INAAP building 6611 sump site 87 report Oct 2002

Description:	The revised final report for building 6611 sump site 87 at Indiana Army Ammunition Plant of Phase II RCRA facility investigation prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in October 2002.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. REVISED FINAL REPORTBUILDING 6611 SUMP – SITE 87INDIANA ARMY AMMUNITION PLANTPHASE II RCRA FACILITY INVESTIGATIONPrepared forU.S. Army Corps of EngineersLouisville DistrictOctober 2002Prepared byURS 12120 Shamrock Plaza, Suite 300Omaha, Nebraska 68154TABLE OF CONTENTSSection PageQ:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev2 (revised final).doc\25-Sep-02 /OMA iExecutive Summary ..........................................................................................................................ES-1Section 1 Site Location and Description....................................................................................... 1-11.1 Operational History and Waste Characteristics ....................................... 1-21.2 Previous Investigations ............................................................................ 1-31.3 Report Organization................................................................................. 1-3Section 2 Field Activities Summary .............................................................................................. 2-12.1 Geophysical Survey ................................................................................. 2-12.2 Soil and Sediment Sampling.................................................................... 2-12.2.1 Soil ............................................................................................... 2-12.2.2 Sediment ...................................................................................... 2-22.3 Field Screening Results............................................................................ 2-22.4 IDW Disposition ...................................................................................... 2-3Section 3 Physical Investigation Results ..................................................................................... 3-13.1 Topography and Surface Features ........................................................... 3-13.2 Local Surficial Geology........................................................................... 3-13.2.1 Geophysical Survey Results ........................................................ 3-13.2.2 Soil Borings and Geotechnical Results........................................ 3-13.3 Shallow Hydrogeology ............................................................................ 3-3Section 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 Metals........................................................................................... 6-16.2 Subsurface Soils....................................................................................... 6-2TABLE OF CONTENTSSection PageQ:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev2 (revised final).doc\25-Sep-02 /OMA ii6.2.1 VOCs............................................................................................ 6-26.2.2 SVOCs ......................................................................................... 6-26.2.3 Metals........................................................................................... 6-2Section 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) ........ 7-1Section 8 Ecological Risk Evaluation ........................................................................................... 8-18.1 Introduction.............................................................................................. 8-18.1.1 Purpose......................................................................................... 8-28.1.2 Background.................................................................................. 8-28.1.3 Technical Approach ..................................................................... 8-38.2 Screening Level Ecological Risk Evaluation........................................... 8-38.2.1 Habitat Assessment and Applicable Media ................................. 8-48.2.2 Identification of Chemicals of Potential Ecological Concern(COPECs) .................................................................................... 8-58.2.2.1 Environmental Screening Values for Higher Vertebratesand Chemicals of Potential ecological Concern .......................... 8-68.3 Tier II Ecological Risk Assessment......................................................... 8-98.3.1 Problem Formulation ................................................................... 8-98.3.1.1 Relevant Ecological Issues and Environmental Setting 8-98.3.1.2 Summary and Assessment Endpoints ......................... 8-148.3.1.3 Exposure Assessment.................................................. 8-158.3.1.4 Toxicity (Effects) Assessment .................................... 8-188.3.2 Analysis Plan ............................................................................. 8-208.3.2.1 Measurement Endpoints and Receptors of Concern... 8-208.3.2.2 Toxicity Reference Values for Risk Characterization 8-258.4 Risk Characterization............................................................................. 8-26TABLE OF CONTENTSSection PageQ:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev2 (revised final).doc\25-Sep-02 /OMA iii8.4.1 Transient and Migratory Herbivores – Assessment EndpointNumber 1 ................................................................................... 8-278.4.2 Transient and Migratory Omnivores – Assessment EndpointNumber 2 ................................................................................... 8-278.4.3 Transient and Migratory 1st Order Carnivores – AssessmentEndpoint Number 3.................................................................... 8-278.4.4 Transient and Migratory 2nd Order Carnivores – AssessmentEndpoint Number 4.................................................................... 8-278.4.5 Risk Characterization Summary and Ecological Significance .. 8-288.5 Uncertainty Analysis.............................................................................. 8-28Section 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 Soil and Sediment ................................... 9-29.1.2.2 Subsurface Soil Samples............................................... 9-29.1.3 Human Health Risk Screen/Assessment...................................... 9-29.1.4 Ecological Risk Screen / Assessment .......................................... 9-29.2 Recommendations.................................................................................... 9-3Section 10 References.................................................................................................................... 10-1TABLE OF CONTENTSList of TablesQ:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev2 (revised final).doc\25-Sep-02 /OMA ivTable 2-1 Summary of Phase I RI Samples for Chemical AnalysisTable 2-2 Summary of Phase II RFI Samples for Chemical AnalysisTable 2-3 Summary of Field Screening Results for Organic Vapors in SoilSamplesTable 5-1 Summary of Chemicals Detected in Soil and Sediment SamplesTable 7-1 Comparison of Total Soil/Sediment Concentrations (All Depths) toScreening LevelsTable 7-2 Comparison of Maximum Surface Soil and Sediment Concentrations toScreening LevelsTable 8-1 Comparison of Potential Dietary (Foodweb) Concentrations Based onMaximum Water/Soil/Sediment Concentrations to Ecological ScreeningValuesTable 8-2 Chemicals Selected as Chemicals of Potential Ecological Concern(COPECs) for Indirect (Foodweb) ExposuresTable 8-3 Physical and Behavioral Characteristic of Representative Species Selectedas Receptors of Concern (ROCs)Table 8-4 Assumed Dietary Compositions for the Representative ROCsTable 8-5 Oral Toxicity Reference Values (TRVs) Selected for Indirect (Foodweb)Exposures to COPECsTable 8-6 Ecological Hazard Quotient (HQ) Results for Representative Herbivores,Assessment Endpoint #1Table 8-7 Ecological HQ Results for Representative Omnivores, AssessmentEndpoint #2Table 8-8 Ecological HQ Results for Representative 1st-Order Carnivores, AssessmentEndpoint #3Table 8-9 Ecological HQ Results for Representative 2nd-Order Carnivores,Assessment Endpoint #4TABLE OF CONTENTSList of FiguresQ:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev2 (revised final).doc\25-Sep-02 /OMA vFigure 1-1 Site Location MapFigure 1-2 Surface Features MapFigure 2-1 Sample Location MapFigure 3-1 Electromagnetic Survey Results, Geonics EM-31 Vertical DipoleQuadrature PhaseFigure 3-2 Electromagnetic Survey Results, Geonics EM-38 Vertical DipoleQuadrature PhaseFigure 3-3 Geologic Cross-SectionFigure 6-1 Concentrations of Chemicals Detected in Soil and SedimentFigure 8-1 Ecological Evaluation ProcessFigure 8-2 Conceptual Ecological Exposure (Direct and Foodweb) ModelTABLE OF CONTENTSList of AppendicesQ:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA viAppendix A Data Quality Review and ValidationAppendix B Human Health Risk Statistics and CalculationsAppendix C Ecological Risk Statistics and CalculationsAppendix D Daily Quality Control ReportsAppendix E Boring and Trench Logs; Topographic Survey DataAppendix F Geotechnical DataAppendix G Sample Collection Field SheetsAppendix H Summary of Analytical DataNote: Information contained in the Appendixes is included in CD-ROM format. The CD-ROMmay be found at the back of this binder.TABLE OF CONTENTSAcronym ListQ:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA viiACHe 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 System.AST 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 FactorsBTEX Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, XylenesBTFs Biota Transfer FactorsBtu British Thermal UnitBW Body WeightCERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability ActCDI 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 LimitsTABLE OF CONTENTSAcronym ListQ:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA viiiCSP Charlestown State ParkCTE Central Tendency ExposureCTV Critical Toxicity ValueDAF Dilution Attenuation FactorDBT Dibutyl phthalateDDD dichlorodiphenyldiehlorethaneDDE 4, 4 DDEDDT 1, 1’ (2,2,2-Trichloroethylidene)bis[4-chlorobenzene]DERP Defense Environmental Restoration ProgramDNA Deoxyribonucleic acidDOD Department of DefenseDQCR Data Quality Control ReportsDQO 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 ValueFC Fraction IngestedFSP Field Sampling PlanGABA Gamma-aminobutyric AcidGOCO Government-Owned, Contractor-Operatedgpm gallons per minuteTABLE OF CONTENTSAcronym ListQ:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA ixGPR Ground Penetrating RadarHEAST Health Effects Assessment Summary TablesHHRA Human Health Risk AssessmentHI Hazard IndexHLSC Human Life Cycle Safe ConcentrationHMW High Molecular WeightHOP Hoosier Ordnance PlantHQ 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 ResourcesIEUBK Integrated Exposure Uptake BiokineticINAAP Indiana Army Ammunition PlantIOW Indiana Ordnance Works Plant 1IRIS Integrated Risk Information SystemIWPCB Indiana Water Pollution Control BoardIWQC Indiana Water Quality CriteriaIOWP Indiana Ordnance Works Plant 2J/UJ Qualified EstimatedKg KilogramL/day Liter per dayLAP Load, Assemble, and PackLC LeachateLMW Low Molecular WeightLOAEL Lowest to Observed Adverse Effects LevelLOEC Lowest Observation Effect concentrationsLOQ Limits of QuantitationMATC Maximum Acceptable Toxicant ConcentrationTABLE OF CONTENTSAcronym ListQ:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA xMCL Maximum Contaminant LevelME Measurement Endpointmg/day milligrams per daymg/kg milligram per kilogrammg/m3 milligram per cubic meterMS/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 Polycyclic Aromatic HydrocarbonPCB Polychlorinated BiphenylPEL Probable – Effects – LevelPpm parts per millionPRG Preliminary Remediation GoalsPVC Polyvinyl ChlorideQA Quality AssuranceQAPP Quality Assurance Project PlanQC Quality Control“R” RejectedRAGS Risk Assessment Guidance for SuperfundRBC Risk-Based ConcentrationRCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery ActRDA Recommended Daily AllowanceRfD Reference DoseRFD-I Reference Inhalation DoseTABLE OF CONTENTSAcronym ListQ:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA xiRFI 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 SedimentSF-SH Slope Factor-Sulfhydryl ligandsSOP Standard Operating ProcedureSP SpringSS Shallow SoilSVOC Semivolatile Organic ChemicalsSW Surface 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 Solids“U” Qualified Nondetectμg/kg microgram per kilogramμg/L microgram per LiterTABLE OF CONTENTSAcronym ListQ:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA xiiμg/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 SurveyUST Underground Storage TankUTL Upper Tolerance LimitVOC Volatile Organic ChemicalsW-C Woodward-ClydeExecutive Summary Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA ES-1The following includes the results of the Phase II RCRA Facility Investigation (RFI) completedfor the Building 6611 Sump (Site 87) at the Indiana Army Ammunition Plant (INAAP). Thereport also summarizes the results of the previously completed Phase I Remedial Investigation(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 a Government-Owned, Contractor-Operated (GOCO), inactive militaryindustrial installation. The Army intends to transfer the property to the Local Reuse Authorityfor commercial development or to the State of Indiana for inclusion in the state park system. TheBuilding 6611 Sump is one of 90 sites identified at 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 reaching the Ohio River indirectly through thePheasant Run 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 Phase I and II investigations at the Building 6611 Sump included the completion of nine soilborings, the collection and analysis of 30 surface and subsurface soil samples, and one sedimentsample. Chemical analysis included VOCs, SVOCs, metals, TPH, and total organic carbon.Site 87 includes a pump station, an underground sewage collector tank, a drainage field, and abermed area. Normally, sanitary waste from the 1500 buildings is pumped (from the pumpstation) to the LAP Area Sewage Treatment Plant. During high flow conditions, overflowsewage enters the collector tank. The collector tank connects to a diversion box which connectto distribution tiles in the drainage field. The distribution tiles have been placed near the top of alayer of crushed stone. A series of collector tiles are located below this crushed stone layer. Thecollector tiles connect to piping that ultimately discharges to a sinkhole.Executive Summary Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA ES-2A gravel-covered earthen berm surrounds the pump station. The crest of the bermed area risesabout 8 feet above the floor of the pump station. Storm water within the bermed area dischargesto a small drainage ditch or swale through a culvert. This drainage ditch is connected to a largerdrainage ditch located east of the site. Surface water entering the drainage ditches flows throughthe west branch of Lentzier Creek, Lentzier Creek, and ultimately enters the Ohio River.Based on materials encountered, the drainage field appears to consist of approximately eight tonine feet of low plastic clay fill overlying four to five feet of crushed limestone. The crushedlimestone was typically underlain by bedrock or one to two feet of clay fill. Borings consistedprimarily of residual clay soil or several feet of clay fill over a few feet of residual clay soil.Refusal (likely due to bedrock) was encountered at about 13 feet bgs. Groundwater was notencountered in any of the direct push borings.Contamination was evaluated in near surface soil and sediment, and subsurface soil.Concentrations of VOCs and SVOCs were detected at low levels in both surface and subsurfacesoils. Several metals were detected at levels above background concentrations.A human health risk screen was performed on all contaminants found in surface soils/sedimentand total soil/sediment at the Building 6611 Sump. Human health Chemicals of PotentialConcern (COPCs) were not identified in total soil/sediment, or in surface soil/sediment;therefore, further human health evaluation of this site is not warranted.An ecological risk screen was performed on all contaminants found in surface soils and sedimentat the Building 6611 Sump. High molecular weight PAHs were characterized as a Contaminantsof Potential Ecological Concern (COPECs) in the screening process. These COPECs were onlydetected in 1 of 12 samples, and do not biomagnify. Based on the low frequency of detection ofthe COPECs and the site’s limited relevance to the overall ecosystem, there are no ecologicallyrelevant assessment endpoints associated with Site 87, and further ecological evaluation of thesite is not warranted.Data of sufficient quality and quantity to characterize the Building 6611 Sump (Site 87) has beencollected. Physical and chemical investigation results were used to evaluate potential humanhealth and ecological risks at the site. Based on the results of these evaluations, no further actionis recommended for Site 87.Site Location and DescriptionSECTIONONE Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA 1-1Building 6611 Sump (Site 87) islocated in the southwest portion ofINAAP (see Figure 1-1) and isbordered by the following:· North – 1500 BuildingsArea, grassland, andgravel access road· South – grassland,woodlands, and WestBranch Lentzier Creek· East – grassland,woodlands, anddrainage ditches· West – grassland andgravel access roadThe site includes a pump station, an underground sewage collector tank, a drainage field, and abermed area (see Figure 1-2).Pump StationThe pump station measures approximately 13 feet wide by 21 feet long by 8 feet high. An 8-inch thick concrete slab supports the pump station. The pump station walls and roof areconstructed of corrugated metal.A pump pit and wet well are located beneath the pump station. The pump pit and wet well haveapproximate capacities of 9,000 gallons and 5,700 gallons, respectively. The walls and bottomof the pump pit and wet well are constructed of concrete, measuring 10 inches and 8 inches inthickness, respectively. A 10-inch-thick concrete wall separates the pump pit and wet well.Sumps are located in the southwest corner of the pump pit and along the north wall of the wetwell.Underground Sewage Collector TankAn underground sewage collector tank is located adjacent to and east of the pump pit and wetwell. The collector tank has an approximate capacity of 43,000 gallons and is covered by abouttwo feet of soil. The walls, bottom, and top of the tank are made of 12-inch-thick concrete. Asump pit is located along the west wall of the tankDrainage FieldThe drainage field includes a brick filter bed, a diversion box, distribution tiles, collector tiles,and associated piping.Site Location and DescriptionSECTIONONE Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA 1-2The filter bed was constructed of fill soil underlain by a minimum of 4 feet of crushed stone. Atar paper layer was placed between the soil fill and the crushed stone (INAAP 1942). Thecrushed stone is underlain by a minimum of 2 inches of soil and then bedrock.According to as built drawings (INAAP 1942), a distribution box is connected to the collectortank by a cast iron pipe measuring 10 inches in diameter. Four-inch-diameter pipes connect thediversion box to 4-inch-diameter distribution tiles, spaced about 10 feet apart. The distributiontiles have been placed about 1 foot below the top of the crushed stone layer. Four-inch-diametercollector tiles are located along the bottom of the crushed stone. One collector tile is reportedlylocated about 5 feet from each side of each distribution tile. The collector tiles are connected toa 6-inch-diameter pipe, which, according to the as built, connected to an 8-inch cast iron pipeand ultimately discharged to a sinkhole.The manhole for the distribution was found. Upon inspection, the line leading to the distributionbox had been sealed. The as built indicates that the dimensions of drain field were about 155 ftlong by 55 ft wide.Bermed AreaA gravel-covered earthen berm surrounds the pump station. The earthen berm is bordered by awooden fence on the north, west, and south sides. Wooden stairs at the north corner of thebermed area allow access to the pump station.Storm water entering the bermed area drains through a culvert to a small drainage ditch or swalelocated on the east side of the site. This small drainage ditch connects to a larger drainage ditchlocated about 100 feet east of the site.1.1 OPERATIONAL HISTORY AND WASTE CHARACTERISTICSBased on interviews, aerial photographs, a records review, and site reconnaissance, the followingoperational history and waste characteristics have been determined:· The pump station, collector tank, drainage field, and bermed area were constructed in1942. The pump station and collector tank are still in use, but the drain field is not.· Sewage (sanitary waste) water from the 1500 Buildings enters the wet well via a10-inch-diameter pipe. This sewage water then enters the pump pit via two 12-inch-diameterpipes. Sewage water in the pump pit is pumped through an 8-inch cast ironforce main to the LAP Area Sewage Treatment Plant (Site 13). During high waterconditions in the pump pit, overflow sewage water flows to the collector tank via a12-inch-diameter pipe.· Overflow sewage water from high water conditions in the collector tank would flowto the drainage field prior to its being plugged.· Sewage water leaving the drainage field flowed through an 8-inch cast iron pipe to asinkhole, according to as builts.Site Location and DescriptionSECTIONONE Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA 1-3· No documentation of releases were found during the records review.· Potential contaminants include solvents, oils, and greases.1.2 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONSPrior to the Phase I Remedial Investigation (RI) (W-C 1998), no investigations of the Building6611 Sump were completed.1.3 REPORT ORGANIZATIONThe remaining portion of this report is organized as follows:· Section 2 – Field Activities Summary· Section 3 – Physical Investigation Results: reviews site topography, local surficialgeology, and shallow hydrogeology· Section 4 – Data Quality Review and Validation: summarizes the results of the 100percent quality control (QC) review and the ten percent full validation· Section 5 – Chemical Investigation Results: identifies the chemical analyses used andfield duplicate samples collected; summarizes the sample detections by sampleidentification number and matrix type in tabular form· Section 6 – Contamination Assessment: uses text and figures to assess chemicalspresent at the site in elevated concentrations, based on matrix and chemical group· Section 7 – Human Health Risk Evaluation: examines the chemicals present invarious matrices at the site to determine if they pose a threat to human health· Section 8 – Ecological Health Risk Evaluation: examines the chemicals present invarious matrices at the site to determine if they pose a threat to the environment· Section 9 – Summary and Recommendations: includes corrective measure studyobjectives· Section 10 – ReferencesFor additional information regarding the rationale for and the objectives of the Phase II RFI,refer to the Sitewide Work Plan (URSGWC 2000a).Field Activities SummarySECTIONTWO Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA 2-1Field activities for this site included a geophysical survey, shallow soil, subsurface soil, andsediment sampling. The locations of the sampling points are provided on Figure 2-1. Samplelocation, identification, depth, matrix, and chemical analysis are presented in Tables 2-1 forsamples collected in 1996, and in Table 2-2 for samples collected in 2000.Site 45 now refers to the 1500 Shops Area Drainage (whereas in the Phase I RI, Site 45described the Building 2552, Vehicle Washrack). Therefore, samples collected from thedrainages as part of Phase I RI at Site 87 (87SW/SD01, 87SW/SD02 and 87SW/SD03) havebeen included in the Phase II RFI report for Site 45, under a separate cover and are not discussedin this report.All field activities were completed in accordance with applicable Standard Operating Procedures(SOPs) (W-C 1995, URSGWC 2000b). Any deviations from the SOPs are noted on the SampleCollection Field Sheets (SCFS), provided in Appendix G.2.1 GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYAn electromagnetic geophysical survey was completed as part of the Phase II RFI. Transectswere generally spaced at 20-foot intervals. Readings were taken every ten feet, first with an EM-31, then with an EM-38. The results of this survey are discussed in Section 3.2.2.2 SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLING2.2.1 SoilNine soil borings and two surface soil samples were located in areas of suspected contaminationbased on the results of the geophysical survey and on historical information. Eleven near surfaceand 19 subsurface soil samples were collected at Site 87. The two surface soil samples (87SS01and 87SS02) were collected using a stainless steel hand auger, eight soil borings (87SB01through 87SB08) were completed using a direct push system and 1.75-inch diameter polyvinylchloride (PVC) liners, and one soil boring (87SB09) was completed using a stainless steel handauger. These soil samples were collected from the following locations (see Figure 2-1):· Surface soil samples 87SS01 and 87SS02 were collected from within the bermed areajust southeast and east, respectively, of the pumping station.· Boring 87SB01 was completed within the drainage field, approximately 90 feetsouth-southeast of the pumping station. Refusal was reached at 13.1 feet bgs andthree samples were retained for chemical analysis.· Boring 87SB02 was completed outside the drainage field, approximately 50 feetsouth-southeast of 87SB01. Refusal was reached at 4.0 feet bgs and two sampleswere retained for chemical analysis.Field Activities SummarySECTIONTWO Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA 2-2· Boring 87SB03 was completed within the drainage field, approximately 40 feetsouthwest of 87SB01. Refusal was reached at 15.0 feet bgs and three samples wereretained for chemical analysis.· Boring 87SB04 was completed within the drainage field, approximately 25 feet west-northwestof 87SB01. Refusal was reached at 12.5 feet bgs and three samples wereretained for chemical analysis.· Boring 87SB05 was completed within the drainage field, approximately 65 feetsouthwest of 87SB01. Refusal was reached at 22.0 feet bgs and five samples wereretained for chemical analysis.· Boring 87SB06 was completed within the only sinkhole present in the vicinity of thedrainage field, approximately 140 feet south-southwest of 87SB01. Refusal wasreached at 4.2 feet bgs and two samples were retained for chemical analysis.· Boring 87SB07 was completed outside and southwest of the bermed area,approximately 95 feet northwest of 87SB01. Refusal was reached at 13.5 feet bgsand four samples were retained for chemical analysis.· Boring 87SB08 was completed outside and southeast of the bermed area,approximately 75 feet north-northeast of 87SB01. Refusal was reached at 13.0 feetbgs and four samples were retained for chemical analysis.· Boring 87SB09 was completed in a drainage located east of the drainage field,approximately 25 feet east-southeast of 87SB01. Refusal was reached at 3.7 feet bgsand two samples were retained for chemical analysis.Sample identification, depth, matrix, and chemical analysis are presented in Tables 2-1 and 2-2.Boring locations are shown in Figure 2-1.2.2.2 SedimentOne sediment sample was collected from the 1500 Shops Drainage Area. Surface water was notpresent at the time of this sample’s collection, so a surface water sample was not collected.Sediment sample 87SD04 was collected using a stainless steel hand trowel near the head of thesame drainage that Boring 87SB09 was located in, approximately 35 feet north-northwest ofBoring 87SB01. The sediment sampling location is shown on Figure 2-1.As discussed above, samples collected from the 1500 Shops Area Drainage (now referenced asSite 45) during the Phase I RI at Site 87 (87SW/SD01, 87SW/SD02 and 87SW/SD03) have beenincluded in the Phase II RFI report for Site 45, under a separate cover.2.3 FIELD SCREENING RESULTSField screening using headspace analysis was completed during both investigations. Recoveredsoil from each boring and sediment sample was field screened using a photoionization detectorField Activities SummarySECTIONTWO Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA 2-3(PID) to verify the presence or absence of organic vapors. Headspace results are presented inTable 2-3, and were recorded on the boring logs (see Appendix E) and the Sample CollectionField Sheets (SCFSs) (see Appendix G).2.4 IDW DISPOSITIONInvestigation-derived wastes (IDW) including soil cuttings, development and purge water,decontamination fluids, and personal protective equipment (PPE) were containerized inaccordance with the Sitewide Work Plan (URSGWC 2000a). Disposal of the IDW containershas been documented in the “IDW Disposition Technical Memorandum” (URS 2001).TABLE 2-1SUMMARY OF PHASE I RI SAMPLES FOR CHEMICAL ANALYSISSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPSample Sample Sample Sample ParametersLocation Identification Depth (ft bgs) Matrix VOCs1 SVOCs2 Metals3 TPH4 Comments87SS01 8701SS02 0-2 Soil X X X X MS/MSD87SS02 8702SS02 0-2 Soil X X X X8704SS02 0-2 Soil X X X X Duplicate (8702SS02)Notes: Abbreviations:1 TCL Volatile Organic Compounds: Preparation Method 5030 / Analysis Method 8260A. bgs = Below Ground Surface2 ft = FeetMS/MSD = Matrix Spike/ Matrix Spike Duplicate3 NA = Not ApplicableSS = Surface Soil Sample4 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons: Preparation Method 3550 / Analysis Method 8015 Duplicate = Quality Control Duplicate(original sample listed in parentheses).Samples were collected in 1996.All samples analyzed for chemical analysis were shipped EMAX Laboratory, Inc, of Torrance, California.TCL Semivolatile Organic Compounds: Preparation Method 3520 (aqueous) and 3550 (soil/sediment) /Analysis Method 8270.TAL Metals: Preparation Method 3010/3020 (aqueous) and 3050B (soil/sediment) / Analysis Method6010/7000.Surface soil samples collected (from 0.0 to 2.0 ft bgs) during the Phase I RI use 02 for the depthindicator portion of the Sample Identification.Geotechnical analytical parameters varied from sample to sample, depending on depth, soil type, etc.Refer to Appendix F for a complete summary of all geotechnical analyses.Q:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 1 of 1 5/9/02TABLE 2-2SUMMARY OF PHASE II RFI SAMPLES FOR CHEMICAL ANALYSISSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPSample Sample Sample SampleLocation Identification Depth (ft bgs) Matrix VOCs1 Metals3 TOC4 Geotech Comments87SB01 8701DS00 0.0-1.0 Soil X X MS/MSD8701DS09 8.0-9.0 Soil X X8701DS13 12.0-13.1 Soil X X X87SB02 8702DS00 0.0-1.0 Soil X X8702DS04 2.0-4.0 Soil X X87SB03 8703DS00 0.0-1.0 Soil X X8703DS09 7.0-8.5 Soil X X8703DS07 6.0-7.0 Soil X8703DS15 13.2-15.0 Soil X X87SB04 8704DS00 0.0-1.0 Soil X X8704DS20 0.0-1.0 Soil X X Duplicate (8704DS00)8704DS08 6.0-8.0 Soil X X8704DS13 12.0-12.5 Soil X X87SB05 8705DS00 0.0-1.0 Soil X X8705DS26 0.0-1.0 Soil X X Duplicate (8705DS00)8705DS07 6.0-7.0 Soil X8705DS09 7.0-8.5 Soil X X8705DS16 14.0-16.0 Soil X X8705DS20 18.0-20.0 Soil X X8705DS22 20.0-22.0 Soil X X87SB06 8706DS00 0.0-1.0 Soil X X8706DS04 3.0-4.2 Soil X X87SB07 8707DS00 0.0-1.0 Soil X X8707DS07 5.0-7.0 Soil X X8707DS27 5.0-7.0 Soil X X Duplicate (8707DS07)8707DS10 8.0-10.0 Soil X X8707DS14 12.5-13.5 Soil X X87SB08 8708DS00 0.0-1.0 Soil X X8708DS07 5.0-7.0 Soil X X8708DS10 8.0-10.0 Soil X X8708DS13 12.0-13.0 Soil X X87SB09 8709SB00 0.0-1.0 Soil X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXParametersXXXSVOCs2XXXQ:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 1 of 2 5/9/02TABLE 2-2SUMMARY OF PHASE II RFI SAMPLES FOR CHEMICAL ANALYSISSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPSample Sample Sample SampleLocation Identification Depth (ft bgs) Matrix VOCs1 Metals3 TOC4 Geotech CommentsParametersSVOCs28709SB04 3.4-3.7 Soil X X87SD04 8704SD00 0.0-1.0 Sediment X XNotes: Abbreviations:1 bgs = below ground surfaceDS = Direct Push - Soil23 ft = feetMS/MSD = Matrix Spike/ Matrix Spike Duplicate requested4 SB = Soil BoringSD = SedimentSamples were collected in 2000.All samples analyzed for chemical analysis were shipped EMAX Laboratory, Inc, ofTorrance, California.Geotechnical analytical parameters varied from sample to sample, depending on depth,soil type, etc. Refer to Appendix F for a complete summary of all geotechnical analyses.TCL Volatile Organic Compounds: Preparation Method 5030 (sediment) and 5035(soil) / Analysis Method 8260B.TCL Semivolatile Organic Compounds: Preparation Method 3520C (aqueous) and3550B (soil/sediment) / Analysis Method 8270C.Surface soil samples collected (from 0.0 to 2.0 ft bgs) during the Phase II RFI use 00 forthe depth indicator portion of the Sample Identification.Total Organic Carbon (TOC) was prepared and analyzed as identified in Method 415.1.XTAL Metals: Preparation Method 3010A (aqueous) and 3050B (soil/sediment) /Analysis Method 6010B/7470A (mercury).Duplicate = Quality Control Duplicate(original sample ID in parentheses)XQ:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 2 of 2 5/9/02TABLE 2-3SUMMARY OF FIELD SCREENING RESULTSFOR ORGANIC VAPORS IN SOIL SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPBoring Number Sample Depth (ft bgs) Concentration (ppm)187SB01 0.0-0.5 0.78.0-9.0 1.112.0-13.0 0.787SB02 0.0-0.5 0.02.0-4.0 0.087SB03 0.0-0.5 0.97.0-8.5 1.113.2-15.0 121.087SB04 0.0-0.5 0.26.0-8.0 212.0-12.5 287SB05 0.0-0.5 0.07.0-8.5 0.014.0-16.0 0.018.0-20.0 0.020.0-22.0 0.087SB06 0.0-0.5 0.03.0-4.2 0.087SB07 0.0-0.5 4.25.0-7.0 17988.0-10.0 57512.5-13.5 35.387SB08 0.0-0.5 0.05.0-7.0 1.18.0-10.0 99612.0-13.0 99687SB09 0.0-0.5 0.03.4-3.7 0.0Notes:1 Measured response above background using a PID2 Not available due to low sample recoveryAll samples were collected during the Phase II RFI (2000).Abbreviations:bgs = Below Ground Surfaceft = feetND = Not Detectedppm = Part Per MillionSB = Soil BoringSD = Sediment sampleQ:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Draft\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 1 of 1 5/9/02Physical Investigation ResultsSECTIONTHREE Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA 3-13.1 TOPOGRAPHY AND SURFACE FEATURESThe surface features at the site are shown on Figure 1-2. The site is situated in an Upland areacharacterized by karst topography associated with shallow limestone bedrock.The crest of the bermed area rises about 8 feet above the floor of the pump station. The surfaceof the bermed area is covered with gravel and grass. The land surface outside the bermed areaslopes toward the west and southwest and is grass-covered. A barbed wire fence is located about100 feet south of the bermed area.Storm water within the bermed area discharges to a small drainage ditch or swale through aculvert. This drainage ditch is connected to a larger drainage ditch located east of the site.Surface water entering the drainage ditches flows through the west branch of Lentzier Creek,Lentzier Creek, and ultimately enters the Ohio River.Access to the site is by a gravel access road.3.2 LOCAL SURFICIAL GEOLOGYThe local surficial geology of this site has been interpreted based on two electromagneticsurveys, eight direct push soil borings and four sediment samples. The results of theelectromagnetic surveys are presented on Figures 3-1 and 3-2. Elevation in feet Mean Sea Level(MSL) on the figures are based on the North American Vertical Datum of 1988. The shallowstratigraphy is represented in a geologic cross-section on Figure 3-3.3.2.1 Geophysical Survey ResultsResults of the two electromagnetic surveys were inconclusive as to the locations of drain tiles orthe edges of the drainage field. No readily identifiable features are visible on the color contourmaps (Figures 3-1 and 3-2), which were produced based on electromagnetic responses measuredby the EM-31 and EM-38 surveys, respectively. Because of this, the locations of direct pushborings 87SB01 through 87SB06 were selected based on drawings that show the dimensions anddesign of the drainage field and on the presence of crushed limestone in the shallow subsurfacewithin the suspected location of the drainage field. Several direct push holes with no analyticalsampling were advanced to determine the approximate location of the drainage field in order toensure that borings for analytical sampling were located within the drainage field.3.2.2 Soil Borings and Geotechnical ResultsDrainage Field SoilsBased on materials encountered in direct push borings 87SB01 through 87SB05, the drainagefield appears to consist of approximately eight to nine feet of low plastic clay fill overlying fourto five feet of crushed limestone. The crushed limestone was typically underlain by bedrock orone to two feet of clay fill. Refusal (likely due to bedrock) was encountered at approximately 12Physical Investigation ResultsSECTIONTHREE Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA 3-2to 15 feet bgs at borings 87SB01, 87SB03, and 87SB04; however, at boring 87SB05 refusal wasencountered at about 22 feet bgs.Boring 87SB02 encountered refusal at about 4 feet bgs at a location that is likely just outside thenorthern extent of the drainage field. Boring 87SB06 was drilled within a small sinkhole beyondthe southern extent of the drainage field, based on reports that a pipe from the drainage fieldemptied into a sinkhole south of the drainage field (Figure 2-1). Boring 87SB09 was completedwithin a small drainage to the northeast of the drainage field (Figure 2-1) and encounteredrefusal at 3.7 feet bgs.The depth to refusal at boring 87SB05 indicates the presence of a subsurface bedrock feature,possibly a sinkhole that has been filled in.The soil below the crushed limestone was characterized as fill, not residual clay soil. This mayrepresent the sinkhole that the collector pipe discharged to when the drainage field wasoperational.Visual, olfactory and headspace analysis (Table 2-3) indicated possible fuel contamination atboring 87SB03.Bermed Area SoilsThe shallow soil samples collected within the bermed area during the Phase I RI consisted ofsilty clay (Unified Soil Classification System [USCS] symbol CL) fill. Hand auger refusaloccurred at about 2 feet bgs. These samples were collected directly above the collector tank.Borings 87SB07 and 87SB06 were collected just outside the bermed area (Figure 2-1). Boring87SB07 consisted primarily of residual clay soil, while 87SB08 consisted of several feet of clayfill over a few feet of residual clay soil. Refusal (likely due to bedrock) was encountered atabout 13 feet bgs at both borings.Visual evidence and headspace results (Table 2-3) indicate potential fuel contamination atborings 87SB07 and 87SB08. Potential fuel contamination was also detected in one boring(45SB17) installed a few hundred feet to the north of Building 6611 that was completed as partof the Site 45 Phase II RI.In summary, the materials encountered were typically described as follows:· Silty clay fill – Medium stiff to stiff, moist, light brown to brown to reddish-brown,low plastic silty clay (USCS symbol CL), some with gray staining and fuel odor· Crushed limestone – Typically up to four inches in diameter· Silty clay – Soft, moist brown, low plastic silty clay (USCS symbol CL) with someblack organics and chert· Residuum – Hard, moist, yellowish-brown to red, low to medium plastic, silty clay(USCS symbol CL), with vertical fractures and some gray staining and fuel odorPhysical Investigation ResultsSECTIONTHREE Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA 3-3Two soil samples were submitted for geotechnical analysis. The samples were collected fromthe six to seven foot intervals at borings 87SB03 and 87SB05. Geotechnical analysis matchedthe field classifications of these samples as low plastic silty clay (USCS symbol CL).Geotechnical results for these samples are presented in Table F-1 in Appendix F.3.3 SHALLOW HYDROGEOLOGYGroundwater was not encountered in any of the direct push borings.0 20 40204060801001201401601802468101214161820222426283032343638QuadratureResponse(mS/M)ELECTROMAGNETIC SURVEY RESULTSGEONICS EM-31 VERTICAL DIPOLE - QUADRATURE PHASESITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPDRN. BY: TJKCHKD. BY: MMSDATE: 10/16/01REVISIONS: 0PROJECT NO.45-FL99010DFIG. NO.3-1ELECTROMAGNETIC SURVEY RESULTSGEONICS EM-38 VERTICAL DIPOLE - QUADRATURE PHASESITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPDRN. BY: TJKCHKD. BY: MMSDATE: 10/16/01REVISIONS: 0PROJECT NO.45-FL99010DFIG. NO.3-2QuadratureResponse(mS/M)0 20 40X-Coordinate (feet)20406080100120140160180Y-Coordinate (feet)-1013579111315171921232527293133353739Data Quality Review and ValidationSECTIONFOUR Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA 4-14.1 PHASE I RINo data were rejected. Reporting limits were elevated due to soil moisture content which rangedfrom 15 percent to 67 percent. See the Phase I RI report for a more detailed discussion of datareview issues.4.2 PHASE II RFIAll chemical data were reviewed following procedures identified in the INAPP Site WideQuality Assurance Project Plan (URS 2000). Analytical data for the samples collected at theBuilding 6611 Sump (Site 87) were qualified estimated (J/UJ) based on surrogate, LaboratoryControl Samples and laboratory duplicate data outside evaluation criteria. Additionally, acetone,carbon disulfide, methylene chloride and 2-butanone data for 18 samples were qualifiednondetect (U) based on the presence of the compounds in the trip blank, laboratory method blanksamples or based on professional judgement (common laboratory contaminants). Based on thedata reviews, no analytical data were qualified as R (rejected). Acceptable levels of accuracyand precision were achieved for the data. A complete summary of the data review is presented inAppendix A.The analytical data for samples collected at the Building 6611 Sump (Site 87) were determinedto be acceptable (including estimated data) for their intended use.Chemical Investigation ResultsSECTIONFIVE Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA 5-1All samples collected from the Building 6611Sump were analyzed for Target Compound List(TCL) volatile organic compound (VOCs), semivolatile organic compound (SVOCs), and TargetAnalyte List (TAL) metals. The samples collected as part of the Phase I RI were also analyzedfor total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), diesel fraction. One sample collected as part of thePhase II RFI (8701DS13) was also analyzed for total organic carbon (TOC). Field duplicatesamples collected from this site included:Field Duplicate Associated Sample8704SS02 8702SS028704DS20 8704DS008705DS26 8705DS008707DS27 8707DS07Field duplicate sample results are presented in Appendix H.Summaries of the chemical investigation results can be found as follows:· Surface and subsurface soil, and sediment samples collected from this site and theanalyses each sample underwent are summarized in Tables 2-1 and 2-2.· Chemicals detected, maximum concentration, and frequency of detects for soil andsediment samples collected from the Building 6611 Sump are summarized in Table5-1.· Appendix H contains all analytical results.TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD ID 8701DS00 8701DS09 8701DS13 8701SS02 8702DS00DATE COLLECTED November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 May 11, 1996 November 12, 2000Maximum Frequency Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL QualVOLATILE ORGANICCOMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Butanone 57 16 / 31 16 22 J 12 22 J 8.5 21 J < 12 U 15 22 JAcetone 350 J 23 / 31 150 11 71 11 72 10 < 12 U 140 11Benzene 57 6 / 31 < 5.5 U < 5.6 U < 5.2 U < 12 U < 5.6 UBromodichloromethane 110 J 1 / 31 < 5.5 U < 5.6 U < 5.2 U < 12 U < 5.6 UCarbon disulfide 5.6 J 3 / 31 < 5.5 U < 5.6 U < 5.2 U < 12 U < 5.6 Ucis-1,2-Dichloroethene 1.9 J 1 / 29 < 5.5 U < 5.6 U < 5.2 U < 5.6 UEthylbenzene 130 J 7 / 31 < 5.5 U < 5.6 U < 5.2 U < 12 U < 5.6 Um/p-xylene 2500 6 / 29 < 11 U < 11 U < 10 U < 11 Uo-Xylene 71 J 2 / 29 < 5.5 U < 5.6 U < 5.2 U < 5.6 UTetrachloroethylene 49 6 / 31 < 5.5 U < 5.6 U 1.1 5.2 J < 12 U < 5.6 UToluene 6.4 8 / 31 < 5.5 U < 5.6 U < 5.2 U 0.6 J < 5.6 UTrichloroethylene 3.7 J 1 / 31 < 5.5 U < 5.6 U < 5.2 U < 12 U < 5.6 USEMIVOLATILE ORGANICCOMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Methylnaphthalene 7300 3 / 31 < 430 U < 380 U < 400 U < 400 U < 400 UAcenaphthene 360 J 1 / 31 < 430 U < 380 U < 400 U < 400 U < 400 UBenzo(a)anthracene 1300 J 1 / 31 < 430 U < 380 U < 400 U < 400 U < 400 UBenzo(a)pyrene 2100 J 1 / 31 < 430 U < 380 U < 400 U < 400 U < 400 UBenzo(b)fluoranthene 3400 1 / 31 < 430 U < 380 U < 400 U < 400 U < 400 UBenzo(g,h,i)perylene 1400 J 1 / 31 < 430 U < 380 U < 400 U < 400 U < 400 UBenzo(k)fluoranthene 1300 J 1 / 31 < 430 U < 380 U < 400 U < 400 U < 400 UBis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 240 J 1 / 31 < 430 U < 380 U < 400 U < 400 U < 400 UChrysene 2100 J 1 / 31 < 430 U < 380 U < 400 U < 400 U < 400 UDi-n-butyl phthalate 300 J 2 / 31 < 430 U < 380 U < 400 U 81 J < 400 UFluoranthene 3100 1 / 31 < 430 U < 380 U < 400 U < 400 U < 400 UFluorene 370 J 1 / 31 < 430 U < 380 U < 400 U < 400 U < 400 UIndeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 1700 J 1 / 31 < 430 U < 380 U < 400 U < 400 U < 400 UNaphthalene 350 J 1 / 31 < 430 U < 380 U < 400 U < 400 U < 400 UPhenanthrene 1100 4 / 31 < 430 U < 380 U < 400 U < 400 U < 400 UPyrene 2700 1 / 31 < 430 U < 380 U < 400 U < 400 U < 400 UQ:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 1 of 21 5/9/02TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD ID 8701DS00 8701DS09 8701DS13 8701SS02 8702DS00DATE COLLECTED November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 May 11, 1996 November 12, 2000Maximum Frequency Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL QualMETALS (mg/kg)Aluminum 19600 31 / 31 10200 25.8 11600 22.8 13400 24.3 11400 10500 24Antimony 53.7 4 / 31 < 12.9 U < 11.4 U < 12.2 U < 12.3 U 4.21 12 JArsenic 28.3 31 / 31 12.5 1.29 10.2 1.14 10.8 1.22 16.4 J 14.6 1.2Barium 281 31 / 31 71.9 1.29 111 1.14 118 1.22 125 79.3 1.2Beryllium 2.4 29 / 31 0.673 1.29 J 0.761 1.14 J 0.775 1.22 J < 1.2 U 0.722 1.2 JCadmium 2.7 5 / 31 < 0.645 U < 0.569 U < 0.608 U < 1.2 U < 0.6 UCalcium 131000 31 / 31 3000 129 20700 114 4450 122 2250 2820 120Chromium 38.2 31 / 31 15.4 1.29 14 1.14 14.1 1.22 21.7 J 17.7 1.2Cobalt 44 31 / 31 12.5 2.58 J 14.6 2.28 20.2 2.43 14.9 14.2 2.4Copper 102 31 / 31 30.6 2.58 J 14.6 2.28 19 2.43 51.1 J 32.1 2.4Iron 52300 31 / 31 23300 25.8 21700 22.8 25500 24.3 32500 J 24300 24Lead 232 31 / 31 23.8 1.29 17.8 1.14 23.3 1.22 22.8 J 26.5 1.2Magnesium 5420 31 / 31 1110 129 1700 114 1380 122 1030 J 1150 120Manganese 3240 31 / 31 739 1.29 J 1580 1.14 2200 1.22 1190 911 1.2Mercury 1.11 24 / 31 0.053 0.129 J 0.024 0.114 J 0.041 0.122 J 0.5 0.068 0.12 JNickel 150 31 / 31 18.3 2.58 15.5 2.28 18.9 2.43 32.1 22.2 2.4Potassium 1250 31 / 31 888 645 669 569 601 608 J 904 J 880 600Selenium 1.52 9 / 31 < 1.29 U < 1.14 U < 1.22 U < 1.2 U 0.77 1.2 JSilver 60.3 2 / 31 < 1.29 U < 1.14 U 0.837 1.22 J < 2.5 U < 1.2 USodium 757 J 28 / 31 40.1 129 J 50 114 J 97.9 122 J < 245 U 29.5 120 JThallium 3.71 24 / 31 < 2.58 U 0.643 2.28 J < 2.43 U 3 1.16 2.4 JVanadium 61.1 31 / 31 31.7 1.29 25.3 1.14 29.7 1.22 43.4 34.8 1.2Zinc 308 31 / 31 50.6 2.58 40.7 2.28 46.5 2.43 65.2 55.1 2.4OTHER PARAMETERS(mg/kg)Total Organic Carbon 77.5 2 / 2 10 12.2 JNotes:* = Sample Collected on Multiple DaysND = Not DetectedRL = Reporting LimitQual = QualifierE = Value exceeds linear range.Q:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 2 of 21 5/9/02TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD ID 8701DS00 8701DS09 8701DS13 8701SS02 8702DS00DATE COLLECTED November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 May 11, 1996 November 12, 2000Maximum Frequency Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL QualJ = EstimatedR = RejectedUJ = Estimated NondetectU = Nondetectmg/kg = milligram per kilogramμg/kg = microgram per kilogramThe maximum detected concentrations for each analyte areunderlined and appear in boldface font.This table contains data from the Phase II RFI (2000-2001).Blank space for a set of analytes indicates that the samplewas not analyzed for these parameters.Analyte frequency information does not include dilutionsand reanalyses.Results in the table represent the highest reportedconcentration for each analyte.Analytical data for samples collected prior to October 2000was obtained from the Army Environmental Centerdatabase.Frequency indicates the number of times a given analytewas detected in the samples.Q:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 3 of 21 5/9/02TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyVOLATILE ORGANICCOMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Butanone 57 16 / 31Acetone 350 J 23 / 31Benzene 57 6 / 31Bromodichloromethane 110 J 1 / 31Carbon disulfide 5.6 J 3 / 31cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 1.9 J 1 / 29Ethylbenzene 130 J 7 / 31m/p-xylene 2500 6 / 29o-Xylene 71 J 2 / 29Tetrachloroethylene 49 6 / 31Toluene 6.4 8 / 31Trichloroethylene 3.7 J 1 / 31SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICCOMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Methylnaphthalene 7300 3 / 31Acenaphthene 360 J 1 / 31Benzo(a)anthracene 1300 J 1 / 31Benzo(a)pyrene 2100 J 1 / 31Benzo(b)fluoranthene 3400 1 / 31Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 1400 J 1 / 31Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1300 J 1 / 31Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 240 J 1 / 31Chrysene 2100 J 1 / 31Di-n-butyl phthalate 300 J 2 / 31Fluoranthene 3100 1 / 31Fluorene 370 J 1 / 31Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 1700 J 1 / 31Naphthalene 350 J 1 / 31Phenanthrene 1100 4 / 31Pyrene 2700 1 / 318702DS04 8702SS02 8703DS00 8703DS09 8703DS15November 12, 2000 May 11, 1996 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual< 23 U < 12 U < 21 U 13 22 J < 22 U36 12 < 12 U 74 10 130 11 < 11 U< 5.8 U < 12 U < 5.2 U < 5.5 U 16 5.5< 5.8 U < 12 U < 5.2 U < 5.5 U < 5.5 U< 5.8 U < 12 U < 5.2 U < 5.5 U < 5.5 U< 5.8 U < 5.2 U < 5.5 U < 5.5 U< 5.8 U < 12 U < 5.2 U < 5.5 U 13 5.5< 12 U < 10 U < 11 U < 11 U< 5.8 U < 5.2 U < 5.5 U < 5.5 U< 5.8 U < 12 U < 5.2 U < 5.5 U < 5.5 U< 5.8 U < 12 U < 5.2 U < 5.5 U 1.8 5.5 J< 5.8 U < 12 U < 5.2 U < 5.5 U < 5.5 U< 380 U < 410 U < 410 U < 1900 U < 420 U< 380 U < 410 U < 410 U < 1900 U < 420 U< 380 U < 410 U < 410 U < 1900 U < 420 U< 380 U < 410 U < 410 U < 1900 U < 420 U< 380 U < 410 U < 410 U < 1900 U < 420 U< 380 U < 410 U < 410 U < 1900 U < 420 U< 380 U < 410 U < 410 U < 1900 U < 420 U< 380 U < 410 U < 410 U < 1900 U < 420 U< 380 U < 410 U < 410 U < 1900 U < 420 U< 380 U < 410 U < 410 U < 1900 U < 420 U< 380 U < 410 U < 410 U < 1900 U < 420 U< 380 U < 410 U < 410 U < 1900 U < 420 U< 380 U < 410 U < 410 U < 1900 U < 420 U< 380 U < 410 U < 410 U < 1900 U < 420 U< 380 U < 410 U < 410 U < 1900 U < 420 U< 380 U < 410 U < 410 U < 1900 U < 420 UQ:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 4 of 21 5/9/02TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyMETALS (mg/kg)Aluminum 19600 31 / 31Antimony 53.7 4 / 31Arsenic 28.3 31 / 31Barium 281 31 / 31Beryllium 2.4 29 / 31Cadmium 2.7 5 / 31Calcium 131000 31 / 31Chromium 38.2 31 / 31Cobalt 44 31 / 31Copper 102 31 / 31Iron 52300 31 / 31Lead 232 31 / 31Magnesium 5420 31 / 31Manganese 3240 31 / 31Mercury 1.11 24 / 31Nickel 150 31 / 31Potassium 1250 31 / 31Selenium 1.52 9 / 31Silver 60.3 2 / 31Sodium 757 J 28 / 31Thallium 3.71 24 / 31Vanadium 61.1 31 / 31Zinc 308 31 / 31OTHER PARAMETERS(mg/kg)Total Organic Carbon 77.5 2 / 2Notes:* = Sample Collected on Multiple DaysND = Not DetectedRL = Reporting LimitQual = QualifierE = Value exceeds linear range.8702DS04 8702SS02 8703DS00 8703DS09 8703DS15November 12, 2000 May 11, 1996 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual11100 23.1 12300 10400 25.1 13100 23.5 15000 25.44.06 11.5 J < 12.4 U < 12.6 U < 11.8 U < 12.7 U11.8 1.15 16.9 J 11.2 1.26 9.99 1.18 11 1.2762.5 1.15 127 80.4 1.26 125 1.18 217 1.270.596 1.15 J < 1.2 U 0.522 1.26 J 0.745 1.18 J 1.26 1.27 J< 0.577 U < 1.2 U < 0.628 U < 0.588 U 0.257 0.635 J4020 115 5450 1960 126 1360 118 20500 12716.7 1.15 20.1 J 17 1.26 16 1.18 18.5 1.277.44 2.31 22.9 21.1 2.51 17.4 2.35 13.3 2.5439.8 2.31 53.9 J 14.5 2.51 13.1 2.35 33.1 2.5430000 23.1 31200 J 20800 25.1 21200 23.5 24000 25.416.7 1.15 34 J 34.5 1.26 22.4 1.18 22.3 1.271380 115 1460 1160 126 1600 118 1660 127290 1.15 1520 1400 1.26 1760 1.18 1510 1.27< 0.115 U 0.4 0.047 0.126 J 0.029 0.118 J 0.026 0.127 J22.8 2.31 42.4 10.7 2.51 17.1 2.35 52.3 2.54488 577 J 1100 J 812 628 666 588 909 635< 1.15 U < 1.2 U < 1.26 U < 1.18 U < 1.27 U< 1.15 U < 2.5 U < 1.26 U < 1.18 U < 1.27 U30.9 115 J < 248 U 29.5 126 J 35.1 118 J 116 127 J1.18 2.31 J 2.1 J < 2.51 U 1.11 2.35 J 1.4 2.54 J32.8 1.15 41.3 26.9 1.26 25.3 1.18 30.4 1.2748 2.31 101 39.9 2.51 41.9 2.35 93.8 2.54Q:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 5 of 21 5/9/02TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyJ = EstimatedR = RejectedUJ = Estimated NondetectU = Nondetectmg/kg = milligram per kilogramμg/kg = microgram per kilogramThe maximum detected concentrations for each analyte areunderlined and appear in boldface font.This table contains data from the Phase II RFI (2000-2001).Blank space for a set of analytes indicates that the samplewas not analyzed for these parameters.Analyte frequency information does not include dilutionsand reanalyses.Results in the table represent the highest reportedconcentration for each analyte.Analytical data for samples collected prior to October 2000was obtained from the Army Environmental Centerdatabase.Frequency indicates the number of times a given analytewas detected in the samples.8702DS04 8702SS02 8703DS00 8703DS09 8703DS15November 12, 2000 May 11, 1996 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL QualQ:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 6 of 21 5/9/02TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyVOLATILE ORGANICCOMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Butanone 57 16 / 31Acetone 350 J 23 / 31Benzene 57 6 / 31Bromodichloromethane 110 J 1 / 31Carbon disulfide 5.6 J 3 / 31cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 1.9 J 1 / 29Ethylbenzene 130 J 7 / 31m/p-xylene 2500 6 / 29o-Xylene 71 J 2 / 29Tetrachloroethylene 49 6 / 31Toluene 6.4 8 / 31Trichloroethylene 3.7 J 1 / 31SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICCOMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Methylnaphthalene 7300 3 / 31Acenaphthene 360 J 1 / 31Benzo(a)anthracene 1300 J 1 / 31Benzo(a)pyrene 2100 J 1 / 31Benzo(b)fluoranthene 3400 1 / 31Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 1400 J 1 / 31Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1300 J 1 / 31Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 240 J 1 / 31Chrysene 2100 J 1 / 31Di-n-butyl phthalate 300 J 2 / 31Fluoranthene 3100 1 / 31Fluorene 370 J 1 / 31Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 1700 J 1 / 31Naphthalene 350 J 1 / 31Phenanthrene 1100 4 / 31Pyrene 2700 1 / 318704DS00 8704DS08 8704DS13 8704SD00 8705DS00November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 30, 2000 November 12, 2000Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual< 24 U 24 22 < 24 U < 25 U 12 26 J100 12 130 11 34 12 < 13 U 99 13< 6 U < 5.6 U < 6 U < 6.4 U < 6.4 U< 6 U < 5.6 U < 6 U < 6.4 U < 6.4 U< 6 U < 5.6 U < 6 U < 6.4 U < 6.4 U< 6 U < 5.6 U < 6 U < 6.4 U < 6.4 U< 6 U < 5.6 U 0.95 6.7 J < 6.4 U < 6.4 U< 12 U < 11 U 2 12 J < 13 U < 13 U< 6 U < 5.6 U < 6 U < 6.4 U < 6.4 U< 6 U 2.2 5.6 J 32 6.7 < 6.4 U < 6.4 U< 6 U < 5.6 U 3.5 6.7 J < 6.4 U < 6.4 U< 6 U < 5.6 U < 6 U < 6.4 U < 6.4 U< 430 U < 390 U < 400 U < 420 U < 430 U< 430 U < 390 U < 400 U < 420 U < 430 U< 430 U < 390 U < 400 U < 420 U < 430 U< 430 U < 390 U < 400 U < 420 U < 430 U< 430 U < 390 U < 400 U < 420 U < 430 U< 430 U < 390 U < 400 U < 420 U < 430 U< 430 U < 390 U < 400 U < 420 U < 430 U< 430 U < 390 U 240 400 J < 420 U < 430 U< 430 U < 390 U < 400 U < 420 U < 430 U< 430 U < 390 U 300 400 J < 420 U < 430 U< 430 U < 390 U < 400 U < 420 U < 430 U< 430 U < 390 U < 400 U < 420 U < 430 U< 430 U < 390 U < 400 U < 420 U < 430 U< 430 U < 390 U < 400 U < 420 U < 430 U< 430 U < 390 U < 400 U < 420 U < 430 U< 430 U < 390 U < 400 U < 420 U < 430 UQ:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 7 of 21 5/9/02TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyMETALS (mg/kg)Aluminum 19600 31 / 31Antimony 53.7 4 / 31Arsenic 28.3 31 / 31Barium 281 31 / 31Beryllium 2.4 29 / 31Cadmium 2.7 5 / 31Calcium 131000 31 / 31Chromium 38.2 31 / 31Cobalt 44 31 / 31Copper 102 31 / 31Iron 52300 31 / 31Lead 232 31 / 31Magnesium 5420 31 / 31Manganese 3240 31 / 31Mercury 1.11 24 / 31Nickel 150 31 / 31Potassium 1250 31 / 31Selenium 1.52 9 / 31Silver 60.3 2 / 31Sodium 757 J 28 / 31Thallium 3.71 24 / 31Vanadium 61.1 31 / 31Zinc 308 31 / 31OTHER PARAMETERS(mg/kg)Total Organic Carbon 77.5 2 / 2Notes:* = Sample Collected on Multiple DaysND = Not DetectedRL = Reporting LimitQual = QualifierE = Value exceeds linear range.8704DS00 8704DS08 8704DS13 8704SD00 8705DS00November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 30, 2000 November 12, 2000Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual11300 26.2 11600 23.3 8220 24.4 14300 25.5 10000 25.8< 13.1 U < 11.7 U 53.7 12.2 < 12.7 U < 12.9 U14.4 1.31 9.7 1.17 9.03 1.22 8.68 1.27 14.1 1.2986.2 1.31 113 1.17 169 1.22 181 1.27 75.5 1.290.612 1.31 J 0.678 1.17 J 0.625 1.22 J 1.01 1.27 J 0.63 1.29 J< 0.654 U < 0.583 U 0.479 0.611 J < 0.637 U < 0.645 U2860 131 2750 117 131000 1220 2830 127 3710 12925.2 1.31 16.1 1.17 18.7 1.22 15.4 1.27 15.5 1.2910.7 2.62 11.1 2.33 8.74 2.44 14.9 2.55 13.2 2.5822 2.62 11.6 2.33 40.9 2.44 15.7 2.55 30.1 2.5827900 26.2 21000 23.3 15400 24.4 20300 25.5 26000 25.829.1 1.31 14.3 1.17 64.9 1.22 24 1.27 29.5 1.291050 131 1240 117 3730 122 1440 127 1210 129695 1.31 1160 1.17 1390 1.22 2280 1.27 797 1.290.063 0.131 J < 0.117 U 1.11 0.122 0.169 0.127 0.084 0.129 J18.7 2.62 13.7 2.33 29 2.44 22.9 2.55 18.1 2.58681 654 586 583 743 611 1250 637 1140 645< 1.31 U < 1.17 U < 1.22 U < 1.27 U < 1.29 U< 1.31 U < 1.17 U 60.3 1.22 < 1.27 U < 1.29 U26.5 131 J 31.1 117 J 176 122 < 127 U 30.3 129 J1.18 2.62 J 0.701 2.33 J 0.715 2.44 J 2.19 2.55 J 1.84 2.58 J33.3 1.31 24.3 1.17 19 1.22 26.5 1.27 31.9 1.2945.7 2.62 37 2.33 240 2.44 67.1 2.55 71.9 2.58Q:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 8 of 21 5/9/02TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyJ = EstimatedR = RejectedUJ = Estimated NondetectU = Nondetectmg/kg = milligram per kilogramμg/kg = microgram per kilogramThe maximum detected concentrations for each analyte areunderlined and appear in boldface font.This table contains data from the Phase II RFI (2000-2001).Blank space for a set of analytes indicates that the samplewas not analyzed for these parameters.Analyte frequency information does not include dilutionsand reanalyses.Results in the table represent the highest reportedconcentration for each analyte.Analytical data for samples collected prior to October 2000was obtained from the Army Environmental Centerdatabase.Frequency indicates the number of times a given analytewas detected in the samples.8704DS00 8704DS08 8704DS13 8704SD00 8705DS00November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 30, 2000 November 12, 2000Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL QualQ:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 9 of 21 5/9/02TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyVOLATILE ORGANICCOMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Butanone 57 16 / 31Acetone 350 J 23 / 31Benzene 57 6 / 31Bromodichloromethane 110 J 1 / 31Carbon disulfide 5.6 J 3 / 31cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 1.9 J 1 / 29Ethylbenzene 130 J 7 / 31m/p-xylene 2500 6 / 29o-Xylene 71 J 2 / 29Tetrachloroethylene 49 6 / 31Toluene 6.4 8 / 31Trichloroethylene 3.7 J 1 / 31SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICCOMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Methylnaphthalene 7300 3 / 31Acenaphthene 360 J 1 / 31Benzo(a)anthracene 1300 J 1 / 31Benzo(a)pyrene 2100 J 1 / 31Benzo(b)fluoranthene 3400 1 / 31Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 1400 J 1 / 31Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1300 J 1 / 31Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 240 J 1 / 31Chrysene 2100 J 1 / 31Di-n-butyl phthalate 300 J 2 / 31Fluoranthene 3100 1 / 31Fluorene 370 J 1 / 31Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 1700 J 1 / 31Naphthalene 350 J 1 / 31Phenanthrene 1100 4 / 31Pyrene 2700 1 / 318705DS09 8705DS16 8705DS20 8705DS22 8706DS00November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual15 23 J < 21 U < 24 U < 22 U 34 31 J120 11 35 11 110 12 < 11 U 350 16 J< 5.7 U < 5.3 U < 5.9 U 2.1 5.5 J < 7.1 U< 5.7 U < 5.3 U < 5.9 U < 5.5 U < 7.1 U< 5.7 U < 5.3 U < 5.9 U < 5.5 U < 7.1 U< 5.7 U < 5.3 U < 5.9 U < 5.5 U < 7.1 U< 5.7 U < 5.3 U < 5.9 U 1.7 5.5 J < 7.1 U< 11 U < 11 U < 12 U 2.5 11 J < 14 U< 5.7 U < 5.3 U < 5.9 U < 5.5 U < 7.1 U4.4 5.7 J < 5.3 U < 5.9 U < 5.5 U 22 7.8 J< 5.7 U < 5.3 U < 5.9 U 6.4 5.5 < 7.1 U< 5.7 U < 5.3 U < 5.9 U < 5.5 U < 7.1 U< 380 U < 400 U < 430 U < 410 U < 2300 U< 380 U < 400 U < 430 U < 410 U < 2300 U< 380 U < 400 U < 430 U < 410 U 1300 2300 J< 380 U < 400 U < 430 U < 410 U 2100 2300 J< 380 U < 400 U < 430 U < 410 U 3400 2300< 380 U < 400 U < 430 U < 410 U 1400 2300 J< 380 U < 400 U < 430 U < 410 U 1300 2300 J< 380 U < 400 U < 430 U < 410 U < 2300 U< 380 U < 400 U < 430 U < 410 U 2100 2300 J< 380 U < 400 U < 430 U < 410 U < 2300 U< 380 U < 400 U < 430 U < 410 U 3100 2300< 380 U < 400 U < 430 U < 410 U < 2300 U< 380 U < 400 U < 430 U < 410 U 1700 2300 J< 380 U < 400 U < 430 U < 410 U < 2300 U< 380 U < 400 U < 430 U < 410 U 1100 2300< 380 U < 400 U < 430 U < 410 U 2700 2300Q:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 10 of 21 5/9/02TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyMETALS (mg/kg)Aluminum 19600 31 / 31Antimony 53.7 4 / 31Arsenic 28.3 31 / 31Barium 281 31 / 31Beryllium 2.4 29 / 31Cadmium 2.7 5 / 31Calcium 131000 31 / 31Chromium 38.2 31 / 31Cobalt 44 31 / 31Copper 102 31 / 31Iron 52300 31 / 31Lead 232 31 / 31Magnesium 5420 31 / 31Manganese 3240 31 / 31Mercury 1.11 24 / 31Nickel 150 31 / 31Potassium 1250 31 / 31Selenium 1.52 9 / 31Silver 60.3 2 / 31Sodium 757 J 28 / 31Thallium 3.71 24 / 31Vanadium 61.1 31 / 31Zinc 308 31 / 31OTHER PARAMETERS(mg/kg)Total Organic Carbon 77.5 2 / 2Notes:* = Sample Collected on Multiple DaysND = Not DetectedRL = Reporting LimitQual = QualifierE = Value exceeds linear range.8705DS09 8705DS16 8705DS20 8705DS22 8706DS00November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual10700 22.8 10600 24.5 12500 25.8 11700 24.8 7870 28.3< 11.4 U < 12.3 U < 12.9 U 5.4 12.4 J < 14.1 U6.71 1.14 8.08 1.23 13.7 1.29 17.5 1.24 9.4 1.41102 1.14 145 1.23 281 1.29 94.9 1.24 120 1.410.68 1.14 J 1.06 1.23 J 1.76 1.29 1.49 1.24 0.795 1.41 J< 0.569 U < 0.613 U < 0.646 U < 0.621 U 0.489 0.707 J1550 114 1420 123 2260 129 3810 124 13100 14112.5 1.14 13.8 1.23 18.8 1.29 38.2 1.24 12.3 1.419.1 2.28 12.7 2.45 32.2 2.58 21 2.48 9.14 2.8310.3 2.28 15.7 2.45 35 2.58 43.1 2.48 27.1 2.8316500 22.8 18000 24.5 31300 25.8 38900 24.8 15900 28.312 1.14 16.7 1.23 36 1.29 30.5 1.24 63.6 1.411190 114 954 123 1070 129 1200 124 2480 141949 1.14 1790 1.23 3010 1.29 528 1.24 929 1.410.024 0.114 J 0.03 0.123 J < 0.129 U 0.026 0.124 J 0.629 0.14114 2.28 18.7 2.45 63.9 2.58 57 2.48 18.6 2.83497 569 J 628 613 838 646 778 621 1030 707< 1.14 U < 1.23 U < 1.29 U < 1.24 U < 1.41 U< 1.14 U < 1.23 U < 1.29 U < 1.24 U < 1.41 U34 114 J 73.2 123 J 92.4 129 J 63.6 124 J 42.3 141 J1.11 2.28 J 2.45 2.45 3.71 2.58 2.63 2.48 1.83 2.83 J18.9 1.14 23.5 1.23 35.8 1.29 38.6 1.24 24.9 1.4134.8 2.28 39.5 2.45 84.3 2.58 108 2.48 117 2.8377.5 14.1Q:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 11 of 21 5/9/02TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyJ = EstimatedR = RejectedUJ = Estimated NondetectU = Nondetectmg/kg = milligram per kilogramμg/kg = microgram per kilogramThe maximum detected concentrations for each analyte areunderlined and appear in boldface font.This table contains data from the Phase II RFI (2000-2001).Blank space for a set of analytes indicates that the samplewas not analyzed for these parameters.Analyte frequency information does not include dilutionsand reanalyses.Results in the table represent the highest reportedconcentration for each analyte.Analytical data for samples collected prior to October 2000was obtained from the Army Environmental Centerdatabase.Frequency indicates the number of times a given analytewas detected in the samples.8705DS09 8705DS16 8705DS20 8705DS22 8706DS00November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000 November 12, 2000Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL QualQ:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 12 of 21 5/9/02TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyVOLATILE ORGANICCOMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Butanone 57 16 / 31Acetone 350 J 23 / 31Benzene 57 6 / 31Bromodichloromethane 110 J 1 / 31Carbon disulfide 5.6 J 3 / 31cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 1.9 J 1 / 29Ethylbenzene 130 J 7 / 31m/p-xylene 2500 6 / 29o-Xylene 71 J 2 / 29Tetrachloroethylene 49 6 / 31Toluene 6.4 8 / 31Trichloroethylene 3.7 J 1 / 31SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICCOMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Methylnaphthalene 7300 3 / 31Acenaphthene 360 J 1 / 31Benzo(a)anthracene 1300 J 1 / 31Benzo(a)pyrene 2100 J 1 / 31Benzo(b)fluoranthene 3400 1 / 31Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 1400 J 1 / 31Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1300 J 1 / 31Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 240 J 1 / 31Chrysene 2100 J 1 / 31Di-n-butyl phthalate 300 J 2 / 31Fluoranthene 3100 1 / 31Fluorene 370 J 1 / 31Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 1700 J 1 / 31Naphthalene 350 J 1 / 31Phenanthrene 1100 4 / 31Pyrene 2700 1 / 318706DS04 8707DS00 8707DS07 8707DS10 8707DS14November 12, 2000 November 10, 2000 November 10, 2000 November 10, 2000 November 10, 2000Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual15 23 J 36 21 18 21 J < 22 U 57 28150 12 290 11 73 11 < 11 U 170 14< 5.8 U 0.52 5.3 J 2.9 5.3 J 45 5.5 J 57 7< 5.8 U < 5.3 U < 5.3 U 110 270 J < 7 U4.8 6.2 J < 5.3 U < 5.3 U < 5.5 U < 7 U1.9 5.8 J < 5.3 U < 5.3 U < 5.5 U < 7 U< 5.8 U < 5.3 U 14 5.3 130 5.5 J 46 7< 12 U < 11 U 2.5 11 J 2500 540 19 14< 5.8 U < 5.3 U < 5.3 U 71 5.5 J 0.99 7 J49 6.2 < 5.3 U < 5.3 U < 5.5 U < 7 U< 5.8 U < 5.3 U 1.3 5.3 J < 5.5 U 2 7 J3.7 6.2 J < 5.3 U < 5.3 U < 5.5 U < 7 U< 2000 U < 430 U 7300 2000 1100 410 < 420 U< 2000 U < 430 U 360 390 J < 410 U < 420 U< 2000 U < 430 U < 390 U < 410 U < 420 U< 2000 U < 430 U < 390 U < 410 U < 420 U< 2000 U < 430 U < 390 U < 410 U < 420 U< 2000 U < 430 U < 390 U < 410 U < 420 U< 2000 U < 430 U < 390 U < 410 U < 420 U< 2000 U < 430 U < 390 U < 410 U < 420 U< 2000 U < 430 U < 390 U < 410 U < 420 U< 2000 U < 430 U < 390 U < 410 U < 420 U< 2000 U < 430 U < 390 U < 410 U < 420 U< 2000 U < 430 U 370 390 J < 410 U < 420 U< 2000 U < 430 U < 390 U < 410 U < 420 U< 2000 U < 430 U < 390 U 350 410 J < 420 U< 2000 U < 430 U 940 390 230 410 J < 420 U< 2000 U < 430 U < 390 U < 410 U < 420 UQ:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 13 of 21 5/9/02TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyMETALS (mg/kg)Aluminum 19600 31 / 31Antimony 53.7 4 / 31Arsenic 28.3 31 / 31Barium 281 31 / 31Beryllium 2.4 29 / 31Cadmium 2.7 5 / 31Calcium 131000 31 / 31Chromium 38.2 31 / 31Cobalt 44 31 / 31Copper 102 31 / 31Iron 52300 31 / 31Lead 232 31 / 31Magnesium 5420 31 / 31Manganese 3240 31 / 31Mercury 1.11 24 / 31Nickel 150 31 / 31Potassium 1250 31 / 31Selenium 1.52 9 / 31Silver 60.3 2 / 31Sodium 757 J 28 / 31Thallium 3.71 24 / 31Vanadium 61.1 31 / 31Zinc 308 31 / 31OTHER PARAMETERS(mg/kg)Total Organic Carbon 77.5 2 / 2Notes:* = Sample Collected on Multiple DaysND = Not DetectedRL = Reporting LimitQual = QualifierE = Value exceeds linear range.8706DS04 8707DS00 8707DS07 8707DS10 8707DS14November 12, 2000 November 10, 2000 November 10, 2000 November 10, 2000 November 10, 2000Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual8980 24.6 19600 25.9 10800 23.9 8890 24.6 13000 25.5< 12.3 U < 12.9 U < 11.9 U < 12.3 U < 12.8 U16.1 1.23 24.1 1.29 19.3 1.19 28.3 1.23 16.1 1.28180 1.23 229 1.29 82.9 1.19 67 1.23 90.3 1.281.25 1.23 2.05 1.29 1.14 1.19 J 2.4 1.23 1.47 1.280.68 0.615 < 0.647 U < 0.597 U < 0.616 U < 0.639 U14200 123 5150 129 2250 119 2120 123 5560 12816.8 1.23 25.4 1.29 13.9 1.19 16.1 1.23 12.4 1.2817 2.46 44 2.59 35.2 2.39 16.3 2.46 11.5 2.5533.1 2.46 78.6 2.59 67.7 2.39 102 2.46 75.9 2.5524100 24.6 52300 25.9 35100 23.9 45900 24.6 29900 25.574.5 1.23 61.3 1.29 41.7 1.19 42.4 1.23 19.1 1.282030 123 1700 129 660 119 418 123 887 1281730 1.23 3240 1.29 1050 1.19 884 1.23 1480 1.280.477 0.123 0.039 0.129 J < 0.119 U 0.065 0.123 J 0.026 0.128 J26.9 2.46 73.7 2.59 76.6 2.39 150 2.46 89.6 2.55800 615 1080 647 535 597 J 644 616 816 639< 1.23 U 1.32 1.29 1.52 1.19 1.4 1.23 1.24 1.28 J< 1.23 U < 1.29 U < 1.19 U < 1.23 U < 1.28 U81.4 123 J 63.9 129 J 39.4 119 J 40.6 123 J 69.1 128 J2.94 2.46 1.94 2.59 J 1.64 2.39 J 2.04 2.46 J 0.878 2.55 J41 1.23 61.1 1.29 38.6 1.19 46.5 1.23 37.6 1.28123 2.46 127 2.59 87.3 2.39 139 2.46 134 2.55Q:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 14 of 21 5/9/02TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyJ = EstimatedR = RejectedUJ = Estimated NondetectU = Nondetectmg/kg = milligram per kilogramμg/kg = microgram per kilogramThe maximum detected concentrations for each analyte areunderlined and appear in boldface font.This table contains data from the Phase II RFI (2000-2001).Blank space for a set of analytes indicates that the samplewas not analyzed for these parameters.Analyte frequency information does not include dilutionsand reanalyses.Results in the table represent the highest reportedconcentration for each analyte.Analytical data for samples collected prior to October 2000was obtained from the Army Environmental Centerdatabase.Frequency indicates the number of times a given analytewas detected in the samples.8706DS04 8707DS00 8707DS07 8707DS10 8707DS14November 12, 2000 November 10, 2000 November 10, 2000 November 10, 2000 November 10, 2000Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL QualQ:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 15 of 21 5/9/02TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyVOLATILE ORGANICCOMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Butanone 57 16 / 31Acetone 350 J 23 / 31Benzene 57 6 / 31Bromodichloromethane 110 J 1 / 31Carbon disulfide 5.6 J 3 / 31cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 1.9 J 1 / 29Ethylbenzene 130 J 7 / 31m/p-xylene 2500 6 / 29o-Xylene 71 J 2 / 29Tetrachloroethylene 49 6 / 31Toluene 6.4 8 / 31Trichloroethylene 3.7 J 1 / 31SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICCOMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Methylnaphthalene 7300 3 / 31Acenaphthene 360 J 1 / 31Benzo(a)anthracene 1300 J 1 / 31Benzo(a)pyrene 2100 J 1 / 31Benzo(b)fluoranthene 3400 1 / 31Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 1400 J 1 / 31Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1300 J 1 / 31Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 240 J 1 / 31Chrysene 2100 J 1 / 31Di-n-butyl phthalate 300 J 2 / 31Fluoranthene 3100 1 / 31Fluorene 370 J 1 / 31Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 1700 J 1 / 31Naphthalene 350 J 1 / 31Phenanthrene 1100 4 / 31Pyrene 2700 1 / 318708DS00 8708DS07 8708DS10 8708DS13 8709SB00November 10, 2000 November 10, 2000 November 10, 2000 November 10, 2000 November 16, 2000Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual23 23 29 24 19 23 J < 22 U < 25 U140 11 180 12 80 11 < 11 U < 13 U< 5.6 U < 5.9 U < 5.7 U < 5.5 U < 6.1 U< 5.6 U < 5.9 U < 5.7 U < 5.5 U < 6.1 U< 5.6 U < 5.9 U 4.7 5.7 J 5.6 5.5 J < 6.3 U< 5.6 U < 5.9 U < 5.7 U < 5.5 U < 6.1 U< 5.6 U < 5.9 U 0.42 5.7 J < 5.5 U < 6.1 U< 11 U < 12 U 1.4 11 J < 11 U < 12 U< 5.6 U < 5.9 U < 5.7 U < 5.5 U < 6.1 U< 5.6 U < 5.9 U < 5.7 U < 5.5 U < 6.1 U< 5.6 U < 5.9 U 0.78 5.7 J < 5.5 U 1.3 6.1 J< 5.6 U < 5.9 U < 5.7 U < 5.5 U < 6.1 U< 440 U < 390 U < 410 U 2000 410 < 2100 U< 440 U < 390 U < 410 U < 410 U < 2100 U< 440 U < 390 U < 410 U < 410 U < 2100 U< 440 U < 390 U < 410 U < 410 U < 2100 U< 440 U < 390 U < 410 U < 410 U < 2100 U< 440 U < 390 U < 410 U < 410 U < 2100 U< 440 U < 390 U < 410 U < 410 U < 2100 U< 440 U < 390 U < 410 U < 410 U < 2100 U< 440 U < 390 U < 410 U < 410 U < 2100 U< 440 U < 390 U < 410 U < 410 U < 2100 U< 440 U < 390 U < 410 U < 410 U < 2100 U< 440 U < 390 U < 410 U < 410 U < 2100 U< 440 U < 390 U < 410 U < 410 U < 2100 U< 440 U < 390 U < 410 U < 410 U < 2100 U< 440 U < 390 U < 410 U 380 410 J < 2100 U< 440 U < 390 U < 410 U < 410 U < 2100 UQ:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 16 of 21 5/9/02TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyMETALS (mg/kg)Aluminum 19600 31 / 31Antimony 53.7 4 / 31Arsenic 28.3 31 / 31Barium 281 31 / 31Beryllium 2.4 29 / 31Cadmium 2.7 5 / 31Calcium 131000 31 / 31Chromium 38.2 31 / 31Cobalt 44 31 / 31Copper 102 31 / 31Iron 52300 31 / 31Lead 232 31 / 31Magnesium 5420 31 / 31Manganese 3240 31 / 31Mercury 1.11 24 / 31Nickel 150 31 / 31Potassium 1250 31 / 31Selenium 1.52 9 / 31Silver 60.3 2 / 31Sodium 757 J 28 / 31Thallium 3.71 24 / 31Vanadium 61.1 31 / 31Zinc 308 31 / 31OTHER PARAMETERS(mg/kg)Total Organic Carbon 77.5 2 / 2Notes:* = Sample Collected on Multiple DaysND = Not DetectedRL = Reporting LimitQual = QualifierE = Value exceeds linear range.8708DS00 8708DS07 8708DS10 8708DS13 8709SB00November 10, 2000 November 10, 2000 November 10, 2000 November 10, 2000 November 16, 2000Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual9690 26.8 8700 23.6 7980 24.7 8360 24.6 8730 25.4< 13.4 U < 11.8 U < 12.3 U < 12.3 U < 12.7 U9.69 1.34 10.6 1.18 6.55 1.23 11.3 1.23 8.56 1.27111 1.34 156 1.18 183 1.23 143 1.23 95.6 1.270.703 1.34 J 0.967 1.18 J 0.993 1.23 J 1.18 1.23 J 0.576 1.27 J< 0.671 U < 0.59 U < 0.617 U < 0.614 U 1.81 0.6354010 134 2820 118 2590 123 13000 123 56800 12716.3 1.34 12.1 1.18 9.68 1.23 12.6 1.23 21.1 1.2711.5 2.68 14.5 2.36 12.2 2.47 22.6 2.46 9.46 2.5417.2 2.68 20 2.36 10.7 2.47 35.9 2.46 48 2.5419400 26.8 19100 23.6 14400 24.7 24600 24.6 16500 25.424.4 1.34 18 1.18 15.8 1.23 27.8 1.23 232 1.271230 134 838 118 973 123 1900 123 5420 1271160 1.34 1730 1.18 1880 1.23 2120 1.23 910 1.27< 0.134 U 0.03 0.118 J < 0.123 U < 0.123 U 1.05 0.12718.7 2.68 23.8 2.36 17.3 2.47 42 2.46 18.3 2.54743 671 698 590 508 617 J 704 614 861 6351.42 1.34 0.829 1.18 J 1.17 1.23 J 0.755 1.23 J < 1.27 U< 1.34 U < 1.18 U < 1.23 U < 1.23 U < 1.27 U44.2 134 J 38.9 118 J 203 123 40.5 123 J 38 127 J< 2.68 U < 2.36 U < 2.47 U < 2.46 U 2.28 2.54 J23.3 1.34 24.6 1.18 16.9 1.23 27.3 1.23 24.1 1.2754.6 2.68 42.7 2.36 35.9 2.47 54.5 2.46 308 2.54Q:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 17 of 21 5/9/02TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyJ = EstimatedR = RejectedUJ = Estimated NondetectU = Nondetectmg/kg = milligram per kilogramμg/kg = microgram per kilogramThe maximum detected concentrations for each analyte areunderlined and appear in boldface font.This table contains data from the Phase II RFI (2000-2001).Blank space for a set of analytes indicates that the samplewas not analyzed for these parameters.Analyte frequency information does not include dilutionsand reanalyses.Results in the table represent the highest reportedconcentration for each analyte.Analytical data for samples collected prior to October 2000was obtained from the Army Environmental Centerdatabase.Frequency indicates the number of times a given analytewas detected in the samples.8708DS00 8708DS07 8708DS10 8708DS13 8709SB00November 10, 2000 November 10, 2000 November 10, 2000 November 10, 2000 November 16, 2000Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL Qual Result RL QualQ:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 18 of 21 5/9/02TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyVOLATILE ORGANICCOMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Butanone 57 16 / 31Acetone 350 J 23 / 31Benzene 57 6 / 31Bromodichloromethane 110 J 1 / 31Carbon disulfide 5.6 J 3 / 31cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 1.9 J 1 / 29Ethylbenzene 130 J 7 / 31m/p-xylene 2500 6 / 29o-Xylene 71 J 2 / 29Tetrachloroethylene 49 6 / 31Toluene 6.4 8 / 31Trichloroethylene 3.7 J 1 / 31SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICCOMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Methylnaphthalene 7300 3 / 31Acenaphthene 360 J 1 / 31Benzo(a)anthracene 1300 J 1 / 31Benzo(a)pyrene 2100 J 1 / 31Benzo(b)fluoranthene 3400 1 / 31Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 1400 J 1 / 31Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1300 J 1 / 31Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 240 J 1 / 31Chrysene 2100 J 1 / 31Di-n-butyl phthalate 300 J 2 / 31Fluoranthene 3100 1 / 31Fluorene 370 J 1 / 31Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 1700 J 1 / 31Naphthalene 350 J 1 / 31Phenanthrene 1100 4 / 31Pyrene 2700 1 / 318709SB04November 16, 2000Result RL Qual< 22 U220 11 J< 5.4 U< 5.4 U< 5.4 U< 5.4 U< 5.4 U< 11 U< 5.4 U< 5.4 U< 5.4 U< 5.4 U< 380 U< 380 U< 380 U< 380 U< 380 U< 380 U< 380 U< 380 U< 380 U< 380 U< 380 U< 380 U< 380 U< 380 U< 380 U< 380 UQ:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 19 of 21 5/9/02TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyMETALS (mg/kg)Aluminum 19600 31 / 31Antimony 53.7 4 / 31Arsenic 28.3 31 / 31Barium 281 31 / 31Beryllium 2.4 29 / 31Cadmium 2.7 5 / 31Calcium 131000 31 / 31Chromium 38.2 31 / 31Cobalt 44 31 / 31Copper 102 31 / 31Iron 52300 31 / 31Lead 232 31 / 31Magnesium 5420 31 / 31Manganese 3240 31 / 31Mercury 1.11 24 / 31Nickel 150 31 / 31Potassium 1250 31 / 31Selenium 1.52 9 / 31Silver 60.3 2 / 31Sodium 757 J 28 / 31Thallium 3.71 24 / 31Vanadium 61.1 31 / 31Zinc 308 31 / 31OTHER PARAMETERS(mg/kg)Total Organic Carbon 77.5 2 / 2Notes:* = Sample Collected on Multiple DaysND = Not DetectedRL = Reporting LimitQual = QualifierE = Value exceeds linear range.8709SB04November 16, 2000Result RL Qual11900 22.9< 11.4 U12 1.1498.6 1.140.711 1.14 J< 0.572 U3180 11416.5 1.1415.8 2.2924.4 2.2924300 22.931.2 1.141490 1141200 1.140.046 0.114 J20.1 2.29576 572< 1.14 U< 1.14 U80.6 114 J2.42 2.2929.6 1.1453.1 2.29Q:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 20 of 21 5/9/02TABLE 5-1SUMMARY OF CHEMICALS DETECTED IN SOIL AND SEDIMENT SAMPLESSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPFIELD IDDATE COLLECTEDMaximum FrequencyJ = EstimatedR = RejectedUJ = Estimated NondetectU = Nondetectmg/kg = milligram per kilogramμg/kg = microgram per kilogramThe maximum detected concentrations for each analyte areunderlined and appear in boldface font.This table contains data from the Phase II RFI (2000-2001).Blank space for a set of analytes indicates that the samplewas not analyzed for these parameters.Analyte frequency information does not include dilutionsand reanalyses.Results in the table represent the highest reportedconcentration for each analyte.Analytical data for samples collected prior to October 2000was obtained from the Army Environmental Centerdatabase.Frequency indicates the number of times a given analytewas detected in the samples.8709SB04November 16, 2000Result RL QualQ:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 21 of 21 5/9/02Contamination AssessmentSECTIONSIX Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA 6-1The chemical results of the soil and sediment samples were assessed to determine the nature andextent of contaminants at the Building 6611 Sump (Site 87). Chemical concentrations detectedat 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 Figure 6-1) wereconsidered elevated. Detected concentrations less than 50% of the Level 2 values wereconsidered to be low.6.1 NEAR SURFACE SOILS AND SEDIMENTSThe assessment of chemicals detected in near surface soils and sediments is based on 12 samplescollected from the top two feet of nine soil borings, from the top two feet at two surface soilsampling locations, and from sediment at one location (see Figure 2-1). Surface water was notpresent at the time of the sediment sample’s collection.Metals were detected in all near surface soil and sediment samples. VOCs were detected in tenof the 12 near surface samples. SVOCs were detected in two of the 12 near surface samples.TPH was not detected in either of the two near surface samples collected during the Phase I RI.Cyanide was not detected in any of the near surface samples.6.1.1 VOCsFive VOCs were detected at low concentrations in the near surface soil and sediment samples(see Table 5-1 and Figure 6-1). These VOCs were generally detected below or just above thereporting limits.The presence of these VOCs may be related to the discharge of hazardous, primarily fuel-related,materials to the Building 6611 Sump. The detected VOCs were used in a risk screeningevaluation for soil and sediment (see Section 7.2).6.1.2 SVOCsEleven SVOCs, all polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), were detected in the near surfacesoil and sediment samples (see Table 5-1 and Figure 6-1). Most of these SVOCs were detectedbelow the reporting limits.The presence of these SVOCs may be related to the discharge of hazardous, primarily fuel-related,materials to the Building 6611 Sump. The detected SVOCs were used in a risk screeningevaluation for soil and sediment (see Section 7.2).6.1.3 MetalsMetals were detected in all near surface soil and sediment samples (see Table 5-1). Since metalsare naturally occurring constituents of soil, the detected metal concentrations were compared toestablished background levels for Upland soils (see Section 7.2). The comparison of detectedContamination AssessmentSECTIONSIX Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA 6-2metal concentrations to background levels for all soil and sediment samples is provided in Table7-1.Based on this comparison, concentrations of seven metals (arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead,mercury, selenium, and zinc) were determined to exceed the corresponding background levels(see Figure 6-1). The presence of these metals may be related to the discharge of hazardous,primarily fuel-related, materials to the Building 6611 Sump.6.2 SUBSURFACE SOILSThe assessment of chemicals detected in subsurface soil samples was based on nine boringscompleted in the area of the flume (see Figure 2-1). Nineteen subsurface soil samples werecollected from these locations.Metals and VOCs were detected in all subsurface soil samples. SVOCs were detected in four ofthe 19 subsurface samples. Cyanide was not detected in any of the subsurface samples.6.2.1 VOCsTwelve VOCs were detected at low concentrations in the subsurface soil samples (see Table 5-1and Figure 6-1). These VOCs were generally detected below or just above the reporting limits.The presence of these VOCs may be related to the discharge of hazardous, primarily fuel-related,materials to the Building 6611 Sump. The detected VOCs were used in a risk screeningevaluation for soil and sediment (see Section 7.2).6.2.2 SVOCsSix SVOCs, including three PAHs, were detected at low concentrations in the subsurface soilsamples (see Table 5-1 and Figure 6-1). These SVOCs were generally detected below or justabove the reporting limits.The presence of these SVOCs may be related to the discharge of hazardous, primarily fuel-related,materials to the Building 6611 Sump. The detected SVOCs were used in a risk screeningevaluation for soil and sediment (see Section 7.2).6.2.3 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 and sediment samples is provided in Table 7-1.Based on this comparison, concentrations of nine metals (antimony, arsenic, copper, lead,mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, and zinc) were determined to exceed the correspondingContamination AssessmentSECTIONSIX Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA 6-3background levels (see Figure 6-1). The presence of these metals may be related to the dischargeof hazardous, primarily fuel-related, materials to the Building 6611 Sump.Human Health Risk EvaluationSECTIONSEVEN Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA 7-17.1 INTRODUCTION7.1.1 PurposeThis section provides a Human Health Risk Screening for contaminants identified at Building6611 Sump (Site 87). 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) (IDEM Risk Integrated Systemof Closure (RISC) Guidance, 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) and the Phase II RFI (current data) were utilized in theidentification of COPCs and the development of exposure point concentrations and risk. Thesedata were considered representative of current conditions, and should provide a conservativeestimate of potential future conditions (i.e., in all likelihood future concentrations would belower).Site data were segregated by exposure media (e.g., surface soil and sediment [less than 2 feetbgs] and total soils [subsurface soil, surface soil.]) Surface water and groundwater were notsampled. Chemicals detected in all soils were evaluated as part of the risk screening process toestablish COPCs. However, no potential exposure exists below 10 feet bgs. The maximumdetected concentrations from each medium were compared to the following criteria in order toidentify the medium-specific COPCs:· Site-specific background levels (inorganic compounds only) developed as part of the Phase IRI Report (W-C, 1998).· IDEM Industrial Default Closure Levels (Level 1)· Calculated site-specific Industrial Closure Levels (Level 2)· Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA) for essential nutrientsIn addition, 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 guidanceHuman Health Risk EvaluationSECTIONSEVEN Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev1.doc\7-May-02 /OMA 7-2(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)rather than a drinking water rate of ingestion of 1 L/day since groundwater in thevicinity of the site is not used as a drinking water source.· A dilution attenuation factor (DAF) of 1 was used rather than 20 due to the karstgeology at the 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/sediment and 100 times higherthan Level 1 values for groundwater/surface water.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 aresummarized in Appendix B, Table B-1. Supporting documentation for development of screeningvalues is included in Tables B-2 through B-4.The INAAP data and COPC selection process are summarized in Table 7-1 (total soil/sediment)and Table 7-2 (surface soil/sediment). These tables provide summary information, including alist of all detected chemicals in each medium, the maximum detected concentrations, thefrequency of detection, the screening values used for COPC selection (from Table B-1), andidentification of those chemicals that fail the screening process (i.e., the COPCs). As noted inthese tables, COPCs were not identified in total soil/sediment, or in surface soil/sediment;therefore, these media were not evaluated further.Based on the results of this risk screening, the chemicals detected at Site 87, the Building 6611Sump, do not warrant further assessment.TABLE 7-1COMPARISON OF TOTAL SOIL/SEDIMENT CONCENTRATIONS (ALL DEPTHS) TO SCREENING LEVELSSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPMaximum Daily Intake Recommended Daily Calculated COPC7Detected from the Site3 Allowance4 Industrial (Y/N)Concentrations1 (Essential Metals) (Essential Metals) Closure Level 2 1,6 Basis8VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Butanone 16 / 31 57 260000 N,AAcetone 23 / 31 350 J 41000 N,ABenzene 6 / 31 57 670 N,ABromodichloromethane 1 / 31 110 J 630 N,ACarbon disulfide 3 / 31 5.6 J 82000 N,Acis-1,2-Dichloroethene 1 / 29 1.9 J 5800 N,AEthylbenzene 7 / 31 130 J 200000 N,Am/p-xylene 6 / 29 2500 410000S N,Ao-Xylene 2 / 29 71 J 410000S N,ATetrachloroethylene 6 / 31 49 640 N,AToluene 8 / 31 6.4 240000 N,ATrichloroethylene 1 / 31 3.7 J 3000 N,ASEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Methylnaphthalene 3 / 31 7300 170000S N,AAcenaphthene 1 / 31 360 J 1200000 N,ABenzo(a)anthracene 1 / 31 1300 J 15000 N,ABenzo(a)pyrene 1 / 31 2100 J 1500 7500 N,ABenzo(b)fluoranthene 1 / 31 3400 15000 N,ABenzo(g,h,i)perylene 1 / 31 1400 J 170000S N,ABenzo(k)fluoranthene 1 / 31 1300 J 39000 N,ABis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 1 / 31 240 J 980000 N,AChrysene 1 / 31 2100 J 25000 N,ADi-n-butyl phthalate 2 / 31 300 J 2000000 N,AFluoranthene 1 / 31 3100 880000 N,AFluorene 1 / 31 370 J 1100000 N,AIndeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 1 / 31 1700 J 3100 N,ANaphthalene 1 / 31 350 J 170000 N,APhenanthrene 4 / 31 1100 170000S N,APyrene 1 / 31 2700 570000 N,AMETALS (mg/kg)Aluminum 31 / 31 19600 28958 676C 3380C N,FAntimony 4 / 31 53.7 8.66 37 N,AArsenic 31 / 31 28.3 23.7 20 100 N,ABarium 31 / 31 281 415 5900 N,A,FBeryllium 29 / 31 2.4 2.5 2300 N,A,FCadmium 5 / 31 2.7 0.85 77 N,AIDEM IndustrialClosure Level 1 Chemical 1,5Frequency ofDetectionBackgroundConcentrations2Q:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Draft\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 1 of 2 5/9/02TABLE 7-1COMPARISON OF TOTAL SOIL/SEDIMENT CONCENTRATIONS (ALL DEPTHS) TO SCREENING LEVELSSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPMaximum Daily Intake Recommended Daily Calculated COPC7Detected from the Site3 Allowance4 Industrial (Y/N)Concentrations1 (Essential Metals) (Essential Metals) Closure Level 2 1,6 Basis8IDEM IndustrialClosure Level 1 Chemical 1,5Frequency ofDetectionBackgroundConcentrations2Calcium 31 / 31 131000 13.1 1200 N,CChromium 31 / 31 38.2 45.5 10000 N,A,FCobalt 31 / 31 44 49.3 36.9C 185C N,A,FCopper 31 / 31 102 47.5 1700 N,AIron 31 / 31 52300 5.23 10 N,CLead 31 / 31 232 39.4 230 1150 N,AMagnesium 31 / 31 5420 0.542 400 N,CManganese 31 / 31 3240 13294 96.3C 482C N,FMercury 24 / 31 1.11 0.14 32 160 N,ANickel 31 / 31 150 70 2700 N,APotassium 31 / 31 1250 0.125 585 N,CSelenium 9 / 31 1.52 0.97 53 N,ASilver 2 / 31 60.3 87 N,ASodium 28 / 31 757 J 0.076 1000 N,CThallium 24 / 31 3.71 5.17 13 N,A,FVanadium 31 / 31 61.1 65 31.6C 158C N,A,FZinc 31 / 31 308 198 10000 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) * ingestion rate of 100 mg/day * 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 Section7.2.1.(7) Chemical of potential concern.(8) See A-F footnotes below.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 value available to quantify risk. Chemical will be evaluated qualitatively in the risk assessment.F = Concentration is below background concentration.Q:\4599\fl010d0\Site 87\Draft\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 2 of 2 5/9/02TABLE 7-2COMPARISON OF MAXIMUM SURFACE SOIL AND SEDIMENT CONCENTRATIONS TO SCREENING LEVELSSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPMaximum Daily Intake Recommended Daily Calculated COPC7Detected from the Site3 Allowance4 Industrial (Y/N)Concentrations1 (Essential Metals) (Essential Metals) Closure Level 2 1,6 Basis8VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)2-Butanone 6 / 12 36 260000 N,AAcetone 8 / 12 350 J 41000 N,ABenzene 1 / 12 0.52 J 670 N,ATetrachloroethylene 1 / 12 22 J 640 N,AToluene 2 / 12 1.3 J 240000 N,ASEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (μg/kg)Benzo(a)anthracene 1 / 12 1300J 15000 N,ABenzo(a)pyrene 1 / 12 2100J 1500 7500 N,ABenzo(b)fluoranthene 1 / 12 3400 15000 N,ABenzo(g,h,i)perylene 1 / 12 1400 J 170000S N,ABenzo(k)fluoranthene 1 / 12 1300 39000 N,AChrysene 1 / 12 2100J 25000 N,ADi-n-butyl phthalate 1 / 12 81J 2000000 N,AFluoranthene 1 / 12 3100 880000 N,AIndeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 1 / 12 1700 J 3100 N,APhenanthrene 1 / 12 1100 170000S N,APyrene 1 / 12 2700 570000 N,AMETALS (mg/kg)Aluminum 12 / 12 19600 28958 676C 3380C N,FAntimony 1 / 12 4.21 J 8.66 37 N,A,FArsenic 12 / 12 24.1 23.7 20 100 N,ABarium 12 / 12 229 415 5900 N,A,FBeryllium 10 / 12 2.05 2.5 2300 N,A,FCadmium 2 / 12 1.81 0.85 77 N,ACalcium 12 / 12 56800 5.7 1200 N,CChromium 12 / 12 25.4 45.5 10000 N,A,FCobalt 12 / 12 44 49.3 36.9C 185C N,A,FCopper 12 / 12 78.6 47.5 1700 N,AIron 12 / 12 52300 5.23 10 N,CLead 12 / 12 232 39.4 230 1150 N,AMagnesium 12 / 12 5420 0.542 400 N,CManganese 12 / 12 3240 13294 96.3C 482C N,FMercury 11 / 12 1.05 0.14 32 N,ANickel 12 / 12 73.7 70 2700 N,APotassium 12 / 12 1250 0.125 585 N,CIDEM IndustrialClosure Level 1 Chemical 1,5Frequency ofDetectionBackgroundConcentrations2Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 25\Draft\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 1 of 2 5/9/02TABLE 7-2COMPARISON OF MAXIMUM SURFACE SOIL AND SEDIMENT CONCENTRATIONS TO SCREENING LEVELSSITE 87 - BUILDING 6611 SUMPMaximum Daily Intake Recommended Daily Calculated COPC7Detected from the Site3 Allowance4 Industrial (Y/N)Concentrations1 (Essential Metals) (Essential Metals) Closure Level 2 1,6 Basis8IDEM IndustrialClosure Level 1 Chemical 1,5Frequency ofDetectionBackgroundConcentrations2Selenium 3 / 12 1.42 0.97 53 N,ASodium 9 / 12 63.9 J 0.006 1000 N,CThallium 9 / 12 3 5.17 13 N,A,FVanadium 12 / 12 61.1 65 31.6C 158C N,A,FZinc 12 / 12 308 198 10000 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) * ingestion rate of 100 mg/day * 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 Section7.2.1.(7) Chemical of potential concern.(8) See A-F footnotes below.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 value available to quantify risk. Chemical will be evaluated qualitatively in the risk assessment.F = Concentration is below background concentration.Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 25\Draft\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Tables_Rev1 Page 2 of 2 5/9/02Ecological Risk EvaluationSECTIONEIGHT Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev2 (revised final).doc\25-Sep-02 /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.” However, USEPA (1998, here after “EPA Guidelines”) does not provide detailedguidance in specific areas and is not highly prescriptive. One of its stated purposes is to providea basis or framework for individual EPA programs and regions to develop more specificguidance “suited to their particular needs.”The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) released Environmental Quality Risk AssessmentHandbook, Volume II: Environmental Evaluation in 1996 that applies to ERAs “for all USACEHTRW investigations, studies, and designs under Department of Defense, DefenseEnvironmental 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. This guidance manual, like the EPA Guidelines, is not intended to be a “how to”document but rather to provide the concepts for performing an ERA consistent with “goodscience” and accepted regulatory procedures (USACE 1996).The EPA Emergency Response Team (ERT, Edison, New Jersey), under the authority ofOSWER 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. For our purposes of discussion, thisdocument will be referred to as ERAGS. In OSWER Directive 9285.7-28P on October 7, 1999,EPA indicated that “all ERAs should generally be performed according to the… processdescribed in [ERAGS]”.Although not specifically labeled “guidance,” several other documents are particularly relevant,and were consulted as appropriate. The first example is RTI (1995), a technical supportdocument for the proposed hazardous waste identification rule (HWIR; USEPA 1995) thatoutlines a rationale and approach for estimating exposures and effects of high-volume, low-toxicitywastes and constituents. A second example is USEPA (1994), a compendium of “issuepapers” commissioned by EPA’s Risk Assessment Forum to highlight important principles andapproaches to be considered in developing ERA guidance. Additionally, certain books and peer-reviewedscientific literature were consulted when relevant and appropriate (e.g., Newman 1999;Ingersoll et al. 1997; Rand 1995; Cockerham and Shane 1994; Suter 1993).Finally, as overall guidance for the performance of the ecological evaluation are the naturalresource management goals for the INAAP facility and grounds (McClellan 1997, IndianaDepartment of Natural Resources [IDNR] 1994, Tetra Tech EM 1999). The natural resourcesare managed so that the wildlife, agricultural, recreational and industrial purposes of the INAAPgrounds are accomplished in concert with each other and in full compliance with a long termEcological Risk EvaluationSECTIONEIGHT Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev2 (revised final).doc\25-Sep-02 /OMA 8-2natural resource stewardship responsibility (McClellen 1997). It is important to emphasize thatnot all areas will be managed as natural or feral habitat for ecological resources. Some areas willbe so managed while others are specifically designated as industrial and/or agricultural lands andwill be managed as such (McClellen 1997). Still other areas (e.g., the Jenny Lind Pond and Runarea) have been designated as sensitive areas due to the presence of endangered species and asnatural areas within the INAAP grounds (IDNR 1994, Tetra Tech EM 1999).8.1.1 PurposeEcological risk assessment is:... the process that evaluates the likelihood that adverse ecological effects mayoccur or are occurring as a result of exposure to one or more stressors. (USEPA1992, USEPA 1998).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.8.1.2 BackgroundThe INAAP Facility is located in southern Indiana along the north shore of the Ohio River. Thisregion is located in the Interior Lowland Plateau Physiographic Province, which encompassesmost of the central United States. The region is divided into many smaller sub-provinces on aregional scale. The INAAP facility is in the transitional zone between the Scottsburg Lowland ofthe Central Lowland Till Plains and the Mitchell Plain of the Interior Low Plateau (Fenneman,1938). The area has narrow floodplains with high bluffs leading to flat or rolling hill uplands.At this section of the Ohio River it flows from north to south along a large meander bend. Theproperty extends from the floodplains along the river, through the upland bluffs to a point over 2miles from the river. The property currently occupies 9,785 acres, with 70 percent classified asunimproved grounds. This includes ammunition storage buildings, agricultural lease areas,ponds and streams, railroads and roads, and the inactive manufacturing plant. Twenty ninepercent is forested with the remaining one percent classified as improved (Tetra Tech, 1999). Alldeveloped lands are located on the western edge of the property away from the river. Thegeneral area around the facility is agricultural and small-scale manufacturing.INAAP is also located in the Mixed Mesophytic Forest type as defined by Braun (1950). TheMixed Mesophytic Forest is the most complex and oldest associate of the deciduous forestformations. While this forest type is defined by the many different climax species found withindifferent physical areas, the primary species in this region have been Beech-Maple Forest type(Braun, 1950: Shelford, 1963). Species typical to this region include beech (Fagus grandifolia),tuliptree (Liriodendron tulipifera), basswood (Tilia heterophylla), sugar maple (Acersaccharum), chestnut (Castanea dentata), buckeye (Aesculus octandra), red oak (QuercusEcological Risk EvaluationSECTIONEIGHT Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev2 (revised final).doc\25-Sep-02 /OMA 8-3borealis) and white oak (Q. alba). Minor species include birch, black cherry, ash, red maple,sourgum, walnut and hickory. Understory species include dogwood, magnolias, sourwood,redbud, ironwood, hornbeam and holly.The fauna of the area is classified as the Carolinian Biotic Province (Dice, 1943). This faunaltype is found throughout the eastern central United States and historically contained whitetaildeer, turkey, elk, wolf, black bear, bobcat, mice, voles, marmots and squirrels. The INAAP areais unique in that it lies within an area of overlap of the geographic ranges of many species. It isthe northern limit of many southern species, the southern limit of many northern species and theeastern limit of many plains species.Site visits were conducted during July of 2001 to assess present conditions at the facility. Noattempt was made to document all species of fauna and flora present. Instead, the purpose was todetermine the extent and types of habitat leading to what species would be expected. Forpurposes of ecological risk assessment INAAP can be divided into four habitat types: woodeduplands with streams, cleared uplands (grass), floodplain and manufacturing areas. Site 87 maybe generally characterized as a portion of the manufacturing area located within cleared uplands.8.1.3 Technical ApproachThe first three steps of an ecological risk evaluation (Figure 8-1) correspond to a preliminary, orscreening level ecological risk assessment (Tier I or SERA) wherein: (1) the presence of anecological component is determined; (2) the contaminated media to which the ecologicalcomponent(s) could be exposed are identified; and (3) the magnitude of contamination in eachapplicable medium is compared to a level conservatively assumed not to constitute a hazard(ecotoxicological screening value). This initial screening tier corresponds to Steps 1 and 2 of theERAGS process (USEPA 1997a) and a screening level ecological risk assessment as defined byUSACE (1996). Where an ecological component is lacking, the process concludes thatchemicals of interest (COIs) are not of potential ecological concern within the site underconsideration (an exception to this may occur if there is a potential for off-site transport of theCOIs from the unit under investigation). Where an ecological component exists, but COIconcentrations in applicable media do not equal or exceed the ecotoxicological screening values,the contaminants are not considered chemicals of potential ecological concern (COPECs). But,given the presence of an ecological component and at least one COPEC, the site requires furtherevaluation – a Tier II assessment.8.2 SCREENING LEVEL ECOLOGICAL RISK EVALUATIONCertain non-domesticated plants and animals will occur, at least at times, in almost any area thatis outdoors, regardless of the absence of “natural” habitat and/or the omnipresence of humanactivity and artificial structures (buildings, pavement). Thus, strictly speaking, virtually any areaoutside of a building might include “habitat for ecological receptors.” Such essentially artificialhabitats are not, however, considered directly ecologically relevant because they exist and areconfigured to support human (industrial/military) functions. Understanding the concept ofEcological Risk EvaluationSECTIONEIGHT Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev2 (revised final).doc\25-Sep-02 /OMA 8-4“direct ecological relevance” is very important in assessing ecological risk at an active industrialsite. In the context of this assessment, ecological relevance may be defined as follows:Assessment of ecological risk for the unit is based on current and future industrialuse and acknowledge that the facility is an active site with limited potential tosupport components (populations, communities) that collectively exist andfunction as an ecosystem or are critical to the structure and function of anadjacent ecosystem. Consideration will be limited to resident populations andcommunities that provide an essential ecological attribute (production, seeddispersal, structural or dynamic control) as well as transient receptors that mayfulfill essential roles in broader (landscape-scale) systems.8.2.1 Habitat Assessment and Applicable MediaThe initial step in the evaluation of a site is whether the unit has an ecological component, whichis primarily based on the availability, within the subject unit, of exploitable habitat. Simplydefined, the term habitat means the “place where a plant or animal lives” (USEPA 1997a), but amore functional definition can be paraphrased as the type of environment where an organism (orcommunity of similarly adapted organisms) normally lives. The term exploitable refers to thepresence of attributes such as food and/or shelter availability. Different species exhibit varyingdegrees of specialization or dependence relative to habitats, some being ubiquitous (e.g., housemouse, house sparrow) and others being more or less confined to very specific types ofenvironment (e.g., gray bat). The habitat requirements and relationships of ecological receptorsgreatly influence their relative vulnerability to contaminant exposures.It is not believed that individual organisms that are occasionally present constitute an ecologicalcomponent because individuals are not appropriate as assessment endpoints for an ecological riskassessment. As stated by USEPA (1997a), “Ecological effects of most concern are those that canimpact populations (or higher levels of biological organization).” By definition, an occasionalindividual does not constitute a population nor would any effects on an occasional individual beexpected to translate into an effect on a population. The exceptions to this paradigm are thosespecies accorded official protection as endangered or threatened (e.g., the gray bat). The speciespotentially associated with the INAAP areas were presented in Tables 1 through 4 of the INAAPPhase II RFI Field Sampling Plan Addendum (URS 2000) along with their typical habitat andtrophic level.The Building 6611 Sump is comprised of a pump house, underground sewage drainage tank, adrainage field, and a bermed area. Neither the pump house nor underground sewage drainagetank represent “habitat” for ecological receptors. The areas to which exposure could potentiallybe complete are surface soils associated with the drainage field and the bermed area. Thebermed area surrounds the pump house. It is gravel covered with grass. The surface of thedrainage area is comprised of clay fill, and is covered with grass and is mowed periodically. Anelectromagnetic survey of the drainage area was conducted over an area of about 60 ft by 180 ft.Though the actual boundaries of the drainage area were indeterminate, the dimensions of theEcological Risk EvaluationSECTIONEIGHT Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev2 (revised final).doc\25-Sep-02 /OMA 8-5survey are believed to represent a reasonable estimate of the drainage area footprint. The overallsize of the bermed area and drainage area is estimated to be about 0.3 acres.The ecological community within the Building 6681 Sump House Area is essentially maintainedin an artificial state. Lawns (i.e., grass) dominate the “habitat” that is present. Thus, the plantand animal communities do not truly represent an ecosystem but rather a community maintainedby human activities. In other words, the potential for adverse effects is not associated withchanges within Site 87 but the potential to elicit adverse changes (effects) on the broader, self-sustainingecosystem within which it (the site and associated artificial community) resides (i.e.,the landscape-scale community or ecosystem).The surrounding area is best characterized as an upland fairly open old-field vegetativeassemblage. There are some nearby rows of trees along hedges or drainage areas, but the area isgenerally open field.There is a sinkhole that receives discharge from the Building 6681 drainage field that representsa potential pathway of contaminant transport. Potential exposures associated with this will beevaluated in conjunction with Site 99.As the resident primary producers and resident primary consumers within the Site 87 Area are ineffect, based on human activities, the potential for adverse effects on these communities is notconsidered germane. However, these resident primary producers and consumers representpotential forage for wider ranging organisms that may be relevant in the overall landscapeecosystem. Thus, the applicable pathway is not direct exposure, but rather food chain transportof chemicals (in biological tissues) and subsequent ingestion-pathway exposures. Biologicaltissues (food and prey items) may become contaminated due to exposure to surface soils at Site87.Subsurface soil is not believed to constitute a complete exposure pathway. Though a “sediment”sample was collected, it is not an aquatic sample in the sense that organisms such as benthicinvertebrates or fish are present and could be exposed. Rather the sample was collected from adrainage area that is generally dry, and that may periodically be wet during rain events. For thepurposes of this evaluation, this sample was assumed to be equivalent to a soil sample forpurposes of evaluating potential ecological exposures.8.2.2 Identification of Chemicals of Potential Ecological Concern (COPECs)A COPEC is a chemical, based on an initial screening of its maximum concentration inapplicable media (i.e., surface soil, surface water, and/or surficial sediment), where there is atleast a suspicion that the chemical may adversely interact with the environment (Issues 3, 4 and 5- ERAGS Screening-Level Problem Formulation). COPECs are selected based on comparison ofmaximum contaminant concentrations to ecotoxicological screening values. The selection ofthese ecotoxicological benchmarks corresponds with the second component within Step 1 asoutlined in ERAGS (1997a) – “evaluation of ecological effects.”Ecological Risk EvaluationSECTIONEIGHT Building 6611 Sump, Site 87Q:\4599\fl010d00\Site 87\Final\Sections 1-10\Site 87 Text_Rev2 (revised final).doc\25-Sep-02 /OMA 8-6There is a degree of uncertainty associated with this process where: (1) no credibleecotoxicological screening values can be obtained or derived; (2) there are insufficient data toevaluate the results of the chemical analysis (e.g., measures of sulfide binding for certain metalsand/or metalloids in sediment, total water concentrations instead of dissolved, etc.); and (3) theanalytical methodology cannot attain a sensitivity required for comparison to an ecologicalscreening value.For the most part, there are few inorganic chemicals that are generally recognized as“biomagnifiers” in aquatic ecosystems (e.g., see USACE 1995a) and even fewer in terrestrialecosystems. The only consistently recognized inorganic bio-magnifier is methyl mercury(USACE 1995a). Arsenic and selenium have shown conflicting evidence as potentialbiomagnifiers in aquatic ecosystems (USACE 1995a). Considering the organic chemicals listedwithin, many of the pesticides are known and well demonstrated biomagnifiers, especially inaquatic ecosystems (USACE 1995a). The organic chemical partitioning coefficient betweenoctanol and water (designated as Kow) can indicate the propensity for biomagnif
Origin:	2002-09-25
Source:	http://indianamemory.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15078coll17/id/33761
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.