tetra tech nus, inc

TETRA TECH NUS, INC.600 Clark Avenue, Suite 3 • King of Prussia, PA 19406-1433Tel 610491 9688 • Fax 610491 9645 • wwwtetratechcom

PHIL-18399

October 11, 2004

Project Number 4192

Mr John Banks (3HS21)United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 31650 Arch StreetPhiladelphia, Pennsylvania 19103

SDMS DocID 2067669

Reference RAC 3 ProgramEPA Contract No 68-S8-3003

Subject Statement of Work for Chemical Oxidation Treatability StudyValmont TCE SiteRemedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS)EPA Work Assignment No 044-RICO-031M

Dear Mr Banks

Enclosed please find the statement of work (SOW) for the treatability study at the subject site This studyinvolves evaluating m-situ chemical oxidation as a viable remedial alternative for contaminatedgroundwater attributable to the site This SOW is intended to be part of the subcontracting package, andshould not be considered to be a formal work plan for the treatability study

Please contact me if you have any questions or comments

Sincerely,

---- -------------- - Project Manager

ANT/vh

Enclosure

Bruce Rundell (EPA Region 3)------ - ----------- - ---- PA Region 3) (without enclosure)--------- - ---------- - - (Tetra Tech NUS) (without enclosure)

PHIL-18401

STATEMENT OF WORK

FOR

IN-SITU CHEMICAL OXIDATIONTREATABILITY STUDY

VALMONT TCE SITE

WEST HAZLETON, LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

EPA CONTRACT NO. 68-S6-3003WORK ASSIGNMENT 044-RICO-031M

PREPARED BY:

TETRA TECH NUS, INC.600 CLARK AVENUE, SUITE 3

KING OF PRUSSIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19406

OCTOBER 2004

STATEMENT OF WORKIN-SITU CHEMICAL OXIDATION TREATABILITY STUDY

VALMONT TCE SITEWEST HAZLETON, LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Tetra Tech NUS (TtNUS) is conducting a treatability study at the Valmont TCE Site (the Site) in Hazle

Township and West Hazleton, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania using chemical oxidizing compounds to

treat contaminated groundwater at the site The study shall be designed and implemented to provide the

necessary data for TtNUS to evaluate and demonstrate m-situ chemical oxidation and/or m-situ

bioremediation as potential groundwater remedial action alternatives either as the primary alternative or in

combination. This subcontract does not address bioremediation at this time.

Results of the remedial investigation (Rl) at the Site indicate that there are risks related to the

groundwater plume that exceed EPA levels and that may require further evaluation. Contamination by

VOCs in groundwater (particularly for TCE) poses risks that will require evaluation for potential remedial

alternatives Remedial alternative evaluation will focus on a set of chemicals of concern (COCs) for each

medium that represents the site-related or potentially site-related chemicals that are the primary risk

drivers for a medium. COCs contribute significantly towards a cumulative cancer risk of 10"4 or have an

HQ exceeding 1

In support of this treatability study, the selected subcontractor will conduct laboratory screening, bench-

scale test, and/or pilot-scale field test to determine the suitability of chemical oxidation technologies to

remediate site groundwater contamination, primarily TCE The subcontractor will submit reports, in a

format agreed upon with TtNUS, at the conclusion of bench-scale test and pilot-scale field test, if

authorized by TtNUS to proceed. These reports shall present the process and results of the bench- and

pilot-scale tests. The pilot-scale field test report shall also present the system design and cost

information for a full-scale implementation. These results and design information will be included in the

feasibility study (FS) report by TtNUS. Prior to implementing the treatability study at the site, the

subcontractor will provide a detailed work plan regarding this work.

1.1 SITE DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY

Based on the currently available information, the Site consists of one known source, the Chromatex Plant

No 2 (Chromatex), a former upholstery manufacturing plant at 423 Jaycee Drive, and contaminated

groundwater attributable to the Chromatex plant in the nearby residential neighborhood. Chromatex is

located at the edge of a large industrial park, and the residential neighborhood is located approximately

L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401

100 feet northeast of this property boundary. There are 59 homes in the residential area, in addition to

five complexes housing about 50 apartments Residential wells in the area are contaminated with TCE,

but the affected homes have been connected to the Hazleton Water Authority (HWA) public water supply.

The site property consists of one plant building and several satellite areas and is about 6 acres in areal

extent. The mam plant is approximately 118,000 square feet in size. The plant was formerly divided into

two parts. The southwest side was primarily used for knitting upholstery fabric, yarn storage, and finished

goods storage, while the northeast side was used for finishing or stabilization of upholstery fabric and as

a shipping/receiving area.

A 10,000-gallon emergency overflow underground storage tank (UST) was formerly located at the

northwestern corner of the plant. This tank was used for collecting chemicals in the event of a spill or

leak. The tank and its contents were removed in the late 1980s. The former plant production well (PW-1)

was along the western side of the plant, about 20 feet northwest of the plant entrance. This well was

converted into a monitoring well (MW-22) during the Rl Since June 2003, the plant has been leased by

Karchner-Riccetti Partners to store liquid soap and detergent products The future use of the Site

includes a potential sale for continued light industrial use.

Chromatex used both water-based and solvent-based adhesives as part of the process to apply stain

repellents to fabrics and to manufacture latex-backed throw rugs. Yarns were received and knitted into

unfinished upholstery fabrics of various styles. The unfinished goods were then processed by applying a

styrene butadiene rubber or acrylic fabric compound on the back to stabilize the fabric and were dried in

one of two steam ovens A fluorocarbon stain repellent was applied in a third oven to some fabrics. The

fluorocarbon used TCE as a carrier and the carrier was recovered in a carbon absorption system to be

reused. These adhesives and the repellent were commonly known under the trademark names of

Scotchgard™ and DuPont Teflon™

Between 1978 and 1988, the TCE used in fabric coating was piped directly from the delivery trailer to one

of two 5,000-gallon storage tanks inside the Chromatex plant. From the tank, TCE was pumped through

an overhead pipe to a 55-gallon mixing drum containing Scotchgard™ chemicals. This mixture was

pumped to the application machine from where it was applied through spraying to fabrics Vapors from

the machine were then recovered by a solvent/vapor adsorption recovery system This system relied on

dual activated carbon units Steam was introduced, into the system to vaporize solvents captured by the

carbon units Any solvents and vapors remaining were then condensed and separated. The exhaust

from the recovery system was piped through the roof of the plant and emitted into the atmosphere The

treated water was piped to the local sewer system, while the reclaimed TCE was sent to the collector and

then back to one of the storage tanks

L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 1-2

The reclaimed TCE could not be used as solvent-based adhesive since it lacked the necessary additives.

Some of the reclaimed TCE, therefore, was apparently returned to the supplier to be tested and restored

to its original specifications. The use of TCE for the stain repellent process was discontinued in June

1988, when Chromatex switched to a water-based latex adhesive process only.

Three operable units (OUs) have been designated at the Site. Groundwater contamination has been

known to exist at the site since 1987, when regulatory investigation began in response to citizen

complaints regarding the quality of their residential well water. The residential water-supply well

contamination was designated as OU-1 in November 1987

EPA determined that a removal action may be appropriate for soils contaminated with VOCs at a portion

of the Site. As such, surface and subsurface soils were the focus of an engineering evaluation/cost

analysis (EE/CA) report. These soils were designated as OU-2 for the Site. EPA completed a portion of

the removal action earlier this year. OU-3 addresses contaminated groundwater associated with the

Site, as well as the indoor air quality of residences near the Site. While groundwater is not used as a

source of drinking water in the vicinity of the Site, the possibility of VOCs migrating from contaminated

groundwater into residential indoor air is, and remains, a potential concern.

1.2 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS AND RESPONSE ACTIONS

Groundwater contamination at the Site was discovered in October 1987 when sampling of private drinking

water wells revealed the presence of high concentrations of TCE and lower concentrations of other

VOCs, including 1,1,1-tnchloroethane (1,1,1-TCA), 1,1-dichloroethene (1,1-DCE), and cis-1,2-

dichloroethe (cis-1,2-DCE). At the request of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

(PADEP), EPA provided bottled water and carbon filters to residences affected by the TCE

contamination. Further sampling indicated the presence of TCE in 23 residential wells on Deer Run

Road, Bent Pine Road/Trail, and Twin Oaks Road, at concentrations up to 1,400 ug/l, and in the

Chromatex production well at a concentration of 2,200 ug/l. In December 1987, EPA subsequently

funded the installation of public water supply connections to all the houses in the neighborhood where

TCE contamination had been found.

Also in 1987, EPA collected soil gas samples around the Chromatex plant TCE was detected at

concentrations ranging from 0.1 to 12 5 parts per million (ppm), with the highest concentrations along the

rear of the plant EPA also analyzed the air of the emergency overflow underground storage tank (UST),

which revealed a concentration of TCE within the UST at 1,100 ppm This tank served as a collection

point for the floor drains within the plant, and was not associated or connected with the solvent recovery

L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 -)_3

system The tank was drained of approximately 10,000 gallons of wastewater and nine 55-gallon drums

of bottom sludge.

Chromatex reported that the liquid wastewater contained 14,000 parts per billion (ppb) of TCE and lower

levels of other VOCs, that the tank was cleaned after removal of the liquid and sludge, and that the tank

was closed to prevent future use. However, the piping associated with the UST was clogged with latex

material. As a result, all lines to and from the UST were excavated for inspection. The inspection

revealed a break in the feed line to the UST, and that the broken portion of the pipe showed corrosion

and rust. A sample of the solidified latex from near the broken pipe contained TCE in the percent range,

while soil samples detected TCE at concentrations ranging from 50 to 1,800,000 micrograms per kilogram

(ug/kg), with the highest concentration reported for the shallow sample collected beneath the broken pipe.

In March 1988, EPA issued Chromatex an order to perform a groundwater contamination study.

Chromatex installed and sampled 12 monitoring wells at and near the Site TCE was detected at a

concentration of 17,000 micrograms per liter (ug/l) in monitoring well sample MW-11, located at the

northeast corner of the plant, and elevated contaminant levels were also detected in other on-site wells

Between 1989 and 1995, EPA completed several evaluations and inspections of the Chromatex plant.

Additional groundwater samples were collected by EPA in December 2000 TCE was detected in these

samples at levels ranging from 100 to 370 ug/l, while 1,1,1-TCA was found at concentrations ranging from

13 to 26 ug/l.

1.3 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SITE

The Site is located on the western side of West Hazleton, Pennsylvania. The former Chromatex plant is

located on a drainage divide and runoff appears to flow towards the northeast and the southwest. The

majority of surface drainage appears to lead toward the adjoining residential neighborhood, and then to

Black Creek, which is located about 1,250 feet of the property. A well-defined overland flow pathway is

not evident between a drainage ditch along the Chromatex plant and Black Creek itself. Some drainage

probably enters the stormwater management system in the vicinity of the Site In addition, a very small

portion of the surface drainage may flow overland for approximately 1 mile before discharging into

Cranberry Creek south of the Site From this point, Cranberry Creek flows west then northwest before

emptying into Black Creek. There is no clear overland flow pathway between Cranberry Creek and the

Site

The thickness of the soil cover near the Site ranges from less than 8.5 feet to 37 feet. Soils consist

predominantly of sandy-silt, with lesser amounts of sandy-clay and silty-clay. The Chromatex property is

L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 1_4

underlain by cut and fill materials, which are classified not as a soil series, but as a land type blanketed by

undifferentiated soils. Residential and other undisturbed soils are most likely classified as the Pocono

Series, which consists of deep, well-drained, gently sloping to moderately steep gravelly sandy loams

which formed in thick, glacially influenced material derived from sandstone, conglomerate, and shale.

The local bedrock geology consists mainly of fine to course grained sandstones, conglomentic

sandstones, and conglomerate. Minor shale, slate, and coal layers are also present. The color of the

rocks vanes from brown, red-brown to light/dark gray and black. The rocks encountered are consistent

with those described for the Pennsylvaman age Pottsville Group

Fractures were encountered at varying depths in the Rl well borings The fractures were encountered

both at lithologic contacts (bedding plane fractures) and within lithologic units (cross-bedding fractures).

Fractures tended to be more common above and below the finer-grained rocks, such as siltstone, shale,

and sandstone beds. Most fractures were assumed to be bedding plane fractures of horizontal

orientation. The average depth to competent bedrock is about 14 feet below the ground surface. The

general area is underlain by the Pottsville and Mauch Chunk Formations and alluvium. Both formations

are water bearing The water primarily moves through interconnected openings in the rocks that have

occurred as a result of primary (interstitial) or secondary (fractured) porosity.

Some degree of hydraulic connection exists between Pottsville Formation hydrogeologic units underlying

the Site, and they are not distinctly characterized by lithostratigraphic properties The aquifer associated

with the Pottsville Formation acts as a water-table aquifer at the surface and becomes semi-confined at

depth

The Site lies within an apparent recharge area Water-level elevations in paired monitoring wells

generally showed a hydraulic head gradient in the downward direction Rainwater infiltrates soil and rock

beneath the Site and migrates in one of two preferential downgradient directions. Shallow groundwater

flows north-northwest from the north side of the Chromatex plant toward the residential neighborhood and

Black Creek and south-southwest from the south side. The depth to shallow groundwater beneath the

Site ranges from 8 to 20 feet.

Residents and commercial businesses near the Site obtain drinking water supplies from a municipal

authority The nearest municipal water-supply well is located within 2 to 3 miles from the Site The

nearest regularly used well is located along State Route 93. Some residences near the Site that are not

connected to public water may rely on private wells for drinking water. It is also possible that residents

connected to public water may use their wells for non-potable purposes (e g, lawn watering and car

washing).


1.4 NATURE AND EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION

VOCs attributable to Chromatex operations were detected in groundwater, surface soil, and subsurface

soil samples collected at the plant's property The VOCs of concern include TCE, cis- and trans-1,2-DCE,

and 1,1-Dichloroethane (1,1-DCA) While PCE and 1,1,1-TCA have been found in groundwater samples

at the Site, these two VOCs were not detected in soil samples from the Chromatex property.

The presence of TCE, 1,1-DCE, 1,2-DCA, and trans-1,2-DCE in soil gas samples collected at the

Chromatex plant, as well as in soil gas samples taken from nearby residences, indicates that VOC vapors

are affecting a portion of the residential neighborhood. Since historical information does not support the

alleged disposal of hazardous substances in the neighborhood itself, the VOC vapors are probably being

released from the shallow groundwater table in the vicinity of the Site. Alternatively, the VOC vapors

detected in residential soil gas samples may indicate that atmospheric releases of the same VOCs from

the Site, or another source of air contaminants altogether, could have occurred in the past.

The area of the contaminated groundwater plume emanating from the Chromatex property extends about

1,500 feet in a relatively narrow band to the northeast into the residential neighborhood along Bent Pine

Road/Trail, at least as far as Deer Run Road Based on the Rl results, the plume is dominated by

elevated TCE concentrations and lesser levels of 1,1,1-TCA and cis-1,2-DCE,

The width of the plume with TCE concentrations greater than 5 ug/l is about 600 feet. It also extends for

a distance of roughly 500 feet south of the Chromatex property and the apparent groundwater divide.

VOC levels steeply decline in this flow direction. The plume orientation parallels the direction of

groundwater flow and approximates the orientation of the axis of the structural low that underlies the Site

The areal extent of the plume with TCE levels greater than 5 ug/l is about 18 acres The depth of

groundwater VOC contamination may be at least 300 feet below the ground surface.

In addition to groundwater contamination attributable to the Chromatex property, four general areas of soil

contamination were identified at the property based on the Rl soil gas survey results and soil sampling

results The volume of VOC-contammated soils is estimated to be 12,000 tons; however, nearly 90

percent of the TCE and cis-1,2-DCE contaminant mass is within Zone "C"

Both surface and subsurface soils revealed elevated VOC concentrations, including TCE and cis-1,2-

DCE, at four general locations at the Chromatex property. The depth of soil contamination varies

between 3 and 12 feet below the ground surface, depending on the particular zone of concern


Among the soil samples collected at the Chromatex property during the Rl, elevated TCE and cis-1,2-

DCE concentrations were detected more frequently and at higher levels in surface soil. The median TCE

concentration among surface soil samples taken at the plant was 97 ug/kg; the median TCE

concentration among subsurface soil samples was about 16 ug/kg For cis-1,2-DCE, the mean

concentrations for surface and subsurface soils were 154 and 6 ug/kg, respectively. The residential soil

samples did not contain TCE, cis-1,2-DCE, 1,1,1-TCA, or vinyl chloride.

Surface soil samples were collected at depths between 0-2 feet below the surface. TCE and cis-1,2-DCE

were the most frequently detected VOCs in the Chromatex property surface soil samples. The highest

TCE level (2,300L ug/kg) was detected in a surface soil sample along the outside eastern edge of the

plant TCE was contained in more than 80 percent of the Chromatex property surface soil samples. The

highest cis-1,2-DCE concentration (3.900L ug/kg) was contained in a surface soil sample collected

beneath the parking lot to the north of the plant Cis-1,2-DCE was detected in more than 50 percent of

the surface soil samples. With one exception, none of the primary VOCs were detected in residential

surface soil samples.

TCE, acetone, and cis-1,2-DCE were the most frequently detected VOCs among the Chromatex property

subsurface soil samples which were collected at depths between 2-12 feet below the surface. The

highest TCE level (290J ug/kg) was detected in a subsurface soil sample collected inside the plant near

the former front office. TCE was contained in more than 65 percent of the Chromatex property

subsurface soil samples Cis-1,2-DCE was detected in about 25 percent of the subsurface soil samples,

at concentrations up to 22J ug/kg.

Two rounds of groundwater sampling and analysis were conducted. Based on these results, the depth of

groundwater VOC contamination attributable to the Site may be at least 300 feet below ground surface

(bgs) This contamination is related to the interconnection of multiple hthological units beneath the Site,

based on the bedding planes and both vertical and angular fractures that were observed in the boring

logs.

Based on TCE levels in shallow groundwater (generally less than 60 feet bgs), the highest levels of

contamination are north of the groundwater divide and in the immediate vicinity of the Chromatex plant.

The highest TCE detection was 8,800 ug/l in the sample from well MW-11S, located at the northeast

corner of the plant. Sample MW-11S also contained the highest shallow groundwater VOC levels for

1,1,1-TCA (560 ug/l) and cis-1,2-DCE (150 ug/l). TCE levels found in samples from shallow monitoring

wells located south of the divide were an order of magnitude less than concentrations in samples

collected to the north of the divide. In addition, TCE levels appeared to steeply decline in the southern

groundwater flow direction The shallow TCE plume emanating from the plant extends at least as far as


Deer Run Road. The approximate configuration of the 1,1,1-TCA plume in shallow groundwater is

comparable to the TCE plume, although contaminant levels are much lower. Well samples with elevated

1,1,1-TCA detections generally contained elevated TCE and cis-1,2-DCE concentrations.

The highest VOC levels for deeper groundwater (generally greater than 60 feet bgs) are also north of the

divide and near the Chromatex plant The maximum TCE concentration detected was 1,400 ug/l in well

sample MW-11D This sample also had the maximum deeper groundwater levels for 1,1,1-TCE (120

ug/l), cis-1,2-DCE (110 ug/l), and trans-1,2-DCE (046J ug/l) TCE sample concentrations for deeper

wells located south of the divide were two orders of magnitude less than concentrations found in deeper

well samples collected north of the divide The TCE levels for deeper well samples steeply decreased in

the southerly flow direction

Among well clusters not located at the Chromatex property, deeper groundwater samples generally had

higher VOC concentrations than the paired shallow samples This implies that groundwater beneath the

Chromatex property has contaminated deeper water-bearing zones in the residential neighborhood to a

greater degree than the shallower water-bearing zones Similar to the shallow groundwater plume, the

deeper TCE plume extends from the plant to the northeast at least as far as Deer Run Road.

Among the inorganic deeper groundwater results frequently detected metals were aluminum, barium,

calcium, chromium, cobalt, iron, magnesium, manganese, nickel, potassium, sodium, and zinc. Except

for barium, cobalt, and potassium these same inorganics were contained in background samples. The

maximum site-related inorganic levels were generally at least 10 times higher than the maximum

background concentrations Elevated VOC levels in deeper groundwater did not correspond to elevated

inorganic concentrations

The groundwater results indicate that VOC concentrations at the Chromatex property have decreased

since 1987 The VOC results for the Round 2 samples were generally lower than the Round 1

groundwater results The decrease in VOC concentrations for wells at the Chromatex property may be

related to the cessation of manufacturing operations at the plant that involved VOCs, or to limiting the

recharge of the contaminated water-bearing zones at the plant through the placement of asphalt in the

large parking lot north of the plant, or to natural attenuation processes, or to changing groundwater flow

conditions due to the absence of pumping influences from nearby wells (e g , the former production well

and residential drinking water wells)

In contrast, groundwater VOC concentrations within the residential neighborhood have not appreciably

decreased since 1987 This may be related to the presence of sources of VOC contamination at the Site


that continue to leach contaminants to the shallow and deeper aquife'rs at a generally steady rate, and the

slow groundwater travel times for those VOCs that are attributable to the Site

Details of site settings and nature and extent of contamination, collected during Rl, are presented in

Attachment A. The EE/CA report (TtNUS, Jan. 2003), the Rl report (TtNUS, July 2004), and any other

relevant information will be made available for review upon request

It is the intention of this solicitation to procure the services of one subcontractor under a fixed price

subcontract to perform a laboratory bench-scale study (using site groundwater), followed by an m-situ

chemical oxidation (ISCO) pilot-scale test at the Site All m-situ chemical oxidation technologies may be

proposed for consideration.


2.0 OVERVIEW AND OBJECTIVES OF TREATABILITY STUDY

It is anticipated that the treatability study will consist of one bench-scale study (including laboratory

screening) and up to two injection events for the field-scale pilot tests Overview and objectives of the

treatability study are described below.

2.1 BENCH-SCALE STUDY

A bench-scale study for chemical oxidation shall precede any on-site field tests or monitoring. TtNUS will

provide the subcontractor with representative site groundwater samples for a bench-scale study. During

the period of bench-scale study, TtNUS will conduct base-line sampling and analysis of all monitoring

wells that will be used or affected by the treatability study. Also, TtNUS will conduct a pump test on

monitoring wells MW-11S and MW-15S Results of the base-line monitoring and pump test will be

provided to the subcontractor for considerations to be incorporated in the design of pilot-scale tests.

The objectives for the bench-scale study are to evaluate the effectiveness of various oxidation

technologies and to determine the most suitable technology, the proper dosage of oxidant(s), and other

parameters (i.e, residual oxidants, degrading products, remaining contaminants, monitoring

requirements, etc.) for the pilot test The results shall demonstrate a minimum 90% destruction efficiency

for TCE at a design dosage and contact time that will be implemented in the pilot-scale tests

It is anticipated that the bench-scale study, including all laboratory analytical work, will be completed in 3

weeks A bench-scale study report shall be submitted within 2 weeks of completion of the bench-scale

test, and provide description of test procedures, results, conclusions, and any recommendations for the

subsequent pilot-scale tests.

2.2 PILOT-SCALE TESTS

It is anticipated that up to two injections of oxidant(s) will be performed by the subcontractor dunng the pilot-

scale tests to evaluate whether active remediation can effectively address the contaminated groundwater and

to develop information necessary to prepare a design for full-scale treatment Because of the heterogeneous

nature of the bedrock aquifer, the injections will be conducted at monitoring well MW-11S where the most

contaminated portion of the plume exists. Monitoring of the oxidant movement and contaminant destruction

will be conducted at monitoring wells MW-10A, MW-10B, MW-10C, MW-15S, MW-15D, MW-6S, MW-6D,

MW-14S, and MW-14D, in addition to MW-11S and MW-11D The subcontractor shall propose oxidants to

be injected, dosages, injection techniques and procedures (with or without pressure), monitoring, and related

activities in a work plan to be reviewed and approved by TtNUS prior to implementation. The subcontractor


shall be responsible for performing all activities related to oxidant injection and monitoring, except sampling

and analysis of groundwater samples, during the proposed on-site period The subcontractor shall provide

instruments and instructions for TtNUS personnel to carry on field monitoring activities after the subcontractor

demobilizes.

The first injection shall be designed to evaluate whether chemical oxidants can be injected and delivered

effectively into the water-beanng fractures, within the most contaminated portion of the plume The first

injection will provide information in determining whether m-situ chemical oxidation is viable at the site and

provide data to refine the second injection of the pilot-scale test, if necessary, /t is expected that the

monitoring conducted by the subcontractor during and within 2 weeks of the injection event will observe initial

movement of oxidants that reach at least monitoring wells MW-10A, MW-15S, and MW-14S. The design of

the first injection shall result in a minimum of 10% destruction of TCE in the samples collected from

monitoring wells MW-10A, MW-15S, and MW-14S TtNUS will continue monitonng (including the monitonng

wells indicated above and other wells at the discretion of TtNUS) after the subcontractor demobilizes. The

continuous monitoring is intended to discover the influence radius and degrees of the chemical oxidation.

Within 2 weeks of completion of all monitoring and analytical activities for the first injection, the

subcontractor shall submit a preliminary treatability study report addressing the first injection of the pilot-

scale test, including the injection procedures, monitoring results, laboratory data, discussions of findings,

conclusions, recommendations, and any modifications that would be needed to conduct the second

injection event There is no assurance that the second injection event will be conducted. If the second

injection is deemed unnecessary, the subcontractor shall finalize the preliminary treatability study report

with conceptual design and cost information for a full-scale chemical oxidation treatment system and

TtNUS' comments.

If monitoring results of the first injection indicate that chemical oxidation is promising, the subcontractor will

then be authorized by TtNUS to perform the second injection as proposed or with modifications. The second

injection is designed to address larger portions of the contaminant plume to evaluate the potential

effectiveness of chemical oxidation for VOCs in the heterogeneous fractures and bedrock matrix Also, the

second injection shall be scaled up to result in a minimum of 50% destruction of TCE in the samples collected

from shallow monitoring wells (including MW-6S, MW-10A, MW-11S, MW-15S, and MW-14S) and a

minimum of 20% TCE destruction in deeper wells in the monitoring plan (including MW-6D, MW-10B, MW-

10C, MW-11D, MW-14D, and MW-15D) The most important objectives for the second injection of oxidants

are to acquire design and cost information for a full-scale application of the technology in the future It is

anticipated that the subcontractor's field activities for the second injection event will be completed in 4

weeks Similar to the first injection event, TtNUS will continue monitoring of the monitonng well network

after the subcontractor demobilizes and until the chemical oxidation in the site groundwater has reached a

pre-application equilibrium status The subcontractor and TtNUS will maintain a periodic discussion of the


monitoring results, including laboratory data Within 3 weeks of completion of all monitoring and

analytical activities for the second injection, the subcontractor shall submit a treatability study report (draft

version) addressing the first and second injection events, including the procedures and observations

during the pilot-scale tests, all monitoring results and laboratory data, discussions of all findings,

conclusions, recommendations, and design and cost information for a full-scale implementation Also, the

bench-scale test data and all supplemental information shall be summarized in the treatability study

report. The treatability study report shall be submitted in draft within 3 weeks first and finalize it after

receiving TtNUS comments in approximately 2 weeks L


3.0 FURNISHED PROPERTY AND SERVICES

3.1 FURNISHED FACILITIES

The subcontractor is responsible to acquire, operate and maintain the necessary office and laboratory

space and other facilities required for the performance of this contract. Except for non-disturbing sharing

of the on-site trailer and sanitary facility that are controlled and maintained by TtNUS, TtNUS will not

provide additional office space, laboratory, or operational facilities to the subcontractor. All analytical

work needed for the monitoring of bench-scale study and pilot tests as described in Section 2 0 shall be

performed by the subcontractor using PADEP-certified laboratories.

3.2 FURNISHED EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL

TtNUS will provide equipment and personnel to collect the base-line groundwater samples for the bench-

scale study and will deliver the samples to the subcontractor's laboratory. The subcontractor must specify

the quantity of sample required for analysis in their proposal TtNUS will provide equipment and

personnel to collect base-line and follow-up groundwater samples for analyses prior to start-up and upon

completion of the pilot test. The laboratory analysis obtained from the groundwater samples will be used

to determine groundwater conditions prior to the pilot test and upon completion of the pilot test The

subcontractor shall be responsible for disposing of waste waters generated during the bench-scale study

and pilot-scale tests according to all applicable laws and regulations

Utilities specified below will be furnished at no cost to the subcontractor

• Potable water for chemical dilution will be made available at no cost to the subcontractor If required,

potable water will be supplied by a local supplier via 5,000-gallon tank trucks under direct contract

with TtNUS There will be no charge to the subcontractor for the use of the potable water. However,

the equipment needed and the associated costs for storing and mixing in order to perform this task

are the responsibility of the subcontractor (for example pumps, mixers, tanks, piping, generators and

personnel)

Electricity may be made available to the subcontractor However, the bidders must inform TtNUS of

requirements for high voltage (greater than 110 volts) or high consumption equipment and availability and

costs must be considered prior to issuance of subcontract agreement


4.0 PROPOSED WORK PLAN FOR TREATABILITY STUDY

As part of the bid proposals, the bidders are expected to submit a proposed treatability study work plan

for the bench- and pilot-scale tests, including adequate details of chemical oxidation processes, test

procedures, chemical and equipment uses, staffing and scheduling, data management, data quality

assurance, health and safety, residual/waste management, and reporting. The proposed work plan must

contain sufficient details for a bid evaluation and must provide the followings at a minimum:

• Indicate the requirements for site groundwater for the bench- and pilot-scale tests. Describe work

procedures, laboratory analyses, oxidant(s) to be tested, standards and specifications of oxidant(s),

details of chemical reactions anticipated, and reporting of the results and recommendations.

• Identify any additional groundwater data (or other data) needs beyond that provided in this SOW

which the bidders deems necessary prior to conducting the treatability study. TtNUS will provide site

access to collect groundwater samples or other field data. Collection of such data is at the

subcontractor's expense, and shall be reflected in its bid The bidder's Work Plan must specify

whether TtNUS' assistance in on site monitoring and sampling are required.

• Include a separate price for mobilization and demobilization. The subcontractor is responsible for

providing and delivering all necessary equipment, materials, and personnel to the Site to support the

treatability study. After completing the treatability study, the subcontractor is responsible for

demobilizing all of the equipment, materials, and personnel and returning the site to its original state.

The subcontractor will coordinate mobilization and demobilization activities with TtNUS project

manager and/or on-site representative If a second injection is authorized by TtNUS during the first

injection event, a second mobilization and demobilization will not be required and shall be excluded

from charges to TtNUS.

• Document all assumptions, such as the mass of contaminant to be targeted by the pilot test and the

associated aquifer volume to be treated (target area). The Work Plan shall include a detailed

explanation of the injection process. The bid form includes up to two oxidant injection events No

well drilling is expected to be performed by the subcontractor. If new wells or piezometers are

required and agreed upon by TtNUS, well drilling and installation services will be provided by a

licensed well driller, contracted by TtNUS


• Provide the identification, concentration and volume of all chemical species used in the procedure

and how they will be measured and/or verified in the field. The work plan will provide a rationale for

each chemical species used.

• Identify the testing parameters that will be measured and possibly varied (such as injection rate,

number of injections, etc) and provide the rationale for varying these parameters.

• Specify the schedule and method of injection and interval of injection as well as the timing of the

various injections

• Propose monitoring parameters, performance criteria, and analytical methods to document conditions

during the pilot test. In addition, oxidation/reduction potential (ORP) and other field parameters must

be monitored by the subcontractor following injections over a proposed period of on site monitoring.

Some monitoring parameters will be oxidant specific The monitoring plan will be implemented only

after approval of the plan by TtNUS TtNUS will collect baseline and post-test samples for laboratory

analysis (including on site monitoring of ORP and other field parameters)

A

• Present all results obtained from the first oxidant injection, evaluation of the delivery method and

treatment effectiveness, discussions and conclusions, recommendations for terminating or

applications of additional oxidants, and any modifications for the second injection. The subcontractor

is responsible for including the base-line and post-injection groundwater analytical data collected by

TtNUS to evaluate the treatment effectiveness Information developed during the pilot-scale test by

the subcontractor and the analytical results need to be evaluated by the subcontractor shall be

incorporated into a preliminary report within three weeks of receiving the sample results from TtNUS

or the laboratory. Test results should be summarized in tabular or graphical form, if possible.

• The second oxidant injection shall follow written work procedures (as modified) and include type of

oxidant(s) to be used, details of chemical reactions anticipated, and reporting of the results and

recommendations The bidders must also include all assumptions, such as the mass of contaminant

to be targeted by the pilot test, the associated aquifer volume to be treated (target area), existing

wells that will be monitored for performance, testing parameters, schedule, method of injection, and

duration of injections. The need for a second injection will be decided during or after the first oxidant

injection, based on results and other considerations. For cost estimating purposes, the second

injection will include its own mobilization and demobilization charge. The mobilization/demobilization

charges may be deducted if no gap between the fist and second injection events


Within 5 days of execution of a subcontract agreement, the selected subcontractor shall submit a final

treatability study work plan to TtNUS, with greater details of the above elements in the proposed work

plan. No work shall begin until the final work plan has been approved by TtNUS The subcontractor shall

furnish all labor, supervision, materials, equipment, and field or laboratory analytical services as

described Note that sample collection and laboratory analytical services for base-line and during or after

injection will be the responsibility of TtNUS. The subcontractor is responsible for the laboratory analytical

services required for the bench-scale test and during the pilot-scale test, to support its monitoring efforts

as deemed appropriate by TtNUS.

Pertinent soils, geology, hydrogeology, and groundwater information for use in this solicitation are

summarized in Attachment A. Details and other relevant information will be made available for review

upon request.

L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 4.3

5.0 BID EVALUATION

TtNUS will evaluate the bids based on the work requirements presented in this solicitation, including the

following categories-

• Merit and adequacy of the technical approach proposed for the pilot scale study

• Potential effectiveness of the proposed injection/treatment system.

• Bidder qualifications - field experience at comparable sites, suitability of equipment and laboratory,

staff qualifications, etc

• Ability to meet the schedule.

• Client references

• Price

Each of the categories will be evaluated by TtNUS in a scale of 1 to 10. The score for the first 4

categories will be weighted among all bidders using the following guidelines-

Value Description

0 This element is not addressed in technical proposal, or is totally deficient.

2 This element is address but contains significant deficiencies.

5 This element is address but minor clarification is required A final score will be applied

following fact finding discussion with the bidder.

8 The element is good It has some superior features.

10 The element is superior in most features

The final scores are expected to be announced within 1 week from the date of bid closure or clarifications

received


6.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE

Monitoring and analytical services, if required, for the treatability study will be provided by the

subcontractor or by its proposed laboratory TtNUS will review the quality assurance project plan (QAPP)

submitted by the subcontractor and/or its laboratory within 5 days of the issuance of subcontract

agreement. All samples shall be analyzed according to standard EPA methods. The QAPP must also

cover the collection of field parameter samples as well as laboratory samples.

UDOCUMENTS/RAC/RACSMI92/18401 6-1

7.0 DATA MANAGEMENT

The subcontractor and the proposed laboratory will keep detailed logs and records of all testing activities

Testing procedures shall be well documented, using bound notebooks, photographs, etc Back-up copies

of all QC and monitoring data will be made. As an appendix to the bench-scale study report and

preliminary and final treatability study reports, the subcontractor will include copies of all drawings, logs,

records, data and other documents generated during this project This appendix will include, as

appropriate, the following items

• Sample chain of custody forms

• Sample progress record or internal laboratory tracking documents

• Sample preparation logs

• Reagent preparation logs

• Experimental logs for bench-scale study and pilot testing

• Sample submission for analysis

• Raw laboratory data

• Laboratory QC summary sheets (duplicates, spikes, blanks, etc)

• Overall QC summary of laboratory analyses

• Computation sheets

• Data reduction summary

UDOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 7-1

8.0 REPORTING

The subcontractor shall submit written reports to TtNUS at the conclusion of the bench-scale study and

the pilot-scale tests, according to the schedule indicated in previous sections. A report for the bench-

scale study must be received by TtNUS within two weeks of completion of the bench study The

preliminary report for the first injection of the treatabihty study shall be submitted to TtNUS within two

weeks of completion of all monitoring and analytical work by the subcontractor. The subcontractor should

expect TtNUS providing comments and supplemental information (e.g., laboratory data) for the

subcontractor to incorporate into these reports The subcontractor must then finalize the reports within

one week of receiving TtNUS comments or additional materials

Within 3 weeks of completion of all monitoring and analytical activities for the second injection, the

subcontractor shall submit to TtNUS a draft treatability study report addressing the bench-scale study and

the first and second injection events. TtNUS will provide its comments in two weeks. The subcontractor

shall submit the final report within 2 weeks of receiving TtNUS comments and complete with all drawings,

logs, records, data, and other documents The treatability study report will include complete

documentation of the work leading up to and conducted during the entire treatability study The

treatability study report will also present the subcontractor's conclusions and recommendations regarding

the bench-scale study, pilot-scale tests, their future applications at the site, if applicable, and design and

cost information for a full-scale application The design for full-scale chemical oxidation treatment shall

have adequate details that allow a preliminary cost estimate (+/- 20 percent accuracy) for the

construction, operation and maintenance of the treatment system

The subcontractor shall submit an electronic copy and two hard copies of the reports indicated above to

TtNUS


9.0 HEALTH AND SAFETY

No later than 5 days after award of the subcontract and prior to conducting any on-site work, the

subcontractor shall submit to TtNUS a project-specific Health and Safety Plan (HASP) for performance of

the treatability study. The HASP will be reviewed by TtNUS and be the governing document for all

subcontractor's work activities conducted on or off site, including any lower tier vendors or contractors

that the subcontractor may employ for this treatability study. It will be the responsibility of the

subcontractor to ensure that all workers are trained in handling hazardous substances and the use of

strong oxidizers and injection equipment, and enforcing the requirements and policies put forth in the

HASP. TtNUS will provide field oversight and monitoring the subcontractor's performance during the

pilot-scale tests

Subcontractor's personnel are required to have completed the standard 40-hour health and safety training

per 29 CFR 1910.120, as well as the annual 8-hour refresher courses Additionally, the subcontractor

must conduct a one-time site-specific health and safety orientation prior to commencement of on-site

activities All subcontractors' personnel working on site, including lower tier contractor personnel, must

attend the site-specific health and safety orientation All subcontractor personnel are required to obtain

medical approval to work at hazardous waste sites, as well as document their inclusion in a medical

monitoring program Copies of training certification and medical monitoring documentation for all on site

personnel, including lower tier contractor or vendor, shall be provided to TtNUS prior to any site related

activities

L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 g.-|

10.0 MANAGEMENT OF RESIDUALS AND WASTE

The subcontractor will submit to TtNUS a residual/waste management plan (R/WMP) three (3) days after

award of the contract The subcontractor will be responsible for disposal of all residual and/or waste

generated by the bench- and pilot-scale activities, unless other arrangements are made with TtNUS. All

unused or spent reagents provided by the subcontractor shall be removed from the Site at the conclusion

of the treatability study. The subcontractor is responsible for the proper reuse, recycling, or disposal of

these reagents in accordance with applicable federal, state and local laws, rules and regulations Any

surface soils that are stained or contaminated during the treatability study must be removed and replaced

with unstained and uncontammated soils.

L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 -| Q-1

11.0 SCHEDULE

The subcontractor will make every effort to maintain the schedule proposed by the subcontractor and

approved by TtNUS and incorporated into the subcontract prior to the start of work, unless a more

appropriate schedule is agreed to by all parties No work shall be performed prior to approval of the work

plan. All laboratory and field activities associated with this treatability study should be completed within

the approved project duration. As a part of the proposal, the bidders shall prepare a project schedule

chart and submit with the bids. The schedule chart shall identify all major events, intermediate

milestones, and report/document submittals

A preliminary project schedule, based on this SOW, is presented in Table 1. The bidders shall submit

their proposed project schedules based on their tasks to meet the project objectives. A final version of

project schedule shall be prepared and executed with the subcontract agreement


12.0 MANAGEMENT AND STAFFING

The subcontractor will identify its key managerial and technical personnel who will be involved in the

treatability study and provide their qualifications and experience to TtNUS prior to commencement of any

work


13.0 OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS

The subcontractor will be responsible for complying with all applicable federal, state and local regulations

governing the performance of pilot-scale treatability studies on hazardous waste sites and for obtaining,

maintaining and paying for any licenses required to perform this work. In addition, all laws and

regulations governing the transportation of hazardous materials to and from the site will be adhered to at

all times

The bench- and pilot-scale test reports shall be submitted to TtNUS under the respective tasks of the

bench-scale study and pilot-scale tests Any modifications to the proposed work plan and/or cost must be

approved by TtNUS prior to execution. The subcontractor will be paid upon completion of the entire

treatability study Incremental invoicing and payments may be considered with prior arrangements with

TtNUS


14.0 PROPOSALS

Responsive bidders shall prepare their proposals consisting of Technical Volume and Commercial

Volume as described below.

PART 1 - TECHNICAL VOLUME

Each bidder is requested to submit a Technical Volume in a separately bound volume. In order that your

Technical Volume may be evaluated strictly on the merit of the material submitted, no contractual price

information is to be included in the Technical Volume The Technical Volume will contain the following

documents:

(1) The bidder shall submit a proposed treatability study work plan as described in Section 4 0 of this

SOW. In addition to the technical contents, this plan should include the work methodology,

classification of major personnel (site supervisors/foreman and up) who will perform the work and

their qualifications, lower-tier subcontractors, their specialties, responsibilities, rolls, and

qualifications, a list of major equipment and material or their suppliers that are to be used in the

contract, work sequence and schedule, and, demonstration of the bidder's ability to meet the

schedule committed and budget authorized.

(2) Descriptions of relevant projects, with at least three (3) client references for projects similar to the

bidder is proposing. Submittal of confidential reference, i e , those who may not be contacted, is

unacceptable.

Tetra Tech NUS reserves the right, in awarding the subcontract, to give such weight as deemed

proper to the bidder's experience records. The bidder shall submit, with the proposal, certification

of the experience requirements listed below The bidder's proposal shall address the experience

records set forth as follows:

The bidder and his/her lower-tier subcontractor(s) shall have been engaged in work of similar

character to that contemplated hereunder for a period of not less than five years immediately•,

prior to the proposal opening date The bidder and his/her lower-tier subcontractor(s) shall

list the names of at least three typical projects with a detailed description of the work

performed.

The bidder and his/her lower-tier subcontractor(s) shall provide evidence that the

manufacturer(s) for equipment to be used have regularly engaged in manufacture of the

proposed equipment and show satisfactory operation for each installation


(3) The bidder shall certify that he/she owns or has commitments for the use of all necessary

equipment, materials, and manpower necessary to complete the work within the time specified

(4) If the bidder proposes to complete the statement of work requested by the solicitation using the

services of any lower-tier subcontractors, this shall be clearly stated in the offer. The costs of using

any lower-tier subcontractors shall be reflected in the price provided. A Lower-Tier Surety Form

completed by any proposed lower-tier subcontractor, if applicable.

If the bidder is awarded a subcontract, he or she shall impose upon any lower-tier subcontractors

the same requirements that Tetra Tech NUS has imposed upon the bidder. The qualifications,

experience, and equipment and services to be provided by any proposed lower-tier subcontractors

shall be documented with the response to this solicitation. The qualifications of the lower-tier will

also be evaluated to determine the qualifications of the bidder.

PART 2 - COMMERCIAL VOLUME

(1) General. Requirements - this Part consists of the actual monetary offer to enter into a subcontract

to perform the specified and proposed work. It also includes required representations,

certifications, and other statements of the bidder, any other administrative information, and a

summary of exceptions and deviations taken.

(2) Format and Content - this Part shall include the following documents (in the order listed):

(a) Bidder representations, certifications, and other statements of the bidder fully executed;

(b) Additional information to be furnished by the bidder, such as bonds and insurance certificates

(if applicable);

(c) Organizational conflict of interest data (if applicable),

(d) Cost proposal;

(e) Exceptions and Deviations taken to the model subcontract; and

(f) Summary of Exceptions and Deviations taken in other Volumes.

(3) Description -

(a) Bidder representations, certifications and other statements of the bidder

UDOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 14_2

Bidder representations, certifications, and other statement are to be executed fully and a copy

included in each copy of this Part

(b) Additional information to be furnished:

(i) Remittance address If the bidder's remittance address is different from the address

shown elsewhere in the proposal, such address shall be furnished, including Zip Code.

(11) Insurance certificate. As described in subcontract General Conditions 7 and the Sample

Subcontract, Section E.

(iii) The completed Quality Assurance Statement of Understanding

(c) Organizational Conflict of Interest.

Any data to be furnished shall be presented in this section.

(d) Cost Proposal.

(i) General. The Cost Proposal consists of the bidder's estimated cost to perform the work

as set forth in the Statement of Work Since each Cost Proposal will be evaluated to

determine such matters as the reasonableness of cost, and the probable cost to Tetra

Tech NUS, and an understanding of the magnitude of effort, it should be accurate,

complete and well documented. Please note that contractual cost information is not to be

included in the Technical Proposal, Part 1.

(ii) As a minimum, the cost proposal shall contain the completed and signed Price Proposal

Form (Attachment B) Payment for items included in the subcontract shall be as defined

herein and in accordance with the Price Proposal Form. Detailed description of items

and measurement and payment for items on the Price Proposal Form also are given in

Attachment B.

(e) Exceptions and Deviations to the Model Subcontract.

(i) The bidder shall identify and explain any exceptions or deviations taken or conditional

assumptions made with respect to the model contract, bidder representations,

certifications, and other matters included in Part 2 including the reporting requirements

UDOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3M192/18401 14.3

AR100030A

TABLE 1

PRELIMINARY PROJECT SCHEDULE

IN-SITU CHEMICAL OXIDATION TREATABILITY STUDYVALMONT TCE SITE

WEST HAZLETON, LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

ACTIVITY

Request for Proposal [RFP] issued

Bid closing

Execute subcontract

Submit detailed treatability study work plan, HASP, R/WMP,

QAPP, and other administrative documents

Review and finalize work plan and other documents

Issue Notice to Proceed

Perform bench-scale study

Submit bench-scale study report

Mobilize (pilot-scale test)

Perform 1st injection for pilot-scale test

Post-injection monitoring (sampling and analysis)

Prepare and submit preliminary treatability study report

Review and finalize preliminary treatability study report,nd

TAGET DATE

WeekO

WeekS

Week 4

WeekS

Week 5-6

Week6

Week 6-8

Week 9

Week 10

Week 10-11

Week 12-13

Week 13-14

Week 15-16

COMMENT

expected on 10/13/04



Subcontractor

TtNUS/subcontractor

TtNUS

Subcontractor •

Subcontractor

Subcontractor

Subcontractor

TtNUS

Subcontractor

TtNUS/subcontractor

(Note If 2 injection is not needed, the report shall be finalized with conceptual design by week 18 )

Authorization to proceed with Phase 2

Perform 2nd injection for pilot-scale test

Post-injection monitoring (sampling and analysis)

Demobilize

Prepare and submit draft treatability study report

Review draft treatability study report

Finalize and submit treatability study report

Week 16

Week 17-20

Week 21-24

Week 25

Week 25-27

Week 28-29

Week 30-31

TtNUS

Subcontractor

TtNUS

Subcontractor

Subcontractor

TtNUS

Subcontractor


ATTACHMENT A

SOILS, GEOLOGY, HYDROGEOLOGY AND GROUNDWATER INFORMATIONVALMONT TCE SITE

TABLE 2-1SUMMARY OF Rl MONITORING WELL INFORMATION

VALMONT TCE SITEW. HA2LETON, PENNSYLVANIA

WELLFIRST

SCREENEDINTERVAL

SECONDSCREENEDINTERVAL

CLASS COMMENTS

MONITORING WELLSI MW-1A

MW-1BMW-1CMW-2

MW-31 MW-4

MW-5MW-6S / 61

I MW-7S / 71

MW-8S / 8D

I MW-9S

MW-10AMW-10BMW-10C

I MW-10DMW-11SMW-11D

MW-12S/12I

I MW-13SI MW-13I/13D

MW-14S

I MW-141 / 14D I

MW-15S/15D

MW-16SMW-16I/16D

MW-17S/17I

MW-18

MW-19S

MW-191

MW-19D

MW-20SMW-20DMW-21S

MW-21I/21D

36 io 46 feet55 to 80 5 feet90 to 100 feet44 to 54 feet

35 to 45 feet15 5 to 55 feet15 to 45 feet24 to 34 feet

34 to 44 feet

35 to 60 feet

24 to 34 feet

36 to 46 feet65 to 75 feet

104 to 114 feet13 to 15 feet44 to 54 feet




48 to 58 feet


36 to 44 feet



40 to 55 feet78 to 98 feet35 to 50 feet56 to 66 feet

88 to 98 feet

58 to 68 feet

97 to 112 feet

88 to 98 feet

122 to 132 feet

155 to 165 feet

90 to 105 feet

104 to 114 feet

56 to 66 feet

84 to 94 feet

ShallowIntermediate

DeepShallow

Shallow

Shallow,Intermediate

Shallow;Intermediate

Shallow;Deep

Shallow

ShallowIntermediate

DeepShallowShallowDeep

Shallow;Intermediate

ShallowIntermediate;

DeepShallow

Intermediate,Deep

Shallow,Deep

ShallowIntermediate;

DeepShallow,

IntermediateIntermediate

Shallow

IntermediateDeep

ShallowDeep

ShallowIntermediate,

Deep

Pre-RI Monitonng WellPre-RI Monitonng WellPre-RI Monitonng WellPre-RI Monitonng Well;

Background WellPre-RI Monitonng WellNo Longer AvailableNo Longer Available

Reconstructed ResidentialWell



Reconstructed ResidentialWell;

Now AbandonedPre-RI Monitonng WellPre-RI Monitonng WellPre-RI Monitoring WellPre-RI Monitonng WellPre-RI Monitonng Well

Background Wells

Background WellBackground Wells


TABLE 2-1 (continued)SUMMARY OF Rl MONITORING WELL INFORMATION

VALMONT TCE SITEW. HAZLETON, PENNSYLVANIA

IWELL

FIRSTSCREENEDINTERVAL

SECONDSCREENEDINTERVAL

CLASS COMMENTS

MONITORING WELLSMW-22D

MW-23S / 23!

MW-24S/24I

MW-25S / 25!

MW-26S/26I

MW-27

RW-1DL-01

DL-02


34 to 44 feet

36 to 46 feet

24 to 34 feet

Unknownto 131 feetUnknownUnknown

to 250 feetUnknown

to 290 feet

88 to 98 feet

64 to 74 feet

92 to 102 feet

102 to 112 feet

DeepShallow,

IntermediateShallow,

lntermed;ateShallow,

IntermediateShallow,

IntermediateDeep

ShallowDeep

Deep

Former Production Well PW-1

Former GW-98 Well

OTHER WELLSGW-6

GW-9

GW-11GW-20GW-21GW-22GW-23GW-24GW-26GW-28GW-30GW-55GW-70

K-1OW-9

OW-12OW-14OW-15OW-20

Unknownto 92 feet

Unknown to110 feet

36 to 175 feetUnknown


150 to 180 feet40 to 190 feet45 to 135 feet

Unknown70 to 350 feet82 to 92 feet

UnknownUnknownUnknownUnknownUnknown

Jnknown to 28 feetJnknown to 55 feet

Intermediate

Intermediate

IntermediateDeep

Intermediate

ShallowShallowShallowShallowShallow

1

UDOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/17576 2-5

TABLE 4-8

OCCURRENCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF ORGANICS AND INORGANICS IN SHALLOW GROUNDWATER (SUMMER 2003)

VALMONT TCE SITE, HAZLETON, PA

Substance - - ,-"-> ~.~ ' • ' - ' - ' '

1,2-Dichloroethene (trans)1 ,4-DioxaneAcetoneBenzeneCarbon Disulfide

Carbon TetrachlondeChloroform

CHoromethaiYecis-1 ,3-Dichloropropene)ichlorodifluoromethaneMethyl Tertbutyl Ether (MTBE)TetrachloroetheneTnchloroethene

•-"•,, .- ; ; -. Background Data '"' -.*". >'T ','>'.?:'"'"<*-»'Ffeq..

of :

election

0/3

0/0

0/0

0/3

0/3

0/3

0/3

0/2

0/0

0/2

0/3

0/3

1/1

0/2

, .. ,R«n§e>fPosltlw» .*""',-:<f , -Detection "5 -","" "•>Min.-\ "-V , tent;*"! ,

019 J

lean ofMl Data

019

Sampling Round andLocation ot Maximum"

VM-MW21S-01-6/27/200

"t. '.jSM-C- ;̂>, -ISlte-RelatedData '" ,•<,?. •.'*•-- ~. «v,v -.f." --> ' -

*«Cf of :'?-

detection

6/25

5/5

2/7

3/25

3/25

3/25

4/13

3/24

1/2

3/21

2/256/24

16/17

2/14

' '^ Ranjj* ofPosltlve .,'_,-',%,•t- '-r ̂ DMoctlbiicT ""/f^"Mn.'~-- •""•j'vh'''Max.V#f^ •

0 08 J • 1 8

2 2 - 6 3 J37 J - 42 J

0048 J - 01 J0028 J - 019 J

01 J - 018 J

0 037 J - 1 7

007 J - 077 J

064 J

069 J - 36 J

019 J - 02 J

0 062 J - 7 1

012 J - 37000073 J - 0076 J

teanof

All Data

207

465

626

195

195

196

354

0317

044505331 97

231

576

321

''"', - 'V>,; • "' 'f~A'\ -Sampling Round andLocation of Maximum ' >

VM-MW11S-01 -6/24/2003

VM-MW11S-01 -6/24/2003

M-OW 15-01 -7/1 1/2003VM-MW 1 0A-01 -6/24/2003VM-MW09S-01 -7/1 0/2003VM-MW 1 1 S-01 -6/24/2003VM-M W 1 0 A-01 -6/24/2003VM-MW 1 5S-01 -6/24/2003VM-MW 06S-01 -7/2/2003VM-M W 1 5S-01 -6/24/2003VM-MW09S-01 -7/1 0/2003VM-RW01 -01 -6/30/2003VM-MW 11 S-01 -6/24/2003VM-MW 1 4S-01 -6/25/2003

lepresentatlve; ,' - *' ^ ^" ̂Johcflntration

126

6.13

439

125

125

125

238

0417

064

1 29125

134

42100221

Notes

Units are ug/LNumber of sample results excludes rejected data or blank-qualified data Duplicates are consolidated Into one result.Mean of all data includes positive detections and non-detected results Detection limits are divided by twoThe determination of representative concentrations is based on comparison of maximum to the 95 % UCL, which Is presented In a separate table

Frequency ol detection refers to number of times compound was detected among all samples versus total number of samples

Number of samples may vary based on the number of usable results

L/DOCUMENTS/R AC/R AC3/4192/175764-41

TABLE 4-8

OCCURRENCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF ORGANICS AND INORGANICS IN SHALLOW GROUNDWATER (SUMMER 2003)


Substance* y-V",'~~'"' ",,' "">

Perfluorooctanyl Sulfonate (PFOS)Aluminum

Arsenic

Bartum

Beryllium

Cadmium

Calcium

Chromium

Cobalt

Copper

Cyanide

Iron

Lead

Magnesium

anganese

Nickel

Potassium

Silver

Sodium

Vanadium

Zmc

1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene

4-Methylphenol

Benz(a)anthracene

Benzo(a pyrene

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

Benzo(g h ijperyletre

3enzo(k)fluoranlhene

Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate

Fluoranthene

lndeno{1 ,2,3-cd)pyiene

Phenanthrene

Phenol

1 1 2-Trtchloroe1har»e

1 , 1 -Dichloroethane

1,1-Dichloroelhene

Free;.'

of ,

•election

0/0

0/2

0/3

1/3

0/3

0/2

2/2

2/2

1/2

1/2

0/3

1/1

0/2

3/3

3/3

3/3

0/0

1/1

1/1

0/3

0/3

0/3

0/3

0/3

0/3

0/3

0/3

0/3

0/2

0/3

0/3

0/3

0/3

0/3

0/3

0/3

2/3

0/3

0/3

0/3

0/3

- ' - • • fcange of Positive?.. V 'Detection "- " -*Win. . - / • L Mix.

25 J

924 J - 2200 J

1 2 J - 21 J

14 1 J

34 J

244

591 J - 1840 J

20 - 569

32 J - 44 J

1 1 J

3320 J

0068 J - 019 J

JteanofMl Data

75

1560

1 65

196

795

244

1030

41 2

38

1 1

3320

0169

- * ' ' % • ' , • ' „'"Sampling Round andLocation at Maximum* I

/M-MW 1 7S-01 -6/30/2003

I/M-MW17S-01 -6/30/2003

I/M-MW03-01 -6/30/2003

I/M-MW03-01 -6/3072003

\/M-MW21 S-01 -6/27/2003

VM-MW21S-01-6/27/2003

VM-MW 1 7S-01 -6/30/2003

VM-MW03-01 -6/30/2003

VM-MW17S-01-6/30/2003

VM-MW21 S-01 -6/27/2003

VM-MW17S-01-6/30/2003

i/M-MW 1 7S-01 -6/30/200;

< ,, - , ' - - " Site-Related Data ' • '*,•,'. «< '-. •Freq.

of. •election

4/6

2/6

19/25

1/25

21/25

5/24

2/16

23/23

23/25

17/21

9/22

1/25

16/16

3/22

25/25

25/25

20/25

10/10

2/20

16/16

5/25

10/25

1/25

1/25

1/25

1/25

1/25

1/25

1/25

2/25

1/25

1/25

1/25

1/25

19/25

3/25

7/25

7/25

". flange of ̂ Positive,- (;- >•!, ', ̂ 'Detection -Vff IWn '";- ,"• • " Max.,'- • /

013 J - 078

023 J - 077

152 J - 5480

134 J

142 , - 278

034 , - 091 J

1 2 , - 1 5 J

1110 , - 23800

088 . - 906

1 5 J - 40 6 J

41 J - 701

41 J

622 J - 36900

88 J - 181

428 J - 11400

124 J - 775

31 J - 874

788 J - 5880

067 J - 078 J

5390 - 5320038 J - 66 J

296 J - 2010049 J

27

1 2 J

1 8 J

23 J

1 7 J

1 7 J

23 J

37 J - 63

22 J

6 2

17 J

34 J

15

47

0044 J - 290

0 1 1 J • 0 42 J

011 J • 81

025 J - 10

Aeon of

0277

03

806

774

807

211

236

7440

133

14 1

142

496

4750

601

2510

196

171

2300

457

24400

21 1

457

1 96

336

233

235

237

235

2352 36

259

237

2 53

235

2 42

288

247

196

1 98

248

291

10 1

^ ' /"' ' - *" *

Sampling Round and '

M-MWIOA-OI-e^^OOS

M-MW 10A-01 -6/24/2003

'M-MW25S-01-7/10/2003/M-OW 1 5-01 -7/1 1 /2003

/M-MW 1 0A-01 -6/24/2003

/M-M W 26S-01 -7/7/2003/M-MW 095-01 -7/1 0/2003

/M-M W 1 2S-0 1 -6/26/2003

M-MW26S-01 -7/7/2003

(/M-MW26S-01 -7/7/2003

VM-RW01-01-6/30/2003

VM-OW15-01-7/11/2003

VM-MW09S-01 -7/1 0/2003

VM-MW09S-01 -7/1 0/2003

VM-MW26S-01-7/7/2003

VM-MW26S-01 -7/7/2003

VM-MW26S-01 -7/7/2003VM-OW20-01 -7/1 0/2003

VM-MW24I-01 -7/1 0/2003

VM-OW15-01-7/11/2003

VM-MW09S-01 -7/1 0/2003

VM-MW 26S-01 -7/7/2003

VM-MW 1 5S-01 -6/24/2003

VM-MW09S-01-7/1 0/2003

VM-OW 15-01 -7/1 1/2003

VM-OW 1 5-01 -7/1 1 12003

VM-OW 1 5-01-7/1 1/2003

VM-OW1 5-01 -7/1 1 /2003

VM-OW 15-01 -7/1 1/2003

VM-MW 1 3S-01 -6/25/2003

VM-MW19S-01-7/t/2003

VM-OW 1 5-01 -7/1 1 /2003

VM-OW 1 S-01 -7/1 1/2003

VM-OW 1 5-01 -7/1 1/2003

VM-OW 1 5-01 -7/1 1 /2003

VM-MW 09S-01 -7/1 0/2003

" VM-OW15-01-7/1V2003

VM-MW 1 1S-01-6/24/2003

VM-MW 1 0A-01 -6/24/2003

VM-M W 1 0 A-01 -6/24/2003

VM-MW 11 S-01 -6/24/2003

VM-MW 1 0A-01 -6/24/2003

Representative^ i* ; ' .

0731

0721

2380

8 14

125

282

253

13100

208

258274

503

38100

601

3710

413

247

3560589

31600

282

807

125

504

241

24

24

24

2 4

239

287

24

279

2 4

249

374

263

137

125

131137

55 9

S/R AC/H AC3/4192/17576

TABLE 4-9

OCCURRENCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF ORGANICS AND INORGANICS IN INTERMEDIATE/DEEP GROUNDWATER (SUMMER 2003)


I I 00815 IVM-MW18-01-7/8/2003Perfluorooctanyl Sulfonale (PFOS)

UDOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3M192/17576 4-42

TABLE 4-9

OCCURRENCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF ORGANICS AND INORGANICS IN INTERMEDIATE/DEEP GROUNDWATER (SUMMER 2003)VALMONT TCE SITE, HAZLETON, PA

Notes

Units are ug/LNumber of sample results excludes rejected data or blank-qualified data Duplicates are consolidated into one resultMean of all data includes positive detections and non-detected results Detection limits are divided by twoThe determination of representative concentrations is based on comparison of maximum to the 95 % UCL, which is presented in a separate table.Frequency of detection refers to number of times compound was detected among all samples versus total number of samplesNumber of samples may vary based on the number of usable results

UDOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3M192/175784-43

W*Sl \\

BEINGINVESTIGATEDBY PADEPX

LEGEND

25 RESIDENCE

OU-1

OU-2

OU-3

----- DRAINAGE PATHWAY

SITE MAPFILE 4192CP13

MKB PHLVALMONT TCE SITE

HAZLE TOWNSHIP AND WEST HAZLETON BOROUGHLUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA FIGURE NUMBER

FIGURE 1-2

1-4

I

\\• 1

- -X

\\MW-DL02

\

TDGW-? -I (1,300 -„

FEETNORTH)

•MW-DL01

. 1

U/x-m " N

\\ xt \ \«ifl

•\ f •i\> 4n\\l\\ \ \ '

MW-19(3)

GW-98 98 vV\D /\

- ^ ^^^ A,

K-,1D i / :

MW-20(2) « i I// ,/ n <V A/1 •

^ ,DGW-24 7/4>GW-23 ^/

GW-21 ^'-§(2) *//

OW-9

MW-12(2)

OW-12 V-20 • /MVV_13(3)

// •

MW-11(2)

MW-26(2)

i—ALLEGEDPOLYCLEANDISPOSALSITE; PADEP

—PROJECT

MW-2

MW-3MW-21(3)

MW-17(2)

LEGEND

• EXISTING MONITORING WELL(S)

fi MONITORING WELL(S) INSTALLED ORw RECONSTRUCTED DURING Rl

25 RESIDENCE

D RESIDENTIAL WELL

500 1000

SCALE IN FEET

TCTRA TCCHNUS.NC.

MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS

VALMONT TCE SITEHAZLE TOWNSHIP AND WEST HAZLETON BOROUGH

LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

SCALE

AS NOTEDFILE 4192CP30

MKB PHLREV DATE

05/03/04FIGURE NUMBER

FIGURE 2-1

2-3

MONITORING WELL

25 RESIDENCE

— GROUNDWATER DIVIDE(INTERMEDIATE WELLS)

7E7HA TECHNUSv WG

GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTION LOCATIONS



SCALE

AS NOTED

FILE 2192GX04MKB PHL

REV DATE

04/29/04FIGURE NUMBER

FIGURE 3-5

3-15

I

v^ =. O xo-

i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i io o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

(13A31 V3S NV3W 3AOSV 133d) NOI1VA313

CO

I I i I i i i r rr~rTT~ri i i i i I iP P P p O p p O p O O p p p O O p O p O p

(13A31 V3S NV3W 3A08V I33J) NOI1VA313 OM

@f=Q.

CL

to

i-AlA-EGED \PQiLfCLEAN 'DISPOSAL

'

MONITORING WELL

RESIDENCE

_ _ GROUNDWATER DIVIDEx (SHALLOW WELLS)

GROUNDWATER ELEV.—1525— CONTOURS (DASHED

WHERE INFERRED)

(1521 50) ELEVATION MEASUREMENT6/23/03

TCTRA TECHNUS, NC.

GROUNDWATER FLOW MAP(SHALLOW WELLS) (JUL 03)



SCALEAS NOTED

4J92GP06MKB PHL

REV DATE

04/20/04FIGURE 3-6

FIGURE 3-8

3-23

CD |

i'<-c\(^o\r^c

-XX' Xx s

X//~x\/, '"\XN

/ /' \ s•'&,' /^

/1/[.

\ \ \\ \

/^' .-' 'V NXC >;J\- / < ' ~ -^ ^ /'* * •- 'A -•£, V -. \^'/-"> /~ \; y/'x\ i x \

.? / C- K MW-241-.

,_.5/\ 'x-(^1l45l

"^K X'«

-^^}

/ ;-/ />/ / / r,

SCALE IN FEET

LEGEND$ MONITORING WELL

25 RESIDENCE

_ _ GROUNDWATER DIVIDE(SHALLOW WELLS)

GROUNDWATER ELEV.—1525— CONTOURS (DASHED

WHERE INFERRED)

(1521.50) ELEVATION MEASUREMENT6/23/03

TETRA TCCH NUS, WC.

GROUNDWATER FLOW MAP(DEEPER WELLS) (JUL 03)



SCALE

AS NOTED

FILE 4192GP07MKB

REV DATE

04/19/04

FIGURE 2-6FIGURE 3-9

3-24

Volmont_4192\RI REPORT FINAL\4192KT03 dwg 05/U/04 MKB

ALLEGED POLYCLEANDISPOSAL SITE; -

A'DEP PROJECT, '-

MONITORING WELL

RESIDENCE

RESIDENTIAL WELL

NO DETECTS

CONCENTRATION / \^ -^^ / SCALE ,N FEET

|W

HUL

C.L.L. INUMDC.

TCE1,1,1-TCA:iS1.2-DCE

PCE

Ivoc

CONCENTRATIONS

OTE:NITS ARE IN MICROGRAMS PERITER Otg/L).

®TFTRA TECH NU8, NC.

PRIMARY VOC CONCENTRATIONSSHALLOW WELLS (SUMMER 2003)



SCALE

AS NOTEDFILE: 4192KT03

MKB PHLREV DATE

05/U/04FIGURE NUMBER

FIGURE 4-13

4-38

Volmont_4192\RI REPORT FINAL\4192KT04.dwg 05/12/04 MKB

LEGEND

0

25

DND

J

MONITORING WELL

ALLEGED POLYCLEANDISPOSAL SITE;

PADEP PROJECT

RESIDENCE

RESIDENTIAL WELL

NO DETECTS

ESTIMATEDCONCENTRATION

IWELL NUMBER!TCE

1.1.1-TCA;IS1.2-DCB

PCE

VOCCONCENTRATIONS

NOTE:UNITS ARELITER

IN MICROGRAMS PERTETRA TCCH NU8, NCX

PRIMARY VOC CONCENTRATIONSINTERMEDIATE & DEEP WELLS

(SUMMER 2003)VALMONT TCE SITE

HAZLE TOWNSHIP AND WEST HA2LETON BOROUGHLUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

SCALE

AS NOTED

FILE 4192KT04MKB PHL

REV DATE

05/12/04

FIGURE NUMBER

FIGURE 4-14

K VALUE MAY BE BIASED HIGH

VALUE MAY BE BIASED LOW

V^= TCE CONCENTRATION (ug/L)SCALE IN FEET

SCALE

AS NOTEDTCE CONCENTRATIONS INSHALLOW GROUNDWATER


LUZERNE COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA

FILE 4192CP32MKB PHL

REV DATE

05/07/04

FIGURE NUMBER

FIGURE 4-15

4-46

0 04J / c-'MW-26,1 / ,

r-AllEGEd /(?OLYCLEANDISPOSAL /

SCALE IN FEET

LEGENDMONITORING WELL

RESIDENCE

D RESIDENTIAL WELL

ND NO DETECTS

ESTIMATED CONCENTRATION

TCE CONCENTRATION (ug/L)

TETRA TCCHNUS, WC.

TCE CONCENTRATIONSIN DEEPER GROUNDWATER



4-47

SCALE:AS NOTED

FILE 4192CP14MKB PHL

REV DATE

i 05/12/04FIGURE NUMBER

FIGURE 4-16

Volmont_4192\RI REPORT FINAL\4192GX06 dwg 05/14/04 MKB

CHROMATEXPARKING LOT

GROUND SURFACCHROMATEXPARKING LOT

•3.

WATER TABLE(APPROXIMATE)

#1500-1

£1490 —UJ2 1480 —

>01470—Im

1460—1

WELL CLUSTERIDENTIFIER

80

GROUND SURFACE

WATER TABLE

SCREENED INTERVAL

TCE CONCENTRATION 100

D160

HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET

0 40 80

VERTICAL SCALE IN FEET

TETOA TWH NU8, WCX

CROSS SECTION A-A'TCE CONCENTRATIONS

VALMONT TCE SITEHAZLE TOWNSHIP AND HAZLETON BOROUGH


SCALE

AS NOTED

FILE: 4192GX06MKB PHL

REV DATE

05/14/04

FIGURE NUMBER

FIGURE 4-17

4-49

Volmont_4192\RI REPORT FINAL\4192GX07 dwg 05/U/04"MKB

pALL STEEL PARKING LOTALL STEEL BUILDING

GROUND SURFACE -s

CHROMATEXPLANT J2PARKING

TABLE (APPROXIMATE)

JAYCEEDRIVE [201 ' DRIVE

LEGENDWELL CLUSTER

IDENTIFIER

GROUND SURFACE

WATER TABLE

SCREENED INTERVAL

TCE CONCENTRATION (ug/L) •100-

300 600

HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET0 60 120

±VERTICAL SCALE IN FEET

TETRA TECH NUB* NCX

CROSS SECTION B-B'TCE CONCENTRATIONS



ND

SCALEAS NOTED

FILE- 4192GX07MKB PHL

REV DATE05/14/04

FIGURE NUMBERFIGURE 4-18

4-50

Volmont_4192\RI REPORT FINAL\4192GX08 dwg 05/14/04 MKB

225

WATERTABLE

(APPROXIMATE

'00. A.720

500

HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET0 37.5 75

VERTICAL SCALE IN FEET

WELL CLUSTERIDENTIFIER

GROUND SURFACE

WATER TABLE

SCREENED INTERVAL

2 _

LJ

TCE CONCENTRATION(ug/L)

ItTCTRA TECH NU8, NC.

CROSS SECTION C-C'TCE CONCENTRATIONS

VALMONT TCE SITEHAZLE TOWNSHIP AND HAZLETON BOROUGH


4-51

SCALEAS NOTED

FILE 4192GX08MKB PHL

REV DATE

05/U/04FIGURE NUMBER

FIGURE 4-19

Volmont_4192\RI REPORT FINAL\4192GX09.dwg 05/14/04 MKB

WATER

TABLE(APPROXIMATE)

GROUNDSURFACE

51480-4

LU 1480^

§1470—1

Q 1450—I

VERTICAL SCALE IN FEETHORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET

LEGENDWELL CLUSTER IDENTIFIER

GROUND SURFACE

WATER TABLE ^

SCREENED INTERVAL

TCE CONCENTRATION (ug/L)

V

D•100'

TETRA TECH NU& N&

VALMONT TCE SITECROSS SECTION D-D'

TCE CONCENTRATIONSHAZLE TOWNSHIP AND HAZLETON BOROUGH


SCALEAS NOTED

FILE- 4192GX09MKB PHL

REV DATE05/14/04


4-52

4192 Valmont\RI RFPORT FINAL\4192KTt7 dwg 07/07/04 MKO

MW-J9S® ND ^U«fe:-^IL-

MW-20S

woonrn WCA

ND * \ \/0 58K •'/ «

? ̂ mv-6lDi ,x v\\V.-1 / ^ ^\> N

v / ^24S,fr*..•/*•> /

WOW-15ND

M W - 2 6 S ' ,® 0 . 6 8 '

•> xv v% /\ "N -><, /,' X <^ Mv>

^<^

^

/

OW-20 JND '*!

<.4^ :MW\15S_._/ _-_

/ ' n

MW-11S290

i /\ ' I i \' '/4?/A ; NDC/VJ-v/ / \-iM\w_ 9Rc;x

x\_-- -/-/^/-7-W--/f-:V

O »7;

,POLYCLEAN ''DISPlOSAL /"SITE;" --T7PADEP''

S-L .. .V--/ n r«i-'E-r \

/,' \LP'ROJECT \

:< \ «\

US1 4.

ND

/// /

<J ®MW-3 gjMW-21S

wnonED AREA

LEGEND® MONITORING WELL

25 RESIDENCE

D RESIDENTIAL WELL

ND NO DETECTS

J ESTIMATED CONCENTRATION

K VALUE MAY BE BIASED HIGH

L VALUE MAY BE BIASED LOW

1,1,1-TCA CONCENTRATION

300 600

SCALE IN FEET

TbTETRA TECH NU3, NC.

1,1,1-TCA CONCENTRATIONSIN SHALLOW GROUNDWATER


LUZERNE COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA

SCALE

AS NOTED


REV DATE

05/14/04

FIGURE NUMBER

FIGURE 4-21

4-54

SCALE IN FEET


RESIDENCE

RESIDENTIAL WELL

NO DETECTS


VALUE MAY BE BIASED HIGH


1,1,1-TCA CONCENTRATION(ug/L)

7ETRA TECH NUS, NC.

1,1,1-TCA CONCENTRATIONS INDEEPER GROUNDWATER



SCALE

AS NOTED


REV DATE05/14/04

FIGURE NUMBER

FIGURE 4-22

4-55

4192 Volmont\RI REPORT riNAL\4192KT18 dwg 07/OB/04 MKB

' MW-19SNO

BOLYCLEANDISPOSAL

/SITEll

, -A , - , -^A? , ) // ,' r

' , - ' '\ \

300 600

SCALE IN FEET

TETRA TCCH NU8, WC.

CIS-1,2-DCE CONCENTRATIONS INSHALLOW GROUNDWATER



SCALE

AS NOTEDFILE 4192KT18

MKB PHLREV DATE

05/14/04

FIGURE NUMBER

FIGURE 4-23

4-56

NDMW-19JMW-19D

049JMW-16I

2.3MW-12D

0.08J ,MW-1B

NDMW-26I /

0.91 /M W 1 8

' MW-228.7J-


RESIDENCE

RESIDENTIAL WELL

NO DETECTS


VALUE MAY BE BIASED HIGH


-vQO, CIS-1.2-DCE CONCENTRATION

SCALEAS NOTED

TECHNUS, Nd

CIS-1.2-DCE CONCENTRATIONS INDEEPER GROUNDWATER



FILE. 4192KT20MKB PHL

REV DATE

05/14/04


4-57

ATTACHMENT B

PRICE PROPOSAL FORM

PRICE PROPOSAL FORM

IN-SITU CHEMICAL OXIDATION TREATABILITY STUDYVALMONT TCE SITE

WEST HAZLETON, LUZERNE COUNTY1, PENNSYLVANIA

OCTOBER 2004

DESCRIETlO

Mobilization and Demobilization LumpSum

Bench-Scale Study (including laboratoryscreening and bench-scale study report)

LumpSum

Pilot-Scale Test- 1 Injection Event(including the preliminary treatability studyreport)

LumpSum

3a Additional Effort for Report Preparation(finalize the preliminary treatability studyreport in the event that 2nd injection is notneeded)

LumpSum

->ndPilot-Scale Test -2 Injection Event'including final treatability study report)

LumpSum

TOTAL - with 1st Injection Event Only

TOTAL - with 1st and 2nd Injection Events

Exceptions or Assumptions by Bidder:

(use continuing pages if needed)

Name of Company:.

Name of Responsible Person/Title:

Signature, Date

L/DOCUMENTS/RAC/RAC3/4192/18401 B-1

WORK ITEM DESCRIPTION AND MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENTIN-SITU CHEMICAL OXIDATION TREATABILITY STUDY

VALMONT TCE SITEWEST HAZLETON, LU2ERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

OCTOBER 2004

The following describes the various work items and establishes the method of measurement and paymentfor the work items to be performed by the subcontractor.

Work Item 1 Mobilization and Demobilization - This item includes mobilizing and demobilizing allpersonnel, equipment, material, and supplies required to implement all bench- and pilot-scale tests for an in-situ chemical oxidation treatabihty study by the subcontractor. Thisitem includes locating all required equipment, manpower, and materials on- or off-siteprior to the start of the work and removal at completion This item also includes thesubcontractor's cost to finalize and submit the treatabihty study work plan and otherdocuments required in the SOW prior to the issuance of Notice to Proceed. This is alump sum item and includes all activities described in the SOW regarding mobilizationand demobilization. Payment will be made at the completion of the subcontract or %after Notice to Proceed and % at the satisfactory completion of demobilization, as agreedupon between the subcontractor and TtNUS

Work Item 2 Bench-scale Study - This item includes all labor, equipment, material, and suppliesnecessary to perform a bench-scale study (including laboratory screening) for an in-situchemical oxidation treatabihty study by the subcontractor. A bench-scale study reportshall be submitted within 2 weeks of completion of the bench-scale test, as required bythe SOW. This is a lump sum item and includes all activities described in the SOWregarding the bench-scale study. Payment will be made to the subcontractor atsatisfactory completion of the bench-scale study, including the bench-scale study report,as required by SOW

Work Item 3 Pilot-Scale Test - 1st Iniection Event - This item includes all labor, equipment, material,and supplies necessary to perform the 1st injection event by the subcontractor for a pilot-scale test of an in-situ chemical oxidation treatabihty study. A preliminary treatabilitystudy report shall be submitted within 2 weeks of completion of all monitoring andanalytical activities for the first injection, as required by the SOW. This is a lump sumitem and includes all activities described in the SOW regarding the 1st injection event fora pilot-scale test. Payment will be made to the subcontractor at satisfactory completionof the 1st injection event for a pilot-scale test, including the preliminary treatabihty studyreport, as required by SOW. Alternatively, monthly invoicing and payment method, asagreed upon between the subcontractor and TtNUS, may be utilized if sufficientdocumentation is provided by the contractor to substantiate its progress

Work Item 4 Additional Effort for Report Preparation - This item includes all labor, equipment,material, and supplies necessary to finalize the preliminary treatabihty study report(prepared under Work Item 3) in the event that 2nd injection is not needed This reportshall contain conceptual design and cost information for a full-scale chemical oxidationtreatment system and TtNUS' comments, with similar details as the final treatabihty studyreport submitted under Work Item 5. This is a lump sum item and includes all activitiesdescribed in the SOW regarding the preparation of the final treatabihty study reportPayment will be made to the subcontractor at satisfactory completion of the finaltreatabihty study report


VWork Item 5 Pilot-Scale Test - 2nd Imection Event - This item includes all labor, equipment, material,

and supplies necessary to perform the 2nd injection event by the subcontractor for a pilot-scale test of an m-situ chemical oxidation treatability study. A draft treatability studyreport shall be submitted within 3 weeks of completion of all monitoring and analyticalactivities for the 2nd injection, as required by the SOW Also, a final treatability studyreport shall be submitted within 2 weeks of receiving TtNUS comments on the draftreport. This is a lump sum item and includes all activities described in the SOWregarding the 2nd injection event for a pilot-scale test. Payment will be made to thesubcontractor at satisfactory completion of the 2nd injection event for a pilot-scale test,including the draft and final preliminary treatability study reports, as required by SOW.Alternatively, monthly invoicing and payment method, as agreed upon between thesubcontractor and TtNUS, may be utilized if sufficient documentation is provided by thecontractor to substantiate its progress.


tetra tech nus, inc

Documents