INAAP wheelabrator baghouses site 44 report Jan 2005

Description:	The final report for the wheelabrator baghouses site 44 at Indiana Army Ammunition Plant of Phase II RCRA facility investigation prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in January 2005.The United States federal government began acquiring land in Charlestown, Indiana in 1940 to build a smokeless powder ordnance plant to supply the US military during World War II. Indiana Ordnance Works (IOW) Plant 1 and Hoosier Ordnance Plant (HOP) began production in 1941. In 1944, IOW Plant 2 construction began. On 30 Nov 1945 at the end of WWII, the three plants were combined and renamed Indiana Arsenal. Between 1 Nov 1961 and 1 Aug 1963, the plant was designated Indiana Ordnance Plant. After this time, it became Indiana Army Ammunition Plant (INAAP). Production of ordnance continued at the plant until 1992. After that time, the land and facilities were leased to private industry. A large portion of the land became Charlestown State Park. In October 2016, all the land and facilities were officially sold by the government. This item is part of a larger collection of items from INAAP that are kept at Charlestown Library. F I N A L R E P O R TWHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSES– SITE 44INDIANA ARMY AMMUNITION PLANTPHASE II RCRA FACILITY INVESTIGATIONPrepared forU.S. Army Corps of EngineersLouisville DistrictJanuary 2005Prepared by12120 Shamrock Plaza, Suite 300Omaha, Nebraska 68154TABLE OF CONTENTSSection PageQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA iExecutive Summary ...............................................................................................................................ES-1Section 1 Site Location and Description ...........................................................................................1-11.1 Operational History and Waste Characteristics ......................................1-11.2 Previous Investigations..........................................................................1-21.3 Report Organization ..............................................................................1-3Section 2 Field Activities Summary ...................................................................................................2-12.1 Surface and Subsurface Soil Sampling ..................................................2-12.1.1 Soil Borings...............................................................................2-12.1.2 Near Surface Soils .....................................................................2-22.1.3 Sediment....................................................................................2-32.1.4 Sludge .......................................................................................2-32.1.5 Standing Water ..........................................................................2-32.1.6 Confirmatory Samples ...............................................................2-32.2 IDW Disposition ...................................................................................2-4Section 3 Physical Investigation Results ..........................................................................................3-13.1 Topography and Surface Features..........................................................3-13.1.1 Local Surficial Geology.............................................................3-13.1.2 Shallow Hydrogeology ..............................................................3-2Section 4 Data Quality Review and Validation..................................................................................4-14.1 Phase I RI..............................................................................................4-14.2 Phase II RFI ..........................................................................................4-1Section 5 Chemical Investigation Results.........................................................................................5-1Section 6 Contamination Assessment...............................................................................................6-16.1 Near Surface Soils and Sediments .........................................................6-16.1.1 VOCs ........................................................................................6-16.1.2 SVOCs ......................................................................................6-16.1.3 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons – Diesel Fraction.......................6-16.1.4 Metals........................................................................................6-26.2 Subsurface Soils ....................................................................................6-26.2.1 VOCs ........................................................................................6-26.2.2 SVOCs ......................................................................................6-26.2.3 Metals........................................................................................6-36.3 Sludge ...................................................................................................6-36.3.1 VOCs ........................................................................................6-36.3.2 SVOCs ......................................................................................6-36.3.3 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons – Diesel Fraction.......................6-36.3.4 Metals........................................................................................6-46.4 Standing Water......................................................................................6-4TABLE OF CONTENTSSection PageQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA ii6.4.1 VOCs ........................................................................................6-46.4.2 SVOCs ......................................................................................6-46.4.3 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons – Diesel Fraction.......................6-46.4.4 Metals........................................................................................6-56.5 Overall Assessment ...............................................................................6-5Section 7 Human Health Risk Evaluation..........................................................................................7-17.1 Introduction...........................................................................................7-17.1.1 Purpose......................................................................................7-17.2 Risk Screening Process..........................................................................7-17.2.1 Identification of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPCs) ........7-17.3 Exposure Point Concentrations..............................................................7-27.3.1 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) .........................................7-37.4 Qualitative Assessment of Exposure to Aluminum ................................7-47.5 Qualitative Assessment of Exposure to Manganese ...............................7-47.6 Qualitative Assessment of Exposure to TPH – Diesel Fraction ..............7-4Section 8 Ecological Risk Evaluation ................................................................................................8-18.1 Introduction...........................................................................................8-18.2 Purpose and Scope ................................................................................8-18.3 Overview of Ecological Evaluation Process...........................................8-28.4 Potentially Affected Habitats.................................................................8-2Section 9 Summary and Recommendations.....................................................................................9-19.1 Summary...............................................................................................9-19.1.1 Physical Characteristics .............................................................9-19.1.2 Contamination Assessment ........................................................9-19.1.2.1 Near Surface Soils and Sediments ...............................9-29.1.2.2 Subsurface Soils ..........................................................9-29.1.2.3 Sludge .........................................................................9-29.1.2.4 Standing Water............................................................9-29.1.2.5 Overall Assessment .....................................................9-39.1.3 Human Health Risk Evaluation..................................................9-39.1.4 Ecological Risk Evaluation........................................................9-49.2 Recommendations .................................................................................9-4Section 10 References.........................................................................................................................10-1TABLE OF CONTENTSList of TablesQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA iiiTable 2-1 Summary of Phase I RI Samples for Chemical AnalysisTable 2-2 Summary of Phase II RFI Samples for Chemical AnalysisTable 5-1 Summary of Chemicals Detected in Surface Soil, Subsurface Soil, andSediment SamplesTable 5-2 Summary of Chemicals Detected in Sludge SamplesTable 5-3 Summary of Chemicals Detected in Surface Water SamplesTable 7-1 Comparison of Total Soil and Sediment Concentrations (All Depths) toScreening LevelsTable 7-2 Comparison of Surface Soil and Sediment Concentrations to ScreeningLevelsTable 7-3 Total Soil and Sediment Exposure Point ConcentrationsTable 7-4 Surface Soil and Sediment Exposure Point ConcentrationsTABLE OF CONTENTSList of FiguresQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA ivFigure 1-1 Site Location MapFigure 1-2 Surface Features MapFigure 2-1 General Sample Location MapFigure 2-2 UST Area Sample Location MapFigure 6-1 Concentrations of Chemicals in Soils and Sediments (General)Figure 6-2 Concentrations of Chemicals in Soils, Sludge and Standing Water(UST Area)Figure 9-1 Human Health COPCs Detected in Soils and SedimentsTABLE OF CONTENTSList of AppendicesQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA vAppendix A Data Quality Review and ValidationAppendix B Human Health Risk Statistics and CalculationsAppendix C Boring and Trench LogsAppendix D Sample Collection Field SheetsAppendix E Summary of Analytical DataAppendix F Analytical Results from UST Excavation Confirmatory Sampling (CAPEEnvironmental Management, Inc.)Note: Information contained in the Appendices is included in CD-ROM format. The CD-ROMmay be found at the back of this binder.TABLE OF CONTENTSList of AcronymsQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA viACHe AcetylcholinesteraseADI Acceptable Daily IntakeADNTs Amino-dinitrotoluenesATP Adenosine TriphosphateAE Assessment EndpointAEC U.S. Army Environmental CenterAET Apparent Effect LevelsALAD Alpha-aminolevulinic Acid DehydrogeuaseAPCB Jefferson County Air Pollution Control BoardAQUIRE Aquatic Information Retrieval SystemAST Aboveground Storage TankASTER Assessment Tools for the Evaluation of RiskATSDR Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registrybgs Below Ground SurfaceBA BioavailabilityBCFs Bioconcentration FactorsBRAC Base Re-Alignment and ClosureBSAFs Biota-Sediment Accumulation FactorsBTFs Biota Transfer FactorsBW Body WeightCERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and LiabilityActCDI Chronic Daily IntakeCLP Contract Laboratory ProgramCMS Corrective Measures StudyCOC Chemicals of ConcernCOI Chemical of InterestCOPC Chemicals of Potential ConcernCOPEC Chemicals of Potential Ecological ConcernCRDL Contract Required Detection LimitCRQL Contract Required Quantitation LimitsCSP Charlestown State ParkTABLE OF CONTENTSList of AcronymsQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA viiCTE Central Tendency ExposureCTV Critical Toxicity ValueDAF Dilution Attenuation FactorDBT Dibutyl phthalateDDD p,p’-DichlorodiphenyldichloroethaneDDE p,p’-DichlorodiphenyldichloroethyleneDDT p,p’-DichlorodiphenyltrichloroethaneDERP Defense Environmental Restoration Program2,4-DNT 2,4-dinitrotoluene2,6-DNT 2,6-dinitrotolueneDNA Deoxyribonucleic acidDOD Department of DefenseDQO Data Quality ObjectivesDS Direct Push SoilDW Direct Push WaterEECs Environmental Exposure ConcentrationsEEQ Environment Exposure QuotientEM ElectromagneticEPA U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyEPC Exposure Point ConcentrationEQP Equilibrium-PartitioningERA Ecological Risk AssessmentERAGS Ecological Risk Assessment Guidance for SuperfundERL Effects – Range - LowERM Effects – Range – MediumERT Emergency Response TeamESV Ecological Screening ValueFSP Field Sampling PlanGABA Gamma-aminobutyric AcidGOCO Government-Owned, Contractor-Operatedgpm gallons per minuteGPR Ground Penetrating RadarTABLE OF CONTENTSList of AcronymsQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA viiiHDPE High-Density PolyethyleneHEAST Health Effects Assessment Summary TablesHHRA Human Health Risk AssessmentHI Hazard IndexHLSC Human Life Cycle Safe ConcentrationHMW High Molecular WeightHQ Hazard QuotientHSA Hollow-Stem AugerHSDB Hazardous Substance DatabaseICI ICI Americas, Inc.ID Inner DiameterIDEM Indiana Department of Environmental ManagementIDL Instrument Detection LimitIDNR Indiana Department Natural ResourcesIDW investigation-derived wastesIEUBK Integrated Exposure Uptake BiokineticINAAP Indiana Army Ammunition PlantIRIS Integrated Risk Information SystemIWPCB Indiana Water Pollution Control BoardIWQC Indiana Water Quality CriteriaJ/UJ Qualified Estimatedkg KilogramL/day Liter per dayLD50 Lethal dose 50LDlo Lowest Lethal DoseLMW Low Molecular WeightLOAEL Lowest to Observed Adverse Effects LevelLOEC Lowest Observation Effect concentrationsLOQ Limits of QuantitationMATC Maximum Acceptable Toxicant ConcentrationMCL Maximum Contaminant LevelME Measurement EndpointTABLE OF CONTENTSList of AcronymsQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA ixmg/day Milligrams Per Daymg/kg Milligram Per Kilogrammg/m3 Milligram Per Cubic MetermL MilliliterMSDS Material Safety Data SheetsMS/MSD Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike DuplicateMSL Mean Sea LevelMW Monitoring WellNCEA National Center for Environmental AssessmentNOAEL No Observable Adverse Effects LevelNOD Notice of DeficiencyNPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination SystemOD outside diameterORNL Oak Ridge National LaboratoryP&E Propellants and ExplosivesPA Preliminary AssessmentPAH Polynuclear Aromatic HydrocarbonPCB Polychlorinated BiphenylPEL Probable – Effects – LevelPPE Personal Protective Equipmentppm Parts Per MillionPRG Preliminary Remediation GoalsPVC Polyvinyl ChlorideQA Quality AssuranceQAPP Quality Assurance Project PlanQC Quality ControlQSAR Quantitative Structure Activity Relationships“R” RejectedRAGS Risk Assessment Guidance for SuperfundRBC Risk-Based ConcentrationRCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery ActRDA Recommended Daily AllowanceTABLE OF CONTENTSList of AcronymsQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA xRfD Reference DoseRFD-I Reference Inhalation DoseRFI RCRA Facility InvestigationRI Remedial InvestigationRISC Risk Integrated System of ClosureRME Recommended Maximum ExposureRNA Ribonucleic acidROC Receptor of ConcernSAP Sampling and Analysis PlanSARA Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization ActSB Soil BoringSCEM Site Conceptual Exposure ModelSCFS Sample Collection Field SheetsSD SedimentSERA Screening-Level Ecological Risk AssessmentSF-SH Slope Factor-Sulfhydryl ligandsSOP Standard Operating ProcedureSP SpringSS Shallow SoilSVOC Semivolatile Organic CompoundSW Standing WaterSWQC Surface Water Quality CriteriaTAL Target Analyte ListTCL Target Compound ListTCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching ProcedureTDS Total Dissolved SolidsTEL Threshold – Effects – LevelTNT TrinitrotouleneToxNet Toxicity Data NetworkTPH Total Petroleum HydrocarbonsTRV Toxicity Reference ValueTSS Total Suspended SolidsTABLE OF CONTENTSList of AcronymsQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA xi“U” Qualified Nondetectμg/kg Microgram Per Kilogramμg/L Microgram Per Literμg/m3 Microgram Per Cubic MeterUCL Upper Confidence LimitURSGWC URS Greiner Woodward ClydeUSACE U.S. Army Corps of EngineersUSATHAMA U.S. Army Toxic and Hazardous Materials AgencyUSCS Unified Soil Classification SystemUSDA U.S. Department of AgricultureUSEPA U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyUSGS U.S. Geologic SurveyUTL Upper Tolerance LimitVOC Volatile Organic CompoundW-C Woodward-ClydeExecutive Summary Wheelabrator Baghouses, Site 44Q:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA ES-1The following summarizes the results of the Phase II RCRA Facility Investigation (RFI)completed at the Wheelabrator Baghouses (Site 44) at the Indiana Army Ammunition Plant(INAAP). The report also summarizes the results of the previously completed Phase I RemedialInvestigation (RI).INAAP currently encompasses approximately 9,790 acres in south-central Clark County,Indiana. Its southern boundary is approximately 6 miles north of Jeffersonville, Indiana and 10miles from the Louisville, Kentucky metropolitan area, which lies to the south across the OhioRiver. INAAP is an inactive military industrial installation. The Army intends to transfer theproperty to the Local Reuse Authority for commercial development or to the State of Indiana forinclusion in the state park system. The Wheelabrator Baghouses site is one of 90 sites identifiedat INAAP.The Plant was originally constructed as three separate facilities: The Indiana Ordnance WorksPlant 1, the Hoosier Ordnance Plant, and the Indiana Works Plant 2. The three facilities wereconsolidated into the Indiana Arsenal in 1945. The Indiana Arsenal was redesignated as theIndiana Ordnance Plant in 1961; in August 1963, it was redesignated again as the Indiana ArmyAmmunition Plant.Topography at the INAAP can be described as a middle-aged karst topography. Karsttopography is produced by the dissolution of limestone, gypsum, or other readily soluble rocks,commonly along joints, fractures, bedding planes, or other such features. The dissolutionprocess results in the formation of sinkholes, caves, and underground drainage. Numeroussinkholes and springs are found throughout much of INAAP.Approximately 96 percent of INAAP’s land surface drains directly into the Ohio River via sevendrainage basins. The remaining 4 percent reaches the Ohio River indirectly through the PheasantRun basin.Groundwater at INAAP is present in the bedrock formations of the upland areas and in theterrace/floodplain sand and gravel deposits located within the Ohio River valley. Thegroundwater present in the floodplain aquifer along the Ohio River is a major water supplysource. Groundwater is not usually found in the thin soil layer covering the bedrock surface inthe upland areas. When present, shallow groundwater typically mingles with surface water byflowing in and out of karst features.The Wheelabrator Baghouses (Site 44) occupies approximately 3.2 acres in the southwesterncorner of Indiana Army Ammunition Plant (INAAP) and is associated with Building 2525,which is located within the 1500 Area Shops (Site 80). Building 2525 measures approximately400 feet by 70 feet. The building was constructed in 1954 and was used for propelling chargecontainer renovation until late in 1993. The building has metal, insulated walls and a metal roof.The floor is made of concrete with no interior floor drains. The wheelabrator inside Building2525 was used to gritblast paint and rust from used artillery charge cans. Dust from the blastingoperation was collected in the wheelabrator baghouses located on the south side of the building.The baghouses consist of particulate discharge equipment and a hopper. This area beneath thebaghouses is stained with a dark residue. A UST was located west of Building 2525, to thenorthwest of a dock associated with this building. This UST was removed in 2004.Executive Summary Wheelabrator Baghouses, Site 44Q:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA ES-2The surface at the site is grass- and weed-covered and relatively flat. Railroad tracks and adrainage swale border the site to the northeast, and an asphalt road runs along the southwest sideof the building with gravel parking areas at the northwest and southeast ends. Surface waterdrains toward the road on the southwest side of the building. Surface drainage on the other threesides of the building flows to the drainage swale to the northeast of the building. The northernportion of this ditch flows to the northwest into a storm water drain. The rest of the ditch flowsto the southeast, eventually emptying into the Central Branch of Lentzier Creek.The typical subsurface profile from the ground surface to a maximum drilled depth of 11.0 feetincludes 0 to 3.0 feet of gravel (fill), followed by silty clay (residuum) ranging from 1.0 to 11.0feet below ground surface (bgs), and finally limestone (bedrock) at 1.2 to 11.0 feet bgs. Waterwas encountered at seven of the 13 boring locations and at several of the near surface soilsampling locations. This water is likely perched groundwater that is not representative of thelocal water table.The Phase I and II investigations at the Wheelabrator Baghouses included the completion of 15soil borings, the collection and analysis of 22 near surface soil samples, 15 subsurface soilsamples, three sediment samples, two sludge samples, and one standing water sample. Chemicalanalysis included volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semivolatile organic compounds(SVOCs), metals, and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH). A contamination assessment wascompleted for near surface soil, subsurface soil, sediment, sludge, and standing water. Lowlevels of nine VOCs were identified in soils throughout the site, and two VOCs were present insubsurface soil at elevated concentrations; however, these elevated concentrations wereassociated with Borings 44SB01 and 44SB02 (2004), located in the vicinity of the UST, whichwas subsequently removed. Low levels of 20 SVOCs, of which 12 are PAHs, were identified insoils throughout the site, and three SVOCs were present in subsurface soil at elevatedconcentrations; however, these elevated concentrations were also associated with Borings44SB01 and 44SB02 (2004), located in the vicinity of the UST, which was subsequentlyremoved. Relatively low levels of TPH – diesel were encountered in two of eight near surfacesoil and sediment samples. Sixteen metals exceeded background levels in site soils by factorsranging from 1.1 to 12.5 times background values; most metals that exceeded background levelsoccurred in samples collected from the middle or deeper depth intervals of the soil borings.VOCs, SVOCs, TPH – diesel fraction, and metals were identified in two sludge samples and astanding water sample collected from the UST and an associated sump; however, because theUST was subsequently removed these identified chemicals are no longer relevant in the contextof a risk screen.All confirmatory sampling results from the UST excavation did not warrant any additionalconsideration following the first two human health risk screening steps (i.e., comparison to site-specificbackground levels and to IDEM RISC Industrial Default Closure Level 1 risk screeningvalues). In addition, the samples associated with the UST (i.e., those from borings 44SB01 and44SB02 collected in 2004, TASD01, and SUSW/SD01) were not included in the risk screenbecause the soil, tank and sump associated with these samples have been removed from the site.A human health risk screen was performed on all contaminants found in surface soils and totalsoils that remain on site at the Wheelabrator Baghouses. The UCLs for arsenic and manganesein both surface and total soils exceeded the respective IDEM Industrial Closure Level 2 riskscreening/background values. However, the estimated excess cancer risk for arsenic fell withinExecutive Summary Wheelabrator Baghouses, Site 44Q:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA ES-3USEPA’s target risk range of 1 x 10-6 to 1 x 10-4, and qualitative assessments of aluminum andmanganese determined that neither is a site contaminant. A qualitative assessment of TPH –diesel fraction found that there is no significant potential human health risks associated with therelatively low concentrations of this parameter at the site. Based on the results of the humanhealth risk evaluation, no further action for human health concerns is warranted at Site 44.It was concluded, based on the lack of any significant exploitable habitat within the site, that nounacceptable ecological risks are present and that no further action for ecological concerns iswarranted at Site 44.Data of sufficient quality and quantity has been collected to characterize the WheelabratorBaghouses (Site 44). Physical and chemical investigation results were used to evaluate potentialhuman health and ecological risks at the site. Based on the results of these evaluations, and thefact that the UST has been removed, no further action (NFA) is recommended for Site 44.SECTIONONE IntroductionQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 1-1The Wheelabrator Baghouses (Site 44) occupies approximately 3.2 acres in the southwesterncorner of Indiana Army Ammunition Plant(INAAP). This site is associated withBuilding 2525, which is located within the1500 Area Shops (Site 80), northeast of theinert storage area, just east of Highway 62(see Figure 1-1).Building 2525 measures approximately 400feet by 70 feet (see Figure 1-2). The buildingwas constructed in 1954 and was used forpropelling charge container renovation untillate in 1993. The building has metal,insulated walls and a metal roof. The floor ismade of concrete with no interior floordrains. Although a previous report (ASI1994) states that there were no secondary containment features, containment dikes in thehazardous materials storeroom were confirmed during a December 1994 site reconnaissance.The wheelabrator inside Building 2525 was used to gritblast paint and rust from used artillerycharge cans. Dust from the blasting operation was collected in the wheelabrator baghouseslocated on the south side of the building. The baghouses consist of particulate dischargeequipment and a hopper. The baghouses filter the dust from circulated air. The baghouses aresituated outside Building 2525 over gravel-covered area. This area beneath the baghouses isstained with a dark residue. Surface drainage flows toward the asphalt-paved street to the south.Empty containers for shipping and storing charges were stored on pallets outside the building onthe south and east sides, both before and after renovation. The building is no longer used forcontainer renovation.An underground storage tank (UST) was located west of Building 2525, to the northwest of adock associated with this building (see Figure 1-3). A sump and a 6-inch steel access pipeassociated with this UST were observed at the surface. This UST was removed in 2004.1.1 OPERATIONAL HISTORY AND WASTE CHARACTERISTICSContainer renovation took place inside Building 2525, and the process entailed reshaping,stripping, and painting containers. Containers were moved through the building via an overheadconveyor system and renovated through the following steps: reshaping, grit blasting in thewheelabrator to remove existing paint, pretreatment with metal primer in the primer tank,painting in the 75-gallon paint bath, and container labeling at a stencil machine (ICI 1979).Raw materials used in the container renovation process were primarily combustible liquids(paint, primers, solvent, and isopropyl alcohol), phosphoric acid, and trichloroethane stored in55-gallon drums. Additional materials included miscellaneous cans of glue, silicone spray, andpesticide sprays (ENSR 1992). When not in use on the production lines, these materials wereSECTIONONE IntroductionQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 1-2stored in the diked, hazardous materials storeroom. The building also had a flammable materialsstorage cabinet, which was observed to contain miscellaneous spray cans of paints, adhesives,and lubricants during the December 1994 site visit. Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) werereviewed for the following products used in Building 2525:· Pretreatment primer wash (acid-alcohol compound)· Pretreatment coating compound· PaintsWaste paint, solvent, and grit blasting residues were transferred to Building 714-18 (Site 7) fortemporary storage. Grit residues were determined to be nonhazardous by EP toxicity testing andwere sent to an off-site landfill for disposal (ASI 1994). A private contractor removed the dustfrom the baghouses for off-site disposal.Although the most recent type of paint residues produced at this facility were considerednonhazardous waste, the types of paints used in the past may have contained metals such as leador cadmium. Paint residues were observed on the ground during site reconnaissance.During INAAP period of operation, one fuel release was reported at Building 2525. OnSeptember 12, 1974, a furnace fuel supply line ruptured releasing approximately 5,000 gallons offuel oil. The release covered a large area of the building floor and also ran beneath the building.Some of this fuel oil flowed into a ditch located across the railroad tracks to the north of the siteand some entered the 12-inch storm sewer at the corner of the building. This sewer drains intoan open ditch, then enters a sinkhole before surfacing near the Administration Patrol Road at theorigin of Lentzier Creek. Approximately 1,000 gallons of fuel oil were recovered from the ditch.Oil-absorbent material was used to prevent oil from reaching the creek. A hay bale “dam” wasconstructed upgradient of the sinkhole, and oil-absorbent material was spread over the water’ssurface upstream from the hay bales. At the conclusion of recovery efforts, the oil-contaminatedsoil was removed and the storm sewer was flushed out. It is not known whether the supply linethat ruptured was related to the UST.On February 5, 1991, approximately 25 gallons of phosphoric acid and isopropanol (thepretreatment primer wash) spilled on the floor of the hazardous materials storeroom. Absorbentmaterial was used to recover the mixture. The absorbent was collected, containerized, anddisposed of properly.1.2 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONSDames & Moore completed a Contamination Survey within the drainage ditches that surroundthe site in 1984 (D&M 1984). However, the analytical methods used are now obsolete,rendering the analytical data collected during this survey incomparable to the data collectedfollowing current standards, during the Phase I RI and the Phase II RFI. Therefore, this data wasnot used.Woodward-Clyde (W-C) completed a Phase I RI at this site in 1997 (W-C 1998).SECTIONONE IntroductionQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 1-3The initial Phase II RFI fieldwork was completed in May 2003.In December 2003, collocated standing water and sludge samples were collected from the sumpassociated with the UST, as part of the follow-up Phase II RFI activities. A sediment samplewas also collected from the bottom of the UST via the 6-inch steel access pipe.In March 2004, again as part of the follow-up Phase II RFI activities, the UST was probed viathe 6-inch steel access pipe in order to determine the tank’s diameter, and the top of the UST waslocated using a narrow-diameter hand probe to determine the tank’s approximate outline. Thisinformation was used to position two borings, which were completed to determine whether or theUST had leaked.The UST was removed in July 2004, and confirmatory soil samples were collected from theresultant excavation by CAPE Environmental Management, Inc. (CAPE). These samples werecompleted to demonstrate that any contamination associated with the UST had been removedfrom the site.For additional information regarding the previous investigations completed at INAAP, refer toSection 3 of the Sitewide Work Plan (URSGWC 2000a).1.3 REPORT ORGANIZATIONThis report compiles the Phase I RI report (W-C 1998) with the results of the Phase II RFI (URS2003). The remaining portion of this report is organized as follows:· Section 2 – Field Activities Summary· Section 3 – Physical Investigation Results: reviews site topography, local surficial geology,and shallow hydrogeology· Section 4 – Data Quality Review and Validation: summarizes the results of the 100 percentquality control (QC) review and the ten percent full validation· Section 5 – Chemical Investigation Results: identifies the chemical analyses and fieldduplicate samples collected; summarizes the sample detections by sample identificationnumber and matrix type in tabular form· Section 6 – Contamination Assessment: presents an evaluation, both in text and on figures,of chemicals present at the site in elevated concentrations by matrix and chemical group· Section 7 – Human Health Risk Evaluation: examines the chemicals present in variousmatrices at the site to determine if they pose a threat to human health· Section 8 – Ecological Health Risk Evaluation: a true ecological risk evaluation could not becompleted for the site because the area lacks exploitable habitat· Section 9 – Summary and Recommendations· Section 10 – ReferencesFor additional information regarding the rational for and the objectives of the Phase II RFI, referto the Sitewide Work Plan (URSGWC 2000a) and the Field Sampling Plan (URS 2003).SECTIONTWO Field Activities SummaryQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 2-1Field activities for the Wheelabrator Baghouses site included surface and subsurface soil, sludge,and standing water sampling. The locations of the sampling points are shown on Figures 2-1 and2-2. Sample location, identification, depth, matrix, and chemical analyses are presented in Table2-1 for samples collected in 1997, and in Table 2-2 for samples collected in 2003 and 2004. Allfield activities were completed in accordance with applicable Standard Operating Procedures(SOPs) (W-C 1998, URSGWC 2000b, URS 2003). Any deviations from the SOPs are noted onthe Sample Collection Field Sheets (SCFS), provided in Appendix D.In addition, confirmatory soil samples were collected by CAPE in July 2004 following removalof the UST. These samples were analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs, and metals. The analytical resultsfrom these samples are presented in Appendix F.2.1 SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE SOIL SAMPLING2.1.1 Soil BoringsFifteen soil borings were advanced in areas of suspected contamination as part of the Phase I RIand Phase II RFI based on historical information, site reconnaissance and topography. Duringthe Phase I RI, two soil borings (44SB01 and 44SB02 [1997]) were drilled using hollow stemaugers (4 ¼-inch inner diameter, 8-inch outer diameter) and a 3-inch diameter stainless steel splitspoon. Each soil boring reached a maximum depth of 5.5 feet below ground surface (bgs). Forthe Phase II RFI, 13 soil borings (44DS01 through 44DS06, 44SB01 and 44SB02 [2004], and78DS01 through 78DS05) were completed using a direct push system with 5-foot long macro-coresamplers and 1.75-inch diameter polyvinyl chloride (PVC) liners. The maximum depthsranged from approximately 1.2 to 11 feet bgs. These borings were completed at the followinglocations (see Figures 2-1 and 2-2):· 44SB01 (1997) – Near the southern corner of a large hopper located on the southwest side ofBuilding 2525· 44SB02 (1997) – Next to a particulate discharge system that emptied into a 55-gallon drumsetting on a small concrete pad, approximately 25 feet east of Boring 44SB01· 44SB01 (2004) – Near the southwest corner of the UST· 44SB02 (2004) – Near the northeast corner of the UST· 44DS01 – Between the hopper located southwest of Building 2525 and the dock also locatedon the southwest side of Building 2525, approximately 7 feet north of 44SS01· 44DS02 – Near the western corner of the hopper located southwest of Building 2525,approximately 7 feet northwest of 44SB01· 44DS03 – Near the eastern corner of the hopper located southwest of Building 2525,approximately 3 feet northeast of 44SS03· 44DS04 – Northwest of the particulate discharge system, approximately 17 feet southwest of44SB02SECTIONTWO Field Activities SummaryQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 2-2· 44DS05 – Northeast of the particulate discharge system, between this system andBuilding 2525· 44DS06 – Southeast of the particulate discharge system, approximately 17 feet northwest of44SS04· 78DS01 – In the northern driveway, on the southwest side of the building, near the buildingfoundation, approximately 14 feet south of 78SS04· 78DS02 – Northwest of the two aboveground storage tanks (ASTs) located northeast ofBuilding 2525, approximately 32 feet north of 78SS01· 78DS03 – Near a drainage swale that runs along the northeast side of the building,approximately 16 feet northeast of 78SD02· 78DS04 – Between the location of 78SS01 and the two ASTs located northeast of thebuilding· 78DS05 – Adjacent to the northeast side of the building, approximately halfway between78SD02 and 78SD03Sample identification, depth, matrix, and chemical analyses are presented in Tables 2-1 and 2-2.Soil boring locations are shown in Figures 2-1 and 2-2.2.1.2 Near Surface SoilsNine near surface soil samples were collected in areas of suspected contamination as part of thePhase I RI field activities. The surface soil samples were collected to maximum approximatedepths of 2 to 3.8 feet bgs. The surface soil samples were collected at the following locations(see Figure 2-1) using a stainless-steel hand auger:· 44SS01 – Northwest of large hopper on west side of Building 2525· 44SS02 – Southeast of large hopper on west side of Building 2525· 44SS03 – Northwest of small particulate discharge system, approximately 15 feet east of44SS02· 44SS04 – Southeast of small particulate discharge system, approximately 10 feet east of44SS03· 78SS01 – Between the storm sewer drain and pump house east of the railroad tracks· 78SS02 – Near the building foundation, and outside the processing room on the west side ofthe building· 78SS03 – Near the building foundation, and outside the processing room on the west side ofthe building, northwest of 78SS02· 78SS04 – Near the building foundation, and outside the storage room on the west side of thebuildingSECTIONTWO Field Activities SummaryQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 2-3· 78SS05 – Near the building foundation, and outside the storage room on the west side of thebuilding, northwest of 78SS04All shallow soil sampling locations were collected from areas covered with crushed rock. Thesoil samples were collected from a 2-foot interval beneath the layer of crushed rock. Sampleidentification, depth, matrix, and chemical analysis are presented in Tables 2-1 and 2-2. Samplelocations are shown in Figure 2-1.2.1.3 SedimentThree sediment samples were collected from drainage areas that may receive surface waterrunoff from the site. However, no water was present when these samples were collected. Thesamples were collected from the following locations (see Figure 2-1) using a stainless-steel handauger:· 78SD01 – From Lentzier Creek, to the north of Building 2525· 78SD02 – From the drainage swale near the northeast side of the building where the fuel oilspill occurred· 78SD03 – From Lentzier Creek, to the southeast of Building 2525Sample identification, depth, matrix, and chemical analysis are presented in Table 2-1. Sedimentsampling locations are shown on Figure 2-1.2.1.4 SludgeTwo sludge samples were collected at the following locations (see Figure 2-2) using a dipsampler and hand trowel:· SUSD01 – From the sump associated with the UST, collocated with standing water sampleSUSW01· TASD01 – From the UST, via the 6-inch stainless steel access pipe2.1.5 Standing WaterOne standing water sample was collected at the following location (see Figure 2-2) using a dipsampler (the volume of water present in the tank was insufficient for a sample):· SUSW01 – From the sump associated with the UST, collocated with sludge sample SUSD012.1.6 Confirmatory SamplesFive confirmatory samples were collected by CAPE from the excavation that resulted from theUST’s removal in July 2004. The analytical results from these samples are presented inAppendix F.SECTIONTWO Field Activities SummaryQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 2-42.2 IDW DISPOSITIONInvestigation-derived wastes (IDW) including soil cuttings, development and purge water,decontamination fluids, and personal protective equipment (PPE) were disposed in accordancewith the Sitewide Work Plan (URSGWC 2000a) and the Field Sampling Plan (URS 2003).TABLE 2-1SUMMARY OF PHASE I RI SAMPLES FOR CHEMICAL ANALYSISSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESSample Sample Sample Sample ParametersLocation Identification Depth (feet bgs) Matrix VOCs1 SVOCs2 Metals3 TPH4 Comments44SB01 4401SB02 0-2.0 Soil X X(1997) 4432SB02 0-2.0 Soil X X Duplicate (4401SB02)4401SB04 2.0-4.0 Soil X X4401SB06 4.0-5.5 Soil X X44SB02 4402SB02 0-2.0 Soil X X MS/MSD(1997) 4402SB04 2.0-4.0 Soil X X4402SB06 4.0-5.5 Soil X X44SS01 4401SS02 2.8-3.8 Soil X X4441SS02 2.8-3.8 Soil X X Duplicate (4401SS02)44SS02 4402SS03 2.5-3.0 Soil X X44SS03 4403SS02 1.5-2.5 Soil X X44SS04 4404SS03 1.0-3.0 Soil X X MS/MSD78SS01 7801SS02 0-2.0 Soil X78SS02 7802SS02 0-2.0 Soil X X X X78SS03 7803SS02 0-2.0 Soil X X X X7834SS02 0-2.0 Soil X X X X Duplicate (7803SS02)78SS04 7804SS02 0-2.0 Soil X X X X MS/MSD78SS05 7805SS02 0-2.0 Soil X X X X78SD01 7801SD02 0-2.0 Sediment X78SD02 7802SD02 0-2.0 Sediment X78SD03 7803SD02 0-1.5 Sediment XNotes:Samples were collected in 1997.1 TCL Volatile Organic Compounds: Preparation Method 5030 / Analysis Method 8260A.2 TCL Semivolatile Organic Compounds: Preparation Methods and 3550 (soil/sediment) / Analysis Method 8270.3 TAL Metals: Preparation Method 3050B (soil/sediment) / Analysis Methods 6010/7471.4 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons: Preparation Method 3550 / Analysis Method 8015.All samples were shipped to EMAX Laboratory, Inc. of Torrance, California for chemical analysis.Abbreviations:bgs = Below ground surfaceSB = Soil boringSS = Shallow SoilSD = SedimentMS/MSD = Matrix Spike/ Matrix Spike DuplicateDuplicate = Quality control duplicate(original sample listed in parentheses).Q:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 1 of 1 1/20/2005TABLE 2-2SUMMARY OF PHASE II RFI SAMPLES FOR CHEMICAL ANALYSISSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESSampleLocationSampleIdentificationSampleDepth (ft bgs)SampleMatrix VOCs1 SVOCs2 TPH3 Metals4 Comments44DS01 4401DS03 0.5-3.0 Soil X X X44DS02 4402DS03 0.6-2.5 Soil X X X44DS03 4403DS02 0.5-2.0 Soil X X X4403DS05 3.0-4.8 Soil X X X44DS04 4404DS02 0-2.0 Soil X X X44504DS02 0-2.0 Soil X X X Duplicate (4404DS02)44DS05 4405DS02 0-2.0 Soil X X X4405DS05 3.0-4.8 Soil X X X44DS06 4406DS02 0-2.0 Soil X X X MS/MSD4406DS04 2.0-3.9 Soil X X X78DS01 7801DS01 1.0-1.2 Soil X78DS02 7802DS02 0.2-2.0 Soil X X X7802DS06 4.0-6.0 Soil X X X78502DS06 4.0-6.0 Soil X X X Duplicate (7802DS06)7802DS09 7.5-8.8 Soil X X X78DS03 7803DS02 0-2.0 Soil X X X78DS04 7804DS02 0-2.0 Soil X X X7804DS06 4.5-6.0 Soil X X X7804DS11 10.0-11.0 Soil X X X78DS05 7805DS02 0-2.0 Soil X X XTASD01 TA01SD01 - Sludge X X X XSUSW/SD01 SU01SW00 Standing Water X X X XSU01SD01 Sludge X X X X44SB01 4401SB05 3.5-5.1 Soil X X X MS/MSD44501SB05 3.5-5.1 Soil X X X Duplicate (4401SB05)(2004) 4401SB06 5.1-5.5 Soil X X X44SB02 4402SB04 3.0-4.0 Soil X X X QA Split(2004) 4402SB05 4.0-4.5 Soil X X XNotes: Abbreviations:Samples were collected in 2003 and 2004. bgs = below ground surface1 DS = Direct push - soilMS/MSD = Matrix Spike/ Matrix Spike Duplicate234All samples were shipped to EMAX Laboratory, Inc. of Torrance, California for chemical analysis.TCL Volatile Organic Compounds: Preparation Method 5035 (soil/sediment) / AnalysisMethod 8260B.TCL Semivolatile Organic Compounds: Preparation Method 3540 (soil/sediment) /Analysis Method 8270C.TAL Metals: Preparation Method 3050B (soil/sediment) / Analysis Method 6010B &7471A (mercury).ParametersDuplicate = Quality Control Duplicate (original sample IDin parentheses)Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons, diesel fractionQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 1 of 1 1/20/2005SECTIONTHREE Physical Investigation ResultsQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 3-13.1 TOPOGRAPHY AND SURFACE FEATURESThe surface features at the site are shown on Figure 1-2. Building 2525 is situated in an Uplandarea characterized by karst topography associated with limestone bedrock. The surface at thesite is grass- and weed-covered and relatively flat. Railroad tracks and a drainage swale borderthe site to the northeast, and an asphalt road runs along the southwest side of the building withgravel parking areas at the northwest and southeast ends.Surface water drains toward the road on the southwest side of the building. Surface drainage onthe other three sides of the building flows to the drainage swale to the northeast of the building.The northern portion of this ditch flows to the northwest into a storm water drain. The rest of theditch flows to the southeast, eventually emptying into the Central Branch of Lentzier Creek.3.1.1 Local Surficial GeologyThe local surface geology interpreted for this site is limited to the topsoil and is based on 13 soilborings drilled to bedrock, nine shallow soil samples, and three sediment samples. The gravelhas been described as loose, brown, moist, fine-grained, clayey gravel (Unified SoilClassification System [USCS] symbol GP).The site investigation indicated that approximately 1 to 3 feet of 2- to 4-inch-diameter crushedrock has been placed over residual clay soil in areas near Building 2525. (One boring, 78DS01,was drilled through a 1.0-foot-thick concrete driveway.) The crushed rock fill is described asloose, moist to wet, gray to brown, clayey gravel to gravel (USCS symbol GP), with some clay.One sampling location had gravelly clay fill separating the gravel from underlying residual claysoil.Away from the building, the typical topsoil to a depth of 2 feet has been described aspredominantly either a clayey gravel or silty clay. The silty clay has been described as mediumstiff, moist, brown to red, low plastic, silty clay (USCS symbol CL).The gravel fill was typically underlain by residual clay soil typically described as stiff, moist towet, brown to red mottled or gray, low plastic, silty clay (USCS symbol CL). The clay wasunderlain by limestone bedrock.The typical subsurface profile from the ground surface to a maximum drilled depth of 11.0 feetis:· Gravel (Fill) – 0 to 3.0 feet bgs· Silty Clay (Residuum) – ranging from 1.0 to 11.0 feet bgs· Limestone Bedrock – at 1.2 to 11.0 feet bgsThe sediments encountered in drainage areas varied from a silty clay to a clayey silt and fine-grainedsand. The clays were typically described as medium stiff, brown to dark reddish-brown,moist, low plastic silty clay (USCS symbol CL). The silt was described as medium dense, toloose, dark gray, moist, clayey silt (USCS symbol ML). The sand was described as mediumSECTIONTHREE Physical Investigation ResultsQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 3-2dense, light gray, moist, fine- to coarse-grained sand (USCS symbol SP) with some fine-grainedgravel.3.1.2 Shallow HydrogeologyWater was encountered at seven of the 13 boring locations and at several of the near surface soilsampling locations. Water was encountered both at the base of the crushed gravel fill and atopthe limestone bedrock in the borings at depths ranging from 2.0 to 9.5 feet bgs. The near surfacemoisture was attributed to recent heavy rains prior to sampling. The deeper water encountered atthe site is likely perched groundwater that is not representative of the local water table.SECTIONFOUR Data Quality Review and ValidationQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 4-14.1 PHASE I RIAll chemical data were reviewed following procedures identified in the INAPP Sitewide QAPP(W-C 1995c). Antimony and silver data were rejected from select samples due to quantificationproblems at low concentrations. This data was judged not to significantly impact thedecision-making process for this site since silver and antimony were not suspected contaminantsat this site. Additionally, reporting limits were elevated due to due to soil moisture content,which ranged from 8 percent to 74 percent. See the Phase I RI report (W-C 1998) for a moredetailed discussion of data review issues.4.2 PHASE II RFIAll chemical data were reviewed following procedures identified in the INAPP Sitewide QAPP(URSGWC 2000) and addenda (URS 2003), and the Louisville Chemistry Guidance (LCG)(USACE 2002). No analytical data were rejected. Select analytical data from the Site 44samples collected during the Phase II RFI were qualified estimated (J/UJ) based on surrogate,MS/MSD, method reporting limit (MRL) and field duplicate data outside evaluation criteria.Additionally, acetone, 2-butanone, sodium, and thallium data were qualified non-detect (U)based on the presence of the compounds in the method blank samples or based on professionaljudgement (i.e. common laboratory contaminants). A tabular list of qualified data, including QCparameters for which qualifications were made, and a summary of data reviews and validationsis presented in Appendix A.Acceptable levels of accuracy and precision were achieved for the Phase II RFI sample data.The analytical data collected from the Site 44 samples were determined to be acceptable for theirintended use, including estimated (J/UJ) data.SECTIONFIVE Chemical Investigation ResultsQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 5-1With the exception of one surface soil sample and the three sediment samples (78SS01 and78SD01 through 78SD03), all samples collected from the Wheelabrator Baghouses wereanalyzed for Target Compound List (TCL) SVOCs and Target Analyte List (TAL) metals.Samples 78SS01 and 78SD01 through 78SD03 were only analyzed for total petroleumhydrocarbons (TPH) – diesel fraction. In addition, four surface soil samples collected during thePhase I RI (78SS02 through 78SS05) and all soil samples collected during the Phase II RFI wereanalyzed for TCL VOCs. Field duplicate samples collected from this site are identified below.Analytical results for field duplicate samples are presented in Appendix G.Field Duplicate Associated SamplePhase I RI4432SB02 4401SB024441SS02 4401SS027834SS02 7803SS02Phase II RFI44504DS02 4404DS0278502DS06 7802DS0644501SB05 4401SB05Summaries of the chemical investigation results can be found as follows:· Surface and subsurface soil samples collected from this site and the types of analyses aresummarized in Tables 2-1 and 2-2.· Chemicals detected, maximum concentration, and frequency of detects for surface andsubsurface soil and sediment samples collected from the Wheelabrator Baghouses aresummarized in Table 5-1.· Appendix G contains all analytical results.TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SURFACE SOIL, SUBSURFACE SOIL, AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESFIELD ID 4401DS03 4402DS03 4403DS02 4403DS05 4404DS02 4405DS02DATE COLLECTED May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003Maximum Frequency Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL QualVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Butanone 30 1 / 26 < 28 U < 20 U < 30 U < 29 U < 29 U < 23 UBenzene 41 3 / 26 < 7 U < 5 U < 7.6 U < 7.2 U < 7.2 U 2.4 5.8 JCarbon disulfide 11 6 / 26 < 7 U 2.9 5 J < 7.6 U < 7.2 U < 7.2 U 2.5 5.8 JChloroform 8.3 4 / 26 < 7 U < 5 U 7.6 7.6 8.3 7.2 6.9 7.2 J < 5.8 UEthylbenzene 690000 8 / 26 < 7 U < 5 U < 7.6 U < 7.2 U < 7.2 U < 5.8 Um/p-Xylene 2900000 5 / 22 < 14 U < 10 U < 15 U < 14 U < 14 U < 12 UMethylene chloride 3 J 1 / 26 < 14 U < 10 U < 15 U < 14 U < 14 U < 12 Uo-Xylene 3.3 J 1 / 22 < 7 U < 5 U < 7.6 U < 7.2 U < 7.2 U < 5.8 UToluene 17 4 / 26 < 7 U < 5 U < 7.6 U < 7.2 U < 7.2 U 6.1 5.8SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2,2-oxybis(1-Chloropropane) 200 J 1 / 142-Methylnaphthalene 6800 6 / 35 < 480 U < 390 U < 460 U < 480 U < 430 U < 430 UAnthracene 200 J 1 / 35 < 480 U < 390 U < 460 U < 480 U < 430 U < 430 UBenzo[a]anthracene 79 J 3 / 35 < 480 U < 390 U < 460 U < 480 U < 430 U < 430 UBenzo[a]pyrene 77 J 2 / 35 < 480 U < 390 U < 460 U < 480 U < 430 U < 430 UBenzo[b]fluoranthene 120 J 4 / 35 < 480 U < 390 U < 460 U < 480 U < 430 U < 430 UBenzo[g,h,i]perylene 140 J 2 / 35 < 480 U < 390 U < 460 U < 480 U < 430 U < 430 UBenzo[k]fluoranthene 100 J 4 / 35 < 480 U < 390 U < 460 U < 480 U < 430 U < 430 UBis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 2100 19 / 35 < 480 U < 390 U < 460 U < 480 U 940 430 J < 430 UButylbenzyl phthalate 51 J 2 / 35 < 480 U < 390 U < 460 U < 480 U < 430 U < 430 UChrysene 81 J 5 / 35 < 480 U < 390 U < 460 U < 480 U < 430 U < 430 UDibenz(ah)anthracene 79 J 1 / 35 < 480 U < 390 U < 460 U < 480 U < 430 U < 430 UDi-n-butyl phthalate 510 J 5 / 35 < 480 U < 390 U < 460 U < 480 U < 430 U < 430 UDi-n-octyl phthalate 56 J 3 / 35 < 480 U < 390 U < 460 U < 480 U < 430 U < 430 UFluoranthene 90 J 2 / 35 < 480 U < 390 U < 460 U < 480 U < 430 U < 430 UFluorene 1400 4 / 35 < 480 U < 390 U < 460 U < 480 U < 430 U < 430 UIndeno[1,2,3-c,d]pyrene 100 J 3 / 35 < 480 U < 390 U < 460 U < 480 U < 430 U < 430 UNaphthalene 7700 5 / 35 < 480 U < 390 U < 460 U < 480 U < 430 U < 430 UPhenanthrene 1800 9 / 35 < 480 U < 390 U < 460 U < 480 U < 430 U < 430 UPyrene 300 J 6 / 35 < 480 U < 390 U < 460 U < 480 U < 430 U < 430 UTOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (mg/kg)TPH (Diesel) 270 2 / 8Q:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 1 of 14 1/20/2005TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SURFACE SOIL, SUBSURFACE SOIL, AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESFIELD ID 4401DS03 4402DS03 4403DS02 4403DS05 4404DS02 4405DS02DATE COLLECTED May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003Maximum Frequency Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL QualMETALS (mg/kg)Aluminum 117000 35 / 35 34000 29.2 17800 23.6 36100 27.7 42600 28.8 26000 26.3 28000 26.3Antimony 9.21 J 18 / 35 8.06 14.6 J 7.47 11.8 J 3.83 13.8 J 7.61 14.4 J 6.2 13.2 J 6.67 13.1 JArsenic 122 35 / 35 65 1.46 20.4 1.18 44.2 1.38 31.2 1.44 24.3 1.32 122 1.31Barium 1400 35 / 35 360 1.46 156 1.18 205 1.38 807 1.44 133 1.32 325 1.31Beryllium 8.06 34 / 35 5.85 1.46 1.31 1.18 5.14 1.38 4.48 1.44 1.62 1.32 3.2 1.31Cadmium 10.5 3 / 35 < 1.46 U < 1.18 U < 1.38 U 2.18 1.44 < 1.32 U < 1.31 UCalcium 92400 35 / 35 6500 146 92400 118 6230 138 6390 144 59900 132 J 27300 131Chromium 93.9 35 / 35 29.8 2.92 93.9 2.36 35.3 2.77 46.9 2.88 26 2.63 31.2 2.63Cobalt 303 35 / 35 27.1 2.92 32.4 2.36 47 2.77 26.2 2.88 14.9 2.63 244 2.63Copper 953 34 / 35 172 2.92 95.6 2.36 190 2.77 188 2.88 85.3 2.63 112 2.63Iron 94700 35 / 35 94200 146 26300 23.6 80500 139 69300 28.8 41300 26.3 80900 132Lead 492 35 / 35 34.7 1.46 492 1.18 49.4 1.38 37.9 1.44 29.2 1.32 97.9 1.31Magnesium 17200 35 / 35 2550 146 5450 118 2710 138 3550 144 6650 132 2580 131Manganese 24200 35 / 35 16200 7.3 1610 1.18 8620 6.9 19200 7.2 7160 6.6 6400 1.31Mercury 0.19 J 22 / 35 0.0701 0.146 J 0.059 0.118 J 0.127 0.138 J 0.0986 0.144 J 0.0709 0.132 J 0.103 0.131 JNickel 1580 35 / 35 162 2.92 37 2.36 154 2.77 382 2.88 46 2.63 145 2.63Potassium 8610 35 / 35 2600 730 2700 590 3050 692 4590 720 2510 658 J 4790 657Selenium 3.48 11 / 35 < 1.46 U < 1.18 U < 1.38 U < 1.44 U < 1.32 U 0.78 1.31 JSodium 573 30 / 35 109 146 J 127 118 149 138 155 144 137 132 215 131Thallium 17.4 13 / 35 4.63 2.92 < 2.36 U < 2.77 U 6.91 2.88 < 2.63 U 5.72 2.63Vanadium 106 35 / 35 93.1 2.92 41.1 2.36 85.2 2.77 104 2.88 61 2.63 91.9 2.63Zinc 621 35 / 35 273 1.46 479 1.18 316 1.38 422 1.44 168 1.32 175 1.31Notes:ND = Not DetectedRL = Reporting LimitQual = QualifierJ = EstimatedR = Rejected dataU = NondetectUJ = Estimated NondetectThe calculation of detection frequency does not include results fromreanalyzed samples.Q:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 2 of 14 1/20/2005TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SURFACE SOIL, SUBSURFACE SOIL, AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Butanone 30 1 / 26Benzene 41 3 / 26Carbon disulfide 11 6 / 26Chloroform 8.3 4 / 26Ethylbenzene 690000 8 / 26m/p-Xylene 2900000 5 / 22Methylene chloride 3 J 1 / 26o-Xylene 3.3 J 1 / 22Toluene 17 4 / 26SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2,2-oxybis(1-Chloropropane) 200 J 1 / 142-Methylnaphthalene 6800 6 / 35Anthracene 200 J 1 / 35Benzo[a]anthracene 79 J 3 / 35Benzo[a]pyrene 77 J 2 / 35Benzo[b]fluoranthene 120 J 4 / 35Benzo[g,h,i]perylene 140 J 2 / 35Benzo[k]fluoranthene 100 J 4 / 35Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 2100 19 / 35Butylbenzyl phthalate 51 J 2 / 35Chrysene 81 J 5 / 35Dibenz(ah)anthracene 79 J 1 / 35Di-n-butyl phthalate 510 J 5 / 35Di-n-octyl phthalate 56 J 3 / 35Fluoranthene 90 J 2 / 35Fluorene 1400 4 / 35Indeno[1,2,3-c,d]pyrene 100 J 3 / 35Naphthalene 7700 5 / 35Phenanthrene 1800 9 / 35Pyrene 300 J 6 / 35TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (mg/kg)TPH (Diesel) 270 2 / 84405DS05 4406DS02 4406DS04 4401SB02 4401SB04 4401SB06May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 March 29, 1997 March 29, 1997 March 29, 1997Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual< 29 U < 25 U < 37 U< 7.3 U < 6.3 U < 9.3 U< 7.3 U < 6.3 U < 9.3 U6.9 7.3 J < 6.3 U < 9.3 U< 7.3 U 10 6.3 < 9.3 U< 15 U < 13 U < 19 U< 15 U < 13 U < 19 U< 7.3 U < 6.3 U < 9.3 U< 7.3 U 17 6.3 < 9.3 U< 450 U 200 J < 450 U< 480 U < 450 U < 470 U < 450 U < 410 U < 450 U< 480 U < 450 U < 470 U < 450 U < 410 U < 450 U< 480 U < 450 U < 470 U 55 J 60 J < 450 U< 480 U < 450 U < 470 U 65 J 77 J < 450 U< 480 U < 450 U < 470 U 97 J 120 J 42 J< 480 U < 450 U < 470 U 100 J 140 J < 450 U< 480 U < 450 U < 470 U 94 J 100 J 48 J< 480 U < 450 U < 470 U 100 J 73 J 94 J< 480 U < 450 U < 470 U 51 J 43 J < 450 U< 480 U < 450 U < 470 U 52 J 81 J 27 J< 480 U < 450 U < 470 U < 450 U 79 J < 450 U< 480 U < 450 U < 470 U 18 J 15 J 19 J< 480 U < 450 U < 470 U 56 J 56 J 18 J< 480 U < 450 U < 470 U < 450 U 27 J < 450 U< 480 U < 450 U < 470 U < 450 U < 410 U < 450 U< 480 U < 450 U < 470 U 83 J 100 J 53 J< 480 U < 450 U < 470 U < 450 U < 410 U < 450 U< 480 U < 450 U < 470 U < 450 U 36 J < 450 U< 480 U < 450 U < 470 U 52 J 130 J 28 JQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 3 of 14 1/20/2005TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SURFACE SOIL, SUBSURFACE SOIL, AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyMETALS (mg/kg)Aluminum 117000 35 / 35Antimony 9.21 J 18 / 35Arsenic 122 35 / 35Barium 1400 35 / 35Beryllium 8.06 34 / 35Cadmium 10.5 3 / 35Calcium 92400 35 / 35Chromium 93.9 35 / 35Cobalt 303 35 / 35Copper 953 34 / 35Iron 94700 35 / 35Lead 492 35 / 35Magnesium 17200 35 / 35Manganese 24200 35 / 35Mercury 0.19 J 22 / 35Nickel 1580 35 / 35Potassium 8610 35 / 35Selenium 3.48 11 / 35Sodium 573 30 / 35Thallium 17.4 13 / 35Vanadium 106 35 / 35Zinc 621 35 / 35Notes:ND = Not DetectedRL = Reporting LimitQual = QualifierJ = EstimatedR = Rejected dataU = NondetectUJ = Estimated NondetectThe calculation of detection frequency does not include results fromreanalyzed samples.4405DS05 4406DS02 4406DS04 4401SB02 4401SB04 4401SB06May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 March 29, 1997 March 29, 1997 March 29, 1997Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual48500 29.4 44500 27.2 45900 28.5 13500 11000 152009.21 14.7 J 6.36 13.6 JI 4.6 14.2 J < 13.6 U < 12.3 U < 13.4 U45.3 1.47 51.6 1.36 84.5 1.42 37.5 12 29.4241 1.47 263 1.36 230 1.42 227 106 1262.7 1.47 3.51 1.36 4.4 1.42 1.2 J 0.83 J 1.1 J< 1.47 U < 1.36 U < 1.42 U < 1.1 U < 0.99 U < 1.1 U5780 147 31100 136 25000 142 9870 37800 2400047 2.94 43.4 2.72 43 2.85 18.7 14.4 19.822.3 2.94 54.6 2.72 124 2.85 25.7 20.9 31.8143 2.94 113 2.72 116 2.85 68.6 29.7 62.470800 29.4 55400 27.2 66400 28.5 54700 21200 3990035.4 1.47 62 1.36 JI 51.4 1.42 43.4 78 55.23820 147 3570 136 4150 142 2010 6010 24809980 7.35 7640 6.8 6310 1.42 7320 1830 28900.0951 0.147 J 0.103 0.136 J 0.103 0.142 J < 0.11 U < 0.1 U 0.1395.8 2.94 94.7 2.72 103 2.85 64.9 23.4 41.64280 734 6840 681 JI 8610 712 750 J 846 J 894 J< 1.47 U < 1.36 U < 1.42 U < 0.82 U < 0.74 U < 0.81 U158 147 248 136 346 142 165 J 207 J 435 J< 2.94 U < 2.89 U 3.91 2.85 < 0.9 U < 0.81 U < 0.89 U106 2.94 96.2 2.72 106 2.85 42.3 26.9 37.4228 1.47 306 1.36 182 1.42 142 267 147Q:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 4 of 14 1/20/2005TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SURFACE SOIL, SUBSURFACE SOIL, AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Butanone 30 1 / 26Benzene 41 3 / 26Carbon disulfide 11 6 / 26Chloroform 8.3 4 / 26Ethylbenzene 690000 8 / 26m/p-Xylene 2900000 5 / 22Methylene chloride 3 J 1 / 26o-Xylene 3.3 J 1 / 22Toluene 17 4 / 26SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2,2-oxybis(1-Chloropropane) 200 J 1 / 142-Methylnaphthalene 6800 6 / 35Anthracene 200 J 1 / 35Benzo[a]anthracene 79 J 3 / 35Benzo[a]pyrene 77 J 2 / 35Benzo[b]fluoranthene 120 J 4 / 35Benzo[g,h,i]perylene 140 J 2 / 35Benzo[k]fluoranthene 100 J 4 / 35Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 2100 19 / 35Butylbenzyl phthalate 51 J 2 / 35Chrysene 81 J 5 / 35Dibenz(ah)anthracene 79 J 1 / 35Di-n-butyl phthalate 510 J 5 / 35Di-n-octyl phthalate 56 J 3 / 35Fluoranthene 90 J 2 / 35Fluorene 1400 4 / 35Indeno[1,2,3-c,d]pyrene 100 J 3 / 35Naphthalene 7700 5 / 35Phenanthrene 1800 9 / 35Pyrene 300 J 6 / 35TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (mg/kg)TPH (Diesel) 270 2 / 84401SS02 4402SB02 4402SB04 4402SB06 4402SS03 4403SS02March 25, 1997 March 26, 1997 March 29, 1997 March 29, 1997 March 26, 1997 March 26, 1997Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual< 430 U < 400 U < 450 U < 450 U < 460 U < 480 U< 430 U 47 J < 450 U < 450 U < 460 U < 480 U< 430 U 200 J < 450 U < 450 U < 460 U < 480 U79 J < 400 U < 450 U < 450 U < 460 U < 480 U< 430 U < 400 U < 450 U < 450 U < 460 U < 480 U73 J < 400 U < 450 U < 450 U < 460 U < 480 U< 430 U < 400 U < 450 U < 450 U < 460 U < 480 U30 J < 400 U < 450 U < 450 U < 460 U < 480 U50 J 52 J 44 J 75 J 64 J 40 J< 430 U < 400 U < 450 U < 450 U < 460 U < 480 U57 J 29 J < 450 U < 450 U < 460 U < 480 U< 430 U < 400 U < 450 U < 450 U < 460 U < 480 U< 430 U < 400 U < 450 U 17 J < 460 U < 480 U< 430 U < 400 U < 450 U < 450 U < 460 U < 480 U90 J < 400 U < 450 U < 450 U < 460 U < 480 U< 430 U < 400 U < 450 U < 450 U < 460 U < 480 U< 430 U < 400 U < 450 U < 450 U < 460 U < 480 U47 J < 400 U < 450 U < 450 U < 460 U < 480 U77 J 200 J < 450 U 50 J < 460 U < 480 U110 J 52 J < 450 U < 450 U < 460 U < 480 UQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 5 of 14 1/20/2005TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SURFACE SOIL, SUBSURFACE SOIL, AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyMETALS (mg/kg)Aluminum 117000 35 / 35Antimony 9.21 J 18 / 35Arsenic 122 35 / 35Barium 1400 35 / 35Beryllium 8.06 34 / 35Cadmium 10.5 3 / 35Calcium 92400 35 / 35Chromium 93.9 35 / 35Cobalt 303 35 / 35Copper 953 34 / 35Iron 94700 35 / 35Lead 492 35 / 35Magnesium 17200 35 / 35Manganese 24200 35 / 35Mercury 0.19 J 22 / 35Nickel 1580 35 / 35Potassium 8610 35 / 35Selenium 3.48 11 / 35Sodium 573 30 / 35Thallium 17.4 13 / 35Vanadium 106 35 / 35Zinc 621 35 / 35Notes:ND = Not DetectedRL = Reporting LimitQual = QualifierJ = EstimatedR = Rejected dataU = NondetectUJ = Estimated NondetectThe calculation of detection frequency does not include results fromreanalyzed samples.4401SS02 4402SB02 4402SB04 4402SB06 4402SS03 4403SS02March 25, 1997 March 26, 1997 March 29, 1997 March 29, 1997 March 26, 1997 March 26, 1997Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual14500 9300 16800 13500 15000 23000< 13.2 U < 12.1 UJ < 13.8 U < 13.8 U R R27.6 30.8 41 36.4 21.2 33.4222 99.1 129 181 232 2681.3 J 1.3 1.7 1.3 J 2.2 1.7< 1.1 U < 0.97 U < 1.1 U 1.3 J < 1.1 U < 1.2 U56000 20900 J 29000 37200 39100 751016 13.6 14.4 16.7 25.9 2727.4 60.2 37.5 54.5 30.8 24.252.8 96.2 89.5 80.4 91.6 11138300 36700 J 51000 45700 46900 7120047.5 56 47.1 42 54.4 J 31.5 J4440 791 J 995 J 1820 4370 20804580 1390 J 5200 4580 7950 8940< 0.11 U 0.11 < 0.11 U 0.13 < 0.12 UJ < 0.12 UJ50.5 40.2 88.1 89.2 115 76.51150 J 954 J 1060 J 984 J 1280 J 1260 J< 0.79 U < 0.73 U < 0.83 U < 0.83 U < 0.84 U < 0.87 U267 J 311 J 223 J 259 J 151 J 206 J1.9 J 1.3 J < 0.91 U < 0.91 U < 0.92 U < 0.95 U38.1 38.3 33.3 34 44.5 66.2219 162 J 239 172 237 J 203 JQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 6 of 14 1/20/2005TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SURFACE SOIL, SUBSURFACE SOIL, AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Butanone 30 1 / 26Benzene 41 3 / 26Carbon disulfide 11 6 / 26Chloroform 8.3 4 / 26Ethylbenzene 690000 8 / 26m/p-Xylene 2900000 5 / 22Methylene chloride 3 J 1 / 26o-Xylene 3.3 J 1 / 22Toluene 17 4 / 26SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2,2-oxybis(1-Chloropropane) 200 J 1 / 142-Methylnaphthalene 6800 6 / 35Anthracene 200 J 1 / 35Benzo[a]anthracene 79 J 3 / 35Benzo[a]pyrene 77 J 2 / 35Benzo[b]fluoranthene 120 J 4 / 35Benzo[g,h,i]perylene 140 J 2 / 35Benzo[k]fluoranthene 100 J 4 / 35Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 2100 19 / 35Butylbenzyl phthalate 51 J 2 / 35Chrysene 81 J 5 / 35Dibenz(ah)anthracene 79 J 1 / 35Di-n-butyl phthalate 510 J 5 / 35Di-n-octyl phthalate 56 J 3 / 35Fluoranthene 90 J 2 / 35Fluorene 1400 4 / 35Indeno[1,2,3-c,d]pyrene 100 J 3 / 35Naphthalene 7700 5 / 35Phenanthrene 1800 9 / 35Pyrene 300 J 6 / 35TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (mg/kg)TPH (Diesel) 270 2 / 84404SS03 7801DS01 7802DS02 7802DS06 7802DS09 7803DS02March 26, 1997 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual< 20 U < 21 U < 25 U < 41 U < 26 U< 5 U < 5.2 U < 6.2 U < 10 U < 6.4 U< 5 U < 5.2 U < 6.2 U 11 10 6 6.4 J< 5 U < 5.2 U < 6.2 U < 10 U < 6.4 U< 5 U < 5.2 U < 6.2 U < 10 U < 6.4 U< 10 U < 10 U < 12 U < 20 U < 13 U< 10 U < 10 U < 12 U < 20 U < 13 U< 5 U < 5.2 U < 6.2 U < 10 U < 6.4 U3 5 J < 5.2 U < 6.2 U < 10 U < 6.4 U< 420 U< 420 U 400 400 < 410 U < 560 U < 420 UJ< 420 U < 400 U < 410 U < 560 U < 420 UJ< 420 U < 400 U < 410 U < 560 U < 420 UJ< 420 U < 400 U < 410 U < 560 U < 420 UJ< 420 U < 400 U < 410 U < 560 U < 420 UJ< 420 U < 400 U < 410 U < 560 U < 420 UJ< 420 U < 400 U < 410 U < 560 U < 420 UJ26 J < 400 U < 410 U < 560 U < 420 UJ< 420 U < 400 U < 410 U < 560 U < 420 UJ< 420 U < 400 U < 410 U < 560 U < 420 UJ< 420 U < 400 U < 410 U < 560 U < 420 UJ< 420 U < 400 U < 410 U < 560 U < 420 UJ< 420 U < 400 U < 410 U < 560 U < 420 UJ< 420 U < 400 U < 410 U < 560 U < 420 UJ< 420 U 220 400 J < 410 U < 560 U < 420 UJ< 420 U < 400 U < 410 U < 560 U < 420 UJ< 420 U < 400 U < 410 U < 560 U < 420 UJ< 420 U 260 400 J < 410 U 1400 560 < 420 UJ< 420 U < 400 U < 410 U 300 560 J < 420 UJQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 7 of 14 1/20/2005TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SURFACE SOIL, SUBSURFACE SOIL, AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyMETALS (mg/kg)Aluminum 117000 35 / 35Antimony 9.21 J 18 / 35Arsenic 122 35 / 35Barium 1400 35 / 35Beryllium 8.06 34 / 35Cadmium 10.5 3 / 35Calcium 92400 35 / 35Chromium 93.9 35 / 35Cobalt 303 35 / 35Copper 953 34 / 35Iron 94700 35 / 35Lead 492 35 / 35Magnesium 17200 35 / 35Manganese 24200 35 / 35Mercury 0.19 J 22 / 35Nickel 1580 35 / 35Potassium 8610 35 / 35Selenium 3.48 11 / 35Sodium 573 30 / 35Thallium 17.4 13 / 35Vanadium 106 35 / 35Zinc 621 35 / 35Notes:ND = Not DetectedRL = Reporting LimitQual = QualifierJ = EstimatedR = Rejected dataU = NondetectUJ = Estimated NondetectThe calculation of detection frequency does not include results fromreanalyzed samples.4404SS03 7801DS01 7802DS02 7802DS06 7802DS09 7803DS02March 26, 1997 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual15300 23000 24.1 21500 24.9 117000 33.8 29300 25.5R 3.36 12 J 4.41 12.5 J 5.15 16.9 J 5.98 12.8 J19.4 17 1.2 21.5 1.25 J 18.6 1.69 35.1 1.28271 43.4 1.2 74 1.25 J 1400 1.69 151 1.281.5 1.27 1.2 2 1.25 8.06 1.69 4.96 1.28< 1 U < 1.2 U < 1.25 U 10.5 1.69 < 1.28 U8400 3350 120 1870 125 6790 169 27400 12815.6 21.4 2.41 22.7 2.49 13.8 3.38 28.5 2.5534.2 8.97 2.41 56.5 2.49 J 303 3.38 76.2 2.5556.9 33.3 2.41 90.5 2.49 953 3.38 123 2.5549100 38700 24.1 37100 24.9 37700 33.8 80500 12829.3 J 13.5 1.2 75.5 1.25 J 13.4 1.69 30.5 1.281310 1840 120 1770 125 1880 169 9770 1285120 556 1.2 651 1.25 J 24200 8.45 4320 1.280.19 J < 0.12 U 0.0411 0.125 < 0.169 U 0.0586 0.128 J76.6 25.8 2.41 38 2.49 1580 3.38 190 2.55945 J 1470 602 2390 623 2360 845 3680 639< 0.76 U 1.2 1.2 0.904 1.25 J < 1.69 U 3.48 1.28138 J < 120 U < 127 U 573 169 131 128< 0.84 U < 2.41 U 1.74 2.49 J 17.4 3.38 < 2.55 U23.9 52.8 2.41 80.5 2.49 26.7 3.38 69.5 2.55141 J 61.2 1.2 63 1.25 621 1.69 253 1.28Q:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 8 of 14 1/20/2005TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SURFACE SOIL, SUBSURFACE SOIL, AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Butanone 30 1 / 26Benzene 41 3 / 26Carbon disulfide 11 6 / 26Chloroform 8.3 4 / 26Ethylbenzene 690000 8 / 26m/p-Xylene 2900000 5 / 22Methylene chloride 3 J 1 / 26o-Xylene 3.3 J 1 / 22Toluene 17 4 / 26SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2,2-oxybis(1-Chloropropane) 200 J 1 / 142-Methylnaphthalene 6800 6 / 35Anthracene 200 J 1 / 35Benzo[a]anthracene 79 J 3 / 35Benzo[a]pyrene 77 J 2 / 35Benzo[b]fluoranthene 120 J 4 / 35Benzo[g,h,i]perylene 140 J 2 / 35Benzo[k]fluoranthene 100 J 4 / 35Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 2100 19 / 35Butylbenzyl phthalate 51 J 2 / 35Chrysene 81 J 5 / 35Dibenz(ah)anthracene 79 J 1 / 35Di-n-butyl phthalate 510 J 5 / 35Di-n-octyl phthalate 56 J 3 / 35Fluoranthene 90 J 2 / 35Fluorene 1400 4 / 35Indeno[1,2,3-c,d]pyrene 100 J 3 / 35Naphthalene 7700 5 / 35Phenanthrene 1800 9 / 35Pyrene 300 J 6 / 35TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (mg/kg)TPH (Diesel) 270 2 / 87804DS02 7804DS06 7804DS11 7805DS02 7801SD02 7801SS02May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 March 25, 1997 March 25, 1997Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual< 24 U < 24 U < 47 U 30 24< 6.1 U < 6 U 41 12 < 6.1 U3.7 7 J < 6 U < 12 U 3 6.1 J< 6.1 U < 6 U < 12 U < 6.1 U45 6.1 J 3 6 J 1600 560 < 6.1 U< 12 U < 12 U 100 24 < 12 U< 12 U < 12 U < 24 U < 12 U3.3 6.1 J < 6 U < 12 U < 6.1 U< 6.1 U < 6 U < 12 U < 6.1 U< 420 U 6800 430 4600 600 < 430 U< 420 U < 430 U < 600 U < 430 U< 420 U < 430 U < 600 U < 430 U< 420 U < 430 U < 600 U < 430 U< 420 U < 430 U < 600 U < 430 U< 420 U < 430 U < 600 U < 430 U< 420 U < 430 U < 600 U < 430 U< 420 U < 430 U < 600 U < 430 U< 420 U < 430 U < 600 U < 430 U< 420 U < 430 U < 600 U < 430 U< 420 U < 430 U < 600 U < 430 U< 420 U < 430 U < 600 U < 430 U< 420 U < 430 U < 600 U < 430 U< 420 U < 430 U < 600 U < 430 U1300 420 1400 430 770 600 < 430 U< 420 U < 430 U < 600 U < 430 U< 420 U 1200 430 2300 600 < 430 U1100 420 1400 430 1800 600 < 430 U< 420 U < 430 U < 600 U < 430 U< 25.32 U 270Q:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 9 of 14 1/20/2005TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SURFACE SOIL, SUBSURFACE SOIL, AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyMETALS (mg/kg)Aluminum 117000 35 / 35Antimony 9.21 J 18 / 35Arsenic 122 35 / 35Barium 1400 35 / 35Beryllium 8.06 34 / 35Cadmium 10.5 3 / 35Calcium 92400 35 / 35Chromium 93.9 35 / 35Cobalt 303 35 / 35Copper 953 34 / 35Iron 94700 35 / 35Lead 492 35 / 35Magnesium 17200 35 / 35Manganese 24200 35 / 35Mercury 0.19 J 22 / 35Nickel 1580 35 / 35Potassium 8610 35 / 35Selenium 3.48 11 / 35Sodium 573 30 / 35Thallium 17.4 13 / 35Vanadium 106 35 / 35Zinc 621 35 / 35Notes:ND = Not DetectedRL = Reporting LimitQual = QualifierJ = EstimatedR = Rejected dataU = NondetectUJ = Estimated NondetectThe calculation of detection frequency does not include results fromreanalyzed samples.7804DS02 7804DS06 7804DS11 7805DS02 7801SD02 7801SS02May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 May 14, 2003 March 25, 1997 March 25, 1997Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual17800 25.3 22600 25.8 29600 36.3 17000 25.9< 12.6 U 3.29 12.9 J < 18.1 U 6.15 13 J17.4 1.26 14.7 1.29 17.6 1.81 25.3 1.352.5 1.26 54.5 1.29 295 1.81 147 1.30.911 1.26 J 1.1 1.29 J 4.01 1.81 1.4 1.3< 1.26 U < 1.29 U < 1.81 U < 1.3 U5510 126 1720 129 4140 181 30800 13015.2 2.53 18.9 2.58 25.2 3.63 66.2 2.596.21 2.53 10.1 2.58 24.8 3.63 28.4 2.5922.7 2.53 32 2.58 59.1 3.63 114 2.5927600 25.3 23600 25.8 51600 36.3 94700 1308.63 1.26 10.9 1.29 34.5 1.81 132 1.31590 126 2040 129 2670 181 4080 130177 1.26 252 1.29 12500 9.05 3250 1.3< 0.126 U < 0.129 U 0.078 0.181 J 0.079 0.13 J13.6 2.53 22 2.58 131 3.63 76.3 2.59880 632 2070 645 2990 907 2550 6491.41 1.26 0.981 1.29 J < 1.81 U 2.11 1.3< 126 U < 129 U 216 181 < 130 U< 2.53 U < 2.58 U 1.84 3.63 J 1.17 2.59 J40.6 2.53 41.5 2.58 57.4 3.63 40.3 2.5937.1 1.26 66.9 1.29 114 1.81 383 1.3Q:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 10 of 14 1/20/2005TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SURFACE SOIL, SUBSURFACE SOIL, AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Butanone 30 1 / 26Benzene 41 3 / 26Carbon disulfide 11 6 / 26Chloroform 8.3 4 / 26Ethylbenzene 690000 8 / 26m/p-Xylene 2900000 5 / 22Methylene chloride 3 J 1 / 26o-Xylene 3.3 J 1 / 22Toluene 17 4 / 26SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2,2-oxybis(1-Chloropropane) 200 J 1 / 142-Methylnaphthalene 6800 6 / 35Anthracene 200 J 1 / 35Benzo[a]anthracene 79 J 3 / 35Benzo[a]pyrene 77 J 2 / 35Benzo[b]fluoranthene 120 J 4 / 35Benzo[g,h,i]perylene 140 J 2 / 35Benzo[k]fluoranthene 100 J 4 / 35Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 2100 19 / 35Butylbenzyl phthalate 51 J 2 / 35Chrysene 81 J 5 / 35Dibenz(ah)anthracene 79 J 1 / 35Di-n-butyl phthalate 510 J 5 / 35Di-n-octyl phthalate 56 J 3 / 35Fluoranthene 90 J 2 / 35Fluorene 1400 4 / 35Indeno[1,2,3-c,d]pyrene 100 J 3 / 35Naphthalene 7700 5 / 35Phenanthrene 1800 9 / 35Pyrene 300 J 6 / 35TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (mg/kg)TPH (Diesel) 270 2 / 87802SD02 7802SS02 7803SD02 7803SS02 7804SS02 7805SS02March 25, 1997 March 25, 1997 March 25, 1997 March 25, 1997 March 25, 1997 March 25, 1997Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual< 11 U < 11 U < 11 U < 11 U< 11 U < 11 U 1 J < 11 U< 11 U < 11 U < 11 U < 11 U< 11 U < 11 U < 11 U < 11 U< 11 U < 11 U < 11 U < 11 U< 11 U < 11 U 3 J < 11 U< 11 U < 11 U 2 J < 11 U< 370 U < 360 U < 370 U < 380 U< 370 U < 360 U < 370 U < 380 U< 370 U < 360 U < 370 U < 380 U< 370 U < 360 U < 370 U < 380 U< 370 U < 360 U < 370 U < 380 U< 370 U < 360 U < 370 U < 380 U< 370 U < 360 U < 370 U < 380 U< 370 U < 360 U < 370 U < 380 U87 J 120 J 75 J 95 J< 370 U < 360 U < 370 U < 380 U< 370 U < 360 U < 370 U < 380 U< 370 U < 360 U < 370 U < 380 U< 370 U < 360 U < 370 U < 380 U< 370 U < 360 U < 370 U < 380 U< 370 U < 360 U < 370 U < 380 U< 370 U < 360 U < 370 U < 380 U< 370 U < 360 U < 370 U < 380 U< 370 U < 360 U < 370 U < 380 U< 370 U < 360 U < 370 U < 380 U< 370 U < 360 U < 370 U < 380 U220 < 22.2 U < 26.95 U < 21.64 U < 22.4 U < 23.09 UQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 11 of 14 1/20/2005TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SURFACE SOIL, SUBSURFACE SOIL, AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyMETALS (mg/kg)Aluminum 117000 35 / 35Antimony 9.21 J 18 / 35Arsenic 122 35 / 35Barium 1400 35 / 35Beryllium 8.06 34 / 35Cadmium 10.5 3 / 35Calcium 92400 35 / 35Chromium 93.9 35 / 35Cobalt 303 35 / 35Copper 953 34 / 35Iron 94700 35 / 35Lead 492 35 / 35Magnesium 17200 35 / 35Manganese 24200 35 / 35Mercury 0.19 J 22 / 35Nickel 1580 35 / 35Potassium 8610 35 / 35Selenium 3.48 11 / 35Sodium 573 30 / 35Thallium 17.4 13 / 35Vanadium 106 35 / 35Zinc 621 35 / 35Notes:ND = Not DetectedRL = Reporting LimitQual = QualifierJ = EstimatedR = Rejected dataU = NondetectUJ = Estimated NondetectThe calculation of detection frequency does not include results fromreanalyzed samples.7802SD02 7802SS02 7803SD02 7803SS02 7804SS02 7805SS02March 25, 1997 March 25, 1997 March 25, 1997 March 25, 1997 March 25, 1997 March 25, 1997Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual7890 6920 11000 16000< 11.1 UJ < 10.8 UJ < 11.2 UJ < 11.5 UJ12.3 6 17 63.180.5 83.4 112 1360.66 J < 0.43 U 0.71 J 1.6< 0.89 U < 0.87 U < 0.9 U < 0.92 U64100 68800 20300 461009.2 13.5 13.8 21.119.4 9 J 19.8 66.324.2 < 11.3 U 35.8 62.318500 11200 23300 4130015.8 40.5 29.6 38.411200 17200 7740 50201260 703 1970 3610< 0.09 U < 0.09 U < 0.09 U 0.1131.1 15.4 27.4 97.2695 J 649 J 810 J 2240< 0.67 U < 0.65 U < 0.67 U < 0.69 U155 J 173 J 171 J 268 J< 0.73 U < 0.71 U < 0.74 U < 2.4 U24.5 13.5 30.2 47.8122 516 238 290Q:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 12 of 14 1/20/2005TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SURFACE SOIL, SUBSURFACE SOIL, AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Butanone 30 1 / 26Benzene 41 3 / 26Carbon disulfide 11 6 / 26Chloroform 8.3 4 / 26Ethylbenzene 690000 8 / 26m/p-Xylene 2900000 5 / 22Methylene chloride 3 J 1 / 26o-Xylene 3.3 J 1 / 22Toluene 17 4 / 26SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2,2-oxybis(1-Chloropropane) 200 J 1 / 142-Methylnaphthalene 6800 6 / 35Anthracene 200 J 1 / 35Benzo[a]anthracene 79 J 3 / 35Benzo[a]pyrene 77 J 2 / 35Benzo[b]fluoranthene 120 J 4 / 35Benzo[g,h,i]perylene 140 J 2 / 35Benzo[k]fluoranthene 100 J 4 / 35Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 2100 19 / 35Butylbenzyl phthalate 51 J 2 / 35Chrysene 81 J 5 / 35Dibenz(ah)anthracene 79 J 1 / 35Di-n-butyl phthalate 510 J 5 / 35Di-n-octyl phthalate 56 J 3 / 35Fluoranthene 90 J 2 / 35Fluorene 1400 4 / 35Indeno[1,2,3-c,d]pyrene 100 J 3 / 35Naphthalene 7700 5 / 35Phenanthrene 1800 9 / 35Pyrene 300 J 6 / 35TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (mg/kg)TPH (Diesel) 270 2 / 84401SB05 4401SB06 4402SB04 4402SB05March 16, 2004 March 16, 2004 March 16, 2004 March 16, 2004Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual< 290000 U < 410000 U < 1200 U < 59000 U< 72000 U < 100000 U < 290 U < 15000 U< 72000 U < 100000 U < 290 U < 15000 U< 72000 U < 100000 U < 290 U < 15000 U610000 72000 690000 100000 130 290 J 78000 150002500000 140000 2900000 200000 5400 580 470000 29000< 72000 U < 100000 U < 290 U < 15000 U< 72000 U < 100000 U < 290 U < 15000 U< 72000 U < 100000 U < 290 U < 15000 U820 430 2200 520 < 430 UJ < 920 U< 430 U < 520 U < 430 UJ < 920 U< 430 U < 520 U < 430 UJ < 920 U< 430 U < 520 U < 430 UJ < 920 U< 430 U < 520 U < 430 UJ < 920 U< 430 U < 520 U < 430 UJ < 920 U< 430 U < 520 U < 430 UJ < 920 U850 430 J 2100 520 280 430 J 530 920 J< 430 U < 520 U < 430 UJ < 920 U< 430 U < 520 U < 430 UJ < 920 U< 430 U < 520 U < 430 UJ < 920 U< 430 U 510 520 J < 430 UJ < 920 U< 430 U < 520 U < 430 UJ < 920 U< 430 U < 520 U < 430 UJ < 920 U< 430 U < 520 U < 430 UJ < 920 U< 430 U < 520 U < 430 UJ < 920 U2800 430 7700 520 < 430 UJ < 920 U< 430 U < 520 U < 430 UJ < 920 U< 430 U < 520 U < 430 UJ < 920 UQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 13 of 14 1/20/2005TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SURFACE SOIL, SUBSURFACE SOIL, AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyMETALS (mg/kg)Aluminum 117000 35 / 35Antimony 9.21 J 18 / 35Arsenic 122 35 / 35Barium 1400 35 / 35Beryllium 8.06 34 / 35Cadmium 10.5 3 / 35Calcium 92400 35 / 35Chromium 93.9 35 / 35Cobalt 303 35 / 35Copper 953 34 / 35Iron 94700 35 / 35Lead 492 35 / 35Magnesium 17200 35 / 35Manganese 24200 35 / 35Mercury 0.19 J 22 / 35Nickel 1580 35 / 35Potassium 8610 35 / 35Selenium 3.48 11 / 35Sodium 573 30 / 35Thallium 17.4 13 / 35Vanadium 106 35 / 35Zinc 621 35 / 35Notes:ND = Not DetectedRL = Reporting LimitQual = QualifierJ = EstimatedR = Rejected dataU = NondetectUJ = Estimated NondetectThe calculation of detection frequency does not include results fromreanalyzed samples.4401SB05 4401SB06 4402SB04 4402SB05March 16, 2004 March 16, 2004 March 16, 2004 March 16, 2004Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual26300 26.2 27400 31.3 24500 25.8 19700 27.94.29 13.1 J 4.07 15.7 J 4.79 12.9 J < 14 U26.6 1.31 22.6 1.57 21.8 1.29 17.6 1.4185 1.31 219 1.57 168 1.29 130 1.41.53 1.31 1.73 1.57 1.46 1.29 1.14 1.4 J< 1.31 U < 1.57 U < 1.29 U < 1.4 U20400 131 J 14000 157 7100 129 14200 14028.5 2.62 31.6 3.13 25.9 2.58 31.9 2.7925.5 2.62 21.8 3.13 28.5 2.58 28.2 2.7946.4 2.62 55.5 3.13 36.6 2.58 32.5 2.7942700 26.2 56600 31.3 33100 25.8 28400 27.932.7 1.31 44.4 1.57 24.8 1.29 52.4 1.44380 131 5050 157 2680 129 7220 1404910 1.31 12000 1.57 2230 1.29 2490 1.40.0465 0.131 J 0.0615 0.157 J 0.0551 0.129 J 0.136 0.14 J61.5 2.62 83 3.13 48.5 2.58 48.3 2.793330 656 3910 784 2610 646 1870 6981.33 1.31 2.07 1.57 1.05 1.29 J 1.02 1.4 J115 131 J 211 157 113 129 J 240 1401.18 2.62 J 2.32 3.13 J 0.651 2.58 J < 2.79 U54.2 2.62 56.9 3.13 51.9 2.58 43 2.79138 1.31 230 1.57 130 1.29 166 1.4Q:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 14 of 14 1/20/2005TABLE 5-2SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SLUDGE SAMPLESSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESFIELD ID TA01SD01 SU01SD01DATE COLLECTED December 17, 2003 December 17, 2003Maximum Frequency Result RL Qual Result RL QualVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)Ethylbenzene 11000000 2 / 2 95000 31000 11000000 8500000m/p-Xylene 42000000 2 / 2 650000 62000 42000000 17000000o-Xylene 9700000 2 / 2 230000 31000 9700000 8500000SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Methylnaphthalene 4100 2 / 2 3500 1600 4100 3400Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 9700 1 / 2 < 1600 U 9700 3400Naphthalene 27000 2 / 2 15000 1600 27000 3400Pyrene 930 J 1 / 2 930 1600 J < 3400 UPETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (mg/kg)Total petroleum hydrocarbons, diesel fraction 170000 2 / 2 8800 250 170000 17000METALS (mg/kg)Aluminum 13800 2 / 2 4970 49.6 13800 34.2Antimony 222 2 / 2 222 24.8 14.3 17.1 JArsenic 10.6 2 / 2 3.97 2.48 10.6 1.71Barium 1320 2 / 2 227 2.48 1320 1.71Beryllium 0.509 J 2 / 4 < 2.48 U 0.509 1.71 JCadmium 99.3 1 / 2 99.3 2.48 < 1.71 UCalcium 8790 2 / 2 5300 248 8790 171Chromium 15300 2 / 2 15300 4.96 525 3.42Cobalt 395 2 / 2 395 4.96 62.2 3.42Copper 44.8 2 / 2 39.3 4.96 44.8 3.42Iron 43500 2 / 2 27900 49.6 43500 34.2Lead 92400 2 / 2 92400 24.8 78.1 1.71Magnesium 19800 2 / 2 3510 248 19800 171Manganese 416 2 / 2 289 2.48 416 1.71Nickel 129 2 / 2 14.7 4.96 129 3.42Potassium 3660 1 / 2 < 1240 U 3660 855Selenium 1.22 J 1 / 2 < 2.48 U 1.22 1.71 JSilver 2.1 J 1 / 2 2.1 4.96 J < 3.42 USodium 114000 2 / 2 114000 248 196 171Thallium 7.55 2 / 2 7.55 4.96 3.43 3.42Vanadium 40.2 2 / 2 29.2 4.96 40.2 3.42Zinc 20900 2 / 2 20900 2.48 2020 1.71Notes:ND = Not DetectedRL = Reporting LimitQual = QualifierJ = EstimatedU = NondetectUJ = Estimated Nondetectmg/kg = milligram per kilogramμg/kg = microgram per kilogramFrequency indicates the number of times a given analyte was detected in theAnalyte frequency information does not include dilutions and reanalyses.Results in the table represent the highest reported concentration for each analyte.Blank space for a set of analytes indicates that the sample was not analyzed for these parameters.Q:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 1 of 1 1/20/2005TABLE 5-3SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SURFACE WATER SAMPLESSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESFIELD ID SU01SW00DATE COLLECTED December 17, 2003Maximum Frequency Result RL QualVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/L)cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.63 J 1 / 1 0.63 1 JEthylbenzene 1.7 1 / 1 1.7 1m/p-Xylene 130 1 / 1 130 10o-Xylene 8.5 1 / 1 8.5 1SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/L)2,4-Dimethylphenol 24 1 / 1 24 9.4PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (mg/L)Total petroleum hydrocarbons, diesel fraction 0.44 J 1 / 1 0.44 0.47 JMETALS (mg/L)Barium 0.038 1 / 1 0.0383 0.01Beryllium 0.001 J 1 / 1 0.0015 0.01 JCalcium 24.1 1 / 1 24.1 1Cobalt 0.006 J 1 / 1 0.0062 0.01 JIron 4.93 1 / 1 4.93 0.2Magnesium 3.42 1 / 1 3.42 1Manganese 0.146 1 / 1 0.146 0.01Potassium 4.11 1 / 1 4.11 2Sodium 1.54 1 / 1 1.54 1Zinc 0.016 1 / 1 0.0161 0.01Notes:ND = Not DetectedRL = Reporting LimitQual = QualifierJ = EstimatedU = NondetectUJ = Estimated Nondetectμg/L = microgram per literFrequency indicates the number of times a given analyte was detected in the samples.Analyte frequency information does not include dilutions and reanalyses.Results in the table represent the highest reported concentration for each analyte.Blank space for a set of analytes indicates that the sample was not analyzed for these parameters.Q:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 1 of 1 1/20/2005SECTIONSIX Contamination AssessmentQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 6-1The chemical results of surface and subsurface soil samples were assessed to determine thenature and extent of contaminants at the Wheelabrator Baghouses. Chemical concentrationsdetected at or above 50% of the calculated, site-specific Industrial Closure Level (Level 2)values (discussed in Section 7, compared in Tables 7-1 and 7-2, and shown on Figures 6-1 and6-2) were considered to be elevated. Detected concentrations less than 50% of the Level 2values were considered to be low.6.1 NEAR SURFACE SOILS AND SEDIMENTSThe assessment of chemicals detected in near surface soils and sediments was based on 25samples generally collected from the top two or three feet of 13 soil borings, nine surface soilsample locations, and three sediment sampling locations within and around the WheelabratorBaghouses (see Figure 2-1). (It should be noted that sample 4401SS02 was collected from 2.8 to3.8 feet bgs because clayey gravel was encountered at this location from the surface to 2.8 feetbgs.)Metals were detected in all near surface soil and sediment samples. VOCs and SVOCs weredetected in about two-thirds of the near surface soil samples collected during the twoinvestigations. TPH was detected in one-quarter of the Phase I RI samples analyzed for thisparameter.6.1.1 VOCsNine VOCs were detected at low concentrations in the near surface soil and sediment samplescollected during both investigations (see Table 5-1 and Figure 6-1). The detected VOCs weregenerally present in concentrations below or just above the reporting limits.The presence of these VOCs may be related to industrial operations at the WheelabratorBaghouses. The detected VOCs were used in a risk screen for soil in Section 7.2.6.1.2 SVOCsEighteen SVOCs, including 12 polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), were detected in thenear surface soil and sediment samples (see Table 5-1 and Figure 6-1). The detected SVOCswere generally present in concentrations below or just above the reporting limits.The presence of these SVOCs may be related to industrial operations at the WheelabratorBaghouses. The detected SVOCs were used in a risk screen for soil in Section 7.2.6.1.3 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons – Diesel FractionTPH – diesel fraction was detected in two of the eight near surface soil and sediment samplesthat were analyzed for this parameter (see Table 5-1 and Figure 6-1). The presence of TPH –diesel fraction may be related to industrial operations at the Wheelabrator Baghouses. Thedetected TPH – diesel fraction concentrations are discussed in Section 7.5.SECTIONSIX Contamination AssessmentQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 6-26.1.4 MetalsMetals were detected in all near surface soil samples (see Table 5-1). Since metals are naturallyoccurring constituents of soil, the detected metal concentrations were compared to establishedbackground levels for Upland soils (see Section 7.2). The comparison of detected metalconcentrations to background levels for all soil samples is provided in Table 7-1.Based on this comparison, concentrations of 16 metals (aluminum, antimony, arsenic, barium,beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, manganese, nickel, selenium, thallium,vanadium, and zinc) exceeded background levels (see Figure 6-1). The presence of these metalsmay be related to industrial operations at the Wheelabrator Baghouses.6.2 SUBSURFACE SOILSThe assessment of chemicals detected in subsurface soils were based on 15 samples collectedfrom 2 to 11 feet bgs from eight borings located within and around the Wheelabrator Baghouses(see Figures 2-1 and 2-2).Metals were detected in all subsurface soil samples. VOCs were detected in about 80 percent ofthe subsurface soil samples, and SVOCs were detected in about 75 percent of the subsurface soilsamples collected during the two investigations.6.2.1 VOCsFive VOCs were detected at low concentrations in the subsurface soil samples collected duringboth investigations (see Table 5-1 and Figures 6-1 and 6-2). Elevated concentrations ofethylbenzene and xylenes were present in three of the four samples collected from the twoborings located the vicinity of the UST. This UST was subsequently removed. The other threeVOCs were generally present in concentrations just above the reporting limits.The presence of these VOCs is most likely related to industrial operations at the WheelabratorBaghouses. The detected VOCs were used in a risk screen for soil in Section 7.2.6.2.2 SVOCsNineteen SVOCs, including 11 PAHs, were detected in the subsurface soil samples (see Table 5-1 and Figures 6-1 and 6-2). The SVOC concentrations were generally below or just above thereporting limits. Exceptions include bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, di-n-butyl phthalate, andnaphthalene, all of which were present in two of the four samples collected from the two boringslocated the vicinity of the UST. This UST was subsequently removed.The presence of these SVOCs is most likely related to industrial operations at the WheelabratorBaghouses. The detected SVOCs were used in a risk screen for soil in Section 7.2.SECTIONSIX Contamination AssessmentQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 6-36.2.3 MetalsMetals were detected in all subsurface soil samples (see Table 5-1). Since metals are naturallyoccurring constituents of soil, the detected metal concentrations were compared to establishedbackground levels for Upland soils (see Section 7.2). The comparison of detected metalconcentrations to background levels for all soil samples is provided in Table 7-1.Based on this comparison, concentrations of 16 metals (aluminum, antimony, arsenic, barium,beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, manganese, nickel, selenium, thallium,vanadium, and zinc) exceeded background levels (see Figures 6-1 and 6-2). The presence ofthese metals is most likely related to industrial operations at the Wheelabrator Baghouses.6.3 SLUDGEThe assessment of chemicals detected in sludge associated with the UST was based on twosludge samples, one collected from the tank bottom and the other collected from the bottom ofthe connected sump (see Figure 2-2). Both sludge samples were collected in December 2003 aspart of the supplement to the Phase II RFI.VOCs, SVOCs, and metals were detected in both sludge samples.6.3.1 VOCsTwo VOCs were detected in the sludge samples (see Table 5-2 and Figure 6-2). Elevatedconcentrations of ethylbenzene and xylenes were present in both sludge samples associated withthe UST. This UST was subsequently removed.The presence of these VOCs is related to industrial operations at the Wheelabrator Baghouses.However, because the UST was subsequently removed the detected VOCs are no longer relevantin the context of a risk screen.6.3.2 SVOCsFour SVOCs, including two PAHs, were detected in the sludge samples (see Table 5-2 andFigure 6-2). The SVOC concentrations were generally below or just above the reporting limits.None of the concentrations present in sludge samples associated with the UST was consideredelevated. The UST was subsequently removed.The presence of these SVOCs is related to industrial operations at the Wheelabrator Baghouses.However, because the UST was subsequently removed the detected SVOCs are no longerrelevant in the context of a risk screen.6.3.3 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons – Diesel FractionTPH – diesel fraction was detected in both sludge samples (see Table 5-2 and Figure 6-2). Thepresence of TPH – diesel fraction is related to industrial operations at the WheelabratorSECTIONSIX Contamination AssessmentQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 6-4Baghouses. However, because the UST was subsequently removed the detected TPH is nolonger relevant in the context of a risk screen.6.3.4 MetalsConcentrations of 10 metals (antimony, barium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, lead, nickel,selenium, thallium, and zinc) exceeded background levels (see Figure 6-2). The presence ofthese metals is most likely related to industrial operations at the Wheelabrator Baghouses.6.4 STANDING WATERThe assessment of chemicals detected in standing water associated with the UST was based onone sample collected from the sump connected to this UST (see Figure 2-2). The sample wascollected in December 2003 as part of the supplement to the Phase II RFI.VOCs, SVOCs, and metals were detected in the standing water sample.6.4.1 VOCsFour VOCs were detected in the standing water sample (see Table 5-3 and Figure 6-2). TheseVOCs were generally present in concentrations below or just above the reporting limits. TheUST and the sump where the sample was collected were subsequently removed.The presence of these VOCs is related to industrial operations at the Wheelabrator Baghouses.However, because the UST was subsequently removed the detected VOCs are no longer relevantin the context of a risk screen.6.4.2 SVOCsOne SVOC was detected in the standing water sample (see Table 5-3 and Figure 6-2). This VOCconcentration was just above the reporting limits. The UST and the sump where the sample wascollected were subsequently removed.The presence of these SVOCs is related to industrial operations at the Wheelabrator Baghouses.However, because the UST was subsequently removed the detected SVOCs are no longerrelevant in the context of a risk screen.6.4.3 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons – Diesel FractionTPH – diesel fraction was detected in the standing water sample (see Table 5-3 and Figure 6-2).The presence of TPH – diesel fraction is related to industrial operations at the WheelabratorBaghouses. However, because the UST was subsequently removed the detected TPH is nolonger relevant in the context of a risk screen.SECTIONSIX Contamination AssessmentQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 6-56.4.4 MetalsNo concentration of metals detected in standing water exceeded background levels. However,the presence of these metals may be related to industrial operations at the WheelabratorBaghouses.6.5 OVERALL ASSESSMENTBased on the collection and analysis of 22 near surface soil samples, 15 subsurface soil samples,three sediment samples, two sludge samples, and one standing water sample, the overallcontamination assessment of the Wheelabrator Baghouses resulted in the following observations(see Figure 6-1):· Low levels of nine VOCs were detected in soils throughout the site. However, the highestconcentrations were associated with Borings 44SB01 and 44SB02 (2004), located in thevicinity of the UST, which was subsequently removed.· Low levels of 20 SVOCs, of which 12 are PAHs, were detected in soils throughout the site.However, again the highest concentrations were associated with Borings 44SB01 and44SB02 (2004), located in the vicinity of the UST, which was subsequently removed.· Relatively low levels of TPH – diesel were encountered in two of eight near surface soil andsediment samples.· Sixteen metals exceeded background levels in site soils and sediments by factors rangingfrom 1.1 to 12.5 times background values. Most metals that exceeded background levelsoccurred in samples collected from the middle or deeper depth intervals of the soil borings.· VOCs, SVOCs, TPH – diesel fraction, and metals were detected in two sludge samples and astanding water sample collected from the UST and an associated sump. However, becausethe UST was subsequently removed these detected chemicals are no longer relevant in thecontext of a risk screen.SECTIONSEVEN Human Health Risk EvaluationQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 7-17.1 INTRODUCTION7.1.1 PurposeThis section provides a Human Health Risk Screening for contaminants identified at theWheelabrator Baghouses. The risk screening process identifies Chemicals of Potential Concern(COPCs) for the estimation of risks. Methods used in this risk screening are those specified bythe Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) in the Risk Integrated System ofClosure (RISC) Guidance (IDEM 2000), and are consistent with current USEPA risk guidance(USEPA 1989).7.2 RISK SCREENING PROCESS7.2.1 Identification of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPCs)COPCs, although a subset of all chemicals detected on-site, represent those chemicals that havethe greatest potential to pose health risks at the site. Through careful screening of site data, theCOPCs focus on the issue of whether the contaminants associated with past operations at the sitepose a potential health threat to site receptor populations, and whether remediation is warranted,without significantly underestimating overall site risks.Data from the Phase I RI (W-C 1998), the Phase II RFI (current data), and the confirmatorysampling results collected from the excavation following removal of the UST (CAPE 2004) wereused in the identification of COPCs and the development of exposure point concentrations andrisk. These data were considered representative of current conditions, and should provide aconservative estimate of potential future conditions (i.e., in all likelihood future concentrationswould be lower due to factors such as natural attenuation).Site data were segregated according to exposure media (i.e., surface soil [generally less than 3feet bgs] and total soils [surface and subsurface soil]). Chemicals detected in all soils wereevaluated as part of the risk screening process to establish COPCs. Although subsurface soilswere collected to a maximum depth of 11 feet bgs, no potential exposure exists below 10 feetbgs. The maximum detected concentrations from each medium were compared to the followingcriteria in order to identify the medium-specific COPCs:· Site-specific background levels (inorganic compounds only) developed as part of the Phase IRI Report (W-C, 1998).· IDEM RISC Industrial Default Closure Levels (Level 1)· Calculated site-specific Industrial Closure Levels (Level 2) based on IDEM RISC guidance· The National Research Council’s Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA) for essentialnutrientsIt should be noted that all confirmatory sampling results from the UST excavation did notwarrant any additional consideration following the first two steps listed above (i.e., comparisonto site-specific background levels and IDEM RISC Industrial Default Closure Levels [Level 1]).SECTIONSEVEN Human Health Risk EvaluationQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 7-2In addition, the samples associated with the UST (i.e., those from borings 44SB01 and 44SB02collected in 2004, TASD01, and SUSW/SD01) were not included in the risk screen because thesoil, tank and sump associated with these samples have been removed from the site.Also, given appropriate toxicity information, a Default Closure Level 1 was calculated forcompounds not listed by IDEM using the exposure equations listed in the IDEM RISC guidance(IDEM 2000). Site-specific Industrial Closure Levels (Level 2) were calculated using theindustrial/commercial exposure equations listed in the IDEM RISC guidance with the exceptionof the following:· Groundwater ingestion was considered to be incidental ingestion only (0.01 L/day) ratherthan a drinking water rate of ingestion of 1 L/day since groundwater in the vicinity of the siteis not used as a drinking water source.· A dilution attenuation factor (DAF) of 1 was used rather than 20 due to the karst geology atthe site.Adjustments made to the Level 2 numbers due to these site-specific parameters resulted in Level2 screening values 5 times higher than the Level 1 values for soil.In the case of organic compounds, a COPC was defined as any chemical that exceeded itsrespective Level 1 and Level 2 screening value. For inorganic compounds, a COPC was definedas any chemical that exceeded both its Level 1 and Level 2 screening value and the backgroundlevel or RDA. The screening values used in the COPC selection process for soil/sediment andwater are summarized in Appendix B, Tables B-1 and B-2, respectively. Supportingdocumentation for development of screening values is included in Tables B-3 through B-5.The INAAP data and COPC selection process are summarized in Table 7-1 (total soil) and Table7-2 (surface soil). These tables provide summary information, including a list of all detectedchemicals in each medium, the maximum detected concentrations, the frequency of detection,the screening values used for COPC selection (from Tables B-1and B-2), and identification ofthose chemicals that fail the screening process (i.e., the COPCs). As noted in these tables, thefollowing COPCs were identified in both total soil and surface soil:· Aluminum· Arsenic· Cobalt· ManganeseSince no toxicity data is available to quantify risk the risk from TPH – diesel fraction, thisparameter is assessed qualitatively in Section 7.6.7.3 EXPOSURE POINT CONCENTRATIONSINAAP is an inactive, restricted-access facility, and is likely to remain so for the foreseeablefuture.SECTIONSEVEN Human Health Risk EvaluationQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 7-37.3.1 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL)Exposure point concentrations (EPCs) are the average chemical concentrations to which areceptor is potentially exposed when contact is made with a specific environmental medium, inthis case soil. The equation used to calculate the UCL concentration is presented below:Equation 1:UCL = e( x+0.5s 2 +sH / n-1)where:UCL = 95% upper confidence limite = constant (base of the natural log, equal to 2.718)x = mean of the transformed datas = standard deviation of the transformed dataH = H statistic (e.g., from table published in Gilbert, 1987)n = number of samplesThe statistical summary of EPCs for total soil are presented in Table 7-3, and the EPCs forsurface soil/sediment are presented in Table 7-4, and supporting documentation is provided inAppendix B (Tables B-6 and B-7).The UCLs for aluminum, arsenic, and manganese in both surface and total soils exceeded therespective IDEM Industrial Closure Level 2 or Level 1 (in the case of arsenic, a Level 2 valuecould not be calculated for arsenic because the Level 1 value is based on the direct exposure tosoil pathway, not the migration to groundwater pathway) risk screening/background values.Cobalt was the only COPC with a maximum concentration (303 mg/kg) that exceeds the Level 2risk screening value (185 mg/kg) where the UCLs for both surface soil (65.99 mg/kg) and totalsoil (68.79 mg/kg) were below the Level 2 risk screening value.Arsenic was detected in soil at concentrations high enough that the reasonable maximumexposures (RMEs, 42.42 mg/kg in total soil and 48.53 mg/kg in surface soil) exceeded theUpland background soil screening value (23.74 mg/kg). Based on this, the estimated excesscancer risk for arsenic, calculated by dividing the RME by the Level 1 value (20 mg/kg) andmultiplying the result by 1 x 10-5 (see Table 2-2) is 2.12 x 10-5 for total soil and 2.43 x 10-5 forsurface soil. Although both of these estimated excess risks exceed the IDEM RISC program’starget risk goal for carcinogens of 1 x 10-5, both still fall within USEPA’s target risk range of1 x 10-6 to 1 x 10-4. In addition, regional background concentrations for arsenic range from 10 to73 mg/kg (USGS 1984). Based on the comparison of arsenic’s RMEs to the riskscreening/background values, further risk evaluation is not warranted for arsenic at Site 44.Aluminum is assessed qualitatively in Section 7.4 and manganese is assessed qualitatively inSection 7.5.SECTIONSEVEN Human Health Risk EvaluationQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 7-47.4 QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF EXPOSURE TO ALUMINUMAluminum was detected in all 31 soil samples; however, just nine of the 31 samples exceededthe mean plus two standard deviations background level. Statistically, approximately 29 % ofsamples exceed the calculated background level based on this method. The background data setwas highly variable and ranged from 10,600 to 33,200 mg/kg for Upland soils. The maximumsoil concentration of 117,000 mg/kg was outside of this background range, but the 95 % UCLsfor both total and surface soils were within the background range. For comparison, the USEPARegion 9 Preliminary Remediation Goal (PRG) for industrial soil is 100,000 mg/kg.Aluminum is the third most abundant element on earth, and it is used to make many commonitems such as soda cans and cookware. Aluminum components are used in antiperspirants,antacids, and medicine. Aluminum is also a naturally occurring metal commonly found in clayminerals and is present in surface water due to chemical weathering. There does not appear to bemuch of a risk of acute toxicity to aluminum in human health, nor do studies show a correlationbetween cancer and aluminum. Therefore, the exclusion of aluminum from the estimation ofpotential cumulative effects from exposure to total or surface soil at the Wheelabrator Baghousesis not likely to affect the conclusions of the human health risk evaluation for this site.7.5 QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF EXPOSURE TO MANGANESEManganese was detected in all of the soil samples collected at the site; however, only three of the31 samples exceeded the mean plus two standard deviations background level. Statistically,approximately 5 % of samples exceed the calculated background level based on this method.The background data set was highly variable and ranged from 426 to 23,100 mg/kg for Uplandsoils. The maximum soil concentration of 24,200 mg/kg was just outside of this backgroundrange, but the 95 % UCLs for both total and surface soils were well below the calculatedbackground level. For comparison, the USEPA Region 9 PRG for industrial soil is 32,000mg/kg.Manganese is an essential nutrient involved in the formation of bone and in amino acid,cholesterol, and carbohydrate metabolism. The risk of an adverse effect resulting from excessintake of manganese from food and supplements at levels up to 10 mg/day appears to be low.Dietary reference intakes for manganese range from 2 to 11 mg/day for infants and adultlactating women. The estimated daily intake at the site based on incidental ingestion of soil was2.4 mg/day indicating that adverse health effects would not be anticipated using the maximumdetected soil concentration. Based on its low frequency of detection above background levels,and on its status as an essential nutrient, manganese is not considered to be a contaminant at thesite.7.6 QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF EXPOSURE TO TPH – DIESEL FRACTIONEight surface soil and sediment samples were analyzed for TPH – diesel fraction during thePhase I RI and it was detected in two of the samples at concentrations of 220 and 270 mg/kg.These concentrations exceed the State of Indiana action level of 100 mg/kg for gasoline andSECTIONSEVEN Human Health Risk EvaluationQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 7-5diesel in soil. The action level, based on the presence of fresh, volatile fuel constituents, isconservative if one considers the decomposition process of aged fuel in soils. TPH is a complexmixture of hundreds of branched, straight-chain, cyclic, and aromatic carbon compounds, mostof which are not particularly toxic. However, a small fraction of fuel constituents are known tohave toxic or carcinogenic properties. The primary toxic fuel constituents include benzene,toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX) and PAHs, all of which were analyzed forindividually during the Phase I and/or Phase II investigations. No BTEX compounds or PAHswere identified as COPCs (i.e. all were below screening values). It is unlikely that the otherhydrocarbon constituents of TPH – diesel fraction would add significantly to the calculatedpotential health risk.TABLE 7-1COMPARISON OF TOTAL SOIL & SEDIMENT CONCENTRATIONS (ALL DEPTHS) TO SCREENING LEVELSSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESMaximum Daily Intake Recommended Daily Calculated COPC7?Detected from the Site3 Allowance4 Industrial (Y/N)Concentrations1 (Essential Metals) (Essential Metals) Closure Level 2 1,6 Basis8VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Butanone 1 / 22 30 260,000 N,ABenzene 3 / 22 41 670 N,ACarbon disulfide 6 / 22 11 82,000 N,AChloroform 4 / 22 8.3 1,200 N,AEthylbenzene 4 / 22 1600 200,000 N,Am/p-Xylene 1 / 18 100 410,000 N,AMethylene chloride 1 / 22 3 J 1,800 N,Ao-Xylene 1 / 18 3.3 J 410,000 N,AToluene 4 / 22 17 240,000 N,ASEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2,2-oxybis(1-Chloropropane) 1 / 14 200 J 250 N,A2-Methylnaphthalene 4 / 32 6,800 170,000S N,AAnthracene 2 / 32 200 J 51,000 N,ABenzo[a]anthracene 3 / 32 79 J 1,200,000 N,ABenzo[a]pyrene 2 / 32 77 J 1,500 N,ABenzo[b]fluoranthene 4 / 32 120 J 15,000 N,ABenzo[g,h,i]perylene 2 / 32 140 J 170,000S N,ABenzo[k]fluoranthene 4 / 32 100 J 39,000 N,ABis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 16 / 32 940 J 15,000 N,AButylbenzyl phthalate 2 / 32 51 J 930,000 N,AChrysene 6 / 32 81 J 25,000 N,ADibenz(ah)anthracene 1 / 32 79 J 1,500 N,ADi-n-butyl phthalate 4 / 32 19 J 2,000,000 N,ADi-n-octyl phthalate 3 / 32 56 J 2,000,000 N,AFluoranthene 2 / 32 90 J 880,000 N,AFluorene 4 / 32 1,400 1,100,000 N,AIndeno[1,2,3-c,d]pyrene 3 / 32 100 J 3,100 N,ANaphthalene 3 / 32 2,300 170,000 N,APhenanthrene 9 / 32 1,800 170,000S N,APyrene 7 / 32 300 J 570,000 N,APETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (μg/kg)Total petroleum hydrocarbons, diesel fraction 2 / 8 270 N,EMETALS (mg/kg)Aluminum 31 / 31 117,000 28,958 676C 3,380C Y,BAntimony 15 / 31 9.21 J 8.66 37 N,AArsenic 31 / 31 122 23.7 20 NA Y,BBarium 31 / 31 1,400 415 5,900 N,AChemicalIDEM IndustrialClosure Level 11,5Frequency ofDetectionBackgroundConcentrations2Q:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 1 of 2 1/20/2005TABLE 7-1COMPARISON OF TOTAL SOIL & SEDIMENT CONCENTRATIONS (ALL DEPTHS) TO SCREENING LEVELSSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESMaximum Daily Intake Recommended Daily Calculated COPC7?Detected from the Site3 Allowance4 Industrial (Y/N)Concentrations1 (Essential Metals) (Essential Metals) Closure Level 2 1,6 Basis8ChemicalIDEM IndustrialClosure Level 11,5Frequency ofDetectionBackgroundConcentrations2Beryllium 30 / 31 8.06 2.5 2,300 N,ACadmium 3 / 31 10.5 0.85 77 N,ACalcium 31 / 31 92,400 9.2 1200 N,CChromium 31 / 31 93.9 45.5 10,000 N,ACobalt 31 / 31 303 49.3 36.9C 185C Y,BCopper 30 / 31 953 47.5 1,700 N,AIron 31 / 31 94,700 9.5 10 N,CLead 31 / 31 492 39.4 230 1,150 N,AMagnesium 31 / 31 17,200 1.7 400 N,CManganese 31 / 31 24,200 13,294 96.3C 482C Y,BMercury 18 / 31 0.19 J 0.14 32 N,ANickel 31 / 31 1,580 70 2,700 N,APotassium 31 / 31 8,610 0.86 585 N,CSelenium 7 / 31 3.48 0.97 53 N,ASodium 26 / 31 573 0.057 1000 N,CThallium 10 / 31 17.4 5.17 13 65 N,AVanadium 31 / 31 106 65 31.6C 158C N,AZinc 31 / 31 621 198 10,000 N,A(1) Organics are reported in μg/kg. Inorganics are reported as mg/kg. Maximum of all soil depths.(2) Detected background concentrations for inorganics.(3) Daily intake from site soil (mg/day) = maximum detected concentration (mg/kg) x ingestion rate of 100 mg/day x conversionfactor of 1x 10-6 kg/mg.(4) National Research Council 1989.(5) IDEM Industrial soil values (Level 1) were used as screening criteria.(6) Level 2 values were calculated as described in Section 7.2.1.(7) Chemical of potential concern.(8) Yes or No. See A-F footnotes below.For chemicals identified as a chemicals of potential concern, the entire row appears in boldface font.IDEM = Indiana Department of Environmental ManagementC = Calculated value per IDEM guidance.S = A toxicologically similar compound was used as a surrogate.A = Does not exceed the screening level.B = Exceeds the screening value.C = The chemical is an essential nutrient; the calculated daily intake did not exceed the recommended daily allowance.D = Daily Intake exceeds the RDA.E = No toxicity data available to quantify risk. Chemical will be evaluated qualitatively in the risk screening.NA = Not available. The Level 1 value is based on direct exposure to soil; therefore, a Level 2 value cannot be calculated.Q:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 2 of 2 1/20/2005TABLE 7-2COMPARISON OF SURFACE SOIL & SEDIMENT CONCENTRATIONS TO SCREENING LEVELSSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESMaximum Daily Intake Recommended Daily Calculated COPC7?Detected from the Site3 Allowance4 Industrial (Y/N)Concentrations1 (Essential Metals) (Essential Metals) Closure Level 2 1,6 Basis8VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Butanone 1 / 15 30 260,000 N,ABenzene 2 / 15 2.4 670 N,ACarbon disulfide 5 / 15 6 J 82,000 N,AChloroform 2 / 15 7.6 1,200 N,AEthylbenzene 2 / 15 45 200,000 N,AMethylene chloride 1 / 15 3 J 1,800 N,Ao-Xylene 1 / 11 3.3 J 410,000 N,AToluene 4 / 15 17 240,000 N,ASEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Methylnaphthalene 2 / 21 6,800 170,000S N,AAnthracene 2 / 21 200 J 51,000 N,ABenzo[a]anthracene 2 / 21 79 J 1,200,000 N,ABenzo[a]pyrene 1 / 21 65 J 1,500 N,ABenzo[b]fluoranthene 2 / 21 97 J 15,000 N,ABenzo[g,h,i]perylene 1 / 21 100 J 170,000S N,ABenzo[k]fluoranthene 2 / 21 94 J 39,000 N,ABis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 12 / 21 940 J 15,000 N,AButylbenzyl phthalate 1 / 21 51 J 930,000 N,AChrysene 4 / 21 57 J 25,000 N,ADi-n-butyl phthalate 1 / 21 18 J 2,000,000 N,ADi-n-octyl phthalate 1 / 21 56 J 2,000,000 N,AFluoranthene 1 / 21 90 J 880,000 N,AFluorene 2 / 21 1,300 1,100,000 N,AIndeno[1,2,3-c,d]pyrene 1 / 21 83 J 3,100 N,ANaphthalene 1 / 21 47 170,000 N,APhenanthrene 4 / 21 1,100 170,000S N,APyrene 4 / 21 110 J 570,000 N,APETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (μg/kg)Total petroleum hydrocarbons, diesel fraction 2 / 8 270 N,EMETALS (mg/kg)Aluminum 20 / 20 44,500 28,958 676C 3,380C Y,BAntimony 9 / 20 8.06 J 8.66 37 N,A,FArsenic 20 / 20 122 23.7 20 NA Y,BBarium 20 / 20 360 415 5,900 N,A,FBeryllium 20 / 20 5.85 2.5 2,300 N,ACalcium 20 / 20 92,400 9.2 1200 N,CChromium 20 / 20 93.9 45.5 10,000 N,AChemicalIDEM IndustrialClosure Level 11,5Frequency ofDetectionBackgroundConcentrations2Q:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 1 of 2 1/20/2005TABLE 7-2COMPARISON OF SURFACE SOIL & SEDIMENT CONCENTRATIONS TO SCREENING LEVELSSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESMaximum Daily Intake Recommended Daily Calculated COPC7?Detected from the Site3 Allowance4 Industrial (Y/N)Concentrations1 (Essential Metals) (Essential Metals) Closure Level 2 1,6 Basis8ChemicalIDEM IndustrialClosure Level 11,5Frequency ofDetectionBackgroundConcentrations2Cobalt 20 / 20 244 49.3 36.9C 185C Y,BCopper 20 / 20 190 47.5 1,700 N,AIron 20 / 20 94,700 9.5 10 N,CLead 20 / 20 492 39.4 230 1,150 N,AMagnesium 20 / 20 17,200 1.7 400 N,CManganese 20 / 20 16,200 13,294 96.3C 482C Y,BMercury 11 / 20 0.19 J 0.14 32 N,ANickel 20 / 20 190 70 2,700 N,APotassium 20 / 20 6,840 JI 0.68 585 N,CSelenium 5 / 20 3.48 0.97 53 N,ASodium 17 / 20 311 J 0.031 1000 N,CThallium 5 / 20 5.72 5.17 13 N,AVanadium 20 / 20 96.2 65 31.6C 158C N,AZinc 20 / 20 516 198 10,000 N,A(1) Organics are reported in μg/kg. Inorganics are reported as mg/kg. Maximum of all soil depths.(2) Detected background concentrations for inorganics.(3) Daily intake from site soil (mg/day) = maximum detected concentration (mg/kg) x ingestion rate of 100 mg/day x conversionfactor of 1x 10-6 kg/mg.(4) National Research Council 1989.(5) IDEM Industrial soil values (Level 1) were used as screening criteria.(6) Level 2 values were calculated as described in Section 7.2.1.(7) Chemical of potential concern.(8) Yes or No. See A-F footnotes below.For chemicals identified as a chemicals of potential concern, the entire row appears in boldface font.IDEM = Indiana Department of Environmental ManagementC = Calculated value per IDEM guidance.S = A toxicologically similar compound was used as a surrogate.A = Does not exceed the screening level.B = Exceeds the screening value.C = The chemical is an essential nutrient; the calculated daily intake did not exceed the recommended daily allowance.D = Daily Intake exceeds the RDA.NA = Not available. The Level 1 value is based on direct exposure to soil; therefore, a Level 2 value cannot be calculated.Q:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 2 of 2 1/20/2005TABLE 7-3TOTAL SOIL AND SEDIMENT EXPOSURE POINT CONCENTRATIONSSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESGroup Chemical Units No. of SamplesMax DetectedConc Mean Conc(a) Mean ln Result(b) SD ln Result(c) H(d) UCL(e)Metal Aluminum mg/kg 31 117,000 25,487 9.95 0.61 2.02 31,333Metal Arsenic mg/kg 31 122 33.6 3.32 0.62 2.03 42.42Metal Cobalt mg/kg 31 303 50.6 3.49 0.87 2.28 68.79Metal Manganese mg/kg 31 24,200 6012 8.17 1.22 2.69 13,563Notes: SVOC - Semi-volatile organic compounda) Arithmetic mean concentration in the designated media. When the concentration of a chemical was reported below laboratory reportinglimits in a sample, one-half of the laboratory reporting limit was used in the calculation of the average (see Table B-24).b) Arithmetic average of the natural log transformed data (logarithmic mean).c) Standard deviation of the natural log transformed data (logarithmic standard deviation).d) H statistic (Gilbert 1987).e) UCL - 95% Upper confidence limit (mg/kg) on the logarithmic mean (Gilbert 1987).Q:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 1 of 1 1/20/2005TABLE 7-4SURFACE SOIL AND SEDIMENT EXPOSURE POINT CONCENTRATIONSSITE 44 - WHEELABRATOR BAGHOUSESGroup Chemical Units No. of SamplesMax DetectedConc Mean Conc(a) Mean ln Result(b) SD ln Result(c) H(d) UCL(e)Metal Aluminum mg/kg 20 44,500 20,296 9.80 0.51 2.01 25,909Metal Arsenic mg/kg 20 122 35 3.33 0.67 2.18 48.53Metal Cobalt mg/kg 20 244 42.8 3.38 0.84 2.38 65.99Metal Manganese mg/kg 20 16,200 16,200 8.07 1.14 2.78 12,534Notes: SVOC - Semi-volatile organic compounda) Arithmetic mean concentration in the designated media. When the concentration of a chemical was reported below laboratory reportinglimits in a sample, one-half of the laboratory reporting limit was used in the calculation of the average (see Table B-24).b) Arithmetic average of the natural log transformed data (logarithmic mean).c) Standard deviation of the natural log transformed data (logarithmic standard deviation).d) H statistic (Gilbert 1987).e) UCL - 95% Upper confidence limit (mg/kg) on the logarithmic mean (Gilbert 1987).Q:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Tables_Rev1.xls Page 1 of 1 1/20/2005SECTIONEIGHT Ecological Risk EvaluationQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 8-18.1 INTRODUCTIONThere is no formally-promulgated, official state guidance for performance of ecological riskassessments (ERAs) at potentially contaminated sites in Indiana. USEPA has released guidancefor the conduct of ecological risk assessment, specifically USEPA (1998). These guidelines, “setforth current scientific thinking and approaches for conducting and evaluating ecological riskassessments.” The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) released Environmental QualityRisk Assessment Handbook, Volume II: Environmental Evaluation in 1996 that applies to ERAs“for all USACE HTRW investigations, studies, and designs under Department of Defense,Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP), Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC),U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Superfund Program, Civil Works, and Work forOthers” (USACE 1996). This is the primary resource of guidance for the ERA(s) withinINAAP. The EPA Emergency Response Team (ERT, Edison, New Jersey), under the authorityof OSWER Directive No. 9285.7-17 of August 12, 1994, has developed guidance for ecologicalrisk application at Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act(CERCLA, otherwise known as Superfund) sites, which is also applicable to ERAs performed atINAAP. The interim final was released in June 1997 (EPA 1997).As overall guidance for the performance of the ecological evaluation are the natural resourcemanagement goals for the INAAP facility and grounds (McClellan 1997, Indiana Department ofNatural Resources [IDNR] 1994, Tetra Tech EM 1999). The natural resources are managed sothat the wildlife, agricultural, recreational and industrial purposes of the INAAP grounds areaccomplished in concert with each other and in full compliance with a long term natural resourcestewardship responsibility (McClellen 1997). It is important to emphasize that not all areas willbe managed as natural or feral habitat for ecological resources. Some areas will be so managedwhile others are specifically designated as industrial and/or agricultural lands and will bemanaged as such (McClellen 1997). Still other areas (e.g., the Jenny Lind Pond and Run area)have been designated as sensitive areas due to the presence of endangered species and as naturalareas within the INAAP grounds (IDNR 1994, Tetra Tech EM 1999).8.2 PURPOSE AND SCOPEEcological risk assessment is:... the process that evaluates the likelihood that adverse ecological effects may occur orare occurring as a result of exposure to one or more stressors. (USEPA 1992a, USEPA1998).In the present context, “adverse ecological effects” are understood to be anthropogenic changesconsidered undesirable because they alter valued structural or functional characteristics ofecological systems (USACE 1996; USEPA 1998). The “stressors” at issue are chemicalcontaminants.SECTIONEIGHT Ecological Risk EvaluationQ:\1616\9601\inaap_phii_rfi_site44\Final\Site 44 Secs 1-10 Text_Rev1.doc\20-Jan-05 /OMA 8-28.3 OVERVIEW OF ECOLOGICAL EVALUATION PROCESSThe first three steps of this ecological risk evaluation roughly correspond to a preliminary, orscreening level (Tier I) wherein: (1) the presence of an ecological component is determined; (2)the contaminated media to which the ecological component(s) could be exposed are identified;and (3) the magnitude of contamination in
Origin:	2005-01-20
Source:	http://indianamemory.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15078coll17/id/33759
Collection:	Clark County Collections
Rights:	http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/
Copyright:	Charlestown-Clark County Public Library provides access to these materials for educational and research purposes and makes no warranty with regard to their use for other purposes. The written permission of the copyright owners and/or holders of other rights such as publicity and/or privacy rights is required for distribution, reproduction, or other use of protected items beyond that allowed by fair use or other statutory exemptions. There may be content that is protected as works for hire copyright held by the party that commissioned the original work and/or under the copyright or neighboring-rights laws of other nations. Responsibility for making an independent legal assessment of an item and securing any necessary permissions ultimately rests with persons desiring to use the item.
Geography:	Charlestown, Clark County, Indiana 38.4357546,-85.6577676
Subjects:	Maps Indiana Ordnance Works (U.S.) Hoosier Ordnance Plant Indiana Arsenal Indiana Army Ammunition Plant Explosives Industry--Indiana Gunpowder, Smokeless Ordnance manufacture Black powder manufacture Facility One ICI Americas Inc Clark County (Ind.) Charlestown (Ind.) United States. Army Ordnance and Ordnance Stores INAAP

Further information on this record can be found at its source.