department of the army installation management …...u.s. environmental protection agency region 2...

1

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY INSTALLATION MANAGEMENT COMMAND

HEADQUARTERS, UNITED STATES ARMY GARRISON, PICATINNY PICATINNY ARSENAL, NEW JERSEY 07806-5000

September 10, 2010 t REPLY TO ATTENTION OF

Environmental Affairs Division SUBJECT: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)/Interagency Agreement (IAG) Administrative Docket No. II-CERCLA-FFA-001-04: Submittal of Former Skeet Range Investigation Data Report: Review is ER,A-eligible Mr. William Roach U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 2 290 Broadway, 18th Floor New York, NY 10007-1866 Mr. Gregory Zalaskus New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Emergency Management Program East State Street, Floor 5, P.O. Box 028 Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0028 Dear Sirs: Enclosed for your review are copies of Former Skeet Range Investigation Data Report developed by Shaw Environmental, Inc. for Picatinny and the Army. This report provides the results of the latest investigation as was discussed at our 2 September meeting in Edison. As you would know from the IAG schedule, the RI Workplan for the Former Skeet Range will be submitted within the next month or so, that workplan will would build upon these results. I ask you to temper your review based on that condition. This report is being co-reviewed by the Army partially for that reason. Any questions or concerns please give me a call at 973-724-6748 or email me at [email protected]

Sincerely,

Project Manager for Environmental Restoration

Enclosure Copies Furnished: NJDEP, Mr. Marchesani NJDEP, Mr. Kealy RAB Co-chair: PDF of Report only

W912DR-05-D-0026 i Former Skeet Range Investigation Data Report HTRW 06 Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey August 2010 Draft

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY .............................................................................................. 2

2.1 EXISITING SITE DATA ....................................................................................................... 3 2.1.1 Historical Site 180 Investigation Results ................................................................ 3 2.1.2 Historical Site 19 and Green Pond Brook Investigation Results ............................ 3 2.1.3 Historical Skeet Range Investigation Results ........................................................ 4

3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION ACTIVITIES ............................................................................................. 6

3.1 MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION ............................................................................... 6 3.2 GROUNDWATER SAMPLING ........................................................................................... 7 3.3 SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLING .................................................................................... 7

4.0 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS ....................................................................................... 8

4.1 GROUNDWATER SAMPLING ........................................................................................... 8 4.1.1 Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons...................................................................... 8 4.1.2 Metals ..................................................................................................................... 8

4.2 SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLING .................................................................................... 8 4.2.1 Surface Soil/Sediment Samples ............................................................................ 8 4.2.2 Sediment Samples ................................................................................................. 9

5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................ 11

6.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................... 12

W912DR-05-D-0026 ii Former Skeet Range Investigation Data Report HTRW 06 Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey August 2010 Draft

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Summary of Chemicals Analyzed for in Groundwater Samples

2 Summary of Chemicals Analyzed for in Soil Samples

3 Summary of Chemicals Analyzed for in Sediment Samples

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Former Skeet Range Location Map

2 Sampling Into the Marsh at Site 180 Push-Out Boundary

3 Previous Lead Sampling and Analysis Area

4 June 17, 2010 Groundwater Elevations

5 PAH Sampling and Analysis Area

6 2010 Lead Sampling and Analysis Area

7 Current and Historical Lead Concentrations in Soil

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix

A Chain of Custodies and Analytical Results

B Monitoring Well Logs and Construction Diagrams

C NJDEP Well Permits

D Monitoring Well Certification Form B’s

E Groundwater Sampling Data Sheets

W912DR-05-D-0026 iii Former Skeet Range Investigation Data Report HTRW 06 Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey August 2010 Draft

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

µg/L ................... micrograms per liter ANL ................... Argonne National Laboratories bgs .................... below ground surface DO ..................... Dissolved Oxygen FSP ................... Field Sampling Plan HASP ................ Health and Safety Plan ICFKE ............... ICF Kaiser Engineers ITRC .................. Interstate Technology Regulatory Council LOC ................... Level of Concern MEC .................. Munitions and Explosives of Concern mg/kg ................ milligrams per kilogram NSSF ................ National Sports Shooting Foundation NTU ................... Nephelometric Turbidity Units NJDEP .............. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection PTA ................... Picatinny Arsenal PAH ................... Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons ORP .................. Oxidation-Reduction Potential QAPP ................ Quality Assurance Project Plan QA/QC .............. Quality Assurance/Quality Control RI ....................... Remedial Investigation RBC .................. Risk-Based Concentration SD ..................... Sediment Sample Shaw ................. Shaw Environmental, Inc. SS ..................... Surface Sample SW .................... Surface Water TAL ................... Target Analyte List TIC .................... Top of Inner Casing TOC .................. Total Organic Carbon UXO .................. Unexploded Ordnance USACE ............. United States Army Corps of Engineers USEPA .............. United States Environmental Protection Agency USFWS ............. United States Fish and Wildlife Service

Section 1.0 Introduction

W912DR-05-D-0026 1 Former Skeet Range Investigation Data Report HTRW 06 Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey August 2010 Draft

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) tasked Shaw Environmental & Infrastructure (Shaw) to further characterize the former Skeet Range located to the north of Site 180 at Picatinny Arsenal (PTA), Dover, New Jersey. Site 180 is located at the southern end of PTA on the eastern side of Green Pond Brook (Figure 1). The work order was performed under the Architect-Engineer contract number W912DR-05-D-0026, Task Order 06.

Analytical results from soil, sediment and surface water sampling, performed in June 2008 by Shaw, indicated several surface soil samples exceeded the soil level of concern (LOC) for lead of 800 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg; Shaw, 2008). In addition, a subsurface soil sample collected at the former Skeet Range had a lead concentration above the soil LOC. Furthermore, sediment and surface water samples collected from a drainage ditch in the area revealed concentrations of lead above the sediment and surface water LOCs. Previous surface soil sampling in the area performed by IT Corporation in October 2002 also found elevated concentrations of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) above applicable LOCs.

Based on the 2008 investigation, the distribution of the lead contamination suggests that the primary source of the lead is the former Skeet Range. In response to regulatory comments regarding findings during previous investigations in the area, further delineation of the lead concentrations in the soil and sediment, evaluation of levels of PAHs in the soil and sediment, and evaluation of metals and PAH concentrations in shallow groundwater were performed at the site.

A Work Plan for the former Skeet Range was finalized in March 2010 to outline proposed soil/sediment sampling for lead and PAH analyses, as well as the installation of two groundwater monitoring wells and sampling of the new and existing nearby groundwater monitoring wells for PAH and metal analyses (Shaw, 2010). Shaw personnel performed the soil and sediment sampling on June 4, 2010, and supervised the installation of the groundwater monitoring wells. The newly installed monitoring wells were developed on June 5, 2010. The two new monitoring wells and three existing wells were sampled on June 17, 2010. Two additional soil samples, which were not accessible and could not be located during the June 4, 2010 sampling event, were collected on June 17, 2010.

This report presents a summary of the analytical results from the June 2010 sampling event. Section 2.0 presents a brief physical setting and site history summary. Section 3.0 includes a brief description of the field investigation and sampling program. Section 4.0 includes a summary and evaluation of analytical results from the June 2010 sampling event. Section 5.0 provides a summary and conclusions based on the results of the investigation.

Section 2.0 Site Description and History


2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY

The former Skeet Range is located approximately 150 feet northwest of Site 180 on the southern end of PTA on the eastern side of Green Pond Brook. The former Skeet Range is bounded by Site 19 to the north-northwest, Site 180 to the south and southeast, Site 34 to the southwest, and the Green Pond Brook to the west (Figure 1). Large portions of the southern end of PTA were subject to landfilling to increase the amount of usable land. A review of aerial photography confirmed that extensive landfilling activities occurred in this area including Site 180 and the Skeet Range.

The range was constructed in the 1950s and was used for recreational trap and skeet shooting into the 1990s. The range consists of three buildings - 1181, 1182 and 1181A – and several asphalt walkways through an open grassy area where the shooting occurs. As part of the Phase I Remedial Investigation (RI), a detailed site inspection was conducted of the range (Dames and Moore, 1995). At the time, Buildings 1181 and 1182 were used to launch the traps and to store cases of targets. Building 1181A contained several barbeque grills and site maintenance equipment such as a wheelbarrow, rakes and plywood. The shooters faced north and shot towards a heavily wooded area. Dames and Moore noted that the range contained accumulated bulk lead shot and clay fragments from the historical use of the range. There was concern that the accumulated lead shot may represent an ecological concern. However, no further investigation was recommended due to the ongoing activities at the range.

From 1991 to 2007, Site 180 was investigated which included the northeastern push-out boundary toward the area of the Skeet Range. Buried debris was found along this push-out boundary in 2005 and subsequently additional environmental sampling and debris removal were performed. After sampling from 2005 to 2007, ARCADIS issued a letter to the Army suggesting that the lead identified in Sample 180SS-15 is outside the boundary of Site 180 (Figure 2), is related to the historical use of the Skeet Range, and therefore should be addressed as a separate site. Thus, the Army agreed to further investigate the lead contamination to identify the potential source of the elevated lead levels.

Analytical results from soil, sediment, and surface water sampling, performed in June 2008 by Shaw, indicated several surface soil samples exceeded the soil LOC for lead (Shaw, 2008). A subsurface soil sample collected in the area also contained a lead concentration above the soil LOC. Furthermore, sediment and surface water samples collected from a drainage ditch in the area revealed concentrations of lead above the sediment and surface water LOCs. Previous surface soil sampling in the area performed by IT Corporation in October 2002 also found elevated concentrations of PAHs above applicable LOCs in the area of the former Skeet Range.

As a result of the 2008 investigation findings, a Work Plan was prepared to further characterize impacts from the former Skeet Range (Shaw, 2010). Based on this Work Plan, Shaw performed an investigation which is further described in the following sections.



2.1 EXISITING SITE DATA

Several investigations have been performed within and around the former Skeet Range. The following sections present an overview of the findings of these investigations.

2.1.1 Historical Site 180 Investigation Results

In 1991, the Site 180 boundaries were defined by Argonne National Laboratories (ANL) as a 300 foot by 300 foot area (ANL, 1991); however, these boundaries did not correlate with any physical or natural features. The original Site 180 included several piles of debris containing railroad ties, concrete rubble, scrap metal and tires (Dames and Moore, 1998). The lateral extent of Site 180 has been increased since the completion of the Phase I RI Report to include additional piles of debris and waste material in the vicinity of the original site. On November 1, 2005 during an Army tour of the site with the regulators, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) representatives expressed concern over the potential contamination and risk associated with buried debris identified along the boundary of Site 180. In November 2005, twelve surface soil samples were collected along the push-out boundary between Site 180 and the marsh (Figure 2). All samples were located near partially buried debris including some drums. The drums were in poor condition and decomposed by rust. Sample 180SS-15A located at the northeastern end of Site 180 exceeded the sediment LOCs for cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, zinc and several PAHs. Subsequent to the sampling event, all of the drum remnants and other surface debris were removed and disposed by Shaw in 2006. Additional delineation sampling was conducted around (Samples 180SS-15N, S, E, W) and beneath (Sample 180SS-15B) Sample 180SS-15A in March 2006 (Figure 2). Lead levels exceeded the sediment LOC of 38.8 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) in all five samples with concentrations ranging from 293 mg/kg to 2,830 mg/kg (Figure 3).

In February 2007, ARCADIS issued a letter to the Army suggesting that the lead identified in Sample 180SS-15 is outside the boundary of Site 180, is related to the historical use of the adjacent Skeet Range, and therefore should be addressed as a separate site. Figure 3 shows that the 180SS-15 soil samples were collected approximately 400 feet from the shooting pad of the former range and within the maximum shot fall zone for trap and skeet ranges of 375 feet to 600 feet from the firing line (ITRC, 2005; NSSF, 1997). Thus, the Army agreed to further investigate the lead contamination to identify the potential source of the elevated lead levels.

2.1.2 Historical Site 19 and Green Pond Brook Investigation Results

In order to assess the lead contamination identified during the Site 180 investigation, data from other sites in proximity to Site 180 and the former Skeet Range were reviewed. The two sites that were evaluated are Site 19 and Green Pond Brook (Figure 1).

In 1993 as part of the Phase I RI at Site 19, five surface soil, five subsurface soil, one surface water, one sediment and 11 groundwater samples from four monitoring wells were collected. PAHs and metals were detected in the soil samples. The PAH concentrations did not exceed the comparison criteria and are believed to be related to the telephone poles stockpiled in the area or open burning activities at Site 34. The PAHs are unlikely to be associated with the skeet targets due to the distance from the range and the trap house. Metals exceedances were reported for arsenic and beryllium. The maximum lead concentration in the ten samples was 43.2 mg/kg (Dames and Moore, 1998).

The surface water and sediment samples were collected from an area of intermittent ponded water at the center of the site and not one of the drainage channels that traverse the area. PAHs and lead were detected in the surface water sample. The PAH and lead concentrations identified in the sediment sample were below the appropriate comparison criteria used at that time, the ER-L and ER-M sediment concentrations as outlined in a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration technical memorandum dated August 1991.

Arsenic and lead were detected above the comparison criteria in the unfiltered groundwater samples collected from the site wells and one upgradient well (C-1B). Arsenic concentrations ranged up to 13.8 micrograms per liter [(µg/L); LOC = 3 µg/L] and lead concentrations ranged up to 32.9 µg/L (LOC



= 5 µg/L). Arsenic concentrations in filtered groundwater samples also exceeded the LOC; however, lead was not detected in the filtered samples at a detection limit of 5 µg/L.

One surface water sample and one sediment sample were collected from Green Pond Brook upgradient of the former Skeet Range and the associated impact fan. Sample SW/SDGP-16 was collected at the intersection of South Brook Road and Shinkle Road (see Figure 4 in the Former Skeet Range Work Plan, Shaw, 2010). The surface water sample did not contain detectable levels of PAHs or lead. The sediment sample contained elevated levels of several PAHs and a lead concentration of 1,250 mg/kg. Several surface water and sediment samples have been collected from Green Pond Brook downgradient of the former range adjacent to Site 34. Similar concentrations of lead and PAHs were detected in the downgradient sediment samples. It is unclear whether the elevated PAHs and lead concentrations in the sediment are related to open burning activities at Site 34, fill used in this marshy portion of the base, former activities at the Skeet Range or base operations upgradient of this area.

2.1.3 Historical Skeet Range Investigation Results

In October 2002, IT Corporation collected seven surface soil samples (34SS-24 through 34SS-30) as part of an investigation of Sites 34 and 180. Samples 34SS-29 and 34SS-30, collected at the Skeet Range (see Figure 3), were the only samples collected at the range prior to Shaw’s investigations. The samples were analyzed for PAHs and Target Analyte List (TAL) Metals. Lead concentrations in the two samples were well below the LOC of 600 mg/kg with levels of 13.1 mg/kg and 76.7 mg/kg. The only LOC exceedances reported in the two samples were arsenic and PAHs. Sample 34SS-29, located upgradient of the actual range had an arsenic concentration of 38.8 mg/kg (LOC = 20 mg/kg). Sample 34SS-30, located within the firing zone of the Skeet Range, had an arsenic concentration of 25.6 mg/kg. The arsenic contamination may be related to runoff from Site 34, Site 180 or the Skeet Range. Seven PAHs were detected in excess of their respective LOCs in Sample 34SS-30. The LOC exceedances ranged from 17 mg/kg for dibenz(a,h)anthracene (LOC = 0.66 mg/kg) to 94 mg/kg for chrysene (LOC = 40 mg/kg). The benzo(a)pyrene concentration of 90 mg/kg exceeded the LOC of 0.66 mg/kg by more than two orders of magnitude. The elevated PAH levels are most likely the result of the clay targets used at the Skeet Range.

In July 2007, Shaw personnel performed a site walk-over in preparation of future investigations and observed similar findings to Dames and Moore site inspection. Most of the surface debris was clay fragments and spent shells.

In order to determine the source and extent of the lead contamination, a sampling approach was developed based on guidance documents from the NJDEP (NJDEP, 2005a,b), the Interstate Technical Regulatory Council (ITRC, 2003; ITRC, 2005); and the National Sports Shooting Foundation (NSSF, 1997). Guidance was also provided by the U.S. Army Environmental Center. As part of the Lead Investigation Report by Shaw in 2008, surface soil samples were collected every 50 feet from previous sample locations 180SS-15N,S,E,W up to 200 feet from the original sample (Figure 3). A subsurface soil sample (180SS-E/C) was collected from 2.0 to 2.5 feet below ground surface (bgs) at former sample location 180SS-15E, which had the highest lead concentration (2,830 mg/kg) for vertical delineation. Sample analyses were limited to lead.

Additionally, Shaw personnel collected samples within the boundaries of the former Skeet Range. At shotgun ranges such as trap and skeet, shot is widely distributed. When a shotgun target is hit by a well-centered shot, only a relatively few of the several hundred pellets in the shot string actually strike the target. These may be deformed or deflected and fall to the ground nearby. Most of the pellets in the load continue beyond where the target was hit. According to guidance developed for small arms ranges, the positions of the shooters and the angles at which trap and skeet targets are thrown result in a fan-shaped shot fall zone. Depending on the load, the angle at which the shot was fired, and wind direction, typical lead skeet loads can reach about 680 feet from the shooter (NSSF, 1997). However, most skeet shot typically tends to fall roughly 375 to 600 feet from the shooter (NSSF, 1997). At the Picatinny Skeet Range, this shot fall zone is heavily vegetated with wetland and upland woody species. The shot fall zone is also very wet and marshy.

Fourteen surface soil samples (B1181SS-1 to B1181SS-14) were collected along transect lines through the shooting fan including the center line of the fan (Figure 3). Since this investigation was not



intended to be a characterization of the former range, only a portion of the shot fall zone was sampled. An additional seven surface soil samples (B1181SS-15 to B1181SS-21) were collected along two transects from the range located outside the shooting fan. Samples were spaced approximately 150 to 100 feet apart along the transects depending on the proximity of other samples and any physical obstructions. Sample analyses were limited to lead.

Lead was detected in the 36 surface soil (SS) samples and the one subsurface soil sample. The lead concentrations ranged from 82.4 mg/kg to 209,000 mg/kg. The LOC for lead in soil is 800 mg/kg. Twenty-five (25) of the 37 samples exceeded the soil LOC.

The subsurface soil sample 180SS-15E/C, collected from 2.0 to 2.5 ft bgs, had a lead level of 6,930 mg/kg. The lead concentration exceeds the lead level detected in the surface soil sample (180SS-15E) collected at this location in 2006. The increased lead concentration in the subsurface soil sample may be the result of the fill used in the area or the leaching of the lead in the surface soil.

Twenty-one (21) of the 37 soil samples had percent solids levels below 50%. Many of these samples could be considered sediment samples based on the percent solids levels and their location within a wetland. Due to the magnitude of the lead concentrations detected in the samples, most samples exceed both the sediment LOC of 38.8 mg/kg and the soil LOC. Lead concentrations in the previous samples collected in 2005 and 2006 have been compared to the sediment LOC despite most samples exceeding 50% solids, because they are located within the wetlands portion of the sampled area. Sample 1181SS-1 with a percent solids content of 37 was not deemed a sediment sample because it is located on a maintained grass cover at the front of the former Skeet Range.

Three surface water and sediment samples (Samples 1181SW/SD-1 to 1181SW/SD-3) were collected from the drainage ditch located to the north of the range within the shot fall zone. These samples were also analyzed for lead.

The sediment (SD) concentrations ranged from 104 mg/kg to 21,500 mg/kg. All three concentrations exceed the sediment LOC of 38.8 mg/kg. Lead concentrations in the surface water (SW) samples ranged from 35.8 µg/L to 354 µg/L. All these concentrations exceed the surface water LOC of 3.2 µg/L. The highest surface water and sediment concentrations were located in the area of the highest soil concentrations (Figure 3). The surface water concentrations decreased downstream toward the confluence of the drainage ditch with Green Pond Brook.

Section 3.0 Field Investigation Activities


3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION ACTIVITIES

The PTA Skeet Range Work Plan proposed the following field activities: installation of two groundwater monitoring wells, measurement of water levels and groundwater sampling in three existing wells and the two newly installed wells, collection of soil samples within the former Skeet Range impact fan, collection of sediment samples from drainage channels located within and adjacent to the Skeet Range impact fan, and collection of subsurface soil samples at a previous surface soil sampling location. The following sections describe these field investigation activities in greater detail.

All field activities and chemical analyses were conducted in accordance with the Picatinny-Wide Field Sampling Plan (FSP) (ICFKE, 1998a), the Picatinny Facility-Wide Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) (ICFKE, 1998a) and its addendum, and the Picatinny Facility-Wide Health and Safety Plan (HASP) (ICFKE, 1998c). All sampling was conducted in accordance with guidance from the USACE, NJDEP, and USEPA Region 2 including the NJDEP’s Field Sampling Procedures Manual (NJDEP, 2005a) and the Technical Requirements for Site Remediation (NJDEP, 2005b).

3.1 MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION

Two groundwater monitoring wells, B1181MW-1 and B1181MW-2, were installed on June 4, 2010 to assess potential impacts to shallow groundwater proximal to and within the former Skeet Range. Well B1181MW-1 was installed near the northwestern corner of the former range along South Brook Road, proximal to Green Pond Brook. Well B1181MW-1 was originally proposed to be installed along the western side of South Brook Road adjacent to Green Pond Brook; however, based on the lack of accessible land and due to potential utility concerns, the well was installed approximately 50 feet to the east along the eastern side of South Brook Road. Well B1181MW-2 was originally proposed to be installed in the south-central area of the former Skeet Range; however, based on the presence of dense Phragmites and marshy conditions at the proposed location, the well was installed approximately 150 feet to the south in an accessible area adjacent to the former shooter’s stand. Well locations are depicted on Figure 4.

The two monitoring wells were advanced by B&B Drilling, Inc. using hollow stem auger methods. Well locations were evaluated in advance for overhead power lines and proximity to utilities, and staked in the field. Locations were subsequently evaluated and cleared for underground utilities by Chugach, Inc. Well drilling permits were obtained from the NJDEP for each well by the driller, and each location was hand dug and cleared for UXO to five feet before drilling. Due to the potential for buried munitions and explosives of concern (MEC) at the site, qualified UXO technicians from REMTC, Inc. cleared all drilling locations and intrusive sample collection locations.

Well installation was supervised by a Shaw geologist, who recorded sediment type, lithology, well yield, total depth, and well construction details. Wells were drilled by a four-inch diameter bit to 17 feet (B1181MW-1) and 19 feet (B1181MW-2) bgs. The wells were completed with two-inch PVC 10 slot screen and riser, and Morie #1 filter sand. Well B1181MW-1 was screened from 7.7 to 12.7 feet and well B1181MW-2 was screened from 11.0 to 16.0 feet. On June 5, 2010, the wells were developed by overpumping a minimum of three volumes of water to remove fine grain sediment from the wells. Development water temperature, dissolved oxygen (DO), conductivity, pH, oxidation – reduction potential (ORP), and turbidity were monitored by a Shaw geologist using a calibrated YSI 6280 multimeter with flow through cell. Development continued until a minimum three well volumes were purged and 50 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU) were achieved. After development, groundwater levels at wells B1181MW-1 and B1181MW-2 were 5.88 and 5.35 feet bgs, respectively. Well boring and construction logs were prepared by a Shaw geologist and are presented in Appendix B. Monitoring well permits were prepared by B&B Drilling, Inc. and are provided as Appendix C.

The completed wells were surveyed by Volosin Associates, a New Jersey-licensed surveyor. The latitude and longitude of the wells were referenced to the New Jersey State Plane North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83) in feet (to nearest 10 feet) and by geographic coordinates (to 1/10 of a second). The surveyor also determined the elevation of top of inner casing (TIC) and grade to within one hundredth of a foot referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). The TIC measurement point was marked with a permanent marker by the surveyor for use as a water level measuring point. Copies of the Monitoring Well Certification Form Bs are located in Appendix D.

Section 3.0 Field Investigation Activities


3.2 GROUNDWATER SAMPLING

Five groundwater monitoring wells were sampled as a part of this investigation on June 17, 2010. These wells included existing wells C-1A, C-1B, and DM19-3, and newly installed wells B1181MW-1 and B1181MW-2. Prior to groundwater sampling, synoptic water level measurements were conducted at these wells. Refer to Figure 4 for the groundwater elevations and potentiometric contours in the area. Following the synoptic water level measurements, the wells were purged and sampled by the USEPA Region 2 low-flow methodology (USEPA, 1998) using decontaminated Grundfos submersible pumps. Groundwater quality parameters were measured using a calibrated multimeter, and temperature, pH, conductivity, ORP, DO, turbidity, and water level were recorded at each well during purging. Sampling data sheets are provided in Appendix E. Following stabilization of the water quality parameters, each well was sampled and bottleware was placed in a cooler with ice for preservation. Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) samples were also collected as part of the sampling effort including one field rinsate blank and one field duplicate. All samples were shipped to Empirical Laboratories (Empirical) and analyzed for TAL metals using USEPA Method 6010B and PAHs by USEPA Method 8270C. Refer to Section 4.0 for an in-depth discussion of the analytical results.

3.3 SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLING

A total of 16 surface soil/sediment samples were collected within the boundaries of the former Skeet Range and the associated impact fan in June 2010. Twelve of these samples (B1181SS-22 through B1181SS-33) were collected along the central and western transect lines within the boundaries of the shooting range fan on June 4, 2010. Sample B1181SS-35 was collected on June 4, 2010 near the trap house where remnants of clay targets have accumulated. Samples B1181SS-36 and B1181SS-37 (collected on June 17, 2010) and sample B1181SS-38 (collected on June 4, 2010) were collected in the central and eastern portion of the shooting fan within the maximum shot fall zone to delineate the downgradient extent of the lead contamination. Proposed surface soil/sediment sample B1181SS-34, which was to be collected within the northeastern portion of the shooting range fan, was not collected during this investigation due to the accumulation of standing water covering the location.

Two subsurface soil samples which were proposed to be collected from the location of previous sample B1181SS-10 at depths of 2.0-2.5 feet (B1181SS-10C) and 4.0-4.5 feet (B1181SS-10D) were not collected due to standing water within the area. The location could not be safely accessed by the sampling personnel.

In addition to the surface soil/sediment samples, two additional sediment samples (B1181SD-4 and B1181SD-5) were collected on June 4, 2010 from drainage channels within and adjacent to the northeastern Skeet Range impact fan.

All soil/sediment samples were collected using decontaminated stainless-steel trowels or bucket augers. A sufficient amount of soil/sediment was placed on a decontaminated stainless-steel tray for mixing. Any rocks or organic matter were removed from the soil/sediment and the soil/sediment was homogenized using the coning and quartering method (NJDEP, 2005a). Following homogenization, the soil/sediment was placed in the appropriate sample bottle and placed in a cooler on ice for preservation.

All the soil/sediment samples collected were analyzed by Empirical. Eleven of the surface soil/sediment samples (B1181SS-22 through B1181SS-32) and the two additional sediment samples (B1181SD-4 and B1181SD-5) were analyzed for lead by USEPA Method 6010B, PAHs by USEPA Method 8270C, pH, total organic carbon (TOC), and grain size. Three of the surface/soil sediment samples (B1181SS-36 through B1181SS-38) were analyzed for lead, pH, TOC, and grain size. The remaining two surface soil/sediment samples (B1181SS-33 and B1181SS-35) were analyzed for PAHs, pH, TOC, and grain size.

In addition to the field soil/sediment samples, QA/QC samples were collected as part of the sampling including two field rinsate blanks and two field duplicates (one for soil and one for sediment). The field rinsate blank collected on June 4, 2010 (SS0604010R1) was analyzed for lead, PAHs, pH, TOC, and, grain size. The field rinsate blank collected on June 16, 2010 (SS061610R1) was analyzed for lead and PAHs. The surface soil/sediment duplicate sample and the sediment duplicate sample were both analyzed for lead, PAHs, pH, TOC, and grain size. Refer to Section 4.0 for an in-depth discussion of the analytical results.

Section 4.0 Summary of Analytical Results


4.0 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS

A discussion of the analytical results from the June 2010 sampling event is included in the following section. Tables 1 through 3 present a summary of the results. All chemicals included in the PAHs and metals analyses are presented on the tables.

4.1 GROUNDWATER SAMPLING

4.1.1 Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons

No PAH compounds were detected in the groundwater samples collected from monitoring wells C-1A, C-1B, DM19-3, B1181MW-1, or B1181MW-2.

4.1.2 Metals

Sixteen metals were detected in one or more of the groundwater samples. However, only five of the detected metals (arsenic, aluminum, iron, manganese, and vanadium) were found at concentrations exceeding the respective LOCs.

Arsenic was detected in two of the six samples (including the duplicate sample) analyzed for arsenic. Both detections exceeded the arsenic LOC of 3.0 µg/L. Arsenic was detected in the sample collected from well C-1B at a concentration of 7.55 µg/L. Arsenic was also detected in the sample collected from well DM19-3 at a concentration of 13.2 µg/L. Well C-1B is located hydraulically downgradient in relation to the Skeet Range, while well DM19-3 is located hydraulically upgradient in relation to the Skeet Range.

Aluminum was detected in all six samples analyzed for aluminum. All of these detections exceeded the aluminum LOC of 200 µg/L. These exceedances included: C-1A (662 µg/L), C-1B (1,110 µg/L), DM19-3 (298 µg/L), B1181MW-1 (1,090 µg/L), B1181MW-2 (487 µg/L), and B1181MW-2 DUP (447 µg/L). Aluminum concentrations are elevated due to local geologic conditions and are not site-related.

Iron was detected in all six samples analyzed for iron. All of these detections exceeded the iron LOC of 300 µg/L. These exceedances included: C-1A (1,380 µg/L), C-1B (2,110 µg/L), DM19-3 (3,690 µg/L), B1181MW-1 (18,300 µg/L), B1181MW-2 (16,000 µg/L), and B1181MW-2 DUP (15,900 µg/L). Iron concentrations are elevated due to local geologic conditions and are not site-related.

Manganese was detected in all six samples analyzed for manganese. All of these detections exceeded the manganese LOC of 50 µg/L. These exceedances included: C-1A (3,350 µg/L), C-1B (1,480 µg/L), DM19-3 (1,400 µg/L), B1181MW-1 (2,260 µg/L), B1181MW-2 (1,730 µg/L), and B1181MW-2 DUP (1,780 µg/L). Manganese concentrations are elevated due to local geologic conditions and are not site-related.

Vanadium was detected in four of the six samples analyzed for vanadium. These detections exceeded the vanadium LOC of 2.0 µg/L. It should be noted that there is no standard for vanadium in groundwater. The LOC is an USEPA tap-water risk-based concentration (RBC). Vanadium was detected in the sample collected from well DM19-3 at a concentration of 6.93 µg/L. Vanadium was detected in the sample collected from well B1181MW-1 at a concentration of 12.4 µg/L. Vanadium was detected in the sample collected from well B1181MW-2 at a concentration of 17.6 µg/L. Vanadium was detected in the sample collected from well B1181MW-2 DUP at a concentration of 18.2 µg/L.

A summary of the groundwater analytical results can be found in Table 1.

4.2 SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLING

4.2.1 Surface Soil/Sediment Samples

All 17 PAHs were detected in one or more of the surface soil samples collected. Five of these PAHs were detected in one or more surface soil/sediment samples at concentrations greater than their respective LOCs. Benzo(a)anthracene (LOC = 2.0 mg/kg) was detected above the LOC in sample B1181SS-23 at a concentration of 27.6 mg/kg, in sample B1181SS-27 at a concentration of 3.61 mg/kg, and in sample B1181SS-35 at a concentration of 6.73 mg/kg. Benzo(a)pyrene (LOC = 0.2 mg/kg) was detected in 13 of 14 samples above the LOC ranging from 0.301 mg/kg in sample B1181SS-30 to 21.6 mg/kg in sample B1181SS-23. Benzo(b)fluoranthene (LOC = 2.0 mg/kg) was detected above the LOC in



sample B1181SS-23 at a concentration of 27.1 mg/kg, in sample B1181SS-27 at a concentration of 4.39 mg/kg, in sample B1181SS-32 at a concentration of 3.79 mg/kg, and in sample B1181SS-35 at a concentration of 7.47 mg/kg. Dibenz(a,h)anthracene was detected in 8 of 14 samples above the LOC ranging from 0.289 mg/kg in sample B1181SS-22 to 4.88 mg/kg in sample B1181SS-23. Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene (LOC = 2.0 mg/kg) was detected above the LOC in sample B1181SS-23 at a concentration of 16.5 mg/kg, in sample B1181SS-27 at a concentration of 2.66 mg/kg, and in sample B1181SS-35 at a concentration of 4.53 mg/kg.

Lead was detected in all 15 surface soil samples where it was analyzed. Of these detections, six concentrations exceeded the lead soil LOC of 800 mg/kg. Lead was detected at a concentration of 56,500 mg/kg in sample B1181SS-25, at a concentration of 46,100 mg/kg in sample B1181SS-26, at a concentration of 1,230 mg/kg in sample B1181SS-29, at a concentration of 84,700 mg/kg in sample B1181SS-32, at a concentration of 1,760 mg/kg in sample B1181SS-36, and at a concentration of 923 mg/kg in sample B1181SS-37.

It should be noted that three of the surface soil samples collected had percent solids below 50, 47% in sample B1181SS-33, 27% in sample B1181SS-36, and 15% in sample B1181SS-37. Therefore, these samples could be compared to sediment LOCs. When compared to the sediment LOCs, 11 of the 17 PAHs analyzed in sample B1181SS-33 had concentrations exceeding their respective sediment LOC. When samples B1181SS-36 and B1181SS-37 are compared to the sediment LOC for lead of 38.8 mg/kg, their respective concentrations are well above the LOC.

The surface soil/sediment samples were also analyzed for pH, TOC, and grain size. The pH values ranged from 3.7 in sample B1181SS-36 to 7.56 in sample B1181SS-23. TOC concentrations ranged from 15,600 mg/kg in sample B1181SS-22 DUP to 412,000 in sample B1181SS-37. Grain size analyses revealed that the soils/sediments at the site are predominantly coarse to fine sands with little silt and a trace of gravel and sandy silts with a trace of gravel and clay.

A summary of the surface soil analytical results can be found in Table 2. Refer to Figures 5 and 6 for PAH and lead soil sample locations and concentrations.

4.2.2 Sediment Samples

Six PAHs, benzo(b)fluoroanthene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, chrysene, fluoroanthene, and pyrene, were detected in one or more of the sediment samples. All of these PAHs detected were found at concentrations exceeding their respective sediment LOCs. Benzo(b)fluoroanthene (LOC = 0.0272 mg/kg) was detected in sample B1181SD-4 DUP at a concentration of 0.227 mg/kg, which exceeds the LOC. Benzo(g,h,i)perylene (LOC = 0.17 mg/kg) was detected in samples B1181SD-4 (0.274 mg/kg), B1181SD-4 DUP (0.27 mg/kg), and B1181SD-5 (1.69 mg/kg), all of which exceed the LOC. Benzo(k)fluoroanthene (LOC = 0.272 mg/kg) was detected in sample B1181SD-4 DUP at a concentration of 0.287 mg/kg, which exceeds the LOC. Chrysene (LOC = 0.0571 mg/kg) was detected in sample B1181SD-4 DUP at a concentration of 0.0955 mg/kg, which exceeds the LOC. Fluoranthene (LOC = 0.06423 mg/kg) was detected in sample B1181SD-4 DUP at a concentration of 0.113 mg/kg, which exceeds the LOC. Pyrene (LOC = 0.053 mg/kg) was detected in samples B1181SD-4 DUP (0.155 mg/kg) and B1181SD-5 (0.467 mg/kg), both concentrations exceeded the LOC.

Lead was detected in all three sediment samples. Of these detections, one concentration exceeded the lead LOC of 38.8 mg/kg. Lead was detected at a concentration of 387 mg/kg in sample B1181SD-5. The remaining sediment samples, B1181SD-4 and B1181SD-4 DUP, had concentrations below the LOC, 31.9 mg/kg and 11.8 mg/kg, respectively.

It should be noted that sediment samples B1181SD-4 and B1181SD-4 DUP were compared to the sediment LOC despite these samples exceeding 50% solids, because these samples are located within the wetlands portion of the sampled area. Sediment sample B1181SD-5 had a percent solid value less than 50 and was also located within the wetlands.

The sediment samples were also analyzed for pH, TOC, and grain size. The pH values included 5.42 in sample B1181SD-4, 5.59 in sample B1181SD-4 DUP, and 4.74 in sample B1181SD-5. TOC concentrations were 16,800 mg/kg in sample B1181SD-4, 14,200 mg/kg in sample B1181SD-4 DUP, and



368,000 mg/kg in sample B1181SD-5. Grain size analyses characterized the sediments as fine to coarse sandy silts and silty sands with a trace of clay.

A summary of the sediment analytical results can be found in Table 3. Refer to Figures 5 and 6 for PAH and lead sediment sample locations and concentrations.

Section 5.0 Summary and Conclusions


5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Sampling conducted at the former Skeet Range in June 2010 indicated concentrations of lead and PAHs in excess of the LOCs for soil and sediment. The highest lead concentrations in the soil/sediment samples collected were primarily found within the maximum shot fall zone. However, concentrations of lead above the LOC were still detected in soil samples outside of the maximum shot fall zone and in sediment samples collected near the maximum extent of the northeastern shot fall zone. Additional vertical delineation of lead impacts was not determined in the assessment due to the presence of standing water and overgrowth of vegetation.

The highest PAH concentrations were detected outside of the Skeet Range impact fan at samples B1181SS-23 and B1181SS-35. Sample B1181SS-23 is located adjacent to an asphalt road and these elevated concentrations may be associated with runoff from the asphalt pavement. Sample B1181SS-35 is located adjacent to a large accumulation of clay pigeons visually observed on the surface soil near the skeet house during sample collection. Other PAH exceedances identified in the western portion of the site may be attributable to the stockpiling of telephone poles at Site 19.

Arsenic, aluminum, iron, manganese, and vanadium were the only metals found above LOCs in the groundwater samples collected. Arsenic is a known groundwater contaminant in the area and is likely from historic landfilling operations or contamination from other sites. Vanadium may also be related to historic landfilling operations in the area. It is unlikely the arsenic and vanadium detections in groundwater are related to the historic operation of the former Skeet Range. Aluminum, iron, and manganese concentrations in groundwater are consistent with levels detected in wells throughout the base and are due to local geologic conditions. PAHs were not detected in the groundwater samples collected. Despite the high concentrations of lead in the soil and given the shallow groundwater level, lead was not detected above the LOC in the groundwater, suggesting that the lead is absorbed to the soil and organic carbon, and it is not leaching into the groundwater or moving in solution.

Since 2008, there have been two investigations conducted specifically to characterize the nature and extent of the impacts from the Skeet Range. As part of these investigations, 52 soil samples, six sediment samples, three surface water samples and five groundwater samples have been collected in proximity to the site. Sampling analyses have focused on lead and PAHs, which are commonly associated with the skeet targets and ammunition, respectively. Of the 52 soil samples analyzed for lead, 31 samples exceed the lead LOC of 800 mg/kg. Figure 7 shows the pattern/distribution of elevated lead concentrations in the area of the Skeet Range. The distribution of the lead contamination suggests that the primary source of the lead in the area is the former Skeet Range. All the lead concentrations in the maximum shot fall zone exceed the soil LOC, with the highest concentrations centered in the eastern portion of this zone. The lowest lead concentrations are located closest to the shooter’s stand and beyond the northwestern maximum shot fall zone. The lead concentrations generally increase with distance from the shooter’s stand. The majority of the lead shot falls to the ground approximately 400 to 600 feet from the shooter and minimal lead shot lands within 300 feet of the shooter.

Based on the results of this investigation, a Remedial Investigation is recommended to further delineate lead concentrations in the soil and sediment both horizontally and vertically, including outside the shot fall zone. The RI should also delineate the extent of PAH contamination in the soil and sediment. In addition, the RI should include a risk assessment to quantify risks associated with the contamination identified at the site and to evaluate whether remedial action will be needed due to historic operations of the former Skeet Range.

Section 6.0 References


6.0 REFERENCES

Argonne National Laboratories, 1991. Remedial Investigation Concept Plan for Picatinny Arsenal, Volume 2: Descriptions of and Sampling Plans for Remedial Investigation Sites. Dames and Moore, 1998. Phase I Remedial Investigation Report, Picatinny Arsenal, Dover, New Jersey. Volume 2, Study Area C, Dames and Moore, 1995. Phase I Remedial Investigation Report, Picatinny Arsenal, Dover, New Jersey. Volume 12, Appendix A, Preliminary Assessments for Non-RI Buildings in Phase I Study Areas. Draft. March 1995. ICF Kaiser Engineers (ICF KE), 1998. Picatinny Arsenal Facility-Wide Field Sampling Plan. Final. September 1998. Interstate Technology Regulatory Council (ITRC), 2005. Environmental Management at Operating Outdoor Small Arms Firing Ranges. February 2005. ITRC, 2003. Characterization and Remediation of Soils at Closed Small Arms Firing Ranges. January 2003. National Sports Shooting Foundation (NSSF), 1997. Environmental Aspects of Construction and Management at Outdoor Shooting Ranges. Facilities Development Series Number 2. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), 2005a. Field Sampling Procedures Manual. August 2005. NJDEP, 2005b. Technical Requirements for Site Remediation. July 2005. Shaw Environmental & Infrastructure, Inc. (Shaw), 2008. Site 180 and Former Skeet Range Lead Investigation Data Report, Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey. December 2008. Shaw, 2010. Picatinny Arsenal Former Skeet Range Work Plan. Final. March 2010.

TABLES

Table 1Former Skeet Range

Summary of Chemicals Analyzed for in Groundwater SamplesSample ID B1181MW-1 B1181MW-2 B1181MW-2DUP C-1A C-1B DM19-3

Analyte Sample Date 6/17/2010 6/17/2010 6/17/2010 6/17/2010 6/17/2010 6/17/2010Sample Depth 7.7-12.7 11-16 11-16 77.2-87.2 12.3-22.3 10-20

LOC LOC Chosen Result LQ MDL EQL Result Q MDL EQL Result LQ MDL EQL Result LQ MDL EQL Result LQ MDL EQL Result LQ MDL EQL

Metals (ug/L)Aluminum 200 NJGWQC 1090 50 200 487 50 200 447 50 200 662 50 200 1110 50 200 298 50 200

Antimony 6NJGWQC, FED MCL, NJMCL, FED DW HA 15 U 5 15 15 U 5 15 15 U 5 15 15 U 5 15 15 U 5 15 15 U 5 15

Arsenic 3 NJPQL 10 U 3 10 10 U 3 10 10 U 3 10 10 U 3 10 7.55 J 3 10 13.2 3 10Barium 2000 FED MCL, NJMCL 56.9 5 40 39.7 J 5 40 41.1 5 40 83.4 5 40 51 5 40 59.1 5 40Beryllium 1 NJGWQC 5 U 1 5 5 U 1 5 5 U 1 5 5 U 1 5 5 U 1 5 5 U 1 5Cadmium 4 NJGWQC 1.61 J 1 5 1.48 J 1 5 1.29 J 1 5 1.28 J 1 5 1.35 J 1 5 1.4 J 1 5Calcium NA NA 33100 1000 5000 22400 1000 5000 23300 1000 5000 35100 1000 5000 31800 1000 5000 32900 1000 5000Chromium 70 NJGWQC 7.79 J 2 10 6.33 J 2 10 6.29 J 2 10 2.79 J 2 10 6.17 J 2 10 3.32 J 2 10Cobalt 100 NJGWQC 12.5 U 5 12.5 12.5 U 5 12.5 12.5 U 5 12.5 12.5 U 5 12.5 12.5 U 5 12.5 12.5 U 5 12.5Copper 1300 NJGWQC, NJMCL 9.97 J 4 10 7 J 4 10 6.43 J 4 10 5.92 J 4 10 8.49 J 4 10 4.55 J 4 10Iron 300 NJGWQC 18300 30 100 16000 30 100 15900 30 100 1380 30 100 2110 30 100 3690 30 100Lead 5 NJGWQC 3.63 1.5 3 1.6 J 1.5 3 1.55 J 1.5 3 3.46 1.5 3 2.23 J 1.5 3 2.78 J 1.5 3Magnesium NA NA 9350 1000 5000 7810 1000 5000 8090 1000 5000 11100 1000 5000 6040 1000 5000 9370 1000 5000Manganese 50 NJGWQC 2260 3 15 1730 3 15 1780 3 15 3350 3 15 1480 3 15 1400 3 15

Mercury 2NJGWQC, FED MCL, NJMCL, FED DW HA 0.2 U 0.08 0.2 0.2 U 0.08 0.2 0.2 U 0.08 0.2 0.2 U 0.08 0.2 0.2 U 0.08 0.2 0.2 U 0.08 0.2

Nickel 100 FED DW HA 4.27 J 3 10 10 U 3 10 10 U 3 10 3.05 J 3 10 5.94 J 3 10 10 U 3 10Potassium NA NA 1680 J 1000 5000 1070 J 1000 5000 1160 J 1000 5000 1130 J 1000 5000 5000 U 1000 5000 1170 J 1000 5000Selenium 40 NJGWQC 5 U 3 5 5 U 3 5 5 U 3 5 5 U 3 5 5 U 3 5 5 U 3 5Silver 40 NJGWQC 3 U 1 3 3 U 1 3 3 U 1 3 3 U 1 3 3 U 1 3 3 U 1 3Sodium 50000 NJGWQC 18000 1000 5000 17000 1000 5000 18000 1000 5000 7750 1000 5000 19100 1000 5000 18000 1000 5000

Thallium 2 NJ PQL, FED MCL, NJMCL 8 U 3 8 8 U 3 8 8 U 3 8 8 U 3 8 8 U 3 8 8 U 3 8Vanadium 2.6 RBC 12.4 J 5 12.5 17.6 5 12.5 18.2 5 12.5 12.5 U 5 12.5 12.5 U 5 12.5 6.93 J 5 12.5Zinc 2000 NJGWQC, FED DW HA 21 5 20 16 J 5 20 13.8 J 5 20 22.6 5 20 15.3 J 5 20 40.1 5 20PAHs (ug/L)2-Methylnaphthalene 30 NJGWQC 4.63 U 0.63 4.63 4.67 U 0.636 4.67 4.67 U 0.636 4.67 4.67 U 0.636 4.67 4.72 U 0.642 4.72 4.72 U 0.642 4.72Acenaphthene 400 NJGWQC 4.63 U 0.583 4.63 4.67 U 0.589 4.67 4.67 U 0.589 4.67 4.67 U 0.589 4.67 4.72 U 0.594 4.72 4.72 U 0.594 4.72Acenaphthylene 100 NJGWQC 4.63 U 0.435 4.63 4.67 U 0.439 4.67 4.67 U 0.439 4.67 4.67 U 0.439 4.67 4.72 U 0.443 4.72 4.72 U 0.443 4.72Anthracene 2000 NJGWQC 4.63 U 0.713 4.63 4.67 U 0.72 4.67 4.67 U 0.72 4.67 4.67 U 0.72 4.67 4.72 U 0.726 4.72 4.72 U 0.726 4.72Benz(a)anthracene 0.1 NJPQL 4.63 U 0.843 4.63 4.67 U 0.85 4.67 4.67 U 0.85 4.67 4.67 U 0.85 4.67 4.72 U 0.858 4.72 4.72 U 0.858 4.72Benzo(a)pyrene 0.1 NJPQL 4.63 U 0.556 4.63 4.67 UN 0.561 4.67 4.67 U 0.561 4.67 4.67 U 0.561 4.67 4.72 U 0.566 4.72 4.72 U 0.566 4.72Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.2 NJPQL 4.63 U 0.657 4.63 4.67 U 0.664 4.67 4.67 U 0.664 4.67 4.67 U 0.664 4.67 4.72 U 0.67 4.72 4.72 U 0.67 4.72Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 100 NJGWQC 4.63 U 1.39 4.63 4.67 U 1.4 4.67 4.67 U 1.4 4.67 4.67 U 1.4 4.67 4.72 U 1.42 4.72 4.72 U 1.42 4.72Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.5 NJGWQC 4.63 U 0.463 4.63 4.67 U 0.467 4.67 4.67 U 0.467 4.67 4.67 U 0.467 4.67 4.72 U 0.472 4.72 4.72 U 0.472 4.72Chrysene 5 NJGWQC 4.63 U 0.926 4.63 4.67 U 0.935 4.67 4.67 U 0.935 4.67 4.67 U 0.935 4.67 4.72 U 0.943 4.72 4.72 U 0.943 4.72Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.3 NJPQL 4.63 U 1.57 4.63 4.67 U 1.59 4.67 4.67 U 1.59 4.67 4.67 U 1.59 4.67 4.72 U 1.6 4.72 4.72 U 1.6 4.72Fluoranthene 300 NJGWQC 4.63 UXQ 0.648 4.63 4.67 UXQ 0.654 4.67 4.67 UXQ 0.654 4.67 4.67 UXQ 0.654 4.67 4.72 UXQ 0.66 4.72 4.72 UXQ 0.66 4.72Fluorene 300 NJGWQC 4.63 UX 0.509 4.63 4.67 UX 0.514 4.67 4.67 UX 0.514 4.67 4.67 UX 0.514 4.67 4.72 UX 0.519 4.72 4.72 UX 0.519 4.72Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 0.2 NJPQL 4.63 U 1.3 4.63 4.67 U 1.31 4.67 4.67 U 1.31 4.67 4.67 U 1.31 4.67 4.72 U 1.32 4.72 4.72 U 1.32 4.72Naphthalene 300 NJGWQC, NJMCL 4.63 U 0.417 4.63 4.67 U 0.421 4.67 4.67 U 0.421 4.67 4.67 U 0.421 4.67 4.72 U 0.425 4.72 4.72 U 0.425 4.72Phenanthrene 100 NJGWQC 4.63 U 0.713 4.63 4.67 U 0.72 4.67 4.67 U 0.72 4.67 4.67 U 0.72 4.67 4.72 U 0.726 4.72 4.72 U 0.726 4.72Pyrene 200 NJGWQC 4.63 U 0.602 4.63 4.67 U 0.607 4.67 4.67 U 0.607 4.67 4.67 U 0.607 4.67 4.72 U 0.613 4.72 4.72 U 0.613 4.72

LOC = Level of Concern NA = None Available Shading The analyte was detected at concentrations above the LOC.

FED MCL = EPA Regional Screening Levels, Maximum Contaminant Level (December 2009) LQ = Lab Qualifier

FED DW HA = EPA 2009 Drinking Water Health Advisories (lowest used) MDL = Method detection limit

NJGWQC = New Jersey Ground Water Quality Standards N.J.A.C. 7:9C, Specific Ground Water Quality Criteria (November, 2009) RL = Reporting Limit

NJGWQC* = New Jersey Ground Water Quality Standards N.J.A.C. 7:9C, Interim Ground Water Quality Criteria (November, 2009) NT = Not Tested

NJPQL = New Jersey Ground Water Quality Standards N.J.A.C. 7:9C, Practical Quantitation Limit (November, 2009) ug/L = micrograms/Liter

NJMCL = New Jersey Drinking Water Quality Standards (October 2009)

RBC = EPA Regional Screening Levels, Tapwater (December 2009)

J = Indicates that the reported result is estimated.

U = Indicates that the analyte was analyzed for but was not detected or the concentration of the analyte quantitated below the MDL.

Q = The RPD and/or percent recovery failed in the associated Blank Spike and/or Blank Spike Duplicate.

X = The parameter shows a potential positive bias on a reported concentration due to an ICV or CCV exceeding the upper control limit on the high side.


Summary of Chemicals Analyzed for in Soil Samples

Sample ID B1181SS-22 B1181SS-22DUP B1181SS-23 B1181SS-24 B1181SS-25

Analyte Sample Date 6/4/2010 6/4/2010 6/4/2010 6/4/2010 6/4/2010Sample Depth 0.0-0.5 0.0-0.5 0.0-0.5 0.0-0.5 0.0-0.5

LOC LOC Chosen Result LQ MDL EQL Result LQ MDL EQL Result LQ MDL EQL Result LQ MDL EQL Result LQ MDL EQL

Metals (mg/kg)Lead 800 NRDCSRS 9.64 0.327 0.653 11.9 0.346 0.691 97 0.348 0.697 160 0.338 0.676 56500 D 84.2 168PAHs (mg/kg)2-Methylnaphthalene 2400 NRDCSRS 0.192 U 0.0396 0.192 0.198 U 0.0407 0.198 0.436 JD 0.203 0.987 0.301 JD 0.0773 0.375 0.123 J 0.0409 0.198Acenaphthene 37000 NRDCSRS 0.226 U 0.0294 0.226 0.0519 J 0.0302 0.233 3.79 D 0.151 1.16 0.442 U 0.0574 0.442 0.234 U 0.0304 0.234Acenaphthylene 300000 NRDCSRS 0.226 U 0.0226 0.226 0.233 U 0.0233 0.233 1.16 U 0.116 1.16 0.442 U 0.0442 0.442 0.234 U 0.0234 0.234Anthracene 30000 NRDCSRS 0.226 U 0.0306 0.226 0.0824 J 0.0314 0.233 7.88 D 0.157 1.16 0.442 U 0.0596 0.442 0.234 U 0.0315 0.234Benz(a)anthracene 2 NRDCSRS 0.238 B 0.0407 0.226 0.295 B 0.0419 0.233 27.6 BD 0.209 1.16 0.432 JBD 0.0795 0.442 0.348 B 0.042 0.234Benzo(a)pyrene 0.2 NRDCSRS 0.366 0.026 0.226 0.418 0.0268 0.233 21.6 D 0.134 1.16 0.935 D 0.0508 0.442 0.405 0.0269 0.234Benzo(b)fluoranthene 2 NRDCSRS 0.402 0.0362 0.226 0.472 0.0372 0.233 27.1 D 0.186 1.16 0.949 D 0.0707 0.442 0.517 0.0374 0.234Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 30000 NRDCSRS 0.342 NX 0.0792 0.226 0.383 X 0.0814 0.233 14.2 D 0.406 1.16 0.925 D 0.155 0.442 0.31 X 0.0817 0.234Benzo(k)fluoranthene 23 NRDCSRS 0.344 0.0441 0.226 0.361 0.0454 0.233 12.2 D 0.226 1.16 0.647 D 0.0861 0.442 0.377 0.0455 0.234Chrysene 230 NRDCSRS 0.244 B 0.0351 0.226 0.298 B 0.0361 0.233 26.2 BD 0.18 1.16 0.626 BD 0.0685 0.442 0.498 B 0.0362 0.234Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.2 NRDCSRS 0.289 0.0679 0.226 0.233 U 0.0698 0.233 4.88 D 0.348 1.16 0.628 D 0.133 0.442 0.234 U 0.0701 0.234Fluoranthene 24000 NRDCSRS 0.344 0.0611 0.226 0.574 0.0628 0.233 38.4 D 0.314 1.16 0.727 D 0.119 0.442 0.594 0.063 0.234Fluorene 24000 NRDCSRS 0.226 U 0.0294 0.226 0.0534 J 0.0302 0.233 3.07 D 0.151 1.16 0.0816 JD 0.0574 0.442 0.234 U 0.0304 0.234Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 2 NRDCSRS 0.429 0.0521 0.226 0.429 0.0535 0.233 16.5 D 0.267 1.16 1.13 D 0.102 0.442 0.234 U 0.0537 0.234Naphthalene 17 NRDCSRS 0.226 U 0.0362 0.226 0.233 U 0.0372 0.233 0.767 JD 0.186 1.16 0.442 U 0.0707 0.442 0.13 J 0.0374 0.234Phenanthrene 300000 NRDCSRS 0.133 J 0.026 0.226 0.431 0.0268 0.233 22 D 0.134 1.16 0.619 D 0.0508 0.442 0.37 0.0269 0.234Pyrene 18000 NRDCSRS 0.419 0.0453 0.226 0.566 0.0465 0.233 36.9 D 0.465 2.32 0.799 D 0.0883 0.442 0.614 0.0467 0.234OtherTotal Organic Carbon (mg/kg) NA NA 25000 500 1600 15600 500 1600 61400 500 1600 101000 500 1600 77400 500 1600pH NA NA 6.3 0.1 0.1 6.51 0.1 0.1 7.56 0.1 0.1 6.21 0.1 0.1 6.17 0.1 0.1% Solids NA NA 88 1 1 86 1 1 86 1 1 91 1 1 86 1 1



Sample ID B1181SS-26 B1181SS-27 B1181SS-28 B1181SS-29 B1181SS-30



Metals (ug/L)Lead 800 NRDCSRS 46100 D 84.6 169 299 0.496 0.991 386 0.421 0.843 1230 0.422 0.845 233 0.344 0.688PAHs (ug/L)2-Methylnaphthalene 2400 NRDCSRS 0.199 U 0.0411 0.199 0.199 JD 0.111 0.539 0.241 U 0.0496 0.241 0.237 U 0.0488 0.237 0.0718 J 0.0394 0.191Acenaphthene 37000 NRDCSRS 0.235 U 0.0305 0.235 0.19 JD 0.0825 0.634 0.284 U 0.0369 0.284 0.279 U 0.0362 0.279 0.225 U 0.0292 0.225Acenaphthylene 300000 NRDCSRS 0.235 U 0.0235 0.235 0.253 JD 0.0634 0.634 0.284 U 0.0284 0.284 0.279 U 0.0279 0.279 0.225 U 0.0225 0.225Anthracene 30000 NRDCSRS 0.235 U 0.0317 0.235 0.936 D 0.0856 0.634 0.284 U 0.0383 0.284 0.279 U 0.0376 0.279 0.225 U 0.0304 0.225Benz(a)anthracene 2 NRDCSRS 0.0937 JB 0.0422 0.235 3.61 BD 0.114 0.634 0.218 JB 0.0511 0.284 0.0997 JB 0.0502 0.279 0.139 JB 0.0405 0.225Benzo(a)pyrene 0.2 NRDCSRS 0.235 U 0.027 0.235 3.17 D 0.0729 0.634 0.393 0.0326 0.284 0.302 0.0321 0.279 0.301 0.0259 0.225Benzo(b)fluoranthene 2 NRDCSRS 0.284 0.0375 0.235 4.39 D 0.101 0.634 0.387 0.0454 0.284 0.286 0.0446 0.279 0.346 0.036 0.225Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 30000 NRDCSRS 0.244 X 0.0821 0.235 2.23 D 0.222 0.634 0.416 X 0.0993 0.284 0.407 X 0.0976 0.279 0.369 X 0.0787 0.225Benzo(k)fluoranthene 23 NRDCSRS 0.329 0.0458 0.235 2.07 D 0.124 0.634 0.399 0.0553 0.284 0.328 0.0544 0.279 0.306 0.0439 0.225Chrysene 230 NRDCSRS 0.0937 JB 0.0364 0.235 3.68 BD 0.0983 0.634 0.211 JB 0.044 0.284 0.146 JB 0.0432 0.279 0.261 B 0.0349 0.225Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.2 NRDCSRS 0.235 U 0.0704 0.235 1.14 D 0.19 0.634 0.379 0.0851 0.284 0.279 U 0.0836 0.279 0.225 U 0.0675 0.225Fluoranthene 24000 NRDCSRS 0.111 J 0.0634 0.235 7.61 D 0.171 0.634 0.361 0.0766 0.284 0.154 J 0.0753 0.279 0.182 J 0.0607 0.225Fluorene 24000 NRDCSRS 0.235 U 0.0305 0.235 0.698 D 0.0825 0.634 0.284 U 0.0369 0.284 0.279 U 0.0362 0.279 0.225 U 0.0292 0.225Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 2 NRDCSRS 0.235 U 0.054 0.235 2.66 D 0.146 0.634 0.499 0.0652 0.284 0.479 0.0641 0.279 0.421 0.0517 0.225Naphthalene 17 NRDCSRS 0.235 U 0.0375 0.235 0.362 JD 0.101 0.634 0.284 U 0.0454 0.284 0.279 U 0.0446 0.279 0.116 J 0.036 0.225Phenanthrene 300000 NRDCSRS 0.0655 J 0.027 0.235 4.61 D 0.0729 0.634 0.152 J 0.0326 0.284 0.112 J 0.0321 0.279 0.175 J 0.0259 0.225Pyrene 18000 NRDCSRS 0.141 J 0.0469 0.235 7.64 D 0.127 0.634 0.455 0.0567 0.284 0.194 J 0.0557 0.279 0.268 0.045 0.225OtherTotal Organic Carbon (mg/kg) NA NA 32300 500 1600 75600 500 1600 29900 500 1600 108000 500 1600 75100 500 1600pH NA NA 5.8 0.1 0.1 6.12 0.1 0.1 5.65 0.1 0.1 4.86 0.1 0.1 5.52 0.1 0.1% Solids NA NA 85 1 1 63 1 1 71 1 1 72 1 1 89 1 1



Sample ID B1181SS-31 B1181SS-32 B1181SS-33 B1181SS-35 B1181SS-36



Metals (ug/L)Lead 800 NRDCSRS 114 0.35 0.701 84700 D 196 393 1760 1.09 2.19PAHs (ug/L)2-Methylnaphthalene 2400 NRDCSRS 0.0599 J 0.0421 0.205 0.179 J 0.0472 0.229 0.361 U 0.0744 0.361 0.993 U 0.204 0.993Acenaphthene 37000 NRDCSRS 0.241 U 0.0313 0.241 0.27 U 0.0351 0.27 0.425 U 0.0553 0.425 0.476 JD 0.152 1.17Acenaphthylene 300000 NRDCSRS 0.241 U 0.0241 0.241 0.153 J 0.027 0.27 0.425 U 0.0425 0.425 1.17 U 0.117 1.17Anthracene 30000 NRDCSRS 0.241 U 0.0325 0.241 0.387 0.0364 0.27 0.425 U 0.0574 0.425 0.947 JD 0.158 1.17Benz(a)anthracene 2 NRDCSRS 0.115 JB 0.0433 0.241 1.91 B 0.0485 0.27 0.349 JB 0.0765 0.425 6.73 BD 0.21 1.17Benzo(a)pyrene 0.2 NRDCSRS 0.365 0.0277 0.241 1.74 0.031 0.27 0.648 0.0489 0.425 6.99 D 0.134 1.17Benzo(b)fluoranthene 2 NRDCSRS 0.371 0.0385 0.241 3.79 0.0431 0.27 0.617 0.068 0.425 7.47 D 0.187 1.17Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 30000 NRDCSRS 0.454 X 0.0842 0.241 1.14 X 0.0944 0.27 0.736 X 0.149 0.425 4.83 D 0.409 1.17Benzo(k)fluoranthene 23 NRDCSRS 0.358 0.0469 0.241 1.44 0.0526 0.27 0.601 0.0829 0.425 3.36 D 0.228 1.17Chrysene 230 NRDCSRS 0.182 JB 0.0373 0.241 3.45 B 0.0418 0.27 0.391 JB 0.0659 0.425 8.97 BD 0.181 1.17Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.2 NRDCSRS 0.388 0.0722 0.241 0.603 0.0809 0.27 0.564 0.128 0.425 1.17 U 0.35 1.17Fluoranthene 24000 NRDCSRS 0.128 J 0.065 0.241 1.26 0.0728 0.27 0.499 0.115 0.425 7.64 D 0.315 1.17Fluorene 24000 NRDCSRS 0.241 U 0.0313 0.241 0.073 J 0.0351 0.27 0.425 U 0.0553 0.425 0.33 JD 0.152 1.17Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 2 NRDCSRS 0.489 0.0553 0.241 1.3 0.062 0.27 0.81 0.0978 0.425 4.53 D 0.269 1.17Naphthalene 17 NRDCSRS 0.241 U 0.0385 0.241 0.176 J 0.0431 0.27 0.425 U 0.068 0.425 1.17 U 0.187 1.17Phenanthrene 300000 NRDCSRS 0.134 J 0.0277 0.241 0.707 0.031 0.27 0.271 J 0.0489 0.425 3.79 D 0.134 1.17Pyrene 18000 NRDCSRS 0.165 J 0.0481 0.241 3.92 0.0539 0.27 0.671 0.085 0.425 9.3 D 0.234 1.17OtherTotal Organic Carbon (mg/kg) NA NA 57900 500 1600 123000 500 1600 64100 500 1600 41300 500 1600 391000 2500 5000pH NA NA 5.91 0.1 0.1 6.35 0.1 0.1 5.38 0.1 0.1 6.71 0.1 0.1 3.7 0.1 0.1% Solids NA NA 83 1 1 74 1 1 47 1 1 86 1 1 27 1 1

NTNT

NTNTNTNTNT

NT NT

NTNTNTNTNTNTNTNTNTNT



Sample ID B1181SS-37 B1181SS-38

Analyte Sample Date 6/17/2010 6/4/2010Sample Depth 0.0-0.5 0.0-0.5

LOC LOC Chosen Result LQ MDL EQL Result LQ MDL EQL

Metals (ug/L)Lead 800 NRDCSRS 923 2.03 4.05 26.4 0.36 0.719PAHs (ug/L)2-Methylnaphthalene 2400 NRDCSRSAcenaphthene 37000 NRDCSRSAcenaphthylene 300000 NRDCSRSAnthracene 30000 NRDCSRSBenz(a)anthracene 2 NRDCSRSBenzo(a)pyrene 0.2 NRDCSRSBenzo(b)fluoranthene 2 NRDCSRSBenzo(g,h,i)perylene 30000 NRDCSRSBenzo(k)fluoranthene 23 NRDCSRSChrysene 230 NRDCSRSDibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.2 NRDCSRSFluoranthene 24000 NRDCSRSFluorene 24000 NRDCSRSIndeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 2 NRDCSRSNaphthalene 17 NRDCSRSPhenanthrene 300000 NRDCSRSPyrene 18000 NRDCSRS

OtherTotal Organic Carbon (mg/kg) NA NA 412000 2500 5000 34400 500 1600pH NA NA 3.85 0.1 0.1 5.07 0.1 0.1% Solids NA NA 15 1 1 83 1 1

LOC = Level of Concern Shading The analyte was detected at concentrations above the LOC.

NRDCSRS = New Jersey Residential Direct Contact Soil Remediation Standards, 2009.

NA = None Available

LQ = Lab Qualifier

MDL = Method detection limit

RL = Reporting Limit

NT = Not Tested

ug/L = micrograms/Liter J = Indicates that the reported result is estimated.

N = The matrix spikes are outside of precision and/or accuracy criteria.

NT

NTNTNTNT

NTNTNT

NT

NTNTNT

NTNTNTNTNTNTNTNTNT

NTNTNTNTNTNT

NT

NTNTNTNTNTNT



B = Indicates that this compound was also detected in the method blank and the data should be interpreted with caution.

D = The sample was rerun diluted because one of the compound concentrations exceeded the highest concentration range for the standard curve.

E = The concentration exceeds the highest concentration level on the standard curve for that compound.


Summary of Chemicals Analyzed for in Sediment Samples

Sample ID B1181SD-4 B1181SD-4DUP B1181SD-5

Analyte Sample Date 6/4/2010 6/4/2010 6/4/2010Sample Depth 0.0-0.5 0.0-0.5 0.0-0.5

LOC LOC Chosen Result LQ MDL EQL Result LQ MDL EQL Result LQ MDL EQL

Metals (mg/kg)Lead 38.8 PTA BC 31.9 0.431 0.863 11.8 0.382 0.763 387 2.5 4.99PAHs (mg/kg)2-Methylnaphthalene 0.0202 Eco ISQC 0.247 U 0.0508 0.247 0.218 U 0.045 0.218 1.44 U 0.297 1.44Acenaphthene 0.00671 Eco ISQC 0.291 U 0.0378 0.291 0.257 U 0.0334 0.257 1.7 U 0.221 1.7Acenaphthylene 0.00587 Eco ISQC 0.291 U 0.0291 0.291 0.257 U 0.0257 0.257 1.7 U 0.17 1.7Anthracene 0.03162 Eco SQB 0.291 U 0.0392 0.291 0.257 U 0.0347 0.257 1.7 U 0.229 1.7Benz(a)anthracene 0.0317 Eco ISQC 0.291 U 0.0523 0.291 0.257 U 0.0463 0.257 1.7 U 0.306 1.7Benzo(a)pyrene 0.0319 Eco ISQC 0.291 U 0.0334 0.291 0.257 US 0.0295 0.257 1.7 U 0.195 1.7Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.0272 Eco SQB 0.291 U 0.0465 0.291 0.227 JS 0.0411 0.257 1.7 U 0.272 1.7Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 0.17 Eco NJDEP 0.274 JX 0.102 0.291 0.27 SX 0.0899 0.257 1.69 JX 0.594 1.7Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.0272 Eco SQB 0.291 U 0.0567 0.291 0.287 S 0.0501 0.257 1.7 U 0.331 1.7Chrysene 0.0571 Eco ISQC 0.291 U 0.045 0.291 0.0955 JB 0.0398 0.257 1.7 U 0.263 1.7Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.00622 Eco ISQC 0.291 U 0.0872 0.291 0.257 US 0.0771 0.257 1.7 U 0.509 1.7Fluoranthene 0.06423 Eco SQB 0.291 U 0.0784 0.291 0.113 J 0.0694 0.257 1.7 U 0.458 1.7Fluorene 0.019 Eco NJDEP 0.291 U 0.0378 0.291 0.257 U 0.0334 0.257 1.7 U 0.221 1.7Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 0.078 Eco SQB 0.291 U 0.0668 0.291 0.257 US 0.0591 0.257 1.7 U 0.39 1.7Naphthalene 0.03275 Eco SQB 0.291 U 0.0465 0.291 0.257 U 0.0411 0.257 1.7 U 0.272 1.7Phenanthrene 0.0419 Eco ISQC 0.291 U 0.0334 0.291 0.257 U 0.0295 0.257 1.7 U 0.195 1.7Pyrene 0.053 Eco ISQC 0.291 U 0.0581 0.291 0.155 J 0.0514 0.257 0.467 J 0.339 1.7OtherTotal Organic Carbon (mg/kg) NA NA 16800 500 1600 14200 500 1600 368000 2500 5000pH NA NA 5.42 0.1 0.1 5.59 0.1 0.1 4.74 0.1 0.1% Solids NA NA 69 1 1 78 1 1 12 1 1

LOC = Level of Concern LQ = Lab Qualifier Shading The analyte was detected at concentrations above the LOC.

Eco ISQC = Ecological Screening Criteria, Interim Sediment Quality Guidline, CCME 2003. MDL = Method detection limit

Eco SQB = Ecological Screening Criteria, Sediment Quality Benchmark, ORNL 1997. RL = Reporting Limit

Eco NJDEP = Ecological Screening Criteria, Effect Range-Low, NJDEP 1998. ug/L = micrograms/Liter

PTA BC = Picatinny Background Concentrations S = The Internal Standard failed criteria.

NA = None Available

J = Indicates that the reported result is estimated.



FIGURES

180SS-9A8.8 180SS-10A22

B1181SS-8143

B1181SS-5637 D

B1181SS-4450

B1181SS-2201 B1181SS-1723

180SS-8A17.6 180SS-19A150

180SS-18A5.2

180SS-17A6.8

180SS-15A587

180SS-14A145 180SS-13A5.8

B1181SS-33030 D

B1181SS-21192 B1181SS-20280

B1181SS-15106

B1181SS-13212

B1181SS-12140

180SS-16A62.7

180SS-15W3391

180SS-12A23.3

180SS-11A15.9

B1181SS-987200 D

B1181SS-627700 D

B1181SS-1986.3

180SS-15S-4377

B1181SS-7179000 D

B1181SS-1810400 DB1181SS-1798800 D

B1181SS-1637100 D

B1181SS-1411100 DB1181SS-1118400 D

180SS-15S-39710 D

180SS-15S-14230 D

180SS-15N467800 D

180SS-15N246700 DB1181SS-10209000 D

180SS-15N3178000 D

180SS-15E-410800 D

180SS-15E-315800 D

180SS-15E-224400 D

180SS-15W42460 D

180SS-15W21110 D

180SS-15W161100 D

180SS-15E/C6930 D

180SS-15E-117100 D

180SS-15S-2102000 D

B1181SS-2397

B1181SS-37923

B1181SS-27299

B1181SS-28386

B1181SS-30233

B1181SS-31114

B1181SS-24160

B1181SS-361760

B1181SS-3826.4

B1181SS-229.64

B1181SS-291230

B1181SS-3284700 D

B1181SS-2646100 D

B1181SS-2556500 D

GREEN

POND B

ROOK

S. Broo

k Road

Shinkle Road

0 150 30075Feet

LEGENDLead Detects in Surface Soil (2005-2010)

< 800 mg/kg

800 - 8,000 mg/kg

8,000 - 80,000 mg/kg

> 80,000 mg/kg

Road

Water Feature

Water Body

Maxiumum Shot Fall Zone

Former Skeet Range Impact Fan

N:\GIS\Picatinny\Projects\Fmr_Skeet_Invest_Data_Rpt\Fig7_SS_Lead_Results_FSR_Data_Rpt.mxd (8/17/2010 12:23:04 PM)

Notes:1) Aerial photography (1-foot resolution), dated 2007-2008,was obtained from New Jersey Office of InformationTechnology (NJOIT), Office of Geographic InformationSystems (OGIS).2) D = Laboratory concentrations qualified at a secondarydilution.

U.S. Army Corpsof Engineers

PICATINNY ARSENAL, DOVER, NEW JERSEY

FIGURE 7CURRENT AND HISTORICAL LEAD

CONCENTRATIONS IN SURFACE SOIL

FORMER SKEET RANGE DATA INVESTIGATION REPORT

APPENDIX A CHAIN OF CUSTODIES

and ANALYTICAL RESULTS

ANALYTICAL SUMMARY DATA PACKAGE SDG # PICARS_008

PROJECT NAME: PICATINNY ARSENAL PROJECT LOCATION: PICATINNY, NJ

CONTRACT #: W912DR-05-D-0026

SUBMITTAL TO: Michelle Lobsiger

SHAW E&I 111 Howard Blvd. Suite 110

Mt. Arlington, NJ 07856

SUBMITTAL BY: Empirical Laboratories, LLC (EL) 621 Mainstream Drive, Suite 270

Nashville, TN 37228 Tel (615)345-1115 Fax (615)846-5426

LABORATORY CONTACT PERSON:

Project Manager: Kim Kostzer Tel (615)345-1115 Fax (615)846-5426

Email: [email protected]

Original Report Date: July 6, 2010 Report Revision #: 01

Revision Date: July 9, 2010 Total # of Pages: 240

THIS DOCUMENT MEETS DoD QSM 4.1 STANDARDS The results relate to only the samples associated with the referenced SDG and the submitted data has been produced in accordance with laboratory procedures. The Laboratory’s Technical Lab Director, Mr. Rick Davis, is responsible

for the final data produced and reported. His signature is listed at the end of the Case Narrative within the Analytical Data Package. If applicable to this report package, details on report revisions and the information on

subcontracted analysis are listed in the package Case Narrative. This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of Empirical Laboratories, LLC.

Table of Contents # Description Page No.

1 Cover Page 1

2 Table of Contents 2

3 Case Narrative

3

4 Sample Receipt Information Chain of Custody Forms

Sample Receipt Confirmations WorkOrder Summary

Sample Delivery Group (SDG) Sheets

8

5 Data by SW8270C Required Data / QAQC / Calibration Forms

Supporting Raw Data / Logs

19

6 Data by SW6010B Required Data / QAQC / Calibration Forms


97

7 Data by Wet Chemistry Required Data / QAQC / Calibration Forms


152

8 Subcontract Data 195

Sample Delivery Group Case Narrative

Receipt Information The samples were received within the preservation guidelines for the associated methods. The information associated with sample receipt and the Sample Delivery Group (SDG) are included within section 4 of this package, which also provides information on the link between the client sample ID listed on the COC and laboratory’s assigned unique sample ID or WorkOrder #. The sample is tracked through the laboratory for all analysis via the assigned WorkOrder #. All samples that were received were analyzed and none of the samples were placed on hold without analyses. Per contract specifications, the designated samples were subcontracted to Beaver Engineering, Inc. for grain size analysis. Changes to the Revision Data package revised to include correct subcontractor data. Analytical Information All samples were prepped (where applicable) and analyzed within the standard allowed holding times, unless noted within the exceptions listed below. The laboratory analyzed all samples within the program and method guidelines. The following information is provided specific to individual methods: Chromatographic Flags for Manual Integration: The following letters are used to denote manual integrations on the laboratory’s raw data in association with chromatographic integrations: A: The peak was manually integrated as it was not integrated in the original chromatogram. B: The peak was manually integrated due to resolution or coelution issues in the original chromatogram. C: The peak was manually integrated to correct the baseline from the original chromatogram. D: The peak was manually integrated to identify the correct peak as the wrong peak was identified in the original chromatogram. E: The peak was manually integrated to include the entire peak as the original chromatogram only integrated part of the peak. SW8270C PAHs: The continuing calibration standards failed criteria in 0F17612-CCV1 for Fluoranthene, in 0F17415-CCV1 for Benzo(g,h,i)perylene, The method blank in batch 0F16704 had low level hits for Benzo(a)anthracene, and Chrysene, and in batch 0F11004 for Benzo(g,h,i)perylene. The matrix spikes associated with sample 1006051-12 had precision and/or accuracy failures for Benzo(g,h,i)perylene.

PICARS_008 Summ Package 3

There were internal standard failures associated with sample 1006051-10 and the associated parameters are flagged. No additional anomalies or deviations are noted and the data is qualified with the appropriate qualifiers. SW6010B: The continuing calibration standard failed criteria for Lead in 0F16715-CCV9. No additional anomalies or deviations are noted and the data is qualified with the appropriate qualifiers. Wet Chemistry: The batch sample duplicate for TOC via Lloyd Khan has a greater than 20% RPD. No additional anomalies or deviations are noted and the data is qualified with the appropriate qualifiers.


Data Qualifiers As applicable and where required, the following general qualifiers are associated with the sample results. Additional qualifiers will be specified within the reporting sections of the data package or within the body of the Case Narrative.

Analytical Report Terms and Qualifiers MDL: The method detection limit (MDL) is defined as the minimum concentration of a

substance that can be measured and reported with 99% confidence that the analyte concentration is greater than zero. The MDL is determined from analysis of a sample containing the analyte in a given matrix.

EQL: The estimated quantitation limit (EQL), also known as Reporting Limit (RL), is

defined as the estimated concentration above which quantitative results can be obtained with a specific degree of confidence. Empirical Laboratories defines the EQL to be at or near the lowest standard of the calibration curve.

*: A failing quality control criteria is associated with the reported result. B: The presence of a "B" to the right of an analytical value indicates that this

compound was also detected in the method blank and the data should be interpreted with caution. One should consider the possibility that the correct sample result might be less than the reported result and, perhaps, zero.

D: When a sample (or sample extract) is rerun diluted because one of the

compound concentrations exceeded the highest concentration range for the standard curve, all of the values obtained in the dilution run will be flagged with a "D".

E: The concentration for any compound found which exceeds the highest

concentration level on the standard curve for that compound will be flagged with an "E". Usually the sample will be rerun at a dilution to quantitate the flagged compound.

H1: The result was analyzed outside of the EPA recommended holding time. H2: The result was extracted outside of the EPA recommended holding time J: The presence of a "J" to the right of an analytical result indicates that the

reported result is estimated. The mass spectral data pass the identification criteria showing that the compound is present, but the calculated result is less than the EQL. One should feel confident that the result is greater than zero and less than the EQL.

M: Indicates that the sample matrix interfered with the quantitation of the analyte.

In dual column analysis the result is reported from the column with the lower concentration. In metals, the qualifier indicates that the parameters MDL/RL


has been raised. N: The matrix spikes are outside of precision and/or accuracy criteria. The

predigested spike recovery is not within control limits for the associated parameter.

P: The associated numerical value is an estimated quantity. There is greater than

a 40% difference between the two GC columns for the detected concentrations. The higher of the two values is reported unless matrix interference is obvious or for HPLC analysis where the primary column is reported.

Q: The RPD and/or percent recovery failed in the associated Blank Spike and/or

Blank Spike Duplicate. R: The RPD and/or percent recovery failed in the associated Matrix Spike and/or

Matrix Spike Duplicate. S: The Internal Standard failed criteria. U: The presence of a "U" indicates that the analyte was analyzed for but was not

detected or the concentration of the analyte quantitated below the MDL. X: The parameter shows a potential positive bias on a reported concentration due

to an ICV or CCV exceeding the upper control limit on the high side. Y: The parameter shows a potential negative bias on a reported concentration due

to an ICV or CCV exceeding the lower control limit on the low side. LIMS Definitions / Naming Conventions: The following are general naming conventions that are used throughout the laboratory; however, on a method by method basis, there are additional QAQC items that are named in a consistent format. BLK: LIMS assigns a unique identifier to the Method Blank by naming it as the letters

BLK appended to the Batch ID. A Method Blank is an analyte-free matrix to which all reagents are added in the same volumes or proportions as used in sample processing. The Method Blank is used to assess for possible contamination during preparation and/or analysis steps. Method Blanks within a Batch or Analytical sequence will be appended with a numerical value beginning with 1 that will increase incrementally.

BS: LIMS assigns a unique identifier to the Blank Spike by naming it as the letters

BS appended to the Batch ID. The Blank Spike or Lab Control Sample is a controlled analyte-free matrix, which is spiked with known and verified concentrations of target analytes. Spiking concentrations can be referenced in the method SOP. The BS is used to evaluate the viability of analytes taken


through the entire prep (when applicable) and analytical process. Blank Spikes within a Batch or Analytical sequence will be appended with a numerical value beginning with 1 that will increase incrementally. A duplicate Blank Spike will be designated as a BSD.

MS: The LIMS assigns each Client sample with a unique identifier. The Matrix Spike is designated with a MS at the end of the sample’s unique identifier. The Matrix Spike sample is used to assess the effect of the sample matrix on the precision and accuracy of the results generated using the selected method. A duplicate Matrix Spike will be designated as a MSD.

IDs: The LIMS assigns each Client sample with a unique identifier. The letter “RE” may potentially be appended to the end of the LIMS Sample ID. And “RE”implies that the sample was either re-prepped, re-analyzed straight, or re-analyzed at a dilution. Subsequent re-analysis for the sample will be appended with a numerical value beginning with 1 that will increase incrementally. Eg: RE1, RE2, RE3, etc.

Statement of Data Authenticity: I certify that, based upon my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information and to the best of my knowledge, the data package is in compliance with the terms and conditions of the contract, both technically and for completeness, with the exception of the conditions detailed in this Case Narrative, as verified by my signature below. During absences, Ms. Marcia K. McGinnity is authorized to sign this Statement of Data Authenticity.

________________________Mr. Rick D. Davis Laboratory Technical Director / VP Operations


Sample Receipt Information


Empirical Laboratories, LLC

WORK ORDER

1006051

Shaw E & I (I700)Picatinny Arsenal NJ SHW10PICARSNProject: Project Number:

Client:

Printed: 6/14/2010 9:11:58AM

Project Manager: Kim Kostzer

Report To:Shaw E & I (I700)Accounts PayablePO Box 98519Baton Rouge, LA 70884Phone: (865) 690-3211Fax: (865) 690-3626

Invoice To:Shaw E & I (I700)Accounts PayablePO Box 98519Baton Rouge, LA 70884Phone :(865) 690-3211Fax: (865) 690-3626

Received By:

Logged In By:

Date Due:

Date Received:

Date Logged In:

06/29/2010 16:00 (15 day TAT)

06/08/2010 09:3006/08/2010 02:00

Franklin RiversFranklin Rivers

Samples Received at: 1.8°C

Analysis Due TAT Expires Comments

COC/Labels Agree

Custody SealsContainers Intact

Preservation Confir

YesYesYesYes

Received On Ice Yes

1006051-01 B1181SS-23 [Solid] Sampled 06/04/2010 08:40 Eastern06/18/2010 07:4006/24/2010 14:00 15SMS_PAH_8270C_3541

06/11/2010 07:4006/24/2010 14:00 15WC_PERCENT_SOLIDS_2540B

06/11/2010 07:4006/24/2010 14:00 15WC_PH_9045C

12/01/2010 07:4006/24/2010 14:00 15MET_ICP_6010B_FULL

07/02/2010 07:4006/24/2010 14:00 15WC_TOC_9060A

1006051-02 B1181SS-24 [Solid] Sampled 06/04/2010 08:50 Eastern06/11/2010 07:5006/24/2010 14:00 15WC_PERCENT_SOLIDS_2540B

06/11/2010 07:5006/24/2010 14:00 15WC_PH_9045C

07/02/2010 07:5006/24/2010 14:00 15WC_TOC_9060A

12/01/2010 07:5006/24/2010 14:00 15MET_ICP_6010B_FULL

06/18/2010 07:5006/24/2010 14:00 15SMS_PAH_8270C_3541

1006051-03 B1181SS-25 [Solid] Sampled 06/04/2010 08:55 Eastern06/18/2010 07:5506/24/2010 14:00 15SMS_PAH_8270C_3541


06/11/2010 07:5506/24/2010 14:00 15WC_PH_9045C

07/02/2010 07:5506/24/2010 14:00 15WC_TOC_9060A

12/01/2010 07:5506/24/2010 14:00 15MET_ICP_6010B_FULL

Page 1 of 7


Empirical Laboratories, LLC

WORK ORDER

1006051

Shaw E & I (I700)Picatinny Arsenal NJ SHW10PICARSNProject: Project Number:

Client:

Printed: 6/14/2010 9:11:58AM

Project Manager: Kim Kostzer

Analysis Due TAT Expires Comments

1006051-04 B1181SS-26 [Solid] Sampled 06/04/2010 09:10 Eastern06/11/2010 08:1006/24/2010 14:00 15WC_PH_9045C

07/02/2010 08:1006/24/2010 14:00 15WC_TOC_9060A


06/18/2010 08:1006/24/2010 14:00 15SMS_PAH_8270C_3541

12/01/2010 08:1006/24/2010 14:00 15MET_ICP_6010B_FULL

1006051-05 B1181SS-32 [Solid] Sampled 06/04/2010 09:30 Eastern06/11/2010 08:3006/24/2010 14:00 15WC_PH_9045C

07/02/2010 08:3006/24/2010 14:00 15WC_TOC_9060A


06/18/2010 08:3006/24/2010 14:00 15SMS_PAH_8270C_3541

12/01/2010 08:3006/24/2010 14:00 15MET_ICP_6010B_FULL

1006051-06 B1181SS-31 [Solid] Sampled 06/04/2010 09:40 Eastern12/01/2010 08:4006/24/2010 14:00 15MET_ICP_6010B_FULL

department of the army installation management …...u.s. environmental protection agency region 2...

Documents