U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Open-File Report 2007–1100

Prepared in cooperation with the Indiana Army National Guard

Environmental Assessment of the 

Muscatatuck Urban Training Center 

near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005

Environmental Assessment of the 

Muscatatuck Urban Training Center

near Butlerville, Indiana,

October and November 2005

By Martin R. Risch, Amanda L. Ulberg, and Bret A. Robinson

In cooperation with the Indiana Army National Guard

Open-File Report 2007–1100

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Mark D. Myers, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2007

For product and ordering information:

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

For more information on the USGS--the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment:

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.

Suggested citation:

Risch, M.R., Ulberg, A.L., and Robinson, B.A., 2007, Environmental Assessment of the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October 

and November 2005: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2007–1100, 76 p.
iii

Contents

Abstract......................................................................................................................................................................................................................1

Introduction................................................................................................................................................................................................................1

Purpose and Scope .........................................................................................................................................................................................1

Previous Investigations...................................................................................................................................................................................1

Description of the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center ...........................................................................................................................2

History. ......................................................................................................................................................................................................2

Physical Setting ......................................................................................................................................................................................2

Hydrology .................................................................................................................................................................................................4

Study Methods ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................4

Assessment Design.........................................................................................................................................................................................4

Sample Collection............................................................................................................................................................................................8

Sample Analysis.............................................................................................................................................................................................10

Quality Assurance..........................................................................................................................................................................................10

Concentrations of Constituents...................................................................................................................................................................11

Comparisons to Regulatory Standards and Guidance Criteria ..............................................................................................................12

Environmental Assessment...................................................................................................................................................................................12

Geographic Study Area 1 (the former stone quarry, AOC 21).................................................................................................................12

Geographic Study Area 2 (the vegetation disposal area, AOC 18)........................................................................................................13

Geographic Study Area 3 (including the lawn shop, AOC 6) ..................................................................................................................13

Geographic Study Area 4 (including the laundry, AOC 5) .......................................................................................................................13

Geographic Study Area 5 (including utility buildings, AOC’s 7 and 8, and trades shops, AOC’s 9 and 10)......................................16

Geographic Study Area 6 (including the existing wastewater-treatment plant, AOC 2, and the 

former wastewater-treatment plant, AOC 13) .............................................................................................................................16

Geographic Study Area 7 (including the power house, AOC 3, and store room, AOC 4)...................................................................16

Summary...................................................................................................................................................................................................................17

Acknowledgments..................................................................................................................................................................................................18

References Cited.....................................................................................................................................................................................................18

Appendixes

1. Characteristics of Sampling Sites..............................................................................................................................................................22

2. Characteristics of Samples .........................................................................................................................................................................24

3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores ........................................................................................................................26

4. Characteristics of Analytical Constituents for Samples.........................................................................................................................46

5. Field-Duplicate Sample Data ......................................................................................................................................................................51

6. Matrix-Spike Sample Data ..........................................................................................................................................................................54

7. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Water Samples and Selected Quality-Assurance Samples ....................56

8. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Ground-Water Samples and Selected Quality-Assurance Samples .....................60

9. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Soil Samples ....................................................................................................65

10. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Buried-Sediment Samples.............................................................................................72
iv

Figures

1–3. Maps showing:

1. Location of the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana ..................................................................3

2. Geographic study areas 1 and 2 and sampling sites at the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center 

 near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005...........................................................................................................6

3. Geographic study areas 3 through 7 and sampling sites at the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center 

 near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005...........................................................................................................7

4–6. Photographs showing:

4. (A) Direct-push drill rig and (B) typical sediment cores collected at the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center 

 near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005...........................................................................................................9

5. Typical sampling techniques for surface-water samples collected at the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center 

 near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005...........................................................................................................9

6. Typical sampling techniques for ground-water and field blank samples collected at the Muscatatuck Urban 

 Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005............................................................................10

7–8. Maps showing:

7. Locations of environmental samples with concentrations of constituents greater than an Indiana regulatory

 standard or guidance critieria in geographic study areas 1 and 2 at the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center 

 near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.........................................................................................................14

8. Locations of environmental samples with concentrations of constituents 

 greater than an Indiana regulatory standard or guidance critieria in geographic study areas 3 through 7 

 at the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005........................... 15

Tables

1. Geographic study areas and areas of concern at the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005. ............................................................................................................................................................................5

2. Environmental samples at the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005. ............................................................................................................................................................................8

3. Constituent groups and methods of laboratory analysis for environmental samples collected at the Muscatatuck 

Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005......................................................................................11

4. Concentrations of constituents detected in environmental samples collected at the Muscatatuck Urban Training 

Center in October and November 2005, that were greater than Indiana regulatory standards or guidance criteria......................13
v

Conversion Factors, Vertical Datum, and Abbreviations

Multiply By To obtain

Length

inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

Area

acre 4,047 square meter (m2)

Volume

gallon (gal) 3.785 liter (L) 

Flow rate

cubic foot per second (ft3/s) 0.02832 cubic meter per second (m3/s)

gallon per minute (gal/min) 0.06309 liter per second (L/s)

Temperature in degrees Celsius (°C) may be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (°F) as follows:

°F=(1.8×°C)+32

Temperature in degrees Fahrenheit (°F) may be converted to degrees Celsius (°C) as follows:

°C=(°F-32)/1.8

Vertical coordinate information is referenced to North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88)

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).

Altitude, as used in this report, refers to distance above the vertical datum.

Specific conductance is given in microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius (μS/cm at 25°C).

Concentrations of constituents in water are given in milligrams per liter (mg/L) and micrograms per liter (μg/L).

Concentrations of constituents in soil or sediment are given in micrograms per kilogram (μg/kg) or milligrams per kilogram 

(mg/kg).

Abbreviations

AOC’s — Areas of Concern

CaCo3 — calcium carbonate 

CAS — Chemical Abstract Services 

CERCLA — Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 

ESA — Environmental Site Assessment 

MUTC — Muscatatuck Urban Training Center 

PVC — polyvinyl chloride

RPD — relative percent difference

SVOC’s — semivolatile organic compounds

USGS — U.S. Geological Survey

VOC’s — volatile organic compounds
vi
Environmental Assessment of the Muscatatuck 

Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005

By Martin R. Risch, Amanda L. Ulberg, and Bret A. Robinson

Abstract

An environmental assessment of the Muscatatuck 

Urban Training Center near Butlerville in Jennings County, 

Indiana, was completed during October and November 

2005. As part of the Department of Defense Earth Science 

Program, the U.S. Geological Survey collected information about environmental conditions at the 825-acre former 

State of Indiana mental health facility prior to its conversion by the Indiana National Guard into an urban training center. The assessment was designed to investigate 

the type and extent of potential contamination associated 

with historical activities in selected areas of the facility.

Samples of surface water, ground water, surface soil, 

and buried sediment were collected for the assessment in 

seven geographic study areas. Surface-water samples were 

collected from flowing and pooled surface water, as well as 

seeps and springs where ground water discharged at the land 

surface. Ground-water samples were collected from temporary 

wells installed in boreholes drilled to bedrock. Surface-soil 

samples were collected near sites of possible contamination. Buried-sediment samples were taken from core material 

collected near the top of bedrock at depths of 6.4 to 26 feet. 

For the assessment, 59 environmental, 22 quality-assurance, and 46 laboratory-blank samples were analyzed for 

as many as 65 volatile organic compounds, 62 semivolatile 

organic compounds, 20 trace elements, 10 inorganic cations 

and anions, 3 nutrients, and 4 water-quality characteristics.

Concentrations of constituents detected in these samples 

were compared with regulatory standards (the Indiana Surface-Water-Quality Standards and Indiana Ground-WaterQuality Standards) and guidance criteria from the Indiana 

Department of Environmental Management’s Risk Integrated 

System of Closures for contaminated soil and ground water. 

Standards or criteria were exceeded by 17 constituent concentrations in 11 environmental samples from 5 of the 7 

geographic study areas. Standards or criteria were exceeded 

for 10 constituents: ammonia, arsenic, benzo(a)pyrene, beryllium, chloride, chloroform, copper, lead, sulfate, and zinc.

Introduction

The Muscatatuck Urban Training Center (MUTC) 

includes the buildings and grounds of a former State 

of Indiana mental health facility in southeastern Indiana. The facility was closed and the property was transferred to the Indiana National Guard in July 2005, who 

converted it into an urban warfare training center.

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), amended 

by the Superfund Amendment Reauthorization Act of 1986, 

established requirements for the cleanup of contaminated 

sites (U.S. Code, 2006). To absolve responsibility for contamination and cleanup, a landowner must perform “due 

diligence” to investigate and document contamination at 

the time of transfer of real estate. These requirements led 

to the environmental assessment described in this report, 

which was conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS) in cooperation with the Indiana National Guard.

Purpose and Scope

This report describes an environmental assessment of 

the MUTC from October 24 through November 19, 2005. 

Background information about the facility history and environmental conditions are included. Methods for collection and 

analysis of surface-water, ground-water, surface-soil, buriedsediment, and quality-assurance samples are discussed. Analytical data for all these samples are presented. Concentrations 

of constituents detected in these samples are discussed, organized by geographic location, sample matrix, and constituent 

group. Concentrations of constituents are compared with regulatory standards and guidance criteria for the State of Indiana.

Previous Investigations

In 2003, the State of Indiana acted to have a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) completed for the MUTC, 

following the American Society of Testing and Materials 

(1998) standard E1527-05. The Phase I ESA was designed 
to determine the potential presence or absence of hazardous 

substances with respect to the range of contaminants within 

the scope of the CERCLA. It included historical information; 

a review of local, State and Federal environmental regulatory 

documents; and a report from a visual investigation of the 

property (Indiana Department of Administration, 2003). The 

Phase I ESA identified 25 areas of concern (AOCs) where 

hazardous substances were likely to be present. In 2005, 

Indiana National Guard personnel made a physical inspection 

of the MUTC to update conditions identified in the Phase I 

ESA (Walter Anderson, Indiana National Guard, written commun., 2005). This inspection concluded that 12 AOCs should 

receive further investigation in a Phase II ESA, which was 

part of the USGS study during October and November 2005.

In 2005, a Source-Water Assessment for the MUTC 

public-water supply was completed by the USGS as part of 

a statewide program to evaluate each area that contributes 

surface water used by individual public-water-supply systems 

(D. Cohen, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 2006). 

The source-water assessment identified pesticides associated with agricultural land use as potential contaminants 

of concern within the emergency management zone of the 

MUTC water supply, which is the area within 1⁄4 mi from the 

shoreline that drains into the Vernon Fork Muscatatuck River 

within 1,000 ft upstream from the intake. None of the areas 

of concern from the environmental assessment by the USGS 

in October and November 2005 were addressed directly by 

the Source-Water Assessment, although relevant background 

information was identified for the MUTC public-water supply.

Description of the Muscatatuck Urban Training 

Center

The study area is described with its history, physical 

setting, and hydrology. The physical setting includes topography, physiography, geology, soils, and climate. Data from 

periodic testing of the public-water system at the MUTC 

provides an indication of the historical quality of water in the 

Vernon Fork Muscatatuck River at the property boundary.

History

The property and buildings of the MUTC were owned 

by the State of Indiana and operated as the Muscatatuck State 

Developmental Center from 1920 until 2005. The Center was 

a residential mental-health facility that included a hospital, 

school, laboratories, and residences. Historically self-sufficient, it utilized onsite facilities for sanitary-waste treatment, 

potable-water supply, solid-waste disposal, power generation, 

maintenance, laundry, food service, and recreation (Indiana 

Department of Administration, 2003). Facilities in use during October and November 2005 included water treatment, 

wastewater treatment, and coal-fired steam generation, along 

with carpentry, plumbing, paint, lawn, and electrical shops.

Physical Setting

The MUTC property consists of approximately 825 

acres within Jennings County in southeastern Indiana. It is 

approximately 1 mi northwest of the town of Butlerville, 

Ind. and 1⁄4 mile north of the Purdue University Southeast 

Agricultural Research Center (fig. 1). Most of the buildings are located on approximately 200 acres in the central 

part of the property on level ground at an altitude of 800 ft. 

Land surface slopes away in all directions, to altitudes of 

700 ft north and west along the Vernon Fork Muscatatuck 

River, 715 ft east at Brush Creek Reservoir and 750 ft 

south at Pleasant Run (U.S. Geological Survey, 1994).

The MUTC lies within the Muscatatuck Plateau, 

described by Gray (2000) as till-covered uplands with 

deeply entrenched streams, with the possibility of underlying 

karst development. Underlying bedrock in the area consists of Devonian Limestone and Dolomite (Gray, 1972).

The predominant soil association in the MUTC is Cincinnati-Rossmoyne silt loams. These soils typically occur in 

rolling areas in the eastern portion of the pre-Wisconsinan till 

plain (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1982). Parent material includes Wisconsinan loess and pre-Wisconsinan till. 

These soils are well drained to moderately well drained. The 

Cincinnati-Rossmoyne silt loam covers most of the central 

and western portions of the property. Other soil types present on the site include Hickory loam and Grayford silt loam. 

Hickory loams are deep, well-drained soils, found on hillsides 

adjacent to natural drainageways. Hickory loams are present in the northeastern portion of the MUTC, primarily on 

slopes adjacent to Brush Creek Reservoir. Grayford silt loams 

are found on undulating ridges and hillsides and are present 

in the southeastern portion of the property (Nickell, 1976).

The climate of the study area is characteristic humid 

continental with no dry season and long, hot summers (Lewis, 

1961). Monthly average temperatures range from about 30°F 

during January to 76°F during July, and the average annual 

temperature is approximately 54°F (Indiana State Climate 

Office, 2006). Summary data from a rain gauge in North Vernon, Ind., approximately 7 mi southwest of the MUTC, shows 

average annual precipitation was 44.5 in. from 1971 through 

2000 (Midwestern Regional Climate Center, 2006). Monthly 

average precipitation ranged from a low in February of 2.7 

in. to a high in May of 4.7 in. In general, average monthly 

precipitation was highest in the spring and summer and lowest 

in the fall and winter. Continuous precipitation data collected 

since 1999 at the Purdue University Southeast Agricultural 

Research Center (fig. 1) indicate that October 1 to November 

14, 2005, was a period of below normal precipitation (Indiana 

State Climate Office, 2006). When most of the environmental 

samples were collected at the MUTC in October and November 2005, 1.82 in. of rain fell, compared with a normal of 5 in.

2 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Figure 1. Location of the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana.

!

EXPLANATION

Muscatatuck Urban

Training Center boundary

Road

Stream

Streamflow-gaging 

station 03369000

State of Indiana showing location 

of Muscatatuck Urban Training Center

and county boundaries

Muscatatuck

Urban Training 

Center

39o03'00" N

39o02'00" N

0 0.5 1 Miles

0 0.5 1 Kilometers

BUTLERVILLE

MUSCATATUCK

URBAN TRAINING 

CENTER

Brush

Creek Re servoir

Verno n Fork Muscatatuck Riv er

Base from U.S. Geological Survey

digital raster graphs 1:24,000, 

Butlerville, Indiana (1994)

Universal Transverse Mercator projection,

Zone 16, NAD83

50

Pleasant Run

Purdue University

Southeast 

Agricultural

Research Center

85o 85o32'00" W 31'00" W

Brush

Creek

Introduction 3
Hydrology

The MUTC is in the East Fork White River Basin. 

Depending upon topography, surface drainage is generally 

to the west and northwest into the Vernon Fork Muscatatuck 

River, north into Brush Creek, northeast into Brush Creek 

Reservoir, or south to Pleasant Run (fig. 1). The USGS 

streamflow-gaging station 03369000 on the Vernon Fork 

Muscatatuck River near the western boundary of the MUTC 

was in operation from 1942 through 2001. The 60 years of 

streamflow record collected show that mean daily streamflow for the Vernon Fork Muscatatuck River ranged from 

a low of 5.37 ft3/s in the fall to a high of 318 ft3/s in the 

winter and spring (U.S. Geological Survey, 2006). Brush 

Creek Reservoir was constructed in 1953 as a water-supply reservoir that provides recreational opportunities. At a 

normal pool elevation, the surface area of the reservoir is 

approximately 150 acres. The dam and most of the property associated with the reservoir are owned by the State of 

Indiana (Indiana Department of Natural Resources, 2006a).

The source of the public water supply for the MUTC is 

the Vernon Fork Muscatatuck River (fig. 1) from an intake 

constructed in 1956 near the north boundary. The location 

of surface-water intakes are not identified by coordinates or 

shown on maps in accordance with USGS policy and Indiana 

Code IC 5-14-3-4(b)(19)(G) (Indiana Legislative Services 

Agency, 2006). A capacity of 800 gal/min piped to a watertreatment facility at the MUTC historically served a population of 800 persons. According to the Source-Water Assessment for the MUTC public-water supply (D. Cohen, written 

commun., 2006), the northern part of the MUTC property 

lies within the water-supply emergency-management zone 

(the area of land within 1⁄4 mi from the shoreline that drains 

into the stream within 1,000 ft upstream from the intake).

Public-water-supply operators are required to periodically test the water for contaminants. The results of the tests 

for the Muscatatuck State Developmental Center represent 

the quality of the treated water provided to the population 

served. Although the water was treated1, these test results 

may be an indication of the historical quality of water in the 

Vernon Fork Muscatatuck River. These data for the period 

January 1993 to November 2002 show that atrazine, cadmium, and thallium were contaminants detected once or 

twice at concentrations equal to or greater than their respective state drinking-water standards. Atrazine was detected 

at a concentration of 3.1 micrograms per liter (μg/L) on 

July 28, 1997—the standard for atrazine is 3.0 μg/L. Cad1

 According to an interview with the water-system operator in June 2003 

for the Source-Water Assessment, treatment may include aeration, flocculation, settling, chlorination, and carbon filtration (K. Fowler, U.S. Geological 

Survey, written, commun., 2006)

mium was detected at 5 μg/L, a concentration equal to its 

standard, on February 16, 1994. Thallium was detected at 

5 μg/L on July 25, 1995, and at concentrations equal to its 

2 μg/L standard on April 1, 1993 and February 16, 1994.

Ground-water resources near the MUTC generally 

are found in the bedrock. The Indiana Water Well Record 

Database (Indiana Department of Natural Resources, 

2006b) and the Hydrogeologic Atlas of Aquifers in Indiana (Fenelon, Bobay, and others, 1994) indicate that most 

domestic wells in the area draw ground water from a bedrock aquifer. Beneath the MUTC, the uppermost bedrock 

is Devonian limestone under 8 to 40 ft of clay-rich till.

Study Methods

The methods for the environmental assessment 

involved the designation of geographic study areas, locations of sampling sites, and types of samples. Other methods described include sample collection, sample analysis, 

and quality assurance. In general, the methods used at 

the MUTC followed the American Society for Testing 

and Materials (1998) standard E1903-97 for a Phase II 

ESA and the USGS National Field Manual for the Collection of Water-Quality Data (Wilde and Radtke, 1998).

Assessment Design

The environmental assessment was designed to appraise the nature and extent of potential contamination at 

the MUTC that could be associated with the 12 AOC’s identified in the Phase I ESA that the Indiana National Guard had 

determined required further investigation. (The AOC numbers 

in this report correspond to the numbers in the Phase I ESA 

[1-25].) These 12 AOC’s were grouped into seven geographic 

study areas (table 1, figs. 2 and 3). The geographic study 

areas designated where contaminants associated with activities at one or more AOC’s might be present. Within these 

geographic study areas, 49 sampling sites were selected for 

collection of surface-water, ground-water, surface-soil, or 

buried-sediment samples. Sampling sites were designated 

with letters and numbers: SW for surface water, B for borehole (ground water and buried sediment were collected at 

boreholes), and SOIL for surface soil. Characteristics of the 

sampling sites are shown in appendix 1. The identification 

of environmental samples is described later in this section.

4 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Surface-water samples were collected from all identified 

surface water, including pools, natural and constructed channels, and seeps and springs where ground water discharged to 

the land surface. Ground-water samples were collected from 

boreholes that produced a quantity of water sufficient for 

sampling. Surface-soil samples were collected where spills or 

disposal of contaminants may have occurred. Buried-sediment 

samples were collected from boreholes that were expected to 

be downgradient from potential contaminant sources. Buried-sediment samples were analyzed to identify the presence of contaminants that were transported by ground water 

and that had an affinity for organic material or sediments. 

A hand-held global positioning system receiver was used to 

record the geographic coordinates of the sampling locations.

A total of 59 environmental samples were collected by 

the USGS from October 24 through November 19, 2005, at 

the MUTC. These consisted of 12 surface-water samples, 8 

ground-water samples, 20 surface-soil samples, and 19 buriedsediment samples (figs. 2 and 3, table 2, and appendix 2.) 

Environmental samples were identified with letters and numbers corresponding to the type of media collected at the sampling sites: SW for surface water, GW for ground water, SOIL 

for surface soil, and SED for buried sediment. In some cases, 

more than one type of sample was collected at a sampling 

site, such as ground-water, surface-soil, and buried-sediment 

samples from the same borehole. When more than one type of 

sample was collected at a sampling site, the sampling site was 

added to the environmental sample identification (B for borehole and SW for surface water). SOIL and SW have two meanings as a sampling site or sample type. Some examples follow:

Sample ID Sample type site Sampling site

SW1 Surface water SW1

GW-B4 Ground water Borehole B4

SED-B4 Buried sediment Borehole B4

SOIL-B4 Surface soil Borehole B4

SOIL7 Surface soil SOIL7

SOIL-SW6 Surface soil SW6

Study Methods 5

Table 1. Geographic study areas and areas of concern at the 

Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.

Geographic 

study area Area of Concern name

Area of 

Concern 

numbera

1 Former Stone Quarry 21

2 Vegetation Disposal Area 18

3 Lawn Shop 6

4 Laundry 5

5 Maintenance Utility Building #77

Maintenance Utility Building #78

Carpenter and Paint Shops

Electrical and Plumbing Shops

7

8

9

10

6 Existing Wastewater Treatment Plant

Former Wastewater Treatment Plant

2

13

7 Power House

Storeroom

3

4

a

Area of Concern number from Indiana Department of Administration 

(2003).
Figure 2. Geographic study areas 1 and 2 and sampling sites at the Muscatatuck Urban Training 

Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.

85o31'45" W 85o31'30" W

39o03'15" N

39o03'00" N

Brush

Creek

Reservoir

SED-B18

SOIL2

SOIL3 SED-B19

SED-B20

GW-B20

SW12

SW6

SOIL-SW6

SW7

SW8

0 1/16 1/8 1/4 Mile

0 1/16 1/8 1/4 Kilometer

EXPLANATION

Building

SW Surface Water

GW Ground Water

SOIL Surface Soil

SED Buried Sediment

 B Borehole

Base from 2003 National

Agricultural Imagery Program,

County Tiles for Indiana, 

Jennings County. Universal 

Transverse Mercator projection, 

Zone 16, NAD 83

1

2

1 Geographic Study Area Name

and Identification Number and

Area of Concern (AOC) Number

Brush Creek

Stream

Brush 

Creek

Dam

Streamflow Direction

Road

Sample Identification

Reservoir

Former Stone Quarry

(AOC 21)

Vegetation Disposal Area

(AOC 18)

Muscatatuck Urban

Training Center from figure 1 

(shaded area shown

in above map)

6 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Figure 3. Geographic study areas 3 through 7 and sampling sites at the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.

0 1/16 1/8 1/4 Mile

0 1/16 1/8 1/4 Kilometer

Perennial Stream

Intermittent Stream

SW6

SW7

SW5

SOILAO8

SOIL7

SOIL16 SEDB17

SEDB5

SOIL15

SEDB10

SW4 SEDB11

SW1

SW12

EXPLANATION

Base from 2003 National

Agricultural Imagery Program,

County Tiles for Indiana, 

Jennings County. Universal 

Transverse Mercator projection, 

Zone 16, NAD 83

3

3

Road

Building

AOC 2

AOC 13

6

Streamflow Direction

SW5

SOIL8

SOIL7

SOIL6

SW3

SED-B10

SED-B11 SW4

SW1

SED-B5

GW-B2

SED-B3

GW-B3

SOIL-B3

SED-B4

GW-B4

SOIL-B4

SW2

GW-B1

SED-B1

SOIL16

SOIL15

SED-B16

SW9

SED-B17

SED-B6

GW-B6

SED-B8

GW-B8

Vernon Fork Muscatatu ck Riv er

SED-B7

SOIL1 SOIL18

SED-B15

SOIL10 SW10

SW11

SED-B14

SOIL9

SOIL11

SOIL20

SED-B9

SOIL19

SED-B12

SED-B13

SOIL12

SOIL13

SOIL14

4

AOC 5

5

AOC 7

AOC 8

AOC 10

AOC 9

7

AOC 3

AOC 4

Underground Stream Reach

SW Surface Water

GW Ground Water

SOIL Surface Soil

SED Buried Sediment

 B Borehole

Sample Identification

Geographic Study Area Name

and Identification Number

Muscatatuck Urban

Training Center from figure 1 

(shaded area shown

in above map)

Lawn Shop

Utility Buildings

and Trades Shops

AOC Area of Concern

 2 Existing Wastewater Plant

 3 Power House

 4 Storeroom

 5 Laundry

 6 Lawn Shop

 7 Utility Maintenance Building 77

 8 Utility Maintenance Building 78

 9 Carpenter and Paint Shops

 10 Electrical and Plumbing Shops

 13 Former Wastewater Plant

Wastewater Plants

Laundry

Power House

and Storeroom

AOC 6

85o32'15" W 85o32'00" W

39o03'00" N

39o02'45" N

GW-B17

Study Methods 7
Sample Collection

Twenty boreholes were made with a truck-mounted, 

direct-push drill rig (fig. 4). Nearly continuous cores were 

collected in acrylic sample tubes as boreholes were advanced 

to bedrock. Borehole depths ranged from 7.4 ft (at B3) to 26 

ft (at B18) below land surface and a written description of the 

sediment cores was completed by a USGS geologist (appendix 3). In boreholes that had water, temporary wells with 

1-in. diameter polyvinyl chloride (PVC) casing and 5-ft PVC 

screens were placed immediately above bedrock (appendix 3).

Drilling and coring equipment was power-washed 

between each borehole. Coring drive caps, points, and cutting shoes were cleaned sequentially with a detergent wash, 

scrubbing, and tap-water rinse. After ground-water samples 

were collected, the temporary wells were removed and the 

boreholes were filled to land surface with bentonite chips.

Surface- and ground-water samples were collected using 

a peristaltic pump with Teflon intake and discharge tubing pumping at a rate of approximately 0.2 gal/min. Sample 

containers were obtained from the laboratory and contained 

the required preservatives. Water from the discharge tubing went directly into the sample containers, which were 

not field rinsed. Water samples were not filtered. For surface-water samples, the intake end of the tubing was placed 

into the pooled or flowing water (fig. 5). For ground-water 

samples, the intake end of the tubing was placed into the 

screened interval of a temporary well. Ground-water-sample 

containers were filled inside a processing chamber, consisting of a plastic frame suspending a clear polyethylene 

bag (fig. 6). Ground-water samples were collected from 

boreholes that produced a total volume of at least 0.75 gal 

of water. Wells were not developed or purged prior to sampling because of the limited volume of water available.

Table 2. Environmental samples at the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.

Geographic study area Sample type and sample identification

Number Name Surface

water

Ground

water

Surface

soil

Buried

sediment

1 Former Stone Quarry SW6

SW7

SW8

SW12

SOIL-SW6

2 Vegetation Disposal Area GW-B20 SOIL2

SOIL3

SED-B18

SED-B19

SED-B20

3 Lawn Shop SW5 SOIL6

SOIL7

SOIL8

4 Laundry GW-B6

GW-B8

SOIL1

SOIL18

SED-B6

SED-B7

SED-B8

5 Utility Buildings and Trades Shops SW11 SOIL12

SOIL13

SOIL14

SED-B12

SED-B13

SED-B14

6 Existing / Former Wastewater Treatment Plants SW1

SW2

SW4

SW9

GW-B1

GW-B2

GW-B3

GW-B4

GW-B17

SOIL-B3

SOIL-B4 

SOIL15

SOIL16

SED-B1

SED-B3

SED-B4

SED-B5

SED-B10

SED-B11

SED-B16

SED-B17

7 Power House and Storeroom SW3

SW10

SOIL9

SOIL10

SOIL11

SOIL19

SOIL20

SED-B9

SED-B15

8 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Surface-soil samples were collected with a hand-operated soil auger; depths ranged from 6 to 18 in. Buried-sediment samples were obtained from core materials near the top 

of the bedrock at depths from 6.4 to 26 ft. Sediment samples 

were removed from cores collected in a new acrylic liner for 

the coring tube that was advanced to bedrock by the drill rig.

Water, soil, and sediment-sampling equipment was 

cleaned between samples with a sequential detergent wash, 

Figure 4. (A) Direct-push drill rig and (B) typical sediment cores collected at the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, 

Indiana, October and November 2005.

Figure 5. Typical sampling 

techniques for surface-water 

samples collected at the 

Muscatatuck Urban Training 

Center near Butlerville, 

Indiana, October and 

November 2005.

tap-water rinse, deionized-water rinse, hydrochloric-acid 

rinse (excluding metal components), methanol rinse, and 

laboratory-grade blank-water rinse. Disposable nitrile gloves 

were worn by field personnel during sampling and changed 

between sites. Samples were kept in closed coolers in a 

refrigerated room under custody control until they were 

shipped by overnight freight to the analytical laboratory.

Study Methods 9
Sample Analysis

Surface-water, ground-water, surface-soil, buried-sediment, and quality-assurance samples were analyzed at a 

laboratory for as many as 6 constituent groups (table 3)—

65 volatile organic chemicals (VOC’s), 62 semivolatile organic 

chemicals (SVOC’s), 20 trace elements, and 6 inorganic 

cations, along with (in water only) 4 inorganic anions and 

3 nutrients. Analysis was completed by the USGS Department of Defense Earth Science Program laboratory in 

Denver, Colorado. Information for individual constituents 

in each group (name, Chemical Abstract Services (CAS) 

number, the long-term laboratory reporting limit, and analytical method) are shown in appendix 4. Four water-quality 

characteristics—pH, specific conductance, dissolved oxygen, and water temperature—were measured in surface- and 

some ground-water samples. Measurements were made 

with an electronic multimeter in a flow-through chamber 

attached to the discharge line of the sampling pump. Values were recorded following collection of water samples.

Quality Assurance

Six field-duplicate samples were collected, including 

two surface-water, two surface-soil, and two buried-sediment samples. Duplicate samples consisted of an environmental sample and a quality-assurance sample. Duplicate 

surface-water samples were collected sequentially. To collect 

duplicate surface-soil and buried-sediment samples, material 

from the soil auger or sediment core was split between the 

environmental and duplicate-sample containers. Field-duplicate samples were used to evaluate the natural variability of 

Figure 6. Typical sampling 

techniques for ground-water 

and field blank samples 

collected at the Muscatatuck 

Urban Training Center near 

Butlerville, Indiana, October 

and November 2005.

constituent concentrations in water and soil/sediment and, to a 

lesser degree, precision in the analysis of water and soil/sediment samples. Concentrations of constituents detected in the 

field-duplicate samples (appendix 5) were evaluated with the 

relative percent difference (RPD). RPD was computed as the 

absolute value of the difference of the concentrations divided 

by the average of the concentrations, expressed as a percentage. (For this comparison, the reporting limit was used if a 

constituent was not detected in one of the two samples.)

Trace elements, inorganic cations, inorganic anions, and 

nutrients were detected in the duplicate water samples. The 

greatest variability (more than 50 RPD) was in concentrations of lead and tin at SW8 and in concentrations of copper 

and iron at SW12. The high RPD for these constituents could 

be attributed to the estimated concentrations. Trace elements 

and inorganic cations were detected in the duplicate surfacesoil and buried-sediment samples. In surface-soil, the greatest variability (more than 50 RPD) was in concentrations of 

beryllium, cobalt, manganese, and nickel at SOIL2 and in 

concentrations of beryllium and strontium at SOIL20. The 

high RPD for beryllium was computed for both duplicate soil 

samples. In buried sediment, the greatest variability (more 

than 50 RPD) was in concentrations of boron, cobalt, manganese, nickel, aluminum, and sodium at B19. Duplicate samples 

at B20 did not have concentrations with more than 50 RPD.

Two sets of water samples (one surface water—SW1 

and one ground water—GWB2) were collected as matrix 

spike and matrix-spike duplicates. These samples were 

prepared at the laboratory by spiking the water samples 

with known amounts of selected VOC’s, SVOC’s, and trace 

elements. Matrix-spike samples were evaluated with the 

percent recovery of the spiked constituents and matrix-spike 

duplicates were evaluated with the RPD (appendix 6). This 

10 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Table 3. Constituent groups and methods of laboratory analysis for environmental samples 

collected at the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and 

November 2005.

[USEPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; GC, gas chromatography; MS, mass spectrometry; ICP, inductively 

coupled plasma; IC, ion chromatography]

Constituent groupa Matrix Type of method USEPA analytical 

method number

Volatile organic compounds water / solid GC/ MS b8260B

Semivolatile organic compounds water / solid GC/ MS b8270C

Trace elements water

solid

ICP-MS

ICP-MS

b

6020B

b

6010B

Inorganic cations water

solid

ICP-MS

ICP-MS

b

6010B

b

6010B

Inorganic anions water IC c300.0A

Nutrients (ammonia, nitrate-nitrite, 

total phosphorous)

water colorimetric c350.1, c350.1, c365.3

a

Individual constituents in each group are in appendix 4.

b

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986.

c

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1983.

evaluation did not indicate apparent interference from the 

sample matrix on analysis of VOC’s and trace elements 

in the water samples. The VOC’s had percent recoveries 

of 60 to 114 and less than 8 RPD. The trace elements had 

percent recoveries of 95 to 110 and less than 2 RPD. Some 

SVOC’s had potential matrix interference—the percent 

recoveries were 60 to 81; duplicates had less than 9 RPD.

Field blanks were prepared by pumping certified, laboratory-grade blank water from its original container through 

clean sampling-pump tubing into a sample container (fig. 6). 

Field blanks were used to evaluate the adequacy of cleaning 

procedures and to detect possible artifacts introduced during 

sample collection and processing. Field blanks were analyzed 

for all constituent groups. Trip blanks for analysis of VOC’s 

were supplied by the analytical laboratory and consisted of 

sealed vials of certified, laboratory-grade blank water. Trip 

blanks were used to detect possible artifacts introduced during 

transport and storage of sample containers. In addition to the 

field and trip blanks, 46 laboratory blanks were analyzed for 

all constituent groups. These blanks were prepared in the laboratory with certified blank water and were used to detect possible artifacts introduced during analysis of the samples. Concentrations of constituents detected in field blanks, trip blanks, 

or laboratory blanks were used to qualify concentrations in 

water samples collected for the environmental assessment.

Concentrations of Constituents

Concentrations of constituents detected in the environmental and blank samples are summarized in tables contained 

in appendixes 7 through 10. The detections, along with the 

type and source of the standards or criteria, are listed for 

organic and inorganic constituent groups in surface water 

(appendix 7), ground water (appendix 8), surface soil (appendix 9), and buried sediment (appendix 10). For each sample 

matrix (water, soil, sediment), the constituents are ordered by 

geographic study area. The constituents that were not detected 

in any sample from the MUTC are not included in appendixes 

7 through 10, although a complete list of all the constituents analyzed, along with the reporting limits, is shown in 

appendix 4. Complete analytical data for the samples at the 

MUTC are archived in the USGS National Water Information System (URL http://waterdata.usgs.gov/in/nwis/gw)

according to the station numbers listed in appendix 1.

Some constituents were detected in environmental 

samples at concentrations less than the laboratory reporting limit and the concentrations are qualified as estimated. 

Some constituents were detected in field-blank, trip-blank, 

or laboratory-blank samples. The highest blank concentrations and number of blank samples with detections are listed 

for these constituents in appendixes 7 through 10. Consistent 

with procedures used by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management, the non-estimated concentrations 

in environmental samples that were greater than five times 

the highest concentration detected in the blank samples were 

Study Methods 11
identified as valid for comparison with regulatory standards or guidance criteria. In the subsequent sections of the 

report, the concentrations discussed will be those considered valid based on the above criteria. Concentrations that 

are not valid will be noted as estimated concentrations,

Comparisons to Regulatory Standards and 

Guidance Criteria

Concentrations of constituents detected in environmental samples were compared with State of Indiana regulatory 

standards and guidance criteria to identify a level of contamination. The standards and criteria that were compared to the 

concentrations of constituents in surface-water, ground-water, 

surface-soil, and buried-sediment samples are described below.

1. Surface-water concentrations were compared with the 

regulatory Indiana Surface-Water-Quality standards from 

Indiana Administrative Code (2006) title 327 article 2 

(327 IAC 2). If more than one criteria concentration was 

listed for aquatic life and human-health protection, the 

lowest concentration was used for comparison.

2. Ground-water concentrations were compared with the 

regulatory Indiana ground-water-quality standards from 

327 IAC 2-1 If a regulatory standard was unavailable, 

guidance criteria were used from the table of default 

levels for residential closure in the Risk Integrated System 

of Closure for sites in the Indiana voluntary remediation 

and leaking underground storage tank programs, effective 

July 2004 (Indiana Department of Environmental Management, 2006).

3. Surface-soil or buried-sediment concentrations were 

compared with guidance criteria from the table of default 

levels for industrial closure in the Risk Integrated System 

of Closure for sites in the Indiana voluntary remediation 

program and leaking underground storage tank programs, 

effective July 2004 (Indiana Department of Environmental 

Management, 2006). Indiana regulatory standards have 

not been promulgated for surface soil or buried sediment.

Environmental Assessment

In the following discussion of the environmental assessment, the constituent detections are ranked in two levels of 

importance. First, the detections with the highest level of 

importance are concentrations of constituents greater than the 

regulatory standards or guidance criteria. Second, the detections of interest are the highest concentrations of a constituent 

in water, soil, or sediment samples at the MUTC or multiple 

constituent detections associated with a geographic study area.

The detections with the highest level of importance are 

17 constituent concentrations greater than Indiana regulatory 

standards or guidance criteria in 11 environmental samples 

from 5 of the 7 geographic study areas, excluding study areas 

2 and 5 (table 4, figs. 7 and 8). Standards or criteria were 

exceeded for 10 constituents: ammonia nitrogen, arsenic, 

benzo(a)pyrene, beryllium, chloride, chloroform, copper, lead, 

sulfate, and zinc. The soil/sediment criteria for arsenic was 

exceeded in four samples. The standard for lead was exceeded 

in one surface-water sample and one ground-water sample. 

The standard for ammonia nitrogen in surface water was 

exceeded in two samples. Standards or criteria were exceeded 

by seven other constituent concentrations in one sample each.

The following discussion summarizes the environmental assessment by geographic study area. Data from 

both levels of importance are described—the constituent 

concentrations greater than standards or criteria and the 

detections of interest that comprise the highest concentrations or multiple constituent detections in an area.

Geographic Study Area 1 (the former stone 

quarry, AOC 21)

Four surface-water samples (appendix 7) and one surface-soil sample (appendix 9) were collected at the former 

stone quarry (fig. 2). Surface-water sample SW6 had the 

largest concentrations of nine trace elements among all the 

surface-water samples collected at the MUTC. These trace 

elements are arsenic, barium, chromium, cobalt, lead, manganese, nickel, vanadium, and zinc. The concentrations of 

three of these trace elements were greater than a regulatory 

standard: 24 μg/L arsenic, 15 μg/L lead, and 120 μg/L zinc. 

The corresponding regulatory standards are 0.02 μg/L arsenic, 

2.5 μg/L lead, and 100 μg/L zinc. Sample SW6 contained the 

largest concentrations of aluminum, calcium, and iron among 

all the surface-water samples collected at the MUTC. The 

concentrations of aluminum (4,100 μg/L) and iron (28,000 

μg/L) in this sample were nearly 20 times greater than the 

next largest concentrations of these cations in surface-water 

samples collected at the MUTC. Sample SW6 had 0.16 mg/L 

ammonia-nitrogen, a concentration greater than the 0.06 

mg/L computed regulatory standard. This sample also contained one concentration of a VOC, 1.8 μg/L ethylbenzene, 

which was less than the 1,400 μg/L regulatory standard.

Sample SW6 was collected from a shallow pool on the 

floor of the former stone quarry downstream from a large 

pile of construction debris and trash along the south wall of 

the quarry. A surface-soil sample collected near this pool 

(SOIL-SW6) did not represent the same level of constituent concentrations and detections as sample SW6. Sample 

SOIL-SW6 had concentrations of trace elements that were 

among the lowest detected in surface-soil samples at the 

MUTC. If water in the multiple pools on the floor of the 

12 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Table 4. Concentrations of constituents detected in environmental samples collected at the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center in 

October and November 2005, that were greater than Indiana regulatory standards or guidance criteria.

[μg/L, microgram per liter; mg/L, milligram per liter; ISWQS, Indiana Surface-Water-Quality Standard; mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; RISC, Risk Integrated 

System of Closure; IGWQS, Indiana Ground-Water-Quality Standard]

Geographic 

study area Sample type Sampleidentification Constituent Concentration Standard or criteria Units Source

1 Surface water

Surface water

Surface water

Surface water

SW6

SW6

SW6

SW6

Arsenic

Lead

Zinc

Ammonia nitrogen

24

15

120

.16

0.02

a 2.5

100a

.06

μg/L

μg/L

μg/L

μg/L

ISWQS

ISWQS

ISWQS

ISWQSb

3 Surface soil SOIL7 Arsenic 24 20 mg/kg RISC

4 Surface soil

Buried sediment

SOIL1

SED-B7

Arsenic

Arsenic

36

22

20 

20

mg/kg

mg/kg

RISC

RISC

6 Surface water

Surface water

Ground water

Ground water

Ground water

SW1

SW1

GW-B2

GW-B17

GW-B17

Chloroform

Chloride

Sulfate

Beryllium

Lead

2.0

270

320

4.6

97 

1.9 

230

250

4.0 

15

μg/L

mg/L

mg/L

μg/L

μg/L

ISWQS

ISWQS

IGWQS

IGWQS

IGWQS

7 Surface soil

Surface soil

Surface soil

Surface water

Surface water

SOIL9

SOIL11

SOIL20

SW10

SW10

Benzo(a)pyrene

Lead

Arsenic

Copper

Ammonia nitrogen

3,500 

620

30

18

1.5

1,500

230

20

a 11

.04

μg/kg

mg/kg

mg/kg

μg/L

mg/L

RISC

RISC

RISC

ISWQS

ISWQSb

a

ISWQS chronic aquatic criteria based on a table of values with water hardness assumed to be 100 mg/L.

b

ISWQS concentrations for ammonia (un-ionized ammonia as nitrogen) vary, based on water temperature and pH, as described in Indiana Administrative 

Code (2006). Water temperature and pH measured during sample collection were used to find the ISWQS ammonia value in a table. If the sample water temperature was between two values in the table, the average of corresponding ammonia standards was applied.

former stone quarry (represented by water samples SW6, 

SW7, and SW8) moved horizontally, a potential area for the 

water to appear as seep springs would be along the stone 

outcrops of the Brush Creek stream bank north of the quarry. 

The only seep spring identified during October and November 2005 was sampled at SW12. Concentrations of VOC’s, 

trace elements, cations, and nutrients were substantially less 

than those in SW6 and similar to those in SW7 and SW8.

Geographic Study Area 2 (the vegetation 

disposal area, AOC 18)

The vegetation disposal area (fig. 2) did not have a 

constituent concentration greater than a regulatory standard 

or guidance criteria. Ground-water sample GW-B20 (appendix 8), surface-soil samples SOIL2 and SOIL3 (appendix 

9), and buried-sediment samples SED-B18, SED-B19, 

and SED-B20 (appendix 10) were collected. Concentrations of trace elements in the soil and buried-sediment 

samples were similar to other samples at the MUTC. Estimated concentrations of tetrachloroethene were reported 

in SOIL2 (0.52 μg/L) and SED-B20 (0.23 μg/L).

Geographic Study Area 3 (including the lawn 

shop, AOC 6)

One surface-water sample (appendix 7) and three surfacesoil samples (appendix 9) were collected near the lawn shop 

(fig. 3). Surface-soil sample SOIL7 had a concentration of 

arsenic of 24 mg/kg, which exceeded the 20 mg/kg guidance 

criteria. Sample SOIL7 also had a detection of a non-target 

volatile organic compound that was identified as P,p’-DDE, a 

chlorinated pesticide, at an estimated concentration of 1,200 

μg/kg. Pesticides were not among the list of target constituents for the assessment. Sample SOIL7 had 10 unknown 

SVOC’s with an estimated concentration sum of 14,240 

μg/kg. Unknown SVOC’s were detected in the other two 

surface-soil samples in study area 3—18 in SOIL6 (estimated 

concentration sum 13,170 μg/kg) and 6 in SOIL8 (estimated 

concentration sum 10,040 μg/kg). Data were unavailable 

to determine if any of the unknown SVOC’s detected in 

the three surface-soil samples near the lawn shop included 

pesticides. Also in geographic area 3, surface-soil sample 

SOIL8 contained a concentration of lead of 220 mg/kg, which 

was nearly equal to the guidance criteria of 230 mg/kg.

Environmental Assessment 13
Figure 7. Locations of environmental samples with concentrations of constituents greater than an 

Indiana regulatory standard or guidance critieria in geographic study areas 1 and 2 at the Muscatatuck 

Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.

85o31'45" W 85o31'30" W

39o03'15" N

39o03'00" N

Brush

Creek

Reservoir

0 1/16 1/8 1/4 Miles

0 1/16 1/8 1/4 Kilometers

Base from 2003 National

Agricultural Imagery Program,

County Tiles for Indiana, 

Jennings County. Universal 

Transverse Mercator projection, 

Zone 16, NAD 83

1

2

Brush Creek

Brush 

Creek

Dam

SW6

 Arsenic, Lead, 

Zinc, Ammonia

EXPLANATION

Building 1

Stream

Streamflow Direction

Road

Reservoir

Sampling Site with Identification and 

Constituents with Concentrations greater

than Standard or Criteria

SW Surface Water

GW Ground Water

SOIL Surface Soil

SED Buried Sediment

 B Borehole

Sample Identification

Geographic Study Area Name

and Identification Number and

Area of Concern (AOC) Number

Former Stone Quarry

(AOC 21)

Vegetation Disposal Area

(AOC 18)

14 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Figure 8. Locations of environmental samples with concentrations of constituents greater than an Indiana regulatory standard or guidance 

critieria in geographic study areas 3 through 7 at the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 

2005.

Environmental Assessment 15

0 1/16 1/8 1/4 Mile

0 1/16 1/8 1/4 Kilometer

SOIL9 SW6

SW7

SW5

SOILAO8

SOIL16 SEDB17

SOIL15

SEDB10

SW4 SEDB11

SW1

SW12

Base from 2003 National

Agricultural Imagery Program,

County Tiles for Indiana, 

Jennings County. Universal 

Transverse Mercator projection, 

Zone 16, NAD 83

AOC 6

AOC 2

AOC 13

GWB17

SW1

SEDB7

Arsenic

 Chloride

Sulfate

Lead

Vernon Fork Muscatatu ck Riv er

 Arsenic

 Arsenic

 Lead

AOC 5

AOC 7

AOC 8

AOC10

AOC AOC9 3

AOC 4

SOIL7

Benzo(a)pyrene

SW10

Copper

Ammonia

SOIL11

Beryllium

GWB2

Chloroform

SOIL1

SOIL20

 Arsenic

5

7

Utility Buildings

and Trades Shops

Power House

and Storeroom

3 Lawn Shop

85o32'15" W 85o32'00" W

39o03'00" N

39o02'45" N

Sampling Site with 

Identification and 

Constituent(s) with 

Concentration(s) greater 

than Standard or Criteria

Perennial Stream

Intermittent Stream

SW12

EXPLANATION

3

Road

Building

Streamflow Direction

Underground Stream Reach

SW Surface Water

GW Ground Water

SOIL Surface Soil

SED Buried Sediment

 B Borehole

Sample Identification

Geographic Study Area Name

and Identification Number

Muscatatuck Urban

Training Center from figure 1 

(shaded area shown

in above map)

AOC Area of Concern

 2 Existing Wastewater Plant

 3 Power House

 4 Storeroom

 5 Laundry

 6 Lawn Shop

 7 Utility Maintenance Building 77

 8 Utility Maintenance Building 78

 9 Carpenter and Paint Shops

 10 Electrical and Plumbing Shops

 13 Former Wastewater Plant

6

4

Wastewater Plants

Laundry
Geographic Study Area 4 (including the laundry, 

AOC 5)

Two ground-water samples (appendix 8), two surfacesoil samples (appendix 9), and three buried-sediment samples 

(appendix 10) were collected near the laundry (fig. 3). The 

concentration of arsenic in a surface-soil sample (SOIL1, 36 

mg/kg) and a buried-sediment sample (SED-B7, 22 mg/kg) 

exceeded the 20 mg/kg guidance criteria. Sample SOIL1, 

collected in the drainage swale downstream of the laundry, 

also contained 420 μg/kg of the SVOC benzo(b)fluoranthene 

and the largest concentrations of manganese (3,500 mg/kg) 

and molybdenum (3.9 mg/kg) detected in surface soil at 

the MUTC. The guidance criteria for benzo(b)fluoranthene 

(15,000 μg/kg) was not exceeded; guidance criteria for 

manganese and molybdenum in soil are not available.

Geographic Study Area 5 (including utility 

buildings, AOC’s 7 and 8, and trades shops, 

AOC’s 9 and 10)

One surface-water sample (appendix 7), three surfacesoil samples (appendix 9), and three buried-sediment samples 

(appendix 10) were collected near the utility buildings and 

trades shops (fig. 3). This area did not have a constituent 

concentration greater than a regulatory standard or guidance criteria. The concentration of copper (260 mg/kg) in 

surface-soil sample SOIL12, collected outside the electrical 

and plumbing shop (AOC 10), was more than 7 times greater 

than any other concentration of copper reported in surface 

soil at the MUTC, but less than the 2,700 mg/kg guidance 

criteria. Soil sample SOIL14, collected outside the carpenter 

and paint shops (AOC 9) had 440 μg/kg benzo(b)fluoranthene, 

which was less than the 15,000 μg/kg guidance criteria.

Geographic Study Area 6 (including the existing 

wastewater-treatment plant, AOC 2, and the 

former wastewater-treatment plant, AOC 13)

A total of 21 surface-water, ground-water, surface-soil, 

and buried-sediment samples (appendixes 7 through 10) 

were collected in the largest geographic study area that 

includes the existing and former wastewater-treatment plants 

(fig. 3). This area had detections of VOC’s, SVOC’s, trace 

elements, and ammonia in ground-water and buried-sediment 

samples. In the area near the existing wastewater-treatment 

plant (AOC 2), buried-sediment sample SED-B17 had 25,000 

μg/kg of an unknown SVOC and some of the largest concentrations of 12 trace elements, including arsenic equal to the 

guidance-criteria concentration of 20 mg/kg. Ground-water 

sample GW-B17, collected from the temporary well in the 

same borehole as SED-B17, contained estimated concentrations of the VOC’s commonly associated with petroleum 

fuels—benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes. Sample 

GW-B17 also contained the largest concentrations of 14 trace 

elements detected in any ground-water sample at the MUTC, 

including two concentrations greater than regulatory standards—4.6 μg/L beryllium and 97 μg/L lead. The corresponding regulatory standards are 4.0 μg/L beryllium and 15 μg/L 

lead. The concentration of lead in sample GW-B3 from this 

study area was equal to the 15 μg/L regulatory standard. Also 

near the existing wastewater-treatment plant, buried-sediment sample SED-B16 contained estimated concentrations 

of 5 VOC’s not detected in a blank, including (like GW-B17) 

benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes, and 5 unknown 

VOC’s with an estimated concentration sum of 104 μg/kg.

In the area near the former wastewater-treatment plant 

(AOC 13) in geographic study area 6, ground-water sample 

GW-B1 contained 2.1 μg/L chlorobenzene and the largest concentration of ammonia nitrogen detected in ground 

water at the MUTC. The 48 mg/L ammonia nitrogen in 

GW-B1 was considerably greater than the 0.03 mg/L computed regulatory standard for surface water in Indiana that 

was used for comparison. Concentrations of ammonia 

nitrogen in two other ground-water samples near the former wastewater-treatment plant also were considerably 

greater than the 0.03 mg/L standard—9.2 mg/L in GW-B2 

and 15 mg/L in GW-B3. In addition to ammonia nitrogen, 

the concentration of sulfate in sample GW-B2 was greater 

than the 250 mg/L regulatory standard for ground water.

 Buried-sediment sample SED-B3 had detections 

of 5 VOC’s not detected in a blank, including the largest concentration of acetone detected in buried sediment at 

the MUTC (35 μg/kg). In sample GW-B3, from the same 

borehole as SED-B3, 1.8 μg/L ethylbenzene was detected 

along with estimated concentrations of 4 other VOC’s. 

Similar compounds, chlorobenzene and 1,4-dichlorobenzene were detected in GW-B3 while 1,4-dichlorobenzene 

and 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene were detected in SED-B3.

 Surface-water sample SW1 was collected from the 

flow downstream of AOC 13 and presumably contained 

treated effluent. The sample had 2.0 μg/L chloroform, which 

exceeded the 1.9 μg/L regulatory standard, and 270 mg/L 

chloride, which exceeded the 230 mg/L regulatory standard. 

Surface-water sample SW4, from a seep spring flowing into 

the stream represented by sample SW1, had 1.2 μg/L trichloroethene; the regulatory standard for trichloroethene is 27 μg/L.

Geographic Study Area 7 (including the power 

house, AOC 3, and store room, AOC 4)

Two surface-water samples (appendix 7), five surfacesoil samples (appendix 9), and two buried-sediment samples 

(appendix 10) were collected near the power house and 

store room (fig. 3). This area had two surface-soil samples 

with the largest numbers of SVOC’s detected in any of the 

surface-soil samples at the MUTC. Sample SOIL9, collected 

east of the gas pump by the storeroom (AOC 4), contained 

13 concentrations of SVOC’s, including the largest concentra16 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
tions of any of these compounds detected at the MUTC. 

The concentration of one of the compounds detected in 

SOIL9, 3,500 μg/kg benzo(a)pyrene, was greater than the 

guidance criteria of 1,500 μg/kg. This surface-soil sample 

also had detections of 28 unknown SVOC’s with an estimated concentration sum of 20,860 μg/kg. Similarly, SOIL11 

contained 9 concentrations of SVOC’s and 19 unknown 

SVOC’s with an estimated concentration sum of 17,510 

μg/kg. Surface-soil sample SOIL11 contained concentrations of 4.6 mg/kg cadmium, 620 mg/kg lead, and 350 mg/kg 

zinc, which were the largest concentrations of these trace 

elements detected in any surface-soil sample at the MUTC. 

The concentration of lead in SOIL11 was greater than the 

230 mg/kg guidance criteria. Sample SOIL11 was collected 

near a diesel-fuel pump south of the MUTC power house 

(AOC 3). Surface-soil sample SOIL20, south of the coal storage area, had a concentration of arsenic of 30 mg/kg, which 

exceeded the 20 mg/kg guidance criteria. Sample SOIL19, 

northwest of the coal storage area, had 15 mg/kg arsenic.

Also in geographic study area 7, surface-water 

sample SW10 contained the largest concentrations of copper (18 μg/L) and ammonia-nitrogen (1.5 mg/L) detected 

in surface-water samples at the MUTC. This concentration of copper was greater than the 11 μg/L regulatory 

standard, and the concentration of ammonia-nitrogen was 

greater than the computed regulatory standard. In addition, sample SW10 had 3 unknown SVOC’s detected with 

an estimated concentration sum of 489.9 μg/L, which was 

10 times larger than the next largest estimated concentration of unknown SVOC’s in any surface-water sample at 

the MUTC. Water from SW10 emerged from a pipe that 

had an unknown origin, assumed to be in study area 7.

Summary

The Muscatatuck Urban Training Center (MUTC) 

includes the buildings and grounds of a former 825-acre State 

of Indiana mental-health facility in Jennings County near 

Butlerville in southeastern Indiana. The facility was closed, 

and the property was transferred to the Indiana National Guard 

in July 2005, then converted into an urban warfare training 

center. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the 

Indiana National Guard, completed the environmental assessment of the MUTC during October and November 2005.

The MUTC was investigated as 7 geographic study areas 

in which 59 environmental samples were collected—

12 surface-water, 8 ground-water, 20 surface-soil, and 19 

buried-sediment samples. Twenty boreholes were made with a 

truck-mounted, direct-push drill rig. Nearly continuous sediment cores were collected as boreholes were drilled to bedrock 

at depths that ranged from 7.4 to 26 feet below land surface.

Surface-water samples were collected from all identified surface water, including pools, natural and constructed 

channels, and seeps and springs where ground water discharged to the land surface. Ground-water samples were 

collected from temporary wells in boreholes that produced 

a quantity of water sufficient for sampling. Surface-soil 

samples were collected where spills or disposal of potential 

contaminants may have occurred. Buried-sediment samples 

were collected from boreholes to identify the presence of 

contaminants that were transported by ground water and 

that had an affinity for organic material or sediments.

Surface-water, ground-water, surface-soil, buriedsediment, and quality-assurance samples were analyzed 

for 65 volatile organic chemicals, 62 semivolatile organic 

chemicals, 20 trace elements, and 6 inorganic cations. 

Water samples also were analyzed for 4 inorganic anions, 

3 nutrients, and 4 water-quality characteristics. Qualityassurance samples included duplicates, matrix spike and 

matrix-spike duplicates, field blanks, trip blanks, and laboratory blanks. Field duplicate samples were used to evaluate the variability of constituent concentrations. Analysis 

of the spiked samples helped evaluate possible interference 

from the sample matrix on constituent concentrations.

Some constituents were detected in environmental 

samples at concentrations less than the laboratory reporting 

limit, and the concentrations were qualified as estimated. 

Some constituents were detected in field-blank, trip-blank, or 

laboratory-blank samples. Consistent with procedures used 

by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management, 

the non-estimated concentrations in environmental samples 

that were greater than five times the highest concentration 

detected in the blank samples were identified as valid for 

comparison with regulatory standards or guidance criteria.

For this environmental assessment, the constituent 

detections were ranked in two levels of importance. First, the 

detections with the highest level of importance are constituent concentrations greater than the regulatory standards or 

guidance criteria. Second, the detections of interest are 

the highest concentrations of a constituent in water, soil, 

or sediment samples at the MUTC or multiple constituent detections associated with a geographic study area.

A total of 17 valid constituent concentrations in 11 

environmental samples from 5 of the 7 geographic study 

areas were greater than State of Indiana regulatory standards 

or guidance criteria. Standards or criteria were exceeded for 

10 constituents: ammonia, arsenic, benzo(a)pyrene, beryllium, chloride, chloroform, copper, lead, sulfate, and zinc.

Detections of interest were identified in three geographic study areas that also had constituent concentrations which exceeded Indiana standards or criteria.

•	 A water sample from a pool in the former stone quarry 

in the northeastern MUTC contained the largest concentrations of nine trace elements detected in any water 

sample, including arsenic, lead, and zinc concentrations that exceeded the Indiana standard.

•	 Two soil samples near the power house in the northwestern MUTC contained concentrations of at least 

nine SVOC’s that were among the largest detected in 

Summary 17
any soil samples, including a benzo(a)pyrene concentration that exceeded Indiana guidance criteria.

•	 In the area near the existing wastewater-treatment plant 

in the eastern MUTC, a buried-sediment sample had 

a large concentration of an unknown SVOC and some 

of the largest concentrations of 12 trace elements, 

including arsenic, equal to the guidance-criteria concentration. A ground-water sample, collected from the 

temporary well in the same borehole as this buried-sediment sample, contained estimated concentrations of 

the four VOC’s commonly associated with petroleum 

fuels. This ground-water sample also contained the 

largest concentrations of 14 trace elements detected in 

any ground-water sample, including beryllium and lead 

concentrations that exceeded the Indiana standards.

•	 In the area near the former wastewater-treatment plant 

in the eastern MUTC, a ground-water sample contained the largest concentration of ammonia nitrogen 

detected in any ground-water sample; the concentration 

was considerably greater than the computed regulatory standard for surface water used for comparison. 

Concentrations of ammonia nitrogen in two other 

ground-water samples in this area also were considerably greater than the standard.

•	 A surface-soil sample collected near the lawn shop in 

the northern MUTC had a detection of a chlorinated 

pesticide, although pesticides were not among the list 

of target constituents for the assessment. This sample 

and two other surface-soil samples in this area contained as many as 18 unknown SVOC’s with substantial estimated concentrations.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful for the advice and direction from Lieutenant Colonel Richard Jones of the Indiana 

Army National Guard Environmental Protection Office. 

Walter Anderson of the Indiana Army National Guard 

Environmental Protection Office is thanked for providing 

important information regarding the previous investigations at the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center. Sarah 

Huffmeyer of the Indiana Army National Guard Environmental Protection Office is thanked for supplying valuable assistance during the fieldwork of the assessment.

References Cited

American Society for Testing and Materials, 1998, Standard 

Guide for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase II Environmental Site Assessment Process, Designation E1903–97.

Fenelon, J.M., Bobay, K.E., and others, 1994, Hydrogeologic 

atlas of aquifers in Indiana: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 92-4142: accessed January 

2006, at URL http://in.water.usgs.gov/atlasweb/

Gray, H.H., 1972, Map of the 1o x 2° Cincinnati Quadrangle, 

Indiana and Ohio, Showing bedrock and unconsolidated 

deposits: Indiana Department of Natural Resources 

Regional Geologic Map 7, Scale 1:250,000.

Gray, H.H., 2000, Physiographic Divisions of Indiana, Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana Geological Survey Special Report 61.

Indiana Administrative Code, 2006, title 327, article 2: 

accessed January 30, 2006, at URL http://www.ai.org/

legislative/iac/title327.html

Indiana Department of Administration, 2003, Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of the Muscatatuck State Developmental Center: Quality Environmental Professionals 

Incorporated.

Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Office of 

Land Quality, 2006, Appendix 1: Default closure tables for 

Risk Integrated System for Closure: accessed January 2006, 

at URL http://www.state.in.us/idem/land/risc/tech_guide/

pdfs/riscapp1.pdf

Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water, 

2006a, Selected projects—Brush Creek Reservoir: accessed 

March 14, 2006, at URL http://www.in.gov/dnr/water/

comm_assistance/selected/brushcreek/

Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water, 

2006b, Indiana Water Well Record Database: accessed 

March 14, 2006, at URL http://www.in.gov/dnr/water/

ground_water/well_database/

Indiana Legislative Services Agency, 2006, Indiana 

Code: accessed April 7, 2006, at URL http://www.

ai.org/legislative/ic/code/title5/ar14/ch3.html#IC5-14-3-4

18 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Indiana State Climate Office, 2006, Historical climate summaries online data: accessed March 15, 2006, at URL http://

shadow.agry.purdue.edu/cgi-bin/map_patrol/images/cd_zen.

map?159,178

Lewis, P., 1961, The dichotomous keys to the Koeppen system: The Professional Geographer, 13:25–31.

Midwestern Regional Climate Center, 2006, Historical climate 

summaries online data: accessed March 15, 2006, at URL 

http://mcc.sws.uiuc.edu/climate_midwest/mwclimate_data_

summaries.htm

Nickell, A.K., 1976, Soil Survey of Jennings County, Indiana, 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service.

U.S. Code, 2006, Title 43—the Public Health and Welfare, 

Chapter 103—Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability: accessed January 30, 2006, at 

URL http://www.access.gpo.gov/uscode/title42/chapter103_

subchapteri_.html

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1982, Map of the Soil Associations of Indiana, Lafayette, Ind., AY-209: Cooperative 

Extension Service, Purdue University, Agricultural Experimental Station, Scale 1:2,000,000.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1983, Methods for 

chemical analysis of water and wastes: EPA-600/4-79-020, 

March 1983 and subsequent revisions.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986, SW846—Test 

methods for evaluating solid waste, physical/chemical methods, (3d ed): November 1986 and subsequent revisions.

U.S. Geological Survey, 1994, Topographic map of Butlerville, Ind.: U.S. Geological Survey 7.5-Minute Series Topographic Maps, scale 1:24,000.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2006, Surface-water data for Indiana: 

accessed March 14, 2006, at URL http://waterdata.usgs.

gov/in/nwis/sw

Wilde, F.D., and Radtke, D.B., eds., 1998, National field 

manual for the collection of water-quality data: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9: accessed January 2006, at URL http://water.

ugsg.gov/owq/FieldManual/

References Cited 19
20 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendixes 1–10

1. Characteristics of Sampling Sites

2. Characteristics of Samples

3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores

4. Characteristics of Analytical Constituents for Samples

5. Field-Duplicate Sample Data

6. Matrix-Spike Sample Data

7. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Water Samples and Selected QualityAssurance Samples

8. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Ground-Water Samples and Selected QualityAssurance Samples

9. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Soil Samples

10. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Buried-Sediment Samples
Appendix 1. Characteristics of Sampling Sites at the Muscatatuck Urban 

Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—

Continued

[NWIS, National Water Information System; MUTC, Muscatatuck Urban Training Center]

Site name NWIS station 

number Location Description

SW1 390300085321901 Gravel road near west property line; upstream of 

culvert; upstream of flow from spring SW4

Combines treated wastewater treatment plant 

effluent and spring at property line.

SW2 390258085321201 Road by lift station; pool in ditch above wastewater treatment plant outfallMinimal flow velocity.

SW3 390304085321501 In ravine north of northern pond below coal pile; 

pool at base of spring

Pond outfall was reported to flow into the ravine 

at times.

SW4 390300085322001 Gravel road near western property line; upstream 

of culvert; large wet area from perennial 

spring

Perennial spring was reported to never dry up; 

does not include effluent.

SW5 390317085320101 Old spring house, east of stairs leading to river 

from water plant

Water flows from pipe in old spring house; 

standing water in pool.

SW6 390323085314201 Pool and wetland on quarry floor Bear to the right after entering gated road.

SW7 390323085314201 Pool at west quarry wall Dripping spring fills pool at base of wall.

SW8 390322085314301 Pool near south end of quarry Pool at base of debris dumped over wall; water 

discolored and has odor.

SW9 390255085320701 Ditch southwest of wastewater treatment plant Pooled water with no visible flow velocity; near 

wastewater plant.

SW10 390306085321201 Water from unknown source, starting at a 10-

inch iron pipe, above Vernon Fork

Water from northwest part of MUTC, located 

northwest of the power house.

SW11 390309085320801 Series of seep springs flowing in bedrock channel, tributary to Vernon ForkWater from northwestern part of MUTC.

SW12 390325085314201 Seep spring along Brush Creek below former 

stone quarry

Receives water from former stone quarry.

B1 390257085321501 Near south edge of old anaerobic digester; north 

of dirt lane to land application site; west of 

lone tree

Edge of filled area.

B2 390259085321601 Southwest of old final clarifiers; near current 

tree line; north of buried effluent drain

Filled area, but outside concrete pits.

B3 390257085321502 Northernmost old wastewater lagoon; south of 

dirt lane to land application site

Not a filled area; should be possible to sample 

near old sludge.

B4 390256085321501 Southernmost old wastewater lagoon; south of 

dirt lane to land application site

Not a filled area; should be possible to sample 

near old sludge.

B5 390258085321501 Northwest of old final clarifiers; near current 

tree line; south of buried effluent drain

Filled area, but outside concrete pits.

B6 390253085321001 Northwest corner of former electric shop Transformers stacked on south side of building.

B7 390250085321001 Southwest of laundry and south of former electric shop; low areaAppears to be downgradient of laundry and 

many of the MUTC buildings.

B8 390254085320901 West edge of gravel road below new wastewater 

plant

Should represent area that includes sewer lines 

from main part of MUTC and laundry.

B9 390303085321501 North of wall, north of north pond at power plant Should be downgradient from power plant coal 

pile.

B10 390302085321801 West of north pond, west of power plant; near 

tree line at former home site

Should be downgradient from power plant coal 

pile.

B11 390300085321701 Southwest of south pond, west of power plant; 

near tree line

Should be downgradient from power plant coal 

pile.

B12 390306085320401 In grass north of east-west lane, north of plumbing and electrical buildingsShould be downgradient from trade shops.

22 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 1. Characteristics of Sampling Sites at the Muscatatuck Urban 

Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—

Continued

[NWIS, National Water Information System; MUTC, Muscatatuck Urban Training Center]

Site name NWIS station 

number Location Description

B13 390304085320501 Northwest of plumbing shop; northeast of power 

plant

Should be downgradient from trade shops.

B14 390303085320701 North of gas pumps near power plant; in grass 

north of east-west lane

Should be downgradient of underground tanks.

B15 390306085321001 North of store room loading docks; in grass 

north of east-west lane

Should be downgradient from power plant.

B16 390259085320601 Low grassy area north of clarifiers at new wastewater plantMay represent leaks from new wastewater plant.

B17 390256085320701 W of road to new wastewater plant; low grassy 

area southwest of clarifiers 

May represent leaks from new wastewater plant.

B18 390309085313301 East edge of vegetation dump Should represent ground water beneath vegetation dump.

B19 390311085313701 Northwest corner of vegetation disposal area Should represent ground water beneath vegetation dump.

B20 390308085313601 West edge of vegetation disposal area Should represent ground water beneath vegetation dump.

SOIL1 390250085320901 West of road, west of laundry; catch basin below 

culvert

Downstream of main campus and laundry.

SOIL2 390309085313101 Patch of wet soils at northeast edge of vegetation 

disposal area

Should represent surface runoff from vegetation 

dump.

SOIL3 390310085313101 Shallow swale at northeast edge of vegetation 

disposal area

Should represent surface runoff from vegetation 

dump.

SOIL6 390314085315801 Southeast corner of lawn shop Should represent activity at lawn shop.

SOIL7 390315085315901 NW corner of Lawn Shop, 25’ west of building Should represent activity at lawn shop.

SOIL8 390316085315901 Swale 30 feet north of lawn shop parking lot Should represent activity at lawn shop.

SOIL9 390305085320701 17 feet east of gas pump, east of Building 17 

store room

SOIL10 390306085320901 Northwest of loading docks at Building 17 store 

room

Should represent surface activity near loading 

docks at Building 17.

SOIL11 390301085320901 South of power house, 50 feet south of diesel 

fuel pump, under lone Sycamore

Should represent surface activity near diesel fuel 

pump at the power house.

SOIL12 390303085320201 Electrical shop back door (north side, lower 

level)

Should represent surface activity at electrical 

shop.

SOIL13 390302085320301 Plumbing shop front door (west side, lower 

level)

Should represent surface activity at plumbing 

shop.

SOIL14 390301085320301 Paint shop side yard (southwest of front door) Should represent surface activity at paint shop.

SOIL15 390300085320601 Swale northwest of clarifiers at new wastewater 

plant

Should catch surface runoff from wastewater 

plant.

SOIL16 390256085320801 Swale southwest of clarifiers at new wastewater 

plant

Should catch surface runoff from wastewater 

plant.

SOIL18 390251085320801 Laundry back door, west side Should represent surface activity at laundry.

SOIL19 390304085321401 Northeast of final lagoon, northwest of coal pile Should represent coal runoff that is bypassing 

the lagoon system.

SOIL20 390300085321201 Rush-grass wetland southwest of coal pile Should represent coal-pile runoff.

Appendix 1. Characteristics of Sampling Sites 23
Appendix 2. Characteristics of Samples Collected from the 

Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

[Identification code: GW, ground water; SW, surface water; SOIL, surface soil; SED, buried sediment; B, borehole; MS, matrix spike; 

MSD, matrix spike duplicate; REP, replicate; FB, field blank. Borehole depth is in feet below land surface.]

Sample 

identification Sample site Sample typea Matrix Sample date Sample time

SW1 SW1 Environmental Water 10/27/2005 1145

SW2 SW2 Environmental Water 10/27/2005 1450

SW3 SW3 Environmental Water 10/27/2005 1400

SW4 SW4 Environmental Water 10/27/2005 1230

SW5 SW5 Environmental Water 10/27/2005 0905

SW6 SW6 Environmental Water 10/27/2005 0815

SW7 SW7 Environmental Water 10/26/2005 1550

SW8 SW8 Environmental Water 10/26/2005 1630

SW9 SW9 Environmental Water 10/27/2005 1650

SW10 SW10 Environmental Water 10/28/2005 0915

SW11 SW11 Environmental Water 10/27/2005 0950

SW12 SW12 Environmental Water 11/9/2005 0955

GW-B1 B1 Environmental Water 10/26/2005 1145

GW-B2 B2 Environmental Water 11/9/2005 1300

GW-B3 B3 Environmental Water 10/28/2005 1055

GW-B4 B4 Environmentalb Water 10/28/2005 1130

GW-B6 B6 Environmentalb Water 10/28/2005 0820

GW-B8 B8 Environmentalb Water 10/26/2005 1315

GW-B17 B17 Environmentalb Water 11/18/2005 1700

GW-B20 B20 Environmentalb Water 11/9/2005 1145

SED-B1 B1 Environmental Sediment 10/25/2005 1425

SED-B3 B3 Environmental Sediment 10/26/2005 1440

SED-B4 B4 Environmental Sediment 10/26/2005 1250

SED-B5 B5 Environmental Sediment 10/25/2005 1550

SED-B6 B6 Environmental Sediment 10/25/2005 0900

SED-B7 B7 Environmental Sediment 11/19/2005 0800

SED-B8 B8 Environmental Sediment 10/24/2005 0940

SED-B9 B9 Environmental Sediment 10/24/2005 1150

SED-B10 B10 Environmental Sediment 10/24/2005 1300

SED-B11 B11 Environmental Sediment 10/26/2005 1110

SED-B12 B12 Environmental Sediment 10/25/2005 1100

SED-B13 B13 Environmental Sediment 10/25/2005 1250

SED-B14 B14 Environmental Sediment 10/24/2005 1730

SED-B15 B15 Environmental Sediment 10/24/2005 1445

SED-B16 B16 Environmental Sediment 11/18/2005 1600

SED-B17 B17 Environmental Sediment 11/18/2005 1450

SED-B18 B18 Environmental Sediment 11/19/2005 1600

SED-B19 B19 Environmental Sediment 11/19/2005 1055

SED-B20 B20 Environmental Sediment 11/7/2005 1345

24 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 2. Characteristics of Samples Collected from the 

Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

[Identification code: GW, ground water; SW, surface water; SOIL, surface soil; SED, buried sediment; B, borehole; MS, matrix spike; 

MSD, matrix spike duplicate; REP, replicate; FB, field blank. Borehole depth is in feet below land surface.]

Sample 

identification Sample site Sample typea Matrix Sample date Sample time

SOIL1 SOIL1 Environmental Soil 10/26/2005 1640

SOIL2 SOIL2 Environmental Soil 11/7/2005 0910

SOIL3 SOIL3 Environmental Soil 10/26/2005 1600

SOIL-B3 B3 Environmental Soil 10/26/2005 1430

SOIL-B4 B4 Environmental Soil 10/26/2005 1310

SOIL6 SOIL6 Environmental Soil 10/27/2005 0810

SOIL7 SOIL7 Environmental Soil 10/27/2005 0825

SOIL8 SOIL8 Environmental Soil 10/27/2005 0835

SOIL9 SOIL9 Environmental Soil 10/27/2005 0935

SOIL10 SOIL10 Environmental Soil 10/27/2005 0955

SOIL11 SOIL11 Environmental Soil 10/27/2005 1155

SOIL12 SOIL12 Environmental Soil 10/27/2005 1225

SOIL13 SOIL13 Environmental Soil 10/27/2005 1250

SOIL14 SOIL14 Environmental Soil 10/27/2005 1320

SOIL15 SOIL15 Environmental Soil 10/27/2005 1400

SOIL16 SOIL16 Environmental Soil 10/27/2005 1420

SOIL-SW6 SW6 Environmental Soil 10/27/2005 1510

SOIL18 SOIL18 Environmental Soil 10/27/2005 1605

SOIL19 SOIL19 Environmental Soil 10/27/2005 1635

SOIL20 SOIL20 Environmental Soil 11/7/2005 0935

FBSW10 SW10 Field blank Water 10/28/2005 0840

FBGW-B1 B1 Field blank Water 10/26/2005 1100

FBSW12 SW12 Field blank Water 11/9/2005 0950

FBSED-B2 B2 Equipment blank Water 10/26/2005 1015

MSDSW1 SW1 Matrix-spike duplicate Water 10/27/2005 1155

MSSW1 SW1 Matrix spike Water 10/27/2005 1150

MSGW-B2 B2 Matrix spike Water 11/9/2005 1305

MSDGW-B2 B2 Matrix-spike duplicate Water 11/9/2005 1310

REPSW8 SW8 Duplicate Water 10/26/2005 1645

REPSW12 SW12 Duplicate Water 11/9/2005 1000

REPSOIL2 SOIL2 Duplicate Soil 11/7/2005 0915

REPSOIL20 SOIL20 Duplicate Soil 11/7/2005 0940

REPSED-B19 B19 Duplicate Sediment 11/19/2005 1100

REPSED-B20 B20 Duplicate Sediment 11/7/2005 1350

a Eight trip blanks are not included. Trip blanks were prepared by the laboratory and transported with empty and filled sample bottles. 

Trip blanks were included with each sample shipment to the laboratory and analyzed by the laboratory for volatile organic compounds.

b

 Partial sample set collected due to limited volume of water available in temporary well.

Appendix 2. Characteristics of Samples 25
Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores Collected 

from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.

Borehole B1 (Sampling site for SEDB1 and GWB1, figure 3)

Located at southeast corner of the former wastewater-treatment plant, west of existing wastewater-treatment 

plant. U.S. Geological Survey (1994) 7.5-minute topographic map, Butlerville quadrangle, T7N, R9E, Sect 16, 

SW1/4. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). 

Gray-shaded box identifies the buried-sediment sampling interval. Drilling, sediment sampling, and well 

installation were completed October 25, 2005. 

Description of geologic materials 0

Total drill depth 8.5 feet

Screened

interval of

temporary

well

(Feet below

land surface)

0

(Feet below

land surface)

Fill

Limestone-gravel road at 3 feet

(Well-preserved 6-inch A-horizon)

6.5

Dark brown clay-rich till with some limestone gravel

Orange and brown, wet, dense, fine to medium, well-sorted sand

Bedrock and refusal at 8.5 feet 8.5

8.3

3.3

(SEDB1 sample collected from 7.5-8.5 feet)

Temporary wells were constructed

with 1.0-inch diameter polyvinyl

chloride (PVC) casing and a 5-foot 

long 0.10-inch slot-size PVC screen.

Buriedsediment

sampling

interval

3

3.5

26 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores 27

Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores Collected 

from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

Borehole B2

Located at northwest corner of the former wastewater treatment plant, west of existing wastewater treatment 

plant. U.S. Geological Survey (1994) 7.5-minute topographic map, Butlerville quadrangle, T7N, R9E, Sect 16, 

SW1/4. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). 

Drilling and well installation activities were completed October 26, 2005. 

Description of geologic materials 0

Total drill depth 16.2 feet

Screened

interval of

temporary

well

(Feet below

land surface)

0

(Feet below

land surface)

Fill including broken concrete

10.3

Bedrock and refusal at 16.2 feet

15.5

12.7

7.7

Dark brown, organic rich, with some vegetation strands (grass/vines).

Gravel fill including glazed tile drain (staturated with 

nearly black organic-rich water)

Unknown 15.5-16.2 feet

11

16.2

(These was no laboratory analysis of buried-sediments for

this borehole)

Temporary wells were constructed

with 1.0-inch diameter polyvinyl

chloride (PVC) casing and a 5-foot 

long 0.10-inch slot-size PVC screen.

(Sampling site for GWB2, figure 3)
Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores Collected 

from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

Located south of the former wastewater treatment plant, at the approximate location of the former settling

lagoons. U.S. Geological Survey (1994) 7.5-minute topographic map, Butlerville quadrangle, T7N, R9E, Sect 16, 

SW1/4. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). 

Gray-shaded box identifies the buried-sediment sampling interval. Drilling, sediment sampling, and well installation 

were completed October 26, 2005. 

Description of geologic materials 0

Total drill depth 7.4 feet

Screened

interval of

temporary

well

(Feet below

land surface)

0

(Feet below

land surface)

Modern soil and fill

Bedrock and refusal at 7.4 feet

7.2

2.2

7.4

Medium gray, moist, firm, very well sorted clay

3

Medium gray, wet, firm, sandy clay with rare gravel 5

(SEDB3 sample collected from 6.4-7.2 feet)

Borehole B3 (Sampling site for SEDB3, SOILB3, and GWB3, figure 3)

Buriedsediment

sampling

interval

Temporary wells were constructed

with 1.0-inch diameter polyvinyl

chloride (PVC) casing and a 5-foot 

long 0.10-inch slot-size PVC screen.

28 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores Collected 

from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

Located south of the former wastewater treatment plant, at the approximate location of the former settling

lagoons. U.S. Geological Survey (1994) 7.5-minute topographic map, Butlerville quadrangle, T7N, R9E, Sect 16, 

SW1/4. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). 

Gray-shaded box identifies the buried-sediment sampling interval. Drilling, sediment sampling, and well 

installation were completed October 26, 2005. 

Description of geologic materials 0

Total drill depth 8.9 feet

Screened

interval of

temporary

well

(Feet below

land surface)

0

(Feet below

land surface)

Modern soil, dark brown with abundant rootlets

Bedrock and refusal at 8.9 feet 8.7

3.7

8.9

1.5

2.8

Dark gray with red/brown mottling, moist, firm, silty clay

4.7

(No sample recovery 2.8-4.7 feet)

Light gray, moist, stiff, very well sorted clay

(appears to be a lacustrine deposit)

7.9

Orange/brown, wet, dense, very well sorted, fine sand

(SEDB4 sample collected from 8.1-8.8 feet)

Borehole B4 (Sampling site for SEDB4, SOILB4, and GWB4, figure 3)

Buriedsediment

sampling

interval

Temporary wells were constructed

with 1.0-inch diameter polyvinyl

chloride (PVC) casing and a 5-foot 

long 0.10-inch slot-size PVC screen.

Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores 29
Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores Collected 

from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

Located at the southwest corner of the former wastewater treatment plant, west of the existing wastewater

treatment plant. U.S. Geological Survey (1994) 7.5-minute topographic map, Butlerville quadrangle, T7N, R9E, 

Sect 16, SW1/4. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where 

approximate). Gray-shaded box identifies the buried-sediment sampling interval. Drilling, sediment sampling, 

and well installation were completed October 25, 2005. 

Description of geologic materials 0

Total drill depth 8.4 feet

Screened

interval of

temporary

well

(Feet below

land surface)

0

(Feet below

land surface)

Bedrock and refusal at 8.4 feet 8.2

3.2

8.4

Red/brown fill with limestone gravel common

6 Light yellow to orange/brown, moist, dense, very well sorted, 

fine sand

(SEDB5 sample collected from 6.9-8.2 feet)

Borehole B5 (Sampling site for SEDB5, figure 3)

Buriedsediment

sampling

interval

Temporary wells were constructed

with 1.0-inch diameter polyvinyl

chloride (PVC) casing and a 5-foot 

long 0.10-inch slot-size PVC screen.

30 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores Collected 

from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

Located near the northwest corner of the former carpentry shop and northwest of the laundry. U.S. Geological 

Survey (1994) 7.5-minute topographic map, Butlerville quadrangle, T7N, R9E, Sect 16, SW1/4. Unit contacts and 

screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). Gray-shaded box 

identifies the buried-sediment sampling interval. Drilling, sediment sampling, and well installation were 

completed October 25, 2005. 

Description of geologic materials 0

Total drill depth 13 feet

Screened

interval of

temporary

well

(Feet below

land surface)

0

(Feet below

land surface)

Bedrock at 12.9 feet 12.8

13

9

(SEDB6 sample collected from 12.2-12.9 feet)

7.8

(Preprobe without coring 0-9 feet)

Brown with abundant gray mottling, moist, very stiff silty clay with

abundant organics and few chert gravel

Borehole B6 (Sampling site for SEDB6 and GWB6, figure 3)

Buriedsediment

sampling

interval

Temporary wells were constructed

with 1.0-inch diameter polyvinyl

chloride (PVC) casing and a 5-foot 

long 0.10-inch slot-size PVC screen.

Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores 31
Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores Collected 

from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

Located south of the former carpentry building and west of the laundry. U.S. Geological Survey (1994) 7.5-minute 

topographic map, Butlerville quadrangle, T7N, R9E, Sect 16, SW1/4. Unit contacts and screened intervals are 

shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). Gray-shaded box identifies the buried-sediment 

sampling interval. Drilling and sediment sampling were completed November 19, 2005. 

Description of geologic materials 0

Total drill depth 7.6 feet

(Feet below

land surface)

Weathered limestone bedrock from 7.3-7.6 feet, refusal at 7.6 feet 7.6

Brown and gray, moist, stiff, sandy silty clay with some gravel

7.3

(SEDB7 sample collected from 6.7-7.3 feet)

No well installed

at this location.

Borehole B7 (Sampling site for SEDB7, figure 3)

Buriedsediment

sampling

interval

32 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores Collected 

from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

Located north of the former carpentry shop, northwest of the laundry and southwest of the existing wastewatertreatment plant. U.S. Geological Survey (1994) 7.5-minute topographic map, Butlerville quadrangle, T7N, R9E, 

Sect 16, SW1/4. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where 

approximate). Gray-shaded box identifies the buried-sediment sampling interval. Drilling, sediment sampling, 

and well installation were completed October 24, 2005. 

Description of geologic materials 0

Total drill depth 12 feet

Screened

interval of

temporary

well

(Feet below

land surface)

0

(Feet below

land surface)

Bedrock at 12 feet 11.8

12

6.8

Light gray/tan to brown, dry, firm, silty clay

Borehole B8 (Sampling site for SEDB8 and GWB8, figure 3)

Temporary wells were constructed

with 1.0-inch diameter polyvinyl

chloride (PVC) casing and a 5-foot 

long 0.10-inch slot-size PVC screen.

Buriedsediment

sampling

interval

8 Brown, slightly moist, hard, fill with abundant angular gravel

Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores 33
Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores Collected 

from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

Located at the northwest corner of the northernmost settling pond west of the Power House. U.S. Geological 

Survey (1994) 7.5-minute topographic map, Butlerville quadrangle, T7N, R9E, Sect 16, SW1/4. Unit contacts are 

shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). Gray-shaded box identifies the buried-sediment 

sampling interval. Drilling and sediment sampling were completed October 24, 2005. 

Description of geologic materials 0

Total drill depth 9.4 feet

(Feet below

land surface)

Bedrock and refusal at 9.4 feet 9.4

5

(SEDB9 sample collected from 6.4-7.2 feet)

Borehole B9 (Sampling site for SEDB9, figure 3)

Buriedsediment

sampling

interval

Red/brown, moist, very stiff, silty clay with some limestone gravel

Orange/brown, moist, loose, very well sorted, fine sand

No well installed

at this location.

34 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Located northwest of the northernmost settling pond west of the Power House, in the vicinity of an old

house foundation. U.S. Geological Survey (1994) 7.5-minute topographic map, Butlerville quadrangle, 

T7N, R9E, Sect 17, SE1/4. Unit contacts are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). 

Gray-shaded box identifies the buried-sediment sampling interval. Drilling and sediment sampling were 

completed October 24, 2005. 

Description of geologic materials 0

Total drill depth 11 feet

(Feet below

land surface)

Bedrock and refusal at 11 feet

(SEDB10 sample collected from 10-11 feet)

Borehole B10 (Sampling site for SEDB10, figure 3)

Buriedsediment

sampling

interval

No well installed

at this location.

11

6.2

Medium brown with some dark grey, moist, stiff, silty clay

Red/brown, dry, loose, silty sand with some tubular concretions

(bioturbation?)

Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores Collected 

from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores 35
Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores Collected 

from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

Located west of the settling ponds and the Power House, adjacent to the treeline. U.S. Geological Survey

(1994) 7.5-minute topographic map, Butlerville quadrangle, T7N, R9E, Sect 17, SE1/4. Unit contacts are shown

in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). Gray-shaded box identifies the buried-sediment 

sampling interval. Drilling and sediment sampling were completed October 26, 2005. 

Description of geologic materials 0

Total drill depth 10.2 feet

(Feet below

land surface)

Bedrock and refusal at 10.2 feet

(SEDB11 sample collected from 9.2-10.2 feet)

Borehole B11 (Sampling site for SEDB11, figure 3)

Buriedsediment

sampling

interval

No well installed

at this location.

4.8

Dark brown silty clay

Orange/brown, slightly moist, dense, very well sorted, fine sand

10.2

36 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores Collected 

from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

Located northeast of utility buildings 77 and 78. U.S. Geological Survey (1994) 7.5-minute topographic map, 

Butlerville quadrangle, T7N, R9E, Sect 16, NW1/4. Unit contacts are shown in feet below land surface

(dashed where approximate). Gray-shaded box identifies the buried-sediment sampling interval. Drilling and 

sediment sampling were completed October 25, 2005. 

Description of geologic materials 0

Total drill depth 10.4 feet

(Feet below

land surface)

Bedrock and refusal at 10.4 feet

(SEDB12 sample collected from 9.5-10.4 feet)

Borehole B12 (Sampling site for SEDB12, figure 3)

Buriedsediment

sampling

interval

No well installed

at this location.

(Preprobed without coring from land surface to 8 feet.)

10.4

8 Brown, slightly moist, sandy silty clay (very poor recovery)

Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores 37
Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores Collected 

from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

Located south of utility buildings 77 and 78 and northwest of the plumbing/electric shop. U.S. Geological 

Survey (1994) 7.5-minute topographic map, Butlerville quadrangle, T7N, R9E, Sect 16, SW1/4. Unit contacts 

are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). Gray-shaded box identifies the 

buried-sediment sampling interval. Drilling and sediment sampling were completed October 25, 2005. 

Description of geologic materials 0

Total drill depth 11 feet

(Feet below

land surface)

Bedrock and refusal at 11 feet

(SEDB13 sample collected from 10.3-11 feet)

Borehole B13 (Sampling site for SEDB13, figure 3)

Buriedsediment

sampling

interval

No well installed

at this location.

(Preprobed without coring from land surface to 7 feet.)

7 Brown, slightly moist, firm, clayey silt with rare gravel

Brown, moist, stiff, silty clay (B- and C-horizon soil structure) 8.5

11

38 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores Collected 

from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

Located north of utility buildings 77 and 78, on northside of the adjacent roadway. U.S. Geological 

Survey (1994) 7.5-minute topographic map, Butlerville quadrangle, T7N, R9E, Sect 16, NW1/4. Unit contacts 

are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). Gray-shaded box identifies the 

buried-sediment sampling interval. Drilling and sediment sampling were completed October 24, 2005. 

Description of geologic materials 0

Total drill depth 13.9 feet

(Feet below

land surface)

Bedrock and refusal at 13.9 feet

(SEDB14 sample collected from 13.5-13.9 feet)

Borehole B14 (Sampling site for SEDB14, figure 3)

Buriedsediment

sampling

interval

No well installed

at this location.

(Preprobed without coring from land surface to 10.5 feet.)

10.5 Brown, slightly moist, very stiff, weathered fill and soil mixture

12 Tan/brown, dry, loose, silty sand

13.9

Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores 39
Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores Collected 

from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

Located north of Storeroom (building 17), on northside of the adjacent roadway. U.S. Geological 

Survey (1994) 7.5-minute topographic map, Butlerville quadrangle, T7N, R9E, Sect 16, NW1/4. Unit contacts 

are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). Gray-shaded box identifies the 

buried-sediment sampling interval. Drilling and sediment sampling were completed October 24, 2005. 

Description of geologic materials 0

Total drill depth 16.5 feet

(Feet below

land surface)

Bedrock and refusal at 16.5 feet

(SEDB15 sample collected from 15-16 feet)

Borehole B15 (Sampling site for SEDB15, figure 3)

Buriedsediment

sampling

interval

No well installed

at this location.

16.5

6

8

(Missing core)

Brown, moist, very stiff, sandy silty clay (undisturbed soil horizons)

Red/brown, moist, very stiff to hard, gravelly silty clay

Orange/brown, very moist, loose, very well sorted, silty fine sand 14.5

40 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores Collected 

from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

Located north of existing wastewater-treatment plant and southwest of paint shop. U.S. Geological 

Survey (1994) 7.5-minute topographic map, Butlerville quadrangle, T7N, R9E, Sect 16, SW1/4. Unit contacts 

are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). Gray-shaded box identifies the 

buried-sediment sampling interval. Drilling and sediment sampling were completed November 18, 2005. 

Description of geologic materials 0

Total drill depth 10.8 feet

(Feet below

land surface)

Bedrock and refusal at 10.8 feet

(SEDB16 sample collected from 10-10.8 feet)

Borehole B16 (Sampling site for SEDB16, figure 3)

Buriedsediment

sampling

interval

No well installed

at this location.

10 Medium gray, wet, dense, sand with angular gravel

10.8

Brown with abundant gray mottling, moist, stiff, sandy silty clay

(weathered till)

Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores 41
Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores Collected 

from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

Located southwest of the existing wastewater-treatment plant and north of the laundry. U.S. Geological 

Survey (1994) 7.5-minute topographic map, Butlerville quadrangle, T7N, R9E, Sect 16, SW1/4. Unit contacts 

and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). Gray-shaded box 

identifies the buried-sediment sampling interval. Drilling, sediment sampling, and well installation were 

completed November 18, 2005. 

Description of geologic materials 0

Total drill depth 8.6 feet

Screened

interval of

temporary

well

(Feet below

land surface)

0

(Feet below

land surface)

bedrock and refusal at 8.6 feet)

7.1

2.1

8.6

(SEDB17 sample collected from 7 - 7.7 feet)

Borehole B17 (Sampling site for SEDB17 and GWB17, figure 3)

Buriedsediment

sampling

interval

Temporary wells were constructed

with 1.0-inch diameter polyvinyl

chloride (PVC) casing and a 5-foot 

long 0.10-inch slot-size PVC screen.

Medium brown, very moist, stiff, gravel-rich silty clay

with abundant black organic material

Light gray, weathered limestone with large calcite cyrstals

(7.9-8 feet: chalky gray very fine sand; 8-8.6 feet: wet, gray, weathered

limestone; 

7.7

42 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores Collected 

from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

Located at the eastern edge of the vegetation disposal area, next to the treeline. U.S. Geological 

Survey (1994) 7.5-minute topographic map, Butlerville quadrangle, T7N, R9E, Sect 16, NE1/4. Unit contacts 

are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). Gray-shaded box identifies the 

buried-sediment sampling interval. Drilling and sediment sampling were completed November 19, 2005. 

Description of geologic materials 0

Total drill depth 26 feet

(Feet below

land surface)

Bedrock and refusal at 26 feet

(SEDB18 sample collected from 25.2-26 feet)

Borehole B18 (Sampling site for SEDB18, figure 2)

Buriedsediment

sampling

interval

No well installed

at this location.

26

Brown with slight gray mottling, moist, hard, sandy silty clay (Till)

(Dark brown till at 10 feet)

(Till expanded greatly in sampling tubes; hammering for 3 feet of

advancement produced 4 feet of hard material in sampling tube)

(Dark brown till at 22 feet)

(Dark brown till at 24 feet)

10

12

22

24

Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores 43
Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores Collected 

from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

Located near the northwestern corner of the vegetation disposal area, next to the treeline. U.S. Geological 

Survey (1994) 7.5-minute topographic map, Butlerville quadrangle, T7N, R9E, Sect 16, NE1/4. Unit contacts 

are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). Gray-shaded box identifies the 

buried-sediment sampling interval. Drilling and sediment sampling were completed November 19, 2005. 

Description of geologic materials 0

Total drill depth 18.5 feet

(Feet below

land surface)

Refusal at 18.5 feet

(SEDB19 sample collected from 6.5-7.4 feet; this was the most sandrich layer seen in this borehole)

Borehole B19 (Sampling site for SEDB19, figure 2)

Buriedsediment

sampling

interval

No well installed

at this location.

18.5

Gray and brown mix, slightly moist, hard, sandy silty clay

(looks like a till/fill mix; natural material that has been disturbed)

6.5

7.4

(From 8-12 feet: very hard material stuck in sampling tube)

8

12

(In the process of drilling this borehole, the hard till locked in three

of the core tubes.)

44 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores Collected 

from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, 

October and November 2005.—Continued

Borehole B20 (Sampling site for SEDB20 and GWB20, figure 2)

Located near the southwestern corner of the vegetation disposal area, next to the treeline. U.S. Geological 

Survey (1994) 7.5-minute topographic map, Butlerville quadrangle, T7N, R9E, Sect 16, NE1/4. Unit contacts 

and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). Gray-shaded 

box identifies the buried-sediment sampling interval. Drilling, sediment sampling, and well installation were 

completed November 7, 2005. 

Description of geologic materials 0

Total drill depth 13.8 feet

Screened

interval of

temporary

well

(Feet below

land surface)

0

(Feet below

land surface)

Orange/brown, moist, very stiff, sandy clay

Refusal at 13.8 feet 13.6

8.6

(SEDB20 sample collected from 12.2-13.8 feet)

Temporary wells were constructed

with 1.0-inch diameter polyvinyl

chloride (PVC) casing and a 5-foot 

long 0.10-inch slot-size PVC screen.

Buriedsediment

sampling

interval

2.5

Medium brown, moist, very stiff, silty clay 

(appears to be modern soil and the landfill's clay cap)

(No sample recovered from 2.5-4 feet)

4

9.5 Orange, brown, and gray mix, moist, very stiff, gravelly sandy clay

11 (all gray by 11 feet)

12.2

13.8

Brown, dry to slightly moist, firm, gravel- and sand-rich silty clay

with some poorly sorted, dirty sand stringers

Appendix 3. Descriptions of Boreholes and Buried-Sediment Cores 45
Appendix 4. Characteristics of Analytical Constituents for Samples Collected from the Muscatatuck 

Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.[USEPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; CAS, Chemical Abstract Services; μg/L, micrograms per liter; μg/kg, micrograms per kilogram; mg/L, milligrams per liter; mg/kg, milligram per kilogram]

Volatile organic compounds in water

by USEPA method 8260B

Volatile organic compounds in water

by USEPA method 8260B

Volatile organic compounds in water 

 by USEPA method 8260B

Constituent CAS number Reporting limit (μg/L) Constituent CAS number Reporting limit (μg/L) Constituent CAS number Reporting limit (mg/L)

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 630-20-6 1 2-Butanone (MEK) 78-93-3 5 Dichlorodifluoromethane 75-71-8 11,1,1-Trichloroethane 71-55-6 1 2-Chlorotoluene 95-49-8 1 Ethylbenzene 100-41-4 11,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 1 2-Hexanone 591-78-6 5 Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 11,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 1 4-Chlorotoluene 106-43-4 1 m-Xylene & p-Xylene 136777-61-2 21,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 1 4-Isopropyltoluene 99-87-6 1 Methyl tert-butyl ether 1634-04-4 51,1-Dichloroethene 75-35-4 1 4-Methyl-2-pentanone 108-10-1 5 Methylene chloride 75-09-2 51,1-Dichloropropene 563-58-6 1 Acetone 67-64-1 10 n-Butylbenzene 104-51-8 11,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 87-61-6 1 Benzene 71-43-2 1 n-Propylbenzene 103-65-1 11,2,3-Trichloropropane 96-18-4 1 Bromobenzene 108-86-1 1 Naphthalene 91-20-3 11,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 1 Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 1 o-Xylene 95-47-6 11,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 95-63-6 1 Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 1 sec-Butylbenzene 135-98-8 11,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 96-12-8 2 Bromoform 75-25-2 1 Styrene 100-42-5 11,2-Dibromoethane 106-93-4 1 Bromomethane 74-83-9 2 tert-Butylbenzene 98-06-6 11,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 1 Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 1 Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 11,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 1 Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 1 Toluene 108-88-3 11,2-Dichloroethene (total) 540-59-0 1 Chloroethane 75-00-3 2 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 11,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 1 Chloroform 67-66-3 1 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-02-6 11,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 108-67-8 1 Chloromethane 74-87-3 2 Trichloroethene 79-01-6 11,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 1 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 1 Trichlorofluoromethane 75-69-4 21,3-Dichloropropane 142-28-9 1 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-01-5 1 Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 11,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 1 Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 1 Xylenes (total) 1330-20-7 22,2-Dichloropropane 594-20-7 5 Dibromomethane 74-95-3 1

46 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 4. Characteristics of Analytical Constituents for Samples Collected from the Muscatatuck 

Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—Continued[USEPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; CAS, Chemical Abstract Services; μg/L, micrograms per liter; μg/kg, micrograms per kilogram; mg/L, milligrams per liter; mg/kg, milligram per kilogram]

 Volatile organic compounds in soil or sediment 

by USEPA method 8260B

Volatile organic compounds in soil or sediment 

by USEPA method 8260B

Volatile organic compounds in soil or sediment 

by USEPA method 8260B

Constituent CAS number Reporting limit (μg/kg) Constituent CAS number Reporting limit (μg/kg) Constituent CAS number Report- ing limit (μg/kg)

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 630-20-6 5 2-Butanone (MEK) 78-93-3 20 Dichlorodifluoromethane 75-71-8 101,1,1-Trichloroethane 71-55-6 5 2-Chlorotoluene 95-49-8 5 Ethylbenzene 100-41-4 51,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 5 2-Hexanone 591-78-6 20 Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 51,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 5 4-Chlorotoluene 106-43-4 5 Isopropylbenzene 98-82-8 51,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 5 4-Isopropyltoluene 99-87-6 5 m-Xylene & p-Xylene 136777-61-2 2.51,1-Dichloroethene 75-35-4 5 4-Methyl-2-pentanone 108-10-1 20 Methyl tert-butyl ether 1634-04-4 201,1-Dichloropropene 563-58-6 5 Acetone 67-64-1 20 Methylene chloride 75-09-2 51,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 87-61-6 5 Benzene 71-43-2 5 n-Butylbenzene 104-51-8 51,2,3-Trichloropropane 96-18-4 5 Bromobenzene 108-86-1 5 n-Propylbenzene 103-65-1 51,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 5 Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 5 Naphthalene 91-20-3 51,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 95-63-6 5 Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 5 o-Xylene 95-47-6 2.51,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 96-12-8 10 Bromoform 75-25-2 5 sec-Butylbenzene 135-98-8 51,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) 106-93-4 5 Bromomethane 74-83-9 10 Styrene 100-42-5 51,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 5 Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 5 tert-Butylbenzene 98-06-6 51,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 5 Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 5 Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 51,2-Dichloroethene (total) 540-59-0 5 Chloroethane 75-00-3 10 Toluene 108-88-3 51,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 5 Chloroform 67-66-3 10 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 2.51,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 108-67-8 5 Chloromethane 74-87-3 10 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-02-6 51,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 5 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 2.5 Trichloroethene 79-01-6 51,3-Dichloropropane 142-28-9 5 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 10061-01-5 5 Trichlorofluoromethane 75-69-4 101,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 5 Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 5 Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 52,2-Dichloropropane 594-20-7 5 Dibromomethane 74-95-3 5 Xylenes (total) 1330-20-7 5

Appendix 4. Characteristics of Analytical Constituents for Samples 47
Appendix 4. Characteristics of Analytical Constituents for Samples Collected from the Muscatatuck 

Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—Continued[USEPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; CAS, Chemical Abstract Services; μg/L, micrograms per liter; μg/kg, micrograms per kilogram; mg/L, milligrams per liter; mg/kg, milligram per kilogram]

Semivolatile organic compounds in water 

by USEPA method 8270C

Semivolatile organic compounds in water 

by USEPA method 8270C

Semivolatile organic compounds in water 

by USEPA method 8270C

Constituent CAS number Reporting limit (μg/L) Constituent CAS number Reporting limit (μg/L) Constituent CAS number Reporting limit (μg/L)

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 1.6 4-Methylphenol 106-44-5 1.6 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 1.42,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 1.5 4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 2.3 Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 1.72,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 1.3 4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 11 Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 1.82,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 1.4 Acenaphthene 83-32-9 1.7 Dimethyl phthalate 131-11-3 1.72,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 10 Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 1.8 Di-n-butyl phthalate 84-74-2 1.92,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 1.8 Acetophenone 98-86-2 2.0 Di-n-octyl phthalate 117-84-0 1.12,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 1.6 Anthracene 120-12-7 1.9 Fluoranthene 206-44-0 1.82-Chloronaphthalene 91-58-7 1.7 Atrazine 1912-24-9 13 Fluorene 86-73-7 1.72-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 1.7 Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 1.7 Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 2.12-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 1.6 Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 1.3 Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 1.32-Methylphenol 95-48-7 1.4 Benzo(b)fluoranthene 205-99-2 1.4 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 5.02-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 1.3 Benzo(ghi)perylene 191-24-2 2.0 Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 1.42-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 1.5 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 207-08-9 2.1 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 193-39-5 1.53,3’-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 0.63 bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane 111-91-1 1.4 Naphthalene 91-20-3 1.53-Nitroaniline 99-09-2 3.6 bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 1.8 Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 1.24,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 9.8 bis(2-Chloroisopropyl) ether 108-60-1 1.4 N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine 621-64-7 1.44-Bromophenyl phenyl ether 101-55-3 2.1 bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate 117-81-7 1.4 N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 86-30-6 2.64-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 1.3 Butyl benzyl phthalate 85-68-7 1.7 Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 104-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 7.5 Caprolactam 105-60-2 11 Phenanthrene 85-01-8 2.04-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 7005-72-3 2.0 Carbazole 86-74-8 1.9 Phenol 108-95-2 1.4

Chrysene 218-01-9 2.0 Pyrene 129-00-0 2.1

48 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 4. Characteristics of Analytical Constituents for Samples Collected from the Muscatatuck 

Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—Continued

[USEPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; CAS, Chemical Abstract Services; μg/L, micrograms per liter; μg/kg, micrograms per kilogram; mg/L, milligrams per liter; mg/kg, milligram per kilogram]

Semivolatile organic compounds in soil or sediment 

by USEPA method 8270C

Semivolatile organic compounds in soil or sediment 

by USEPA method 8270C

Semivolatile organic compounds in soil or sediment 

by USEPA method 8270C

Constituent CAS number Reporting limit (μg/kg) Constituent CAS number Reporting limit (μg/kg) Constituent CAS number Reporting limit (μg/kg)

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 330 4-Methylphenol 106-44-5 330 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 53-70-3 3302,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 330 4-Nitroaniline 100-01-6 1,600 Dibenzofuran 132-64-9 3302,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 330 4-Nitrophenol 100-02-7 1,600 Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 6602,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 330 Acenaphthene 83-32-9 330 Dimethyl phthalate 131-11-3 3302,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 1,600 Acenaphthylene 208-96-8 330 Di-n-butyl phthalate 84-74-2 3302,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 330 Acetophenone 98-86-2 330 Di-n-octyl phthalate 117-84-0 3302,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 330 Anthracene 120-12-7 330 Fluoranthene 206-44-0 3302-Chloronaphthalene 91-58-7 330 Atrazine 1912-24-9 330 Fluorene 86-73-7 3302-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 330 Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 330 Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 3302-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 330 Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 330 Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 3302-Methylphenol 95-48-7 330 Benzo(b)fluoranthene 205-99-2 330 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 1,6002-Nitroaniline 88-74-4 1,600 Benzo(ghi)perylene 191-24-2 330 Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 3302-Nitrophenol 88-75-5 330 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 207-08-9 330 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 193-39-5 3303,3’-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 660 bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane 111-91-1 330 Naphthalene 91-20-3 3303-Nitroaniline 99-09-2 1,600 bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 330 Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 3304,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 534-52-1 1,600 bis(2-Chloroisopropyl) ether 108-60-1 330 N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine 621-64-7 3304-Bromophenyl phenyl ether 101-55-3 330 bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate 117-81-7 330 N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 86-30-6 3304-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 330 Butyl benzyl phthalate 85-68-7 330 Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 1,6004-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 330 Caprolactam 105-60-2 1,600 Phenanthrene 85-01-8 3304-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 7005-72-3 330 Carbazole 86-74-8 330 Phenol 108-95-2 330

Chrysene 218-01-9 330 Pyrene 129-00-0 330

Appendix 4. Characteristics of Analytical Constituents for Samples 49
Appendix 4. Characteristics of Analytical Constituents for Samples Collected from the Muscatatuck 

Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—Continued[USEPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; CAS, Chemical Abstract Services; μg/L, micrograms per liter; μg/kg, micrograms per kilogram; mg/L, milligrams per liter; mg/kg, milligram per kilogram]

Trace elements in water by USEPA method 6020B Trace elements and inorganic cations in soil or sediment by USEPA method 6010B Inorganic cations in water by USEPA method 6010B

Constituent CAS number Reporting limit (mg/L) Constituent CAS number Reporting limit (mg/L) Constituent CAS number Reporting limit (mg/L)

Antimony 7440-36-0 2.0 Aluminum 7429-90-5 10 Aluminum 7429-90-5 0.1Arsenic 7440-38-2 5.0 Antimony 7440-36-0 1.0 Calcium 7440-70-2 0.2Barium 7440-39-3 1.0 Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.0 Iron 7439-89-6 0.1Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.0 Barium 7440-39-3 1.0 Magnesium 7439-95-4 0.2Boron 7440-42-8 1.0 Beryllium 7440-41-7 0.5 Potassium 7440-09-7 3.0Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.0 Boron 7440-42-8 12 Sodium 7440-23-5 5.0Chromium 7440-47-3 2.0 Cadmium 7440-43-9 0.5Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.0 Calcium 7440-70-2 20 Inorganic anions in water by EPA method 300.0ACopper 7440-50-8 2.0 Chromium 7440-47-3 1.0 Chloride 16887-00-6 3.0Lead 7439-92-1 1.0 Cobalt 7440-48-4 1.0 Fluoride 16984-48-8 0.5Manganese 7439-96-5 1.0 Copper 7440-50-8 2.0 Sulfate 14808-79-8 5.0Molybdenum 7439-98-7 2.0 Iron 7439-89-6 10Nickel 7440-02-0 2.0 Lead 7439-92-1 0.8 Nutrients in water by EPA methods 350.1, 353.2, 365.3Selenium 7782-49-2 5.0 Magnesium 7439-95-4 20 Ammonia 7664-41-7 0.1Silver 7440-22-4 5.0 Manganese 7439-96-5 1.0 Nitrate-nitrite 17778-88-0 0.1Strontium 7440-24-6 1.0 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 2.0 Total phosphorus 7723-14-0 0.1Thallium 7440-28-0 1.0 Nickel 7440-02-0 4.0Tin 7440-31-5 1.0 Potassium 7440-09-7 300Vanadium 7440-62-2 5.0 Selenium 7782-49-2 1.3Zinc 7440-66-6 10 Silver 7440-22-4 1.0

Sodium 7440-23-5 500Strontium 7440-24-6 1.2Thallium 7440-28-0 1.2Tin 7440-31-5 12Vanadium 7440-62-2 2.0Zinc 7440-66-6 2.0

50 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 5. Field-Duplicate Sample Data 51

Appendix 5. Field-Duplicate Sample Data Collected from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.[mg/L, milligrams per liter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; RPD, relative percent difference; ND, not detected; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; %, percent; <, less than reporting limit listed; gray cell indicates value greater than 50 RPD]

Surface water

Trace elements

Sample ID Antimony (μg/L) Arsenic (μg/L) Barium (μg/L) Beryllium (μg/L) Cadmium (μg/L) Chromium (μg/L) Cobalt (μg/L) Copper (μg/L) Lead (μg/L)

SW8 ND ND 54 ND ND 0.53 E 0.16 E ND 0.18 EREPSW8 ND ND 57 ND ND 0.69 E 0.17 E ND <1.0RPD 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% 26% 6% 0% 139%SW12 0.42 E 0.29 E 88 ND ND 0.38 E 0.30 E 2.00 E 0.19 EREPSW12 0.35 E 0.41 E 88 ND ND 0.45 E 0.32 E 0.71 E 0.30 ERPD 18% 34% 0% 0% 0% 17% 6% 95% 45%

Sample ID Manganese (μg/L) Molybdenum (μg/L) Nickel (μg/L) Selenium (μg/L) Silver (μg/L) Thallium (μg/L) Tin (μg/L) Vanadium (μg/L) Zinc (μg/L)

SW8 15 0.070 E 1.7 E ND ND ND 0.30 E 0.21 E 4.3 EREPSW8 15 0.071 E 1.9 E ND ND ND 0.06 E 0.23 E 3.3 ERPD 0% 1% 11% 0% 0% 0% 131% 9% 26%SW12 20 0.72 E 2.1 ND ND ND 0.14 E 0.27 E 5.8 EREPSW12 26 0.72 E 2.1 ND ND ND 0.11 E 0.35 E 6.7 ERPD 26% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 24% 26% 14%

Inorganic cations

Sample ID Aluminum (μg/L) Calcium (μg/L) Iron (μg/L) Magnesium (μg/L) Potassium (μg/L) Sodium (μg/L)

SW8 ND 63,000 76 E 31,000 1,400 E 15,000 REPSW8 ND 61,000 90 E 29,000 1,300 E 14,000 RPD 0% 3% 17% 7% 7% 7%SW12 70 E 70 60 E 26,000 3,100 17,000 REPSW12 99 E 99 110 26,000 3,000 17,000 RPD 34% 34% 59% 0% 3% 0%

Inorganic anions Nutrients

Sample ID Bromide (mg/L) Chloride (mg/L) Fluoride (mg/L) Sulfate (mg/L) Ammonia nitrogen (mg/L) Nitrate- nitrite (mg/L) Total phosphorus (mg/L)

SW8 ND 30 0.11 E 13 0.087 E 0.73 0.0050 EREPSW8 ND 30 0.12 E 13 0.085 E 0.79 0.0046 ERPD 0% 0% 9% 0% 2% 8% 8%SW12 0.065 E 28 0.12 E 14 0.034 E ND 0.0072 EREPSW12 0.065 E 28 0.12 E 14 0.038 E ND 0.0074 ERPD 0% 0% 0% 0% 11% 0% 3%
Appendix 5. Field-Duplicate Sample Data Collected from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center 

near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—Continued[mg/L, milligrams per liter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; RPD, relative percent difference; ND, not detected; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; %, percent; <, less than reporting limit listed; gray cell indicates value greater than 50 RPD]

Surface soil

Trace elements

Sample ID Arsenic (mg/kg) Barium (mg/kg) Beryllium (mg/kg) Boron (mg/kg) Chromium (mg/kg) Cobalt (mg/ kg) Copper (mg/kg) Lead (mg/kg)

SOIL2 7.9 93 0.7 3.2

E 16 11 14 20

REPSOIL2 11 120 1.6 2.8

E 23 80 22 31

RPD 33% 25% 78% 13% 36% 152% 44% 43%SOIL20 30 87 0.22

E 18 18 3.5 27 19

REPSOIL20 20 73 0.41

E 15 20 4.7 26 21

RPD 40% 18% 60% 18% 11% 29% 4% 10%

Sample ID Manganese (mg/kg) Molybdenum (mg/kg) Nickel (mg/kg) Selenium (mg/kg) Strontium (mg/kg) Tin (mg/kg) Vanadium (mg/kg) Zinc (mg/kg)

SOIL2 350 1.3

E 12 ND 7.8 1.4

E 32 38

REPSOIL2 840 1.6

E 22 ND 12 1.4

E 41 47

RPD 82% 21% 59% 0% 42% 0% 25% 21%SOIL20 57 2.6

E 16 2.4 5.7 1.3

E 43 54

REPSOIL20 87 3.1 24 2.1 11 1.5

E 45 47

RPD 42% 18% 40% 13% 63% 14% 5% 14%

Inorganic cations

Sample ID Aluminum (mg/kg) Calcium (mg/kg) Iron (mg/kg) Magnesium (mg/kg) Potassium (mg/kg)

SOIL2 16,000 1,700 19,000 1800 720REPSOIL2 24,000 2,600 28,000 2500 850RPD 40% 42% 38% 33% 17%SOIL20 14,000 340 54,000 1400 1100REPSOIL20 12,000 270 40,000 1300 1000RPD 15% 23% 30% 7% 10%

52 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 5. Field-Duplicate Sample Data Collected from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near 

Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—Continued[mg/L, milligrams per liter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; RPD, relative percent difference; ND, not detected; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; %, percent; <, less than reporting limit listed; gray cell indicates value greater than 50 RPD]

Buried sediment

Trace elements

Sample ID Arsenic (mg/kg) Barium (mg/kg) Beryllium (mg/kg) Boron (mg/kg) Cadmium (mg/kg) Chromium (mg/kg) Cobalt (mg/kg) Copper (mg/kg) Lead (mg/kg)

SEDB19 11 100 0.82 1.2

E ND 16 4.9 20 10

REPSEDB19 7.9 100 0.78 <12 ND 22 2.9 18 6.9RPD 33% 0% 5% 164% 0% 32% 51% 11% 37%SEDB20 5.1 27 0.39

E 3.5

E 0.049

E 14 7.1 11 15

REPSEDB20 5.8 21 0.37

E 4.0

E 0.05

E 15 6.8 14 13

RPD 13% 25% 5% 13% 2% 7% 4% 24% 14%

Sample ID Manganese (mg/kg) Molybdenum (mg/kg) Nickel (mg/kg) Selenium (mg/kg) Strontium (mg/kg) Tin (mg/kg) Vanadium (mg/kg) Zinc (mg/ kg)

SEDB19 130 1.8

E 25 ND 9.8 1.1

E 29 51

REPSEDB19 57 1.8

E 14 ND 10 1.1

E 36 31

RPD 78% 0% 56% 0% 2% 0% 22% 49%SEDB20 850 1.7

E 11 1.0

E 60 ND 26 30

REPSEDB20 720 1.7

E 12 1.1

E 48 ND 26 28

RPD 17% 0% 9% 10% 22% 0% 0% 7%

Inorganic cations

Sample ID Aluminum (mg/kg) Calcium (mg/kg) Iron (mg/ kg) Magnesium (mg/kg) Potassium (mg/kg) Sodium (mg/kg)

SEDB19 13,000 2,000 28,000 2,000 540 <500REPSEDB19 23,000 1,700 25,000 1,900 600 70

E

RPD 56% 16% 11% 5% 11% 151%SEDB20 5,900 84,000 16,000 21,000 640 76

E

REPSEDB20 5,200 69,000 17,000 22,000 680 120

E

RPD 13% 20% 6% 5% 6% 45%

Appendix 5. Field-Duplicate Sample Data 53
Appendix 6. Matrix-Spike Sample Data Collected from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near 

Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.[%, percent; μg/L, micrograms per liter; RPD, relative percent difference; NA, not analyzed]

Volatile organic compounds

1,1-Dichloroethene 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 2,4-Dinitrotoluene

Sample ID Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery

MSSW1 10 9.89 99 99.6 64.7 65 99.6 60.9 61 99.6 71.6 72MSDSW1 10 10.3 103 97.7 60.8 62 97.7 59.6 61 97.7 66.0 68RPD 4% 6% 2% 8%MSGWB2 10 9.96 100 101 64.0 63 101 63.9 63 101 66.9 66MSDGWB2 10 10.5 105 103 62.6 61 103 60.9 60 103 64.4 62RPD 5% 2% 5% 4%

Benzene Chlorobenzene Toluene Trichloroethene

Sample ID Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery

MSSW1 10 9.46 95 10 9.22 92 10 9.43 94 10 9.22 92MSDSW1 10 9.63 96 10 9.41 94 10 9.36 94 10 9.26 93RPD 2% 2% 1% 0%MSGWB2 10 9.23 92 10 10.3 103 10 9.42 94 10 11.2 112MSDGWB2 10 9.36 94 10 10.1 101 10 9.5 95 10 11.4 114RPD 1% 2% 1% 2%

Semivolatile organic compounds

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 4-Nitrophenol Acenaphthene N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine

Sample ID Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery

MSSW1 149 97.7 65 149 110 73 99.6 63.6 64 99.6 70.9 71MSDSW1 146 92.6 63 146 103 70 97.7 59.5 61 97.7 68 70RPD 5% 7% 7% 4%MSGWB2 152 100 66 152 107 71 101 63.5 63 101 71.9 71MSDGWB2 155 101 65 155 109 70 103 62.5 60 103 69.4 67RPD 1% 2% 2% 4%

2-Chlorophenol Pentachlorophenol Phenol Pyrene

Sample ID Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery

MSSW1 149 97.9 66 149 121 81 149 95.1 64 99.6 72.4 73MSDSW1 146 93.3 64 146 111 76 146 93 63 97.7 66 68RPD 5% 9% 2% 9%MSGWB2 152 100 66 152 110 72 152 94.8 62 101 67.6 67MSDGWB2 155 98.3 63 155 109 70 155 95.6 62 103 71.2 69RPD 2% 1% 1% 5%

54 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 6. Matrix-Spike Sample Data Collected from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near 

Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—Continued[%, percent; μg/L, micrograms per liter; RPD, relative percent difference; NA, not analyzed]

Trace elements

Antimony Arsenic Barium Cadmium

Sample ID Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery

MSSW1 40 42.6 106 40 42.1 103 40 87.8 104 40 40.1 100MSDSW1 40 42.4 105 40 41.4 101 40 87.6 103 40 40.1 100RPD 0% 2% 0% 0%MSGWB2 40 41.7 104 40 41.9 102 40 74.3 99 40 39.4 98MSDGWB2 40 41.3 103 40 41.7 102 40 76.5 104 40 39.7 99RPD 1% 0% 3% 1%

Chromium Cobalt Copper Lead

Sample ID Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery

MSSW1 40 44.5 110 40 42.4 105 40 50.4 99 40 40.7 100MSDSW1 40 44.6 110 40 42.5 105 40 49.9 98 40 40.3 99RPD 0% 0% 1% 1%MSGWB2 40 43.2 107 40 42.6 104 40 40.4 88 40 40.3 101MSDGWB2 40 43.0 106 40 43 105 40 40.4 88 40 39.9 100RPD 0% 1% 0% 1%

Manganese Molybdenum Nickel Selenium

Sample ID Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery

MSSW1 40 109 109 40 44.8 109 40 44.9 104 40 39.5 98MSDSW1 40 108 106 40 44.1 107 40 43.9 101 40 39.5 98RPD 1% 2% 2% 0%MSGWB2 40 3,300 NAa 40 44.4 110 40 44.8 97 40 39.7 98MSDGWB2 40 3,500 NAa 40 44.2 110 40 45.5 99 40 40.2 99RPD 6% 0% 2% 1%

Thallium Tin Vanadium Zinc

Sample ID Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery Spike (μg/L) Reported (μg/L) Percent Recovery

MSSW1 40 40.3 101 40 41.3 102 40 45.8 112 40 54.5 97MSDSW1 40 39.7 99 40 41.4 102 40 45.8 112 40 54.7 98RPD 1% 0% 0% 0%MSGWB2 40 42.3 106 40 43.1 107 40 44.4 110 40 40.2 95MSDGWB2 40 42.0 105 40 43.4 107 40 44.3 110 40 40.1 95RPD 1% 1% 0% 0%

aSample concentration was more than four times the spike amount; percent recovery not calculated.

Appendix 6. Matrix-Spike Sample Data 55
Appendix 7. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Water Samples and Selected QualityAssurance Samples from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and 

November 2005.[μg/L, microgram per liter; VOC’s, volatile organic compounds; SVOC’s, semivolatile organic compounds; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; ND, not detected; gray cells indicate valid concentration (greater than reporting limit and greater than 5 times highest blank concentration, or concentration greater than reporting limit with no detection in blank); yellow cells indicate valid concentrations greater than criteria; conc., concentration; — no data; NA, not available; POI -T, Point of water supply intake for protection of human health from toxic effects; POI - C, Point of water supply intake for protection of human health from carcinogenic effects; ISWQS, Indiana Surface-Water-Quality Standards]

Volatile and semivolatile organic compounds

Gegraphic 

study area Sample ID Acetone (μg/L) Chloro- benzene (μg/L) Chloroform (μg/L) Ethyl- benzene (μg/L) Methylene chloride (mg/L) Styrene (μg/L) Toluene (μg/L) Trichloro- ethene (μg/L) Number of unknown VOC’s Suma of unknown VOC’s (μg/L) Number of unknown SVOC’s Suma of unknown SVOC’s (μg/L)

1 SW6 ND ND ND 1.8 0.38

E 0.7

E 0.29

E ND 2 4.0 4 19.8

SW7 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDSW8 13 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDSW12 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 1 49.0

3 SW5 ND ND ND ND 0.35

E ND ND ND 2 22.6 ND ND

5 SW11 ND 0.31

E ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

6 SW1 3.6

E ND 2.0 ND 0.35

E ND ND ND ND ND 1 5.3

SW2 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 1 5.1 ND NDSW4 ND ND ND ND 0.33

E ND ND 1.2 3 42.3 ND ND

SW9 4.6

E ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

7 SW3 ND ND 0.2

E ND ND ND ND 1.7 ND ND ND ND

SW10 7.8

E 0.40

E ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 3 489.9

Reporting limit conc. 10 1.0 1.0 1.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

—

—

—

—

Laboratory blank conc. ND ND ND ND 1.4 ND ND ND

— 9 — 60

Detections in lab 

blanks

—

—

—

— 4 of 5

—

—

—

— NA

— NA

Trip blank conc. 2.0 ND ND ND 0.58 ND ND ND

— 32.2

—

—

Detections in trip 

blanks 1 of 8

—

—

— 4 of 8

—

—

—

— 4 of 8

—

—

Field blank conc. ND ND ND ND 0.32 ND ND ND

— 44.4

— 42

Detections in field 

blanks

—

—

—

— 1 of 3

—

—

—

— 2 of 3

— 2 of 3

5 times blank conc. 10.0

—

—

— 7.0 

—

—

—

— 222

— 300

Standard or criteria NA NA 1.9 1,400

— NA 14,300 27

— NA

— NA

Type

—

— POI - C POI - T

—

— POI - T POI - C

—

—

—

—

Source

—

— ISWQS ISWQS

—

— ISWQS ISWQS

—

—

—

—

a Estimated concentrations.

56 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 7. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Water Samples and Selected QualityAssurance Samples from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and 

November 2005.—Continued[μg/L, microgram per liter; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; ND, not detected; gray cells indicate valid concentration (greater than reporting limit and greater than 5 times highest blank concentration, or concentration greater than reporting limit with no detection in blank); yellow cells indicate valid concentrations greater than criteria; conc., concentration; — no data; NA, not available; POI –T, Point of water supply intake for protection of human health from toxic effects; POI – C, Point of water supply intake for protection of human health from carcinogenic effects; POI – DW, Point of water supply intake drinking water standard; CAC, Chronic Aquatic life Criteria continuous concentration for protection of aquatic life; ISWQS, Indiana Surface-Water-Quality Standards]

Trace elements

Geographic 

study area Sample ID Antimony (μg/L) Arsenic (μg/L) Barium (μg/L) Beryllium (μg/L) Cadmium (μg/L) Chromium (μg/L) Cobalt (μg/L) Copper (μg/L) Lead (μg/L) Manganese (μg/L) Molybdenum (μg/L)

1 SW6 0.78

E 24 180 0.21

E 0.19

E 5.1 6.2 5.6 15 1,600 1.0

E

SW7 0.31

E 0.35

E 62 ND ND 0.39

E 0.20

E 1.0

E 0.09

E 20 0.25

E

SW8 ND ND 54 ND ND 0.53

E 0.16

E ND 0.18

E 15 0.07

E

SW12 0.42

E 0.29

E 88 ND ND 0.38

E 0.30

E ND 0.19

E 20 0.72

E

3 SW5 ND ND 60 ND ND 0.96

E 0.25

E ND 0.20

E 34 0.58

E

5 SW11 ND 0.27

E 79 ND ND 1.40

E 0.20

E 0.84

E 0.21

E 5.0 0.28

E

6 SW1 0.27

E 1.1

E 46 ND 0.07

E 0.72

E 0.37

E 11 0.79

E 65 1.2

E

SW2 0.06

E 0.58

E 62 ND ND 0.28

E 1.1 ND 0.12

E 1,100 0.52

E

SW4 ND ND 22 ND 0.26

E 0.58

E 0.37

E 3.2 0.14

E 5.4 ND

SW9 0.04

E 0.27

E 50 ND ND 0.56

E 0.23

E 1.9

E 0.19

E 25 0.91

E

7 SW3 ND ND 42 ND 0.06

E 0.54

E 0.27

E 0.86

E 0.11

E 7.6 0.05

E

SW10 ND 0.46

E 6.2 ND 0.07

E 0.71

E 0.37

E 18 0.87

E 140 0.06

E

Reporting limit conc. 2.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0Laboratory blank conc. ND ND 0.1 ND ND ND ND ND 0.15 0.18 NDDetections in lab blanks

—

— 1 of 3

—

—

—

—

— 2 of 3 3 of 3

—

Field blank conc. ND ND 0.87 ND 0.064 0.61 0.012 1.9 0.14 0.81 NDDetections in field blanks

—

— 3 of 3

— 1 of 3 3 of 3 1 of 3 1 of 3 3 of 3 3 of 4

—

5 times blank conc.

—

— 4.35

— 0.32 3.05 0.06 9.5 0.75 4.0

—

Standard or criteria 146 0.02 1,000 0.068 1 11a NA 11 2.5 NA NAType POI - T POI - C POI -DW POI - C CACb CACb — CACb CACb —

—

Source ISWQS ISWQS ISWQS ISWQS ISWQS ISWQS

— ISWQS ISWQS

—

—

a Criteria concentration for chromium-III.b Hardness of 100 mg/L CaCO3 assumed for selection of appropriate criteria level.

Appendix 7. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Water Samples and Selected Quality-Assurance Samples 57
Appendix 7. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Water Samples and Selected QualityAssurance Samples from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and 

November 2005.—Continued[μg/L, microgram per liter; std. unit, standard unit; uS/cm, microsiemen per centimeter; mg/L, milligram per liter; o C, degrees Celsius; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; ND, not detected; gray cells indicate valid concentration (greater than reporting limit and greater than 5 times highest blank concentration, or concentration greater than reporting limit with no detection in blank); yellow cells indicate valid concentrations greater than criteria; conc., concentration; — no data; NA, not available; POI –T, Point of water supply intake for protection of human health from toxic effects; POI – DW, Point of water supply intake drinking water standard; CAC, Chronic Aquatic life Criteria continuous concentration for protection of aquatic life; ISWQS, Indiana Surface-Water-Quality Standards]

Trace elements Water-quality characteristics

Geographic 

study area Sample ID Nickel (μg/L) Selenium (μg/L) Thallium (μg/L) Tin (μg/L) Vanadium (μg/L) Zinc (μg/L) pH (std. unit) Specific conductance (μS/cm) Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) Water temperature (o C)

1 SW6 6.7 0.66

E 0.07

E 0.32

E 9.8 120 7.4 695 2.0 7.7

SW7 1.9 

E ND ND 0.18

E 0.35

E 4.6

E 7.3 600 5.2 9.5

SW8 1.7 

E ND ND 0.30

E 0.21

E 4.3

E 7.4 538 5.7 10.5

SW12 2.1 ND ND 0.14

E 0.27

E 5.8

E 7.5 697 6.6 14.2

3 SW5 2.4 0.41

E ND 0.14

E 0.43

E 6.4

E 7.9 666 6.0 12.8

5 SW11 2.2 0.69

E ND 0.13

E 0.33

E 5.2

E 8.2 647 9.3 10.0

6 SW1 3.4 0.44

E 0.03

E 0.48

E 1.1

E 16 8.0 1,216 8.7 13.5

SW2 2.0 ND 0.02

E 0.18

E 0.14

E 5.8

E 7.4 498 5.1 12.7

SW4 5.0 0.95

E 0.04

E ND ND 6.1

E 6.6 999 3.0 15.5

SW9 1.7 

E ND ND 0.12

E 0.64

E 3.5

E 8.6 329 12.0 12.8

7 SW3 3.2 0.97

E 0.03

E 0.18

E 0.10

E 4.3

E 7.0 902 3.6 16.5

SW10 2.2 ND ND 0.10

E 0.24

E 20 6.7 73 4.7 16.9

Reporting limit conc. 2.0 5.0 1.0 10 5.0 10

—

—

—

—

Laboratory blank conc. 0.13 ND ND 0.23 ND ND

—

—

—

—

Detections in lab blanks 2 of 3

—

— 1 of 3

—

—

—

—

—

—

Field blank conc. 0.12 ND ND 0.17 ND 2.6

—

—

—

—

Detections in field blanks 2 of 3

—

— 1 of 3

— 1 of 3

—

—

—

—

5 times blank conc. 0.65

—

— 1.15

— 13

—

—

—

—

Standard or criteria 13.4 10 13 NA NA 100 NA NA NA NA

Type POI - T POI - DW POI - T

—

— CACb —

—

—

—

Source ISWQS ISWQS ISWQS

—

— ISWQS

—

—

—

—

b Hardness of 100 mg/L CaC)3 assumed for selection of appropriate criteria.

58 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 7. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Water Samples and Selected QualityAssurance Samples from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and 

November 2005.—Continued[μ/L, microgram per liter; mg/L, milligrams per liter; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; ND, not detected; gray cells indicate valid concentration (greater than reporting limit and greater than 5 times highest blank concentration, or concentration greater than reporting limit with no detection in blank); yellow cells indicate concentrations greater than criteria; conc., concentration; —, no data; NA, not available; POI – DW, Point of water supply intake drinking water standard; CAC, Chronic Aquatic life Criteria continuous concentration for protection of aquatic life; ISWQS, Indiana Surface-Water-Quality Standards]

Inorganic cations Inorganic anions Nutrients

Geographic 

study area

Sample 

ID

Aluminum 

(μg/L)

Calcium 

(μg/L)

Iron 

(μg/L)

Magnesium 

(μg/L)

Potassium 

(μg/L)

Sodium 

(μg/L)

 Bromide 

(mg/L) 

 Chloride 

(mg/L) 

Fluoride 

(mg/L) 

 Sulfate 

(mg/L) 

 AmmoniaNitrogen 

(mg/L) 

 NitrateNitrite 

(mg/L) 

Total

Phosphorus 

(mg/L)

1 SW6 4,100 120,000 28,000 31,000 2,900 

E 15,000 0.086

E 30 0.12

E 5.5 0.160 ND 0.10

SW7 ND 64,000 51 

E 30,000 1,900 

E 26,000 ND 35 0.12

E 28 0.020

E ND ND

SW8 ND 63,000 76 

E 31,000 1,400 

E 15,000 ND 30 0.11

E 13 0.087

E 0.73 0.005

E

SW12 70 E 88,000 60 

E 26,000 3,100 17,000 0.065

E 28 0.12

E 14 0.034

E ND 0.007

E

3 SW5 100 72,000 140 31,000 1,400 

E 28,000 0.092

E 64 0.13

E 23 ND 3.7 ND

5 SW11 17 

E 78,000 ND 32,000 2,300 

E 25,000 0.081

E 49 0.12

E 28 0.022

E 2.4 ND

6 SW1 94 

E 68,000 240 21,000 7,800 180,000 0.130

E 270 0.16

E 74 ND 5.5 0.76

SW2 27 

E 61,000 400 24,000 1,100 

E 17,000 0.092

E 32 0.13

E 27 0.039

E 0.07

E ND

SW4 ND 120,000 28 

E 49,000 3,700 33,000 0.096

E 58 0.10

E 280 0.021

E 2.0 ND

SW9 240 47,000 130 15,000 1,400 

E 8,200 ND 9.2 0.15

E 32 ND 0.16 ND

7 SW3 ND 99,000 ND 43,000 2,000 

E 42,000 0.140

E 78 0.12

E 110 ND 2.1 ND

SW10 46 

E 3,000 1,500 310 ND ND ND 0.11

E 0.11

E ND 1.50 0.18 0.006

E

Reporting limit conc. 100 200 100 200 3,000 5,000 0.2 3.0 0.5 5 0.1 0.1 0.05Laboratory blank conc. ND 55 ND ND ND ND 0.12 ND ND 0.34 ND ND 0.0035Detections in lab 

blanks

— 1 of 3 

—

—

—

— 1 of 3

—

— 2 of 3

—

— 1 of 3

Field blank conc. 80 690 70 ND ND 1,100 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Detections in field 

blanks 2 of 3 3 of 3 1 of 3

—

— 1 of 3

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

5 times blank conc. 400 3,450 350

—

— 5,500 0.60

—

— 1.7

—

— 0.0175

Standard or criteria NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 230 2 1,000 Computeda 10 NAType

—

—

—

—

—

—

— CAC CAC CAC CAC POI-DW

—

Source

—

—

—

—

—

—

— ISWQS ISWQS ISWQS ISWQS ISWQS

—

aISWQS concentrations for ammonia (un-ionized ammonia as nitrogen) vary, based on water temperature and pH, as described in Indiana Administrative Code (2006). Water temperature and pH measured during 

sample collection were used to find the ISWQS ammonia value in a table (0.06 mg/L for SW6 and 0.04 mg/L for SW10). If the sample water temperature was between two values in the table, the average of corresponding ammonia standards was applied.

Appendix 7. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Water Samples and Selected Quality-Assurance Samples 59
Appendix 8. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Ground-Water Samples and Selected QualityAssurance Samples from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and 

November 2005.μg/L, microgram per liter; VOC’s, volatile organic compounds; SVOC’s, semivolatile organic compounds; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; ND, not detected; gray cells indicate valid concentration (greater than reporting limit and greater than 5 times highest blank concentration, or concentration greater than reporting limit with no detection in blank); conc., concentration; —, no data; NA, not available; MCL, Maximum Contaminant Level for drinking water; IGWQS, Indiana Ground-Water-Quality Standards (327 IAC 2-11)]

Volatile and semivolatile organic compounds

Geographic 

study area

Sample 

ID

Acetone 

(μg/L)

Benzene 

(μg/L)

Chlorobenzene 

(μg/L)

1,2-Dichlorobenzene 

(μg/L)

1,4-Dichlorobenzene 

(μg/L)

Ethylbenzene 

(μg/L)

Methylene 

chloride 

(μg/L)

Toluene 

(μg/L)

Total 

xylenes 

(μg/L)

Number of 

unknown 

VOC’s

Suma of 

unknown 

VOC’s 

(μg/L)

Number of 

unknown 

SVOC’s

Suma of 

unknown 

SVOC’s 

(μg/L)

2 GW-B20 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 3 48.54 GW-B6 4.6

E 0.24

E ND ND ND ND 0.32

E 0.34

E ND 3 9.5 8 62.4

GW-B8 5.2

E 0.21

E ND ND ND ND ND 0.39

E ND 1 6.8 8 67.4

6 GW-B1 5.2

E 0.19

E 2.1 ND 0.68

E ND 0.35

E 0.47

E ND ND ND 1 6.7

GW-B2 ND ND ND 0.28

E ND ND ND ND ND 1 1.1 6 103.3

GW-B3 2.6

E ND 0.17

E ND 0.79

E 1.8 0.34

E ND ND 2 11.5 3 24.4

GW-B4 4.9

E 0.23

E ND ND ND ND 0.33

E 0.46

E ND 3 13.1 1 7.5

GW-B17 2.9

E 0.39

E ND ND ND 0.21

E ND 0.99

E 0.4

E ND ND 2 75.6

Reporting limit conc. 10 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 5.0 1.0 2.0

—

—

—

—

Laboratory blank 

conc.

ND ND ND ND ND ND 1.4 ND ND

— 9 — 60

Detections in lab 

blanks

—

—

—

—

—

— 4 of 5

—

—

— NA

— NA

Trip blank conc. 2.0 ND ND ND ND ND 0.58 ND ND

— 32.2

—

—

Detections in trip 

blanks 1 of 8

— 4 of 8

—

—

— 4 of 8

—

—

Field blank conc. ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.32 ND ND

— 44.4

— 42

Detections in field 

blanks

—

—

—

—

—

— 1 of 3

—

—

— 2 of 3

— 2 of 3

5 times blank conc. 10

—

—

—

—

— 7 —

—

— 222

— 300

Standard or Criteria NA 5.0 NA 600 75 700 1,000 10,000 

— NA

— NA

Type

— MCL

— MCL MCL MCL

— MCL MCL

—

—

—

—

Source

— IGWQS

— IGWQS IGWQS IGWQS

— IGWQS IGWQS

—

—

—

—

aEstimated concentrations.

60 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 8. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Ground-Water Samples and Selected Quality-Assurance Samples 61 Appendix 8. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Ground-Water Samples and Selected Quality- Assurance Samples from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—Continued [μg/L, microgram per liter; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; ND, not detected; gray cells indicate valid concentration (greater than reporting limit and greater than 5 times highest blank concentration, or concentration greater than reporting limit with no detection in blank); yellow cells indicate valid concentrations greater than criteria; conc., concentration; —, no data; NA, not available; MCL, Maximum Contaminant Level for drinking water; IGWQS, Indiana Ground-Water-Quality Standards (Indiana Administrative Code, 2006); trace elements not analyzed because of low sample volume in GW-B4, GW-B6, GW-B8, and GW-B20] Trace elements Geographic study area Sample ID Antimony (μg/L) Arsenic (μg/L) Barium (μg/L) Beryllium (μg/L) Cadmium (μg/L) Chromium (μg/L) Cobalt (μg/L) Copper (μg/L) Lead (μg/L)

6 GW-B1 0.13

E 11 620 0.14

E 0.14

E 6.5 19 3.1 3.6

GW-B2 0.14

E 0.96

E 35 ND ND 0.55

E 1.1 5.2 0.11

E

GW-B3 0.16

E 12 330 0.48

E 0.45

E 10 30 9.4 15

GW-B17 0.40

E 24 1,700 4.6 1.9 88 110 51 97

Reporting limit conc. 2.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0Laboratory blank conc. ND ND 0.1 ND ND ND ND ND 0.15Detections in lab blanks

—

— 1 of 3

—

—

—

—

—

—

Field blank conc. ND ND 0.87 ND 0.064 0.61 0.012 1.9 0.14Detections in field blanks

—

— 3 of 3

— 1 of 3 3 of 3 1 of 3 1 of 3 3 of 3

5 times blank conc.

—

— 4.35

— 0.32 3.05 0.06 9.5 0.75

Standard or criteria 6.0 50 2,000 4.0 5.0 100a NA NA 15Type MCL MCL MCL MCL MCL MCL

—

— MCL

Source IGWQS IGWQS IGWQS IGWQS IGWQS IGWQS

—

— IGWQS

aRegulatory standard for total chromium
Appendix 8. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Ground-Water Samples and Selected QualityAssurance Samples from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—Continued[μg/L, microgram per liter; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; ND, not detected; gray cells indicate valid concentration (greater than reporting limit and greater than 5 times highest blank concentration, or concentration greater than reporting limit with no detection in blank); conc., concentration; —, no data; NA, not available; MCL, Maximum Contaminant Level for drinking water; IGWQS, Indiana Ground-Water-Quality Standards (Indiana Administrative Code, 2006); GWC, ground water criteria for residential closure; RISC, Risk Integrated System of Closure (Indiana Department of Environmental Management, 2006); trace elements not analyzed because of low sample volume in GW-B4, GW-B6, GW-B8, and GW-B20]

Trace elements

Geographic 

study area Sample ID Manganese (mg/L) Molydenum (mg/L) Nickel (mg/L) Selenium (mg/L) Silver (mg/L) Thallium (mg/L) Tin (mg/L) Vanadium (mg/L) Zinc (mg/L)

6 GW-B1 5,300 3.4 20 0.39

E 0.02

E 0.64

E 0.61

E 6.9 58

GW-B2 3,400 0.3

E 5.9 0.63

E ND ND 0.48

E 0.3

E 2.1

E

GW-B3 11,000 1.7

E 21 0.70

E 0.45

E 0.35

E 1.1

E 20 66

GW-B17 17,000 7.6 110 3.4

E 0.20

E 1.4 0.16

E 160 210

Reporting limit conc. 1.0 2.0 2.0 5.0 5.0 1.0 10 5.0 10Laboratory blank conc. 0.18 ND 0.13 ND ND ND 0.23 ND NDDetections in lab blanks 3 of 3

— 2 of 3

—

—

— 1 of 3

—

—

Field blank conc. 0.81 ND 0.12 ND ND ND 0.17 ND 2.6Detections in field blanks 3 of 4

— 2 of 3

—

—

— 1 of 3

— 1 of 3

5 times blank conc. 4.0

— 0.65

—

—

— 1.15

— 13.0

Standard or criteria NA NA 730 50 180 2.0 NA 715 11000Type

—

— GWC MCL GWC MCL

— GWC GWC

Source

—

— RISC IGWQS RISC IGWQS

— RISC RISC

62 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 8. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Ground-Water Samples and Selected Quality-Assurance Samples 63 Appendix 8. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Ground-Water Samples and Selected Quality- Assurance Samples from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—Continued [mg/L, milligram per liter; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; ND, not detected; gray cells indicate valid concentration (greater than reporting limit and greater than 5 times highest blank con- centration, or concentration greater than reporting limit with no detection in blank); yellow cells indicate valid concentrations greater than criteria; —, no data; NA, not available; MCL, Maximum Contaminant Level for drinking water; IGWQS, Indiana Ground Water Quality Standards (Indiana Administrative Code, 2006); trace elements not analyzed because of low sample volume in GW-B4, GW-B6, GW-B8, and GW-B20] Inorganic cations Inorganic anions Geographic study area Sample ID Alminum (mg/L) Cacium (mg/L) Iron (mg/L) Magnsium (mg/L) Potasium (mg/L) Sodium (mg/L) Bromide (mg/L) Chloride (mg/L) Fluoride (mg/L) Sulfate (mg/L) 

6 GW-B1 2,900 59,000 14,000 24,000 7,800 12,000 0.18

E 16 0.17

E 40

GW-B2 ND 190,000 5,200 69,000 11,000 12,000 0.21 15 ND 320GW-B3 10,000 45,000 29,000 14,000 5,100 5,000 0.15

E 5.1 0.12

E 68

GW-B17 72,000 130,000 150,000 60,000 4,300 4,300

E 0.06

E 3.6 ND 17

Reporting limit conc. 100 200 100 200 240 5,000 0.2 3.0 0.5 5.0Laboratory blank conc. ND 55 ND ND ND ND 0.12 ND ND 0.3Detections in lab blanks

— 1 of 3 

—

—

—

— 1 of 3

—

— 1 of 3

Field blank conc. 80 690 70 ND ND 1100 ND ND ND NDDetections in field blanks 2 of 3 3 of 3 1 of 3

—

— 1 of 3

—

—

5 times blank conc. 400 3450 350

—

— 5500 0.60

—

— 1.5

Standard or criteria NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 250 4.0 250Type

—

—

—

—

—

—

— MCL MCL MCL

Source

—

—

—

—

—

—

— IGWQS IGWQS IGWQS
Appendix 8. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Ground-Water Samples and Selected QualityAssurance Samples from the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and 

November 2005.—Continued[mg/L, milligram per liter; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; gray cells indicate valid concentration (greater than reporting limit and greater than 5 times highest blank concentration, or concentration greater than reporting limit with no detection in blank); ND, not detected; conc., concentration; —, no data; NA, not available; MCL, Maximum Contaminant Level for drinking water; IGWQS, Indiana Ground-Water-Quality Standards (Indiana Administrative Code, 2006); std. unit, standard unit; μS/cm, microsiemen per centimeter; o C, degrees Celsius; trace elements not analyzed because of low sample volume in GW-B4, GW-B6, GW-B8, and GW-B20; water-quality characteristics not analyzed in GW-B17 because of low sample volume]

Nutrients Water-quality characteristics

Geographic

study area Sample ID

 AmmoniaNitrogen 

(mg/L) 

 Nitratenitrite

(mg/L) 

Total

Phosphorus 

(mg/L)

pH (std. unit)

Specific 

conductance 

(μS/cm)

Dissolved 

oxygen 

(mg/L)

Water temperature 

(o C)

6 GW-B1 48 ND 0.12 6.7 860 1.60 17.72

GW-B2 9.2 ND 14 6.5 1,430 0.82 17.41GW-B3 15 ND 0.27 6.6 500 2.03 16.77GW-B17 0.046

E 3.2 0.39

—

—

—

—

Reporting limit conc. 0.1 0.1 0.05

—

—

—

—

Laboratory blank conc. ND ND 0.003

—

—

—

—

Detections in lab blanks

—

— 1 of 3

—

—

—

—

Field blank conc. ND ND

—

—

—

—

—

Detections in field blanks

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

5 times blank conc.

—

— 0.015

—

—

—

—

Standard or criteria NAa 10 NA

—

—

—

—

Type

— MCL

—

—

—

—

—

Source

— IGWQS

—

—

—

—

aISWQS concentrations for ammonia (un-ionized ammonia as nitrogen) can be computed for comparison. These ISWQS concentrations vary, based on water temperature and pH, as described in Indiana 

Administrative Code (2006). Average water temperature and pH for the three ground-water samples were used to find the ISWQS ammonia value in a table (0.03 mg/L).

64 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005 
Appendix 9. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Soil Samples from the Muscatatuck 

Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.[μg/kg, microgram per kilogram; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; ND, not detected; yellow cells indicate valid concentrations greater than criteria; conc., concentration; —, no data; NA, not available; criteria are for soil for industrial closure in the Risk Integrated System of Closure (Indiana Department of Environmental Management, 2006)]

Volatile organic compounds

Geographic 

study area Sample ID 1,2,4-Trimethyl- benzene (μg/kg) 1,4-Dichloro- benzene (μg/kg) 2-Butanone (MEK) (μg/kg) 4-Isopropyl toluene (μg/kg) Acetone (μg/kg) Benzene (μg/kg) Chlorobenzene (μg/kg) Chloroform (μg/kg)

1 SOILSW6 ND ND ND ND 6.9 E ND ND ND2 SOIL2 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

SOIL3 ND ND ND ND 2.6

E ND ND ND

3 SOIL6 ND ND ND ND 2.1

E ND ND ND

SOIL7 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDSOIL8 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

4 SOIL1 ND ND ND 0.63 ND ND ND ND

SOIL18 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

5 SOIL12 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

SOIL13 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDSOIL14 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

6 SOILB3 ND 4.7

E 6.3 ND 33 ND 0.26 E ND

SOILB4 ND ND ND ND 3 E ND ND NDSOIL15 ND ND ND ND 2.3 E ND ND NDSOIL16 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

7 SOIL9 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

SOIL10 ND ND ND ND 2.4 E ND ND NDSOIL11 0.19 ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.11

E

SOIL19 ND ND ND ND ND 0.3

E ND 0.22

E

SOIL20 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Reporting limit conc. 5.0 5.0 20 5.0 20 5.0 5.0 10Laboratory blank conc. 0.16 ND ND ND 3.1 ND 0.14 NDDetections in lab blanks 2 of 4

—

—

— 2 of 4

— 3 of 4

—

5 times blank conc. 0.80

—

—

— 15.5

— 0.70

—

Criteria concentration 170,000 3,400 NA NA 370,000 350 27,000 1,200

Appendix 9. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Soil Samples 65
Appendix 9. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Soil Samples from the Muscatatuck 

Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—Continued[μg/kg, microgram per kilogram; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; VOC’s, volatile organic compounds; ND, not detected; conc., concentration; —, no data; NA, not available; criteria are for soil for industrial closure in the Risk Integrated System of Closure (Indiana Department of Environmental Management, 2006)]

Volatile organic compounds

Geographic 

study area Sample ID

Methylene 

chloride 

(mg/kg)

Naphthalene 

(mg/kg)

secButylbenzene 

(mg/kg)

Tetrachloroethene 

(mg/kg)

Toluene 

(mg/kg)

Total 

xylenes 

(mg/kg)

Number of 

unknown 

VOC’s

Suma of 

unknown 

VOC’s 

(mg/kg)

1 SOILSW6 ND ND ND ND ND ND2 SOIL2 ND ND ND 0.52

E ND ND 4 61.8

SOIL3 ND ND ND ND ND ND

3 SOIL6 ND 0.7 E ND ND 0.12 E ND 3 29.7

SOIL7 ND 0.46 E ND ND 0.16 E ND P,p’-DDEb 1,200

E

SOIL8 ND 0.62 E ND ND ND ND 2 14.4

4 SOIL1 ND 0.43 E 0.38

E ND ND ND 3 56

SOIL18 ND ND ND ND ND ND

5 SOIL12 ND ND ND ND ND ND

SOIL13 ND 0.53 E ND ND ND ND 2 34SOIL14 ND ND ND ND 0.16 E ND 3 25.3

6 SOILB3 ND ND ND ND 0.15 E ND

SOILB4 ND ND ND ND ND NDSOIL15 ND ND ND ND ND NDSOIL16 ND ND ND ND ND ND 1 6.6

7 SOIL9 ND 0.53 E ND ND 0.22 E ND

SOIL10 ND ND ND ND ND NDSOIL11 ND 0.72 E ND ND 0.51 E 0.47

E 3 31

SOIL19 2.7

E 1.7 E ND ND 1.8 E 0.99

E 4 68

SOIL20 ND ND ND ND ND ND 5 161.3

Reporting limit conc. 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 NA NALaboratory blank conc. ND 1.1 ND ND 0.2 ND 92Detections in lab blanks

— 4 of 9

—

— 3 of 4

—

—

—

5 times blank conc.

— 5.5

—

— 1.0

—

— 460

Criteria concentration 1,800 170,000 NA 640 240,000 170,000 NA

aEstimated concentrations.bNon-target constituent identified as P,p’-DDE; criteria concentration 86,000 μg/kg.

66 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 9. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Soil Samples from the Muscatatuck Urban 

Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—Continued[μg/kg, microgram per kilogram; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; ND, not detected; gray cells indicate valid concentration (greater than reporting limit and greater than 5 times highest blank concentration, or concentration greater than reporting limit with no detection in blank); yellow cells indicate valid, non-estimated concentrations greater than criteria; conc., concentration; —, no data; criteria are for soil for industrial closure in the Risk Integrated System of Closure (Indiana Department of Environmental Management, 2006)]

Semivolatile organic compounds

Geographic 

study area Sample ID

2-Methylnaphthalene 

(μg/kg)

Acenaphthene 

(μg/kg)

Acenaphthylene 

(μg/kg)

Anthracene 

(μg/kg)

Benzo(a) 

anthracene 

(μg/kg)

Benzo(a)

pyrene 

(μg/kg)

Benzo(b) 

fluoranthene 

(μg/kg)

Benzo(ghi) 

perylene 

(μg/kg)

1 SOILSW6 ND ND ND ND 150

E 180

E ND 130

E

2 SOIL2 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

SOIL3 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

3 SOIL6 65

E ND ND ND 89

E 160

E 270

E 140

E

SOIL7 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDSOIL8 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

4 SOIL1 ND ND ND ND 200

E 250

E 420 160

E

SOIL18 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

5 SOIL12 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

SOIL13 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDSOIL14 ND ND 76

E 55

E 240

E 350

Ec 440 270

E

6 SOILB3 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

SOILB4 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDSOIL15 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDSOIL16 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

7 SOIL9 150

E 63

E 1,200 480 2,900 3,500 5,600 2,400 

SOIL10 ND ND ND ND 38

E ND ND ND

SOIL11 120

E ND ND 110

E 720 830 1,500 580

SOIL19 130

E ND ND 68

E 110

E 70

E ND 51

E

SOIL20 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Reporting limit conc. 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330Laboratory blank conc. ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDDetections in lab blanks

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

5 times blank conc.

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

Criteria concentration 210,000 1,200,000 180,000 51,000 15,000 1,500 15,000 16,000

cReporting limit was 440 μg/kg.

Appendix 9. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Soil Samples 67
Appendix 9. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Soil Samples from the Muscatatuck 

Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—Continued[μg/kg, microgram per kilogram; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; ND, not detected; gray cells indicate valid concentration (greater than reporting limit and greater than 5 times highest blank concentration, or concentration greater than reporting limit with no detection in blank); conc., concentration; —, no data; criteria are for soil for industrial closure in the Risk Integrated System of Closure (Indiana Department of Environmental Management, 2006)]

Semivolatile organic compounds

Geographic 

study area Sample ID

Benzo(k) 

fluoranthene 

(μg/kg)

bis(2-

Ethylhexyl) 

phthalate 

(μg/kg)

Butyl benzyl 

phthalate 

(μg/kg)

Carbazole 

(μg/kg)

Chrysene 

(μg/kg)

Dibenz(a,h)-

anthracene 

(μg/kg)

Dibenzofuran 

(μg/kg)

Fluoranthene 

(μg/kg)

1 SOILSW6 ND ND ND ND 180

E ND ND 290

E

2 SOIL2 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

SOIL3 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

3 SOIL6 ND ND ND ND 120

E ND 52

E 110

E

SOIL7 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDSOIL8 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

4 SOIL1 ND ND ND ND 210

E ND ND 270

E

SOIL18 ND ND ND ND 43

E ND ND ND

5 SOIL12 ND 270

E ND ND ND ND ND 65

E

SOIL13 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDSOIL14 280

E 69

E ND ND 300

E 66

E ND 350

Ed

6 SOILB3 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

SOILB4 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDSOIL15 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDSOIL16 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

7 SOIL9 ND 410 75

E 110

E 3,000 690 100

E 4,000 

SOIL10 ND ND ND ND 45

E ND ND 76

E

SOIL11 ND 91

E ND 74

E 750 ND ND 1,200 

SOIL19 ND 67

E ND ND 130

E ND 100

E 240

E

SOIL20 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

Reporting limit conc. 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330Laboratory blank conc. ND 52 ND ND ND ND ND NDDetections in lab blanks

— 1 of 5

—

—

—

—

—

—

5 times blank conc.

— 260

—

—

—

—

—

—

Criteria concentration 39,000 980,000 310,000 20,000 25,000 1,500 65,000 880,000

dReporting limit was 440 μg/kg.

68 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 9. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Soil Samples from the Muscatatuck 

Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—Continued[SVOC’s, semivolatile organic compounds; μg/kg, microgram per kilogram; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; ND, not detected; gray cells indicate valid concentration (greater than reporting limit and greater than 5 times highest blank concentration, or concentration greater than reporting limit with no detection in blank); conc., concentration; —, no data; NA, not available; criteria are for soil for industrial closure in the Risk Integrated System of Closure (Indiana Department of Environmental Management, 2006)]

Semivolatile organic compounds

Geographic 

study area Sample ID Fluorene (μg/kg) Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene (μg/kg) Naphthalene (μg/kg) Phenanthrene (μg/kg) Pyrene (μg/kg) Number of unknown SVOC’s Sume of unknown SVOC’s (μg/kg)

1 SOILSW6 ND 120

E ND 130

E 310

E 9 19,340 

2 SOIL2 ND ND ND ND ND 7 17,490 

SOIL3 ND ND ND ND ND 11 19,110 

3 SOIL6 ND 130

E ND 250

E ND 18 13,170 

SOIL7 ND ND ND ND ND 10 14,240 SOIL8 ND ND ND 46

E ND 6 10,040 

4 SOIL1 ND 160

E ND 70

E 230

E 5 13,310 

SOIL18 ND ND ND ND ND 6 9,230 

5 SOIL12 ND ND ND 44

E ND 19 17,500 

SOIL13 ND ND ND ND ND 3 9,850 SOIL14 ND 260

E ND 190

E 400

Ef 9 21,580 

6 SOILB3 ND ND ND ND ND 2 7,780 

SOILB4 ND ND ND ND ND 8 14,110 SOIL15 ND ND ND ND ND 3 7,160 SOIL16 ND ND ND ND ND 8 15,090 

7 SOIL9 81

E 2,500 160

E 1,000 3,500 28 20,860 

SOIL10 ND ND ND ND ND 3 8,210 SOIL11 ND 530 ND 620 1,200 19 17,510 SOIL19 ND ND ND 560 280

E 10 38,530 

SOIL20 ND ND ND ND ND 13 24,680 

Reporting limit conc. 330 330 330 330 330

— NA

Laboratory blank conc. ND ND ND ND ND

— 9,300

Detections in lab blanks

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

5 times blank conc.

—

—

—

—

—

— 46,500

Criteria concentration 1,100,000 3,100 170,000 170,000 570,000 NA NA 

eEstimated concentrations.fReporting limit was 440 μg/kg.

Appendix 9. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Soil Samples 69
Appendix 9. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Soil Samples from the Muscatatuck 

Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—Continued[mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; ND, not detected; gray cells indicate valid concentration (greater than reporting limit and greater than 5 times highest blank concentration, or concentration greater than reporting limit with no detection in blank); yellow cells indicate valid, non-estimated concentrations greater than criteria; conc., concentration; —, no data; NA, not available; criteria are for soil for industrial closure in the Risk Integrated System of Closure (Indiana Department of Environmental Management, 2006)]

Trace elements

Geographic 

study area Sample ID Arsenic (mg/kg) Barium (mg/kg) Beryllium (mg/kg) Boron (mg/kg) Cadmium (mg/kg) Chromium (mg/kg) Cobalt (mg/kg) Copper (mg/kg) Lead (mg/kg)

1 SOILSW6 7.5 140 0.61 5.7

E 0.36 E 13 6.1 16 31

2 SOIL2 7.9 93 0.7 3.2

E ND 16 11 14 20

SOIL3 8.9 93 0.71 3.6

E ND 22 7.5 13 14

3 SOIL6 7.6 83 1.9 37 0.46 E 18 7.1 19 22

SOIL7 24 100 0.95 5.8

E 0.29 E 16 9.7 19 87

SOIL8 14 150 2.1 15 0.90 17 9.6 33 220

4 SOIL1 36 550 1.6 ND 0.53 E 37 43 18 56

SOIL18 7.1 130 0.88 2.7

E ND 17 13 9.8 17

5 SOIL12 11 110 0.81 6.9

E 1.2 24 11 260 71

SOIL13 8.4 120 0.78 5.2

E 0.29 E 20 9.1 21 31

SOIL14 7.6 82 0.95 12

E 0.35 E 19 7.6 20 51

6 SOILB3 4.4 100 0.84 1.8

E ND 16 8.6 6.9 15

SOILB4 5.9 100 0.73 2.4

E 0.06 E 16 9.6 13 18

SOIL15 6.3 76 0.61 1.7

E ND 16 9.4 9.6 13

SOIL16 12 120 1.1 2.2

E 0.20 E 31 13 20 34

7 SOIL9 18 70 1.0 8.4

E 1.8 22 7.5 35 86

SOIL10 7.0 74 0.71 6.0

E 0.26 

E 14 9.7 17 27

SOIL11 19 75 0.93 21 4.6 15 8.3 71 620SOIL19 15 59 2.0 60 0.07 E 13 6.1 24 16SOIL20 30 87 0.22

E 18 ND 18 3.5 27 19

Reporting limit conc. 1.0 1.0 0.50 12 0.50 1.0 1.0 2.0 0.8Laboratory blank conc. ND ND ND ND 0.025 ND ND ND NDDetections in lab blanks

—

—

—

— 1 of 4

—

—

—

—

5 times blank conc.

—

—

—

— 0.13

—

—

—

—

Criteria concentration 20 5,900 2,300 NA 77 120g NA 2,700 230

gCriteria concentration for chromium-VI.

70 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 9. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Soil Samples from the Muscatatuck Urban 

Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—Continued[mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; ND, not detected; gray cells indicate valid concentration (greater than reporting limit and greater than 5 times highest blank concentration, or concentration greater than reporting limit with no detection in blank); conc., concentration; —, no data; NA, not available; criteria are for soil for industrial closure in the Risk Integrated System of Closure (Indiana Department of Environmental Management, 2006)]

Trace elements

Geographic 

study area Sample ID Manganese (mg/kg) Molybdenum (mg/kg) Nickel (mg/kg) Selenium (mg/kg) Silver (mg/kg) Strontium (mg/kg) Thallium (mg/kg) Tin (mg/kg) Vanadium (mg/kg) Zinc (mg/kg)

1 SOILSW6 440 0.74

E 11 ND ND 110 ND 2.3 E 26 140

2 SOIL2 350 1.3 

E 12 ND ND 7.8 ND 1.4 E 32 38

SOIL3 450 1.3 

E 12 ND ND 8.9 ND 2.5 E 43 45

3 SOIL6 380 2.7 15 ND ND 21 ND 2.5 E 33 90

SOIL7 940 0.95

E 15 ND ND 11 0.83

E 1.7 E 28 98

SOIL8 890 2.9 19 ND ND 19 0.90

E 3.2 E 32 200

4 SOIL1 3,500 3.9 17 ND ND 7.1 0.81

E 2.8 E 71 100

SOIL18 1,300 0.71

E 15 ND ND 7.7 1.5 1.7 E 32 46

5 SOIL12 1,000 1.9 

E 16 1.2

E ND 12 ND 2.2 E 36 340

SOIL13 990 1.1 

E 14 ND ND 23 0.90

E 2.3 E 35 77

SOIL14 510 2.3 

Eh 13 ND ND 15 1.3 

Ei 2.1 E 28 85

6 SOILB3 520 0.61

E 8.7 ND ND 4.3 0.84

E 1.8 E 32 32

SOILB4 1,100 1.2 

E 10 ND ND 6.4 ND 4.5 E 34 52

SOIL15 650 1.1 

E 9.9 ND ND 5.8 ND 1.6 E 34 32

SOIL16 1,200 1.8 

E 16 ND ND 5.3 1.2 

E 4.9 E 47 93

7 SOIL9 650 1.7 

E 15 ND ND 20 0.99

E 3.6 E 31 140

SOIL10 850 2.1 

Eh 13 ND ND 9.0 ND 1.5 E 28 82

SOIL11 700 2.5 37 2.0 1.4 67 ND 2.3 E 25 350SOIL19 390 3.0 35 ND ND 25 ND 2.5 E 30 39SOIL20 57 2.6 16 2.4 ND 5.7 ND 1.3 E 43 54

Reporting limit conc. 1.0 2.0 4.0 1.3 1.0 1.2 1.2 12 2.0 2.0Laboratory blank conc. 0.21 ND ND ND ND ND ND 1.3 ND NDDetections in lab blanks 3 of 4

—

—

—

—

—

— 4 of 4

—

—

5 times blank conc. 1.1

—

—

—

—

—

— 6.50

—

—

Criteria concentration NA NA 2,700 53 87 NA 10 NA NA 10,000

hReporting limit was 2.4 mg/kg.iReporting limit was1.4 mg/kg

Appendix 9. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Surface-Soil Samples 71
Appendix 10. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Buried-Sediment Samples from the 

Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.

[μg/kg, microgram per kilogram; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; ND, not detected; gray cells indicate valid concentration (greater than reporting limit and greater than 5 times highest blank concentration, or concentration greater than reporting limit with no detection in blank); conc., concentration; —, no data; NA, not available; criteria are for soil for industrial closure in the Risk Integrated System of Closure (Indiana Department of Environmental Management, 2006)]

Volatile organic compounds

Geographic 

study area Sample ID

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 

(mg/kg)

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 

(mg/kg)

1,2-Dichlorobenzene 

(mg/kg)

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 

(mg/kg)

1,4-Dichlorobenzene 

(mg/kg)

2-Butanone 

(mg/kg)

Acetone 

(mg/kg)

Benzene 

(mg/kg)

2 SED-B18 ND ND ND ND ND ND 13

E ND

SED-B19 ND ND ND ND ND ND 5.3

E ND

SED-B20 ND 0.12 E ND ND ND ND 4.4

E ND

4 SED-B6 ND ND ND ND ND ND 4.0

E ND

SED-B7 0.44

E 0.17 E 0.14

E ND ND ND ND ND

SED-B8 ND ND ND ND ND ND 5.3

E ND

5 SED-B12 ND ND ND ND ND 3.7

E 24

Eb ND

SED-B13 ND 0.63

E ND 0.19

E ND ND ND ND

SED-B14 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

6 SED-B1 ND ND ND ND ND ND 7.3

E ND

SED-B3 ND 0.37

E ND ND 5.1

Ea 6.9

E 35 ND

SED-B4 ND ND ND ND ND ND 4.9

E ND

SED-B5 ND ND ND ND ND ND 2.3

E ND

SED-B10 ND ND ND ND ND ND 3.3

E ND

SED-B11 ND ND ND ND ND ND 4.3

E ND

SED-B16 ND 0.6 E ND 0.25

E ND ND 3.1

E 0.46

E

SED-B17 ND ND ND ND ND ND 9 E ND

7 SED-B9 ND ND ND ND ND ND 2.8

E ND

SED-B15 ND ND ND ND ND ND 4.2

E ND

Reporting limit conc. 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 20 20 5.0 Laboratory blank conc. 0.57 0.16 0.17 ND ND ND 3.1 NDDetections in lab blanks 2 of 4 2 of 4 2 of 4

—

—

— 2 of 4

—

5 times blank conc. 2.85 0.8 0.85

—

—

— 15.5

—

Criteria concentration 77,000 170,000 220,000 68,000 3,400 NA 370,000 350

aReporting limit was 7.5 μg/kg.bReporting limit was 25 μg/kg.

72 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 10. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Buried-Sediment Samples from the 

Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—Continued[μg/kg, microgram per kilogram; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; VOC’s, volatile organic compounds; ND, not detected; conc., concentration; —, no data; NA, not available; criteria are for soil for industrial closure in the Risk Integrated System of Closure (Indiana Department of Environmental Management, 2006)]

Volatile organic compounds

Geographic 

study area Sample ID

Chlorobenzene 

(mg/kg)

Ethylbenzene 

(mg/kg)

Naphthalene 

(mg/kg)

Tetrachloroethene 

(mg/kg)

Toluene 

(mg/kg)

Total 

xylenes 

(mg/kg)

Number of 

unknown 

VOC’s

Sumc of 

unknown VOC’s 

(mg/kg)

2 SED-B18 ND ND ND ND ND ND 1 7.0

SED-B19 ND ND ND ND ND ND 3 47SED-B20 ND ND ND 0.23

E 0.33

E ND 3 32.1

4 SED-B6 ND ND ND ND 0.20 E ND 3 67

SED-B7 ND ND 1.0 E ND 0.16 E ND 1 9.6SED-B8 ND ND 0.68 E ND 0.12 E ND 1 10. 

5 SED-B12 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

SED-B13 ND 0.31

E 0.78 E ND 0.57 E 1.2

E ND ND

SED-B14 ND ND ND ND ND ND 1 9.9

6 SED-B1 ND ND ND ND 0.11 E ND ND ND

SED-B3 0.56

E 0.25

E 0.64 E ND 0.64 E 1.0

E ND ND

SED-B4 ND ND ND ND 0.17 E ND 1 6.6SED-B5 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDSED-B10 ND ND ND ND ND ND 3 30.9SED-B11 ND ND ND ND ND ND 3 46SED-B16 ND 0.62

E 0.93 E ND 2.0 E 2.0

E 5 104

SED-B17 ND ND 0.56 E ND 0.17 E ND 4 113

7 SED-B9 0.13

E ND ND ND 0.13 E ND 2 32.3

SED-B15 ND ND ND ND 0.09 E ND 5 85.3

Reporting limit conc. 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 NA NALaboratory blank conc. 0.14 ND 1.1 ND 0.20 ND

— 92

Detections in lab blanks 3 of 4

— 4 of 9

— 3 of 4

—

—

5 times blank conc. 0.7

— 5.5

— 1.0

—

— 460

Criteria concentration 27,000 160,000 170,000 640 240,000 170,000 NA NA

cEstimated concentrations.

Appendix 10. Cocentrations of Constituents Detected in Buried-Sediment Samples 73
Appendix 10. Concentrations of Constituents Detected 

in Buried-Sediment Samples from the Muscatatuck 

Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October 

and November 2005.—Continued

[μg/kg, microgram per kilogram; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; SVOC’s, semivolatile 

organic compounds; ND, not detected; conc., concentration; —, no data; NA, not available; criteria are for soil 

for industrial closure in the Risk Integrated System of Closure (Indiana Department of Environmental Management, 2006)]

Semivolatile organic compounds

Geographic 

study area Sample ID bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate (μg/kg)

Number of 

unknown 

SVOC’s

Sumd of 

unknown 

SVOC’s (μg/kg)

2 SED-B18 ND 1 16,000 

SED-B19 ND 1 17,000 

SED-B20 ND 4 10,600 

4 SED-B6 ND 2 14,270 

SED-B7 ND 1 13,000 

SED-B8 110 E 3 9,950 

5 SED-B12 ND 1 8,600 

SED-B13 ND 4 11,980 

SED-B14 ND 2 8,370 

6 SED-B1 ND 2 8,490 

SED-B3 ND 5 13,980 

SED-B4 ND 2 7,000 

SED-B5 ND 2 9,050 

SED-B10 ND 2 9,120 

SED-B11 ND 4 10,700 

SED-B16 ND 1 12,000 

SED-B17 ND 1 25,000 

7 SED-B9 ND 2 9,440 

SED-B15 ND 1 7,300 

Reporting limit conc. 330 — NA

Laboratory blank conc. 52 — 9,300 

Detections in lab blanks 1 of 5 — —

5 times blank conc. 260 — 46,500 

Criteria concentration 980,000 NA NA 

d

Estimated concentrations.

74 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005
Appendix 10. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Buried-Sediment Samples from the 

Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—Continued[mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; ND, not detected; gray cells indicate valid concentration (greater than reporting limit and greater than 5 times highest blank concentration, or concentration greater than reporting limit with no detection in blank); conc., concentration; —, no data; NA, not available; criteria are for soil for industrial closure in the Risk Integrated System of Closure (Indiana Department of Environmental Management, 2006)]

Trace elements

Geographic 

study area Sample ID Arsenic (mg/kg) Barium (mg/kg) Beryllium (mg/kg) Boron (mg/kg) Cadmium (mg/kg) Chromium (mg/kg) Cobalt (mg/kg) Copper (mg/kg) Lead (mg/kg)

2 SED-B18 4.3 42 0.49

E 4.0

E ND 17 7.9 19 15

SED-B19 11 100 0.82 1.2

E ND 16 4.9 20 10

SED-B20 5.1 27 0.39

E 3.5

E 0.05 

E 14 7.1 11 15

4 SED-B6 9.3 300 1.5 3.2

E 3.7 22 5.7 16 19

SED-B7 22 340 2.0

Ee 1.6

E ND 35 8.1 39 26

SED-B8 4.2 33 0.45

E 2.4

E 0.30 E 9.8 2.3 5.8 3.9 

5 SED-B12 8.7 240 1.5 3.5

E 3.7 24 10 5.0 16

SED-B13 6.1 65 0.95 2.4

E 2.6 15 3.5 12 12

SED-B14 ND 5.7 0.23

E ND ND 1.5 0.18

E 0.8

E 0.68

E

6 SED-B1 0.94

E 11 ND ND ND 4.5 0.56

E 1.6

E 1.2 

SED-B3 10 250 0.91 3.9

E 3.0 26 5.5 8.4 10

SED-B4 2.9 3.1 ND ND ND 4.9 0.99

E 1.5

E 0.98

SED-B5 ND 21 ND ND ND 23 0.59

E 2.1

E 1.0

SED-B10 3.7 34 0.64 1.5

E ND 8.6 1.6 5.6 4.6 

SED-B11 2.4 21 0.26

E ND ND 4.7 0.98

E 4.0 2.9 

SED-B16 ND 8.6 ND 2.5

E ND 2.6 0.24

E 1.7

E 1.2 

SED-B17 20 210 2.5 ND ND 42 7.2 29 22

7 SED-B9 1.8 18 0.30

E 1.5

E ND 5.0 1.5 4.4 2.1 

SED-B15 ND 3.7 ND ND 0.03 E 1.9 0.26

E 4.7 0.97

Reporting limit conc. 1.0 1.0 0.50 12 0.50 1.0 1.0 2.0 0.08Laboratory blank conc. ND ND ND ND 0.03 ND ND ND NDDetections in lab blanks

—

—

—

— 1 of 4

—

—

—

—

5 times blank conc.

—

—

—

— 0.13

—

—

—

—

Criteria concentration 20 5,900 2,300 NA 77 120f NA 2,700 230

eReporting limit was 3.7 mg/kg.fCriteria for chromium-VI.

Appendix 10. Cocentrations of Constituents Detected in Buried-Sediment Samples 75
Appendix 10. Concentrations of Constituents Detected in Buried-Sediment Samples from the 

Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and November 2005.—Continued[mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; E, estimated concentration less than reporting limit; ND, not detected; gray cells indicate valid concentration (greater than reporting limit and greater than 5 times highest blank concentration, or concentration greater than reporting limit with no detection in blank); conc., concentration; —, no data; NA, not available; criteria are for soil for industrial closure in the Risk Integrated System of Closure (Indiana Department of Environmental Management, 2006)]

Trace elements

Geographic 

study area Sample ID Manganese (mg/kg) Molybdenum (mg/kg) Nickel (mg/kg) Selenium (mg/kg) Strontium (mg/kg) Thallium (mg/kg) Tin (mg/kg) Vanadium (mg/kg) Zinc (mg/kg)

2 SED-B18 730 2.0

Eg 17 1.0

E 43 ND 1.2 E 30 48

SED-B19 130 1.8 

E 25 ND 9.8 ND 1.1 E 29 51

SED-B20 850 1.7 

E 11 1.0

E 60 ND ND 26 30

4 SED-B6 4,600 3.3 52 ND 26 ND 1.9 E 54 120

SED-B7 4,400 5.9 54 ND 13 ND ND 81 210SED-B8 490 1.5 

E 21 ND 48 0.82

E 1.7 E 16 140

5 SED-B12 4,500 0.43

E 25 ND 14 0.94

E 1.2 E 47 66

SED-B13 1,500 0.74

E 32 2.1 41 ND 1.1 E 34 81

SED-B14 260 0.38

E 9.3 ND 2.2 ND ND 2.3 11

6 SED-B1 410 0.78

E 4.6 1.2

E 15 ND ND 3.8 11

SED-B3 2,300 1.2 

E 32. 2.6 45 ND ND 42 58

SED-B4 130 0.64

E 7.9 ND 15 ND 1.0 E 8.9 16

SED-B5 550 9.0 5.6 ND 2.8 ND 0.96 E 3.8 6.5SED-B10 400 0.56

E 11 ND 3.7 ND ND 20 24

SED-B11 420 0.42

E 4.6 ND 2.7 ND ND 10 16

SED-B16 350 0.41

E 4.2

Eh 3.7 62 ND ND 6.7 14

SED-B17 2,500 5.1 67 ND 9.7 ND 2.0 E 69 130

7 SED-B9 370 0.30

E 5.3 ND 1.1

E ND 1.2 E 12 26

SED-B15 220 ND 3.1

E ND 10 ND ND 2.4 11

Reporting limit conc. 1.0 2.0 4.0 1.3 1.2 1.2 12 2.0 2.0Laboratory blank conc. 0.21 ND ND ND ND ND 1.3 ND NDDetections in lab blanks 3 of 4

—

—

—

—

— 4 of 4

—

—

5 times blank conc. 1.05

—

—

—

—

— 6.50

—

—

Criteria concentration NA NA 2,700 53 NA 10 NA NA 10,000

gReporting limit was 2.3 mg/kg.hReporting limit was 4.7 mg/kg.

76 Environmental Assessment of the Muscatuck Urban Training Center, Indiana, October and November 2005

Risch, M.R., Ulberg, A.L., and Robinson, B.A.—Environmental Assessment of the Muscatatuck Urban Training Center near Butlerville, Indiana, October and 

November 2005—Open-File Report 2007–1100

Printed on recycled paper