);Calibration; , .Blanks;Surrogate Recovery, -Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate;Internal Standard Performance;Compound Identification; andCompound Quantitation and Detection Limits.

r2-37J/93 '

ftR3QQ71i9

15

\ J . Table 4 is a summary of the organic data validation completed for this supplementalv~ investigation. In accordance with the reference method and USEP A data validation

guidelines, the.data generated for each parameter analyzed by Lancaster Laboratories was. determined to be acceptable for use to meet the objectives of this investigation.

Samples were analyzed for volatile organic fraction of the 1988 TCL to be consistent withsamples collected at the site and analyzed during past sampling events.

r2.37S/93 • .. •. . -,, • '^ " ' . '. - . . •

4R300750

16

4.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Based on previous studies and the results of the supplemental investigation conducted inthe Courtyard Area of the Elevator Plant Site, the following findings have beenestablished; ,

• The'solvent released in the Courtyard Area on May 3,1991 was reported to be CHLOROETHENE SM,manufactured by DOW Chemical U.S.A. Theprimaryconstituent of this solvent is /, 1, /-TC A. A letter fromthe manufacturer to Schhdler indicates that "based onhistorical data, the trichloroethylene concentration inCHLOROETHENE SM solvent is typically less than10 parts per million and usually non-detectable bystandard analytical methods" (Attachment I ).

• A sample of the solvent contained in the storage tank' inSeptember 1992 was analyzed using a solvent .identification method and was found to be 95 percent byweight 7.7,7-TCA

• The majority of the solvent spilled probably flowednorth directly off the concrete pad, with a smalleramount flowing south to a concrete joint, then west offthe pad. Due to the existing excavation, it is notapparent which direction the solvent may have migratedafter leaving the concrete pad. " .

1 . . *•- •

«. Based on previous leak tests results and soil sampleanalysis, the former remote fill line does not appear tobe a source for compounds of interest present in soilwithin the Courtyard Area. :.'..<

' ' - • " ' " • '

• Concentrations of /,y,7"TC A and TCE increased frombelow method detection limits in three soil samplescollected in August 1990 at Boring PTB- 1 2, to 7 ng/kgand 23 ug/kg in Boring RTB- 1 sampled in September1992 and located approximately two feet from BoringPTB-12.

AR30075I

17

•Concentrations of 1,1, /-TCA have been found todecrease with increasing depth in the vicinity of the May1991 spill.

• Concentrations of TCE have been found to increasewith depth in the two areas investigated by Borings .RTB-4 and RTB-7 where the majority of the solvent,based on a field test, probably left the concrete pad.

Respectfully submitted,PaulJC. Rizzo Associc

David M. BrownProject Supervisor

DMB/jmc

rt-373/93

ft-R 3 007-52

TABLES r

AR30Q753, : \

11fai/?0*S&;

iitisis3*HIPSS|1*

IIsD

1

£ '

•-

._.

,

E

<N

E

E

f

\

^•>'

00

•£a

|

£

JJ

tOT

E

oz

Ci

d

I

oz

E

^.a

-

•<•*

a

•Q

QZ

E

p

Dz

1?a

iJ!1

9

eo

Q

*

a

£j

;^

Ci

O

^a

.1£•a§^s

E

p

•oz

»>

z

•6C

3

, .

0

56

i

•Q

•QZ

DZ

_

QZ

Oz

ec

a

p

1

I

*• *

QZ

••fiz

o

00

«

a

g

•1fe

ig

«

QZ

Q

Z

az

GZ

Oz

QZ

et

a

gjjb|

5

5

F—

a

2

?.

o

• ^

«M

^

a

J--3|

•>

2

CO

a

oo

f»>

>o

_

"O

i9*

••*ia

I Moisture

: ; vi

• '•' • .

• • . . . ' ' . -

. '•• • ..' '-

flR30075lj

5,1

CKi*&

3 '

a-

ZM§

«N

o

••

'

. .. ' ./ •< . •

t

/ • ' , ' ,

. - . ' • - • . • ; ' :

2 :- ' .-• • :' •<82 2^o i

I P §«'S |g 8g"• «j f <iSi 2-B

- g £ ;.M a

»*« • ^^• to . . g- • ^1

' 8^

••

^ ' , • ' ' . * ' • ' . ' ' '

t .

- „

. • • ' ' • • '

*M

P'S

•5?f fj, '***

IfH eo

II•oe£ Jt? **GQ

i?•

% w*« Cu «s

to

•M•Ctt) .is|55ds•ED

|1e "e coa.2 «

".•

'-.

;;

Wl

i'0U••»<B

o£^

1

QZ

1

QZ

D

QZ

QZ

QZ

SO

' -

en*a

«cco•£|.1D

0Z

1

1

Ov

Q

QZ

i

z

s

w«a

•g3

en•»n

Q

|

1

QZ

•Z

I1'" '

geo1a

o,25•SoJ

i

oeo

§

Sm

eo00

QZ

IN

•O

O

**V

.

1

„A<Catg

J

j§

<

vO

g

OZ

oz

D

O

.

Q

eota

S-•1|

I

* , i . . •

. i '' • • • • '

S • ' • :

1 ''•,." - ' '« '• . :', . : .•'. '.

. . ;• -'I •':.. . . .'•"•§•• • •• .S ' -••" '

1 ••• -, • ' ':; : : '.C . . . _ . ' •

''-•.£.. ' . '' ; • • . .

' ' • - • • . * 8 • ' • . . . ' . . ' . •' • • ' § - - • ' • ' . ' " ... ' ' • - « • • • • . . • ••o . • •

•\ •:•'•• ....: ' - • . ' ; ••"..,•'.•

: ' S

" 3 • ' . '

;lg '"".•-• •• . . LJ £ • • • -. '

1 ' ' • J IS3 33? ,,6u v

. ' : : fl ' \ • , • . " ' ' - . •'•'.''• ' •'• ^i &- ••'• : • '.•' •11S'ff• § S- •• : . .• f *• :.: •'

II ' v|i5 .8

' ' ' ^M ^3 ' ' '

1; •'".'' '• • '"5 eo5, G\ C™ " • • * '

, . ' . {§,=.; . ' ••• " ?: RR300756 |

TABLES \ J> • • . .. • ^ B ^

SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTSUSEPA SPLIT SAMPLES

SOLVENT RELEASE - COURTYARD INVESTIGATIONELEVATOR PLANT SITE

Parameter

Corresponding Paul C. RizzoAssociates Sample I.D.Collection DateSample Depth

Acetone2-ButanoneChloroformMethylene Chloride .Trichloroethene

Units®

feet

ug/kg(c)ug SUS/kg

, MS/kSUS/kg

CDS-79

EQB-1

9/28/92

NDWND26[4]ND

CDS-80

TB-B-1

9/25/92

NDND16,[4]ND

CDS-76

RTB-4-S-2RTB-4-S-49/29/923.5-5.57.5-9.515NDNDND100

CDS-77

RTBr5-S-5

9/29/928J-9.9

3114NDND21

CDS-78

RTB-5-S-5

9/29/928.5-9.9

2210NDNDW

, .Notes: , ' .

(a) Results are reported on a dry-weight basis: dry-weight = as-received value + D, where D 3 (100 - moisture content) +•/100; • . • ' ' . . . - . . • " . ' ; . • • " • - . ' • • • v • • ' . ' • ' :

(b) The volatile organic compounds on the Target Compound List (TCL) that are not listed were not detected in thesamples above quantitation limits. Refer to Attachment 2 for a complete listing of analytical results and quantitationlimits. ' >

(c) "ug/kg" indicates micrograms per kilogram or parts per billion(d) "ND" indicates parameter was analyzed.for but was not detected in the sample above quantitation limits.(e) "[]" indicates value is estimated. .

r2-O-37J/93

ftR300757

' , • '•' . • y ' .;• :; ; ' • ." TABLE4 ". f

. ORGANIC DATA VAUDATION SUMMARY^ '

SOLVENT RELEASE- COURTYARD INVESTIGATIONELEVATOR PLANT SITE

Analytical Laboratory: Lancaster LaboratoriesSample Delivery Group: SDG- RIZ01, VOLATILE ANALYSIS

LAB ID:18730921873093187309418730951873096187309718730981873536

f 18735371873538187353918735401873541187354218735431873544. '187354518735461873547

PAULC. RizzoASSOCIATES ID:

SS-1TB-922EQB-1RTB-l.S-3RTB-2.S-2RTB-3.S-2RTB-3.S-5RTB-4, S-2RTB-4, S-4 'RTB-5.S-5TB-2RTB-6, S-5RTB-6, S-5 MSRTB-6, S-5, MSDRTB-7.S-2RTB-7.S-4RTB-7.S-4DRTB-8, S-2RTB-8.S-4

MATRIXSOIL

,-.,:x ;

•.' 'X; "•XX '•x

, XX

"•'• "'x -.'.'•'-- :x ::':

XX

• •"• - ; X : - : ' -XXXX

WATER

XX

, X

;

COMMENTS

TRIP BLANK (9-28-92)EQUIPMENT BLANK

; . ' . ' _ • • .

'•' ' ' ''. •- ' .'

. ' . ' ' . . ,

TRIP BLANK (9-29-92)

MATRIX SPIKEMATRIX SPIKE DUPLICATE

DUPLICATE

CRITERIA VALIDATION StATusO")1. Sample Holding Time ..'. " v 02. GC/MS Tuning • Instrument Performance 03. Calibration . 04. Blanks 05. Surrogate Recovery -'.. 06. Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicate . .A7. Internal Standards . 08. Compound Identification : 09. Compound Quantitation/Detection Limits 0

(a) Samples were analyzed for the volatile organic fraction of the 1988 Target Compound List to beconsistent with samples collected at the site and analyzed during past sampling events.

(b) 0 * No significant variation from method criteria which affects data usability.A * Letter designation denotes variation from method criteria which is described :

• • ' " ' . ' below. • : . . . . . : ; . . • • • ' • " . ' ' •A. A field sample (RTB-6, S-5) was used by the laboratory for the matrix spike and

matrix spike duplicate analysis. The percent recovery of trichloroethene was low(52%) in the MSD which also caused an elevated relative percent difference. Percentrecovery was acceptable for the MS sample. No data qualification was necessary.

r244-561/93

HR3007S8

FIGURES

AR300759

i i ' i •*P / : •; !is I laS. 8fcI* ul ~ §ss| o*>f a- Jl w «e!«85 « 15 «5

fe "*»« 5 ^1* i P«- Olt. -Jl -'.i 'f a« 2f?. I iii ft: ' "• °-r</>!W1 ; tf "° a'•c

. K*^H3 ::'1;/>;;. :^.'l "// '- ^fel\ l\( vt:Ki\\ K\>m i?J?sl

^- - - > ::-lS? ^ ?'•:mg &£m-.yr\i>i-- • • - u US;,!- '-rj HI i\* '

^V ' - '-fpS :#

' »»« ——

• ."?v

i

t!S— lOC— OO <G8HnM **•*'•• I .'3*9 I Aa oaSQMddV IZ8-S1-OWS-tt go! u-t.-H I ygft I Aaoa^Ho I ssr A8 I TTul

"" H DOT. ATT I

AP3Q0762

! 11

- - • • - . . . • •

l5) L—— 1^ ^ *\ j ^ .** *< •': ' " * ' * ' ' " i i'.'.. 'ii,II *£vc' v^< .'f\ ,s " ••*- • • * A * . • • i • • - - • J t i

.-'''< V?C*.-">NN *T'»- • •"• ' ; • • /• ••"•j'l,>.. .ix . »_;, .^ . . . . . ^ . . • ,'.j'i ' "

'••''/&,, v...... >!•!•!.•"• .• '•' .:''v:j!

K'K.'Nx\'vXy AX' ->- •" ... •..<•. <\.>s>i;i!i!i!i! !i

S 2 8 8

tf"

f:C.d

, • - • . . . . , ' , . ' • ' •.• •** '1JJJ NQIWU.U - '•• ... • ;

s i i a *•.". i • •!'.-' s » ' r * i i • s s i s a

w QI—LOC—flfi xsannNl :»-»i-ci e»* I AB o^QMddv i ee-c-t iV 93 IBS-BB jmoval-nHit-tl -5-30 | Ta oa aHO l rTirl

SOI 3 (28

3l| Ifa \S*8 "«§ii«s"531 IsS * 2*

|S*ip:S ! - I P

i i i i i

,TSH 11U NMUMTO

fe

-lflS-fiSm^—«u •V-O I *3?Q I AB CaftOMddV I Z6- -on A8 I I m?t>-« I >Oe I A8 03X03H3 I "VT-Q I. NMVMO |——|»g>r

lR30076ii

* §i'• ro.CA

1 ", • ••••-•... itn -uii HOUVATO ' ' • . .

£ J 2 8 * I i ! S 3 .' 1 i 3 a - S - . S i__5

Ol

U" S* ' "I

p | • • ' i i i . i i i ' i i i 1 1 1 i r i i iI i ! i i I I ! 5 I I i i i S3 5 !